Any app with the mic permission can listen -- it does not need to be signed by the OEM/system/rom. What they can't do is leverage a lower power dedicated processor such at that on the Moto X. But any app can turn on the mic with the correct permission granted.
Listen, sonny, you lived through that world. Slashdot once did well for itself. And given your uid, you should remember that.
"Buzzfeedification" of content is killing the net. Notice all those outbrain, taboola, and other shit all over news sites? This article is the same thing. Corporations astroturfing "advertorial" clickbait is bad for everyone -- especially on a site the is supposedly still "driven by user submissions".
So fuck any fatalistic or indignant defense of this turd masquerading as news.
Maybe it's fantasy to imagine it'll ever change, but don't be a tool.
Just look back in his history: 0 comments, always an astroturf account, even pre-dice.
here's page 50 from his submissions which date back to May, 2012:
http://slashdot.org/users2.pl?...
Yeah it would seem like a relatively easy fix for the background uploader service to check
Something sorta like:
if (photosApp.isInstalled()) {
performBackupSync();
} else {
promptUser();
}
I'm sure they also pinky-swear not to look at any of the other logs for illegal activity.
I 100% agree with that^
Well, sure, but what's your point? Do you think they put the exemption there for companies to differentiate themselves with their altruistic overtime policy?
Another thing to note is that many computer professionals make above the old max, *and* the new max -- but as was mentioned above these rates are ridiculously low, near minimum wage. So again, why the exemption?
Previously, computer professionals had been considered exempt under section 13(a)(1), along with the exemption for executives, administrators, and professionals, but under Section 13(a)(17) a specific exemption was provided for any “computer systems analyst, computer programmer, software engineer, or other similarly skilled worker”
(from the same site I linked to).
To me it's strange they call-out computer professionals explicitly, and that they added it in 1996 when programmers were really starting to cost money for companies.
But you have to wonder about all the other exemption stuff too. There are also "learned professionals" and "creative professionals" exemptions. They might as well said "anyone that could cost big business a lot of money".
The "reasoning" behind the act is described as making it so that the FLSA would not apply to anyone who is capable of "exercising judgment" in their job. Because ostensibly, these people can negotiate for themselves. Have you found that to be the case with young/low level "professionals"? I know I haven't. I have seen lots of companies try to work the 20-something crowd 50-70hrs a week.
Also, at a time when states are passing laws against collective bargaining, it seems there are few places for these workers to turn. These rates need to be higher, and pegged to cost of living based on location. As it stands almost no one who works in SF or NYC would qualify.
In 1996,
1. The application of systems analysis techniques and procedures, including consulting with users, to determine hardware, software or system functional specifications;
2. The design, development, documentation, analysis, creation, testing or modification of computer systems or programs, including prototypes, based on and related to user or system design specifications; [or]
3. The design, documentation, testing, creation or modification of computer programs related to machine operating systems;
http://www.generalcounsellaw.c...
FLSA: FUBAR.
Interesting stat Thanks. I may certainly have the wrong impression about usage. Do you have a link to your source though? Would like to read more.
To be clear, I think that's 35,000 daily usages, not users. And most are under 30 mins (I think). But I did mean to make sure it was clear I was only speaking anecdotally, "as far as I can tell" -- I certainly may have a skewed perspective from the stations I see.
Thank goodness we have urban transit planners, people with degrees in this stuff. They are heavily, heavily pushing bicycle transit and bike shares. Not because it's 'sexy', but because it works.
I couldn't agree more. I am in awe of what they accomplish, to be honest. But at the same time, I can see they are struggling. From what I have read the MTA is $15-32B in the hole. So even though these bikes are a drop in the bucket, it is easy to be overly sensitive about the city wasting money, and the ever forward march of advertising. I also think it's good to look at them in that larger context.
You can plop down a bike share station in a matter of days or weeks (the biggest hassle are the community meetings) which affords enormous flexibility; it takes months to redo a bus route, and decades to plan a subway line.
An interesting point for sure.
Bike share bikes convert a fair number of people over to bike ownership, too - and the presence or more bike riders on the city's streets makes the streets safer for everyone.
Both of these statements seem unquantifiable to me -- I just say this because you have a good reply that seeks to show the actual number of bikes in comparison to my admittedly anecdotal statement. I have seen stats regarding "protected bike lanes" making things safer, but that is a subtle difference to "more bikes make everything safer" Here are the stats, I assume this is what you are referring to: http://www.streetsblog.org/201... But I really dont know where you could find data on these bikes converting people to ownership.
I think though you are talking an order of magnitude difference in cost, or more. I would expect that citibikes are relatively cheap in the grand scheme of infrastructure and any modifications to roads will spread across to private cycles as well.
Oh, definitely. Sorry, didn't mean to imply otherwise. The MTA budget is in the tens of billions, while the bikes are in the tens of millions. But the MTA moves 8 million+ per day while citibikes are ridden ~35,000 times per day.
I think Citi foots most of the upfront cost for the bikes but they are far from free to use: https://www.citibikenyc.com/pr...
Compare that to a $3 subway ride.
I am all for people riding their bikes, but a citibank advertisement is no substitute for a proper, functioning mass transit system. But from Citi's perspective, as an brand-awareness advertising campaign, I would be that the bikes are an unquestionable success. I just hope we aren't wasting too much time on a feel-good fix, and not enough on the real needs of the city. ( The MTA is thought to be $30B in debt: http://www.capitalnewyork.com/... )
Anyways, thanks for your links, hope to visit your country someday. Now I know where to bike!
After the last of 16 mounting screws has been removed from an access cover, it will be discovered that the wrong access cover has been removed.
