Should we be then arresting the average person who puts GPS devices on someone's vehicle? If so, what is their crime? And don't just spit out some legal term, explain how it is actually a crime. What, you mean someone knew where you were? There is no crime if we live in a free country. Do we arrest private investigators who tail people in cars to see where they go throughout the day?
You all talk about freedom and rights, what a bunch of hypocrites you all are. We don't live in a free country if we arrest people for doing something with no evidence of malicious intent.
Microsoft has been and remains one of the great enemies of open source.
Perhaps it is a necessary enemy. A large model like Microsoft was absolutely necessary to allow software to get to the stage that open source could actually become a viable alternative.
You can complain all you want and say that Microsoft is an enemy of open source, but the fact of the matter is open source wouldn't be anywhere without Microsoft (or insert giant-corporation here).
[1 + 2 = 3 = 4 - 1] is a perfectly valid statement, but is it really easy to follow the flow of logic?
Take even a simple example: 2x = 1 + 2 + 3
Which is easier to read? a) 2x = 1 + 2 + 3 = 6. 2x = 6. x = 3.
b) 2x = 1 + 2 + 3 2x = 6 x = 3
I would argue b is easier to read, and you don't repeat yourself. With the (a) method, you always need to end up repeating anyway until you get to one side being x, then you can use your multiple equal signs in a row.
Now imagine it takes you 10 lines to simplify both sides of the equation, if you've repeated yourself with multiple equalities on each line, it starts to get messy if you made a mistake and need to go back up to fix it.
Kind of baffled to see "( )" instead of say.. x? I have never seen parentheses used like that, at least not that I can remember. In what region/mathematical area is this commonplace?
You would think an article discussing not understanding basic symbols would actually attempt to use the most commonly used symbols in the argument..
As humans can't survive anywhere else in the solar system, and as travel outside the solar system is impossible, it's obvious that humans will eventually go extinct.
Blah blah blah. What would it have sounded like a few hundred years ago if we said we were going to the moon?
So what? The wish-fulfillment of Trekkies notwithstanding, basic physics and engineering make it a practical impossibility.
Yes, because physics is fully evolved and we never run into utter fucking surprises. Hasn't relatively and quantum mechanics made you think that there are many mind-fucks left to be had?
Newton's law doesn't just apply to anything you want it to, he was talking about physics for god sakes. If I stab you in the eye right now, I will probably go to jail. Unless I get away, and then there is no reaction. Just how are either of those equal and opposite?
What's wrong with dying? We all do it sooner or later as individuals. Why should the race last forever?
If that was everyone's attitude then we wouldn't have our outrageously lavish lifestyles now would we? You would be stuck in an era where you still have to worry every day about if you will have any food to live or if your crappy shelter will shield you from the coming storm.
After all, why dedicate time to inventing things and passing on knowledge when we can just give up and die because as an individual we will eventually. Great idea.
I think the greed inherent in human nature will prevent us from ever getting organized enough to leave this planet for another.
Sorry, what? If anything, "greed" (as you want to put it) would most certainly help people get organized to go for another planet if there was one available. Have you heard of a thing called resources? I assume another planet would have those....
NY is considering making organ donation the default status in the state unless you opt out of it. I actually think that's a bridge too far -- the state ought not to assume that I want to give away my body parts without confirmation of this wish.
So, I see in your signature you have a quote that jokes about how the US Government does not want peace of earth and goodwill toward man.
Yet, you think it's going to far for them to put as default something that can only help people (shall we say, does goodwill) and harms no one? (And no, it doesn't harm you. You are DEAD.).
To me the concept of a Do-Not-Call registry is very different than what this would be aimed at and should not be thought of in the same manner.
Advertisers wanting to advertise or track consumer behaviour is not a bad activity that should be banned.
The problem that occurred with phone advertising is that it is extremely intrusive. There is a Do-Not-Call list because people don't want their phone ringing all day long and trying to get to the phone, or interrupting calls, only to find it's an advertiser.
Consumer tracking through cookies is not intrusive in the same sense at all (if you want to argue it is invading personal information, that is a different discussion). It is a completely passive activity that is not disrupting people.
So I don't think it should be put in the same bucket as a Do-Not-Call list.
Ah I see how it is on Slashdot: instant flaimbait to post a non popular opinion.
Corporations are nothing but greedy on slashdot. However the people on slashdot that do everything they can to avoid ads and yet still want everything for free are not greedy. Makes perfect sense.
Do you like using all of google's free services? I sure do. And where would we be without their advertising income?
Just a guess, but when you are selecting pictures at the kiosk you can probably also do some options such as red-eye reduction, rotating etc. I would imagine most people who do that at a kiosk would like those changes saved on the original picture on their USB drive instead of having to repeat the process at home where they might not even know how to do it.
So there is a reason for not mounting it as read-only.
I also feel a little cheated playing Singularity. Yeah the time device it's a cool idea, but the implementation is just silly. This game just turns into every time you are stuck it means you use the time device to turn a broken staircase into a working one.... yay? Oh gee, however will I open this door.. crush box, put box under, un-crush.
Look I applaud the effort to add a new dimension, but in order for this to work a large majority of the environment has to be able to interact in the same fashion. Not once has there been multiple ways to escape a certain area in Singularity. You have to do exactly what they want you to do. You'd think with such an awesome device that wouldn't be the case...
lways good to see people who are intolerant of Christians. If you can be tolerant of gays, and tolerant of people speaking ideas you disagree with, why can't you be tolerant of Muslims, Jews, and Christians too? They have as much right to "pursue happiness" as anybody else, even if you disagree with their religious philosophy.
Being tolerant doesn't mean that I am not also allowed to say that you are a moron. You are free to practice religion all you want, but at the same time I can also tell you how wrong and stupid you are for believing in it.
I really don't care what arbitrary reason they picked. I'm just glad to hear of someone - anyone - standing up and saying that they refuse to be tagged like cattle. Good for you, Indians!
Wow, you really don't care about the reason they are acting a certain way, as long as it has an outcome you desire?
Firefox will still be used so long as Chrome maintains its policy of not really allowing any major customizations. Firefox lets you customize -EVERYTHING-, seriously, type in about:config in Firefox, until Chrome lets you do this, I for one will stay with Firefox because I've got it customized exactly how I like it and Chrome won't let me.
Sure Firefox will still be "used", but it will become a huge minority. I don't give a f about random extension X. I just want a fast reliable web browser. That's what Chrome is.
P.S. I know I know, if I was using Firefox there is probably an extension to tell me that I shouldn't end a sentence with 'is'.
You are reading a US centric website.
The article refers to a US based company.
The product in question has a lot to do primarily with the US phone system.
Slashdot Mirror
Should we be then arresting the average person who puts GPS devices on someone's vehicle? If so, what is their crime? And don't just spit out some legal term, explain how it is actually a crime. What, you mean someone knew where you were? There is no crime if we live in a free country. Do we arrest private investigators who tail people in cars to see where they go throughout the day?
You all talk about freedom and rights, what a bunch of hypocrites you all are. We don't live in a free country if we arrest people for doing something with no evidence of malicious intent.
I love how LiveJasmine is one of the highest on the list... Who actually goes there, versus how many people end up there after getting redirected....
Agreed! I wasn't actually surprised to see them that high because I can personally attest to the insane number of times I have been redirected there.
Hey, I just happen to search for information on the Sweet 16 basketball tournament every other night...
Microsoft has been and remains one of the great enemies of open source.
Perhaps it is a necessary enemy. A large model like Microsoft was absolutely necessary to allow software to get to the stage that open source could actually become a viable alternative.
You can complain all you want and say that Microsoft is an enemy of open source, but the fact of the matter is open source wouldn't be anywhere without Microsoft (or insert giant-corporation here).
This election is really a case of trying to pick a candidate that is the least awful.
Ugh
As opposed to any other election anywhere in the world...
since when was there a need to prove "criminal intent" before prosecuting someone?
So now someone complains that Feds decide to *gasp* act like human beings and decide if there was any intent before going after someone?
Because it isn't always worth the time.
[1 + 2 = 3 = 4 - 1] is a perfectly valid statement, but is it really easy to follow the flow of logic?
Take even a simple example: 2x = 1 + 2 + 3
Which is easier to read?
a)
2x = 1 + 2 + 3 = 6.
2x = 6.
x = 3.
b)
2x = 1 + 2 + 3
2x = 6
x = 3
I would argue b is easier to read, and you don't repeat yourself. With the (a) method, you always need to end up repeating anyway until you get to one side being x, then you can use your multiple equal signs in a row.
Now imagine it takes you 10 lines to simplify both sides of the equation, if you've repeated yourself with multiple equalities on each line, it starts to get messy if you made a mistake and need to go back up to fix it.
Kind of baffled to see "( )" instead of say.. x? I have never seen parentheses used like that, at least not that I can remember. In what region/mathematical area is this commonplace? You would think an article discussing not understanding basic symbols would actually attempt to use the most commonly used symbols in the argument..
As humans can't survive anywhere else in the solar system, and as travel outside the solar system is impossible, it's obvious that humans will eventually go extinct.
Blah blah blah. What would it have sounded like a few hundred years ago if we said we were going to the moon?
So what? The wish-fulfillment of Trekkies notwithstanding, basic physics and engineering make it a practical impossibility.
Yes, because physics is fully evolved and we never run into utter fucking surprises. Hasn't relatively and quantum mechanics made you think that there are many mind-fucks left to be had?
Hello Mr Conclusion, did you have a nice jump?
Newton's law doesn't just apply to anything you want it to, he was talking about physics for god sakes. If I stab you in the eye right now, I will probably go to jail. Unless I get away, and then there is no reaction. Just how are either of those equal and opposite?
What's wrong with dying? We all do it sooner or later as individuals. Why should the race last forever?
If that was everyone's attitude then we wouldn't have our outrageously lavish lifestyles now would we? You would be stuck in an era where you still have to worry every day about if you will have any food to live or if your crappy shelter will shield you from the coming storm.
After all, why dedicate time to inventing things and passing on knowledge when we can just give up and die because as an individual we will eventually. Great idea.
I think the greed inherent in human nature will prevent us from ever getting organized enough to leave this planet for another.
Sorry, what? If anything, "greed" (as you want to put it) would most certainly help people get organized to go for another planet if there was one available. Have you heard of a thing called resources? I assume another planet would have those....
NY is considering making organ donation the default status in the state unless you opt out of it. I actually think that's a bridge too far -- the state ought not to assume that I want to give away my body parts without confirmation of this wish.
So, I see in your signature you have a quote that jokes about how the US Government does not want peace of earth and goodwill toward man.
Yet, you think it's going to far for them to put as default something that can only help people (shall we say, does goodwill) and harms no one? (And no, it doesn't harm you. You are DEAD.).
To me the concept of a Do-Not-Call registry is very different than what this would be aimed at and should not be thought of in the same manner.
Advertisers wanting to advertise or track consumer behaviour is not a bad activity that should be banned.
The problem that occurred with phone advertising is that it is extremely intrusive. There is a Do-Not-Call list because people don't want their phone ringing all day long and trying to get to the phone, or interrupting calls, only to find it's an advertiser.
Consumer tracking through cookies is not intrusive in the same sense at all (if you want to argue it is invading personal information, that is a different discussion). It is a completely passive activity that is not disrupting people.
So I don't think it should be put in the same bucket as a Do-Not-Call list.
Ah I see how it is on Slashdot: instant flaimbait to post a non popular opinion.
Corporations are nothing but greedy on slashdot. However the people on slashdot that do everything they can to avoid ads and yet still want everything for free are not greedy. Makes perfect sense.
Do you like using all of google's free services? I sure do. And where would we be without their advertising income?
Fucking hypocrites.
More greedy than the creator of ads.
I was kidding. But one can only hope something shuts down that huge pile of crap.
Says the person with a twitter signature?
And where are the engineers learning social skills in order to to program said skills into robots?
/sorry, too easy..
Just a guess, but when you are selecting pictures at the kiosk you can probably also do some options such as red-eye reduction, rotating etc. I would imagine most people who do that at a kiosk would like those changes saved on the original picture on their USB drive instead of having to repeat the process at home where they might not even know how to do it.
So there is a reason for not mounting it as read-only.
I also feel a little cheated playing Singularity. Yeah the time device it's a cool idea, but the implementation is just silly. This game just turns into every time you are stuck it means you use the time device to turn a broken staircase into a working one.... yay? Oh gee, however will I open this door.. crush box, put box under, un-crush.
Look I applaud the effort to add a new dimension, but in order for this to work a large majority of the environment has to be able to interact in the same fashion. Not once has there been multiple ways to escape a certain area in Singularity. You have to do exactly what they want you to do. You'd think with such an awesome device that wouldn't be the case...
lways good to see people who are intolerant of Christians. If you can be tolerant of gays, and tolerant of people speaking ideas you disagree with, why can't you be tolerant of Muslims, Jews, and Christians too? They have as much right to "pursue happiness" as anybody else, even if you disagree with their religious philosophy.
Being tolerant doesn't mean that I am not also allowed to say that you are a moron. You are free to practice religion all you want, but at the same time I can also tell you how wrong and stupid you are for believing in it.
I really don't care what arbitrary reason they picked. I'm just glad to hear of someone - anyone - standing up and saying that they refuse to be tagged like cattle. Good for you, Indians!
Wow, you really don't care about the reason they are acting a certain way, as long as it has an outcome you desire?
What kind of morons modded you insightful.
Firefox will still be used so long as Chrome maintains its policy of not really allowing any major customizations. Firefox lets you customize -EVERYTHING-, seriously, type in about:config in Firefox, until Chrome lets you do this, I for one will stay with Firefox because I've got it customized exactly how I like it and Chrome won't let me.
Sure Firefox will still be "used", but it will become a huge minority. I don't give a f about random extension X. I just want a fast reliable web browser. That's what Chrome is.
P.S. I know I know, if I was using Firefox there is probably an extension to tell me that I shouldn't end a sentence with 'is'.
So because it's regulated everywhere means you can no longer discuss if it should be regulated?
You are reading a US centric website.
The article refers to a US based company.
The product in question has a lot to do primarily with the US phone system.
So "All=all the people in the US" is implied.
Deal with it.