TSA members are not law enforcement officers. They are still rent-a-cops, like the guys at the mall: they may have additional security privileges but still have to call in actual LEOs if there's an incident they believe warrants someone being arrested. This is a common misconception; it's apparently bad enough that a House bill has been proposed so they won't be able to have cop-like uniforms: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationnow/2011/12/strip-act-targets-tsa.html
Because airports have lots of real cops that are easily accessible, they can still make your life (or at least your day) pretty miserable with ease, but on their own they're just expensive thugs.
I've travelled with multiple terabytes of "these are obviously hard drives" storage and never had a problem with search or confiscation. They did swab things down and run it through their bomb detector (unsurprising). If I have data that needs protection, it's encrypted - often twice (I run full-disk encryption on my system, and then encrypt any extra-sensitive data on top of that in case my system fails to lock for some reason).
If I had the need of disguising the fact that I was bringing data at all, I'd probably put a microSD card behind/in an earring or something else that would have no trouble going through a metal detector (any concealed compartments would likely show up on xray, if they were really looking). Or just wrap the thing in plastic and swallow it.
No kidding. I moved cross-country including a small photo studio's worth of gear (two monoblocs, a half-dozen or more small strobes, at least five stands, two SLR bodies, several lenses, etc., etc.) in a MINI Cooper, and had room to spare - and that was with a co-pilot and his luggage. Aside from some extremely unwieldy backdrops, fitting any piece of photo gear in my car is no problem whatsoever (and as the GP said he was driving to make landscape shots... that's irrelevant here).
Would it be more convenient to throw it all in the back of a pickup or SUV? Sure. But it takes about five seconds to fold down my back seats. That sure isn't worth more-than-doubling my fuel costs.
Is that a problem, though? Don't think of it in terms of MPG, think about $/mile. Hippies care about MPG, the rest of us care about the cost of transportation and MPG is currently our most meaningful metric to gauge that. Handily, $/mi also works across all vehicles, including public transportation and bicycles. Based on some rough estimates, my current cost is about 12.5c/mi (~$4/gal, ~32MPG), if I exclude the purchase price of the car. If I bought a Tesla tomorrow (or perhaps an EV that's a bit less expensive), how many miles could I go on 12.5c worth of electricity? More than one, I expect. Net gain, all other things being equal (they obviously aren't - this excludes purchase price, maintenance, etc).
No matter what the cost of fuel is, it's always financially advantageous to go with the vehicle that consumes less fuel. Gas could be $0.10c/gal or $100/gal. You need to take the emotion out of the equation. Are you getting dicked over by the fuel companies? Probably. It's still better to pay less by having the more efficient vehicle.
Doing it once in a controlled environment to prove a point is very different than reckless trolling. The comment also suggested the kids are bracing themselves so the chance of a neck ending up wrapped around the head restraint of the seat in front is minimal. Granted I'd probably only do it at 15-20mph (it doesn't take much), but even still, you have to do something to make your point.
There's a big difference between "two for 600 employees" and "one per 300 employees". The former is (likely) 1+backup for all employees, whereas the latter is just wasteful stupidity. I'm guessing if your employer doubles its headcount, it will not expand to four datacenters to support them.
Security is hard. I agree that yes, most frameworks suck at security (my team has reported security bugs, with implementation details, to the framework authors. They were rejected as "not an issue", demonstrably false by running the example we sent which followed their own best practices guidelines).
PHP is no exception, but security with it is no harder than with any other language. But as a powerful set of tools with relatively few safeguards, it's easy to do stupid things. And if you know what you're doing, it's also pretty easy to lock down. Some poor default settings did not help here, but they have been deprecated for the better part of a decade (PHP5 was introduced, what, six years ago now?). If Wordpress had been written in Python or Ruby, do you think it would suddenly be more secure? It was written by lousy coders that needed to hack together a functional product, and poor security is part of that baggage.
Great, I've gone from $179 vendor lock-in to $0 vendor lock-in. Until others implement NaCl, I'm still forced to use Chrome to get at that software. As it so happens I use and quite like Chrome, but when that inevitably changes and suddenly I want to start using Firefox again, I will not have that option. No, I will not fork chromium and make my own browser. Technically possible does not mean practical, and therefore I don't consider it an option.
Just another example of timezones being confusing and counterproductive. Switch the entire world to UTC (and kill am/pm since they'll no longer correspond to morning/night in half the world). Sure, it'll take some getting your head around working 16h-01h for what's currently an 8-5PT, but just the idea of eliminating "2pm your time or mine?" makes it worthwhile.
You're mixing economics with idealism. Everyone likes the idea of free software, and most people rely on it even if they don't realize that's the case. But due to the way people's brains are typically wired, having a baseline of >0 is advantageous for the seller. For example, if there were two apps, one free and one $2.00, the free one will have massively more downloads even if the paid one is significantly better. But change the pricing to $0.99 and $2.99 and "better" will tend to win out (well, the ratio will be a lot more in line with what you'd expect given the quality of what's being purchased, even if it's not actually making more sales) over "free", despite the same $2.00 spread between the products.
As it turns out, people that don't want to pay for stuff tend to be lousy customers. So I don't feel bad if I don't gain a customer who thinks that my product is overpriced. If you think I'm not adding enough value for what I charge - that's fine, you're welcome to not use what I'm making (free market, etc). Other people are happy to pay, and they also tend to focus on the reasons my stuff is improving their lives rather than searching for flaws that would justify me offering a discount. I'm happy, my customers are happy, and my non-customers are no more or less whiny than they would be without me.
As you might have guessed, I don't believe that all software should be free just because. I feel it's perfectly reasonable to ask for compensation if you're providing value, even if that value is in the form of carefully-arranged ones and zeroes. I would prefer that more software is Free (as in speech) if only to encourage interoperability, but that's a completely separate and mostly unrelated discussion. Anything that I create for free (which may or may not also be Free; generally it is) is strictly unsupported - it needs to fulfill my needs alone, and if you don't have to duplicate my efforts, then have at it! But as a general rule, I don't take feature requests on anything for which I'm not charging. I just don't have the time or energy.
I trust Google's engineers not to get me killed more than I trust the vast majority of drivers, especially knowing how little it takes to get a drivers license. So far, the only incident involving one of Google's self-driving cars is when a human was in control (i.e., it was sheer coincidence that it was one of those cars); statistically speaking, they're the safest vehicles currently in existence. At least software can be fixed; try as we might, we haven't yet fixed stupid. I'm trying to look up how many are mechanical failures versus human error but this hotel internet connection sucks, but I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of problems are people's faults (and of mechanical failures, most of those probably would have been preventable with proper maintenance)
Well to be fair, a lot of drivers are just stupid. At a construction site the other night, I slowed down to let some people in for the upcoming traffic merge. Every one of the people in the lane sped past me, continued on right up until the giant flashing sign, and then proceeded to block up everything as they tried to find a way to get into the open lane.
Better driver education would go a long way.
But as it is, reckless driving is already illegal. There's no need to ban specific activities. If you're doing them safely, continue on as normal (though I agree... mascara? Yikes). If you're not, do not pass go, do not collect $200.
That argument is BS and you know it. Texting while driving is an act of you actively diverting your attention from driving to your cell phone. When you're driving, your full-time job is doing so safely. Everything else comes second (even if you're driving 100mph to get to the hospital because a passenger just lost a leg in a chainsaw accident; if you can do that without making your situation or that of those around you worse, good for you).
Yes, there's some degree of risk associated with using a bus. There's some degree of risk associated with using a car. There's some degree of risk associated with going to work, with not going to work, with having sex, with cliff-jumping, and sitting at home all day. It's your job to weigh the risk versus the reward. In the case of using a bus, the risk is quite low (bus drivers literally have the full-time job of operating the vehicle safely, not just figuratively), and the reward varies but is usually fairly high. Operating a phone while driving? Extremely high risk under most circumstances, typically very low reward. I won't pretend I've never done it, but I avoid doing so whenever possible and try to limit it to stoplights.
How would banning manual transmissions help? You're using both hands for driving, they're just not both on the steering wheel 100% of the time. Unless someone is suggesting that we should require passenger assistance to put on your four-way flashers or defroster, neither of which tend to be accessible while your hand is on the steering wheel.
Smoking? Meh. It's a bad idea for a number of reasons but I don't see that as a huge distraction. I think the world would be a better place without cigarettes, but it's not a huge physical or mental distraction.
As for the handicapped - if they're incapable of operating a motor vehicle safely due to their disability, then yes, they absolutely should be banned from driving. When political correctness goes up in a battle against physics, physics will win.
It's not like it should come as a surprise to anyone that Sony has chosen to create yet another proprietary format (and attempted to lock it down beyond simply being incompatible with anything else). They got away with it in the '80s and '90s because they actually made good hardware and the concept of interoperability barely existed. The only time they've had any real success with it was Blu-Ray, and I'm sure that hasn't seen the adoption they'd like since legal download services so shortly after its introduction, and their attempts to force it down everyone's throats have certainly been expensive. Today the reverse is true - their products tend to be sub-par and we increasingly expect stuff to work across our devices, but they're still stuck in the past.
Channel-flipping worked fifteen years ago when we had maybe 50 channels. The hundreds we have today, often duplicated in different formats? Not so much. The entire experience is just awful and broken:
* Content discovery is awful * The menus, channel guides, and other navigation stuff are some of the worst experiences I've seen (I generally avoid TV, so when I see them in use at friends' houses I cringe) * We still have the idea of content being delivered by channels in timeslots. Talk about being stuck in the past. Everything is delivered digitally now, yet we still push content in a way that was built around the restrictions of analog broadcasting. I realize it's not exactly the same, but given that we re-use the lines for cable internet connections, it's clearly possible to have two-way communication. We use DVRs as a lousy hack to get around this, but the future is clearly a more iTunes-like experience in the sense of "get the three most recent episodes of the show" * Pricing is a mess. They try to hit you everywhere for all sorts of different things. Six levels of TV service, PPV options, premium channels, rental fees, etc. There are so many things they could do to make this simpler, and yet they continue to make it more confusing, presumably to trick people into being upsold. That can't be sustained indefinitely. * Content overload - and nothing worth watching (obviously that's a matter of opinion) * Extremely complicated set-up. All of these digital systems have such poor integration with each other, despite decent attempts to make systems smarter. HDMI was designed in part to alleviate this, but I'm still trying to get everything working in harmony. Even just some UI tweaks and speedups to flip between input sources would be a huge improvement. Why must I slowly (very, very slowly!) scroll through a list of uselessly-named inputs? Just put up a grid of things that are receiving content and let me arrow between them. And for the love of god, make it more responsive.
I may be a poor case study not being a big fan of "I'm bored; placate me with mindless content", and I find TV to be a very ineffective way to get news; however, I can still look at the overall experience pretty objectively. Hulu and iTunes among others are making steps in the right direction, but that experience is still largely limited to the computer, and what's done on TVs is kludgy at best. The AppleTV is decent and the Hulu app for internet-enabled TVs is, last I used it, extremely buggy and also requires a premium subscription.
I've wasted enough time thinking about it for now, but the headline of "TV isn't broken" is just absurd. I can hardly think of an experience that would be a better poster-child of "barely-functional, bordering on unusable".
Disclaimer: IANAL. You lose unvested shares if you're fired or if you quit. You can still buy vested shares at the original strike price for up to, I believe, thirty days after termination.
Whether you'd want to after getting screwed so royally is another matter, but chances are there's still money to be made (recovered may be a better term) if you keep emotion out of it and dump them just after the IPO, especially if you got in early enough and have the options at a favorable strike price. In fact you might not need to wait until they go public; there are plenty of secondary markets for privately-held stocks. The company probably has the right of first refusal in that case, but you still get paid the same amount; they just get to buy the shares back at the agreed-upon price instead of you doing business with the original buyer. This is in effect what Zynga's trying to do, but without actually paying to get the stock back.
I've never heard of founders having anti-dilution rights, and even if they did it would be very unlikely they'd be able to exercise them (unless they have their own massive cash war-chest). When investors have them, they don't get free shares, but rather the option to buy enough additional shares at the new valuation to keep their ownership percentage the same. Companies may issue more options after raising a round but there are usually strings attached - and when that round is an IPO, there's quite a bit of scrutiny (see: Groupon)
That said, it's very typical that only founders and VERY early employees end up with any significant amount of money, and only then if they're not dealing with ownership that's shady as fuck. I have little sympathy for anyone that gets screwed by Zynga since they're actually quite transparent about not operating on the up-and-up (Pincus is quite obviously a psycho, and just look at their "products" if that's not enough) so it's not too hard to see this kind of thing coming. But any talented developers who want to reclaim what's left of their soul... get in touch with me.
Because it's highly impractical if you want your audit logs to be in any way useful (also if you don't want your key rotation to take months). It's also pointless overhead when it comes to non-sensitive data. Get a name and city, and there's a good chances you can get phone number, full street address, and more from whitepages.com (and similar sites). Several years ago, people got this same info from things called phone books.
I'm disappointed to hear this happened, but assuming they're correct in their belief that the encryption keys were not compromised I'm not worried. I don't think anything was compromised that isn't about four seconds worth of Googling away, with the exception of the list of games I've bought (oh, no!)
They should have. I liked iOS apps better back when their app review department actually did something. Everyone bitched and whined about slow updates, and now we have a bunch of shitty apps. They shouldn't be reviewing for good taste (beyond store policy violations) but there's no way they even opened the app since the first thing it did on launch was pop up a cryptic error dialog.
Honestly I'm just as disappointed in Apple for letting this through as I am in Google for submitting such an atrocious piece of crap. If you're going to curate, then actually curate. It should have been denied just for piss-poor implementation, never mind the bugginess (see also: Google+ for iOS)
I was looking at options available for a potential next car, and when I saw the Auto AC option paused for a minute. "Why would I pay extra for this? I never touch my car's climate controls." And then the smacking of forehead - that means it was doing precisely what I wanted. The only time I never interact with it is to turn the actual AC (vs just blowers) off if I'm driving with the windows open. Other than that it's been left alone with outside temperatures ranging from about 15F to 105F. I dialed it in to a comfortable temperature about a year and a half ago and it just sits there and does its thing.
For the longest time I wanted to fiddle with it constantly out of habit - then I finally realized it was someone's full-time job to make sure I don't have to.
HOWEVER - It does NOT say to do a full battery drain. It says to complete a full charge cycle at least once a month. It's just as valid to use 1/4 of the battery and recharge once a week. The only section that mentions a full discharge says that you shouldn't store devices fully discharged for extended periods of time - but on the flip side, it also says that you shouldn't leave it fully charged all the time either.
He also doesn't have the right to say that breaking his mall's rules is illegal. If you break policy, they can ask you to leave. If you refuse, you are then trespassing. That is illegal. Despite what cops (or pompous property owners) say, photography is not a crime. They can neither confiscate your camera nor make you delete the photos.
Of course, that only applies to the US; YMMV but I expect most countries are very similar.
Slashdot Mirror
TSA members are not law enforcement officers. They are still rent-a-cops, like the guys at the mall: they may have additional security privileges but still have to call in actual LEOs if there's an incident they believe warrants someone being arrested. This is a common misconception; it's apparently bad enough that a House bill has been proposed so they won't be able to have cop-like uniforms: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationnow/2011/12/strip-act-targets-tsa.html
Because airports have lots of real cops that are easily accessible, they can still make your life (or at least your day) pretty miserable with ease, but on their own they're just expensive thugs.
Last I checked (before the Flixter debacle, for reference), sub-accounts were only allowed to manage the queue but not stream. Has that changed?
I've travelled with multiple terabytes of "these are obviously hard drives" storage and never had a problem with search or confiscation. They did swab things down and run it through their bomb detector (unsurprising). If I have data that needs protection, it's encrypted - often twice (I run full-disk encryption on my system, and then encrypt any extra-sensitive data on top of that in case my system fails to lock for some reason).
If I had the need of disguising the fact that I was bringing data at all, I'd probably put a microSD card behind/in an earring or something else that would have no trouble going through a metal detector (any concealed compartments would likely show up on xray, if they were really looking). Or just wrap the thing in plastic and swallow it.
No kidding. I moved cross-country including a small photo studio's worth of gear (two monoblocs, a half-dozen or more small strobes, at least five stands, two SLR bodies, several lenses, etc., etc.) in a MINI Cooper, and had room to spare - and that was with a co-pilot and his luggage. Aside from some extremely unwieldy backdrops, fitting any piece of photo gear in my car is no problem whatsoever (and as the GP said he was driving to make landscape shots... that's irrelevant here).
Would it be more convenient to throw it all in the back of a pickup or SUV? Sure. But it takes about five seconds to fold down my back seats. That sure isn't worth more-than-doubling my fuel costs.
Is that a problem, though? Don't think of it in terms of MPG, think about $/mile. Hippies care about MPG, the rest of us care about the cost of transportation and MPG is currently our most meaningful metric to gauge that. Handily, $/mi also works across all vehicles, including public transportation and bicycles. Based on some rough estimates, my current cost is about 12.5c/mi (~$4/gal, ~32MPG), if I exclude the purchase price of the car. If I bought a Tesla tomorrow (or perhaps an EV that's a bit less expensive), how many miles could I go on 12.5c worth of electricity? More than one, I expect. Net gain, all other things being equal (they obviously aren't - this excludes purchase price, maintenance, etc).
No matter what the cost of fuel is, it's always financially advantageous to go with the vehicle that consumes less fuel. Gas could be $0.10c/gal or $100/gal. You need to take the emotion out of the equation. Are you getting dicked over by the fuel companies? Probably. It's still better to pay less by having the more efficient vehicle.
Doing it once in a controlled environment to prove a point is very different than reckless trolling. The comment also suggested the kids are bracing themselves so the chance of a neck ending up wrapped around the head restraint of the seat in front is minimal. Granted I'd probably only do it at 15-20mph (it doesn't take much), but even still, you have to do something to make your point.
There's a big difference between "two for 600 employees" and "one per 300 employees". The former is (likely) 1+backup for all employees, whereas the latter is just wasteful stupidity. I'm guessing if your employer doubles its headcount, it will not expand to four datacenters to support them.
A decade ago, it stood for Personal Home Page. It's stood for PHP: Hypertext Preprocessor since PHP3 or so.
Security is hard. I agree that yes, most frameworks suck at security (my team has reported security bugs, with implementation details, to the framework authors. They were rejected as "not an issue", demonstrably false by running the example we sent which followed their own best practices guidelines).
PHP is no exception, but security with it is no harder than with any other language. But as a powerful set of tools with relatively few safeguards, it's easy to do stupid things. And if you know what you're doing, it's also pretty easy to lock down. Some poor default settings did not help here, but they have been deprecated for the better part of a decade (PHP5 was introduced, what, six years ago now?). If Wordpress had been written in Python or Ruby, do you think it would suddenly be more secure? It was written by lousy coders that needed to hack together a functional product, and poor security is part of that baggage.
Great, I've gone from $179 vendor lock-in to $0 vendor lock-in. Until others implement NaCl, I'm still forced to use Chrome to get at that software. As it so happens I use and quite like Chrome, but when that inevitably changes and suddenly I want to start using Firefox again, I will not have that option. No, I will not fork chromium and make my own browser. Technically possible does not mean practical, and therefore I don't consider it an option.
Just another example of timezones being confusing and counterproductive. Switch the entire world to UTC (and kill am/pm since they'll no longer correspond to morning/night in half the world). Sure, it'll take some getting your head around working 16h-01h for what's currently an 8-5PT, but just the idea of eliminating "2pm your time or mine?" makes it worthwhile.
You're mixing economics with idealism. Everyone likes the idea of free software, and most people rely on it even if they don't realize that's the case. But due to the way people's brains are typically wired, having a baseline of >0 is advantageous for the seller. For example, if there were two apps, one free and one $2.00, the free one will have massively more downloads even if the paid one is significantly better. But change the pricing to $0.99 and $2.99 and "better" will tend to win out (well, the ratio will be a lot more in line with what you'd expect given the quality of what's being purchased, even if it's not actually making more sales) over "free", despite the same $2.00 spread between the products.
As it turns out, people that don't want to pay for stuff tend to be lousy customers. So I don't feel bad if I don't gain a customer who thinks that my product is overpriced. If you think I'm not adding enough value for what I charge - that's fine, you're welcome to not use what I'm making (free market, etc). Other people are happy to pay, and they also tend to focus on the reasons my stuff is improving their lives rather than searching for flaws that would justify me offering a discount. I'm happy, my customers are happy, and my non-customers are no more or less whiny than they would be without me.
As you might have guessed, I don't believe that all software should be free just because. I feel it's perfectly reasonable to ask for compensation if you're providing value, even if that value is in the form of carefully-arranged ones and zeroes. I would prefer that more software is Free (as in speech) if only to encourage interoperability, but that's a completely separate and mostly unrelated discussion. Anything that I create for free (which may or may not also be Free; generally it is) is strictly unsupported - it needs to fulfill my needs alone, and if you don't have to duplicate my efforts, then have at it! But as a general rule, I don't take feature requests on anything for which I'm not charging. I just don't have the time or energy.
I trust Google's engineers not to get me killed more than I trust the vast majority of drivers, especially knowing how little it takes to get a drivers license. So far, the only incident involving one of Google's self-driving cars is when a human was in control (i.e., it was sheer coincidence that it was one of those cars); statistically speaking, they're the safest vehicles currently in existence. At least software can be fixed; try as we might, we haven't yet fixed stupid. I'm trying to look up how many are mechanical failures versus human error but this hotel internet connection sucks, but I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of problems are people's faults (and of mechanical failures, most of those probably would have been preventable with proper maintenance)
That said, I won't be beta testing this one.
Well to be fair, a lot of drivers are just stupid. At a construction site the other night, I slowed down to let some people in for the upcoming traffic merge. Every one of the people in the lane sped past me, continued on right up until the giant flashing sign, and then proceeded to block up everything as they tried to find a way to get into the open lane.
Better driver education would go a long way.
But as it is, reckless driving is already illegal. There's no need to ban specific activities. If you're doing them safely, continue on as normal (though I agree... mascara? Yikes). If you're not, do not pass go, do not collect $200.
That argument is BS and you know it. Texting while driving is an act of you actively diverting your attention from driving to your cell phone. When you're driving, your full-time job is doing so safely. Everything else comes second (even if you're driving 100mph to get to the hospital because a passenger just lost a leg in a chainsaw accident; if you can do that without making your situation or that of those around you worse, good for you).
Yes, there's some degree of risk associated with using a bus. There's some degree of risk associated with using a car. There's some degree of risk associated with going to work, with not going to work, with having sex, with cliff-jumping, and sitting at home all day. It's your job to weigh the risk versus the reward. In the case of using a bus, the risk is quite low (bus drivers literally have the full-time job of operating the vehicle safely, not just figuratively), and the reward varies but is usually fairly high. Operating a phone while driving? Extremely high risk under most circumstances, typically very low reward. I won't pretend I've never done it, but I avoid doing so whenever possible and try to limit it to stoplights.
How would banning manual transmissions help? You're using both hands for driving, they're just not both on the steering wheel 100% of the time. Unless someone is suggesting that we should require passenger assistance to put on your four-way flashers or defroster, neither of which tend to be accessible while your hand is on the steering wheel.
Smoking? Meh. It's a bad idea for a number of reasons but I don't see that as a huge distraction. I think the world would be a better place without cigarettes, but it's not a huge physical or mental distraction.
As for the handicapped - if they're incapable of operating a motor vehicle safely due to their disability, then yes, they absolutely should be banned from driving. When political correctness goes up in a battle against physics, physics will win.
It's not like it should come as a surprise to anyone that Sony has chosen to create yet another proprietary format (and attempted to lock it down beyond simply being incompatible with anything else). They got away with it in the '80s and '90s because they actually made good hardware and the concept of interoperability barely existed. The only time they've had any real success with it was Blu-Ray, and I'm sure that hasn't seen the adoption they'd like since legal download services so shortly after its introduction, and their attempts to force it down everyone's throats have certainly been expensive. Today the reverse is true - their products tend to be sub-par and we increasingly expect stuff to work across our devices, but they're still stuck in the past.
Channel-flipping worked fifteen years ago when we had maybe 50 channels. The hundreds we have today, often duplicated in different formats? Not so much. The entire experience is just awful and broken:
* Content discovery is awful
* The menus, channel guides, and other navigation stuff are some of the worst experiences I've seen (I generally avoid TV, so when I see them in use at friends' houses I cringe)
* We still have the idea of content being delivered by channels in timeslots. Talk about being stuck in the past. Everything is delivered digitally now, yet we still push content in a way that was built around the restrictions of analog broadcasting. I realize it's not exactly the same, but given that we re-use the lines for cable internet connections, it's clearly possible to have two-way communication. We use DVRs as a lousy hack to get around this, but the future is clearly a more iTunes-like experience in the sense of "get the three most recent episodes of the show"
* Pricing is a mess. They try to hit you everywhere for all sorts of different things. Six levels of TV service, PPV options, premium channels, rental fees, etc. There are so many things they could do to make this simpler, and yet they continue to make it more confusing, presumably to trick people into being upsold. That can't be sustained indefinitely.
* Content overload - and nothing worth watching (obviously that's a matter of opinion)
* Extremely complicated set-up. All of these digital systems have such poor integration with each other, despite decent attempts to make systems smarter. HDMI was designed in part to alleviate this, but I'm still trying to get everything working in harmony. Even just some UI tweaks and speedups to flip between input sources would be a huge improvement. Why must I slowly (very, very slowly!) scroll through a list of uselessly-named inputs? Just put up a grid of things that are receiving content and let me arrow between them. And for the love of god, make it more responsive.
I may be a poor case study not being a big fan of "I'm bored; placate me with mindless content", and I find TV to be a very ineffective way to get news; however, I can still look at the overall experience pretty objectively. Hulu and iTunes among others are making steps in the right direction, but that experience is still largely limited to the computer, and what's done on TVs is kludgy at best. The AppleTV is decent and the Hulu app for internet-enabled TVs is, last I used it, extremely buggy and also requires a premium subscription.
I've wasted enough time thinking about it for now, but the headline of "TV isn't broken" is just absurd. I can hardly think of an experience that would be a better poster-child of "barely-functional, bordering on unusable".
Disclaimer: IANAL. You lose unvested shares if you're fired or if you quit. You can still buy vested shares at the original strike price for up to, I believe, thirty days after termination.
Whether you'd want to after getting screwed so royally is another matter, but chances are there's still money to be made (recovered may be a better term) if you keep emotion out of it and dump them just after the IPO, especially if you got in early enough and have the options at a favorable strike price. In fact you might not need to wait until they go public; there are plenty of secondary markets for privately-held stocks. The company probably has the right of first refusal in that case, but you still get paid the same amount; they just get to buy the shares back at the agreed-upon price instead of you doing business with the original buyer. This is in effect what Zynga's trying to do, but without actually paying to get the stock back.
I've never heard of founders having anti-dilution rights, and even if they did it would be very unlikely they'd be able to exercise them (unless they have their own massive cash war-chest). When investors have them, they don't get free shares, but rather the option to buy enough additional shares at the new valuation to keep their ownership percentage the same. Companies may issue more options after raising a round but there are usually strings attached - and when that round is an IPO, there's quite a bit of scrutiny (see: Groupon)
That said, it's very typical that only founders and VERY early employees end up with any significant amount of money, and only then if they're not dealing with ownership that's shady as fuck. I have little sympathy for anyone that gets screwed by Zynga since they're actually quite transparent about not operating on the up-and-up (Pincus is quite obviously a psycho, and just look at their "products" if that's not enough) so it's not too hard to see this kind of thing coming. But any talented developers who want to reclaim what's left of their soul... get in touch with me.
Because it's highly impractical if you want your audit logs to be in any way useful (also if you don't want your key rotation to take months). It's also pointless overhead when it comes to non-sensitive data. Get a name and city, and there's a good chances you can get phone number, full street address, and more from whitepages.com (and similar sites). Several years ago, people got this same info from things called phone books.
I'm disappointed to hear this happened, but assuming they're correct in their belief that the encryption keys were not compromised I'm not worried. I don't think anything was compromised that isn't about four seconds worth of Googling away, with the exception of the list of games I've bought (oh, no!)
They should have. I liked iOS apps better back when their app review department actually did something. Everyone bitched and whined about slow updates, and now we have a bunch of shitty apps. They shouldn't be reviewing for good taste (beyond store policy violations) but there's no way they even opened the app since the first thing it did on launch was pop up a cryptic error dialog.
Honestly I'm just as disappointed in Apple for letting this through as I am in Google for submitting such an atrocious piece of crap. If you're going to curate, then actually curate. It should have been denied just for piss-poor implementation, never mind the bugginess (see also: Google+ for iOS)
Maybe the one in your car just sucks?
Seriously - not trolling here.
I was looking at options available for a potential next car, and when I saw the Auto AC option paused for a minute. "Why would I pay extra for this? I never touch my car's climate controls." And then the smacking of forehead - that means it was doing precisely what I wanted. The only time I never interact with it is to turn the actual AC (vs just blowers) off if I'm driving with the windows open. Other than that it's been left alone with outside temperatures ranging from about 15F to 105F. I dialed it in to a comfortable temperature about a year and a half ago and it just sits there and does its thing.
For the longest time I wanted to fiddle with it constantly out of habit - then I finally realized it was someone's full-time job to make sure I don't have to.
http://www.apple.com/batteries/ right sidebar, bottom of the page.
HOWEVER - It does NOT say to do a full battery drain. It says to complete a full charge cycle at least once a month. It's just as valid to use 1/4 of the battery and recharge once a week. The only section that mentions a full discharge says that you shouldn't store devices fully discharged for extended periods of time - but on the flip side, it also says that you shouldn't leave it fully charged all the time either.
He also doesn't have the right to say that breaking his mall's rules is illegal. If you break policy, they can ask you to leave. If you refuse, you are then trespassing. That is illegal. Despite what cops (or pompous property owners) say, photography is not a crime. They can neither confiscate your camera nor make you delete the photos.
Of course, that only applies to the US; YMMV but I expect most countries are very similar.