Facilitating copyfraud could invalidate their DMCA protections. Since they choose to provide monetary compensation based on accusations instead of evidence with a system they created, they would also be responsible for the system that they created facilitating said copyfraud that is knowingly taking money from legitimate copyright holders and giving it to false claimants. If any other publisher were to give money owed to a creator, say a book creator, this would be obvious fraud, as it is in this case. I think the case is stronger against YouTube than it will would initially appear.
We pay soldiers who literally go into war zones less than what we pay officers typically. I'm if the opinion that we should pay soldiers more and gurantee lifetime healthcare for soldiers, but at this time it does put the actual risk into perspective. Healthcare workers are also routinely put into danger, as are security guards, and really any position that deals with the public on a regular basis. I'm not sure police officers really have a strong argument about being more dangerous because of several occasions of violence or risk of harm, obviously it's a non-trivial risk, but they typically should have body armor and training to minimize the risk that others may not have access to.
Why does the fact that they are unionized matter? The police union is one of the strongest unions in the country and they will even protect obviously bad apples from prosecution. On the one hand, it's good to see unions protect their members, on the other police don't really need more protection from prosecution than they inherently receive just for being officers. It's pretty hard to prosecute an officer even when is obvious to most of society that they've done something wrong that any other person would get some form of punishment for simply because it's in the DA's best interest to not screw with the police, who they require assistance from regularly.
Just money? No. Money doesn't ever solve problems. The effective use of said money does. You can't find effective uses for money without trying to see what works. Most cities have homeless if some sort. My small city has a homeless population and it took my church guaranteeing to donating time just to keep people alive in the winter. The mayor here routinely destroys places where the homeless live and takes all their resources in the middle of winter. Does our effort help? It keeps a lot of them stay alive over the winter. We also have a community meal on Saturdays to give people community and companionship. No government here helping, but it does require a lot of time and money.
If the parties were working for the good of all Americans I think you'd be correct. The Republican party decided to literally impede anything, right or wrong that President Obama did. Democrats changed some rules for lower court justices because Republicans refused to even vote against judges just to claim Obama was leaving seats vacant. That's not governance, that's plain impeding government from doing it's job by people who don't believe government should exist. You cannot have a functional government when people meant to govern it don't believe it should exist.
You can disagree all you want. It doesn't make you less wrong. You literally are limited by the nature of the universe and your physical body so reality is a filter. Time limits how much you can consume should you be able to bypass the physical limitations of your body. Your belief is fundamentally incongruous with the intent of free speech.
If I am forced to host your platform/speech/lewd gestures/etc. you're taking away my rights of free speech to not host your platform. No one is taking away access. What they are doing is kicking the drunk ass jerk out of the bar for harassing other people because they were warned to stop being such a dick and they continued on anyways. They can say whatever they want from someplace them own and no one is preventing access to them. They want a bar full of jerks, they can go right ahead and have no rules of decorum.
You're confusing unlimited speech with free speech. There has never been a right to access to all speech. Private conversations happen all the time and no one has a right to listen to those. So again, just because someone owns a billboard doesn't mean they are required to post your message. The courts have been pretty solid on this and it's why the baker won his case against the couple. You cannot force me to advocate for you if I don't believe in it.
The amount of people who see even the most popular tweets is a small subsection of Twitter. If you're banned from the platform, sucks to be you. You shouldn't have violated their TOS. If you didn't understand the TOS then you shouldn't have joined. Pewdiepie is one of the biggest people on Youtube, how many people have heard of him? Outside of that slice of society not many. How many people could tell you off the top of their head who Marshall Mathers is? Noam Chomsky? Outside of tech how many people know who Linus is? The point is there are very, very few people who have their voices heard. Even famous people aren't guaranteed to have their tweets read. If you want a platform where people will listen you have to control your own platform, like Oprah or the pope. You have to have as many people following you as Oprah to have a guaranteed voice.
I would hardly classify Hacker News as a bad website. My inflammatory comments are routinely downvoted as they should be. My good posts tend to be well received. This is quite frankly one of the least terrible places on the internet for discussion with a relatively wide viewpoint for the internet. We've got libertarians, liberals, conservatives and even a few greens and generally we agree to keep it mostly civil because that's why we're all here. There's no crappy memes, no quizzes. We're explicitly here for the comments.
The spirit of free speech is this. You have a right to say whatever the hell you want in public. That doesn't mean I have to let you do it in my home, my business, my private internet website. I am not required to give a platform to speech I disagree with. It also doesn't shield you from responsibility or the inevitable reaction from choosing free speech.
Really? What competition is there in the U.S. cellular market? MVNOs are beholden to whomever they buy from. T-Mobile, Sprint, AT&T, Verizon. That's 4 carriers total.
Definition of oligopoly: Oligopoly is a market structure with a small number of firms, none of which can keep the others from having significant influence.
I can literally buy a SIM card in Europe for my phone that gives me 5 times my monthly usage for less than what I pay for a single month.The market is absolutely harmed by the lack of competition and we did it to ourselves by selling off the public spectrum and paying for the privilege to do so. The Republican party is the most anti-American party that exists in the US and they used the willingness of the religious right to follow whatever lip service they get paid to the ballot box.
Democrats are pretty terrible too, but mostly because they are naive, unwilling to get their hands dirty, and try to play by rules that are only used by them. You don't win a war with flowery words and kind gestures. You win it by eliminating your enemy and taking away any ability by them to continue the fight.
I wish they had gone into what they meant by paid by the shift. Does that mean they got to go home early if the work was done? They had to stay later if it wasn't? I'm not sure that paying for 8 hours is much incentive, and forcing people to work more for the same money seems like it would be a recipe for disaster. Giving a reward for getting through the mail faster by getting to go home early send like a pretty awesome reward though.
There's no such thing as someone you're not going to have to train. Every single company does something different. To suggest that you're not going to have months of train up isn't feasible. I wish this mindset would go away. Training is, and should be an integral part of any workplace. It's what makes your whole team better, it's what makes everyone have a similar style, and shows people the expectations. This goes for internal code process as well as external code and tools. Embedded especially is going to be hard because it's a specialized skill set that's far harder than people realize especially once you get into space constraints.
I'm not sure that the title accurately reflects the article that people don't want to devalue their home values by moving apartment blocks next to their million dollar homes. Somehow everyone in California is a liberal, and the article cites Massachusetts as a state allowing denser urban areas. Maybe the article would be better titled wealthy people in suburbs don't want apartments next to their homes. Reading other articles by the author he seems to think the only things that matter happen in San Francisco. Might want to get out of his bubble. There's a wide range of liberals and conservatives with a wide range of perspectives in a country as large as ours.
Plumbers, electricians, lots of other sole proprietor workforces in the trades have unions that institute strong training and protection for their union work. Is it perfect, nope. I can't stand police unions in my state because they prevent perfectly reasonable road crews from functioning with only flag crews instead of with flag crews and a usually sleeping officer just to pad their wages. There's some crappy things about unions but it's the only effective way to protect individuals from companies. They don't however protect companies from outsourcing, usually to lower paid non union workers of lower quality.
If you're working for an airline you're probably not rolling in dough. They don't typically all make what people in software make, so it's not a given that all those bills are paid in the first place.
Because they think people are more likely to challenge their taxes and be less complacent to tax hikes if they have to see it and deal with it yearly. In reality those who make enough to be concerned are already well aware of their tax obligation and how to minimize it. It's just hogwash to punish citizens and poor people especially.
Yup this is Republicans once again acting on behalf of a company instead of their constituents. It's not just federal either California had their Ready Return product a while back. We're the only country that does taxes this way. There's no reason to do it either. The IRS already knows how much you owe. Having the ability the revised statements is important and there should be an allocation table of where your tax money went provided with details available publicly.
Your assumption doesn't account for the fact that the most common devices are Samsung Galaxy phones which aren't the cheapest on the market. While pricing certainly has an impact on some markets, in others it's more about prestige and surpringly iPhones have lost a lot of their prestige as they aren't far and away better phones than Android phones. They're still good phones and the Apple watch is hands down the best smartwatch on the market. My evidence is based on sales figures year after year. Currently devices like the Xiaomi Redmi and Samsung Galaxy lines are tops. When Apple tried a cheaper line it didn't sell as well as their higher end line. I'd argue that Android dominance isn't currently because of control either, it's because of ecosystem. It's easier to find an Android phone that meets your needs than an iPhone. That because there's only a few iPhones and hundreds of Android devices.
No but Microsoft used to be untouchable too. They've come back a bit under Nadella who seems to understand why people use his product. I never thought I'd see the day where I trusted MS more than Google but wow has Google just become a scummy, unreliable company since Alphabet.
It's nice to see them improving Windows. It's actually making useful contributions to my workflow. If they could tie in the Windows subsystem for linux it would be very nice. This seems to be Microsft looking at the software people are using and making native clones that are better integrated into the OS. I use ConEmu for this currently and this upgrade seems very similar.
The very quick decline in quality of Amazon products has led me to start shopping elsewhere. I don't spend an insignificant amount at Amazon. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's done this. When I can buy higher quality goods from my local dollar store or cheaper Chinese stuff directly from AliExpress with better service and quality, what's Amazon's benefit? It doesn't matter how fast something arrives if it costs me my health, home, or breaks within a single use.
Unless you burn yourself out once you have a hard time recognizing in the future so as to avoid it. Not saying it's healthy or correct, but there's a reason these jobs tend to attract the best and brightest. Money is a good motivator when you don't have it. When you have it you realize there are other things that can be important to you, but you've got to get the money first.
Their code because of bad practices can indeed cause a disaster. Misplacing a decimal in finance can mean millions lost. It doesn't mean they are less capable coders, it means that like the rest of us, they're human.
You can measure outcomes without specifics of who was impacted. The doctor actually as a bulwark in this case and only provides the data specific to the devices as a report. I.e. we performed 175 hip replacement surgeries using x device. During that time there was a median issue rate of x percent. This is within x range of standard. This would have the added benefit of evaluating the medical professionals against similar circumstances especially if you factors in removing outliers that have a higher risk profile.
Define socialism and let me know how economic theory impacts civil liberties. The US has had socialist programs for a long time and hasn't devolved into madness. If I recall correctly it's been the conservative Congress that has stripped protections by establishing "free speech zones", they pushed through the Patriot Act which stripped more civil liberties, they expanded the surveillance state, they removed civil liberties from everyone within 100 miles of the border to include airports. But you're right a business being told it can't discriminate against people when baking a cake is the absolute worst possible outcome. The cake maker had their artistic rights upheld by the courts as well, so I'm not sure what you're particularly upset about. Those other things I mentioned are still ongoing. I think perhaps you would benefit from adjusting your perspective and spending your valuable time where it actually could be impactful and useful to yourself and other citizens.
At what point is it your responsibility to verify that something you're using is keeping it's end of the bargain? Ceding all responsibility doesn't seem like the answer either. While forced arbitration and other crappy things in contracts suck, a company protecting itself against explicitly stupid or bad behavior seems reasonable. While it's reasonable to expect a consumer to understand hot coffee is hot, its unreasonable to say that a customer who has purchased coffee that gives them second degree burns had reasonable understanding of the risks. I think the only real solution would be putting customers through plain English video presentations of what rights are present or excluded for every piece of software. This would be terribly inconvenient, however it would make sure people only installed software they trusted and actually needed.
Lynx, Midori, Safari, IE6. Maybe Palemoon, Samsung browser is another possibility. Maxthon was popular for a bit. Maybe you're super 1337 and run in only curl or wget.
- Private industry creates perverse incentives by allowing individuals with power and money more and better access to the law. This means that those who benefit most from a lack of proper taxation are those who already have the money.
- When a private company is behaving badly because of the power imbalance between you and a corporation that literally doesn't need to sleep your chances of getting any recourse are almost zero. You have no right to not have your water poisoned by a company and generally those companies will just declare bankruptcy if things get too expensive to avoid having to pay. No executives choosing to poison the water for profit will go to jail.
- Citation needed that somehow a single entity processing taxes versus literally hundreds of different charities is less efficient. When there's a natural disaster it's not your local charity you're calling, it's FEMA.
- We've literally had numerous tax cuts go through federal government. The idea that it doesn't happen is just plain false.
- How does a body of government made up of Representatives elected by it's constituents in any way relate to serfdom. The country literally had slaves at the founding. Your point is entirely invalidated. The idea that the government cannot compel someone to pay into a system that they use but that it was totally okay to literally own people falls flat on it's face.
If all it took was hard work to live a dignified life there would already be plenty of dignity. The fact of the matter is the world doesn't work on dreams, hopes, and hard work. Silicon Valley had plenty of failed companies to prove this. It works on the fact that bad things happen to good people, good things happen to bad people and the vast majority of your ability to deal with that comes from how much money your parents had, something over which you have no control. The fact that you have to pay dues in the form of taxes to be part of something like the United States shouldn't be a hard choice to make. We're all willing to pay for corporate welfare, military excess, public land give aways to private entities, but heaven forbid we give up a little bit of cash in the form of taxes to help our fellow citizen. If you look at the outrage on taxes it's always when it comes to helping other people. Access to healthcare shouldn't be a political issue. There is no liberty in a life where one must make the choice between certain death and loss of freedom. As a citizen you're also not compelled to stay in the United States. You can gain all the benefits of citizenship and live in another country. You can even choose to become a citizen of another country. This idea that you're forced to help your fellow citizens is plainly a falsehood. As soon as you become an adult you're free to leave the country. Compulsion is an illusion.