Do you mean introvert, nerd, slightly autistic? Or you you mean backstabbing, businessman. If the former, put him in control of your product design, it sounds like he knows how to get things done (and being the most popular man around the water coolers does not help the company one bit). It worked for jobs and Woz. If you mean the second. Their is nothing you can really do about the boss. He is not going to resign simply because everyone hates him.
Both installing censors to prevent any media for saying anything you dislike and simply killing them if they do is censorship, since both are suppression of speech. It does not matter if it is direct or indirect.
Good god, it is called freedom of "speech", and no one has ever come up with a way (baring death or cutting out of the tongue) to prevent or take back physical speech, by your definition. Speech is suppressed by threats, and punishments for doing it; This is censorship.
So we have freedom of speech laws so that you can say anything that everyone agrees with?
How does this differ from 1,000 years ago? Did they just randomly outlaw accepted words and phrases then? Or do you think it is possibly that the founding fathers put in freedom of speech to protect speech that many would disagree with, that many would find horrible?
"You are allowed to do exactly that, no one's stopping you, it's simply that there are consequences, this is not censorship." Yes it is. Most censorship is not pre-emptive (only copyright infringing videos can really be automatically scanned) any more than people know they will get punished for it. I guess Youtube could try to convert audio to text and then run algorithms on the text to try and figure what is being said, possible, if somewhat advanced.
Lets say, we outlaw saying anything bad about the President. We do not prevent anyone from saying these things, ?how would you even do this?, but whenever you get a report of it, the criminal gets executed (for example) and the offending material taken down if it was not simply speech. This is not censorship?
I have a very hard time believing that some random person can pick up a beer making kit and produce anything like the quality that others have spent generations refining.
Except that none of these good native beers that you speak of would be cheap enough to classify as cheapest in the world. American beer classifies as cheapest in the world because a large portion of your population are will to actually purchase the incredibly cheap, watered down crap that many of your big breweries do produce.
I agree, but the graph scale shows that only 300 out of the 100,000 people used those most common passwords. I am not sure what the average perentage of users that use horrible passwords are, but.3% is below what I would expect (and you have to think that all of those people probably know better, but just have nothing on their account worth protecting).
We already make many times over enough food to feed all hungry people in the entire world. World production of food is about enough to feed 11 billion people well, almost twice the number of people on the planet.
Yes but that ruling was unfair as well, actually far more so. Not only was it an accepted industry practise, but it was the best practice for computer users. Bundling a single software product for all important tasks, is simply the best way to distribute a OS.
Bing does this as well, I do not think it is particularly fair to start fining people for doing something that has been going on and in the open since internet searches were first born.
Now if they wanted to created some regulations to protect internet searches to make them fair, well that would be a good start.
Sites cannot just shorten passwords, as they do not know our passwords, only their hash. They may have started telling people about this, it it has always been this way (at least for the last decade). Like 7+ years ago I had long password on Hotmail (16+), I eventually learned that both the signup and login password field just allowed 16 characters so I was just typing extra characters for no reason.
So since simulations/renders can sometimes look too much like the real thing to tell apart, they are now banned. So if you cannot tell them apart, how will you enforce this rule?
Since this will only hurt people who care about rules, this will just make the fake scam projects look better in relation to the real projects. And if scammers were already able to make renders that could fool people, well they will just continue to do so.
Yes I get the idea, but KS is to fund development of stuff, and if you are going with KS you probably do not have a fully functional product (and simulations will be needed to show off what you want to create). As long as you make sure you make obvious that it is a simulation, and not actual footage, it can only be beneficial to the developer.
You make it sound like the worse part of prison rape is that they do not deserve sex. The problem with isolation is that isolation is far more harmful to the psychi than rape. Personally, I do not know why everyone complains about it so much. But that is just how it is.
Having them work would be a kindness. Sticking them in small confined spaces and having them work out there anger on each-other is far worse then what most slaves had to endure.
I am as accepting to the state murdering innocent people as enslaving them.
You cannot give a person back those ten or twenty years. You cannot fix the mistake, only try to fix a small amount of the damage. In the same way you could give his family money if you executed someone. And a significant amount of people who get out after those 10 to 20 years will be seriously scared for life from their imprisonment, some will even kill themselves.
Slashdot Mirror
That is an even better acronym. it is a MANPADS Man-Portable Air-Defense System.
Do you mean introvert, nerd, slightly autistic?
Or you you mean backstabbing, businessman.
If the former, put him in control of your product design, it sounds like he knows how to get things done (and being the most popular man around the water coolers does not help the company one bit). It worked for jobs and Woz.
If you mean the second. Their is nothing you can really do about the boss. He is not going to resign simply because everyone hates him.
Don't do it, and their apparently is, (http://www.atlnightspots.com/boy-dies-after-masturbating-42-times/).
3) Break the local law and move your operations offshore.
4) Break the law, but get away with it because you are a powerful corporation.
Both installing censors to prevent any media for saying anything you dislike and simply killing them if they do is censorship, since both are suppression of speech. It does not matter if it is direct or indirect.
Good god, it is called freedom of "speech", and no one has ever come up with a way (baring death or cutting out of the tongue) to prevent or take back physical speech, by your definition. Speech is suppressed by threats, and punishments for doing it; This is censorship.
So we have freedom of speech laws so that you can say anything that everyone agrees with?
How does this differ from 1,000 years ago? Did they just randomly outlaw accepted words and phrases then? Or do you think it is possibly that the founding fathers put in freedom of speech to protect speech that many would disagree with, that many would find horrible?
Unless you have a time machine to bring you back to 1947 you cannot switch "worlds".
"You are allowed to do exactly that, no one's stopping you, it's simply that there are consequences, this is not censorship."
Yes it is. Most censorship is not pre-emptive (only copyright infringing videos can really be automatically scanned) any more than people know they will get punished for it. I guess Youtube could try to convert audio to text and then run algorithms on the text to try and figure what is being said, possible, if somewhat advanced.
Lets say, we outlaw saying anything bad about the President. We do not prevent anyone from saying these things, ?how would you even do this?, but whenever you get a report of it, the criminal gets executed (for example) and the offending material taken down if it was not simply speech.
This is not censorship?
Ya, the artists get nothing. But that does not change the laws effects on the rest of us.
I have a very hard time believing that some random person can pick up a beer making kit and produce anything like the quality that others have spent generations refining.
Except that none of these good native beers that you speak of would be cheap enough to classify as cheapest in the world.
American beer classifies as cheapest in the world because a large portion of your population are will to actually purchase the incredibly cheap, watered down crap that many of your big breweries do produce.
This is not a funny comment, it is an insightful one.
Not only is just crappy bear, but it is also watered down beer.
I agree, but the graph scale shows that only 300 out of the 100,000 people used those most common passwords. .3% is below what I would expect (and you have to think that all of those people probably know better, but just have nothing on their account worth protecting).
I am not sure what the average perentage of users that use horrible passwords are, but
We already make many times over enough food to feed all hungry people in the entire world. World production of food is about enough to feed 11 billion people well, almost twice the number of people on the planet.
Yes but that ruling was unfair as well, actually far more so. Not only was it an accepted industry practise, but it was the best practice for computer users.
Bundling a single software product for all important tasks, is simply the best way to distribute a OS.
Bing does this as well, I do not think it is particularly fair to start fining people for doing something that has been going on and in the open since internet searches were first born.
Now if they wanted to created some regulations to protect internet searches to make them fair, well that would be a good start.
Would make more sense to me to fine them 20% (or whatever) of all EU monies, instead.
Try Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball, everyone plays that one with just one hand anyways.
But seriously, point and click adventures almost never require more than one hand for mouse use.
Sites cannot just shorten passwords, as they do not know our passwords, only their hash.
They may have started telling people about this, it it has always been this way (at least for the last decade). Like 7+ years ago I had long password on Hotmail (16+), I eventually learned that both the signup and login password field just allowed 16 characters so I was just typing extra characters for no reason.
So since simulations/renders can sometimes look too much like the real thing to tell apart, they are now banned. So if you cannot tell them apart, how will you enforce this rule?
Since this will only hurt people who care about rules, this will just make the fake scam projects look better in relation to the real projects.
And if scammers were already able to make renders that could fool people, well they will just continue to do so.
Except many products and people could never get it that far (90% of the way to completion) without prior funding.
Yes I get the idea, but KS is to fund development of stuff, and if you are going with KS you probably do not have a fully functional product (and simulations will be needed to show off what you want to create). As long as you make sure you make obvious that it is a simulation, and not actual footage, it can only be beneficial to the developer.
You make it sound like the worse part of prison rape is that they do not deserve sex.
The problem with isolation is that isolation is far more harmful to the psychi than rape. Personally, I do not know why everyone complains about it so much. But that is just how it is.
Having them work would be a kindness. Sticking them in small confined spaces and having them work out there anger on each-other is far worse then what most slaves had to endure.
I am as accepting to the state murdering innocent people as enslaving them.
You cannot give a person back those ten or twenty years. You cannot fix the mistake, only try to fix a small amount of the damage. In the same way you could give his family money if you executed someone.
And a significant amount of people who get out after those 10 to 20 years will be seriously scared for life from their imprisonment, some will even kill themselves.