I used to subscribe to a film channel in the UK called FilmFour. They mainly showed independent, British and foreign cinema, not films made through Hollywood studios.
They stopped charging for subscription and started to include adverts to try and boost viewer numbers. I saved on my subscription and stopped watching.
I don't want adverts. I especially don't want adverts midway through a film. If Netflix start doing that I'll revert to film sources that let me watch a film, not watch a third of a film then completely destroy any narrative, mood or tension its created by imposing shitty fucking adverts on me.
The other factor of course is that British people are used to watching BBC channels which never interrupt shows (or films) with adverts. We're not conditioned to accept the ubiquitous and abusive advertising practices that make American television so unwatchable.
Well, you're using modern electronics, a modern computer network, numerous servers and your own computing device to post that message so clearly you support the modern use of the world's resources for communication purposes.
Given that I'm not finding your reason for wanting to sink the ships that assure continued provision of such resources obvious at all. Perhaps you could educate me, ideally in a way that doesn't prove you're a virtue signally hypocrite.
In the UK many retailers and restaurants don't take American Express because the fees are too high. This keeps surprising Americans that visit.
$pick_your_favorite_controversial_topic
Yeah, there are numerous rumours floating around that Mastercard are attempting to exert political power through threats to cut off financial processing capabiltiies. This is very concerning but I've seen no actual evidence yet.
Hopefully it's just shitty internet rumours, because otherwise I'll have to exert a lot of time and energy getting UK regulators and parliament engaged and involved on the issue.
those laws in the EU apply to US companies... like Google and Facebook too
Of course they fucking do. Google and Facebook (and other US companies) do business in Europe. It's not fucking unreasonable to expect them to obey the same laws applied to other companies doing business in Europe, including the ones based there.
The alternative is that you only ever hold a company accountable to the laws in the country in which it is registered, in which case watch every fucking company on the planet get registered in some African shithole that eliminates all controls and regulations on corporations.
You might not have a problem with that but I fucking promise you the US government would.
People are much more likely to tell the young white girl that having babies at 15 is bad than the young black girl.
Why is that? Is it because they're racist, or because they're fucking racist?
Who is invariably harmed by that?
So fucking fix it. Treat the black girls exactly the same as the white girls. Just stop fucking pretending that skin colour has any fucking causality for teenage pregnancy.
There's a not country on Earth where you get a subsidized phone "for free " and the carriers are not allowed to lock the service on that phone they subsidized
China.
Use your mind, don't be a Marxist drone.
Ironic, given the above. But if you want a very capitalist country: Singapore.
But I buy phones that are unlocked and pay £16/month for my mobile service. To be fair that only covers me for 2500 minutes of voice, unlimited SMS and unlimited data, so calling premium numbers, internationally or sending MMS messages does cost me a little extra.
Still a fuck of a lot cheaper than paying £70/month for a 24 month contract just to get a shitty iPhone for no up-front fee. But if someone does do that, it's perfectly legal for them to unlock it and use it on another network anyway. Because I live in a sane country, on Earth.
It's always ACs posting bulllshit about GDPR and claiming its protectionism.
This stinks of a disinformation campaign.
GDPR applies to everybody. It does not target foreign countries. EU based companies are required to comply with data protection. EU based companies are prosecuted for failing to comply with data protection. US and other companies are also prosecuted for failing to comply with data protection.
To avoid prosecution under this law stop fucking break it. To avoid prosecution for misusing consumer data, stop fucking abusing consumers.
The EU has been doing kangaroo courts
Where? When? Show us all where there's a fucking EU court that hasn't followed due process and has ruled against EU law.
If you look at europa.eu and court verdicts, they never clean their own house.
Nobody ever looks at europa.eu. As for court verdicts, most cases never even get to court. In the UK for instance, the ICO issues legally binding fines without needing to use courts, because the law is pretty fucking clear.
If Google were a German company, it could sell what it felt like, and never see the scrutiny of officials.
Given that Germany's first fine issued under GDPR was against a German company you're looking pretty fucking stupid.
The EU is just doing a very simple tactic. Xenophobia.
Consumer protection applied consistently across companies from anywhere on the planet - including the EU - is now xenophobia? Someone buy this cunt a dictionary.
The GDPR is just a trade war tool, because few European companies deal in data control
Almost every fucking European company deals in data control. Most businesses these days are IT companies with a sideline in manufacturing, retail or something less tangible.
it is crafted explicitly as a bill of attainder, which in more civilized countries is illegal
Just because your shitty business practices are made illegal by the law doesn't make it a bill of attainder. It only criminalises people that refuse to respect and protect the data they hold on others.
Stop being a cunt and you wont be breaking the law. Simples.
A law that is designed so literally nobody understands or can comply with.
So like every other law then.
Still, it's amazing how many companies are managing to comply with this one. It's also amazing how much leeway regulators will give you if they feel you're in breach of it, especially inadvertently.
Virtually any collection of data is liable under GDPR -worldwide-
Only if you're operating or interacting with someone in the EU.
serve an EU citizen in your hotel, liable
Oh please. I'm typing this from a hotel in Florida that under EU law I could put out of business in a week, their management practices are so scummy. Luckily for them they're in Florida where consumer protections are fuck all.
Yeah, I'm leaving them some seriously abusive reviews on online sites. No, I'm not going to try and make them comply with EU law because - unlike you - I know it doesn't apply here.
The EU hasn't set a rule on companies. The EU has agreed collectively that its member states must pass rules on company behaviour.
The benefit of the EU is that complying with one country's rules means you're (broadly) automatically complying with all of the other countries' rules. You still have to obey the law in each country in which you operate.
Yeah, this is only an issue for people living in countries that vote against government regulation of big businesses.
It's almost as though they fail to understand that the government is formalised representation of people and their wishes and a necessary control against well resourced organisations that could otherwise abuse and exploit ordinary people.
You forgot a few, such as new competitor services being created that succeed without fucking over the people they're providing service to. Or that little one about people in Europe not being exploited senselessly by mindless corporations prioritising profits over social impacts.
Sure, I've encountered companies selling products I'm interested in buying that refuse to sell to Europe because they don't want to comply with GDPR. Some of them may even behave ethically. I'm willing for them to lose my business if it means everybody else has to fucking behave.
The US has no law that prevents its citizens from using online services anywhere in the world.
Of course it does. Try using a service from Iran or Cuba. Try using an online gambling site.
No, it is not reasonable for countries to demand that data about citizens reside in some specific country for "audit"
Of course it is. That it's a serious fucking pain to comply with doesn't make it unreasonable, it makes it a cost of doing business in that country.
A Russian citizen sees an advertisement for my product in a magazine. They mail my company an international money order, and we ship them the product. Do I have to have an office space in Russia in which to physically store their name, address and invoice information since I have it written down in a ledger in some other country? How reasonable is that?
Wait, you want to import products into Russia without complying with Russian law? I'd say you're being the unreasonable cunt here.
If Russia cannot compete in this space, and cannot attract users (even within their own country) to services created within Russia, then they pass laws like this to try and get their grimy fingers on at least some of the data.
Or maybe they believe that data residency helps reduce their citizens' exposure to corporate malpractice, as epitomised by companies based in California.
Anyway, nice attempt at spinning this and justifying Russia's lack of rights and privacy abuses against its own citizens.
Russia's misbehaviour towards its own citizens doesn't excuse your attempts to be just as big a cunt towards them.
The problem is that the personal record reflects systemic racism and sexism, and the population records exacerbate both.
Black men are more likely than white men to be prosecuted having committed a crime, and that's reflected in conviction rates and recidivism rates.
Men are substantially more likely than women to be prosecuted having committed a crime, and that's reflected in conviction rates.
The answer isn't to use population or individual inputs into determining how to puish people, it's to apply justice fairly based on the crime and context, not the sex, race or socio-economic situation of the person that committed it.
Maybe he's suggesting that a GPU with over twice the surface area of a CPU offers substantially greater heat dissipation capabilities and is thus far easier to cool for a given TDP.
Sadly juries are led to believe that DNA evidence is infallible, instead of being told to use it only to rule someone out of being guilty, never to use it as an indicator of guilt.
Slashdot Mirror
What's bewildering me is the assumption that a single neanderthal has to accurately throw a spear to kill an animal.
8 neanderthals throwing their spears at the same group of four animals are going to eat well that night, no matter how shit a throw they are.
I used to subscribe to a film channel in the UK called FilmFour. They mainly showed independent, British and foreign cinema, not films made through Hollywood studios.
They stopped charging for subscription and started to include adverts to try and boost viewer numbers. I saved on my subscription and stopped watching.
I don't want adverts. I especially don't want adverts midway through a film. If Netflix start doing that I'll revert to film sources that let me watch a film, not watch a third of a film then completely destroy any narrative, mood or tension its created by imposing shitty fucking adverts on me.
The other factor of course is that British people are used to watching BBC channels which never interrupt shows (or films) with adverts. We're not conditioned to accept the ubiquitous and abusive advertising practices that make American television so unwatchable.
Well, you're using modern electronics, a modern computer network, numerous servers and your own computing device to post that message so clearly you support the modern use of the world's resources for communication purposes.
Given that I'm not finding your reason for wanting to sink the ships that assure continued provision of such resources obvious at all. Perhaps you could educate me, ideally in a way that doesn't prove you're a virtue signally hypocrite.
Oh, you bastard. You deserve what you're going to get, oh yes.
Retailers can choose not to accept them though.
In the UK many retailers and restaurants don't take American Express because the fees are too high. This keeps surprising Americans that visit.
$pick_your_favorite_controversial_topic
Yeah, there are numerous rumours floating around that Mastercard are attempting to exert political power through threats to cut off financial processing capabiltiies. This is very concerning but I've seen no actual evidence yet.
Hopefully it's just shitty internet rumours, because otherwise I'll have to exert a lot of time and energy getting UK regulators and parliament engaged and involved on the issue.
ah, I see... thank you, we'll be getting in touch with them on your behalf
-- the financial ombudsman
ah, I see... thank you, we'll arrange an audit
-- the FCA
What d'ya think you boys over there take him in as yer PM?
Sadly the evidence strongly suggests he'd do a fuck of a lot better than our current one.
those laws in the EU apply to US companies... like Google and Facebook too
Of course they fucking do. Google and Facebook (and other US companies) do business in Europe. It's not fucking unreasonable to expect them to obey the same laws applied to other companies doing business in Europe, including the ones based there.
The alternative is that you only ever hold a company accountable to the laws in the country in which it is registered, in which case watch every fucking company on the planet get registered in some African shithole that eliminates all controls and regulations on corporations.
You might not have a problem with that but I fucking promise you the US government would.
People are much more likely to tell the young white girl that having babies at 15 is bad than the young black girl.
Why is that? Is it because they're racist, or because they're fucking racist?
Who is invariably harmed by that?
So fucking fix it. Treat the black girls exactly the same as the white girls. Just stop fucking pretending that skin colour has any fucking causality for teenage pregnancy.
There's a not country on Earth where you get a subsidized phone "for free " and the carriers are not allowed to lock the service on that phone they subsidized
China.
Use your mind, don't be a Marxist drone.
Ironic, given the above. But if you want a very capitalist country: Singapore.
But I buy phones that are unlocked and pay £16/month for my mobile service. To be fair that only covers me for 2500 minutes of voice, unlimited SMS and unlimited data, so calling premium numbers, internationally or sending MMS messages does cost me a little extra.
Still a fuck of a lot cheaper than paying £70/month for a 24 month contract just to get a shitty iPhone for no up-front fee. But if someone does do that, it's perfectly legal for them to unlock it and use it on another network anyway. Because I live in a sane country, on Earth.
EU courts would spank them senseless if they tried that.
Comply with the spirit of the law, don't try and find the fucking loopholes in it.
It's always ACs posting bulllshit about GDPR and claiming its protectionism.
This stinks of a disinformation campaign.
GDPR applies to everybody. It does not target foreign countries.
EU based companies are required to comply with data protection.
EU based companies are prosecuted for failing to comply with data protection.
US and other companies are also prosecuted for failing to comply with data protection.
To avoid prosecution under this law stop fucking break it.
To avoid prosecution for misusing consumer data, stop fucking abusing consumers.
The EU has been doing kangaroo courts
Where? When? Show us all where there's a fucking EU court that hasn't followed due process and has ruled against EU law.
If you look at europa.eu and court verdicts, they never clean their own house.
Nobody ever looks at europa.eu. As for court verdicts, most cases never even get to court. In the UK for instance, the ICO issues legally binding fines without needing to use courts, because the law is pretty fucking clear.
If Google were a German company, it could sell what it felt like, and never see the scrutiny of officials.
Given that Germany's first fine issued under GDPR was against a German company you're looking pretty fucking stupid.
The EU is just doing a very simple tactic. Xenophobia.
Consumer protection applied consistently across companies from anywhere on the planet - including the EU - is now xenophobia? Someone buy this cunt a dictionary.
The GDPR is just a trade war tool, because few European companies deal in data control
Almost every fucking European company deals in data control. Most businesses these days are IT companies with a sideline in manufacturing, retail or something less tangible.
it is crafted explicitly as a bill of attainder, which in more civilized countries is illegal
Just because your shitty business practices are made illegal by the law doesn't make it a bill of attainder. It only criminalises people that refuse to respect and protect the data they hold on others.
Stop being a cunt and you wont be breaking the law. Simples.
A law that is designed so literally nobody understands or can comply with.
So like every other law then.
Still, it's amazing how many companies are managing to comply with this one. It's also amazing how much leeway regulators will give you if they feel you're in breach of it, especially inadvertently.
Virtually any collection of data is liable under GDPR -worldwide-
Only if you're operating or interacting with someone in the EU.
serve an EU citizen in your hotel, liable
Oh please. I'm typing this from a hotel in Florida that under EU law I could put out of business in a week, their management practices are so scummy. Luckily for them they're in Florida where consumer protections are fuck all.
Yeah, I'm leaving them some seriously abusive reviews on online sites. No, I'm not going to try and make them comply with EU law because - unlike you - I know it doesn't apply here.
The EU hasn't set a rule on companies. The EU has agreed collectively that its member states must pass rules on company behaviour.
The benefit of the EU is that complying with one country's rules means you're (broadly) automatically complying with all of the other countries' rules. You still have to obey the law in each country in which you operate.
Is that so hard to comprehend?
Yeah, this is only an issue for people living in countries that vote against government regulation of big businesses.
It's almost as though they fail to understand that the government is formalised representation of people and their wishes and a necessary control against well resourced organisations that could otherwise abuse and exploit ordinary people.
You forgot a few, such as new competitor services being created that succeed without fucking over the people they're providing service to. Or that little one about people in Europe not being exploited senselessly by mindless corporations prioritising profits over social impacts.
Sure, I've encountered companies selling products I'm interested in buying that refuse to sell to Europe because they don't want to comply with GDPR. Some of them may even behave ethically. I'm willing for them to lose my business if it means everybody else has to fucking behave.
The US has no law that prevents its citizens from using online services anywhere in the world.
Of course it does. Try using a service from Iran or Cuba. Try using an online gambling site.
No, it is not reasonable for countries to demand that data about citizens reside in some specific country for "audit"
Of course it is. That it's a serious fucking pain to comply with doesn't make it unreasonable, it makes it a cost of doing business in that country.
A Russian citizen sees an advertisement for my product in a magazine. They mail my company an international money order, and we ship them the product. Do I have to have an office space in Russia in which to physically store their name, address and invoice information since I have it written down in a ledger in some other country? How reasonable is that?
Wait, you want to import products into Russia without complying with Russian law? I'd say you're being the unreasonable cunt here.
If Russia cannot compete in this space, and cannot attract users (even within their own country) to services created within Russia, then they pass laws like this to try and get their grimy fingers on at least some of the data.
Or maybe they believe that data residency helps reduce their citizens' exposure to corporate malpractice, as epitomised by companies based in California.
Anyway, nice attempt at spinning this and justifying Russia's lack of rights and privacy abuses against its own citizens.
Russia's misbehaviour towards its own citizens doesn't excuse your attempts to be just as big a cunt towards them.
The GDPR is just jingoistic regulation for use to attack companies in a trade war
No, it's not. Don't be such a fucking idiot. The world does not revolve around you and your inability to understand basic consumer protections.
It's not really true in the Americas either.
Hey guys, I found the racist.
Economic, social and cultural factors influence levels of crime.
Skin colour merely predicts the likelihood of it being prosecuted.
The problem is that the personal record reflects systemic racism and sexism, and the population records exacerbate both.
Black men are more likely than white men to be prosecuted having committed a crime, and that's reflected in conviction rates and recidivism rates.
Men are substantially more likely than women to be prosecuted having committed a crime, and that's reflected in conviction rates.
The answer isn't to use population or individual inputs into determining how to puish people, it's to apply justice fairly based on the crime and context, not the sex, race or socio-economic situation of the person that committed it.
No, it gets modded down because it's off topic hatred being spewed by an imbecile.
Nobody is trying to disprove it because we just ignore the idiocy and move on to other posts relevant to the article.
Maybe he's suggesting that a GPU with over twice the surface area of a CPU offers substantially greater heat dissipation capabilities and is thus far easier to cool for a given TDP.
Or is that too complicated for you?
If the flight sim isn't scaling with the cores, it's a software issue, not a hardware issue.
Fine. You fix the software, and in the meantime, we'll buy fucking fast CPUs so that we can continue to use it.
Sadly juries are led to believe that DNA evidence is infallible, instead of being told to use it only to rule someone out of being guilty, never to use it as an indicator of guilt.