Where I live I've been through worse, MUCH worse than the Average Joe conceives. Dictatorial Communism, anyone?
So please excuse me, but I'm not going to lose any fluffy life style, I won't lose my house (I have none to speak of), I won't lose my savings (no savings) and if I lose my job, I'm gonna get another (albeit less paid, but I'll still manage).
"The world" means a hell of a lot of places where the Great Fall of the US of A won't really affect anyone. I plan on going to such a place rather soon; hopefully I'll be there by the time everything happens. If not, well then I'll manage anyway.
And such thing is not "scary". It's worthy of knowing about, but that's pretty much it from my point of view.
But since you feel so strongly about it, I invite you to post your real name, your job, and your positions on:
1) Abortion
2) Gay Rights
3) The War(s)
4) Immigration
5) Pornography
6) Religion
1. Abortion is irrelevant to me, because I'm a man, I have a wife and we, in our family, decided not to use abortion. Ever. What other people do with their bodies / unborn babies and what their stance is would be irrelevant to me. I don't care.
2. Gay Rights - pretty much the same thing. I feel awkward when I see flamboyant gay people because they have that "in-your-face" attitude. But that's a general repulse I have when facing any sort of such attitude (be it from anyone at all). if they prefer same-sex marriage and apply it, who gives a crap. It's their own damn decision:)
3. Not sure what you mean here. Wars are dumb and never end up with a winner, to be honest. Everybody loses anyway.
4. Again, I am pro-total freedom. I would happily make all borders disappear. I think borders are the main weapon which keeps countries and nations and peoples imbalanced. So let them come, compete with them, let the best win and so on. Afraid of something?:)
5. I watch porn. With my wife, no less. We feel comfortable with our sexuality, we apply what we see and like and we are happy about it. Big deal.
6. Sometimes I go to church and I usually feel better while being there. I am not a practicing Christian but I see no harm in going and listening to a sermon every now and then. Some sermons suck though. As for Muslims, Buddhists, Catholics, protestants and so on and so forth, as long as they don't have an "in-your-face" attitude (see point 2), I have nothing against them.
I think many people are bored beyond belief and then they search for stuff to fill their lives. So they find subjects like any of the above, make that subject exquisitely important and start spending time on bearing flags for their belief. That leads to extremism, fanaticism and sometimes people get hurt/killed in the process. I think it's stupid, no matter the cause.
Signed: Eduard Burlacu, Service Delivery Manager , Romania.
(I don't fear being myself and discussing so-called "sensitive" subjects; if people are smart enough, they would understand that these are discussions. If not, then maybe it's for the best if they just don't discuss these at all with me)
Being someone who lives on an entirely different continent, I don't really care about this whole affair, but I am nevertheless curious as to what's going to happen if this suit ends with concluding that the elections were stolen.
Maybe they will throw Bush into jail. So what? What's past is past, and having someone serve prison time won't help a bit. I mean, prison time is to punish someone for their deeds and hopefully teach them to not do it again. Bush won't do it again anyway, and punishing him could get a bit more creative.
Maybe they will throw some small fish into jail. Bah, nobody would care after a few months anyway.
So I wonder if there's indeed a goal for this trial. "Bringing the truth to the surface" is not really a goal, is a welcome addition to the goal itself. So... what's the goal?
True; what I meant was "services that require you to log in".
that was the idea, that in case your account gets locked out, you still can use some of their services and not care whether you have an account or not. Or create another account and happily subscribe to their services again.
E-mail, however... if that gets locked out, I might lose some stuff that I need.
This.
As I previously said (in the Google+ poll not so long ago): Not interested. If Google ever forces me to move to Google+, I'd probably switch e-mail providers first (that's 90% of my Google service usage anyway).
No intention to be offensive, but when I slam the CD in I don't give a shit about dBSPL or whatever. All I want to do is enjoy the music as INTENDED by its creators.
Take Electric Wizard, for example (hint: album, 2000). Their INTENTION was to distort the music and crank up the volume everywhere. And I love their music. But on the other hand, Metallica's latest whatever-the-album-name-is is CRAP. I listened to half a song at my "I'm a rocka', dude!" acquaintance and left in horror. That ugly composition set screams "we need MONIES!!!" before you even get to hear 4 full measures.
I ceased listening to mainstream radio years ago; also, before you jump "but CD albums sound the same!", yes, I know. I also ceased buying anything produced by any remotely known music label; and I regret nothing. My CDs contain excellent music, albeit produced by obscure bands and labels, and none of it suffers from all the shit that big labels push down our throats.
Mainstream bands? They make HUGE concessions for the greens. They fucking lost it, man, all they care for is greens and more greens.
Someone mentioned concerts above. Yeah, like sound ain't cranked up to the max because all those pubeless kids need it LOUD, dog!
And I ain't THAT old. I'm 31. But I can discern between good music that means something and that horrendous "doof-tsss, doof-tsss" that's EVERYWHERE nowadays.
Now get off MY lawn.
Yeah well we're not discussing whether they can or can't make the rules; we're discussing whether the rules could have been better. And furthermore, whether the way of enforcing the rules could have been better.
When someone bans your account and don't leave you any method to get your account back - then they are abusing their power and frankly I would negatively advertise them pretty much anywhere. Sure, probably nobody would care, but when enough dissatisfied people do it, who knows?
Now wait a minute.
Assume I am that developer and running those ads. Now Facebook comes and says "listen dude, we have blocked your ads. We are sorry. We feel your ads are negatively impacting us. Please either change them or run them elsewhere. Yes, we know it's not nice; yes, we know we might lose a bit of cash; but please understand our motives". Now I would be a bit pissed at them but I would understand.
I would even appreciate their approach.
But what they did is piss-poor judgement and reaction. Disabling the account altogether for clouded (yet duh!-style obvious) reasons? "We can't tell you why"? That's utter bullshit.
See, that's the difference between "some company nicely trying to protect their business" and "some company stomping on you head-on to protect their business".
Many, many EULAs say "we can disable your account for any reason or no reason" (anyone playing World of Warcraft? Yes? read it: http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/about/termsofuse.html - "BLIZZARD MAY SUSPEND, TERMINATE, MODIFY, OR DELETE ACCOUNTS AT ANY TIME FOR ANY REASON OR FOR NO REASON, WITH OR WITHOUT NOTICE TO YOU."). Sorry for caps, guys, it's the original shit.
And guess what. They actually DO it. Whether you hear of it or not is a different story. Most people don't publicly complain, and if they do, they don't gain momentum unless they're celebrities.
I was playing a rather crappy MMO and in our group's internal chat we were typing in Romanian. Now the game masters had no issue with private chatrooms using non-english languages; but they had a problem with their filtering bots. See, Romanian has a word (translated to English, it means "How") which is spelled "cum". And their filter reported me numerous times for abusing this word. So my account got banned (one game master actually was pressed enough to mention why). Needless to say, the account never got reactivated.
Anyway, the point is that companies AFFORD to be unethical. And they got your agreement to be so. Kinda sad if you think about it.
I think it depends on how you look at passcodes and whatnot. I tend to regard PIN numbers, passcodes and passwords as "something that has meaning to me" rather than "something that's generally easy to remember".
A good few years back I was testing some applications that embedded within Microsoft Office 2000 and I had to perform MULTIPLE reinstallations of MS Office 2000 (up to 10 a day on various machines), up to the point the Serial Number was memorized. So i used that as password for some of my accounts. 25 letters and numbers is hard to crack, and furthermore I made each even letter an uppercase. It all looked like this: "b3X2sW25pQ7rF213p4Q7nBqY3". It all came naturally for me, though.
PIN Numbers and passcodes I use are following the same simple mnemonic.
*I can't think of any before the internet age but then I've not been alive that long and it's most likely we've forgotten the affixes through time. That is the beauty of the birth of two new words.
ACME. -tron. -ism. All being born way, WAY before Internet came to be.
Anti-Euro and various ex-colonies question: how the hell do you still have state-run media? Are you children that need Loving Mother Government to tell you what's going on in the world?
Have you watched any?
[sarcasm]Better run by the government and publicly known as that, than run by megacorporations for their nefarious purposes! [/sarcasm]
Disclaimer: I stopped watching ANY sort of TV years ago.
I'm looking at this whole thing from a different perspective: proper news flow.
Too many times it happens that journalists obtain some information from Twitter/Facebook and broadcast it specifying the above as sources. With this ban, maybe they will do their job properly and will search for the ROOT source of the story instead of simply mentioning the most popular website as source.
Of course, according to TFA, if the ROOT source IS indeed Facebook or Twitter, they CAN mention that.
As for the "follow us on Twitter" broad-casted live, that was dumb anyway. Just mention the company's web page and a shortlink to the specific branch (e.g. "Socialize with us at www.abc.com/livenews"). What's on that webpage is their own business.
They follow the successful model of the Apollo MP3 player, which died back in 2007 after reaching version... 37zz:)
Basically those guys added +1 to the version number regardless of what they would update.
I am looking forward to seeing versions like 2e^14 or 1e18:)
Am I the only one who doesn't really use Facebook? I have an account but I never login unless I receive some strange friend request and HAVE to log in to reject it.
I think Facebook is some sort of "I have nothing to do with my time so I go to Facebook to make time pass". I find 24 hours to not be enough for all the important things. Facebook is NOT one of those things. At all.
I think that makes me a weirdo nowadays...
They still haven't fixed the proxy issue, as in "IT DOESN'T WORK BEHIND A PROXY". So unless they do, it means nothing to the many many people working in corporate environments:)
A bad GUI is a bad GUI. Just like a bad CLI is a bad CLI (and I've seen quite a few, yes).
You don't want to fix a bad GUI in the first place, you want to obtain a good one. If you buy a solution with a bad GUI (e.g. one that doesn't let you change to its underlying CLI for that once-in-a-lifetime operation that it can't perform) then it's your fault entirely.
I see another interesting bias here: blaming a GUI for being useless in certain situation is wrong; you shouldn't blame the GUI, you should blame the company/people who compiled it.
We all should realize that we can take the approach the other way around and blame the CLI for its obvious limitations (good luck looking at insightful, realtime, graphical reports/data visualization from a CLI). Does this mean the CLI is bad? No, it means it wasn't built to do exactly that.
TFA is biased and furthermore gives the wrong example. That's my pet peeve here. I ain't saying that between CLI and GUI, one is better than the other, I'm just saying you can't really compare the two. They have different scopes and one can be altered/designed to do what the other can do, up to some extent, but not replacing each other 100%.
To your surprise, I do just that.
It's not the GUI itself that is flawed. It's the people who made the GUI who lack skills, such as thinking outside the box.
After reading TFA, I gasped at the clearly biased GUI description the guy provided. Limit the GUI and it will show its limits. Doh! ...But what if the GUI had the possibility to import a CSV/XLS file from an USB thumb or whetever source you can access. A browse button with some code behind it; a "GO" button with some code behind it - big deal. I can code something like this in one hour.
BTW, this is part of my job: to develop small standalone apps in VBA - which automate repetitive tasks, such as report generation in Excel using multiple (and mainly incompatible with each other) data sources.
What most CLI zealots don't understand is that a well designed GUI lowers a company's costs by a LOT because you no longer have to train/teach people to do various tasks; point-and-click and a short training is all they need.
TFA says a good CLI is better than a bad GUI. Wow. Thanky for pointing out the obvious!
Mark the above as VERY insightful.
On a different note, I earn about 2 times the pay cut TFA is talking about. Granted, not in the US, but for a Fortune 100 company.
They save enough from my skin:P
Slashdot Mirror
I would advise you to look up the meaning of the word "unless".
Where I live I've been through worse, MUCH worse than the Average Joe conceives. Dictatorial Communism, anyone?
So please excuse me, but I'm not going to lose any fluffy life style, I won't lose my house (I have none to speak of), I won't lose my savings (no savings) and if I lose my job, I'm gonna get another (albeit less paid, but I'll still manage).
"The world" means a hell of a lot of places where the Great Fall of the US of A won't really affect anyone. I plan on going to such a place rather soon; hopefully I'll be there by the time everything happens. If not, well then I'll manage anyway.
And such thing is not "scary". It's worthy of knowing about, but that's pretty much it from my point of view.
But since you feel so strongly about it, I invite you to post your real name, your job, and your positions on: 1) Abortion 2) Gay Rights 3) The War(s) 4) Immigration 5) Pornography 6) Religion
1. Abortion is irrelevant to me, because I'm a man, I have a wife and we, in our family, decided not to use abortion. Ever. What other people do with their bodies / unborn babies and what their stance is would be irrelevant to me. I don't care. :) :)
2. Gay Rights - pretty much the same thing. I feel awkward when I see flamboyant gay people because they have that "in-your-face" attitude. But that's a general repulse I have when facing any sort of such attitude (be it from anyone at all). if they prefer same-sex marriage and apply it, who gives a crap. It's their own damn decision
3. Not sure what you mean here. Wars are dumb and never end up with a winner, to be honest. Everybody loses anyway.
4. Again, I am pro-total freedom. I would happily make all borders disappear. I think borders are the main weapon which keeps countries and nations and peoples imbalanced. So let them come, compete with them, let the best win and so on. Afraid of something?
5. I watch porn. With my wife, no less. We feel comfortable with our sexuality, we apply what we see and like and we are happy about it. Big deal.
6. Sometimes I go to church and I usually feel better while being there. I am not a practicing Christian but I see no harm in going and listening to a sermon every now and then. Some sermons suck though. As for Muslims, Buddhists, Catholics, protestants and so on and so forth, as long as they don't have an "in-your-face" attitude (see point 2), I have nothing against them.
I think many people are bored beyond belief and then they search for stuff to fill their lives. So they find subjects like any of the above, make that subject exquisitely important and start spending time on bearing flags for their belief. That leads to extremism, fanaticism and sometimes people get hurt/killed in the process. I think it's stupid, no matter the cause.
Signed: Eduard Burlacu, Service Delivery Manager , Romania.
(I don't fear being myself and discussing so-called "sensitive" subjects; if people are smart enough, they would understand that these are discussions. If not, then maybe it's for the best if they just don't discuss these at all with me)
Being someone who lives on an entirely different continent, I don't really care about this whole affair, but I am nevertheless curious as to what's going to happen if this suit ends with concluding that the elections were stolen.
Maybe they will throw Bush into jail. So what? What's past is past, and having someone serve prison time won't help a bit. I mean, prison time is to punish someone for their deeds and hopefully teach them to not do it again. Bush won't do it again anyway, and punishing him could get a bit more creative.
Maybe they will throw some small fish into jail. Bah, nobody would care after a few months anyway.
So I wonder if there's indeed a goal for this trial. "Bringing the truth to the surface" is not really a goal, is a welcome addition to the goal itself. So... what's the goal?
True; what I meant was "services that require you to log in".
that was the idea, that in case your account gets locked out, you still can use some of their services and not care whether you have an account or not. Or create another account and happily subscribe to their services again.
E-mail, however... if that gets locked out, I might lose some stuff that I need.
This.
As I previously said (in the Google+ poll not so long ago): Not interested. If Google ever forces me to move to Google+, I'd probably switch e-mail providers first (that's 90% of my Google service usage anyway).
No intention to be offensive, but when I slam the CD in I don't give a shit about dBSPL or whatever. All I want to do is enjoy the music as INTENDED by its creators.
Take Electric Wizard, for example (hint: album, 2000). Their INTENTION was to distort the music and crank up the volume everywhere. And I love their music. But on the other hand, Metallica's latest whatever-the-album-name-is is CRAP. I listened to half a song at my "I'm a rocka', dude!" acquaintance and left in horror. That ugly composition set screams "we need MONIES!!!" before you even get to hear 4 full measures.
I ceased listening to mainstream radio years ago; also, before you jump "but CD albums sound the same!", yes, I know. I also ceased buying anything produced by any remotely known music label; and I regret nothing. My CDs contain excellent music, albeit produced by obscure bands and labels, and none of it suffers from all the shit that big labels push down our throats.
Mainstream bands? They make HUGE concessions for the greens. They fucking lost it, man, all they care for is greens and more greens.
Someone mentioned concerts above. Yeah, like sound ain't cranked up to the max because all those pubeless kids need it LOUD, dog!
And I ain't THAT old. I'm 31. But I can discern between good music that means something and that horrendous "doof-tsss, doof-tsss" that's EVERYWHERE nowadays.
Now get off MY lawn.
ACS *IS* part of Oracle Support.
Yeah well we're not discussing whether they can or can't make the rules; we're discussing whether the rules could have been better. And furthermore, whether the way of enforcing the rules could have been better.
When someone bans your account and don't leave you any method to get your account back - then they are abusing their power and frankly I would negatively advertise them pretty much anywhere. Sure, probably nobody would care, but when enough dissatisfied people do it, who knows?
Now wait a minute.
Assume I am that developer and running those ads. Now Facebook comes and says "listen dude, we have blocked your ads. We are sorry. We feel your ads are negatively impacting us. Please either change them or run them elsewhere. Yes, we know it's not nice; yes, we know we might lose a bit of cash; but please understand our motives". Now I would be a bit pissed at them but I would understand.
I would even appreciate their approach.
But what they did is piss-poor judgement and reaction. Disabling the account altogether for clouded (yet duh!-style obvious) reasons? "We can't tell you why"? That's utter bullshit.
See, that's the difference between "some company nicely trying to protect their business" and "some company stomping on you head-on to protect their business".
Many, many EULAs say "we can disable your account for any reason or no reason" (anyone playing World of Warcraft? Yes? read it: http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/about/termsofuse.html - "BLIZZARD MAY SUSPEND, TERMINATE, MODIFY, OR DELETE ACCOUNTS AT ANY TIME FOR ANY REASON OR FOR NO REASON, WITH OR WITHOUT NOTICE TO YOU."). Sorry for caps, guys, it's the original shit.
And guess what. They actually DO it. Whether you hear of it or not is a different story. Most people don't publicly complain, and if they do, they don't gain momentum unless they're celebrities.
I was playing a rather crappy MMO and in our group's internal chat we were typing in Romanian. Now the game masters had no issue with private chatrooms using non-english languages; but they had a problem with their filtering bots. See, Romanian has a word (translated to English, it means "How") which is spelled "cum". And their filter reported me numerous times for abusing this word. So my account got banned (one game master actually was pressed enough to mention why). Needless to say, the account never got reactivated.
Anyway, the point is that companies AFFORD to be unethical. And they got your agreement to be so. Kinda sad if you think about it.
I think it depends on how you look at passcodes and whatnot. I tend to regard PIN numbers, passcodes and passwords as "something that has meaning to me" rather than "something that's generally easy to remember".
A good few years back I was testing some applications that embedded within Microsoft Office 2000 and I had to perform MULTIPLE reinstallations of MS Office 2000 (up to 10 a day on various machines), up to the point the Serial Number was memorized. So i used that as password for some of my accounts. 25 letters and numbers is hard to crack, and furthermore I made each even letter an uppercase. It all looked like this: "b3X2sW25pQ7rF213p4Q7nBqY3". It all came naturally for me, though.
PIN Numbers and passcodes I use are following the same simple mnemonic.
*I can't think of any before the internet age but then I've not been alive that long and it's most likely we've forgotten the affixes through time. That is the beauty of the birth of two new words.
ACME. -tron. -ism. All being born way, WAY before Internet came to be.
I can't believe nobody mentioned Magicka...
Anti-Euro and various ex-colonies question: how the hell do you still have state-run media? Are you children that need Loving Mother Government to tell you what's going on in the world?
Have you watched any?
[sarcasm]Better run by the government and publicly known as that, than run by megacorporations for their nefarious purposes! [/sarcasm]
Disclaimer: I stopped watching ANY sort of TV years ago.
I'm looking at this whole thing from a different perspective: proper news flow.
Too many times it happens that journalists obtain some information from Twitter/Facebook and broadcast it specifying the above as sources. With this ban, maybe they will do their job properly and will search for the ROOT source of the story instead of simply mentioning the most popular website as source.
Of course, according to TFA, if the ROOT source IS indeed Facebook or Twitter, they CAN mention that.
As for the "follow us on Twitter" broad-casted live, that was dumb anyway. Just mention the company's web page and a shortlink to the specific branch (e.g. "Socialize with us at www.abc.com/livenews"). What's on that webpage is their own business.
They follow the successful model of the Apollo MP3 player, which died back in 2007 after reaching version... 37zz :) :)
Basically those guys added +1 to the version number regardless of what they would update.
I am looking forward to seeing versions like 2e^14 or 1e18
If people don't feel like paying attention, they won't pay attention.
Thank God it wasn't on Uranus...
Am I the only one who doesn't really use Facebook? I have an account but I never login unless I receive some strange friend request and HAVE to log in to reject it.
I think Facebook is some sort of "I have nothing to do with my time so I go to Facebook to make time pass". I find 24 hours to not be enough for all the important things. Facebook is NOT one of those things. At all.
I think that makes me a weirdo nowadays...
Make that two of us. And guess what, I don't even care :)
Many people think not: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntuone-client/+bug/387308
They still haven't fixed the proxy issue, as in "IT DOESN'T WORK BEHIND A PROXY". So unless they do, it means nothing to the many many people working in corporate environments :)
A bad GUI is a bad GUI. Just like a bad CLI is a bad CLI (and I've seen quite a few, yes).
You don't want to fix a bad GUI in the first place, you want to obtain a good one. If you buy a solution with a bad GUI (e.g. one that doesn't let you change to its underlying CLI for that once-in-a-lifetime operation that it can't perform) then it's your fault entirely.
I see another interesting bias here: blaming a GUI for being useless in certain situation is wrong; you shouldn't blame the GUI, you should blame the company/people who compiled it.
We all should realize that we can take the approach the other way around and blame the CLI for its obvious limitations (good luck looking at insightful, realtime, graphical reports/data visualization from a CLI). Does this mean the CLI is bad? No, it means it wasn't built to do exactly that.
TFA is biased and furthermore gives the wrong example. That's my pet peeve here. I ain't saying that between CLI and GUI, one is better than the other, I'm just saying you can't really compare the two. They have different scopes and one can be altered/designed to do what the other can do, up to some extent, but not replacing each other 100%.
To your surprise, I do just that.
...But what if the GUI had the possibility to import a CSV/XLS file from an USB thumb or whetever source you can access. A browse button with some code behind it; a "GO" button with some code behind it - big deal. I can code something like this in one hour.
It's not the GUI itself that is flawed. It's the people who made the GUI who lack skills, such as thinking outside the box.
After reading TFA, I gasped at the clearly biased GUI description the guy provided. Limit the GUI and it will show its limits. Doh!
BTW, this is part of my job: to develop small standalone apps in VBA - which automate repetitive tasks, such as report generation in Excel using multiple (and mainly incompatible with each other) data sources.
What most CLI zealots don't understand is that a well designed GUI lowers a company's costs by a LOT because you no longer have to train/teach people to do various tasks; point-and-click and a short training is all they need.
TFA says a good CLI is better than a bad GUI. Wow. Thanky for pointing out the obvious!
Mark the above as VERY insightful. :P
On a different note, I earn about 2 times the pay cut TFA is talking about. Granted, not in the US, but for a Fortune 100 company.
They save enough from my skin