From what I've seen, they're saying pretty much what I've been saying for a few months now and some of what I've been thinking since the recession. However, with no real definition to them aside from the vague desire to do something about the corporate government and a sense of being on the wrong end of the stick, it's difficult to tell other people (like my grandmother) just what Occupy Wall St and similar protests are about. "Ending corporate control of the government" isn't really enough explanation and the groups refuse to get into more details.
On the one hand, formlessness and lack of unique identity and goals helps them by keeping the doors open to anyone who wants the same goal but may support different methods of it. It also makes taking action against them, whether through the media or law, difficult. On the other, those same traits confuse the hell out of people. Not just the talking heads or the politicians, but other regular Joes that want to understand and maybe support them. It's going to take more than simple anger to gain results.
They're working on getting some details done, but the model of self-government they've chosen (a fully democratic consensus seeking assembly) makes it difficult to get to that point with any real speed. Right now, they have my support. We will just have to see how well that holds as time goes by. The Tea Party had good talking points in the beginning too, but they got co-opted by the Republicans. I'm desperately hoping that sort of thing doesn't happen here, but history is not favoring those odds.
We already have cops in high schools, given the principals the authority to ruin the lives of high school students on the slightest whimsy, and eroded (if not destroyed outright) any suspicion that these students nearing adulthood actually have any rights while ensuring the parents have no actual responsibility for their child's eventual success or failure.
I will point that there have been pushes to fingerprint kids in schools all over the nation for years now. Fingerprint scanners are a natural combination of this and the above. Schools are prisons and daycares now. Who needs education? Just give them a pass if they can spell their name and move on.
I'm pretty certain that doing this would violate the free speech protections in the European Union's charter and related laws, no? While I haven't read it, I wouldn't be surprised if there was something in the Italian constitution about it, considering the idea of free speech goes back centuries.
After three pages that few people care enough to read, they get to the tests. Each page talks about one test or two or something. I dunno. I skimmed through most of it and basically saw just the horizontal blue bar graphs with a few paragraphs of text per page.
My stepfather and I would get into discussions sometimes touching on privacy. His viewpoint is basically "if you're not breaking the law, what do you have to worry about?". I suspect this viewpoint and the natural tendency for humans to be lazy nowadays are allowing companies to get away with this. There is also the feeling that customers don't really have an option as far as these things go. I pointed out the PSN ToS change to my father, who owns a PS3. His response was "we sign away our lives everyday".
The reality of the situation is that consumers, as a group, are too widely disparate and largely separated from each other, even with the increasingly connected world we live in. And so many of them are outright ignorant of the issues, both potential and actual, surrounding corporations, privacy, and legal rights that simple sleights of hand allow for this stuff to keep happening. It isn't enough to be mad as hell over this. We have to get everyone else as mad as hell over this. And unless you're an influential politician or own a large media chain, that's a tall order.
But it won't happen, at least not anytime soon. They make too much money right now.
You really should also be able to explicitly tell them not to sell your personal information to other companies and have them actually follow through with not doing that, but it doesn't look like that will actually happen anytime soon either despite the victories won by privacy advocates. Too many people just don't care as long as they're not being physically inconvenienced.
This was my first thought. "I wonder how much longer until we have real corporate wars." We're already close enough with the industrial-military complex and the fact that corporations basically buy their own Congressmen (as they have been since the 1800s).
I think the only thing that really stops them is that governments still have slightly more power than the major corporations.
The line we need for anyone in government to do anything nowadays isn't "I'll vote for you if you do this", it's "I will give you more money than the other lobbyist."
This is especially true for Rick Perry.
Contracts requiring arbitration is nothing new, apparently. You may want to write your Congressman to get that act repealed if you feel strongly enough about the issue.
Personally, I question the notion that clicking an Agree button is legally binding in the first place. There's no signature and no witness. There's something wrong when I have to go through more paperwork in using my credit card in a store than to agree to sign away basic legal rights.
No charity or cause funding. Examples of prohibited use include raising money for the Red Cross, funding an awareness campaign, funding a scholarship, or donating a portion of funds raised on Kickstarter to a charity or cause.
The article says the judges are giving the teacher immunity because there's no current clear precedent in law for this being unconstitutional, so the teacher wouldn't have known his comments might be unconstitutional.
The San Francisco-based appeals court said the teacher was entitled to immunity because it was not clearly established in the law that a teacher’s expression of hostility to certain religious beliefs in a public school classroom would violate the First Amendment’s establishment clause.
They never ruled on whether his comments were actually unconstitutional or not. Just that there wasn't fair warning that it might not be. Rather than let it be, why aren't they using this case to make that precedent? Or am I missing something?
"Noob" is now also an official word in the dictionary. I suppose that means I have to actually add it to my browser's dictionary so it'll stop telling me it's not a real word.
Take that, spellchecker!
All I have to do is pretend my hearing aid battery just died or just go "What?" enough times. Few random people have the patience to deal with someone with a hearing loss.
Failing that, I've long ago mastered the art of listening while not hearing a word they've said and I have an out if they ask me if I've been listening afterwards.:D
That's because they have a life away from the computer. Probably whatever they specialize in for a living is something you know nothing about, and you might even sound pretty dumb to them in that field of expertise.
For some, yes. For others, no. It varies from person to person. I don't expect encyclopedic knowledge of computers (I don't have that level of knowledge myself), but I do expect some level of basic knowhow.
To people who have lives, computers are just a tool to get something done and not a hobby to maintain. When a mechanics fixes your car or a doctor explains the surgery they performed on you, I bet they see the same blank stare on your face as you nod obediently. However, because they work in fields that require customer interaction, they've learned not to be assholes about it.
What makes you think I'm an asshole about it? When I explain what I've done, I'm as polite as the oncologist telling me about the lymphoma I have in my neck. I'm as attentive to their questions as the car mechanic who told me about the catalytic convertor in my car. I can only hope that I leave my customers feeling as satisfied with what I've done and how I've explained it to them as I did after talking with the people who fix stuff for me (or in it, as the case may be. I might have a bit of an ego, but I do my best not to be an asshole.
People like you live alone. You're bitter, and you hate people, so you tie your self-worth to your knowledge of computers. And now you're expressing your smugness on Slashdot, the stereotypical community for angry zealots with neckbeards who treat operating systems like religions. Why don't you go outside for a while?
I'm not sure whether to be more amused by your hypocrisy or by your psychoanalysis from a brief post on Slashdot. Computers are as common as cars nowadays. Is it too much to expect some basic level of knowledge, the same sort that every car owner is expected to have? Just as I'm expected to know how to change the oil or a flat, shouldn't computer owners be expected to know how to plug in their computer, set up a browser, and safely surf the Internet? Is it really being an "angry zealot with a neckbeard that worships Linux" to think "Man, was it really too much for them to check that it was plugged in in the first place?"
Well, the big problem with most IE users is that IE, to them, simply is the Internet. The computer is simply this mysterious black box that they play Mahjong and read emails on. If they're really savvy, they use Microsoft Office and know how to print documents. So whenever you're asked to troubleshoot a problem for them, it's a bit like fixing a child's favorite toy. All they know is that you, the nearest geek type, is the only one they know of that regards the computer as something other than the Magic Black Box and can magically fix it.
They don't care that most problems are easily fixed, the equivalent of just popping the arm back on a Barbie. They just want it to work. As long as it works, they never have the drive to learn anything more about their computers. I've explained to people what I've done to their computers to fix it all the time and all I get is a blank face and "Ok." The net effect is that they look incredibly dumb most of the time to those of us who do take the time to learn something more than how to turn the computer on and open Internet Explorer, even if they're incredibly smart otherwise.
Slashdot Mirror
Since when?
From what I've seen, they're saying pretty much what I've been saying for a few months now and some of what I've been thinking since the recession. However, with no real definition to them aside from the vague desire to do something about the corporate government and a sense of being on the wrong end of the stick, it's difficult to tell other people (like my grandmother) just what Occupy Wall St and similar protests are about. "Ending corporate control of the government" isn't really enough explanation and the groups refuse to get into more details.
On the one hand, formlessness and lack of unique identity and goals helps them by keeping the doors open to anyone who wants the same goal but may support different methods of it. It also makes taking action against them, whether through the media or law, difficult. On the other, those same traits confuse the hell out of people. Not just the talking heads or the politicians, but other regular Joes that want to understand and maybe support them. It's going to take more than simple anger to gain results.
They're working on getting some details done, but the model of self-government they've chosen (a fully democratic consensus seeking assembly) makes it difficult to get to that point with any real speed. Right now, they have my support. We will just have to see how well that holds as time goes by. The Tea Party had good talking points in the beginning too, but they got co-opted by the Republicans. I'm desperately hoping that sort of thing doesn't happen here, but history is not favoring those odds.
We already have cops in high schools, given the principals the authority to ruin the lives of high school students on the slightest whimsy, and eroded (if not destroyed outright) any suspicion that these students nearing adulthood actually have any rights while ensuring the parents have no actual responsibility for their child's eventual success or failure.
I will point that there have been pushes to fingerprint kids in schools all over the nation for years now. Fingerprint scanners are a natural combination of this and the above. Schools are prisons and daycares now. Who needs education? Just give them a pass if they can spell their name and move on.
I'm pretty certain that doing this would violate the free speech protections in the European Union's charter and related laws, no? While I haven't read it, I wouldn't be surprised if there was something in the Italian constitution about it, considering the idea of free speech goes back centuries.
After three pages that few people care enough to read, they get to the tests. Each page talks about one test or two or something. I dunno. I skimmed through most of it and basically saw just the horizontal blue bar graphs with a few paragraphs of text per page.
The highlight isn't the overall winner, really, which seems to be chosen a bit arbitrarily. It's the tests themselves and the results of those tests.
My stepfather and I would get into discussions sometimes touching on privacy. His viewpoint is basically "if you're not breaking the law, what do you have to worry about?". I suspect this viewpoint and the natural tendency for humans to be lazy nowadays are allowing companies to get away with this. There is also the feeling that customers don't really have an option as far as these things go. I pointed out the PSN ToS change to my father, who owns a PS3. His response was "we sign away our lives everyday".
The reality of the situation is that consumers, as a group, are too widely disparate and largely separated from each other, even with the increasingly connected world we live in. And so many of them are outright ignorant of the issues, both potential and actual, surrounding corporations, privacy, and legal rights that simple sleights of hand allow for this stuff to keep happening. It isn't enough to be mad as hell over this. We have to get everyone else as mad as hell over this. And unless you're an influential politician or own a large media chain, that's a tall order.
But it won't happen, at least not anytime soon. They make too much money right now.
You really should also be able to explicitly tell them not to sell your personal information to other companies and have them actually follow through with not doing that, but it doesn't look like that will actually happen anytime soon either despite the victories won by privacy advocates. Too many people just don't care as long as they're not being physically inconvenienced.
This was my first thought. "I wonder how much longer until we have real corporate wars." We're already close enough with the industrial-military complex and the fact that corporations basically buy their own Congressmen (as they have been since the 1800s). I think the only thing that really stops them is that governments still have slightly more power than the major corporations.
The line we need for anyone in government to do anything nowadays isn't "I'll vote for you if you do this", it's "I will give you more money than the other lobbyist." This is especially true for Rick Perry.
Contracts requiring arbitration is nothing new, apparently. You may want to write your Congressman to get that act repealed if you feel strongly enough about the issue.
Personally, I question the notion that clicking an Agree button is legally binding in the first place. There's no signature and no witness. There's something wrong when I have to go through more paperwork in using my credit card in a store than to agree to sign away basic legal rights.
From the kickstarter guidelines:
No charity or cause funding. Examples of prohibited use include raising money for the Red Cross, funding an awareness campaign, funding a scholarship, or donating a portion of funds raised on Kickstarter to a charity or cause.
The article says the judges are giving the teacher immunity because there's no current clear precedent in law for this being unconstitutional, so the teacher wouldn't have known his comments might be unconstitutional.
The San Francisco-based appeals court said the teacher was entitled to immunity because it was not clearly established in the law that a teacher’s expression of hostility to certain religious beliefs in a public school classroom would violate the First Amendment’s establishment clause.
They never ruled on whether his comments were actually unconstitutional or not. Just that there wasn't fair warning that it might not be. Rather than let it be, why aren't they using this case to make that precedent? Or am I missing something?
"Noob" is now also an official word in the dictionary. I suppose that means I have to actually add it to my browser's dictionary so it'll stop telling me it's not a real word. Take that, spellchecker!
Precogs!
All I have to do is pretend my hearing aid battery just died or just go "What?" enough times. Few random people have the patience to deal with someone with a hearing loss. Failing that, I've long ago mastered the art of listening while not hearing a word they've said and I have an out if they ask me if I've been listening afterwards. :D
That's because they have a life away from the computer. Probably whatever they specialize in for a living is something you know nothing about, and you might even sound pretty dumb to them in that field of expertise.
For some, yes. For others, no. It varies from person to person. I don't expect encyclopedic knowledge of computers (I don't have that level of knowledge myself), but I do expect some level of basic knowhow.
To people who have lives, computers are just a tool to get something done and not a hobby to maintain. When a mechanics fixes your car or a doctor explains the surgery they performed on you, I bet they see the same blank stare on your face as you nod obediently. However, because they work in fields that require customer interaction, they've learned not to be assholes about it.
What makes you think I'm an asshole about it? When I explain what I've done, I'm as polite as the oncologist telling me about the lymphoma I have in my neck. I'm as attentive to their questions as the car mechanic who told me about the catalytic convertor in my car. I can only hope that I leave my customers feeling as satisfied with what I've done and how I've explained it to them as I did after talking with the people who fix stuff for me (or in it, as the case may be. I might have a bit of an ego, but I do my best not to be an asshole.
People like you live alone. You're bitter, and you hate people, so you tie your self-worth to your knowledge of computers. And now you're expressing your smugness on Slashdot, the stereotypical community for angry zealots with neckbeards who treat operating systems like religions. Why don't you go outside for a while?
I'm not sure whether to be more amused by your hypocrisy or by your psychoanalysis from a brief post on Slashdot. Computers are as common as cars nowadays. Is it too much to expect some basic level of knowledge, the same sort that every car owner is expected to have? Just as I'm expected to know how to change the oil or a flat, shouldn't computer owners be expected to know how to plug in their computer, set up a browser, and safely surf the Internet? Is it really being an "angry zealot with a neckbeard that worships Linux" to think "Man, was it really too much for them to check that it was plugged in in the first place?"
Well, the big problem with most IE users is that IE, to them, simply is the Internet. The computer is simply this mysterious black box that they play Mahjong and read emails on. If they're really savvy, they use Microsoft Office and know how to print documents. So whenever you're asked to troubleshoot a problem for them, it's a bit like fixing a child's favorite toy. All they know is that you, the nearest geek type, is the only one they know of that regards the computer as something other than the Magic Black Box and can magically fix it. They don't care that most problems are easily fixed, the equivalent of just popping the arm back on a Barbie. They just want it to work. As long as it works, they never have the drive to learn anything more about their computers. I've explained to people what I've done to their computers to fix it all the time and all I get is a blank face and "Ok." The net effect is that they look incredibly dumb most of the time to those of us who do take the time to learn something more than how to turn the computer on and open Internet Explorer, even if they're incredibly smart otherwise.