Source: Kentucky.com -- Fayette County
One of Lexington’s most unique and largest restaurant buildings is empty again after less than a year. Cowboy Brazilian Steakhouse, which opened last fall, is gone. It’s unclear exactly when … Click to Continue »
Source: Hacker News
Source: Hacker News
Source: Hacker News
Source: Hacker News
Source: Boing Boing
The NCAA is notionally an "amateur" league, but the only thing amateur about it is that the athletes (who risk their health and even their lives) are unpaid, while the universities effectively own and operate wildly profitable pro sports teams.
California state senator Nancy Skinner [D] has cosponsored the The Fair Pay to Play Act, which entitles California college athletes to get paid for "the use of their name, image and likeness." The bill -- popular with both labor activists and free market ideologues -- passed the Assembly on Monday 72-0. Governor Newsom is expected to sign the bill in the next 30 days, and it would go into effect in 2023.
The NCAA and the colleges that back it strongly oppose the legislation. Athletes like LeBron James strongly support it (and James has received public support from Bernie Sanders: "College athletes are workers. Pay them.").
The colleges say it spells the end of California's participation in collegiate sports, predicting that California teams will be excluded from national play (they don't mention the possibility that other states will pass legislation similar to California's).
Reducing the importance of college sports to America's universities would be a net positive; American higher-ed has been wildly distorted by sports, with budgets and resources allocated to sports as a way of making alumni happy, without regard to the actual educational priorities of the institutions.
Skinner expects opponents to mount court challenges during that time, but she also anticipates a growing corps of allies.
Similar bills are in their infancy in state legislatures in Washington and Colorado, and United States Representative Mark Walker, Republican of North Carolina, introduced a federal bill this year that would allow college athletes to be compensated for the use of their name, image and likeness.
Skinner sees her bill as a catalyst rather than an end unto itself.
California Lawmakers Vote to Undo N.C.A.A. Amateurism [Billy Witz/New York Times]
(Image: Ervins Strauhmanis, CC-BY, modified)
(via Naked Capitalism)
Source: Ars Technica
Enlarge / If your new Chromebook told you it's past EOL, don't panic—as long as you were running Canary or Dev, that is. (If you were running Stable or Beta, you may continue panicking.) (credit: Valentina Palladino)
A lot of Chromebook and Chromebox users don't realize this, but all ChromeOS devices have an expiration date. Google's original policy was for devices to be supported for five years, but the company has recently extended that time to 6.5 years.
When your Chromebook or Chromebox approaches its built-in expiration date, it will warn you that it's time to go buy a new device entirely. Not long after that, it will refuse to apply any further security or feature updates. In addition to leaving users vulnerable to unpatched security exploits, this means that constantly evolving services such as Gmail will eventually stop working entirely.
Google has been working on a way to warn users six months ahead of time that their device's EOL date is approaching to allow them to plan with a little less time-sensitive desperation. But users running the Canary and Dev early-preview ChromeOS builds discovered a bug in the new code the hard way. After any reboot, brand-new devices started warning "this is the last automatic software and security update for this Chromebook. To get future updates, upgrade to a newer model."
Read 3 remaining paragraphs | Comments
Source: Hacker News
Source: Kentucky.com -- Education
After panic erupted at a Lexington football game last month when unaccompanied minor students falsely shouted that someone had a gun, Fayette County Public School officials have decided to enact … Click to Continue »
Source: Ars Technica
Enlarge / NEW YORK, NY - NOVEMBER 22: A Transportation Security Administration (TSA) worker screens passengers at LaGuardia Airport (LGA) on the day before Thanksgiving, the nation's busiest travel day on November 22, 2017 in New York City. (credit: Spencer Platt | Getty Images)
A federal judge in Virginia has ruled that the government's terrorism screening database (TSDB) is unconstitutional because people on the list are not given an adequate opportunity to contest their inclusion. The ruling is a victory for a group of almost 20 Muslim Americans who sued the government over the list in 2016.
"There is no independent review of a person's placement on the TSDB by a neutral decisionmaker," Judge Anthony Trenga wrote on Wednesday. "Individuals are not told whether or not they were or remain on the TSDB watchlist and are also not told the factual basis for their inclusion."
As a result, the judge concluded, the watchlist system is unconstitutional.
Read 8 remaining paragraphs | Comments
