I like that way of looking at it. It won't really affect police departments in my area that much because, as this is a college town, the police focus on handing out PAULAs (possession of alcohol under legal age) as their cash cow, but could the mainstreaming of speed trap avoidance tech potentially have huge impacts on some county's cash flow through their police departments?
Not that you could even realistically dam this river.
On another note, I saw an ad for a "radar detector detector detector" a few years ago. It's amazing what lengths people will go to in order to speed without ticket paranoia.
Humanity has precious little time left before marketers become so astute at selling directly to each and every consumer that we become powerless to resist their offerings. The only defense we will have will be to hide from all advertising, which will require curling up into a tiny little ball in a dark corner.
That's very interesting and promising that ocean areas can be tapped for energy, I hope that it's not environmentally destructive and that it doesn't provoke international conflict over who gets to use which ocean sectors.
River would read your mind and use her dance/fighting skills to prevent you from slowing down her water. All of the experiments the Alliance performed on her made her quite resistant to your attempted exploitation.
Well, Clinton never tried to insist that his VP wasn't part of the executive branch, never tried to put Harriet Miers on the supreme court...
Actually I think the shadiest person in the administration is Cheney. He's certainly one of the only members of the 2001 Bush team left, and he keeps so many secrets! Also, he shot a man in the face one time. I love adding that to the end of my Dick Cheney rants. Is that too partisan?
Well, most of that 400GB from Clinton's administration was dirty pictures of interns.
In all seriousness, though, I don't think the problem will be finding a way to store all that data. The real kicker will be finding information you need in it. Seems to me like the best way to hide relevant and/or damaging e-mails would be to have them stored right alongside truckloads of chain letters.
Whenever I receive news that information that we're supposed to have access to from the Bush administration has gone missing, it makes me queasy. There's so much secrecy surrounding random little things that it's started to make me paranoid. Maybe it's just me wanting to blame the last eight years on a scapegoat, but I feel like someone at the top is trying to hide something really big and succeeding.
Obama has said time and time again he wants to bring in people he disagrees with to staff his cabinet. I would presume the purpose of doing that would not be to enact policies he disagrees with.
Presumably, since Obama made reducing jail time for non-violent drug offenders an (admittedly minor) issue in the campaign, he will have spoken to Holder about that view and made sure that Holder isn't going to do anything monumentally stupid.
I am not afraid that being caught with weed will be worse under the Obama administration than it was under Bush.
Do you ever think about the potentially catastrophically apocalyptic events that could be heralded by the phrase, "The Pentagon has suffered from a cyber attack"?
I shudder to think of various blue screens of death and then the weapons systems hijacked by Obvious Trolls and turned on X. Suddenly the internet becomes "serious business".
Intel is a great company to look at; I went to a US News and World Report conference about three weeks ago where an Intel VP came to talk about the special deals and discounts they've worked out with select school systems. Apparently, Intel contributes not only by donating technology for classrooms and computer labs, but also by training teachers in how to use them effectively in the classroom and developing a "digital literacy" curriculum for them to use. Intel takes great pride in their school involvement, and you can find details about that at http://www.intel.com/education/. Now, there was a panel at this conference talking about the role of private interests in fulfilling the technology needs of 21st century schools beyond just straight philanthropy, and the perspective that came out was that more private companies should be selling deeply discounted equipment to schools to get bulk orders steady customers, not to mention the image boost. There was also a very touching vignette about New York middle school students reading Romeo and Juliet videoconferencing with an Israeli class that was reading the same work. Finally, the Brookings Institution had a little bit about how the Federal government can facilitate involvement in "educational entrepreneurship" which is developing cheap, classroom-relevant tech specifically targeted for school use. This was part of the Blueprint for Prosperity report which can be found at http://www.blueprintprosperity.org./
Nice, you hit the nail right on the head. If this were done through any medium other than the internet, she would have gotten the charges you mentioned: harassment, maybe manslaughter, maybe accessory to a suicide. But since it's the big and scary internet (and who knows what your kids are doing on there) it's clearly her unfair voodoo use of MySpace that receives the most focus. Just imagine if she had written that teenaged girl a letter instead. Nobody would be saying that the big issue here was violating the ToS of the Postal Service.
I agree, this is going to be taken by a lot of people as a reason why there should not be anonymity on the internet and why attempts to assume a fake identity on the net should be viewed as criminal. Maybe all we need is a law that says it's illegal to be a manipulative, predatory jackass anywhere.
Hmm, I wonder if Ms. Drew could be considered to be legally insane. She does seem incapable of telling right from wrong, but I don't know if this behavior is grounds for institutionalization. Maybe just de-internet-access-ization.
Actually I think you could make a good case for whoever was at the keyboard being an accessory to the crime of suicide. One of the rare justifications for making suicide illegal.
Ooh, you're definitely right about this having the capability to create a precedent that may be abused. Maybe the last court to rule on this case will have a flash of insight and use some language relating to "malicious intent" or "intent to cause harm", but I don't see any ruling against Ms. Drew containing more restrictive terms than that.
Like the NYT article says, this does seem like a case the Federal statute doesn't technically apply to. It's a pretty blatant example of overreaching. However, this woman should clearly be punished. I think the trial's going to have to take a look into who actually wrote the messages that compelled suicide and exactly how much Ms. Drew knew about the victim's mental instability. I still don't know whether or not to think of this as an immature prank gone terribly, terribly wrong, or a real attempt to prey on a weak girl's vulnerable mental state.
In other news today, Jenny Tildwell and Brock Johnson, both sixth-graders, broke up on Facebook in the late afternoon, between seventh and eight period.
A rampaging horde of schoolchildren across the country, composed of Jenny and Brock's entire extended networks, clogged the tubes to post, twitter, stream, or otherwise network their personal reactions to this saucy development. The internet promptly refused to put up with that shit and died.
"We accidentally the whole internet," said one fifth grader, showcasing what was either a working knowledge of internet memes or the total and utter failure of the public school system's English language instruction.
Neither Jenny nor Brock could be reached for comment, but the sharp increase in the amount of Facebook wall posts made by Brock on the profile of one Pearl Jaysberg, eighth-grader, seems to indicate that the drama is only beginning to come to a boil.
We have been assured that the entire goddamn school will keep us updated.
I suppose I agree that by the time WoW and Google hit there were already established markets in terms of thirsty audiences, but I would still say those qualify as "early entries" into those markets because they both took advantage of improving technological capabilities to provide user experiences that came to represent the industry standard for the product. I guess they redefined the market from "MMOs" to "MMOs that are at least this pretty and accessible".
Entering after that standard had been established, other search engines and MMOs find themselves having to measure up to the monumental success and popularity of these giants. So I guess I would state that Google and WoW took emerging markets and choked off their... emerginess.
Seems accurate. The "ghost town effect" as you put it plagues many otherwise cool games/forums... or I guess sites that would be cool if more people were using them.
Generally if you're not one of the first comers to the market to snap up a share of the early waves of people to realize the potential for a service, you can never recover. Tabula Rasa will never ever compare to WoW because it just never got the same kind of mass membership momentum and nothing can compete with that. Same goes for other social networking sites trying to compete with Facebook and MySpace, although I guess that's about the same because they're really text-based MMORPGs. Nyerk.
Maybe they should do some research with a separate group of children who spend at least half an hour or so of that time every couple days playing video games with their parents or with some other responsible adult?
They say your kids can watch pretty much any kind of TV as long as you watch with them and talk about it... I bet the same is true for video games too.
Although if the parents become more violent, we may have some heavier findings on our hands.
Slashdot Mirror
I like that way of looking at it. It won't really affect police departments in my area that much because, as this is a college town, the police focus on handing out PAULAs (possession of alcohol under legal age) as their cash cow, but could the mainstreaming of speed trap avoidance tech potentially have huge impacts on some county's cash flow through their police departments?
Not that you could even realistically dam this river.
On another note, I saw an ad for a "radar detector detector detector" a few years ago. It's amazing what lengths people will go to in order to speed without ticket paranoia.
Humanity has precious little time left before marketers become so astute at selling directly to each and every consumer that we become powerless to resist their offerings. The only defense we will have will be to hide from all advertising, which will require curling up into a tiny little ball in a dark corner.
That's very interesting and promising that ocean areas can be tapped for energy, I hope that it's not environmentally destructive and that it doesn't provoke international conflict over who gets to use which ocean sectors.
River would read your mind and use her dance/fighting skills to prevent you from slowing down her water. All of the experiments the Alliance performed on her made her quite resistant to your attempted exploitation.
Well, Clinton never tried to insist that his VP wasn't part of the executive branch, never tried to put Harriet Miers on the supreme court... Actually I think the shadiest person in the administration is Cheney. He's certainly one of the only members of the 2001 Bush team left, and he keeps so many secrets! Also, he shot a man in the face one time. I love adding that to the end of my Dick Cheney rants. Is that too partisan?
Well, most of that 400GB from Clinton's administration was dirty pictures of interns. In all seriousness, though, I don't think the problem will be finding a way to store all that data. The real kicker will be finding information you need in it. Seems to me like the best way to hide relevant and/or damaging e-mails would be to have them stored right alongside truckloads of chain letters.
Whenever I receive news that information that we're supposed to have access to from the Bush administration has gone missing, it makes me queasy. There's so much secrecy surrounding random little things that it's started to make me paranoid. Maybe it's just me wanting to blame the last eight years on a scapegoat, but I feel like someone at the top is trying to hide something really big and succeeding.
I don't recall, I don't remember being briefed on tht, I'm really not prepared to answer that question.
Obama has said time and time again he wants to bring in people he disagrees with to staff his cabinet. I would presume the purpose of doing that would not be to enact policies he disagrees with. Presumably, since Obama made reducing jail time for non-violent drug offenders an (admittedly minor) issue in the campaign, he will have spoken to Holder about that view and made sure that Holder isn't going to do anything monumentally stupid. I am not afraid that being caught with weed will be worse under the Obama administration than it was under Bush.
Do you ever think about the potentially catastrophically apocalyptic events that could be heralded by the phrase, "The Pentagon has suffered from a cyber attack"? I shudder to think of various blue screens of death and then the weapons systems hijacked by Obvious Trolls and turned on X. Suddenly the internet becomes "serious business".
Intel is a great company to look at; I went to a US News and World Report conference about three weeks ago where an Intel VP came to talk about the special deals and discounts they've worked out with select school systems. Apparently, Intel contributes not only by donating technology for classrooms and computer labs, but also by training teachers in how to use them effectively in the classroom and developing a "digital literacy" curriculum for them to use. Intel takes great pride in their school involvement, and you can find details about that at http://www.intel.com/education/. Now, there was a panel at this conference talking about the role of private interests in fulfilling the technology needs of 21st century schools beyond just straight philanthropy, and the perspective that came out was that more private companies should be selling deeply discounted equipment to schools to get bulk orders steady customers, not to mention the image boost. There was also a very touching vignette about New York middle school students reading Romeo and Juliet videoconferencing with an Israeli class that was reading the same work. Finally, the Brookings Institution had a little bit about how the Federal government can facilitate involvement in "educational entrepreneurship" which is developing cheap, classroom-relevant tech specifically targeted for school use. This was part of the Blueprint for Prosperity report which can be found at http://www.blueprintprosperity.org./
Nice, you hit the nail right on the head. If this were done through any medium other than the internet, she would have gotten the charges you mentioned: harassment, maybe manslaughter, maybe accessory to a suicide. But since it's the big and scary internet (and who knows what your kids are doing on there) it's clearly her unfair voodoo use of MySpace that receives the most focus. Just imagine if she had written that teenaged girl a letter instead. Nobody would be saying that the big issue here was violating the ToS of the Postal Service.
I agree, this is going to be taken by a lot of people as a reason why there should not be anonymity on the internet and why attempts to assume a fake identity on the net should be viewed as criminal. Maybe all we need is a law that says it's illegal to be a manipulative, predatory jackass anywhere.
Hmm, I wonder if Ms. Drew could be considered to be legally insane. She does seem incapable of telling right from wrong, but I don't know if this behavior is grounds for institutionalization. Maybe just de-internet-access-ization.
Actually I think you could make a good case for whoever was at the keyboard being an accessory to the crime of suicide. One of the rare justifications for making suicide illegal.
Ooh, you're definitely right about this having the capability to create a precedent that may be abused. Maybe the last court to rule on this case will have a flash of insight and use some language relating to "malicious intent" or "intent to cause harm", but I don't see any ruling against Ms. Drew containing more restrictive terms than that.
Like the NYT article says, this does seem like a case the Federal statute doesn't technically apply to. It's a pretty blatant example of overreaching. However, this woman should clearly be punished. I think the trial's going to have to take a look into who actually wrote the messages that compelled suicide and exactly how much Ms. Drew knew about the victim's mental instability. I still don't know whether or not to think of this as an immature prank gone terribly, terribly wrong, or a real attempt to prey on a weak girl's vulnerable mental state.
In other news today, Jenny Tildwell and Brock Johnson, both sixth-graders, broke up on Facebook in the late afternoon, between seventh and eight period. A rampaging horde of schoolchildren across the country, composed of Jenny and Brock's entire extended networks, clogged the tubes to post, twitter, stream, or otherwise network their personal reactions to this saucy development. The internet promptly refused to put up with that shit and died. "We accidentally the whole internet," said one fifth grader, showcasing what was either a working knowledge of internet memes or the total and utter failure of the public school system's English language instruction. Neither Jenny nor Brock could be reached for comment, but the sharp increase in the amount of Facebook wall posts made by Brock on the profile of one Pearl Jaysberg, eighth-grader, seems to indicate that the drama is only beginning to come to a boil. We have been assured that the entire goddamn school will keep us updated.
I suppose I agree that by the time WoW and Google hit there were already established markets in terms of thirsty audiences, but I would still say those qualify as "early entries" into those markets because they both took advantage of improving technological capabilities to provide user experiences that came to represent the industry standard for the product. I guess they redefined the market from "MMOs" to "MMOs that are at least this pretty and accessible". Entering after that standard had been established, other search engines and MMOs find themselves having to measure up to the monumental success and popularity of these giants. So I guess I would state that Google and WoW took emerging markets and choked off their... emerginess.
Seems accurate. The "ghost town effect" as you put it plagues many otherwise cool games/forums... or I guess sites that would be cool if more people were using them. Generally if you're not one of the first comers to the market to snap up a share of the early waves of people to realize the potential for a service, you can never recover. Tabula Rasa will never ever compare to WoW because it just never got the same kind of mass membership momentum and nothing can compete with that. Same goes for other social networking sites trying to compete with Facebook and MySpace, although I guess that's about the same because they're really text-based MMORPGs. Nyerk.
Maybe they should do some research with a separate group of children who spend at least half an hour or so of that time every couple days playing video games with their parents or with some other responsible adult? They say your kids can watch pretty much any kind of TV as long as you watch with them and talk about it... I bet the same is true for video games too. Although if the parents become more violent, we may have some heavier findings on our hands.