it should never be permitted to pro^H^Hersecute people for modifying what they own.
But in this case Sony is clearly not interested in the hardware. Sony is interested in preventing people from modifying Sony software, which the license agreement indicates the end user definitely does not own.
IP law is of course something that is hotly debated, especially with respect to software licenses. But under the current law Sony has a legal expectation that users not modify their software. If we don't like that we should work on modifying IP law. Actively seeking to violate it doesn't make hacker communities look noble, it makes us/them look like cheap teenagers looking to play pirated games for free.
The analogy that jumped into my head is that it is illegal to make certain modifications to your care that might make it unsafe to operate on the road.
Granted the public roadways are nothing like the Sony PSN, but in the sense that people have to share access and play along nicely with each other it is completely rational that we accept reasonable limitations on freedoms to ensure everyone is able to use it for its intended purpose.
The rational nature of your logic is truly astounding sir.
When presented with a rational explanation of how an invested but uninterested third party would desire simply that disruptions to their service be resolved, you've parried with the Booo-fucking-hoooo defense. Bravo. Surely this sets the stage for further meaningful discussion.
For the record, I totally agree with the GP. I bought a PS3 for a streamlined walled garden online gaming experience. I don't want script kiddies messing with my games, and I don't want to have to sit through a 20 minute update process whenever I want to play. Which, as a result of my twice a month gaming habit, happens to be every goddamn time I turn the thing on.
Well yeah. It's an official Sony blog that requires you to be signed in with your PSN tag to post. There would be no reason to go there if you weren't a fan of the products. It's like calling attendees at a Star Trek convention or customers in an Apple store fanbois.
Fortunate then that at least a Google they have some portion of their time dedicated to their own projects. I imagine it's a LOT more difficult at places that don't make similar allowances.
If these science teachers also taught the scientific method, it would become obvious almost immediately that ID is not a science because it is no more supportable by scientific process than FSM.
Kind of. ID is not the same thing as straight up creationism. Teaching kids that god created the world in 6 days would really break with the scientific method. Teaching that evolution is a specific process through which species have reached their current form is not out of line with ID. Many rational ID proponents are simply trying to make the point that God Intelligently Designed the universe, and that science and evolution are the way they are because God made the universe that way.
Even as an atheist that seriously doubts the existence of God, I see no reason what that claim is incompatible with science.
the teacher gave a statement to the effect of "This is a science class, not a religion class. We're not interested in religion here, we're not discussing religion here, and if you don't learn and understand the material, you're going to fail. If you want to talk about religion, do it somewhere else."
It continues to surprise me that people can't get behind this line of thinking. Science classes teach science. If you want Christian creationism you go to Sunday school or a bible study. Then, being an adult with high order intelligence and/or blessed with free will, the onus is on you the individual to come to a conclusion about what you believe.
The government intervened to help the economy, much to the consternation of Republicans everywhere.
??? The first economic stimulus package in response to the financial crisis came from the Bush administration. Granted it did not get a great deal of support from congressional Republicans, but it's not at all accurate to say that all Republicans everywhere opposed it.
Without government intervention, job losses would have continued unabated.
Maybe (ok, probably). But that doesn't mean the intervention we got was the best possible intervention either. We now know that TARP and ARRA are probably going to work out ok, but what we don't know is how well a smaller less expensive intervention might have worked.
Citing job creation under Obama as evidence of the genius of Obama's recovery plan fails to account for cyclic market behavior. When something crashes that hard, it inevitable has to come back up at some point. What we will never know is how the market might have recovered without government intervention.
I think the concern is not so much healthcare, but the precedent set by allowing the federal government it issue an individual mandate. I think people would be more willing to accept a higher tax burden in exchange for government provided healthcare, but the concept that the federal government believes it has the authority to compel me to go out and buy a product from a private company is kind of scary.
It's not the healthcare bit that's frightening. It's the bit about our government reaching down from on high and dictating our behavior.
I'm sorry, but could you explain again how exactly does dotting together "defending", "an actual attack" (with link to 9/11) and "Afghanistan AND Iraq" work? I'm sure they will find the WMDs in Iraq any moment now, and can justify it being "national defense"?
At the time we had every reason to believe Iraq had WMD's. They were intentionally taunting us with intelligence and troop/materials movements to give the impression that they did have Chem/Bio production capability and were close to a breakthrough on Nuclear capability. Turns out they were doing this to present the impression of a strong defense.
I will likely be modded as troll for this, but it doesn't matter to me whether they had such capabilities or not. They intentionally represented themselves as having such capability and routinely threatened use it. They could have resolved it by allowing inspectors in, but they refused because they were afraid to look weak.
This strikes me as a really really good way of getting everyone on board with +1 and working to integrate it seamlessly into Google's other services. It dawns on me that this is something that Google already does pretty well. They definitely take a systems approach to deploying new products.
But bonuses are never guaranteed. The reason that bonuses exist in the first place is to offer incentive for employees to get behind whatever initiative the company has in a given quarter and is not part of their base salary.
Google could just as easily take away bonuses from the other teams altogether.
I wish politicians were more scientific, but I don't want scientists to be more political.
One of the basic tenants of good science is to present unbiased results. If we try to blend our science and politics we will inevitably see science perverted to push personal agendas.
If a scientist finds that cancer causing chemical s/he should stand up and say "hey everybody look at what I found!" (read: Publish). Let the lawmakers figure out how to handle it.
Anyhow, if you didn't have a GPS or if your GPS was turned off it may have defaulted back to generic ads.
Yes.
When I have GPS off I get generic ads. When I have it on I get location specific ads. This is really amusing for me because the only time I let GPS run is when I'm driving and need Navigation, so while the ads might be localized they are most definitely not relevant.
A meaningless statement. In order for something to be considered an illusion you must consider the possibility that something can be deceived. And in order for that something to be deceived, it must be conscious.
by Tyler Durden (136036) Alter Relationship on Wednesday April 06, @03:47PM (#35737136) Homepage
What annoys me most is the "If we can't do it, noone can" attitude.
But that's the premise of the show. It's not Mythinvestigators. The whole model is them exploring a myth, replicating the event, and making a declaration. The show wouldn't work if all their results were "plausible".
I assumed the Library of Congress unit of time referred to the time it would take a million monkeys on a million typewriters to replicate it by chance, the LoCUoT.
What's the sense of adopting a standard unit if we can only use it for a single type of measurement? I've already modified my oven dial to the Library of Congress unit of energy, the LoCUoE.
I think the point was that we watch 100 million hours of TV advertising, as in commercials.
But even then, 20 minutes of commercials would translate to like 90-120 minutes of TV time (not accounting for DVR's). That's a higher number, but still not hard to believe.
But that's not telecommuting in the truest sense. You're an on call kind of guy.
Your work is still done on-site. Your customers don't maintain for you a permanent presence, but they still get to have you physically there when they need you (without buying a plane ticket and waiting 12+hours).
The point is if the GP can do his job from his living room, someone in India could also do it from their living room for a LOT less money.
It's not only cell phones. It's the 'bad' habits as well. Things like not respecting parents or elders, the 'me, me, me' attitude the teen pregnancies, the spending beyond our means for both government and a good chunk of the population.
One of the only fond memories of have of my High School Latin class was translating a missive from the Roman senate to the people bemoaning how young people are not as respectful to their elders as they used to be, and that their society was becoming morally bankrupt.
Every generation looks at their children as being somehow increasingly disrespectful and making poor moral decisions. That perception is weirdly constant.
Also, you have completely misrepresented this link:
The actual claim made was that a poll in 2006 indicated that 85% of soldiers believed they were sent over there to retaliate, not that they are currently in 2011 deployed there in retaliation.
And finally, Zogby International is one of the worst international polling organizations in the world (leading questions, selection biases in their polled populations, etc). And the oilempire site you linked looks like the online Wal-Mart of conspiracy theories. Is JFK somehow responsible for peak oil by orchestrating 9/11? I don't know, but that website makes me suspect that somebody thinks so.
Some of that depends on the culture of the specific organization.
There is lots of literature indicating people become more productive over time if they are allowed to blend personal and work time. Being hunched over a keyboard for 9 hours a day gets a lot of man-hours out of people, but allowing people a little bit of freedom to manage their own time and pursue personal interests during the day can really empower people to approach their jobs more efficiently and professionally.
I would want my team to be held accountable for work output, not just hours worked. If people want to shop or check some geeky news site during the workday and maintain a high level of performance, let them. If they stop producing then you have a problem, but that is true with or without internet.
Slashdot Mirror
it should never be permitted to pro^H^Hersecute people for modifying what they own.
But in this case Sony is clearly not interested in the hardware. Sony is interested in preventing people from modifying Sony software, which the license agreement indicates the end user definitely does not own.
IP law is of course something that is hotly debated, especially with respect to software licenses. But under the current law Sony has a legal expectation that users not modify their software. If we don't like that we should work on modifying IP law. Actively seeking to violate it doesn't make hacker communities look noble, it makes us/them look like cheap teenagers looking to play pirated games for free.
The analogy that jumped into my head is that it is illegal to make certain modifications to your care that might make it unsafe to operate on the road.
Granted the public roadways are nothing like the Sony PSN, but in the sense that people have to share access and play along nicely with each other it is completely rational that we accept reasonable limitations on freedoms to ensure everyone is able to use it for its intended purpose.
The rational nature of your logic is truly astounding sir.
When presented with a rational explanation of how an invested but uninterested third party would desire simply that disruptions to their service be resolved, you've parried with the Booo-fucking-hoooo defense. Bravo. Surely this sets the stage for further meaningful discussion.
For the record, I totally agree with the GP. I bought a PS3 for a streamlined walled garden online gaming experience. I don't want script kiddies messing with my games, and I don't want to have to sit through a 20 minute update process whenever I want to play. Which, as a result of my twice a month gaming habit, happens to be every goddamn time I turn the thing on.
Wow, what a bunch of Sony fanbois.
Well yeah. It's an official Sony blog that requires you to be signed in with your PSN tag to post. There would be no reason to go there if you weren't a fan of the products. It's like calling attendees at a Star Trek convention or customers in an Apple store fanbois.
Or am I missing something?
Probably something like sending a message to the other horses in case they were thinking about getting out too.
Having an injunction in this highly publicized case might make it easier for them to sue the next hacker into oblivion.
Megalitres is an obscure term? I suppose if you're american.
We think of volume primarily in terms of Budweiser cans. Tallboys mainly.
Fortunate then that at least a Google they have some portion of their time dedicated to their own projects. I imagine it's a LOT more difficult at places that don't make similar allowances.
If these science teachers also taught the scientific method, it would become obvious almost immediately that ID is not a science because it is no more supportable by scientific process than FSM.
Kind of. ID is not the same thing as straight up creationism. Teaching kids that god created the world in 6 days would really break with the scientific method. Teaching that evolution is a specific process through which species have reached their current form is not out of line with ID. Many rational ID proponents are simply trying to make the point that God Intelligently Designed the universe, and that science and evolution are the way they are because God made the universe that way.
Even as an atheist that seriously doubts the existence of God, I see no reason what that claim is incompatible with science.
the teacher gave a statement to the effect of "This is a science class, not a religion class. We're not interested in religion here, we're not discussing religion here, and if you don't learn and understand the material, you're going to fail. If you want to talk about religion, do it somewhere else."
It continues to surprise me that people can't get behind this line of thinking. Science classes teach science. If you want Christian creationism you go to Sunday school or a bible study. Then, being an adult with high order intelligence and/or blessed with free will, the onus is on you the individual to come to a conclusion about what you believe.
The government intervened to help the economy, much to the consternation of Republicans everywhere.
??? The first economic stimulus package in response to the financial crisis came from the Bush administration. Granted it did not get a great deal of support from congressional Republicans, but it's not at all accurate to say that all Republicans everywhere opposed it.
Without government intervention, job losses would have continued unabated.
Maybe (ok, probably). But that doesn't mean the intervention we got was the best possible intervention either. We now know that TARP and ARRA are probably going to work out ok, but what we don't know is how well a smaller less expensive intervention might have worked.
Citing job creation under Obama as evidence of the genius of Obama's recovery plan fails to account for cyclic market behavior. When something crashes that hard, it inevitable has to come back up at some point. What we will never know is how the market might have recovered without government intervention.
I think the concern is not so much healthcare, but the precedent set by allowing the federal government it issue an individual mandate. I think people would be more willing to accept a higher tax burden in exchange for government provided healthcare, but the concept that the federal government believes it has the authority to compel me to go out and buy a product from a private company is kind of scary.
It's not the healthcare bit that's frightening. It's the bit about our government reaching down from on high and dictating our behavior.
I'm sorry, but could you explain again how exactly does dotting together "defending", "an actual attack" (with link to 9/11) and "Afghanistan AND Iraq" work? I'm sure they will find the WMDs in Iraq any moment now, and can justify it being "national defense"?
At the time we had every reason to believe Iraq had WMD's. They were intentionally taunting us with intelligence and troop/materials movements to give the impression that they did have Chem/Bio production capability and were close to a breakthrough on Nuclear capability. Turns out they were doing this to present the impression of a strong defense.
I will likely be modded as troll for this, but it doesn't matter to me whether they had such capabilities or not. They intentionally represented themselves as having such capability and routinely threatened use it. They could have resolved it by allowing inspectors in, but they refused because they were afraid to look weak.
You are correct sir.
This strikes me as a really really good way of getting everyone on board with +1 and working to integrate it seamlessly into Google's other services. It dawns on me that this is something that Google already does pretty well. They definitely take a systems approach to deploying new products.
But bonuses are never guaranteed. The reason that bonuses exist in the first place is to offer incentive for employees to get behind whatever initiative the company has in a given quarter and is not part of their base salary.
Google could just as easily take away bonuses from the other teams altogether.
I wish politicians were more scientific, but I don't want scientists to be more political.
One of the basic tenants of good science is to present unbiased results. If we try to blend our science and politics we will inevitably see science perverted to push personal agendas.
If a scientist finds that cancer causing chemical s/he should stand up and say "hey everybody look at what I found!" (read: Publish). Let the lawmakers figure out how to handle it.
I think I finally beat the Pandora algorithms when I started getting Elton John and Kid Rock on the same station.
Anyhow, if you didn't have a GPS or if your GPS was turned off it may have defaulted back to generic ads.
Yes.
When I have GPS off I get generic ads. When I have it on I get location specific ads. This is really amusing for me because the only time I let GPS run is when I'm driving and need Navigation, so while the ads might be localized they are most definitely not relevant.
A meaningless statement. In order for something to be considered an illusion you must consider the possibility that something can be deceived. And in order for that something to be deceived, it must be conscious.
by Tyler Durden (136036) Alter Relationship on Wednesday April 06, @03:47PM (#35737136) Homepage
My mind just asploded.
What annoys me most is the "If we can't do it, noone can" attitude.
But that's the premise of the show. It's not Mythinvestigators. The whole model is them exploring a myth, replicating the event, and making a declaration. The show wouldn't work if all their results were "plausible".
Grant can articulate himself in a science-y fashion, and the show gives him the lines to explain the science-y things.
There are plenty of other ways to express intelligence than the spoken word. Grant sounds smart, but there is probably a reason he words for Jaime.
I assumed the Library of Congress unit of time referred to the time it would take a million monkeys on a million typewriters to replicate it by chance, the LoCUoT.
What's the sense of adopting a standard unit if we can only use it for a single type of measurement? I've already modified my oven dial to the Library of Congress unit of energy, the LoCUoE.
I think the point was that we watch 100 million hours of TV advertising, as in commercials.
But even then, 20 minutes of commercials would translate to like 90-120 minutes of TV time (not accounting for DVR's). That's a higher number, but still not hard to believe.
But that's not telecommuting in the truest sense. You're an on call kind of guy.
Your work is still done on-site. Your customers don't maintain for you a permanent presence, but they still get to have you physically there when they need you (without buying a plane ticket and waiting 12+hours).
The point is if the GP can do his job from his living room, someone in India could also do it from their living room for a LOT less money.
It's not only cell phones. It's the 'bad' habits as well. Things like not respecting parents or elders, the 'me, me, me' attitude the teen pregnancies, the spending beyond our means for both government and a good chunk of the population.
One of the only fond memories of have of my High School Latin class was translating a missive from the Roman senate to the people bemoaning how young people are not as respectful to their elders as they used to be, and that their society was becoming morally bankrupt.
Every generation looks at their children as being somehow increasingly disrespectful and making poor moral decisions. That perception is weirdly constant.
Also, you have completely misrepresented this link:
It's no wonder that 85% of US soldiers in Iraq believe that they are there to get revenge for 9/11.
The actual claim made was that a poll in 2006 indicated that 85% of soldiers believed they were sent over there to retaliate, not that they are currently in 2011 deployed there in retaliation.
And finally, Zogby International is one of the worst international polling organizations in the world (leading questions, selection biases in their polled populations, etc). And the oilempire site you linked looks like the online Wal-Mart of conspiracy theories. Is JFK somehow responsible for peak oil by orchestrating 9/11? I don't know, but that website makes me suspect that somebody thinks so.
Some of that depends on the culture of the specific organization.
There is lots of literature indicating people become more productive over time if they are allowed to blend personal and work time. Being hunched over a keyboard for 9 hours a day gets a lot of man-hours out of people, but allowing people a little bit of freedom to manage their own time and pursue personal interests during the day can really empower people to approach their jobs more efficiently and professionally.
I would want my team to be held accountable for work output, not just hours worked. If people want to shop or check some geeky news site during the workday and maintain a high level of performance, let them. If they stop producing then you have a problem, but that is true with or without internet.