I don't check people's karma before modding up or down... If it's funny, I give it funny, if it's actually insightful, I give insightful, if it's both (funny BECAUSE it is insightful) then it's normally an insight.
Let me get this right, you are saying that if you wiped someone's memory totally, you couldn't do the following:
1) Take the person with (now) no memories at all into a new environment (like your factory floor) and convince them that although they had no memories, this was where they had previously worked.
2) Tell them that they had to work 16 hour days like everyone else (See, Joe over there is working them).
3) Pay them in food and lodging as was the agreement that they signed (See, here is your signature from four years ago).
4) Profit!!!
Of course, you would have to overcome such things as having to teach a person how to speak, eat, get dressed (mmmm.... possibilities, Hollywood starlets, here I come with my mind wiper gizmo thingy).
If you did manage to totally erase someone's mind though, I can't see if you controlled the information and environment, how you couldn't "teach" them to believe anything you wanted.
If you ask a question but limit the possible answers to answers that you want to hear, you will always get an answer that you like.
Is it possible to get a transcript of this trial? I am curious to see what sort of arguments both sides made.
I cannot imagine that a lawyer with half a clue or half a serving of common sense would allow anything to stand that might sway a jury to award these sort of clearly insane numbers.
Is there a link anywhere that I could have a gander at?
You only get to go PVP with people who have consented, and the arena is a place for people on other sides of the Heroes / Villains game split to be able to chat otherwise.
So when he got them to consent and beat them by outwitting them, they cry because people keep falling for it? Pffft. Sounds like a dream game for a few smart people.
Sure, in reality it's griefing other players, but that's up to the dev's to decide whether they need to change game mechanics to alter what players are able to do. If a dev doesn't want people to fall for said stupid trick over and over, they need to stop that trick being able to be done.
A perfect example would be the old "run up to a monster, kite it to another player and have it agro them via some game mechanic (Feign Death, invisibility etc etc). Blizzard decided they would not allow this to happen, so they changed the AI in monsters to run back to where they were originally after losing interest in the tagged player. This stops people kiting something totally. If enough people cried about falling for some simple dumb trick or it really broke the game that much, the dev's would have resolved the issue. If it's just dumb people complaining that someone tricked them into doing something stupid, then I am totally with the researcher.
spending that much money on something like that, at this point in the economic downswing, is just kinda wrong.
Actually, I totally disagree. At the moment, the funding and stimulus packages that governments are putting together to keep a flailing economy and helpless industry on it's feet is keeping alive the VERY thing that caused this problem.
My point is that lets say you have 100 banks. 30 of them use superb principles and are safe from any sort of failing that the economy has. 40 of them use run of the mill practice and are somewhat okay. A big downturn like this will still leave them vulnerable while maybe not closing their doors. The last 30 run through utterly anything to turn a dollar, throwing caution to the wind and betting on the solid economy. Now, these last 30 are the ones that have been totally boned through this crisis. Sure, it's bad for the people that bank with them, but these banks should be closed down.
Propping up these poorly managed banks with packages like this merely REWARDS bad management.
The amounts of money that are being talked about here for Nasa are trivial compared to the spending that is going on to keep other players in a game that they should have been left out of long ago.
Take Ford for example. It's a US National Icon - yet at the same time, it's floundering and it's an embarrassment to global car manufacturers. It is the pinnacle of trying to tell a customer what they want rather than listening to what they are asking for. Yes, they are losing sales in droves to Asian manufacturers. Why? Because those Japanese factories are churning out what the public want and making very reliable cars out of them. Ford has seriously misidentified the markets, produced poor quality automobiles and is now suffering very badly due to it. While Ford is one of the few American car manufacturers, and letting it fall into the ground would have mixed implications, poor management and poor business models (more what the banks have been using) should not be ALLOWED to be propped up by government to make the short term look better.
Does that mean that after a few years, despite all the searching, it still won't be actually verified?
I have a friend like that, no matter all the tall stories he shares, no-one has actually spoken to a girl who has actually let him get it out. Poor guy. It's that bad, we have actually started passing a hat around at work.
I would argue. Either you get it without needing to watch the movie simply by being surrounded by people who in their day to day existence simply follow instructions blindly "because they have to" or you won't get it - whether you watch the movie or not.
As for the GP, I believe he is mixing two things incorrectly:
fail to see how automation leads to lower IQ scores
and
lead to a lesser society
Lower IQ scores don't immediately mean a lesser society, but if you take the thinking out of a process and let a process/machine/program do all the thinking, your mind will inevitably get lazy and your work will suffer over time
as many small farms already do, or they'll fold, as many more have over the years.
An interesting thing in your comment I don't really get is that you seem to be pushing for everyone to do it, no matter what the cost is to them (read: will be passed onto you). Why would you not be content with paying the same premium (you don't really really think those big farms don't pass the cost to you do you?) from a farmer who chose to tag their cattle rather than forcing everyone to?
Well, I ain't from the US (where I assume you are) and am therefore in a different market, but I tell you what, I go out of my way to buy from the little guy, the hobby farmer, the small winery or the local restaurant rather than their big mega corporation brothers.
Why you ask? Because having worked for one (major retail chain in Australia) I know how projects are organized, I know how change is managed and I know just how many incompetent people work their way into such bureaucracies. I would prefer not to consume food products (or most products to be honest) made by this sort of business. I know where corners are cut and where management doesn't listen to much more informed staff due to conflicting priorities. Does it cost more to do this? Yes. Am I happy to pay for it? Yes. Apart from all that, it comes down to taste.
Free range eggs taste better than cage eggs. A rabbit caught on a farm in a stew is simply AMAZING. The same thing from a shop is pretty godawful. The list goes on. I can't really say the same for organic food (I don't find much taste difference at all with it), but what I am sort of leading to: you happily eat your MacDonalds, I will keep going to the local cafe for lunch.
Now, on a more serious note, they introduced warlock portals to make it easier to have raids get to an instance. Not everyone needs to make the tedious and long flight to places now.
Sourced from NATIONAL CENTER ON INSTITUTIONS
AND ALTERNATIVES, INC. Sex Offenders Report
There is a widespread misperception that people who commit
sexual crimes do it again and again. The research, however,
directly contradicts this. Recidivism rates for sex offenses are
relatively low, typically running in the 3-13% range, and among
the lowest of all types of crimes.
In contrast, the general rearrest rate for people released from prison was 68%. The highest rates
were stealing motor vehicles (79%) and possessing or selling stolen property (77%)
The chance that a person convicted of a sex
crime will someday commit some other crime
greatly exceeds the chance that he or she will
commit another sex crime. The second offense
may be possession of marijuana, driving drunk
or shoplifting â" but it increases the reoffense
rate. Such subsequent misconduct carries its
own concerns, but it is not the repeat incurable
pedophile of myth. Indeed reoffense rates for
all crimes among sex offenders is still lower than
reoffense rates for all crimes among non-sex
offenders. For example, the U.S. Bureau of
Justice Statistics found:
Child molester rearrest rate for new
sex crime against a child: 3.3%
All sex offender rearrest rate for new
sex crime against a child: 2.2%16
All sex offenders rearrest rate for
any kind of offense: 43%
All offenders rearrest rate for
any kind of offense: 68%
Oh, as for rehabilitation of these people? Lets have a look at some more stats.
Margaret Alexanderâ(TM)s 1999 meta-analysis of
nearly 11,000 sex offenders from 79 separate
studies found that people who participated in
treatment programs had a combined rearrest
rate of 7.2% compared to 17.6% among
untreated individuals (a reduction of 59%).
Karl Hansonâ(TM)s 2000 comprehensive metaanalysis
found 10% of treatment subjects
reoffended, compared to 17% of untreated
subjects (a reduction of 41%).
The Campbell Collaboration meta-analysis of
69 studies of 22,000 individuals found that
treatment reduced recidivism by 37%.
Guess that makes you post a bit of a swing and a miss?
If someone is physically handicapped, we go out of our way to help them. If they are blind, we give them guide dogs and sound driven information. If someone is clinically depressed, we try to treat them. Why can you not understand that trying to help and educate sex offenders is so much better than just locking them up and throwing away the key - not even looking at the slippery slope I put up in my original post.
In a perfect world, we'd lock up just the dangerous perverts...
I would hate to live in your perfect world. What's next? Locking up all the people who have "perverted" mental problems? What about all those sick people with an extra chromosome? What about all those deviants from *insert country name here*?
I would have thought in your perfect world you would have helped those people who were ill/deficient not locked them up.
The parent is modded down because it's a Anon Cow post, and most mods seem to mod/read with their normal reading hiddens turned on. Chances are that it's simply not being looked at enough yet to get modded up. Having said that, as the parent of this is a +5 already, those mods should be modding the parent up as well.
I totally agree, I am right handed and always use my left hand for my phone as I prefer to have my right hand free to do all the other things like driving, smoking and drinking (Not all at the same time of course).
Curious to find out if you think that 20k is a reasonable return on your investment programming it in the first place? Have you done some analysis on your hourly rate after you look at your time spent working and income returns?
Was it a case of "I want to make money" or "Hmmm, how does this thing work... Oh, money..."
RTFA: They are trying to lower printing/paper costs by avoiding these longwinded 7000 word page-hog stories that take up the same amount as a handful of other normal stories.
While there are two sides to this, those "stragglers" seem to be the ones footing the bills for the web presence - short of the ads that they are selling on their site, which are unlikely to be bringing in enough cash to buy a icypole during lunch.
Having said that, I doubt there is anywhere in the paper that says that ALL content online will also be in the printed format.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't check people's karma before modding up or down... If it's funny, I give it funny, if it's actually insightful, I give insightful, if it's both (funny BECAUSE it is insightful) then it's normally an insight.
Let me get this right, you are saying that if you wiped someone's memory totally, you couldn't do the following:
1) Take the person with (now) no memories at all into a new environment (like your factory floor) and convince them that although they had no memories, this was where they had previously worked.
2) Tell them that they had to work 16 hour days like everyone else (See, Joe over there is working them).
3) Pay them in food and lodging as was the agreement that they signed (See, here is your signature from four years ago).
4) Profit!!!
Of course, you would have to overcome such things as having to teach a person how to speak, eat, get dressed (mmmm.... possibilities, Hollywood starlets, here I come with my mind wiper gizmo thingy).
If you did manage to totally erase someone's mind though, I can't see if you controlled the information and environment, how you couldn't "teach" them to believe anything you wanted.
If you ask a question but limit the possible answers to answers that you want to hear, you will always get an answer that you like.
3, Open an "Internet Addition" rehab.
Is that like asking Google to calculate something, or more like a rehab center for people who have done too much maths?
Is it possible to get a transcript of this trial? I am curious to see what sort of arguments both sides made.
I cannot imagine that a lawyer with half a clue or half a serving of common sense would allow anything to stand that might sway a jury to award these sort of clearly insane numbers. Is there a link anywhere that I could have a gander at?
You only get to go PVP with people who have consented, and the arena is a place for people on other sides of the Heroes / Villains game split to be able to chat otherwise.
So when he got them to consent and beat them by outwitting them, they cry because people keep falling for it? Pffft. Sounds like a dream game for a few smart people.
Sure, in reality it's griefing other players, but that's up to the dev's to decide whether they need to change game mechanics to alter what players are able to do. If a dev doesn't want people to fall for said stupid trick over and over, they need to stop that trick being able to be done.
A perfect example would be the old "run up to a monster, kite it to another player and have it agro them via some game mechanic (Feign Death, invisibility etc etc). Blizzard decided they would not allow this to happen, so they changed the AI in monsters to run back to where they were originally after losing interest in the tagged player. This stops people kiting something totally. If enough people cried about falling for some simple dumb trick or it really broke the game that much, the dev's would have resolved the issue. If it's just dumb people complaining that someone tricked them into doing something stupid, then I am totally with the researcher.
Play YOUR game, following other people's rules.
spending that much money on something like that, at this point in the economic downswing, is just kinda wrong.
Actually, I totally disagree. At the moment, the funding and stimulus packages that governments are putting together to keep a flailing economy and helpless industry on it's feet is keeping alive the VERY thing that caused this problem.
My point is that lets say you have 100 banks. 30 of them use superb principles and are safe from any sort of failing that the economy has. 40 of them use run of the mill practice and are somewhat okay. A big downturn like this will still leave them vulnerable while maybe not closing their doors. The last 30 run through utterly anything to turn a dollar, throwing caution to the wind and betting on the solid economy. Now, these last 30 are the ones that have been totally boned through this crisis. Sure, it's bad for the people that bank with them, but these banks should be closed down.
Propping up these poorly managed banks with packages like this merely REWARDS bad management.
The amounts of money that are being talked about here for Nasa are trivial compared to the spending that is going on to keep other players in a game that they should have been left out of long ago.
Take Ford for example. It's a US National Icon - yet at the same time, it's floundering and it's an embarrassment to global car manufacturers. It is the pinnacle of trying to tell a customer what they want rather than listening to what they are asking for. Yes, they are losing sales in droves to Asian manufacturers. Why? Because those Japanese factories are churning out what the public want and making very reliable cars out of them. Ford has seriously misidentified the markets, produced poor quality automobiles and is now suffering very badly due to it. While Ford is one of the few American car manufacturers, and letting it fall into the ground would have mixed implications, poor management and poor business models (more what the banks have been using) should not be ALLOWED to be propped up by government to make the short term look better.
Does that mean that after a few years, despite all the searching, it still won't be actually verified?
I have a friend like that, no matter all the tall stories he shares, no-one has actually spoken to a girl who has actually let him get it out. Poor guy. It's that bad, we have actually started passing a hat around at work.
These are great photos, but what's the story here?
When you have great footage, you don't need a story. What news have you been watching?
As for the GP, I believe he is mixing two things incorrectly:
fail to see how automation leads to lower IQ scores
and
lead to a lesser society
Lower IQ scores don't immediately mean a lesser society, but if you take the thinking out of a process and let a process/machine/program do all the thinking, your mind will inevitably get lazy and your work will suffer over time
as many small farms already do, or they'll fold, as many more have over the years.
An interesting thing in your comment I don't really get is that you seem to be pushing for everyone to do it, no matter what the cost is to them (read: will be passed onto you). Why would you not be content with paying the same premium (you don't really really think those big farms don't pass the cost to you do you?) from a farmer who chose to tag their cattle rather than forcing everyone to? Well, I ain't from the US (where I assume you are) and am therefore in a different market, but I tell you what, I go out of my way to buy from the little guy, the hobby farmer, the small winery or the local restaurant rather than their big mega corporation brothers.
Why you ask? Because having worked for one (major retail chain in Australia) I know how projects are organized, I know how change is managed and I know just how many incompetent people work their way into such bureaucracies. I would prefer not to consume food products (or most products to be honest) made by this sort of business. I know where corners are cut and where management doesn't listen to much more informed staff due to conflicting priorities. Does it cost more to do this? Yes. Am I happy to pay for it? Yes. Apart from all that, it comes down to taste.
Free range eggs taste better than cage eggs. A rabbit caught on a farm in a stew is simply AMAZING. The same thing from a shop is pretty godawful. The list goes on. I can't really say the same for organic food (I don't find much taste difference at all with it), but what I am sort of leading to: you happily eat your MacDonalds, I will keep going to the local cafe for lunch.
Trust a slashdot user to logically connect my post to the GP in CLEARLY the wrong way. I love it!
I tip my hat to you sir!
Can't you get around it by using a proxy?
Menethil Harbor to Southshore
Quit your whining PUNY ALLIANCE!
Now, on a more serious note, they introduced warlock portals to make it easier to have raids get to an instance. Not everyone needs to make the tedious and long flight to places now.
Oh, *puhleeze*, let's not start that thread again; we just did it last week. :-)
We do this EVERY week.
Sourced from NATIONAL CENTER ON INSTITUTIONS AND ALTERNATIVES, INC.
Sex Offenders Report
There is a widespread misperception that people who commit sexual crimes do it again and again. The research, however, directly contradicts this. Recidivism rates for sex offenses are relatively low, typically running in the 3-13% range, and among the lowest of all types of crimes.
In contrast, the general rearrest rate for people released from prison was 68%. The highest rates were stealing motor vehicles (79%) and possessing or selling stolen property (77%)
The chance that a person convicted of a sex crime will someday commit some other crime greatly exceeds the chance that he or she will commit another sex crime. The second offense may be possession of marijuana, driving drunk or shoplifting â" but it increases the reoffense rate. Such subsequent misconduct carries its own concerns, but it is not the repeat incurable pedophile of myth. Indeed reoffense rates for all crimes among sex offenders is still lower than reoffense rates for all crimes among non-sex offenders. For example, the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics found:
Child molester rearrest rate for new sex crime against a child: 3.3%
All sex offender rearrest rate for new sex crime against a child: 2.2%16
All sex offenders rearrest rate for any kind of offense: 43%
All offenders rearrest rate for any kind of offense: 68%
Oh, as for rehabilitation of these people? Lets have a look at some more stats.
Margaret Alexanderâ(TM)s 1999 meta-analysis of nearly 11,000 sex offenders from 79 separate studies found that people who participated in treatment programs had a combined rearrest rate of 7.2% compared to 17.6% among untreated individuals (a reduction of 59%).
Karl Hansonâ(TM)s 2000 comprehensive metaanalysis found 10% of treatment subjects reoffended, compared to 17% of untreated subjects (a reduction of 41%).
The Campbell Collaboration meta-analysis of 69 studies of 22,000 individuals found that treatment reduced recidivism by 37%.
Guess that makes you post a bit of a swing and a miss?
If someone is physically handicapped, we go out of our way to help them. If they are blind, we give them guide dogs and sound driven information. If someone is clinically depressed, we try to treat them. Why can you not understand that trying to help and educate sex offenders is so much better than just locking them up and throwing away the key - not even looking at the slippery slope I put up in my original post.
In a perfect world, we'd lock up just the dangerous perverts...
I would hate to live in your perfect world. What's next? Locking up all the people who have "perverted" mental problems? What about all those sick people with an extra chromosome? What about all those deviants from *insert country name here*?
I would have thought in your perfect world you would have helped those people who were ill/deficient not locked them up.
The parent is modded down because it's a Anon Cow post, and most mods seem to mod/read with their normal reading hiddens turned on. Chances are that it's simply not being looked at enough yet to get modded up. Having said that, as the parent of this is a +5 already, those mods should be modding the parent up as well.
Well! Get on the case boobs!
No, "right hand man" comes from someone who needs to wash their right tube socks much more often than others.
Yes. Ewwwww.
I totally agree, I am right handed and always use my left hand for my phone as I prefer to have my right hand free to do all the other things like driving, smoking and drinking (Not all at the same time of course).
Coming in at 20km/s
I call bullshit.
When does "play pump" end and "child labor" begin?
I thought it was when pocket money was handed out based on the amount of "playing" that children did.
yet I have never heard anyone ask for '200 grammes of carrots'.
That's cause 200 grams of carrots would be a CARROT. Who shops for a single carrot?
Bugs, is that you?
Curious to find out if you think that 20k is a reasonable return on your investment programming it in the first place? Have you done some analysis on your hourly rate after you look at your time spent working and income returns?
Was it a case of "I want to make money" or "Hmmm, how does this thing work... Oh, money..."
RTFA: They are trying to lower printing/paper costs by avoiding these longwinded 7000 word page-hog stories that take up the same amount as a handful of other normal stories.
While there are two sides to this, those "stragglers" seem to be the ones footing the bills for the web presence - short of the ads that they are selling on their site, which are unlikely to be bringing in enough cash to buy a icypole during lunch.
Having said that, I doubt there is anywhere in the paper that says that ALL content online will also be in the printed format.