Agreed, doing all this is entirely possible, there is no slip backwards, I can publish what I like on the Internet in exactly the same way as the *establishment* can.
I think it's important to remember that the view from the technically minded web elite (!) is not that of the majority of facebook users. Most of my friends on facebook don't have enough interest in maintaining a web presence to learn how to write html, css, use ftp, rent server space, register a domain, Etc. ( Not to mention php/perl, db's etc to make it dynamic or allow them to upload photos from their phones, Etc ) And if they did, then the quality of that site would probably be nowhere near the standard set by facebook, where their friends already are.
There are lots of things in life which I'm not an expert at either, and there are probably internet forums somewhere shouting that I should be, if I cared. I don't have the time for everything, how can anyone ?
If a general internet user is now interested in how his personal data is dealt with, and what happens to their privacy online then I think that means a great deal more in the grand scheme of things than a few geeks who know how to get around the issues anyway, and is a step forwards.
Issues dealt with by the masses, by people voting with their feet on the more popular websites, help set what is acceptable for the rest of the Internet.
But it's also your ( the person in the examples ) job.
It's what you spend however-many hours a day doing, and it doesn't sound so very complicated, it sounds like something a fairly standard working adult could probably achieve ?
You assess the cost:
a/ You put the server somewhere else, secure it, get guaranteed uptime / backup.
b/ You talk to the building people, and go through the fairly linear steps till it's done.
I'm in no way saying managers don't do an equal amount of work for the company, I'm very grateful to my producers for letting me focus, but I can't see this as a super complicated example.
If it was you climbing to the 18th floor in a pink harness... ( :
There are *lots* of people read/. and those people are *likely* to have lots of machines around which all have a possibility of crashing at some stage ?
So, at *any* random time, posting this story on the front page is likely to correspond to something falling over nearby for more than a few people ?
Man, you remember 2000, when a load of shit ( didn't really very ) broke, wouldn't it be cool if that had happened again . . .
I beleive that the Internet was created as a way of guaranteeing that the military would have a chance at a second strike, that is, a chance to fire their nuclear arsenal after an attack had been made on them.
And this to stop a itchy trigger finger situation whereby whoever fired first *won*, unless the recipient got their response in immediately.
So, made for the purposes of killing in the same way that bulletproof vests are.
As the son of a skilled Yorkshire mining engineer who lost his *lifelong* job in Thatchers power battles with the unions, I'd like to point out that no, this didn't affect just people who were sat around waiting for handouts.
From his perspective, you've probably never done a days work in your life, ( I certainly havn't ) his friends lost life, limbs, eyesight... doing dangerous, hard work and expecting only fair pay for that.
What Thatcher did do, was break the working spirit of a skilled manufacturing country, leaving little pride and allowing work trained skill sets to die. As a modernisation it was short sighted and led to the current situation where most of the country's economy is based in London.
I'm not saying that there aren't people who are asking for handouts, but please don't generalise for everyone, in a lot of this country there is now very little opportunity, retraining or not.
Disclaimer : I work in London, in one of those fancy *new* jobs.
And when none of these 'prospective employees' are employed, what's the message to the current staff ? The management tried to replace us and failed so :
- The job market doesn't contain the skills to replace us ?
- The management failed to find new employees ?
- No-one who doesn't work here currently would want to, so working elsewhere is preferable ?
I think tricks and fear may get you short term productivity, at best.
Again, you've made assumptions, and been aggressive about it. For what it's worth, when I was a child, having a car to put all your possessions in was pretty posh. And me having worked 6-7 days a week for the last fifteen years, that's no longer the case.
So, with that chip off your shoulder, I don't agree, and I still think that greed is a principal factor in the current state of western decline.
I'm sorry, I don't know much about American politics, but for sure, when I speak to my mostly minimum wage family later, I'll be sure to tell them that a foulmouthed, now rich and shouting about it guy on the internet said I was their biggest problem.
Which will be a relief, I'm pretty sure they think that it's some greedy bank people messing with the barter system for their own profit.
Keep fighting the good fight, brother, and watch those pesky liberals and their anti greed power grabs now.
Thank you for taking the time to discuss this, even though I think we may never agree.
The problem for me, is that in promoting greed, you're setting up a system which needs these checks and balances in an environment of 'whatever you can get away with', it also seems to be a system which selects towards most-greedy, and requires a large overhead of rule writers / rule enforcers.
In a single, ideal transaction, with both parties having the option of proceeding or not then yes, it seems irrelevant, but I don't think that's the usual case.
I see the system as self defeating, as the rule writers are also expected to be greedy, within the bounds of the rules that they write, and this fits quite well with my very anecdotal experience.
I think we may be working on slightly different interpretations of the word greed. The greed I mean is not selling dead cows to make money and it doesn't matter about the motivations of the transaction. It's feeding the cows their own offal, to increase that margin of profit, it's people selling, multiple times, the potential of this meat, without benefiting anyone but themselves, and keeping the profit away from the poor cattle rancher.
Mutual greed being beneficial seems to me to require everyone to be equally greedy, and that's demonstrably not true.
Self interest is one thing. Greed is another.
Re:Any chance we can draw circles and boxes now
on
GIMP 2.6 Released
·
· Score: 1
It would be nice if it had a drop down of the names of all the people in the photograph too, maybe it could get their favourite ring colour from facebook ?
I'm sorry, no, I think that would require that everyone had an equal starting place, and a choice of which direction to go. People who start in poverty have no choice, poor education and little chance to change any of that for them or their children.
I think you might find lazy is a relative term, most poor people's work slowly kills them, THEY ARE NOT HAPPY. They didn't choose this, they would choose something else.
As to you having lots of money affecting others, that depends, if daddy gave it to you, then you're in no position to be able to comment, you are the opposite of a field expert, and likely to have been schooled in greed and keeping it.
If you'd made it for yourself, from poor beginnings, then you wouldn't be having this conversation.
America's economy has been based on greed and selfishness for over 200 years, and even now we're one of the most powerful, richest nations in the history of the world.
And the current vector, directly resulting from individuals manipulating the barter system for personal greed, is down, you've failed to manage a society for just two hundred years, and they were the easy ( large unindustrialized land-masses, before you let weapon manufacturers write foreign policy ) ones.
You may be rich, but that's just a point on scale, if all the money and power goes constantly upwards, it will pass you, or your children by too, and there will be no-one left to fight for you.
Because humanity is a collective, and greed and selfishness are the opposite of this, they are concerned with the good of the individual, at the expense of society.
Greed stretches society, pulling money and power into the hands of people who feel they have no responsibility to that society, leaving other members of that society providing with virtually no return.
This imbalance in a society makes it weak to other more collective societies, and to itself when the balance has reached a certain point.
Please don't congratulate yourself on your free thinking if you've got no further than 'I've got, I'm better'.
I'm only mid thirties, but I remember metal tapes for the things you really loved ( I remember still being able to hear what you had on the other side of the tape in the quiet parts too ).
I don't agree that music has got worse though, certainly the small ( but *pop*ular ) section of it that gets constantly directed at you might have, it's hard to tell once your taste is somewhat set by your hormone rich years, and it's hard for me to find anything in common with misogynistic urban tough guys, but interesting people are making new interesting music all the time, and access to it has never been easier.
It may be that you're listening for familiarity, but if you're not, some of my favourite artists are now on first / second albums and still getting better.
Following *sounds like* on last.fm or pandora.com ( they're ranked by people who-listen-to-also-listen-to ) tend to give you artists from a similar generation, but looking at 'followers' on allmusic.com will give you a list of people who thought simiarily about your favourites, and made music to match.
Isn't there already a razor for this kind of thing ?
a / A supernatural being whom we have no direct evidence for, and who differs radically depending on what isolated group of the species you happen to be part of, created the world in a four billion year old state, 6000 years ago.
b / The world is four billion years old.
Why ? Why would he/she/it do that ? Is this an ideal state to test us / prove to us that obeying a set of rules will gain us entry to unlimited pleasure ?
Why would a benevolent creator test us anyway ? Why would you make something imperfectly, to damn some of them to an eternity of pain ? Is this benevolence ?
Don't get me wrong, I believe fully in a great deal of the social religious teachings, kindness and respect.
A God who believes in the balance of good and evil and who allows so many of it's creations to be so badly hurt and killed in it's name is not something I want any part of.
IMHO, the sooner we realise that we're alone on a ball of rock floating through an inhospitable space, and stop wondering where our mysterious mommy/daddy went the better.
Nah, in the UK we've been conditioned to expect ineptitude, in the last two months alone:
- It took me a week to start the process of reactivating a BT phone line to my new apartment, as *the system is down*.
- The phone line to my workplace was disconnected, for no reason, taking a ( No internet. We're a mainly web based graphics company ) week to re-connect.
The trains don't work, the airports don't work...
If you are in the UK, however, I can heartily recommend Be ( bethere.co.uk ) 24 meg for £18 pcm. ( No affiliation, just a happy customer. )
I'm sorry, but I can't extrapolate one action ( punching someone once ) into a character judgement and retribution based on 'probably'. I agree that it's certainly a 'maybe', but the need to justify an action based on the opposite of the generally agreed course of justice ( innocent until proven guilty ) is no justification to hit a woman.
Maybe she's hitting you because she heard you hit women ? Violence breeds violence.
Of course, America has the economic clout to affect the rest of the world vastly, but I think you may overestimate. I can't believe that German things get to England via America ( I was in Sweden at the weekend, I could have taken a car down ? ), nor for that matter Japanese or Chinese goods ( of course American money is involved in the transaction, I believe the rest of the world is more than capable of looking after itself ).
I also feel that it may be an inappropriate time to be triumphing the ubiquity of the American economy, it seems that it's taking the world in the direction of job losses and instability already.
As to the angry bear. I hope so, but not so far, and it doesn't fit with my impression of American foreign policy to do anything that is not in it's ( mainly financial ) self interest.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed, doing all this is entirely possible, there is no slip backwards, I can publish what I like on the Internet in exactly the same way as the *establishment* can.
I think it's important to remember that the view from the technically minded web elite (!) is not that of the majority of facebook users. Most of my friends on facebook don't have enough interest in maintaining a web presence to learn how to write html, css, use ftp, rent server space, register a domain, Etc. ( Not to mention php/perl, db's etc to make it dynamic or allow them to upload photos from their phones, Etc ) And if they did, then the quality of that site would probably be nowhere near the standard set by facebook, where their friends already are.
There are lots of things in life which I'm not an expert at either, and there are probably internet forums somewhere shouting that I should be, if I cared. I don't have the time for everything, how can anyone ?
If a general internet user is now interested in how his personal data is dealt with, and what happens to their privacy online then I think that means a great deal more in the grand scheme of things than a few geeks who know how to get around the issues anyway, and is a step forwards.
Issues dealt with by the masses, by people voting with their feet on the more popular websites, help set what is acceptable for the rest of the Internet.
+1. Thank you
A great deal of the difference between a religion and a cult is transparency. Religions are generally open to outsiders, and cults are not.
Oh, and just a bit pedantic, that was a great description. ( :
Hey, nice sig, how often do you change it ?
But it's also your ( the person in the examples ) job.
It's what you spend however-many hours a day doing, and it doesn't sound so very complicated, it sounds like something a fairly standard working adult could probably achieve ?
You assess the cost:
a/ You put the server somewhere else, secure it, get guaranteed uptime / backup.
b/ You talk to the building people, and go through the fairly linear steps till it's done.
I'm in no way saying managers don't do an equal amount of work for the company, I'm very grateful to my producers for letting me focus, but I can't see this as a super complicated example.
If it was you climbing to the 18th floor in a pink harness... ( :
To overcomplicate the process and make exaggerated claims about how difficult it is to set up a relatively simple thing ?
There are *lots* of people read /. and those people are *likely* to have lots of machines around which all have a possibility of crashing at some stage ?
So, at *any* random time, posting this story on the front page is likely to correspond to something falling over nearby for more than a few people ?
Man, you remember 2000, when a load of shit ( didn't really very ) broke, wouldn't it be cool if that had happened again . . .
I beleive that the Internet was created as a way of guaranteeing that the military would have a chance at a second strike, that is, a chance to fire their nuclear arsenal after an attack had been made on them.
And this to stop a itchy trigger finger situation whereby whoever fired first *won*, unless the recipient got their response in immediately.
So, made for the purposes of killing in the same way that bulletproof vests are.
As the son of a skilled Yorkshire mining engineer who lost his *lifelong* job in Thatchers power battles with the unions, I'd like to point out that no, this didn't affect just people who were sat around waiting for handouts.
From his perspective, you've probably never done a days work in your life, ( I certainly havn't ) his friends lost life, limbs, eyesight... doing dangerous, hard work and expecting only fair pay for that.
What Thatcher did do, was break the working spirit of a skilled manufacturing country, leaving little pride and allowing work trained skill sets to die. As a modernisation it was short sighted and led to the current situation where most of the country's economy is based in London.
I'm not saying that there aren't people who are asking for handouts, but please don't generalise for everyone, in a lot of this country there is now very little opportunity, retraining or not.
Disclaimer : I work in London, in one of those fancy *new* jobs.
Trainer is British English for sneaker / sports shoe. I'd go running in a pair of trainers.
Use truecrypt + dropbox ( :
Where do I find the trainer for [Coping Mechanisms] ?
And when none of these 'prospective employees' are employed, what's the message to the current staff ? The management tried to replace us and failed so :
- The job market doesn't contain the skills to replace us ?
- The management failed to find new employees ?
- No-one who doesn't work here currently would want to, so working elsewhere is preferable ?
I think tricks and fear may get you short term productivity, at best.
Again, you've made assumptions, and been aggressive about it. For what it's worth, when I was a child, having a car to put all your possessions in was pretty posh. And me having worked 6-7 days a week for the last fifteen years, that's no longer the case.
So, with that chip off your shoulder, I don't agree, and I still think that greed is a principal factor in the current state of western decline.
I'm sorry, I don't know much about American politics, but for sure, when I speak to my mostly minimum wage family later, I'll be sure to tell them that a foulmouthed, now rich and shouting about it guy on the internet said I was their biggest problem.
Which will be a relief, I'm pretty sure they think that it's some greedy bank people messing with the barter system for their own profit.
Keep fighting the good fight, brother, and watch those pesky liberals and their anti greed power grabs now.
Thank you for taking the time to discuss this, even though I think we may never agree.
The problem for me, is that in promoting greed, you're setting up a system which needs these checks and balances in an environment of 'whatever you can get away with', it also seems to be a system which selects towards most-greedy, and requires a large overhead of rule writers / rule enforcers.
In a single, ideal transaction, with both parties having the option of proceeding or not then yes, it seems irrelevant, but I don't think that's the usual case.
I see the system as self defeating, as the rule writers are also expected to be greedy, within the bounds of the rules that they write, and this fits quite well with my very anecdotal experience.
I think we may be working on slightly different interpretations of the word greed. The greed I mean is not selling dead cows to make money and it doesn't matter about the motivations of the transaction. It's feeding the cows their own offal, to increase that margin of profit, it's people selling, multiple times, the potential of this meat, without benefiting anyone but themselves, and keeping the profit away from the poor cattle rancher.
Mutual greed being beneficial seems to me to require everyone to be equally greedy, and that's demonstrably not true.
Self interest is one thing. Greed is another.
It would be nice if it had a drop down of the names of all the people in the photograph too, maybe it could get their favourite ring colour from facebook ?
Hey !
Mindless ? How dare you, a murloc ate my father, mother, brother and sister.
And they will pay.
I think you might find lazy is a relative term, most poor people's work slowly kills them, THEY ARE NOT HAPPY. They didn't choose this, they would choose something else.
As to you having lots of money affecting others, that depends, if daddy gave it to you, then you're in no position to be able to comment, you are the opposite of a field expert, and likely to have been schooled in greed and keeping it.
If you'd made it for yourself, from poor beginnings, then you wouldn't be having this conversation.
America's economy has been based on greed and selfishness for over 200 years, and even now we're one of the most powerful, richest nations in the history of the world.
And the current vector, directly resulting from individuals manipulating the barter system for personal greed, is down, you've failed to manage a society for just two hundred years, and they were the easy ( large unindustrialized land-masses, before you let weapon manufacturers write foreign policy ) ones.
You may be rich, but that's just a point on scale, if all the money and power goes constantly upwards, it will pass you, or your children by too, and there will be no-one left to fight for you.
Because humanity is a collective, and greed and selfishness are the opposite of this, they are concerned with the good of the individual, at the expense of society.
Greed stretches society, pulling money and power into the hands of people who feel they have no responsibility to that society, leaving other members of that society providing with virtually no return.
This imbalance in a society makes it weak to other more collective societies, and to itself when the balance has reached a certain point.
Please don't congratulate yourself on your free thinking if you've got no further than 'I've got, I'm better'.
Greed is a weakness.
I'm only mid thirties, but I remember metal tapes for the things you really loved ( I remember still being able to hear what you had on the other side of the tape in the quiet parts too ).
I don't agree that music has got worse though, certainly the small ( but *pop*ular ) section of it that gets constantly directed at you might have, it's hard to tell once your taste is somewhat set by your hormone rich years, and it's hard for me to find anything in common with misogynistic urban tough guys, but interesting people are making new interesting music all the time, and access to it has never been easier.
It may be that you're listening for familiarity, but if you're not, some of my favourite artists are now on first / second albums and still getting better.
Following *sounds like* on last.fm or pandora.com ( they're ranked by people who-listen-to-also-listen-to ) tend to give you artists from a similar generation, but looking at 'followers' on allmusic.com will give you a list of people who thought simiarily about your favourites, and made music to match.
I hope you find something you like.
Isn't there already a razor for this kind of thing ?
a / A supernatural being whom we have no direct evidence for, and who differs radically depending on what isolated group of the species you happen to be part of, created the world in a four billion year old state, 6000 years ago.
b / The world is four billion years old.
Why ? Why would he/she/it do that ? Is this an ideal state to test us / prove to us that obeying a set of rules will gain us entry to unlimited pleasure ?
Why would a benevolent creator test us anyway ? Why would you make something imperfectly, to damn some of them to an eternity of pain ? Is this benevolence ?
Don't get me wrong, I believe fully in a great deal of the social religious teachings, kindness and respect.
A God who believes in the balance of good and evil and who allows so many of it's creations to be so badly hurt and killed in it's name is not something I want any part of.
IMHO, the sooner we realise that we're alone on a ball of rock floating through an inhospitable space, and stop wondering where our mysterious mommy/daddy went the better.
Nah, in the UK we've been conditioned to expect ineptitude, in the last two months alone:
- It took me a week to start the process of reactivating a BT phone line to my new apartment, as *the system is down*.
- The phone line to my workplace was disconnected, for no reason, taking a ( No internet. We're a mainly web based graphics company ) week to re-connect.
The trains don't work, the airports don't work...
If you are in the UK, however, I can heartily recommend Be ( bethere.co.uk ) 24 meg for £18 pcm. ( No affiliation, just a happy customer. )
I'm sorry, but I can't extrapolate one action ( punching someone once ) into a character judgement and retribution based on 'probably'. I agree that it's certainly a 'maybe', but the need to justify an action based on the opposite of the generally agreed course of justice ( innocent until proven guilty ) is no justification to hit a woman.
Maybe she's hitting you because she heard you hit women ? Violence breeds violence.
Of course, America has the economic clout to affect the rest of the world vastly, but I think you may overestimate. I can't believe that German things get to England via America ( I was in Sweden at the weekend, I could have taken a car down ? ), nor for that matter Japanese or Chinese goods ( of course American money is involved in the transaction, I believe the rest of the world is more than capable of looking after itself ).
I also feel that it may be an inappropriate time to be triumphing the ubiquity of the American economy, it seems that it's taking the world in the direction of job losses and instability already.
As to the angry bear. I hope so, but not so far, and it doesn't fit with my impression of American foreign policy to do anything that is not in it's ( mainly financial ) self interest.