Yeah... I'm a little confused myself. It's almost as if they are suggesting that there is some sort of movement that (perhaps simply as a by product of whatever its main purpose is) is getting rid of crop rotation.
1: In "Idiocracy" the machine with the probes actually DIAGNOSED the patient without the attendant running it having a clue how it worked.
Ok, yeah, I'd forgotten about that scene just a few minutes (seconds?) after the one with the receptionist trying to decide what button to press after listening to all of Luke Wilson's babble.
2: You're reading far too much into this. Just read the post, get the reference, and chuckle. Debating this to expose every little flaw in the analogy simply destroys the humor while accomplishing nothing of value.
Perhaps I am reading too much into it, but I disagree that it accomplishes nothing. While I enjoy the occasional Idiocracy reference, I don't want to see it become synonymous with "this idea is new and/or different, therefore it will destroy the future". But maybe it's too late for that.
Sure it's inconvenient, but I don't see why you should expect privacy when you are using your work computer.
I think most people would expect to be able to make private phone calls on office telephones (for example, to/from their doctor). So why should email be any different?
How? In Idiocracy, you had a human patient telling a human receptionist all their symptoms, and the human receptionist (presumably) deciding for themself what the single worst symptom is, and pressing the corresponding button for that symptom. While here it seems more like a human patient telling all of their symptoms to a computer (or alternately, to a human who then enters the symptoms into the computer), and the computer deciding what is wrong with the human patient.
Though it certainly has the potential to become like Idiocracy if people start blindly accepting the results of the computer without understanding how it arrived at its diagnosis.
it gets pretty annoying to have to remember each place you used it and update them all appropriately when you get issued a new number.
If things worked like they should, you'd need to update all those places roughly every other year anyway when your CCV code and expiration date change. Instead, you've got places that don't even bother asking for the CCV (if they don't need it, why do others?) and that will never once complain about how the expiration date on file is 5+ years expired.
and i don't care what the proponents "think the intent is" it will be used to-the-letter of how it is stated.
Maybe in addition to pointing out how it can be misused, we should followup with the following:
"Now I know that you would never use this law in that way, but say a member of the other party is elected into your position. What is to keep them from misusing the law in the way I'd just described?"
If nothing else, should provide some entertainment when their head explodes because they can't come up with an answer that doesn't either a) cause them to have to pull the bill, or b) reveal that even they know there is really only 1 political party.
this bill asserts that because I have a physical presence in California (while that presence technically only occupies 2U in a server farm) that's enough to establish nexus. [...] I could re-engineer my business processes to collect sales taxes from Californians, [...] until I discovered that every county in California has a different sales tax, and I'm responsible for knowing what county somebody is in and applying the right sales tax formula.
Just highlighting what I thought to be the important parts, because it got me thinking.
One thing that has always irked me about the whole taxing internet purchases is all the people who say "well, brick'n'morter stores have to put up with all that variation, so why should a website get a freeride?". Because brick'n'morter stores don't have to put up with all that variation. If I operate a single store in a single county, the only county's sales tax that I care about is the county that my store is located in. I'm not asking my customers for their driver's license in order to charge them the rate of their home county.
Now I'm not saying I agree, but your post got me thinking that perhaps there is a way in which to determine which county's sales tax to collect, if you base it off the physical location of the web server.
I understand that at some point, it becomes pointless.
About 20 years ago, I had a cat run away from home, and it made me very sad. I searched all over for her, but eventually I had to move on. And it hurt a lot to have to accept that, because there was still hope that she was alive somewhere since all she did was run away. At this point she's obviously dead, but even now, just thinking about it hurts a little, since I have no idea if she was hit by a car, mauled by a dog, drowned, starved, or just passed away peacefully in her sleep.
As grim as this may sound, at least with the WTC the upper time limit on finding still living bodies is a lot shorter than the rest of their fucking lives, and there's less uncertainty regarding the fates of those trapped in the rubble.
Most people must work within a fixed budget. I can't just go out and buy subscriptions to every single thing I might enjoy, I have to pick and chose a limited number that will work within my budget. And if something that I enjoy is changing from a pay-once model to a subscription-based model, you bet your ass I'm gonna complain about it. I would want the people who made such a decision to know why I didn't buy their latest game.
If everyone who disliked this change simply avoided the game but said nothing about why they avoided it, and there were enough to cause sales to plummet, how would the people in charge know what to do to try and fix things?
You're right, this particular instance, probably not to a point where it makes sense to actually grant it such rights. But that's not what it sounded like you were saying at first. It sounded more like you thought it ludicrous to even consider having a discussion about the point at which a brain grown in a jar becomes indistinguishable from one with a body attached.
I believe that one day, we will reach that point. And I don't see why it makes someone an idiot to want to have that discussion now instead of later.
My point was it is not at all silly to be having moral and philosophical debates on the treatment of such brains. Or do you have a problem with people standing up for the rights of others?
well, yes, all of those debates will be started by those, who are in possession of non-functional brains.
I think that's a little unfair. Personally, if I just so happened to be a brain grown in a lab, I don't think I'd like someone poking around in me.
Sure, it's science fiction now. But is the idea of growing in a lab a fully functioning and conscious human brain, complete with its own distinct memories, really so far outside the realm of possibility that anyone debating how we should treat such a brain must be an idiot?
Perhaps not quite with the level of understanding that that would seem to imply (at least to me), but a memory of an unpleasant experience was certainly my first thought as well. But then I remembered how I'd heard long ago that the brain cannot feel pain.
Not intending this to be a flame/troll/whatever - just a reality check.
Please tell me the "reality check" of which you speak is that "the customers" will stand for it because most customers didn't buy a PS3 for OtherOS. Otherwise, it sounds like you are saying that it is ok for a company to remove functionality from a device I paid for, as long as I am in the minority of users of that functionality.
I think the analogy is kinda breaking down at this point, but the closest I can think of is it would be like the hackers gaining access to the architect's house, the architect locking everyone out of his house, and that somehow impacting all other owners of houses designed by that architect.
I'd have to see a comparison between TFA's picture and zsnes to be certain, but I agree with the AC. At least going by memory, it doesn't look any different from what I recall zsnes looking like.
If someone has a comparison image handy, it'd certainly be welcome. Otherwise I'll just check it out myself when I get home.
In some jobs they DO listen in on your phone calls.
I wasn't saying they don't, I was more of incorrectly presuming that you think they should not be allowed to.
While I certainly agree that it's safer to use your own personal device rather than trusting your employer to "do the right thing", I do not think people should be required to own a cellphone in order to have a private conversation while at the office, nor do I think that the near-ubiquitous presence of personal cell phones should be used to justify an employer monitoring 100% of employee activity on company email/phone/etc.
That's not to say I think there should be 0% monitoring. Obviously a balance must be struck between ensuring proper allocation of resources and employee privacy. I simply disagree with the notion that employees do not deserve at least a modicum of privacy.
Use your own email account from your own computer or phone.
Why?
No, seriously, why? I suppose one could make the argument that it's trivial to setup access to a personal email account from the office, but why should email be treated any differently from a phone call? Do you think my employer has the right to listen in on conversations with my doctor just because they were made with an office phone?
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah... I'm a little confused myself. It's almost as if they are suggesting that there is some sort of movement that (perhaps simply as a by product of whatever its main purpose is) is getting rid of crop rotation.
1: In "Idiocracy" the machine with the probes actually DIAGNOSED the patient without the attendant running it having a clue how it worked.
Ok, yeah, I'd forgotten about that scene just a few minutes (seconds?) after the one with the receptionist trying to decide what button to press after listening to all of Luke Wilson's babble.
2: You're reading far too much into this. Just read the post, get the reference, and chuckle. Debating this to expose every little flaw in the analogy simply destroys the humor while accomplishing nothing of value.
Perhaps I am reading too much into it, but I disagree that it accomplishes nothing. While I enjoy the occasional Idiocracy reference, I don't want to see it become synonymous with "this idea is new and/or different, therefore it will destroy the future". But maybe it's too late for that.
Sure it's inconvenient, but I don't see why you should expect privacy when you are using your work computer.
I think most people would expect to be able to make private phone calls on office telephones (for example, to/from their doctor). So why should email be any different?
Nah, everyone knows that the bird is the word. ;)
How? In Idiocracy, you had a human patient telling a human receptionist all their symptoms, and the human receptionist (presumably) deciding for themself what the single worst symptom is, and pressing the corresponding button for that symptom. While here it seems more like a human patient telling all of their symptoms to a computer (or alternately, to a human who then enters the symptoms into the computer), and the computer deciding what is wrong with the human patient.
Though it certainly has the potential to become like Idiocracy if people start blindly accepting the results of the computer without understanding how it arrived at its diagnosis.
asshole customers who complain to your boss
Is that before or after they (the customers) are hauled off by the police for animal cruelty?
it gets pretty annoying to have to remember each place you used it and update them all appropriately when you get issued a new number.
If things worked like they should, you'd need to update all those places roughly every other year anyway when your CCV code and expiration date change. Instead, you've got places that don't even bother asking for the CCV (if they don't need it, why do others?) and that will never once complain about how the expiration date on file is 5+ years expired.
An author publishing his book on Amazon isn't an Amazon employee.
And that matters with regard to Amazon being required to collect a federal sales tax because...?
Not saying a federal sales tax could replace the IRS, but it seems like you and OP are talking about two different things.
Not how they're always portrayed here, but I guess it wouldn't be the first time /. got something wrong.
You'd be getting a life sentence for repeatedly being accused of breaking the law; the shoplifting being only the most recent incident.
FTFY. At least that has been my understanding of the various 3-strikes laws.
and i don't care what the proponents "think the intent is" it will be used to-the-letter of how it is stated.
Maybe in addition to pointing out how it can be misused, we should followup with the following:
"Now I know that you would never use this law in that way, but say a member of the other party is elected into your position. What is to keep them from misusing the law in the way I'd just described?"
If nothing else, should provide some entertainment when their head explodes because they can't come up with an answer that doesn't either a) cause them to have to pull the bill, or b) reveal that even they know there is really only 1 political party.
this bill asserts that because I have a physical presence in California (while that presence technically only occupies 2U in a server farm) that's enough to establish nexus. [...] I could re-engineer my business processes to collect sales taxes from Californians, [...] until I discovered that every county in California has a different sales tax, and I'm responsible for knowing what county somebody is in and applying the right sales tax formula.
Just highlighting what I thought to be the important parts, because it got me thinking.
One thing that has always irked me about the whole taxing internet purchases is all the people who say "well, brick'n'morter stores have to put up with all that variation, so why should a website get a freeride?". Because brick'n'morter stores don't have to put up with all that variation. If I operate a single store in a single county, the only county's sales tax that I care about is the county that my store is located in. I'm not asking my customers for their driver's license in order to charge them the rate of their home county.
Now I'm not saying I agree, but your post got me thinking that perhaps there is a way in which to determine which county's sales tax to collect, if you base it off the physical location of the web server.
I understand that at some point, it becomes pointless.
About 20 years ago, I had a cat run away from home, and it made me very sad. I searched all over for her, but eventually I had to move on. And it hurt a lot to have to accept that, because there was still hope that she was alive somewhere since all she did was run away. At this point she's obviously dead, but even now, just thinking about it hurts a little, since I have no idea if she was hit by a car, mauled by a dog, drowned, starved, or just passed away peacefully in her sleep.
As grim as this may sound, at least with the WTC the upper time limit on finding still living bodies is a lot shorter than the rest of their fucking lives, and there's less uncertainty regarding the fates of those trapped in the rubble.
Most people must work within a fixed budget. I can't just go out and buy subscriptions to every single thing I might enjoy, I have to pick and chose a limited number that will work within my budget. And if something that I enjoy is changing from a pay-once model to a subscription-based model, you bet your ass I'm gonna complain about it. I would want the people who made such a decision to know why I didn't buy their latest game.
If everyone who disliked this change simply avoided the game but said nothing about why they avoided it, and there were enough to cause sales to plummet, how would the people in charge know what to do to try and fix things?
Sounded to me more like getting Al Capone on tax evasion.
You're right, this particular instance, probably not to a point where it makes sense to actually grant it such rights. But that's not what it sounded like you were saying at first. It sounded more like you thought it ludicrous to even consider having a discussion about the point at which a brain grown in a jar becomes indistinguishable from one with a body attached.
I believe that one day, we will reach that point. And I don't see why it makes someone an idiot to want to have that discussion now instead of later.
My point was it is not at all silly to be having moral and philosophical debates on the treatment of such brains. Or do you have a problem with people standing up for the rights of others?
well, yes, all of those debates will be started by those, who are in possession of non-functional brains.
I think that's a little unfair. Personally, if I just so happened to be a brain grown in a lab, I don't think I'd like someone poking around in me.
Sure, it's science fiction now. But is the idea of growing in a lab a fully functioning and conscious human brain, complete with its own distinct memories, really so far outside the realm of possibility that anyone debating how we should treat such a brain must be an idiot?
Perhaps not quite with the level of understanding that that would seem to imply (at least to me), but a memory of an unpleasant experience was certainly my first thought as well. But then I remembered how I'd heard long ago that the brain cannot feel pain.
Not intending this to be a flame/troll/whatever - just a reality check.
Please tell me the "reality check" of which you speak is that "the customers" will stand for it because most customers didn't buy a PS3 for OtherOS. Otherwise, it sounds like you are saying that it is ok for a company to remove functionality from a device I paid for, as long as I am in the minority of users of that functionality.
I wasn't aware that they made laptops where the screen could be rotated like that. :P
I think the analogy is kinda breaking down at this point, but the closest I can think of is it would be like the hackers gaining access to the architect's house, the architect locking everyone out of his house, and that somehow impacting all other owners of houses designed by that architect.
I'd have to see a comparison between TFA's picture and zsnes to be certain, but I agree with the AC. At least going by memory, it doesn't look any different from what I recall zsnes looking like.
If someone has a comparison image handy, it'd certainly be welcome. Otherwise I'll just check it out myself when I get home.
In some jobs they DO listen in on your phone calls.
I wasn't saying they don't, I was more of incorrectly presuming that you think they should not be allowed to.
While I certainly agree that it's safer to use your own personal device rather than trusting your employer to "do the right thing", I do not think people should be required to own a cellphone in order to have a private conversation while at the office, nor do I think that the near-ubiquitous presence of personal cell phones should be used to justify an employer monitoring 100% of employee activity on company email/phone/etc.
That's not to say I think there should be 0% monitoring. Obviously a balance must be struck between ensuring proper allocation of resources and employee privacy. I simply disagree with the notion that employees do not deserve at least a modicum of privacy.
Use your own email account from your own computer or phone.
Why?
No, seriously, why? I suppose one could make the argument that it's trivial to setup access to a personal email account from the office, but why should email be treated any differently from a phone call? Do you think my employer has the right to listen in on conversations with my doctor just because they were made with an office phone?