1. That's quite a lot like fighting a fire with gasoline and would piss people off even more.
2. Who would do the job of modding those subreddits then? Modding a large subreddit takes a lot of work. I'm semi-active in one sub which is just over 100k subscribers. I'm not a mod but I'm facebook friends with many of the mods. It's basically a part-time job for roughly 8 people. iAmA and other subs are even larger and crazier. Good modding can make or break a sub. iAmA in particular is one of the biggest drivers of new people to reddit. Imagine the traffic they must get when major celebrities put something on their facebook feed that they'll be doing an AMA on reddit.
He's not really using his terms very well. He seems to be defining Netflix and Hulu as primarily television companies as opposed to internet companies. He says so at this point:
Netflix bills itself as a disrupter of television - except that it is television, paying Hollywood and the TV industry almost $2 billion a year in licensing and programming fees.
You can certainly make an argument for that. They are certainly a blend of the two. His argument is really much more about subscription services versus ad-supported services.
Be careful there. There is "evidence" for just about anything you can imagine. The evidence may be weak, or hearsay, or highly subject to interpretation, but that doesn't mean it isn't evidence. Simply stating there is none won't likely get you anywhere and just completely shuts down any potential dialogue. Showing how their evidence is actually your evidence, or that it is inconclusive, is going to be much more productive.
> You and I do NOT benefit from private passenger vehicles other than our own.
That's not entirely true. If I drive to McDonalds but there's nobody working there then it's pretty useless. I suppose in theory they could take public transit, but that's spotty at best in many areas of the country. If I'm disabled to the point of being effectively unable to drive then I do not directly use roads at all, but am far more dependent on them. And lets not forget the joys of pizza delivery!
In general, there are lot of benefits to having a good infrastructure regardless of whether I use it directly. I'm not sure it's worth even trying to determine who uses it the most.
You can make a case that when and where also matters, perhaps the speed I'm driving, any drugs I've taken lately, and even whether my girlfriend recently broke up with me, but I'd rather not share all that with my insurance company. I think the commercial / non-commercial split was just a simple way to split people between those who drive a lot and those who don't without giving lots of personal information to insurance companies.
It appears that some insurance companies are working on getting you options for this, but it's not available in all states yet: https://www.policygenius.com/b...
Uber and Lyft both provide full insurance coverage while someone is driving a fare for them. There is apparently a strange insurance gap if the driver is logged into their app looking to get a fare but not actually driving someone and is in an accident. If I'm understanding things right that's considered a commercial activity and not covered under personal insurance, but since they don't have an active fare it's not covered by Uber/Lyft either. Insurance companies are now offering policies that cover that gap. It's only a concern for the drivers though, as a passenger you're always covered by Uber/Lyft.
I think we have reached the point where a display + camera may be just as good for seeing out and more structurally sound then windows. Take a look at the windowless plane interior shot from upthread:
In most cases the billing receipts will be just one small piece of a VERY large system. I suspect that specifying more readable bills isn't exactly a high priority during negotiations. There is definitely pressure in this area, but it's a slow moving industry.
There's a kickstarter right now doing full 3D scans of people and they seem to think that the primary market will be people who want a fully digital version of themselves for video games and other virtual environments. They do have various "3D portraits" available, but I get the impression they think their biggest business will be just providing the data files from the scans.
I was under the impression that the housing prices are mostly due to the cost of land there. Since he already owns the land and is just having to pay construction costs I am surprised by this.
> There's a big difference between promoting gun safety at home, and putting it into law.
Tell that to Florida, who wrote a law forbidding doctors from even asking if people have guns at home, much less recommending that they keep them secure.
This is a tough one. You are using a somewhat narrow definition of "working for" to mean a defined financial arrangement between an employer and employee. That's not the only way to read that phrase. I can accurately say that I am working for my family, in the sense that my goal is to provide for them. You can certainly be "working for" a cause as well. If we accept that part of ISIS goal is driving a wedge between Muslims and the rest of us then Fox is definitely working for them. If someone is unintentionally furthering my nefarious plans to take over the world I might say something like "They are working for me. They just don't know it!" and then engage in some maniacal laughter.
Why do you think consumption taxes are inherently progressive? It may be possible to make them that way, but I don't see how that is an inherent aspect.
The poor and middle classes generally have to spend the vast majority of their income and invest very little. All that is generally "consumption" the rich may seem to consume more, but as a percentage of their income it's far less than others. You can attempt to fix this by making food and other staples not subject to taxation and with luxury taxes, but that adds complications and you've pointed out the other dangers. I suspect any attempt to create progressive consumption taxes will be easily gamed. I'm open to the idea if it can be made to work, but taxing wealth has a big advantage of being relatively simple and much harder to game.
You can check regular size items at the gate. They are loaded into cargo last. The most common use for this is strollers, but other items are possible.
I totally agree with you here. It seems like they killed 3.x right when they finally got their balance issues mostly fixed with the Tome of Battle. I really don't understand the big deal with Pathfinder.
While I generally support year-round schools it will make maintenance of the schools a bit trickier. Just about half the schools here get some sort of construction done on them every summer and it's almost always down to the wire getting it finished in time for classes to start.
I'm guessing that it was already there and they aren't going to spend money to remove it, even though someone out there has probably already done it for them.
In that first article the CEO of AddThis says that "Itâ(TM)s not uniquely identifying enough" and the guy who originally developed it says it's only 90% accurate.
> regulate the medical industry like the criminals they are
I got a bit of a chuckle out of this. The Medical industry is rather intensively regulated, and durable medical equipment (the category this stuff falls into) has among the most stringent requirements and an awful lot of red-tape to cut through.It's not necessarily a bad thing, but it does add a good chunk to the cost of these, and DME companies are generally doing very well.
Of course, all that regulation does is give you something your insurance might consider paying for, they probably can't legally pay for non-regulated equipment even if they want to. When you get things cheap enough that we can afford them without insurance, cool stuff can happen.
Just a note: Depending on how well your employer games the system you may be loaning it to your employer more than you are to the government. Your employer "withholds" it when it pays you, but it's not cutting a check to the govt for that withheld portion immediately. Smaller employers may even get away with just paying the withholding taxes on their annual corporate taxes. I know my state govt is way more insistent about getting it's tax withholding promptly than the fed is.
But it's truly hilarious when we find their not-entirely-terrible ideas (ACA/Obamacare) and try to implement them. Their insanity forces them to immediately become against it. I'm not sure how many good ideas they have, but as soon as a "liberal" tries to implement it they turn against it completely.
While I'm not necessarily all that impressed by this, your specific criticism doesn't seem to be valid. It appears that n accounts are pre-created with null information and assigned out as needed. When those are about to get used up another n are created. There would appear to be a possible attack on a new account by creating lots of dummy accounts to have a big chunk of the password space under your control, but that seems like a pretty uncommon circumstance.
What I like about it is that it seems to protect stupid users from themselves. All the salt in the world doesn't do much for people who just use "password" for their password. It will still fall in the blink of an eye. We often seem to have the opinion that they deserve it for choosing a poor password, but it's still a compromised account.
The threat model is very limited to "attacker got the password hashes", but that is a common threat currently. If you're going to pick one, that's not a bad choice. It's biggest issue may be if tomorrows threat model is significantly different.
Slashdot Mirror
I can think of 2 primary reasons:
1. That's quite a lot like fighting a fire with gasoline and would piss people off even more.
2. Who would do the job of modding those subreddits then? Modding a large subreddit takes a lot of work. I'm semi-active in one sub which is just over 100k subscribers. I'm not a mod but I'm facebook friends with many of the mods. It's basically a part-time job for roughly 8 people. iAmA and other subs are even larger and crazier. Good modding can make or break a sub. iAmA in particular is one of the biggest drivers of new people to reddit. Imagine the traffic they must get when major celebrities put something on their facebook feed that they'll be doing an AMA on reddit.
He's not really using his terms very well. He seems to be defining Netflix and Hulu as primarily television companies as opposed to internet companies. He says so at this point:
Netflix bills itself as a disrupter of television - except that it is television, paying Hollywood and the TV industry almost $2 billion a year in licensing and programming fees.
You can certainly make an argument for that. They are certainly a blend of the two. His argument is really much more about subscription services versus ad-supported services.
They did announce the other banned subs, just not in the text of the main announcement:
fatpeoplehate (150k+ subscribers)
hamplanethatred (3071)
transfags (149)
neofag (1239)
shitniggerssay (219)
Be careful there. There is "evidence" for just about anything you can imagine. The evidence may be weak, or hearsay, or highly subject to interpretation, but that doesn't mean it isn't evidence. Simply stating there is none won't likely get you anywhere and just completely shuts down any potential dialogue. Showing how their evidence is actually your evidence, or that it is inconclusive, is going to be much more productive.
> You and I do NOT benefit from private passenger vehicles other than our own.
That's not entirely true. If I drive to McDonalds but there's nobody working there then it's pretty useless. I suppose in theory they could take public transit, but that's spotty at best in many areas of the country. If I'm disabled to the point of being effectively unable to drive then I do not directly use roads at all, but am far more dependent on them. And lets not forget the joys of pizza delivery!
In general, there are lot of benefits to having a good infrastructure regardless of whether I use it directly. I'm not sure it's worth even trying to determine who uses it the most.
You can make a case that when and where also matters, perhaps the speed I'm driving, any drugs I've taken lately, and even whether my girlfriend recently broke up with me, but I'd rather not share all that with my insurance company. I think the commercial / non-commercial split was just a simple way to split people between those who drive a lot and those who don't without giving lots of personal information to insurance companies.
It appears that some insurance companies are working on getting you options for this, but it's not available in all states yet: https://www.policygenius.com/b...
Uber and Lyft both provide full insurance coverage while someone is driving a fare for them. There is apparently a strange insurance gap if the driver is logged into their app looking to get a fare but not actually driving someone and is in an accident. If I'm understanding things right that's considered a commercial activity and not covered under personal insurance, but since they don't have an active fare it's not covered by Uber/Lyft either. Insurance companies are now offering policies that cover that gap. It's only a concern for the drivers though, as a passenger you're always covered by Uber/Lyft.
I think we have reached the point where a display + camera may be just as good for seeing out and more structurally sound then windows. Take a look at the windowless plane interior shot from upthread:
http://rack.1.mshcdn.com/media...
There are lots of other reasons why we might still want windows, but I think we have superior options for just needing to see out.
In most cases the billing receipts will be just one small piece of a VERY large system. I suspect that specifying more readable bills isn't exactly a high priority during negotiations. There is definitely pressure in this area, but it's a slow moving industry.
There's a kickstarter right now doing full 3D scans of people and they seem to think that the primary market will be people who want a fully digital version of themselves for video games and other virtual environments. They do have various "3D portraits" available, but I get the impression they think their biggest business will be just providing the data files from the scans.
https://www.kickstarter.com/pr...
I was under the impression that the housing prices are mostly due to the cost of land there. Since he already owns the land and is just having to pay construction costs I am surprised by this.
> There's a big difference between promoting gun safety at home, and putting it into law.
Tell that to Florida, who wrote a law forbidding doctors from even asking if people have guns at home, much less recommending that they keep them secure.
http://www.theatlantic.com/hea...
This is a tough one. You are using a somewhat narrow definition of "working for" to mean a defined financial arrangement between an employer and employee. That's not the only way to read that phrase. I can accurately say that I am working for my family, in the sense that my goal is to provide for them. You can certainly be "working for" a cause as well. If we accept that part of ISIS goal is driving a wedge between Muslims and the rest of us then Fox is definitely working for them. If someone is unintentionally furthering my nefarious plans to take over the world I might say something like "They are working for me. They just don't know it!" and then engage in some maniacal laughter.
Why do you think consumption taxes are inherently progressive? It may be possible to make them that way, but I don't see how that is an inherent aspect.
The poor and middle classes generally have to spend the vast majority of their income and invest very little. All that is generally "consumption" the rich may seem to consume more, but as a percentage of their income it's far less than others. You can attempt to fix this by making food and other staples not subject to taxation and with luxury taxes, but that adds complications and you've pointed out the other dangers. I suspect any attempt to create progressive consumption taxes will be easily gamed. I'm open to the idea if it can be made to work, but taxing wealth has a big advantage of being relatively simple and much harder to game.
You can check regular size items at the gate. They are loaded into cargo last. The most common use for this is strollers, but other items are possible.
That's good if you want to really weird people out. I prefer the pure panic-inducing power of lp0 on Fire!
I totally agree with you here. It seems like they killed 3.x right when they finally got their balance issues mostly fixed with the Tome of Battle. I really don't understand the big deal with Pathfinder.
While I generally support year-round schools it will make maintenance of the schools a bit trickier. Just about half the schools here get some sort of construction done on them every summer and it's almost always down to the wire getting it finished in time for classes to start.
I'm guessing that it was already there and they aren't going to spend money to remove it, even though someone out there has probably already done it for them.
It looks like the technical details would be found in this link: http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~hovav/...
In that first article the CEO of AddThis says that "Itâ(TM)s not uniquely identifying enough" and the guy who originally developed it says it's only 90% accurate.
> regulate the medical industry like the criminals they are
I got a bit of a chuckle out of this. The Medical industry is rather intensively regulated, and durable medical equipment (the category this stuff falls into) has among the most stringent requirements and an awful lot of red-tape to cut through.It's not necessarily a bad thing, but it does add a good chunk to the cost of these, and DME companies are generally doing very well.
Of course, all that regulation does is give you something your insurance might consider paying for, they probably can't legally pay for non-regulated equipment even if they want to. When you get things cheap enough that we can afford them without insurance, cool stuff can happen.
Just a note: Depending on how well your employer games the system you may be loaning it to your employer more than you are to the government. Your employer "withholds" it when it pays you, but it's not cutting a check to the govt for that withheld portion immediately. Smaller employers may even get away with just paying the withholding taxes on their annual corporate taxes. I know my state govt is way more insistent about getting it's tax withholding promptly than the fed is.
But it's truly hilarious when we find their not-entirely-terrible ideas (ACA/Obamacare) and try to implement them. Their insanity forces them to immediately become against it. I'm not sure how many good ideas they have, but as soon as a "liberal" tries to implement it they turn against it completely.
While I'm not necessarily all that impressed by this, your specific criticism doesn't seem to be valid. It appears that n accounts are pre-created with null information and assigned out as needed. When those are about to get used up another n are created. There would appear to be a possible attack on a new account by creating lots of dummy accounts to have a big chunk of the password space under your control, but that seems like a pretty uncommon circumstance.
What I like about it is that it seems to protect stupid users from themselves. All the salt in the world doesn't do much for people who just use "password" for their password. It will still fall in the blink of an eye. We often seem to have the opinion that they deserve it for choosing a poor password, but it's still a compromised account.
The threat model is very limited to "attacker got the password hashes", but that is a common threat currently. If you're going to pick one, that's not a bad choice. It's biggest issue may be if tomorrows threat model is significantly different.