"But the emotional and cultural payoff may be more valuable, helping women be more productive human beings."
Some people would assert that raising happy, healthy, well-adjusted and well-loved children makes a more "productive" and "valuable" human being than working at a law firm or technology company.
I don't think anyone objects to him having an opinion, or even being a wordy bastard.
What I object to is that/. seems to be his personal blog, where the editors allow him to bloviate on whatever crappy subject he feels the urge to opine on.
How would you feel if PBS just started televising some jackwagon's youtube diary? You'd probably wonder wtf happened to an information channel you respected.
Fantastic info, but I'd submit that part of the problem is ubiquity. I have, at a quick guess, at least a DOZEN passwords that matter personally, and at least another dozen that are reasonably critical for work. Probably at least 200+ more that I don't substantially care about. At least a couple of them are for systems that - for "security's" sake - require me to change the password every 90 days to a password I haven't used the last 6 times. One system actually requires a password, then 2 layers deeper into the function, ANOTHER password, each with different rules about what's valid - the first accepts "." and spaces, the other doesn't, for example. You could have a 128bit number as your password, and that would be hard to crack. But the fact is that in the real world, you have to have either: - something to write them down in - a system to remember them, or an algorithm that you can apply to the site name or whatever that will give you your pw for that location.
Either one is vulnerable for precisely the same reasons they're useful.
Until we get absolute biometric systems - and such that can also ensure that the 'sample' tested is still attached to the live, willing human - in the words of an intelligent man: "there is no 'safe', only 'safer'".
"Should everything online be a cost-benefit analysis now?" Yes. Is that clear enough? If it is inconsequential, then sure, don't bother. But if it is something important to you, and you DON'T cost/benefit your choices, you're a fucking moron.
Sorry to be blunt, but there it is.
You can store your gold bullion on the front step if you want, I mean, it saves you all the work and all struggling to carry all that weight inside to your safe. I get it.
Are they still criminals for stealing it? Sure. And they should be prosecuted.
But then don't be whining and bitching that someone stole your gold because you were too lazy to put a little more effort into protecting it. Obviously, they valued your gold more than you did.
(And BTW, if you have naked selfies lying around in your house, I'd say the SAME THING: 1) they're criminals for B&E and stealing something that wasn't theirs, and 2) you're still an ignorant slut for leaving naked selfies lying around your house IF naked pictures of you floating around would bother you.)
I understand, downloading something pirated is illegal.
So do they also disqualify any person who has also committed speeding, jaywalking, underage consumption, or parking violations (or lies about having done so)?
Those too are all "crimes", clearly?
Perhaps the ubiquity of criminality says something about our society, or maybe more about the laws we've written to circumscribe citizen behavior.
Certainly excluding every person with a trivial illegality in their history will do 2 things for the FBI: 1) seriously reduce their potential employee pool, meaning those that get the jobs will get paid more (good for them), and 2) end up staffing the FBI with people that have led inhumanly-detached lives like beauty queens and the sorts of nearly-sociopathic weenies who have been cultivating themselves for public office since 3rd grade.
Of course, some people would say that yes, such interventions for SARS may have wasted $40 billion primarily because SARS wasn't really anything dangerous in the first place, just something ballooned into histrionic nonsense by a paranoid, risk-averse public and a government that likes very much scaring them.
This would be very much like building a giant armored and fenced barn when someone cried wolf. Yes, at that point, those precautions would have been wasted. That doesn't ipso facto mean that such precautions now (when there really IS a dangerous fucking wolf out there) are overreacting in any way.
This times a BILLION. Just to have a crawlable time/date stamp on pages consistently....delightful.
IIRC there's a google command-line tag like sort:date or something that will give you freshest pages first, but i've never found it useful - dunno, maybe changing ad-content 'refreshes' page ages to the point of meaninglessness?
Funny, I was going to say exactly the same thing...but focusing on the "US" bit.
If anyone thinks that China, Russia, Germany, Japan, France, UK, hell, even Brazil aren't doing *precisely* the same thing to the greatest extent of THEIR capabilities, they're idiots.
I'm an American, and proud to be one. I firmly believe that there IS an American Exceptionalism in a number of positive ways. But as I'm growing older, I have to admit - we just don't handle being a superpower very well.
I thought the postwar era of 'utterly thoughtless American "we won the war" bullshit hubris' ended with their noisy collapse in the 1960s. - the era of dumping radioactive dust at elementary schools to trace possible fallout patterns, giving LSD to mental patients, or a foreign policy shot through with arrogance and amoral choices.
Now, it seems again that we're returning to an era where the folks in Washington again see themselves as beholden to no one, responsible to no one, and capable of absolutely breathtaking hypocrisy and conceit without a trace of conscience or humility (or, for that matter, historical perspective).
For those outsiders observing the US: please note that we are talking exclusively about the US FEDERAL government, for the most part. That is (ever more) distinct from the United States as a nation, culture, and people. Not to say that the US states don't cheerfully do this sort of stuff too, but they are more immediately connected with both their victims and the voters (who are often the same group) and are thus managed more closely.
Obviously we need a Federal government; but personally the advantages of a stronger one (and there certainly are some) don't outweigh the concomitant dangers. Some of us believe - as did the Founding Fathers - that the task of American democracy is about constantly and assertively constraining the Federal government (not to eliminate it, to preclude the libertarian strawman that always seems to be dragged out at this point) to limit their functions narrowly to only needful roles, and NO FURTHER.
Perhaps - lacking a strong federal government - the United States couldn't so easily assert its desires on the international stage. Perhaps we forego some of the 'macht' of a superpower. But perhaps that isn't all bad. That power corrupts is a cliche, but never is it more evidently true than within the District of Columbia.
I've been kicking around the internet since before the web, since one was delighted by the capabilities of gophur, etc. And: "We've all experienced the frustration of trying to access information on websites, only to find that the data is trapped in outdated, difficult-to-read file formats and that metadata..."
Nonsense. There may be a lot of people who refuse to work for less than they +think+ they're worth, but that doesn't actually say anything about how much they're really worth.
If a business can get that talent for what they are willing to pay, then that's what it is actually worth.
Salaries are not about what you think you're worth or how much it cost to get that talent; they're about replaceability.
I believe that University of Colorado environmental studies professor Roger Pielke Jr.should start us off by reducing his carbon footprint to 3rd world levels as an example.
"These companies are free to build space ships and rockets all they want. " Actually, no, they're not. The private space industry has repeatedly hit regulatory roadblocks, NIMBY, and bureaucracies that are barely in the 20th century let alone the 21st, and for whom "don't you do anything without a) a government agency approving it and b) paying some sort of license/tax" is dogma.
Yes, this CURRENT issue has to do with government bidding and contracts, and LIKELY doesn't* prevent them doing what they need to with their own funds. *note, however, even the summary implies this is in question: "...officials have not commented on whether-or-not the companies can continue working if they are using private funds..."
What? That doesn't even make sense? Yes, different results might have prompted me to speculate on different bases for the behavior. Is that astonishing?
In the first place, using your backwards example, if there was a study showing that people watching thin people took less food, yes, I'd probably say that it could be because people watching healthy people are going to emulate them. We're a social species, we do lots of things because of simple emulation. If there was a study showing people behaved CONTRARY to fat people behavior - ie took less food when they saw fat people gorging - I would indeed have speculated that we may have internalized that fat=unhealth and thus were subconsciously trying to avoid that outcome....because internet forums are kind of about "open speculation"? What sort of a dilwad doesn't understand that? New to the internet?
I can think of a billion-dollar segment of the recording industry that's pretty much predicated on the use of the word in every album they produce, is that good enough?
Top 10 Rap Songs On Billboard.com as of 09/25/2013:
Jay-Z ft. Justin Timberlake â" Holy Grail Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 9 Eminem â" Berzerk Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 0 Macklemore & Ryan Lewis â" Same Love Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 0 4: Macklemore & Ryan Lewis â" Canâ(TM)t Hold Us Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 0 J. Cole â" Crooked Smile ft. TLC Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 2 Sage The Gemini ft. IamSu â" Gas Pedal Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 4 Big Sean ft. Lil Wayne, Jhene Aiko â" Beware Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 2 Rich Homie Quan â" Type of Way Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 3 Macklemore & Ryan Lewis ft. Wanz â" Thrift Shop Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 0 Sage The Gemini â" Red Nose Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 1 Bonus Track For Fun: Birdman & Lil Wayne ft. Fat Joe â" About All That Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 27
...from the colleges point of view. It is almost completely arbitrary, non-quantifiable*, and obfuscatory - meaning they can admit whomever they want, for whatever reason.**
*note that the one place it IS at least somewhat quantifiable by outside observation, that of race/gender demographics, they've scrambled mightily to make sure that 'diversity' is reached. Well, that is until women are overrepresented...then I haven't noticed as many righteous protests about gender balance in education. (?) ** as a non-public system in a capitalist society, this should be ultimately their choice; however, the moment the US government felt that it had a compelling interest in mandating "freedom of association" as meaning "freedom to associate as long as the right mix of genders and races are present", I believe we've long since set a precedent of Federal meddling in private practices in this context.
...that in 100 years, historians will postulate that the US space program really vanished into the bureaucratic morass, and that politics and special interests combined to torpedo any hope that the private sector would ever make it into space.
Considering the bulk of human evolution has been spent hungry, looking for something to eat, it makes perfect sense to emulate people who appear to be the opposite of hungry. . Not only is (whatever they are eating) fundamentally safe, it's so abundant they're fat. For all but the last 50 years, those were purely positive cues.
Note the actress wrote a 50 lb fat suit....I'm curious if she was morbidly obese (ie 150lb fat suit, obviously unhealthy) if the same would still be true.
Slashdot Mirror
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't we still just trying to get a sustainable fusion reaction generating more power than it takes?
This article reads like the acheivement is in the commoditization and simplification of a process that doesn't (afaik) even exist yet?
What's next, announcing that they've figured out how to run an oscillation overthruster with your ipad?
"But the emotional and cultural payoff may be more valuable, helping women be more productive human beings."
Some people would assert that raising happy, healthy, well-adjusted and well-loved children makes a more "productive" and "valuable" human being than working at a law firm or technology company.
But hey, I'm old fashioned.
I don't think anyone objects to him having an opinion, or even being a wordy bastard.
What I object to is that /. seems to be his personal blog, where the editors allow him to bloviate on whatever crappy subject he feels the urge to opine on.
How would you feel if PBS just started televising some jackwagon's youtube diary? You'd probably wonder wtf happened to an information channel you respected.
Fantastic info, but I'd submit that part of the problem is ubiquity.
I have, at a quick guess, at least a DOZEN passwords that matter personally, and at least another dozen that are reasonably critical for work. Probably at least 200+ more that I don't substantially care about.
At least a couple of them are for systems that - for "security's" sake - require me to change the password every 90 days to a password I haven't used the last 6 times.
One system actually requires a password, then 2 layers deeper into the function, ANOTHER password, each with different rules about what's valid - the first accepts "." and spaces, the other doesn't, for example.
You could have a 128bit number as your password, and that would be hard to crack.
But the fact is that in the real world, you have to have either:
- something to write them down in
- a system to remember them, or an algorithm that you can apply to the site name or whatever that will give you your pw for that location.
Either one is vulnerable for precisely the same reasons they're useful.
Until we get absolute biometric systems - and such that can also ensure that the 'sample' tested is still attached to the live, willing human - in the words of an intelligent man: "there is no 'safe', only 'safer'".
"Should everything online be a cost-benefit analysis now?"
Yes. Is that clear enough?
If it is inconsequential, then sure, don't bother. But if it is something important to you, and you DON'T cost/benefit your choices, you're a fucking moron.
Sorry to be blunt, but there it is.
You can store your gold bullion on the front step if you want, I mean, it saves you all the work and all struggling to carry all that weight inside to your safe. I get it.
Are they still criminals for stealing it? Sure. And they should be prosecuted.
But then don't be whining and bitching that someone stole your gold because you were too lazy to put a little more effort into protecting it. Obviously, they valued your gold more than you did.
(And BTW, if you have naked selfies lying around in your house, I'd say the SAME THING: 1) they're criminals for B&E and stealing something that wasn't theirs, and 2) you're still an ignorant slut for leaving naked selfies lying around your house IF naked pictures of you floating around would bother you.)
So it's no longer "eat shit and die"?
I understand, downloading something pirated is illegal.
So do they also disqualify any person who has also committed speeding, jaywalking, underage consumption, or parking violations (or lies about having done so)?
Those too are all "crimes", clearly?
Perhaps the ubiquity of criminality says something about our society, or maybe more about the laws we've written to circumscribe citizen behavior.
Certainly excluding every person with a trivial illegality in their history will do 2 things for the FBI:
1) seriously reduce their potential employee pool, meaning those that get the jobs will get paid more (good for them), and
2) end up staffing the FBI with people that have led inhumanly-detached lives like beauty queens and the sorts of nearly-sociopathic weenies who have been cultivating themselves for public office since 3rd grade.
Of course, some people would say that yes, such interventions for SARS may have wasted $40 billion primarily because SARS wasn't really anything dangerous in the first place, just something ballooned into histrionic nonsense by a paranoid, risk-averse public and a government that likes very much scaring them.
This would be very much like building a giant armored and fenced barn when someone cried wolf.
Yes, at that point, those precautions would have been wasted. That doesn't ipso facto mean that such precautions now (when there really IS a dangerous fucking wolf out there) are overreacting in any way.
As long as you understand that your and my definition if data hog may not be synonymous?
http://grammarist.com/usage/ha...
How does one get the job of "editor" exactly?
This times a BILLION.
Just to have a crawlable time/date stamp on pages consistently....delightful.
IIRC there's a google command-line tag like sort:date or something that will give you freshest pages first, but i've never found it useful - dunno, maybe changing ad-content 'refreshes' page ages to the point of meaninglessness?
...you're suggesting a project announced to great fanfare on the web might not be realistic or even possible?
But...they have a website!
(Anyway, I'm sure the process of tearing their plan apart was actually a fairly interesting engineering exercise.)
Funny, I was going to say exactly the same thing...but focusing on the "US" bit.
If anyone thinks that China, Russia, Germany, Japan, France, UK, hell, even Brazil aren't doing *precisely* the same thing to the greatest extent of THEIR capabilities, they're idiots.
It's funny, and more than a little bit sad.
I'm an American, and proud to be one. I firmly believe that there IS an American Exceptionalism in a number of positive ways. But as I'm growing older, I have to admit - we just don't handle being a superpower very well.
I thought the postwar era of 'utterly thoughtless American "we won the war" bullshit hubris' ended with their noisy collapse in the 1960s. - the era of dumping radioactive dust at elementary schools to trace possible fallout patterns, giving LSD to mental patients, or a foreign policy shot through with arrogance and amoral choices.
Now, it seems again that we're returning to an era where the folks in Washington again see themselves as beholden to no one, responsible to no one, and capable of absolutely breathtaking hypocrisy and conceit without a trace of conscience or humility (or, for that matter, historical perspective).
For those outsiders observing the US: please note that we are talking exclusively about the US FEDERAL government, for the most part. That is (ever more) distinct from the United States as a nation, culture, and people. Not to say that the US states don't cheerfully do this sort of stuff too, but they are more immediately connected with both their victims and the voters (who are often the same group) and are thus managed more closely.
Obviously we need a Federal government; but personally the advantages of a stronger one (and there certainly are some) don't outweigh the concomitant dangers. Some of us believe - as did the Founding Fathers - that the task of American democracy is about constantly and assertively constraining the Federal government (not to eliminate it, to preclude the libertarian strawman that always seems to be dragged out at this point) to limit their functions narrowly to only needful roles, and NO FURTHER.
Perhaps - lacking a strong federal government - the United States couldn't so easily assert its desires on the international stage. Perhaps we forego some of the 'macht' of a superpower. But perhaps that isn't all bad. That power corrupts is a cliche, but never is it more evidently true than within the District of Columbia.
I've been kicking around the internet since before the web, since one was delighted by the capabilities of gophur, etc.
And:
"We've all experienced the frustration of trying to access information on websites, only to find that the data is trapped in outdated, difficult-to-read file formats and that metadata..."
Nope, not even once.
Nonsense.
There may be a lot of people who refuse to work for less than they +think+ they're worth, but that doesn't actually say anything about how much they're really worth.
If a business can get that talent for what they are willing to pay, then that's what it is actually worth.
Salaries are not about what you think you're worth or how much it cost to get that talent; they're about replaceability.
I believe that University of Colorado environmental studies professor Roger Pielke Jr.should start us off by reducing his carbon footprint to 3rd world levels as an example.
"These companies are free to build space ships and rockets all they want. "
Actually, no, they're not. The private space industry has repeatedly hit regulatory roadblocks, NIMBY, and bureaucracies that are barely in the 20th century let alone the 21st, and for whom "don't you do anything without a) a government agency approving it and b) paying some sort of license/tax" is dogma.
Yes, this CURRENT issue has to do with government bidding and contracts, and LIKELY doesn't* prevent them doing what they need to with their own funds.
*note, however, even the summary implies this is in question: "...officials have not commented on whether-or-not the companies can continue working if they are using private funds..."
What? That doesn't even make sense? Yes, different results might have prompted me to speculate on different bases for the behavior. Is that astonishing?
In the first place, using your backwards example, if there was a study showing that people watching thin people took less food, yes, I'd probably say that it could be because people watching healthy people are going to emulate them. We're a social species, we do lots of things because of simple emulation. ...because internet forums are kind of about "open speculation"? What sort of a dilwad doesn't understand that? New to the internet?
If there was a study showing people behaved CONTRARY to fat people behavior - ie took less food when they saw fat people gorging - I would indeed have speculated that we may have internalized that fat=unhealth and thus were subconsciously trying to avoid that outcome.
He did, which was amazing since by that time he'd gone blind.
I can think of a billion-dollar segment of the recording industry that's pretty much predicated on the use of the word in every album they produce, is that good enough?
Top 10 Rap Songs On Billboard.com as of 09/25/2013:
Jay-Z ft. Justin Timberlake â" Holy Grail
Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 9
Eminem â" Berzerk
Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 0
Macklemore & Ryan Lewis â" Same Love
Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 0
4: Macklemore & Ryan Lewis â" Canâ(TM)t Hold Us
Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 0
J. Cole â" Crooked Smile ft. TLC
Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 2
Sage The Gemini ft. IamSu â" Gas Pedal
Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 4
Big Sean ft. Lil Wayne, Jhene Aiko â" Beware
Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 2
Rich Homie Quan â" Type of Way
Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 3
Macklemore & Ryan Lewis ft. Wanz â" Thrift Shop
Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 0
Sage The Gemini â" Red Nose
Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 1
Bonus Track For Fun:
Birdman & Lil Wayne ft. Fat Joe â" About All That
Number of âoeNiggaâ Occurrences: 27
...from the colleges point of view.
It is almost completely arbitrary, non-quantifiable*, and obfuscatory - meaning they can admit whomever they want, for whatever reason.**
*note that the one place it IS at least somewhat quantifiable by outside observation, that of race/gender demographics, they've scrambled mightily to make sure that 'diversity' is reached. Well, that is until women are overrepresented...then I haven't noticed as many righteous protests about gender balance in education. (?)
** as a non-public system in a capitalist society, this should be ultimately their choice; however, the moment the US government felt that it had a compelling interest in mandating "freedom of association" as meaning "freedom to associate as long as the right mix of genders and races are present", I believe we've long since set a precedent of Federal meddling in private practices in this context.
I know, we should do one of those White House petitions online, I'm sure that will make a difference?
...that in 100 years, historians will postulate that the US space program really vanished into the bureaucratic morass, and that politics and special interests combined to torpedo any hope that the private sector would ever make it into space.
Considering the bulk of human evolution has been spent hungry, looking for something to eat, it makes perfect sense to emulate people who appear to be the opposite of hungry.
.
Not only is (whatever they are eating) fundamentally safe, it's so abundant they're fat. For all but the last 50 years, those were purely positive cues.
Note the actress wrote a 50 lb fat suit....I'm curious if she was morbidly obese (ie 150lb fat suit, obviously unhealthy) if the same would still be true.