Happens during vilifying too.
Happens during vilifying too.
The wireless giant announced a new program this week called "Smart Rewards" that offers customers credit card-style perks like discounts for shopping, travel and dining. You accrue points through the program by doing things like signing onto the Verizon website, paying your bill online and participating in the company's trade-in program.
Verizon emphasizes that the data it collects is anonymized before it's shared with third parties.
The program is novel in that offers Verizon users some compensation for the collection of their data, which has become big business for telecom and tech companies. Some privacy advocates have pushed data-collecting companies to reward customers for their personal information in the interest of transparency."
Link to Original Source
A competitor claims to have not just reproduced the technology, but improved upon it. Preliminary reports suggest the new design is cheaper, but performs the same typhoon-survival response.
Copyright lawyers have prepared the below flowchart to help identify what they will consider unauthorized copies or infringement that are potentially actionable:
Is it a day that ends in 'y'?
Is it a day that doesn't end in 'y'?
Then super yes.
I'll accept that having poorly tracked, poorly secured, poorly vetted, poorly restricted, and/or poorly located samples keeps them from being a benign non-factor as above.
I don't accept that throwing them away (the ones we know about) is the only counter. Hell, we can spare a few grams of payload and put one in space.
I only have an ordinary understanding of the scientific process, but I'm pretty sure you can't take "Group 1 cheated more than Group 2" and shoehorn in the identifier cause.
Seriously though, promising tech.
>The proposal does call for a "ramp up" period where the sounds get louder and louder.
I'm thinking you were hasty on knocking down the idea and assumed the one-off.
But I'm guessing you had "real" concerns in mind. "Maybe one day law enforcement will scale back and only hunt those," he failed to say with a straight face.
I'm willing to accept that this technology could be exploitable or unsafe. It could, just maybe, have a marginally useful application in crime. But I'm not seeing it here, and I'm not expecting it tomorrow.
If anything, LE should be delighted at the idea of remote control, surveillance, etc. when cars are on TIOT.
However, password reuse kills a user whether it's strong or not. If I hack into some photosharing socnet crap and get your password, chances are I now have access to a lot of your services. Even if I don't use the loot directly, I'll sell off the credentials or data (SSN) to others.
But hey, if you think soccer moms and surfers are just as likely to indulge a "Sandbox-contained PW manager in a secure virtual OS" tutorial as the five seconds it takes to tell them "Hey, use a special password for those super important sites, 'kay?" then knock yourself out.
Good luck fitting it on a billboard, though.
But I guess it's okay; "this Thor isn't that Thor" or maybe even "No relation, never heard of him." if that's the case.
More than historical accuracy, what gets me is the parading. It's not even self-righteous parading, it's more like astroturf. If I was one of those social justice zealots, I'd have to ask myself whether I was being pandered to and exploited.
I don't agree with refuting OR supporting a product or media or art because of the creator or other unrelated details. I don't check if my oil change mechanic donates blood, I don't check if my waiter was a (convicted?) sex offender, I don't ask about my barber's stance on gun control - I ask what a haircut costs.
This is all tangential though; Thor's a chick superhero and I take the "Okay - so?" stance. A healthy one IMO.