64 karma · joined August 14, 2014
Ahh, the memories.
I don't miss running my own MTA. At all.
For example: http://rd.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F11935070_14
What's _really_ valuable, though, isn't real-time traffic information, but future traffic information. What matters isn't the traffic right now, but the traffic as it will be when you arrive at a given portion of the journey. I suspect that at present cabbies have the edge there, but that edge will also be swept away by predictive algorithms incorporating knowledge of typical traffic patterns plus lots of inputs about events that may affect traffic.
The latter point is particularly interesting if a navigation system acquires enough scale that it is directing a substantial fraction of the traffic. In that case, it knows not only what external events may affect traffic, but can further make decisions to control the flow, distributing and smoothing.
This password security measure is a Chrome extension that's required by company policy to be installed on all corporate machines. It watches all input (to browser forms) and if it detects your password being typed anywhere other than an actual sign-on page, then the next time you sign on successfully you're required to change your password. I believe there's also an e-mail notification, but it's delayed.
This is actually a pretty good password security technique, specifically because people often inadvertently type their password into the wrong forms due to focus errors, lack of caffeine, etc.
In either case, there is zero domestic legal consequence to deciding to ignore the treaty provisions. Technically a decision by the executive branch to violate treaty provisions is a violation of federal law, but there are no consequences. Obviously, if the US decides to violate a treaty agreement there may well be international consequences, including other nations' decisions to back out of the treaty, to refuse to trust the US in other negotiations or treaties, etc. All of that, of course, is exactly the same regardless of whether or not there is a formal process of derogation.
[0] There's a third form of treaty, "sole executive". That form is applicable when the treaty obligations are entirely within the scope of presidential power, such as Status Of Forces Agreements which the president executes in his role as Commander-In-Chief. Those, of course, have no legal standing at all except as lawful orders from the president to his employees.