All good options.
I would argue that while billionaires are stealing your money, healthcare CEOs are taking lives, which is more important in my mind.
Which isn't to say that billionaires don't deserve the same treatment, this is just prioritization for the most benefit in the shortest amount of time.... Long term, a lot more heads need to roll.
This is the harsh truth. Right now, legally, their case is falling apart. A nontrivial amount of hard evidence was in that bag and this action should get everything tossed because the chain of evidence is non-existent.
The other poster is also correct, they've decided he should be punished for this, whether he did or not is irrelevant. They're going to twist every ounce of evidence they can to say he did it. If that doesn't work, he'll be found hanging from his shoelaces...
This. The chain of evidence is tainted and cannot be accounted for. Anything in the backpack could have been placed there by anyone, at any time, before, during, or after his arrest.
My feelings on this: good. One less thing that they can use against him. If his defense doesn't get any evidence from the backpack thrown out, then idk what they're even doing.
This is actually rather poignant.
By this standard, "successful" companies simply haven't failed yet.
It's standard that in human experience, we will fail at things. It happens, it happens often, and it will continue to happen. Failing at something is the first step. Without failure, how would we ever know how to "succeed"?
This doesn't, and shouldn't, imply that we are bad at a thing, or that we can't become good at it, or that we should give up and stop trying. It also doesn't and shouldn't imply that we should continue to try. "Failure" is just an outcome, whether that is good or bad is entirely up to the viewer to decide.
I would argue that failure is simply a mental/social concept. Things simply happen. "Success" or "failure" is entirely dependent on those who had some interest in what specifically happened. Even if you're trying to achieve a specific outcome, whether you do or not is entirely inconsequential. You tried to achieve an outcome by doing x, y, or z, and then a, b, and c occurred. Whether a, b, and c are the outcome that was desired or not is not a consequence that the universe cares about.
So much of this is simply social constructs.
Fun. I didn't grow up issuing a Mac, not did I grow up using Windows.... Nor Linux.
When I started on computers, we used DOS.
I'm old.
I'm not old enough to remember punch cards, I was solidly in the x86 generation, but still.
For the record, I do IT support now. I'm the one that helps you with your printer.
No, we can't. Otherwise how would people like Elon and Bezos know that they're better than us?
/s
I've been preaching about this for a while. Many modern systems are getting bitlocker turned on by default.
If your system gets messed up, or simply won't start because of some security vendors bad update, goodbye data. You need the recovery key, and if you don't have it, you'll never see your bits the the correct order again.
It really doesn't do much and the cost is barely pennies per user when you operate at scale. The largest costs will be for the DNS resolver service and the domain registration, both of which you are already required to have, in order to have a functioning presence on the Internet. The cost of the issuing intermediate certificate is probably the largest single cost of the whole operation.
To be fair to Plex, they run some intermediary (caching) metadata servers to offload the demand their users put on services like the tvdb and IMDb. Honestly, is probably not required.... But they do it. (I've seen their caching system fail more often than either site, so, it's not all good), but even with that, you can put most of that load into your existing webhost, and it's unlikely to make an impact on performance.
When you do this stuff at scale, the costs of simply having it set up, usually cover the costs of using it for thousands, if not tens of thousands of users.
Popularist and nationalist.
I wonder where I've seen that before...
I have two pieces of paper from my time in post-secondary education. One says information technology, the other says business. I've worked in an IT field for well over 10 years in a B2B capacity. I've had to handle cost/benefit and ROI arguments with customers, and justify having them spend incredible amounts for their own good.
Are we done dick measuring about what we think we know?
Listen, we're not going to agree on this. I couldn't give any fewer shits if you do or not. Bluntly, I'm unbothered.
Good day to you sir.
I have a very good knowledge of business operations.
They already offered Plex pass to earn their income. Plex is an extremely price elastic product, given that alternatives like jellyfin exist. They are taking features away, and charging people if they don't want to lose those features. That's a really good way to piss off your existing userbase (or customer base). Better would be to offer something new, and charge for that. Keep existing products at the same cost, but have "better" products at a premium. You won't get a huge number of people buying the extended product, but it will likely be more new paying users than how many you would get with the crap they're doing now, and they wouldn't lose any customers in the process.
When you understand the social and economic factors here, this is a super idiotic move. When you're only looking at how many dollars you can extract from the customer base, this is a golden idea.... I mean, it will fail, but it looks golden if you're only looking at the money numbers.
I would question whether you know how a business works (or whether Plex does, for that matter).
As far as I'm concerned, Plex failed to read the room. They were already walking a fine line with the people in a legal grey area, which comprised a good amount of their customer base (those that are sharing media at least). There's a nontrivial number of people who share media that are rather paranoid with reason. Nobody wants the RIAA/MPAA to have any reason to investigate what you are doing on the Internet. We all know how well that goes from the whole Napster thing. So now than a few are almost tinfoil hat level of paranoid. Many have already jumped ship to jellyfin or something similar. The rest are either unconcerned, not paying attention, or simply don't care. I would argue that the numbers of people who run servers currently that host content using Plex, that are not looking at alternatives because of this, is pretty damned low.
Plex alienated the group that brought everyone into their umbrella. When the people who host media entirely abandon their product because of this shit, their client base vaporizes.
Can't have a product or company with no clients. At least, not for long.
Hey, everyone, check out this person's brain!
... See, noone cares.