Somewhere between 1~12% of humans are sexually attracted to children...the pedophiles we know about are just the tip of the iceberg. Our society needs to find a healthier way of handling them that allows them to out themselves without being unfairly discriminated against, it would be better and safer for everyone.

Would make an interesting premise for a story - that we're part of the diaspora from a dying Venus, the same way we envision having to leave earth because we fouled our nest. An earlier , dinner Sun, and more unaccreted material floating around in space before it was mostly sucked into the planets or blasted away by the solar wind ...

People had to pay to not be in the phone book. It was called "unlisted number" and came at a price. Extremely few people did it - local politicians, business people that didn't want to be bothered at home with a phone call, etc. Hardly anyone hid from people. Now there's heart palpitations over people knowing totally useless shit like where you live. Again, I think people need to grow a pair and quit worrying.

We don't know if the gouging is on verizons' side. This tower may not belong to them and the owner of the tower might be charging verizon quite a bit for the roaming data. I remember someone telling me once people living on the border in some cities have to be careful with the phones as it was easy to pick up a tower from over the border some towers placed very very close on purpose to pick up this traffic and then gouge on them. I think they were talking about Niagara but i'm not certain.

Roaming prices are exclusively on the carrier's side. Sure, with roaming agreements, Verizon has to pay the Canadian carrier for the data, but the primary reason for the roaming agreement is to not only have preferred carriers, but preferred rates.

The actual cost to Verizon would probably amount to around $5 or so, if not much less. Roaming agreements don't take plans into account, so if you have a roaming plan, carriers still pay the same rate.

In fact, it used to be you had to disable roaming data, but that evolved to being able to buy "travel packs" that give you roaming plans for a low rate. And now, they evolved again where they automatically cap your roaming costs - to something like $10 a day. Even better, it's just automatic you roam at will and know it's capped. It's just roaming charges - if you exceed your existing plan, you still pay your plan overage charges. You can still buy roaming plans if you know you're going to roam a lot - even $10/day can add up if you're doing it a lot. But for the odd traveller who doesn't roam often, or for day trips across the border, it's seamless and automatic.

Verizon is just being a typical carrier - they know they can try and get away with it, hoping people will just pay it without researching anything to realize that it's already covered.

The only time it's the roaming carrier's fault is when there's no alternative and no roaming agreement exist. So a carrier like "Cellular at Sea" or "Cellular in Air" who makes no agreements purposely because they know they can gouge users in flight and at sea. That's why ships using them legally must turn them off when approaching shore

actually, no, the Olympic International Comitee has very precise rules about which gender one can do sports as, and currently they measure hormone levels on "borderline case".

I'm not saying that this is a good solution l. It's not. It's discrimatory toward people who happen not to exactly look like what society expects their gender to look like (i.e.: if you look like a "perfect" woman, you won't get your hormone tested, and won't be denied even if at that point you have a high level of androgens) and is very problematic to intersex people who for complex reasons (both cultural and biological) are represented more frequently in high level sports than in general population. (And in the worst case women, as in XX genotype, born with a vagina and ovaries, but looking slightly masculine can get tested and denied if they have a high enough level of hormones).

I'm just saying that "feeling man or woman" is not enough to run in a competition at a high level.

For the rest of your anti-IX rant: yeah, so what? Are you that much afraid of your peepee being seen by some "girl" (or, more likely, some cowboy-looking butch who happens to be born with a pussy, but otherwise identifies as a bear)? Give me a break. On this planet there are cultures where it's already acceptable to enter in the wrong gender rest-rooms, or who plain don't give a crap about gendering toilet stalls, it's just a toilet: you queue in front of the door, you open the door, enter and pee no matter which biological equipment you use to pee with. And nobody has ever died because of that.

While I never really looked into his work (there was never any interesting enough in it), this is about what I expect. That guy had not clue about his chosen field of research. They probably kept him on for the press exposure.

The same legally defensible assertion that I made could also be made by someone with malicious intent.

Me, I use it defensively whenever people are trying to disadvantage men.

Yes, please have the GOVERNMENT collect all my private data into a website and then keep track of all the private entities I interact with.

That's the end goal of GDPR, government control and regulation. EU privacy is f--ked.

Hilariously, the summary equates the subset of "CEOs who cheat in the bedroom" with "CEOs who had an account on Ashley Madison".

Virtually *none* of Ashley Madison's clients were able to find a side-piece through their website, since just about all of the women on the site were fake accounts created by the website to drum up business.

Some of the Ashley Madison clients must have had affairs with women that they met by other means, of course. But we have no way to know whether they did so more frequently or less frequently than married men who were not Ashley Madison clients. (Maybe *less* frequently. Men who sign up for a scam service like this one have usually run out of good ideas about how to meet available women.)

I do kind of wonder about the ethics of this study. The leakage of non-anonymized data about AM's clients was a criminal act; is it really considered ethical to make use of this non-anonymized data for a study? To make a rough analogy, if HIPAA-protected medical data is illegally released, other doctors would not be allowed to use the data for a study, and in fact would have an ethical obligation to destroy the data.

That is your personal belief. There is about as much evidence for it (namely zero) as for the other models. The question is completely open.

I call bullshit on this. This is a baseless claim. Where is your evidence and how do you overcome the null hypothesis on this one? To me, this is a product of the human ego no different than the Geocentric universe: "give a monkey a brain and he'll swear he's the center of the universe." The best you can say is we are a consequence of a complex series of cause and effect due to natural processes. For what existential purpose? We have no fucking clue and probably never will. The secret to life is to enjoy the ride. If you pull a Nietzche and obsessively ponder existentialism, you go insane. As Stephen Hawking said:

We have this one life to appreciate the grand design of the universe, and for that I am extremely grateful.

Just because you are paranoid, does not mean that they are not out to get you.

The GDPR is bad for us. Don't conflate the issue, the GDPR is designed for more information to be collected so the government can eventually get involved and demand it all into a central database because by design it's impossible to comply with GDPR.

There is no conceivable way for private industry to either comply or fix the issue. Non compliance is the fix. Companies can simply say: we don't collect sufficient information to be able to verify your identity so we cannot release the data - which the EU would happily punish with millions of fines (taxes) and increased government intervention.

May I add an excerpt from the GDPR relating to requests about personal data:
"(64) The controller should use all reasonable measures to verify the identity of a data subject who requests access, in particular in the context of online services and online identifiers"

So how would you, without even more government intervention and without the government collecting and databasing all the private and financial and IP address data (basically your entire life in detail) on its citizens, set up a clearinghouse that can verify someone's identity.

And every company with a website requires this per the GDPR (IP address is identifiable information)

How dare you? Did you ask the admins to do this to silence the Great One?

He worked long hours to save the masses from malware. Slashdot should be honored to ever have been graced by his touch. Now he's gone forever. Small-minded fools! And what have we left now? You? Will YOU save people from malware? Will you stop spammers and adware? Will you do it for free? No! Nobody will. Except the Great One They're so angry over his "spamming" to avoid relentless and pointless downmods that they've finally thrown up their hands and effectively banned him from the site.

Such typical balderdash is to be expected from those that see the surface but refuse to acknowledge what lies underneath. The Great One's endless posts concealed care and concern for fellow computer users. Even if you did not like his hosts engine per se, it was simple to extract useful hosts files from his work. But no, people wanted to pick nits over computer languages or harass him over his alleged employment history.

Honestly, who cares where he works/worked or what he does with his personal time? He still cared about us. His software was functional. It used less CPU time and RAM than something like Ublock Origins. He could have been a drooling homeless person begging for handouts on street corners, working tirelessly to block malware from a library terminal when permitted. The end result is all that matters. And he gave it to us for free.

Can you say the same? No. All you do is give us headaches.

And there would have to be some magic thing creating dark energy and something to create the magic thing that created the dark energy and something to create the thing that created the other magic thing that created the dark energy. It's turtles all the way down man...

Honestly he swung right with the Third Way type of campaign because American leftists had proven time and time again they were completely incompetent at winning national elections.

I'm happy for you, but I'm still struggling to see how this could benefit someone with malicious intent.

I'm saying is that a fast and large address space GUI workstation for running LISP is not "AI", but a tool for AI, allowing for example programs that needed more than the 256K of 36 bit words PDP-10s were limited to.

I can't supply examples because I'm a hard science type who, for the record, isn't jealous in that domain because I indeed got admitted to MIT and can, for example, list advances from MIT's biology department made by one of my faculty advisers. My relevant computer role during the early 1980s was helping researchers with their computer systems, I don't know the field of AI itself at all.

Since you claim to have learned the field in depth in the 1980s, you should be able to list several specific AI advancements from MIT during that period, otherwise GTFO.

Back when I was using google I noticed the same thing. Directed me to streets that didn't connect (you can't get there from here even though they say you can), or sending me in the wrong direction when I can SEE where I want to go further down the block. One time it told me that I should turn left in 5 feet , but left was an open field for hundreds of feet in both directions.

A few times I've had to rely on guesses and hope I end up recognizing something.

Where do they check in then? Is the ADA suggesting that airlines should allow people to arrive at the gate unannounced with three fucking ponies that the airline has had no chance to prepare for? That's not safe for the ponies, let alone other passengers.

I do believe that this would be taking the piss.

In the UK disability law requires 'reasonable adjustments', not 'let people claiming to be disabled be utter cunts'.

If by God of the gaps you mean Flying Spaghetti Monster, you are absolutely correct.

Having a single IP address in your server logs is enough to require GDPR compliance. And then, as I said, you are required to collect more information just to keep track of that IP address just so later some SJW or criminal can demand whether you have any information on their (perhaps illegal) actions and delete it, which you can't because of EU terrorism and copyright regulation.

And then he turned water into wine and said: LET'S PARTAYYYYY!!!!

'meter-age' seems awkward, and would confuse things since it's a meteor.

It amuses me that you think that somehow makes it better.

I could say the same thing about all the women that slept with Harvey Weinstein.

The net completely went to shit when doxing became a fucking thing. Sorry kids and dumb fucks information wants to be free plz ENJOY IT. It's been 20 years of something more pathetic than the previous year and hand in hand with the idea of doxing being the most fucked up neutering of the net we have ever seen!

You seem to have missed the part where banks make more money off people with bad credit than from those with good credit.

In Europe especially you have to hold a lot of information by law. Whether it's tax law, employment law, terrorism law, copyright law - most transactions are required to be kept track of in great detail so the government can later demand them directly or report on them.

Point in fact, if you read the GDPR you are required to keep track of any data used just to make a query whether the data exist. So even if you don't keep data if anyone, if anyone asks, you are now required to keep track of their data just so you can later report to the government that you complied with the law.

Same with websites, if you have a website and you create an access log this is now covered under GDPR because IP addresses are identifiable information. Now if someone demands whether you kept track of their IP address, how will you verify whether they really are the person they say they are? You can't, and to comply with GDPR and at the same time violate it you have to release that information.

It's a catch 22 and will ultimately be used to tax corporations with more government programs and regulations that collect your information to clear the corporate information. And that's the ultimate goal of the EU is to control all the information.