That should actually make it even easier to block!
My phone wouldn't have even rung.
They're most likely one of the people who you had blocked, and they realized you allow anonymous calls, and so they flagged in the database as having those settings. Expect other scammers to know that about you in the future before they even call the first time!
They don't have to hunt them down, they knew that answer in realtime.
You probably just don't understand who the NSA is, what their job is, or who has access to their information.
(The answers are "the military," "military electronic surveillance," and "the military.)
Unfortunately, most of the people blathering on the internet mistook them for being law enforcement, or somehow connected to the civilian gubermint. But no. They know who the robo-dialers are, and if the military decides to conduct air strikes to solve the problem, then somebody would finally use that knowledge. Otherwise, no, it just sits in a database.
I see "websites" all the time that are obviously just rows in a database created to build 1000s of sites with hours of work just to match a search term now and then and achieve a view on a paid ad.
That there are websites that are just rows in a database designed to build lots of sites to match search terms, that much is obvious and well known.
Your claim about the purpose is substantially off, however. In fact, it mistakes who is lying, and to who. Consider: Who gets paid to make those sites? What is their job called? Who does it benefit, in what way? And what about the ads, who benefits when the ad gets clicked on? Is it the same person that is benefiting from the fake sites, or is the person who gets paid for the ad actually the person who the site seeks to deceive?! Makes a bit of difference.
Or at least, if it really is just the tip why would they be admitting it so readily?
That implies that the problem, which they previously were just ignoring, is really really huge and even when they try to do something, they have little impact.
But coming from a Director of Trust and Safety, that admission is truly frightening. They're admitting that it's a huge problem and to being barely able to impact it, and that's the spin designed to make you trust them! Z0MG!
It is a slashdot thing; it deletes key words, or changes positive statements to negatives, to punish people who don't use "preview." It rewrites your comment when you press preview, you're not previewing just to check for your own mistakes, you have to proof read for the added mistakes too.
Wow, I'm surprised to see somebody in the wild who mistakes a words etymology for its definition.
Even sadder is conflating "declaring publicly" with "recognized officially." As if History has never taught the difference! LMFAO You can find extensive examples just from the Greeks, you don't even have to resort to the Current Era.
I saw that cartoon; the self-driving line painting truck ended up chasing its tail right off the cliff, and then a bird on drugs flew past in a Tesla and said something smart.
I was just trying to figure out what a "not on" was, and why it would be visible to the GPS. Maybe it is a type of jamming device.
If it was a really a "knot on" "on a divided highway," in my State you end up having to register your address on a list for the rest of your life if you get caught doing that.
At legal speeds in residential neighborhoods, a self-driving car that detected the dog promptly would have a very high likelihood of stopping in time. Brands with crappy sensors would hit the dog, but ones with good sensors you're not going really be able to jump out that fast when the vehicle is going that slow. Brakes are too good at stopping at low speed.
A disengagement is the equivalent of my wife warning me about an approaching object before I see it, even though I keep my eyes glued to the task at hand even on a long trip.
Yes, I see the bicycle, thank you. Yes, I see the pedestrian, thank you. Yes, I see that person in front of us driving like an idiot; there's one behind us, too! Eventually we get to, oh yes, thank you, I didn't see that goat on the shoulder. That's the equivalent of a disengagement. But a goat is unlikely to jump in the street.
If you look at the reports, some companies the disengagements are situations where they almost killed somebody. Waymo disengagements are more like the goat on the shoulder. Eventually the government will figure the testing out, and then the wheat will be separated from the chaff.
ARM doesn't design hardware though, they only define an instruction set. Each company that makes an ARM chip had to either design or license an implementation of their own, and that is where any backdooring would happen. ARM doesn't even include any peripherals like memory!
That really shows how considered your comments were.;)
Most of the ARM chips I use were designed by Texas Instruments, in Texas. They do have one chip fab in China, a bunch in the US, a couple in Japan, and a couple in Europe, though the ARM chips are probably mostly produced by contract fabs.
If you think "you're" "playing each party against the other," that tells me you're looking for somebody to play you, and feed you the correct supporting PR.
We really need more heroes in Congress, like Senator Ron Wyden... Representatives with the integrity to stand for what's right even if it's a losing battle and politically unfavorable.
It isn't politically unfavorable at all; Senator Wyden is a Democrat from Oregon!
Rather, his politics are unassailably popular! He's the least likely politician in the State to lose an election, and he gets votes from the left and right. He also has a bunch of people in his office who spend their time advocating for individual senior citizens in Oregon who are having problems receiving (mostly medical) services that they are due.
Voters in States where everybody assumes politicians are corrupt go on to vote for corrupt politicians. Voters in Oregon prefer to vote for people like Senator Wyden. Our other Senator is really good too, though not consistently on every issue the way Wyden is. Mostly the reason for it is that we have a really strong "ballot measure" system for local politics, and very few ballot measure receive party-line votes. So voters are used to considering multiple real issues on every ballot, and they're not accustomed to checking all the boxes based on Party. We've also trained our State Legislature to vote to refer controversial issues to the Voters, instead of voting directly to pass them; that way they don't get punished if we have to say "no," and we don't expect to have to live under laws we don't like unless it's been voted on directly by the People.
+5V?! Luxury! I was stuck with ECL memory; it isn't enough just to keep your voltage between -3 and -4.6V, you also have to turn the crank at an exact speed to maintain the current.
You claim your actions weren't in "real life," but they say that the logs show you really did it, using real servers, with real users. You didn't just pretend to stalk somebody online, but it was really just a video game. Nope; it was real servers, real people, real log files.
I stopped reading when you claimed to have not told a joke.
If you write more words than I did, at least spend the time to comprehend my words before spewing.
When you accuse people of not having a sense of humor, you are engaged in the idiocy of complaining that people didn't laugh at your jokes. It doesn't need a lot more parsing than that; you can expect in that situation to receive that response, and it is not an inaccurate response. Nobody cares about your take on the semantics; don't whine about other people's sense of humor, and don't whine about mods. Easy peasy. See, now did you really need to spew all that?
You're not a scientist, and I'm not writing an academic paper, so why would I agree to "supply a reference?"
I would never do so!
I would instead come to an understanding of the ideas involved, and apply them to the situation. You want people to point to Authorities, because you don't comprehend that Argument From Authority is a logical fallacy. It doesn't touch my thinking at all when you ask me to engage in logical fallacies for your pleasure; it doesn't touch me at all! I feel no desire at all to provide you with a reference when you beg for it. None. I do not suspend my belief in logic at that invitation, nor does doing so begin to appear desirable.
When you ask for references outside of an academic context, you're asking to be fed propaganda. I'm not going to feed you propaganda; it is very very easy to find some on the internet if you want to consume it. I get no benefit by feeding you propaganda that tells you to think the same thing that I think. I understand that many people find that appealing or entertaining, but I do not.
Instead, I might tell you what my understanding of publicly available information is, so that if you're one of the small percent of people who are capable of evaluating and filtering sources of information you might go out and look at various sources of information to assess if what I communicated has value. I have no interest in providing "references" for people who don't want ideas, they merely want to know which Authoritay I sought virtue from signaling association with.
Your comfort with nazis is not going to stop anybody else from fighting the nazis, though.
The Princess Bride was a good movie. As far as action-adventure-comedies targeted at a young audience go, it might even be one of the best of all time. But it is not a substantive source of philosophy, and even considering the literal meaning of your quote, I'm not convinced you understand what meaning the movie would have as an attempt to cite an Authoritay.
The attempt implies you have no understanding at all of why people would fight nazis, or how deep their willingness to sacrifice in that fight might go. That you're afraid of antifa, and also lack understanding of their seriousness, that indicates you should probably be a lot more afraid of them than you are!
The same as everything else that costs money and has no purpose; the goal would be to find a reason to do it, not a reason not to do it. You have to have a reason to want to do it before you worry about reasons not to! If you didn't already know you wanted to do it, and you did the analysis anyways, you'd only be worried about if there is some reason to want to do it that you missed. If you never find a reason to do it, then when you get to the part about how it costs millions of dollars you're not even going to be looking for a reason to do it, you're just going to cast the idea aside.
Foreigners don't just "disappear" the way locals might. You might think they disappeared for few days, but then you'll find all sorts of people keep showing up looking for them.
If you're just passing through and you spit on the sidewalk, they'll already keep you around long enough to cane you, what more than that would have a use case?
You have a view of people being evil, but you to be missing some sort of "theory of mind" where they have actual real-world reasons for their actions. It leaves you with no predictive power at all.
Slashdot Mirror
That should actually make it even easier to block!
My phone wouldn't have even rung.
They're most likely one of the people who you had blocked, and they realized you allow anonymous calls, and so they flagged in the database as having those settings. Expect other scammers to know that about you in the future before they even call the first time!
Render. When you're engaged in rendition, the verb is render.
Or more likely, one of his secretaries calling to find an attorney willing to represent him after the last dozen quit.
It might even just be all his past attorneys making calls to their liability insurance agents to verify their account status.
They don't have to hunt them down, they knew that answer in realtime.
You probably just don't understand who the NSA is, what their job is, or who has access to their information.
(The answers are "the military," "military electronic surveillance," and "the military.)
Unfortunately, most of the people blathering on the internet mistook them for being law enforcement, or somehow connected to the civilian gubermint. But no. They know who the robo-dialers are, and if the military decides to conduct air strikes to solve the problem, then somebody would finally use that knowledge. Otherwise, no, it just sits in a database.
I see "websites" all the time that are obviously just rows in a database created to build 1000s of sites with hours of work just to match a search term now and then and achieve a view on a paid ad.
That there are websites that are just rows in a database designed to build lots of sites to match search terms, that much is obvious and well known.
Your claim about the purpose is substantially off, however. In fact, it mistakes who is lying, and to who. Consider: Who gets paid to make those sites? What is their job called? Who does it benefit, in what way? And what about the ads, who benefits when the ad gets clicked on? Is it the same person that is benefiting from the fake sites, or is the person who gets paid for the ad actually the person who the site seeks to deceive?! Makes a bit of difference.
Or at least, if it really is just the tip why would they be admitting it so readily?
That implies that the problem, which they previously were just ignoring, is really really huge and even when they try to do something, they have little impact.
But coming from a Director of Trust and Safety, that admission is truly frightening. They're admitting that it's a huge problem and to being barely able to impact it, and that's the spin designed to make you trust them! Z0MG!
It is a slashdot thing; it deletes key words, or changes positive statements to negatives, to punish people who don't use "preview." It rewrites your comment when you press preview, you're not previewing just to check for your own mistakes, you have to proof read for the added mistakes too.
Wow, I'm surprised to see somebody in the wild who mistakes a words etymology for its definition.
Even sadder is conflating "declaring publicly" with "recognized officially." As if History has never taught the difference! LMFAO You can find extensive examples just from the Greeks, you don't even have to resort to the Current Era.
I saw that cartoon; the self-driving line painting truck ended up chasing its tail right off the cliff, and then a bird on drugs flew past in a Tesla and said something smart.
True, that; the only thing slower than a bus truck is a house truck.
I was just trying to figure out what a "not on" was, and why it would be visible to the GPS. Maybe it is a type of jamming device.
If it was a really a "knot on" "on a divided highway," in my State you end up having to register your address on a list for the rest of your life if you get caught doing that.
At legal speeds in residential neighborhoods, a self-driving car that detected the dog promptly would have a very high likelihood of stopping in time. Brands with crappy sensors would hit the dog, but ones with good sensors you're not going really be able to jump out that fast when the vehicle is going that slow. Brakes are too good at stopping at low speed.
A disengagement is the equivalent of my wife warning me about an approaching object before I see it, even though I keep my eyes glued to the task at hand even on a long trip.
Yes, I see the bicycle, thank you. Yes, I see the pedestrian, thank you. Yes, I see that person in front of us driving like an idiot; there's one behind us, too! Eventually we get to, oh yes, thank you, I didn't see that goat on the shoulder. That's the equivalent of a disengagement. But a goat is unlikely to jump in the street.
If you look at the reports, some companies the disengagements are situations where they almost killed somebody. Waymo disengagements are more like the goat on the shoulder. Eventually the government will figure the testing out, and then the wheat will be separated from the chaff.
Too.
I'm using firefox with uMatrix and I haven't seen an autoplay video in years.
One time I thought it was broken but I'd accidentally clicked the youtube slider.
What is the use case, why not floor coverings, or slippers?
As articles like that point out, they do know how.
It isn't used because it is more expensive. Simple.
This is even more expensive, and even better. So, even less useful.
ARM doesn't design hardware though, they only define an instruction set. Each company that makes an ARM chip had to either design or license an implementation of their own, and that is where any backdooring would happen. ARM doesn't even include any peripherals like memory!
That really shows how considered your comments were. ;)
Most of the ARM chips I use were designed by Texas Instruments, in Texas. They do have one chip fab in China, a bunch in the US, a couple in Japan, and a couple in Europe, though the ARM chips are probably mostly produced by contract fabs.
If you think "you're" "playing each party against the other," that tells me you're looking for somebody to play you, and feed you the correct supporting PR.
We really need more heroes in Congress, like Senator Ron Wyden... Representatives with the integrity to stand for what's right even if it's a losing battle and politically unfavorable.
It isn't politically unfavorable at all; Senator Wyden is a Democrat from Oregon!
Rather, his politics are unassailably popular! He's the least likely politician in the State to lose an election, and he gets votes from the left and right. He also has a bunch of people in his office who spend their time advocating for individual senior citizens in Oregon who are having problems receiving (mostly medical) services that they are due.
Voters in States where everybody assumes politicians are corrupt go on to vote for corrupt politicians. Voters in Oregon prefer to vote for people like Senator Wyden. Our other Senator is really good too, though not consistently on every issue the way Wyden is. Mostly the reason for it is that we have a really strong "ballot measure" system for local politics, and very few ballot measure receive party-line votes. So voters are used to considering multiple real issues on every ballot, and they're not accustomed to checking all the boxes based on Party. We've also trained our State Legislature to vote to refer controversial issues to the Voters, instead of voting directly to pass them; that way they don't get punished if we have to say "no," and we don't expect to have to live under laws we don't like unless it's been voted on directly by the People.
+5V?! Luxury! I was stuck with ECL memory; it isn't enough just to keep your voltage between -3 and -4.6V, you also have to turn the crank at an exact speed to maintain the current.
You claim your actions weren't in "real life," but they say that the logs show you really did it, using real servers, with real users. You didn't just pretend to stalk somebody online, but it was really just a video game. Nope; it was real servers, real people, real log files.
I stopped reading when you claimed to have not told a joke.
If you write more words than I did, at least spend the time to comprehend my words before spewing.
When you accuse people of not having a sense of humor, you are engaged in the idiocy of complaining that people didn't laugh at your jokes. It doesn't need a lot more parsing than that; you can expect in that situation to receive that response, and it is not an inaccurate response. Nobody cares about your take on the semantics; don't whine about other people's sense of humor, and don't whine about mods. Easy peasy. See, now did you really need to spew all that?
You're not a scientist, and I'm not writing an academic paper, so why would I agree to "supply a reference?"
I would never do so!
I would instead come to an understanding of the ideas involved, and apply them to the situation. You want people to point to Authorities, because you don't comprehend that Argument From Authority is a logical fallacy. It doesn't touch my thinking at all when you ask me to engage in logical fallacies for your pleasure; it doesn't touch me at all! I feel no desire at all to provide you with a reference when you beg for it. None. I do not suspend my belief in logic at that invitation, nor does doing so begin to appear desirable.
When you ask for references outside of an academic context, you're asking to be fed propaganda. I'm not going to feed you propaganda; it is very very easy to find some on the internet if you want to consume it. I get no benefit by feeding you propaganda that tells you to think the same thing that I think. I understand that many people find that appealing or entertaining, but I do not.
Instead, I might tell you what my understanding of publicly available information is, so that if you're one of the small percent of people who are capable of evaluating and filtering sources of information you might go out and look at various sources of information to assess if what I communicated has value. I have no interest in providing "references" for people who don't want ideas, they merely want to know which Authoritay I sought virtue from signaling association with.
Your comfort with nazis is not going to stop anybody else from fighting the nazis, though.
The Princess Bride was a good movie. As far as action-adventure-comedies targeted at a young audience go, it might even be one of the best of all time. But it is not a substantive source of philosophy, and even considering the literal meaning of your quote, I'm not convinced you understand what meaning the movie would have as an attempt to cite an Authoritay.
The attempt implies you have no understanding at all of why people would fight nazis, or how deep their willingness to sacrifice in that fight might go. That you're afraid of antifa, and also lack understanding of their seriousness, that indicates you should probably be a lot more afraid of them than you are!
The same as everything else that costs money and has no purpose; the goal would be to find a reason to do it, not a reason not to do it. You have to have a reason to want to do it before you worry about reasons not to! If you didn't already know you wanted to do it, and you did the analysis anyways, you'd only be worried about if there is some reason to want to do it that you missed. If you never find a reason to do it, then when you get to the part about how it costs millions of dollars you're not even going to be looking for a reason to do it, you're just going to cast the idea aside.
Foreigners don't just "disappear" the way locals might. You might think they disappeared for few days, but then you'll find all sorts of people keep showing up looking for them.
If you're just passing through and you spit on the sidewalk, they'll already keep you around long enough to cane you, what more than that would have a use case?
You have a view of people being evil, but you to be missing some sort of "theory of mind" where they have actual real-world reasons for their actions. It leaves you with no predictive power at all.