The Internet is extremely good at pushing things out of context or missing that little bit of info that completely changes the meaning of something.
You mistake strength for weakness. Imagine such levels of hue and cry and demanding of accountability in the mainstream populous -- Such is missing even over things that actually really matter.
'Tis better to Sense Emphatically and waste a few cycles for self correction than Decide to dismiss threats by default and Act far too late. For the first time in your planet's history businesses can respond nearly instantly to customer demands. Just look at the Xbone, for a recent example. The point is that if Google had removed such feature they'd know it was a bad move, and going forward they know for sure not to strip that feature.
Tell me, do you curse yourself for your immediately incorrect first impression before you've even considered a second look to discover something a bit closer to truth? Your indignation would be warranted if despite widespread evidence of the falsehood everyone still believed the initially perceived deceptions. Let they who hath never done the double take pass the first judgment.
The Internet is not unlike your brain, except that you can see every part of this seething Cybernetic system as it fills with speculation prior to arriving at better understanding over time. Like humans the Internet reacts the most to what is perceived most threatening. What is most notable is not the time frames of the responses but the relative time frames of each cybernetic phase: Rapid repeated Sensing and even duplication of thoughts bubble up here in Slashdot's corner of the global mind; At a slower pace do the Decisions percolate as information is gathered; Yet more energy still is required to activate that synapse of the collective's Actions.
As a cyberneticist I agree that you should have the sense to decide before you act; However, do not mistake Sensation for Decision or Action. The Internet isn't perfect, but I couldn't have designed it better myself.
For those of you who know something about statistics, consider this math problem:
A sample group of 24,000 students who think they have what it takes to go to a university take the entrance exam. Out of those 24,000, none of them pass the exam.
Let event A be a randomly selected student from this population passing the exam. Find the maximum value of P(A) that would keep the results of the sample group above within a 95% confidence interval.
Then, once you've done that, think long and hard about the reasons why nobody passed the test.
For those of you who know something about enigmatic idealists, consider this people problem:
A group of people who think more people deserve a service which is being rationed in proportion to demonstration of knowledge take a test. Out of all of them none of them pass the exam.
Let event A have fuck all to do with statistics. Find the motive A for reducing the difficulty of the exam in the aforementioned statements, such that parent poster is sufficiently demonstrated to be ignorant.
Then, once you've done that, think long and hard about why statisticians love concentrating on distracting numbers instead of people.
TL;DR: Bitch, please, you just suggested I assume my confirmation bias correct.
I wonder when 1984 will become a forbidden book. It is, after all, a terrorism guidebook in disguise!
Did you read the same 1984 that I did? Because, mine explained how such works wouldn't become forbidden, just editorialized and/or deleted then forgot.
What's interesting is considering that your 1984 really is a terrorism guidebook, and yet the discussions about its censorship would still make sense to you as an inciting anti-government book -- As if my version was actually the same as yours... We would even both agree that it's a freedom of speech issue for the book to exist even if it's critical of the government, even if yours proscribes suicidebombs while mine describes despotism.
If your 1984 is a terrorism guidebook then that proves the point and explains the reasoning behind its seemingly forgotten status in the common culture. It need not be forbidden then, eh? Everyone can see that a pro-terrorist book is doubleplusungood and should not be re-printed, or seen as extreme satire... Some may even agree that the violent acts in your version warrant all copies of the book's exposure to 451 degrees of Fahrenheit, or at least dismissal as insane paranoia.
At least 1984 would make a perfect test for society's censorship thresholds -- As an e-book today, how would people react if the very book describing such secret information warfare were dumbed down to merely thought policing or just terrorist acts, and then experimentally deleted right from under people's noses? Perhaps if there were not much outrage, Big Brother would know it safe to proceed with plans for their Prismatic Digital Panopticon? Indeed it may be construed a guidebook, but for governments not terrorists.
Tell me, in your 1984 are the people ever wakened from their despotism? In the face of such a powerful government agency do the protagonists in 1984 win a hard yet inspirational victory or is your copy hopelessly defeatist? Interesting...
Orwell would be laughing in his grave... In incredulity, amazement, or like a terrorist gone mad? What does your copy tell you?
Well Yes and No.
No - I don't agree that the subject matter that has been actually leaked was right for governments to have done in the first place. eg: The deliberate killing of innocent civilians in Iraq. That is wrong.
Yes - I do agree that leaking information is harmful to government and beneficial to enemies,
but... what if the "enemies" didn't really exist? What if the people of the countries were just like you and me and didn't want to fight us? What if the most secret secret is that the "enemies" are fabrications of the governments, and without any secrets allowed at all they couldn't trick us into fighting each other?
Take Syria for example. The folks on the front line on each side just want peace, and Assad's forces are monitored and fed only state media and kept from communicating with the enemy... Why? If the enemy were evil, wouldn't they still be shouting evil things? Oh, it's to prevent traitors? But if they were traitors they wouldn't be fighting on the front line...
What sort of "wrong things" do you propose the government stop doing? Perhaps their real enemy is you?
BOO! now SHHH! we can't tell you why they're the enemy, that's a secret.
Well poisoning. There's a 'common sense' reason that phrase doesn't have a good connotation.
Only because you consider Poison as bad, quite irrationally. For instance: Distilled Water is poisonous if too much is ingested, messes up the electrolytes.... which plants crave. Aspirin is helpful for thinning blood and ridding headaches... Take a bottle of Aspirin and it'll be the last thing you ever do. English being the ambiguous cluster fsck it is, I've applied good connotation to "Well Poisoning": Medication. AKA Poisoning till Well. See also: Chemotherapy, or a host of other medicinal practices.
TL;DR: Your prescription of connotation implies a false prevalence as to the meanings of terms "Well" and "Poison".
Note: No one saw Chelyabinsk coming. Humans are basically blind. Rocks are really hard to see, hell, we didn't even know Eris was out there -- A DWARF PLANET MORE MASSIVE THAN PLUTO, was only just seen in 2008! That's why Pluto's not a planet anymore, because if we left it a planet, we'd have to admit there are PLANET SIZED ROCKS we didn't see drifting about in our back yard.
Just Imagine it: Every channel on TV is talking about the huge asteroid comparable to the one that caused the extinction of the dinosaurs. We have only 8 years to change its course, but since we're missing it's transit this time around, we are all doomed. If only we already had the Mass in orbit already to use as a gravity tug, and the optics in place for full sky observation, we could have detected it sooner, we could have prevented the disaster. We had the technology to get such in place since the 70's, but no funding to do it.... Our greed has finally killed all humans, and chaos rules for the better part of a decade as desperate attempt after desperate attempt fails and society tears itself apart.
And you don't know if it's a good idea to take charge of the space around our planet? It's not just a good idea, it's THE ONLY IDEA we should execute on until we've put down all threats like the 20-30 Hiroshima H-Bombs of Chelyabinsk. Thank the stars that one exploded in the atmosphere and didn't touch down.... You can see that shit happen, and think it might not be a good idea to attain the means to lower the currently 100% Assured Extinction of your species? Ask any astronomer, they'll tell you it's only a matter of time before something big hits us. Bury your head in the sand and ignore the fossil record therein chronicling all the mass extinction level events, and the fact that we're long overdue....
If you're not sure it's a good idea, then you might not have a brain.
Back then you were scared to death of communists, and those same communists were launching people (and possibly nuclear weapons) into space.
Yesssss, well, guess what the communists are doing now? China has a space program, they've shot satellites with missiles, and done asteroid fly-bys. Chelyabinsk was 20 to 30 times Hiroshima, it just didn't strike ground. You mistake me, this is perfect opportunity for the pansy ass scientists to grow some balls and use the social science for the advancement of the human race -- It'll be used to its detriment otherwise.
Here, I'll draft a bit of the speech:
If we don't capture and control the asteroids we lose space superiority. We lose Earth. We lose AMERICA! Whomever conquers the asteroid belt wins a near infinite supply of weapons as powerful as nuclear weapons, and far more dangerous. You see, a nuclear blast poisons the land and sea and air, but an asteroid grants that level of destruction while leaving the land free of radiation, ready to colonize...
The American Tax Payer has put Trillions into the war effort, in the name of fighting the nebulous terrorist threat. This Space Threat is immensely more dangerous. While a terrorist may topple a pair of sky scrapers killing tens of thousands of lives, a single asteroid strike to New York can Kill MILLIONS. And, unlike our bluff with the first Nuclear Bombs, there really is a rock for every city in America. No assembly required.
The American people will NOT sit still and wait for this very real and immense threat to our country, nay, Our Planet, to grow unchecked. NASA's budget operates on par with the budget for our troop's air conditioning. No Longer! It would be a DISGRACE for America to have all our military might rendered futile by a Few Space Rocks!
We Americans have never balked at a fertile frontier in fear. We have the technology. We have the man power. We have the Intelligence. We have the Integrity. In 2015 the United States of America will become the First Nation of Earth to capture an Asteroid. By 2018 we will have pushed the frontier of human space exploration further than even any other nation has plans to do in decades. We will have several Asteroids in Lunar Orbit granting the means to defend our Great Nation from any threat on Earth, and for the first time in Human History, Mankind will have made a commitment to Fight off Extinction Itself directly with a Rogue Asteroid Deflection program.
As the American People have done time and again, we will pull together do what think impossible, for the good of Mankind. We can no longer ignore our Duty to our Beloved Planet, the only cradle of life in the known Universe. As President Kennedy said before I say again with every bit as much resolve, "We do these things not because they are easy, but because they are hard".
Damned "moral" pussies, you would rather be practical and wait... Just like the Dinosaurs did. You'd call it "unethical" to sway the mind of the public into NOT letting Extinction win. You foolish humans disgust me.
Do this: Click the "Reply to This" link below the post. Then type something, then close the tab. Now restore the tab. Note that the text you typed is gone (at least on Chromium and Firefox, can't bring myself to care about other browsers off the clock). The TFA acts as if this will save you some headache, and perhaps it does if the form fields were not dynamically generated via DOM manipulation... Otherwise you lose your shit. Especially if you use Dvorak, where the Ctrl+V is dangerously close to Ctrl+W (which closes the current window / tab). Sadly the plugin that allows you to remap / disable Ctrl+W no longer works in Firefox. I could make a new one to re-add the feature, but it's no big deal to remove it when merging the other changes prior to browser compilation.
Do this instead: Middle Click the "reply to this" link, or right click it and select: "open in new tab". Now Navigate to that tab (Ctrl+Tab for toggling tabs like Alt+Tab does for applications). Now enter some text in the box, then close that tab (Ctrl+W). Re-open it (Ctrl+Shift+Tab).... Aha! There's your content, still typed in the box, and even survives restoring from crashes in most cases.
The only downside is, you can post text without being forced to preview it... Which I'm doing right now because I still like to live a bit dangerously.
We built a decentralized network called The Internet, even capable of withstanding global thermonuclear war -- packets rerouted moments after a city disappears from the mesh... And folks use data silos? Protip: Don't centralize services, that's daft in terms of both uptime and congestion.
For a cool $10,000,000.00, the prototype surveillance rock full of spy gadgets box could be yours! More importantly, home server backups from the gentleman's time at Lockheed are included, which was real valuable to this auction as that's where schematics and such are. The seller seemed to think that the current xBee radio box is actually based on his square design done at Lockeed. Proceeds go towards legal action; The seller is allegedly taking against his former employer's wishes....
So, let's pretend you're on Mars, and for some retarded reason my browser is saying that wiki link I typed is known not to exist in the Mars archive. Thus, I would include an excerpt (or maybe Interplanetary Slashdot would do this automatically):
Delay-tolerant networking (DTN) is an approach to computer network architecture that seeks to address the technical issues in heterogeneous networks that may lack continuous network connectivity. Examples of such networks are those operating in mobile or extreme terrestrial environments, or planned networks in space.
The latency will be absolute shit. Useless for most bandwidth-intensive internet applications.
Well, latency has nothing to do with bandwidth. Youtube and Facebook over store and forward? Sure, it's called the Netflix Queue and Email. I'm already looking into supporting the DTN (Delay Tolerant Network -- the interstellar Internet) for an action / strategy video game with user generated content. You know another name for Store and Forward? Co-Location. Yep. Those repeated requests for the same data? They can be served by the nodes that still have them. It's networking with built in caching.
Imagine trying to play a game with twice the lag of a dialup modem. Not only that, but one cloud in the sky and it's game over, man.
Not reliable at all.
Uh, yeah, and? Playing and developing network applications and games for such networks is old hat to us BBS sysops... You've just been spoiled by the Internet; It's quaint, really.
Latency has nothing to do with reliability. Bonus, if the connection is down it doesn't matter since the system is called Delay Tolerant Networking. Soon as it comes back up again the data is beamed to the nearby nodes, and next time you check it's there even if the remote connection isn't. Look at it the other way: The Green Mechanoid Army has set the siege plans in motion sometime last night, and even though the link is broken right now, the relay is providing their cached deployment strategy and when you join the game you can see they're taking the bait and call on your alliance with the Warlock Empire of Earth to flank them. Sure, gameplay is slower, but that's fine for some games, (see: BBS Door Games -- Protip: Tradewars was rated 10th best game of all time by PC World...) Not every game has to be played the same time-frame. It's a different experience to check in, see what happened, and make your moves then be done with that game for the day. See? It's not a ton of grinding for grinding's sake, and lets you get on with your life (or local multiplayer deathmatch) -- We can all just get along: The highest rated Cat Videos of Earth can be beamed up to Mars or the Moon on schedule while that video that everyone linked in their earth-bound emails of the Rover with Bunny Ears only has to get sent down once through the network.
Nowadays we have better than ANSI graphics, but we can also do some wicked client side prediction: Think of that progress bar that seems to slow down logarithmically... In game time can go like that, picking back up as new data arrives, but I won't bore you with details... Responsiveness is a luxury of a local planetary network, but store and forward does work. High bandwidth is key for spotty connections with high latency. Fidonet, for all it's drama, actually delivered my pre-Internet email just fine...
In a decade or so there will be bored people on Mars.... That's a problem we have the technology to fix in a big way. The massive amount of bandwidth of Laser Communication is actually a much needed addition to the DTN.
TL;DR: This has all happened before, and it will all happen again. Don't be a lamer, newb.
Microsoft spent millions every year researching things like user interfaces.
That explains why MS Windows looked pretty much like the design that Xerox-PARC showed both MS and Apple... And why deviating from that design after all those millions of dollars of research went so well for them?
Sorry, the toxic inter-company competitive bureaucracy in MS makes them as dumb as a box of rocks if that's what you get for decades of UI research.
Here, I'll fucking do them the favor: You ask the users how to improve the OS in the sticking points: Stop patronizing and make that "Windows $W was my idea" commercial real. Then you post different UI changes in public beta and get user response, nixing shit that's horrible no matter who's ugly baby it is. This way you get proper market research and don't roll out a fucking flop. Additionally, it costs less since you divert that waste on flops into creating new innovative directions that pay for themselves.
They threw it all away in a short-sighted quest to shove their way into the revenue stream of walled markets.
There is absolutely zero reason Windows 8 couldn't have looked and worked like Windows7 and kept the app market as well. So, they didn't give up the UI for the app market (Linux has had the "app store" co-existing with X11 for a long time).
So now the decision is to move to something slightly less familiar (Linux and OSX), or move to something WILDLY unfamiliar (Windows 8, Server 2012, etc...) - which makes more sense? so It departments are no longer beholden to Microsoft, thanks to Microsoft's own stupid decisions.
The only sane thing to do is use a POSIX OS: Those who do not understand POSIX will re-implement it poorly. See BASH vs Power Shell, oh look a command line interface... like you get when you start typing on the interface formally known as Metro...
Here's how MS fixes everything. Use Linux or BSD. All those OS changes are essentially at the application level anyway. Just re-skin a standard POSIX OS that everyone already tested. Embracing BSD will let MS create the closed source walled garden bullshit so they can get right back to Extending and Extinguishing the FLOSS world. The proprietary file formats and protocols MS uses to create vendor lock in will run fine on GNU/Linux already...
I mean, why duplicate all that work if others have already done it and will keep doing it? I do experimental OS development, and there are some things (like stack smashing and code pointer protection (via privilege ring)) that modern OSs would benefit from greatly, but the current OSs have vastly incompatible designs. There's a reason why new more secure OSs aren't adopted right away -- New code means New Bugs. MS could simply stop re-inventing the wheel and just do the body work, like we're always blaming Apple of doing.
Get back to what worked. Mobile and Desktop are separate markets
More General purpose hardware always wins. Mechanical Pinball games lost to Programmable Arcade Cabinets lost to Game Consoles which are set to lose to PCs (PS4 & XBone are AMD x64 PCs) and will be transforming into Mobiles as compute power increases (consoles have always been weaker than PCs for the duration of their lives). The same goes for the Mechanical Adding Machines which lost to Digital Calculators lost to Mainframe Computers w/ terminals lost to Microcomputers which are transforming into Mobiles. Dedicated hardware like Arcades and Super Computers still exist, and so will Desktop computers, to suit the smaller markets that need such things. Most consumers don't need a Super Computer, sadly, most won't need a traditional desktop power-house either.
The trend is smaller and faster and more general purpose (a smart phone is a pocket PC that makes phone calls). Slot your phone into your big screen monitor use it with a wireless keyboard and mouse that charges by induction, ej
PC != MS; A three year old Mac is a three year old PC. I run GNU/Linux on them all. Additionally, In terms of computation power the three year old non-apple computer will cost less for the same power. Indeed, you can buy two ore three or four for the same price. Can you even imagine trouncing that lone Mac with a Beowulf Cluster of these!?
I for one am sick of this culture of "nobody's wrong, we're all right, we're all winners." It's not going to help our society and will destroy us in the long run.
Well, that's a false equivalence. You're conflating the "nobody's wrong" anti-aggression/anti-competition feminist agenda with that of communication protocol tolerance. While I agree that competition and even a bit of aggression are healthy components of society -- indeed boys are falling behind in the new non-competitive environments, and even simply challenging them with "betcha can't do X" causes them to perform better than positive reinforcement; Yet teachers are foolishly fearful of fostering competition... I don't agree that communication tolerance is inherently bad. As with anything, moderation is key.
Ever use a search engine? Of course not, you just type the exact URL to the places you want to go every time... Or maybe not? Maybe you think advancements in natural language processing where the meaning is more important than the precise syntax would be neat, eh? I know I do. In fact, many of my machine learning systems have overcome the minor grammatical and spelling errors -- A great benefit since they can still know what I mean even with a bit of noise in the signal.
You must realize the truth. Language is a shitty lossy compression of your thought patterns. Soon we may have wireless inductive thought protocols for direct mind to mind conversation. In the meantime it's the meaning that matters in the message, not the way its messaged. While even a simple neural network with tiny fraction of your processing power has mastered the meaning extraction and all but eliminated halting due to syntax errors, you sit here balking at minor mistakes like a damned dumb BASIC prompt. You've got a fucking brain, stop wasting it!
I hire a contractor for $2000 to fix my roof. He takes the job and begins work. Halfway through he says that $2000 is not enough for his isolation and high altitude. He stops the work, goes on strike demanding more money and prevents me from hiring another contractor. Someone care to explain how that is legal and not a breach of contract?
Contractor's got ol' roofie fixed right up for $2k. Ah, but your balls of steel and the once banned Bay-Watch reruns have got your roof in a constant state of ill repair. So, you ring the roofologist up and say, "I've got another $2000, Doc, so fix me up."
The workers have been around your block though, and risking a blown off head over your smeggin' flat-top just isn't flyin'. They refuse to do the deadly tap dance lest better pay be coming their way too.
Now let's put you in the scientists' shoes: say instead of you fitting the bill it's your land lord's flat wot your rocks 'r blastin' off in. Seein' you commin' they budgeted bucketloads for repairs. Now you're bottled up with more rage than a widowed cuckold, but that don't change a bleedin' thing though, right? No one's breechin' the $2k contract 'cause they ain't takin' the money shots.
So, you can either negotiate a rate or get a new crew who won't be so great as the last guys, since it'll be their first time; The fresh folk'll want more than $2k being as your little game's exposed on the telly now and everyone's wise to your surprise.
Wasn't there a children's nursery rhyme about the loss of a kingdom for want of a nail?
Ah yes, I remember it well...
Kindly said, "They know not what they do,"
Advised instead, "Rope can not hold this Jew!"
From crossed timbers made spell,
And chosen kingdom fell,
The Immortal's now locked up with Xenu.
Hehe yeah right AFTER we all get our personal maintenance-free unique flying unicorn pony (or pig if you so prefer, oink ftw).
Yeah, that's the point though isn't it? Blind following of any ideology is foolish. Absolutism is the true enemy. Look at the way science works, testing the correct paths by experimentation and proven results, not just baseless theories.
In other words, absolutist notions like "Communism" or pure "Free Market Capitalism" are the personal maintenance-free unique flying unicorn ponies and pigs. Neither Neigh-sayer nor Oinker will admit that perhaps the best way forward could be a far less lofty goal: Simply riding unicorn-pig hybrids safely along the ground instead. Additionally: Magical Bacon!
This isn't about Wikipedia. It's really about consumer interest. Know what's far better than a giant flop? Measuring consumer interest before you blow the money in the first place. That's why crowd funding is taking off.
The non-profit/no-loss part is COMPLETELY relevant, as it is two of the four tests used in determining if something is fair use:
Yeah, but that's only one component of the case here. The video can get reinstated fairly simply under fair use provisions, but Lessig will have to prove the rightsholder sent the DMCA takedown in bad faith to win damages.
The DMCA makes illegal the process of knowingly abusing the takedown notices. The 3rd party must oblige the DMCA notice and take the vid down, then a counter notice by the alleged infringer saying they want the video back online can cause and reinstatement of the video by a 3rd party who is no longer culpable for the alleged infringement being that they complied with the DMCA. At that point the alleged infringer has taken responsibility for the content.
I want Copyright abolished, but this is actually a part of the DMCA that I like -- It gives you a warning instead of a lawsuit right out of the gate, and a chance to not re-instate the video. My issue, and it seems Lessig's issue, is that these takedown notices are being sent apparently without review of the alleged infringing content -- Any fool copyright holder would realize a presentation about copyright law shouldn't be DMCA'd, that's asinine. I mean, sure it might be found infringing because fair use is so fuzzy, but it's dumb even from a PR nightmare standpoint...
Additionally, the 3rd party often times provides no means for the alleged infringer to reinstate the video, thus the 3rd party often complies with only part of the DMCA takedown procedure, omitting the reinstatement procedure, and given their TOS they can refuse to display content at their discretion. IMO, that may weakly classify as a form of editorial oversight of the content -- Videos sent takedowns staydown... Were I a judge I would strip Safe Harbor protections from such entities that don't treat both sides of the DMCA dispute equally by implementing the full process of takedown and restoration.
Note: It's been a long time since I had a DMCA takedown of a Youtube video, so I'm not sure if Google now has some facility in place to get the vids back online or not, but such didn't used to exist...
It's a hard case to make that the DMCA takedowns were intentionally abusive or in bad faith. I would say that those rights holders that use automated detection and filing of DMCA takedown requests MUST know the possibility exists that such notices can affect Fair Uses. That means it's known in advance that some DMCA takedowns are going to be fraudulent. That means violation of the DMCA.
As long as all the DMCA takedowns are against infringing users no one can make the case that the system is being used unfairly (no harm = no foul). However, once the takedowns sent with little or no human review DO affect Fair Use then said user can bring a case of DMCA abuse against the rights holder.
Of course, I'm just speculating on Lessig's probable case. The main point is that it's a hard case to make because the rights holder filing DMCA takedown notices can say, "Well, I didn't know for absolute sure the notices were fraudulent." IMO, there's no way they could not have known some would be fraudulent, and here is the fraudulent DCMA use they knew might happen, and did. It will be up to the courts to decide. Such erroneous takedowns have occurred many times; I'm just glad someone is actually taking a stand against them at all. I couldn't have picked a better guy for the fight than Lessig.
Slashdot Mirror
The Internet is extremely good at pushing things out of context or missing that little bit of info that completely changes the meaning of something.
You mistake strength for weakness. Imagine such levels of hue and cry and demanding of accountability in the mainstream populous -- Such is missing even over things that actually really matter.
'Tis better to Sense Emphatically and waste a few cycles for self correction than Decide to dismiss threats by default and Act far too late. For the first time in your planet's history businesses can respond nearly instantly to customer demands. Just look at the Xbone, for a recent example. The point is that if Google had removed such feature they'd know it was a bad move, and going forward they know for sure not to strip that feature.
Tell me, do you curse yourself for your immediately incorrect first impression before you've even considered a second look to discover something a bit closer to truth? Your indignation would be warranted if despite widespread evidence of the falsehood everyone still believed the initially perceived deceptions. Let they who hath never done the double take pass the first judgment.
The Internet is not unlike your brain, except that you can see every part of this seething Cybernetic system as it fills with speculation prior to arriving at better understanding over time. Like humans the Internet reacts the most to what is perceived most threatening. What is most notable is not the time frames of the responses but the relative time frames of each cybernetic phase: Rapid repeated Sensing and even duplication of thoughts bubble up here in Slashdot's corner of the global mind; At a slower pace do the Decisions percolate as information is gathered; Yet more energy still is required to activate that synapse of the collective's Actions.
As a cyberneticist I agree that you should have the sense to decide before you act; However, do not mistake Sensation for Decision or Action. The Internet isn't perfect, but I couldn't have designed it better myself.
Microsoft has always been our ally.
We have always been at war with Least Pays-yah.
I imagine the folks on Big Brother's PA are playing a most wicked game of Telephone (Chinese Whispers in metric).
For those of you who know something about statistics, consider this math problem:
A sample group of 24,000 students who think they have what it takes to go to a university take the entrance exam. Out of those 24,000, none of them pass the exam.
Let event A be a randomly selected student from this population passing the exam. Find the maximum value of P(A) that would keep the results of the sample group above within a 95% confidence interval.
Then, once you've done that, think long and hard about the reasons why nobody passed the test.
For those of you who know something about enigmatic idealists, consider this people problem:
A group of people who think more people deserve a service which is being rationed in proportion to demonstration of knowledge take a test. Out of all of them none of them pass the exam.
Let event A have fuck all to do with statistics. Find the motive A for reducing the difficulty of the exam in the aforementioned statements, such that parent poster is sufficiently demonstrated to be ignorant.
Then, once you've done that, think long and hard about why statisticians love concentrating on distracting numbers instead of people.
TL;DR: Bitch, please, you just suggested I assume my confirmation bias correct.
Since when have terrorists needed government documents to blow people up?
Since documented, the first government policy was. Mindless machines of destruction, you think them? Swapping the 'them', you've tried?
Heard of United States of Terrorism, have you?
Terrorism is revolutionary, yes?
I wonder when 1984 will become a forbidden book. It is, after all, a terrorism guidebook in disguise!
Did you read the same 1984 that I did? Because, mine explained how such works wouldn't become forbidden, just editorialized and/or deleted then forgot.
What's interesting is considering that your 1984 really is a terrorism guidebook, and yet the discussions about its censorship would still make sense to you as an inciting anti-government book -- As if my version was actually the same as yours... We would even both agree that it's a freedom of speech issue for the book to exist even if it's critical of the government, even if yours proscribes suicidebombs while mine describes despotism.
If your 1984 is a terrorism guidebook then that proves the point and explains the reasoning behind its seemingly forgotten status in the common culture. It need not be forbidden then, eh? Everyone can see that a pro-terrorist book is doubleplusungood and should not be re-printed, or seen as extreme satire... Some may even agree that the violent acts in your version warrant all copies of the book's exposure to 451 degrees of Fahrenheit, or at least dismissal as insane paranoia.
At least 1984 would make a perfect test for society's censorship thresholds -- As an e-book today, how would people react if the very book describing such secret information warfare were dumbed down to merely thought policing or just terrorist acts, and then experimentally deleted right from under people's noses? Perhaps if there were not much outrage, Big Brother would know it safe to proceed with plans for their Prismatic Digital Panopticon? Indeed it may be construed a guidebook, but for governments not terrorists.
Tell me, in your 1984 are the people ever wakened from their despotism? In the face of such a powerful government agency do the protagonists in 1984 win a hard yet inspirational victory or is your copy hopelessly defeatist? Interesting...
Orwell would be laughing in his grave... In incredulity, amazement, or like a terrorist gone mad? What does your copy tell you?
Well Yes and No. No - I don't agree that the subject matter that has been actually leaked was right for governments to have done in the first place. eg: The deliberate killing of innocent civilians in Iraq. That is wrong.
Yes - I do agree that leaking information is harmful to government and beneficial to enemies,
but... what if the "enemies" didn't really exist? What if the people of the countries were just like you and me and didn't want to fight us? What if the most secret secret is that the "enemies" are fabrications of the governments, and without any secrets allowed at all they couldn't trick us into fighting each other?
Take Syria for example. The folks on the front line on each side just want peace, and Assad's forces are monitored and fed only state media and kept from communicating with the enemy... Why? If the enemy were evil, wouldn't they still be shouting evil things? Oh, it's to prevent traitors? But if they were traitors they wouldn't be fighting on the front line...
What sort of "wrong things" do you propose the government stop doing? Perhaps their real enemy is you?
BOO! now SHHH! we can't tell you why they're the enemy, that's a secret.
Well poisoning. There's a 'common sense' reason that phrase doesn't have a good connotation.
Only because you consider Poison as bad, quite irrationally. For instance: Distilled Water is poisonous if too much is ingested, messes up the electrolytes.... which plants crave. Aspirin is helpful for thinning blood and ridding headaches... Take a bottle of Aspirin and it'll be the last thing you ever do. English being the ambiguous cluster fsck it is, I've applied good connotation to "Well Poisoning": Medication. AKA Poisoning till Well. See also: Chemotherapy, or a host of other medicinal practices.
TL;DR: Your prescription of connotation implies a false prevalence as to the meanings of terms "Well" and "Poison".
Note: No one saw Chelyabinsk coming. Humans are basically blind. Rocks are really hard to see, hell, we didn't even know Eris was out there -- A DWARF PLANET MORE MASSIVE THAN PLUTO, was only just seen in 2008! That's why Pluto's not a planet anymore, because if we left it a planet, we'd have to admit there are PLANET SIZED ROCKS we didn't see drifting about in our back yard.
Just Imagine it: Every channel on TV is talking about the huge asteroid comparable to the one that caused the extinction of the dinosaurs. We have only 8 years to change its course, but since we're missing it's transit this time around, we are all doomed. If only we already had the Mass in orbit already to use as a gravity tug, and the optics in place for full sky observation, we could have detected it sooner, we could have prevented the disaster. We had the technology to get such in place since the 70's, but no funding to do it.... Our greed has finally killed all humans, and chaos rules for the better part of a decade as desperate attempt after desperate attempt fails and society tears itself apart.
And you don't know if it's a good idea to take charge of the space around our planet? It's not just a good idea, it's THE ONLY IDEA we should execute on until we've put down all threats like the 20-30 Hiroshima H-Bombs of Chelyabinsk. Thank the stars that one exploded in the atmosphere and didn't touch down.... You can see that shit happen, and think it might not be a good idea to attain the means to lower the currently 100% Assured Extinction of your species? Ask any astronomer, they'll tell you it's only a matter of time before something big hits us. Bury your head in the sand and ignore the fossil record therein chronicling all the mass extinction level events, and the fact that we're long overdue....
If you're not sure it's a good idea, then you might not have a brain.
Back then you were scared to death of communists, and those same communists were launching people (and possibly nuclear weapons) into space.
Yesssss, well, guess what the communists are doing now? China has a space program, they've shot satellites with missiles, and done asteroid fly-bys. Chelyabinsk was 20 to 30 times Hiroshima, it just didn't strike ground. You mistake me, this is perfect opportunity for the pansy ass scientists to grow some balls and use the social science for the advancement of the human race -- It'll be used to its detriment otherwise.
Here, I'll draft a bit of the speech:
If we don't capture and control the asteroids we lose space superiority. We lose Earth. We lose AMERICA! Whomever conquers the asteroid belt wins a near infinite supply of weapons as powerful as nuclear weapons, and far more dangerous. You see, a nuclear blast poisons the land and sea and air, but an asteroid grants that level of destruction while leaving the land free of radiation, ready to colonize...
The American Tax Payer has put Trillions into the war effort, in the name of fighting the nebulous terrorist threat. This Space Threat is immensely more dangerous. While a terrorist may topple a pair of sky scrapers killing tens of thousands of lives, a single asteroid strike to New York can Kill MILLIONS. And, unlike our bluff with the first Nuclear Bombs, there really is a rock for every city in America. No assembly required.
The American people will NOT sit still and wait for this very real and immense threat to our country, nay, Our Planet, to grow unchecked. NASA's budget operates on par with the budget for our troop's air conditioning. No Longer! It would be a DISGRACE for America to have all our military might rendered futile by a Few Space Rocks!
We Americans have never balked at a fertile frontier in fear. We have the technology. We have the man power. We have the Intelligence. We have the Integrity. In 2015 the United States of America will become the First Nation of Earth to capture an Asteroid. By 2018 we will have pushed the frontier of human space exploration further than even any other nation has plans to do in decades. We will have several Asteroids in Lunar Orbit granting the means to defend our Great Nation from any threat on Earth, and for the first time in Human History, Mankind will have made a commitment to Fight off Extinction Itself directly with a Rogue Asteroid Deflection program.
As the American People have done time and again, we will pull together do what think impossible, for the good of Mankind. We can no longer ignore our Duty to our Beloved Planet, the only cradle of life in the known Universe. As President Kennedy said before I say again with every bit as much resolve, "We do these things not because they are easy, but because they are hard".
Damned "moral" pussies, you would rather be practical and wait... Just like the Dinosaurs did. You'd call it "unethical" to sway the mind of the public into NOT letting Extinction win. You foolish humans disgust me.
The Defense of Farmage Act.
Do this: Click the "Reply to This" link below the post. Then type something, then close the tab. Now restore the tab. Note that the text you typed is gone (at least on Chromium and Firefox, can't bring myself to care about other browsers off the clock). The TFA acts as if this will save you some headache, and perhaps it does if the form fields were not dynamically generated via DOM manipulation... Otherwise you lose your shit. Especially if you use Dvorak, where the Ctrl+V is dangerously close to Ctrl+W (which closes the current window / tab). Sadly the plugin that allows you to remap / disable Ctrl+W no longer works in Firefox. I could make a new one to re-add the feature, but it's no big deal to remove it when merging the other changes prior to browser compilation.
Do this instead: Middle Click the "reply to this" link, or right click it and select: "open in new tab". Now Navigate to that tab (Ctrl+Tab for toggling tabs like Alt+Tab does for applications). Now enter some text in the box, then close that tab (Ctrl+W). Re-open it (Ctrl+Shift+Tab).... Aha! There's your content, still typed in the box, and even survives restoring from crashes in most cases.
The only downside is, you can post text without being forced to preview it... Which I'm doing right now because I still like to live a bit dangerously.
We built a decentralized network called The Internet, even capable of withstanding global thermonuclear war -- packets rerouted moments after a city disappears from the mesh... And folks use data silos? Protip: Don't centralize services, that's daft in terms of both uptime and congestion.
And With PRISM's power's combined, welcome to the Panopticon. -- Panopticlick's namesake. TADA: The world is now a giant prison.
Indeed.
For a cool $10,000,000.00, the prototype surveillance rock full of spy gadgets box could be yours! More importantly, home server backups from the gentleman's time at Lockheed are included, which was real valuable to this auction as that's where schematics and such are. The seller seemed to think that the current xBee radio box is actually based on his square design done at Lockeed. Proceeds go towards legal action; The seller is allegedly taking against his former employer's wishes....
And you can keep your weed in there, man!
Hmm, botched a link, but you could search it. Here: Delay-Tolerant Networking
So, let's pretend you're on Mars, and for some retarded reason my browser is saying that wiki link I typed is known not to exist in the Mars archive. Thus, I would include an excerpt (or maybe Interplanetary Slashdot would do this automatically):
Delay-tolerant networking (DTN) is an approach to computer network architecture that seeks to address the technical issues in heterogeneous networks that may lack continuous network connectivity. Examples of such networks are those operating in mobile or extreme terrestrial environments, or planned networks in space.
The latency will be absolute shit. Useless for most bandwidth-intensive internet applications.
Well, latency has nothing to do with bandwidth. Youtube and Facebook over store and forward? Sure, it's called the Netflix Queue and Email. I'm already looking into supporting the DTN (Delay Tolerant Network -- the interstellar Internet) for an action / strategy video game with user generated content. You know another name for Store and Forward? Co-Location. Yep. Those repeated requests for the same data? They can be served by the nodes that still have them. It's networking with built in caching.
Imagine trying to play a game with twice the lag of a dialup modem. Not only that, but one cloud in the sky and it's game over, man.
Not reliable at all.
Uh, yeah, and? Playing and developing network applications and games for such networks is old hat to us BBS sysops... You've just been spoiled by the Internet; It's quaint, really.
Latency has nothing to do with reliability. Bonus, if the connection is down it doesn't matter since the system is called Delay Tolerant Networking. Soon as it comes back up again the data is beamed to the nearby nodes, and next time you check it's there even if the remote connection isn't. Look at it the other way: The Green Mechanoid Army has set the siege plans in motion sometime last night, and even though the link is broken right now, the relay is providing their cached deployment strategy and when you join the game you can see they're taking the bait and call on your alliance with the Warlock Empire of Earth to flank them. Sure, gameplay is slower, but that's fine for some games, (see: BBS Door Games -- Protip: Tradewars was rated 10th best game of all time by PC World...) Not every game has to be played the same time-frame. It's a different experience to check in, see what happened, and make your moves then be done with that game for the day. See? It's not a ton of grinding for grinding's sake, and lets you get on with your life (or local multiplayer deathmatch) -- We can all just get along: The highest rated Cat Videos of Earth can be beamed up to Mars or the Moon on schedule while that video that everyone linked in their earth-bound emails of the Rover with Bunny Ears only has to get sent down once through the network.
Nowadays we have better than ANSI graphics, but we can also do some wicked client side prediction: Think of that progress bar that seems to slow down logarithmically... In game time can go like that, picking back up as new data arrives, but I won't bore you with details... Responsiveness is a luxury of a local planetary network, but store and forward does work. High bandwidth is key for spotty connections with high latency. Fidonet, for all it's drama, actually delivered my pre-Internet email just fine...
In a decade or so there will be bored people on Mars.... That's a problem we have the technology to fix in a big way. The massive amount of bandwidth of Laser Communication is actually a much needed addition to the DTN.
TL;DR: This has all happened before, and it will all happen again. Don't be a lamer, newb.
Microsoft spent millions every year researching things like user interfaces.
That explains why MS Windows looked pretty much like the design that Xerox-PARC showed both MS and Apple... And why deviating from that design after all those millions of dollars of research went so well for them?
Sorry, the toxic inter-company competitive bureaucracy in MS makes them as dumb as a box of rocks if that's what you get for decades of UI research.
Here, I'll fucking do them the favor: You ask the users how to improve the OS in the sticking points: Stop patronizing and make that "Windows $W was my idea" commercial real. Then you post different UI changes in public beta and get user response, nixing shit that's horrible no matter who's ugly baby it is. This way you get proper market research and don't roll out a fucking flop. Additionally, it costs less since you divert that waste on flops into creating new innovative directions that pay for themselves.
They threw it all away in a short-sighted quest to shove their way into the revenue stream of walled markets.
There is absolutely zero reason Windows 8 couldn't have looked and worked like Windows7 and kept the app market as well. So, they didn't give up the UI for the app market (Linux has had the "app store" co-existing with X11 for a long time).
So now the decision is to move to something slightly less familiar (Linux and OSX), or move to something WILDLY unfamiliar (Windows 8, Server 2012, etc...) - which makes more sense? so It departments are no longer beholden to Microsoft, thanks to Microsoft's own stupid decisions.
The only sane thing to do is use a POSIX OS: Those who do not understand POSIX will re-implement it poorly. See BASH vs Power Shell, oh look a command line interface... like you get when you start typing on the interface formally known as Metro...
Here's how MS fixes everything. Use Linux or BSD. All those OS changes are essentially at the application level anyway. Just re-skin a standard POSIX OS that everyone already tested. Embracing BSD will let MS create the closed source walled garden bullshit so they can get right back to Extending and Extinguishing the FLOSS world. The proprietary file formats and protocols MS uses to create vendor lock in will run fine on GNU/Linux already...
I mean, why duplicate all that work if others have already done it and will keep doing it? I do experimental OS development, and there are some things (like stack smashing and code pointer protection (via privilege ring)) that modern OSs would benefit from greatly, but the current OSs have vastly incompatible designs. There's a reason why new more secure OSs aren't adopted right away -- New code means New Bugs. MS could simply stop re-inventing the wheel and just do the body work, like we're always blaming Apple of doing.
Get back to what worked. Mobile and Desktop are separate markets
More General purpose hardware always wins. Mechanical Pinball games lost to Programmable Arcade Cabinets lost to Game Consoles which are set to lose to PCs (PS4 & XBone are AMD x64 PCs) and will be transforming into Mobiles as compute power increases (consoles have always been weaker than PCs for the duration of their lives). The same goes for the Mechanical Adding Machines which lost to Digital Calculators lost to Mainframe Computers w/ terminals lost to Microcomputers which are transforming into Mobiles. Dedicated hardware like Arcades and Super Computers still exist, and so will Desktop computers, to suit the smaller markets that need such things. Most consumers don't need a Super Computer, sadly, most won't need a traditional desktop power-house either.
The trend is smaller and faster and more general purpose (a smart phone is a pocket PC that makes phone calls). Slot your phone into your big screen monitor use it with a wireless keyboard and mouse that charges by induction, ej
PC != MS; A three year old Mac is a three year old PC. I run GNU/Linux on them all. Additionally, In terms of computation power the three year old non-apple computer will cost less for the same power. Indeed, you can buy two ore three or four for the same price. Can you even imagine trouncing that lone Mac with a Beowulf Cluster of these!?
I for one am sick of this culture of "nobody's wrong, we're all right, we're all winners." It's not going to help our society and will destroy us in the long run.
Well, that's a false equivalence. You're conflating the "nobody's wrong" anti-aggression/anti-competition feminist agenda with that of communication protocol tolerance. While I agree that competition and even a bit of aggression are healthy components of society -- indeed boys are falling behind in the new non-competitive environments, and even simply challenging them with "betcha can't do X" causes them to perform better than positive reinforcement; Yet teachers are foolishly fearful of fostering competition... I don't agree that communication tolerance is inherently bad. As with anything, moderation is key.
Ever use a search engine? Of course not, you just type the exact URL to the places you want to go every time... Or maybe not? Maybe you think advancements in natural language processing where the meaning is more important than the precise syntax would be neat, eh? I know I do. In fact, many of my machine learning systems have overcome the minor grammatical and spelling errors -- A great benefit since they can still know what I mean even with a bit of noise in the signal.
You must realize the truth. Language is a shitty lossy compression of your thought patterns. Soon we may have wireless inductive thought protocols for direct mind to mind conversation. In the meantime it's the meaning that matters in the message, not the way its messaged. While even a simple neural network with tiny fraction of your processing power has mastered the meaning extraction and all but eliminated halting due to syntax errors, you sit here balking at minor mistakes like a damned dumb BASIC prompt. You've got a fucking brain, stop wasting it!
I hire a contractor for $2000 to fix my roof. He takes the job and begins work. Halfway through he says that $2000 is not enough for his isolation and high altitude. He stops the work, goes on strike demanding more money and prevents me from hiring another contractor. Someone care to explain how that is legal and not a breach of contract?
Contractor's got ol' roofie fixed right up for $2k. Ah, but your balls of steel and the once banned Bay-Watch reruns have got your roof in a constant state of ill repair. So, you ring the roofologist up and say, "I've got another $2000, Doc, so fix me up."
The workers have been around your block though, and risking a blown off head over your smeggin' flat-top just isn't flyin'. They refuse to do the deadly tap dance lest better pay be coming their way too.
Now let's put you in the scientists' shoes: say instead of you fitting the bill it's your land lord's flat wot your rocks 'r blastin' off in. Seein' you commin' they budgeted bucketloads for repairs. Now you're bottled up with more rage than a widowed cuckold, but that don't change a bleedin' thing though, right? No one's breechin' the $2k contract 'cause they ain't takin' the money shots.
So, you can either negotiate a rate or get a new crew who won't be so great as the last guys, since it'll be their first time; The fresh folk'll want more than $2k being as your little game's exposed on the telly now and everyone's wise to your surprise.
What possible reason does such a company have for an Ethernet MAC that receives only?
The answer is available on every *nix box. Just open /dev/null and see for yourself.
Wasn't there a children's nursery rhyme about the loss of a kingdom for want of a nail?
Ah yes, I remember it well...
Kindly said, "They know not what they do,"
Advised instead, "Rope can not hold this Jew!"
From crossed timbers made spell,
And chosen kingdom fell,
The Immortal's now locked up with Xenu.
Hehe yeah right AFTER we all get our personal maintenance-free unique flying unicorn pony (or pig if you so prefer, oink ftw).
Yeah, that's the point though isn't it? Blind following of any ideology is foolish. Absolutism is the true enemy. Look at the way science works, testing the correct paths by experimentation and proven results, not just baseless theories.
In other words, absolutist notions like "Communism" or pure "Free Market Capitalism" are the personal maintenance-free unique flying unicorn ponies and pigs. Neither Neigh-sayer nor Oinker will admit that perhaps the best way forward could be a far less lofty goal: Simply riding unicorn-pig hybrids safely along the ground instead. Additionally: Magical Bacon!
This isn't about Wikipedia. It's really about consumer interest. Know what's far better than a giant flop? Measuring consumer interest before you blow the money in the first place. That's why crowd funding is taking off.
The non-profit/no-loss part is COMPLETELY relevant, as it is two of the four tests used in determining if something is fair use:
Yeah, but that's only one component of the case here. The video can get reinstated fairly simply under fair use provisions, but Lessig will have to prove the rightsholder sent the DMCA takedown in bad faith to win damages.
The DMCA makes illegal the process of knowingly abusing the takedown notices. The 3rd party must oblige the DMCA notice and take the vid down, then a counter notice by the alleged infringer saying they want the video back online can cause and reinstatement of the video by a 3rd party who is no longer culpable for the alleged infringement being that they complied with the DMCA. At that point the alleged infringer has taken responsibility for the content.
I want Copyright abolished, but this is actually a part of the DMCA that I like -- It gives you a warning instead of a lawsuit right out of the gate, and a chance to not re-instate the video. My issue, and it seems Lessig's issue, is that these takedown notices are being sent apparently without review of the alleged infringing content -- Any fool copyright holder would realize a presentation about copyright law shouldn't be DMCA'd, that's asinine. I mean, sure it might be found infringing because fair use is so fuzzy, but it's dumb even from a PR nightmare standpoint...
Additionally, the 3rd party often times provides no means for the alleged infringer to reinstate the video, thus the 3rd party often complies with only part of the DMCA takedown procedure, omitting the reinstatement procedure, and given their TOS they can refuse to display content at their discretion. IMO, that may weakly classify as a form of editorial oversight of the content -- Videos sent takedowns staydown... Were I a judge I would strip Safe Harbor protections from such entities that don't treat both sides of the DMCA dispute equally by implementing the full process of takedown and restoration.
Note: It's been a long time since I had a DMCA takedown of a Youtube video, so I'm not sure if Google now has some facility in place to get the vids back online or not, but such didn't used to exist...
It's a hard case to make that the DMCA takedowns were intentionally abusive or in bad faith. I would say that those rights holders that use automated detection and filing of DMCA takedown requests MUST know the possibility exists that such notices can affect Fair Uses. That means it's known in advance that some DMCA takedowns are going to be fraudulent. That means violation of the DMCA.
As long as all the DMCA takedowns are against infringing users no one can make the case that the system is being used unfairly (no harm = no foul). However, once the takedowns sent with little or no human review DO affect Fair Use then said user can bring a case of DMCA abuse against the rights holder.
Of course, I'm just speculating on Lessig's probable case. The main point is that it's a hard case to make because the rights holder filing DMCA takedown notices can say, "Well, I didn't know for absolute sure the notices were fraudulent." IMO, there's no way they could not have known some would be fraudulent, and here is the fraudulent DCMA use they knew might happen, and did. It will be up to the courts to decide. Such erroneous takedowns have occurred many times; I'm just glad someone is actually taking a stand against them at all. I couldn't have picked a better guy for the fight than Lessig.