It's not binary: bosses and investors want to know who will obey the rules as you see them for a variety of reasons. They'll fund / promote based on the needs of the projects you will likely face.

With tillerhq.com, you can set up a pretty nice workflow to review your spending daily, weekly, or whatever cadence makes sense to you across all of your accounts, and it's only $79/year! :)

I like Elon, too, but "no qualifications to run a rocket company" is simply delusional. He majored in physics at Penn and econ at Wharton and went to grad school at Stanford studying material science (for two days, just enough to get to signal being smart). I have a harder time imagining what kind of background would be better being CEO of a rocket company.

If he runs Twitter like 4chan, it will surely fail, but I think he has more to his plan than he is willing to share publicly at this time.

As someone who left Facebook awhile ago mostly because life got busy, those ads seem to solidify an (alternative?) narrative of why I left rather than urge me to come back.

Fake News / Facebook's impact on the 2016 election is only part of why I avoid it now. I also believe the site caused / causes instagrammification of people's lives. Which is sort of like Fake News of personality or false lifestyle chasing meaningless likes.

I believe other institutions have caused people to live out false lives prior to Facebook as well. But I can actually damage facebook by _not_ posting content and not sharing my life there. I don't even have to encourage others not to. I just have to avoid resolving the domain.

I don't think likes are meaningless — they tap into a very primal need for social status and peer approval. It's a stupid game, but like many other stupid games, it's effective!

They miss out on the social status a dislike can give. To be against something is easier for many then to be for something.

I grant you that, it is effective at getting page views and ad revenue.

That too. I saw the ad for the first time yesterday during the Warriors game, as we don’t watch live TV, only stream. Two observations:

1) as you said there was nothing in that ad that would make me come back, rather if I had not already been aware of it I would have searched about it to learn - the Streisand effect.

2) there was another similar ad, from another company, about breaking trust, Wells Fargo bank -> nuff said.

Uber is running the same sort of ads, featuring the new CEO talking about doing right by customers

Is there no laws w.r.t. negligence that can be used to punish negligent actors? If a door manufacturer is negligent in their construction of the door and someone gets robbed as a result, in violation of how they expected their door to work, is there nothing currently in the law that could help them?

Just as a door being breakable by sufficient force doesn't necessarily mean that the manufacturer is negligent, the fact that some software isn't perfect (i.e. contains bugs) doesn't necessarily mean that the developers are negligent.

> Just as a door being breakable by sufficient force doesn't necessarily mean that the manufacturer is negligent, the fact that some software isn't perfect (i.e. contains bugs) doesn't necessarily mean that the developers are negligent.

So you consider well-known and well-understood design limitations to be comparable to unknown defects?

Should the manufacturers of locks exhibited in DEFCON's lockpick village be sued for negligence? Are they getting sued for it?

I propose that hardware manufacturers be forced to divulge admin methods and encryption keys to their products 6 months after their software updates end.

At least users can apply workarounds in that condition. As it stands, there are no options for the owner of the device.

This just shifts the burden to the users, I don't see this as a meaningful solution.

I think that there would probably need to be classifications of software.

Things like:

1) Is this infrastructure (routers, scada)

2) What level of user data is exposed to this software ? (unencrypted user data, credit card info, etc - we already do this to some extent)

3) What level of exposure exists? (NAT'd, routable, etc)

And then start imposing restrictions on software in those cases.

But this is very off-the-cuff, obviously it's far more complex than this. But someone needs to be responsible.

Is this sarcastic? Locks get picked and doors smashed by burglars multiple times a day.

Architects and civil engineers are held liable. I would imagine we would use a similar system, as someone with no idea how that system works.

The homeowner's insurance regulates the locks and doorframes to be used for external doors, maybe differentiation more or less.

Do you send user data anywhere in a way users may not expect? If not there's probably nothing to comply with. It's really the opposite of bureaucratic law — the entire thing is quite readable and reasonable.

Its going to become cookie law v2 with more annoying opt-ins

Because he's lazy and thinks he'll get away with it. He'll come into compliance after penalties outweigh the costs of changing the way he does business. This is probably the reaction of the vast majority of folks dealing with customer data, and not at all unexpected — they have a business to run, and costs to customer privacy are an externality being rolled into their costs via regulation.

Also, this is one of the sane solution if he know he has not that much user data. First fines will not be high or won't happen at all, and he will receive advice and even help from regulatory instances if he is ever reported.

If every business owner commenting those GDPR post on HN could act the same and not like headless chicken, discussions would be more healthy.

Seems like you can both be right in different circumstances. Humble Bundle got to a nice acquisition married to GCP. Snapchat has successfully unwound. I haven't looked into it in depth but it seems examples on both sides abound.

What's a call record? Like a single phone call or an SMS? Pinging the tower doesn't count, does it?

Why not? It's perfect way to signal.

nvm, the article mentions it. cell phones check in with the tower while they are on, which is a way to track where someone has taken their cell phone. afaik, there's very limited privacy protections around this in the US because they are considered the business records of the cell company.

Key logger + making a cron job that copies everything off your drive = 5 minutes of work? I hope you trust the folks you use this setup on...

Key logger + screen shots and you also get access to a 1 password account

No matter what you do if the computer you are using isn't trustworthy you're losing.

Yeah, totally with you — don't trust devices you (or your employer) doesn't own. I'm borderline still where I trust my employer's devices with my personal passwords sometimes, but even that seems a bit iffy.