If Google was, say, a public utility then I'd back you up. But they're not. Filtering or selectively promoting things is entirely within their scope. Their rights don't change because they're popular.
However, if they're publicly viewed as abusing those rights, they very well may become much less popular.
That's not that unusual - I got my Real Doll on Amazon and think she's gorgeous. (In a rubbery, plasticy, inanimate sort of way...) Any way - She creeps the kids out enough to make a decent babysitter.
I don't really know anything about Kim's racial or political motivations. But I have copies of Machiaveli's "The Prince", Sun Tzu's "The Art of War", The Communist Manifesto, and have spent a good amount of time in Austria and a little in Germany (Vienna's beautiful.) And I work in the US supporting the DoD & DoE - My books hardly make me a traitor. And if Sun Tzu somehow miraculously signed my copy of "The Art of War", I'd think it was cool as hell. (Although it'd probably go to auction pretty quickly.)
The Axis advance was stopped in '42 and things started to settle down (comparatively - It was still pretty nasty.) The Russians kicked their asses the next year and the surrender happened in '45. Troops were being rotated to the front lines from several countries in '42 (rotated NOT meaning sent to the line until dead.) And, the year in which the person in question rotated in/out or when the war was over "for him" is pretty much irrelevant unless you're preparing something for the History Channel.
I fail to see the relevance. No wait - I do. If they're enforcing free speech, that means they can't regulate what a person (or corporation) can say. Or selectively not say of their own volition. Does Freedom of Speech imply that we force people/corporations to say things that they choose not to? Regardless of their motivations? If I run a web-site and there's an article somewhere that says, "China censors nothing!", do I have to provide a link to it despite the fact that I personally think it's biased?
Which means it's up for debate. All we really know is that it's "not too far off" and likely in the wrong season.
Anyway it was meant mostly facetiously in case that wasn't apparent from the post. All I was trying to get across is that the calendar start time is arbitrary. Even if the gods descend and tell us the exact place, time, and date of the birth, that doesn't mean we have to change the year, or Christmas, or anything else. We've been rolling with it this long, why lift the whole train onto an identical set of parallel tracks? For the sake of accuracy? My guesstimate of the big bang wasn't far off from accepted theory. And, as a calendar start date, my big bang guess is as useful as the commonly used year 1 or Unix epoch or really any other metric.
Engineer-designed UIs are damned near perfect. As long as you're the engineer that designed them. And it hasn't been too long since you used them.
Yes - I am an engineer. And yes, I have outsmarted myself more than once. Go back to a 3-year-old project and think, "What was this person thinking??? Oh wait, that person was me..."
Based on the birth of UNIX is at least agreed upon. The birth of Jesus is up for debate and an odd choice to try and promote as a global "Year Zero". We need to devote our resources to determining the exact moment of the big bang and start counting from there. At least writing the date would give people some idea of perspective. "Wow - I can't believe it's 13.805.624.212.04.27.14.21.12 already... Seems like just yesterday it was just 13.805.624.211.04.27.14.21.12!" "Lord... It's only 13.805.624.212.04.27.14.21.12... I don't get off work until 13.805.624.212.04.27.15.30.00 today. I've been here since 13.805.624.212.04.27.06.05.33!"
Sorry - If your birthday falls after the 28th of the month, your birthday is being revoked. That's OK though - We can toss our names in the pool for birthday reassignment sometime during Smarch.
My wife's was at least quick in the office - I made the appointment for her and she made the 200 mile round trip for about 5 minutes in the office. Then took a nap in the van waiting for the pizza place to open where we met for lunch.
You'd think and you'd be right. But burning a couple of hours of vacation & $400 in lawyer's fees to recoup a $180 fraudulent charge doesn't really balance out.
As far as you know. Any info you provided has been logged "somewhere". Recently, I needed to set some stuff for my wife - Completely innocent, but it could have been anything. She was at work so I couldn't really bug her with stuff I could do on my own. Starting with nothing but her name and date of birth (I had a lot more info, but it would have meant a long drive to retrieve - Her name and DOB I can actually remember without a hint), I came up with her SSN, a list of past addresses, credit inquiries, and the list goes on.
As a side note: Annoyingly, I could have easily set up several credit card accounts in her name using whatever address I chose, but obtaining her alien registration ID (that she's had for 35 years), meant she had to drive 100+ miles to show ID.
Getting behind the wheel of an automatic with the parking brake on the floor and stomping down on the "clutch" can get pretty damned exciting too... Locked up the wheels on a GOV SUV getting off the Interstate. Whoops...
Or if someone was speeding, but a drunk ran a stop sign and hit the speeder, do you blame the drunk? Yes.
Agreed. AND you ticket the speeder.
Or if you leave your front door unlocked and someone walks in and steals all your stuff do we blame the robber? Yes.
Agreed. AND you raise the home-owner's insurance rates because they leave without locking their door and putting themselves at higher risk.
Just because someone does something silly does not mean they are not a victim when someone breaks the law targeting them.
I still agree. I think the debate here is more similar to noticing that there are unlocked doors and then posting an article announcing that people need to start locking them or risk burglary. If it's reasonable to notify each homeowner with an unlocked door that they and their family are at risk of burglary, then you do that. If that's not reasonable, you just tell everyone that there's a potential of burglary if they leave their doors open.
Why? I don't see why people shouldn't use every technology available to them to give themselves an advantage. Are we going to make laws that say that technology can never advance again and we will all just stay in the twentieth century?
Kind of... It's not like spotlights were just invented last week, but they're still regulated for hunting. So is the time of year you can hunt different species, how many you can kill, and what kind of weaponry/traps/bait can be used. This isn't new - It's just evolving slowly to maintain some sense of balance. If we could just set up turrets, everyone with a license would be bagging their limit every day.
The right question to ask is, what is the source of MOST of the HIGH QUALITY news, and the answer to that is blogs.
I'd say a better question is what is the average level of quality produced. CNN, Fox, BBC, etc. may have their own slant on things, but in general they get most of the facts right. Granted, CNN may post "Child Run Down by Drunk Driver," while Fox reports "Juvenile Vandalizes Lawyer's Car with Fresh Human Blood," describing the same story. But, you generally don't have to slog through a million pages of "My Cat Did the CUTEST THING!!!" or "Aliens Spotted Eating at Denny's" to get there. If the major sources have 90% of the worth-while stories and are 90% accurate, that still makes them better places to turn than finding 95% of the worth-while stories from sources that are 99% garbage.
A million monkeys at a million typewriters will eventually generate the best novel ever written, but I'd prefer to stick to respected authors who, even they all fall short of perfection, are generally more interesting than the monkeys' content.
If I shelled out enough to buy titanium clubs, I'd sure as hell notice if I hit concrete with it when I swung. Maybe people are just too embarrassed to admit that they not only dinged up their expensive club, but also were there when some grass (presumably off the fairway and thus unwatered) spontaneously combusted.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're driving your Tesla at 110mph, you probably don't care what catches on fire as long as it's not you.
You're driving 110mph in a titanium shielded metal box full of batteries. You ARE the ammunition.
Leave our beer alone? If you could get an Arrogant Bastard for the price of a Keystone, wouldn't you?
If Google was, say, a public utility then I'd back you up. But they're not. Filtering or selectively promoting things is entirely within their scope. Their rights don't change because they're popular.
However, if they're publicly viewed as abusing those rights, they very well may become much less popular.
That's not that unusual - I got my Real Doll on Amazon and think she's gorgeous. (In a rubbery, plasticy, inanimate sort of way...) Any way - She creeps the kids out enough to make a decent babysitter.
I don't really know anything about Kim's racial or political motivations. But I have copies of Machiaveli's "The Prince", Sun Tzu's "The Art of War", The Communist Manifesto, and have spent a good amount of time in Austria and a little in Germany (Vienna's beautiful.) And I work in the US supporting the DoD & DoE - My books hardly make me a traitor. And if Sun Tzu somehow miraculously signed my copy of "The Art of War", I'd think it was cool as hell. (Although it'd probably go to auction pretty quickly.)
The Axis advance was stopped in '42 and things started to settle down (comparatively - It was still pretty nasty.) The Russians kicked their asses the next year and the surrender happened in '45. Troops were being rotated to the front lines from several countries in '42 (rotated NOT meaning sent to the line until dead.) And, the year in which the person in question rotated in/out or when the war was over "for him" is pretty much irrelevant unless you're preparing something for the History Channel.
I fail to see the relevance. No wait - I do. If they're enforcing free speech, that means they can't regulate what a person (or corporation) can say. Or selectively not say of their own volition. Does Freedom of Speech imply that we force people/corporations to say things that they choose not to? Regardless of their motivations? If I run a web-site and there's an article somewhere that says, "China censors nothing!", do I have to provide a link to it despite the fact that I personally think it's biased?
Which means it's up for debate. All we really know is that it's "not too far off" and likely in the wrong season.
Anyway it was meant mostly facetiously in case that wasn't apparent from the post. All I was trying to get across is that the calendar start time is arbitrary. Even if the gods descend and tell us the exact place, time, and date of the birth, that doesn't mean we have to change the year, or Christmas, or anything else. We've been rolling with it this long, why lift the whole train onto an identical set of parallel tracks? For the sake of accuracy? My guesstimate of the big bang wasn't far off from accepted theory. And, as a calendar start date, my big bang guess is as useful as the commonly used year 1 or Unix epoch or really any other metric.
Engineer-designed UIs are damned near perfect. As long as you're the engineer that designed them. And it hasn't been too long since you used them.
Yes - I am an engineer. And yes, I have outsmarted myself more than once. Go back to a 3-year-old project and think, "What was this person thinking??? Oh wait, that person was me..."
That seems to make sense and seems like an interesting idea. Can you express it using a car analogy?
Based on the birth of UNIX is at least agreed upon. The birth of Jesus is up for debate and an odd choice to try and promote as a global "Year Zero". We need to devote our resources to determining the exact moment of the big bang and start counting from there. At least writing the date would give people some idea of perspective. "Wow - I can't believe it's 13.805.624.212.04.27.14.21.12 already... Seems like just yesterday it was just 13.805.624.211.04.27.14.21.12!" "Lord... It's only 13.805.624.212.04.27.14.21.12... I don't get off work until 13.805.624.212.04.27.15.30.00 today. I've been here since 13.805.624.212.04.27.06.05.33!"
Sorry - If your birthday falls after the 28th of the month, your birthday is being revoked. That's OK though - We can toss our names in the pool for birthday reassignment sometime during Smarch.
My wife's was at least quick in the office - I made the appointment for her and she made the 200 mile round trip for about 5 minutes in the office. Then took a nap in the van waiting for the pizza place to open where we met for lunch.
I'd like to announce my new app for sale - Free after using the $200 rebate redeemable at a nearby ATM.
You'd think and you'd be right. But burning a couple of hours of vacation & $400 in lawyer's fees to recoup a $180 fraudulent charge doesn't really balance out.
...Nothing has been done.
As far as you know. Any info you provided has been logged "somewhere". Recently, I needed to set some stuff for my wife - Completely innocent, but it could have been anything. She was at work so I couldn't really bug her with stuff I could do on my own. Starting with nothing but her name and date of birth (I had a lot more info, but it would have meant a long drive to retrieve - Her name and DOB I can actually remember without a hint), I came up with her SSN, a list of past addresses, credit inquiries, and the list goes on.
As a side note: Annoyingly, I could have easily set up several credit card accounts in her name using whatever address I chose, but obtaining her alien registration ID (that she's had for 35 years), meant she had to drive 100+ miles to show ID.
All of the information on Wikipedia is "plagiarized" by design; it's not a place for original research it's an encyclopedia.[1]
1. ^aAnonymous Coward
Getting behind the wheel of an automatic with the parking brake on the floor and stomping down on the "clutch" can get pretty damned exciting too... Locked up the wheels on a GOV SUV getting off the Interstate. Whoops...
...the whole state is a scrap heap...
You're right. What has New Mexico ever done? Except figure out friggin plutonium...
Or if someone was speeding, but a drunk ran a stop sign and hit the speeder, do you blame the drunk? Yes.
Agreed. AND you ticket the speeder.
Or if you leave your front door unlocked and someone walks in and steals all your stuff do we blame the robber? Yes.
Agreed. AND you raise the home-owner's insurance rates because they leave without locking their door and putting themselves at higher risk.
Just because someone does something silly does not mean they are not a victim when someone breaks the law targeting them.
I still agree. I think the debate here is more similar to noticing that there are unlocked doors and then posting an article announcing that people need to start locking them or risk burglary. If it's reasonable to notify each homeowner with an unlocked door that they and their family are at risk of burglary, then you do that. If that's not reasonable, you just tell everyone that there's a potential of burglary if they leave their doors open.
Why? I don't see why people shouldn't use every technology available to them to give themselves an advantage.
Are we going to make laws that say that technology can never advance again and we will all just stay in the twentieth century?
Kind of... It's not like spotlights were just invented last week, but they're still regulated for hunting. So is the time of year you can hunt different species, how many you can kill, and what kind of weaponry/traps/bait can be used. This isn't new - It's just evolving slowly to maintain some sense of balance. If we could just set up turrets, everyone with a license would be bagging their limit every day.
For a while...
The right question to ask is, what is the source of MOST of the HIGH QUALITY news, and the answer to that is blogs.
I'd say a better question is what is the average level of quality produced. CNN, Fox, BBC, etc. may have their own slant on things, but in general they get most of the facts right. Granted, CNN may post "Child Run Down by Drunk Driver," while Fox reports "Juvenile Vandalizes Lawyer's Car with Fresh Human Blood," describing the same story. But, you generally don't have to slog through a million pages of "My Cat Did the CUTEST THING!!!" or "Aliens Spotted Eating at Denny's" to get there. If the major sources have 90% of the worth-while stories and are 90% accurate, that still makes them better places to turn than finding 95% of the worth-while stories from sources that are 99% garbage.
A million monkeys at a million typewriters will eventually generate the best novel ever written, but I'd prefer to stick to respected authors who, even they all fall short of perfection, are generally more interesting than the monkeys' content.
If I shelled out enough to buy titanium clubs, I'd sure as hell notice if I hit concrete with it when I swung. Maybe people are just too embarrassed to admit that they not only dinged up their expensive club, but also were there when some grass (presumably off the fairway and thus unwatered) spontaneously combusted.
Well put. I actually have a copy of the entire source right here. Here's a piece:
e
All that's left is to fill in the blanks around it. Doesn't really pack the same wallop as seeing the entire source in context though, does it?