It's quite possible to overspend, even if the spending itself is for a reasonable purpose, and even if the amount of money is not all that high in absolute terms.
I'm trying to keep an open mind about this. Let's say $30k is a reasonable salary for a Flash programmer in Malaysia. So that's 20 man years development time. I've been searching for the pages, but it's difficult to find them using the names from the article (which is not a good sign):
The Flash game seems to be here.
Didn't feel like starting it, given that it asked to post stuff on my wall and send me email. Sorry about that - but maybe someone would like to give it a spin and let us know?
Is that really all they have - some plain text and photo galleries, plus a simple Flash game? Or did I not find the right stuff? Finding that should be easy though - otherwise it's hardly useful for it's intended purpose of convincing tourists to visit Malaysia. (I purposely searched for this marketing campaign and didn't find anything which would attract me to Malaysia - that can't be a good result for a country which I'm sure is an interesting place to visit...)
That might work - the Green party in Germany is on the rise in a major way. They poll at around 20% of the votes and have picked up their first governorship in the state of Baden-Wuerttemberg. They are opposed to software patents and patents on genes and their positions have become a lot more influential in Germany, now.
"Imperialist and capitalist"? Capitalism - I don't think so, but who actually cares? Imperialism would imply that they went out their armies and established colonies like Europe did not so long ago. I am not convinced either China or USA fits the bill.
Well USA in present day - no I don't think it's imperialist currently. Historically that's a different matter - spreading out "from coast to coast", Philippines, Hawaii, Puerto Rico - yes that was imperialism.
For China - well the expansion in Tibet falls into that category, and in present day China makes territorial claims to many of it's neighbors - against India (Arunachal Pradesh), against Taiwan (particularly it's right to exist) and pretty much everybody in the South China sea (Natuna Islands, Malampaya and Camago, Scarborough Shoal, Spratly Islands, Paracel Islands, Gulf of Thailand and Singapore Strait). Also against Japan (Senkaku islands).
It's certainly an expansionist agenda - you can argue whether that on it's own constitutes imperialism or not.
I would assume it's still the same old "if you use something other than windows or maybe mac, you are free to do so however you are on your own to figure it out and resolve any issue!" attitude. Which really I think is fair.
Why? Linux is not particularly exotic anymore, and learning to use Linux is quite valuable for many university students. It seems that is something they should encourage rather than brush off. And of course new Linux users - just like new users of any OS - will occasionally need help.
Supporting Linux shouldn't be that much extra work if you avoid platform-specific setups and specialty tools. And that should be fairly straightforward these days.
I think they should evaluate how many of their users are actually using a particular OS - e.g. if 90% of their users use Windows, 7% Mac and 3% Linux, then the Linux users should get about 3% of the support resources. That would be fair - 0% or 50% would both be unfair.
That's definitely not what they are doing. I'm not sure what the meaning behind the phrase could possibly be, but as stated it's a clear lie. You likely mean something by it which is true (though perhaps just waffling), but if you keep expressing yourself in that manner then your customers will lose trust.
I'm not sure what drives phrasing like this, but it's a fairly common disease in many companies. The submitter might want to look if it infects his consulting company too, and then get rid of it. Each time someone is using a phrase like that - ask what they actually mean, then replace the phrase with something which is true - or if it's merely waffling, just stop using it.
Users don't need to know what a bootloader is in order to care about this. They'll want to know that they can install the latest version of the OS on it, because there is that one cool feature they are interested in. And they'll hear stuff like "oh you can't upgrade a Motorola".
The desire to run the latest and coolest stuff is widespread, even among users who are not particularly technical. For proof just look at the way even trivial Trojans are spreading.
I don't think there is enough computing power in the world to model an entire PC on sub-atomic level. You could in principle do this, but in any engineering sense you can't.
Penrose is the only one brave enough to ask the question; "Is consciousness real?" and try to answer it using physics and science.
Physics is probably the wrong tool. Whatever happens in the brain obeys the laws of physics, but that applies to e.g. evolution as well. Nevertheless biology is the scientific discipline which discovered evolution.
When we write an application like a word processor we use some high-level formal language and a tool which translates those into machine code. This code is executed on a computer chip, a circuit composed of logical gates. These gates consist of transistors which switch electrical currents around. The transistors consist of complex arrangements of conducting, isolating and semiconducting materials.
Ultimately your word processor will move electrons around on a series of computer chips, that's correct. However looking at the problem of writing a word processor in terms of moving electrons around will get you absolutely nowhere.
The brain is a hugely complex system - trying to understand how it works by looking at subatomic effects is very likely a hopeless task. If we can't manage to understand it on a much more abstract level, then we will probably never understand it.
No it's not evil. You made the profile in order to be found, they index the profile so you can be found. They told you about it beforehand, you knew about it beforehand.
What I wrote is true, obviously. Sure their customer support is usually fairly generous, I never claimed it wasn't. However they have no issue tracking system. If you can't resolve your problem with the first call, then you'll start from square zero next time you call. Their email system is set up in the same way, but your chances to get a useful response on the first try is extremely low.
Just call them up and ask - *they* will readily tell you that.
That's all you ever get from Amazon on *any* issue. Sending them email - whether it's about a complaint with an order or a protest - will only get you a form letter. On top of that Amazon has no issue tracking system, if you email and then call, they will have no record of your email. Next call they won't have a record of your previous call. There is more than one reason to swear off them.
Pressing for an (theoretically maybe implied) right to privacy will only give the TSA another smokescreen to hide behind. It will merely afford them not to be accountable to the public because they "have to protect the victim's privacy". And of course people photographing, or reporting what the TSA does would then have to be treated as criminals. That's the very last thing we need.
the argument can be made that the loudest protestors against the TSA are overly neurotic and likely sexually repressed
I think you'll find that the loudest protesters against this are people who care about the principle of the thing and not so much people who are otherwise known to be neurotic or sexually represent in any other part of their life.
I might agree with you in a way, in so far as I also have the impression that the sexual aspect of this may be exaggerated, and perhaps not very genuinely felt. It seems like a convenient angle of attack allowing to apply the arguments used in the context of sexual harassment. Those are rather widely respected, and of course they do very much apply in this case.
However I believe what's really driving the protest is the desire not to live in an authoritarian police state. That's exactly where you live, as soon as you enter a US airport though, and it looks like it may well expand from there. That's a much more complex argument to make though, and one which is no longer widely accepted.
Well, they didn't comment on this until it became public. As much as I dislike the TSA, at this point they ought to have the right to respond.
Also personally I'd much prefer the process to be in public. As soon as you introduce "privacy" into that, you'll find yourself shielded from sight, in some cubicle - just you and 2-3 TSA agents. No thanks, I'd rather the other passengers would watch - I trust them more then the TSA.
Instead, I'll vote for someone who I think will do a decent job.
But you won't tell us who that is. He must have tremendous chances...
If you vote for the "lesser of two evils", don't be surprised when you're rewarded with evil.
*You* are rewarded with evil, too. That's how elections work, at the end you have to live with the victor of the election, no matter who *you* voted for.
If you voted for evil, you only have yourself to blame.
If we are getting more evil, we blame those who made that possible. That includes those who think participating in an election is a mere exercise to feel blameless.There are large numbers of voters who will always stick to their party, no matter which candidate runs. If that number is bigger then the number of people who have even heard of your alleged "decent job doing guy", then voting for him is an exercise in futility. It's possible to get a fairly good idea whether that's the case using polls. If you ignore that information you should be blamed for doing so.
The first-past-the-gate election system has created a nice big hole for tyranny, through perfectly rational decisions by game theory.
I don't like two-party systems either, but you can mitigate this by voting in the primaries.
In addition it's quite possible to bring in third parties, however you have to get rid of the idea that there is a quick and easy fix available. You need to build it from the ground up - start running in local elections, get council members, mayors then state representatives, governorships, senators. Only once you've established yourself as a political force you field your own presidential candidate.
From what we've been told it wasn't very difficult for Manning to get to the data. With so many people having easy access, it's hard to imagine that actual enemies of the USA didn't have this information before. Which in turn would make it rather unlikely that there is any additional danger from letting the public know, too.
Slashdot Mirror
The $600,000 might be a little bit high
It's quite possible to overspend, even if the spending itself is for a reasonable purpose, and even if the amount of money is not all that high in absolute terms.
I'm trying to keep an open mind about this. Let's say $30k is a reasonable salary for a Flash programmer in Malaysia. So that's 20 man years development time. I've been searching for the pages, but it's difficult to find them using the names from the article (which is not a good sign):
The Flash game seems to be here. Didn't feel like starting it, given that it asked to post stuff on my wall and send me email. Sorry about that - but maybe someone would like to give it a spin and let us know?
Is that really all they have - some plain text and photo galleries, plus a simple Flash game? Or did I not find the right stuff? Finding that should be easy though - otherwise it's hardly useful for it's intended purpose of convincing tourists to visit Malaysia. (I purposely searched for this marketing campaign and didn't find anything which would attract me to Malaysia - that can't be a good result for a country which I'm sure is an interesting place to visit...)
It really does look like a ripoff.
That might work - the Green party in Germany is on the rise in a major way. They poll at around 20% of the votes and have picked up their first governorship in the state of Baden-Wuerttemberg. They are opposed to software patents and patents on genes and their positions have become a lot more influential in Germany, now.
That's what happens to everybody who is late in the market. It's a struggle to get started.
"Imperialist and capitalist"? Capitalism - I don't think so, but who actually cares? Imperialism would imply that they went out their armies and established colonies like Europe did not so long ago. I am not convinced either China or USA fits the bill.
Well USA in present day - no I don't think it's imperialist currently. Historically that's a different matter - spreading out "from coast to coast", Philippines, Hawaii, Puerto Rico - yes that was imperialism.
For China - well the expansion in Tibet falls into that category, and in present day China makes territorial claims to many of it's neighbors - against India (Arunachal Pradesh), against Taiwan (particularly it's right to exist) and pretty much everybody in the South China sea (Natuna Islands, Malampaya and Camago, Scarborough Shoal, Spratly Islands, Paracel Islands, Gulf of Thailand and Singapore Strait). Also against Japan (Senkaku islands).
It's certainly an expansionist agenda - you can argue whether that on it's own constitutes imperialism or not.
I would assume it's still the same old "if you use something other than windows or maybe mac, you are free to do so however you are on your own to figure it out and resolve any issue!" attitude. Which really I think is fair.
Why? Linux is not particularly exotic anymore, and learning to use Linux is quite valuable for many university students. It seems that is something they should encourage rather than brush off. And of course new Linux users - just like new users of any OS - will occasionally need help.
Supporting Linux shouldn't be that much extra work if you avoid platform-specific setups and specialty tools. And that should be fairly straightforward these days.
I think they should evaluate how many of their users are actually using a particular OS - e.g. if 90% of their users use Windows, 7% Mac and 3% Linux, then the Linux users should get about 3% of the support resources. That would be fair - 0% or 50% would both be unfair.
and those patents have all expired
Assuming that will happen. Copyrights are already in indefinite extension mode, maybe patents will follow?
what sales actually do is to create buyers
That's definitely not what they are doing. I'm not sure what the meaning behind the phrase could possibly be, but as stated it's a clear lie. You likely mean something by it which is true (though perhaps just waffling), but if you keep expressing yourself in that manner then your customers will lose trust.
I'm not sure what drives phrasing like this, but it's a fairly common disease in many companies. The submitter might want to look if it infects his consulting company too, and then get rid of it. Each time someone is using a phrase like that - ask what they actually mean, then replace the phrase with something which is true - or if it's merely waffling, just stop using it.
Siemens sells a variation of that basic idea: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdheOROTxuU Came out in 2007.
Users don't need to know what a bootloader is in order to care about this. They'll want to know that they can install the latest version of the OS on it, because there is that one cool feature they are interested in. And they'll hear stuff like "oh you can't upgrade a Motorola".
The desire to run the latest and coolest stuff is widespread, even among users who are not particularly technical. For proof just look at the way even trivial Trojans are spreading.
Yes, we should let intolerant people exercise their freedom of speech. We are free to have the better arguments.
We should not tolerate when they are actually bringing in laws to restrict our freedom, that's where it stops.
I don't think there is enough computing power in the world to model an entire PC on sub-atomic level. You could in principle do this, but in any engineering sense you can't.
Penrose is the only one brave enough to ask the question; "Is consciousness real?" and try to answer it using physics and science.
Physics is probably the wrong tool. Whatever happens in the brain obeys the laws of physics, but that applies to e.g. evolution as well. Nevertheless biology is the scientific discipline which discovered evolution.
When we write an application like a word processor we use some high-level formal language and a tool which translates those into machine code. This code is executed on a computer chip, a circuit composed of logical gates. These gates consist of transistors which switch electrical currents around. The transistors consist of complex arrangements of conducting, isolating and semiconducting materials.
Ultimately your word processor will move electrons around on a series of computer chips, that's correct. However looking at the problem of writing a word processor in terms of moving electrons around will get you absolutely nowhere.
The brain is a hugely complex system - trying to understand how it works by looking at subatomic effects is very likely a hopeless task. If we can't manage to understand it on a much more abstract level, then we will probably never understand it.
No it's not evil. You made the profile in order to be found, they index the profile so you can be found. They told you about it beforehand, you knew about it beforehand.
The service is advertised with Decide what the world sees when it searches for you.
Useless maybe, but not evil.
Established technology, not tied down to a single manufacturer, large user base, mobile and desktop clients exist...
No video chat and international calls cost a fortune. It's great as long as you don't want any of Skype's benefits.
What I wrote is true, obviously. Sure their customer support is usually fairly generous, I never claimed it wasn't. However they have no issue tracking system. If you can't resolve your problem with the first call, then you'll start from square zero next time you call. Their email system is set up in the same way, but your chances to get a useful response on the first try is extremely low.
Just call them up and ask - *they* will readily tell you that.
Send an email get a form letter. I suppose it's a steady income for some clerk in India.
That's all you ever get from Amazon on *any* issue. Sending them email - whether it's about a complaint with an order or a protest - will only get you a form letter. On top of that Amazon has no issue tracking system, if you email and then call, they will have no record of your email. Next call they won't have a record of your previous call. There is more than one reason to swear off them.
Well, it's easy to overlook small details like that.
Pressing for an (theoretically maybe implied) right to privacy will only give the TSA another smokescreen to hide behind. It will merely afford them not to be accountable to the public because they "have to protect the victim's privacy". And of course people photographing, or reporting what the TSA does would then have to be treated as criminals. That's the very last thing we need.
the argument can be made that the loudest protestors against the TSA are overly neurotic and likely sexually repressed
I think you'll find that the loudest protesters against this are people who care about the principle of the thing and not so much people who are otherwise known to be neurotic or sexually represent in any other part of their life.
I might agree with you in a way, in so far as I also have the impression that the sexual aspect of this may be exaggerated, and perhaps not very genuinely felt. It seems like a convenient angle of attack allowing to apply the arguments used in the context of sexual harassment. Those are rather widely respected, and of course they do very much apply in this case.
However I believe what's really driving the protest is the desire not to live in an authoritarian police state. That's exactly where you live, as soon as you enter a US airport though, and it looks like it may well expand from there. That's a much more complex argument to make though, and one which is no longer widely accepted.
Well, they didn't comment on this until it became public. As much as I dislike the TSA, at this point they ought to have the right to respond.
Also personally I'd much prefer the process to be in public. As soon as you introduce "privacy" into that, you'll find yourself shielded from sight, in some cubicle - just you and 2-3 TSA agents. No thanks, I'd rather the other passengers would watch - I trust them more then the TSA.
Instead, I'll vote for someone who I think will do a decent job.
But you won't tell us who that is. He must have tremendous chances...
If you vote for the "lesser of two evils", don't be surprised when you're rewarded with evil.
*You* are rewarded with evil, too. That's how elections work, at the end you have to live with the victor of the election, no matter who *you* voted for.
If you voted for evil, you only have yourself to blame.
If we are getting more evil, we blame those who made that possible. That includes those who think participating in an election is a mere exercise to feel blameless.There are large numbers of voters who will always stick to their party, no matter which candidate runs. If that number is bigger then the number of people who have even heard of your alleged "decent job doing guy", then voting for him is an exercise in futility. It's possible to get a fairly good idea whether that's the case using polls. If you ignore that information you should be blamed for doing so.
The first-past-the-gate election system has created a nice big hole for tyranny, through perfectly rational decisions by game theory.
I don't like two-party systems either, but you can mitigate this by voting in the primaries.
In addition it's quite possible to bring in third parties, however you have to get rid of the idea that there is a quick and easy fix available. You need to build it from the ground up - start running in local elections, get council members, mayors then state representatives, governorships, senators. Only once you've established yourself as a political force you field your own presidential candidate.
even if I don't use it whatever it may be.
It maps names of domains which were seized for some reason, to the new domains the websites moved to.
From what we've been told it wasn't very difficult for Manning to get to the data. With so many people having easy access, it's hard to imagine that actual enemies of the USA didn't have this information before. Which in turn would make it rather unlikely that there is any additional danger from letting the public know, too.