Yes this is fairly standard in manufacturing environments. builds of material and lot or down to serial # level are tracked for production of complex goods.
the press, the proxy of the elite and wealthy have waged an all out war on americans for decades. They've long lost their status as a 4th pillar of government and instead are complicit in a long list of crimes.
by "The Press" we're not talking about newswriters but organizations who are large, evil, and morally bankrupt.
Anyone is free to start up a paper and write what they please
Great example of Newspeak you have there. "the press, the proxy of the elite and wealthy" will have no problem signing this, so this is not an attack on them. You even acknowledge this by saying
> by "The Press" we're not talking about newswriters but organizations who are large, evil, and morally bankrupt
So the logical conclusion must be that the GP meant something else than your self-serving redefinition. Yet, you still choose to attack the post as if it is completely wrong, and the attack on the press is fully justified?
riddle me this, who was complicit in perpetrating the lies in the invasion of Iraq. The fourth estate is dead. It does not protect safeguard democracy but erodes it.
Vietnam, Iraq, Covid-19, financial crises, NSA mass surviellence, afghanistan, opioid crises, not to mention the endless 'pee gate' russiagate crap. Jussie smollet, hunter bidens laptop, the crushing of occupy, coverage of gamestop, AI panic slop about destroying jobs... it never ends
I doubt you're interested in the truth, since you think Russiagate was crap. With your comment history it's actually very clear that it's narrative over truth every time.
I wrote this years ago about GDPR but it applies here too
I don't really oppose gdpr but one of the reasons I vehemently opposed implementing GDPR at my former job is that we were not operating in the EU. Well, we had customers there, but we were an American company operating with American severs. GDPR sets another precident that other countries can make laws about what people from other jurisdictions can do..
Our lawyers said "Do it anyway, just in case".
The side effect of these very many different local regulatory bodies is you start trying to comply with multiple laws, some that can conflict each other - and this costs not just time and money, but the rigidity to stand up and say "No, our elected leaders have decided what the laws of the land are, and we follow them".
And the thing is, many countries do not have good faith laws. The majority of the people in the world live under what Americans and the EU, and the West would call lacking fundamental human rights. Some of these laws are plain BAD (hell, the US and AU even have our own bad internet laws) and some are EVIL.
Google routinely complying with the Chinese government is a great example of them wanting to take the cash first and ask questions later (or not at all). I don't want to work for that company.
I don't really think being a good 'worldwide' citizen can exist when there are conflicting views held by governments about what is right. The fact is some governments are objectively etter than others
I don't really think we aught to be involving ourselves at all with Russian officals, apparatjiks or other government bodies - but we find ourselves in this situation again, like GDPR, Russian officals have set certain rules about how data for russian citizens needs be held.
Of course Russia has no grounds to sue me in America and if it did, do you think a judge would enforce our compliance with laws that hold no water in our countries? Of course not.
Russia wants russians data - on russian servers in russia. The fact is they're probably mostly interested in being able to physically seize - without any due process - russian citizens data from servers which all happen to be in russia. It's a smart law if you're interested in putting people in gulags.
I'd rather lose all russian customers, and also all of the customers in north korea, or whatever else despotic governments that exist that think they can exert pressure on independent companies who don't operate under their jurisdictions and not have to worry about what bullshit they'll come up with next.
None of this to imply that the US and EU, Australia, Switzerland, etcdon't have a bunch of questionable laws and procedures that might not be quite fair or free either, but the world ain't perfect
What happens next is country X decides you must do one thing, and country Y decides you do another, and you come to TECHNICAL problems and BUSINESS problems and ETHICAL problems trying to comply with both.
If you're not in the EU, do not even bother with GDPR.
They responsibly disclosed it in their research paper. An unethical use would be to use those coordinates to gain state secrets about say, research facilities
without Limited Liability Companies, a civil matter as simple as a copyright lawsuit could permenently bankrupt a small business and take the owners house and all their assets.
I don't agree with companies wantonly externalizing their costs onto the environment or the populace such as Dow or 3M poisoning the entire planet. Criminal liability never goes away for serious crimes, whether sole-proprietership, LLC, or Corp. We need to actually start jailing people though
If you are a part owner of a restaurant that's an LLC, and the restaurant engages in wage theft, which is rampant in that business, in many states the corporate veil can be pierced to recover stolen wages. "Limited" doesn't mean "none."
No flushing is necessary; it is conceptually fading on the internet whether the state acknowledges it or not.
It'll be great if some solemn elder-statesmen step up and read the writing on the wall instead of throwing more tantrums, but I think it's beyond obvious now that the internet will not abide copyright.
Clearly the system by which "grandma" owns a small part of a criminal organization is flawed.
Whether criminal liability needs to flow to individual owners I don't know, but I'm sure someone has done the thinking here about how to make this less insane.
Large shareholders are very different than grandma owning a few shares or even a few hundred shares. If criminal risk was priced into the stock, our society would look very different.
They may not need the contents, seeing you're connecting to a netflix IP and having a lot of data transfer may be a good reason to throttle, for example.
reply