This is why the marketers need to be dragged out in the street and gutted like pigs:)
You know that an engineer came up with the idea of SmartGlass, and it was really cool... in the lab. The awesomeness was then taken as a prototype to a bunch of executives who cooed and went gaga over their new money maker... and then the marketers came in and fucked the whole thing up by "giving" customers exactly what they don't want.
Uhhhh... what is illegal porn again? Child porn involves criminal acts with a child. Rape porn, also involves criminal acts against a person. Snuff... well you get the point.
Other than obvious instances of crimes that are being visually recorded just what do you feel should be made illegal?
Sounds to me like "illegal" porn is just what you find objectionable on a moral or cultural basis, and is not actually against any law. Unless you are talking about antiquated sodomy laws or something.
I'm sitting here on Saturday reading/., and more than a little sloshed, finding myself thinking about weird pink flamingos running around in nacho filled pants....
Guns kill people no matter how you look at it, and less guns will only lead to less deaths
Noooo. People kill People. A gun has almost never killed anybody by itself. The cases where it has killed somebody, that was a pretty damn freak accident. Like it fell from some height, or caught on fire and the bullets exploded out or something.
Less guns only removes the instrument, not the intent to kill another person. While you may argue that the removal of such an effective instrument might lead to less deaths, that can just as well be said about poisons, toxic chemicals, steak knifes, pictures-of-you-fucking-your-mistress-in-your-wifes-hands, etc.
If you genuinely think that a gun protects you from the goverment you're deluding yourself.
...and you are deluding yourself about government and ignoring history. Anytime a country or government has attempted to suppress the people, it has done so most successfully with an unarmed populace. In fact, there are several instances in which strong anti-gun measures were just a precursor to the formation of a totalitarian regime (Germany).
All a gun represents is an ability to defend yourself, your property, and your liberty. People that would come take that from you by force, often under the auspices of government, are faced with non-trivial resistance when a gun is involved.
Take Burma as an example. If the populace were armed to the teeth with automatic weapons, things might be playing out a little differently.
The gun is merely a contemporary example as well, as the true principle at work is the parity between government's ability to oppress you with weapons, and the populace's ability to defend themselves with weapons. While it might be argued that the military possess far superior and sophisticated fire power, said firepower cannot be effectively directed towards urban targets or used for long term urban pacification. See Syria as an example. It is not advanced weaponry killing people en masse, but traditional arms on the ground.
Yes deeply stupid... but it does remind me of the incredibly stupid argument back in the 90's (I think) where it was discussed that we needed to change the naming conventions on IDE hard drives.
Master/Slave was just too controversial and needed to be replaced. I remember several times over hearing somebody ask another tech if they had set the drive to slave mode only to be responded with, "Oh yes Masa. Set it to slave mode right quick Masa.". Yes, we did have a sarcasm problem where I worked.
Nothing is going to change anyways. This is all just mental masturbation.
Advertising is a wholly deplorable affair in which all active participants (excluding the victims) will be "sent to the special hell where they will be skinned alive and set simple".
Look at how hard Big Entertainment is fighting the "attacks" on their advertising platform through purchased legislation, intimidation, harassment, collusion, and outright terrorism. SonicBlue was sued out of existence for having the audacity to allow advertising to be skipped, which is not even the same as a true opt-out where the advertisers can tell their content was rejected. What was it.. Direct TV or Dish which recently said they were going to implement a skip mechanism and the brouhaha has already been started there. Big Entertainment has consistently demonstrated that they are willing to fire the lawyerpults and use insane arguments like skipping-commercials-is-stealing.
Hulu caved in like complete pussies and will start demanding that you have a cable subscription to access content like HBO already does. That's kind of like getting out of prison, but being forced to come back periodically to give a conjugal to Bubba because he misses you.
Microsoft makes only a small portion of their revenue from advertising, whereas Google makes how much of it from advertising? Of course they are not going to actually cooperate with any scheme or platform that drives their profitably down. It would be suicide as a business decision.
Microsoft turning on the DNT by default is basically a declaration of war (well we are already in one) against Google primarily, and the other ancillary business involved in online advertising, marketing, statistics, analytics, microtargetting, etc.
Lord knows why when it is such a stupid and pointless move.
The only way you are going to get privacy online and no tracking is to take it by force (technical methods are available), or hope that those whores in Congress, or your local whore at a state level implement legislation with real teeth.
Regular people do not want advertising. Anybody that says they do, should recuse themselves from the argument because they are clearly part of the advertising industry as either a client, or a provider.
The inevitable conclusion is that a war is being waged, and will be decided, by technology. People want technology to remove advertisements and unwanted content from their lives and have always demonstrated that the moment the barrier to entry is lowered enough (average level of sophistication and availability) they use it.
While it is an interesting argument, it is still fundamentally flawed.
YouTube is not the one performing the copyright infringement. "They" don't like to hear this, but "They" are required to control and defend their copyrights, and nobody else.
To say that YouTube needs to verify every single possible iota of content for proper use of legal entitlements is just plain crazy. That would be like IHOP being required to frisk you down, take your smartphone and tablets, and then somehow check to see if you have the legal entitlements to all IP on your person. I say somehow, because the logistics of identifying the copyright holder, contacting them, and the copyright holder even assessing the truth is damn near insurmountable.
No.
It needs to be a system where the copyright holders are responsible for administering the copyrights that we, The People, gave to them. I don't think society would have decided to give them those copyrights if they were going to go all psycho-batshit-nuts and started conscripting large groups of citizens into their private copyright armies to terrorize the masses.
At some point, enough is enough, and it no longer serves the original purpose, which was to enrich society by providing a stream of valuable content for the Public Domain.
An alternative explanation may be required because the Taliban is claiming they did not do it.
That I find interesting because it's not like the Taliban has a problem with taking credit for stuff like this. If they say they did not do it we might want to explore alternate explanations.
Personally, I don't believe it was mass hysteria either. More than likely somebody not affiliated with the Taliban, or acting without orders from higher ups. Religious extremism is rampant in that country and the Taliban probably organizes only a fraction of it.
Politicians are incredibly self-serving. When huge websites went down it made the Plebs get angry because their bread and circuses were being fucked with. That is historically a bad thing.
While I am sure that some big corporations who were fighting for their own interests, which only temporarily aligned with the best interests of The People, had some large influence on the outcome, it was not the only major influence in the room.
There was the Pro, the Con, the Intelligence Community, and mass public unrest from the Plebs. In this particular instance the math just happened to add up in our favor. Note, The People's interests once again were not even a variable.
I was thinking the same thing. A league is an alliance between a group of people. This is more like the Borg and they get to be the queen issuing the orders to all the drones.
An alarm system where information and activities is coordinated against laws and censorship sounds like a good thing, but that does not require site code controlled by other entities. It can be just a website where you have a membership and a mailing list, which has been pretty effective for a large number of things.
Now, a link on the site to such a website might not be a bad idea if you, or your client, strongly supports those ideals.
Loading remote code on a site has never seemed like a good idea to me anyways. Most of it is not secure, meaning that its authenticity is verified. I have seen plenty of websites that link to remote code for Javascript plugins from just about anywhere. One of Google's domains I might I understand, but not Joe Everybody.
Because some of us don't give a fuck. Some of us don't steal music, we don't have pictures of 8 year old boys being pounded in the ass by a college football coach and we don't run government agencies. We're ok that a manufacturer has a back door to their own device. They're never going to use it when it comes to the man on the street. Don't get a fuck, seriously.
Maybe the reason why we are not ok with it is because it is not Cisco's equipment but our own? I mean, we did pay for it right?
Setting aside all the arguments about privacy, anonymity, and you dont-have-anything-to-fear-if-you-have-nothing-to-hide crap we can at least agree that if you own something... you know... maybe you should own it?
I guess you don't give a fuck if you walk into your house, or business, and you find somebody standing there inspecting or modifying your equipment just because they sold it to you. That's sounds perfectly reasonable.
I kind of see your point, but you are being a little bit simplistic. Perhaps that is why you are being modded troll.
In just about any kind of renewal energy design, that is based on variable power sources, they are using energy storage to provide a constant amount of energy. Obviously the peak energy that can produced will be during daylight hours, and during the parts of the year where there is more sun.
Storing energy in molten sodium is not a new concept. On a smaller point source scale I have seen designs using flywheels and conventional batteries.
If you are going to go renewable, the sources should be multiple, and energy storage is usually a given.
IMO, you don't need to go fully renewable right away. If Germany can produce 1/3rd of its daily energy needs (especially during peak hours) from renewable sources that is valuable progress.
I can't even watch it over the net in most cases, which I assume you mean torrents.
Hulu was never an option because I could not skip the commercials, and Hulu Plus will start requiring a cable subscription anyways (or so I have been led to believe).
All the overlay ads during the program are so fucking obnoxious it takes all the joy and immersion right out of a program. Was over at my parents watching something and the overlay on the bottom was so big it actually obscured part of the program they were actively focusing on. Really?
All I can do now is wait for a web rip which has no overlays as well as no commercials. At that point I just don't give a shit as much. Other than Fringe and a couple of other shows I get web ripped, I am now waiting for the DVD box set or just watching it on Netflix.
These asshats have totally fucked up TV for good. I can remember when you had nearly 25 minutes of content for a 30 minute show and they seemed to survive just fine. Those days are gone for good.
So by your logic a purely descriptive term cannot be offensive? I can call a gay man fudgepacker and picklesmoker and not cause offense? Perhaps the most direct one, cocksucker?
What about midget or dwarf? I know that one of those descriptive terms is offensive, but I don't know which.
I don't understand how shemale can be derogatory either, but your logic does not seem to hold up. Whatever group the term is directed at seems to be able to call those shots, regardless of how illogical they may be as well.
uTorrent and RSS feeds. Any decent private torrent tracker will have RSS feeds. Some regex rules (not simple I know), an updated RSS feed 4 times an hour, and you have an automated download to whatever box you want to run.
I can't remember since I don't use it anymore, but there was a one-click front end for this kind of set up. It was based off public trackers which is why I stopped early on. Public torrents have way to much infected crap and are monitored by dickheads willing to sue you if they decide to make an example (of their stupidity).
It had TV shows divided into categories, and IIRC it had its own RSS feed too. For the time I had it running I had over a dozen shows on automatic download schedules.
Sorry, I can't remember the name anymore, but what you are talking about already exists. Why more average people are not using it, I dunno.
(I'm in the North so the best we have to hope for is the torch passing through
Uhhhhh.....
Do you mean the flash light passing through? I seem to remember that is what you guys mean by torch. Kind of like how french fries are chips, and chips are crisps and all that.....
Arguing about it being on at a different local time live is just pedantic. You're right the 12 hours makes no difference.
If they are already paying for a cable subscription and have DVR, the path of least resistance dictates that they would just hit the record button instead of going online and messing around, and then trying to get it on their big screen.
That's what the studios just don't get. Make the path of least resistance be in their favor, even if it theoretically results in slightly less revenue (which I don't believe).
Additionally, what is beyond stupid, is having a one week delay and then claiming that paying customers who pirate the show a week early are actually causing any declines in revenue. They paid for the product, just went out and got a copy a week early.
When that logic does not apply because the customer is not paying them for anything like a cable subscription, and they are not providing a method of purchase in that demographic, it is ludicrous to complain about any piracy from that demographic and that it affects revenue that logically cannot exist.
Slashdot Mirror
This is why the marketers need to be dragged out in the street and gutted like pigs :)
You know that an engineer came up with the idea of SmartGlass, and it was really cool... in the lab. The awesomeness was then taken as a prototype to a bunch of executives who cooed and went gaga over their new money maker... and then the marketers came in and fucked the whole thing up by "giving" customers exactly what they don't want.
Good Job, Marketers, Hip Hip Hooray! :)
He was trying to save people from the dehydration. Stop picking on the poor water distribution engineer.
Just illegal porn would be much better
Uhhhh... what is illegal porn again? Child porn involves criminal acts with a child. Rape porn, also involves criminal acts against a person. Snuff... well you get the point.
Other than obvious instances of crimes that are being visually recorded just what do you feel should be made illegal?
Sounds to me like "illegal" porn is just what you find objectionable on a moral or cultural basis, and is not actually against any law. Unless you are talking about antiquated sodomy laws or something.
Oh wait. You said flaming, not flamingos. It doesn't make any more sense now though.
WTF
I'm sitting here on Saturday reading /., and more than a little sloshed, finding myself thinking about weird pink flamingos running around in nacho filled pants....
That's still retarded. It's like when you turn off the stereo it burns all your CDs.
I think Sony has something like that in the works right now....
Combining your post with the Rule of 34..................
You're incredibly naive and your logic is flawed.
Guns kill people no matter how you look at it, and less guns will only lead to less deaths
Noooo. People kill People. A gun has almost never killed anybody by itself. The cases where it has killed somebody, that was a pretty damn freak accident. Like it fell from some height, or caught on fire and the bullets exploded out or something.
Less guns only removes the instrument, not the intent to kill another person. While you may argue that the removal of such an effective instrument might lead to less deaths, that can just as well be said about poisons, toxic chemicals, steak knifes, pictures-of-you-fucking-your-mistress-in-your-wifes-hands, etc.
If you genuinely think that a gun protects you from the goverment you're deluding yourself.
...and you are deluding yourself about government and ignoring history. Anytime a country or government has attempted to suppress the people, it has done so most successfully with an unarmed populace. In fact, there are several instances in which strong anti-gun measures were just a precursor to the formation of a totalitarian regime (Germany).
All a gun represents is an ability to defend yourself, your property, and your liberty. People that would come take that from you by force, often under the auspices of government, are faced with non-trivial resistance when a gun is involved.
Take Burma as an example. If the populace were armed to the teeth with automatic weapons, things might be playing out a little differently.
The gun is merely a contemporary example as well, as the true principle at work is the parity between government's ability to oppress you with weapons, and the populace's ability to defend themselves with weapons. While it might be argued that the military possess far superior and sophisticated fire power, said firepower cannot be effectively directed towards urban targets or used for long term urban pacification. See Syria as an example. It is not advanced weaponry killing people en masse, but traditional arms on the ground.
Yes deeply stupid... but it does remind me of the incredibly stupid argument back in the 90's (I think) where it was discussed that we needed to change the naming conventions on IDE hard drives.
Master/Slave was just too controversial and needed to be replaced. I remember several times over hearing somebody ask another tech if they had set the drive to slave mode only to be responded with, "Oh yes Masa. Set it to slave mode right quick Masa.". Yes, we did have a sarcasm problem where I worked.
Nothing is going to change anyways. This is all just mental masturbation.
Advertising is a wholly deplorable affair in which all active participants (excluding the victims) will be "sent to the special hell where they will be skinned alive and set simple".
Look at how hard Big Entertainment is fighting the "attacks" on their advertising platform through purchased legislation, intimidation, harassment, collusion, and outright terrorism.
SonicBlue was sued out of existence for having the audacity to allow advertising to be skipped, which is not even the same as a true opt-out where the advertisers can tell their content was rejected. What was it.. Direct TV or Dish which recently said they were going to implement a skip mechanism and the brouhaha has already been started there. Big Entertainment has consistently demonstrated that they are willing to fire the lawyerpults and use insane arguments like skipping-commercials-is-stealing.
Hulu caved in like complete pussies and will start demanding that you have a cable subscription to access content like HBO already does. That's kind of like getting out of prison, but being forced to come back periodically to give a conjugal to Bubba because he misses you.
Microsoft makes only a small portion of their revenue from advertising, whereas Google makes how much of it from advertising? Of course they are not going to actually cooperate with any scheme or platform that drives their profitably down. It would be suicide as a business decision.
Microsoft turning on the DNT by default is basically a declaration of war (well we are already in one) against Google primarily, and the other ancillary business involved in online advertising, marketing, statistics, analytics, microtargetting, etc.
Lord knows why when it is such a stupid and pointless move.
The only way you are going to get privacy online and no tracking is to take it by force (technical methods are available), or hope that those whores in Congress, or your local whore at a state level implement legislation with real teeth.
Regular people do not want advertising. Anybody that says they do, should recuse themselves from the argument because they are clearly part of the advertising industry as either a client, or a provider.
The inevitable conclusion is that a war is being waged, and will be decided, by technology. People want technology to remove advertisements and unwanted content from their lives and have always demonstrated that the moment the barrier to entry is lowered enough (average level of sophistication and availability) they use it.
I'm not sure who that insults more....
While it is an interesting argument, it is still fundamentally flawed.
YouTube is not the one performing the copyright infringement. "They" don't like to hear this, but "They" are required to control and defend their copyrights, and nobody else.
To say that YouTube needs to verify every single possible iota of content for proper use of legal entitlements is just plain crazy. That would be like IHOP being required to frisk you down, take your smartphone and tablets, and then somehow check to see if you have the legal entitlements to all IP on your person. I say somehow, because the logistics of identifying the copyright holder, contacting them, and the copyright holder even assessing the truth is damn near insurmountable.
No.
It needs to be a system where the copyright holders are responsible for administering the copyrights that we, The People, gave to them. I don't think society would have decided to give them those copyrights if they were going to go all psycho-batshit-nuts and started conscripting large groups of citizens into their private copyright armies to terrorize the masses.
At some point, enough is enough, and it no longer serves the original purpose, which was to enrich society by providing a stream of valuable content for the Public Domain.
An alternative explanation may be required because the Taliban is claiming they did not do it.
That I find interesting because it's not like the Taliban has a problem with taking credit for stuff like this. If they say they did not do it we might want to explore alternate explanations.
Personally, I don't believe it was mass hysteria either. More than likely somebody not affiliated with the Taliban, or acting without orders from higher ups. Religious extremism is rampant in that country and the Taliban probably organizes only a fraction of it.
It might not be that simple.
Politicians are incredibly self-serving. When huge websites went down it made the Plebs get angry because their bread and circuses were being fucked with. That is historically a bad thing.
While I am sure that some big corporations who were fighting for their own interests, which only temporarily aligned with the best interests of The People, had some large influence on the outcome, it was not the only major influence in the room.
There was the Pro, the Con, the Intelligence Community, and mass public unrest from the Plebs. In this particular instance the math just happened to add up in our favor. Note, The People's interests once again were not even a variable.
I was thinking the same thing. A league is an alliance between a group of people. This is more like the Borg and they get to be the queen issuing the orders to all the drones.
An alarm system where information and activities is coordinated against laws and censorship sounds like a good thing, but that does not require site code controlled by other entities. It can be just a website where you have a membership and a mailing list, which has been pretty effective for a large number of things.
Now, a link on the site to such a website might not be a bad idea if you, or your client, strongly supports those ideals.
Loading remote code on a site has never seemed like a good idea to me anyways. Most of it is not secure, meaning that its authenticity is verified. I have seen plenty of websites that link to remote code for Javascript plugins from just about anywhere. One of Google's domains I might I understand, but not Joe Everybody.
Because some of us don't give a fuck. Some of us don't steal music, we don't have pictures of 8 year old boys being pounded in the ass by a college football coach and we don't run government agencies. We're ok that a manufacturer has a back door to their own device. They're never going to use it when it comes to the man on the street. Don't get a fuck, seriously.
Maybe the reason why we are not ok with it is because it is not Cisco's equipment but our own? I mean, we did pay for it right?
Setting aside all the arguments about privacy, anonymity, and you dont-have-anything-to-fear-if-you-have-nothing-to-hide crap we can at least agree that if you own something... you know... maybe you should own it?
I guess you don't give a fuck if you walk into your house, or business, and you find somebody standing there inspecting or modifying your equipment just because they sold it to you. That's sounds perfectly reasonable.
I kind of see your point, but you are being a little bit simplistic. Perhaps that is why you are being modded troll.
In just about any kind of renewal energy design, that is based on variable power sources, they are using energy storage to provide a constant amount of energy. Obviously the peak energy that can produced will be during daylight hours, and during the parts of the year where there is more sun.
Storing energy in molten sodium is not a new concept. On a smaller point source scale I have seen designs using flywheels and conventional batteries.
If you are going to go renewable, the sources should be multiple, and energy storage is usually a given.
IMO, you don't need to go fully renewable right away. If Germany can produce 1/3rd of its daily energy needs (especially during peak hours) from renewable sources that is valuable progress.
I can't even watch it over the net in most cases, which I assume you mean torrents.
Hulu was never an option because I could not skip the commercials, and Hulu Plus will start requiring a cable subscription anyways (or so I have been led to believe).
All the overlay ads during the program are so fucking obnoxious it takes all the joy and immersion right out of a program. Was over at my parents watching something and the overlay on the bottom was so big it actually obscured part of the program they were actively focusing on. Really?
All I can do now is wait for a web rip which has no overlays as well as no commercials. At that point I just don't give a shit as much. Other than Fringe and a couple of other shows I get web ripped, I am now waiting for the DVD box set or just watching it on Netflix.
These asshats have totally fucked up TV for good. I can remember when you had nearly 25 minutes of content for a 30 minute show and they seemed to survive just fine. Those days are gone for good.
Dude.... STFU... you could give them ideas today.
So by your logic a purely descriptive term cannot be offensive? I can call a gay man fudgepacker and picklesmoker and not cause offense? Perhaps the most direct one, cocksucker?
What about midget or dwarf? I know that one of those descriptive terms is offensive, but I don't know which.
I don't understand how shemale can be derogatory either, but your logic does not seem to hold up. Whatever group the term is directed at seems to be able to call those shots, regardless of how illogical they may be as well.
Like I said, it was based off public trackers.
The software already exists.
uTorrent and RSS feeds. Any decent private torrent tracker will have RSS feeds. Some regex rules (not simple I know), an updated RSS feed 4 times an hour, and you have an automated download to whatever box you want to run.
I can't remember since I don't use it anymore, but there was a one-click front end for this kind of set up. It was based off public trackers which is why I stopped early on. Public torrents have way to much infected crap and are monitored by dickheads willing to sue you if they decide to make an example (of their stupidity).
It had TV shows divided into categories, and IIRC it had its own RSS feed too. For the time I had it running I had over a dozen shows on automatic download schedules.
Sorry, I can't remember the name anymore, but what you are talking about already exists. Why more average people are not using it, I dunno.
(I'm in the North so the best we have to hope for is the torch passing through
Uhhhhh.....
Do you mean the flash light passing through? I seem to remember that is what you guys mean by torch. Kind of like how french fries are chips, and chips are crisps and all that.....
Or is a torch both things at the same time?
I'm confused.
Ease of Use.
Arguing about it being on at a different local time live is just pedantic. You're right the 12 hours makes no difference.
If they are already paying for a cable subscription and have DVR, the path of least resistance dictates that they would just hit the record button instead of going online and messing around, and then trying to get it on their big screen.
That's what the studios just don't get. Make the path of least resistance be in their favor, even if it theoretically results in slightly less revenue (which I don't believe).
Additionally, what is beyond stupid, is having a one week delay and then claiming that paying customers who pirate the show a week early are actually causing any declines in revenue. They paid for the product, just went out and got a copy a week early.
When that logic does not apply because the customer is not paying them for anything like a cable subscription, and they are not providing a method of purchase in that demographic, it is ludicrous to complain about any piracy from that demographic and that it affects revenue that logically cannot exist.
1/10th?
My jaw dropped when I saw Dell pushing a 700+ MB printer driver. You have to look for it but you can find a 6MB driver only install instead.
How on earth you need 700MB for a printer driver and software is beyond me..