You can choose to use or not use Facebook.
You can choose not to use the Facebook UI or to register with them. But you have no easy way for them not to know who you are as an entity, and what you do. You know how there is a Facebook "Like" button on every page? Yeah.
That is doubly true of Google... or anyone that runs a large ad network.
How does Facebook and Google see that I binge-play Elder Scrolls Online an entire night?
Because they see your "signal" go dark for the night and you talk about it on some service later that Google can see (i.e. they know now). Or maybe the company that runs Elder Scrolls just told them since there is nothing stoping THEM from selling your info.
Meanwhile if you had played over a VPN your ISP would know nothing. They are literally the only service it's actually possible to keep in the dark, yet you want to make a fuss about what they can see.
A VPN will shut out your ISP.
The funny thing about that point is that it is even easier to block what your ISP can see (via VPN) than it is someone like Facebook or Google, which will happily discern who you are whatever IP you come through or from.
You can throw up speedbumps to what they can see, and limit the sharing quite a bit.
I know how to do that - but I do not.
Do you think even 1% of non technical people do anything like that?
For 99.9% of ISP users it doesn't matter if technically they COULD POSSIBLY limit tracking of someone like Facebook or Google to be more limited than your ISP - in practice there is no difference.
Because they tried price discrimination once, and it blew up on them badly.
Ha Ha they offer dynamic pricing all the time, even now. Some "blow up".
I see this all-or-nothing bullshit all the time.
Now THAT is some grade A dripping wet irony.
I calll bullshit. There's a HUGE difference between positions in education and in industry and commerce.
Outside of the educational community, the desire for companies to hire ANY technical women is massive. You can for sure gat an interview at any tech company if you are a woman. You will be 99% sure to be made an offer if you are at all competent (and sometimes even if not, the power of quotas).
I have a friend with a daughter who is a CS major, and she was offered extremely well paid internships with a large signing bonus at every single company she applied for (ten or so I believe). She is pretty skilled but currently only in Python.
I say that not to say it is negative but just to speak the truth about how things are, because so many seem to think it hard for women to find tech jobs once they acquire skills and they are scaring away young women from a gold mine with a very rich vein.
To be frank it's not hard for any competent male to find tech work either, but loads of large companies have diversity quotas and they are absolutely desperate to fill them which gives women a huge advantage...
Note that his ease of hiring is utterly separate from the conditions they may find once working there. Outside of Silicon Valley women are usually treated well and as equals, in most California companies they will probably face horrific abuse and discrimination (which is where the myth that tech women are mostly mistreated in companies comes from).
What's this, an actual supercilious asshole on slashdot
Wherever you go - there you are.
I'll allow you the last response because you assholes always have to have the last word, never mind the supercilious ones.
Genie's out of the bottle, and neither the FAA nor DJIs weak-sauce attempt to corner the market by suggesting the mandating of a technology they just happen to have ready in their back pocket (probably protected with some bogus patents) is going to stop it. Yeah, they can hit you with a jillion-dollar fine for operating your drone with an open-source controller, but that requires they catch you first, and the FAA lacks the manpower.
There's your problem: ever using I-35.
Except if you're going from North Austin to Downtown or vice versa there's no other route which isn't also clogged. You basically have to live near work. I approve of that, but it's not always feasible.
Who gives a shit? If every corporation in America has my data, big deal. It's the government I fear, and they can already demand a full log of all your packets from your ISP under NSL.
There is only one ISP I can realistically use where I live, so it doesn't really matter what their TOS, AUP, PP or anything else says.
Trump's not perfect, but at least he rejected both parties.
You don't actually believe that, right?
I don't think what you said and what I said are different. You can't tell people what they want to hear if you are trying to be accurate.
Some people would like to hear the truth. You can reach those people. You can also reach a percentage of people who would like to hear lies, but it's a pretty small one. It's a variation of the saying about it being difficult to teach a man something if his paycheck depends on him not learning it.
That's illegal, generally classified as "peeping Tom/voyeurism/invasion of privacy/intrusion of solitude." So let's restrict drone operation in the same manner instead of simply letting them broadcast an ID.
It's already illegal to operate the drone in a manner which violates your privacy. If they're looking in your windows, they're not supposed to be.
I'm not really against drones having transponder signals; I'm against people being able to look up my identity from the signal information. You (or the DA) should have to file a lawsuit to get that information.
1) Start hosting open source projects for free
2) Stop hosting open source projects for free
If a drone is close enough to know who I am, I should be able to know who the operator is,
Drones don't know who you are. They're just remote controlled aircraft with some level of autonomy.
Someone can already hide in a tree and view you with a long lens without your knowledge.
Time is an illusion perpetrated by the manufacturers of space.