There's a such thing as picking your battles. If I have to choose between signing a paper that both sides know is unenforceable or being broke for a year... I'll sign. Typically unless you're really flagrant about it or make a ton of money on your idea you won't hear a peep.
In a restaurant, the choice is "eat here or eat somewhere else". In a hospital, the choice is "use our services or die". I'm a little more inclined to be forgiving in that situation.
Maybe this will help bring down health care costs as hopefully these will be a lot cheaper - and hopefully no longer will hospitals in the middle of nowhere have to spend several million dollars on an MRI machine.
Technology certainly doesn't have all the answers, but things like this can only lead to good.
Since when did disappointing a child become something to be avoided at all costs? PRetty much no one likes to see a disappointed child, but it's a part of life, and the sooner they learn to live with it, the better.
There is certainly predatory behavior in consumerland which needs to be stopped. This ain't it.
In my view, if they made it look *exactly* like a wiimote and named it the "xii" or the "nii", then I would say, yeah, we need to do something about that. But as it stands? Let the buyer beware.
Eh. They don't look alike at all. They share some of the same design elements, but the changes are significant enough that I wouldn't be fooled.
If someone is going to buy this while looking for a wii, they deserve what they get.
Personally, I think they just wanted to make it look like a wii because they thought "the wii is popular and maybe if we look like a wii we'll look popular too". Not "wow, if we make something that looks like a wii maybe we'll sell some by mistake".
Though I'm sure they consider that a bonus. No way do I think they're *completely* innocent.
A 230kV transmission line would probably blow holes in the concrete and arc to any metal in the building. You couldn't get within 10 feet of the wall without the electrical fields being strong enough to make your skin tingle...
Not to mention once it faults the building would probably explode.
What I'd recommend instead would be a fine mesh of metal connected to an *ungrounded* 480V feeder line.
That was a truly "professional" operation. It's happened four times. They're specifically targeting this datacenter, and management's reaction is anomalous. If I were a police investigator, I'd start probing. Maybe there's nothing to find, but I'd bet money that there is.
Kind of reminds me of that pizza bomber a couple of years ago.
Suddenly I understand the spastic moderation being done on this particular thread - causing multiple comments written by myself an others to seesaw violently between -1 and 5. Apparently there are a bunch of people with moderator points who are using them to fight a proxy war between people who represent different factions of wikipedia.
That comment doesn't deserve to be modded down. However, I'd be interested in why we should care about Daniel Brandt, and specifically, why we should care enough to attribute an "anonymous coward" to the guy and then down-moderate his comments?
Of the two of you, I'd say you're coming off as the more unhinged.
It wasn't when I posted this. It spent some time at -1 (Flamebait) for a while.
Believe me, no one is as surprised as I am.
I still think the moderation system here is broken, but maybe not quite as badly as I thought - it did indeed correct itself this time, at least for the moment. So your point is well taken.
For me, it's not as much about the karma as it is about the injustice. Karma is a measurement of the community's idea of the worth of your comments, and when it takes a significant hit because you made a comment that is... well, not trolly, not offtopic, and not flamebait (by any reasonable definition of the word) it's somewhat discouraging, to say the least.
If you're ("you" meaning the moderator) going to knock me down, at least wait for me to do something to deserve it.
Ah, I understand. Sorry for misreading your intent. Still, the little boxes don't really concern me as much as wholesale abuses. Bigger fish to fry, and all that.
Excellent sarcasm, but that's not what I'm referring to. I don't care about the little warnings and stuff, and I don't like vandalism any more than anyone else. In fact, there was one page that someone kept vandalizing that I tried very hard to get unvandalized. It worked, and hasn't been touched for a while now.
I'm referring to the notability wars, and admins skirting around the whole peer review thing and making wholesale changes to articles, after when they ban if someone reverts them. That's a problem.
Slashdot Mirror
There's a such thing as picking your battles. If I have to choose between signing a paper that both sides know is unenforceable or being broke for a year... I'll sign. Typically unless you're really flagrant about it or make a ton of money on your idea you won't hear a peep.
In a restaurant, the choice is "eat here or eat somewhere else". In a hospital, the choice is "use our services or die". I'm a little more inclined to be forgiving in that situation.
Maybe this will help bring down health care costs as hopefully these will be a lot cheaper - and hopefully no longer will hospitals in the middle of nowhere have to spend several million dollars on an MRI machine.
Technology certainly doesn't have all the answers, but things like this can only lead to good.
Do the rest of us have FAKE IDs?
:)
Wish that'd happened 20 years ago when I could really use one.
Why not? Sounds like a good lesson for children.
Something akin to "measure twice, cut once".
Since when did disappointing a child become something to be avoided at all costs? PRetty much no one likes to see a disappointed child, but it's a part of life, and the sooner they learn to live with it, the better.
Egg-zactly.
There is certainly predatory behavior in consumerland which needs to be stopped. This ain't it.
In my view, if they made it look *exactly* like a wiimote and named it the "xii" or the "nii", then I would say, yeah, we need to do something about that. But as it stands? Let the buyer beware.
But I'd point out that even on the pictures, it says "football" in big letters on the bottom.
Caveat Emptor - even for people who buy at Wal-mart.
How could you think that resembles it so closely as to be regarded as counterfeit?
It's obvious they took design cues from it, but I don't see what people are complaining about.
Eh. They don't look alike at all. They share some of the same design elements, but the changes are significant enough that I wouldn't be fooled.
If someone is going to buy this while looking for a wii, they deserve what they get.
Personally, I think they just wanted to make it look like a wii because they thought "the wii is popular and maybe if we look like a wii we'll look popular too". Not "wow, if we make something that looks like a wii maybe we'll sell some by mistake".
Though I'm sure they consider that a bonus. No way do I think they're *completely* innocent.
If you want to tell me something, do it "to my face", as it were, and not as an AC.
Translated:
:)
As an ex-employee of the webhost in question, I am really getting a kick out of these replies...
Sorry, I spend too much time on another discussion site.
Before someone catches my bad math, that's closer to 23MW.
Sigh. It's a Saturday, can you tell?
Either way, a fault would be spectacular.
Heh, not to mention blacking out half the city once it faults.
230kV at 100A comes out to, what, about 10MW?
A 230kV transmission line would probably blow holes in the concrete and arc to any metal in the building. You couldn't get within 10 feet of the wall without the electrical fields being strong enough to make your skin tingle...
Not to mention once it faults the building would probably explode.
What I'd recommend instead would be a fine mesh of metal connected to an *ungrounded* 480V feeder line.
At the risk of using a fark cliche, THIS.
GP, Keep that up and pretty soon the University of Delaware will be hiring you to define a racist.
That was a truly "professional" operation. It's happened four times. They're specifically targeting this datacenter, and management's reaction is anomalous. If I were a police investigator, I'd start probing. Maybe there's nothing to find, but I'd bet money that there is.
Kind of reminds me of that pizza bomber a couple of years ago.
$200,000 is way excessive.
But for those who would say that she's not guilty - too late for that. Legally, she is.
Suddenly I understand the spastic moderation being done on this particular thread - causing multiple comments written by myself an others to seesaw violently between -1 and 5. Apparently there are a bunch of people with moderator points who are using them to fight a proxy war between people who represent different factions of wikipedia.
That comment doesn't deserve to be modded down. However, I'd be interested in why we should care about Daniel Brandt, and specifically, why we should care enough to attribute an "anonymous coward" to the guy and then down-moderate his comments?
Of the two of you, I'd say you're coming off as the more unhinged.
It wasn't when I posted this. It spent some time at -1 (Flamebait) for a while.
Believe me, no one is as surprised as I am.
I still think the moderation system here is broken, but maybe not quite as badly as I thought - it did indeed correct itself this time, at least for the moment. So your point is well taken.
For me, it's not as much about the karma as it is about the injustice. Karma is a measurement of the community's idea of the worth of your comments, and when it takes a significant hit because you made a comment that is... well, not trolly, not offtopic, and not flamebait (by any reasonable definition of the word) it's somewhat discouraging, to say the least.
If you're ("you" meaning the moderator) going to knock me down, at least wait for me to do something to deserve it.
Yeah, ok, I asked for that. ;)
Yeah, but I don't think it was meant how you think it was meant. Though in fairness, after I posted it I could see how you could think it was harsh.
It was meant more as irony. As in "Yeah, but we won't find any of that here, will we?". Not as an insult to slashdotters in general.
Ah, I understand. Sorry for misreading your intent. Still, the little boxes don't really concern me as much as wholesale abuses. Bigger fish to fry, and all that.
Excellent sarcasm, but that's not what I'm referring to. I don't care about the little warnings and stuff, and I don't like vandalism any more than anyone else. In fact, there was one page that someone kept vandalizing that I tried very hard to get unvandalized. It worked, and hasn't been touched for a while now.
I'm referring to the notability wars, and admins skirting around the whole peer review thing and making wholesale changes to articles, after when they ban if someone reverts them. That's a problem.
Dude, I've never been banned from wikipedia. That's probably because I've tried very hard to stay under the radar and only edit occasionally.
I have, however, seen plenty of examples of people who were. It's bad enough that Wikinews is investigating it.
Wikipedia is a very good idea that has grown too big for itself.