In the US, apparently slightly less than half of all marriages are "fake" (i.e., end in divorce) already. And I understand there are numerous "degrees" you can buy on-line for a nominal fee. (Not to mention degrees that are awarded by "respectable" institutions without representing actual academic achievement.)
So, a cynical view might be that everything else is LESS fake than your wedding and graduation. The difference is that we overtly acknowledge that the other things are fake.
My understanding of how to interpret this is that: Students whose parents are involved with their education do better in ANY kind of school (public or private). Just guessing, but I suspect the areas where students are doing better are ones with more 2-parent, single income homes.
You don't understand. Put aside for a moment the implicit ridiculous comparison of circumcision to the mutilation committed against young women in Africa.
Think about communities where circumcision is most common: Arabs Americans (US) Jews
By condemning circumcision as an evil practice, you get to condemn not only ALL of those troublesome Middle-Easterners, but also the United States in general! It's a pretty diversely targetted insult. But, it does seem a bit like pissing into the wind.;-)
So you mean that discounting large, diverse groups of people by attempting to characterize them in 8 inflamatory words is unlikely to result in enlightenment or productive discussion?
It is interesting to see a Slashdot user refer to social media users as "sheep", considering that Slashdot itself is successful because it is such an effective social medium.
Oral contraceptives still remain RX only. Glad theology trumps science, no matter which party is in office.
Actually, I think there's a good health safety argument for making any hormone-based medication a prescription. I don't think this is an example of the Roman Catholic Church exerting its influence over US public policy (though there certainly appear to be valid related examples in the area of women's health).
Good point about the monochrome display. The "Hover" text thing is really a nit related to the examples, since it would almost certainly be done by web developers. However, it still does apply to tablets and other touch devices, since I understand that accessibility software (for example, screen readers) generally reads the alt text for images.
Yup. This is privacy obfuscated, not "Privacy Simplified". If you're color blind, this is badly designed. And the examples have no "hover text", so you can't see what the icons actually mean without clicking on them.
Also, I noticed that in certain examples the text for the "red" and "green" compliance icons is identical. For example:
For example, Facebook (red compliance icon): "This organization might provide your data to a government that asks for it without following the legally required process."
but Craigslist & Google (green compliance icon): "This organization might provide your data to a government that asks for it without following the legally required process."
Ebay, Netflix, Pandora, & Spotify (green compliance icon): "When an organization receives a phone call, letter, or other legally insufficient request for your data, they don't comply because the law requires the government to take additional steps before getting your data. This website requires the government to comply, at a minimum, with the legal process provided by the law before getting users' data."
So, are Craigslist and Google supposed to be red? Or was somebody getting carried away with copy & paste?
True. Add to the list, providing unfiltered Internet searches for China. Yup. Illegal.
Fact is, many people don't realize that most other countries have more restrictive laws than the US. There are lots of cases like these, but most of them the US or English-language press just doesn't care about because they're not in countries we (the news-consuming public) are particularly interested in.
To someone in the US, many of these issues seem stupid, caused by repressive local laws in protectionist or third-world countries.
Microsoft got sued (successfully) for claiming their non-compliant version was real Java(R), not for making their own version. It was a trademark violation because Microsoft's version didn't pass the Java compatibility suite, not a copyright issue. Microsoft had the last laugh when it went off and used C# instead of Java.
The ISPs and device vendors who sold UNSAFE PRODUCTS to consumers are the folks we should be mad at.
Car analogy: Do you get mad at the guy who slowed his car in front of you, or the auto manufacturer who sold you a car with the brakes detached from the brake pedal?
I'm not a huge Bjork fan, but I like her for being an innovative musician. She seems a little weird, but I she's never done anything that bothered me, so... why not?
(Note: for the folks who disagree with her political views, I understand why they might not like her, but her politics don't really bother me.)
Heh... Not sure... I didn't think I was saying anything controversial. My Linux system at work runs AV software for the reason I described. It's irritating because it sucks a fair amount of memory, but I understand the reason for it.
Whether it's fair or not, local, state, and federal governments regulate business, and this is overtly allowed by the US Constitution, the state constitutions, and local government charters. The various governments do, in fact, impose restrictions on businesses that the Bill of Rights would not allow for individual citizens.
Slashdot Mirror
Good advice from the AC. Here's the link that tells you how to report a map data error.
When US appeared as an independent country, we didn't rename the Gulf of Mexico, for example.
Hmmm.... I smell an opportunity to score some cheap nationalist political points. It's never too late to do something retarded....
In other words, "conservatives" aren't actually conservative?
In the US, apparently slightly less than half of all marriages are "fake" (i.e., end in divorce) already. And I understand there are numerous "degrees" you can buy on-line for a nominal fee. (Not to mention degrees that are awarded by "respectable" institutions without representing actual academic achievement.)
So, a cynical view might be that everything else is LESS fake than your wedding and graduation. The difference is that we overtly acknowledge that the other things are fake.
My understanding of how to interpret this is that:
Students whose parents are involved with their education do better in ANY kind of school (public or private). Just guessing, but I suspect the areas where students are doing better are ones with more 2-parent, single income homes.
You don't understand. Put aside for a moment the implicit ridiculous comparison of circumcision to the mutilation committed against young women in Africa.
Think about communities where circumcision is most common:
Arabs
Americans (US)
Jews
By condemning circumcision as an evil practice, you get to condemn not only ALL of those troublesome Middle-Easterners, but also the United States in general! It's a pretty diversely targetted insult. But, it does seem a bit like pissing into the wind. ;-)
So you mean that discounting large, diverse groups of people by attempting to characterize them in 8 inflamatory words is unlikely to result in enlightenment or productive discussion?
It is interesting to see a Slashdot user refer to social media users as "sheep", considering that Slashdot itself is successful because it is such an effective social medium.
Drat; I already posted, so I can't mod you Funny.
Well played, Hognoxious.
In the US, the USDA certifies food products that meets certain criteria as "organic".
Obviously, there are other definitions of "organic". Interestingly the definitions are not uniform across disciplines.
Seriously, my biggest gripe with "the full cinematic experience" is that it's loud enough for me to hear FROM my living room.
No kidding! And it's even worse at the movie theaters!
This may be the first and only Slashdot story where Costco and Walmart are mentioned in positive light.
Just to be clear: Likely first and only where BOTH Costco and Walmart are mentioned in positive light.
Oral contraceptives still remain RX only. Glad theology trumps science, no matter which party is in office.
Actually, I think there's a good health safety argument for making any hormone-based medication a prescription. I don't think this is an example of the Roman Catholic Church exerting its influence over US public policy (though there certainly appear to be valid related examples in the area of women's health).
Good point about the monochrome display. The "Hover" text thing is really a nit related to the examples, since it would almost certainly be done by web developers. However, it still does apply to tablets and other touch devices, since I understand that accessibility software (for example, screen readers) generally reads the alt text for images.
Well, the pathetic thing is that none of the people they're putting on billboards have made any public statements about global warming.
Yup. This is privacy obfuscated, not "Privacy Simplified". If you're color blind, this is badly designed. And the examples have no "hover text", so you can't see what the icons actually mean without clicking on them.
Also, I noticed that in certain examples the text for the "red" and "green" compliance icons is identical. For example:
For example, Facebook (red compliance icon):
"This organization might provide your data to a government that asks for it without following the legally required process."
but Craigslist & Google (green compliance icon):
"This organization might provide your data to a government that asks for it without following the legally required process."
Ebay, Netflix, Pandora, & Spotify (green compliance icon):
"When an organization receives a phone call, letter, or other legally insufficient request for your data, they don't comply because the law requires the government to take additional steps before getting your data.
This website requires the government to comply, at a minimum, with the legal process provided by the law before getting users' data."
So, are Craigslist and Google supposed to be red? Or was somebody getting carried away with copy & paste?
True. Add to the list, providing unfiltered Internet searches for China. Yup. Illegal.
Fact is, many people don't realize that most other countries have more restrictive laws than the US. There are lots of cases like these, but most of them the US or English-language press just doesn't care about because they're not in countries we (the news-consuming public) are particularly interested in.
To someone in the US, many of these issues seem stupid, caused by repressive local laws in protectionist or third-world countries.
Microsoft got sued (successfully) for claiming their non-compliant version was real Java(R), not for making their own version. It was a trademark violation because Microsoft's version didn't pass the Java compatibility suite, not a copyright issue. Microsoft had the last laugh when it went off and used C# instead of Java.
The ISPs and device vendors who sold UNSAFE PRODUCTS to consumers are the folks we should be mad at.
Car analogy: Do you get mad at the guy who slowed his car in front of you, or the auto manufacturer who sold you a car with the brakes detached from the brake pedal?
I'm pretty sure it would only work on eared seals.
...either he doesn't understand his own site's paywall, or it's one of the worst slashvertisements in a while...
Well, it wasn't blocked by Adblock, so I'd say it works pretty well.
Wait... does that "disable Advertising" checkbox remove things like this?
What??? No! (Oh, wait; yes.)
I'm not a huge Bjork fan, but I like her for being an innovative musician. She seems a little weird, but I she's never done anything that bothered me, so... why not?
(Note: for the folks who disagree with her political views, I understand why they might not like her, but her politics don't really bother me.)
Heh... Not sure... I didn't think I was saying anything controversial. My Linux system at work runs AV software for the reason I described. It's irritating because it sucks a fair amount of memory, but I understand the reason for it.
Whether it's fair or not, local, state, and federal governments regulate business, and this is overtly allowed by the US Constitution, the state constitutions, and local government charters. The various governments do, in fact, impose restrictions on businesses that the Bill of Rights would not allow for individual citizens.