2,099 karma · joined February 15, 2012
The other side of the coin is that if you're a news organisation, "the economics just don't work" with micro payments. You can't fund a month long investigative report based on micropayments, even if it produces a prize-winning piece, if you don't have guaranteed income to support it. What happens if you spend the month investigating and don't find anything?
Micro-payment per-article will only encourage "safe" journalism - articles that you know will resonate with your readers, rather than controversial pieces or in-depth, resource intensive research.
They were literally doing this! Then they got slammed for 'censorship', so they got rid of the moderators. Now they're in the position they are now.
Our compulsory voting is really "compulsory voting". It's "compulsory turn up to a polling station and get your name marked off". You can drop an empty ballot in the box, draw penises on it, or even just turn and walk out of the polling place.
Also, the OP underestimates the impact of the minor parties. While there are two major parties, one of them is a coalition between two parties (Liberals and the Nationals), and there's a significant block of smaller parties and independents that are big enough that when they vote together they can have a deciding vote on legislation.
Security is about layers. Nothing is foolproof. It's about implementing layers of controls to reduce your attack surface to an acceptable level, with the trade-off that many controls increase the complexity of your setup or compromises the convenience for your users.
For example, for SSH, this probably includes
* changing the default port
* enforcing SSH key authentication
* enforcing passwords on SSH keys
* implementing fail2ban
* installing jump hosts for internal machines
* implementing a VPN rather than external facing hosts (and with that comes all the additional layers for the VPN)
* etc...
There are normally multiple observers from all parties, plus election officials, that scrutinize the counting process in real-time. Disputes are raised and resolved on the spot where possible, and it not are normally escalated. This is why elections can have provisional results on the same day/night, and the official results are a few days later.
The people who run a business, or are building something or are otherwise working, will say that. People who say they're in 'business' or are an 'entrepreneur' are the ones who haven't figured out exactly what they're up to.
- running government more like a business isn't necessarily a bad thing, and
- a ruthless business-man isn't necessarily the best suited person to do it
It's a slight difference, where the end result is a difference of 2 paychecks per year (24 for semi-monthly vs 26 for bi-weekly)
Not sure if this is what you were referring to, but the article notes
"With Fuchsia, Google would not only be dumping the Linux kernel, but also the GPL: the OS is licensed under a mix of BSD 3 clause, MIT, and Apache 2.0. "
Once Uber goes self driving, they take on responsibility for all of these logistical activities, and they currently have no capability and capacity to do that. These activities only scale so far.
You bought a Google phone and don't want to use Google services, but complain that the dialler can be provided by a third party? Isn't that a good thing?
Unless you want to switch your HDD to another computer and have it boot properly?
No, but civil engineers say stuff like "What's the likelihood that a 9.5 earthquake will his this area? What about a 5?" and model their designs on that. That's the point behind threat modelling - if a nation state actor decides they want to 'hack your Gibson' that's one thing, but if you're a bank than it may be that your most likely threat is employees or contractors stealing customer data. So you put your effort into protecting against those threats as well.