The AP's review of annual Freedom of Information Act reports filed by 17 major agencies found that the administration's use of nearly every one of the law's nine exemptions to withhold information from the public increased during fiscal year 2009, which ended last October.
The status update was invented to massage the ego of the user
And therefore can't serve to keep you up to date with friends somehow. Nice strawman yourself.
and the shear mass of trivia people spew out, blocks real interaction.
You know, you can block people who have nothing interesting to say, so that you can actually talk to people you want to talk to. Another nice strawman.
Drop the anti-social networks, and you will have less unsigned int friends
WTF indeed. I have no idea what this means.
There are also better tools than facebook, twitter etc, to keep connected with a small non-broadcasting oriented group.
Which I'm sure none of my friends or family use. I signed up to Facebook because the entire rest of my family uses it, and that's how my last family reunion was planned. I was completely out of the loop on what was going on. Since then, I've reconnected with Marine buddies all over the world as well. I had no other way to talk to any of them before Facebook and now I can talk to them every day. I still have realtime meatspace local friends, and Facebook doesn't take away from them. How is using Facebook anti-social again?
You, sir, are an idiot. Keeping up to date with friends is about as social as it gets. If you want to stop talking to friends and be, what's that word?...oh yeah, anti-social, then go ahead. That's hardly a solution for someone who flat-out says he wants to keep in touch though.
Yeah, well, according to conservapedia, wikipedia has a strong liberal bias, was founded by two atheists, and is edited mostly by teenagers and unemployed people.
The military of a foreign government, with whom we have had less than cordial relations for at least 30 years, hacked some websites our intel community uses, and that's not a cyber war? What would qualify for you, pray tell? Do you really think there is no hostile action being taken on something as strategically important and all-pervasive as the internet, and other computer networks?
Last week when I posted that we were in fact actually at cyber war, I was roundly ridiculed for not knowing what I was talking about because I am not a sysadmin. I guess being an intelligence analyst might count for something here.
Yeah, I feel the same way with any service I provide. Want me to hold the door for you? Pay up. Want me to help you move? Pay. Pick up a coke while I'm up? Pay. Jumpstart your car? Fix your collar? Point out your shoe's untied? That's right, PAY.
Yeah, I remember on Mythbusters (OK, not the most scientific source, but still), they evaluated stuff like this and (GASP!) found that none of them work. At the end, the remarked it would be hard to see huge increases in fuel efficiency when >98% of the fuel is already burned anyway. Go figure.
Uh, do car accidents have nuclear weapons? No? Didn't think so. Al Qaeda has gotten its hands on weapons-grade uranium (which really isn't that hard). Would you like to sit back and see what they do with it, or would you like to try to stop them?
Oh, and 9/11 didn't kill as many people as car accidents, but it did cause tens of billions in damage and exacerbate a recession for many years. They're proven that asymmetric warfare works and can have devastating effects with little investment on their part. They've also ramped up their attacks each time and warned us each time. And they've warned us they will use nukes on our turf. Yeah, car accidents are much more worrisome. We should make people wear seatbelts and put up clearly marked signs..oh, wait, we've done that.
You mean the one where hundreds of terrorist groups around the world affiliated themselves with each other and declared war on the US? The one where they vowed not to stop until, "The flag of Islam flies over the White House"? Yeah, I've heard of it. Just because some people would prefer not to think about it doesn't mean we don't have enemies hellbent on killing us.
No, I have not been an admin. And I had previously read it was closer to tens of thousands a day, though perhaps that too is within the range of normal.
From the below article about the 2007 attack on the Pentagon: The Pentagon is exposed to "perhaps hundreds of attacks a day," and the department has back up systems in place, Gates said.
What would you call a regular series of attacks on our military headquarters using computers, hmmm? A compu-insurgency? Techno-terrorism? Cyberwarfare seems pretty apt to me.
Doesn't really matter if it's China behind any of it to call it a cyber war.
What in the who again?
on
Window Pain
·
· Score: 5, Funny
Pop-ups in Internet Explorer? How quaint. I've forgotten what browsing in the late '90s was like since I've been using FIrefox for so long. Haven't seen a pop-up in ages. Thanks for the blast from the past.
Pithy tagline or no, it's the word they chose to describe their site. News is an incredibly broad word, covering publicly funded radio stations, cable news networks, and local newspapers who simply repost articles from AP (which is their equivalent of slashdot linking to an article). Providing original research or commentary is not necessary to make it an "official" news site, or whatever your point was.
But as anyone can see, Slashdot is not a news site,
Which is why I have to make exasperating explanations to all my meatspace friends that slashdot merely links to articles, etc. It is NOT immediately apparent to non-slashdaughters that it is not a news site like CNN or Fox News. Everyone I know that has seen it has thought it was a real news site that did real original reporting the first time they saw it.
The tagline says, "News for Nerds." If it said, "Link Aggregator for Nerds," you might have an argument. But it doesn't. Slashdot claims it is a news site. CNN and NPR also link to or report random non-news stuff too, and when they report on entities their corporate overlord also owns, it's a conflict of interest.
Conflicts of interests apply more broadly than just your area of interest. Wikipedia defines it as, "A conflict of interest (COI) occurs when an individual or organization is involved in multiple interests, one of which could possibly corrupt the motivation for an act in the other."
Slashdot reports news. Thinkgeek sells products. Using a news site to generate sales at a site they also own is a conflict of interest. It raises questions as to their biases and how much their financial interests are skewing their reporting of news. Is it illegal? No. But it does in fact meet the definition of conflict of interest.
...and obloquy... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as hate, ridicule, obloquoy, and obloquy,.... I'll come in again.
Slashdot Mirror
The AP's review of annual Freedom of Information Act reports filed by 17 major agencies found that the administration's use of nearly every one of the law's nine exemptions to withhold information from the public increased during fiscal year 2009, which ended last October.
Saruman is a Decepticon!
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/5/28/
Social networks are anti-social.
You're still an idiot.
The status update was invented to massage the ego of the user
And therefore can't serve to keep you up to date with friends somehow. Nice strawman yourself.
and the shear mass of trivia people spew out, blocks real interaction.
You know, you can block people who have nothing interesting to say, so that you can actually talk to people you want to talk to. Another nice strawman.
Drop the anti-social networks, and you will have less unsigned int friends
WTF indeed. I have no idea what this means.
There are also better tools than facebook, twitter etc, to keep connected with a small non-broadcasting oriented group.
Which I'm sure none of my friends or family use. I signed up to Facebook because the entire rest of my family uses it, and that's how my last family reunion was planned. I was completely out of the loop on what was going on. Since then, I've reconnected with Marine buddies all over the world as well. I had no other way to talk to any of them before Facebook and now I can talk to them every day. I still have realtime meatspace local friends, and Facebook doesn't take away from them. How is using Facebook anti-social again?
Sadly, not a satire.
You, sir, are an idiot. Keeping up to date with friends is about as social as it gets. If you want to stop talking to friends and be, what's that word?...oh yeah, anti-social, then go ahead. That's hardly a solution for someone who flat-out says he wants to keep in touch though.
Yeah, well, according to conservapedia, wikipedia has a strong liberal bias, was founded by two atheists, and is edited mostly by teenagers and unemployed people.
http://www.conservapedia.com/Wikipedia
The military of a foreign government, with whom we have had less than cordial relations for at least 30 years, hacked some websites our intel community uses, and that's not a cyber war? What would qualify for you, pray tell? Do you really think there is no hostile action being taken on something as strategically important and all-pervasive as the internet, and other computer networks?
Last week when I posted that we were in fact actually at cyber war, I was roundly ridiculed for not knowing what I was talking about because I am not a sysadmin. I guess being an intelligence analyst might count for something here.
Unless it's lead with a solid plastic fan, I'm not interested.
Yeah, eel is rather savory.
Yeah, I feel the same way with any service I provide. Want me to hold the door for you? Pay up. Want me to help you move? Pay. Pick up a coke while I'm up? Pay. Jumpstart your car? Fix your collar? Point out your shoe's untied? That's right, PAY.
Who needs friends as long as you have money?
Yeah, I remember on Mythbusters (OK, not the most scientific source, but still), they evaluated stuff like this and (GASP!) found that none of them work. At the end, the remarked it would be hard to see huge increases in fuel efficiency when >98% of the fuel is already burned anyway. Go figure.
Uh, do car accidents have nuclear weapons? No? Didn't think so. Al Qaeda has gotten its hands on weapons-grade uranium (which really isn't that hard). Would you like to sit back and see what they do with it, or would you like to try to stop them?
Oh, and 9/11 didn't kill as many people as car accidents, but it did cause tens of billions in damage and exacerbate a recession for many years. They're proven that asymmetric warfare works and can have devastating effects with little investment on their part. They've also ramped up their attacks each time and warned us each time. And they've warned us they will use nukes on our turf. Yeah, car accidents are much more worrisome. We should make people wear seatbelts and put up clearly marked signs..oh, wait, we've done that.
You mean the one where hundreds of terrorist groups around the world affiliated themselves with each other and declared war on the US? The one where they vowed not to stop until, "The flag of Islam flies over the White House"? Yeah, I've heard of it. Just because some people would prefer not to think about it doesn't mean we don't have enemies hellbent on killing us.
No, I have not been an admin. And I had previously read it was closer to tens of thousands a day, though perhaps that too is within the range of normal.
From the below article about the 2007 attack on the Pentagon: The Pentagon is exposed to "perhaps hundreds of attacks a day," and the department has back up systems in place, Gates said.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/133301/pentagon_shuts_down_systems_after_cyberattack.html
What would you call a regular series of attacks on our military headquarters using computers, hmmm? A compu-insurgency? Techno-terrorism? Cyberwarfare seems pretty apt to me.
No, not much. Just a bunch of massive cyber attacks on the U.S. government's websites.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberwarfare#History_of_attacks
Doesn't really matter if it's China behind any of it to call it a cyber war.
Pop-ups in Internet Explorer? How quaint. I've forgotten what browsing in the late '90s was like since I've been using FIrefox for so long. Haven't seen a pop-up in ages. Thanks for the blast from the past.
Hey, isn't that the stuffed animal (alien?) for sale in Thinkgeek, which shares a corporate overlord with slashdot?
http://www.thinkgeek.com/geektoys/plush/c534/
But as anyone can see, Slashdot is not a news site,
Which is why I have to make exasperating explanations to all my meatspace friends that slashdot merely links to articles, etc. It is NOT immediately apparent to non-slashdaughters that it is not a news site like CNN or Fox News. Everyone I know that has seen it has thought it was a real news site that did real original reporting the first time they saw it.
The tagline says, "News for Nerds." If it said, "Link Aggregator for Nerds," you might have an argument. But it doesn't. Slashdot claims it is a news site. CNN and NPR also link to or report random non-news stuff too, and when they report on entities their corporate overlord also owns, it's a conflict of interest.
Conflicts of interests apply more broadly than just your area of interest. Wikipedia defines it as, "A conflict of interest (COI) occurs when an individual or organization is involved in multiple interests, one of which could possibly corrupt the motivation for an act in the other."
Slashdot reports news. Thinkgeek sells products. Using a news site to generate sales at a site they also own is a conflict of interest. It raises questions as to their biases and how much their financial interests are skewing their reporting of news. Is it illegal? No. But it does in fact meet the definition of conflict of interest.
One man's shameless plug is another man's conflict of interest.
Bender! Are you jacking on in there?
...and obloquy... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as hate, ridicule, obloquoy, and obloquy,.... I'll come in again.