That's exactly what I thought upon reading the headline. I fully expected to see a gaggle of posts of the "Translation: I haven't bothered doing the goddamn research myself and now am begging for help on/." variety.
As soon as your plan involves more than one person, yeah, you're guilty of conspiracy. Conspiracy charges aren't applicable in all cases, but they would have been in the original.
Not to pick nits with your evidenciary dilemma, but:
The problem is "terrorists" and "potential criminals", who don't do anything illegal up until they committ an act which harms a good many relatively innocent people.
Technically, that's not true. If they plan to commit an act of terrorism, they're guilty of conspiracy, whether or not the actual action is carried out.
Re:I wonder how much of this is quality . . .
on
Critics Pan Nemesis
·
· Score: 2
An annotated bibliography of Benford's work is available here. I'm forced to admit that I haven't read the majority of his ouevre, although his collaboration with David Brin is, for my money, the best hard SF ever written.
Pfft. Farscape may not have detox gel, but it had plenty of steamy scenes involving Claudia Black, Virginia Hey, and Gigi Edgley (one can only assume that Raelee Hill isn't far behind).
Say what you will about Farscape, but it didn't lack sex appeal.
It is precisely because she reinforces stereotypes about Americans (Californians, in particular) that we find her fascinating. Specifically, it's the vacant, listless, "I'm drugged to the gills" manner of speech she exhibited in the ad that made us laugh at her. She was just such an unlikely choice for a spokesperson - sincere, but not particularly articulate, her wit possibly dulled by the use of chemicals - that we couldn't help but celebrate her.
Plus, as it turns out, she was on drugs in that interview. Even if it was just an over-the-counter antihistimine.
Usually, this is called "predatory pricing," a situation where an entrenched vendor sells a product at a loss with the knowledge that they'll be able to soak the lost revenue, while their competitors are forced out of business (through loss of sales, loss of revenue on sales, or both).
With the consoles, however, pricing yourself below the competition is only half of the story. This type of pricing model is very dangerous with services or goods with a brief shelf-life - for example, airline tickets. But with consoles, there's a whole secondary method by which all of the vendors can make money back: the games. Microsoft breaks even on the Xbox if you shell out for... I think it was three games, which you're pretty certain to do. (Who buys a console and then never buys more than two games for it?) With that in mind, a predatory pricing accusation seems kind of lame.
Not that I usually criticize Slashdot for lack of editorial judgement - that would be like criticizing the devil for being naughty - but the "one interviewee" who foretold MS giving away Windows for free was Brian Behlendorf, who can't exactly be called neutral where questions about Microsoft and open source software are concerned.
In other news, Bill Gates says "We will crush Linux like a bug," and Steve Jobs says, "Mac OS X is just so insanely great, it's insane in its greatness." Ho hum.
Why on earth would some random low-level ad person lie to help Microsoft? Is she an evil, conniving, "not entirely straightforward" person? Answer: no, of course not. She did it because Microsoft told her to do it, and paid her.
Right, because everyone knows that people in advertising are the soul of discretion and honesty. Wait, what the fuck?
Microsoft doesn't pay random low-level people to lie. They hire whole ad agencies to do campaigns for them. So, maybe it was someone from Microsoft who came up with the idea for a "reverse switched" campaign (nevermind the absurdity of the concept - how many Mac users convert to die-hard Windows freaks?). What probably happened was that MS said, "great, get some testimonials and make it happen!" and the poor shmuck stuck with the job sat there for a little while until she realized that there weren't any such testimonials to be had. So she made one up.
Microsoft has done plenty of ad campaigns in the past, but their deceptions have all been about matters of substance - stuff like "the GPL will take over your software." Lying about something like this isn't just dumb - it may actually be too far beneath their notice to be worth pinning on them.
(Conscious of the fact that we're getting more and more offtopic...)
Most people don't have nearly enough sex to be able to burn any signifigant amount of calories from it. Vigorous sexual activity burns around 6 to 7 calories per minute, but most people aren't doing pelvic thrusts continuously for a half hour to an hour.
And if you are, regularly... dude, don't you have a problem with chafing?
"Standardizing" slang is meaningless without a subjective judgement as to what kind of slang is "acceptable." Otherwise, your "standard" says that anything goes, and a definition that admits everything isn't particularly useful.
Damn straight. I made the mistake of putting myself on the Atkins diet. During the intial induction phase (which is supposed to last two weeks), you're to consume less than 20 grams of carbohydrates per day, but can otherwise eat pretty much what you want (although most diet sodas are considered bad too - apparently, they can trigger insulin reactions similarly to non-diet sodas). Atkins insists that it is impossible to feel "deprived" on this diet.
Lemmee tell you something: I felt deprived. Not hungry, mind, but definitely deprived. I would have killed your grandmother for a piece of Wonder Bread.
I did manage to lose weight in the - oh, four days I managed to stay on the stupid diet, but that's mostly because I was eating less in total, not because I'd entered ketosis. I was cranky all the time.
These days, I eat slowly, but eat pretty much what I want, and make a concerted effort to stop when I'm not actually hungry anymore. I'm in better shape than I've been in years. In the end, that's just about the best advice I can give anyone.
More than likely, they'd heard tales from other users involving "ID-tenT" and "PEBChAK" jokes, or the old "shut it down, reboot it after ten minutes" trick for grabbing a cigarette break, and are suspicious that you're trying to pull something similar.
Just wanted to echo that sentiment. My wife and I met on TooMush when the admins there were kind enough to provide us refugees from the temporarily siteless SouCon MUSH a temporary home to play. (We'd both been playing on SouCon, but hadn't played together until the TooMush move).
A few weeks after we started playing together, we started talking on the phone. Then a few meetings in person, then a long period of dating. We were married August 2, 1997, and so far, so good.
Ironically, when friends of ours told us that they were dating people they'd met over the Internet, our first reaction was to freak out. "Oh," we'd say, "the Internet was different back when we met online ('93 and '94). It's not the same anymore." Which is, of course, true, but to a degree we're just vulnerable to the same stupid hysteria that affects everyone else (read: non geek types) regarding online relationships.
I fondly remember the first apartment my wife and I occupied. We needed furnishings in quantity, and were pretty broke, so we did the usual thing for our neck of the woods: we head out to Ikea and snagged as much cheap stuff as we good.
We discovered an interesting thing that evening: the more difficult to assemble pieces usually have the more gutteral names. Which is convenient, because when you're screaming it in frustration, it's more satisfying. For example, when I torqued my hand on a hex wrench trying to assemble a "sverker" shelving unit, I spent a good minute and a half shouting, "Goddamn sverking sverk of a sverker!"
With this technology, I don't really expect this phenomenon to go away:
Me: Okay, lemmee see here. Almost got it... (Electronic Female Swede): Warning. You are now applying excessive pressure to the hex wrench. Bodily injuy may result if cont... Me: OWW! Sverking son of a sverk! EFS: Hey, I warned you, asshole.
Getting caught is no small affair. Cheating at cards in Nevada can carry a sentence of up to 10 years. Card counting, on the other hand, will merely get you kicked out of the casino for good. But to Griffin and the surveillance establishment, the distinction between cheaters and counters is irrelevant. "Our job is to provide the casinos with information to explain why someone is winning," Griffin says. "It's up to the casinos as to what they want to do with the information."
It's against the house rules to count cards, but it's not illegal. You try cheating some other way, and that's punishable by jail time. For counting, they'll just kick you out (and maybe try to scare the piss out of you in the process.)
Slashdot Mirror
That's exactly what I thought upon reading the headline. I fully expected to see a gaggle of posts of the "Translation: I haven't bothered doing the goddamn research myself and now am begging for help on /." variety.
Yeah, because information about the formation of memories could never be of any interest to geeks.
As soon as your plan involves more than one person, yeah, you're guilty of conspiracy. Conspiracy charges aren't applicable in all cases, but they would have been in the original.
Not to pick nits with your evidenciary dilemma, but:
Technically, that's not true. If they plan to commit an act of terrorism, they're guilty of conspiracy, whether or not the actual action is carried out.
An annotated bibliography of Benford's work is available here. I'm forced to admit that I haven't read the majority of his ouevre, although his collaboration with David Brin is, for my money, the best hard SF ever written.
IBM's "planned" available of Rational isn't just "planned." It's actually done. I'd suggest that maybe you guys missed it, but, well, you know.
Pfft. Farscape may not have detox gel, but it had plenty of steamy scenes involving Claudia Black, Virginia Hey, and Gigi Edgley (one can only assume that Raelee Hill isn't far behind).
Say what you will about Farscape, but it didn't lack sex appeal.
It is precisely because she reinforces stereotypes about Americans (Californians, in particular) that we find her fascinating. Specifically, it's the vacant, listless, "I'm drugged to the gills" manner of speech she exhibited in the ad that made us laugh at her. She was just such an unlikely choice for a spokesperson - sincere, but not particularly articulate, her wit possibly dulled by the use of chemicals - that we couldn't help but celebrate her.
Plus, as it turns out, she was on drugs in that interview. Even if it was just an over-the-counter antihistimine.
Usually, this is called "predatory pricing," a situation where an entrenched vendor sells a product at a loss with the knowledge that they'll be able to soak the lost revenue, while their competitors are forced out of business (through loss of sales, loss of revenue on sales, or both).
With the consoles, however, pricing yourself below the competition is only half of the story. This type of pricing model is very dangerous with services or goods with a brief shelf-life - for example, airline tickets. But with consoles, there's a whole secondary method by which all of the vendors can make money back: the games. Microsoft breaks even on the Xbox if you shell out for... I think it was three games, which you're pretty certain to do. (Who buys a console and then never buys more than two games for it?) With that in mind, a predatory pricing accusation seems kind of lame.
Not that I usually criticize Slashdot for lack of editorial judgement - that would be like criticizing the devil for being naughty - but the "one interviewee" who foretold MS giving away Windows for free was Brian Behlendorf, who can't exactly be called neutral where questions about Microsoft and open source software are concerned.
In other news, Bill Gates says "We will crush Linux like a bug," and Steve Jobs says, "Mac OS X is just so insanely great, it's insane in its greatness." Ho hum.
Look for a companion volume to be published by Microsoft Press entitled, "Embracing and Extending Perl."
Right, because everyone knows that people in advertising are the soul of discretion and honesty. Wait, what the fuck?
Microsoft doesn't pay random low-level people to lie. They hire whole ad agencies to do campaigns for them. So, maybe it was someone from Microsoft who came up with the idea for a "reverse switched" campaign (nevermind the absurdity of the concept - how many Mac users convert to die-hard Windows freaks?). What probably happened was that MS said, "great, get some testimonials and make it happen!" and the poor shmuck stuck with the job sat there for a little while until she realized that there weren't any such testimonials to be had. So she made one up.
Microsoft has done plenty of ad campaigns in the past, but their deceptions have all been about matters of substance - stuff like "the GPL will take over your software." Lying about something like this isn't just dumb - it may actually be too far beneath their notice to be worth pinning on them.
(Conscious of the fact that we're getting more and more offtopic...)
Most people don't have nearly enough sex to be able to burn any signifigant amount of calories from it. Vigorous sexual activity burns around 6 to 7 calories per minute, but most people aren't doing pelvic thrusts continuously for a half hour to an hour.
And if you are, regularly... dude, don't you have a problem with chafing?
You can't garner their incomes, I think you mean. Unless you intend to include a sprig of parsley with their paychecks?
"Standardizing" slang is meaningless without a subjective judgement as to what kind of slang is "acceptable." Otherwise, your "standard" says that anything goes, and a definition that admits everything isn't particularly useful.
Those two statements aren't mutually exclusive. Sometimes, the reason something happens was "because someone fucked up."
This is the funniest thing I've read on /. in months. Would that I could mod you up.
Damn straight. I made the mistake of putting myself on the Atkins diet. During the intial induction phase (which is supposed to last two weeks), you're to consume less than 20 grams of carbohydrates per day, but can otherwise eat pretty much what you want (although most diet sodas are considered bad too - apparently, they can trigger insulin reactions similarly to non-diet sodas). Atkins insists that it is impossible to feel "deprived" on this diet.
Lemmee tell you something: I felt deprived. Not hungry, mind, but definitely deprived. I would have killed your grandmother for a piece of Wonder Bread.
I did manage to lose weight in the - oh, four days I managed to stay on the stupid diet, but that's mostly because I was eating less in total, not because I'd entered ketosis. I was cranky all the time.
These days, I eat slowly, but eat pretty much what I want, and make a concerted effort to stop when I'm not actually hungry anymore. I'm in better shape than I've been in years. In the end, that's just about the best advice I can give anyone.
More than likely, they'd heard tales from other users involving "ID-tenT" and "PEBChAK" jokes, or the old "shut it down, reboot it after ten minutes" trick for grabbing a cigarette break, and are suspicious that you're trying to pull something similar.
Just wanted to echo that sentiment. My wife and I met on TooMush when the admins there were kind enough to provide us refugees from the temporarily siteless SouCon MUSH a temporary home to play. (We'd both been playing on SouCon, but hadn't played together until the TooMush move).
A few weeks after we started playing together, we started talking on the phone. Then a few meetings in person, then a long period of dating. We were married August 2, 1997, and so far, so good.
Ironically, when friends of ours told us that they were dating people they'd met over the Internet, our first reaction was to freak out. "Oh," we'd say, "the Internet was different back when we met online ('93 and '94). It's not the same anymore." Which is, of course, true, but to a degree we're just vulnerable to the same stupid hysteria that affects everyone else (read: non geek types) regarding online relationships.
Sigh. "As we could," that should have read. Christ.
I fondly remember the first apartment my wife and I occupied. We needed furnishings in quantity, and were pretty broke, so we did the usual thing for our neck of the woods: we head out to Ikea and snagged as much cheap stuff as we good.
We discovered an interesting thing that evening: the more difficult to assemble pieces usually have the more gutteral names. Which is convenient, because when you're screaming it in frustration, it's more satisfying. For example, when I torqued my hand on a hex wrench trying to assemble a "sverker" shelving unit, I spent a good minute and a half shouting, "Goddamn sverking sverk of a sverker!"
With this technology, I don't really expect this phenomenon to go away:
Me: Okay, lemmee see here. Almost got it...
(Electronic Female Swede): Warning. You are now applying excessive pressure to the hex wrench. Bodily injuy may result if cont...
Me: OWW! Sverking son of a sverk!
EFS: Hey, I warned you, asshole.
For the record, it's on page 5:
Actually, it isn't.
It's against the house rules to count cards, but it's not illegal. You try cheating some other way, and that's punishable by jail time. For counting, they'll just kick you out (and maybe try to scare the piss out of you in the process.)
Reread the article.
You win a prize. Duh.