Could you imagine what would happen if you told every urbanite that they couldn't bring a bottle of Evian on the plane?
Since they're already paying an outrageous amount for it outside the airport, they'd be willing to pay a slightly more outrageous amount for it INSIDE the airport: no revolt.
Could you imagine what would happen if you told ever Mom that she couldn't bring a box of apple juice for her kid?
Her kids still get their dose of high fructose corn syrup once on the plane, and again, higher priced juice available on the other side of the gate keeps the revolting to a minimum. I do remember some bad press about a woman being required to drink her own breast milk (from a bottle) to prove it wasn't milk-colored liquid explosives, but she got it on.
Anyway: no revolt.
Could you imagine what would happen if you told the guy with the fancy cowboy boots or the woman wearing Prada shoes that they have to come off and go through the scanner, and they have to walk through security on the icky floors wearing only socks/stockings?
I don't actually know many people with fancy boots... maybe they've all been shot by security because they went a hootin' and a hollerin'. I suspect though that they may have been proud to do their part to stop terrorism. Prada shoes probably whined a bit and bitched on twitter about it. And at the end of the day, having your shoes off for 5-20 mins is not that annoying, even the spoiled have a hard time making much noise about it. Once again, on the other side of the gate, things go back to normal: no revolt
All the things you point to as failing to start a revolution are things that are very short inconvinences to small demographics. Maybe I'm being optimistic, but I don't believe they could get away with banning all -outside- lithium batteries just to sell you higher priced lithium batteries inside the airport. They're going to ask you to give up your device for the entire trip. As you point out, theres going to be a lot more people affected by this one. Therefore, I don't think they would do this one, for fear of losing buisiness.
Disclaimer: I'm trying to read the wiki page on IPv6, but I'm so ignorant that I can't even understand that... so maybe answering this question will be pointless. I'm not following why verizon is not allowing IPv6?
The final line in TFA is
And based on their position, theyâ(TM)re probably (although we have not confirmed, but based on the 29% figure we came up with it is extremely likely) blocking similar ranges from the other regional registries in the name of global routability.
So it isn't that it will cost them more money to provide the full internet, it's that it's easier for their organization purposes? They just really want IPv4 exhaustion because then it will be harder to criticize Verizon? Or is it more likely someone at Verizon knew about as much about IPv6 as I do and decided they didn't like the sound of it at all?
Along the lines of heat and cold, you have several different type of pain receptors which are seperate from your proprioception sensors and tactile sensors. I think nociception (sensing pain) definitely qualifies as it's own seperate sense if this webcam thing does. It shouldn't be lumped under touch, most aren't triggered that way.
Also, when have government agencies ever restrained themselves in favor of privacy among citizens? The government in 1936 said that social security numbers were never supposed to be used for identification*...
We also had a few constitutional provisions that seem to say you can't spy on innocent civilians. Hard to believe now I know. And of course the FBI wildly overstepped it's bounds from day one.
We really need to start drilling "Protecting public privacy is the most important thing for your job" into the heads of law enforcement types for a few generations, and making sure it sticks, before we start tearing down what few barriers they respect. Otherwise we may as well cut to the chase and put RFID chips under our skin.
I am glad but slightly nervous that got marked insightful. Glad that there are such nerds, but nervous that they might actually be klingons... which I now just insulted...
Probably wouldn't go over so well here in the good old USA though... too many paranoid morons.
Too true, my religion requires to carry a cell phone jammer and bazooka at all times, you won't BELIEVE the trouble that gets me into.
In all honesty, allowing people to carry swords on airplanes is a bad idea even if we were somehow sure that they would never be used in terrorism. Air rage and all.
Oh yeah, I was of course sidestepping the issue of "Is the finding ACTUALLY valid." Somewhat like what the chinese government will do, only they probably won't do it with sarcasm. It'd be refreshing if they did though.
Chinese officials will conclude that the scientific findings are acurrate and convincing, will acknowledge that the dam did cause the quake, will apologize sincerely, and resign in disgrace. The replacements will then close down the dam, making sure to dismantle it in an ecologically sensible way, doing the least disruption to the surrounding communities as well, and every victim of the quake will be compensated accordingly. You know, much as it would happen here.
You really have to love government humility and responsibility.
I was actually thinking more along the lines of stargate SG-1 and the gould (guauld?) snake things, they crawl down your mouth and heal you. Added bonus: knowledge of ancient alien technology and a new megalomaniac personality.
I think the FCC may have been more motivated to fine them for the nation wide janet jackson thing, and the hundreds of thousands of idiots who were screaming to them for blood. This is a much smaller population, so hopefully this won't become a thing.
At the very least, they will get fined probably, but by pacifying the idiots they can hopefully silence a few of them screaming for even more restrictions.
So the masses of idiots who write letters to the FCC urging the immediate nationalization of all TV will be pacified. The FCC was flooded with complaints at the Janet Jackson bit, and I bet they weren't happy with the delay they were forced to put in for all live broadcasts. You can guess at least a few people are so miffed at seeing human body parts that they want more government control.
It would be nice if they didn't apologize so deeply, grew a spine, and issued a statement that reflected the ridiculousness of this situation, something like
"We're sorry, that was of course unintentional, and when we find whoever did it they're at least going to lose their job here. Of course, it's not like this is anything too bad, it's anatomy, grow up already and get over it."
We are so fortunate to have Jack Thompson. Without his antics, people might start to take the "violence in media = real violence" statement as a logical thought, and may consider censorship.
Continue to fight for the right side (probably unintentionally) Mr. Thompson!
i make a throwaway sophomoric sex joke and i get serious analysis and get rated "insightful"
You must either be new here or a lot more mature than I am. Subtlety is sometimes lost on these people, and it's usually scary when that happens. Jonathan Swift would have probably shot himself had he visited these boards.
Maybe we should resolve the ethical concerns before we perform the science...
This is opening Pandora's Box.
Seems to me the only time we resolve ethical concerns are when the ethical concerns become obsolete. People are still debating whether abortion is ethical. It comes down to a matter of beliefs. Does a human genetic code constitute an independant human? Your answer to that question, reguardless of how much you believe it, is not based on fact. Different people don't all share your beliefs and will have different answers. There is no resolving this ethics question. Well, there is one way, and that is to perform the science. If it turns out to be a scientific dead-end, then we'll have our answer: no it is not ethical because it's pointless.
Note that I'm not saying lets do it BECAUSE it might be a scientific dead end and then we can move on, that would be a terrible reason to do something. Just pointing out that waiting for the ethical question to be answered 100% is basically a sneaky way of saying "lets not do this ever because I am uncomfortable with it."
I'm okay with that penalty: the wii doesn't have background downloading, which makes the wait much more annoying. Wait times on the 360 aren't much of an issue, since I can be playing another game as the file is downloading (I don't know about the PS3, I would guess it also has background downloading.)
Not to mention that factoring that out would be pointless: most of the stuff you can download for the wii is about that size, that's always going to be an issue for the wii.
Of course that's because you're a total coward : you only complain if the side you're madly blabbering about doesn't attack you back.
Which means the only type of US government that you'd be happy about is... a REALLY imperialistic dictatorship, one that DOES hurt you. Which is "supposedly" what you want to avoid in the first place.
That really started not making sense towards the end there. I think if you spent less time with the typical far right wing tactic of accusing your enemies of absurd motivations, and more on the matter at hand, you wouldn't sound so ridiculous.
So three different consoles, all downloading from different servers, on different networks, with different network configurations... and they're not even downloading the same data.
Except that it appears each of the three consoles were tested from the same network, and repeated on different networks (unless I'm on crack again.)
The other differences are exactly what you would want to test. I don't care if the wii is actually blazing fast at downloading but nintendo's servers are extremely slow, to me that's summed up as "Dowloading is slow on the wii."
Note that I'm not certain I have servers straight from networks, and if I am in fact getting the two mixed up, I have a "I told you I was no expert" I'll use. And the aforementioned crack problem doesn't help. But the article does seem interesting to me.
I don't own any of the current-gen consoles, so perhaps someone could clue us in: are there serious frustrations with downloading content on the Wii, or for that matter any of the other consoles?
With the 360 and I think the PS3, there is background downloading, so it's not much of an issue. The wii, which happens to be the slowest in most of the tests and also the slowest in my house, does not. Downloading something means you can't use the wii while you're waiting. You do get to watch mario run and pick up coins and hit coin boxes as a 3 stage status bar, but that's about it. Kind of annoying, and makes everything you download seem a lot slower. It is interesting that it's not all in my head.
I suppose this could have been a more useless article...if perhaps it was spread across multiple pages in classic C|net style.
You don't own any current consoles, of course YOU'RE going to find it useless!
Slashdot Mirror
Could you imagine what would happen if you told every urbanite that they couldn't bring a bottle of Evian on the plane?
Since they're already paying an outrageous amount for it outside the airport, they'd be willing to pay a slightly more outrageous amount for it INSIDE the airport: no revolt.
Could you imagine what would happen if you told ever Mom that she couldn't bring a box of apple juice for her kid?
Her kids still get their dose of high fructose corn syrup once on the plane, and again, higher priced juice available on the other side of the gate keeps the revolting to a minimum. I do remember some bad press about a woman being required to drink her own breast milk (from a bottle) to prove it wasn't milk-colored liquid explosives, but she got it on.
Anyway: no revolt.
Could you imagine what would happen if you told the guy with the fancy cowboy boots or the woman wearing Prada shoes that they have to come off and go through the scanner, and they have to walk through security on the icky floors wearing only socks/stockings?
I don't actually know many people with fancy boots... maybe they've all been shot by security because they went a hootin' and a hollerin'. I suspect though that they may have been proud to do their part to stop terrorism. Prada shoes probably whined a bit and bitched on twitter about it. And at the end of the day, having your shoes off for 5-20 mins is not that annoying, even the spoiled have a hard time making much noise about it. Once again, on the other side of the gate, things go back to normal: no revolt
All the things you point to as failing to start a revolution are things that are very short inconvinences to small demographics. Maybe I'm being optimistic, but I don't believe they could get away with banning all -outside- lithium batteries just to sell you higher priced lithium batteries inside the airport. They're going to ask you to give up your device for the entire trip. As you point out, theres going to be a lot more people affected by this one. Therefore, I don't think they would do this one, for fear of losing buisiness.
Disclaimer: I'm trying to read the wiki page on IPv6, but I'm so ignorant that I can't even understand that... so maybe answering this question will be pointless. I'm not following why verizon is not allowing IPv6?
The final line in TFA is
And based on their position, theyâ(TM)re probably (although we have not confirmed, but based on the 29% figure we came up with it is extremely likely) blocking similar ranges from the other regional registries in the name of global routability.
So it isn't that it will cost them more money to provide the full internet, it's that it's easier for their organization purposes? They just really want IPv4 exhaustion because then it will be harder to criticize Verizon? Or is it more likely someone at Verizon knew about as much about IPv6 as I do and decided they didn't like the sound of it at all?
Along the lines of heat and cold, you have several different type of pain receptors which are seperate from your proprioception sensors and tactile sensors. I think nociception (sensing pain) definitely qualifies as it's own seperate sense if this webcam thing does. It shouldn't be lumped under touch, most aren't triggered that way.
Also, when have government agencies ever restrained themselves in favor of privacy among citizens? The government in 1936 said that social security numbers were never supposed to be used for identification*...
Oops.
(* http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs10-ssn.htm not a good source, so take it with a grain of salt, could be an urban myth)
We also had a few constitutional provisions that seem to say you can't spy on innocent civilians. Hard to believe now I know. And of course the FBI wildly overstepped it's bounds from day one.
We really need to start drilling "Protecting public privacy is the most important thing for your job" into the heads of law enforcement types for a few generations, and making sure it sticks, before we start tearing down what few barriers they respect. Otherwise we may as well cut to the chase and put RFID chips under our skin.
Realistically, running in a non-admin account is a pain in the ass. ...in Windows.
...on a computer.
(was today "add an ellipsis and then point out something obvious" day and nobody told me?)
On the other hand, shitting your pants in battle is a semi-effective technique to distract your enemy.
I am glad but slightly nervous that got marked insightful. Glad that there are such nerds, but nervous that they might actually be klingons... which I now just insulted...
sincerely,
Bob Smith in montreal canada.
Probably wouldn't go over so well here in the good old USA though... too many paranoid morons.
Too true, my religion requires to carry a cell phone jammer and bazooka at all times, you won't BELIEVE the trouble that gets me into.
In all honesty, allowing people to carry swords on airplanes is a bad idea even if we were somehow sure that they would never be used in terrorism. Air rage and all.
What are you talking about? That post was 100% not sarcastic! Higher praise for the chinese government has never been seen on slashdot!
Oh yeah, I was of course sidestepping the issue of "Is the finding ACTUALLY valid." Somewhat like what the chinese government will do, only they probably won't do it with sarcasm. It'd be refreshing if they did though.
Mr. Bush's citizenship was revoked in 2003 after the United States invaded Iraq.
Wow. You know, more countries should punish warmongering, though jail sentances would probably be better than exiling them.
Chinese officials will conclude that the scientific findings are acurrate and convincing, will acknowledge that the dam did cause the quake, will apologize sincerely, and resign in disgrace. The replacements will then close down the dam, making sure to dismantle it in an ecologically sensible way, doing the least disruption to the surrounding communities as well, and every victim of the quake will be compensated accordingly. You know, much as it would happen here.
You really have to love government humility and responsibility.
I was actually thinking more along the lines of stargate SG-1 and the gould (guauld?) snake things, they crawl down your mouth and heal you. Added bonus: knowledge of ancient alien technology and a new megalomaniac personality.
I think the FCC may have been more motivated to fine them for the nation wide janet jackson thing, and the hundreds of thousands of idiots who were screaming to them for blood. This is a much smaller population, so hopefully this won't become a thing.
At the very least, they will get fined probably, but by pacifying the idiots they can hopefully silence a few of them screaming for even more restrictions.
Why are they apologizing?
So the masses of idiots who write letters to the FCC urging the immediate nationalization of all TV will be pacified. The FCC was flooded with complaints at the Janet Jackson bit, and I bet they weren't happy with the delay they were forced to put in for all live broadcasts. You can guess at least a few people are so miffed at seeing human body parts that they want more government control.
It would be nice if they didn't apologize so deeply, grew a spine, and issued a statement that reflected the ridiculousness of this situation, something like
"We're sorry, that was of course unintentional, and when we find whoever did it they're at least going to lose their job here. Of course, it's not like this is anything too bad, it's anatomy, grow up already and get over it."
Are you kidding? They would break the legal system! You're just trying to set up some sort of DoS attack on district courts, aren't you?
We are so fortunate to have Jack Thompson. Without his antics, people might start to take the "violence in media = real violence" statement as a logical thought, and may consider censorship.
Continue to fight for the right side (probably unintentionally) Mr. Thompson!
The point of the hybrids mentioned isn't to make freakish movie monsters or vile fringe-wank material
Now he tells me. I'm off to drop out of my graduate genetics program.
i make a throwaway sophomoric sex joke and i get serious analysis and get rated "insightful"
You must either be new here or a lot more mature than I am. Subtlety is sometimes lost on these people, and it's usually scary when that happens. Jonathan Swift would have probably shot himself had he visited these boards.
Maybe we should resolve the ethical concerns before we perform the science ...
This is opening Pandora's Box.
Seems to me the only time we resolve ethical concerns are when the ethical concerns become obsolete. People are still debating whether abortion is ethical. It comes down to a matter of beliefs. Does a human genetic code constitute an independant human? Your answer to that question, reguardless of how much you believe it, is not based on fact. Different people don't all share your beliefs and will have different answers. There is no resolving this ethics question. Well, there is one way, and that is to perform the science. If it turns out to be a scientific dead-end, then we'll have our answer: no it is not ethical because it's pointless.
Note that I'm not saying lets do it BECAUSE it might be a scientific dead end and then we can move on, that would be a terrible reason to do something. Just pointing out that waiting for the ethical question to be answered 100% is basically a sneaky way of saying "lets not do this ever because I am uncomfortable with it."
i own all three current gen consoles and I found it useless...
Funny, I found YOUR post useless...
I'm okay with that penalty: the wii doesn't have background downloading, which makes the wait much more annoying. Wait times on the 360 aren't much of an issue, since I can be playing another game as the file is downloading (I don't know about the PS3, I would guess it also has background downloading.)
Not to mention that factoring that out would be pointless: most of the stuff you can download for the wii is about that size, that's always going to be an issue for the wii.
Of course that's because you're a total coward : you only complain if the side you're madly blabbering about doesn't attack you back.
Which means the only type of US government that you'd be happy about is ... a REALLY imperialistic dictatorship, one that DOES hurt you. Which is "supposedly" what you want to avoid in the first place.
That really started not making sense towards the end there. I think if you spent less time with the typical far right wing tactic of accusing your enemies of absurd motivations, and more on the matter at hand, you wouldn't sound so ridiculous.
So three different consoles, all downloading from different servers, on different networks, with different network configurations... and they're not even downloading the same data.
Except that it appears each of the three consoles were tested from the same network, and repeated on different networks (unless I'm on crack again.)
The other differences are exactly what you would want to test. I don't care if the wii is actually blazing fast at downloading but nintendo's servers are extremely slow, to me that's summed up as "Dowloading is slow on the wii."
Note that I'm not certain I have servers straight from networks, and if I am in fact getting the two mixed up, I have a "I told you I was no expert" I'll use. And the aforementioned crack problem doesn't help. But the article does seem interesting to me.
I don't own any of the current-gen consoles, so perhaps someone could clue us in: are there serious frustrations with downloading content on the Wii, or for that matter any of the other consoles?
With the 360 and I think the PS3, there is background downloading, so it's not much of an issue. The wii, which happens to be the slowest in most of the tests and also the slowest in my house, does not. Downloading something means you can't use the wii while you're waiting. You do get to watch mario run and pick up coins and hit coin boxes as a 3 stage status bar, but that's about it. Kind of annoying, and makes everything you download seem a lot slower. It is interesting that it's not all in my head.
I suppose this could have been a more useless article...if perhaps it was spread across multiple pages in classic C|net style.
You don't own any current consoles, of course YOU'RE going to find it useless!