Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see how the Seven step model for legal revenge blog article supports the claim that she "has been outspoken about how women should use rape accusations to destroy men".
First, the blog article does not mention rape accusations at all.
Second, the blog article advises that, "It is almost always better to forgive than to revenge".
Third, the blog article advises that if you do decide to revenge rather than forgive, then the revenge should not be disproportionately excessive.
Can you elaborate on how you think this blog article supports the claim?
Holy fuck is it annoying to completely rewrite document after document produced by a bunch of slackers who think because they know how to ping something that means they can be practically nonfunctional at everything else including such basic things as language.
That reminds me of an old piece of graffiti: I used to want to be an engineer. Now I are one.
Actually, Gandhi made several hunger-strikes, but they all occurred only after he was a hugely popular leader- which meant that the possibility of his death, brought massive pressure over the ruling British Government who would have to deal with anarchic rage riots that could break out in the population.
True. But Gandhi also trained some (I think a few dozen) of his followers in his tactics, and sent them off to various villages to carry his message. Typically, such a follower would work hard to become a respected member of the village. Later, if a serious disputes arose in the village, then the person might go on hunger strike until the dispute was resolved. According to one of Gandhi's biographies, such hunger strikes were successful in ending disputes, at least in some cases.
I think this shows that a person who is respected nationally can go on hunger strike and have a national impact, while a person who is respected more locally can go on a hunger strike and have a local impact.
Whether locally, nationally or internationally known, a hunger strike is much more likely to be effective if there is widespread publicity about it. The fact that the Chinese people on hunger strike against Google have gotten international exposure will certainly help their chances of success.
there is an incident, where several men (at least a dozen) were imprisoned by the SS -- I think they were suspected communists, but I might be mistaken about that. [...] But the SS hadn't expected that their wives would come to the prison and loudly demand their husbands to be released [...]
A small correction: the people were Jewish spouses of (non-Jewish) German citizens. The event happened in Berlin in 1943. I agree it is amazing that the Nazis released an estimated 35 Jewish people during the height of the Holocaust. You can read the fascinating story on the first page of a 6-page article (148-KB PDF file).
Regarding Gandhi... I spent four years researching and writing an open-source training course called Skills You Need to Change the World. The training course is not exclusively, or even mainly, about Gandhi, but he does feature a bit. My research lead me to realise that Gandhi (and some of his biographers) explained his non-violent tactics exclusively in spiritual terms, which is a shame because that makes it difficult for people who don't share similar spiritual beliefs to understand why his tactics can be so effective.
I found some non-intuitive but easy-to-understand psychological principles that explain the effectiveness of Gandhi's tactics, and the circumstances required for them to be effective. If you are interested in reading about this, then look at The Bell Curve of Intolerance and Satyagraha parts of the training course's slides manual. You can download it from my website.
someone[...] complained that on a web page I had worked on, that half the hyperlinks were purple and the other half were blue, chastising me for the inconsistency.
I've encountered a great many websites that suffer from that problem. Finally, I know who is to blame for it!
As an analogy, let's suppose you have a spare room in your house or apartment. A friend suddenly finds himself needing a place to stay (perhaps his own apartment burned down, he was evicted, or his wife threw him out). Would you say to your friend "You can crash in my spare room for a few days/weeks/months"?
In deciding whether to make that offer, you will be thinking: "Letting my friend stay here will inconvenience me by X amount, but it will benefit him Y amount." Your decision will be partially based on the relative magnitudes of X and Y, and partially based on how nice/altruistic you are.
Gary Phebus (the man in the article) has made that sort of decision. He has compared the benefit to him of his remaining life with ever-deteriorating health (X) against the benefit to anonymous others of him sacrificing X so they have a chance of a long and healthy life (Y).
If Ozzy was chosen because of his high levels of drug abuse, then it is only a matter of time before a/. reader is chosen because of his high level of self abuse.
i bought a $5 multitool at the hardware store and removed the tools from it. get some copies of your keys made, cut them down to fit, and stick them in place of the tools. the multitool i bought holds eight keys, four in either handle. that just happens to be the number of keys i have too~
That's a nice idea. Unfortunately, I suspect there might be difficulty in getting such a contraption past the security check at an airport.
I'm just waiting for Google to send a fleet of their black vans around the Milky Way so we can see it all on Google Street View. Perhaps one day we will be able to see the view outside the Restaurant at the End of the Universe.
There was a British comedy duo called the Symbolics. One member of the pair introduced themselves to audiences with "We're the Symbolics. I'm Sim. And he's the other one."
This just in... It seems the governor's office was right to be wary. The FBI have confirmed that all the laptops are infected with Windows Vista Basic. Truly nasty.
My story is different, but some issues in it may be of interest.
There was a clasue in my employment contract stating that anyting I did of a copyrightable nature while employed belonged to the company, even if I did it outside of office hours on my own computer. The verbal assurance of the manager who hired me (he was one of the company's founders and my PhD thesis supervisor) was that they would not enforce the copyright ownership if whatever I did was irrelevant to the company's business, but he said it would be polite for me to ask for transfer of copyright ownership if I was to do something for myself.
Several years later, the manager who hired me had moved to a different part of the company. I did start to write stuff for myself. I did ask my (new) manager for a transfer of copyright ownership. In principle, he was happy to do this, but he had to run it past the legal department and get the CTO to proofread the draft of my book to ensure it didn't say anything embarrassing to the company. Of course, looking after the core business of the company and meeting quarterly revenue targets took a higher priority than dealing with my request, so the transfer of copyright ownership took 6 months. That was for the first book I wrote. It took 8 months for the second book. The point I am making is that if your employment contract states you own the copyright of non-work-related stuff that you write on your own time then that will save you from dealing with frustratingly slow bureaucracy.
I work in the consultancy and training department of the company, so I travel a lot. For this I need a laptop. It would have been impractical to carry 2 laptops with me: a company one and a personal one. So when I was working out details of the transfer of copyright ownership, I requested that I be able to keep my own stuff on the company laptop. Both my boss and the legal department were concerned with the possibility of "my stuff" and "company stuff" getting inter-mingeled on the same disk drive. We solved this concern by me buying a compact flash card and a compact-flash-to-PCMCIA-card adapter. I put these into the PCMCIA card slot on my laptop and used it as a separate drive for "my stuff". (By the way, I discovered that Windows has dreadfully slow drivers for accessing flash-based devices, but Linux has very fast drivers.) I got a written letter stating that I owned a "project" that was on the PCMCIA-card drive if my employer pre-approved the "project". The need to get pre-approval for projects was irritating-but-tolerable for a few years. Eventually, I paid off my mortgage and my wife's university fees. At that point, I realised that I could afford to live on far less money, so I negotiated to switch from being a full-time employee to being a part-time one. Suddenly the issue of copyright ownership became a non-issue because under UK law the company can demand copyright ownership only for what I do during the part-time work hours; what I develop under the rest of my time is automatically mine. I have been blissfully happy ever since.
One last point. About a year ago I bought a netbook. It's powerful enough for the needs of my projects--running PowerPoint, LaTeX and developing small C++/Java programs with "vi" and "make" or "ant"--your mileage may vary. I plug the netbook into an external monitor and keyboard when working in my home office. When I travel on company business, the netbook is small enough for me to carry it and the company laptop. So now I have a more complete physical separation between "company stuff" and "my stuff" and I don't have to endure Windows' slow drivers for flash-based disks.
There is a great book called The Lucifer Effect: How Good People Turn Evil by Philip Zimbardo. The author was the guy who conducted the Standford Prison Experiment a few decades ago. The book discusses that experiment and how it relates to other well-known acts of evil that have occurred, such as massacres during war, genocides, and abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib.
In the book, the author argues against the idea that some people are intrinsically good and other people are intrinsically evil. Instead, the evidence from the Stanford Prison Experiment indicates that if you put good people into an evil situation then they will behave in evil ways. Of course, this viewpoint is exactly the opposite
of the assumption made by the person who wrote the AI program in the article.
Some people have expressed scepticism about the readability and maintainability of the generated Java code. That's a simple concern to deal with. Just run the generated Java code though a Java-to-Perl translator. Then there won't be any question at all about its level of readability and maintainability.
Modern bus systems have bike racks on the front bumper that people can load and unload their bikes onto quickly.
An alternative idea is to buy a good-quality folding bicycle, such as a Dahon or Brompton. These fold up small enough that you can take them as hand luggage when boarding a bus or train, without any need for bicycle racks, or you can put them in the boot of a taxi.
With a folding bicycle, you can cycle to work when the weather is good. And if the weather is not to your liking (and you do not have wet-weather clothing) then you can fold up the bike and take it with you on public transport. Folding bicycles are also compact enough to store under your desk at work or in your hallway at home.
A folding bicycle won't work for somebody who has, say, a 50-mile commute on a freeway, but for shorter commutes it can be great.
[...] according to workplace law, sexual harassment is defined to have occurred regardless of the events that transpired. The only requirement for sexual harassment to have occurred in an American workplace is that the "victim" reports feeling harassed.
If you look at a dictionary definition of "harassment", you will see it means to trouble or torment a person persistently or repeatedly. Since this was a once-off incident, it does not qualify as harassment; at least not under the law in England (which is where I live). I would be surprised if US law was different in this regard.
There is a famous story of a patient in hospital complaining of an earache. The doctor doing the rounds wrote a prescription for a nurse to fulfill. The prescription stated that several drops of a particular drug should be put in "R ear" ("R" being an abbreviation for "right").
The nurse dutifully put the earache drops in the patients anus.
Yes, I know this has nothing to do with texting, but abbreviations are common in text messages so I was reminded of this story.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see how the Seven step model for legal revenge blog article supports the claim that she "has been outspoken about how women should use rape accusations to destroy men".
First, the blog article does not mention rape accusations at all.
Second, the blog article advises that, "It is almost always better to forgive than to revenge".
Third, the blog article advises that if you do decide to revenge rather than forgive, then the revenge should not be disproportionately excessive.
Can you elaborate on how you think this blog article supports the claim?
Holy fuck is it annoying to completely rewrite document after document produced by a bunch of slackers who think because they know how to ping something that means they can be practically nonfunctional at everything else including such basic things as language.
That reminds me of an old piece of graffiti: I used to want to be an engineer. Now I are one.
Actually, Gandhi made several hunger-strikes, but they all occurred only after he was a hugely popular leader- which meant that the possibility of his death, brought massive pressure over the ruling British Government who would have to deal with anarchic rage riots that could break out in the population.
True. But Gandhi also trained some (I think a few dozen) of his followers in his tactics, and sent them off to various villages to carry his message. Typically, such a follower would work hard to become a respected member of the village. Later, if a serious disputes arose in the village, then the person might go on hunger strike until the dispute was resolved. According to one of Gandhi's biographies, such hunger strikes were successful in ending disputes, at least in some cases.
I think this shows that a person who is respected nationally can go on hunger strike and have a national impact, while a person who is respected more locally can go on a hunger strike and have a local impact.
Whether locally, nationally or internationally known, a hunger strike is much more likely to be effective if there is widespread publicity about it. The fact that the Chinese people on hunger strike against Google have gotten international exposure will certainly help their chances of success.
there is an incident, where several men (at least a dozen) were imprisoned by the SS -- I think they were suspected communists, but I might be mistaken about that. [...] But the SS hadn't expected that their wives would come to the prison and loudly demand their husbands to be released [...]
A small correction: the people were Jewish spouses of (non-Jewish) German citizens. The event happened in Berlin in 1943. I agree it is amazing that the Nazis released an estimated 35 Jewish people during the height of the Holocaust. You can read the fascinating story on the first page of a 6-page article (148-KB PDF file).
Regarding Gandhi... I spent four years researching and writing an open-source training course called Skills You Need to Change the World. The training course is not exclusively, or even mainly, about Gandhi, but he does feature a bit. My research lead me to realise that Gandhi (and some of his biographers) explained his non-violent tactics exclusively in spiritual terms, which is a shame because that makes it difficult for people who don't share similar spiritual beliefs to understand why his tactics can be so effective.
I found some non-intuitive but easy-to-understand psychological principles that explain the effectiveness of Gandhi's tactics, and the circumstances required for them to be effective. If you are interested in reading about this, then look at The Bell Curve of Intolerance and Satyagraha parts of the training course's slides manual. You can download it from my website.
It is interesting, but unsurprising, that they found that ADHD and autism had no link thus far
They couldn't find anyone with ADHD to lie still long enough to complete the 15-minute MRI scan.
I've encountered a great many websites that suffer from that problem. Finally, I know who is to blame for it!
As an analogy, let's suppose you have a spare room in your house or apartment. A friend suddenly finds himself needing a place to stay (perhaps his own apartment burned down, he was evicted, or his wife threw him out). Would you say to your friend "You can crash in my spare room for a few days/weeks/months"?
In deciding whether to make that offer, you will be thinking: "Letting my friend stay here will inconvenience me by X amount, but it will benefit him Y amount." Your decision will be partially based on the relative magnitudes of X and Y, and partially based on how nice/altruistic you are.
Gary Phebus (the man in the article) has made that sort of decision. He has compared the benefit to him of his remaining life with ever-deteriorating health (X) against the benefit to anonymous others of him sacrificing X so they have a chance of a long and healthy life (Y).
I greatly admire his attitude.
That must have far worse consequences for global warming than the methane emitted by all the cows in the world.
If Ozzy was chosen because of his high levels of drug abuse, then it is only a matter of time before a /. reader is chosen because of his high level of self abuse.
That's a nice idea. Unfortunately, I suspect there might be difficulty in getting such a contraption past the security check at an airport.
I vote for GOTO as the only instruction.
That would be hilarious.
Actually, GOTO would be considered harmful.
I'm just waiting for Google to send a fleet of their black vans around the Milky Way so we can see it all on Google Street View. Perhaps one day we will be able to see the view outside the Restaurant at the End of the Universe.
Almost everybody in the large crowd murmers agreement, but then a lone voice at the back replies "I'm not."
I'm gonna get a "First Post" patent and bring slashdot to its knees.
There was a British comedy duo called the Symbolics. One member of the pair introduced themselves to audiences with "We're the Symbolics. I'm Sim. And he's the other one."
I think we have enough for a beowulf cluster of state governors... All we need to do is get them to run Linux and drive around in a bad car analogy.
This just in... It seems the governor's office was right to be wary. The FBI have confirmed that all the laptops are infected with Windows Vista Basic. Truly nasty.
My story is different, but some issues in it may be of interest.
There was a clasue in my employment contract stating that anyting I did of a copyrightable nature while employed belonged to the company, even if I did it outside of office hours on my own computer. The verbal assurance of the manager who hired me (he was one of the company's founders and my PhD thesis supervisor) was that they would not enforce the copyright ownership if whatever I did was irrelevant to the company's business, but he said it would be polite for me to ask for transfer of copyright ownership if I was to do something for myself.
Several years later, the manager who hired me had moved to a different part of the company. I did start to write stuff for myself. I did ask my (new) manager for a transfer of copyright ownership. In principle, he was happy to do this, but he had to run it past the legal department and get the CTO to proofread the draft of my book to ensure it didn't say anything embarrassing to the company. Of course, looking after the core business of the company and meeting quarterly revenue targets took a higher priority than dealing with my request, so the transfer of copyright ownership took 6 months. That was for the first book I wrote. It took 8 months for the second book. The point I am making is that if your employment contract states you own the copyright of non-work-related stuff that you write on your own time then that will save you from dealing with frustratingly slow bureaucracy.
I work in the consultancy and training department of the company, so I travel a lot. For this I need a laptop. It would have been impractical to carry 2 laptops with me: a company one and a personal one. So when I was working out details of the transfer of copyright ownership, I requested that I be able to keep my own stuff on the company laptop. Both my boss and the legal department were concerned with the possibility of "my stuff" and "company stuff" getting inter-mingeled on the same disk drive. We solved this concern by me buying a compact flash card and a compact-flash-to-PCMCIA-card adapter. I put these into the PCMCIA card slot on my laptop and used it as a separate drive for "my stuff". (By the way, I discovered that Windows has dreadfully slow drivers for accessing flash-based devices, but Linux has very fast drivers.) I got a written letter stating that I owned a "project" that was on the PCMCIA-card drive if my employer pre-approved the "project". The need to get pre-approval for projects was irritating-but-tolerable for a few years. Eventually, I paid off my mortgage and my wife's university fees. At that point, I realised that I could afford to live on far less money, so I negotiated to switch from being a full-time employee to being a part-time one. Suddenly the issue of copyright ownership became a non-issue because under UK law the company can demand copyright ownership only for what I do during the part-time work hours; what I develop under the rest of my time is automatically mine. I have been blissfully happy ever since.
One last point. About a year ago I bought a netbook. It's powerful enough for the needs of my projects--running PowerPoint, LaTeX and developing small C++/Java programs with "vi" and "make" or "ant"--your mileage may vary. I plug the netbook into an external monitor and keyboard when working in my home office. When I travel on company business, the netbook is small enough for me to carry it and the company laptop. So now I have a more complete physical separation between "company stuff" and "my stuff" and I don't have to endure Windows' slow drivers for flash-based disks.
There is a great book called The Lucifer Effect: How Good People Turn Evil by Philip Zimbardo. The author was the guy who conducted the Standford Prison Experiment a few decades ago. The book discusses that experiment and how it relates to other well-known acts of evil that have occurred, such as massacres during war, genocides, and abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib.
In the book, the author argues against the idea that some people are intrinsically good and other people are intrinsically evil. Instead, the evidence from the Stanford Prison Experiment indicates that if you put good people into an evil situation then they will behave in evil ways. Of course, this viewpoint is exactly the opposite of the assumption made by the person who wrote the AI program in the article.
Some people have expressed scepticism about the readability and maintainability of the generated Java code. That's a simple concern to deal with. Just run the generated Java code though a Java-to-Perl translator. Then there won't be any question at all about its level of readability and maintainability.
Modern bus systems have bike racks on the front bumper that people can load and unload their bikes onto quickly.
An alternative idea is to buy a good-quality folding bicycle, such as a Dahon or Brompton. These fold up small enough that you can take them as hand luggage when boarding a bus or train, without any need for bicycle racks, or you can put them in the boot of a taxi.
With a folding bicycle, you can cycle to work when the weather is good. And if the weather is not to your liking (and you do not have wet-weather clothing) then you can fold up the bike and take it with you on public transport. Folding bicycles are also compact enough to store under your desk at work or in your hallway at home.
A folding bicycle won't work for somebody who has, say, a 50-mile commute on a freeway, but for shorter commutes it can be great.
[...] according to workplace law, sexual harassment is defined to have occurred regardless of the events that transpired. The only requirement for sexual harassment to have occurred in an American workplace is that the "victim" reports feeling harassed.
If you look at a dictionary definition of "harassment", you will see it means to trouble or torment a person persistently or repeatedly. Since this was a once-off incident, it does not qualify as harassment; at least not under the law in England (which is where I live). I would be surprised if US law was different in this regard.
Hey dude, it's just got to be a Beowulf cluster.
Preferably a russian one.
And don't forget to use low-profile car tires for extra performance.
There is a famous story of a patient in hospital complaining of an earache. The doctor doing the rounds wrote a prescription for a nurse to fulfill. The prescription stated that several drops of a particular drug should be put in "R ear" ("R" being an abbreviation for "right").
The nurse dutifully put the earache drops in the patients anus.
Yes, I know this has nothing to do with texting, but abbreviations are common in text messages so I was reminded of this story.
Roaming in Africa and calling England costs £1.20/minute (or over $1.75/minute) if you have the Orange Travel plan. Texting is much, much cheaper.
1. A life is saved with the aid of text messages.
2. Text messages are cheap.
1 plus 2 means that (saving a) life is cheap.
It's ironic when you consider that the phrase "life is cheap" normally means that life is not valued highly.