The fact is that he had donated (which is political speech) to a cause to keep marriage at a traditional definition (his opinion about marriage) was the reason behind him being forced into leaving.
You're really really close, unlike the AC who hand-waved away the fact that this wasn't about something he said, but something he did. There's some nuance here that you have overlooked. He did make a 'political speech', but he ended up representing Mozilla on views that they weren't interested in supporting, unlike places like Chick Fil A. Worse, he proved he was hostile towards a portion of his own employees, which, btw, is who brought the issue to light.
So, no, the OP was wrong, he wasn't ousted for simply having an opinion.
This seems like something one who is reasonably educated on the topic should know. I'll give you two hints: It wasn't because of a remark he made and it wasn't because people around him were telepathic.
How is a company going to obtain meta data that would allow them to analyse for product improvement.
Transparency.
Its time to stop thinking that everyone cares about your private life. With a few million watches sold, your info is only one anonymous statistical measuement.
There is nothing anonymous about it. All you can do is hope they're benevolent.
The Chinese would like to know if the bracelet can fit fat slobs, battery life, etc.
Intercept the packets, change a few bytes here and there, and send them on their way.
In all seriousness, I wonder when we're going to start responding with tactics like this. Imagine not just fuzzing the data, but imagine software that mimics thousands of these watches sending the fuzzed data back. Which one is the real data?
Oh of course, yes. And how useful is it, never mind how carefully crafted? I could also carefully craft the same experiment with a twin living in a submarine. Who gives a rat's ass?
Yet another reason why I won't miss AC posting on Slashdot when it finally goes.
Apple hasn't written the software they need to do it. It doesn't exist right now. Once they write it, it's written. Precedent is set and a floodgate of requests will begin and there won't be much Apple can do to make them stop.
Why would someone let your employer monitor YOUR iphone? I could see if they supplied it but not if it is mine.
Here ya go.
While it's not clear whether the message shows up for all types of monitoring, it's there for supervised devices set up through Apple's Device Enrollment Program, which is a way for companies to easily deploy a large number of corporate-owned Mac or iOS devices to employees.
Is it my fault if I believe the rest of the world is populated by savages because I've only ever watched the national geographic channel?
I would just like to point out the hilarity of you bringing this up without asserting that NatGeo misrepresented the 'savages'. Thank you for supporting my point.;)
When an idea is so clearly developed that they've made movies involving the use of it, how can a corporation even think of patenting it?
Because movies don't tell you how to build the fucking thing.
I'm not even sure that there are grounds for patenting particular implementations of the glove. The idea of building a glove with electronics to measure e.g. finger bend and pressure is out there in the public domain -- there are dozens of ways to implement it and NONE of them should be patentable, not unless they contain a truly unique invention that is patentable in its own right for e.g. measuring the bend. But I'm not seeing much of that.
Try clicking the link in the summary. Those nice little pictures they show depict a not-Power Glove. In fact, no glove at all. Take a look.
Slashdot Mirror
The fact is that he had donated (which is political speech) to a cause to keep marriage at a traditional definition (his opinion about marriage) was the reason behind him being forced into leaving.
You're really really close, unlike the AC who hand-waved away the fact that this wasn't about something he said, but something he did. There's some nuance here that you have overlooked. He did make a 'political speech', but he ended up representing Mozilla on views that they weren't interested in supporting, unlike places like Chick Fil A. Worse, he proved he was hostile towards a portion of his own employees, which, btw, is who brought the issue to light.
So, no, the OP was wrong, he wasn't ousted for simply having an opinion.
Heh, yeah, it's full of security holes, just not the ones that will let the gov't in.
So if you know why, please tell us.
This seems like something one who is reasonably educated on the topic should know. I'll give you two hints: It wasn't because of a remark he made and it wasn't because people around him were telepathic.
He lost his job because he didn't keep his controversial views secret.
Nope, he wasn't fired for his views.
Their former CEO lost his job merely because of his views about marriage...
False.
How is a company going to obtain meta data that would allow them to analyse for product improvement.
Transparency.
Its time to stop thinking that everyone cares about your private life. With a few million watches sold, your info is only one anonymous statistical measuement.
There is nothing anonymous about it. All you can do is hope they're benevolent.
The Chinese would like to know if the bracelet can fit fat slobs, battery life, etc.
[CITATION NEEDED]
One day , just think from the victims families point of view . it's just about one iPhone data .
You say that as if there wouldn't be victims of government overreach.
Intercept the packets, change a few bytes here and there, and send them on their way.
In all seriousness, I wonder when we're going to start responding with tactics like this. Imagine not just fuzzing the data, but imagine software that mimics thousands of these watches sending the fuzzed data back. Which one is the real data?
First one, then the other.
Ah, so you hated Amazon back when they were underground. Nerd-hipsterism is a funny looking beast.
But why is the title bar to this story red?
That happens automatically when a ship decloaks.
Oh of course, yes. And how useful is it, never mind how carefully crafted? I could also carefully craft the same experiment with a twin living in a submarine. Who gives a rat's ass?
Yet another reason why I won't miss AC posting on Slashdot when it finally goes.
"Your honor, I object." "On what grounds?" "It's devastating to my case!"
Apple hasn't written the software they need to do it. It doesn't exist right now. Once they write it, it's written. Precedent is set and a floodgate of requests will begin and there won't be much Apple can do to make them stop.
I use an ad-blocker. I also pay Hulu and Youtube for an ad-free experience. I wonder if Hulu and Youtube have detected that.
I'm assuming this is some sort of fishing-related framework.
Why would someone let your employer monitor YOUR iphone? I could see if they supplied it but not if it is mine.
Here ya go.
While it's not clear whether the message shows up for all types of monitoring, it's there for supervised devices set up through Apple's Device Enrollment Program, which is a way for companies to easily deploy a large number of corporate-owned Mac or iOS devices to employees.
Is it my fault if I believe the rest of the world is populated by savages because I've only ever watched the national geographic channel?
I would just like to point out the hilarity of you bringing this up without asserting that NatGeo misrepresented the 'savages'. Thank you for supporting my point. ;)
he sad thing is that many liberal will read this and it will play straight into their bias on how they think conservatives really think.
Heh. Is that reaaally the fault of the biased liberal?
How does this work when one of the chief complaints about Linux is the 3D drivers are so terrible?
(Yes, this is a serious question.)
Without assembly line workers Apple has nothing to sell.
When an idea is so clearly developed that they've made movies involving the use of it, how can a corporation even think of patenting it?
Because movies don't tell you how to build the fucking thing.
I'm not even sure that there are grounds for patenting particular implementations of the glove. The idea of building a glove with electronics to measure e.g. finger bend and pressure is out there in the public domain -- there are dozens of ways to implement it and NONE of them should be patentable, not unless they contain a truly unique invention that is patentable in its own right for e.g. measuring the bend. But I'm not seeing much of that.
Try clicking the link in the summary. Those nice little pictures they show depict a not-Power Glove. In fact, no glove at all. Take a look.
No, Minority Report did not contain a list of claims in Microsoft's patent.
I thought the more common name for the behaviors you describe was trolling. Where is the line supposed to be?
The line is when the troll is defeated with an indisputably factual reply. When that line is crossed, he cries "SJW! SJW!!"
So... you're saying that this isn't malicious at all, it's a public service?