Politics aside, if the Internet was being compared with pneumatic tubes in the pre-email era, then it actually seems like a fairly sound analogy to me. Could someone please explain what I'm missing here?
Specifically, the "Efficient Market Hypothesis", in which it is proposed that the price for a good or service ALWAYS reflects ALL available information, implicitly assumes that market actors are acting rationally.
Actually, it's not a good or service that the EMH refers to, but rather the market price of publicly-traded equities, bonds and commodities in an environment in which there are relatively low transaction fees. You should read more here before posting about it, although since you got a rating of "5" maybe only cursory knowledge is required?
First of all, you need to skip to minute 9 before you start getting any info. And if you read the book Super Freakonomics, you already know everything in the 20-minute video:
- Monkeys steal money from each other, as do humans.
- Monkeys are terrible savers, as are humans.
- Monkeys are poor calculators of risk/reward, as are humans. (She goes on for about 8 minutes belaboring this point.)
And the goal for us as humans is to use our logic to overcome our emotions. There, I have now saved you 20 minutes of your life!
Google already has broken its commitment to privacy: Personalized Search for Everyone. As of last December, every computer that uses Google is opted in by default to being tracked, whether you're logged in or not.
Whether a computer is signed in or not, the Gorg is tracking everything the computer does, in order to "personalize" the search results for it.
It seems the concept of "opt in" is now gone forever, since tracking is the default. I wonder if privacy advocates even understand the implications, given how often Google is the Internet for so many people.
(By the way, for Google fanboys, a non-evil company would have a toggle on the search page saying, "Personalized Results: ON - OFF"... But I won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.)
After reading that article, I hope some people are a little more hesitant about the evil Gorg. This part here I found particularly interesting:
Consider 26-year-old Ari Brand, an actor living in Manhattan's East Village. Google has access to the fact he paid $733 for a flat-screen TV, because he uploaded his budget to Google Docs, an online word processor and spreadsheet. It has access to the 23,000 emails he has sent through Gmail.
At this point I need to put in a plug for the Start Page Search Engine, which does not store your IP address.
...just ask any small business that has been banned from advertising on Google's Adwords network. I'm not going to plug my own business here, but I run a software company and was forced to lay off three people because Google decided my site violated their vague "Terms & Conditions." (They did not tell me what my supposed violations were.)
However, I will give you two examples of two other small businesses that were banned from Adwords. The first is this one, a small local pest-control company Reno. If anyone can find anything objectionable about that site, definitely let me know! Read their story here. (Scroll down to the 6th reply.)
Here's another company banned from Adwords, in this case a company in LA that has helped non-profits obtain grants for the past 35 years. You can read their story here.
Best solution to keeping your boss out of your personal stuff? Don't do personal stuff on company time.
Eric Schmidt, is that you? (The CEO of Google said, "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place.")
For any file up to 20 mb, you can create email drafts in Gmail and attach the files you want to save. Have the subject of the email be the name of the file you're saving to it. Then save it as a draft (don't send it to anybody).
Here's why. Every individual has two commodities they own:
1. Time.
2. Money.
People with #2 tend not to have #1, and vice versa.
So for someone with a good income, it's just not worth the time involved to locate a torrent, download it from the few people seeding it, etc., etc. (Even if YOU could find it quickly, there's still a learning curve involved for the average person.)
The people who pirate software almost always are those who wouldn't buy it in the first place, simply because they don't have any money. But by getting your software, a certain tiny percentage will help you via word of mouth, which in the end helps your bottom line.
Given that I only got free internet at an airport when Google felt generous last holiday season, I'd gladly use it and gladly watch ads.
Given that Google, which is everyone's favorite monopoly, controls 90+ percent of Internet advertising, I wonder why they don't offer free Internet everywhere they can. Does anyone know why not?
But when you reach a certain age, it becomes harder and harder to meet new friends. I used to have tons of them, but then I moved to a new city and have almost none here. And if you're too old for the clubs, don't have a family, and aren't religious or a sports fan--you're pretty much SOL in many places
You should go to meetup.com. Seriously, check it out. There's lots of opportunities there to meet new friends.
In Brazil, proofs produced by illegal means cannot be used (Federal Constitution, Art. 5, Inc. LVI).
Also, commiting a crime in order to produce proofs is aggravated up to a 1/3 (Decree-Law 2.848, Art. 342, Par. 1).
Of course, law vs. reality can be entirely different things.
My favorite quote from that article is this: "If women truly did earn less for doing exactly the same job as a man, any non-sexist CEO could thrash his competition by hiring only women, thus saving 25% on employee salaries relative to his competitors."
I've often wondered about that myself.
If the government seizes BP, for one thing there's the small aspect that it's not exactly legal. For another thing, now taxpayers are on the hook to pay for the clean-up. On the other hand, if BP stays in business, then it will be able to pay for the clean-up rather than taxpayers.
It's always important to ask the question, "And then what?" For example: "We have to seize BP. And then what?"
So you see, the world is not as simple as you think.
Wow! Best post of the article, definitely made my day.
I'm 33 years old now, not old... but not too young anymore either. Age 50 for example no longer seems as far off as it once did.
I'm definitely taking your words to heart.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, now I see. Thanks. :-)
Politics aside, if the Internet was being compared with pneumatic tubes in the pre-email era, then it actually seems like a fairly sound analogy to me. Could someone please explain what I'm missing here?
They have done evil. Here just one example.
Specifically, the "Efficient Market Hypothesis", in which it is proposed that the price for a good or service ALWAYS reflects ALL available information, implicitly assumes that market actors are acting rationally.
Actually, it's not a good or service that the EMH refers to, but rather the market price of publicly-traded equities, bonds and commodities in an environment in which there are relatively low transaction fees. You should read more here before posting about it, although since you got a rating of "5" maybe only cursory knowledge is required?
...here's my assesment:
First of all, you need to skip to minute 9 before you start getting any info. And if you read the book Super Freakonomics, you already know everything in the 20-minute video:
- Monkeys steal money from each other, as do humans.
- Monkeys are terrible savers, as are humans.
- Monkeys are poor calculators of risk/reward, as are humans. (She goes on for about 8 minutes belaboring this point.)
And the goal for us as humans is to use our logic to overcome our emotions. There, I have now saved you 20 minutes of your life!
Google already has broken its commitment to privacy: Personalized Search for Everyone. As of last December, every computer that uses Google is opted in by default to being tracked, whether you're logged in or not.
...you should see this blog post from Google: Personalized Search For Everyone.
Whether a computer is signed in or not, the Gorg is tracking everything the computer does, in order to "personalize" the search results for it.
It seems the concept of "opt in" is now gone forever, since tracking is the default. I wonder if privacy advocates even understand the implications, given how often Google is the Internet for so many people.
(By the way, for Google fanboys, a non-evil company would have a toggle on the search page saying, "Personalized Results: ON - OFF"... But I won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.)
I find it interesting that doing evil but at least reflecting on it a bit beforehand has now become what passes as a "good thing."
Consider 26-year-old Ari Brand, an actor living in Manhattan's East Village. Google has access to the fact he paid $733 for a flat-screen TV, because he uploaded his budget to Google Docs, an online word processor and spreadsheet. It has access to the 23,000 emails he has sent through Gmail.
At this point I need to put in a plug for the Start Page Search Engine, which does not store your IP address.
...thanks to Adblock
A smart business realizes that free advertising is worth its weight in gold and tells its legal department to STFU.
Lots of armchair quarterbacks give you ideas. You say to one of them, "Great idea! Why don't you go ahead and do it." Then their excuses begin.
However, I will give you two examples of two other small businesses that were banned from Adwords. The first is this one, a small local pest-control company Reno. If anyone can find anything objectionable about that site, definitely let me know! Read their story here. (Scroll down to the 6th reply.)
Here's another company banned from Adwords, in this case a company in LA that has helped non-profits obtain grants for the past 35 years. You can read their story here.
in fact pretty much all animals need to eat other lifeforms because we can't draw energy from the sun directly.
What about algae? What about plants?
Best solution to keeping your boss out of your personal stuff? Don't do personal stuff on company time.
Eric Schmidt, is that you? (The CEO of Google said, "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place.")
For any file up to 20 mb, you can create email drafts in Gmail and attach the files you want to save. Have the subject of the email be the name of the file you're saving to it. Then save it as a draft (don't send it to anybody).
Known bogus accusations are standard cop-tricks to get you to confess to something, throw you off guard or make you reveal something.
Mod this up please. This is something everyone can learn from.
Here's why. Every individual has two commodities they own: 1. Time. 2. Money. People with #2 tend not to have #1, and vice versa. So for someone with a good income, it's just not worth the time involved to locate a torrent, download it from the few people seeding it, etc., etc. (Even if YOU could find it quickly, there's still a learning curve involved for the average person.) The people who pirate software almost always are those who wouldn't buy it in the first place, simply because they don't have any money. But by getting your software, a certain tiny percentage will help you via word of mouth, which in the end helps your bottom line.
Given that I only got free internet at an airport when Google felt generous last holiday season, I'd gladly use it and gladly watch ads.
Given that Google, which is everyone's favorite monopoly, controls 90+ percent of Internet advertising, I wonder why they don't offer free Internet everywhere they can. Does anyone know why not?
But when you reach a certain age, it becomes harder and harder to meet new friends. I used to have tons of them, but then I moved to a new city and have almost none here. And if you're too old for the clubs, don't have a family, and aren't religious or a sports fan--you're pretty much SOL in many places
You should go to meetup.com. Seriously, check it out. There's lots of opportunities there to meet new friends.
In Brazil, proofs produced by illegal means cannot be used (Federal Constitution, Art. 5, Inc. LVI). Also, commiting a crime in order to produce proofs is aggravated up to a 1/3 (Decree-Law 2.848, Art. 342, Par. 1).
Of course, law vs. reality can be entirely different things.
My favorite quote from that article is this: "If women truly did earn less for doing exactly the same job as a man, any non-sexist CEO could thrash his competition by hiring only women, thus saving 25% on employee salaries relative to his competitors." I've often wondered about that myself.
It's just how capitalism works. If woman working for less pay, why pay them more?
Conversely, if you could get the same work out of a woman for less money, why would anyone ever hire a man?
If the government seizes BP, for one thing there's the small aspect that it's not exactly legal. For another thing, now taxpayers are on the hook to pay for the clean-up. On the other hand, if BP stays in business, then it will be able to pay for the clean-up rather than taxpayers.
It's always important to ask the question, "And then what?" For example: "We have to seize BP. And then what?"
So you see, the world is not as simple as you think.
Wow! Best post of the article, definitely made my day. I'm 33 years old now, not old... but not too young anymore either. Age 50 for example no longer seems as far off as it once did. I'm definitely taking your words to heart.