Google is very upfront about what is collected and what they do with it and who they do and do not share what data with. As someone who actually follows this stuff closely and READS agreements and doesn't just rely on Slashdot hype, I am 100% comfortable with everything Google does and what they do with the data, and also with how hard they fight back against governments who want that data. Google doesn't sell your data to ANY third parties, they use it INTERNALLY for their own stuff. As such it is actually VERY private. The data you share with Google is a lot more private than the data you share with your telco or cable company or bank in this respect.
Compare this to Facebook or LinkedIn or even Twitter, who are NOT upfront about what is collected and shared, and who not only share data with governments, but ALSO 3rd party companies at will as part of their business models. As well as your bank, your telco, etc again - all of whom routinely sell client lists including names, addresses, and phone numbers.
An open source library in the codec world is meaningless if the codec itself is covered by patents, because this means that no one can use the library in any country that enforces software patents. Last I saw H.265 is blanketed by over 500 patents. And in this case it's even worse than H.264 because they're not all held by one group, but by all kinds of different groups who all say they want royalties.
This was covered in detail already the last time this happened. Payroll rebate programs have clauses to protect against this. They only get the money when they make their hiring numbers. They have not made those numbers so have not gotten a dime.
These layoffs suck for the region and I have close friends who have been directly affected, but mis-reporting the situation with false truths helps no one.
The bottleneck in coding is solving the problem, and debugging issues in your code. Code rapidly written is more likely to have errors because you have not had as much time to think about what you are writing. Coding is not like writing a book.
That is not true. The bags ARE NOT scanned as they move around the airport. If you have ever lost your bag you will find this out. You will be sent to an international bag tracking database. All this database has stored in it is what airport the bag was last at. There is no record of where it was in the airport and no one has any information other than calling from airport to airport and doing manual searches in rooms for bags.
It is a very archaic system compared to Fedex or UPS and It is plainly obvious that bags are not tracked as they move around.. they are only tracked when they get on and off the plane. Bags with totally valid tags are lost all the time. If UPS or Fedex had the same arrival ratio as US airlines they would be out of business.
The luggage tracking systems of most airlines and airports are horrible. Luggage is only scanned when you check it, and when it gets onto the plane. Compare luggage tracking systems in airports to those used by UPS.. with UPS, I can enter a tracking code and find out EXACTLY where my package is at any time, down to the truck it is on. UPS itself can even see the GPS location of the truck. As anyone who has had their luggage lost can tell you (which happens FAR too often), the airlines know little more about your bag other than the plane it is supposed to be on or the airport it is in. They don't have any idea WHERE in the airport it actually is. This is because bags are not scanned enough as they move around the airport. A bag should not be able to go through a chain of custody without scanning it.
Requiring 4.5 stars out of 5 is not a 90% approval rating. A 90% approval rating would have a "Do you approve of this driver? Yes/No" poll and require 90% to be yes.
A 90% approval rating on a 5 star program would mean 90% of people must rate at 3 stars or higher. Not that the average rating be 4.5 stars or above. It is TOTALLY different.
Your comments point out the problem perfectly. " I imagine that a driver that does their job on time, is safe, and doesn't smell too bad gets an automatic 5 stars.". So what does one do to get 3 stars? Stink of onions, run red lights, and be late? That's a 3 star driver?
Then what is a 1 star driver, someone who runs over your wife and then spits on the corpse?
By designing the rating system this way they are FORCING a skew to the right. It's idiotic. The only reason I can see them doing this is for some marketing tactic where they can claim they have all 5 star drivers without explaining the meaning.
If you have 100 four stars you will be kicked out. The system is basically saying you need to give any driver you want to keep five stars, all the time. This makes a 5 point rating system pointless and it might as well be a boolean "Keep? Yes / No" flag that is averaged.
"Passengers and drivers rate each other after every ride. If you rate a driver below 4 stars, youâ(TM)ll never be matched with that driver again. If a driver's average falls below 4½ out of 5 stars, they are removed from the Lyft community. It's our way of maintaining high-quality standards."
Can anyone tell me what the point is of a 5 star rating system if anything below 4.5 stars gets you kicked out? All this is going to end up doing is artificially inflating ratings. Basically everyone will be a five star driver or a zero star. It makes no sense whatsoever. I would think any logical system would have at least 3 stratas of "Excellent/Well above average", "OK", and "Average, but would ride with again".
Does that hold true for 6 more months? 12 months? 24 months?
In the two years I have been following the movement, the price of an at home 3D printer has gone from 2000 to 1000 to 500 to 400 and under. You can already buy them from Staples. It won't be very long before you will be able to get a 3D printer at Walmart for $99. The cost of manufacture of these things is actually very small... its just a bunch of plastic pieces, a couple of motors, and a heated nozzle, the kind you can get on a glue gun at the dollar store. There is no reason that manufactured en-masse they could not be brought below $100.
This argument is nonsense. It is like saying "Coal power made the world a better place, compare what things were like in 1860 to today", and using that to advocate ramping up coal production. It's a nonsense argument.
Whatever benefit something had IN THE PAST does not have bearing on TODAY. What is the benefit a union provides society TODAY. Rights of the worker are now codified in legislation; we're not returning to sweatshops. Meanwhile unions are silent on most of the most pressing social issues in society. I don't see any large unions striking for rights for same sex marriage.
I find way more useful extensions in the Chrome web store than I do in the Firefox store nowadays. In fact, Chrome's addons are what keep me tied to the browser.
- Improving the efficiency of a single power station in a fixed location where weight is not an issue
- Improving the efficiency of a million mobile vehicles not in a fixed location where weight is an issue.
Even if electric cars are ZERO percent more efficient today, heck even if they are NEGATIVE today, they are still an investment in the future and the way forward. I don't get how people can't see this. Centralization always drives efficiency.
Maybe if you would RTFA instead of pontificating, you would have found that the reference QUIC implementation is already open source, the specification is open, the wire specification is open, the whole thing is open. If you don't trust Google's implementation then roll your own.
No, they are MOST CERTAINLY NOT "damned if they do and damned f they don't". There is a big difference between doing an ACTUAL INVESTIGATION, and arresting someone without any critical thought or due process.
If any actual critical thinking was applied here, this kid would not be arrested.
No one has a problem with the police investigating threats. They are not "damned if they do". The problem starts when they just go off arresting people without any thoughts on if, you know, they actually meant whatever was being written.
The idea that banks are hesitating to do business with these exchanges because Bitcoin is posing as a "thread" is hilarious on it's face.
Ask any average person on the street what a bitcoin is and you will be greeted with nothing but blank stares.
People who use bitcoin and drive up it's value are living inside a reality distortion field of their own making. This supposed currency is going nowhere.
Big data is not about using 1 thing as a predictor. It is about using the analysis of 10,000,000 different things about groups of people analyzed as an aggregate as a predictor. And it is right a lot more often than it is not, when applied properly.
The real reason people are scared of big data is because the more and more we study it, the more and more it is proven that most people are very, very predictable. It's gotten to the point that companies optimize the color placement of objects in the background of their advertising to appeal to people they are targetting.
The thing that amazes me however is how some companies can still get things so outstandingly wrong/backwards in this day and age. Take the recent Microsoft Xbox One fiasco. I find it hard to believe that a company like Microsoft would not have known this reaction was coming. Any trivial study of online sentiment data would have shown this in advance.
This is referrig to California. Gas prices in California are as high or higher than Canada any time I have checked. Fuel quality in California is highly regulated and taxed which adds to the cost.
A corporation is motivated to make money. A government is motivated to maintain control
A company like Google has no motivation to use my private information to frame me and lock me away. It would be counter to their interest. The only motivation Google has is to use the information to sell me stuff. And guess what - not only do they do that, they ADMIT FREELY to doing it. And I really don't have a problem with it because ads do not sway my opinions very much because I am an intelligent person.
The government on the other hand has entirely different motivations. They are not trying to sell me things. The only motivation the government has to know personal and private information on me, is to control me. This is far, far worse than what a company wants to do with that knowledge.
Slashdot Mirror
Google is very upfront about what is collected and what they do with it and who they do and do not share what data with. As someone who actually follows this stuff closely and READS agreements and doesn't just rely on Slashdot hype, I am 100% comfortable with everything Google does and what they do with the data, and also with how hard they fight back against governments who want that data. Google doesn't sell your data to ANY third parties, they use it INTERNALLY for their own stuff. As such it is actually VERY private. The data you share with Google is a lot more private than the data you share with your telco or cable company or bank in this respect.
Compare this to Facebook or LinkedIn or even Twitter, who are NOT upfront about what is collected and shared, and who not only share data with governments, but ALSO 3rd party companies at will as part of their business models. As well as your bank, your telco, etc again - all of whom routinely sell client lists including names, addresses, and phone numbers.
Who is the poster child again?
An open source library in the codec world is meaningless if the codec itself is covered by patents, because this means that no one can use the library in any country that enforces software patents. Last I saw H.265 is blanketed by over 500 patents. And in this case it's even worse than H.264 because they're not all held by one group, but by all kinds of different groups who all say they want royalties.
This was covered in detail already the last time this happened. Payroll rebate programs have clauses to protect against this. They only get the money when they make their hiring numbers. They have not made those numbers so have not gotten a dime.
These layoffs suck for the region and I have close friends who have been directly affected, but mis-reporting the situation with false truths helps no one.
The bottleneck in coding is solving the problem, and debugging issues in your code. Code rapidly written is more likely to have errors because you have not had as much time to think about what you are writing. Coding is not like writing a book.
That is not true. The bags ARE NOT scanned as they move around the airport. If you have ever lost your bag you will find this out. You will be sent to an international bag tracking database. All this database has stored in it is what airport the bag was last at. There is no record of where it was in the airport and no one has any information other than calling from airport to airport and doing manual searches in rooms for bags.
It is a very archaic system compared to Fedex or UPS and It is plainly obvious that bags are not tracked as they move around.. they are only tracked when they get on and off the plane. Bags with totally valid tags are lost all the time. If UPS or Fedex had the same arrival ratio as US airlines they would be out of business.
Sure, assuming this is implemented in the airports and not just a marketing gimmick by BA.
The luggage tracking systems of most airlines and airports are horrible. Luggage is only scanned when you check it, and when it gets onto the plane. Compare luggage tracking systems in airports to those used by UPS.. with UPS, I can enter a tracking code and find out EXACTLY where my package is at any time, down to the truck it is on. UPS itself can even see the GPS location of the truck. As anyone who has had their luggage lost can tell you (which happens FAR too often), the airlines know little more about your bag other than the plane it is supposed to be on or the airport it is in. They don't have any idea WHERE in the airport it actually is. This is because bags are not scanned enough as they move around the airport. A bag should not be able to go through a chain of custody without scanning it.
Requiring 4.5 stars out of 5 is not a 90% approval rating. A 90% approval rating would have a "Do you approve of this driver? Yes/No" poll and require 90% to be yes.
A 90% approval rating on a 5 star program would mean 90% of people must rate at 3 stars or higher. Not that the average rating be 4.5 stars or above. It is TOTALLY different.
Your comments point out the problem perfectly. " I imagine that a driver that does their job on time, is safe, and doesn't smell too bad gets an automatic 5 stars.". So what does one do to get 3 stars? Stink of onions, run red lights, and be late? That's a 3 star driver?
Then what is a 1 star driver, someone who runs over your wife and then spits on the corpse?
By designing the rating system this way they are FORCING a skew to the right. It's idiotic. The only reason I can see them doing this is for some marketing tactic where they can claim they have all 5 star drivers without explaining the meaning.
If you have 100 four stars you will be kicked out. The system is basically saying you need to give any driver you want to keep five stars, all the time. This makes a 5 point rating system pointless and it might as well be a boolean "Keep? Yes / No" flag that is averaged.
"Passengers and drivers rate each other after every ride. If you rate a driver below 4 stars, youâ(TM)ll never be matched with that driver again. If a driver's average falls below 4½ out of 5 stars, they are removed from the Lyft community. It's our way of maintaining high-quality standards."
Can anyone tell me what the point is of a 5 star rating system if anything below 4.5 stars gets you kicked out? All this is going to end up doing is artificially inflating ratings. Basically everyone will be a five star driver or a zero star. It makes no sense whatsoever. I would think any logical system would have at least 3 stratas of "Excellent/Well above average", "OK", and "Average, but would ride with again".
Does that hold true for 6 more months? 12 months? 24 months?
In the two years I have been following the movement, the price of an at home 3D printer has gone from 2000 to 1000 to 500 to 400 and under. You can already buy them from Staples. It won't be very long before you will be able to get a 3D printer at Walmart for $99. The cost of manufacture of these things is actually very small... its just a bunch of plastic pieces, a couple of motors, and a heated nozzle, the kind you can get on a glue gun at the dollar store. There is no reason that manufactured en-masse they could not be brought below $100.
This argument is nonsense. It is like saying "Coal power made the world a better place, compare what things were like in 1860 to today", and using that to advocate ramping up coal production. It's a nonsense argument.
Whatever benefit something had IN THE PAST does not have bearing on TODAY. What is the benefit a union provides society TODAY. Rights of the worker are now codified in legislation; we're not returning to sweatshops. Meanwhile unions are silent on most of the most pressing social issues in society. I don't see any large unions striking for rights for same sex marriage.
Why do they not use a federated identity system?
Why does ANYONE aside from some key core ID providers (Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, Facebook, OpenID, etc) need to store a password?
When are companies going to stop this madness.... no Ubisoft, I will not be giving you another password to lose thanks.
I find way more useful extensions in the Chrome web store than I do in the Firefox store nowadays. In fact, Chrome's addons are what keep me tied to the browser.
Tell me which is easier
- Improving the efficiency of a single power station in a fixed location where weight is not an issue
- Improving the efficiency of a million mobile vehicles not in a fixed location where weight is an issue.
Even if electric cars are ZERO percent more efficient today, heck even if they are NEGATIVE today, they are still an investment in the future and the way forward. I don't get how people can't see this. Centralization always drives efficiency.
They are not doing their own crypto.... they are using TLS. Again, please read the actual documents.
Maybe if you would RTFA instead of pontificating, you would have found that the reference QUIC implementation is already open source, the specification is open, the wire specification is open, the whole thing is open. If you don't trust Google's implementation then roll your own.
No, they are MOST CERTAINLY NOT "damned if they do and damned f they don't". There is a big difference between doing an ACTUAL INVESTIGATION, and arresting someone without any critical thought or due process.
If any actual critical thinking was applied here, this kid would not be arrested.
No one has a problem with the police investigating threats. They are not "damned if they do". The problem starts when they just go off arresting people without any thoughts on if, you know, they actually meant whatever was being written.
Since Tesla is a California company and these laws are being applied in other states, why would this not fall under interstate commerce ?
The idea that banks are hesitating to do business with these exchanges because Bitcoin is posing as a "thread" is hilarious on it's face.
Ask any average person on the street what a bitcoin is and you will be greeted with nothing but blank stares.
People who use bitcoin and drive up it's value are living inside a reality distortion field of their own making. This supposed currency is going nowhere.
Big data is not about using 1 thing as a predictor. It is about using the analysis of 10,000,000 different things about groups of people analyzed as an aggregate as a predictor. And it is right a lot more often than it is not, when applied properly.
The real reason people are scared of big data is because the more and more we study it, the more and more it is proven that most people are very, very predictable. It's gotten to the point that companies optimize the color placement of objects in the background of their advertising to appeal to people they are targetting.
The thing that amazes me however is how some companies can still get things so outstandingly wrong/backwards in this day and age. Take the recent Microsoft Xbox One fiasco. I find it hard to believe that a company like Microsoft would not have known this reaction was coming. Any trivial study of online sentiment data would have shown this in advance.
This is referrig to California. Gas prices in California are as high or higher than Canada any time I have checked. Fuel quality in California is highly regulated and taxed which adds to the cost.
A corporation is motivated to make money. A government is motivated to maintain control
A company like Google has no motivation to use my private information to frame me and lock me away. It would be counter to their interest. The only motivation Google has is to use the information to sell me stuff. And guess what - not only do they do that, they ADMIT FREELY to doing it. And I really don't have a problem with it because ads do not sway my opinions very much because I am an intelligent person.
The government on the other hand has entirely different motivations. They are not trying to sell me things. The only motivation the government has to know personal and private information on me, is to control me. This is far, far worse than what a company wants to do with that knowledge.
IBM is investing big into OpenStack. They talk about it all over the place.
Rackspace is also investing big into OpenStack.
Both of these players dwarf RedHat.