No, you're not. You're talking about the Iraq War, which happened well over a decade ago. I'm in the US too and never supported that war either, so why the fuck are you complaining to me about it?
What country are you in? Tell me so I can criticize you for your country's actions at some point in the past. If you don't tell me, then you're just a hypocritical piece of shit.
Freedom of speech doesn't allow incitement to violence, and ISIS propaganda **clearly** does exactly that.
This sounds like a slam-dunk to me. I hope she refuses a settlement, drags them into court, and gets a judgment so large the company has to be liquidated.
Bad comparisons IMO. There's two measures you can look at to see if a company has responsibility for the bad uses of its product: if the product is used frequently for nefarious purposes (meaning: is there really a problem?), and how feasible it is for the company to keep its product out of the hands of evil-doers.
First, with hardware and grocery stores, those supplies have other, non-nefarious purposes which they are used for 99.99999% of the time. It's extremely rare that people buy supplies at those places to build bombs. The last time I think I heard about someone building actual bombs from supplies from grocery and hardware stores, it involved an assassin android sent from the future to 1984.
For Swith & Wesson, while guns certainly are designed to be efficient killing machines, and they are used for bad things too often (unlike home-made pipe bombs), the gun companies, through their dealers (who they're required to sell through by federal law), DO take steps to prevent them from falling into the wrong hands: they use federal instant background checks, again mandated by federal law and using a federally-run system, to make sure that blacklisted people can't buy a gun. As far as I'm concerned, the gunmakers have had this problem solved for them by the government itself taking on that responsibility; if the government doesn't think its own background check is sufficient, then the government needs to improve its own checking system.
In the case of Twitter, it appears that there has been a BIG problem with terrorist groups using them for propaganda, and that they've done little to nothing about it even though everyone knew about it. That to me shows that they are certainly culpable in a civil suit. By comparison, would terrorist videos uploaded to YouTube stay up there very long, or their accounts be allowed to persist? I don't think so.
But how exactly do you interview for people skills? Give them questions like "Tell me your greatest weakness"? Technical things are testable; people skills really aren't. The best you can do is introduce them to your team, have them hang around a bit, talk to them for a while, and get a "gut feeling" which amounts to nothing more than if you like them or not. A real test would basically be some kind of internship: have them work there for a week and see how they do, but the cost of doing that is pretty high, so no one ever does that.
Google, meh, what have you done since search anyway?
Mail, Maps, and Voice.
Gmail was in-house, but the others were initially purchased. Maybe you don't appreciate Gmail, but I certainly do, and judging by the sheer number of @gmail.com addresses, a lot of other people do too. And Google Maps is unparalleled as a business directory; if I want to see all the Greek restaurants (or whatever) in a certain area, then see what their operating hours are, see reviews for them, and then pick one and get turn-by-turn directions with traffic updates and rerouting, Google Maps does all of that easily.
Yes, but the problem here is that not all your employees, or even all your programmers, need to do that kind of work. If you're working on embedded devices for instance (like Android/iOS/WP phones or Fire tablets), you're going to have some people writing low-level driver code for interacting with hardware, and those people never work with binary trees. There's lots of other programming jobs that just aren't challenging in that way, like most web programming.
Well presumably, that's why they have not one, but four interviewers. If one is a problem, you theoretically should see that after a number of interviews where the bad one is giving particular ratings to candidates and the other three are all giving opposite ratings.
Yep, I have to say the same thing. Google Mail works just fine for me, and I've been using it for years (mostly in Firefox, but sometimes in Chromium). It's uglier than it used to be, I'll admit, just like pretty much all modern UIs, but I certainly don't have any problems with lots of mouse clicks being ignored or anything like that. It's ugly, but it works.
Same thing with Google Maps. It's uglier (and slower, on the PC/web browser version) than it used to be, but it still works. The Android phone version works well though. I use it as a backup for the HERE-based nav system in my car. Google Maps will notify me of traffic problems which the built-in nav doesn't. I do want to try Waze sometime, but I haven't gotten around to it.
Maybe the parent's problem is with crappy Windows.
Same thing, effectively. NYC citizens are mostly who elects the state government. This is why a lot of upstate NYers would prefer to have their own state.
Bad idea; whoever does this first will lose sales to whoever doesn't.
Remember also, New Yorkers are largely pro-authoritarians who enjoy having military combat troops serving as police in their city. They aren't the type of people who would want a phone which the government doesn't have a back door into.
So a simple solution is to go ahead and offer back-doored phones (with this clearly advertised, since most NYers will count it as a feature), and then for people who want a non-backdoored phone, point them to one of their online partners or tell them to drive a short distance to NJ or CT or PA or VT or MA.
The problem is, if absolutely no one actually practices it the way the manifesto says, then the manifesto is irrelevant. No one's talking about some mythical thing that no one really does in the real world, they're complaining about how it's actually used in real life. It's like communism as described in Marx's writings versus how real communist countries actually act.
The problem is that it's not fine-grained enough. You shouldn't be able to down-mod a reply to your post, but you should be able to moderate posts in completely different threads for the same article. SoylentNews allows this (and uses Slashcode, so it's not like it can't be done here).
I used to give away some stuff on Craigslist years ago, and it was always a pain in the ass because people would reserve it, then never bother to show up.
So I finally gave up and when I gave something away for free, I stuck it on the curb and posted where it was, first come first serve, no reservations taken. If someone shows up and wastes their gas and it's already gone, too fucking bad. Too many assholes ruined it for you. After I adopted this policy, I didn't have any more problems.
The only problem with your analysis is that currently, the false grandparent is at +1 Informative, and the correcting parent is at +4 Informative.
Slashdot definitely has big problems with its moderation system, but this doesn't look like one of them. Of course, we could also argue that your post pointing out this stupidity is what shined light on this particular instance and it got corrected quickly as a result.
But I'll say it again, as I've complained countless times before: the "feature" where you can't post in any discussion where you moderate is utterly stupid, and as a result, I simply never moderate at all.
Did you miss the part about how the vaccine is needed at a young age to be effective?
And did you not get the part about how they can get it from a partner? What if they marry a guy who had sex *once* with a girl who was infected? Remember, there is NO test for this for men. You really want to roll the dice with your kids' lives?
Your standards for morality are simply ridiculous and unrealistic. What happens when one of your daughters has her husband die at an early age (~30), then remarries some guy who's infected, perhaps because he got it from his now-dead wife? Even with no one committing a "sin" in your eyes, there's ways for them to get infected.
That can be said about all kinds of mental problems that might drive people to violence. That's why I specifically mentioned the impulse thing; there's pedos out there who keep it under control and never hurt anyone, and that's fine; people should be punished for crimes, not thoughtcrimes.
Well hopefully there's a huge number of people out there just like you, and all the whiners saying they *must* have application X and will never leave Windows because of it are in the minority. But I'm not hopeful on that.
Hahaha. I use Mint myself, but I'm sorry, I don't see anyone converting to Linux over all these Microsoft shenanigans. They just sit around and bitch endlessly about it, but they refuse to dump the vendor that abuses them.
Actually, it is. If consumers are so dumb they'll continue to buy from vendors no matter how much the vendors abuse them, then why shouldn't the vendors take advantage of them for greater profit? What are the consumers going to do, switch to Linux? Apparently not. So MS might as well do this stuff if it makes them more money. It seems that no amount of abuse will drive their customers away.
You should surrender it because you made a stupid choice in vendor and product selection. If you don't like the way your vendor is treating you, maybe you could sue them. But the easier thing to do is simply avoid this vendor in the future.
Slashdot Mirror
No, you're not. You're talking about the Iraq War, which happened well over a decade ago. I'm in the US too and never supported that war either, so why the fuck are you complaining to me about it?
What country are you in? Tell me so I can criticize you for your country's actions at some point in the past. If you don't tell me, then you're just a hypocritical piece of shit.
Freedom of speech doesn't allow incitement to violence, and ISIS propaganda **clearly** does exactly that.
This sounds like a slam-dunk to me. I hope she refuses a settlement, drags them into court, and gets a judgment so large the company has to be liquidated.
Bad comparisons IMO. There's two measures you can look at to see if a company has responsibility for the bad uses of its product: if the product is used frequently for nefarious purposes (meaning: is there really a problem?), and how feasible it is for the company to keep its product out of the hands of evil-doers.
First, with hardware and grocery stores, those supplies have other, non-nefarious purposes which they are used for 99.99999% of the time. It's extremely rare that people buy supplies at those places to build bombs. The last time I think I heard about someone building actual bombs from supplies from grocery and hardware stores, it involved an assassin android sent from the future to 1984.
For Swith & Wesson, while guns certainly are designed to be efficient killing machines, and they are used for bad things too often (unlike home-made pipe bombs), the gun companies, through their dealers (who they're required to sell through by federal law), DO take steps to prevent them from falling into the wrong hands: they use federal instant background checks, again mandated by federal law and using a federally-run system, to make sure that blacklisted people can't buy a gun. As far as I'm concerned, the gunmakers have had this problem solved for them by the government itself taking on that responsibility; if the government doesn't think its own background check is sufficient, then the government needs to improve its own checking system.
In the case of Twitter, it appears that there has been a BIG problem with terrorist groups using them for propaganda, and that they've done little to nothing about it even though everyone knew about it. That to me shows that they are certainly culpable in a civil suit. By comparison, would terrorist videos uploaded to YouTube stay up there very long, or their accounts be allowed to persist? I don't think so.
But how exactly do you interview for people skills? Give them questions like "Tell me your greatest weakness"? Technical things are testable; people skills really aren't. The best you can do is introduce them to your team, have them hang around a bit, talk to them for a while, and get a "gut feeling" which amounts to nothing more than if you like them or not. A real test would basically be some kind of internship: have them work there for a week and see how they do, but the cost of doing that is pretty high, so no one ever does that.
Google, meh, what have you done since search anyway?
Mail, Maps, and Voice.
Gmail was in-house, but the others were initially purchased. Maybe you don't appreciate Gmail, but I certainly do, and judging by the sheer number of @gmail.com addresses, a lot of other people do too. And Google Maps is unparalleled as a business directory; if I want to see all the Greek restaurants (or whatever) in a certain area, then see what their operating hours are, see reviews for them, and then pick one and get turn-by-turn directions with traffic updates and rerouting, Google Maps does all of that easily.
Yes, but the problem here is that not all your employees, or even all your programmers, need to do that kind of work. If you're working on embedded devices for instance (like Android/iOS/WP phones or Fire tablets), you're going to have some people writing low-level driver code for interacting with hardware, and those people never work with binary trees. There's lots of other programming jobs that just aren't challenging in that way, like most web programming.
Well presumably, that's why they have not one, but four interviewers. If one is a problem, you theoretically should see that after a number of interviews where the bad one is giving particular ratings to candidates and the other three are all giving opposite ratings.
Yep, I have to say the same thing. Google Mail works just fine for me, and I've been using it for years (mostly in Firefox, but sometimes in Chromium). It's uglier than it used to be, I'll admit, just like pretty much all modern UIs, but I certainly don't have any problems with lots of mouse clicks being ignored or anything like that. It's ugly, but it works.
Same thing with Google Maps. It's uglier (and slower, on the PC/web browser version) than it used to be, but it still works. The Android phone version works well though. I use it as a backup for the HERE-based nav system in my car. Google Maps will notify me of traffic problems which the built-in nav doesn't. I do want to try Waze sometime, but I haven't gotten around to it.
Maybe the parent's problem is with crappy Windows.
What's to stop people from going to another state, buying a cell phone, and then coming back to NY?
Nothing, but very, very few New Yorkers will do that. Most NYers like authoritarianism, and like having combat troops stationed around their city.
Same thing, effectively. NYC citizens are mostly who elects the state government. This is why a lot of upstate NYers would prefer to have their own state.
Bad idea; whoever does this first will lose sales to whoever doesn't.
Remember also, New Yorkers are largely pro-authoritarians who enjoy having military combat troops serving as police in their city. They aren't the type of people who would want a phone which the government doesn't have a back door into.
So a simple solution is to go ahead and offer back-doored phones (with this clearly advertised, since most NYers will count it as a feature), and then for people who want a non-backdoored phone, point them to one of their online partners or tell them to drive a short distance to NJ or CT or PA or VT or MA.
I've been saying for ages that this push to skip the Moon and go straight to Mars with manned missions was a bad idea.
The problem is, if absolutely no one actually practices it the way the manifesto says, then the manifesto is irrelevant. No one's talking about some mythical thing that no one really does in the real world, they're complaining about how it's actually used in real life. It's like communism as described in Marx's writings versus how real communist countries actually act.
No True Scotsman fallacy. If it's called "Agile" and that's how most companies practice it, then it IS "Agile".
The problem is that it's not fine-grained enough. You shouldn't be able to down-mod a reply to your post, but you should be able to moderate posts in completely different threads for the same article. SoylentNews allows this (and uses Slashcode, so it's not like it can't be done here).
That's why you change jobs every 6-18 months. Every time you change jobs, take a month off.
I used to give away some stuff on Craigslist years ago, and it was always a pain in the ass because people would reserve it, then never bother to show up.
So I finally gave up and when I gave something away for free, I stuck it on the curb and posted where it was, first come first serve, no reservations taken. If someone shows up and wastes their gas and it's already gone, too fucking bad. Too many assholes ruined it for you. After I adopted this policy, I didn't have any more problems.
The only problem with your analysis is that currently, the false grandparent is at +1 Informative, and the correcting parent is at +4 Informative.
Slashdot definitely has big problems with its moderation system, but this doesn't look like one of them. Of course, we could also argue that your post pointing out this stupidity is what shined light on this particular instance and it got corrected quickly as a result.
But I'll say it again, as I've complained countless times before: the "feature" where you can't post in any discussion where you moderate is utterly stupid, and as a result, I simply never moderate at all.
Did you miss the part about how the vaccine is needed at a young age to be effective?
And did you not get the part about how they can get it from a partner? What if they marry a guy who had sex *once* with a girl who was infected? Remember, there is NO test for this for men. You really want to roll the dice with your kids' lives?
Your standards for morality are simply ridiculous and unrealistic. What happens when one of your daughters has her husband die at an early age (~30), then remarries some guy who's infected, perhaps because he got it from his now-dead wife? Even with no one committing a "sin" in your eyes, there's ways for them to get infected.
That can be said about all kinds of mental problems that might drive people to violence. That's why I specifically mentioned the impulse thing; there's pedos out there who keep it under control and never hurt anyone, and that's fine; people should be punished for crimes, not thoughtcrimes.
Well hopefully there's a huge number of people out there just like you, and all the whiners saying they *must* have application X and will never leave Windows because of it are in the minority. But I'm not hopeful on that.
Hahaha. I use Mint myself, but I'm sorry, I don't see anyone converting to Linux over all these Microsoft shenanigans. They just sit around and bitch endlessly about it, but they refuse to dump the vendor that abuses them.
Actually, it is. If consumers are so dumb they'll continue to buy from vendors no matter how much the vendors abuse them, then why shouldn't the vendors take advantage of them for greater profit? What are the consumers going to do, switch to Linux? Apparently not. So MS might as well do this stuff if it makes them more money. It seems that no amount of abuse will drive their customers away.
You should surrender it because you made a stupid choice in vendor and product selection. If you don't like the way your vendor is treating you, maybe you could sue them. But the easier thing to do is simply avoid this vendor in the future.