I don't think anyone is complaining that this isn't a straight adaptation of an Asimov story, or that it looks like they are creating new characters or robots. It doesn't even seem like anyone is particularly upset that Susan Calvin seems to have been transformed into a useless little bitch. And I agree that Asimov probably wouldn't have been uptight about a movie following the PLOTS of his stories. But the Three Laws of Robotics ARE the stories. The whole POINT of Asimov's robot stories is that the Three Laws are unbreakable, but humans keep on fucking up and things get screwy, even within the constraints of the Three Laws.
What people (myself included) are so upset about is that this has nothing to do with Asimov's work. If Hollywood wants to make a robot movie with Will Smith that has something similar to the Three Laws of Robotics in it, where robots run amock and kill people, they should go for it. But don't lie and say it has anything to do with Asimov's work. Asimov _created_ the field of robotics and revolutionised science fiction by moving it away from what he called the "Frankenstein Complex." Read some of his indroctions or essays for why he doesn't like the "Frankenstein Complex." For one thing, it's boring and gets old quickly. But that's exactly what this movie is. It's an overblown and (it would appear) poorly done "Frankenstein Complex" film hiding behind Asimov's title and giving a nod to his Laws of Robotics to attempt and give itself some credibility.
That's why I (and apparently many others) are so disgusted with this film seems to be.
Having viewed the trailer (got through eventually from one of the links someone posted), I don't know why anyone would want to see it...taking it off the web by/.ing and - ideally - taking the film out of production entirely would be the best gift the producers could offer.
I picked up "Robot Visions," a collection of Asimov robot stories and essays, last week because it had a couple stories I had never read and a number I just hadn't read in a while. Asimov's writing, which discuss the posibilities of human missunderstandings and technology problems as well as just being well written enjoyable sci-fi, has nothing to do with the crap that Will Smith is starring in.
As other people on this thread have said, the movie is inherently incompatible with Asimov's visions. The Three Laws aren't suggestions or helpful guidelines for robots to follow. They are physically built into each robot and cannot fail without the robot being 'insane' or broken beyond any posibility of repair. The vision of hundreds of robots attacking humans, being defended by Will Smith and "Dr. Calvin" (the idea of Dr. Calvin shooting at a robot is yet another thing to add to the growing list of "Why this movie looks inherently flawed") is an abomination against Asimov's work.
This movie looks, smells, and tastes like the 'sci-fi' crap Hollywood has been shitting out.
I admit I haven't RTFA, but 34% (WMP) + 19% (Real) + 10% (QT) leaves 37% to add to 100. I'm assuming this is only streaming video, so what takes up that extra market share?
Where is the link to it from that school webpage? I'm not trying to be difficult, just honestly can't find it....
-Trillian
PS Would also like to use this as an opportunity to complain that their site didn't render correctly in Mozilla. Just me, or anyone else have this problem?
I don't think sites should be LIABLE for what people post, but because of the unique nature of the Internet, once something is posted on a site it's likely to stay there and be easily accessable, in ways past forms of communication weren't. That gives sites like Teacher Reviews, and even places like Slashdot, unique responsibility.
If I tell a friend that Mr. Example Teacher is an ass, word may or may not spread, and the comments may or may not be linked back to me. But it takes an active effort by many people for the comment to spread. And if it's not true, it will probably fizzle out. Even if it isn't true and does NOT fizzle out, rumors are very specific forms of communication that most people don't take serriously.
On the other hand, if I post a comment to Teacher Reviews, 30 seconds of my time has created something that may stay there for ever and ever. And, unlike rumors, there's no way for others to say, "I don't think this is true, but I heard that...." All the comments are posted as equals.
So I would say if something libelous is posted to a website, while the webmaster isn't responsible for the actual content, I would say they're responsible for removing it in a timely manner, once notified of the content.
Speaking of Teacher Reviews specifically, I think if a bad review of a teacher was posted (talks slow, bad assignments, boring) then Teacher Review does not have a responsibility to take it down. On the contrary, they have a responsibility to leave it up if they want to achieve their goals of a student-reviewed teacher database. But I would say labeling a teacher as a "Bipolar Paranoid Schitzophrenic" could be considered libelous. I don't think it's unreasonable that it be asked to be removed.
Bringing it back to Slashdot...
This site is in a very odd position, in that much of the postings here (for example, about SCO or Microsoft) could easily be considered as libel. But unlike Teacher Reviews, they're (usually) posted as jokes. And Slashdot has a moderation system and a reply system so posts that are blatently untrue get shouted down by more accurate responses.
I'd say Teacher Reviews, unfortunatly, took the only realistic course of action. They took the site down, and are taking time to regroup. I'd be sad if some of the suggested implimentations actually happen (hiding teacher reviews from Google, or non anonymous reviews) but I think things like emailing professors reviews or having a better process for review removeall are very reasonable.
All in all, I hope Teacher Reviews is able to continue. It's a great site and a very nifty idea.
-Trillian
PS I didn't find a way to work it gracefully into my post, but I think the teacher who threatened to sue, even after the review was removied, is an ass. I'll risk the possibility of getting Slashdot sued, and go so far as to say he sounds like one of those crazy Bipolar Paranoid Schitzophrenics you've been hearing so much about recently....
Responding to your post, in no particular order...
Ask Slashdot is a section for people to pose their questions to the Slashdot community. Slashdot is made up of, in large part, a tech-savy and geek-indentifying community. I'd be willing to bet that a higher percentage of Slashdot readers have TiVo and/or ReplayTV than the general population. So this seemingly narrow question that, on the surface, would not be helpful to anyone is probably of interest to a large number of/. readers.
Likewise, those lucky enough to play with tech-related toys are likely to have more money to throw around. Again, compare Slashdot's readers to the general population, and I'll be you'll find a higher income among the Slashdot population. So while saying that the poster owns a TiVo and ReplayTV may cause envy in some Slashdotters eyes (mine included), it probably isn't enough to cause any fits of jealousy over this damnable soul who is clearly of a higher social and econimic standing than the rest of us slobs.
Finally, I very much doubt that the manual has instructions for not using a phone line. My guess is it simply says that TiVo requires a phone line. But that would seem to not be the case. And Ask Slashdot could be considered "checking a website..." The poster is asking for Slashdot's collective knowledge on the subject. Consulting Google is the only valid point you bring up. Plugging in tivo and "no phone line" brings up MOSTLY ads, but a couple of valid-looking links.
But Ask Slashdot isn't meant to only to give the origonal poster an answer (hopefully) to their question, but to provoke discussion and inform others. So someone with a unique experience might post here, and only here. Their knowledge may be absent from every single webpage out there, and a Google search could be useless. Or maybe I was thinking about getting a TiVo, but know I don't have a phoneline for it to work with. After reading this thread, I might learn that I definitely can or cannot buy a TiVo and expect it to work.
Or, as someone who doesn't have and doesn't plan on getting a TiVo, I may just be curious about the problems of living without a land-line. A friend of mine recently killed her phone line, and I'm curious how others have dealt with possibel problems. Dealing with TiVo and ReplayTV is only a small subset of the larger problem of living without a land-line. So I'm interested in what people have to say, not only about TiVo and ReplayTV specifically, but about living without a land-line in general.
The "Your problems aren't important enough so we'll ignore them" argument has always seemed shallow to me. The fact of the matter is the editors (for whatever reason) decided to post this question to Ask Slashdot. Maybe they were currious themselves. Maybe it was just a slow news day. Maybe the specific goal was to piss someone like you off to the point of posting a knee-jerk, thoughtless response to prove some point about the nature of Slashdot. We'll probably never know.
But clearly a sarcastic comlaint is the right sollution...
I'm sorry. I really, honestly am. But I keep running into trouble. I bought the Flash2Advance 256 Ultra, which (as I said) comes with F2APowerWriter 1.00b. Unfortunatly, it's a POS software. I can, SOME of the time, get PogoShell working if I upload it with an older version of the Flash2Advance writing software, but more often than not I can't upload it. Am I simply forced to upload it through F2APowerWriter and then open PogoShell from the F2A default file menu? That seems cludgy and not very graceful.
Again, I'm sorry to keep bothering you. But it's so close to working! -Trillian
I got my Flash2Advance cartridge today, and the USB linker. I've had much fun loading games onto it, and you're right: it definitely rocks. One last (I hope) question. With the USB linker and the software provided (F2APowerWriter 1.00b) the cart is akwats automatically pre-written with the Flash2Advance file navigator. You seemed to indicate PogoShell should be the only thing written to the file, but this looks impossible with the software they provided me with to link to the computer. Am I missing something?
Thanks again for all of your help so far! It's awesome beyond belief to be playing NES games on my GBA.
Sorry to keep bothering you. Just want to make sure about what I'm getting into before I spend money.
I realize this is obviously not going to give accurate performance, but I downloaded a GBA emulator to try PogoShell in. Unfortunatly, it keeps crashing. Is this just a symptom of the emulator?
I get tantalizingly close to it working (shows the PogoShell shell, and I can select roms) but they crash when I attempt to play 'em. It really does work for you?
Any other information or suggestions you can think of? (I'm pretty sure I've talked myself into buying a flash cartridge...)
This is OT, but you touched on it in your post. I just recently got a GBA and am loving it, but it sounds like you have a flash reader and linker (and presumably GBA-compatible emulator) to play NES games on your GBA. That would simply kick ass and be worth some expendature of money to get the required hardware. I was wondering how that worked and if you had any advice for where or how to get equipment.
Thanks for the extremely informative post. You brought up a couple things I hadn't thought of (the advantages of sign language, communication through multiple channels, etc) and gave a very good explanation of both sides of the issue of deaf culture.
Thanks again. And I'll definatly ask her about "Egg train is a short name." =)
This is off-topic, but I'm curious. You sound like someone who, while not involved in a directly emotional sense, might have an opinion on cochlear implants and the entire idea of deaf culture.
My mom has been a teacher for the deaf for longer than I've been alive (although she does not have any hearing loss). Because of her I always take an interest in deafness-related stories, and have heard arguments from both sides of the debate on how cochlear implants and similar devices are a threat to deaf culture. I've been exposed to videos like "Sound and Fury" and have had the good fortune to talk with a number of deaf individuals.
My understanding is that deaf culture revolves around the idea of deafness not being a disability, and deaf people (specifically those born deaf) have developed their own unique culture in the same way that more regularly recognized cultures have. As a result movements to grant hearing to deaf people - especially with devices like cochlear implants which, while amazing pieces of technology, create a type of hearing that is not 'natural' or the same as a non-deaf person would experience - are viewed with hostility and as an attempt to break up deaf culture. Deafness, if my understanding is correct, isn't even viewed as a disability.
I have very mixed feelings on this. On the one hand, I can emotionally understand how a group such as deaf individuals could see themselves as a seperate culture than everyone else. This is especially true because unlike blindness or loss of a limb or almost any other disability, hearing loss greatly changes how you can communicate with people, and who can communicate with you. On the other hand, when I view it from a more removed position, I can't think of deafness as anything other than a disability. It doesn't mean deaf people are "bad," or have any less to contribute to the world at large, or that wishes to remain deaf shouldn't be respected. But it's a basic biological function breaking down. It impedes communication, and makes living in a society more difficult. I can't be honest and say that I think of it as anything other than a disability.
Anyway, I was wondering if you had any opinions on the subject. I'm always interested in what others have to say on the topic.
As someone who's been playing SWG for less than a month, I'm very torn about this revelation. I'm still rather early along in any skill progressions, and haven't gotten anywhere near aquiring even a single holocron, so I was nowhere near being a Jedi. But because the game is still pretty new to me, I've been enjoying it a lot. Even without the prospect of becoming a Jedi any time in the near future, I've enjoyed running Rebel missions and exploring the Star Wars galaxy (excuse the pun).
But I can see the grind of leveling getting old and the feeling that some gamers might have, of their 'right' to become Jedi in a Star Wars game. And as a gamer, I can relate. Part of the fun of almost every Star Wars game has been the excitement of being a Jedi. But as a Star Wars fan, I have to agree with other posts: the universe of the origonal trilogy was almost entirely devoid of Jedi. The Empire was hunting them down and killing them, one by one.
And even outside the origonal trilogy, even at the HEIGHT of the Jedi Order, we're talking a couple thousand Jedi, tops. Even with tens of thousands. Even (and this is just silly) MILLIONS of Jedi. In a galaxy populated by billions and billions of sentient beings, that's less than one percent of the population.
So I don't think it's unreasonable that it's hard as fuck to become a Jedi, and it's kind of a bitch to be one once you've achieved it. That's consistant with the rules the origonal trilogy laid out.
I know some people may say, "Yes, but it's just a videogame." But it's a videogame set in a specific universe with specific rules that it has to follow to be able to truely claim it's in the Star Wars universe. And if it doesn't follow those, then I don't know why I would want to bother playing it. There are a number of other MMORPGs out there, and have their own cool sets of rules and characters and stories, without having to conform to an already existing background universe. But SWG has chosen to constrain itself within specific boundaries, and I expect it to do so.
I guess I'll have to wait and see. I've been having a good time, but have also been annoyed with certain things. For example, the Rebel mission terminals are sitting out in the open. Even though certain systems may be doing a better job than others resisting the Empire, I think it's fair to assume a Rebel standing in the middle of a public square yelling "COME WORK FOR THE REBELLION!!!" would be killed rather quickly...
And it's one thing to get a repeating mission to go deliver something or go kill a lair of some beast, but to get a mission to kill a specific person, and then to get it again? With the same mission description? So what did I do the first time?
These aren't complaints on the game mechanics, just on the implimentation. And a sign that maybe the creators don't care about keeping true to the SW Trilogy as much as I'd like. I'm waiting to pass judgement on the revamped Jedi system, but will be extremely pissed off if there's a new Jedi Mission Terminal in every city and you can get force points by completting them.
If I wanted to play a game where I could get magical powers simply by leveling, I'd have chosen something else. An inherent nature of the Jedi is that they're more powerful than pretty much anyone else. Maybe that's an impossible thing to achieve in an MMORPG, and I know there's no "accurate" way to portray The Force in a MMORPG, but I really hope they can do a little better than having mission terminals or some such shit.
I thought you were kidding, but it's actually in there. Page 17 (Note to Adobe: Why have a stupid "Search" function if it doesn't work?) on the right side during the list of awards the game has won.
Absolutely briliant.
Unlike some other posts on this page, I have no problem with AA and actually think it's quite fun. It's free, and it doesn't pretend to be anything other than what it is (a recruiting method). So what's the problem?
I think AV companies renaming virii is obnoxious as hell. If I'm cleaning up a virus that has hidden itself in Windows (although this one didn't do an amazingly good job) and named itself "Beagle" I want to be able to go to Google and pull up entries for BEAGLE. I don't want to have to know what the AV companies decided to rename it to.
Likewise, if it's on the news I and is called something different than the file I've been cleaning off my friends systems, I'm going to think, "Shit. Is there another strain coming that I don't know about?" The natural reaction ISN'T, "Oh! Clearly they renamed the virus out of a child-like effort to deny the virus writer the satisfaction of knowing their program screwed with people."
You're totaly right. I'm sorry for using the lazy definition of 'virus' (pretty much any malicious code running on a computer).
Although it's sometimes hard to tell when only speaking through text, this post isn't meant to be sarcastic or anything, but is an honest apology because I should have said 'trojan.' I thought about it, and completely understand why something spreading as a trojan (requiring 'help' from the user) is worse than a virus that uses a Windows (or your OS of choice) exploit.
I missread Symantec's site (didn't scroll far enough down). It does indeed contain malicious code beyond it's own reproduction: from http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.beagle.a@mm.html
#
# Creates a listening thread on port 6777 (this port can change during the worm execution) that allows a remote attacker to:
- execute commands on the local system as if he were the current user - download executables onto the local system - terminate and delete the worm program
# Creates a notification thread that will contact a remote website (using local browser proxy settings) and announce the presence of the worm on the local system every 10 minutes.
The list of websites contacted is predetermined and are contained within the body of the worm.
As I said, the variation I saw was hidden in a version of the windows calculator. Specifically, the attachment was an EXE file with a random string of letters (I saw names between three and seven letters long). Also, it ran as bbeagle.exe, and the bbeagle.exe file lived in the C:\Windows\System32\ folder. Finally, deleting the bbeagle.exe file and going into the registry and searching for bbeagle.exe, and deleting THAT entry should kill it. (Again, acording to Symantec)
I'm the resident geek in my dorm, and have spent the last 24 hours getting rid of it on computers of anyone and everyone. The particular strain we saw came in an email with the subject of simply "Hi" and contained (basically) the following test.
Hi! This is a test. (random string of letters) Testy test.
The attached file was a modified version of the Windows calculator which (according to the Symantec site) "Emails all the contacts it can find inside files with the extensions.wab,.htm,.html, and.txt"
It's interesting because apparently that's ALL it does. It doesn't screw with files or settings, or run malicous code (outside the actual act of reproducing itself). It's annoying, however, because it sends emails to people who are NOT in your address book, but merely mentioned in text files somewhere on your computer. In the last 24 hours I've gotten emails with the virus from friends, random people in my university, at least one university email address that should have been run by someone who knew better, and a couple random friends-of-friends.
Also, according to Symantec, it dies on the 28th.
It was really interested to see the spread at my college. For us, it began around 1 AM Monday morning, peaked around 2, and was already slacking off by 3 AM. I know this from my own inbox, people in my dorm, and talking to people elsewhere.
I do find it currious the virus didn't DO anything. Is it just someone screwing around, a test for a future release or (as some of the more paranoid people in my dorm are suggesting) a released virus by the anti-virus companies to keep people in enough fear to demand their products.
As a side note, I also spent hours cleaning the assorted spyware and adware that builds up when people don't know how to properly use their computers....more than one person could literaly not do work becasue of the porn popups that plagued their computer.
A couple of things. First, I said "why people who dislike Microsoft are CALLED extremist zealot idiots," and not "all people who dislike microsoft ARE extremist zealot idiots." My basic viewpoint wasn't that Microsoft was good (or bad, for that matter). I happen to dislike Microsoft a great deal, but can back it up with opinions based on their behavior as a company and choices put into their software.
But I'm tired of seeeing the people who create the idea of the 'extremist zealot' continue to act assinine. Spelling Microsoft with a dollar sign might have been creative wit, once upon a time. Now it just looks silly and childish.
And in direct responses to your post, I used namecalling and all caps as a sarcastic imitation of said 'zealots,' and not as an honest expression of my opinion. And I don't think the origonal post was funny. As I said, if it was trying to be funny it failed, and if it wasn't then it was just foolish. But it was unclear what the intent was, so I responded as if it were serrious. Another perfectly valid response would have simply been: That's not funny. But I used this oportunity to vent my general frustration at those who dislike Microsoft and display it in a childish manner, making the rest of us look foolish by ascociation.
And what type of zealot would I be, exactly? An anti-zealot zealot? Fine. I think zealots are almost always stupid and foolish-looking, express themselves poorly, and over-react. Of those qualifications, I think I met one: Over-reacting. So I'm not too much of a zealot, I guess.
But my response was a calm (albiet sarcastic) reply to the origonal post, and while I let my general dislike for anti-microsoft zealots cloud my opinions, I don't think it negated my message.
Trillian
Warning label: It's 3:45 AM and I'm tired. I'm sorry for any incoherency in the above post. It was a bit of a free ascociation...
Clearly your blindingly witty placement of a dollar sign for the "S" in Microsoft highlights your superior mental ability. Likewise, your logic is flawless: Microsoft puts a THEIR OWN LOGO in THEIR OWN GAME (according to you it's not even an ad, but just their logo) and you refuse to purchase any more Microsoft games. It's not as if they sold huge ad-space in the game but, gosh darnit, if their logo is visible for a single second the game has to go! One of the things I always hated about Age of Empires was the Microsoft product placement that plagued the game.
Oh wait...it didn't.
And I take it you still use other Microsoft products? You said you only haven't purchased _games_ from Microsoft. Or maybe you take the moral high road by downloading them from Kazaa? Surely you can justify THAT position!
If you were attempting to be funny, you failed. If you're honestly serious, then you're a prime example of why people who dislike Microsoft are called extremist zealot idiots.
As I recall, Oedipus was punished for something his grandfather did, sleeping with (or failing to sleep with, I can't remember) the duaghter of this god or that. Unfortunatly, I can't find a link to support that, so I may be wrong.
Regardless, the story of Oedipus was well-known quite a while before Christ. It's generally accepted that Sophocles took a known myth and made a play out of it, but even if he created it all by his little self, he still wrote it, at the latest, around 400 B.C. (Just type if Sophocles or Oedipus into google and click any of the links.) So the _intended_ meaning of the Oedipus myth is not about abandoning knowledge of our selves as God, it's about denying your destiny.
I realize that, arguably, those are the same things. If we are all pieces of God (something I don't believe but am willing to use for conjecture) then by going against Gods will we are going against our own will, and thus damning ourselves. This was a large part of Dante's explanation for how souls are placed in Heaven or Hell, and is not a new concept.
But Oedipus wasn't about denying self (or "remembering childhood"), it was about trying to escape that which he (and his father, and his mother) were destined for. Sure, you could argue that had Oedipus been able to remember his true parents he could have escaped his fate, but that would be a flawed argument. The whole point is that it WAS his fate, and he couldn't do a thing about it.
There was no Christian imagery anywhere in it. And there shouldn't have been, as Christ wasn't around yet to be imagery-ized.
Finally, changing gears for a couple questions. These aren't attacks but honest questions. What is the "human experience" that we are supposed to be in search of? Because I'm pretty sure I know how to be a human, but wouldn't know the first thing about being a spirit. I think the Emporer's New Clothes is relevant, because it addresses what's "known" to be true, even when it is so obviously false. But How does the life of Jesus tie in? The virgin birth as a metaphor saying that only children (i.e. those who haven't had sex) know what's going on?
I think your post is a stretch, attempting to pull stories that do _not_ have Christian imagery and using them as Christian metaphors, rather than just speaking of religion straight out.
This is probably being posted too late to get noticed, but I'm transgendered and planning to being transitioning sooner than later. My mom (who rules) is paying for some of my hair removal for Chanukah. Definatly my weirdest gift ever.
It's sad that I saw a semi-on-topic subject, a bolded first line, and a list and assumed it was another off-topic bullshit post about shoving something up my ass or why SCO is a cult...
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think anyone is complaining that this isn't a straight adaptation of an Asimov story, or that it looks like they are creating new characters or robots. It doesn't even seem like anyone is particularly upset that Susan Calvin seems to have been transformed into a useless little bitch. And I agree that Asimov probably wouldn't have been uptight about a movie following the PLOTS of his stories. But the Three Laws of Robotics ARE the stories. The whole POINT of Asimov's robot stories is that the Three Laws are unbreakable, but humans keep on fucking up and things get screwy, even within the constraints of the Three Laws.
What people (myself included) are so upset about is that this has nothing to do with Asimov's work. If Hollywood wants to make a robot movie with Will Smith that has something similar to the Three Laws of Robotics in it, where robots run amock and kill people, they should go for it. But don't lie and say it has anything to do with Asimov's work. Asimov _created_ the field of robotics and revolutionised science fiction by moving it away from what he called the "Frankenstein Complex." Read some of his indroctions or essays for why he doesn't like the "Frankenstein Complex." For one thing, it's boring and gets old quickly. But that's exactly what this movie is. It's an overblown and (it would appear) poorly done "Frankenstein Complex" film hiding behind Asimov's title and giving a nod to his Laws of Robotics to attempt and give itself some credibility.
That's why I (and apparently many others) are so disgusted with this film seems to be.
-Trillian
Having viewed the trailer (got through eventually from one of the links someone posted), I don't know why anyone would want to see it...taking it off the web by /.ing and - ideally - taking the film out of production entirely would be the best gift the producers could offer.
I picked up "Robot Visions," a collection of Asimov robot stories and essays, last week because it had a couple stories I had never read and a number I just hadn't read in a while. Asimov's writing, which discuss the posibilities of human missunderstandings and technology problems as well as just being well written enjoyable sci-fi, has nothing to do with the crap that Will Smith is starring in.
As other people on this thread have said, the movie is inherently incompatible with Asimov's visions. The Three Laws aren't suggestions or helpful guidelines for robots to follow. They are physically built into each robot and cannot fail without the robot being 'insane' or broken beyond any posibility of repair. The vision of hundreds of robots attacking humans, being defended by Will Smith and "Dr. Calvin" (the idea of Dr. Calvin shooting at a robot is yet another thing to add to the growing list of "Why this movie looks inherently flawed") is an abomination against Asimov's work.
This movie looks, smells, and tastes like the 'sci-fi' crap Hollywood has been shitting out.
-Trillian
I admit I haven't RTFA, but 34% (WMP) + 19% (Real) + 10% (QT) leaves 37% to add to 100. I'm assuming this is only streaming video, so what takes up that extra market share?
-Trillian
Where is the link to it from that school webpage? I'm not trying to be difficult, just honestly can't find it....
-Trillian
PS Would also like to use this as an opportunity to complain that their site didn't render correctly in Mozilla. Just me, or anyone else have this problem?
IANAL. This is a personal opinion.
I don't think sites should be LIABLE for what people post, but because of the unique nature of the Internet, once something is posted on a site it's likely to stay there and be easily accessable, in ways past forms of communication weren't. That gives sites like Teacher Reviews, and even places like Slashdot, unique responsibility.
If I tell a friend that Mr. Example Teacher is an ass, word may or may not spread, and the comments may or may not be linked back to me. But it takes an active effort by many people for the comment to spread. And if it's not true, it will probably fizzle out. Even if it isn't true and does NOT fizzle out, rumors are very specific forms of communication that most people don't take serriously.
On the other hand, if I post a comment to Teacher Reviews, 30 seconds of my time has created something that may stay there for ever and ever. And, unlike rumors, there's no way for others to say, "I don't think this is true, but I heard that...." All the comments are posted as equals.
So I would say if something libelous is posted to a website, while the webmaster isn't responsible for the actual content, I would say they're responsible for removing it in a timely manner, once notified of the content.
Speaking of Teacher Reviews specifically, I think if a bad review of a teacher was posted (talks slow, bad assignments, boring) then Teacher Review does not have a responsibility to take it down. On the contrary, they have a responsibility to leave it up if they want to achieve their goals of a student-reviewed teacher database. But I would say labeling a teacher as a "Bipolar Paranoid Schitzophrenic" could be considered libelous. I don't think it's unreasonable that it be asked to be removed.
Bringing it back to Slashdot...
This site is in a very odd position, in that much of the postings here (for example, about SCO or Microsoft) could easily be considered as libel. But unlike Teacher Reviews, they're (usually) posted as jokes. And Slashdot has a moderation system and a reply system so posts that are blatently untrue get shouted down by more accurate responses.
I'd say Teacher Reviews, unfortunatly, took the only realistic course of action. They took the site down, and are taking time to regroup. I'd be sad if some of the suggested implimentations actually happen (hiding teacher reviews from Google, or non anonymous reviews) but I think things like emailing professors reviews or having a better process for review removeall are very reasonable.
All in all, I hope Teacher Reviews is able to continue. It's a great site and a very nifty idea.
-Trillian
PS I didn't find a way to work it gracefully into my post, but I think the teacher who threatened to sue, even after the review was removied, is an ass. I'll risk the possibility of getting Slashdot sued, and go so far as to say he sounds like one of those crazy Bipolar Paranoid Schitzophrenics you've been hearing so much about recently....
Responding to your post, in no particular order...
/. readers.
Ask Slashdot is a section for people to pose their questions to the Slashdot community. Slashdot is made up of, in large part, a tech-savy and geek-indentifying community. I'd be willing to bet that a higher percentage of Slashdot readers have TiVo and/or ReplayTV than the general population. So this seemingly narrow question that, on the surface, would not be helpful to anyone is probably of interest to a large number of
Likewise, those lucky enough to play with tech-related toys are likely to have more money to throw around. Again, compare Slashdot's readers to the general population, and I'll be you'll find a higher income among the Slashdot population. So while saying that the poster owns a TiVo and ReplayTV may cause envy in some Slashdotters eyes (mine included), it probably isn't enough to cause any fits of jealousy over this damnable soul who is clearly of a higher social and econimic standing than the rest of us slobs.
Finally, I very much doubt that the manual has instructions for not using a phone line. My guess is it simply says that TiVo requires a phone line. But that would seem to not be the case. And Ask Slashdot could be considered "checking a website..." The poster is asking for Slashdot's collective knowledge on the subject. Consulting Google is the only valid point you bring up. Plugging in tivo and "no phone line" brings up MOSTLY ads, but a couple of valid-looking links.
But Ask Slashdot isn't meant to only to give the origonal poster an answer (hopefully) to their question, but to provoke discussion and inform others. So someone with a unique experience might post here, and only here. Their knowledge may be absent from every single webpage out there, and a Google search could be useless. Or maybe I was thinking about getting a TiVo, but know I don't have a phoneline for it to work with. After reading this thread, I might learn that I definitely can or cannot buy a TiVo and expect it to work.
Or, as someone who doesn't have and doesn't plan on getting a TiVo, I may just be curious about the problems of living without a land-line. A friend of mine recently killed her phone line, and I'm curious how others have dealt with possibel problems. Dealing with TiVo and ReplayTV is only a small subset of the larger problem of living without a land-line. So I'm interested in what people have to say, not only about TiVo and ReplayTV specifically, but about living without a land-line in general.
The "Your problems aren't important enough so we'll ignore them" argument has always seemed shallow to me. The fact of the matter is the editors (for whatever reason) decided to post this question to Ask Slashdot. Maybe they were currious themselves. Maybe it was just a slow news day. Maybe the specific goal was to piss someone like you off to the point of posting a knee-jerk, thoughtless response to prove some point about the nature of Slashdot. We'll probably never know.
But clearly a sarcastic comlaint is the right sollution...
-Trillian
I'm sorry. I really, honestly am. But I keep running into trouble. I bought the Flash2Advance 256 Ultra, which (as I said) comes with F2APowerWriter 1.00b. Unfortunatly, it's a POS software. I can, SOME of the time, get PogoShell working if I upload it with an older version of the Flash2Advance writing software, but more often than not I can't upload it. Am I simply forced to upload it through F2APowerWriter and then open PogoShell from the F2A default file menu? That seems cludgy and not very graceful.
Again, I'm sorry to keep bothering you. But it's so close to working!
-Trillian
Actually figured it out. Downloaded another flash loader and got it working.
Thanks again for all your help!
-Trillian
I'm just going to keep picking your brain...
I got my Flash2Advance cartridge today, and the USB linker. I've had much fun loading games onto it, and you're right: it definitely rocks. One last (I hope) question. With the USB linker and the software provided (F2APowerWriter 1.00b) the cart is akwats automatically pre-written with the Flash2Advance file navigator. You seemed to indicate PogoShell should be the only thing written to the file, but this looks impossible with the software they provided me with to link to the computer. Am I missing something?
Thanks again for all of your help so far! It's awesome beyond belief to be playing NES games on my GBA.
-Trillian
Sorry to keep bothering you. Just want to make sure about what I'm getting into before I spend money.
I realize this is obviously not going to give accurate performance, but I downloaded a GBA emulator to try PogoShell in. Unfortunatly, it keeps crashing. Is this just a symptom of the emulator?
I get tantalizingly close to it working (shows the PogoShell shell, and I can select roms) but they crash when I attempt to play 'em. It really does work for you?
Any other information or suggestions you can think of? (I'm pretty sure I've talked myself into buying a flash cartridge...)
-Trillian
This is OT, but you touched on it in your post. I just recently got a GBA and am loving it, but it sounds like you have a flash reader and linker (and presumably GBA-compatible emulator) to play NES games on your GBA. That would simply kick ass and be worth some expendature of money to get the required hardware. I was wondering how that worked and if you had any advice for where or how to get equipment.
Thanks!
-Trillian
Thanks for the extremely informative post. You brought up a couple things I hadn't thought of (the advantages of sign language, communication through multiple channels, etc) and gave a very good explanation of both sides of the issue of deaf culture.
Thanks again. And I'll definatly ask her about "Egg train is a short name." =)
-Trillian
This is off-topic, but I'm curious. You sound like someone who, while not involved in a directly emotional sense, might have an opinion on cochlear implants and the entire idea of deaf culture.
My mom has been a teacher for the deaf for longer than I've been alive (although she does not have any hearing loss). Because of her I always take an interest in deafness-related stories, and have heard arguments from both sides of the debate on how cochlear implants and similar devices are a threat to deaf culture. I've been exposed to videos like "Sound and Fury" and have had the good fortune to talk with a number of deaf individuals.
My understanding is that deaf culture revolves around the idea of deafness not being a disability, and deaf people (specifically those born deaf) have developed their own unique culture in the same way that more regularly recognized cultures have. As a result movements to grant hearing to deaf people - especially with devices like cochlear implants which, while amazing pieces of technology, create a type of hearing that is not 'natural' or the same as a non-deaf person would experience - are viewed with hostility and as an attempt to break up deaf culture. Deafness, if my understanding is correct, isn't even viewed as a disability.
I have very mixed feelings on this. On the one hand, I can emotionally understand how a group such as deaf individuals could see themselves as a seperate culture than everyone else. This is especially true because unlike blindness or loss of a limb or almost any other disability, hearing loss greatly changes how you can communicate with people, and who can communicate with you. On the other hand, when I view it from a more removed position, I can't think of deafness as anything other than a disability. It doesn't mean deaf people are "bad," or have any less to contribute to the world at large, or that wishes to remain deaf shouldn't be respected. But it's a basic biological function breaking down. It impedes communication, and makes living in a society more difficult. I can't be honest and say that I think of it as anything other than a disability.
Anyway, I was wondering if you had any opinions on the subject. I'm always interested in what others have to say on the topic.
-Trillian
As someone who's been playing SWG for less than a month, I'm very torn about this revelation. I'm still rather early along in any skill progressions, and haven't gotten anywhere near aquiring even a single holocron, so I was nowhere near being a Jedi. But because the game is still pretty new to me, I've been enjoying it a lot. Even without the prospect of becoming a Jedi any time in the near future, I've enjoyed running Rebel missions and exploring the Star Wars galaxy (excuse the pun).
But I can see the grind of leveling getting old and the feeling that some gamers might have, of their 'right' to become Jedi in a Star Wars game. And as a gamer, I can relate. Part of the fun of almost every Star Wars game has been the excitement of being a Jedi. But as a Star Wars fan, I have to agree with other posts: the universe of the origonal trilogy was almost entirely devoid of Jedi. The Empire was hunting them down and killing them, one by one.
And even outside the origonal trilogy, even at the HEIGHT of the Jedi Order, we're talking a couple thousand Jedi, tops. Even with tens of thousands. Even (and this is just silly) MILLIONS of Jedi. In a galaxy populated by billions and billions of sentient beings, that's less than one percent of the population.
So I don't think it's unreasonable that it's hard as fuck to become a Jedi, and it's kind of a bitch to be one once you've achieved it. That's consistant with the rules the origonal trilogy laid out.
I know some people may say, "Yes, but it's just a videogame." But it's a videogame set in a specific universe with specific rules that it has to follow to be able to truely claim it's in the Star Wars universe. And if it doesn't follow those, then I don't know why I would want to bother playing it. There are a number of other MMORPGs out there, and have their own cool sets of rules and characters and stories, without having to conform to an already existing background universe. But SWG has chosen to constrain itself within specific boundaries, and I expect it to do so.
I guess I'll have to wait and see. I've been having a good time, but have also been annoyed with certain things. For example, the Rebel mission terminals are sitting out in the open. Even though certain systems may be doing a better job than others resisting the Empire, I think it's fair to assume a Rebel standing in the middle of a public square yelling "COME WORK FOR THE REBELLION!!!" would be killed rather quickly...
And it's one thing to get a repeating mission to go deliver something or go kill a lair of some beast, but to get a mission to kill a specific person, and then to get it again? With the same mission description? So what did I do the first time?
These aren't complaints on the game mechanics, just on the implimentation. And a sign that maybe the creators don't care about keeping true to the SW Trilogy as much as I'd like. I'm waiting to pass judgement on the revamped Jedi system, but will be extremely pissed off if there's a new Jedi Mission Terminal in every city and you can get force points by completting them.
If I wanted to play a game where I could get magical powers simply by leveling, I'd have chosen something else. An inherent nature of the Jedi is that they're more powerful than pretty much anyone else. Maybe that's an impossible thing to achieve in an MMORPG, and I know there's no "accurate" way to portray The Force in a MMORPG, but I really hope they can do a little better than having mission terminals or some such shit.
-Trillian
I thought you were kidding, but it's actually in there. Page 17 (Note to Adobe: Why have a stupid "Search" function if it doesn't work?) on the right side during the list of awards the game has won.
Absolutely briliant.
Unlike some other posts on this page, I have no problem with AA and actually think it's quite fun. It's free, and it doesn't pretend to be anything other than what it is (a recruiting method). So what's the problem?
-Trillian
I think AV companies renaming virii is obnoxious as hell. If I'm cleaning up a virus that has hidden itself in Windows (although this one didn't do an amazingly good job) and named itself "Beagle" I want to be able to go to Google and pull up entries for BEAGLE. I don't want to have to know what the AV companies decided to rename it to.
Likewise, if it's on the news I and is called something different than the file I've been cleaning off my friends systems, I'm going to think, "Shit. Is there another strain coming that I don't know about?" The natural reaction ISN'T, "Oh! Clearly they renamed the virus out of a child-like effort to deny the virus writer the satisfaction of knowing their program screwed with people."
It's just annoying, and nothing else.
-Trillian
You're totaly right. I'm sorry for using the lazy definition of 'virus' (pretty much any malicious code running on a computer).
Although it's sometimes hard to tell when only speaking through text, this post isn't meant to be sarcastic or anything, but is an honest apology because I should have said 'trojan.' I thought about it, and completely understand why something spreading as a trojan (requiring 'help' from the user) is worse than a virus that uses a Windows (or your OS of choice) exploit.
-Trillian
Last one, I promise.
c /data/w32.beagle.a@mm.html
I missread Symantec's site (didn't scroll far enough down). It does indeed contain malicious code beyond it's own reproduction:
from http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/ven
#
# Creates a listening thread on port 6777 (this port can change during the worm execution) that allows a remote attacker to:
- execute commands on the local system as if he were the current user
- download executables onto the local system
- terminate and delete the worm program
# Creates a notification thread that will contact a remote website (using local browser proxy settings) and announce the presence of the worm on the local system every 10 minutes.
The list of websites contacted is predetermined and are contained within the body of the worm.
-Trillian
A reply to my own post....(a little more info)
As I said, the variation I saw was hidden in a version of the windows calculator. Specifically, the attachment was an EXE file with a random string of letters (I saw names between three and seven letters long). Also, it ran as bbeagle.exe, and the bbeagle.exe file lived in the C:\Windows\System32\ folder. Finally, deleting the bbeagle.exe file and going into the registry and searching for bbeagle.exe, and deleting THAT entry should kill it. (Again, acording to Symantec)
-Trillian
I'm the resident geek in my dorm, and have spent the last 24 hours getting rid of it on computers of anyone and everyone. The particular strain we saw came in an email with the subject of simply "Hi" and contained (basically) the following test.
.wab, .htm, .html, and .txt"
Hi!
This is a test.
(random string of letters)
Testy test.
The attached file was a modified version of the Windows calculator which (according to the Symantec site) "Emails all the contacts it can find inside files with the extensions
It's interesting because apparently that's ALL it does. It doesn't screw with files or settings, or run malicous code (outside the actual act of reproducing itself). It's annoying, however, because it sends emails to people who are NOT in your address book, but merely mentioned in text files somewhere on your computer. In the last 24 hours I've gotten emails with the virus from friends, random people in my university, at least one university email address that should have been run by someone who knew better, and a couple random friends-of-friends.
Also, according to Symantec, it dies on the 28th.
It was really interested to see the spread at my college. For us, it began around 1 AM Monday morning, peaked around 2, and was already slacking off by 3 AM. I know this from my own inbox, people in my dorm, and talking to people elsewhere.
I do find it currious the virus didn't DO anything. Is it just someone screwing around, a test for a future release or (as some of the more paranoid people in my dorm are suggesting) a released virus by the anti-virus companies to keep people in enough fear to demand their products.
As a side note, I also spent hours cleaning the assorted spyware and adware that builds up when people don't know how to properly use their computers....more than one person could literaly not do work becasue of the porn popups that plagued their computer.
-Trillian
A couple of things. First, I said "why people who dislike Microsoft are CALLED extremist zealot idiots," and not "all people who dislike microsoft ARE extremist zealot idiots." My basic viewpoint wasn't that Microsoft was good (or bad, for that matter). I happen to dislike Microsoft a great deal, but can back it up with opinions based on their behavior as a company and choices put into their software.
But I'm tired of seeeing the people who create the idea of the 'extremist zealot' continue to act assinine. Spelling Microsoft with a dollar sign might have been creative wit, once upon a time. Now it just looks silly and childish.
And in direct responses to your post, I used namecalling and all caps as a sarcastic imitation of said 'zealots,' and not as an honest expression of my opinion. And I don't think the origonal post was funny. As I said, if it was trying to be funny it failed, and if it wasn't then it was just foolish. But it was unclear what the intent was, so I responded as if it were serrious. Another perfectly valid response would have simply been: That's not funny. But I used this oportunity to vent my general frustration at those who dislike Microsoft and display it in a childish manner, making the rest of us look foolish by ascociation.
And what type of zealot would I be, exactly? An anti-zealot zealot? Fine. I think zealots are almost always stupid and foolish-looking, express themselves poorly, and over-react. Of those qualifications, I think I met one: Over-reacting. So I'm not too much of a zealot, I guess.
But my response was a calm (albiet sarcastic) reply to the origonal post, and while I let my general dislike for anti-microsoft zealots cloud my opinions, I don't think it negated my message.
Trillian
Warning label: It's 3:45 AM and I'm tired. I'm sorry for any incoherency in the above post. It was a bit of a free ascociation...
Clearly your blindingly witty placement of a dollar sign for the "S" in Microsoft highlights your superior mental ability. Likewise, your logic is flawless: Microsoft puts a THEIR OWN LOGO in THEIR OWN GAME (according to you it's not even an ad, but just their logo) and you refuse to purchase any more Microsoft games. It's not as if they sold huge ad-space in the game but, gosh darnit, if their logo is visible for a single second the game has to go! One of the things I always hated about Age of Empires was the Microsoft product placement that plagued the game.
Oh wait...it didn't.
And I take it you still use other Microsoft products? You said you only haven't purchased _games_ from Microsoft. Or maybe you take the moral high road by downloading them from Kazaa? Surely you can justify THAT position!
If you were attempting to be funny, you failed. If you're honestly serious, then you're a prime example of why people who dislike Microsoft are called extremist zealot idiots.
-Trillian
As I recall, Oedipus was punished for something his grandfather did, sleeping with (or failing to sleep with, I can't remember) the duaghter of this god or that. Unfortunatly, I can't find a link to support that, so I may be wrong.
Regardless, the story of Oedipus was well-known quite a while before Christ. It's generally accepted that Sophocles took a known myth and made a play out of it, but even if he created it all by his little self, he still wrote it, at the latest, around 400 B.C. (Just type if Sophocles or Oedipus into google and click any of the links.) So the _intended_ meaning of the Oedipus myth is not about abandoning knowledge of our selves as God, it's about denying your destiny.
I realize that, arguably, those are the same things. If we are all pieces of God (something I don't believe but am willing to use for conjecture) then by going against Gods will we are going against our own will, and thus damning ourselves. This was a large part of Dante's explanation for how souls are placed in Heaven or Hell, and is not a new concept.
But Oedipus wasn't about denying self (or "remembering childhood"), it was about trying to escape that which he (and his father, and his mother) were destined for. Sure, you could argue that had Oedipus been able to remember his true parents he could have escaped his fate, but that would be a flawed argument. The whole point is that it WAS his fate, and he couldn't do a thing about it.
There was no Christian imagery anywhere in it. And there shouldn't have been, as Christ wasn't around yet to be imagery-ized.
Finally, changing gears for a couple questions. These aren't attacks but honest questions. What is the "human experience" that we are supposed to be in search of? Because I'm pretty sure I know how to be a human, but wouldn't know the first thing about being a spirit. I think the Emporer's New Clothes is relevant, because it addresses what's "known" to be true, even when it is so obviously false. But How does the life of Jesus tie in? The virgin birth as a metaphor saying that only children (i.e. those who haven't had sex) know what's going on?
I think your post is a stretch, attempting to pull stories that do _not_ have Christian imagery and using them as Christian metaphors, rather than just speaking of religion straight out.
-Trillian
This is probably being posted too late to get noticed, but I'm transgendered and planning to being transitioning sooner than later. My mom (who rules) is paying for some of my hair removal for Chanukah. Definatly my weirdest gift ever.
-Trillian
It's sad that I saw a semi-on-topic subject, a bolded first line, and a list and assumed it was another off-topic bullshit post about shoving something up my ass or why SCO is a cult...
-Trillian