I said "under the same heading" not "identical to". There was a reason for that. The limitations placed on speech encompass just a wee bit more than literally yelling "Fire" in a theatre. I may be wrong, but I believe there's actually something about counseling suicide, or otherwise giving a person you know to be vulnerable that last little push.
Surely this woman's actions come under the same heading as yelling "Fire" in a theatre. Free speech is one thing. Using speech as part of a cold-blooded attempt to psychologically destroy a child is something else entirely. If what I've read is true, the woman used knowledge she gained dishonestly to manipulate an underage girl...a girl who should have been protected from verbal assault by an adult. We do not expose children to some speech that is protected by the First Amendment with the NC-17 rating, "Adults Only" areas of the Public Library and in many other ways.
Calling what Lori Drew did "free speech" is like saying a child molester's threat to murder his victim's parents in order to hide the crime "free speech".
How many low-rent laptops could be crammed with utterly useless information and sent back and forth, back and forth across the US border? Like any basically stupid, attack-trained creature these border-control idiots occasionally have to learn the lesson that when you piss off the boss too often, there are going to be consequences.
Thousands of man-hours wasted on trivia and the inevitable reaming they'll will eventually get from their elected masters, hopefully the loss of some upper-level jobs...now there's some consequences.
Being held accountable is the only thing these fascist half-wits really worry about.
Re:Anyone else find that quote hilarious?
on
A Quasi-Quasicrystal
·
· Score: 3, Funny
"Or make an off topic meme-based joke"
You mean, like teaching sharks with lasers on their heads to swim in formation so they could generate quasi-crystals as they went about their nefarious business? I am above such childish antics!
A system Hitler would have had wet dreams about, and it's a right wing Jewish government that is bringing it into being. How long until some uniformed Israeli soldier struts up to a family and arrogantly demands, "Your papers. Immediately!"
I would bet the majority of Jews around the world and in Israel are horrified by this measure, and disgusted by the people who want to implement it. What price security?
The word "Verizon" shares all but two of its letters (the z and the n, if you're interested) with the words "coercive assholes". Can this be allowed to stand, this perfect example of a company cold-bloodedly choosing a name that shares so much with an aggressively obscene phrase? Church-going matrons across the world will surely keel over in a dead faint when they hear the company named in public, then rise up in righteous outrage to protest its vile decision to share letters in such an unclean and ugly way.
End the madness. Demand that Verizon change its name to something decent and righteous. Perhaps Zzzzzzz would be appropriate.
The grandmother of an extremely attractive young lady in Toronto used Chinese characters in a design she embroidered on one of the girl's shirts. Somebody in Chinatown eventually pointed out to her that the characters said, "This dish is inexpensive but delicious."
Whenever it faces a country big enough, strong enough or mean enough to stand up to it, the brave men of the IOC have a standard negotiation strategy that can best be summed up as "I'll blow you now. You can pay me back later."
To absolutely nobody's surprise, the IOC is still waiting for its first oral experience that doesn't involve gargling with 3 gallons of Listerine afterward.
"I wonder what happens if you inform a cop that you are recording him when he pulls you over."
Simple: the officer in question politely requests that you turn over your cell phone/camera, stomps it into tiny pieces, THEN beats the living shit out of you.
When it comes to pure, mealy-mouthed, underhanded douchebaggery, it's difficult to beat your basic European upper class snob. The IOC, of course, is completely infested with the creatures.
This must be what they mean about a search with a "wide stance".
Perhaps it's more enlightening to add together all the terms appearing more than once, like sex!, fired, racis!, arrest!, intox! and contravers!. What emerges is an interesting psychological view into the heads of the people doing the search. Based on what they list more than once, I would guess Jan Williams and Monica Gooding are afraid of getting so drunk or otherwise intoxicated that they wind up having sex with someone of a different race, being arrested (perhaps by an aggrieved other-racial spouse or something), and having the subsequent controversy cost them their jobs.
Just kidding, but who knows? Some of those prim and proper morality queens get really, really twisted when they drink a bit too much. Yeah alcohol!
If you aren't blessed with particularly tender sensibilities, I'd suggest you turn off the "Safe Search" option. I entered "rhinoceros" in the search box and came back with virtually nothing. After turning off "Safe Search" and "Typing Suggestions" in Preferences, I got back about what you'd expect from a decent search engine.
There's obviously some bugs to work out, but Cuil looks like it could be a winner. I especially like the fact that they emphatically DON'T keep track of searches and personal information. That aspect of Google has always made me a bit uneasy. True story: about six years ago, my sister was having trouble with her new dog. I thought I'd find some information to help her train the beast, and typed "Dog Instruction" into Google's search box. What came back was, um, not exactly what I expected.
I can imagine Google linking that search up with my computer in some way, and stuffing it away in its little electronic filing cabinet. For that matter, I'm not pleased with ANY of my searches being tracked, and not because I spend my life searching for pornography or anything else shameful. It just isn't anybody's business.
This strikes me as one of those situations where what actually happened is less important than the company's reaction to your questions. The initial silence, followed by a response from a company official that is not in harmony with their published policy, screams "guilty conscience". They got caught with their hand in the cookie jar (yours, in this case), and they're just hoping you'll shut up and go away. I find myself wondering whether they routinely snoop databases hoping to find information that might be of use to them.
Three recommendations: Encrypt everything that matters if you decide to stay with this company; publish their name, along with a factual account of their actions and links to your documentation; if there is a relevant regulatory body or professional association, send your story to them and ask whether the company's actions and response are reasonable under the circumstances.
In spite of all the criticism, much of it deserved, something like this reminds us that NASA has had its share of triumphs. I hope they start to find their way again.
There seems to be some evidence that among people who are heavy cell phone users and who develop brain cancer (no link between the two has been demonstrated, but it's statistically certain that such people will exist), the tumor is appearing on the side of the head where the user habitually holds the phone more often than can be accounted for by chance. At this point, all that can be said is that the situation needs study.
In the mean time, it seems sensible to exercise a bit of caution with respect to having a cell phone glued to one's ear for two or three hours per day. If a link is eventually found between cell phone use and some kind of cancer, I wonder how many of the Slashdotters scoffing at the idea will have the guts to post a mea culpa. I'm reminded of all the sneering contempt directed at the idea of tiny, camera-bearing aircraft similar to the one apparently bopping around at a demo in some Dutch gymnasium.
This old chestnut has been around for years. The way I first heard it (at least 15 years ago) was that the Chicken Gun was Canadian and the FAA had to have the concept of a thawed fowl gently explained to them.
I have no doubt every country has a different idiot/victim, depending on who your most popular "moron nation" happens to be at the moment.
Here's an article on the place that may help you decide whether or not it's worthwhile. No mention is made of batteries, and I'm pretty sure it doesn't use any.
"I'd say that we are now behind because we did not fully understand, frankly, the limitations in the Vista environment."
Don't sweat it buddy. A lot of us did appreciate those limitations, and Vista won't be part of our computing world any time soon. So just go ahead and optimize for Windows 7. Or Linux. Whatever.
More seriously, a question: Would the problem be the way Vista tends to hammer the main HDD so much, but the rest of the OS universe doesn't?"
The Zenn isn't allowed on Canadian roads because it has more in common with a golf cart than with a real car, not because of government red tape. I believe the top speed of the thing is only about 25 mph. You sure as hell wouldn't want to allow one on your basic city street, where the speed limit is at least 30 mph, and often higher. People driving the thing would have to keep their windows rolled up to avoid getting wind burn from the bicycles whizzing past them.
I'll give him a call. He's living in a farm house, and there's another, small house behind it that usually has extended family or the occasional tenant living in it.
Slashdot Mirror
I said "under the same heading" not "identical to". There was a reason for that. The limitations placed on speech encompass just a wee bit more than literally yelling "Fire" in a theatre. I may be wrong, but I believe there's actually something about counseling suicide, or otherwise giving a person you know to be vulnerable that last little push.
Surely this woman's actions come under the same heading as yelling "Fire" in a theatre. Free speech is one thing. Using speech as part of a cold-blooded attempt to psychologically destroy a child is something else entirely. If what I've read is true, the woman used knowledge she gained dishonestly to manipulate an underage girl...a girl who should have been protected from verbal assault by an adult. We do not expose children to some speech that is protected by the First Amendment with the NC-17 rating, "Adults Only" areas of the Public Library and in many other ways.
Calling what Lori Drew did "free speech" is like saying a child molester's threat to murder his victim's parents in order to hide the crime "free speech".
I wish I could disagree with you.
How many low-rent laptops could be crammed with utterly useless information and sent back and forth, back and forth across the US border? Like any basically stupid, attack-trained creature these border-control idiots occasionally have to learn the lesson that when you piss off the boss too often, there are going to be consequences.
Thousands of man-hours wasted on trivia and the inevitable reaming they'll will eventually get from their elected masters, hopefully the loss of some upper-level jobs...now there's some consequences.
Being held accountable is the only thing these fascist half-wits really worry about.
"Or make an off topic meme-based joke"
You mean, like teaching sharks with lasers on their heads to swim in formation so they could generate quasi-crystals as they went about their nefarious business? I am above such childish antics!
A system Hitler would have had wet dreams about, and it's a right wing Jewish government that is bringing it into being. How long until some uniformed Israeli soldier struts up to a family and arrogantly demands, "Your papers. Immediately!"
I would bet the majority of Jews around the world and in Israel are horrified by this measure, and disgusted by the people who want to implement it. What price security?
The word "Verizon" shares all but two of its letters (the z and the n, if you're interested) with the words "coercive assholes". Can this be allowed to stand, this perfect example of a company cold-bloodedly choosing a name that shares so much with an aggressively obscene phrase? Church-going matrons across the world will surely keel over in a dead faint when they hear the company named in public, then rise up in righteous outrage to protest its vile decision to share letters in such an unclean and ugly way.
End the madness. Demand that Verizon change its name to something decent and righteous. Perhaps Zzzzzzz would be appropriate.
File under "Sauce for the Goose".
The grandmother of an extremely attractive young lady in Toronto used Chinese characters in a design she embroidered on one of the girl's shirts. Somebody in Chinatown eventually pointed out to her that the characters said, "This dish is inexpensive but delicious."
Whenever it faces a country big enough, strong enough or mean enough to stand up to it, the brave men of the IOC have a standard negotiation strategy that can best be summed up as "I'll blow you now. You can pay me back later."
To absolutely nobody's surprise, the IOC is still waiting for its first oral experience that doesn't involve gargling with 3 gallons of Listerine afterward.
"I wonder what happens if you inform a cop that you are recording him when he pulls you over."
Simple: the officer in question politely requests that you turn over your cell phone/camera, stomps it into tiny pieces, THEN beats the living shit out of you.
When it comes to pure, mealy-mouthed, underhanded douchebaggery, it's difficult to beat your basic European upper class snob. The IOC, of course, is completely infested with the creatures.
This must be what they mean about a search with a "wide stance".
Perhaps it's more enlightening to add together all the terms appearing more than once, like sex!, fired, racis!, arrest!, intox! and contravers!. What emerges is an interesting psychological view into the heads of the people doing the search. Based on what they list more than once, I would guess Jan Williams and Monica Gooding are afraid of getting so drunk or otherwise intoxicated that they wind up having sex with someone of a different race, being arrested (perhaps by an aggrieved other-racial spouse or something), and having the subsequent controversy cost them their jobs.
Just kidding, but who knows? Some of those prim and proper morality queens get really, really twisted when they drink a bit too much. Yeah alcohol!
If you aren't blessed with particularly tender sensibilities, I'd suggest you turn off the "Safe Search" option. I entered "rhinoceros" in the search box and came back with virtually nothing. After turning off "Safe Search" and "Typing Suggestions" in Preferences, I got back about what you'd expect from a decent search engine.
There's obviously some bugs to work out, but Cuil looks like it could be a winner. I especially like the fact that they emphatically DON'T keep track of searches and personal information. That aspect of Google has always made me a bit uneasy. True story: about six years ago, my sister was having trouble with her new dog. I thought I'd find some information to help her train the beast, and typed "Dog Instruction" into Google's search box. What came back was, um, not exactly what I expected.
I can imagine Google linking that search up with my computer in some way, and stuffing it away in its little electronic filing cabinet. For that matter, I'm not pleased with ANY of my searches being tracked, and not because I spend my life searching for pornography or anything else shameful. It just isn't anybody's business.
This strikes me as one of those situations where what actually happened is less important than the company's reaction to your questions. The initial silence, followed by a response from a company official that is not in harmony with their published policy, screams "guilty conscience". They got caught with their hand in the cookie jar (yours, in this case), and they're just hoping you'll shut up and go away. I find myself wondering whether they routinely snoop databases hoping to find information that might be of use to them.
Three recommendations: Encrypt everything that matters if you decide to stay with this company; publish their name, along with a factual account of their actions and links to your documentation; if there is a relevant regulatory body or professional association, send your story to them and ask whether the company's actions and response are reasonable under the circumstances.
Thank you very much for the link. It's now living in the "Revisit" folder in my Bookmarks.
In spite of all the criticism, much of it deserved, something like this reminds us that NASA has had its share of triumphs. I hope they start to find their way again.
There seems to be some evidence that among people who are heavy cell phone users and who develop brain cancer (no link between the two has been demonstrated, but it's statistically certain that such people will exist), the tumor is appearing on the side of the head where the user habitually holds the phone more often than can be accounted for by chance. At this point, all that can be said is that the situation needs study.
In the mean time, it seems sensible to exercise a bit of caution with respect to having a cell phone glued to one's ear for two or three hours per day. If a link is eventually found between cell phone use and some kind of cancer, I wonder how many of the Slashdotters scoffing at the idea will have the guts to post a mea culpa. I'm reminded of all the sneering contempt directed at the idea of tiny, camera-bearing aircraft similar to the one apparently bopping around at a demo in some Dutch gymnasium.
This old chestnut has been around for years. The way I first heard it (at least 15 years ago) was that the Chicken Gun was Canadian and the FAA had to have the concept of a thawed fowl gently explained to them.
I have no doubt every country has a different idiot/victim, depending on who your most popular "moron nation" happens to be at the moment.
Note to self: Never to make a joke when there's some dough-head around to take it seriously.
Here's an article on the place that may help you decide whether or not it's worthwhile. No mention is made of batteries, and I'm pretty sure it doesn't use any.
http://www.thespec.com/go/go_at_home/article/360214
Hope that gives you enough info to decide whether the place is environmentally responsible or not.
Cheers!
"I'd say that we are now behind because we did not fully understand, frankly, the limitations in the Vista environment."
Don't sweat it buddy. A lot of us did appreciate those limitations, and Vista won't be part of our computing world any time soon. So just go ahead and optimize for Windows 7. Or Linux. Whatever.
More seriously, a question: Would the problem be the way Vista tends to hammer the main HDD so much, but the rest of the OS universe doesn't?"
The Zenn isn't allowed on Canadian roads because it has more in common with a golf cart than with a real car, not because of government red tape. I believe the top speed of the thing is only about 25 mph. You sure as hell wouldn't want to allow one on your basic city street, where the speed limit is at least 30 mph, and often higher. People driving the thing would have to keep their windows rolled up to avoid getting wind burn from the bicycles whizzing past them.
I'll give him a call. He's living in a farm house, and there's another, small house behind it that usually has extended family or the occasional tenant living in it.