The simple fact is, trolls will attack anyone they perceive to be low-hanging fruit. And trolls can be anyone— male or female. Why should anyone trust anything a troll says, including that they may represent themselves as male? They will present themselves as anything that the target might find offensive. Only one thing can be safely said about trolls as a group: They want you to suffer. And they will pick targets who are more likely to publicly express anguish or outrage. For trolls this is a win. This is why women in the public eye are more likely to get death or rape threats— because they are likely to be goaded into responding publicly.
Another indicator of bias is calling it the "Buy American Hire American" OFFENSIVE. For any other President in my lifetime it would have been an INITIATIVE. Why choose a word from military nomenclature to describe an economic move? Perhaps The Guardian, wants to look at it this way because it might affect the hiring of British workers. Nonetheless, I think it's clearly rhetoric and not reporting.
Women are still far under-represented in the large coal mining and garbage collection industries. Obviously we won't have true gender equality until we have 50% women software engineers, coal miners, and garbage collectors. What are feminists doing about this egregious imbalance in industries other than STEM?
Why would the world population want to do that when they could be using BTC2 or BTC3 or... BTC (each with a slight tweek of the algorithm) instead?
There are tons of virtual currencies already in existence, and no barrier to entry for creating more (including no barrier to entry for creating clones of Bitcoin that use a different cryptographic base).
Because Bitcoin has a huge first-mover advantage over all other cryptocurrencies. Bitcoin is a grand experiment that could succeed dramatically or fail utterly. The other current attempts at cryptocurrencies are also-rans that more often than not are simply Bitcoin clones with some minor tweaks that add nothing of significance when compared to the magnitude of Bitcoin's dramatic breakthroughs.
I'm the developer of Flying Logic, a highly graphical planning application that runs beautifully on Mac, Windows, and even Linux thanks to Java. But I'm a Mac guy, and I do all my development on the Mac, and I use a number of other Java applications on my Mac including IntelliJ and MySQL Workbench. I also develop iOS software, and I've had numerous requests for Flying Logic on the iPad, which would require a binary-compatible JRE. So even though I'm an Apple fanboy and supportive of many of their moves, I'm quite disappointed that Apple has left a huge question mark hanging over the fate of Java applications on the Mac.
To put more restrictions on the time and manner of cannabis procurement and consumption that are any greater than those that are already placed on the procurement and consumption of alcohol or tobacco, you would need to first show that cannabis is more dangerous than those other substances. In fact, it is far less dangerous.
Gives a whole new meaning to the phrase, "Pushing up the daisies."
Scott Adams and E-Publishing
on
God's Debris
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
When Scott Adams first published God's Debris as an e-book, I refused to buy it because of the platform-biased and fair use-restricted nature of his chosen distribution technology. And I told him so. The conversation turned into a fairly in-depth conversation on the nature of e-publishing and software piracy. The results are on my web site as an e-mail exchange between us that he gave permission for me to post.
At least one person who has written me about the exchange felt that I gave up. I didn't really give up-- in fact I hadn't intended it to become a drawn out argument in the first place. But by the end I felt I had reached the point of diminishing returns-- it was clear that Scott didn't want to be convinced. I decided that the real argument would be won in the court of public opinion-- which was why I felt it important to end on a (superficially) conciliatory note and get him to give me permission to publish the discussion. If I had taken the last word, I think it unlikely he would have let me post our exchange.
To be fair, Scott made two points that bear further consideration:
1) E-books are not identical to executable software.
2) If free file sharing is ubiquitous, people will steal when it's easier than buying.
I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but briefly I would respond to both points by saying that non-executable media such as books, movies, photographs, and music need to have a new distribution infrastructure put in place where buying is actually easier than stealing, and quite cheap for the end user. I believe the future of electronic distribution will lie not in increasingly Draconian legal and technical barriers that fight against the paying customer, but in the ubiquitous availability of micropayments that make enjoying creative content painless and subject to the Free Market. I believe Scott would point out that that system isn't here yet.
In another unpublished conversation, Scott credits e-publishing in this matter with enabling him to land his print-based book deal. He's happy with the outcome.
Slashdot Mirror
> "potential angry male ramifications"
The simple fact is, trolls will attack anyone they perceive to be low-hanging fruit. And trolls can be anyone— male or female. Why should anyone trust anything a troll says, including that they may represent themselves as male? They will present themselves as anything that the target might find offensive. Only one thing can be safely said about trolls as a group: They want you to suffer. And they will pick targets who are more likely to publicly express anguish or outrage. For trolls this is a win. This is why women in the public eye are more likely to get death or rape threats— because they are likely to be goaded into responding publicly.
Another indicator of bias is calling it the "Buy American Hire American" OFFENSIVE. For any other President in my lifetime it would have been an INITIATIVE. Why choose a word from military nomenclature to describe an economic move? Perhaps The Guardian, wants to look at it this way because it might affect the hiring of British workers. Nonetheless, I think it's clearly rhetoric and not reporting.
My candle happens to be twice as big.
Women are still far under-represented in the large coal mining and garbage collection industries. Obviously we won't have true gender equality until we have 50% women software engineers, coal miners, and garbage collectors. What are feminists doing about this egregious imbalance in industries other than STEM?
Why would the world population want to do that when they could be using BTC2 or BTC3 or ... BTC (each with a slight tweek of the algorithm) instead?
There are tons of virtual currencies already in existence, and no barrier to entry for creating more (including no barrier to entry for creating clones of Bitcoin that use a different cryptographic base).
Because Bitcoin has a huge first-mover advantage over all other cryptocurrencies. Bitcoin is a grand experiment that could succeed dramatically or fail utterly. The other current attempts at cryptocurrencies are also-rans that more often than not are simply Bitcoin clones with some minor tweaks that add nothing of significance when compared to the magnitude of Bitcoin's dramatic breakthroughs.
"Despite numerous tests, doctors can't explain ... even what stage of sleep he's in while he works."
This rings all sorts of alarm bells.
The Onion, of course, pointed out this disturbing trend some time ago:
Report Finds Troubling Rise In Teen Uranium Enrichment
...and I'll also add that Flying Logic is not eligible for inclusion in the new Mac App Store because it uses a deprecated technology: Apple Java.
I'm the developer of Flying Logic, a highly graphical planning application that runs beautifully on Mac, Windows, and even Linux thanks to Java. But I'm a Mac guy, and I do all my development on the Mac, and I use a number of other Java applications on my Mac including IntelliJ and MySQL Workbench. I also develop iOS software, and I've had numerous requests for Flying Logic on the iPad, which would require a binary-compatible JRE. So even though I'm an Apple fanboy and supportive of many of their moves, I'm quite disappointed that Apple has left a huge question mark hanging over the fate of Java applications on the Mac.
To put more restrictions on the time and manner of cannabis procurement and consumption that are any greater than those that are already placed on the procurement and consumption of alcohol or tobacco, you would need to first show that cannabis is more dangerous than those other substances. In fact, it is far less dangerous.
Next.
"...adult content on the Internet increased by 17% in the first quarter of 2010"
Wow, that's a lot of adults using the Internet!
Gives a whole new meaning to the phrase, "Pushing up the daisies."
When Scott Adams first published God's Debris as an e-book, I refused to buy it because of the platform-biased and fair use-restricted nature of his chosen distribution technology. And I told him so. The conversation turned into a fairly in-depth conversation on the nature of e-publishing and software piracy. The results are on my web site as an e-mail exchange between us that he gave permission for me to post.
At least one person who has written me about the exchange felt that I gave up. I didn't really give up-- in fact I hadn't intended it to become a drawn out argument in the first place. But by the end I felt I had reached the point of diminishing returns-- it was clear that Scott didn't want to be convinced. I decided that the real argument would be won in the court of public opinion-- which was why I felt it important to end on a (superficially) conciliatory note and get him to give me permission to publish the discussion. If I had taken the last word, I think it unlikely he would have let me post our exchange.
To be fair, Scott made two points that bear further consideration:
1) E-books are not identical to executable software.
2) If free file sharing is ubiquitous, people will steal when it's easier than buying.
I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but briefly I would respond to both points by saying that non-executable media such as books, movies, photographs, and music need to have a new distribution infrastructure put in place where buying is actually easier than stealing, and quite cheap for the end user. I believe the future of electronic distribution will lie not in increasingly Draconian legal and technical barriers that fight against the paying customer, but in the ubiquitous availability of micropayments that make enjoying creative content painless and subject to the Free Market. I believe Scott would point out that that system isn't here yet.
In another unpublished conversation, Scott credits e-publishing in this matter with enabling him to land his print-based book deal. He's happy with the outcome.