I don't want a news source that withholds information as leverage like Assange is trying to do.
Do you honestly think you know enough about how major newspapers/publishing orgs operate to claim that they don't use information as leverage against competitors, it's readers or even sources?
I think your comment shows you don't know the first thing.
I'll give you an example: "Snow expected this weekend, stay tuned after this commercial break to find out how much and how it will effect your weekend plans."
So the news network is willing to let you die in a snowy car crash just so that you'll watch the next set of ads. Assange defends himself from the threat of extra-legal assassination and he's an evil monster!
Wikileaks has no concept of responsible disclosure or anything similar.
Who are you people who keep repeating this crap? If you spent less time commenting and more time actually reading you might actually have something to say.
From TFA: "Mr. Assange is no boon to American journalists. His activities have already doomed proposed federal shield-law legislation protecting journalists' use of confidential sources in the just-adjourned Congress. An indictment of him could be followed by the judicial articulation of far more speech-limiting legal principles than currently exist with respect to even the most responsible reporting about both diplomacy and defense. If he is not charged or is acquitted of whatever charges may be made, that may well lead to the adoption of new and dangerously restrictive legislation. In more than one way, Mr. Assange may yet have much to answer for."
I can understand that Abrams is disappointed that the shield law is being shelved but how is that Assange's fault? Why should Assange be held responsible for legislation that the US congress chooses to vote on or not? Once again a Wikileaks detractor shows that they have an axe to grind unrelated to Wikileaks or Assange. He's old and mad that he's not getting what he wants i.e. Stay off my lawn Julian!
Also...Ellsberg himself says that The Pentagon Papers and Wikileaks are two sides of the same coin. That sounds like a bit more of a credible source for comparisons of mission statement and motives. You know...the guy who actually had the motive.
Note how few points Greenwald raised that Wired addressed.
That is really the point of all this isn't it. The attitude in the Wired article should tell you everything. It's a bunch of bluster that makes Wired look petty and guilty at the same time. That to me should be the most telling part. They're dodging. Big time.
One of my favorite aspects to Greenwalds recent high-profile writings is that the targets of his questions keep shooting themselves in the foot with their responses. Michael Lind did this last week and I'm sure anyone who cares enough time to read through it all will find that Wired went straight down Lind's already face-palming path.
Of course, he was also Stuart Smalley. So that's kind of not doing anything for his image.
I would just like to point out to those who reference Stuart Smalley when talking Franken (not you specifically tophermeyer). Smalley was a PARDOY of new-agey talk show host that was the life-coach of that time. He was making fun of those kinds of people and yet I constantly catch people referencing SS as if he was a real person or a character that Al took seriously as a healer or something. It's like people who don't get that Stephen Colbert is a parody character.
Now if you don't think the Stuart character is funny that's your opinion. I for one don't like SS but have always liked Franken's standup.
It does not necessarily follow that he actually has a developed sense of humor, merely that he happened upon enough catchphrases that the yokels would hyuk-hyuk to over and over again to make a career of it
Comedy is one of the hardest industries to break into in any meaningful way period. Call up ANY comedian and ask them (assuming they make enough money to pay for some kind of phone service.)
Now why don't you tell us what you do for a living so that I can write two sentences that dismiss your life's work with ignorant generalizations.
I've never followed a posters comments on his own story until today because you're so obviously the biggest troll ever. Your statements contradict each other and no matter what a sensible commenter does to refute your points you keep up your inane refrain of bias and Democrat love and the claim nobody's refuting your points.
but when Google faces the threat of inquiry
Google was not only threatened with an inquiry, an inquiry was actually made! Imagine that! Said inquiry said there isn't evidence of theft or wrongdoing so no charges are made. It's easy to imagine that charges were dropped as the information they collected was publicly broadcast over unsecured networks. It's a much more plausible explanation than conspiracy but I assume you will continue to project your bias issues on everyone else.
Government programs are/always/ plagued by waste and inefficiencies.
Whereas corporate bureaucracies are models of efficiency, see the big picture, and never waste a thing.
I guarantee you if you gave private spaceflight the information and the like that NASA has and a budget that they could get stuff done faster and more efficiently than NASA could.
I'd like my guarantee written in blood please. You can fax it over.
While your post is childish and poorly punctuated, I think the troll rating is undeserved as you make a good point. I've even seem the movie twice and while i found it entertaining I was thinking in the back of my head "Who gives a shit about high scores is DK Jr.?"
No, they are just likely to last longer because they have the technology to deal with the declining numbers, outside observers that are interested enough to notice, and a peaceful enough world to keep it from being overthrown by the outside observers that are interested enough to notice.
I think you're going to have to explain that a bit better. What technology is going to stop the declining numbers? Why not just have sex like the rest of us?
No, it doesn't "merge". It recombines.
Semantic difference. I know how DNA recombines. My point is that genetic purity is a silly notion. The more diverse the genes the better the individual traits. If the Japanese were less worried about preserving some romantic notion of blood purity and more serious about being members of a larger world community their numbers wouldn't be declining.
What is better about having your genetic code bred out of existence, and your culture completely replaced by immigrants over having your genetic code lost through lack of breeding and your culture lost due to nobody from your culture being left?
The idea that a culture can be bred out of existence is antithetical to how DNA works. DNA merges, it doesn't attack and destroy other DNA.
They have both happened to many cultures over the centuries, and they are both likely to continue to happen.
It is rare for a populous to die out from a culturally imposed social dysfunction which is what makes Japan so interesting. They could breed themselves to healthy numbers if they really wanted to.
Japanese culture will go down in the history books as one of the most interesting and self-destructive cultures of all time. They're essentially destroying themselves (both literally with suicide and figuratively by not breeding enough to replace their population numbers) and seem to be in some kind of race to replace themselves with robots rather than suffer the indignity of opening their culture to outsiders. My wish is that the burakumin take to the streets and impose a cultural uprising that will set Japan back on a course toward healthy minds, equality, and some damn common-sense. If they wanted to throw animal blood on the attendees of Tokyo U that would be good too.
I know a lot of people think Japanese culture is really cool as I once did. You won't think it's so cool if you dig past the bright lights and anime to see the seriously f'd up stuff that goes on there. I would go as far as to say that they're culture is more depraved and sad than ours (US Urban North East-Cost).
The ironic part of this is that you need not look further than human behavioral scientists to help solve this problem. It is also possible that the whole idea of anything human-based being "non-biased" is a fantasy made up to represent an ideal that will never happen. Humans are just biased to their physiology and environment. End of story.
I believe you mean until they perfect the neural interface. If the story is true, the neural interface seemed a lot closer to reality than practical quantum computing until about 3 mins ago.
If you design the experience properly you don't have to choose between an artistic and scientifically accurate rendering of the Hubble material. You can first show the artistic version and then add a scientific overlay with a basic set of data (what you're looking at, distance from earth, chemical makeup, etc). You can then transition into the wonky scientific version for a final pan across the subject matter so that you're representing the needs of multiple viewers. A decent 3D Info-graphics template can look really cool and add some production value without breaking your budget as well.
If I someone at Hubble was actually interested I'd be willing to donate some time in making a storyboard that illustrates the concept.
I had to fly through Narita once on my way to Beijing during the bird flu scare and I saw things at the airport there that I will never forget. Mainly the hordes of doctors, nurses, and security people who all boarded the plane upon landing (probably 20 people total) and put infrared cameras right in everyone's faces (like really strangely and aggressively). People who were deemed "a risk" had these funny yellow stickers attached to them by the doctors (weird!) and were herded off the plane. We were all then given "health history" forms to fill out that were in some of the most ridiculous Engrish I have ever seen - I could only barely understand about a third of the questions. The half American/half Japanese guy sitting next to me said that he considered the event and specifically the form a true embarrassment for his country and we then proceeded to repeat the medical inspection routine two more times are different points along the way to pick up our bags. You also should have seen the smoking lounge there...it's incredible and also permanently staffed with a clean-up crew in hazmat gear with masks and vacuums that attach to their backs to clean up the butts and ashes.
My point is that crazy shit happens in Japanese airports and it's best to just accept it...it comes with the territory. Jobs should have been prepared for this being the frequent jet-setter that he is. I've only been to a Japanese airport once and wasn't surprised at all by the story.
It's just part of a greater Microsoft strategy to get and keep the Microsoft brand in front of people. It's the same evil, different day.
None of you have any proof of this. I don't mean to single you out here but come on. If your working knowledge of business strategies assumes that a behemoth of a company like MS has "one" strategy you need to check your working knowledge. A company like MS has multiple strategies for every business group and every market they service. If MS has shown us anything over the years it's that they are very non-committal when it comes to direct-to-consumer business strategies at the very least. It's actually one of their biggest weaknesses in the market (trying to be all things to all people) so to paint this picture of a grand MS scheme gives them too much credit. It's just not that simple.
I for one will wait for proof or a memo or something about this before I go diving in to impugn their motives.
You'll notice from your troll rating that any deviation from the standard talking point that everything MS does is an attack on open source cannot be tolerated. Maybe it is an attack and maybe it isn't but no discussion on the topic that does not assume it is cannot be viewed or discussed by others on this board. Thanks for playing and hope you do a better job of reinforcing group-think in the future.
Bingo! If I had a mod point I'd give it to you. The comparison is not even close to "Apples to Apples". It's like saying that people spend more time on the toilet than they do watching TV.
Correction...The analogy would be that for the first time people now spend more time watching TV than they do on the toilet...which was probably hit the first year TVs came out.
Agreed. Facebook is practically it's own (crappy) operating system. It's not easy to pigeon-hole it's user personas as so many people use it for very different reason and functions. If I were to estimate off-hand (I do this for a living so know how stupid that is) the number of unique facebook user personas would be around 20 or 30.
Twitter is essentially the condensation of everything purely narcissist about Facebook and attracts that crowd in spades. Even people I respect in normal media conditions sound like such idiots on Twitter. I refudiate them.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't want a news source that withholds information as leverage like Assange is trying to do.
Do you honestly think you know enough about how major newspapers/publishing orgs operate to claim that they don't use information as leverage against competitors, it's readers or even sources?
I think your comment shows you don't know the first thing.
I'll give you an example: "Snow expected this weekend, stay tuned after this commercial break to find out how much and how it will effect your weekend plans."
So the news network is willing to let you die in a snowy car crash just so that you'll watch the next set of ads. Assange defends himself from the threat of extra-legal assassination and he's an evil monster!
Welcome to the Kool-Aid you just drank.
Wikileaks has no concept of responsible disclosure or anything similar.
Who are you people who keep repeating this crap? If you spent less time commenting and more time actually reading you might actually have something to say.
Here. I'll do the work for you.
From TFA: "Mr. Assange is no boon to American journalists. His activities have already doomed proposed federal shield-law legislation protecting journalists' use of confidential sources in the just-adjourned Congress. An indictment of him could be followed by the judicial articulation of far more speech-limiting legal principles than currently exist with respect to even the most responsible reporting about both diplomacy and defense. If he is not charged or is acquitted of whatever charges may be made, that may well lead to the adoption of new and dangerously restrictive legislation. In more than one way, Mr. Assange may yet have much to answer for."
I can understand that Abrams is disappointed that the shield law is being shelved but how is that Assange's fault? Why should Assange be held responsible for legislation that the US congress chooses to vote on or not? Once again a Wikileaks detractor shows that they have an axe to grind unrelated to Wikileaks or Assange. He's old and mad that he's not getting what he wants i.e. Stay off my lawn Julian!
Also...Ellsberg himself says that The Pentagon Papers and Wikileaks are two sides of the same coin. That sounds like a bit more of a credible source for comparisons of mission statement and motives. You know...the guy who actually had the motive.
Note how few points Greenwald raised that Wired addressed.
That is really the point of all this isn't it. The attitude in the Wired article should tell you everything. It's a bunch of bluster that makes Wired look petty and guilty at the same time. That to me should be the most telling part. They're dodging. Big time.
One of my favorite aspects to Greenwalds recent high-profile writings is that the targets of his questions keep shooting themselves in the foot with their responses. Michael Lind did this last week and I'm sure anyone who cares enough time to read through it all will find that Wired went straight down Lind's already face-palming path.
It's really a wonder to behold.
Glenn Greenwald is just a guy that somehow got a job being a professional troll.
Consitutional lawyers have a way of being trolls against those who violate the constitution's tenants. That's kind of their job. You get a cookie.
Of course, he was also Stuart Smalley. So that's kind of not doing anything for his image.
I would just like to point out to those who reference Stuart Smalley when talking Franken (not you specifically tophermeyer). Smalley was a PARDOY of new-agey talk show host that was the life-coach of that time. He was making fun of those kinds of people and yet I constantly catch people referencing SS as if he was a real person or a character that Al took seriously as a healer or something. It's like people who don't get that Stephen Colbert is a parody character.
Now if you don't think the Stuart character is funny that's your opinion. I for one don't like SS but have always liked Franken's standup.
It does not necessarily follow that he actually has a developed sense of humor, merely that he happened upon enough catchphrases that the yokels would hyuk-hyuk to over and over again to make a career of it
Comedy is one of the hardest industries to break into in any meaningful way period. Call up ANY comedian and ask them (assuming they make enough money to pay for some kind of phone service.)
Now why don't you tell us what you do for a living so that I can write two sentences that dismiss your life's work with ignorant generalizations.
I've never followed a posters comments on his own story until today because you're so obviously the biggest troll ever. Your statements contradict each other and no matter what a sensible commenter does to refute your points you keep up your inane refrain of bias and Democrat love and the claim nobody's refuting your points.
but when Google faces the threat of inquiry
Google was not only threatened with an inquiry, an inquiry was actually made! Imagine that! Said inquiry said there isn't evidence of theft or wrongdoing so no charges are made. It's easy to imagine that charges were dropped as the information they collected was publicly broadcast over unsecured networks. It's a much more plausible explanation than conspiracy but I assume you will continue to project your bias issues on everyone else.
Jesus you're dense. A preference for one entity's actions over another is not bias you twit. You sound like a petulant child.
Government programs are /always/ plagued by waste and inefficiencies.
Whereas corporate bureaucracies are models of efficiency, see the big picture, and never waste a thing.
I guarantee you if you gave private spaceflight the information and the like that NASA has and a budget that they could get stuff done faster and more efficiently than NASA could.
I'd like my guarantee written in blood please. You can fax it over.
And how much does Mobile Me cost you annually versus using Google's sync on Android?
While your post is childish and poorly punctuated, I think the troll rating is undeserved as you make a good point. I've even seem the movie twice and while i found it entertaining I was thinking in the back of my head "Who gives a shit about high scores is DK Jr.?"
No, they are just likely to last longer because they have the technology to deal with the declining numbers, outside observers that are interested enough to notice, and a peaceful enough world to keep it from being overthrown by the outside observers that are interested enough to notice.
I think you're going to have to explain that a bit better. What technology is going to stop the declining numbers? Why not just have sex like the rest of us?
No, it doesn't "merge". It recombines.
Semantic difference. I know how DNA recombines. My point is that genetic purity is a silly notion. The more diverse the genes the better the individual traits. If the Japanese were less worried about preserving some romantic notion of blood purity and more serious about being members of a larger world community their numbers wouldn't be declining.
What is better about having your genetic code bred out of existence, and your culture completely replaced by immigrants over having your genetic code lost through lack of breeding and your culture lost due to nobody from your culture being left?
The idea that a culture can be bred out of existence is antithetical to how DNA works. DNA merges, it doesn't attack and destroy other DNA.
They have both happened to many cultures over the centuries, and they are both likely to continue to happen.
It is rare for a populous to die out from a culturally imposed social dysfunction which is what makes Japan so interesting. They could breed themselves to healthy numbers if they really wanted to.
Japanese culture will go down in the history books as one of the most interesting and self-destructive cultures of all time. They're essentially destroying themselves (both literally with suicide and figuratively by not breeding enough to replace their population numbers) and seem to be in some kind of race to replace themselves with robots rather than suffer the indignity of opening their culture to outsiders. My wish is that the burakumin take to the streets and impose a cultural uprising that will set Japan back on a course toward healthy minds, equality, and some damn common-sense. If they wanted to throw animal blood on the attendees of Tokyo U that would be good too.
I know a lot of people think Japanese culture is really cool as I once did. You won't think it's so cool if you dig past the bright lights and anime to see the seriously f'd up stuff that goes on there. I would go as far as to say that they're culture is more depraved and sad than ours (US Urban North East-Cost).
Malcolm Gladwell would agree with you.
The ironic part of this is that you need not look further than human behavioral scientists to help solve this problem. It is also possible that the whole idea of anything human-based being "non-biased" is a fantasy made up to represent an ideal that will never happen. Humans are just biased to their physiology and environment. End of story.
Unless they perfect a neural interface.
I believe you mean until they perfect the neural interface. If the story is true, the neural interface seemed a lot closer to reality than practical quantum computing until about 3 mins ago.
If you design the experience properly you don't have to choose between an artistic and scientifically accurate rendering of the Hubble material. You can first show the artistic version and then add a scientific overlay with a basic set of data (what you're looking at, distance from earth, chemical makeup, etc). You can then transition into the wonky scientific version for a final pan across the subject matter so that you're representing the needs of multiple viewers. A decent 3D Info-graphics template can look really cool and add some production value without breaking your budget as well.
If I someone at Hubble was actually interested I'd be willing to donate some time in making a storyboard that illustrates the concept.
I had to fly through Narita once on my way to Beijing during the bird flu scare and I saw things at the airport there that I will never forget. Mainly the hordes of doctors, nurses, and security people who all boarded the plane upon landing (probably 20 people total) and put infrared cameras right in everyone's faces (like really strangely and aggressively). People who were deemed "a risk" had these funny yellow stickers attached to them by the doctors (weird!) and were herded off the plane. We were all then given "health history" forms to fill out that were in some of the most ridiculous Engrish I have ever seen - I could only barely understand about a third of the questions. The half American/half Japanese guy sitting next to me said that he considered the event and specifically the form a true embarrassment for his country and we then proceeded to repeat the medical inspection routine two more times are different points along the way to pick up our bags. You also should have seen the smoking lounge there...it's incredible and also permanently staffed with a clean-up crew in hazmat gear with masks and vacuums that attach to their backs to clean up the butts and ashes.
My point is that crazy shit happens in Japanese airports and it's best to just accept it...it comes with the territory. Jobs should have been prepared for this being the frequent jet-setter that he is. I've only been to a Japanese airport once and wasn't surprised at all by the story.
It's just part of a greater Microsoft strategy to get and keep the Microsoft brand in front of people. It's the same evil, different day.
None of you have any proof of this. I don't mean to single you out here but come on. If your working knowledge of business strategies assumes that a behemoth of a company like MS has "one" strategy you need to check your working knowledge. A company like MS has multiple strategies for every business group and every market they service. If MS has shown us anything over the years it's that they are very non-committal when it comes to direct-to-consumer business strategies at the very least. It's actually one of their biggest weaknesses in the market (trying to be all things to all people) so to paint this picture of a grand MS scheme gives them too much credit. It's just not that simple.
I for one will wait for proof or a memo or something about this before I go diving in to impugn their motives.
You'll notice from your troll rating that any deviation from the standard talking point that everything MS does is an attack on open source cannot be tolerated. Maybe it is an attack and maybe it isn't but no discussion on the topic that does not assume it is cannot be viewed or discussed by others on this board. Thanks for playing and hope you do a better job of reinforcing group-think in the future.
This thread is pretty much old and dead but I thought I would just post this Onion article. It about sums it up.
Bingo! If I had a mod point I'd give it to you. The comparison is not even close to "Apples to Apples". It's like saying that people spend more time on the toilet than they do watching TV. Correction...The analogy would be that for the first time people now spend more time watching TV than they do on the toilet...which was probably hit the first year TVs came out.
Agreed. Facebook is practically it's own (crappy) operating system. It's not easy to pigeon-hole it's user personas as so many people use it for very different reason and functions. If I were to estimate off-hand (I do this for a living so know how stupid that is) the number of unique facebook user personas would be around 20 or 30.
Twitter is essentially the condensation of everything purely narcissist about Facebook and attracts that crowd in spades. Even people I respect in normal media conditions sound like such idiots on Twitter. I refudiate them.
If iPads do to the classroom what they've done for my office conference calls those kids are doomed.