I rarely talk to my best friend from high school on the phone or via text, but we do interact via Facebook pretty frequently. Without that social network link, we would've fallen out of touch over the years
Then why do you care? Or more to the point, it's clear you don't care, so why do you think it's valuable?
I have friends that are a 10 hour drive away that I chat to every day, but I don't need to broadcast those chats to 1000 other disinterested parties, and if you're not doing it "in public" then it's no better than email or XMMP and you're just bullshitting yourself.
There might be people that claim it's true, but short of casinos having broken cash comp systems, it's still bullshit. The theory would rely on Video Poker being the *one* slot machine in the casino that uses random chance in shuffling. That doesn't even pass the laugh test.
All these stories start with, "Oh yeah, you have to play $5 a hand as fast as you possibly can, for hours on end, and you will win just a little bit."
If ONLY I could find people stupid enough to believe that, I too would have casino owner money.
I know summaries are meant to be hyperbolic, but given you only have to take "reasonable steps" to secure customer data, there's not going to be too many $1.7 million repeat-offender fines meted out.
Yeah, and they'd buy 1-2 a year, not the 50 they can pirate a year (most of which they play for minutes before abandoning). But the industry, and this stunt, claim that all pirate copies are lost sales. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
I don't see anything in what you say that means "what it deems necessary" would be "less" overall.
Besides, it would make some sense if your population was half as mobile or able to select where they live as you make out when you carp on about states rights, but realistically most live and die within 50 miles of where they're born, and I don't know anyone that chose where they lived based on legislative shopping.
So, when you have California spending near 54% of their budget on education, and Alabama spending 33% (to pick the first 2 I thought of), is that actually equitable, or are those hicks being screwed over? Per capita spending is probably along the same lines, but would admittedly be a better number. Still seems to me like it shouldn't be up to "lobbying" as to how much education your kids get.
If all 104 plants in the US had Fukushima style meltdowns, it might get to the level of deaths caused by coal over it's time in the sun. Probably not though.
This brain region gives an individual the capacity to exercise “good judgment” when presented with difficult life situations. Brain research indicating that brain development is not complete until near the age of 25, refers specifically to the development of the prefrontal cortex.
Seems though that once they're used to being Facebook's bitch, they can age to any level and post justify their adolescent actions. As many on this thread will no doubt show.
Fair enough, "pay phone" would be the US-ism though.
Still, I read a good bit about phreaking as a kid, don't recall any widespread international call efforts in Australia. I blame Wargames for making that popular.
Voice recognition is about tuning software, it's not a hardware advance. And then you have Siri... a VR service that relies on offload to a server farm at Apple, it's not "on the phone".
GPS, accelerometers, and a camera are all; a) useless or peripherals, not unavailable, b) so horribly draining on battery they require a battery pack the size of a car for life support (in the case of GPS)
Wifi was certainly an available option on a PC in 2003, and as for cell and *snicker* bluetooth networking, they aren't anything a desktop needs either. It's like saying "Well, this Lamborghini is a fine car, but it doesn't have a winch or off-road tyres..."
Did you do a search? Did you not follow up by reading or at least skimming three or four likely-looking results? Did you read the linked piece on the blog?
I agree about the poisonous bit. The piece cited is not, I submit, an example of it. It does need some reasoning to arrive at why that is so. YMMV.
For that matter I've never quite fathomed the twisty mentality of someone who finds joy in plucking legs from ants. Trolls and bullies remind me of people such as that. Now why did I think of that? It certainly couldn't have been something you said.
There were many, many, links on that blog, very few of which were to primary sources, none of which proved the point of "piracy is a term in continuous use for about 350 years to mean copyright infringement". That is the claim of the article you linked, and it is in no way proved by the works sited. The author has a clear bias and surely fits my definition of poision as clearly as those that used to say "average temperatures have decreased over 10 years" desipte that being a statistical anomoly that only held true for a very short time until one outlier datum fell off the 10 year chart.
In other writings you site, It's not even really clear from context what definition the speaker had for Pirate/Pyrate and what action it might have been referring to; as for Defoe he was upset with the wholesale printing and distribution of works for profit that excluded the author, if you had suggested to him that removing the ability to pass on a book to another was required to stop that he'd have been taken rather aback. And none of that bestows "continuity" in the public use of the word, indeed it would be wholly unusual that it wouldn't have been in living memory if that were the case, since many of us were living before it was re-appropriated for similar bombastic use by the MPAA and their ilk. The MPAA being one of the blogger's clients doesn't help his credibility either.
I'll tell you what I've "learned", I should just fire and forget. Apparently my insistence that factoids have some kind of credible source is a filter for mine own eyes. Widening my reading to include more opinion pieces that selectively quote earlier opinion peices doesn't seem to be a worthy use of anyone's time.
And yeah, I read enough to see there was a mismash of quotes of essays, quoting treatises, such that any conscise conclusion was already 4 levels removed from the actual primary source the claim is based on. Did you read that?
Because it's not credible? Because it's another "factoid" pushed by people to legitimise an otherwise dull and irrelevant argument that has no credence?
I think the most poisonous thing about the internet is not trolls, or bullies, it's the people that either spout or accept "facts" that have no attribution and generally increase the level of entropy in discussion.
So my question is; what, at all, makes "the information credible"?
Slashdot Mirror
I rarely talk to my best friend from high school on the phone or via text, but we do interact via Facebook pretty frequently. Without that social network link, we would've fallen out of touch over the years
Then why do you care? Or more to the point, it's clear you don't care, so why do you think it's valuable?
I have friends that are a 10 hour drive away that I chat to every day, but I don't need to broadcast those chats to 1000 other disinterested parties, and if you're not doing it "in public" then it's no better than email or XMMP and you're just bullshitting yourself.
Fuck me, Steve. Get over it already. RIP.
There might be people that claim it's true, but short of casinos having broken cash comp systems, it's still bullshit. The theory would rely on Video Poker being the *one* slot machine in the casino that uses random chance in shuffling. That doesn't even pass the laugh test.
All these stories start with, "Oh yeah, you have to play $5 a hand as fast as you possibly can, for hours on end, and you will win just a little bit."
If ONLY I could find people stupid enough to believe that, I too would have casino owner money.
That's the most delusional statement I've read on /.
Congratulations.
Oh, good, I'm glad first post shared my first thought ^^
I know summaries are meant to be hyperbolic, but given you only have to take "reasonable steps" to secure customer data, there's not going to be too many $1.7 million repeat-offender fines meted out.
Yeah, and they'd buy 1-2 a year, not the 50 they can pirate a year (most of which they play for minutes before abandoning). But the industry, and this stunt, claim that all pirate copies are lost sales. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
And most of them make most of their money "giving concerts", not from DRM protected works. So how is any of that relevant?
I don't see anything in what you say that means "what it deems necessary" would be "less" overall.
Besides, it would make some sense if your population was half as mobile or able to select where they live as you make out when you carp on about states rights, but realistically most live and die within 50 miles of where they're born, and I don't know anyone that chose where they lived based on legislative shopping.
So, when you have California spending near 54% of their budget on education, and Alabama spending 33% (to pick the first 2 I thought of), is that actually equitable, or are those hicks being screwed over? Per capita spending is probably along the same lines, but would admittedly be a better number. Still seems to me like it shouldn't be up to "lobbying" as to how much education your kids get.
Always makes me laugh that Americans figure 50 some states will spend less money more efficiently than 1 fed.
That's easy. Universally accepted software, like say, Unity.
If all 104 plants in the US had Fukushima style meltdowns, it might get to the level of deaths caused by coal over it's time in the sun. Probably not though.
I'd say you need them under 25, since science keeps proving my theory that they're still children until 25+
http://www.hhs.gov/opa/familylife/tech_assistance/etraining/adolescent_brain/Development/prefrontal_cortex/index.html
This brain region gives an individual the capacity to exercise “good judgment” when presented with difficult life situations. Brain research indicating that brain development is not complete until near the age of 25, refers specifically to the development of the prefrontal cortex.
Seems though that once they're used to being Facebook's bitch, they can age to any level and post justify their adolescent actions. As many on this thread will no doubt show.
Fair suck of the sav. I'd never suggest anyone upgrade to Windows 8 (now that it's gone up from $40...)
BTW, if you had the open source alternative, then you'd still need those expensive ops. My livelihood depends on it ;P
Yeah, but plenty of people would tolerate it running in a terminal services window on a server that has very limited internet access. And do. Often.
The solution here is better support staff, but they'll cost more than $10,000, so the point is moot.
What the doctor really wants is to whine and/or a magical free solution to their problems. One of those is possible.
Fair enough, "pay phone" would be the US-ism though.
Still, I read a good bit about phreaking as a kid, don't recall any widespread international call efforts in Australia. I blame Wargames for making that popular.
What? This is put out there like it's common knowledge in Australia but "Informative" to others.
What do you even mean by "Bell" public phone? It's obviously not Ma Bell, is that why the air quotes?
Replying to an AC seems like pissing into the wind... but anyway.
I think your definition needs work, otherwise every murder mystery author would be guilty.
I've never had to wait for a carrier to upgrade my Nexus.....
Oh, wait, did you think that was unique to iPhone?
Voice recognition is about tuning software, it's not a hardware advance. And then you have Siri... a VR service that relies on offload to a server farm at Apple, it's not "on the phone".
GPS, accelerometers, and a camera are all; a) useless or peripherals, not unavailable, b) so horribly draining on battery they require a battery pack the size of a car for life support (in the case of GPS)
Wifi was certainly an available option on a PC in 2003, and as for cell and *snicker* bluetooth networking, they aren't anything a desktop needs either. It's like saying "Well, this Lamborghini is a fine car, but it doesn't have a winch or off-road tyres..."
Did you do a search? Did you not follow up by reading or at least skimming three or four likely-looking results? Did you read the linked piece on the blog?
I agree about the poisonous bit. The piece cited is not, I submit, an example of it. It does need some reasoning to arrive at why that is so. YMMV.
For that matter I've never quite fathomed the twisty mentality of someone who finds joy in plucking legs from ants. Trolls and bullies remind me of people such as that. Now why did I think of that? It certainly couldn't have been something you said.
There were many, many, links on that blog, very few of which were to primary sources, none of which proved the point of "piracy is a term in continuous use for about 350 years to mean copyright infringement". That is the claim of the article you linked, and it is in no way proved by the works sited. The author has a clear bias and surely fits my definition of poision as clearly as those that used to say "average temperatures have decreased over 10 years" desipte that being a statistical anomoly that only held true for a very short time until one outlier datum fell off the 10 year chart.
In other writings you site, It's not even really clear from context what definition the speaker had for Pirate/Pyrate and what action it might have been referring to; as for Defoe he was upset with the wholesale printing and distribution of works for profit that excluded the author, if you had suggested to him that removing the ability to pass on a book to another was required to stop that he'd have been taken rather aback. And none of that bestows "continuity" in the public use of the word, indeed it would be wholly unusual that it wouldn't have been in living memory if that were the case, since many of us were living before it was re-appropriated for similar bombastic use by the MPAA and their ilk. The MPAA being one of the blogger's clients doesn't help his credibility either.
I'll tell you what I've "learned", I should just fire and forget. Apparently my insistence that factoids have some kind of credible source is a filter for mine own eyes. Widening my reading to include more opinion pieces that selectively quote earlier opinion peices doesn't seem to be a worthy use of anyone's time.
Oh yeah, I'd forgotten Telstra and Optus had opted to voluntarily take a list of child abuse websites and block them.
If that's what it's about, then IP is the only way to be sure. You can't expect paedos to be stopped by DNS/name filtering.
If it's blocked by one ISP, you can blame a mistake. If it's blocked by many ISPs, then the directive must have come from somewhere
Yeah, like BGP maybe?
No issue getting to the site from my Australian ISP..
And yeah, I read enough to see there was a mismash of quotes of essays, quoting treatises, such that any conscise conclusion was already 4 levels removed from the actual primary source the claim is based on. Did you read that?
Because it's not credible? Because it's another "factoid" pushed by people to legitimise an otherwise dull and irrelevant argument that has no credence?
I think the most poisonous thing about the internet is not trolls, or bullies, it's the people that either spout or accept "facts" that have no attribution and generally increase the level of entropy in discussion.
So my question is; what, at all, makes "the information credible"?