Re: Technical question
It's "hostile environment" rather than "solution to some sort of problem"
877 posts • joined 12 Jun 2009
you can't legislate for novel use.... use of land/aircraft ...Phonographs/sheet music...radio/phonograph IP, internet/broadcast radio IP
There are plenty of counter examples, assault laws deal with tazers and pepper spray, harassment laws deal with online harassment, fraud laws deal with online fraud, libel with online libel, and employment laws (eventually) with uber.
"what could disinformation purposes."
Is there any reason to believe it is disinformation? It looks like the interviewee is trying to imply this without giving anything to back it up
(I'm not says the leak definitely isn't disinformation, I have no idea. Spreading information to wind people up seems very likely, but I don't see where the idea that the info is false came from)
"I wouldn't be surprised if some large companies with a poor reputation (*cough* Amazon) even have internal security departments whose purpose includes finding people posting or saying negative things about the company in the press or online."
eBay say they don't normally do this https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/28/ebay_security_prison/
"You can't keep inventory for sales "on-hand" when you can't GET the inventory to your warehouses because of problems with shipping or production."
That's...why you build up your inventory when everything is going smoothly, so you HAVE inventory in your warehouse when there are there are shipping and production problems
You are comparing the death rate when spending a huge amount to fight covid and the death rate when spending a small amount to fight influenza, which isn't a fair comparison.
I'd be very surprised if the government has a plan for when to cut covid spending, but if there were a plan a reasonable starting point would be something like 'funding will be reduced to around the amount we spend fighting flu at the point when doing so would mean the death rates are similar to those for flu'
net income figures shows that they have reduced their losses throughout the pandemic. Which implies they are doing something right. With their cash reserves of 1.75B it may be enough.
GameStop annual net income for 2021 was $-0.215B, a 54.28% decline from 2020.
GameStop annual net income for 2020 was $-0.471B, a 30.03% decline from 2019.
GameStop annual net income for 2019 was $-0.673B, a 2039.48% decline from 2018.
"GameStop annual gross profit for 2021 was $1.26B, a 34.01% decline from 2020.
GameStop annual gross profit for 2020 was $1.909B, a 17.3% decline from 2019.
GameStop annual gross profit for 2019 was $2.308B, a 7.11% decline from 2018."
A bricks-and-mortar company making a billion a year in a pandemic doesn't need a new business plan.
Corbyn's has a tendency to prevaricate, and to listen to everyone - including experts. He'd be more inclined to trust the response to the NHS (the body behind the vaccination program, which worked) than outsourcing companies (track and trace, or accepting millions in exchange for no PPE, which didn't)
So I would imagine there would have been thousands of people around the country spending their time complaining about his dithering, whereas under Boris Johnson's leadership they are, instead, mourning their grandparents.
"Our data is already bought and sold for profit. And we love it."
It's a bold move to start an article with such an obvious untruth.
At most the article argues for people with rare conditions to be allowed to share their data - which nobody is arguing against - so that there will be research into these conditions - but the article doesn't say how the first would lead to the second. Pharmacy companies aren't interested because there is no profit. University research is poorly funded. If there is a drug for common condition A that treats rare condition B then you still need a company to manufacture it.
"societies whose people are willing to widely participate in public health measures like social distancing and wearing masks for the collective good have better outcomes. This is a lesson that translates to health data sharing."
In what way?
In an opt-out system there is an incentive to design the system well, in an opt-out system you have a huge captive audience, so don't have to care.
And anonymisation isn't always possible. 50 is fairly young for prostate cancer. If he's a new case then, combine that with Brian living in London and we've narrowed him down to around 3000 people (1700 new cases per 100k in people aged 50-54. 9 million people in London). Currently there are around 100 Brians born a year in the uk - it was probably higher in 1961, but I still think we have enough data to uniquely identify him.
The last time the lib dems had any power was when they were writing the agreement with the tories for the coalition. Then the coalition started, and they were scapegoats.
The tories would probably have agreed to a clause that said "we won't vote for anything that breaks one of our pledges". "The AV referendum will have to follow election commission rules" would probably have been harder to get through.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022