No they didn't. They gave it to them. They're getting their money charging by the face.
I think your statement assumes facts not in evidence.
The evidence that we have seen doesn't really show that facial recognition will make people safer; in fact, there is a fair indication that the contrary would be true.
I think all your pronouncements of case weakness are wishful thinking. I'd take odds that he'll get convicted (includes taking a plea) and sentenced to 5 or more years.
Remember, modern prosecution operates on what they can sell a judge and jury, and has little or nothing to do with justice...or guilt.
I wonder how long it would have taken Facebook to wind down the Huawei deal if it hadn't been for the sudden media attention. Probably only a few more decades...
Some of these companies are like roaches: "They consume, infest, destroy, live off the death and destruction of" their customers, but shine a little light and they run for cover.
...companies not only mindlessly raise rates like it's going out of style...
Wait...cable is going out of style, isn't it?
You misspelled "privacy" in the first sentence. But upon reflection, and given the perverted nature of these laws, maybe it would be more appropriate if you'd spelled it this way: "Illinois' Biometric Information Pervacy Act".
This case perfectly exemplifies the problems with mandated moderation.
Companies rarely get into moderation on their own, because moderation is expensive. Instead we have our governments insisting that companies must moderate content, creating laws with a furrowed brow concern that we were warned would be the father of so many bad measures.
First comes moderation, then comes censorship, then comes the use of the censorship as justification for stronger penalties.
Censorship is always a weapon of those who are in power, and it is always used as a weapon against the downtrodden. It does not matter whether the censorship is overt or comes through the back door in the form of mandated moderation.
Enthusiasts of FOSTA/SESTA, and enemies of CDA 230, could learn a thing or two from this case if they were paying attention.
It's all in the name. If PP wanted a seat, they should have rebranded. No one investigates past the name.
Maybe "IP Advancement League" would have done it? (Doesn't say how they're advancing it. But they can explain that on their website, no one will read it.)
No, it is not short. It is just elegant.
You're only paranoid if the government doesn't actually want to listen in on everything you say.
It's almost as if most of the people on either side of this political horse race are determining which news orgs to support based on whose side the revelations help.
Yeah, it does almost seem like that, doesn't it?
That's... bad.
No, it depends. Is this leak embarrassing the Republicans or the Democrats? It's bad if it's one of them all right, but if it's the other one, it's nothing more than the bastards deserve!
The FTC was created in 1914. Under your reasoning, that makes it even less qualified than the FCC.
I suppose that is true enough, but I would like to point out that they also learn even more and get unbrainwashed very quickly.
They would only count as a Faraday cage if the aluminum foil extends from the top of the head to the neck, the neck is then cut through, and the foil closed completely around the entire head and inflated into a spherical shape.
...making him a dubious selection for the job. [...] ...he's going to have to recuse himself from a long list of decisions at the FTC, which also doesn't make him a particularly compelling hire.
What rock did you say you spend your time under? The way Washington works these days, zero experience in representing the citizenry is the only qualification for the job, and conflict of interest (or outright bribe-taking) is just (non-)regulation as usual.
Don't worry. The service won't be cheap for long...
My cynical interpretation of this solicitation is that ICE is looking for software that will dig and dig and dig until it finds something that can be used to exclude any particular visitor. Excuse me, every particular visitor.
You are so wrong. 5G is better in every way, because it has 5 G's instead of 4 G's. That's like a 500% improvement right there. Of course it takes 5G to support all those new fangled IOT apps, because we won't let them be built on 4G, because 4G won't support them and 5G will! 5G is like magic, it solves every problem you have, and some you don't. Support 5G now, my bonus depends on it.
Re: Re: Re: Tragic
Good point about your comment not being specific to facial recognition, I overlooked that.
But, for the rest, I would counter that some tools cannot be used safely by anyone, even with best intentions.