Julian's points about the power of big data resonates with me, since I work in and teach data warehousing. I show clients how to amass and structure massive amounts of data and datamine it so that they can identify customers who meet specific criteria, such as those who are more likely to buy beer, or who may be more likely to make insurance claims.
With Julian's insight, I can now see how, by storing the data of each web search, each facebook posting, each email, and each blip of a person's GPS, governments could identify (or think they identify) insurgents, rebels and general troublemakers even while they are only thinking of doing something, before they commit any crime. And I see no technical reason why this could not and is not being done currently, even in real-time. The irony is that the US was formed by rebels and insurgents, and now the US, with their ability to collect and mind this massive amount of data, would be in a position to be able to squash nascent insurgencies before they even occurred. It seems expeditious, and tempting. And so what if a few innocent people get swept up and go missing along with the "baddies?" Isn't the world better off as a whole? I can see the entire terrifying slippery-slope now. But maybe it hasn't yet occurred. We don't really know.
But Julian's point is that there is tipping point that can occur, and in fact, -will- occur, simply by collecting so much data and mining it, the system is already set up. Someone with access to those systems, and with enough legitimate power, would just have to create a different query, and then it all begins, and slowly slides down the slope with more and more queries targeting more and more key people, finding ways to "take them out" with their own weaknesses. Hence, this "turn-key" system is already in place, just waiting for the most basic of human characteristics: weakness and greed, to come along and turn the key and use it for one man's gain. Why not? If you saw a way to control the entire world, and it was just sitting there, silently, waiting for you to use it, wouldn't you be tempted?
We hold here in high esteem the opines of anonymous cowards. Please forgive me, I must have been so wrong to attempt to point out the similarity between this erstwhile article and those championed by the esteemed tabloids to which you subscribe. You're right, this article literally screams/., because it take so little expertise to jump right into the fray and with deep emotional conviction make some bullshit up and enlighten the world with the searing light that powers your blinding insight. Again, forgive me, and allow me to stand down to make way for your in-depth analysis of this game-changing technological discovery.
hah crap like this isn't the reason why, it's the logical conclusion of/.'s no-data-ownership model. it's the emperical evidence that the ship has no rudder.
MS made this same announcement in '97 when they released win 98. The idea was similar to car model years, and the hope was that people would want to keep up appearances and buy a new model every year just like cars. This failed because of MS's inability to deliver on time, the OS was almost a year late in its release, so they abandoned that idea because it made them look bad. I wonder what will be different about it this time?
Finally someone realizes not all users are the same. Now if they would release an interface for power users without time-wasting transitions, silly skewmorphics, lame swipes and minus the overall nursery-age feel, mobile devices will take the next big step forward.
Flu shots often result in delayed side effects and long-term injury, and according to the CDC, "The following substances are found in vaccines: aluminum,(brain toxin) antibiotics, formaldehyde (now listed as carcinogenic), MSG or monosodium glutamate (a known neurotoxin),and thimerosal(neurotoxic mercury)."
http://www.naturalnews.com/033891_vaccines_delayed_injury.html
The FDA admits in a court case that vaccines still contain mercury:
http://www.naturalnews.com/035432_vaccines_mercury_court_case.html
Thanks in advance for all reasoned responses. I believe there is still much to learn about vaccinations, their ingredients and the body's responses to them, provided we have an open mind. (jab, lol)
The point of my post was entirely to identify a negative and inflammatory statement embedded in the lead article. I don't like remarks like that; I find they stifle original thought and are generally counter-productive. However, by the negative and inflammatory remarks found in your reply, you appear to disagree. You are welcome to. You should know however, that the "put-other-people-down because their opinion differs from mine" kind of attitude will win you no followers except the blind. Personally, I want to converse with people who can think, and will expend the energy to fashion well-informed opinions for themselves. I really don't want to have to hold your hand, or lead you to water you don't want to drink.
Who mentioned autism? Not me. So why are your ranting about it? Before you spend more energy trying to argue this or other points that I did not make, follow this bouncing ball: SOME vaccines CAN have dangerous side-effects, including death, by the CDC's OWN admission:
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-effects.htm
That is my entire point. If you would like to argue that, please argue with the CDC. Thank-you.
And if you want to argue that the side-effects are always minor compared to what they prevent, please note that Guillain-Barré Syndrome has been caused by the flu vaccine, and the Yellow Fever vaccine, and it's no joke. Personally, I'd rather risk the flu than a vaccination that could give me GBS. But hey, as long as you have -all- the facts, you personally are welcome to take that risk. And I personally should be free to inform others that the risk exists, and that people who rate vaccinations in the "less-than-perfect" category are not "anti-science," and are not evil.
So thanks for ranting so as to to be an example to others of the dangers of spewing predefined opinions and giving me yet another chance to re-iterate how potentially destructive it is to have such a closed mind, especially about vaccinations, which as of October, 2012, can still be a dangerous thing:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-10-24/italy-bans-novartis-flu-vaccines-citing-side-effects
Mod me troll if you like, but:
1) The original article would have read perfectly well without including the inflammatory and derogatory phrase "contrary to opinions from the anti-science crowd." Go back and read it and see. So, the article itself begged to be called out as flamebait, which I did. I find it hypocritical of/. to allow inflammatory comments to be embedded directly within an article.
2) There are instances in which vaccines have had effects other than which they are purported to create. For example, in October this year, Italy banned all flu vaccines because of their documented side-effects. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-24/italy-bans-novartis-flu-vaccines-citing-side-effects.html . I'm not saying that all vaccines are bad, or -good-, but let's not put down people who question their veracity, because it is true that not all vaccines are good.
3) I am particularly sensitive to anything which purports to be "news" and contains spin. This article pushed my hot button because it contained a wealth of good information, and yet managed to wrap it with tainting bias. Enough already. Be news, or be irresponsible. There is no crossover in my mind. If the reporting is irresponsible, it should be recognized as such. There are too many people in the world who do not recognize it for me to let it go. We all need an education in what is really information, and what is unfounded speculation./. needs to maintain a sterling reputation for knowing the difference, and labeling speculation for what it is.
The entire gamut of science is based on ensuring there is no bias in our assertions, so let's all keep an open mind.
"...contrary to opinions from the anti-science crowd, "
Any article that begins with a put-down of a generalized segment of the population in my opinion is already tainted with bias. I'll look elsewhere for reliable information, thanks.
The point is that you are proclaiming publicly a promise, and if you break your promise (your vows in this case) you and everyone -should- feel, and rightly so, that you do not have personal integrity, and your word should not be trusted.
Complex societies are built on a web of trusts, and when we can no long trust each other, public order will crumble and we will abandon our complex civilization. This happens one person at a time.
Children need good examples to follow, especially example of trusting relationships. So now, do you still wonder why children are ill-behaved, and we feel that society becomes more corrupt each day, with a sky-high divorce rate such as we have?
And so it falls.
Sorry, my opinion still stands. When I was a n00b, I felt that I had to "sell out" to make make money selling software. Then, ten years ago I created some software purely guided by my own design ideas and principles, and today, 10 years later it still is paying the rent, so now I would have to disagree.
Is there a point to posting a purely hypothetical legal question like this on slashdot? Wouldn't this be better posted on a legal forum? Personally, I've never been a fan of the purely speculative form of alleged "news reporting."
Will they then also ban all devices capable of being involved in triggering a bomb: clocks, watches, matches, and egg timers? Are they also banning the use of vehicles to inhibit mobility in planting these bombs? Will they be requiring people to report to the local police station to have their hands tied behind their backs to prevent them from making said bombs?
Just wondering....
Slashdot Mirror
"impairment in social interaction and repetitive and stereotyped patterns of behavior, activities and interests"
This describes everyone I work with, myself included.
Apparently, one can make a good living at being autistic. :)
Julian's points about the power of big data resonates with me, since I work in and teach data warehousing. I show clients how to amass and structure massive amounts of data and datamine it so that they can identify customers who meet specific criteria, such as those who are more likely to buy beer, or who may be more likely to make insurance claims.
With Julian's insight, I can now see how, by storing the data of each web search, each facebook posting, each email, and each blip of a person's GPS, governments could identify (or think they identify) insurgents, rebels and general troublemakers even while they are only thinking of doing something, before they commit any crime. And I see no technical reason why this could not and is not being done currently, even in real-time. The irony is that the US was formed by rebels and insurgents, and now the US, with their ability to collect and mind this massive amount of data, would be in a position to be able to squash nascent insurgencies before they even occurred. It seems expeditious, and tempting. And so what if a few innocent people get swept up and go missing along with the "baddies?" Isn't the world better off as a whole? I can see the entire terrifying slippery-slope now. But maybe it hasn't yet occurred. We don't really know.
But Julian's point is that there is tipping point that can occur, and in fact, -will- occur, simply by collecting so much data and mining it, the system is already set up. Someone with access to those systems, and with enough legitimate power, would just have to create a different query, and then it all begins, and slowly slides down the slope with more and more queries targeting more and more key people, finding ways to "take them out" with their own weaknesses. Hence, this "turn-key" system is already in place, just waiting for the most basic of human characteristics: weakness and greed, to come along and turn the key and use it for one man's gain. Why not? If you saw a way to control the entire world, and it was just sitting there, silently, waiting for you to use it, wouldn't you be tempted?
One ring to rule them all...
I'm starting a "retarded /. stories" list because shit like this is ruining /. and has got to stop.
- 'Unicorn Lair' In Pyongyang (stupid)
- 'Kidney For iPad' (tabloid fodder)
- Plastic Found on Mars (pwned)
- Earthshaking Discovery On Mars (fake)
Anyone have any other stories to add? At this rate I won't be surprised to read a story about My Little Pony on here soon.
/., in collaboration with the Erowid Vault. brings you "get high and watch this code run." Wow, it's so cool.
We hold here in high esteem the opines of anonymous cowards. Please forgive me, I must have been so wrong to attempt to point out the similarity between this erstwhile article and those championed by the esteemed tabloids to which you subscribe. You're right, this article literally screams /., because it take so little expertise to jump right into the fray and with deep emotional conviction make some bullshit up and enlighten the world with the searing light that powers your blinding insight. Again, forgive me, and allow me to stand down to make way for your in-depth analysis of this game-changing technological discovery.
Proceed.</end-sarcasm>
Why buy the Enquirer? Read all your Mardi-Gras-Beads-On-Mars and Kidney-For-iPad articles right here!
There's an iPad involved, so this must be geek news (rolls eyes)
hah crap like this isn't the reason why, it's the logical conclusion of /.'s no-data-ownership model. it's the emperical evidence that the ship has no rudder.
I'm gonna meta-mod u down for *obvious* lol
Did they get the right Mars? Or did they land on some cheap knock-off planet from China?
MS made this same announcement in '97 when they released win 98. The idea was similar to car model years, and the hope was that people would want to keep up appearances and buy a new model every year just like cars. This failed because of MS's inability to deliver on time, the OS was almost a year late in its release, so they abandoned that idea because it made them look bad. I wonder what will be different about it this time?
Finally someone realizes not all users are the same. Now if they would release an interface for power users without time-wasting transitions, silly skewmorphics, lame swipes and minus the overall nursery-age feel, mobile devices will take the next big step forward.
Tell them to stop watching Batman movies and take their meds. Then hang up. They are obviously too affected by them.
Flu shots often result in delayed side effects and long-term injury, and according to the CDC, "The following substances are found in vaccines: aluminum,(brain toxin) antibiotics, formaldehyde (now listed as carcinogenic), MSG or monosodium glutamate (a known neurotoxin),and thimerosal(neurotoxic mercury)." http://www.naturalnews.com/033891_vaccines_delayed_injury.html The FDA admits in a court case that vaccines still contain mercury: http://www.naturalnews.com/035432_vaccines_mercury_court_case.html Thanks in advance for all reasoned responses. I believe there is still much to learn about vaccinations, their ingredients and the body's responses to them, provided we have an open mind. (jab, lol)
The point of my post was entirely to identify a negative and inflammatory statement embedded in the lead article. I don't like remarks like that; I find they stifle original thought and are generally counter-productive. However, by the negative and inflammatory remarks found in your reply, you appear to disagree. You are welcome to. You should know however, that the "put-other-people-down because their opinion differs from mine" kind of attitude will win you no followers except the blind. Personally, I want to converse with people who can think, and will expend the energy to fashion well-informed opinions for themselves. I really don't want to have to hold your hand, or lead you to water you don't want to drink. Who mentioned autism? Not me. So why are your ranting about it? Before you spend more energy trying to argue this or other points that I did not make, follow this bouncing ball: SOME vaccines CAN have dangerous side-effects, including death, by the CDC's OWN admission: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-effects.htm That is my entire point. If you would like to argue that, please argue with the CDC. Thank-you. And if you want to argue that the side-effects are always minor compared to what they prevent, please note that Guillain-Barré Syndrome has been caused by the flu vaccine, and the Yellow Fever vaccine, and it's no joke. Personally, I'd rather risk the flu than a vaccination that could give me GBS. But hey, as long as you have -all- the facts, you personally are welcome to take that risk. And I personally should be free to inform others that the risk exists, and that people who rate vaccinations in the "less-than-perfect" category are not "anti-science," and are not evil. So thanks for ranting so as to to be an example to others of the dangers of spewing predefined opinions and giving me yet another chance to re-iterate how potentially destructive it is to have such a closed mind, especially about vaccinations, which as of October, 2012, can still be a dangerous thing: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-10-24/italy-bans-novartis-flu-vaccines-citing-side-effects
Mod me troll if you like, but: 1) The original article would have read perfectly well without including the inflammatory and derogatory phrase "contrary to opinions from the anti-science crowd." Go back and read it and see. So, the article itself begged to be called out as flamebait, which I did. I find it hypocritical of /. to allow inflammatory comments to be embedded directly within an article.
2) There are instances in which vaccines have had effects other than which they are purported to create. For example, in October this year, Italy banned all flu vaccines because of their documented side-effects. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-24/italy-bans-novartis-flu-vaccines-citing-side-effects.html . I'm not saying that all vaccines are bad, or -good-, but let's not put down people who question their veracity, because it is true that not all vaccines are good.
3) I am particularly sensitive to anything which purports to be "news" and contains spin. This article pushed my hot button because it contained a wealth of good information, and yet managed to wrap it with tainting bias. Enough already. Be news, or be irresponsible. There is no crossover in my mind. If the reporting is irresponsible, it should be recognized as such. There are too many people in the world who do not recognize it for me to let it go. We all need an education in what is really information, and what is unfounded speculation. /. needs to maintain a sterling reputation for knowing the difference, and labeling speculation for what it is.
The entire gamut of science is based on ensuring there is no bias in our assertions, so let's all keep an open mind.
"...contrary to opinions from the anti-science crowd, " Any article that begins with a put-down of a generalized segment of the population in my opinion is already tainted with bias. I'll look elsewhere for reliable information, thanks.
The point is that you are proclaiming publicly a promise, and if you break your promise (your vows in this case) you and everyone -should- feel, and rightly so, that you do not have personal integrity, and your word should not be trusted. Complex societies are built on a web of trusts, and when we can no long trust each other, public order will crumble and we will abandon our complex civilization. This happens one person at a time. Children need good examples to follow, especially example of trusting relationships. So now, do you still wonder why children are ill-behaved, and we feel that society becomes more corrupt each day, with a sky-high divorce rate such as we have? And so it falls.
Thanks for sharing, er, or not.
It's an add-on for Tradestation. It enables traders to optimize the code which implements investment strategies.
Sorry, my opinion still stands. When I was a n00b, I felt that I had to "sell out" to make make money selling software. Then, ten years ago I created some software purely guided by my own design ideas and principles, and today, 10 years later it still is paying the rent, so now I would have to disagree.
however if you are experienced and have a good game idea, how would this advice apply?
Probability is for other people. I feel lucky!! ;)
Is there a point to posting a purely hypothetical legal question like this on slashdot? Wouldn't this be better posted on a legal forum? Personally, I've never been a fan of the purely speculative form of alleged "news reporting."
The zombies are coming, he'll be ready. Will you?
Will they then also ban all devices capable of being involved in triggering a bomb: clocks, watches, matches, and egg timers? Are they also banning the use of vehicles to inhibit mobility in planting these bombs? Will they be requiring people to report to the local police station to have their hands tied behind their backs to prevent them from making said bombs? Just wondering....