Bugging individual suspects is not ethically worse than pervasive mass surveillance of the population as a whole. The former may or may not be unethical, depending on the circumstances, the latter is always immoral and dangerous to democracy.
and taking quite some bullshit. Oh well, news at 11.
In most countries (though not the US) you have to ask for permission before photographing them.
Okay, next time I see you having a dinner, I'll point a huge directed microphone at you to capture everything you say. You fucking dumbass moron.
If you're in public, you do have an expectation of privacy as well, though of course not as much as at home.
Why dou think he is not concerned? Can't we just prefer not to be filmed at all?
What's wrong with (glass)holes like you?
Drones against drones seems to be finally the right way to spend military expenditures. Anything is better than continuing to use drones against innocent people in deliberate political killings on souvereign foreign soil conducted outside of police authority, judicial oversight and jurisdiction and violating ratified human rights chartas.
Yeah, nice systemd trolling attempt. I've been administrating a little NetBSD box for quite a while as a hobby in the 90s and believe I know pretty well what the difference between Unix and Linux is. The point is that as the hybrid bastard nonstandard Unix that it is, OS X is just enough of a pain in the ass that most people who actually need to install and use Unix tools will find it a rather displeasing. Especially if you want to compile and install scientific software with lousy make files in an academic environment. I speak from plenty of personal experience, as I've been using Macs from around 1992 to 2007 (in addition to NetBSD) and started using the underlying command line tools in OS X 10.0 and later Fink when it became available almost from day one.
If your mileage varies, good for you. After all, computers are just tools and nobody in his right mind would actually care about which operating system he's using as long as it does what it's supposed to do.
Somebody who writes with LaTeX or otherwise uses OSS tools for most of his work has no advantage by using OSX plus Fink or Macports. There is no advantage at all, from my experience the ports install in nonstandard places and introduce tons of configuration problems. Moreover, installing software that has not yet been ported is a major pain in the ass on OSX due to the highly nonstandard nature of its Unix.
That's the main reason why I switched from OSX to Linux. There are others. With GNU/Linux there is no need for paid software, Apple's walled garden, and the OS getting slower with each upgrade so Apple can sell their hardware. I didn't buy Mac hardware, though, but some of the Apple laptops might be okay for other people who don't mind loosing their eyesight due to glaring mirror displays.
There are many reasons. For example, speculating with currencies produces no product and no useful service for society, and is in that sense also not work. (Just as sitting on your money and watch it grow is not work.) There is also no guarantee that the dynamic systems created by such speculations are sufficiently stable and non-chaotic to ensure that they won't collapse some day out of the blue and ruin thousands people and companies in the course of it.
Keep in mind that the ultimate test of intelligence is survival.
Yeah, it's quiz time! Please complete the following phrase:
Survival of the __________
1.) most faithful
2.) most intelligent
3.) zombies
Remember, only one answer is correct!
Nobody ever lost bitcoin that they kept in their own wallets unless they were stupid enough not to get necessary precautions, like getting their pc hacked while not having their wallet encrypted with a secret passphrase.
And that's exactly what would happen on a massive scale if this technology would be used for voting. Everyone from the NSA over Anonymous, the Russian Mafia, the Chinese government, up to college prankers would hack your PC and hundreds of thousands of others until you could throw the voting results right into the garbage can.
God lord, I wouldn't even trust most anti-virus and backup companies not to influence my votes with their root access, and they're supposed to be the good guys.
Legally, it's extortion.
--start rant--
Amazon is too aggressive in trying to bind customers to their ecosystem. Customers appreciate that much less than Amazon's managers might think. Case in point: Because Google for inexplicable reasons did not let me buy anything with my well-working Paypal account, I had to install Amazon's app store. Now that means you have to allow 3rd party apps so they can fully control your phone. Very insecure, but okay. Then I had to buy some 'Amazon coins" because any other payment method did not work, even though I customarily order books to my country from this account. Fine, I bought them and got the apps. But then I realized to my horror that Amazon injects code into them that only allows you to use the aps when you are currently logged into your Amazon account on the phone! Not only that, they also automatically activated the 1-click buy function!
Not only do these apps take an eternity to start now (boy, this log-in check must be complicated), if somebody grabs my phone he can now order anything with one click and has full access to my Amazon account! How crazy is that?
On the plus side, their customer service is top quality. The only thing they aren't allowed to tell you, but probably wish they could, is that you should not use Amazon's "app shop" under any circumstances
--end of rant--
There is just as much practical knowledge in the field of theology as there is psychology, sociology and many of the other soft sciences.
No there isn't. There is almost no knowledge in theology at all, except for knowledge of some arcane scriptures.
theology only has the human experience to study and as such, is probably dead on with how the world behaves.
There is not the slightest evidence for that claim. Moreover, the study of human experience is part of psychology.
Science and religion do not have to be opposed to each other. They can coexist quite happily.
Only in the mind of hypocrites, namely people who apply completely different standards of adequacy, consistency and correctness to religion and science without being able to explain why they would be justified to do so.
The only conflict comes is when either goes beyond it's theoretical framework and tries to apply it to the other.
Religion really has no 'theoretical framework' worth speaking of. It's a bunch of old stories with a lot of bullshit in them, plus some mildly interesting and arcane cultural heritage and rites.
It will be great for the 3d porn industry. Hopefully some interesting applications will evolve.
Love may laugh at locksmiths, but he has a profound respect for money bags. -- Sidney Paternoster, "The Folly of the Wise"
