It does a good job of detecting an absence of sarcasm, giving a zero in such situations, but the sarcasm readout indicator gets sarcastic itself, giving a sarcastic zero when there is sarcasm. I'm beginning to think it may actually be just a "zero" sticker.
What would a robot's ideal soup be? Hot soup would interfere with the cooling systems, so it would have to be cold, it's a robot, so obviously petroleum would be a must, and needs a good amount of salt. Oh, hey, robot soup is oil in ocean water.
This whole mess is probably caused by robots trying to get delicious, delicious robot soup.
The kittens are pacified with a clutch of their neck scruff, but the older cats are a mystery as to how she does it.
A lot of older cats are still pacified by grabbing the scruff of their neck. They get quite agitated if you -lift them- by their scruff (probably hurts over a certain weight), and they don't usually have quite the reaction that kittens do, but it still calms them.
Yeah, because we here on Slashdot are miles above the intellect of every detective, lawyer, judge, politician, analyst, and security consultant who has anything to do with the G20 security.
Maybe, but my point was that we shouldn't assume those specific law enforcement agents in question aren't doing this to shut him up just because it would be a bad idea.
Think of the black eye to Canada (and especially their law enforcement), if this were shown to be trumped up charges over a guy with a cell phone, a can of gas in his garage, and a couple walkie talkies? They'd be laughed at as a bunch of Keystone Kops for years over this.
Just because -we- realize this doesn't mean the canadian law enforcement realizes this. They might have arrested him to shut him up, meanwhile patting themselves on the back for thinking up their brilliant idea of charging him with something rather than just beating him up.
Also, it's youtube. You know what's more annoying than websites all mimicking each other? 99.9% of the content on youtube, that's what.
The vuvuleza sound is actually quite an improvement. For instance, this morning one of my friends had sent me a link which turned out to be two minutes of a video of a rabbit, not doing anything. The buzzing sound gave it an ominous tone which was highly amusing, like the bunny was very very slowly moving toward a swarm of evil robotic bees.
The top youtube videos, what you might expect to be the cream of the crop, are even worse: "Justin Bieber LOVES Chinese Guy!" I can't imagine a horrible buzzing noise degrading the quality of that one. A bunch of clips from the world cup, most having already been taken down, a buzzing noise would at least be something. "Seattle Cop Punches Woman - Raw Footage " didn't have the option, a buzzing noise masking the incoherent shouting would have been nice.
It really failed to improve "Super Mario Beatbox" though.
I can't understand most of the PDF posted there, anything in there about how Viacom uploaded their own material so they could bust youtube for it? It would be nice if that bit of douchebaggery came back to screw them over, though I expect that's too much to ask from justice.
the major parties fail to work for the benefit of the people, and focus instead on the interests of large corporations
Was there a 3rd party candidate for presidency who was running on a platform which included "Don't do anything to enforce intellectual property rights?" And if so, is the reason they didn't get elected -really- because they weren't with one of the two parties?
Because if not, then it might not be an issue with the parties, it might be an issue with an apathetic public and several industries having effective lobbying campaigns that would work to their benefit whether there were two parties or a hundred.
Money always finds receptive ears in government, no matter what the party structure is like.
Perhaps he considers his Oath to the Constitution to be more important? To allow a single man to extract money from a corporation, without due process, is to create a lawless society.
That would be a fair argument were we talking just about this particular incident, but I was taking about his other dealings on the committee. His opinion here may have been based on the constitution, but his phrasing to me sounded like he was on the oil industry's side, and I'm suggesting that he had oil's interests ahead of ours in things like safety regulations on these oil rigs.
You need to go back and re-read the apology he issued.
I know he meant he disliked the manner in which the white house forced the payment. I still think the exact terms he used, in his prepared statement, are telling of a greater allegiance to the industry he worked in as an executive and that helped him get elected, than to the public he was supposed to be serving.
If you're a deep water drilling company and you don't have all your ducks in a row after that, you're an idiot. So Obama's reasoning for the moratorium, until the safety measures can be re-evaluated, is redundant because these companies had better be at the forefront of responsibility without further external incentives.
Incentives being in place failed to prevent this in the first place, why would you assume they'll prevent another case? It was clearly in their interests to do that before. BP going bankrupt because of this is not surprising. Yet that apparently didn't stop BP from cutting corners everywhere they could, gambling with not only the investors' money, but the entire gulf region as well. It's not like the big investors and executives are going to see any negative consequences of BP going under. I see no reason to assume that oil companies have suddenly wised up since they should have before. The other guys had the exact same plans in place to deal with this.
Regulations may actually be enforced now, which may help and might have prevented this, but the oil companies seem to have neutered the regulators if not actually achieved regulatory capture, and as I said earlier, their interests have not changed.
We're so used to being shamed into believing that just because personal inclinations exist we have to throw out all logic and reason.
We're dealing with big oil. Conflicts of interest over oil companies are something we'd be idiots not to take seriously. Remember Joe Barton, on the House Energy and Commerce Committee? Actually apologized to BP a few days ago for them having to pay for the damage they caused? Should we assume that guy had public interest at heart?
Have a 401k or any investment vehicle that has DJIA or S&P400 indexes in it? Then you do, as well.
The honorable gyrogeerloose is not actually presiding over those hearings, so it's not hypocrisy to point out that a conflict of interest exists there, if that's your aim.
I'd also be interested in where he lives. Nowhere near the coast or on a part of the coast that is already covered in tar, and he wants others to feel the petroleum love?
Amphetamine is better than caffine because it takes much less to keep you awake and focus.
Worth mentioning though that it's often easier to find a trustworthy coffee maker than a trustworthy amphetamine dealer. Having said that, a questionable prescription to ritalin is probably just as safe if not safer than a Mr. Coffee.
While the idea of Wikileaks is still quite popular; with more revelations about Wikileaks, Assange is no longer the media darling with everyone taking a more critical view of the man behind Wikileaks.
Yeah, because when you out corrupt business practices, everyone but the criminals you're exposing can get behind that and you're everyone's pal. When you're outing soldiers for gunning down unarmed children in broad daylight, there are some people who think you're attacking the military.
they need $55,000 to run servers but as much as $200,000 is used by the men who run Wikileaks for business class travel, hotels etc.
Goodness me, they have other expenses besides server costs in their efforts to do real journalism? Those evil bastards!!!
Read Cryptome to see that despite its idealistic mission, at some level Wikileaks behaves like another secret Government department with a couple of people deciding what is public interest.
Seems like a no-brainer that it takes some effort and restraint to remain credible while publishing these important stories. You can't just publish any unsubstantiated conspiracy theory, then publish a real story and expect anyone to take you seriously.
On the flip side, this could be a governments wonder weapon. Target a specific trait in the DNA, ie. people with black hair, or men, etc. etc. and kill them off, or make them weaker... all sorts of nasty things.
If we had the technology to do that, which we do not.
If someone has black hair, their physiologies are very similar to anyone else, receptors are likely to be identical. Blondes would likely be susceptible to the exact same things. We don't have the capability to target specific genes in cells within a patient to, say fight cancerous cells.
An ability to deploy something into the environment that would specifically target black hair genes yet can't be used to target cancer cells? I don't believe it.
Before anyone suggests to me that the government or pharmaceutical industries have such a cure for cancer but are keeping it a secret... there's really not much point in us talking if either you're that paranoid or I'm this naive. Except to say that if they were that smart, they wouldn't be announcing this.
Anyway, why would the government want to kill off people with black hair or men in a given population specifically? A simple bomb that doesn't discriminate is cheaper, easier, and more effective.
Slashdot Mirror
Sarcasm detector...that's a useful invention
It does a good job of detecting an absence of sarcasm, giving a zero in such situations, but the sarcasm readout indicator gets sarcastic itself, giving a sarcastic zero when there is sarcasm. I'm beginning to think it may actually be just a "zero" sticker.
What would a robot's ideal soup be? Hot soup would interfere with the cooling systems, so it would have to be cold, it's a robot, so obviously petroleum would be a must, and needs a good amount of salt. Oh, hey, robot soup is oil in ocean water.
This whole mess is probably caused by robots trying to get delicious, delicious robot soup.
The kittens are pacified with a clutch of their neck scruff, but the older cats are a mystery as to how she does it.
A lot of older cats are still pacified by grabbing the scruff of their neck. They get quite agitated if you -lift them- by their scruff (probably hurts over a certain weight), and they don't usually have quite the reaction that kittens do, but it still calms them.
hundreds of people died of Malaria.
Yeah, because their cats can't catch and kill all the mosquitoes, they can't jump high enough. With rocket paws though...
They have accomplished what I would have thought an impawsible feet. I certainly would have been stumped by it.
Yeah, because we here on Slashdot are miles above the intellect of every detective, lawyer, judge, politician, analyst, and security consultant who has anything to do with the G20 security.
Maybe, but my point was that we shouldn't assume those specific law enforcement agents in question aren't doing this to shut him up just because it would be a bad idea.
Way to put words in my mouth, by the way.
Think of the black eye to Canada (and especially their law enforcement), if this were shown to be trumped up charges over a guy with a cell phone, a can of gas in his garage, and a couple walkie talkies? They'd be laughed at as a bunch of Keystone Kops for years over this.
Just because -we- realize this doesn't mean the canadian law enforcement realizes this. They might have arrested him to shut him up, meanwhile patting themselves on the back for thinking up their brilliant idea of charging him with something rather than just beating him up.
as if the government isn't more corrupt, inept, and power-hungry than corporations.
They are usually more inept than corporations, which to some degree mitigates the impacts of the other two.
Also, it's youtube. You know what's more annoying than websites all mimicking each other? 99.9% of the content on youtube, that's what.
The vuvuleza sound is actually quite an improvement. For instance, this morning one of my friends had sent me a link which turned out to be two minutes of a video of a rabbit, not doing anything. The buzzing sound gave it an ominous tone which was highly amusing, like the bunny was very very slowly moving toward a swarm of evil robotic bees.
The top youtube videos, what you might expect to be the cream of the crop, are even worse: "Justin Bieber LOVES Chinese Guy!" I can't imagine a horrible buzzing noise degrading the quality of that one. A bunch of clips from the world cup, most having already been taken down, a buzzing noise would at least be something. "Seattle Cop Punches Woman - Raw Footage " didn't have the option, a buzzing noise masking the incoherent shouting would have been nice.
It really failed to improve "Super Mario Beatbox" though.
I can't understand most of the PDF posted there, anything in there about how Viacom uploaded their own material so they could bust youtube for it? It would be nice if that bit of douchebaggery came back to screw them over, though I expect that's too much to ask from justice.
Sure. Find me a candidate who says that is what I'm saying.
the major parties fail to work for the benefit of the people, and focus instead on the interests of large corporations
Was there a 3rd party candidate for presidency who was running on a platform which included "Don't do anything to enforce intellectual property rights?" And if so, is the reason they didn't get elected -really- because they weren't with one of the two parties?
Because if not, then it might not be an issue with the parties, it might be an issue with an apathetic public and several industries having effective lobbying campaigns that would work to their benefit whether there were two parties or a hundred.
Money always finds receptive ears in government, no matter what the party structure is like.
Perhaps he considers his Oath to the Constitution to be more important? To allow a single man to extract money from a corporation, without due process, is to create a lawless society.
That would be a fair argument were we talking just about this particular incident, but I was taking about his other dealings on the committee. His opinion here may have been based on the constitution, but his phrasing to me sounded like he was on the oil industry's side, and I'm suggesting that he had oil's interests ahead of ours in things like safety regulations on these oil rigs.
You need to go back and re-read the apology he issued.
I know he meant he disliked the manner in which the white house forced the payment. I still think the exact terms he used, in his prepared statement, are telling of a greater allegiance to the industry he worked in as an executive and that helped him get elected, than to the public he was supposed to be serving.
Point well taken, though I'd still be more interested in where exactly he lives rather than how much he's invested financially.
If you're a deep water drilling company and you don't have all your ducks in a row after that, you're an idiot. So Obama's reasoning for the moratorium, until the safety measures can be re-evaluated, is redundant because these companies had better be at the forefront of responsibility without further external incentives.
Incentives being in place failed to prevent this in the first place, why would you assume they'll prevent another case? It was clearly in their interests to do that before. BP going bankrupt because of this is not surprising. Yet that apparently didn't stop BP from cutting corners everywhere they could, gambling with not only the investors' money, but the entire gulf region as well. It's not like the big investors and executives are going to see any negative consequences of BP going under. I see no reason to assume that oil companies have suddenly wised up since they should have before. The other guys had the exact same plans in place to deal with this.
Regulations may actually be enforced now, which may help and might have prevented this, but the oil companies seem to have neutered the regulators if not actually achieved regulatory capture, and as I said earlier, their interests have not changed.
We're so used to being shamed into believing that just because personal inclinations exist we have to throw out all logic and reason.
We're dealing with big oil. Conflicts of interest over oil companies are something we'd be idiots not to take seriously. Remember Joe Barton, on the House Energy and Commerce Committee? Actually apologized to BP a few days ago for them having to pay for the damage they caused? Should we assume that guy had public interest at heart?
Have a 401k or any investment vehicle that has DJIA or S&P400 indexes in it? Then you do, as well.
The honorable gyrogeerloose is not actually presiding over those hearings, so it's not hypocrisy to point out that a conflict of interest exists there, if that's your aim.
I'd also be interested in where he lives. Nowhere near the coast or on a part of the coast that is already covered in tar, and he wants others to feel the petroleum love?
Amphetamine is better than caffine because it takes much less to keep you awake and focus.
Worth mentioning though that it's often easier to find a trustworthy coffee maker than a trustworthy amphetamine dealer. Having said that, a questionable prescription to ritalin is probably just as safe if not safer than a Mr. Coffee.
While the idea of Wikileaks is still quite popular; with more revelations about Wikileaks, Assange is no longer the media darling with everyone taking a more critical view of the man behind Wikileaks.
Yeah, because when you out corrupt business practices, everyone but the criminals you're exposing can get behind that and you're everyone's pal. When you're outing soldiers for gunning down unarmed children in broad daylight, there are some people who think you're attacking the military.
they need $55,000 to run servers but as much as $200,000 is used by the men who run Wikileaks for business class travel, hotels etc.
Goodness me, they have other expenses besides server costs in their efforts to do real journalism? Those evil bastards!!!
Read Cryptome to see that despite its idealistic mission, at some level Wikileaks behaves like another secret Government department with a couple of people deciding what is public interest.
Seems like a no-brainer that it takes some effort and restraint to remain credible while publishing these important stories. You can't just publish any unsubstantiated conspiracy theory, then publish a real story and expect anyone to take you seriously.
On the flip side, this could be a governments wonder weapon. Target a specific trait in the DNA, ie. people with black hair, or men, etc. etc. and kill them off, or make them weaker... all sorts of nasty things.
If we had the technology to do that, which we do not.
If someone has black hair, their physiologies are very similar to anyone else, receptors are likely to be identical. Blondes would likely be susceptible to the exact same things. We don't have the capability to target specific genes in cells within a patient to, say fight cancerous cells.
An ability to deploy something into the environment that would specifically target black hair genes yet can't be used to target cancer cells? I don't believe it.
Before anyone suggests to me that the government or pharmaceutical industries have such a cure for cancer but are keeping it a secret... there's really not much point in us talking if either you're that paranoid or I'm this naive. Except to say that if they were that smart, they wouldn't be announcing this.
Anyway, why would the government want to kill off people with black hair or men in a given population specifically? A simple bomb that doesn't discriminate is cheaper, easier, and more effective.
Or Opera, because that ain't working either.
Indeed, when was the last time Washington blocked a supermerger that forms at our expense? I'm actually asking.
If history is any indication, the bigger companies get the more out of touch they get with their customers and the more fragile their success becomes.
So then they get too big to fail and it's on to a bailout, subsidies, etc. And then we pay for it again with internet service.