Unfortunately, those that pray to the great God Mammon are incapable of understanding that there is no honest way to amass such riches and that it will always have massive negative consequences for the rest of the world. Bill Gates is the evil mastermind that prevented the world form having an universal OS with several reference implementations by now. Instead the mainstream OS is a closed mess made by utter fuckups that does not even have a stable UI or API.
That is a massive romaticization. Bill Gates is a crook, and the bit about giving some money to the poor and in a questionable (and pretty much non-effective) manner on top of it does not make him a hero in any sane view of reality.
For variable definitions of "generous". If you made a lot of money by basically evil market domination with a bad product (as he has) giving to charity may be more of an attempt to get at least some good karma. The term "generous" does not really apply to that.
Yes, they very much do require censorship. Which is why we are seeing censorship and its ugly little sibling "chilling effects" on the raise all in the west.
Well, ignoring facts in decisions is pretty much one of the core definitions of "stupid".
You probably confuse "stupid" with "of low intelligence". The two do not match. People with low intelligence can be very much not stupid by clearly understanding what they do and do not understand and seeking expert advice on the latter. The problem stupid people have (even those of high intelligence) is vastly over-estimating their skills and hence arriving at invalid conclusions, such as to which facts do matter and which facts can be ignored. Personally, I like to call this "low wisdom" which, when combined with high intelligence, makes for the most dangerously stupid people. In science, the "Dunning-Kruger Effect" describes basically the same thing, although they have a bit of a different angle on it.
You mean the framework used is to utterly bad that designers can break the functionality of the code without ever touching it? In that case, sack the coders that did the framework for even worse incompetence. And while many, many fuckups are the fault of management, sometimes it _is_ stupid coders.
Makes sense. Stupid people cannot accept voices disagreeing with them, because they cannot grasp the idea that they may be wrong themselves. Hence they create a filter-bubble and make the world a bit worse for everybody.
Anyways, I much rather give to Patreon for my favorite creators and block ads completely.
Indeed. And they critically depend on people continuing to make content for them, so they have to make sure enough money ends up with the content creators. This "demonetizing" nonsense indicates they do not understand their own business model.
If a viable alternative becomes available, they will be gone, even if it is years from now. Morale: Do not do something like this to people you critically depend on.
The usual cave-men are at work here, believing that violence will solve all of their problems. The actual truth is that Spain is economically in much worse shape than Catalonia and was content to just leave it at that. The Catalonians obviously were fed up with this state of affairs. This also means that if Spain now takes over by force in Catalonia, they will be massively hurting themselves. But it takes two brain-cells to rub together to see that, and the cave-men in power do not have those. All they needed to do was to treat Catalonia better, and nothing of this would have happened.
Sure, they can work if they stay reasonably stable, because there actually is real work necessary to produce more "coins" and they can be used for other purposes than speculation. But as soon as the value fluctuates wildly (as Bitcoin does at the moment), they become unusable for anything except speculation and then they turn into a game of chicken and will eventually crash, just like a pyramid-scheme does.
The main reason to back a currency (or stocks) with something solid is to prevent wild fluctuations and to make it something that can be used to store value and to exchange in trade.
Indeed. A police solving all crimes is hugely undesirable and massively dangerous, because it leads to them having far too much power. This basically assures a police-state were everybody is _less_ safe as the police in police-states turn more or less openly into criminal gangs that are exempt form the law. Part of that is already happening in the US, just look at civil forfeiture or the extremely lenient punishment a rapist cop can expect.
Solving of crimes needs to fulfill one thing: Society must be kept reasonably functional. Anything above that is a problem. The police must be carefully monitored and carefully limited in what they can do by the population.
I am pretty sure they wanted the way into that phone to create precedent and propaganda. They must have known how unlikely it was that there was anything useful on that phone...
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately, those that pray to the great God Mammon are incapable of understanding that there is no honest way to amass such riches and that it will always have massive negative consequences for the rest of the world. Bill Gates is the evil mastermind that prevented the world form having an universal OS with several reference implementations by now. Instead the mainstream OS is a closed mess made by utter fuckups that does not even have a stable UI or API.
That is a massive romaticization. Bill Gates is a crook, and the bit about giving some money to the poor and in a questionable (and pretty much non-effective) manner on top of it does not make him a hero in any sane view of reality.
For variable definitions of "generous". If you made a lot of money by basically evil market domination with a bad product (as he has) giving to charity may be more of an attempt to get at least some good karma. The term "generous" does not really apply to that.
Yes, they very much do require censorship. Which is why we are seeing censorship and its ugly little sibling "chilling effects" on the raise all in the west.
Well, ignoring facts in decisions is pretty much one of the core definitions of "stupid".
You probably confuse "stupid" with "of low intelligence". The two do not match. People with low intelligence can be very much not stupid by clearly understanding what they do and do not understand and seeking expert advice on the latter. The problem stupid people have (even those of high intelligence) is vastly over-estimating their skills and hence arriving at invalid conclusions, such as to which facts do matter and which facts can be ignored. Personally, I like to call this "low wisdom" which, when combined with high intelligence, makes for the most dangerously stupid people. In science, the "Dunning-Kruger Effect" describes basically the same thing, although they have a bit of a different angle on it.
Who said anything about ignoring the banksters? I certainly did not.
If anything at all, this should cause a criminal investigation against those responsible, as gross negligence was clearly involved.
Indeed. Same here. YouTube does not have exclusivity and it is not _their_ content in the first place. They seem to have forgotten that.
You mean the framework used is to utterly bad that designers can break the functionality of the code without ever touching it? In that case, sack the coders that did the framework for even worse incompetence. And while many, many fuckups are the fault of management, sometimes it _is_ stupid coders.
Because this is clearly what most of the stock-market is.
Makes sense. Stupid people cannot accept voices disagreeing with them, because they cannot grasp the idea that they may be wrong themselves. Hence they create a filter-bubble and make the world a bit worse for everybody.
Anyways, I much rather give to Patreon for my favorite creators and block ads completely.
Indeed. And they critically depend on people continuing to make content for them, so they have to make sure enough money ends up with the content creators. This "demonetizing" nonsense indicates they do not understand their own business model.
If a viable alternative becomes available, they will be gone, even if it is years from now.
Morale: Do not do something like this to people you critically depend on.
You probably were more qualified than these morons at that point...
... produce things like this. They should be sacked for gross incompetence.
The usual cave-men are at work here, believing that violence will solve all of their problems. The actual truth is that Spain is economically in much worse shape than Catalonia and was content to just leave it at that. The Catalonians obviously were fed up with this state of affairs. This also means that if Spain now takes over by force in Catalonia, they will be massively hurting themselves. But it takes two brain-cells to rub together to see that, and the cave-men in power do not have those. All they needed to do was to treat Catalonia better, and nothing of this would have happened.
Counting metrics are useless. Unless you take into account what was actually patched, you will come to invalid conclusions like yours.
Well, with morons like you around, at least the hackers need not worry about getting more opportunities in the future.
While true. those that messed up will not supper much in the way of consequences. And that is why this thing will continue.
As far as I am aware, we have not had a scandal of this type. I have no doubt that it is going on though.
Sure, they can work if they stay reasonably stable, because there actually is real work necessary to produce more "coins" and they can be used for other purposes than speculation. But as soon as the value fluctuates wildly (as Bitcoin does at the moment), they become unusable for anything except speculation and then they turn into a game of chicken and will eventually crash, just like a pyramid-scheme does.
The main reason to back a currency (or stocks) with something solid is to prevent wild fluctuations and to make it something that can be used to store value and to exchange in trade.
Makes a lot of sense to me.
Indeed. A police solving all crimes is hugely undesirable and massively dangerous, because it leads to them having far too much power. This basically assures a police-state were everybody is _less_ safe as the police in police-states turn more or less openly into criminal gangs that are exempt form the law. Part of that is already happening in the US, just look at civil forfeiture or the extremely lenient punishment a rapist cop can expect.
Solving of crimes needs to fulfill one thing: Society must be kept reasonably functional. Anything above that is a problem. The police must be carefully monitored and carefully limited in what they can do by the population.
I am pretty sure they wanted the way into that phone to create precedent and propaganda. They must have known how unlikely it was that there was anything useful on that phone...
Why not throw the Constitution out entirely? Clearly, law enforcement only wants the best for the citizens....