Skip to content

Google CIO Calls Trump Admin’s Climate Denialism “Fantastic” | Ruth Porat called for data centers to be powered by coal, gas, and nuclear

Technology
44 40 1
  • TikTok Shop Sells Viral GPS Trackers Marketed to Stalkers

    Technology technology
    54
    1
    242 Stimmen
    54 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    M
    The app broke for a few days with a message kissing Dump's ass, and when it came back, all videos that mentioned fascism had been removed
  • Combining TLS and MLS: An experiment

    Technology technology
    3
    1
    27 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    49 Aufrufe
    M
    QUIC+MLS could be super efficient since QUIC already handles connection migration and reduces handshake latency, while MLS would add the secure group messaging layer on top without duplicating crypto operations thats already handled by QUIC.
  • Apple Just Proved They're No Different Than Google

    Technology technology
    20
    32 Stimmen
    20 Beiträge
    240 Aufrufe
    S
    2 ads when Linus mentioned candy crush. There is zero flow to youtube anymore
  • Uber, Lyft oppose some bills that aim to prevent assaults during rides

    Technology technology
    12
    94 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    127 Aufrufe
    F
    California is not Colorado nor is it federal No shit, did you even read my comment? Regulations already exist in every state that ride share companies operate in, including any state where taxis operate. People are already not supposed to sexually assault their passengers. Will adding another regulation saying they shouldn’t do that, even when one already exists, suddenly stop it from happening? No. Have you even looked at the regulations in Colorado for ride share drivers and companies? I’m guessing not. Here are the ones that were made in 2014: https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/2021/title-40/article-10-1/part-6/section-40-10-1-605/#%3A~%3Atext=§+40-10.1-605.+Operational+Requirements+A+driver+shall+not%2Ca+ride%2C+otherwise+known+as+a+“street+hail”. Here’s just one little but relevant section: Before a person is permitted to act as a driver through use of a transportation network company's digital network, the person shall: Obtain a criminal history record check pursuant to the procedures set forth in section 40-10.1-110 as supplemented by the commission's rules promulgated under section 40-10.1-110 or through a privately administered national criminal history record check, including the national sex offender database; and If a privately administered national criminal history record check is used, provide a copy of the criminal history record check to the transportation network company. A driver shall obtain a criminal history record check in accordance with subparagraph (I) of paragraph (a) of this subsection (3) every five years while serving as a driver. A person who has been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol in the previous seven years before applying to become a driver shall not serve as a driver. If the criminal history record check reveals that the person has ever been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to any of the following felony offenses, the person shall not serve as a driver: (c) (I) A person who has been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol in the previous seven years before applying to become a driver shall not serve as a driver. If the criminal history record check reveals that the person has ever been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to any of the following felony offenses, the person shall not serve as a driver: An offense involving fraud, as described in article 5 of title 18, C.R.S.; An offense involving unlawful sexual behavior, as defined in section 16-22-102 (9), C.R.S.; An offense against property, as described in article 4 of title 18, C.R.S.; or A crime of violence, as described in section 18-1.3-406, C.R.S. A person who has been convicted of a comparable offense to the offenses listed in subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (c) in another state or in the United States shall not serve as a driver. A transportation network company or a third party shall retain true and accurate results of the criminal history record check for each driver that provides services for the transportation network company for at least five years after the criminal history record check was conducted. A person who has, within the immediately preceding five years, been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to a felony shall not serve as a driver. Before permitting an individual to act as a driver on its digital network, a transportation network company shall obtain and review a driving history research report for the individual. An individual with the following moving violations shall not serve as a driver: More than three moving violations in the three-year period preceding the individual's application to serve as a driver; or A major moving violation in the three-year period preceding the individual's application to serve as a driver, whether committed in this state, another state, or the United States, including vehicular eluding, as described in section 18-9-116.5, C.R.S., reckless driving, as described in section 42-4-1401, C.R.S., and driving under restraint, as described in section 42-2-138, C.R.S. A transportation network company or a third party shall retain true and accurate results of the driving history research report for each driver that provides services for the transportation network company for at least three years. So all sorts of criminal history, driving record, etc checks have been required since 2014. Colorado were actually the first state in the USA to implement rules like this for ride share companies lol.
  • 179 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    19 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • All About Backplane Board – Share, Learn & Discuss!

    Technology technology
    1
    2
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    22 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Selling Surveillance as Convenience

    Technology technology
    13
    1
    112 Stimmen
    13 Beiträge
    109 Aufrufe
    E
    Trying to get my peers to care about their own privacy is exhausting. I wish their choices don't effect me, but like this article states.. They do in the long run. I will remain stubborn and only compromise rather than give in.
  • 551 Stimmen
    30 Beiträge
    365 Aufrufe
    swelter_spark@reddthat.comS
    Yeah, I don't prefer that. But with some things I feel like it's barely a downside, and I'd put Boxes into that category. It's useful and well-designed enough in terms of functionality that I'm willing to overlook the Gnominess.