General population does not even want to do that.
There is also an issue if they are capable of doing things like: making informed guesses, making and applying plans, monitoring them and modifying them to adjust to the actual conditions (that is beyond comprehension even of the well educated software people that we work with), following a process and diverting from it when necessary and when adverse effects are still acceptable, communicating efficiently, respecting people of different opinions while knowing borders of this respect e.g. I respect your views only to the point where they have a direct deadly consequences - but even that has exceptions. Most of the people have basic understanding what is good and bad. We fail miserably however when discussion touches difficult subjects obscured by our feelings and technical complexity (what to do when the blood test shows you have AIDS - despair or make another test?). A flock of such miserable animals shall make a reasonable decision? Even in simple cases that is difficult and decisions that are to betaken are usually of a type: a runaway train goes direction of group of children, you have a switch that can put the train on alternate rail where only a old,fat, dirty man is drinking a bottle of vodka - what do you decide? What if our fat buddy is a group of doctors working on a cure for cancer? This is all complicated but add to this huge size of any modern society and lack of common values between large groups of people in it (liberals and tea party associates in US for instance). Then come corruption - outright or because if it does not matter anyway then why I should not take some money for TTIP for instance? I guess now we have a vision of our democratic societies.
If I be caught by police smoking a joint in Germany - my driving license will be gone and I can get it back only after I make an idiocy test - why?
All the usual nazifems go wild because Amnesty International supports prostitution now. None of those nazifems asked sex workers actually - they do not care. In Russia these issues exist to but are expressed differently. It is easy to criticize and demand change. We all were very happy to criticize Assad - I think removal of Assad has still quite wide spread support in Western countries as it had back then when troubles started. The bloody hell that Syria has become since was predictable and exactly as it would happen if Assad was removed. I suggest we shall be very careful what we wish because we have to take responsibility after what we wished becomes reality - nobody wants all these thousands of refugees that come from north Africa and Syria now - they mostly come to Germany and Sweden - Germany did not want to have anything to do with toppling of Gaddafi - UK did, yet Germany accepts the refugees and UK defends itself as much as it can. It is easy to express well sounding wishes. To make the world better is not. After all these years I spent here, I think the best way to improve the world is to talk about it only - drinking your beverage of choice trough the night. The only consequence then is a headache.
Bottom line is this: we do not want to, can and possibly should make important decisions - as imperfect and unfair as it is - it seems that the status quo is the best we can get. How sad, is it not?
He is a simpleton enough to actually do it, me thinks. I also find it amusing that he has some societal uses after all. Seems everybody can do some good.
Either way his best options were to charge the journalists. In this way a discussion is intensified and leads to the situation where one has to decide either way. In some states the journalists would end up in jail or some other GITMO like place or would be able to find out how difficult a life one has without being actually charged by justice system.
Looks like Germans learned their lessons last century. Not all other nations were as fleissig .
In defense of public prosecutors in Germany - they may have difficulties attacking the real culprits and going ahead with this charge may very well end up not where the government of Germany wants it to go.
I think you forget about one little thing - the point of intelligence gathering may be exactly this. Everybody does it of course. It should be doing it rather with means accepted by the guys who pay or else face consequences. That is the basic thing about democracy. This activity may include cooperating with others in spying on enemies of the state within the country as long as that remains at least superficially legal or outside. It does not include however allowing gross spying on own people including government members. This is a failure for the nation and depending for whom Merkel works is a failure or success for German government.
This is one way of rationally approach this situation. Another is to look at any great things in the past. None of them were easily possible. None of t he freedoms that people got were for free. Keeping those freedoms is also not free of charge. You are not willing to pay then they privilege may and will be revoked. As for being a fool - people taking part in any activity against establishment like civil rights movement in US or siblings Scholl had when they started no reasonable way to believe in their success. Some of them succeeded. Some of them died in vain. It is foolish to believe however that even those that failed completely did not help us in some way. By showing that something bigger than few cents and one more day to live is there. It is there not because dear god gave it to us but because we decided it is. That is what I think. Not sure if I would do what people doing this stuff did. But I value their sacrifice.
There is also another thing which one may consider. Willingly or not federal prosecutors in Germany are bringing some energy into this fault line so we may eventually see some conclusion some day. Even if they succeed this may be what Pyrrhus got long time ago.
job to attack journalists. If it charge fails - freedom of press is the highest priority. If the charge succeeds then the country was saved against evil conspiracy.
No such fortunate situation when real culprits from Verfassungschutz and other federal institutions including the chief master boss Frau Merkel would be charged with anything.
The lists of triggers are still not analyzed by the parliamentary commission because NSA did not give its permission. Either German government is just a vassal of Murica on own wish or Murica has (thanx among others NSA activities) something nasty on key figures in government. Either way it is time to resign for some of them or be forcibly removed from office. That would be pity of course as they were not damaging(*) all too much so far, which is already good thing for any government.
* - they did not manage to destroy the luck that Germany had in riding the waves of economic disruptions of late.
I am for well educated and well meaning fellow humans that use reason, are considerate and have enough time and competence to do all this. Unfortunately most of us humans are stupid, incompetent and lazy and that is not even so bad. The fact is - a tool that requires you to jump a lots of loops to make it work is good for a hobbyist but not for a busy person with multitude of obligations. This is a design failure that may have dire consequences thus it belongs to be fixed. Possibly the home network design needs features that allow it to be relatively safe without major investment in time and effort. OC if somebody wants to have it on the cheap and without any sort of security then please go for it. Put a label with an appropriate warning on it and it is ok. The sad reality is however that we cannot allow this to continue because at the end we will have everything with labels and warning that do not increase anybody's awareness.
The home control allows for instance turning heating/AC on when coming home from holidays earlier than expected - for this, a normal user would use his mobile and web interface or an app. If this is done over vpn then it is (in theory) not exposed but I have serious doubts if normal users would expect vpn to be be necessary for it. In any case it was apparently not in the cards to use vpn.
There are other uses too. Clearly they are not a must but if you can control some of the house functions from your phone then why not from outside of the house?
At one thing you are correct - having multiple house is not a must with this technology and probably not even most used albeit a summer house at the seaside is a multihome situation already.
Your statement would perfectly fit as a summary. Pity we do not have a possibility to mod one post into summary. Could be helpful not only in this case.
So your argument is that because the local laws governing the taxi service are different from location to location then this is sign that these regulations are invalid? This is nice - the wording of laws protecting property and life of citizens in the world different from location to location as well - are they thus invalid (and we can extract some kidneys for profit) ?
As for the laws that are BS - would you be more specific? Which parts of insurance and safety requirements are wrong? The limit on taxis in some places - maybe? But that is not even the main issue in many of the places where Uber has legal problems and Uber still says 'fuck it'.
I do not like cabbies all that much but I do not care about Uber either. Yet I see Uber as a global monopolist in making and I dislike it even more. Uber owner and managers behave like UFC back in first half of previous century. Only difference now is that Marines get sent less and mostly to fight terrorism these days. Trade treaties and lawyers are used instead to ensure US corps are well. I guess if Uber were forced to obey the law in EU after EU and US signed the TTIP we in EU would have to pay Uber a nice sum of money for lost profits or?
... To say that any law that prevents maximal profits is good, because anyone who wants to maximize profits is automatically wrong, is kind of silly.
Does anybody say that actually? Maximizing profits is how companies do business. Maximizing profits in certain ways - not following rules like everbody else - maybe questionable. If violating existing laws provide a company economic advantage and disadvantage to everybody else then I'd say such maximizing of profits is not beneficial to society. It is arguably a question of values. I value society that prevents such a thing. Uber owner does not unless I suppose his property and well being is in question.
It is oversimplification to say that in case of Uber it is only other corporation that gets profits. The way Uber acts means that not only additional costs are incurred locally by somebody else than Uber but also the bigger profits are taken out of the local context too. Frankly I do not see how that benefits me as a citizen or customer.
I seriously doubt that 'cheering Uber..." (assuming it works) is how we (society) are getting much of value. From what I see Uber as providing global money skimming service over the taxi market. In some places that provides allegedly better service to customers. The technology Uber provides is not new either and apps hiring local cabbies are there for some years already. I can imagine however that some US businessmen see advantage in mcTaxi service and investors celebrate a company fighting 'red tape' and against 'workers rights'. Does not look like I should be celebrating anything unless I am Uber shareholder or live in jurisdiction where Uber profits arrive after long hard traveling all over world.
I donno - seems like shooting at more or less random people is something that US accept as a fact of life or else US laws would be modified. But then again similarly to Uber's situation - huge mountain of money prevents any meaningful action in this direction. This let me think that money mountains have more rights than people. That is of course true in all other places in the world but there is I think only one jurisdiction on earth where money mountain in from of a corporation have almost the same rights as a citizen (quite frankly I consider this a rumour as I cannot believe that is true).
'Not even wrong' is referring to a fallacy. That is fair enough but which part of GP's argument is that exactly? You failed to point that yet your claim stands high -> look s/he is doing fallacy - evil!
Assuming GP did wrong, how are you better?
Yes that is how the system should work. We know that it should be so. At the very end however it is survival of the fittest and Uber being bigger than most of its opponents financially, can outlast them.
We the people have a say only in minority of cases. Th civil rights era was bloody and its fight still did not end apparently. I do not see how people would raise in such case where worker's rights (oops sorry - freelancers working for Uber voluntarily on contract bases) or public safety or property rights (due to insufficient insurance for instance) of some individuals are/can be affected. This is not racial discrimination that made some substantial number of white people to sympathize with oppressed. In this case costs to society is spread and individualized while benefits are mostly concentrated in Uber.
Uber is attacking with the sun and down the hill on isolated enemy positions, the only thing better would be if enemy gave up.
This (laws needing a fix because of some reason) could have been used as argument but if one looks at Uber (managers and owner) behaviour one can see that it is not about fixing some laws so that businesses could operate better and (which is vital for society actually) provide better service. The main reason given is usually law is old and does not fit with modern times because Uber says so. I am for fixing old and flowed laws but Uber is not even trying to do that - it wants it all and fuck the rest. If so then society has a good right to say 'fuck you' to Uber. The only legal way to do it is to sue it as apparently many authorities do not see the point in enforcement. The problem with it is that companies like Uber can just last longer and win argument by endurance because have more money for lawyers and do not accept NO as an answer.
It is somewhat entertaining watching all the sociopaths joining the ranks Uber. The good thing is that even if Uber wins it will be forced by forces in the business itself to comply with some laws and will be tamed this way. It happened to all big companies and it will happen to Uber too. The question is whether it is good for us all to wait till that happens or to tame Uber directly.
This OT but wonders me still: for somebody that dislikes Karl M. you definitely talk a lot about the guy and his works. Looks like an obsession to me.
As for the contradictions: all males are like you say they are i.e. do not care for anything that is not competed for? If women are uncomfortable only when competing with men then it still does not prove they do not compete. I suppose many examples show they actually do only in ways that escapes some troglodytes (that is not a reference to you just to general male audience that populates this site, including me - that seems to be what people in IT usually are).
Why is the flamebait given here while GP is getting 3interesting? I disagree with the 'vagina is always right' promoted by nazifems but even more with/.ers throwing verbal abuse with verbiage closely related to randtardism and nazi-feminism i.e. as GP did.
Feminazis are evil and are also counterproductive. So are randtards and right wing bigots. You could for instance solve part oft he problems inherent to the IT industry by enforcing simple labour rules of pay per hour spent and limits for overtime per year - but that would be communist tactics meant at destruction of capitalism or even universe as we know it. Similarly you could resolve big part of discrimination against blacks in US by working against poverty and exclusion that it causes (access to education and health care for instance). But that too would be a communist agenda at work. It is really tiring indeed to have the 'too few vaginas or whatever in X' articles but it is also tiring to have meaningless rants by bigots against anything that does not fit into their little minds.
These results are surely conspiracy of greeners, communists, pederasts and other abusers. They surely did something to the sensors or data. It could also be that in order to prove global warming actually occurs they did something terrible to cause it (drove bigger cars and ate bigger steaks etc).
For those with no interest in human contact (besides occasional pr0n) the future looks bright only if they have enough money to guarantee human contact free life, the others will have to suffer of course although their suffering will bear distinctive tones comparing to that of other suckers.
Slashdot Mirror
General population does not even want to do that.
There is also an issue if they are capable of doing things like: making informed guesses, making and applying plans, monitoring them and modifying them to adjust to the actual conditions (that is beyond comprehension even of the well educated software people that we work with), following a process and diverting from it when necessary and when adverse effects are still acceptable, communicating efficiently, respecting people of different opinions while knowing borders of this respect e.g. I respect your views only to the point where they have a direct deadly consequences - but even that has exceptions. Most of the people have basic understanding what is good and bad. We fail miserably however when discussion touches difficult subjects obscured by our feelings and technical complexity (what to do when the blood test shows you have AIDS - despair or make another test?). A flock of such miserable animals shall make a reasonable decision? Even in simple cases that is difficult and decisions that are to betaken are usually of a type: a runaway train goes direction of group of children, you have a switch that can put the train on alternate rail where only a old,fat, dirty man is drinking a bottle of vodka - what do you decide? What if our fat buddy is a group of doctors working on a cure for cancer? This is all complicated but add to this huge size of any modern society and lack of common values between large groups of people in it (liberals and tea party associates in US for instance). Then come corruption - outright or because if it does not matter anyway then why I should not take some money for TTIP for instance? I guess now we have a vision of our democratic societies.
If I be caught by police smoking a joint in Germany - my driving license will be gone and I can get it back only after I make an idiocy test - why?
All the usual nazifems go wild because Amnesty International supports prostitution now. None of those nazifems asked sex workers actually - they do not care.
In Russia these issues exist to but are expressed differently. It is easy to criticize and demand change. We all were very happy to criticize Assad - I think removal of Assad has still quite wide spread support in Western countries as it had back then when troubles started. The bloody hell that Syria has become since was predictable and exactly as it would happen if Assad was removed. I suggest we shall be very careful what we wish because we have to take responsibility after what we wished becomes reality - nobody wants all these thousands of refugees that come from north Africa and Syria now - they mostly come to Germany and Sweden - Germany did not want to have anything to do with toppling of Gaddafi - UK did, yet Germany accepts the refugees and UK defends itself as much as it can. It is easy to express well sounding wishes. To make the world better is not. After all these years I spent here, I think the best way to improve the world is to talk about it only - drinking your beverage of choice trough the night. The only consequence then is a headache.
Bottom line is this: we do not want to, can and possibly should make important decisions - as imperfect and unfair as it is - it seems that the status quo is the best we can get. How sad, is it not?
He is a simpleton enough to actually do it, me thinks. I also find it amusing that he has some societal uses after all. Seems everybody can do some good.
They should not be doing this because?
Either way his best options were to charge the journalists. In this way a discussion is intensified and leads to the situation where one has to decide either way. In some states the journalists would end up in jail or some other GITMO like place or would be able to find out how difficult a life one has without being actually charged by justice system.
Looks like Germans learned their lessons last century. Not all other nations were as fleissig .
In defense of public prosecutors in Germany - they may have difficulties attacking the real culprits and going ahead with this charge may very well end up not where the government of Germany wants it to go.
I think you forget about one little thing - the point of intelligence gathering may be exactly this. Everybody does it of course. It should be doing it rather with means accepted by the guys who pay or else face consequences. That is the basic thing about democracy. This activity may include cooperating with others in spying on enemies of the state within the country as long as that remains at least superficially legal or outside. It does not include however allowing gross spying on own people including government members. This is a failure for the nation and depending for whom Merkel works is a failure or success for German government.
This is one way of rationally approach this situation. Another is to look at any great things in the past. None of them were easily possible. None of t he freedoms that people got were for free. Keeping those freedoms is also not free of charge. You are not willing to pay then they privilege may and will be revoked. As for being a fool - people taking part in any activity against establishment like civil rights movement in US or siblings Scholl had when they started no reasonable way to believe in their success. Some of them succeeded. Some of them died in vain. It is foolish to believe however that even those that failed completely did not help us in some way. By showing that something bigger than few cents and one more day to live is there. It is there not because dear god gave it to us but because we decided it is. That is what I think. Not sure if I would do what people doing this stuff did. But I value their sacrifice.
There is also another thing which one may consider. Willingly or not federal prosecutors in Germany are bringing some energy into this fault line so we may eventually see some conclusion some day. Even if they succeed this may be what Pyrrhus got long time ago.
No such fortunate situation when real culprits from Verfassungschutz and other federal institutions including the chief master boss Frau Merkel would be charged with anything.
The lists of triggers are still not analyzed by the parliamentary commission because NSA did not give its permission. Either German government is just a vassal of Murica on own wish or Murica has (thanx among others NSA activities) something nasty on key figures in government. Either way it is time to resign for some of them or be forcibly removed from office. That would be pity of course as they were not damaging(*) all too much so far, which is already good thing for any government.
* - they did not manage to destroy the luck that Germany had in riding the waves of economic disruptions of late.
I am for well educated and well meaning fellow humans that use reason, are considerate and have enough time and competence to do all this. Unfortunately most of us humans are stupid, incompetent and lazy and that is not even so bad. The fact is - a tool that requires you to jump a lots of loops to make it work is good for a hobbyist but not for a busy person with multitude of obligations. This is a design failure that may have dire consequences thus it belongs to be fixed. Possibly the home network design needs features that allow it to be relatively safe without major investment in time and effort. OC if somebody wants to have it on the cheap and without any sort of security then please go for it. Put a label with an appropriate warning on it and it is ok. The sad reality is however that we cannot allow this to continue because at the end we will have everything with labels and warning that do not increase anybody's awareness.
You mean, they charged bookkeepers (of limited brain capacity) with design and architectural responsibilities? Seems to be normal corporate practice.
Come to think of it - the lax security may have been a government contract.
The home control allows for instance turning heating/AC on when coming home from holidays earlier than expected - for this, a normal user would use his mobile and web interface or an app. If this is done over vpn then it is (in theory) not exposed but I have serious doubts if normal users would expect vpn to be be necessary for it. In any case it was apparently not in the cards to use vpn.
There are other uses too. Clearly they are not a must but if you can control some of the house functions from your phone then why not from outside of the house?
At one thing you are correct - having multiple house is not a must with this technology and probably not even most used albeit a summer house at the seaside is a multihome situation already.
Your statement would perfectly fit as a summary. Pity we do not have a possibility to mod one post into summary. Could be helpful not only in this case.
So your argument is that because the local laws governing the taxi service are different from location to location then this is sign that these regulations are invalid? This is nice - the wording of laws protecting property and life of citizens in the world different from location to location as well - are they thus invalid (and we can extract some kidneys for profit) ?
As for the laws that are BS - would you be more specific? Which parts of insurance and safety requirements are wrong? The limit on taxis in some places - maybe? But that is not even the main issue in many of the places where Uber has legal problems and Uber still says 'fuck it'.
I do not like cabbies all that much but I do not care about Uber either. Yet I see Uber as a global monopolist in making and I dislike it even more. Uber owner and managers behave like UFC back in first half of previous century. Only difference now is that Marines get sent less and mostly to fight terrorism these days. Trade treaties and lawyers are used instead to ensure US corps are well. I guess if Uber were forced to obey the law in EU after EU and US signed the TTIP we in EU would have to pay Uber a nice sum of money for lost profits or?
... To say that any law that prevents maximal profits is good, because anyone who wants to maximize profits is automatically wrong, is kind of silly.
Does anybody say that actually? Maximizing profits is how companies do business. Maximizing profits in certain ways - not following rules like everbody else - maybe questionable. If violating existing laws provide a company economic advantage and disadvantage to everybody else then I'd say such maximizing of profits is not beneficial to society. It is arguably a question of values. I value society that prevents such a thing. Uber owner does not unless I suppose his property and well being is in question.
It is oversimplification to say that in case of Uber it is only other corporation that gets profits. The way Uber acts means that not only additional costs are incurred locally by somebody else than Uber but also the bigger profits are taken out of the local context too. Frankly I do not see how that benefits me as a citizen or customer.
I seriously doubt that 'cheering Uber..." (assuming it works) is how we (society) are getting much of value.
From what I see Uber as providing global money skimming service over the taxi market. In some places that provides allegedly better service to customers. The technology Uber provides is not new either and apps hiring local cabbies are there for some years already. I can imagine however that some US businessmen see advantage in mcTaxi service and investors celebrate a company fighting 'red tape' and against 'workers rights'. Does not look like I should be celebrating anything unless I am Uber shareholder or live in jurisdiction where Uber profits arrive after long hard traveling all over world.
I donno - seems like shooting at more or less random people is something that US accept as a fact of life or else US laws would be modified. But then again similarly to Uber's situation - huge mountain of money prevents any meaningful action in this direction. This let me think that money mountains have more rights than people. That is of course true in all other places in the world but there is I think only one jurisdiction on earth where money mountain in from of a corporation have almost the same rights as a citizen (quite frankly I consider this a rumour as I cannot believe that is true).
'Not even wrong' is referring to a fallacy. That is fair enough but which part of GP's argument is that exactly? You failed to point that yet your claim stands high -> look s/he is doing fallacy - evil!
Assuming GP did wrong, how are you better?
Yes that is how the system should work. We know that it should be so. At the very end however it is survival of the fittest and Uber being bigger than most of its opponents financially, can outlast them.
We the people have a say only in minority of cases. Th civil rights era was bloody and its fight still did not end apparently. I do not see how people would raise in such case where worker's rights (oops sorry - freelancers working for Uber voluntarily on contract bases) or public safety or property rights (due to insufficient insurance for instance) of some individuals are/can be affected. This is not racial discrimination that made some substantial number of white people to sympathize with oppressed. In this case costs to society is spread and individualized while benefits are mostly concentrated in Uber.
Uber is attacking with the sun and down the hill on isolated enemy positions, the only thing better would be if enemy gave up.
This (laws needing a fix because of some reason) could have been used as argument but if one looks at Uber (managers and owner) behaviour one can see that it is not about fixing some laws so that businesses could operate better and (which is vital for society actually) provide better service. The main reason given is usually law is old and does not fit with modern times because Uber says so. I am for fixing old and flowed laws but Uber is not even trying to do that - it wants it all and fuck the rest. If so then society has a good right to say 'fuck you' to Uber. The only legal way to do it is to sue it as apparently many authorities do not see the point in enforcement. The problem with it is that companies like Uber can just last longer and win argument by endurance because have more money for lawyers and do not accept NO as an answer.
It is somewhat entertaining watching all the sociopaths joining the ranks Uber. The good thing is that even if Uber wins it will be forced by forces in the business itself to comply with some laws and will be tamed this way. It happened to all big companies and it will happen to Uber too. The question is whether it is good for us all to wait till that happens or to tame Uber directly.
This OT but wonders me still: for somebody that dislikes Karl M. you definitely talk a lot about the guy and his works. Looks like an obsession to me.
As for the contradictions: all males are like you say they are i.e. do not care for anything that is not competed for? If women are uncomfortable only when competing with men then it still does not prove they do not compete. I suppose many examples show they actually do only in ways that escapes some troglodytes (that is not a reference to you just to general male audience that populates this site, including me - that seems to be what people in IT usually are).
Why is the flamebait given here while GP is getting 3interesting? I disagree with the 'vagina is always right' promoted by nazifems but even more with /.ers throwing verbal abuse with verbiage closely related to randtardism and nazi-feminism i.e. as GP did.
Feminazis are evil and are also counterproductive. So are randtards and right wing bigots. You could for instance solve part oft he problems inherent to the IT industry by enforcing simple labour rules of pay per hour spent and limits for overtime per year - but that would be communist tactics meant at destruction of capitalism or even universe as we know it. Similarly you could resolve big part of discrimination against blacks in US by working against poverty and exclusion that it causes (access to education and health care for instance). But that too would be a communist agenda at work. It is really tiring indeed to have the 'too few vaginas or whatever in X' articles but it is also tiring to have meaningless rants by bigots against anything that does not fit into their little minds.
I hope they have thought of all these things. It would be foolish if they did not..
Here I FTFY.
These results are surely conspiracy of greeners, communists, pederasts and other abusers. They surely did something to the sensors or data. It could also be that in order to prove global warming actually occurs they did something terrible to cause it (drove bigger cars and ate bigger steaks etc).
For those with no interest in human contact (besides occasional pr0n) the future looks bright only if they have enough money to guarantee human contact free life, the others will have to suffer of course although their suffering will bear distinctive tones comparing to that of other suckers.
are you at all human or are you a bot for Uber like corp doing propaganda work?