The reason is because most of us generally hold intelligence in much higher regard to the other traits you straw-manned. Oh, you're stronger or taller then me? Good for you, you are more capable of doing a few trivial things that I don't care about better then me. But if you're smarter then me, why then, the insinuation is that I'm inferior to you in something I actually care a lot about. You'll find offense in the insinuation of superiority in any trait you value highly, so for example, the statements "Let me pay for that, I'm much more successful and have more money then you" or "Let me talk to her, I'm more attractive both mentally and physically than you" or "Let me raise your children, I'm better at it" are also plainly offensive.
Imagine if somebody did this but instead of donating time to distributed computing projects like that one on cancer research, the distributed computing project was to have the bot spread like a cancer, refuse to be treated like a cancer, and generally plague and cripple the world with problems like a cancer.
Oh wait.
Re:Diminishing sales equals diminishing use?
on
The Dying PC Market
·
· Score: 1
To be fair, the sales figures and people commenting on them primarily use them to show that the PC Market is decreasing (which is pretty obvious, seeing as how sales are the market).
The main issue at hand is that although a PC's technological growth in the last few years has been marginal, handhelds and cellphones are now growing by leaps and bounds and finally getting to the point where they're for the most part, fully functional for the casual user, with the advantage that you have them with you wherever you go. And if you can browse all your websites and check all your e-mail on the subway trip home, then IM with your friends on your phone while watching TV or playing on your PSWii, then there's a lot less incentive to use your PC.
So I wouldn't say it's so much that diminishing sales equals diminishing use, but rather the increasing sales of a viable substitute combined with diminishing sales equals diminishing use.
Sorry for actually RTFA, I know that's frowned upon here -- but I had to call you out on your poor, exaggerated, sensationalized example.
The software in question doesn't flag people as terrorists, it merely provides info into their previous postings.
Writeprint... can determine with more than 95 percent accuracy if the author has produced other content in the past. The system can then alert analysts when the same author produces new content, as well as where on the Internet the content is being copied, linked to or discussed.
The actual 'flagging' of terrorists happens with their other software.
Dark Web also uses complex tracking software called Web spiders to search discussion threads and other content to find the corners of the Internet where terrorist activities are taking place.
What this means is that in 1,000,000 posters, the Dark Web's tracking software (this is NOT the software with 95% accuracy -- it's accuracy is undisclosed) will probably trawl through the forum and flag some arbitrary number of posters (not 5% flat) who may 'potentially' be terrorists based on dangerous keywords (e.g. kill, infidel), semantics and/or other criteria. Then, they will run Writeprint (THE software with 95% accuracy) to look up the previous postings of these posters, which may possibly be under separate or anonymous accounts to look for more details. They can then look over the entirety (with a theoretical 95% degree accuracy, so it will either incorrectly match one of their postings or miss one of their postings 5% of the time) of all that posters postings to see whether they actually pose a potential terrorist threat, and that is the point where you can actually get labeled a terrorist.
Thus out of 1,000,000 posters, Dark Web may not even detect a single terrorist threat, or it may detect 1,000,000 -- but you can't estimate that number because it is dependent on their "complex tracking software"/"Web spiders" (which we are given no statistics about), the actual messages contained on the forum (e.g. it probably will not flag Slashdot discussions about Free Pascal 2.2 with 100% reliability, but it may accidentally mistake Apple fanboyism for religious extremism), and follow-up by the individuals who analyze the 'flagged' messaged (which is the time when the '1. Evade Dark Web 2. Destroy Infidels 3. ??? 4. Profit!!!' plans get separated from the 'Deceptions TERRORIZE!' plans).
I'm all for criticizing authoritarian government -- but get the facts strait first and keep the sensationalism to a minimum mmm k?
Slashdot Mirror
And hookers!
The reason is because most of us generally hold intelligence in much higher regard to the other traits you straw-manned. Oh, you're stronger or taller then me? Good for you, you are more capable of doing a few trivial things that I don't care about better then me. But if you're smarter then me, why then, the insinuation is that I'm inferior to you in something I actually care a lot about. You'll find offense in the insinuation of superiority in any trait you value highly, so for example, the statements "Let me pay for that, I'm much more successful and have more money then you" or "Let me talk to her, I'm more attractive both mentally and physically than you" or "Let me raise your children, I'm better at it" are also plainly offensive.
Have you seen the crowd at a Korean Starcraft tournament lately?
Because there isn't one?
Imagine if somebody did this but instead of donating time to distributed computing projects like that one on cancer research, the distributed computing project was to have the bot spread like a cancer, refuse to be treated like a cancer, and generally plague and cripple the world with problems like a cancer. Oh wait.
To be fair, the sales figures and people commenting on them primarily use them to show that the PC Market is decreasing (which is pretty obvious, seeing as how sales are the market). The main issue at hand is that although a PC's technological growth in the last few years has been marginal, handhelds and cellphones are now growing by leaps and bounds and finally getting to the point where they're for the most part, fully functional for the casual user, with the advantage that you have them with you wherever you go. And if you can browse all your websites and check all your e-mail on the subway trip home, then IM with your friends on your phone while watching TV or playing on your PSWii, then there's a lot less incentive to use your PC. So I wouldn't say it's so much that diminishing sales equals diminishing use, but rather the increasing sales of a viable substitute combined with diminishing sales equals diminishing use.
Basic service in the US runs roughly $30-40 monthly (so comparable to your 14 euros). The $60 plans are with unlimited data.
Dear Hammer, I sincerely like to thank you Cuz now I got the world swingin from my nuts And damn it feels good to be a gangsta
- Hardware Keyboard
- 3G
- Better Camera
- Less smugness
Oh Wait.
http://qwantz.com/archive/001057.html Tell your friends ok.
Sorry for actually RTFA, I know that's frowned upon here -- but I had to call you out on your poor, exaggerated, sensationalized example.
The software in question doesn't flag people as terrorists, it merely provides info into their previous postings.
Writeprint... can determine with more than 95 percent accuracy if the author has produced other content in the past. The system can then alert analysts when the same author produces new content, as well as where on the Internet the content is being copied, linked to or discussed.
The actual 'flagging' of terrorists happens with their other software.
Dark Web also uses complex tracking software called Web spiders to search discussion threads and other content to find the corners of the Internet where terrorist activities are taking place.
What this means is that in 1,000,000 posters, the Dark Web's tracking software (this is NOT the software with 95% accuracy -- it's accuracy is undisclosed) will probably trawl through the forum and flag some arbitrary number of posters (not 5% flat) who may 'potentially' be terrorists based on dangerous keywords (e.g. kill, infidel), semantics and/or other criteria. Then, they will run Writeprint (THE software with 95% accuracy) to look up the previous postings of these posters, which may possibly be under separate or anonymous accounts to look for more details. They can then look over the entirety (with a theoretical 95% degree accuracy, so it will either incorrectly match one of their postings or miss one of their postings 5% of the time) of all that posters postings to see whether they actually pose a potential terrorist threat, and that is the point where you can actually get labeled a terrorist.
Thus out of 1,000,000 posters, Dark Web may not even detect a single terrorist threat, or it may detect 1,000,000 -- but you can't estimate that number because it is dependent on their "complex tracking software"/"Web spiders" (which we are given no statistics about), the actual messages contained on the forum (e.g. it probably will not flag Slashdot discussions about Free Pascal 2.2 with 100% reliability, but it may accidentally mistake Apple fanboyism for religious extremism), and follow-up by the individuals who analyze the 'flagged' messaged (which is the time when the '1. Evade Dark Web 2. Destroy Infidels 3. ??? 4. Profit!!!' plans get separated from the 'Deceptions TERRORIZE!' plans).
I'm all for criticizing authoritarian government -- but get the facts strait first and keep the sensationalism to a minimum mmm k?