He meant that his parents were not forced to pay out of pocket for his primary education. He was not discussing the wider economic issues of public school funding.
You're right, but only by changing the context of the discussion.
These phones are being donated for distribution to battered women for emergency use. I think he's being overly dramatic and overstating his case, but his overall point is valid.
I am an American, and I approve this message. We are indeed all morons; not a single one among us is capable of critical thinking. Even the immigrants are required to have half their brains removed before they are granted citizenship.
Oh... both my kids had all their shots. And I don't blame that for my younger daughter's autism.
But you're right, I'm a moron. Through and through. Just sayin'.
Not as good as what you're asking for, but a decent stopgap. I admit I've been having problems with it on Pie. Just now got an update, we'll see if it's fixed.
There are others, I picked this because it was versatile and let me choose music for my alarm. YMMV.
Eh, he's just a troll. Ignore him. As soon as somebody starts invoking Godwin's Law -- especially when he does it to equate government regulation with mass torture and murder -- you can tell he's pushing a provocative argument to try to get you to stop thinking and start reacting irrationally.
OK, first: Censorship is action by the government or other ruling body (e.g. church) that limits or prevents your ability to express yourself. It's not you being butthurt because people disagree with you. You can't just re-define a word to mean whatever supports your argument and then claim that you won the argument....Actually, you can. It's a form of free expression. But people like me are going to roll their eyes, point and laugh when you do it.
Second, your comment is there for all to see. It has merely been modded down. It was modded down by people who used their mod points to express their opinions of your post. So you want to freely express yourself but don't want the same for others, apparently. It has nothing to do with the government (or church or other ruling body), it doesn't even have to do with the platform (slashdot, in case you've forgotten), because it was done by other people like you. (Not exactly like you, because they're not suffering rectal/cranial inversion, but other people with the freedom to express their opinions. By modding you down.) So you can't even validly claim that your form of expression has been removed or constrained. (You CAN claim it, ofc., and probably will. See above about forms of free expression regardless of validity. I roll my eyes. I point. I laugh. Hah hah hah!) Your message is still there, and everybody can read it.
Third, the post was off-topic. It's pretty much a convention that off-topic posts get deleted, modded down, disparaged, or whatever a particular platform's mechanism allows. One of a moderator's jobs is to keep a conversation on-topic. So they're not only freely expressing themselves, they're actually properly doing their jobs. The fact that it was merely downrated and not removed is a testament to slashdot's dedication to freedom of expression.
As for using censorship to punish: well, that's not what moderation is. I won't say that there aren't people who will punish others for having opinions they disagree with by modding them down, but moderation is a valid process and regardless of their reasons, modding you down was the correct application of the process in this case.
As for my opinion: I may get modded down for this. If so, I'll accept it with grudging grace, but I won't start shouting about censorship. IHMO you're either a troll or just so self-centered you can't see past the end of your own nose. Hanlon's Razor insists that I pretend you're not a troll, but I think that's more likely.
I don't sign the back of my card because if somebody steals my card with the signature, they now not only have my card, but they also have my signature. You may not care. It's not your money. It's my money. I care.
Also, did your store train you in handwriting analysis? How can you be sure the person who signs the receipt is the same one who signed the card? How good are you, really, at determining that? How much time are you willing to take to analyze the signature to be sure? Maybe the guy stole the card, then learned to fake the signature.
By writing "please ask for ID" I can also prevent our hypothetical thief from simply putting his own signature on the card, which would presumably match his own signature on the receipt. No amount of handwriting expertise would foil that.
I'm fascinated to know which store requires me to sign my card and will not otherwise accept my custom, because I want to avoid that store. They're trying to make me compromise my financial security for a reason that does absolutely nothing to help theirs. Not interested.
You can sneer contemptuously at me for wanting to protect my resources all you want, but if you haven't considered that there may be more than one side to this issue, then your opinion means nothing to me. This isn't me trying to play some sort of game with my individuality. But if that's how you insist on seeing it, well, more power to you. I won't be changing your mind. You're free to feel smug in your blanket of superiority.
There are problems with custom OSes, and it can be a lot of work (or at least a steep learning curve) to install one. They're not for everybody. It's not a general solution. I've had at least two people decline upgrades to custom in spite of the fact that I was maintaining the phones, because they preferred the more stable and familiar stock ROMs.
People with degrees in journalism that work for obsolescent dead-tree newspapers, reprint press releases, do no research and have no sense of humor.
Or that the government has declared are "real" journalists because they like how they report. e.g., reprinting press releases without doing any research.
This article starts with the assumption that the reader needs everything that the author's cable service is offering. He does admit that not everybody may feel the same way, but the article doesn't discuss it so much as dismiss it. It's very self-centered and arrogant. "Oh, sure, if you're an inferior being who doesn't WANT all the amazing stuff, hey no problem, settle for less."
He's right as far as he goes. Yes, if he wants to keep everything he's getting now, he's going to have to subscribe to a whole bunch more more services, disjoint and expensive, and it'll cost more and be less convenient than simply keeping his cable service.
Part of me wants to sneer something like, "If you REALLY feel your life is incomplete without your cable service, perhaps the problem isn't your cable service." But that's mean, and while I do wonder about that enough to have mentioned it, I also don't feel that it's my place to judge. I've spent many hours of my own watching plenty of passive entertainment (including daytime soap operas, for a while). And sneering at him while complaining that he's sneering at me is a tad hypocritical.
Had to mention it, though. *shrug* What can I say, I'm only human. And hypocritical.:)
But no, that's not really the point I want to make. What I really want to point out is: if you're satisfied with the content you're cable service is giving you, and don't feel that you want to sacrifice any of it, then why are you talking about cutting the cord? Cord cutting is for those of us who feel we are getting too little value for the money. It's for people like me who see 200 channels and nothing is on. It's for people who don't feel a strong need to keep up with the latest of popular shows. It's for those of us who would rather lose a channel than pay an extra $80 premium. It's for those of us who like being able to watch what we want, when we want, on the device we want.
Yeah, there are problems. There are limitations. Shows are being nixed from my favorite service while others are being brought in. Networks are being parsimonious with their programming; not everything I want to watch is available on the few accounts I own. While streaming services are pretty well established as A Thing, nevertheless it's still early days (especially with the major networks still in denial about cord cutting).
If all you're looking for is a way to save a few bux on your cable bill, but you don't want to give anything up, then stop talking about cord cutting. It's not for you. It's not about you. You're not part of that demographic.
If you want to save a LOT of money, and are willing to sacrifice some things you've gotten used to, then cord cutting is something to consider.
If you want to... well, there are a lot of reasons to cut the cord, I won't try to list them here, but in fact I've already covered a bunch. Suffice to say that cord cutting is an obvious move for some of us. TFA did his research and discovered it's not for him. Fair enough. I have access to a couple streaming services and Youtube, and sometimes I do things aside from potato* the couch. I usually watch the stuff on my tablet anyway. In fact we cut the cord almost 20 years ago. We're pretty happy with what we've got now.
If you can't justify cutting the cord, then it's not for you. Yet. Maybe someday. For now, relax and enjoy your cable service. Cord cutting will be there when you're ready.
For that matter, how many rescues for real emergencies will not be mounted in a timely manner due to resources having been diverted to cover a prank call?
I was thinking that a good physical-world parallel would be deliberately spraying peanut oil in aerosol or mist form in the vicinity of somebody allergic to peanuts. It's a form of physical attack that would not harm a typical person, but would be deadly to the target (and any bystanders who happened to share the allergy).
Or perhaps wearing or releasing a scent known to trigger a certain person's asthma attacks.
Slashdot Mirror
He meant that his parents were not forced to pay out of pocket for his primary education. He was not discussing the wider economic issues of public school funding.
You're right, but only by changing the context of the discussion.
These phones are being donated for distribution to battered women for emergency use. I think he's being overly dramatic and overstating his case, but his overall point is valid.
I am an American, and I approve this message. We are indeed all morons; not a single one among us is capable of critical thinking. Even the immigrants are required to have half their brains removed before they are granted citizenship.
Oh... both my kids had all their shots. And I don't blame that for my younger daughter's autism.
But you're right, I'm a moron. Through and through. Just sayin'.
True, but let us not forget the Nirvana fallacy.
Uh... I'll be sure to stop being a misogynist prick as soon as I'm finished beating my wife.
A privileged white male needs his priorities, after all.
https://play.google.com/store/...
Not as good as what you're asking for, but a decent stopgap. I admit I've been having problems with it on Pie. Just now got an update, we'll see if it's fixed.
There are others, I picked this because it was versatile and let me choose music for my alarm. YMMV.
Those damned homophones are the cause of all the problems in this country, I'm tellin' ya.
Indeed. Waiting to hear what autism has to do with this.
Eh, he's just a troll. Ignore him. As soon as somebody starts invoking Godwin's Law -- especially when he does it to equate government regulation with mass torture and murder -- you can tell he's pushing a provocative argument to try to get you to stop thinking and start reacting irrationally.
Sure, it's easy. Next month you (gp) can pay Netflix's Internet account. Then tell us again how Netflix is getting a free ride.
You've been drinking Comcast's kool-aid; this is exactly what they want you to think.
I think I'm not planning to follow that link to find out what's there.
Also have to wonder about "fellow yank" in a thread titled "Happy Australia Day." Does not lull suspicion.
"We need access to all these phones to solve cases because we never, ever solved a case before cellphones existed."
OK, first: Censorship is action by the government or other ruling body (e.g. church) that limits or prevents your ability to express yourself. It's not you being butthurt because people disagree with you. You can't just re-define a word to mean whatever supports your argument and then claim that you won the argument. ...Actually, you can. It's a form of free expression. But people like me are going to roll their eyes, point and laugh when you do it.
Second, your comment is there for all to see. It has merely been modded down. It was modded down by people who used their mod points to express their opinions of your post. So you want to freely express yourself but don't want the same for others, apparently. It has nothing to do with the government (or church or other ruling body), it doesn't even have to do with the platform (slashdot, in case you've forgotten), because it was done by other people like you. (Not exactly like you, because they're not suffering rectal/cranial inversion, but other people with the freedom to express their opinions. By modding you down.) So you can't even validly claim that your form of expression has been removed or constrained. (You CAN claim it, ofc., and probably will. See above about forms of free expression regardless of validity. I roll my eyes. I point. I laugh. Hah hah hah!) Your message is still there, and everybody can read it.
Third, the post was off-topic. It's pretty much a convention that off-topic posts get deleted, modded down, disparaged, or whatever a particular platform's mechanism allows. One of a moderator's jobs is to keep a conversation on-topic. So they're not only freely expressing themselves, they're actually properly doing their jobs. The fact that it was merely downrated and not removed is a testament to slashdot's dedication to freedom of expression.
As for using censorship to punish: well, that's not what moderation is. I won't say that there aren't people who will punish others for having opinions they disagree with by modding them down, but moderation is a valid process and regardless of their reasons, modding you down was the correct application of the process in this case.
As for my opinion: I may get modded down for this. If so, I'll accept it with grudging grace, but I won't start shouting about censorship. IHMO you're either a troll or just so self-centered you can't see past the end of your own nose. Hanlon's Razor insists that I pretend you're not a troll, but I think that's more likely.
'Bye troll!
I'm one of your "precious snowflakes."
I don't sign the back of my card because if somebody steals my card with the signature, they now not only have my card, but they also have my signature. You may not care. It's not your money. It's my money. I care.
Also, did your store train you in handwriting analysis? How can you be sure the person who signs the receipt is the same one who signed the card? How good are you, really, at determining that? How much time are you willing to take to analyze the signature to be sure? Maybe the guy stole the card, then learned to fake the signature.
By writing "please ask for ID" I can also prevent our hypothetical thief from simply putting his own signature on the card, which would presumably match his own signature on the receipt. No amount of handwriting expertise would foil that.
I'm fascinated to know which store requires me to sign my card and will not otherwise accept my custom, because I want to avoid that store. They're trying to make me compromise my financial security for a reason that does absolutely nothing to help theirs. Not interested.
You can sneer contemptuously at me for wanting to protect my resources all you want, but if you haven't considered that there may be more than one side to this issue, then your opinion means nothing to me. This isn't me trying to play some sort of game with my individuality. But if that's how you insist on seeing it, well, more power to you. I won't be changing your mind. You're free to feel smug in your blanket of superiority.
Thanks for playing!
Swype, not Swipe. It's the one I use. It's got its pros and cons.
http://www.swype.com/
There are problems with custom OSes, and it can be a lot of work (or at least a steep learning curve) to install one. They're not for everybody. It's not a general solution. I've had at least two people decline upgrades to custom in spite of the fact that I was maintaining the phones, because they preferred the more stable and familiar stock ROMs.
I have three spares.
Yes, it is my fault your video stutters. Because I shouldn't be watching video on your bandwidth. Also, it's my fault your bill is increasing.
People with degrees in journalism that work for obsolescent dead-tree newspapers, reprint press releases, do no research and have no sense of humor.
Or that the government has declared are "real" journalists because they like how they report. e.g., reprinting press releases without doing any research.
Oddly enough, Techdirt seems to have read the same article. Or one just like it.
https://www.techdirt.com/artic...
They said much the same thing, better, made points I missed, and they published first. :)
This article starts with the assumption that the reader needs everything that the author's cable service is offering. He does admit that not everybody may feel the same way, but the article doesn't discuss it so much as dismiss it. It's very self-centered and arrogant. "Oh, sure, if you're an inferior being who doesn't WANT all the amazing stuff, hey no problem, settle for less."
He's right as far as he goes. Yes, if he wants to keep everything he's getting now, he's going to have to subscribe to a whole bunch more more services, disjoint and expensive, and it'll cost more and be less convenient than simply keeping his cable service.
Part of me wants to sneer something like, "If you REALLY feel your life is incomplete without your cable service, perhaps the problem isn't your cable service." But that's mean, and while I do wonder about that enough to have mentioned it, I also don't feel that it's my place to judge. I've spent many hours of my own watching plenty of passive entertainment (including daytime soap operas, for a while). And sneering at him while complaining that he's sneering at me is a tad hypocritical.
Had to mention it, though. *shrug* What can I say, I'm only human. And hypocritical. :)
But no, that's not really the point I want to make. What I really want to point out is: if you're satisfied with the content you're cable service is giving you, and don't feel that you want to sacrifice any of it, then why are you talking about cutting the cord? Cord cutting is for those of us who feel we are getting too little value for the money. It's for people like me who see 200 channels and nothing is on. It's for people who don't feel a strong need to keep up with the latest of popular shows. It's for those of us who would rather lose a channel than pay an extra $80 premium. It's for those of us who like being able to watch what we want, when we want, on the device we want.
Yeah, there are problems. There are limitations. Shows are being nixed from my favorite service while others are being brought in. Networks are being parsimonious with their programming; not everything I want to watch is available on the few accounts I own. While streaming services are pretty well established as A Thing, nevertheless it's still early days (especially with the major networks still in denial about cord cutting).
If all you're looking for is a way to save a few bux on your cable bill, but you don't want to give anything up, then stop talking about cord cutting. It's not for you. It's not about you. You're not part of that demographic.
If you want to save a LOT of money, and are willing to sacrifice some things you've gotten used to, then cord cutting is something to consider.
If you want to... well, there are a lot of reasons to cut the cord, I won't try to list them here, but in fact I've already covered a bunch. Suffice to say that cord cutting is an obvious move for some of us. TFA did his research and discovered it's not for him. Fair enough. I have access to a couple streaming services and Youtube, and sometimes I do things aside from potato* the couch. I usually watch the stuff on my tablet anyway. In fact we cut the cord almost 20 years ago. We're pretty happy with what we've got now.
If you can't justify cutting the cord, then it's not for you. Yet. Maybe someday. For now, relax and enjoy your cable service. Cord cutting will be there when you're ready.
* "Potato" is now a verb. :)
Why does he need to lighten his antenna?
For that matter, how many rescues for real emergencies will not be mounted in a timely manner due to resources having been diverted to cover a prank call?
I was thinking that a good physical-world parallel would be deliberately spraying peanut oil in aerosol or mist form in the vicinity of somebody allergic to peanuts. It's a form of physical attack that would not harm a typical person, but would be deadly to the target (and any bystanders who happened to share the allergy).
Or perhaps wearing or releasing a scent known to trigger a certain person's asthma attacks.
And then there's This Old Shack.