The only people who may use it safely are those who choose to use it of themselves.
I call bullshit on this. If it is perjorative, then those who choose to use it of themselves are buying into the mindset - who in their right mind could possibly want to "take for themselves" the word "nigger", huh?
Personally, I see nothing perjorative in the word; it's an informal gender reference (see "dude" or "guy"). If you've got a problem with the word, then fine, speak up. But if you try to escalate it to the level of "nigger" or "spic", then as far as I'm concerned you are the one out of line.
FWIW, I will no longer think of you as a chick - I'll go with uptight, nagging, PC control freak.
1)ISP gives you a static IP
2)Monitor all traffic to/from said IP address
3)Sell for profit
That would be OK with you?
Well, I don't like the idea, but I presume that this is already happening. Or at least, that at some point it will happen without anyone bothering to inform me.
When I don't want my ISP to know what I'm doing, I route my traffic through a secure proxy with a previously arranged crypto key. Doing anything else would be disingenuous.
What if they also decided to block any and all encrypted traffic?
I'd get a different ISP so fast your head would spin.
Anyone using a computer who doesn't understand why they shouldn't accept all cookies and scripts and click on everything shiny deserves (yes, really!) to have their actions remotely monitored and the resulting data sold to the highest bidder.
I don't want to drown in regulation just because some idiots can't be bothered to pull their collective head out before they use their systems.
I don't see why this should have any effect on the living vs. undead debate for virii. Anything complex and successful enough to fool a cell into absorbing and then reproducing it seems like a perfectly reasonable target for other, less host-adapted things to hijack. If something like this hadn't already existed, I'm quite sure it would have come along sooner or later.
What would be really impressive is for someone to figure out how the adaptation occurred, and whether we should be afraid or not.
TinyMCE - half a billion fragment loads later, it might work. Or maybe it won't; my one and only experience with it was trying to hunt down a bug with image link embedding in some wiki I was evaluating. I'd really rather have something standards-based in native code. Something that still works when I decide to kill off all the JavaScript on the page.
Speaking of which, the NoScript extension for Firefox is absolutely fantastic at limiting the amount of crap scripting running in your browser.
This is all well and good, but... does it really mean anything? I mean, "Oooo, look, we write software so good that Microsoft has to scramble to keep up" seems like a questionable metric to me. I'd rather hear something like, "We just came up with something so cool you'll forget not to drool when we let you peek at the specs."
Not to knock FF3 - I like faster JS as much as the next guy, but, er, awesomebar?
Until someone with the correct technical understanding can actually go to their manager and (with a straight face) say, "I'll use cloud computing to solve this problem because that'll save us money and time" there's no real reason to expect anyone to get it.
Successful blue-sky projects are mostly run by strong companies in good economic times. So, not so likely right now. Someone who's playing with their own money could well take advantage of this lack of understanding or vision or whatever, but that's not really a bad thing. Unless you're stuck in cubicle land and still want to play with the latest, coolest buzzwords.
Um, hold on. ISPs are already capable of discriminating traffic by content. It's cruddy tech right now, but it will inevitably get better and faster, and eventually it will certainly be feasible to filter *all* of the traffic between average (DSL-speed) users at the point of connection. This leaves me unsure whether you mean that they should be prevented by the government from using that capability, or whether they should just not be required by the government to use it.
If you mean the latter, I absolutely agree, though with faint hope of staving off that eventuality.
The "public," in my limited experience, has no clue that these issues even exist, and can barely work google to find out why their Chevy's making that strange noise. Like every other area of public policy that can't be completely explained in one and a half phrases, it will eventually be co-opted by some guy whose popularity is sagging mid-term and he will ride the death of yet another freedom to reelection.
Allow me to clarify, then: Discussion of novel "free" services makes me nervous.
Every "free" (meaning, of course, tax-supported in one way or another) service I could possibly want, and a great many more I believe should not be "free", are already provided by my current city.
I was wondering about that, too (the acceptance thing, not the kitten thing). Maybe the idea is that if Windows market share gets diluted "enough", more companies will start thinking about cross-OS development and distribution of their products.
I'm pretty sure this is a vain hope, though. The markets for most products segment nicely along exactly the same lines as OS adoption, and it'll take more than another 2% market share for Apple to have any impact on that. Not to mention that Apple would likely be *happier* to further fragment the software market, 'cause differentiation is the name of that game.
I get nervous when folks start talking about "free" services. Seems that more often than not, "free" actually means that I end up paying for power, bandwidth, and the army of bureaucrats that makes sure those bills get paid on time, and that their uncle's brother's company wins next year's bid.
So, please, count me out. I'll rig my own parabolic signal booster if and when I feel like it.
I finally upgraded last night. So far, so good - it's certainly faster, and the most important mods to me (CSL and NoScript) seem to be working just fine.
Of course, if it isn't all good then I'm screwed now, but c'est la vie.
Yep. Sure is. But justice is only one of myriad considerations in the running of a state, or the function of a society. Sometimes it's appropriate for justice to give way to other considerations.
Consider: 1% (or thereabouts) of the adult population of the US is in prison. Is this application of justice serving us?
Oh, crap. It's... it's all true. The silken web of lies and deceit can now be cast aside to reveal the fragile butterfly trapped within. I'm... I'm free. Free!
This was not a step back for mankind - that happened many years ago. I saw only steps forward or sideways here - that's a pretty hefty fine for a kid, and he'll actually have a chance at doing something that isn't entirely socially destructive now. The alternatives (conviction and incarceration or parole) would just be destructive to him and worse than useless to the state.
If they jailed every 18-year-old that somehow didn't get a good sense of right and wrong from watching MSM, society would implode overnight. And just jailing some of them won't have any effect on the behavior of the rest.
Sorry, no solutions here - the problems are beyond my ken.
This is exactly why I remain leery of applications in the cloud. I've got a google account for work, and that's the only use it ever sees. And it's under real.name.company anyway, and has no other useful information associated with it.
I try really, really hard not to leave to broad a trail online. Those databases just never die (except when they do, of course - but the timing is subject to Murphy's Law, so it's never in my favor).
Slashdot Mirror
The only people who may use it safely are those who choose to use it of themselves.
I call bullshit on this. If it is perjorative, then those who choose to use it of themselves are buying into the mindset - who in their right mind could possibly want to "take for themselves" the word "nigger", huh?
Personally, I see nothing perjorative in the word; it's an informal gender reference (see "dude" or "guy"). If you've got a problem with the word, then fine, speak up. But if you try to escalate it to the level of "nigger" or "spic", then as far as I'm concerned you are the one out of line.
FWIW, I will no longer think of you as a chick - I'll go with uptight, nagging, PC control freak.
1)ISP gives you a static IP
2)Monitor all traffic to/from said IP address
3)Sell for profit
That would be OK with you?
Well, I don't like the idea, but I presume that this is already happening. Or at least, that at some point it will happen without anyone bothering to inform me.
When I don't want my ISP to know what I'm doing, I route my traffic through a secure proxy with a previously arranged crypto key. Doing anything else would be disingenuous.
What if they also decided to block any and all encrypted traffic?
I'd get a different ISP so fast your head would spin.
Ahem. STOP SPENDING MY TAX DOLLARS ON THIS CRAP.
Anyone using a computer who doesn't understand why they shouldn't accept all cookies and scripts and click on everything shiny deserves (yes, really!) to have their actions remotely monitored and the resulting data sold to the highest bidder.
I don't want to drown in regulation just because some idiots can't be bothered to pull their collective head out before they use their systems.
I don't see why this should have any effect on the living vs. undead debate for virii. Anything complex and successful enough to fool a cell into absorbing and then reproducing it seems like a perfectly reasonable target for other, less host-adapted things to hijack. If something like this hadn't already existed, I'm quite sure it would have come along sooner or later.
What would be really impressive is for someone to figure out how the adaptation occurred, and whether we should be afraid or not.
TinyMCE - half a billion fragment loads later, it might work. Or maybe it won't; my one and only experience with it was trying to hunt down a bug with image link embedding in some wiki I was evaluating. I'd really rather have something standards-based in native code. Something that still works when I decide to kill off all the JavaScript on the page.
Speaking of which, the NoScript extension for Firefox is absolutely fantastic at limiting the amount of crap scripting running in your browser.
This is all well and good, but... does it really mean anything? I mean, "Oooo, look, we write software so good that Microsoft has to scramble to keep up" seems like a questionable metric to me. I'd rather hear something like, "We just came up with something so cool you'll forget not to drool when we let you peek at the specs."
Not to knock FF3 - I like faster JS as much as the next guy, but, er, awesomebar?
Until someone with the correct technical understanding can actually go to their manager and (with a straight face) say, "I'll use cloud computing to solve this problem because that'll save us money and time" there's no real reason to expect anyone to get it.
Successful blue-sky projects are mostly run by strong companies in good economic times. So, not so likely right now. Someone who's playing with their own money could well take advantage of this lack of understanding or vision or whatever, but that's not really a bad thing. Unless you're stuck in cubicle land and still want to play with the latest, coolest buzzwords.
Um, hold on. ISPs are already capable of discriminating traffic by content. It's cruddy tech right now, but it will inevitably get better and faster, and eventually it will certainly be feasible to filter *all* of the traffic between average (DSL-speed) users at the point of connection. This leaves me unsure whether you mean that they should be prevented by the government from using that capability, or whether they should just not be required by the government to use it.
If you mean the latter, I absolutely agree, though with faint hope of staving off that eventuality.
The "public," in my limited experience, has no clue that these issues even exist, and can barely work google to find out why their Chevy's making that strange noise. Like every other area of public policy that can't be completely explained in one and a half phrases, it will eventually be co-opted by some guy whose popularity is sagging mid-term and he will ride the death of yet another freedom to reelection.
Dammit, now I'm all depressed.
An "infrastructural paradigm shift" that cannot be succinctly described. Or even not-succinctly described. A paradigm shift into the unknown.
Suddenly, this sounds a heckuva lot like the late 90's.
Excuse me, I've gotta go find some VC.
Allow me to clarify, then: Discussion of novel "free" services makes me nervous.
Every "free" (meaning, of course, tax-supported in one way or another) service I could possibly want, and a great many more I believe should not be "free", are already provided by my current city.
I was wondering about that, too (the acceptance thing, not the kitten thing). Maybe the idea is that if Windows market share gets diluted "enough", more companies will start thinking about cross-OS development and distribution of their products.
I'm pretty sure this is a vain hope, though. The markets for most products segment nicely along exactly the same lines as OS adoption, and it'll take more than another 2% market share for Apple to have any impact on that. Not to mention that Apple would likely be *happier* to further fragment the software market, 'cause differentiation is the name of that game.
I get nervous when folks start talking about "free" services. Seems that more often than not, "free" actually means that I end up paying for power, bandwidth, and the army of bureaucrats that makes sure those bills get paid on time, and that their uncle's brother's company wins next year's bid.
So, please, count me out. I'll rig my own parabolic signal booster if and when I feel like it.
I finally upgraded last night. So far, so good - it's certainly faster, and the most important mods to me (CSL and NoScript) seem to be working just fine.
Of course, if it isn't all good then I'm screwed now, but c'est la vie.
Yep. Sure is. But justice is only one of myriad considerations in the running of a state, or the function of a society. Sometimes it's appropriate for justice to give way to other considerations.
Consider: 1% (or thereabouts) of the adult population of the US is in prison. Is this application of justice serving us?
Oh, crap. It's... it's all true. The silken web of lies and deceit can now be cast aside to reveal the fragile butterfly trapped within. I'm... I'm free. Free!
This was not a step back for mankind - that happened many years ago. I saw only steps forward or sideways here - that's a pretty hefty fine for a kid, and he'll actually have a chance at doing something that isn't entirely socially destructive now. The alternatives (conviction and incarceration or parole) would just be destructive to him and worse than useless to the state.
If they jailed every 18-year-old that somehow didn't get a good sense of right and wrong from watching MSM, society would implode overnight. And just jailing some of them won't have any effect on the behavior of the rest.
Sorry, no solutions here - the problems are beyond my ken.
I wish someone would figure out which side is my favorite, and then feed me there. My midriff's getting worn out from having to turn so much.
This is exactly why I remain leery of applications in the cloud. I've got a google account for work, and that's the only use it ever sees. And it's under real.name.company anyway, and has no other useful information associated with it.
I try really, really hard not to leave to broad a trail online. Those databases just never die (except when they do, of course - but the timing is subject to Murphy's Law, so it's never in my favor).
I'm gonna go hide in my cave now.