All right, you're giving Socrates' story of the Artisan as the basis for your disagreement, but this is one that I'm not familiar with. A quick search is turning up nothing - I don't suppose you could give a link? Or the Clif Notes version, maybe?
More like a self-driving taxi, I'd imagine. A self-driving bus doesn't have any substantial advantages over regular buses, but a self-driving taxi... might be slightly cheaper. Slightly. It's revolutionary!
Bleh. Wish the original paper wasn't paywalled, this vegetarian business doesn't make a lot of sense to me. If you take that produce and feed it to animals, and then eat the animals, you should have at least as much exposure as from eating the produce straight. If the drug in question is one which bioaccumulates, then your exposure should be higher than it would be from eating the produce straight. It would be nice to see what the paper said specifically, rather than getting it second hand.
Does anyone have such a connection to Jackson or Hamilton to care about their ouster?
Amusingly, yes. The next bill due for a change was the $10 bill, but there's currently a Broadway musical about the life of Alexander Hamilton. The producer of that show wrote the treasury and asked them to postpone changing the $10 bill, and apparently they agreed to it.
Setting aside her race and gender, I like this choice for the fact that for once we're acknowledging the importance of someone who wasn't in a leadership position. We have this tendency to celebrate the person in charge and ignore the grunts, especially when it comes to presidents, and I'm glad to see someone else on a bill.
(Yes, Ben Franklin was never technically a president but only because he was too old. He might as well have been one.)
Breivik never said that. He hates Muslims, that was the beginning and end to the motivation behind his killing spree. He has since identified himself as a fascist, so... Wait. Maybe I should be responding to the second part of your claim - how on earth does this prove anything about Norway being too left-wing? The fact that they have managed to stick to principles of humane treatment even when it comes to their most hated criminal is, if anything, witness to their strength.
He's best known right now for hosting a quiz show called QI. It's currently running, has been running for more than ten years now, and is pretty popular among younger people. If you're thinking of his recognition among older audiences it's likely for his acting career, but QI is where the bulk of people see him nowadays.
Are you trying to imply that this is an easy question? I know people who would choose a cell phone over a home internet connection. They might be the minority on Slashdot, but they do exist. The answer isn't as obvious as you're suggesting.
The bigger problem is, this is a ridiculous bill - you can't let all of your citizens individually pick fights with foreign countries. Laws and lawsuits are too inflexible to allow for real diplomacy. Some politicians are going to recognize that, see that this bill has no chance of passing, and vocally support it - saying that those politicians who oppose it are corrupt and selling out American citizens to foreign interests. There's no risk to these opportunist politicians, since the bill is never going to get passed / signed anyway, so they're free to grandstand to their hearts' content.
Some of the power of a union also comes from the government - striking is a legal action which a union may take, and retribution from the employer is limited by law. It's all very complicated, and I don't know squat about it, but New York is not a right-to-work state so unions still have some rights there. It's possible that these people might have some ability to resist what their employer is doing.
I'm sorry, "greed is evil" is obviously retarded? So obvious that you don't even need to defend that? Sure. Fine. Let's skip that, the comment was about deforestation anyway, not greed.
The noble savage isn't a fallacy, it's a romantic ideal. I suppose that you're trying to refer to the naturalistic fallacy, which supposes that something is good or right simply because that's how it is in nature and with no other justification. The thing is, the bulk of the movie is devoted to convincing the audience that the natural way on Pandora is good and worth defending on its merits, not simply for being natural. So... I don't know where you're going with that comment. Is that just another rant against the 1%ers? Just 'cause they're rich doesn't mean they're wrong all the time.
This notion that you have a right to be forgotten is beyond parody.
The notion is certainly not a parody, the point of the law is that imperfect data storage and retrieval, i.e.: the old way of doing things, is preferable when it comes to issues of a personal nature. It's implementation that's difficult, though I don't think it's nearly as much of an insurmountable challenge as some people here suggest.
Just one approach: news organizations attach an expiration date to each article and they get archived when the date expires. Search engines read that date and remove search results at the appropriate time. That's 90% of the problem solved, right there. There's always going to be some wanker who thinks he's "fighting the good fight" by rehosting an embarrassing drunken photo that someone posted when they were a teenager, but that person can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Most of the time, he can just be ignored.
I am delighted to see that there's someone out there who still cares about privacy, and who hasn't been bought off by the data aggregators or cowed by overreaching law enforcement... yet. There may be a few flaws in the law, but I'm glad that it exists.
All questions are valid, some are just stupid flamebait. But, all right, let's assume you're one of those children who think that cable TV is an antiquated relic and you have no idea how big and important it is. Even then, even in the case where you might be genuinely curious what all the fuss is about, phrasing your question as just another attack on the president renders it worthless as a means of furthering conversation. So... Hm. I guess not all questions are valid.
Funny enough, the FCC also regulates ISPs. This is something that they can address, provided that bill from the other day doesn't go through. Ideally this will mean unbundling of cable internet services in addition to TV, which is possible now that ISPs have been reclassified as telecommunications services. That would be a huge win for everyone (except the existing monopolies).
The full quote: "Bill Nye is as much a scientist as I am, and I know all about the weather and stuff. You know how much weather we get in Alaska? Tons. Most every day there's some kinda weather, the wind's blowin' or the rain's rainin'... Shoot, I can see all of that from my house sometimes. I'm an expert."
If you watch the full video that I linked above, it's really pretty clear. Here it is again. At 4:59 the mob gets up and surrounds the police, then sits in a ring around them, with those people who were arrested in the center. At 7:08 the crowd says, "If you let them go, we will let you leave." At 7:26 the officer is explaining to a portion of the people who are sitting in the ring, the portion who is sitting across the road, that they need to bring in a squad car to retrieve those people who had been arrested. The squad car, unsurprisingly, needs to travel on the road. He explains to each one of them that if they still refuse to move when the car comes then they will have to be removed. Really, he was very civil under the circumstances. I'm impressed with his professionalism.
There are many bad things to be said about search engine optimization, and some bad things to be said about PR in general, but you are exaggerating.
I don't know what you're talking about with this "administration" business. "The administration" didn't order the pepper spray or have anything directly to do with the group of students who were preventing the officers from leaving. "The administration" ordered that a group of protestors couldn't camp out in that spot overnight, security acted to remove them, and arrested them when they refused to leave. That was all reasonably routine. Then a mob surrounded the officers to block them from leaving and demanded the release of the people who had been arrested. It's those people, the mob, who got sprayed. Watch the video if you're still confused.
The "erase from the internet" thing is typical headline drama. They hired a PR firm who did some SEO to get it off of the first page of a Google search. That's it.
I'm sorry, calling that naive was unnecessarily combative on my part. But I don't know what you mean by "pepper spraying them before they gave any resistance." They certainly were resisting, passive resistance is resistance. And what alternative do you suggest? If the students need to be removed, and they won't leave on their own, then they need to be removed by force. There is no third option, the only thing you can do is make sure to limit the amount of force that you use to the least which is necessary.
This is just naive. Some students were arrested and they were being taken away, but the police were surrounded by others who demanded that those arrested be released. Here's the video. What are they supposed to do there? Ask nicely? They did. Point out that a chanting mob does not get to dictate who can and can't be arrested?
Pepper spray looks bad, and is bad in some respects, but it's the least dangerous means of force which they can employ. It's less likely to cause injury than a taser, and a lot less likely than a baton. The officer went up to each student individually before spraying any of them and explained exactly what was going to happen and gave them time to leave. The action they took was reasonable under the circumstances.
It's a good example of one of the reason why short and readable bills are not a panacea. Being able to read the bill does not mean that you understand its implications.
Nuance is not how things work on the internet and, increasingly, not how things work in real life. "Trying to understand what all the fuss is about" is tantamount to taking sides, it stems from going to the absolute extreme on a position. Think about that: with one side claiming that she's the devil, the only other option is that she isn't. If you don't buy the idea that everything she does or touches or looks at is tainted and evil, then she can't possibly be as bad as they're saying she is and you are, therefore, disagreeing with them.
In your mind, "not the devil" may still leave a lot of room for negativity, but it firmly places you on the "Hillary Clinton may not necessarily be evil incarnate" side of the political isle.
Slashcode has its problems, and the first-post thing is one of them, but it's a problem shared by every single user-moderated commenting system that I've seen. It's also something that can be addressed, it's not a fundamental problem with the system. Slashcode has the best user moderation system currently running, and what's disappointing about that it the fact that it's so old. Why doesn't it have more imitators?
You're "experiment" though - that's just bullshit.
Slashdot Mirror
All right, you're giving Socrates' story of the Artisan as the basis for your disagreement, but this is one that I'm not familiar with. A quick search is turning up nothing - I don't suppose you could give a link? Or the Clif Notes version, maybe?
More like a self-driving taxi, I'd imagine. A self-driving bus doesn't have any substantial advantages over regular buses, but a self-driving taxi... might be slightly cheaper. Slightly. It's revolutionary!
"At this point we're not planning to charge for it," vows Opera.
That's quite a vow!
Bleh. Wish the original paper wasn't paywalled, this vegetarian business doesn't make a lot of sense to me. If you take that produce and feed it to animals, and then eat the animals, you should have at least as much exposure as from eating the produce straight. If the drug in question is one which bioaccumulates, then your exposure should be higher than it would be from eating the produce straight. It would be nice to see what the paper said specifically, rather than getting it second hand.
Does anyone have such a connection to Jackson or Hamilton to care about their ouster?
Amusingly, yes. The next bill due for a change was the $10 bill, but there's currently a Broadway musical about the life of Alexander Hamilton. The producer of that show wrote the treasury and asked them to postpone changing the $10 bill, and apparently they agreed to it.
Setting aside her race and gender, I like this choice for the fact that for once we're acknowledging the importance of someone who wasn't in a leadership position. We have this tendency to celebrate the person in charge and ignore the grunts, especially when it comes to presidents, and I'm glad to see someone else on a bill.
(Yes, Ben Franklin was never technically a president but only because he was too old. He might as well have been one.)
He attacked a group affiliated with the Labour Party, who he blamed for letting Muslims into the country. What's your point?
Breivik never said that. He hates Muslims, that was the beginning and end to the motivation behind his killing spree. He has since identified himself as a fascist, so... Wait. Maybe I should be responding to the second part of your claim - how on earth does this prove anything about Norway being too left-wing? The fact that they have managed to stick to principles of humane treatment even when it comes to their most hated criminal is, if anything, witness to their strength.
He's best known right now for hosting a quiz show called QI. It's currently running, has been running for more than ten years now, and is pretty popular among younger people. If you're thinking of his recognition among older audiences it's likely for his acting career, but QI is where the bulk of people see him nowadays.
Are you trying to imply that this is an easy question? I know people who would choose a cell phone over a home internet connection. They might be the minority on Slashdot, but they do exist. The answer isn't as obvious as you're suggesting.
The bigger problem is, this is a ridiculous bill - you can't let all of your citizens individually pick fights with foreign countries. Laws and lawsuits are too inflexible to allow for real diplomacy. Some politicians are going to recognize that, see that this bill has no chance of passing, and vocally support it - saying that those politicians who oppose it are corrupt and selling out American citizens to foreign interests. There's no risk to these opportunist politicians, since the bill is never going to get passed / signed anyway, so they're free to grandstand to their hearts' content.
Some of the power of a union also comes from the government - striking is a legal action which a union may take, and retribution from the employer is limited by law. It's all very complicated, and I don't know squat about it, but New York is not a right-to-work state so unions still have some rights there. It's possible that these people might have some ability to resist what their employer is doing.
I'm sorry, "greed is evil" is obviously retarded? So obvious that you don't even need to defend that? Sure. Fine. Let's skip that, the comment was about deforestation anyway, not greed.
The noble savage isn't a fallacy, it's a romantic ideal. I suppose that you're trying to refer to the naturalistic fallacy, which supposes that something is good or right simply because that's how it is in nature and with no other justification. The thing is, the bulk of the movie is devoted to convincing the audience that the natural way on Pandora is good and worth defending on its merits, not simply for being natural. So... I don't know where you're going with that comment. Is that just another rant against the 1%ers? Just 'cause they're rich doesn't mean they're wrong all the time.
This notion that you have a right to be forgotten is beyond parody.
The notion is certainly not a parody, the point of the law is that imperfect data storage and retrieval, i.e.: the old way of doing things, is preferable when it comes to issues of a personal nature. It's implementation that's difficult, though I don't think it's nearly as much of an insurmountable challenge as some people here suggest.
Just one approach: news organizations attach an expiration date to each article and they get archived when the date expires. Search engines read that date and remove search results at the appropriate time. That's 90% of the problem solved, right there. There's always going to be some wanker who thinks he's "fighting the good fight" by rehosting an embarrassing drunken photo that someone posted when they were a teenager, but that person can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Most of the time, he can just be ignored.
I am delighted to see that there's someone out there who still cares about privacy, and who hasn't been bought off by the data aggregators or cowed by overreaching law enforcement... yet. There may be a few flaws in the law, but I'm glad that it exists.
Wait, we're saying "apps" to describe non-mobile software now? Is that what we're doing? Could we avoid that if I asked politely?
All questions are valid, some are just stupid flamebait. But, all right, let's assume you're one of those children who think that cable TV is an antiquated relic and you have no idea how big and important it is. Even then, even in the case where you might be genuinely curious what all the fuss is about, phrasing your question as just another attack on the president renders it worthless as a means of furthering conversation. So... Hm. I guess not all questions are valid.
Funny enough, the FCC also regulates ISPs. This is something that they can address, provided that bill from the other day doesn't go through. Ideally this will mean unbundling of cable internet services in addition to TV, which is possible now that ISPs have been reclassified as telecommunications services. That would be a huge win for everyone (except the existing monopolies).
The full quote: "Bill Nye is as much a scientist as I am, and I know all about the weather and stuff. You know how much weather we get in Alaska? Tons. Most every day there's some kinda weather, the wind's blowin' or the rain's rainin'... Shoot, I can see all of that from my house sometimes. I'm an expert."
If you watch the full video that I linked above, it's really pretty clear. Here it is again. At 4:59 the mob gets up and surrounds the police, then sits in a ring around them, with those people who were arrested in the center. At 7:08 the crowd says, "If you let them go, we will let you leave." At 7:26 the officer is explaining to a portion of the people who are sitting in the ring, the portion who is sitting across the road, that they need to bring in a squad car to retrieve those people who had been arrested. The squad car, unsurprisingly, needs to travel on the road. He explains to each one of them that if they still refuse to move when the car comes then they will have to be removed. Really, he was very civil under the circumstances. I'm impressed with his professionalism.
There are many bad things to be said about search engine optimization, and some bad things to be said about PR in general, but you are exaggerating.
I don't know what you're talking about with this "administration" business. "The administration" didn't order the pepper spray or have anything directly to do with the group of students who were preventing the officers from leaving. "The administration" ordered that a group of protestors couldn't camp out in that spot overnight, security acted to remove them, and arrested them when they refused to leave. That was all reasonably routine. Then a mob surrounded the officers to block them from leaving and demanded the release of the people who had been arrested. It's those people, the mob, who got sprayed. Watch the video if you're still confused.
The "erase from the internet" thing is typical headline drama. They hired a PR firm who did some SEO to get it off of the first page of a Google search. That's it.
I'm sorry, calling that naive was unnecessarily combative on my part. But I don't know what you mean by "pepper spraying them before they gave any resistance." They certainly were resisting, passive resistance is resistance. And what alternative do you suggest? If the students need to be removed, and they won't leave on their own, then they need to be removed by force. There is no third option, the only thing you can do is make sure to limit the amount of force that you use to the least which is necessary.
This is just naive. Some students were arrested and they were being taken away, but the police were surrounded by others who demanded that those arrested be released. Here's the video. What are they supposed to do there? Ask nicely? They did. Point out that a chanting mob does not get to dictate who can and can't be arrested?
Pepper spray looks bad, and is bad in some respects, but it's the least dangerous means of force which they can employ. It's less likely to cause injury than a taser, and a lot less likely than a baton. The officer went up to each student individually before spraying any of them and explained exactly what was going to happen and gave them time to leave. The action they took was reasonable under the circumstances.
It's a good example of one of the reason why short and readable bills are not a panacea. Being able to read the bill does not mean that you understand its implications.
Nuance is not how things work on the internet and, increasingly, not how things work in real life. "Trying to understand what all the fuss is about" is tantamount to taking sides, it stems from going to the absolute extreme on a position. Think about that: with one side claiming that she's the devil, the only other option is that she isn't. If you don't buy the idea that everything she does or touches or looks at is tainted and evil, then she can't possibly be as bad as they're saying she is and you are, therefore, disagreeing with them.
In your mind, "not the devil" may still leave a lot of room for negativity, but it firmly places you on the "Hillary Clinton may not necessarily be evil incarnate" side of the political isle.
Slashcode has its problems, and the first-post thing is one of them, but it's a problem shared by every single user-moderated commenting system that I've seen. It's also something that can be addressed, it's not a fundamental problem with the system. Slashcode has the best user moderation system currently running, and what's disappointing about that it the fact that it's so old. Why doesn't it have more imitators?
You're "experiment" though - that's just bullshit.