Tagged: before Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • jkabtech 8:17 pm on July 13, 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , before, Billed, , , , , Signed,   

    Signed Up for Free Apple Music Trial at Launch? Last Chance to Cancel Before You Are Billed 

    If you are among those who signed up for the three-month free trial of Apple Music when it launched on June 30, then your trial is about to expire. Apple will start charging you Rs. 120 per month if you signed up for the individual plan, or Rs. 190 per month if you signed up for the family plan. If you love Apple Music, then this might seem like a good deal, but if you’d rather use another music streaming service or just don’t want to pay for Apple Music, then you should cancel your subscription before the three months are up.

    Doing this is a simple process and you can cancel your subscription from the Music app on your iOS device itself. In case you don’t have your iOS device, or if you’d rather do it via a PC or Mac, you can stop your subscription from renewing automatically using iTunes. We have described this process in detail and all you need to do is follow the steps in our article.

    If you are still on the fence about which music streaming service to use in India, we’ve compared them all to help you make the choice. Apple Music remains one of the best streaming services for international music, but if Indian music is a big part of your playlist then you might want to consider other alternatives.

    Did you cancel your Apple Music subscription or do you like it enough to pay for it? Let us know via the comments. For more tutorials, visit our How To section.

    For the latest tech news and reviews, follow Gadgets 360 on Twitter, Facebook, and subscribe to our YouTube channel.

    Tags: Apple, Apple Music, Beats 1, How To, iOS, iOS 8.4, iOS 9

    View the Original article

    Advertisements
     
  • jkabtech 8:17 pm on January 31, 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , before, Deadspin High, , , Forfeits, Jezebel Playboy, , ,   

    Deadspin High School Football Team Takes Oxy Before Game, Forfeits Entire Season | Jezebel Playboy F 

    Kinja!Today 10:01amFiled to: Morning Favorites11EditSend to EditorsPromoteShare to KinjaGo to permalink

    Deadspin High School Football Team Takes Oxy Before Game, Forfeits Entire Season

    View the Original article

     
  • jkabtech 4:17 am on August 27, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: before, , Panic,   

    Make a Safety Plan Before You Panic in a Crowd 

    Photo by Amy West

    If you get panicked by crowds, you might not even know it. You might just tense up or get angry. (I got snippy at the farmers market for years before I noticed the pattern.) And certain crowded spots, like Times Square or an emptying stadium, can freak anyone out. As Dr. Liz Lasky says in Time Out New York, it helps to have a safety plan.

    One basic way to cut through a crowd is to keep your eyes on your destination. That signals your path to others and helps you focus on the goal rather than the obstacles.

    View the Original article

     
  • jkabtech 12:17 pm on August 23, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , before, decryption, introduce   

    Australian govt will introduce decryption laws before end of year 

    Legal powers to force assistance where necessary.

    The federal government will introduce proposed laws to force providers of end-to-end encrypted communications services to decrypt messages for law enforcement before the end of this year.

    Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull today said the laws were intended to “illuminate” the “dark places online” that “terrorists and child molestors” and drug traffickers inhabit.

    He said it would extend powers the government already had to compel telcos to hand over information to the likes of Apple, Facebook, and Google.

    The government said the legislation would also apply to device manufacturers, requiring them to help police access encrypted information.

    But both Turnbull and Attorney-General George Brandis denied this equated to a backdoor.

    “I’m not a cryptographer, but what we’re seeking to do is to secure their assistance. They have to face up to their responsibility,” Turnbull said.

    “They can’t just wash their hands of it and say it’s got nothing to do with them. So we need to secure their co-operation.”

    Turnbull said how technology companies ensure they complied with the law was “a matter for them”.

    He also declined to answer questions about how the government would respond should encrypted comms providers – the majority of which are located outside Australia – simply declined to co-operate.

    Just two weeks ago the government had said it would pursue a voluntary agreement with encrypted communications providers that would lay out a set of agreed protocols for the circumstances in which assistance is to be provided to law enforcement.

    Turnbull today said while it was still his “very strong first preference” that companies volunteer their help, the proposed laws would enable the government to force assistance where it needed to.

    The government claimed nine out of 10 priority investigations carried out by ASIO are being hampered by encryption.

    “The internet is not an ungoverned space,” Brandis told Sky News. 

    “The rule of law has to apply as much online as in everyday life. This is not mass surveillance and will not make people’s every day dealings online insecure.” 

    Australia’s proposed legislation is expected to closely mirror the UK’s Investigatory Powers Bill, which obliges encrypted communications providers to ensure they are technically able to hand over decrypted data to law enforcement in “near real time”.

    Brandis today said the government wanted to “impose upon the companies an obligation conditioned by reasonableness and proportionality”.

    The UK’s ‘technical capability notices’ work as a first step to “prepare the ground” in case an operator receives an interception warrant, ensuring they have the technical ability to comply.

    But the UK law has been fiercly criticised as vague and leaving no option but for communications providers to build backdoors into their systems, given the companies don’t hold the keys to decrypt encrypted information.

    A UK public bills parliamentary committee said the law should include a specific threshold that recognises it is unreasonable to hand over decrypted content from end-to-end encrypted channels.

    “The damage to security may be done as soon as a company finds itself having to comply with such a notice and install a backdoor, whether or not it subsequently has to provide data under warrant,” the committee said.

    New Zealand introduced similar legislation four years ago. 

    Brandis said the Australian laws would require a warrant be obtained before a request can be made by law enforcement.

    The government has cited cases like the terrorist attack in San Bernardino, where Apple refused to help the FBI break into an attacker’s iPhone to access data, as justification for its plan.

    The FBI later managed to unlock the iPhone with the help of Israeli digital forensics company Cellebrite.

    It is also claimed that Telegram was used by terrorists to co-ordinate the November 2015 Paris attacks.

    The Labor party has previously indicated plans to support the proposed legislation.

    View the Original article

     
  • jkabtech 9:51 am on July 17, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , before, Clinton, Fusion Trump, , Meeting, Nonsense, Putin, Root Ph, Tweeting   

    Fusion Trump Was Tweeting About Hillary Clinton Nonsense Before His Meeting With Putin | The Root Ph 

    Kinja!Friday 10:58amFiled to: Morning Favorites01EditPromoteShare to KinjaGo to permalink

    Fusion Trump Was Tweeting About Hillary Clinton Nonsense Before His Meeting With Putin

    View the Original article

     
  • jkabtech 5:51 pm on July 13, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: before, , Practice, Simulator   

    Use a Drone Simulator to Practice Before You Buy 

    Image credit: Andrew Turner/Flickr

    No one wants to buy a $500 hobby drone only to discover they’re a bad pilot, especially considering how one bad twist or crash can leave your investment in pieces. Practice on a simulator before you buy one, just to be safe (and show off in front of friends).

    View the Original article

     
  • jkabtech 1:25 pm on March 7, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , before, , , ,   

    Tech companies support Apple before court ruling 

    Thursday, 3 Mar 2016 | 4:48 PM ETReuters

    Apple Iphone with logo

    Alphabet’s Google, Facebook, Microsoft and several other Internet and technology companies will file a joint legal brief on Thursday asking a judge to support Apple in its encryption battle with the U.S. government, sources familiar with the companies’ plans said.

    The effort is a rare display of unity and support for the iPhone maker from companies which are competitors in many areas, and shows the breadth of Silicon Valley’s opposition to the government’s anti-encryption effort.

    The fight between Apple and the government became public last month when the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation obtained a court order requiring Apple to write new software and take other measures to disable passcode protection and allow access to an iPhone used by one of the San Bernardino shooters in December.

    Apple has pushed back, arguing that such a move would set a dangerous precedent and threaten customer security. The clash has intensified a long-running debate over how much law enforcement and intelligence officials should be able to monitor digital communications.


    Separately on Thursday, six relatives of San Bernardino attack victims filed a legal brief opposing Apple.

    In the families’ brief, they argue that Apple’s arguments are misplaced because the government has a valid warrant, and “one does not enjoy the privacy to commit a crime.” The families also said Apple “routinely modifies its systems” to comply with Chinese government directives.

    Meanwhile, the group of tech companies plans to file what is known as an amicus brief — a form of comment from outside groups common in complex cases — to the Riverside, California, federal judge Sheri Pym. She will rule on Apple’s appeal of a court order that would force it to create software to unlock the iPhone.

    The companies will contest government arguments that the All Writs Act, a broad 1789 law that enables judges to require actions necessary to enforce their own orders, compels Apple to comply with its request.

    In their joint brief, the tech companies will say that Congress passed the All Writs Act before the invention of the light bulb, and that it goes too far to contend that the law can be used to force engineers to disable security protections, according to a source familiar with their arguments.

    Google, Facebook and others also appear to be tailoring their arguments specifically to a U.S. Supreme Court audience, where the case may end up. The brief will highlight a unanimous 2014 U.S. Supreme Court case which said law enforcement needs warrants to access smartphones snared in an arrest, the source said.

    That opinion, penned by Chief Justice John Roberts, united the Supreme Court’s liberal and conservative factions.

    Read MoreThe ‘esoteric’ law being used to fight Apple

    Briefs are also expected in support of the government.

    Stephen Larson, a former federal judge, told Reuters last week that he is working on a brief with victims of the San Bernardino shooting who want the FBI to be able to access the data on the phone used by Rizwan Farook. “They were targeted by terrorists, and they need to know why, how this could happen,” Larson said.

    Several other tech companies are joining Google, Facebook and Microsoft.

    Mozilla, maker of the Firefox web browser, said it was participating, along with online planning tool maker Evernote and messaging app firms Snapchat and WhatsApp. Bookmarking and social media site Pinterest and online storage firm Dropbox are also participating.

    “We stand against the use of broad authorities to undermine the security of a company’s products,” Dropbox General Counsel Ramsey Homsany said in a statement.

    A separate group including Twitter, eBay, LinkedIn and more than a dozen other tech firms filed a brief with the court in support of Apple on Thursday. AT&T filed its own brief.

    Networking leader Cisco Systems said it expected to address the court on Apple’s behalf, but did not say whether it was joining with the large group of companies.

    Semiconductor maker Intel plans to file a brief of its own in support of Apple, said Chris Young, senior vice president and general manager for Intel Security Group.

    “We believe that tech companies need to have the ability to build and design their products as needed, and that means that we can’t have the government mandating how we build and design our products,” Young said in an interview.

    The Stanford Law School for Internet and Society filed a separate brief on Thursday morning on behalf of a group of well-known experts on iPhone security and encryption, including Charlie Miller, Dino Dai Zovi, Bruce Schneier and Jonathan Zdziarski.

    Privacy advocacy groups the American Civil Liberties Union, Access Now and the Wickr Foundation filed briefs on Wednesday in support of Apple before Thursday’s deadline set by Pym.

    Salihin Kondoker, whose wife Anies Kondoker was injured in the San Bernardino attack, also wrote on Apple’s behalf, saying he shared the company’s fear that the software the government wants Apple to create to unlock the phone could be used to break into millions of other phones.

    “I believe privacy is important and Apple should stay firm in their decision,” the letter said. “Neither I, nor my wife, want to raise our children in a world where privacy is the tradeoff for security.”

    Law enforcement officials have said that Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, were inspired by Islamist militants when they shot and killed 14 people and wounded 22 others last Dec. 2 at a holiday party. Farook and Malik were later killed in a shootout with police and the FBI said it wants to read the data on Farook’s phone to investigate any links with militant groups.

    Earlier this week, a Brooklyn judge ruled that the government had overstepped its authority by seeking similar assistance from Apple in a drug case.

    SHOW COMMENTS Please add a username to view or add commentsPublic Username for Commenting

    View the original article here

     
  • jkabtech 4:52 pm on January 17, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , before, negotiating, , , , ,   

    Things you should know about stock options before negotiating your offer 

    Are you considering an offer from a private company, which involves stock options? Do you think those stock options might be worth something one day? Are you confused? Then read this! I’ll give you some motivation to learn more, and a few questions to consider asking your prospective employer.

    I polled people on Twitter and 65% of them said that they’ve accepted an offer without understanding how the stock options work.

    I have a short story for you about stock options. First: stock options are BORING AND COMPLICATED AND AWFUL. They are full of taxes, which we all know are awful. Some people think they’re fun and interesting to learn about. I am not one of those people. However, if you have an offer that involves stock options, I think you should learn a little about them anyway. All of the following assumes that you work for a private company that is still private when you leave it.

    In this post I don’t want to explain comprehensively how options work. (For that, see how to value your startup stock options or The Open Guide to Equity Compensation ) Instead I want to tell you a story, and convince you to ask more questions, do a little research, and do more math.

    I took a job 2 years ago, with a company with a billion-dollar-plus valuation. I was told “we pay less than other companies because our stock option offers are more generous”. Okay. I understood exactly nothing about stock options, and accepted the offer. To be clear: I don’t regret accepting the offer (my job is great! I ? my coworkers). But I do wish I’d understood the (fairly serious) implications at the time.

    From my offer letter:

    the offer gives you the option to purchase 114,129 shares of Stripe stock. [We bias] our offers to place weight on your ownership in the company.

    I’m happy to talk you through how we think about the value of the options. As far as numbers: there are approximately [redacted] outstanding shares. We can talk in more detail about the current valuation and the strike price for your options.

    This is a good situation! They were being pretty upfront with me. I had access to all the information I needed to do a little math. I did not do the math. Let me tell you how you can start with an offer letter like this and understand what’s going on a little better!

    The math I want you to do is pretty simple. The following example stock option offer is not at all my situation, but there are some similarities that I’ll explain in a minute.

    The example situation:

    stock options you’re being offered: 500,000vesting schedule: 4 years. you get 25% after the first year, then the rest granted every month for the remainder of the time.outstanding shares: 100,000,000 (the number of total shares the company has)company’s current valuation: 1 billion dollars

    This is an awesome start. You have options to buy 0.5% of the shares of a billion dollar company. What could be better? If you stay with the company until it goes public or dies, this is easy. If the company goes public and the stock price is more than your exercise price, you can exercise your options, sell as much of the stock as you want to, and make money. If it dies, you never exercise the options and don’t lose anything. win-win. This is where options excel.

    However! If you want to ever quit your job (in the next 5 years, say!), you may not be able to sell any of your stock for a long time. You have more math to do.

    ISOs (the usual way companies issue stock options) expire 3 months after you quit. So if you want to use them, you need to buy (or “exercise”) them. For that, you need to know the exercise price. You also need to know the fair market value (current value of the stock), for reasons that will become apparent in a bit. We need a little more data:

    exercise price or strike price: $1. (This is how much it costs, per share, to buy your options.)current fair market value: $1 (This is how much each share is theoretically worth. May or may not have any relationship to reality)fair market value, after 3 years: $10

    All this is information the company should tell you, except the value after 3 years, which would involve time travel. Let’s see how this plays out!

    Okay awesome! You had a great job, you’ve been there 3 years, you worked hard, did some great work for the company, you want to move on. What next? Since your options vested over 4 years, you now have 375,000 options (75% of your offer) that you can exercise. Seems great.

    Surprise! Now you need to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to invest in an uncertain outcome. The outcomes (IPO, acquisition, company fails) are all pretty complicated to discuss, but suffice to say: you can lose money by investing in the company you work for. It may be a good investment, but it’s not risk-free. Even an acquisition can end badly for you (the employee). Let’s see exactly how it costs you hundreds of thousands of dollars:

    Pay the exercise price:

    The exercise price is $1, so it costs $375,000 to turn your options into stock. Your options go poof in three months, but you can keep the stock if you buy it now.

    What?! But you only have 300k in the bank. You thought that was… a lot. You make an amazing salary (even $200k/year wouldn’t cover that). You can still afford a lot of it though! Every share costs $1, and you can buy as many or as few as you want. No big deal.

    You have to decide how much money you want to spend here. Your company hasn’t IPO’d yet, so you’ll only be able to make money selling your shares if your company eventually goes public AND sells for a higher price than your exercise price. If the company dies, you lose all the money you spent on stock. If the company gets acquired, the outcome is unpredictable, and you could still get nothing for all the money you spend exercising options.

    Also, it gets worse: taxes!

    Pay the taxes:

    The value of your stock has gone up! This is awesome. It means you get the chance to pay a lot of taxes! The difference in value between $1 (the exercise price) and $10 (the current fair market value) is $9. So you’ve potentially made $9 * 375000 = 3.3 million dollars.

    Well, you haven’t actually made that, since you’re buying stock you can’t sell (yet). But your local tax agency thinks you have. In Canada (though I’m not yet sure) I might have to pay income tax on that 3 million dollars, whether or not I have it. So that’s an extra 1.2 million in taxes, without any extra cash.

    The tax implications are super boring and complicated, and super super important. If you work for a successful company, and its value is increasing over time, and you try to leave, the taxes can make it totally unaffordable to exercise your options. Even if the company wasn’t worth a lot when you started! See for instance this person describing how they can’t afford the taxes on their options. Early exercise can be a good defense against taxes (see the end of this post).

    I don’t want to get too far into this fake situation because when people tell me fake situations, I’m like “ok but that’s not real why should I care.” Here’s something real.

    I do not own 0.5% of a billion dollar company. In fact I own 0%. But the company I work for is valued at more than a billion dollars, and I do have options to buy some of it. The options I’m granted each year would cost, very roughly, $100,000 (including exercise prices + taxes). Over 4 years, that’s almost half a million dollars. My after-tax salary is less than $100,000 USD/year, so by definition it is impossible for me to exercise my options without borrowing money.

    The total amount it would cost to exercise + pay taxes on my options is more than all of the money I have. I imagine that’s the case for some of my colleagues as well (for many of them, this is their first job out of school). If I leave, the options expire after 3 months. I still do not understand the tax implications of exercising at all. (it makes me want to hide under my bed and never come out)

    I was really surprised by all of this. I’d never made a financial decision much bigger than buying a $1000 plane ticket or signing a lease before. So the prospect of investing a hundred thousand dollars in some stock? Having to pay taxes on money that I do not actually have? super scary.

    So the possibilities, if I want to ever quit my job, are:

    exercise them somehow (with money I get from ??? somewhere ???).give up the optionsfind a way to sell the options or the resulting stock

    There are several variations on #3. They mostly involve cooperation from your employer – it’s possible that they’ll let you sell some options, under some conditions, if you’re lucky / if they like you / if the stars are correctly aligned. This post How to sell secondary stock says a little more (thanks @antifuchs!). This HN comment describes a situation where someone got an offer from an outside investor, and the investor was told by the company to not buy from him (and then didn’t buy from him). Your employer has all the power.

    Again, this isn’t a disaster – I have a good job, which pays me a SF salary despite me living in Montreal. It’s a fantastic situation to be in. And certainly having an option to buy stock is better than having nothing at all! But you can ask questions, and I like being informed.

    Stock options are very complicated. If you start out knowing nothing, and you have an offer to evaluate this week, you’re unlikely to be able to understand every possible scenario. But you can do better than me!

    When I got an offer, they were super willing to answer questions, and I didn’t know what to ask. So here are some things you could ask. In all this I’m going to assume you work for a US company.

    Basic questions:

    how many stock options (# shares)vesting schedule (usually 4 years / 1 year “cliff”)how many outstanding sharescompany’s current valuationexercise price (per share)fair market value (per share: a made-up number, but possibly useful)if they’re offering ISOs, NSOs, or RSUshow long after leaving do you have to exercise?

    Then you can do some basic math and figure out how much it would cost to exercise the options, if you choose to. (I have a friend who paid $1 total to exercise his stock options. It might be cheap!)

    More ambitious questions

    As with all difficult questions, before you accept an offer is the best time to ask, because it’s when you have the most leverage.

    will they let you sell stock to an outside investor?If you can only exercise for 3 months after leaving, is that negotiable? (pinterest gives you the option of 7 years and worse tax implications. can they do the same?)If the company got sold for the current valuation (2X? 10X?) in 2 years, what would my shares be worth? What if the company raises a lot of money between now and then?Can they give you a summary of what stock & options other people have? This is called the “cap table”. (The reason you might want to know this: often VCs are promised that they’ll get their money first in the case of any liquidation event. Before you! Sometimes they’re promised at least a 3x return on their investment. This is called a “liquidation preference” .)Do the VCs have participation? (there’s a definition of participation and other stock option terms here)Can you early exercise your options? I know someone who early exercised and saved a ton of money on taxes by doing it. This guide talks more about early exercising.Do your options vest faster if the company is acquired? What if you get terminated? (these possibilities are called “single/double trigger”)

    If you have more ideas for good questions, tell me! I’ll add them to this list.

    I think it’s important to talk about stock option grants! A lot of money can be at stake, and it’s difficult to talk about amounts in the tens or hundreds of thousands.

    There’s also some tension about this topic because people get very emotionally invested in startups (for good reason!) and often feel guilt about leaving / discussing the financial implications of leaving. It can feel disloyal!

    But if you’re trying to make an investment decision about thousands of dollars, I think you should be informed. Being informed isn’t disloyal 🙂 The company you work for is informed.

    The company making you an offer has lawyers and they should know the answers to all the questions I suggested. They’ve thought very carefully about these things already.

    I wish I’d known what questions to ask and done some of the math before I started my job, so I knew what I was getting into. Ask questions for me! 🙂 You’ll understand more clearly what investment decisions might be ahead of you, and what the financial implications of those decisions might be.

    Thanks for Leah Hanson and Dan Luu for editing help!

    View the original article here

     
  • jkabtech 12:19 am on January 1, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , before, , , nonexpansion, states, survivors   

    Even before ACA, cancer survivors in non-expansion states had less health-care access 

    How will Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) change cancer survivors’ access to healthcare? Answering the question first requires defining access to healthcare before the ACA. An analysis published in the Journal of Cancer Survivorship finds that even in the landscape before the ACA, cancer survivors in states that had already expanded Medicaid coverage prior to the ACA had more access to healthcare than cancer survivors in states that had not expanded Medicaid.

    “Populations most affected are the low-income and uninsured. If cancer survivors cannot get the follow-up care they need, recurrences may be missed and long-term consequences of cancer treatment may not be appropriately managed,” says Cathy J. Bradley, PhD, associate director for Population Science at the University of Colorado Cancer Center, professor in the Colorado School of Public Health, and one of the paper’s authors.

    The study used data from the 2012 and 2013 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, which collects annual health data of over 400,000 people living in the United States. Specifically, the study looked at whether cancer survivors across states had personal doctors, received an annual checkup, and reported inability to see a doctor because of cost.

    Again, even in the healthcare landscape as it existed before the ACA, cancer survivors in states without expanded Medicaid were less likely to have a personal doctor and more likely to report inability to see a doctor due to cost (odds ratios 0.76 and 1.14 respectively). The study controlled for other possible factors that could determine access.

    “The reasons for these disparities were outside the scope of the current study, but my guess is that non-expansion states have higher uninsurance rates and more stringent eligibility criteria for their existing Medicaid programs,” Bradley says.

    “While cancer survivors are at high risk of developing other cancers and experiencing late effects of treatment, our findings imply that survivors living in non-expansion states are less likely to access health care services that are necessary to receive the care they need,” the paper writes.

    According to Bradley, the paper shows that increased access to Medicaid benefits low-income cancer survivors. The study sets the stage for continuing analysis of healthcare access and health outcomes for cancer survivors in the era of the Affordable Care Act.

    Journal Reference:

    Wafa W. Tarazi, Cathy J. Bradley, David W. Harless, Harry D. Bear, Lindsay M. Sabik. Medicaid expansion and access to care among cancer survivors: a baseline overview. Journal of Cancer Survivorship, 2015; DOI: 10.1007/s11764-015-0504-5

    View the original article here

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
%d bloggers like this: