Now ISPs can be regulated just like cable or phone companies because they are no longer pass-through entities. Remember, ISPs keep saying they shouldn't be regulated like those others, but now, since they are controlling what you can and can't access (through deals they cut with Netflix and such), they are no different than cable companies.
Now that they're collecting data, similar to what cable companies do when they know what you watch, ISPs can now be classified as common carriers.
Even better, since these folks will now know where you go, they can be held responsible for not reporting child pornography and other criminal acts. Nor can they claim ignorance. After all, they're no longer a pass-through entity. They're watching you.
Ignoring the stench of racism in your comments:
*Then why did the US and UK pick different countries?
*Why is this only for certain airlines, and not for all airlines in that airport?
*Why is it only for certain airports, and not all airports in a given country (only one of two international airports in Morocco were mentioned. Its not that hard to get from Casablanca to Rabat).
Or we can take the obvious answer- its all bullshit, and you're a racist prick.
What the hell are people doing?
Those people are turing their cameras on, more often than you do.
Let's assume this is a real threat And obviously it is doable, you could open up an ipod, rip out the guts, and put other stuff in its place. Why just 8 countries then? If its a real threat, its a global threat. Its not all that hard for someone to fly to another country first and then travel from an allowed airport. If this is a real threat, it should be from all airports. Otherwise its just games.
she had to buy a new computer.
Yes, in the same way that I would have to buy a new car if my starter gave out.
If the repair of the starter represented 50-200% of the value of the car then, yes, you would probably feel like you needed to get a new car.
I like the idea of moving as much decision making as possible to the phone, but I don't want a whitelist. That would require me to make the effort to whitelist people, plus having the prescient power of anticipating which strangers I want to hear from (e.g. whoever found my dog and called the number on her collar). I'm ok with getting a call from a stranger, as long as their "return address" isn't forged. If the return address is correct, and they are annoying, I can blacklist 'em. Allowing strangers to call me is the best default. Not perfect (it's easy to imagine some failure scenarios), but best.
My app, FuckSlahdotAds is the fastest growing app. It has grown from 0 users to 1 in the last 3 seconds, an infinite% increase.
This is by far the lowest value, least use slashvertisement I've ever seen.
This just removes the fig leaf.
.. Anyone who's serious about security wouldn't rely on the ISP being on their side-- one would already be using strong encryption etc. for all communication if one were actually concerned about security.
This really is the best way to look at things.
If people want "privacy laws" then those laws shouldn't be about what's not allowed to happen; the laws need to be about what is required to happen (the goal being to encourage common sense practices, because nobody can protect your privacy for you.). Make it so that businesses and people can't access government's network services without going through a darknet, for example. Do not allow any plaintext email communication with the government. Put into "REAL ID" that the issuing authority also has to sign the identified person's key and include the fingerprint on the ID card. Don't allow government money to be spent on computers containing any software which can't be audited and maintained. And so on.
Don't make anyone protect their privacy overall, but do make it so that they have to pay lip service to common sense in any interaction with government (and then let convenience and economy of scale take it from there; lazy people will then do the right thing). Or, just don't have privacy laws since, obviously, we don't really care. Pick one or the other.
I don't think you're scaring anyone. People could do it, and fear wouldn't stop them.
Laziness and apathy, on the other hand...
Is that a problem?
Anyone without a red flag is pretty damn suspicious. Step one in being discreet is to get your red flag immedi-- wait.. in the average amount of time. (But not too average!)
That is the GUI. A launcher completely replaces your homescreen and apps drawer, which is just an app. The default launcher has no special privlidges or permissions over a third party, so implementing it there is no more technically valuable than doing so in a 3rd party. So find a 3rd party you like and use it instead. That's one of the benefits of Android- swap out the parts you don't like.
If MS is creating a competitive product and expanding market share, good for them! That is big news for them. As you so correctly noted, this is just what is expected from every other company on Earth, but so novel and exciting to see Microsoft trying to do it.
This really could be a stroke of genius on the part of MS. A CRM tool is only as good as the information that goes into it. If everybody on the team is not disciplined in putting good information into the tool, then garbage-in-garbage-out. The genius that I see here is this is a CRM that leverages a platform where the customer wants to put into it as much work-related information about themselves as they can. My LinkedIn network isn't that big and I see a constant stream of things where people are patting themselves on the back for some new job, certification, or other such thing. From a sales perspective, each of those events represents a potential opportunity to engage, or a lead. It would be the equivalent of each time a mention something cool I did at work it was via an email to every salesperson with whom I had come into contact.
If executed properly, this could be a rather significant development in the CRM space. This is especially valuable because as a salesperson, everything depends on timing and the LinkedIn activity feed is nothing but a stream of potential cues: "I see that John just took a new position at his company. Now is a good time to connect back up with him and see if there is anything I can offer to help him in his new role." That is not the sort of insight you typically get form a CRM system.
I'm not arguing VM vs IM. IM is better for almost everything. But IM doesn't solve the problem of not being able to connect and have an ongoing conversation- the phone tag problem.
Computers don't actually think. You just think they think. (We think.)