0
stringlengths 9
22.1k
|
|---|
I've been to those conferences as well.
And on one hand, yeah it blows when an AMAZING concept doesn't get recognition because the topic isn't as flashy or, conversely, the presenter isn't willing to make it 'flashy'. That being said I think flashy might be a misnomer. Part of being a scientist is sharing your ideas and getting others excited about them and there might be some research topics that do that for you automatically but there's also a sadly large amount of scientists that don't seem to put effort in that area. If I'm sitting in your audience I want to like your presentation but, dude, you still gotta give me something to help.
One of the AI researchers at Oregon State is working on a bird watching database. That could be a yawn fest but he is passionate, excited and can get even people who don't care about birds and who haven't spent the last year neck deep in his research into his work. Whereas there are researchers who can make autonomous vehicles boring(seriously how do you even do that?). |
It happens because school in its current form is just a test of how well you conform to a system with a rigid set of rules to abide by. They determined that the current rate of learning is acceptable for the majority of students. If you think about it, about half of students should be in grades higher than their own, for example. But given that school is already easy as hell as is, we could easily take this to mean that school being so easy, coupled with appealing to the median student's assumed ability (which is horribly underestimated) leads us to have a dysfunctional education system where it's almost all rote learning and obedience training at a level much lower than what even an average student can achieve. So these grade-skipping students will be in fields with other high-achievers and everything seems more normal. |
I have to wonder how she fairs in other aspects of her life. For example, Einstein would often forget where he lived and other daily tasks like whether he drove to work or rode the bus that day. All I'm saying is that we all excel at some things while we utterly fail at others. We as a society need scholars like her to think of new things, but without skilled workers physically doing work nothing would actually get done. |
Basically what they're doing is modifying or injecting messages into the car's CAN bus, which is the communications bus used between all control modules. They're not running arbitrary code or anything like that, just sending fake messages to make certain control modules respond in a certain way. There's no way to do this without a physical link to the car's CAN bus, such as the bluetooth adaptor used in the video. These attacks are also specific to both the manufacturer of the car and the manufacturer(s) of the various electronic controllers, so ideally would only work for a handful of models of a certain age. |
I remember going to the mall with my mother and grandmother, who wasn't that spry due to her age and standing outside of a Child World toy store waiting for it to open. Super Soaker 100's were going on sale that day.
Unlike the way they do today, they weren't any main displays set up out front for it and nothing mentioning where the damned things were. So my mother, grandmother, and I all split in different direction looking for one. Mom goes left, I go up the middle, and Abuelita goes right.
I run the length of the store trying to not get trampled by the adults. After having no luck after scanning all the back isles I make my way back to the front to find my relatives... and that's when i see my grandmother... wrestling the last one out of this big guys hands, or rather, trying not to let go while this guy tried to steal it from her.
So I come running up to go help my grandmother, all 45 pounds of me, and jump on the guy's back yelling at him to stop stealing from my grandma.... I guess being accused of stealing from an old lady is not something he wanted to be called out on, especially when you are big and black, so he finally lets go.... and my grandmother gets the biggest shit eating grin on her face.
Funny thing is there totally was another one on the bottom shelf all the way to the back where adults wouldn't have been able to see without getting on their knees. I point it out to my grandmother and she tells me to grab that one too. My mom comes walking up with a shopping cart and we throw the last 2 super soaker 100's into the cart.
As we were leaving the store I overheard my grandmother telling my mom in Spanish about how this guy grabbed the last one and she totally stole from him and how she couldn't have done it without my help..... |
His/her post:
>What reasonable person would ever think he was entitled to $70 million for inventing a squirter?
This at face value, is trolling already... This person posted something that is obviously contrary to what the majority of people believe should be the correct. And not only is it contrary, it is also belittling anyone who stands on the opposing viewpoint - "What reasonable person..."
Now, that would've been troll enough, albeit a simple one...But! There's subtlety to be discovered yet.
If you look at all the people who replied to this post, they were all pulling at something that was never said. Strings included: Did you read the article; everyone should get paid for their work; nobody would innovate unless there's money to be made. So when they carelessly tried to rebuttal thinking this person was ill informed, they got systematically countered (successfully imho). This wouldn't be trolling originally, but you can tell from the responses that this person is indeed well informed and simply chose to withhold their justification in their original post in order to stir shit up . Not to mention always taking a moment in their response to belittle the poster for having such simple thoughts.
So |
Yes, i'm sure patenting devices after your concurrent release them, or patenting using a touchscreen are actually normal attitudes and definitely brand new inventions
Nothing about this accurately describes what happened .
> Not withstanding either the fact that the computer GUI was invented by xerox like 50 years ago.
Not even this is accurate.
> In your magical legalese world it might makes perfect sense, but in the real world it's just buying paper scrap saying that you own your concurrents products because you have more money and time to fill in said papers than them.
This is ignorant, trolling nonsense. You've provided no evidence of any of this.
> |
I don't understand why they haven't usurped DNS in general to support their own DNS system that would be untouchable. It seems the most obvious answer.
Think about it- a DNS system that is not controlled by ICANN- sure, they would still forward requests to ICANN DNS servers for domain names controlled by ICANN- but by first serving the DNS requests, and only propagating to other "PIRATEDNS" servers, they could update their root server lists automatically and have top level domains of their own choosing.
It would still be a constant battle with ISPs rejecting the IPs of certain DNS servers, and filtering packets to not allow certain lookups- but they would always be ahead. Maybe you'd have to install a certain client that encrypts your DNS traffic to these servers- maybe using SSL so the ISPs couldn't sniff the packets- but they'd never be able to tell what you are doing. The problem now is DNS is UDP on port 53. Change that and the ISPs would be scrambling to find an effective way to control it. |
As a rule of thumb, any "unit cost" you ever see on the internet is always the direct parts and sometimes the direct labor cost (the direct labor cost is generally very low, so it is negligible whether or not it is included). Nobody includes the many indirect costs associated with a product such as research and development, marketing, accounting, administrative salaries, sales wages and overhead for sales location, shipping, warehouse storage costs etc. |
Fuck, I try to turn mine off but it turns out that I never have one.
I was in the process joining google+, I'm glad I realized it half way that I don't have one, and just close my tab. |
again word games to dodge answering my point.
What word games? I asked for examples, you gave none.
>Jeff Bezos started a website, did he actually do the building? Who are the rest, did they actually build anything, or did they just "own things". I am thinking the latter.
Jeff Bezos founded and runs the most successful online store in the world. It was started in his garage. The others you can do your own homework.
>your mixing up develops and designs with funds. Generally develope and designing and not done by the people who fund. They are done by other workers hired to do so. But again, in your twisted definition of work, wage earners don't actually do work, property owners are the workers. Its somewhat twisted view on life.
Never claimed for a moment wage earners don't do work. I merely stated that founders and owners also do work. You claim they don't.
>He got the money from the last company, or thing. Your implying that people who have start up capital had to do real work at some point which is not always true. More often than not, its false.
More completely bogus claims. Did these people just snap their fingers and produce cash? NO. They borrowed or worked for it. Sure maybe some inherited but why punish people for passing on wealth to their children? If your claim was even remotely true then upward social/financial mobility has never been possible in the last 200 years.
>you imply all these are somehow on equal footing in use of language, but some of these positions have far more economic rights than others. In fact the way Americans generally talk, the people who actually do the work, the design, the physical labor, the programming, are not actually doing work, but whoever owns whatever they are part of is doing the work.
Your strange generalizations about Americans are utterly untrue. If Americans didn't think these positions were unworthy of being called work then nobody would be paid. The wages of those workers are determined like everywhere else in world by supply and demand. Out of curiosity on what planet are programmers underpaid? Most of them are massively overpaid, but the market demands it so that is what happens. Manual labor is low skill work and can be done by just about anyone, market demand is low so wages are low. Would you prefer we all be paid exactly the same? Why bother getting an education or learning new skills? The economy would shrivel up and die if people had no incentive to improve their skills and education.
>In your own line of thinking, everything in the world before the Republican revolutions we hold so dear as overthrowing tyranny, everything was made by kings and princes, and we should be so happy to have had them, and nothing could be done without them.
Why do you keep going back to kings and princes? Are you equating someone like Jeff Bezos to a king or prince? Are all business owners kings and princes? That is absurd. Maybe in a family company ownership is passed to a son or daughter but if they don't effectively run that business it will die or be taken away. In other words they still have to WORK.
>what about all the employees that worked extremely hard alongside the owner who have no rights. If an employee asks to receive credit and benefits after he stops working, people scream about laziness. If an owner who once works for a company decides to stop working, how is it not stealing from people who still work for the company.
Do unemployment benefits not exist in your country? The economy puts value on ideas, if an owner continues to be paid for his idea why is that wrong? Even if he stops working he might continue to be paid for his idea. We should encourage new ideas and businesses. The worker in the company is being paid for his work. When he stops working he stops being paid. For practical reasons we created safety nets in the form of severance and unemployment benefits. These are a good thing but they are not in return for current value or work being created. They were created so people who lose their job don't crash and burn.
Does corruption exist? Hell yes. That doesn't mean we throw out the baby with the bathwater. |
I don't believe that Net Neutrality is the solution. I think that we need to either classify the ISPs as common carriers
Does not compute. The purpose of classifying them as common carriers would be to enforce net neutrality. The reason that the supreme court ruled that the FCC lacked the authority to enforce net neutrality is because ISPs are currently classified as content providers.
Obama was talking about exactly this in his announcement. He used the term "utility" as a synonym for "common carrier" which most people are probably not familiar with.
>I think that if it were explained that the current situation is preventing the free market from working
The free market is not applicable to certain things such as utilities which essentially function as monopolies due to infrastructure constraints. Competing companies will not be able to start laying their own water pipes for example.
Realistically, the same is true for Internet service. Towns aren't going to let companies go around laying their own fiber due to the disruptive nature of such infrastructure projects. |
I find it outstanding that my interactions with any non-profit is nothing but them trying to get money out of me. I mean those organizations that send out volunteers to "spread their message".
I would really like to find out more information about what those human rights, animal rights, pollution, etc. people on the street promote (you know the ones that stand around with a clipboard?). Maybe it's an organization I'll give money to in the future.
I have, however, found it to be pointless and a very unpleasant experience. Instead of convincing me that their cause is good, they start convincing me to give them money pretty much up front. Then they try and make me feel shitty that I won't give them money right now, right this instant. There is no "hey this is important to us, we want to spread our message, please consider helping us out in the future".
I might not be willing to give them money now, but if I think their cause is good, I might consider giving them money in the future. When I can financially afford to.
As soon as I give into them, because I'm curious, they automatically give me the 15 second explanation and then quickly shove me their clipboard so I can put down my credit card details. Can I give you 5 dollars in cash now? No, often more than anything I have to sign up for a monthly payment plan, or have some one time minimum of 20 dollars.
I am a student, with very little financial resources. They know that, I tell them every time. I ask them "can you just tell me more about what your organization does. I can't really give you money right now, but I would like to know more". Then agree, they tell me "I totally get it". Then in a few minutes I am once again handed the clipboard and told "just X number of dollars per month will go a long way".
Not everyone is like that though. I have met reasonable people, that stand out in the cold and they just want to spread their message. They make me want to consider donating, on my own time, when I have the financial ability to. They might allude to donating money, but really they are passionate about their cause.
But the amount of NP people trying to beg you for money is just not cool. |
That is a straw-man. No one wants people to work for free, they just want charities to be efficient, expending most of the money into the mission, and that includes salaries of employees working towards the mission.
If I have a manufacturing company that expends 95% of its income in management salaries while expending 5% for raw-materials and manufacturing labour, then that company would soon break because its inefficiency would make it unable to compete with more efficient competitors.
But there is no market pressure for charities, actually it works the other way around, without oversight any charity would tend to expend 100% of its income into marketing and salaries dedicated only to bring more donations, with no money at all going to the mission. And that is what we are all against. |
People seem to think that employees of charities or non-profits in general work for free. This isn't the case at all. The people working there are earning a living, just like anyone else, so a large chunk of what they take in as donations end up going out as income because, just like any other company, paying people's salaries and benefits is really expensive. You also have to pay rent and utilities and advertising and technology and most everything else every other company pays for.
You wouldn't believe how many arguments I've had with people on politics about this. I say something like, "why do pharma companies have to be for-profit?" and I get dozens of responses like "why would these researchers work for free!". Or even worse, I've had people in the argued industry say, "I work at so-and-so and I don't feel like giving away my paycheck, thank you!". |
I feel like this is going to be Fargo 2 someday. The CIA releases a movie about the CIA undermining Kim Jong Un. Then organize a cyber attack on Sony and quickly blame it on N. Korea (they denied doing it). The CIA pulls the strings to get it to headline the news. Then when the hype peaks they release it everywhere knowing that the story will be so big that it will seep into NK, shattering the image of Kim Jong Un (the plan in the movie as well), weakening Un and leading to his eventual removal. |
My city (Lexington, KY) has public WiFi, but you have to re-authenticate every ~25 minutes. Then that process is a crapshoot, and it all stops working around 12:30, so there's that. Can't even play one game of Hearthstone, let alone watch a movie with any sense of continuity. |
I don't see what that has to do with anything. My point is Wheeler has apparently done a 180 against his former masters. I find it really hard to believe that there isn't an ulterior motive here. In order for congress to fight their perceived encroachment of the FCC, the FCC first has to overstep - they haven't yet, but they are about to. There will be a reaction from the other side. I think this is all orchestrated. You can't get the yowling rednecks screaming against the policies of a non-partisan public appointee, but history has shown that they'll gnash their teeth and vote their own mothers out of healthcare once FOX and the republicans start hollering about gubment overstepping their bounds. |
How can anybody prove an NDA violation. Who's to say some engineer learned shit at apple , gets hired somewhere else, and through collaborations with other engineers develops a battery just as good. |
Not much they can do. These companies tend to be fly-by-night operations. They get an LLC on a post office box, run their racket for a few months, maybe a year. By the time the fraud complaints come through, they cash out and start up another one.
Thanks to a nice little bit of the law, they can form the LLCs using an "Authorized Representative" as the only public contact name. This will typically be an online legal service where everything's automated. So it's almost impossible without a court order or a lot of digging and filing fees to find out who actually owned the company (usually it's another LLC which is owned by another LLC which is owned by another LLC and so on, each with a different Authorized Representative and each requiring a fee to see the documents on the company).
AT&T, Verizon, etc. have already paid out the money they've billed customers. If you think it's like pulling teeth to cancel service with them, it's nothing compared to getting them to pay out for third parties they've already paid. They will direct you to whoever billed you to process the refund and refuse to step in unless you make a lot of noise.
It's a really crappy process that doesn't get a lot of attention aside from scare pieces on the news when they run out of other things to talk about ("What you don't know about your phone bill could be costing you a lot! Find out at 11 with our special report we've recycled every two years since 1998!"). Because no one's up in arms about it, it's rare for any regulatory body to step up to put a stop to it. There's also been legal wrangling between whether it's an FTC or FCC matter, and the telecom companies have lobbied hard to keep those waters as murky as possible so they can draw out any hearings or lawsuits with jurisdictional requests. |
the gilded age
Can we get an ELI5 |
But if you have the developers sitting next to HR, its just a clusterfuck of fails.
Look don't laugh at me but I have came to this realization not so long ago because of a game followed by two weeks at work. I can't remember the name right now.
It's in early access and it's a mix of the Sims and Game Dev Tycoon. It's a management game.
I've been working for almost two years now but always been lucky with my offices. They're all open and we're all IT. Help Desk, Developers, Testing, etc.
Naturally when trying the game I said I'll make my office! And did it but with HR, Marketing Team and Devs all in the same place. They were constantly complaining about the noise so I had to make rooms for each team and they were all fine. I thought it was a bit unrealistic and the NPCs a little too peckish.
Next week at work we had to share our workplace with HR because they were getting another floor ready to move in. Turns out IT guys are focused most of the time so you don't get much ambient noise, except for clickity clacking and some random conversation that everyone tunes in and then back to work.
HR, the complete opposite because most of their work (at least what they were doing at the time) didn't need them to be typing/focusing/or even at their computer. I'm sure we can all get used to it but the change of pace was really noticeable and the noise went through the roof. |
I tried to yesterday, but Reddit was being retarded.
It may be that I'm reading you wrong, it may be that I read it too damn early (my two year old has decided sleeping with mommy and daddy is a fun game), but your first two posts just didn't seem to grammatically make sense to me. I got the jist of what you were trying to say, but my inner grammar nazi wouldn't allow interpretation. |
Check out this page:
All of their recent tax returns are there, along with audited financial statements and other relevant documents. Royalty fees are the primary source of revenue, and they flow through the Mozilla Corporation--a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Foundation. This allows the Foundation to maintain not-for-profit status under 501(c)(3) without concerns of being called a private foundation (if Google donated directly, they'd effectively have total control and donations to the Foundation would not be eligible for the same tax exempt status) or having to worry about excess unrelated business income (i.e. the not-for-profit actually makes profits). In the latter case, they'd lose their tax exempt status altogether. So it's a best of both worlds thing; get the money from Google, but stay a not-for-profit. Of course, they do file separate corporate returns and pay corporate tax on those revenues.
The main thing is that the Foundation wants to continue to pursue their nonprofit mission, but also realizes that the project needs funding. That's why development/sales/revenue generation are in the Corporation now. Plus, if Google comes knocking and says they're going to give you big bucks, you're not going to say, "no thanks, that doesn't meet with our not-for-profit structure." You make it work... and they did. |
It's ironic to see a company which would not exist (at anything like its current size, anyhow) bemoan having to pay for acquiring users.
I wonder what their cost-per-user-acquisition would be w/o fcbk? |
Just wanted to add more. Yes it rapes your facebook account. I looked at the sources intel and Leo Laporte. I trusted them so I went for it. I also immediately disabled the facebook app after presentation and rescinded all rights. I totally understand people not wanting to take part (here's looking at you Sony).
As far as Facebook, I was a hold out for years until my wife finally convinced me to give it a shot. I was surprised to find Facebook was not some all evil pot of all that is wrong with the world. On the contrary it strengthened loose bonds, and helped me find a few unique ways to contribute to my community. I also understand not wanting to take part though. It can seem like high school all over again to many people, and I would wager most of us would like to skip that phase of life. |
This encapsulates all of my concerns with 'Cloud Computing'.
Although I like the idea of 'Always On' storage and applications, I have been in enough situations where a firewall, a dead-spot in 3G/4G coverage, or some other client-side problem prevented me from connecting to some online service. That's not even covering all the host issues the comic brings up. Consider the recent AWS problems, all due to growing too fast, and some really poor planning. |
Ok, here's the rub, and why some consider the GPL to be "More free" than the BSD License.
The Bill of Rights gives people Freedom of (political) Speech, which can't be taken away. This means that you lose the ability to "close" speech so you aren't offended by something someone else says. While it would be nice to not be offended, the value of other's freedom of speech is valued more than your freedom to not be offended.
The GPL is like the Bill of Rights- it holds the right to modify the software to be inalienable. It can't be taken away from you. This means that yes, you lose the right to close the source, but it's not YOUR right they are protecting here, it's the right of your fellow man. Stallman & the GPL hold than the right to modify the code is more valuable than your ability to close the source.
BSD was written to meet requirements for government research grants. It basically says: "You gave us the money to develop this- the People of the USA- so they should be able to use it without paying again." It's not an ideological license, but a pragmatic one. Your closing off the source after modifying it doesn't prevent someone else from using the source as paid for by the People of the USA. |
Say the NAME of my computer is HelterSkeletor
and the CODE they gave me is PGPHA6724
These go on the computer that wants you to input the data into it. Not both computer names in each field or two codes or whatever.
Hopefully that wasn't too confusing. |
If you get a phone from a carrier, you're trusting the carrier not to embed spyware. (And they all violate that trust.)
If you get an image from someone else, at WORST, you're trusting that person. But an open-source image gets compiled by multiple people and scrutinized closely, so there's a good chance, even the author would be caught if they were slipping in spyware. |
Yes, I do. Intimately.
Regulatory capture happens when regulatory bodies stop serving the public interest (in other words, they stop regulating in the public interest), and start serving private interest (in other words, they regulate in favor of private interest).
So it's two parts.
The first part is ending regulation in the public interest.
The second part is starting to regulate in the private interest.
Ron Paul's ticket is the first part of regulatory capture, applied to every regulatory body in the federal government.
Sure, business wants the second part too. But the first part is plenty for now.
Incidentally, this is precisely why Ron Paul will not get the republican nomination. Regulation is the engine through which congress currently solicits campaign funding. Ron Paul wants to shoot congress's golden goose (companies interested enough in the regulation that affects them to donate to political campaigns) and our golden goose (regulation intended to serve the public good) with the same bullet. |
The difference here is the IP industries have no real costs to make instances of their goods. Trivial clones cost next to nothing to produce, while actual production of goods has high labour, energy, materials, machinery, transit and infrastructure costs. |
You sound like you think that businesses are embodiments of evil that will do anything just to get money. In fact, businesses are just organizations that will do anything to get money. They're not evil. The situation right now is that because government has so much power, businesses can bribe government officials to allow those businesses to do evil things to make money. If you strip government power down to barebones, and simply enforce contracts and property rights, then there is no way government officials could let businesses do evil. If businesses do something evil, like polluting your property, then there are property rights that allow you to defeat them in court. Whereas if government has a lot of power, the business doing the polluting could just get officials in government to pass a law saying that polluting your property isn't illegal. This example is obviously contrived, but hopefully the idea is clear. |
Thanks for the edit. I don't live in Sweden anymore and forgot that swedes commonly put 5 words together into one, cuz psh who needs spaces anyway? |
If you went into a store and copied a music cd, the effect is the same. No one loses anything.
the store loses the sale and would consider this stealing. You can't go into a CD store and burn a copy of a CD without paying anything.
> They're presumably paid an hourly or monthly wage. If not, they're yet another group screwed over by the record companies
it means the entire industry has less dollars to spend - the engineers etc...dont get as many jobs, as many hours. They feel the pain.
we can go on and on - someone responded to my post and I think he/she put it best:
"most redditors are young adults who don't believe in private property rights and feel they are entitled to free stuff." |
Any lawyers here?
What would happen if every victim of throttling sued AT&T. According to our contract, AT&T won't allow a class action. It must either be small claims or arbitration. If we all file small claims, would AT&T be able to get court dates postponed due to not being able to be at all cases all the time, or would they lose for failure to appear, or what?
And if the answer is AT&T will just stop this policy, then what happens if people sue for damages that occurred when the policy was in place? |
I believe the same thing happened when Cingular Wireless bought out AT&T Wireless, then after months of raping customers they decided to rebrand themselves AT&T again (because it's a brand that people trust and we are that stupid) only to keep providing the same shitty customer service). Former Customer Rep for AT&T Wireless/Cingular/AT&T. We are not bad people but their policies, biz practices and overall douchiness force ud to do so. |
See, the problem with this is that the bar lowers rapidly. In order to be taken out of the pool to be throttled, people will switch over from unlimited to limited - lowering the bar further. After several rounds of this, you see people using low amounts of data hitting the 5% bracket. |
Michael Geist sez
And that's where I quit reading and scrolled to the bottom for a link to the article that wasn't written by (and apparently for) 12-year-olds. |
Why is Apple fading? Part of it has to do with the way it's being covered in the press. After talking up Apple for years (and probably contributing to its success), the media have apparently decided that it's now time to run "Apple is doomed" stories, and lazy journalists are simply going with the trend.
In the past few weeks, Apple has suffered some actual setbacks, as patents that they had used in court cases against their competitors were overturned by courts. That will hurt them. However, the slide in their stock price - and the first wave of "Apple is doomed" stories - predated that by many months. The fall-off started at a point when Apple was riding high, with strong financial results and some impressive new products that were expected to sell well (and have done). The first crop of negative articles appeared shortly thereafter.
One thing I haven't seen are any equivalent "Microsoft is doomed" stories. Apple, which has been doing well, and has had several successful product launches, gets panned in the media. Microsoft, which looks increasingly like a has-been and which has recently suffered a series of high-profile flops (Windows 8, Surface, maybe Windows Phone) just gets ignored. If press coverage were actually impartial and informative, we'd be seeing a lot of negativity about Microsoft's long-term prospects.
I think the reason doesn't have to do with Apple's actual strengths or weaknesses, and more to do with what stories will sell at any given moment. Write "Microsoft is doomed", and people will just say "Huh? Oh, yeah, I guess so." But if you write "Apple is doomed", you're playing into people's desire to be shocked: "Apple, this giant company with its crazy stock-price and its fabulous products, is doomed? Tell me more!"
The problem (for Apple) is that it could become a self-fulfilling prophecy, at least in terms of the stock price. |
The only scary part about recreating neanderthals is that they are physically superior to us. They can take incredible punishment and are stronger. |
Woo! time to un-lurk
So.. They will not kill free Wi-Fi, they are planning on rolling out free Wi-Fi across the US. This is a move to make sure that small business are not offering out free Wi-Fi to their customers through third party services.
Just so you know, where ever Wi-Fi is free - you are the product. Your data and your eye balls on adverts. Google Fiber countrywide would just mean that Google had a monopoly on the adverts you see when you sign in. And your data - this doesn't mean just basic demographic data anymore. Wi-Fi is getting bloody smart with 802.11ac.
Sign into a mesh network in, say wall mart, they can track your location throughout the store by triangulating between hotspots. Track how long you spend in certain isles, and send you targeted advertising accordingly. |
Well to be fair in the terms of who's lawyer you want to deal with between that of a multi-million/billion dollar company/artist or that of a 16 year old kid with a shitty nickelback song making 17 cents a day I'd err on the side of the original content owner and let the little guy fight the battle. Chances are more than likely the 16 year old kid didn't have rights to use that song anyways.
ALSO with the sheer number of videos that are uploaded to youtube do you have ANY idea how much it would cost to staff enough people to handle all those DCMA cases? Again it's easier to pull a video and let the person who uploaded it decide if it's worth it to contest weather they are in the right or not. |
Right, I'm not stupid
Let me spell this out for you:
I asked what part represents the subpoena information, not the warrant information. He said the envelope is a better example but the original 'car' example was contrasting and defining a subpoena VS a warrant and what information can be obtained from each. |
Well, many of us who have been opposed to subsidies have been saying "Just wait and let the tech mature until it is commercially viable", and such a massive boost in efficiency would make this commercially viable.
Assuming this pans out, and the manufacture isn't cost prohibitive, this tech in conjunction with the graphene super-capacitor tech we were discussing about a month ago would make solar a VERY viable means of powering structures.
Basically, what you need for this to take off are a whole bunch of people willing to switch over to it, and the best way to do that is to make it save them money. Then you start to see economy of scale come into play due to increased manufacturing, and the momentum builds from there.
So, |
I work for one of the private educational companies (a big one) that will be using this database in the coming months, and most of the objections I'm reading here and in these articles show a total misunderstanding of what this data is for and why it's being collected. Some key points:
This information is ALREADY being collected by private companies, and has been for decades. Do you really think schools/districts/states are building their own Student Information Systems? Digital Gradebooks? Rostering tools? Reporting tools? If your kid attends a school with any kind of digital record-keeping (and that's everyone), private companies already have this info.
When you say "Corporations gain access to X, Y, and Z" it implies that any old evil corporation can plug in and do what they will with this info. Not the case. The database (InBloom) is being built to support New York State's goal of giving their districts a choice in how to support their reporting and data analysis needs. New York State issued a request for proposals to give them state- and district-level reporting. But they didn't want to dictate a single technological solution to their districts, so they chose several companies from the pool of applicants and are letting the districts pick their preferred solution. But in order to support unified state- level reporting as districts all use different reporting tools, all of these reporting tools must draw from the same database. Hence, InBloom was born.
Just to drive home the point that this database exists to give districts a choice, take a look at who's collecting state-wide student data in other states. North Carolina, Kentucky, Idaho, and many other states ALL use systems, run and owned by private companies, to manage the exact same set of student data. The only difference is these states do not give their districts any latitude to choose what system best meets their reporting needs, so there is no need to build a database that can be accessed by multiple companies, since a single company controls all. Where's the backlash to that?
The fact that this database exists to give a choice to districts actually ensures that the companies competing for these contracts will actually fulfill the promises they make. There's a huge incentive in the education marketplace right now to lie, lie, lie to secure these contracts, because it's typically almost impossible for the states to change course once a solution has been implemented, even if that solution doesn't live up to the promises the company made. InBloom changes that. |
I like how all the people commenting to save this extremely important and informative comment are getting downvoted just because the elitist pc users think that they just ”must be too stupid to get RES” when in reality not everyone has a pc to install it to and have to rely on their local library for internet access, or browse on mobile devices exclusively to the point of making such an installation meaningless. Of course a common reply would be that they wouldn't be able to use these products in such a case, but that doesn't account for the future. Think about it, you're punishing people for not having what everyone else has, regardless of the possibility that they might not be able to get it. this information is exactly the kind of thing one should save just in case, even if you are new to reddit or have yet to own a computer. And yes reddit, these people exist. |
I'll just shamelessly comment here to piggy back on the top comment, as I need to sleep and I probably won't be able to reddit until after the vote tomorrow.
(1) Call offices, starting at 9a (maybe slightly before - some open by 8:30 - and messages ARE checked first thing in most).
(2) Specifically, Tea Party R's need calls - those are the changeable votes in my mind. If the member has railed about our founding principles, or the Constitution, or the 10th Amendment, etc, you can win his vote (liberal D's are already in the bag in my view).
(3) Don't try to argue facts; they've all heard both sides of this, and your argument won't get beyond the person who answers anyway. Both parties have had member-level caucus meetings where the bill has been discussed; I've been in these meetings on one side of the aisle, and heard about them on the other. They've been heated, but I assure you, your side has been presented (be proud of this - it doesn't always happen) - they have heard it from other Congressmen who they know and trust. |
Are you sure it's because they were born here and not because they've worked their ass off and invested a good deal of cash for a degree in a field that they're unable to get work in?
I know this is going to be a completely alien concept to you, but... you know... you are actually supposed to work your ass off to learn shit and become smart , not just to get the degree itself. If you just invest all of your time and energy to grab that worthless piece of paper no matter what it takes, you shouldn't act surprised if it does not automatically entitle you to a six figure job with tenure. I can assure you that every American who has actually worked his ass off to become as smart and skilled as some of those H1Bs (especially those companies like IBM are hiring) has absolutely no problem finding job offers anywhere. |
Why are you recording/uploading a 60fps video? The max youtube supports is 30fps. You might as well just record it at 30fps. If we make the assumption that size scales linearly with FPS, then it should be about 10gigs per 30 mins. So you could upload about 90 minutes of footage.
On top of that, you should be recording at a far lower bitrate setting, or if that isn't available in the settings you should be encoding your files before uploading it to youtube with another program. Do you know what the bitrate of your files are? 89Mbits That is fucking insanely high for what you're doing
Take a look at that. They recommend just 50Mbits for enterprise quality internet connections. You've blown past that by about 50%. What your file size should be if you had done the due diligence is about about 1.8gigs for 30 mins, and at that size you could upload about 8 hours of footage. |
I'm still reading the motion, but the core of the motion seems to be that Aereo hasn't taken concrete steps to launch its services outside Boston and New York, so declaratory judgment that their activity won't infringe a bunch of other cities is premature.
Even if CBS said they will sue them everywhere, unless they've actually taken steps to set up Aereo in those cities, the Court shouldn't decide whether its illegal.
They also make a kind of weird forum shopping argument. As well as arguing that this case is duplicative of existing litigation. |
I absolutely have to disagree with you. I've never purchased an iPod the only one I ever had was a shuffle that I got for free for opening my bank account. Cool. That being said I'm no apple fanboy either, but I do have to say the iPhone 5 is the best phone I've ever had the pleasure to use. I had a droid eris, Motorola droid, the g1, the nexus one, iPhone 4, htc one x, and now the iPhone 5.
It has the most consistent battery of any of the previous phones I e owned, it is fast I don't have to wait for my phone to bring up a menu or open my pictures library, it just does it and it does it now. iOS itself hasn't changed in appearance since the inception of the iphone. I always was so eager for the next android update for my old devices because I was so dissatisfied I would do anything to make it a hair faster. |
this ruling comes just as President Barack Obama has announced his intention to cut down on "patent trolling" and lessen the frequency with which companies seek ITC bans on competitors' products. |
AT&T has 266,500 or BP that can cover those court costs.
No court is going to give those people that much money. They would lose out. Look at how much people usually make in class action lawsuits. They don't get much. Most goes to making lawyers rich, while the actual victims are left with pocket change. Literally. [This guy got $0.49]( for a class action lawsuit with Bank of America.
Hundreds of thousands of people would lose their jobs, and would be left with less money. They would be unable to pay their bills, possibly lose their houses or cars, their quality of life would go down. The increase in unemployed people hurts the economy. That's 266,500 extra people out looking for a job. Any job they do take could've went to another unemployed person, so it would contribute to the stagnation of unemployment in the area.
Nobody wins if that happens.
Dissolving a company like that because of selling customer's info is a FUCKING RETARDED idea. The people in charge of the company should be held accountable (considering companies "people" was one of the worst rulings the USSC ever agreed to), but we need to realize that there are hundreds of thousands of people at those companies, and their livelihoods depend on their job. Vast majority of them never agreed to screw over the customers like that, but they would be screwed over much worse than some CEO with other investments who would only take a minor hit comparatively. Dropping from $100 million to $50million is a whole lot less worse than dropping from $30,000 to $15,000.
Disssolving a company like that hurts the people MUCH more than it helps the people. it's not the solution. It's not even close to the solution.
People should actually stop and think before they say something so stupid. Im_in_timeout needs to realize that companies aren't one giant homogenous entity, they are made up of thousands of individuals who are just trying to do their jobs. It is very few individuals in power that are fucking over the customers.
It's cool for people on here to talk about the fantasy of how all these companies should pay severely for violating our privacy, or some shit, but here in reality we realize that it would be a lot worse on everyone if they went down like that. It's a lot more complicated than that. Sorry, but securing the data you signed away on a contract with that company is not worth the livelihoods of 266,500 people plus their families plus all the people affected by the downturn in the local economy in some areas from the layoffs.
I'll take the lesser of two evils in this situation
If outcome A and outcome B are both bad. I'll choose whichever outcome is the least harmful. Doing what Im_in_timeout suggested is FAR worse, and does more harm to more people than just letting AT&T sell your data.
The people in charge need to be held accountable, but lets just take a step back and think for a minute. The fact that Im_in_timeout got any upvotes is just ludicrous. Many redditors love to live in their own little fantasy land pf what they think is right, and what they think is a just punishment. People need to realize the effects these things will have on a large group of people. |
The new destroyers are indeed impressive, as are the newly planned Cruisers, both of which are more effective than the Iowa class battleships for sure.
I, however, don't think there will be a resurgence of battleship type vessels. The Iowa class is too old to be refurbished effectively to compete with missiles and rail guns. New battleship designs/plans will run into problems with what role to fill. Historically battleships have been heavily armored ships with big guns, where the armor was meant to stop (or greatly reduce) damage to the inside of the ship from large guns. With rail guns and armor piercing missiles, I don't think that armor will be effective as a defensive measure. Without the need for obscene amounts of armor, it then makes more sense to make smaller ships so as not to put all your money, people and weapons on one platform. |
Why is /r/technology so rampantly pro piracy? Do you believe you should get everything in life for free or just media? It's not like movies or TV or books or music or games are particularly expensive. (In fact games are cheaper than the SNES era after adjusting for inflation.)
Edit: |
Guys. This title and this case are way out of line. Google did not do anything wrong. Every website tracks you around the web, it's neither illegal nor immoral. You can't sue Google for using cookies to improve your ad experience as you browse the web. Of course Google would defend itself from these frivolous lawsuits. This suit is as dumb as suing McDonalds because their hot coffee is TOO DAMN HOT!
By the way, did not ONE PERSON notice that the article is not from the UK, or even the US, but from the south CHINA morning post?!? Google is being called "arrogant and immoral" by a Chinese post. Unfortunately, people who didn't read the article or don't understand the technicalities of the suit suddenly blast Google because they want to blame a big company for doing evil, even if they don't know why.
Google has shown time and time again that it is a friend to the internet and the common man. Fuck the few people who decided to be sue-happy and fuck China for running away with the story. |
Recognition
I think a flaw is that not a lot of people know or care about Folding@home or World Community Grid profiles. Attaching points to a more well-known Google account might be more appealing for companies or consumers.
Incentive
> Yet there is no greater injustice than the double standard that exists between the for-profit and nonprofit sectors. One gets to feast on marketing, risk-taking, capital and financial incentive, the other is sentenced to begging.
-Dan Pallotta, TED speaker
One Today charity Android and iOS app by Google
Reputation and points systems
You could probably get more people to donate if you register nonprofits with Google One Today.
>"Your One Today profile also includes information based on your usage of One Today, such as which projects you've donated to."
Reputation and points systems can affect motivation, and may be the only source of motivation for some people to do something charitable.
Combine competition with cooperation
People by nature can be mostly status-conscious, self-interested, and competitive. Either you have a system that allows people to satisfy their ego by spending money on the purchasing of charity points, or you let people continue to flaunt their wealth through expensive cloths, cars, jewelry, etc.. |
This is quite silly honestly. Just making a separate internet will do literally zero to protect the people within those new internets from the NSA, or the various versions of the NSA that exist.
The reason why, is that these people assume that by not being connected to the old internet the NSA/etc has no connection to them and thus they are safe. This is called an "air gap" and it works on small scales like within a building. But it ONLY works on the scale of a building because you have the ability to physically prevent nefarious types from walking up and plugging in a wifi device to one of the computers, suddenly allowing a guy across the street from connecting into your previously secured network.
On the scale of a country, if ANY individual computer is set up to provide a connection from the "new" internet to the "old" your entire multi billion dollar system has been defeated. Lets then say that the company has been very thorough in removing ALL the old infrastructure so there is no "old" internet around to connect to. This is hardly a problem, ignoring the various ways someone with a budget like the NSA could still run a cable to do this, they could always route the data they want through satellite communications. Even easier honestly, would be for the NSA to just set up a fake company based around the idea of "Big Data" (collecting a bunch of data, finding trends, selling the trends to people. It is how a lot of useful things happen like, hey we should start stocking winter jackets, etc.) and then bam, they have a fancy new data center collecting all the data they need, and they only need to hide their work or bribe any inspector that happens to show up to remain in operation.
In short, cutting the internet into sub-internets that are separate from each other will do literally zero to protect you from what you hate about the NSA.
What is the real effect of doing this? That country now trivially has the ability to censor what is going on in their internet, and now the people have a much harder time crying for help. When a dictator shuts of twitter to prevent the protestors from working together or crying out for help, everybody knows about it. But if you could never see that twitter in the first place, you find out days or even weeks later. |
Summary
B&O make expensive speakers amongst other things. Office for Internal Harmonization or OHIM is where you register for a Community Trade Mark or CTM to give your protection under the trade mark directive.
In 2003 B&O tried to submit a trademark application for a three dimensional sign, the shape of their distinctive speakers.
OHIM rejected this application saying it was devoid of any distinctive character.
in 2005 B&O appealed all the way to the General Court and won, the court ruling in 2007 that OHIM had made an error of law in holding that the mark applied for was devoid of any distinctive character.
OHIM examined the application again and rejected it, deciding that the sign consisted exclusively of the shape which gives substantial value to the goods
The court dismissed B&Os appeal, stating that the shape made a big component of the design but since shape isn't protected by TM law, the application for a trade mark could be rejected |
Yeah, Frontier might be "better" than Verizion, but they're hardly the standard of excellence.
I live in WV, when we moved to our new house, it took them THREE MONTHS to hook up our internet and phoneline. We called them a good bit, trying to get them to come hook our stuff up, and nothing. They'd say the same thing "We'll send a technician to set you up!", then when we called after the technician was supposed to arrive, they'd say "Our technician reported that he had arrived and your internet should be working."
Eventually, my dad ended up calling the BBB, and not too long after that they finally arrived to hook it up.
Even after finally getting it, it had very shoddy service, we were lucky to get 700 KBS download (which I know isn't HORRIBLE, but it's far less than it should have been, given the price.) A few months later, we were getting HUGE dropoff in speed, our internet would shut off randomly for hours at a time. We called for somebody to come fix it, and same deal. This time it only took them around 3 attempts to finally send somebody to our house, and the technician said it had something to do with the cable. That's fine, I understand that isn't their fault (though it wasn't really ours either, it was just a perk of living near wildlife), but it shouldn't take 3 appointments to get a technician to a household.
The problem in WV, is that they are pretty much the only option for remotely fast internet. Until last year, Frontier was the ONLY Broadband option where we lived. So even though we were overpaying for shoddy service, we had no real choice.
Luckily, Atlantic Broadband swept in and saved us 2ish years ago. One of thier employees had to ask permission to park his truck on our property so he could do some line work. He told us that they were moving in. I immediately walked inside, called Atlantic Broadband, and we've had very solid internet service at a far more reasonable (though still pricey) price.
Frontier knows they have a monopoly on the majority of the areas around here, so they treat you like shit knowing you have no other choice. I like the idea of spreading the lines to other households (Granted they still are being lazy with that, my grandmother lives a mile away from me, she lives with a grouping of a few dozen households, but they cannot get access anyways.)
I bet that rating is mostly due to people around here never experiencing DECENT internet. They don't realize that 200 kbs download speed is slow, or that the internet shouldn't just randomly turn off for no reason. They don't complain because that is the norm for them. Not to mention, not many of them do a lot of "internet intensive" activities, most of them only use the internet for basic stuff that doesn't require a great internet connection. They don't even realize they are getting ripped off. |
I used to work in a call center that fielded their technical support calls (and other ISPs) and their WV migration process was a nightmare to deal with, but honestly it was mostly on Verizon's end...not that Frontier was any better really. DSL is awful.
Fiber is truly the way to go. Cable is an improvement over DSL due to infastructure (decades old copper wire that is often times exposed to the elements and not buried under ground), but the pricing model and services are still just as bad if not worse. |
well with reddit, lets say they do cache everything, then yes you would never see anything new. To solve this, they use a technique called cache invalidation. This is either done by affixing a timestamp on the cache keys that are stored in cache (cache keys are like a table of contents for a book, showing you where the cache content can be looked up at). after every 5 minutes or so, reddit will invalidate a cache key. now since the cache key gets deleted whenever a user requests the page, it will actually hit reddits servers and get fresh content, which goes back into the cache, so when user #2 requests the same thing, they will also get the new content.
formally (although this is a pretty basic description) these terms are known as a 'cache hit' (when a request can use the cache to serve a page), and a 'cache miss' (when a request has to hit the actual server to find the data). Cache invalidation allows cache hit's for a certain amount of time, then forces a 'cache miss' by invalidating the cache keys (which is essentially just emptying the cache). this forces the following request to fetch new content and fill up the cache again which is served to the next users. |
Microsoft and their core services have died more times than Voyager has left the Solar System.
I wouldn't want to be on the wrong side of the MS zombie. Windows Phone is their best mobile OS yet and one-time market dominators like Palm and Blackberrry... well... |
the app market is a bit crap
I disagree.
Even over a year ago when I was reviewing lists of Android and iOS "must have apps" year in review pieces, I found that the coolest functionality offered by the apps was baked into the OS (for example, the song recognition built into the search on WP vs. downloading Shazam).
Next there were popular apps, many social networking - and all but a handful of hold-outs like Instagram had WP versions.
Most of the "apps that aren't on Windows Phone" are games... and similar ones with high production values tend to be available. The games I play most (such as Halo: Spartan Assault) aren't available on other platforms. |
Windows Phone Doesn't Support Google Maps Because Google Doesn't Want It To -- Misspelling Windows Phone in user agent string allows it to work](
[According to Google, your Windows Phone is a feature phone -- Gmail renders using the mobile version for feature phones, not smart phones](
[Google Blocks Microsoft's YouTube Windows Phone App. Again](
The YouTube shit was probably the most annoying thing dealing with Google on this phone. Here's how it went in a nutshell.
Windows Phone releases, and Google doesn't want to make a YouTube app. The YouTube app available at the time is literally just a link to their mobile website.
Microsoft requests access to the API's that Google hides which allow them to access metadata about the videos so that they can make an actual YouTube app. They want access to the same API Google uses for search and their native apps. Google refuses. [source](
Two years pass from the above (and after god knows how many behind the scenes negotiations since WP users are understandably frustrated), and Microsoft basically said fuck it and created a native YouTube app as best as they could. It was pretty fucking fantastic actually. It didn't show advertisements (because Google didn't give them access to those API's) and allowed you to download the videos onto the phone. Suffice to say, WP users loved this, but this got Google's attention. This was on May 7th. [source](
May 15th, Google sends Microsoft a cease and desist on their YouTube app due to the ads and downloading concerns their app implemented, and the app didn't get Google's stamp of approval. They give MS until the 22nd to remove the app [source](
May 22nd, Microsoft updates the YouTube app to remove the video download feature, but there still isn't ads because Google doesn't allow access to the API's. [source](
May 24th, Microsoft and Google announce that they will co-develop a YouTube app for Windows Phone. [source](
August 13th, Microsoft releases an updated YouTube app for Windows Phone that addresses the concerns from Google, and finally ads advertisments as well as the ability to upload videos. Yay, YouTube app is back! [source](
August 15th, two days after the release of the app, Google blocks the new YouTube app. Again. Why? Because it's not made with HTML5, and Microsoft made it a native app, even though Google's own YouTube apps are native apps. [source](
August 15th, Microsoft issues a very long statement on "the limits of Google's openness". |
Fellow UK-er here, the following is complete guesswork:
Our infrastructure is centralised with BT (or Openworld or whatever). All 10 (or 9) of those ISPs use the same physical infrastructure, at least between the exchange and your house
BT's infrastructure is government regulated, since it was (is?) government owned
We're much more densely packed, so to be miles and miles from an exchange is unusual. Imagine how many exchanges the USA would need to make sure everyone is < 5 miles from an exchange
Virgin Media is an exception to all of this and they have their own infrastructure but serves as competition
None of this is true of the USA. |
List of ISPs in my town: Hughesnet and DISH. That's it. No regular options, only satellite. Both suck, and are ridiculously expensive. $85/month with Hughesnet gives us 10Mbps of shitty satellite Internet, with a data cap of 10GB. Well, technically it's 20GB, but half of it can only be used from 2AM to 8AM. If we go over the data limit, the already shitty Internet speed is cut in half. |
I called their customer service line one day because I finally did a speed test. I was paying for 7mb internet and was getting 3mb speeds a few months after I got it. I talked to one of the support guys ( politely) and told them my issue. They really didnt have any clue what I meant as they were saying that the only speed they offered in my area was 3mb (obviously not the case as I had tested the speed when I got it at 7mb/s). So I asked(politely with a slight tone) if I could be transferred to someone with more knowledge on the subject. They said that they were qualified to answer my question (obviously not) and I just fucking lost it. I screamed into the phone "no you aren't or you wouldn't have just given me that bullshit line about only offering 3mb internet being as when I first set it up i did a speed test and it came out to 7mb! You have absolutely no clue, and I would like to speak with a manager!" he then tryed to jerk me around saying that he should just hang up on me or that he was going to report my number or something like that. I said look im sorry I yelled at you. You have onw of the shittiest jobs imaginable and probably get this all the time. But I need to speak with your manager....NOW. finally.... got a hold of a manager and asked why my speeds were slower than advertised. They tried telling me that I had exceeded my fair use cap (which isn't true because its 250gb per month) and they were throttling me for it. I called bullshit and told them how absolutely dissatisfied I was with their service and that i would be looking to change internet providers soon.
After that no slowdowns EVER. I've had it for like 3 years since then I'm always around 8mb/s and sometimes even faster than that. |
I also have had good CS from Uverse. My modem went bad one night around midnight. Called up AT&T the next morning and an hour later a tech was at my house with a new modem.
My alternative is Time Warner, who can go to hell for all I care. I had them for 2 years and it was 2 years of shit internet service and shit customer service. They made up every excuse possible when I called to report a service problem. One tech even went as far as saying they don't support third-party wireless routers plugged into their shitty DOCSIS 1.1 modem (yes, in 2011 they were (are?) still deploying circa-2000 equipment.) They wouldn't replace the modem with a new one. Even when I had friends who lived houses down from mine who had a brand new modem with wireless from them. |
Are you really saying that the US became the wealthiest country in the world because of wars pumping up the economy?
No, I think I explained why I think the US became the currently wealthiest country in the world. Feel free to refer to the post you are replying to.
>what about the classic liberalism priciples that were extremely popular until the 20's?
I already discussed that.
>But in reality, govt agents create so much difficulties and barriers for the bussiness owner so that they end up being forced to bribe them so they dont bankrupt.
No, that is not reality. It's a ridiculous claim not founded on evidence. Feel free to cite some examples and/or scientific sources for that.
>For example, a lightbulb factory is the only factory that makes a certain lightbulb in a certain region. The owner of this factory can team up with a state or city legislators to force every restaurant, for example, to use those lamps.
That's not regulation, that's collusion. And yes, collusion is bad. And without regulation you will see a lot more collusion than you will ever see without. In fact, regulation is all about preventing collusion as much as possible.
Regulation is: "You can not team up, if you do, you will be fined and go to prison."
>He makes up a dumb excuse and passes the law.
Yes, in a country with a lack of regulation and oversight or a too powerful corproate aristocracy that can easily happen.
>Do you think im exageratting?
No, it's what happens in a country with a weak government and corporations being able to buy it.
>The more regulation there is, the harder it is to open a business, and thus the less competition there is.
No, not really. The more regulatory capture there is, the harder it is to open a business.
Regulatory capture results from a lack of regulation and oversight and allowing private individuals to gather enough power to influence governments through some kind of bribery or similar.
>The same applies to taxes.
Yes, the same applies to taxes. Taxes means redistributing monetary resources from the already wealthy to support startups, thereby encouraging competition. |
That was a subjective survey based on nothing more than what the physisian thinks. You can see it here with ,"Forty-two percent of US primary care physicians believe that patients in their own practice are receiving too much care;" The best part about this is it is a mail survey ," Between June and December 2009, we conducted a nationally representative mail survey of US primary care physicians (general internal medicine and family practice) randomly selected from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile (response rate, 70%; n = 627)."
This is based on nothing more than what the Physician thinks what his patient needs due to pressures. Furthermore it could have easily been the Physician's daughter who filled it out for all we know. Take a look at the first line of the conclusion real quick and you will see it again ,"Many US primary care physicians believe that their own patients are receiving too much medical care." |
Yeah. Pretty much. We use the parliamentary form of government which means once, and if, a party can form the official government they can pretty much act with impunity, well till the next election or there's a call of no confidence they can.
And we've had a run of small c governments, with Harper being the latest and.... ^^greatest? So yeah it's pretty much use all our resources no matter the environmental or personal costs to keep our economy going. In fact that's what we're known for. It's Canada, the world's big resource reserves country, get them well you can .
The thing is, it ultimately it is our only way to energize our economy, though I wish it wasn't. For example I live on Vancouver Island in a retirement destination community, and any good paying jobs for young people have just dried up. There's a close by community that historically was a mining center. There's also a mining company that really, really, wants to mine coal seams in the area. It's a extremely low sulfur, great quality coal. But there's been a battle for years over whether they should be allowed to develop it.
And that's the main problem. We have no good paying jobs for young people, the majority are in the service industry, so many are going to Alberta to work in their resource sector. There's just no way a community can grow and prosper if the only industry is being a retirement community. But mining coal is a dirty business no matter how you slice it. And onced mined no matter how you utilize it you're going to increase C02 emissions.
So what do we do. Canada has to start looking beyond being a resource country and start investing in another high growth area for our future jobs. But it's hard and conservative governments are known for being pro business. So they try to do all they can to encourage any, and I mean any, business that's going to create jobs. And the easiest to create are high environmental impact jobs, which really puts us between a rock and a hard place, unfortunately. |
Frontier is a phone company. That's DSL service, which is inherently limited by the copper loop length from the central office. Since Frontier makes a point of serving rural areas (thus the name), it's got a good chance of being a very long loop. (Supporting evidence: /u/HuskeyG has no better option.) Note that as a guy who used to sell DSL service, my perception of Frontier (granted, five or six years old now) is overwhelmingly positive. They provided faster internet, sooner, to a far more remote area, than AT&T did in a neighboring region. I live in a small Verizon pocket nearby, and we still don't have DSL at all -- I'm on 1.8Mb/s cable. |
Very good analogy, but there's one little fact that you didn't mention.
"They're still making a profit, but its cutting things closer" The big ISPs like Comcast have a 97% margin. For every hundred dollars you give them, they get to keep as profit ninety seven. Internet infrastructure use costs are miniscule.
Read this little tid bit:
Yes you read that right in a worst case scenario your cost per Gigabyte is less than 8 cents.
Heres where I got the 97% profit margin from as well:
Now add to this the reasons a company would have to upgrade infrastructure.
A) Equipment is reaching it's EoL (End of Life) and needs to be replaced, plus upgrading instead of just replacing is economically viable.
Thing is internet infrastructure has very few to no moving parts and if treated properly has a very long EoL. For example my townhouse was built in the early 70's and is still using the same lines in for both cable and telcos. I'm also using ADSL and getting 6Mbs off of copper that is over 40 years old.
B) The company needs to expand it's production/service so it can increase it's user base to increase profit margins.
Well, a 97% profit margin is unbelievable. In any other sector a margin like that would cause the board to erect a full scale gold (and not gilded either) statue of the CEO in the lobby of the head quarters. So there's no need to increase the margin. But that doesn't mean the greedy bastards aren't trying with their new "toll" lane.
C) The company needs to become more efficient/effective due to competition threatening to take away some of their user base by offering better prices and/or service.
Well we all know the answer to this one. What competition?
Now there's one more piece to this puzzle. Most customers do not base their choice on speed/service quality. They base it on availability and cost per month. Unless your using the top tier and are chomping on the bit to get even faster speeds you're not going to pay more for faster speeds, you'll pay what you've budgeted you can for the speed you can live with.
This was all fine and good before we had high bandwidth services like Netflix that started to saturate the pipe. But now that we have it's showing the weaknesses of the infrastructure that big ISPs don't want you to see. They relied on the fact that a very low percentage of users would be using their full capacity at any one time. Oops!
But here's the rub in all this. Big ISPs have you locked in and are under no pressure to upgrade as I've shown. Even more importantly if they do it won't increase the 97% margin because very few users will migrate to a higher costing service. So they'll be spending money with no real return on that money other than customer good will. So it's much easier for them to not blame the lack of adequate infrastructure but blame it on the new high bandwidth services, which they have. Their new proposed toll on high bandwidth services is just the greed of someone that has almost all the pie but want's more. It is also a minor smoke screen for the issue of why aren't they using their enormous profits to upgrade the infrastructure. |
Why not water?
Start with all-you-can-drink for a flat rate. Instead of metering water at the inflow, they install meters on every appliance. After all, your lawn is not as important as a bath which can be replaced with showers, none of which is as important as the tap that provides your life-sustaining liquid.
The stupid part is that they are trying to charge the makers of products for their devices' consumption.
If information is a utility and bandwidth is finite, why do they not itemize the traffic they can inspect and meter it appropriately? Email and HTML get through quick, images and video are more expensive, and BitTorrent is yet more? Don't throttle, just bill appropriately.
The problem is that they don't want to sell bandwidth. Like all businesses, they want people to pay them something for nothing. Failing that, they will accept the conditions of equal payment from everyone in exchange for providing varying degrees of service.
In the beginning, we saw flat rate service plans. Then, we saw them degrade service for high-traffic customers while they lined their pockets with our money. Now, we are seeing them scrambling to charge someone -- anyone -- so that they can retain their antiquated ways. If corporations are people, they are old and diseased, in need of government medicine, and they have the money to buy it. |
Oh, you young whippersnappers! The .com boom wasn't the first tech boom, you know. Personally, I started work with the super-minicomputer boom: the VAX 11/780 was just introduced (as was the VT100 terminal!); there was a huge opportunity for software developers in writing that software.
But this was also the time when the IBM PC and the Mac were developed; there was a need for all kinds of software -- editors, development systems, and everything. This is the environment that Lotus, Microsoft and more were operating in. My own favorite spreadsheet, MBA Context, came out at this time.
But these were laid on the foundations of two separate sets of micro-computers: the CP/M machines (of which were business machines) and the home computers (of which there were hundreds).
But this wasn't even close to the first boom! DEC was founding in the late 1950's and still holds the record for venture capital return on investment (one investment of IIRC 75K turned into multiple billiions). There were hundreds of other computer companies producing entire systems (Data General, CDC) or various pieces (Mohawk systems, Ann Arbor, and more). |
Or you have complete transparency and security goes out the window. For this reason and others, such as economic competitiveness, every country has secrets and programs run in secret. There is a naivety to demanding all the veils be lifted - if you think others wouldn't act on the revelations such as enacting countermeasures or duplicating exclusive capabilities, you're sadly mistaken. China steals from US companies and government agencies daily using cyber attacks and no one bats an eye... the NSA does it for our benefit and it's unchecked tyranny just because 'Murcia is doing it. |
I am wrong that we are working with Germany to spy on their own citizens and they fake being upset that we spied on Merkel while they spy on any of any dignitaries who land on their soil or do the same to us?
Did you know about the 14-Eyes group? Or how Germany was being "a little grumpy for not being invited to join the 9-Eyes" spying groups where the biggest players (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, and the US as well as others) share all their information?
You may need to educate yourself a little bit on this subject matter, please see and you can go from there.
>Germany is reportedly interested in moving closer to the inner circle of the alliance. An internal GCHQ document from 2009 said that the "Germans were a little grumpy at not being invited to join the 9-Eyes group." Germany may even wish to join the Five Eyes.[59][60]
>Several members of the United States Congress such as Tim Ryan and Charles Dent are currently pushing for Germany's entrance to the Five Eyes alliance.[61]
>According to Edward Snowden, the NSA has a "massive body" called the Foreign Affairs Directorate that is responsible for partnering with foreign countries.[62] |
Once that threshold is crossed we've given up due process and our rights in general, there's a reason it's in place and we can't just give it up because their jobs are hard.
You're right, in an increasingly technological world it is more difficult, but once again that doesn't make it legal . It has been difficult to solve crimes forever, but we cannot give up citizen liberty for security, especially given [dragnet surveillance has been proven to be ineffective](
And if your argument is that dragnet makes it easier to discern criminals from citizens then you're ignoring the fact that someone has to read through all of the information gathered for it, it just doesn't pop up. That's no more efficient and still illegal. |
You're being downvoted. I just wanted to point out to all the stupid people downvoting, why it is expensive.
Google Fiber : Spent $84M to run fiber to 149k homes[^1](
$563 per home
City of Longmont, Colorado : In 1997 spent $1.62M to run 17 miles of fiber along main roads:
$95k per mile
In 2012 residents voted 66% in favor of a $45.3M bond issue to run fiber to homes.[^2](
Population of Longmont: 88,669 (2012)
FTTH cost per person: $511
FTTH cost per household (assuming 1.9 people per household): $971
Villagers of Löwenstedt, Germany : collected $3.4M to run fiber to 620 homes in 2014 [^3](
$5,312 per home
British farmers in rural Lancashire : Raised £0.5M ($762k), and need another £1.5M ($2.3M). [^4]( They believe they can get the cost for FTTH down to
£1,000 ($1,600) per home |
Seth's situation is WAY worse than what I've dealt with but I'd like to get 3 stories off my chest.
1: Back in 2000 I was looking for a new place to live, closer to work. I wound up choosing a place that wasn't as nice as the others because they promised me that they had cable broadband there while the other places didn't. Since an AT&T network hub was just down the street and the manager's insistence that they had customers with it I signed the lease.
I called AT&T and they started the process of opening an account for me. The tech came out and ran some tests, made some calls, then informed me that they didn't actually service this complex. I complained to the managers and tried to get out of the lease (my car was also broken into that first weekend there) but they wouldn't let me.
Next month there was a rep walking through the complex trying to sell people TV and Internet packages. I asked him to set me up with Internet and he went through the same process and came back with the same result.
Two months later a tech shows up at my door and asks if I still want Internet. He said that he had clipped 8 illegal connections in the box for my building and now their system was reading the building properly.
I was happy to have broadband again but why the hell did it take them 4 months to solve that mystery?
2: Last year my cable and power lines were ripped down by iced-over fallen branches. The trees were trimmed and power was back up that day but Cox said it would be a week. Given the scope of the storm I felt that was reasonable (despite only needing to string a new wire about 100 feet).
I left to visit family for the holidays and after a week I called Cox to check on the ticket. They said it would be done the next day. I got home late the following night, plugged in my modem, nothing. The support line couldn't see my modem on their system either but said that the tech marked the job as complete.
The next morning I went out to looked at the line. There was nothing there but a freshly clipped stub where my old line was. I called Cox back and the lady got snippy with me saying that just because I don't see a line doesn't mean there isn't a connection. I told her that they hadn't buried anything new and that there were no radio links (I'm an electrical engineer, I sometimes know what I'm talking about.) She continued to be snippy so I hung up and called back. The next agent said they couldn't create a new request for a line since one had recently been completed but would schedule another tech to visit in a week.
I was pretty pissed but agreed and asked if the new tech would run a line. She said no, he would just inspect and schedule someone to come out (up to a week after that visit) to run the line.
I spent that week in and out of the local sales office trying to get an answer about why the tech had failed to replace my line but marked it complete. I never did get an answer.
The 2nd tech showed up on schedule and thankfully had the equipment to run a new line.
3: While waiting for Cox to unfuck the previous incident I got a card from AT&T about a U-Verse offer. I called them up and they said they didn't service my neighborhood. Okay...
Next month, got another card. Called, same story.
This kept happening for months. I asked them to stop mailing me until they offered it but they wouldn't.
Last month I was talking to my neighbor (same building) and she asked if my Internet was out because hers was. I said I wasn't having any problems and that she should give Cox a call. She was confused and told me that she had AT&T and thought I did too.
She's had U-Verse for the last year.
Seems that AT&T hasn't made any improvements since 2000. |
OSes, games, none of that matters to me. This is the reason why I fucking hate mac. They blatantly rip people off. Worse off is the way they pump and exploit educational facilities for cash. One of my old schools I worked in converted one of their computer labs to a Mac lab. They got the computers at a decent rate but were forced into a contract that required them to buy any and all upgrades both software and hardware from Mac. Two years later only 8 of the initial 18 computers are functional. Many are down because the monitors ran out, others a powe rsupply died. Nevertheless the budget cannot afford to pay for a replacement of these parts. Even though they have excess monitors, they are contractually obligated not to use them. the only way to get these computers working again is to pay $6,000 for new monitors. Not to mention that all of the other computers have been upgraded to Windows 7 with Office 2007, and these machines are still using office 2003.
In another example. One of the research labs had a similar agreement with Mac. They ended up wanting to upgrade their computers. To upgrade 6 computers with 4 gigs of ram and 500 GB of storage it cost them over $7,000. This could have been done for less than $1,000 on a PC.
No only does Mac cost exorbitant amount of tax payer money, but it also costs other researchers. The money for the aforementioned upgrades could have funded another grad student or many experiments. |
What a stupid fucking op-ed. Seriously. Why doesn't the operator go back to the days prior to 1800, where if someone when more than 10 miles away, there was a very good possibility that you would never see nor speak to them again unless you were landed gentry or a fucking king. Where everybody lives next door to their parents and they organize festivals each year where all the people for miles and miles around gather up so their kids can meet and fuck each other so they can marry someone other than a cousin.
I'm surprised the author even deigns to use the internet.
Fuck you, I WANT to be connected. I'm in my late 20's and it's the way I communicate. People I value don't disappear from my life just because one of us moved a ways away and I hate the telephone, but I can have a meaningful conversation with my best friend across the country via 7 text messages. I can let my mom know as I'm parking that I made it home safely despite driving 3 hours home through snow. I can let my friends know I'm running late so to order dinner without me. I can not leave some poor woman sitting and feeling like a fool waiting for me to arrive on a date because I slipped on the ice gassing up my car and tore my pants and am bleeding. I can text my brother a good idea for a birthday present for another of our brothers instead of forgetting it or writing it down and losing it. I can find out that my grandfather is in the hospital when I'm away from my desk for the entire workday, leave 6 hours earlier than I would have without my cellphone and make it in time to see him before he died . Fuck you judgmental pricks who think these things make me a "baby."
I, like most people, don't require you to compete with a cell phone for my attention. The thing you need to realize is this: the people who do so would be rude fucking assholes even without the cell phone.
So fuck that judgmental bitch and all the people who are "holdouts" for some archaic, "principled" reason. You know why people are dependent on their cellphones? Because cellular telephones and especially smartphones are literally paradigm-shifting devices. They have and continue to transform the entire world , and they wouldn't if they weren't generally awesome .
Oh, and if you're worried you're always reachable on a cell phone? Guess what? There's a fucking off button. |
drew from dropbox here. i hope you guys can give us the benefit of the doubt: when something pops up that encourages people to turn dropbox into the next rapidshare or equivalent (the title on HN was suggesting it could be the successor to torrents), you can imagine how that could ruin the service for everyone -- illegal file sharing has never been permitted and we take great pains to keep it off of dropbox. the internet graveyard is filled with services that didn't take this approach.
>
> so, when something like this gets called to our attention, we have to do something about it. note that this isn't even by choice -- if we don't take action, then we look like we are tacitly encouraging it. the point is not to censor or "kill" it (which is obviously impossible and would be idiotic for us to try to do), but we sent kindly worded emails to the author and other people who posted it to take it down for the good of the community so that we don't encourage an army of pirates to flock to dropbox, and they voluntarily did so.
there were no legal threats or any other shenanigans to the author or people hosting -- we just want to spend all our time building a great product and not on cat-and-mouse games with people who try to turn dropbox into an illegal file sharing service against our wishes. (for what it's worth, dropship doesn't even work anymore -- we've fixed the deduplication behavior serverside to prevent "injection" of files you don't actually have, for a variety of reasons.)
>
> that said, when we disabled public sharing of that file by hash, it auto-generated a DMCA takedown notice to the OP, which as many pointed out here was invalid and particularly inappropriate in this case, and was absolutely not what we intended to do, so i apologize to dan that this happened.
[Source.]( |
They will probably go the Showtime route and offer their own streaming service just for their own content. What these idiots don't understand is that people want central hubs of content that has a large diverse wealth abundance of content. We don't want to go to umpteen different fragmented streaming services to see this and that.
We don't want online streaming to turn in to cable TV where we have to pay for gazillion different online "channels" to get at only one or two shows per streaming service that we actually care about. |
After having run the test linked to in the article, I read the results. It's basically a steaming pile of Windows marketing bullshit. Number one I am running Firefox on Linux. So all there crap about protecting from access to Windows system files shouldn't even be counted. |
If we disregard the complex looking figures and look only at what is claimed in the patent, the actual claims are very broad and full of vagaries, basically vaporware. It looks like a patent of a generic fuel cell that can regulate its output hooked up to a computer, without any engineering specifics. The patent does not describe a fuel cell that fits the size, power, cost, efficiency, or safety requirements of PC. But if someone else later figures out these (likely immense) problems and succeeds in building a hydrogen fuel cell powered computer, they are automatically are infringing this patent and are guilty of stealing intellectual property. |
My cable box comes with the option to watch porn. But I still have to pay to watch it. What the fuck!? IT COMES WITH IT! WHY CAN'T I ACCESS ALL THE THINGS AVAILABLE FOR SOMETHING I HAVE! |
That would mean:
Higher bitrate for equal quality
Potential anti-trust issues
Shitty framerates on phones and low powered computers because of lack of hardware acceleration for webm |
He suggests boycotting the companies, which is great, but his point about how it's hard to know whether or not you're supporting a company means you basically have to withdraw from society to boycott anything. Boycott TimeWarner? For some people, that means no internet. Once you've effectively withdrawn from society, it's hard to know or even care what laws someone's trying to pass. Also, you're no longer part of a movement people can get behind. You're that loon who locked himself in a cabin in the woods.
Obviously, that's a hyperbole, but at some point boycotts become impractical. What are we to do then?
Those Facebook photos may sound stupid, but at least it raises awareness, which, for tech issues, is often very important. The general public doesn't read tech blogs or reddit all day; they don't know about this stuff unless we bang our pots and pans. |
Nike has contracts with all sorts of sports leagues though, like the NCAA, NFL, etc. And they're a major distributor of all kinds of athletic equipment besides just shoes -- they have independent lines for pretty much every major sport, and their new NFL contract makes them the exclusive distributor of authentic NFL jerseys to sports stores nation-wide. I'm sure they make enough money from projects like these that even a sizable decrease in shoe sales wouldn't take them down. Not to mention it has the same problem as the gas boycott: we buy shoes so infrequently, that this boycott would have to last a very long time -- many months at the very least -- to have any real affect.
Also, I don't think the majority of Nike's target demographic are the type of people who would easily be convinced to get behind something like this. I doubt many of them are social activists or frequenters of web sites like reddit and 4chan -- they're probably casual/infrequent internet users who spend a lot of time outdoors. Good luck getting those people to join the boycott: reaching them would be as much a problem as actually convincing them to join, as you're not likely to recruit them on sites like reddit, for the reasons previously stated. And even if you did, you'd have to make them agree that it's worth not purchasing/supporting ANY Nike products for an extended period of time, for a cause that is probably not very important to them. |
I totally agree, but in my situation, it seems like banging pots and pans is the only thing I can do. I'm not a US citizen (Australian), and I haven't voted in any election previously because of age (now 18). I'm even unworkably far away from my state capital/largest city, so a protest would have to coincide with other events. Besides signing a petition, liking a facebook page, or sharing this actual site, what am I able to accomplish? |
The problem is that if the government wants to do something then they do it. It doesn't matter what the populace wants, they'll do it. They could put it in a bill for better roads (and on the by no privacy) or they'll just do whatever the hell they want with the internet equivalent of black bagging dissenters. |
The population of Denmark is less than that of New York City, and mainland Denmark is around one-quarter of the size of New York State. It's very easy to run a tiny country made up of mainly one ethnicity that shares a cultural heritage spanning more than a thousand years. You will cooperate very easily.
This does not scale up, however. The US is made up of 50 states, few of them getting much smaller than Denmark. A population of more than 300 million people of varied ethnicity, religion, and no shared heritage naturally finds it hard to find common ground. Socialism would ruin this country if not approached properly.
It's really annoying to hear from all these people living in tiny, pseudo-socialist European countries claiming that you can just "switch to our form of government" and expect things to become easier somehow. Just think about it this way: Could you switch all of Europe (you don't have to include Russia, but you can if you want to) to your form of government and expect them to cooperate? If the answer isn't "no", you're extremely naive.
If you want to see socialism in the US, you'll have to try it on an individual state first. Or even an individual city. You will never be able to convince the entire US at once. |
That's hard to say. Most would probably say yes of course it would be, but they are disregarding the full cost of the vehicle. Each car has thousands of component parts, most not even made in union shops, so that shouldn't make much of a difference. Assembly is (mostly) what we think of when we hear about the auto unions, not manufacturing. Though GM does do some union manufacturing. Most of the secondary union benefits, like sick days, vacations and the like would not have any marginal effect. The big ones are medical, and retirement, which together is almost the equivalent of doubling the persons pay. The cost is great, but there are benefits to the company also. Healthier people, who are there for the long-term, increase the quality of the work and reduce training costs for new workers. |
No. He always was a criminal. He started his hacking career by distributing stolen phone cards so people would upload warez and movies to his "house of cool", only to turn on his heel a few months later and rat out major contributors to the state prosecution in Germany.
He defrauded investors by blatant insider trading (in the BLUNTEST way: He bought stock, held a press conference announcing he would inject 50 Million into the company, waited for prices to rise, sold, and called off his investment. The company went BUST.), and fled to Hong Kong. He was promptly extradited, and did prison time in Germany.
Next he claimed to have developed a "trading AI" called Trendax, trying to get 50k closed-fund investment. Never got his trading license, project vanished (do you notice a trend here?).
He then struck rich with MegaUpload, which I STILL consider one of the sleaziest, most obvious copyright-infringement sites ever (and before you bitch and cry and shout "Freedom", yes Hollywood sucks, but this does NOT give you the right to steal. Fair enough many people do it, but to claim it legitimate is just wrong.). Just consider the frequency of copyright links to MegaUpload, and compare that to e.g. Dropbox.
If his previous ventures are any indication, I would think it almost sure that he seeded the initial couple of thousands of "hot" links himself, as he has done in the past- how else could Megaupload (with its crappy interface) come from nowhere to suddenly dominate movie and software downloads? He might have been wise enough this time to not leave tracks of this, but his argument is a bit like the old "guns don't kill people".
Soooo no, he is nothing like a banker. Yeah I know evil Wallstreet, and there are enough bankers that SHOULD be behind prison.
Kim Schmitz, if you want to compare him to someone, would be more like your neighbourhood drug dealer, claiming that if people didn't want crack, he wouldn't have to supply it, so he was basically doing a public service, and if he occasionally has to break someone's leg for snitching or not paying up or moving into his territory, then it's the fault of the state for not providing a nice regulated crack market.
Where his argument falls flat is that if, as he keeps insincerely whining for, Hollywood would get its act together and offer Netflix-like content access, then frauds like Kim Schmitz would not be able to buy the biggest mansion in New Zealand (and apparently half the government to boot). |
Most of the time, I find the left/right channel divide on Beatles songs annoying. Most of the time.
I was having a pretty crazy DOC trip once, thinking about my friends, my family, my mother and father specifically. I was in a pretty weird headspace, finding my thoughts repeating in the 3 to 5 second loop that to me is the defining characteristic of that particular drug. In an attempt to snap me out of it, my friend started playing Abbey Road on his very nice speaker setup. The combination of the drugs and the two distinct channels coming from two distinct corners of the room gave me an overwhelming feeling that John, Paul, George, and Ringo were in the room with me.
Now I was raised with a very Beatles-centric belief system towards music. As my parents told it, the Beatles were it. They were music. My mom's greatest disappointment in life was that she never got to see them live. So here I am, tripping balls in my friend's tiny living room, feeling this fantastic connection to my parents, imagining that I'm my dad at my age chilling in some bar with the Beatles playing 10 feet away. It was emotional. It was revelatory. It was transcendant.
It was due entirely to the fact that the Beatles put each instrument/track in only one audio channel. |
Your statement is false. It just means you can be sued by your carrier for unlocking the phone. it is not a crime that they can send feds or police to your house and prosecute you under federal law over. |
Laws are bullshit and contracts are unread. Contracts should be made illegal instead of consumer being liable to ridiculous penalties for being ignorant to the contract they sign. Either that or every place that offers contracts should have a lawyer on stand by to go over the contract before you sign it. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.