They would force you to keep the "all-clear" signal with guns pointed at your head? That might be a problem.
The question is what the NSA can force companies to do.
It seems quite clear that they can force company not to publish information. Whether they can force a company to lie is something quite different. As Apple was mentioned, it would seem quite illegal for them to say in a public statement that they didn't receive certain requests when they actually did - much much more illegal than not saying that they received such request.
I get that it would suck if you were in a collision that wasn't your fault, but I believe it'd be better for everyone on the whole if we ditched something which mostly benefits the insurance companies in the end.
Well, it would suck if you were in a collision whether it's your fault or not. Even more if it is your fault. The guilty party would be in deep shit, and the innocent party would be in deep shit if the guilty party has either no money, or tons of money and great lawyers.
It's even more amusing to sit in the same lane driving at a nice constant speed while watching them do this, only to pass them a few minutes later when they get stuck behind a semi truck that just doesn't give a shit about their tailgating and bright flashing.
That's something that I always find amazing. Should be obvious that flashing a truck in front of you will not make the driver do anything they don't want, but it _will_ make them slow you down if they can do so safely.
But the stupid thing is the tailgating. Tailgating means that if you move lanes to start overtaking, you start out at the same speed, so you need a long time to overtake and a long gap in the oncoming traffic. And your view onto oncoming traffic is restricted when you are tailgating. At a good distance, you can see a gap in the traffic much better, and you can start accelerating in the lane where you are, so when you change lanes you are already significantly faster, which means you need a lot less time and a much smaller gap in the traffic to overtake.
While that may seem unsafe, for a race car driver who has a reaction time and muscle memory far faster than the average motorist, those actions would be completely safe. But he would get dinged because his driving habits do not match the slower reactions of the average driver.
Racing driver, behaving like a jerk when he is surrounded by people who are not racing drivers and don't expect people to race, deserves to get dinged.
I completely fail to understand the willingness of anyone to use one of these things for any discount. Even for a 100% discount I wouldn't do it. Insurance is cheap (I pay $280 a year); you'd have to be either too broke to buy gas, or a complete idiot, to sell your privacy for such a low price.
As a beginner male driver aged 18 in the UK, you can expect to pay about £4,000 per year. Going from £4,000 to £3,000 makes this worth whle.
Example: you're driving on the highway and encounter a dangerous situation for which the safest solution is to speed up way past the speed limit -- e.g. you are beside a the first of a tandem trailer, the truck driver doesn't see you, and he starts to change into your lane. So you do, and you may get on "Flo"'s shit list for it, or not, depending on how some coder tuned some Kalman filter or whatnot.
Fact is that hitting the brakes will change the speed of your car an awful lot quicker than hitting the gas pedal. Another fact is that a good driver will avoid situations that have the potential to become dangerous. If you think otherwise then you have an awful lot to learn until you become a good driver.
True story: I had a box of fungicide in my shed, and my wife wanted to throw it out because it was expired. I finally convinced her that it was unlikely that fungicide would rot
A) It fosters competition, which should also foster a better product (I don't actually agree this is the case, though)
Where I work, if someone else is good at their job, that's good for me, because it makes my job easier. With stack ranking, if someone else is good at their job, I'd have to try hard to make them look bad without them noticing, so that I look relatively better. Where I work, I'd help somone getting their job done so we get a better product. With stack ranking, as long as it looks like their fault if the product is shit, I'm Ok.
If you run a service on the internet, you have no expectation of privacy of the data you serve. That sounds reasonable enough. But why then was weev [wired.com] imprisoned for downloading data from a publically facing web server?
If weev can be imprisoned for computer hacking by using a publicly facing server in ways not intended by the owner, why aren't the police here facing similar charges?
Your argument is total rubbish. The "expectation of privacy" or lack thereof means that "weev" whoever that is probably was allowed to tell the world that a company is careless with customers' data. That doesn't give him any right to the actual data. It's private information. He can't get the right to download information belonging to X, Y, Z and over hundred thousand other people just because someone who is neither X, Y, Z or any of those other people makes a mistake.
But they didn't want to. They had no business nor plans to a business to sell that work. There's a lot of argument about weather "intellectual property" can or can not be stolen since it's not a real object. But if that property isn't even for sale, it most certainly can not be stolen. If anything these sites are probably adding to the value of the real property... the song.
That seems to be wrong. They have been mentioning "fully licensed" lyrics site. If I search for some lyrics and find only one lyrics site that pays for the lyrics and makes money with ads instead of 100 others that don't pay for the lyrics, I'm fine with that.
It's not like they're posting the sheet music or the guitar chords, let alone any kind of recording. If you don't already know the tune, the lyrics aren't going to help you understand the actual music. And since singers are so mush-mouthed these days, you need the lyrics to avoid accidentally creating new mondegreens.
Just by coincidence, I did a search for some sheet music just yesterday. Found lots of matches, checked two. One sold the sheet music for a song for $3.28. The other offered it for free. What they offered was a pdf file with an obviously scanned copy of the first one.
i was fine with google taking my info because i know they a singular goal: use the information to provide more targeted ads. they don't care what you are interested in, just get an ad to you. Microsoft and Apple have a bad track record of psychopathic behavior [wikipedia.org] and denying any responsibility for their actions.
Please give us some examples of what you call "psychopathic behaviour".
Samsung ended up with the rounded smooth shapes. Samsung should patent the look and feel of phones with curved screens. They could file separate patents for different curvatures.
They not only should, but they have. Samsung has design patents for their Galaxy phones (I haven't looked for others). Design patents that consist of a list of design details, including corners that are rounded in a certain way.
An Apple insider who asked not to be identified because the information is classifiedâ¦
In other words, an unverifiable rumour from an unverifiable source. It appeared first on MacRumors, where it has some justification to appear because it is about rumours. It does not fit under "news for nerds", because it isn't news.
Adding to the previous post: Of course my computer can, without any problems, access the internet using your WiFi if it is unencrypted, and if you pay per GB and I download tons of videos it may hurt your pocket. But this is not what this is about. I can't, without specifically written software, find out what _you_ are doing on the network.
" to access private wi-fi networks" I seriously doubt it was hacking their networks. If you don't put a password on your wi-fi... it becomes a "public wi-fi network"...
It's like leaving the door to your home open. The contents doesn't become public property. Anyone taking it is still a thief. Anyone entering against your will is still trespassing. Sure, it's stupid and no big surprise if things are gone (depending on your neighbourhood) but it's not public.
Same with WiFi. Just because my neighbours use unencrypted WiFi, that doesn't mean I can listen to what goes on on their network. I'd probably be able to find software that allows me to do this, but my computer, out of the box, has no way for me to read for example unencrypted e-mails being sent through their unencrypted WiFi.
$500,000? To one of the biggest companies on Earth? They spend more than that on coffee. Go big or go home, Brazil.:)
This is a quite common idiotic attitude, that a fine should be somehow related to the size of the company. It should be related to the seriousness of whatever they are fined for. It's obvious that a big company will do 10 times more things that are wrong than each of ten companies that are 1/10th of the size. So total fines will be ten times higher, as they should, but each fine should be the same.
Listen up: recent scandals have demonstrated that Apple's "sandbox" DOESN'T WORK for things like this, as Chalie Miller [cnet.com] and a lot of others [informationweek.com] found out.
They "don't work" in the way that seat belts and airbags "don't work" by not preventing all traffic deaths. Charlie Miller was thrown out of the developer program, so apparently that bit worked anyway.
And developers who unlike marketers often sympathise with the customer, have remarked that Apple's store review has one gigantic advantage: When your marketing departments demands functionality that is hurting the customer, the developers can just point to Apple's review guidelines and tell the marketer that this functionality will keep the app out of the app store.
The problem is that Microsoft apparently reads users emails for the same reason Google does, for targeted ads. It's a nice question that makes people suspicious, but Microsoft email is not a solution for those that answer 'yes'.
You should then write to the British advertising watchdog at www.asa.org.uk and tell them that Microsoft is lying in their adverts. Otherwise, it would seem that you are just bullshitting.
Not only a dupe, but one of the first remark on the discussion was that, not CREDIT CARD COMPANIES already track your every purchase and visits to specific stores, and have done this for a long time.
But CREDIT CARD COMPANIES don't put adverts on my phone.
casting a wide net, there are four major mobile phone OS's. Here's a link to news about one OS capturing and selling location information:
Google Starts Tracking Retail Store Visits On Android and iOS
do you have any links for iOS, blackberry, or windows phone?
Microsoft is doing adverts now in the UK asking potential customers if they want an email service that doesn't read their emails. They don't mention Google by name yet.
lots of people claimed that it didn't really matter because nobody is interested in benchmarks. And now we have this whole article and huge discussions because of benchmark results. Quite interesting.
Any opinions whether benchmarks matter or not are welcome. On the other hand, there was an old joke about a potential customer asking what was the horse power and top speed of a Rolls Royce. Answer: "Enough".
The main advantage of 64 bitness is access to a far larger memory address space. Yes there can be a few minor performance improvements with proper use of larger registers, but it's really not that big an advantage. Until smartphones and tablets start exceeding 4 gigabytes of RAM there is really not much point other than marketing to use 64 bit code on such devices.
That has been debunked again and again and again.
There has been iOS code that was measured to be 45% faster just by being recompiled to 64 bit. There are plenty of tricks in the Objective-C runtime and the C++ libraries that make it _significantly_ more efficient when running on a 64 bit processor. For example, a std::string up to 22 chars doesn't allocate any memory on the heap in 64 bit code but just uses three 64 bit words.
One has to admit that they are an important part of the Internet infrastructure. Billions and Billions of dollars of commerce are generated by Google searches for companies that have little or no direct contact with Google. Every time a government does this, Google should shut that country off until the various entities that DEPEND on the free exchange of information complain and withhold campaign contributions/bribes.
Slashdot Mirror
They would force you to keep the "all-clear" signal with guns pointed at your head? That might be a problem.
The question is what the NSA can force companies to do.
It seems quite clear that they can force company not to publish information. Whether they can force a company to lie is something quite different. As Apple was mentioned, it would seem quite illegal for them to say in a public statement that they didn't receive certain requests when they actually did - much much more illegal than not saying that they received such request.
I get that it would suck if you were in a collision that wasn't your fault, but I believe it'd be better for everyone on the whole if we ditched something which mostly benefits the insurance companies in the end.
Well, it would suck if you were in a collision whether it's your fault or not. Even more if it is your fault. The guilty party would be in deep shit, and the innocent party would be in deep shit if the guilty party has either no money, or tons of money and great lawyers.
It's even more amusing to sit in the same lane driving at a nice constant speed while watching them do this, only to pass them a few minutes later when they get stuck behind a semi truck that just doesn't give a shit about their tailgating and bright flashing.
That's something that I always find amazing. Should be obvious that flashing a truck in front of you will not make the driver do anything they don't want, but it _will_ make them slow you down if they can do so safely.
But the stupid thing is the tailgating. Tailgating means that if you move lanes to start overtaking, you start out at the same speed, so you need a long time to overtake and a long gap in the oncoming traffic. And your view onto oncoming traffic is restricted when you are tailgating. At a good distance, you can see a gap in the traffic much better, and you can start accelerating in the lane where you are, so when you change lanes you are already significantly faster, which means you need a lot less time and a much smaller gap in the traffic to overtake.
While that may seem unsafe, for a race car driver who has a reaction time and muscle memory far faster than the average motorist, those actions would be completely safe. But he would get dinged because his driving habits do not match the slower reactions of the average driver.
Racing driver, behaving like a jerk when he is surrounded by people who are not racing drivers and don't expect people to race, deserves to get dinged.
I completely fail to understand the willingness of anyone to use one of these things for any discount. Even for a 100% discount I wouldn't do it. Insurance is cheap (I pay $280 a year); you'd have to be either too broke to buy gas, or a complete idiot, to sell your privacy for such a low price.
As a beginner male driver aged 18 in the UK, you can expect to pay about £4,000 per year. Going from £4,000 to £3,000 makes this worth whle.
Example: you're driving on the highway and encounter a dangerous situation for which the safest solution is to speed up way past the speed limit -- e.g. you are beside a the first of a tandem trailer, the truck driver doesn't see you, and he starts to change into your lane. So you do, and you may get on "Flo"'s shit list for it, or not, depending on how some coder tuned some Kalman filter or whatnot.
Fact is that hitting the brakes will change the speed of your car an awful lot quicker than hitting the gas pedal. Another fact is that a good driver will avoid situations that have the potential to become dangerous. If you think otherwise then you have an awful lot to learn until you become a good driver.
True story: I had a box of fungicide in my shed, and my wife wanted to throw it out because it was expired. I finally convinced her that it was unlikely that fungicide would rot
She's right. It might kill some fungi.
A) It fosters competition, which should also foster a better product (I don't actually agree this is the case, though)
Where I work, if someone else is good at their job, that's good for me, because it makes my job easier. With stack ranking, if someone else is good at their job, I'd have to try hard to make them look bad without them noticing, so that I look relatively better. Where I work, I'd help somone getting their job done so we get a better product. With stack ranking, as long as it looks like their fault if the product is shit, I'm Ok.
If you run a service on the internet, you have no expectation of privacy of the data you serve. That sounds reasonable enough. But why then was weev [wired.com] imprisoned for downloading data from a publically facing web server?
If weev can be imprisoned for computer hacking by using a publicly facing server in ways not intended by the owner, why aren't the police here facing similar charges?
Your argument is total rubbish. The "expectation of privacy" or lack thereof means that "weev" whoever that is probably was allowed to tell the world that a company is careless with customers' data. That doesn't give him any right to the actual data. It's private information. He can't get the right to download information belonging to X, Y, Z and over hundred thousand other people just because someone who is neither X, Y, Z or any of those other people makes a mistake.
But they didn't want to. They had no business nor plans to a business to sell that work. There's a lot of argument about weather "intellectual property" can or can not be stolen since it's not a real object. But if that property isn't even for sale, it most certainly can not be stolen. If anything these sites are probably adding to the value of the real property... the song.
That seems to be wrong. They have been mentioning "fully licensed" lyrics site. If I search for some lyrics and find only one lyrics site that pays for the lyrics and makes money with ads instead of 100 others that don't pay for the lyrics, I'm fine with that.
It's not like they're posting the sheet music or the guitar chords, let alone any kind of recording. If you don't already know the tune, the lyrics aren't going to help you understand the actual music. And since singers are so mush-mouthed these days, you need the lyrics to avoid accidentally creating new mondegreens.
Just by coincidence, I did a search for some sheet music just yesterday. Found lots of matches, checked two. One sold the sheet music for a song for $3.28. The other offered it for free. What they offered was a pdf file with an obviously scanned copy of the first one.
i was fine with google taking my info because i know they a singular goal: use the information to provide more targeted ads. they don't care what you are interested in, just get an ad to you. Microsoft and Apple have a bad track record of psychopathic behavior [wikipedia.org] and denying any responsibility for their actions.
Please give us some examples of what you call "psychopathic behaviour".
Samsung ended up with the rounded smooth shapes. Samsung should patent the look and feel of phones with curved screens. They could file separate patents for different curvatures.
They not only should, but they have. Samsung has design patents for their Galaxy phones (I haven't looked for others). Design patents that consist of a list of design details, including corners that are rounded in a certain way.
What they need now is an ejection seat to bet the idiotic driver out of the car in such a situation.
And while they're at it, they might add a roof that opens automatically before ejecting the driver.
An Apple insider who asked not to be identified because the information is classifiedâ¦
In other words, an unverifiable rumour from an unverifiable source. It appeared first on MacRumors, where it has some justification to appear because it is about rumours. It does not fit under "news for nerds", because it isn't news.
Adding to the previous post: Of course my computer can, without any problems, access the internet using your WiFi if it is unencrypted, and if you pay per GB and I download tons of videos it may hurt your pocket. But this is not what this is about. I can't, without specifically written software, find out what _you_ are doing on the network.
" to access private wi-fi networks" I seriously doubt it was hacking their networks. If you don't put a password on your wi-fi... it becomes a "public wi-fi network"...
It's like leaving the door to your home open. The contents doesn't become public property. Anyone taking it is still a thief. Anyone entering against your will is still trespassing. Sure, it's stupid and no big surprise if things are gone (depending on your neighbourhood) but it's not public.
Same with WiFi. Just because my neighbours use unencrypted WiFi, that doesn't mean I can listen to what goes on on their network. I'd probably be able to find software that allows me to do this, but my computer, out of the box, has no way for me to read for example unencrypted e-mails being sent through their unencrypted WiFi.
$500,000? To one of the biggest companies on Earth? They spend more than that on coffee. Go big or go home, Brazil. :)
This is a quite common idiotic attitude, that a fine should be somehow related to the size of the company. It should be related to the seriousness of whatever they are fined for. It's obvious that a big company will do 10 times more things that are wrong than each of ten companies that are 1/10th of the size. So total fines will be ten times higher, as they should, but each fine should be the same.
Listen up: recent scandals have demonstrated that Apple's "sandbox" DOESN'T WORK for things like this, as Chalie Miller [cnet.com] and a lot of others [informationweek.com] found out.
They "don't work" in the way that seat belts and airbags "don't work" by not preventing all traffic deaths. Charlie Miller was thrown out of the developer program, so apparently that bit worked anyway.
And developers who unlike marketers often sympathise with the customer, have remarked that Apple's store review has one gigantic advantage: When your marketing departments demands functionality that is hurting the customer, the developers can just point to Apple's review guidelines and tell the marketer that this functionality will keep the app out of the app store.
The problem is that Microsoft apparently reads users emails for the same reason Google does, for targeted ads. It's a nice question that makes people suspicious, but Microsoft email is not a solution for those that answer 'yes'.
You should then write to the British advertising watchdog at www.asa.org.uk and tell them that Microsoft is lying in their adverts. Otherwise, it would seem that you are just bullshitting.
Not only a dupe, but one of the first remark on the discussion was that, not CREDIT CARD COMPANIES already track your every purchase and visits to specific stores, and have done this for a long time.
But CREDIT CARD COMPANIES don't put adverts on my phone.
casting a wide net, there are four major mobile phone OS's. Here's a link to news about one OS capturing and selling location information:
Google Starts Tracking Retail Store Visits On Android and iOS
do you have any links for iOS, blackberry, or windows phone?
Microsoft is doing adverts now in the UK asking potential customers if they want an email service that doesn't read their emails. They don't mention Google by name yet.
lots of people claimed that it didn't really matter because nobody is interested in benchmarks. And now we have this whole article and huge discussions because of benchmark results. Quite interesting.
Any opinions whether benchmarks matter or not are welcome. On the other hand, there was an old joke about a potential customer asking what was the horse power and top speed of a Rolls Royce. Answer: "Enough".
The main advantage of 64 bitness is access to a far larger memory address space. Yes there can be a few minor performance improvements with proper use of larger registers, but it's really not that big an advantage. Until smartphones and tablets start exceeding 4 gigabytes of RAM there is really not much point other than marketing to use 64 bit code on such devices.
That has been debunked again and again and again.
There has been iOS code that was measured to be 45% faster just by being recompiled to 64 bit. There are plenty of tricks in the Objective-C runtime and the C++ libraries that make it _significantly_ more efficient when running on a 64 bit processor. For example, a std::string up to 22 chars doesn't allocate any memory on the heap in 64 bit code but just uses three 64 bit words.
One has to admit that they are an important part of the Internet infrastructure. Billions and Billions of dollars of commerce are generated by Google searches for companies that have little or no direct contact with Google. Every time a government does this, Google should shut that country off until the various entities that DEPEND on the free exchange of information complain and withhold campaign contributions/bribes.
Or Microsoft buys a few more servers for Bing.