Hmm… 1 in 20 individuals are affected… I get the idea being 2 adults per family, one of them affected, hence 1 in 10 families, but I think its incorrect/misleading (potentially in either direction) to say 1 in 10 families. I haven't looked at the data about how many families are single parent (which could increase the impact per family) OR how many of those 5% identified as working multiple jobs are married (I wouldn't be surprised if more of them are unmarried, since a two parent family with both working one job might be expected to not need the additional jobs).
Easily the worst part of this for me is that Australia has put me in the position of supporting Facebook/Google - which I almost never would do otherwise. The control over what if anything Facebook/Google can parse automatically/display as a preview is defined by open standards that are well documented putting it wholly in the control of the media organizations. Additionally content being posted to Facebook by users comes from the media companies own customers… Ben Thompson and others have documented this well:
If you want to tax the social media companies and redirect that revenue to journalism - write that law and make it happen (assuming your constitution allows for it). But trying to frame this as redressing an imbalance in power is ridiculous, and the binding arbitration process defined is ludicrous as well.
Yeah, I mean you don’t need to say Facebook and Google are entirely good to say the law is bad. The law is terrible, and Facebook has done the right thing in this case at least.
It works(ish) but worked better before most of the major players locked virtual cameras out with updates. Issues with unsigned code, so then some folks started unsigning apps smh. Still works with Chrome based version of several tools, and it’s cool when it works, but definitely a bit on the fragile side. The Canon software has the same limitations and just lets you use software from a perhaps more trusted source depending on your perspective…
Nope. Also, it shows a lack of understanding of costs that those who made the decision/are defending it only mention the amount of time - which is certainly a factor, but ignores mileage and the fact that as another comment mentioned, it’s likely an inefficient roundtrip in most cases…
And last but not least there’s the sneaky little reference to the fact that there’s legislation in play potentially to make the cap permanent. So even IF lack of traffic is enough to offset increased costs (when it’s almost certainly not) the truth is this is a political ploy to backdoor a manipulation of the market during a time of emergency, not an ACTUAL emergency order for the public good.
And shocking that the representative for that area is aghast at this response from UberEats and in support of the original decision… that’s their job!
Cause data has never leaked from cloud server storage rented by individuals or companies before… oh, wait… (but trust him, it’s just him and a buddy who have access, what could possibly go wrong).
Pretty sure you can choose to disable the secure boot options… from only the latest, to ones that were at one point trusted (old OSes), to no restrictions - https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208330
Not exactly true. I use jekyll on a VPS, store my site's content in a Dropbox folder kept in sync on the server, then use inotifywait to watch for new posts/updates to existing posts and kick off a site regeneration. This means I can update or post using any mobile/tablet text-editing app that supports Dropbox.
