Actually, I had the same problem. Suits are outfits. Lawsuits are lawsuits, unless you've already dropped another keyword like "court" or "lawyer."
Then I'm the kind of punster who, in the computer game I run, makes it so that a "law suit" is also a kind of clothing, but you take psychic damage from wearing it.
... anyone who knows anything about computers can easily see that it's just a thin sheen of technobabble hastily thrown on top of a standard action movie.
Sure, but a thin sheen of technobabble is about the best we can get in *any* major motion picture. The Matrix certainly isn't any more realistic as computers go, and while it's been a long time since I've seen Hackers I don't remember it being much better. They make movies to tell stories, and the computer stuff is tacked on either as flavor, or as a hand-wavy stand-in for "magic", or to tune the movie to pick up the computer geeks along with kids and action fans, or whatever their demographic map says they're going after.
I really liked Tron 2. Why? Because I went in saying, well, basically this is a gladiator-style action movie, but it'll be pretty and have some computery flavor. I actually came out pleasantly surprised, because they did a better job at those aspects than I expected.
The plural of anecdote is not data, but my car's body rattles, the upholstery is worn, the doors leak (well, not too much), the paint is scratched, the windshield is cracked, plastic parts are broken, and while the dashboard is holding up fine I do have a massive dent on the passenger side door. The reason I haven't sold the car? Because the engine still runs great. My primary criterion for selling is when it doesn't work anymore, which mostly has to do with the engine.
So, now what? Are you going to send him commercial spam and wait for him to sue you? Then what? Is your plan to have a good chuckle over the semantic trick you pulled on him, or are you looking to countersue, or what? Or just worth the $9 to make a joke here for us? Not really sure what you're going after.
Will 2011 be the Year of the Rabbit according to the Chinese zodiac? Yes, yes it will!
Having been born in the year of the rabbit some multiple of 12 years ago, I expect 2011 to be particularly auspicious.
Does anybody actually care if it's an A or an S? I've got a BA in Physics. Nobody in my program once grumbled that it was going to be inferior while we were getting it. I've never had anyone in an interview stop and ask me about it, they all just say "okay, degree in physics, that's great."
Are you asking why a company a few years old doesn't have as many branches and divisions as a company that's past three decades? How many divisions did Microsoft have when it was the same age as FB is now? Even Google was pretty linear to start with, and only really seems to have exploded in the last few. And, honestly, other than their original searchvertising product, I'm not sure most of Google's branches are really doing anything profits-wise.
Well, I do drive an hour and a quarter to the nearest Target a couple of times a year, but it's hard to justify an extra two hours in the car just to avoid Wal-Mart.
The channel itself is also called "Fox News" isn't it? It makes it confusing to anyone trying to tell which is being talked about, the channel or a show. As a casual channel flipper, I'm not sure I've ever seen the less-biased news, only the" frothing unreasonable opinion" portion of their programming.
Wish I had mod points for you Pyro. I lean left, but I think for myself, and I like a good discussion, based on facts and reason. I can readily talk to, work with, and respect those who lean right but give me equivalent treatment. Fox News does none of that.
Not really to object to most of your point, but there are important subtleties to deciding what should or shouldn't be paid for. Plastic surgery is a common example--there's a huge spectrum of work that ranges from "affects to quality of life" to "vanity" with a large grey middle ground. It's often an expensive procedure and what one person might say is an acceptable government-paid cost is something the next person might say should be paid out of pocket. I'm not saying that's reason to object to a more sensible organizing of the system, but to point out there definitely still needs to be some standards and approval process.
You'll also get a lot of push back from doctors, who fear their salaries will be decimated, and fear from prospective medical students and society at large that nobody will want to be a doctor if you can't make enough to repay the cost of schooling. These concerns can of course be addressed reasonably, but you're going to get a lot of fight back while trying to sort it out.
Hell if I know. But I don't really consider government confiscation of information to be disclosure. I don't think they're on the same level at all. I also don't think an attacker is a "user" who would be covered by a policy like that. I'd like to see someone in either case try to object. In the first they'd be objecting to my complying with a court order, and in the second they'd be admitting to attacking my site.
I feel like this is way outside the realm of what normal privacy concerns for normal users is all about. You can nitpick, but my message is simple, understandable, and exactly what a normal user wants to know. It would be a complete shame to destroy that for the sake of fringe cases and legal caveats, and it puts us right back where we are now: with unreadable monstrosities of text that nobody trusts anyway because we all know they're full of loopholes and lies. I'll take my chances with your examples before I'll put out the crap that normally passes as a privacy policy on most sites.
I'm pretty sure being required to present information in court couldn't reasonably be considered a violation of a privacy policy. And that's not a tough choice, it's 100% obvious that the court wins. A majority of the clauses and conditions are in there to protect the sites that do buy/sell/trade user information. I'm not a lawyer either, but until one tells me otherwise, I still maintain you don't need anything else if you don't let that information go to anyone else.
Fake reviews of joke items are funny, yes. But what about the part where the author asks if they can trust reviews of real products? That's a genuine question.
This is what I came here to say. Always look at reviews from the different ratings brackets. Sometimes the 2-star and 4-star ones are a little more useful than the 1's and 5's, because those authors are less likely to be out to provide irrational hate or praise. Good way to get a sampling of opinions. Particularly for games, but also generally a great way to get contrary discussion on books.
Also want to note the "reviews are just jokes" crowd apparently completely missed the transition from the author talking about fake reviews of joke products to noting that it's also possible to fake reviews of real products. Should still be obvious that it could happen, but "uranium is clearly a joke product" is not a logical answer to "so can I trust the reviews of real products?"
Absolutely. I've put privacy policies on web sites that are sometimes as simple as "We don't share your information with anyone." In those cases it was honest, true, and actually acceptable. As opposed to this honest but reprehensible (albeit pretty typical) one.
Wow. That's a fantastic example of a coder "being smart" in a really dumb way. In most languages converting a string to lower is a matter of a simple built-in function. All of 10 or 15 extra characters to just convert and all is good. That's an incredibly stupid error message, and that programmer deserves to be kicked in the shins.
Slashdot Mirror
The question then is, what do you build with it?
More 3D printers, to keep driving the prices down!
Then I'm the kind of punster who, in the computer game I run, makes it so that a "law suit" is also a kind of clothing, but you take psychic damage from wearing it.
I dunno. I'd totally buy stuff from a company called "Gloom & Misery, Inc."
... anyone who knows anything about computers can easily see that it's just a thin sheen of technobabble hastily thrown on top of a standard action movie.
Sure, but a thin sheen of technobabble is about the best we can get in *any* major motion picture. The Matrix certainly isn't any more realistic as computers go, and while it's been a long time since I've seen Hackers I don't remember it being much better. They make movies to tell stories, and the computer stuff is tacked on either as flavor, or as a hand-wavy stand-in for "magic", or to tune the movie to pick up the computer geeks along with kids and action fans, or whatever their demographic map says they're going after.
I really liked Tron 2. Why? Because I went in saying, well, basically this is a gladiator-style action movie, but it'll be pretty and have some computery flavor. I actually came out pleasantly surprised, because they did a better job at those aspects than I expected.
The plural of anecdote is not data, but my car's body rattles, the upholstery is worn, the doors leak (well, not too much), the paint is scratched, the windshield is cracked, plastic parts are broken, and while the dashboard is holding up fine I do have a massive dent on the passenger side door. The reason I haven't sold the car? Because the engine still runs great. My primary criterion for selling is when it doesn't work anymore, which mostly has to do with the engine.
A: Ride their bike instead?
B: Walk?
C: Take a 2-minute detour?
Wouldn't botnets still get around this pretty easily?
So, now what? Are you going to send him commercial spam and wait for him to sue you? Then what? Is your plan to have a good chuckle over the semantic trick you pulled on him, or are you looking to countersue, or what? Or just worth the $9 to make a joke here for us? Not really sure what you're going after.
My wife would certainly object to that one!
Will 2011 be the Year of the Rabbit according to the Chinese zodiac? Yes, yes it will! Having been born in the year of the rabbit some multiple of 12 years ago, I expect 2011 to be particularly auspicious.
Does anybody actually care if it's an A or an S? I've got a BA in Physics. Nobody in my program once grumbled that it was going to be inferior while we were getting it. I've never had anyone in an interview stop and ask me about it, they all just say "okay, degree in physics, that's great."
And just think of what we'll be able to do once we put those silly deeply-held beliefs behind us and work with just the facts!
Are you asking why a company a few years old doesn't have as many branches and divisions as a company that's past three decades? How many divisions did Microsoft have when it was the same age as FB is now? Even Google was pretty linear to start with, and only really seems to have exploded in the last few. And, honestly, other than their original searchvertising product, I'm not sure most of Google's branches are really doing anything profits-wise.
Well, I do drive an hour and a quarter to the nearest Target a couple of times a year, but it's hard to justify an extra two hours in the car just to avoid Wal-Mart.
The channel itself is also called "Fox News" isn't it? It makes it confusing to anyone trying to tell which is being talked about, the channel or a show. As a casual channel flipper, I'm not sure I've ever seen the less-biased news, only the" frothing unreasonable opinion" portion of their programming.
Wish I had mod points for you Pyro. I lean left, but I think for myself, and I like a good discussion, based on facts and reason. I can readily talk to, work with, and respect those who lean right but give me equivalent treatment. Fox News does none of that.
You'll also get a lot of push back from doctors, who fear their salaries will be decimated, and fear from prospective medical students and society at large that nobody will want to be a doctor if you can't make enough to repay the cost of schooling. These concerns can of course be addressed reasonably, but you're going to get a lot of fight back while trying to sort it out.
Anybody who wants a second chance at the Monopoly game. Most people will give away more than that for a shot at a million bucks.
I feel like this is way outside the realm of what normal privacy concerns for normal users is all about. You can nitpick, but my message is simple, understandable, and exactly what a normal user wants to know. It would be a complete shame to destroy that for the sake of fringe cases and legal caveats, and it puts us right back where we are now: with unreadable monstrosities of text that nobody trusts anyway because we all know they're full of loopholes and lies. I'll take my chances with your examples before I'll put out the crap that normally passes as a privacy policy on most sites.
I'm pretty sure being required to present information in court couldn't reasonably be considered a violation of a privacy policy. And that's not a tough choice, it's 100% obvious that the court wins. A majority of the clauses and conditions are in there to protect the sites that do buy/sell/trade user information. I'm not a lawyer either, but until one tells me otherwise, I still maintain you don't need anything else if you don't let that information go to anyone else.
Fake reviews of joke items are funny, yes. But what about the part where the author asks if they can trust reviews of real products? That's a genuine question.
Also want to note the "reviews are just jokes" crowd apparently completely missed the transition from the author talking about fake reviews of joke products to noting that it's also possible to fake reviews of real products. Should still be obvious that it could happen, but "uranium is clearly a joke product" is not a logical answer to "so can I trust the reviews of real products?"
Absolutely. I've put privacy policies on web sites that are sometimes as simple as "We don't share your information with anyone." In those cases it was honest, true, and actually acceptable. As opposed to this honest but reprehensible (albeit pretty typical) one.
Wow. That's a fantastic example of a coder "being smart" in a really dumb way. In most languages converting a string to lower is a matter of a simple built-in function. All of 10 or 15 extra characters to just convert and all is good. That's an incredibly stupid error message, and that programmer deserves to be kicked in the shins.
If they're smart, it'll be another Tab key. The only time I ever press caps lock is when I'm reaching for Tab and hit CL by accident.