Comment Re:meanwhile (Score 1) 342
This is going to put many a libertarian in a hissy fit.
I'm pretty sure the right wing is called liberals and conservatives in Europe...
This is going to put many a libertarian in a hissy fit.
I'm pretty sure the right wing is called liberals and conservatives in Europe...
Really, I think that the internet can be a huge distraction.... and, if cut off from the internet, I would probably do my best work!
Agree... but I fear I would be inventing a wheel that already exists
So much coding today is finding libraries and stitching them together...
Wikipedia does not have, and has never had, an EULA. There are Guidelines for conflict of interest, but their is no legal requirement that they be followed.
Whilst, that is certainly true. This is still corruption. It definitely warrants a police investigation with disciplinary action (firing of all involved parties).
It's true that no laws or contracts have been violated, but this is a clear betrayal of public trust. The are proper guidelines for addressing factual errors.
This is the equivalent of police officials writing letters to the editor of a news paper for publication under a false name. Or letters to politicians under false names.
I don't grasp why such betrayal of trust is tolerated in the US.
"an act of social provocation"
All the open carry demonstrations and make a gun tricks... All seem to be the kind of sarcastic "social provocations" that one undertake to encourage stricter gun control.
I find it hilarious...
Then again, you walk into a location with the intent of going on a rampage and note EVERYONE is carrying a firearm, you may change your mind
The kind of people who are going on a rampage aren't likely to be thinking all that much. The idea that a deterrent would stop them is pretty out there...
The first line of defence against people like that I social services, engagement and outreach programs. Followed by restricting access to weapons. Followed by police officers trained to do defuse a situation rather than escalate it. Followed by armed police capable of neutralising a threat. And if all else fails civilians capable of defending themselves.
The US often seems to have this backwards...
Witness European nations outlawing blasphemy and other free speech issues that would be laughed out of court here.
Most of these laws are legacy.... can you cite some recent examples?
Also note EU countries are subject to rulings of the European court of human rights. There is no shortage of courts in which you can test your right to free speech.
Welcome to leadership Obama. Where sometimes you have to make unpopular/hard choices and live with the consequences.
And I suppose you're unhappy with Obama for implementing health care...
Or maybe you're unhappy with him for releasing "prisoners" from Guantanamo...
Or maybe you're unhappy with him for murdering innocent civilians (including children) with drone strikes around the world.
Or maybe you're unhappy with him because the US foreign policy of bombing and deploying troops without declaring war, is one of the biggests threads to world peace, up there with Mr Putin...
For whatever reason you don't like him. Let's just agree that he certainly has made unpopular decisions.
And he lives with the consequences, such as republicans unwilling to make any deals with him, or get anything done.
(the quick reader will notice from my wording that I don't think all of his decisions were good).
We have Chrome and Mozilla who for the most part dumped minor versions and we get a Major version every other week.
And then we have emacs where they dropped the major version number (see cute wikipedia story)..
In my mind a Major Number should be when there is a large change to the system.
On topic: Lots of things have changed in the linux 3.x series. For example the kernel now supports docker out of the box (if I recall correctly). This was added and improved over multiple releases, but there is a big difference between 3.0 and now. IMO, it's totally valid to make a major release...
Anyways, at the end of the day, this doesn't matter. But it is so lovely simple that everybody can have an opinion about it. So taking a poll on the issue is certainly both sane and cool as it highlights just how unimportant it really is
The fact that an organisation like mozilla, who stand for digital freedom and user rights, have implemented a proprietary software DRM method does make you wonder what the point of this device is.
AFAIK Mozilla isn't involved in the development... Other than the fact that Mozilla develops Firefox OS.
That said, I would much rather have properly containerized DRM provided by an organization I trust, than say flash...
Which is fine, except that now any thief with some cheap equipment can break into keyless cars, clone a key fob within a minute and drive away with it.
Comon that's just because manufacturers implement security through obscurity. Nothing prevents the keyless fob from containing a private key. There are many ways to make a key infrastructure such that only authorized third parties can clone keys. Just this is manufacturer incompetence/carelessness.
When I say, "It took this long?" I mean that a completely unregulated livery (taxi) service went this long without some Uber driver or other comitting a major crime upon one of their 'customers'?
In many countries regulation consists of mandatory training, extra drivers tests, advanced first aid courses, etc. Most companies requires a clean criminal record (well they review the record, in case of severe crimes). But in many countries entries on a criminal record also expires... These are not guarantees.
Either way, I feel more safe using Uber because there is an electronic record on everything linked to credit cards, car registrations, etc. So if a driver robs me tries something funny, filing criminal charges against the driver is easy. A random cap driver on the other hand is hard unless you're quick to memorize a license number.
The principle of "innocent until proven guilty" means that there should be quite a few dangerous people out there.
And if you refuse to hire people because of supposedly baseless accusations made against them, you can get sued for that too!
Why should it be okay for employers to consider applicants guilty until proven otherwise?
Do proper background checks to ensure criminals and rapists are not being hired?
Because criminals doesn't deserve a second chance... Note, in many countries it's illegal to ask for a criminal records when hiring, and if you're stupid enough to ask anyways many people have unions ready to sue on their behalf.
Either way, why doesn't this case belong in criminal court in India, I'm sure Uber would share: identity of the driver, timestamps, location data, etc. with authorities...
I suspect that this is more a case of frustration with how the Indian authorities handles rape cases.
"What man has done, man can aspire to do." -- Jerry Pournelle, about space flight
