when I tell the house I want 2 eggs over easy a slice of toast and orange juice for breakfast at 6am I do not want eggs at 5am, toast at 6:30 and OJ at 3 in the afternoon
I put the butter in the pan, put the bread in the toaster, put the eggs in the pan, pour the OJ, flip the eggs, take the toast out, and flip the egg onto it. None of that requires Stratum-1 quality time, or even an internet connection.
More importantly - You have apparently confused "magic" for "the internet". The fact that your toaster has its own facebook feed (with 27,000 followers, no doubt!) doesn't mean that it can walk over to the pantry (dodging your robotic frying-pan on its way to get the eggs and butter, of course), take out the bread, remove that pesky little plastic clip without breaking it, take out two slices, put the clip back on (again without breaking it), then cook them for you.
Why does my toaster need to know the time more accurately than, say, a five minute window? For that matter, why does my toaster need internet access?
For that matter, why the hell do I want my two-ton thin-metal-shelled death trap visible on the internet while flinging its contents (me) down the highway at 80MPH?
Cameras in every home would kill millions. Literally.
You realize "1984", all similarities to reality aside, counts as a work of fiction, right? Not "history", merely speculation about one particular flavor of distopian society.
Still irrelevant - Google doesn't "owe" you free advertising.
Google exists as a publicly-traded for-profit company. They "just happen" to provide a tool for free that lets you find things online, but they have absolutely no obligation to make that tool "fair". If they want to put things that make them money at the top of the list, they can.
If they wanted to sort their search results by the number of cat references per result, they could do that, too. And none of us have the least right to complain about it.
As is your idea of "true" suicidal people - most of them can't plan ahead. Most suicide attempts are impulsive.
Way to read your own biases into what I said.
Wanting to talk to someone does not mean the same thing as changing your facebook status to "just took a bottle of pills LOLWTFBBQ".
You also contradict yourself in your stance on this - So most suicides happen impulsively, but they fucking stop to talk about it on Facebook first? Impulsive means "Hey, I had a bad day, and whatd'ya know, I casually walked to the top of this bridge. Hey, I could jump!". Impulsive doesn't mean telling your 1500 closest friends you want to die and then giving them a few hours to make sure enough people read it. In any other context, we would call that proof of premeditated intent, not "impulsive".
The irony of all this - People who really just want to die don't post to Facebook about it. They get their affairs in order, make sure no one will need to deal with their shit (beyond the trauma of their final exit), and then just go off on a weekend "hiking trip" that they never come back from.
The people posting to Facebook about suicide want/need attention. So how does Facebook deal with this? Socially fucking isolate them??? Well done, Facebook! Now, I personally think more people should "just do it" and quit talking about it, but you've managed to enact a policy that will accomplish that goal far, far better than my own opinions ever could!
No one who voted for Nader cared about his sanity - Burning the whole fucking thing down and start over looks a hell of a lot more appealing than yet another four years of the slow erosion of our rights.
We literally have political dissidents seeking asylum in Russia - Really think about that for a minute. Russia. The big enemy (drugs and terrorism and copyright violators and Cuba aside), notorious for its human rights abuses and opaque near-totalitarian government. And our political refugees flee there?
People didn't vote for Nader to vote for Nader. They voted for Nader to vote for "anyone else".
Poor people commit more crimes precisely because the upper classes dictate what ethical behavior is in such a way as to justify and reenforce their own values and behavior at the expense of other classes
Did you seriously mean to say that we've outlawed murder as a mere point of fashion?
Proportional fines are not a means of revenue, where did you get that stupid idea from? Fines are punishments.
Bullshit. All fines generate revenue, and traffic enforcement counts as one of the worst offenders.
"Gee, why does the speed suddenly drop from 45 to 25 for a tenth of a mile riiight at that otherwise-uninteresting spot where cops can easily hide?"
"Safety."
For those who still want to believe that there's a long-term future in coding... how DO you plan to compete with people who have no debt from education and will qualify for massive job subsidies?
I don't worry about it because I don't buy into the bullshit idea that anyone can do anything if they just have the opportunity and apply themselves.
Many of the same attributes that make someone a good programmer act in directly opposition to those shortcomings that make someone a criminal (the capriciousness of the US legal system aside) - Problem solving, impulse control, ability to sit motionless for hours, ability to attend to a task despite external distractions, solid math background, early exposure to technology and the luxury of spending time learning it, etc.
I honestly don't believe that everyone can learn to code; and of those who can, a large majority would hate it. When I describe what I do to most (educated and intelligent) people, they involuntarily cringe.
Yes, this program will probable find a few gems who fell through the cracks early in life (at the expense of millions of taxpayer dollars, of course). I feel comfortable that I can withstand a few dozen subsidized competitors entering my profession per year.
They only banned the practice for females(in practice)
"In practice", they haven't done anything, for two simple reasons:
1) The victim needs to complain, and most will never even notice, and
2) It takes 15 seconds to make a throwaway account, and hours or even days for someone to notice, complain, and get a response; then, 15 seconds later...
I fully expect Twitter to have the same level of success.
all other communication has been through Q and A via his attorneys
They have offered from the beginning to allow Ny to either question him in London, or to do it via teleconference, both of which Swedish law allows. Even the Swedish press and non-NyD MPs have started ridiculing Ny for her stubborn refusal to do so.
Heck, one of Assange's attorneys (Emerson) all but admitted that he did it.
Why wouldn't they? Anna Ardin never accused him of rape, just wanted to force him to get tested for STDs. She has even tweeted since then that he never raped her. Why would Assange or his lawyers bother denying facts that no one disputes?
before he fled
Slight correction there - After the first prosecutor cleared him, and Ny stalled for weeks, Assange asked permission to go to London, which Ny granted (and then immediately issued an international arrest warrant to generate as much worldwide publicity as possible).
The claim that Assange was "free to go" as promulgated by BjÃrn Hurtig, a former attorney of Assange's.
The chief magistrate of Assange's extradition hearing (who originally voted to extradite) has publicly stated that he incorrectly applied a law that effectively tied his hands into approving the extradition, and would have voted against it otherwise. Unfortunately for Assange, that really doesn't matter, because the UK has chosen to interpret him seeking asylum as breach of bail - Though in some sort of alice-in-wonderland loop of logic, amusingly enough, that doesn't count as a criminal offense in the UK, it just allows forfeiture of the bail itself and taking the accused into custody pending trial. Except, he doesn't face trial because Sweden hasn't actually charged him because (as you point out) they can't charge him without interviewing him, which Ny has refused to do until now.
Neither Assange nor his accuser deny that they had sex. They just disagree over how consensually they had sex.
What, exactly, do they hope to prove from a DNA test?
Now, I suppose it would certainly put quite an interesting spin on all this if it turns out Assange didn't have sex with her, but other than that totally-out-there possibility, what other use could they have for his DNA?
Ah, that last, mostly rhetorical question brings out the paranoid anti-government side of me. What other use could they have? "Hey, check it out, we "found" his DNA in hundreds of previously-unprocessed-for-decades rape kits from the US!" And just like that, the US would have direct standing to extradite him.
To me, the preponderance of multi-book series highlights the loss of ability.
You have mistaken "revenue generation" for "ability".
That said, don't view the past through too rosy glasses. Harry Potter consisted of seven books, but so did LotR (if you include The Hobbit), and so did the Chronicles of Narnia. HHGttG has five books by DNA. Dune has six (and a half) by Herbert. Clarke's Space Odyssey has four. And to address the FP topic, Asimov's Foundation has seven.
Now, if you want to tackle "series" that have no fixed length - Keep in mind that the past had plenty of those, too. We have the luxury of picking the cream of the crop in hindsight, and tend to forget about the amazing volume of mostly-aptly-named "pulp fiction" pumped out in first half of the 1900s.
Okay, I admit it, I don't get the punchline. I even added one to the cart expecting that as the price per stick (even then, unbelievably low, but maybe for tested pulls), but no, $79 for the whole bulk pack, new???
You can't even get no-name sticks of non-ECC labelled in Chinese for that. That can't count as a real price, can it?
I bought one myself and was astonished that it was cost effective to deliberately engineer defective machines.
16GB (as 2x8GB) of ECC will cost you at least $160 for the absolute bottom of the barrel. The same 16GB of non-ECC goes for just about $100. That gives you a 60% markup for only 12% more chips. Really, it surprises me we don't see more fraud like that.
FTA: The 2013 mass surveillance disclosures included a slide from a classified NSA presentation that made explicit reference to Wikipedia, using our global trademark. Because these disclosures revealed that the government specifically targeted Wikipedia and its users, we believe we have more than sufficient evidence to establish standing.
The slide they reference contains a random collection of corporate logos (which bizarrely includes MySpace, CNN, and Google Earth). It doesn't say anything about actually targeting them, just a vague mention of why the NSA has an interest in capturing HTTP traffic.
I fully support Wiki in this effort, and would like to see them beat the pants off the NSA. I just don't see that as happening - This will get dismissed again for lack of standing. Even if a judge accepts that slide as proof that the NSA spied on Wiki specifically, where does any form of "damage" to Wiki come into the picture? Hell, I consider myself pretty high on the government distrust scale, and even I can't honestly say that I've stopped using Wikipedia just because the NSA might see what I look up.
If someone writes mountains of code on their own time then I won't have to pay them much to write code for me since they were going to do it for free anyway.
Sure! You want to send me $2000 per month, I'll send you a copy of all the code I write for fun. And hey, perhaps you just happen to have an interest in game bot scripting, or chaotic iterators, or analyzing Apache logs. And this doesn't really count as "programming", but just last week I wrote a Sudoku solver in Excel without using VBA, just to see if I could! I'd gladly throw that in as a bonus for your money.
The guys were racist, they got the hammer of justice thrown at them.
One problem there - In the US, you have every right to hold racist views. You can't act on them in certain protected contexts, but you can rant day in and day out about hating blacks or Jews or Asians or, yes, even Whites.
Now, I have no problem with the university choosing not to support a racist organization - If I attended OSU, I'd much rather the university disband the entire "Greek" system (see? I have a right to that particular prejudice, except I won't find myself homeless a week from now as a result). But talking about expulsion and searching frantically for actual crimes to charge them with, for singing a stupid racist song?
No. We need to collectively get a fucking grip, and move on. Stupid kids doing stupid things.
In a perfect world I want to see some of your code but thats nearly always locked up under contracts.
Any experienced programmer who doesn't have mountains of code they've written on their own time and could show you a sampling of, should raise a huge red flag for you.
Personally, I take a CD "portfolio" of code snippets I've written to every interview. If they ask about it, I hand them the CD. Even better if they don't specifically request code samples, but ask something like "So how would you solve blah blah blah", and I have an example of it I can show them on-the-spot.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, Mr. Righteous Indignation - Please give me a historical example of ubiquitous in-home cameras leading to a war where millions died.
when I tell the house I want 2 eggs over easy a slice of toast and orange juice for breakfast at 6am I do not want eggs at 5am, toast at 6:30 and OJ at 3 in the afternoon
I put the butter in the pan, put the bread in the toaster, put the eggs in the pan, pour the OJ, flip the eggs, take the toast out, and flip the egg onto it. None of that requires Stratum-1 quality time, or even an internet connection.
More importantly - You have apparently confused "magic" for "the internet". The fact that your toaster has its own facebook feed (with 27,000 followers, no doubt!) doesn't mean that it can walk over to the pantry (dodging your robotic frying-pan on its way to get the eggs and butter, of course), take out the bread, remove that pesky little plastic clip without breaking it, take out two slices, put the clip back on (again without breaking it), then cook them for you.
Why does my toaster need to know the time more accurately than, say, a five minute window? For that matter, why does my toaster need internet access?
For that matter, why the hell do I want my two-ton thin-metal-shelled death trap visible on the internet while flinging its contents (me) down the highway at 80MPH?
Cameras in every home would kill millions. Literally.
You realize "1984", all similarities to reality aside, counts as a work of fiction, right? Not "history", merely speculation about one particular flavor of distopian society.
Still irrelevant - Google doesn't "owe" you free advertising.
Google exists as a publicly-traded for-profit company. They "just happen" to provide a tool for free that lets you find things online, but they have absolutely no obligation to make that tool "fair". If they want to put things that make them money at the top of the list, they can.
If they wanted to sort their search results by the number of cat references per result, they could do that, too. And none of us have the least right to complain about it.
Don't like it? Use Bing.
As is your idea of "true" suicidal people - most of them can't plan ahead. Most suicide attempts are impulsive.
Way to read your own biases into what I said.
Wanting to talk to someone does not mean the same thing as changing your facebook status to "just took a bottle of pills LOLWTFBBQ".
You also contradict yourself in your stance on this - So most suicides happen impulsively, but they fucking stop to talk about it on Facebook first? Impulsive means "Hey, I had a bad day, and whatd'ya know, I casually walked to the top of this bridge. Hey, I could jump!". Impulsive doesn't mean telling your 1500 closest friends you want to die and then giving them a few hours to make sure enough people read it. In any other context, we would call that proof of premeditated intent, not "impulsive".
The irony of all this - People who really just want to die don't post to Facebook about it. They get their affairs in order, make sure no one will need to deal with their shit (beyond the trauma of their final exit), and then just go off on a weekend "hiking trip" that they never come back from.
The people posting to Facebook about suicide want/need attention. So how does Facebook deal with this? Socially fucking isolate them??? Well done, Facebook! Now, I personally think more people should "just do it" and quit talking about it, but you've managed to enact a policy that will accomplish that goal far, far better than my own opinions ever could!
WTF? Nobody that voted Nader was sane.
You seem to misunderstand the point.
No one who voted for Nader cared about his sanity - Burning the whole fucking thing down and start over looks a hell of a lot more appealing than yet another four years of the slow erosion of our rights.
We literally have political dissidents seeking asylum in Russia - Really think about that for a minute. Russia. The big enemy (drugs and terrorism and copyright violators and Cuba aside), notorious for its human rights abuses and opaque near-totalitarian government. And our political refugees flee there?
People didn't vote for Nader to vote for Nader. They voted for Nader to vote for "anyone else".
Don't just easily obfuscate foul play with the way it's supposed to be.
Oh, no mistake - It works exactly the way they intend it.
Poor people commit more crimes precisely because the upper classes dictate what ethical behavior is in such a way as to justify and reenforce their own values and behavior at the expense of other classes
Did you seriously mean to say that we've outlawed murder as a mere point of fashion?
Proportional fines are not a means of revenue, where did you get that stupid idea from? Fines are punishments.
Bullshit. All fines generate revenue, and traffic enforcement counts as one of the worst offenders.
"Gee, why does the speed suddenly drop from 45 to 25 for a tenth of a mile riiight at that otherwise-uninteresting spot where cops can easily hide?"
"Safety."
Get rid of artificially low speed limits.
I know, I know, crazy talk. Won't someone think of the revenue?
For those who still want to believe that there's a long-term future in coding ... how DO you plan to compete with people who have no debt from education and will qualify for massive job subsidies?
I don't worry about it because I don't buy into the bullshit idea that anyone can do anything if they just have the opportunity and apply themselves.
Many of the same attributes that make someone a good programmer act in directly opposition to those shortcomings that make someone a criminal (the capriciousness of the US legal system aside) - Problem solving, impulse control, ability to sit motionless for hours, ability to attend to a task despite external distractions, solid math background, early exposure to technology and the luxury of spending time learning it, etc.
I honestly don't believe that everyone can learn to code; and of those who can, a large majority would hate it. When I describe what I do to most (educated and intelligent) people, they involuntarily cringe.
Yes, this program will probable find a few gems who fell through the cracks early in life (at the expense of millions of taxpayer dollars, of course). I feel comfortable that I can withstand a few dozen subsidized competitors entering my profession per year.
They only banned the practice for females(in practice)
"In practice", they haven't done anything, for two simple reasons:
1) The victim needs to complain, and most will never even notice, and
2) It takes 15 seconds to make a throwaway account, and hours or even days for someone to notice, complain, and get a response; then, 15 seconds later...
I fully expect Twitter to have the same level of success.
all other communication has been through Q and A via his attorneys
They have offered from the beginning to allow Ny to either question him in London, or to do it via teleconference, both of which Swedish law allows. Even the Swedish press and non-NyD MPs have started ridiculing Ny for her stubborn refusal to do so.
Heck, one of Assange's attorneys (Emerson) all but admitted that he did it.
Why wouldn't they? Anna Ardin never accused him of rape, just wanted to force him to get tested for STDs. She has even tweeted since then that he never raped her. Why would Assange or his lawyers bother denying facts that no one disputes?
before he fled
Slight correction there - After the first prosecutor cleared him, and Ny stalled for weeks, Assange asked permission to go to London, which Ny granted (and then immediately issued an international arrest warrant to generate as much worldwide publicity as possible).
The claim that Assange was "free to go" as promulgated by BjÃrn Hurtig, a former attorney of Assange's.
The chief magistrate of Assange's extradition hearing (who originally voted to extradite) has publicly stated that he incorrectly applied a law that effectively tied his hands into approving the extradition, and would have voted against it otherwise. Unfortunately for Assange, that really doesn't matter, because the UK has chosen to interpret him seeking asylum as breach of bail - Though in some sort of alice-in-wonderland loop of logic, amusingly enough, that doesn't count as a criminal offense in the UK, it just allows forfeiture of the bail itself and taking the accused into custody pending trial. Except, he doesn't face trial because Sweden hasn't actually charged him because (as you point out) they can't charge him without interviewing him, which Ny has refused to do until now.
If he didn't legitimately fear the
Neither Assange nor his accuser deny that they had sex. They just disagree over how consensually they had sex.
What, exactly, do they hope to prove from a DNA test?
Now, I suppose it would certainly put quite an interesting spin on all this if it turns out Assange didn't have sex with her, but other than that totally-out-there possibility, what other use could they have for his DNA?
Ah, that last, mostly rhetorical question brings out the paranoid anti-government side of me. What other use could they have? "Hey, check it out, we "found" his DNA in hundreds of previously-unprocessed-for-decades rape kits from the US!" And just like that, the US would have direct standing to extradite him.
But the important question - Do they work?
...Because a sub-$100 knock-off counts as the only way I'll ever try one.
To me, the preponderance of multi-book series highlights the loss of ability.
You have mistaken "revenue generation" for "ability".
That said, don't view the past through too rosy glasses. Harry Potter consisted of seven books, but so did LotR (if you include The Hobbit), and so did the Chronicles of Narnia. HHGttG has five books by DNA. Dune has six (and a half) by Herbert. Clarke's Space Odyssey has four. And to address the FP topic, Asimov's Foundation has seven.
Now, if you want to tackle "series" that have no fixed length - Keep in mind that the past had plenty of those, too. We have the luxury of picking the cream of the crop in hindsight, and tend to forget about the amazing volume of mostly-aptly-named "pulp fiction" pumped out in first half of the 1900s.
/ Grabs popcorn
// Dons asbestos armor
Okay, I admit it, I don't get the punchline. I even added one to the cart expecting that as the price per stick (even then, unbelievably low, but maybe for tested pulls), but no, $79 for the whole bulk pack, new???
You can't even get no-name sticks of non-ECC labelled in Chinese for that. That can't count as a real price, can it?
I bought one myself and was astonished that it was cost effective to deliberately engineer defective machines.
16GB (as 2x8GB) of ECC will cost you at least $160 for the absolute bottom of the barrel. The same 16GB of non-ECC goes for just about $100. That gives you a 60% markup for only 12% more chips. Really, it surprises me we don't see more fraud like that.
FTA: The 2013 mass surveillance disclosures included a slide from a classified NSA presentation that made explicit reference to Wikipedia, using our global trademark. Because these disclosures revealed that the government specifically targeted Wikipedia and its users, we believe we have more than sufficient evidence to establish standing.
The slide they reference contains a random collection of corporate logos (which bizarrely includes MySpace, CNN, and Google Earth). It doesn't say anything about actually targeting them, just a vague mention of why the NSA has an interest in capturing HTTP traffic.
I fully support Wiki in this effort, and would like to see them beat the pants off the NSA. I just don't see that as happening - This will get dismissed again for lack of standing. Even if a judge accepts that slide as proof that the NSA spied on Wiki specifically, where does any form of "damage" to Wiki come into the picture? Hell, I consider myself pretty high on the government distrust scale, and even I can't honestly say that I've stopped using Wikipedia just because the NSA might see what I look up.
If someone writes mountains of code on their own time then I won't have to pay them much to write code for me since they were going to do it for free anyway.
Sure! You want to send me $2000 per month, I'll send you a copy of all the code I write for fun. And hey, perhaps you just happen to have an interest in game bot scripting, or chaotic iterators, or analyzing Apache logs. And this doesn't really count as "programming", but just last week I wrote a Sudoku solver in Excel without using VBA, just to see if I could! I'd gladly throw that in as a bonus for your money.
The guys were racist, they got the hammer of justice thrown at them.
One problem there - In the US, you have every right to hold racist views. You can't act on them in certain protected contexts, but you can rant day in and day out about hating blacks or Jews or Asians or, yes, even Whites.
Now, I have no problem with the university choosing not to support a racist organization - If I attended OSU, I'd much rather the university disband the entire "Greek" system (see? I have a right to that particular prejudice, except I won't find myself homeless a week from now as a result). But talking about expulsion and searching frantically for actual crimes to charge them with, for singing a stupid racist song?
No. We need to collectively get a fucking grip, and move on. Stupid kids doing stupid things.
In a perfect world I want to see some of your code but thats nearly always locked up under contracts.
Any experienced programmer who doesn't have mountains of code they've written on their own time and could show you a sampling of, should raise a huge red flag for you.
Personally, I take a CD "portfolio" of code snippets I've written to every interview. If they ask about it, I hand them the CD. Even better if they don't specifically request code samples, but ask something like "So how would you solve blah blah blah", and I have an example of it I can show them on-the-spot.