Indeed he did.
It's just that the term is getting shorter, apparently.
18221 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Apr 2007
To further your conclusion, I learned not long ago that France is dropping the TV tax that was in effect since forever.
For the French government to actually remove a tax is almost as groundbreaking as finding life on another planet.
And I am appalled by the continued insistance to conflate this issue with privacy and personal attention.
What part of "it's the plane that's being tracked" do you not understand ?
What part of "the information is publicly available" goes above your head ?
We're not talking about some guy with a camera and an absurdly expensive telephoto lens climbing on top of a hill to snap pics of someone beside a private pool, we're talking about using official public data to record the whereabouts of a piece of equipment.
Climb down from your soapbox already, you're off-subject.
Hey Google ! Are you paying attention ?
It's slightly astonishing how, in the USA, any measure destined to legally protect children online is immediately met with ferocious resistance by corporations who, on any other subject, immediately spout things about "thinking of the children".
Limitation of Free Speech ? Violation of the First Amendment ? Really ?
What I conclude from all of this is that US corporations are perfectly willing to think of the children, as long as it doesn't hit their bottom line.
And NASA has a great history of making things reusable.
The Shuttles were a fine example, if you call a $1.6 billion cost per launch "reuseable".
If you wait for it to be over the horizon to detect it, you've already lost.
To have any chance above zero of resisting a hypersonic strike, you need eyes in the sky that can bring your reaction time into a more comfortable range of 10 seconds at least.
And most of the stuff doing the reacting needs to be completely automated to avoid meatbag reaction time.
No, the layers are not too hard to clear. That is a lame excuse. Three minutes with a sledgehammer and I guarantee those layers will be gone, along with that part of the wall.
Then you can redo the wall, the connections and the red button, and you can even put a nice clear plexiglass guard to keep said button from getting inadvertantly pressed again.
Because just painting the layers in red in one spot is not going to solve the problem.
The article is about banning Tik Tok from government platforms, a move with which I totally agree.
No because Tik Tok is Chinese, but because I don't see why a government employee should have that on his government-issued smartphone or computing device.
All governments should have a blanket ban on anything not government-related when using government-oriented platforms, period.
No, politically it isn't and never has been.
Don't you remember the famous journal article entitled "Fog on the Channel, the Continent is isolated" ?
The UK paid lip service to the EU, but never took the Euro as currency.
It's only on maps that you can confuse the UK with being part of Europe. Nobody in the UK has ever thought they were part of Europe - especially not in the political arena.
Sorry, I won't.
At the best of times, they're useless. When they get creepy, they want to sell me something I just bought.
Then there are the ads that are downright threats to my computer and/or my privacy/money/data.
NoScript and Ublock Origin, or Brave is what I use, and you can pry them out of my cold, dead hands.
So do I.
A transparent and honest explanation, not just a "promise, we didn't do nuthin' wrong" explanation.
In any case, when you are root certificate, you should be above suspicion. That does not mean you shold not be suspected, it means you should do everything, continuously, to prove that there is no need to suspect you.
TrustCore has failed on that count, so its status as root cert should be revoked.
Yeah but, it's also work, plus admission of blame.
When you have major companies paying hundreds of millions in settlement fines and going before the press proudly stating "we admit no wrongdoing", you can hardly expect a standards body to admit that it fouled up when it's the others making the cables following the standards who can be blamed.
Agreed.
When I saw the interview, the only thing I could think of is : this is a kid. He's got zero banking experience, zero CEO experience and the only reason he got the job is because venture capitalists are stupid and willing to give hundreds of millions to someone that just spouts the right bullshit.
If there is one thing that this crypto madness is demonstrating repeatedly, it's that you don't hand the responsability of money to someone who doesn't have more than a decade of experience handling money in a regulated environment.
There's a reason why the bank teller doesn't become head of branch in six months.
Depends on the bank you work with.
For my professional needs I have a bank in Luxembourg, the BCEE. The BCEE never sends me mail, I have a mail icon on my screen when I connect to my account via their secure website (secured by the traditional login name + password and a one time token) if a message is waiting for me.
To make any important change to my account, I have to physically present myself in one of the many branches, justify my identity and then ask for what I need.
I very much doubt that any criminal is going to be able to modify anything remotely.
Of course, if you live in the USA, things are very much different.
Excuse me, but a veteran is someone who is supposed to have significant experience in a particular domain or activity. Doing something once does not give you significant experience.
Fei Junlong was part of the second Chinese crewed mission, no problem there, but that does not make him a veteran.
If he is part of the next three crewed missions after this one, then he will have five missions under his belt and, like a WWII ace, will then likely deserve the term veteran.
But not before.
However, if ordering Amazon to play nice is a Good ThingTM, making that order come with a billion dollar fine would likely ensure more immediate compliance in my opinion.
Fines need to be redefined when a company makes more than a billion dollars a year. Even a $200,000 fine won't make them bat an eyelid. Fines need to be defined as X days of operational income (not benefits, sales income).
That will make these financial behemoths sit up and take notice.