Being "anonymous" on a "social network". I know plenty of people who have "fake" accounts, and everyone knows who they are, they aren't fooling anyone.
They did not ship a defective unit. The unit was shipped worked fine. The problem was it was exploitable, which is not a defect, it is a lack of foresight.
Any sufficient level of incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
If you're going to ignore year of experience because of some Cert number on a resume, you get what you deserve. I know plenty of people with certs who can't do shit that people with years of active experience can do blindfolded. Why? Because a Cert doesn't teach you how to think on the fly to solve incredible problems where the book says "it should be running".
Not that certs are worthless, but experience is worth more than certs in my book.
Some Certs used to be good, but no longer are. My Novel Certs are useless. And anyone wanting me to get certified at this point better be paying me for the Certs. If my 30 years of experience (yeah, getting old) doesn't count for anything, no cert is going to fix that.
For me, it isn't enough to lower the number of clicks. Moving something I use all the time to behind three additional clicks, because the average user never sees it, is just stupid. Changing the name of the computer from "Computer" to "My Computer" to "The Computer" is change, for what reason? Changing things just to be different hurts everyone.
I have said, and will continue to say, that the problem with Netflix vs MegaCableCo is one of the last mile monopoly and "franchise" agreements with local municipalities. You fix this problem, and the whole Net Neutrality is fixed, without any further laws being needed.
The time has come to have a planned infrastructure that allows consumer choice beyond limited franchise agreements. Build Fiber infrastructure, to a common backhaul COLO Facility which allows multiple vendors to vie for their customers there. Introducing competition, because you remove the last mile from the equation is the ONLY viable solution, that doesn't involve politics and stupid politicians who have been bought by MegaCableCo lobbyists.
You assume I am an (R), I am not. Additionally, there is a power imbalance with the Media following a story. Since the media tends to side with liberal causes, they get more airtime. Take for instance the case of a thug being shot by a cop, and the case of a woman being shot by an illegal alien in "Sanctuary City".
The coverage on nightly news was vastly different. And this comparison is repeatable. Want another example? HRC lying about email.
The problem is, nobody on the LEFT gives a damn when one of their own does it. See Bob Packwood for Liberal views on anyone with an (R) after their name doing the exact same thing (milder version) that WJC did.
people who wish to express different values can't do it. Reddit is just saying it's not their job to provide the platform for it.
Where are the full and complete guidelines and rules for what is tolerated and what is not. Until they have a community standard outlined and in place, such is pure sophistry and reverse-engineering of their excuse.
What is the platform for? I'm not sure Reddit board has even a vague definition they can use at this point. Platitudinous statements don't a platform or definition make.
Ethics of "fatpeoplehate" isn't up for debate. What is up for debate is allowing people to have vile speech protected, because all it takes to silence speech is to label it "vile". It is what is happening right now in Political Correctness circles. If I disagree with Obamacare, I suddenly am "vile" and bam, I cannot express myself.
Tell me, if someone equates (using term "vile") two things (not liking ObamaCare, fatpeoplehate), how do YOU distinguish between which one is vile and which one is vile?
So, the result is that we must allow "vile" speech even if it is distasteful. THAT is the most ethical way to proceed. Anything less than that is simply vile censorship;)
You miss the point. Letting people express themselves, makes it much easier to deal with the problems they create. Let the assholes hate, let them spew their shit and let those that like that shit congregate there. Much easier to deal with them once you have identified the assholes.
I saw you have posed on FatPeopleHate Sub, buhbye!
The definition of "punks, assholes, douchebags and morons" doesn't really change. What changes is we classify as ""punkery, assholeary, douchebagary and moronic".
Because your definition of "hate" and mine are probably different. I disagree with a person philosophically, and I get charged as a "hater" all the time.
The problem isn't the haters, those people tend to be rare and easy to spot. The problem are the Politically Correct Crowd that defines "disagrees" as "hate". I must be a "hater" because I have a different viewpoint, even if I have no malice towards anyone or any group in particular. But the PC class defines hate in such a way that it is designed to quash free expression of ideas.
The politically correct crowd will willingly ignore horrible behavior as long as the person is otherwise supportive of their cause. I point to William Jefferson Clinton (Bill) as my defacto example of someone, who had they been had an (R) after their name, would have been judged completely differently by the PC (read, liberal) crowd.
So I take the cries of the PC crowd to be largely hypocritical.
Slashdot Mirror
Cisco is one of the worst companies that certify, because their version of networking is strange compared to everyone else's.
They had Baltar working for them, and I don't blame him. Who wouldn't give up secrets to Six?
Being "anonymous" on a "social network". I know plenty of people who have "fake" accounts, and everyone knows who they are, they aren't fooling anyone.
Unless you're paying for your social networking, you are the product. Google is just up front with it.
You don't. Stay with Facebook idiots, where you belong.
Or, as I put it, the people who aren't on Google+ are the reason I am on Google+
There is a reason why they are called "Unwashed masses"
I don't consider exploits to be defective. Defects require no outside "help"
This would be the same as saying the Twin Towers were defective because the couldn't withstand airplane crashing into it (extreme example).
To me, defective is something that breaks all on its own.
They did not ship a defective unit. The unit was shipped worked fine. The problem was it was exploitable, which is not a defect, it is a lack of foresight.
Any sufficient level of incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
I point you to Admiral Adama of (Battlestar Gallactica) wise words ... "Do not network the ships computers"
Yeah, I can see it now. NSA Linux, "Freedom Edition with Proprietary Patriot Act Protection!"
And a Obama working with Boehner will get it done.
If you're going to ignore year of experience because of some Cert number on a resume, you get what you deserve. I know plenty of people with certs who can't do shit that people with years of active experience can do blindfolded. Why? Because a Cert doesn't teach you how to think on the fly to solve incredible problems where the book says "it should be running".
Not that certs are worthless, but experience is worth more than certs in my book.
Some Certs used to be good, but no longer are. My Novel Certs are useless. And anyone wanting me to get certified at this point better be paying me for the Certs. If my 30 years of experience (yeah, getting old) doesn't count for anything, no cert is going to fix that.
For me, it isn't enough to lower the number of clicks. Moving something I use all the time to behind three additional clicks, because the average user never sees it, is just stupid. Changing the name of the computer from "Computer" to "My Computer" to "The Computer" is change, for what reason? Changing things just to be different hurts everyone.
Both Analog and Digital are being obscured by road noise. WHAT I CAN'T HEAR YOU!
BTW, I need new speakers in my car because they are blownout.
IMHO, Streaming music is fine for 99% of use cases, where background noise is already affecting (i.e. ruining) the experience.
I have said, and will continue to say, that the problem with Netflix vs MegaCableCo is one of the last mile monopoly and "franchise" agreements with local municipalities. You fix this problem, and the whole Net Neutrality is fixed, without any further laws being needed.
The time has come to have a planned infrastructure that allows consumer choice beyond limited franchise agreements. Build Fiber infrastructure, to a common backhaul COLO Facility which allows multiple vendors to vie for their customers there. Introducing competition, because you remove the last mile from the equation is the ONLY viable solution, that doesn't involve politics and stupid politicians who have been bought by MegaCableCo lobbyists.
You assume I am an (R), I am not. Additionally, there is a power imbalance with the Media following a story. Since the media tends to side with liberal causes, they get more airtime. Take for instance the case of a thug being shot by a cop, and the case of a woman being shot by an illegal alien in "Sanctuary City".
The coverage on nightly news was vastly different. And this comparison is repeatable. Want another example? HRC lying about email.
and yet... NOBODY (but you) GIVES A DAMN
The problem is, nobody on the LEFT gives a damn when one of their own does it. See Bob Packwood for Liberal views on anyone with an (R) after their name doing the exact same thing (milder version) that WJC did.
Actually, it is easy to do, de-authorize the authorities. Without authority, they can't abuse it. ;)
"Neither Alexis nor I created reddit to be a bastion of free speech, but rather as a place where open and honest discussion can happen.".
Um, anyone notice that the two phrases in that sentence are mutually exclusive?
Here is the equations
Reddit Free Speech (Not a bastion on free speech), Reddit = Free Speech (open and honest discussion)
Pick a Lane
people who wish to express different values can't do it. Reddit is just saying it's not their job to provide the platform for it.
Where are the full and complete guidelines and rules for what is tolerated and what is not. Until they have a community standard outlined and in place, such is pure sophistry and reverse-engineering of their excuse.
What is the platform for? I'm not sure Reddit board has even a vague definition they can use at this point. Platitudinous statements don't a platform or definition make.
Ethics of "fatpeoplehate" isn't up for debate. What is up for debate is allowing people to have vile speech protected, because all it takes to silence speech is to label it "vile". It is what is happening right now in Political Correctness circles. If I disagree with Obamacare, I suddenly am "vile" and bam, I cannot express myself.
Tell me, if someone equates (using term "vile") two things (not liking ObamaCare, fatpeoplehate), how do YOU distinguish between which one is vile and which one is vile?
So, the result is that we must allow "vile" speech even if it is distasteful. THAT is the most ethical way to proceed. Anything less than that is simply vile censorship ;)
You miss the point. Letting people express themselves, makes it much easier to deal with the problems they create. Let the assholes hate, let them spew their shit and let those that like that shit congregate there. Much easier to deal with them once you have identified the assholes.
I saw you have posed on FatPeopleHate Sub, buhbye!
The definition of "punks, assholes, douchebags and morons" doesn't really change. What changes is we classify as ""punkery, assholeary, douchebagary and moronic".
Define "hate".
Because your definition of "hate" and mine are probably different. I disagree with a person philosophically, and I get charged as a "hater" all the time.
The problem isn't the haters, those people tend to be rare and easy to spot. The problem are the Politically Correct Crowd that defines "disagrees" as "hate". I must be a "hater" because I have a different viewpoint, even if I have no malice towards anyone or any group in particular. But the PC class defines hate in such a way that it is designed to quash free expression of ideas.
The politically correct crowd will willingly ignore horrible behavior as long as the person is otherwise supportive of their cause. I point to William Jefferson Clinton (Bill) as my defacto example of someone, who had they been had an (R) after their name, would have been judged completely differently by the PC (read, liberal) crowd.
So I take the cries of the PC crowd to be largely hypocritical.