Lenovo did not steal people's bank information. Not even close. What they did do was make online banking less secure but Lenovo itself never copied/viewed anything that anyone did on their computers.
This. Lenovo's crime here is getting greedy (in that they were paid by Superfish to install software that did bad stuff they weren't aware of.) And unlike Superfish/Komodia, they eventually decided to change their business model.
Microsoft also has made online backing less secure over the years, think of all the security patches you see from them each month.
The intelligence agencies have, allegedly, actively done far more to make banking less secure, as well as computing less secure, in the last couple decades. Microsoft just sucks at programming, and is extremely slow at fixing stuff reported to them. Not defending Microsoft for their stupidity, but so long as computers are programmed by humans, we will continue to have these problems.
If we stop shipping items based on bad PR caused purely by marketing of the product, even if the product itself doesn't violate the law, what the hell are we doing?
Creating an opportunity for competition from companies who don't have an issue with transporting legal merchandise from one place to another. So long as it is legal to transport legal merchandise, and there are no artificial barriers to the business (which sadly, may be the case.) If it becomes illegal to transport legal merchandise, than we have much bigger problems. If CNC machines become illegal merchandise, then we have much bigger problems as well.
If UPS (who, in the Ars Technica article say they won't transport these CNC machines as well,) and FedEx wish to leave money on the table, let them, so long as they don't then run to their buddies and complain and quash someone else who is willing to pick up the money and transport legal merchandise in their place.
It sucks, and will likely make this endeavor cost more in the short run as they search for another company, but in the long run it just means more competition that is sorely needed. Isn't this exactly how capitalism works?
Betamax was a superior product design to VHS, but Sony wouldn't allow porn on it.
Sony wouldn't allow a lot of things, like other manufacturers to manufacture the BetaMax tapes, while JVC allowed just about anyone who would pay the low licensing costs to manufacture their own VHS tapes. The result was that VHS tapes and players/recorders were far less expensive than BetaMax. Nobody is going to spend $999 on a Sony BetaMax VCR, especially when they can buy a Sharp VHS VCR for $60.
JVC won the battle by being cheaper and far more open and non-controlling, and Sony learned to be less of a dick when the Blu-Ray/HD-DVD battle appeared on the horizon years later (though, they are Sony, they will always be dicks...they learned their lesson and saturated the market with Blu-Ray players which helped them win that battle.)
Also why I can get laughs from certain crowds by commenting that I engage in intercourse hundreds of times every day.
Probably the same group of people who blush when you tell them you masticate a bunch several times a day. I masticated this morning during breakfast, then again around lunch time, and will probably do it again around dinner time. Sometimes I even masticate in my sleep, though my dentist gave me something to prevent that.
With my employees, the only thing that I cared about was that they didn't break the law at work and that they did excellent work on time. As long as they were doing that, I couldn't care less about anything else they did.
That is not the normal way government works. Sadly, in my experience, it isn't whether you're excellent work is on time, but whether you sit in your desk during your scheduled "duty" day and look busy. I've seen people read the newspaper all day, but so long as they looked like they were doing work, they were good.
Government tends to wear down "hackers" (the smart people that keep things working,) because they tend to do as much as they possibly can as quickly as they can, and then goof-off for a while until they need to get busy again. Its why government tends to shun things like telecommuting, because they can't be sure that folks look like their working instead of giving employees their tasks, priorities, and due-dates and let them get busy in their own way.
No, that's correct. From ancient days, the flag has been a visible rallying point and a symbol of the strength of one's army, and capturing an enemy flag was considered a great feat of valor.
Even further, during the American Civil War, a flag barer or also known as color barer and color guard (who were responsible for keeping the color barer safe, but often failed, and if the color barer was lost, they stepped in to take the position,) was a very esteemed and privileged and also very deadly position. Your job was to keep the flag flying at all costs, and when you lost yours, another flag barer would step forward to take the position. Flag barers couldn't fight back, as their hands kept the flag flying and thus couldn't manipulate their weapons.
It is the main reason why military and civilian barers are flanked by color guard with ceremonial weapons today...
However, the best way to fix this disrespect for the flag is through talk, not through locking the person up and preventing them from getting an education. Teach them why the flag is so important, and why so many people died *under*, not over, the flag. They didn't die for the flag, they died for their brother or sister, or the ideal of America. The kid probably hasn't had a good influence in their life to sit them down and show them what it really means.
I guess you could say the loss of Mr Tran's once valuable trademark to descriptiveness?
Maybe, but like John, I see Sriracha and I immediately think of "Cock Sauce" (because of the giant rooster on the packaging.) I tend to use a lot of it, and like Mr. Geigner, it holds a special place in my refrigerator.
French's produces a Worcestershire sauce (which actually sucks, if you buy it thinking it is Lea & Perrins, a Heinz company, Worcestershire sauce.) When someone talks about Worcestershire sauce (or embalming fluid, thanks South Park,) I immediately think of Lea & Perrins, not French's brand Worcestershire.
It may be that it is what most of us grew up with, and that in the future, French's Worcestershire might replace Lea & Perrins as the version everyone thinks of, but I think it is still a description of specific brand and not a general sauce.
I'm not sure it is Apple so much as Apple users who are petty. Most of my friends have iPhones, and I prefer an Android, partly because I own the phone and the OS, and everything running on it, and don't have to kiss someone's ring if I want to install something that isn't sanctioned. Yet I've never heard anyone say that my SMS messages piss them off.
I think what we have here is a small but vocal pretentious crowd of iPhone cultists. The same type of cultists you have surrounding horribly inefficient and more destructive to the environment Prius drivers who won't talk to you because you drive a gasoline-powered or battery-powered vehicle and not a hybrid.
I've got two of them, both bricks after an automatic update after the vendor decided to stop supporting them, at some point when I get some time, I'm going to crack open one of them and start playing. Luckily, I didn't pay $449 (list) for either of them, but I wasted way too much money on what I did pay for them.
YouTube directly monetizes plays of songs for the artist/label. Spotify gives it's payments to the record labels who pretend to distribute it to the artists.
Fine. But that is not what her stated grievance was. She stated that the reason she didn't want her music on Spotify was because it would be made available to both subscribers and "free-loaders", and that there was no way to make the music only available to paid subscribers.
I always found her reasoning to be disingenuous, especially since YouTube doesn't offer the same thing that she is slamming Spotify for. If her reason for hating Spotify and loving YouTube is about the amount of money each gives her, then she should say that. The problem with her saying that is that she was the one who signed the contract, not her fans, that allowed her label to steal so much money from her via Spotify vs. YouTube, and blaming Spotify because she or her representation is bad at handling her affairs seems equally disingenuous.
Is it Taylor swift acting, or the corporate people behind her?
This is the same Taylor Swift that badmouth'd Spotify and forced them to take down all her music for daring to do the same thing that she praised YouTube for doing...making her music available to fans in a walled garden without making them available to everyone (which I am pretty sure I can get to Taylor Swift's music (if I wanted to) on YouTube without paying or subscribing, thereby defeating her very complaints about Spotify.)
"No "probably" about it. Hookers are much better at that than corporations are."
Until you get your blood test results...
Uhm...doesn't that kinda prove the point?
Independent discovery doesn't change their secrecy handling skills. It's kinda like getting upset with, and suing someone for disclosing one of your Trade Secrets when you didn't tell anyone about your Trade Secret to begin with.
I'd agree, up until you talk about Plex. The Plex app that runs on smart TVs seems to be built right, in that it is as easy to navigate as NetFlix and is pretty fast too. About the only issue I have with it is that it still relies on DLNA updates, which result in File Not Found messages when new stuff is added to the library and you have to exit and restart the Plex App to avoid these errors.
It's far easier to just plug my laptop in and hit play.
Maybe, though the problem there is that you have to have your laptop running and set up to output to HDMI, and a cable long enough to plug in while you are sitting some distance from the TV. I use the Plex app mainly because I don't have to turn on another device. Luckily I am not using a Samsung TV, and I've been monitoring my Smart TV for the same stupidity and have not seen it (no callback to home, no injecting ads, and no listening devices or monitoring devices.) It does have a stupid non-disableable and non-configurable WiFi Access Point, but that seems to be its only stupidity in this current iteration of the firmware.
Ordering the death penalty for anyone found guilty of a crime would drastically decrease crime rates.
Maybe, but it would also likely increase the severity of crime. While not everyone would resort to violence to escape being caught, I suspect that many, when faced with execution for being caught versus a chance to get away and live to fight another day, would do whatever they could to avoid being caught, including offing witnesses during the act. I certainly wouldn't want to live in that society.
Unless your bag was manufactured in a clean room and never removed from it, it contains organic matter.
Unless your bag is made solely of metal, not likely, it contains organic matter. Plastics, cotton fiber, canvas, etc., all contain carbon, and thus are organic no matter how they are made. The statement, made by the TSA, is not only not scientific based, but it isn't really based in any known use of the word organic either.
I've been asked at the airport if my bag contained any organic material, and I've always said yes. When they checked and didn't find anything, I said my bag was made of plastic fibers and contained clothes, all which had carbon in them. Luckily, I've never flown through Philadelphia and every time the TSA agent has returned my luggage to me after swabbing it and allowed me to move on.
US movie theaters sound horrible. I've never once seen someone using their phone during a movie. I don't think it would be tolerated by everyone else in the theater.
It shouldn't be tolerated. From my observations, it is usually it is a pre-teen or teenage girl on the phone, and I have yet to go to a theater (in the last ten years) where it hasn't happened at least once during the movie (it is almost always the following, almost scripted, "ring ring, hello, I am watching [movie] so I can't talk right now...yeah, its great, you should see it, should have come with us, oh yeah, ... [talk talk talk] ".) And like Art Guerrilla, I've seen quite a few laptops, including a person who sat in the front of the theater and blinded everyone with their laptop screen while typing away on whatever they were doing. With all the distractions, I'd end up leaving half way through the movie after reporting it to the manager. They'd always refund my money, but never even sent an usher into the theater to remove the individual. The only time I've seen a revolt by movie goers was when a drunk guy started being really obnoxious during a movie, and he was removed by other patrons, and the manager refunded *his* money (but didn't stop the movie or offer refunds to the folks that removed him from the theater.)
But I wholeheartedly agree: it's the experience that brings me there. (It sure isn't the overpriced popcorn...) Some movies are worth the theater experience and others aren't, but if they would just put a little extra effort into that experience I think it would pay off a whole lot more than anything else they're trying to do.
As do I. It is the experience that has kept me away. I cannot see paying $15+ for tickets alone to see a movie in a crowded movie theater where more than half of the attendees are inconsiderate and rude, talking or playing on their cell phones, talking to other movie goers, kicking the seat, etc. I have a decent sized video projection device at home, with decent speakers, and if I really want the "movie going experience," I can invite friends and family to watch with me. The theater going experience is what has kept me from going to the theaters for over a year, and has resulted in me seeing three movies in the movie theater in the last five years. And I tend to buy and rent more than my share. Will I watch Intersteller at the movie theater? No. Will I miss the experience while watching it at home. Hell no.
I only wish I could have your experience in the movie theaters, but sadly, I apparently live in a city/country that doesn't have much respect for others when it comes to movie going experience.
either they are lying that customers complained, or they have the stupidest customers who somehow can't distinguish that IPA is a style of beer and not a brand.
The customers who seek out to drink their beer most definitely know that IPA is a style, not a brand. I'd see this as being a problem with the majors, where the drinker most likely thinks the piss they are drinking tastes better than the piss that one of the others makes, but those who seek out IPAs know what it is they are drinking (most Buttwiper fans would take a swig of an IPA and immediately spit it out and complain that it has way too much flavor for their tastes, since they prefer drinking sandpaper flavored water.)