Slashdot Mirror

As much as myself and others may dislike the way Google does certain things, they are primarily an advertising company and they have to turn a profit. That they are big enough to take the risk of standing up for our freedoms speaks volumes about the stewardship of the company. Let the Google bashers come out, but as they say, Haters Gonna Hate.

Your excerpt stops before it gets to the good bit. I will add a bit more, and suggest that anyone that is interested read the whole thing. The link below that is from a former head of the CIA that discusses aspects of the same topic.

Statement by Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper on Allegations of Economic Espionage

What we do not do, as we have said many times, is use our foreign intelligence capabilities to steal the trade secrets of foreign companies on behalf of - or give intelligence we collect to - US companies to enhance their international competitiveness or increase their bottom line.

Why We Spy on Our Allies - By R. James Woolsey, former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency

Because all government's want to spy on their citizens. European governments used to be the best at fascism but have been playing catch up to the US for a while now.

But do all government's of the world wish to permit industrial espionage on their soil, or is it political power first over protecting national business interests...

Statement by Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper on Allegations of Economic Espionage

"...It is not a secret that the Intelligence Community collects information about economic and financial matters, and terrorist financing...."

Hard not to think of these when Gamefly comes up: http://ibrill.tumblr.com/post/22589153484/all-the-video-games-peteholmez-mentioned-in-his

Haven't quite mastered Lego Human Centipede yet.

Considering iOS 7 isn't available to the general public of course you won't hear outcries (just yet).

However even artists are pointing out the stupidity of the lack of contrast:
      http://boomcookie.tumblr.com/post/52922782067/why-ios-7-design-fails

Good UI can be summarized up with four words:

    Signal-To-Noise ratio

iOS7 is a garbage design because it blurs the ling between signal-to-noise.

The LSD color scheme is just a visual distraction, symptom, of the problem.

What the GP roughly paraphrases (but gets key details of wrong), is the basic principles of felony murder.

I see your wikipedia link, and raise you a illustrated guide.

Knowledge of the gun has absolutely nothing to do with it -- just willing participation in a conspiracy to commit or in the commission of a dangerous felony.

Yes, but it's a separate (but related) issue. Flip back a page and you'll see the exact example I used; a plate being thrown at someone and then them falling on it and dying. It was manslaughter by that definition.

But we're getting off topic; the judge didn't rule this applies if you have NO prior knowledge; He said it was a crime if you did. And that's pretty solid, legally speaking. There's no controversy there; If you can prove that the defendant had good cause to believe the text message would be read by someone while operating a motor vehicle, you're not getting out of it. The key facts here are immediacy, and prior knowledge. The chance that someone might be operating a motor vehicle isn't sufficient -- I think the judge is right here. That's reasonable. But if it's not just possible, but would be found to be likely by a reasonable person, you're screwed.

What the GP roughly paraphrases (but gets key details of wrong), is the basic principles of felony murder.

I see your wikipedia link, and raise you a illustrated guide.

Knowledge of the gun has absolutely nothing to do with it -- just willing participation in a conspiracy to commit or in the commission of a dangerous felony.

Yes, but it's a separate (but related) issue. Flip back a page and you'll see the exact example I used; a plate being thrown at someone and then them falling on it and dying. It was manslaughter by that definition.

But we're getting off topic; the judge didn't rule this applies if you have NO prior knowledge; He said it was a crime if you did. And that's pretty solid, legally speaking. There's no controversy there; If you can prove that the defendant had good cause to believe the text message would be read by someone while operating a motor vehicle, you're not getting out of it. The key facts here are immediacy, and prior knowledge. The chance that someone might be operating a motor vehicle isn't sufficient -- I think the judge is right here. That's reasonable. But if it's not just possible, but would be found to be likely by a reasonable person, you're screwed.

Your example is absolutely wrong.

"Hello? Yes, someone on the internet is wrong. You're sending over an illustrated guide to why they're wrong? Thanks, I'll hold."

An example that would fit is that you know your friend bought a gun legally. That is the end of your knowledge. Suddenly the Police show up because your friend committed armed robbery. You were implicated because you had knowledge of the gun, and no knowledge of the crime.

Very. Different. Things. Gun ownership isn't the problem. Gun possession during the commission of a crime is.

An even better example would be this. You know your friend bought a motorcycle. The police show up and arrest you because your friend committed vehicular homicide.

The sky is cloudy. Therefore the police show up and arrest you. Then the price of tea in china doubles. And I saw a kitty walking by my window just now. This all proves you're wrong, as anyone can see! -_- Again... context... you really need to work on this concept.

There is a huge difference between knowing someone owns a legal device (in which a car can be a murder weapon) and knowing that they intent to use it for criminal purposes at some point in the future.

Yeah, just as there's a huge difference between looking at the entire argument, instead of intentionally ignoring a crucial piece of it, then blubbering on about what an idiot the other guy is because 1+ [omitted] = 2, when clearly it should have equalled 1.

Don't confuse my example with your friend buying a gun and telling you he was going to rob a bank.

If your friend buys a gun and tells me he's going to rob a bank, I'm calling the FBI and telling them they need to send an investigator to his house. There's nothing confusing about that. I don't want a bunch of dead people in a bank on my conscience.

The only self-benefit is to my karma.

So you don't feel completely ambivalent about making these donations? I'm not saying you should - "giving is its own reward" is probably a more ancient saying than modern English - just that being charitable makes most people feel good.

You're correct that I "feel good" (or, at least, not bad) about being able to help and actually helping my friends (and a few charities), but I'm not sure I'd qualify that (or any change in my karma) as a "benefit" to myself/family/community with regard to the the original poster's comment, though perhaps I'm not looking through the same lens. Regardless of my karma, a coffee at Starbucks still costs $1.50 (or whatever) - and my wife is still dead [ Remember Sue... (as I've mentioned before) ] ....

I helped out because I have more than I need and they needed more than they had - through no major fault of their own.

This article is anecdotal and about Australia, but still relevant. I think it does indicate that there is some gender bias in the tech industry.

Some mass media manipulate graphs to large audiences to alter their opinion. Here's a bunch of good examples: http://foxnewsgraphs.tumblr.com/

One has to look pretty closely to ensure that each graph has a y-axis that starts at 0, a consistent x-axis, that the height of bars and points match the numbers that are presented and other forms of lying with data.

...Hayden shook with indignant rage and bellowed, "NERRRRDS!!"

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m74f0wvK501rq2uh5o1_400.jpg

And this what I think, when I think of their 'help'.

NSFW IKEA catalog.

Do not view at work.

You know, where musicians actually make money as opposed to record deals which usually land the artists deeply in debt when they don't pan out?

This isn't necessarily the case, especially for self-published artists. For instance, Zoe Keating has published her revenue breakdown -- only 26% comes from touring. And that's revenue, not profit, and touring is expensive.

Her situation is unique as she is independent (so no label to take profits) and yet reasonably successful. However, the aggregate information based on responses to this survey puts live performance income at 28%, so her experience is right in line with that. (The survey responses are wildly spread out though -- it covers people who just don't do live performances all the way through people who only make money from live performance (6.3%). The number varies a lot by genre; e.g., in rock, the average was 44%. But that's still a long way from "where they actually make money".)

Dude...

I just read this: http://remembersue.tumblr.com/remember

Wow. :( Made me cry a little.

I won't say I'm sorry, as I don't know you, but thanks for sharing; There's so much shit on the Internet not worth reading these days, it's nice sometimes to find something so real and emotive.

Thank you. You're the first person to have mentioned reading it. I don't know if it's any good from an objective/writing point of view, but it says what I needed it to say. Sue was a special person and the world is simply less without her.

I still don't know why she left that poem for me, all those years ago...

Dude...

I just read this:

http://remembersue.tumblr.com/remember

Wow. :( Made me cry a little.

I won't say I'm sorry, as I don't know you, but thanks for sharing; There's so much shit on the Internet not worth reading these days, it's nice sometimes to find something so real and emotive.

-Jar

Everything stopped being funny YEARS ago

Welcome to being old.

Actually, as someone who turned 50 in May, I find many things/people getting funnier/stupider as I get older. Probably as I gain perspective and realize how ridiculous and unimportant most things really are, especially in contrast to how serious and important people think those things are. Losing my wife of 20 years to brain cancer in 2006 (just 7 weeks after diagnosis) probably helps with that perspective -- Remember Sue...

All life's little problems are just a distraction from the one big problem - that there's no fucking point to anything. (Just my 2 cents.)

I don't know whether it can topple my all-time favorite analysis of 2001, Mad Magazine's "201 Minutes of Space Idiocy".

Incidentally: http://malshandir.tumblr.com/

YW

I think I may write a song called "Malshandir" too.

Per Tumble at http://www.tumblr.com/docs/en/nsfw
        NSFW blogs contain occasional nudity or mature/adult-oriented content.
        Adult blogs contain substantial nudity or mature/adult-oriented content.

So yes, if your blog is primarily focused on adult content, then Tumbler will not help you advertise it to the world. Yahoo is trying very hard to shake the notion that Tumbler it is a haven for porn.

Personally, I don't use Tumbler and I don't care to waste my time reading the drivel. (Yes I get the irony that I'm posting on /.)

Here you go. Just don't try to Google it.

Good thing I have already found my favorite Tumblr, Short Shorts Obsession.

Oh! Won't someone PLEASE think of the children!

Slightly off topic, but I think plumpergeddon http://plumpergeddon.tumblr.com/ deserves a mention in this thread :-)

Don't worry. It's merely a cynical PR stunt from a company that produces mostly shit.
Having said that, after the owners membership of the Nazi party and the use of slave labor, forcing refugees to live in IKEA designed housing seems like a new low to me.

Hey look IKEA porn!

Someone has to get this into Nintendo's hands.

The pig smell is not so bad if you're not immediately downwind of a pig farm (which most of Iowa is not) and sweaty, corn-fed women are underrated. (see pics): http://image.cdnllnwnl.xosnetwork.com/pics32/640/WK/WKRHXIHUQVRQUHC.20120925204720.JPG http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8591bavyu1rawnv3o1_500.jpg

It may have a character jump over a shark, would that do?

Nope.

You kinda missed the point there. It's called a stunt.
You know... basing the episode around an act intended to catch you attention instead of on actual story or plot. Or humor.

Occam says A in this case.

Actually, Occam says it's what I mentioned above - cherry picking. Also, confirmation bias.

I'm gonna make a wild guess and assume that your "the people I know IRL who don't think it's funny and don't like it are all uneducated high school dropouts" is a rather limited set.
Also, that you did no actual statistical analysis on the subject NOR actual inquiry into WHY those and other people find it not funny.

In other words, all your "conclusions" are actually based on time honored theory of "I like this, this is great, those who don't like it are stupid".

On the other hand, there are vast numbers of sources pointing out that many of people who don't find TBBT funny or likeable ARE quite intelligent and that they get the intended joke - only they find it not funny at best and cringe worthy at other times.

http://bigbangmistakes.tumblr.com/whydoesitsuck
http://www.1up.com/do/blogEntry?bId=9112031
http://www.spectrecollie.com/archives/2013/01/my-problem-with-the-big-bang-theory
http://butmyopinionisright.tumblr.com/post/31079561065/the-problem-with-the-big-bang-theory

BTW, have you noticed just how much of it's humor is based on a) pop culture references, b) catch phrases and c) laugh track?
Neither of which is humor.
One is basic recognition (which presses some of the same buttons in your brain as "getting a joke") and the other two are borderline Pavlovian prods to try to incite laughter.
"LAUGH MONKEY BOY! LAUGH! BEJEZUZ! ZIMBABWE! BLOOBLOOBLUBLU! LISTEN TO THESE PEOPLE LAUGHING! IT IS SOOOO FUNNY! LAAAAUGH!"

While we're on the subject of pop culture references...
American Dad and Family Guy for instance do A LOT of the "pop culture instead of humor" thing.
Basically, all of its humor is in those bits that have no connection to the story otherwise.
Not sure about the older episodes but relatively recent seasons of The Simpsons are doing the same thing.
Except instead of cutting away to completely unrelated characters it's one of the usual clowns (Homer, Wiggum Sr. or Jr. etc.) that does the "IT'S FUNNY! LAUGH!" bit.

It may have a character jump over a shark, would that do?

Nope.

You kinda missed the point there. It's called a stunt.
You know... basing the episode around an act intended to catch you attention instead of on actual story or plot. Or humor.

Occam says A in this case.

Actually, Occam says it's what I mentioned above - cherry picking. Also, confirmation bias.

I'm gonna make a wild guess and assume that your "the people I know IRL who don't think it's funny and don't like it are all uneducated high school dropouts" is a rather limited set.
Also, that you did no actual statistical analysis on the subject NOR actual inquiry into WHY those and other people find it not funny.

In other words, all your "conclusions" are actually based on time honored theory of "I like this, this is great, those who don't like it are stupid".

On the other hand, there are vast numbers of sources pointing out that many of people who don't find TBBT funny or likeable ARE quite intelligent and that they get the intended joke - only they find it not funny at best and cringe worthy at other times.

http://bigbangmistakes.tumblr.com/whydoesitsuck
http://www.1up.com/do/blogEntry?bId=9112031
http://www.spectrecollie.com/archives/2013/01/my-problem-with-the-big-bang-theory
http://butmyopinionisright.tumblr.com/post/31079561065/the-problem-with-the-big-bang-theory

BTW, have you noticed just how much of it's humor is based on a) pop culture references, b) catch phrases and c) laugh track?
Neither of which is humor.
One is basic recognition (which presses some of the same buttons in your brain as "getting a joke") and the other two are borderline Pavlovian prods to try to incite laughter.
"LAUGH MONKEY BOY! LAUGH! BEJEZUZ! ZIMBABWE! BLOOBLOOBLUBLU! LISTEN TO THESE PEOPLE LAUGHING! IT IS SOOOO FUNNY! LAAAAUGH!"

While we're on the subject of pop culture references...
American Dad and Family Guy for instance do A LOT of the "pop culture instead of humor" thing.
Basically, all of its humor is in those bits that have no connection to the story otherwise.
Not sure about the older episodes but relatively recent seasons of The Simpsons are doing the same thing.
Except instead of cutting away to completely unrelated characters it's one of the usual clowns (Homer, Wiggum Sr. or Jr. etc.) that does the "IT'S FUNNY! LAUGH!" bit.

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxjp6mEPzf1qjhons.jpg

Basically, the problem is that despite all of the progress that's been made in allowing us to look at gender in a sane and reasonable way there is still a small but significant minority of 'that guy'.

I don't even think it's the dongle jokes as much as it is the false sense of superiority that some men have, including men who are old enough and experienced enough and educated enough that they ought to know how much they don't know and that there are other people out there, many of them women, who know more than they about most subjects that are outside of their specialty.

Here's a collection of stories: http://mansplained.tumblr.com/, some of these are pretty jarring.

(Safe for work)
http://25.media.tumblr.com/ec2f7358b2d283a0a133ecb57d25b320/tumblr_mo7u7f0rzx1s8zzzfo1_500.png

Republicans supported this when Bush was in office. Democrats opposed it.

Democrats now support this when Obama is in office. Republicans oppose it.

What's wrong with that picture?

We have learned this:
(Safe for work unless your boss hates politics)
http://25.media.tumblr.com/1e0d1a0450dda3d32b0b97efdf439e9e/tumblr_mo12lvCGeL1s8zzzfo1_500.jpg

Plenty of things like the following exist:

http://samsungcopiesapple.tumblr.com/

That's about as much evidence as you need to see that free sharing of information and the FOSS movement is going virtually nowhere. You can't even make products that look similar to other products and the funny thing is it even angers people that aren't associated with the companies in question, why do such people get so emotional and angry about that? What sort of person buys a device and ends up so defined by their ownership of it that they get angry when another company makes something that looks similar?

You did not see the S1 and S2 packagings and shape and look of the phones as well as icons and so on?

You might just want to do a simple google search. Plenty of things like the following exist:

http://samsungcopiesapple.tumblr.com/

The benefit of meeting online is that you're pretty much forced to talk, and talk, and talk. It's not like you can take them to a movie and then then make out in the back of the car - instead you'll have to show them that you're a likeable person they would like to spend more time with. On the other hand, the guy you ran into in the coffee-shop who ask you out to see a movie may be the biggest creep in modern history

Ya. Now if only there were a way to meet and talk and talk and talk with a person face-to-face, in-real-life, instead of *having* to go to a movie and then make out in the car...

TL:DR; Online dating works because you must talk and reveal yourself to the other before meeting.

IRL dating works because you must talk and reveal yourself to the other *during* the meeting.

As for me, I met my wife in 1985 (when I was 22 and she 41) when I helped her to set up her new home (after she separated from her second husband). After a few days, she offered to pay me for all my work and I suggested she take me out to dinner instead. We were together for 20.5 years before she died in 2006 of a brain tumor - just seven weeks after diagnosis. (I haven't dated anyone since.) Remember Sue...

YMMV

This guy obviously is http://plumpergeddon.tumblr.com/

I suppose its only fair to link to some of the social media photos.

Thank you for posting the tumblr link - really gives an idea of the scope of things (which is, of course, exactly what the Turkish government wants to avoid at this point).

Can an iPhone focus?

According to this, the iPhone doesn't need to focus, though it does have a "tap to focus" gesture.

. At a focus distance of 4 feet, the iPhone 4S still has a somewhat shallow (for f/18.38, mind you!) total depth of 8.38 feet while the iPhone 4 has a total depth of 46.9 feet!

The hyperfocal distance of the iPhone 4 is 4.354618 feet while the hyperfocal distance of the iPhone 4S is 6.333142 feet.

It's not as if it sports a 50mm/f1.4.

I suppose its only fair to link to some of the social media photos.

hahah ~username? that's so 90s, brah. if any, it would be fox.tumblr.com
but for a dose of reality, Diario Clarín here in Argentina does exactly that: http://clarincomhd.tumblr.com/ except their photos are actually professional. post high quality photos on tumblr: not only trendy, you also save in bandwidth! It's tumblr's problem now!

http://pussysushi.tumblr.com/

You can visit millons of user's tumblrs without registering.
Oh, the faq is in the help page, and you don't need to register:
http://www.tumblr.com/help

I've never actually spent any time at Tumblr and didn't realize it was "popular" until this whole "the guy who created it is a certified genius blah blah blah" thing started being hyped in the media in the past few months.

As best I understand, it is a streaming-twitter sort of thing, but that is not actually used for interaction or new content or anything. It is pretty much just used for people to link or post other people's content to in their own stream that other people can view or subscribe to or something.

I guess the best comparison might be "an even shittier Pintrest"... and about as dumb.

The only thing stupider than a company trying to chase a trend that has a clear finite time for relevance is chasing a trend that is only really a hot trend in its own mind.

Apparently they have a bunch of users (well, tens of millions -- nothing absolutely astonishing or anything), so I guess the real purchase here is a mix of "durp durp Tumblr is a hip brand and will rub off on us in the mind of the public" and "we want to market shit to teens with emo hair and tight pants who are about to grow their fist pube".

It reminds me a lot of Dell trying to be cool by buying Alienware, when most people saw Alienware as expensive stupid shit for suckers and Dell didn't see an ounce of "cool" rub off on them for their effort.

Here's a pretty good example of a Tumblr "blog":

http://aarontothekyle.tumblr.com/

WTF? Really? http://www.tumblr.com/about I must be smarter than you. Or you're trolling.

http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/brazilian-fart-porn

Sad panda here :(

I'd not really heard of Tumblr before, and went to their site, and to even get in and find out WTF the site is about, they seem to insist on you setting up an account with email.

You went to www.tumblr.com rather than a specific tumblr feed. I'm at work, so I couldn't provide you with any specific tumblr feed I'm familiar with, which brings us to your original question.

Tumblr is porn. Lots and lots of reasonably well organized porn. I'm sure there's other stuff there, but I have no idea why you'd bother.

(alright, there are some which are memes which start out as funny and then you get tired of after five minutes, such as this one popular during the last election.)

Check out GeoCities on Tumblr. They post a screen shot of a GeoCities home page every 10 minutes or so.

http://oneterabyteofkilobyteage.tumblr.com/

It's a blogging platform. Many of the blogs are cutesy category blogs. You've probably read stuff there without knowing it.

Like http://awkwardstockphotos.com/ or http://richkidsofinstagram.tumblr.com/