The reason this story is newsworthy is because humanity in general hates liars. Call it what you will...spin, doctoring, touching up for "aesthetic reasons", etc...it's a variation from the truth.
That being said, I agree there's a boundary where nobody cares anymore whether it's real or not - e.g. if a cover girl's photo is severely doctored to conform to the beauty standard of the times. Why? Because it's bubblegum pop news.
BP on the other hand is not only front page news, it's currently the antagonist in what will be recorded as one of the worst environmental disasters of the 21st century. History will forget that People Magazine's cover of Britney Spears makes it look like she's a D cup instead of a B cup*, but it won't forget that BP downgraded the seriousness of the situation at every available opportunity.
*This is a purely fictional example...I have no idea of what magazines splashed Britney Spears' cleavage all over their front page, and what her actual vs depicted dimensions are...all I care is that she appears to be popping out of any garment they squeeze her into.
Read the decision. The judge agrees with you. She finds the original award unconstitutionally excessive, and thus has grounds to reduce it; however, she still must still respect the findings of the jury, who were "going for broke" in her words. In this case, determining the size of the award fell to the jury, not the court. There's only so much she could do.
Actually there's probably only so much the jury could do as well, given that Tenenbaum not only admitted to years of copyright infringement, but also admitted to lying about it to authorities when caught. No jury likes a weasel.
I never thought I'd say this, but...HIRE A GODDAMN PR CONSULTANT ALREADY! I hate PR bullshit...I really do...but honestly, after arguing myself blue in the face with my right-wing relatives that environmentalism transcends politics and just because I like clean air and a healthy earth, doesn't make me a commie, publishing a single report that wildly contradict previous findings makes it practically impossible to defend you. I understand the unwillingness to hold back data/findings because of politics, but even a rookie PR guy will warn you about the dangers of publishing a single report that purportedly negates all previous recommendations.
I'm not asking you to cover up findings and/or only publish reports that further your political agenda...just to maybe take the findings of the experiment a few steps further - run several more tests to ensure the validity of the findings, and then propose reasonable recommendations for future policy.
Simply leaving the conclusion of the report at "Sorry guys, you know how we told you that we were all going to die if we don't outlaw sulfate aerosols? Yeah, well, we were wrong, and it turns out now we're really fucked up" is just like throwing handfuls of painkillers at Rush Limbaugh's mouth.
My analogy would be that it's like the owner of a stolen car having to spend $700,000 on a secure garage after realizing that keeping the car on the street with the keys in the ignition is inadequate.
Sorry it took so long for the fix...I got on it as soon as I realized the anguish a non-car analogy would cause on/.
Why would anyone spend $700 buy a device that is dependent on the web to function, when a netbook costs half and can access the web and still function when offline?
Bullshit. The media companies are only interested in viewership/copies sold. Ideology / world view has nothing to do with it. News has been viewed as entertainment rather education for a long time now. Sensationalist reporting gets much more attention than ensuring their stories are fair and unbiased. Imagine the average American - what do you think will get their attention - "Piracy Strongly Linked to Child Prostitution" or "Potential Link Found between File Sharing and Child Pornography (Maybe)"?
I agree with abolishing the daylight savings time, but not with using UTC. The vast majority of our activities are based on solar time. Everyone instantly recognizes what getting up at 4:00 AM means. You can only recognize what getting up at 12:00 UTC (or GMT) means if you also know the location of the person doing the action, and where that location is in relation to the central time zone.
Can you imagine what this would do to story telling - not just published works, but also the daily anecdotes we tell each other? It would require either significantly more mental math, or two time standards as suggested by the original poster - both of which I would find more of a pain in the ass than the need to deal with occasionally convert time from another zone to current time.
Slashdot Mirror
The reason this story is newsworthy is because humanity in general hates liars. Call it what you will...spin, doctoring, touching up for "aesthetic reasons", etc...it's a variation from the truth.
That being said, I agree there's a boundary where nobody cares anymore whether it's real or not - e.g. if a cover girl's photo is severely doctored to conform to the beauty standard of the times. Why? Because it's bubblegum pop news.
BP on the other hand is not only front page news, it's currently the antagonist in what will be recorded as one of the worst environmental disasters of the 21st century. History will forget that People Magazine's cover of Britney Spears makes it look like she's a D cup instead of a B cup*, but it won't forget that BP downgraded the seriousness of the situation at every available opportunity.
*This is a purely fictional example...I have no idea of what magazines splashed Britney Spears' cleavage all over their front page, and what her actual vs depicted dimensions are...all I care is that she appears to be popping out of any garment they squeeze her into.
Read the decision. The judge agrees with you. She finds the original award unconstitutionally excessive, and thus has grounds to reduce it; however, she still must still respect the findings of the jury, who were "going for broke" in her words. In this case, determining the size of the award fell to the jury, not the court. There's only so much she could do.
Actually there's probably only so much the jury could do as well, given that Tenenbaum not only admitted to years of copyright infringement, but also admitted to lying about it to authorities when caught. No jury likes a weasel.
I know, I know...Slashdot...News for Nerds...etc. And Star Wars falls squarely into this demographic.
But am I the only one that finds a quote from Princess Leia just sounds stupid?
Maybe I'm missing something, but what is the link between publishing a book in a pamphlet style and a love for digital readers?
I never thought I'd say this, but...HIRE A GODDAMN PR CONSULTANT ALREADY! I hate PR bullshit...I really do...but honestly, after arguing myself blue in the face with my right-wing relatives that environmentalism transcends politics and just because I like clean air and a healthy earth, doesn't make me a commie, publishing a single report that wildly contradict previous findings makes it practically impossible to defend you. I understand the unwillingness to hold back data/findings because of politics, but even a rookie PR guy will warn you about the dangers of publishing a single report that purportedly negates all previous recommendations.
I'm not asking you to cover up findings and/or only publish reports that further your political agenda...just to maybe take the findings of the experiment a few steps further - run several more tests to ensure the validity of the findings, and then propose reasonable recommendations for future policy.
Simply leaving the conclusion of the report at "Sorry guys, you know how we told you that we were all going to die if we don't outlaw sulfate aerosols? Yeah, well, we were wrong, and it turns out now we're really fucked up" is just like throwing handfuls of painkillers at Rush Limbaugh's mouth.
My analogy would be that it's like the owner of a stolen car having to spend $700,000 on a secure garage after realizing that keeping the car on the street with the keys in the ignition is inadequate.
Sorry it took so long for the fix...I got on it as soon as I realized the anguish a non-car analogy would cause on /.
Why would anyone spend $700 buy a device that is dependent on the web to function, when a netbook costs half and can access the web and still function when offline?
Bullshit. The media companies are only interested in viewership/copies sold. Ideology / world view has nothing to do with it. News has been viewed as entertainment rather education for a long time now. Sensationalist reporting gets much more attention than ensuring their stories are fair and unbiased. Imagine the average American - what do you think will get their attention - "Piracy Strongly Linked to Child Prostitution" or "Potential Link Found between File Sharing and Child Pornography (Maybe)"?
I agree with abolishing the daylight savings time, but not with using UTC. The vast majority of our activities are based on solar time. Everyone instantly recognizes what getting up at 4:00 AM means. You can only recognize what getting up at 12:00 UTC (or GMT) means if you also know the location of the person doing the action, and where that location is in relation to the central time zone. Can you imagine what this would do to story telling - not just published works, but also the daily anecdotes we tell each other? It would require either significantly more mental math, or two time standards as suggested by the original poster - both of which I would find more of a pain in the ass than the need to deal with occasionally convert time from another zone to current time.
For everyone outside of the US...here's the link to "Silo Lullabye" on Grooveshark. Works in Canada at least - not sure about the rest of the world. http://listen.grooveshark.com/#/song/Silo_Lullaby/8977133