bkor

43 ms·

391.
by bkor 8y ago
> Wasn't the victim the real offender, crossing a road on unmarked spot without paying attention to oncoming traffic? If someone makes a mistake while in traffic I'm much more happy do not immediately die as a result. There&#x2
392.
by bkor 8y ago
> Yes I don't understand why so much focus has been put on the failure of the technology rather than the failure of the back up driver. Waymo specifically monitors the driver plus checks their attention span before hiring them. Ther
393.
by bkor 8y ago
> I think it’d be a lot of (evil) fun to form a crowdfunded entity with the sole purpose of suing companies that egregiously violate privacy norms. Enforcement is one dedicated organization per country. See https://en.wikipedi
394.
by bkor 8y ago
> Are they that cash strapped? It's more the opposite. They get a huge amount of money from Google. It's pretty hard to replace. E.g. see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation#Financing for a me
395.
by bkor 8y ago
> I'd also like to point out that NN has only been a thing for <2 years. This is not true. The most recent law was in place for 2 years. It existed in other forms for a long time before that.
396.
by bkor 8y ago
> No, we do not NEED Net Neutrality. The internet can/has/will survived for the short ~2ish years of really weak NN Net neutrality was in place much longer than this. Furthermore, there were put in place because companies conti
397.
by bkor 8y ago
> Net neutrality regulations were not created in the US until 2014. It is ignorant to think these stopped companies before 2014. Such regulations were in place before that. Companies started questioning the authority which resulted in ne
398.
by bkor 8y ago
> And Netflix opted to pay instead of battling it at the time. Netflix didn't just pay. They battled it for a huge amount of time.
399.
by bkor 8y ago
The fallacy is about doing nothing because one action might eventually lead to a bad action being taken. The solution is to still take the action (e.g. not working together), while being careful not to immediately go on a witch hunt for any
400.
by bkor 8y ago
> Governments will always do evil. Not to everyone, all of the time - but they are by nature evil. If a lot of people assume this, then eventually behaviour happens according to the expectation. Within Netherlands I assume the government
401.
by bkor 8y ago
2.0 came out around Sep 2002 (a bit less than 16 years ago). 3.0 came out in Apr 2011 (7 years ago). Most of the components were the same between the last 2.32 release and 3.0, except for the very visible gnome-panel to gnome-shell switch.
402.
by bkor 8y ago
> Maybe get back to the original question and the reason Trump is interested in starting a trade war? The reason for starting it was explained in completely different ways. Therefore it's not clear. It's both for security reaso
403.
The $1.4 Trillion U.S. ‘Surplus’ That Trump’s Not Talking About(bloomberg.com)
3 points by bkor 8y ago|0 comments
404.
by bkor 8y ago
As a European: T-Mobile is charging companies for their music zero rating. If you love paying twice for things it might be a good thing. Zero rating is crap.
405.
by bkor 8y ago
> FCC liked what T-Mobile was doing with Binge on because it didn't favour particular services or alter consumer choice significantly. It was fair and open or any website to participate in In Netherlands T-Mobile has a unlimited mus
406.
by bkor 8y ago
> It's also in response to an equally-hypothetical situation, IMO Repeal of Net Neutrality makes his a possibility. Yours not so much.
407.
by bkor 8y ago
> In fact NetNeutrality put in place an expensive regulatory process that often priced out small competitor Could you please show how Net Neutrality was an expensive regulatory process. And then also show how it priced out small ISPs? La
408.
by bkor 8y ago
> The EU is under constant attack at the moment from many sides, and people feel they need to defend it at all costs, even it they are wrong. As you mention that "they are wrong" in reference to saying that the regulators aren&
409.
by bkor 8y ago
> "I read on a blog that they'd be nice and send me a warning first" That's not what happened. Various people pointed out various cases where it's shown over the course of 20 years what happened. Ample history. &
410.
by bkor 8y ago
Enabling people to force a company into bankruptcy using the GDPR is not the intention. From https://gdpr-info.eu/art-12-gdpr/ : "Where requests from a data subject are manifestly unfounded or excessive, in particu
411.
by bkor 8y ago
> But GDPR enforcement is incentivised by large sums of money, for an organisation that is technically bankrupt. What do you mean here? It seems to be about suggesting that GDPR is about getting the fine money? Elsewhere the law is quote
412.
by bkor 8y ago
As mentioned elsewhere, these regulators have been operating for a very long time. Even when dealing with the whole Facebook / Cambridge Analytica they're moving quite slowly. There have been various legal changes regarding privac
413.
by bkor 8y ago
> I think everyone already knows that more regulations hurt businesses. That's not a given. Further, it's more important to look at what's better for society as a whole. Further, less regulation within banking caused some
414.
by bkor 8y ago
> GDPR is enforced retroactively on everything since the beginning of the internet. That is not allowed. GDPR is only enforced for things which do not comply after in goes into effect. Further, it's not specific to the internet.
415.
by bkor 8y ago
Obviously it might cost money (or time, which might mean money). Argument is still the same, it's not out of the ordinary to comply with regulations and laws. It seems more like a cultural difference, whereby some one-man shops from US
416.
by bkor 8y ago
> A car you built yourself (or more often a motorcycle) actually _can_ be driven on roads in the US Such a car cannot be driven on the road within The Netherlands without it being validated as safe (plus some other inspections). For US,
417.
by bkor 8y ago
> Well, if the intent behind the legislation was to protect personal data Either prove that it isn't or please stop this rhetoric. Thanks
418.
by bkor 8y ago
> Uber's ultimately at fault because it was their car. Uber while hiring should've specifically looked for people who can pay attention for hours on end. Basically like a train driver. Further, they should review if people pay
419.
by bkor 8y ago
> However (if this makes sense): the video released was an accurate representation of what you see driving on that road. There have been many videos on that same road which were super clear. Only the Uber video was really dark. The other
420.
by bkor 8y ago
The format used by Microsoft Office differs from the ECMA spec (how much I'm not sure). By default it saves it in a different format. You have to choose a Strict filetype for that format to be used. Meaning, most files out there don&#x

More ›