Basically, I tend to agree. I think as a society we have gotten to the point where anything that's "new" or "smart" or whatever is just accepted as "good" and everyone buys into it wholesale, without actually taking a second to critically examine the essence of the functionality and think about whether or not it's actually a good thing.
One of my daughter's best friends is homeschooled. She and her two sisters have to be the nicest, most well-adjusted, and intelligent kids we know, and they have tons of (non-homeschooled) friends. Their parents work their asses off to make sure the kids are involved in a lot of activities, though, so it does take a lot of effort.
If public was the only option I had, I would seriously consider homeschooling and working with other homeschoolers in the community for social interaction. (Our state has some of the worst public schools in the US.) I know several parents who homeschool and their kids are doing excellent. Luckily we have a couple of good private schools in the area, and even more luckily, I can actually afford to send my kid there, so that's where she goes -- and does very well. Kids are surprisingly good at adapting to most whatever you throw at them.
For that to be true, though, you have to let them grow and develop as independent human beings. Your wife's reluctance to let go should not be the deciding factor -- this is entirely about your kid's education, not your wife's emotional needs. Good luck finding a way to tell her that without ending up sleeping on the couch for a week, though...
I'd say many if not most people who have smartphones don't *need* them either. If you have a job that has you on the road constantly, working offsite, etc., then you may need one, but a dumbphone is perfectly sufficient for the average person. We've let companies with slick marketing campaigns convince us that we need a LOT of stuff we actually don't need.
Seriously, to put it simply, these guys are the shit. I figure most Slashdotters are well aware of what the EFF does, but if you aren't, definitely check out their website, blog, etc., look at what they've done, and consider donating to support them. (FWIW, I am in no way affiliated with the EFF. I just think it's a great organization.)
Seriously, with stuff like this, the whole "Internet of Things," and whatnot, I feel like it's every day that I see some new product or service blaring about how awesome and convenient it is. Except we're at the point, in our relatively advanced and spoiled society, where there is very little that is so damned inconvenient that it requires a tech-based solution. "Convenience saturation" or something like that.
Oh, and if Slashdot is going to be advertising shit, at least advertise breakthrough products. This is a "meh" at best on the "gobsmacking tech inventions" scale.
I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I try to balance the practicality of a situation with what is right from a legal perspective. I want to end the encounter as quickly as possible, and doing what you are suggesting is only likely to prolong it.
Being "detained" absolutely does have a specific meaning when it comes to a police encounter. An officer needs to have reasonable suspicion that you have committed a crime, are committing a crime, or are about to commit a crime in order to detain you. If you ask, the officer (eventually) either has to say "yes," in which case s/he must demonstrate that reasonable suspicion, or say "no," which means you are free to go.
No, you didn't say you'd just walk away -- fair enough, my bad. But I don't see what point there is in trying to procure more "psychological power". Asking those two questions is really all the "power" you need, legally speaking. I mean, do you really think stating instead of asking is going to give you the upper hand? If you say "Thank you officer, but I'm going to go now," you set yourself up to be stopped again, likely by a now even more irate cop.
I was in the very situation about a year back. Two cops stopped me when I was walking home from work in the evening. I was doing nothing suspicious -- I live in a very small town and I had just moved there, so I figure they had probably seen a new face around town and wanted to know who I was. They told me they had gotten a phone call about a "suspicious person" who apparently had my first name and the last name "Smith" walking around town. I'm guessing they asked the clerk at the convenience store next to my office and got my first name, and then just cooked up a last name to fabricate the story -- I mean, Smith? Come on.
Still, though, I had no way of knowing if there was more to it than that. By asking if I was being detained, it forced them to essentially admit that there was no probable cause or reasonable suspicion. If they hadn't fabricated the whole thing and actually *had* received a tip, they might have had a reason to detain me; but then they would have had to defend it in court, which obviously they chose not to, which makes me think they had nothing to begin with. I don't know for sure, but that's the best I can make of it. Either way, it's much safer to just ask if you are being detained and get an answer from the horse's mouth.
But if you want to try your way, please do, and please upload the results.
That question -- am I being detained, or am I free to go? -- uses police terminology to force them into either admitting they are detaining you in the legal sense -- for which they need probable cause, suspicion you are committing a crime, etc. -- or admitting that they are not detaining you, in which case you are not legally obligated to stick around. Doing so completely clarifies the legal situation. Just walking away before doing so is NOT a good idea.
Touche. At the same time, that's all the more reason for people of color to videotape *every* police encounter and know exactly what to say when they are stopped by a cop.
Basically, don't talk to the police without a lawyer present. Period. I mean, I'm not going to stonewall a cop that pulls me over for a broken taillight, but if the line of questioning goes any further than what's immediately relevant to said taillight, that's when I shut up. And you can guarantee that I will be videotaping the entire encounter! Cops are under no obligation to tell you the truth about anything; it's up to you to know what your rights are in a given situation and assert them.
Now why would I want my wife to know that when I say "I'll do it in five minutes" I really mean "not important, get to it when I can, probably quicker to do it yourself"?
How about a wife translator? Give me a program that accurately parses "I'm not mad" into "no sex for you for a month," "it's not important" into "this should be number 1 on your priority list," etc. etc.
It's all cost-benefit. It would take me at least a full working day to prepare everything on my own (I'm self-employed, with investments and several income streams from a couple of different countries), and my CPA charges less to do my taxes than I can make by spending the same amount of time working. I dunno, if your situation is very simple then doing it all yourself probably makes more sense, but as soon as it starts to get more complicated it's likely easier and more economically feasible to hire someone. (Not a CPA, by the way; no horse in this race.)
Slashdot Mirror
Basically, I tend to agree. I think as a society we have gotten to the point where anything that's "new" or "smart" or whatever is just accepted as "good" and everyone buys into it wholesale, without actually taking a second to critically examine the essence of the functionality and think about whether or not it's actually a good thing.
One of my daughter's best friends is homeschooled. She and her two sisters have to be the nicest, most well-adjusted, and intelligent kids we know, and they have tons of (non-homeschooled) friends. Their parents work their asses off to make sure the kids are involved in a lot of activities, though, so it does take a lot of effort.
If public was the only option I had, I would seriously consider homeschooling and working with other homeschoolers in the community for social interaction. (Our state has some of the worst public schools in the US.) I know several parents who homeschool and their kids are doing excellent. Luckily we have a couple of good private schools in the area, and even more luckily, I can actually afford to send my kid there, so that's where she goes -- and does very well. Kids are surprisingly good at adapting to most whatever you throw at them.
For that to be true, though, you have to let them grow and develop as independent human beings. Your wife's reluctance to let go should not be the deciding factor -- this is entirely about your kid's education, not your wife's emotional needs. Good luck finding a way to tell her that without ending up sleeping on the couch for a week, though...
I'd say many if not most people who have smartphones don't *need* them either. If you have a job that has you on the road constantly, working offsite, etc., then you may need one, but a dumbphone is perfectly sufficient for the average person. We've let companies with slick marketing campaigns convince us that we need a LOT of stuff we actually don't need.
Absolutely, thanks for the extra info.
Seriously, to put it simply, these guys are the shit. I figure most Slashdotters are well aware of what the EFF does, but if you aren't, definitely check out their website, blog, etc., look at what they've done, and consider donating to support them. (FWIW, I am in no way affiliated with the EFF. I just think it's a great organization.)
Seriously, with stuff like this, the whole "Internet of Things," and whatnot, I feel like it's every day that I see some new product or service blaring about how awesome and convenient it is. Except we're at the point, in our relatively advanced and spoiled society, where there is very little that is so damned inconvenient that it requires a tech-based solution. "Convenience saturation" or something like that.
Oh, and if Slashdot is going to be advertising shit, at least advertise breakthrough products. This is a "meh" at best on the "gobsmacking tech inventions" scale.
Hahaha, you can just hear the disdain and scorn in his voice. He might as well have just said "and all of that other privacy bullshit"
Man, I wish you had filmed it. Right onto Youtube and viral on the Internet. That's the only thing that kind of cop is afraid of.
Should have known sarcasm wouldn't fly on a message board for nerds...
The previous 200 comments have not satisfactorily answered the question: will it be free forever or subscription based?
Clearly a lot of teenage boys' passwords were leaked as well.
I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I try to balance the practicality of a situation with what is right from a legal perspective. I want to end the encounter as quickly as possible, and doing what you are suggesting is only likely to prolong it.
Being "detained" absolutely does have a specific meaning when it comes to a police encounter. An officer needs to have reasonable suspicion that you have committed a crime, are committing a crime, or are about to commit a crime in order to detain you. If you ask, the officer (eventually) either has to say "yes," in which case s/he must demonstrate that reasonable suspicion, or say "no," which means you are free to go.
No, you didn't say you'd just walk away -- fair enough, my bad. But I don't see what point there is in trying to procure more "psychological power". Asking those two questions is really all the "power" you need, legally speaking. I mean, do you really think stating instead of asking is going to give you the upper hand? If you say "Thank you officer, but I'm going to go now," you set yourself up to be stopped again, likely by a now even more irate cop.
I was in the very situation about a year back. Two cops stopped me when I was walking home from work in the evening. I was doing nothing suspicious -- I live in a very small town and I had just moved there, so I figure they had probably seen a new face around town and wanted to know who I was. They told me they had gotten a phone call about a "suspicious person" who apparently had my first name and the last name "Smith" walking around town. I'm guessing they asked the clerk at the convenience store next to my office and got my first name, and then just cooked up a last name to fabricate the story -- I mean, Smith? Come on.
Still, though, I had no way of knowing if there was more to it than that. By asking if I was being detained, it forced them to essentially admit that there was no probable cause or reasonable suspicion. If they hadn't fabricated the whole thing and actually *had* received a tip, they might have had a reason to detain me; but then they would have had to defend it in court, which obviously they chose not to, which makes me think they had nothing to begin with. I don't know for sure, but that's the best I can make of it. Either way, it's much safer to just ask if you are being detained and get an answer from the horse's mouth.
But if you want to try your way, please do, and please upload the results.
This is exactly what I'm talking about:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Would mod this up if I had mod points. Great post.
That question -- am I being detained, or am I free to go? -- uses police terminology to force them into either admitting they are detaining you in the legal sense -- for which they need probable cause, suspicion you are committing a crime, etc. -- or admitting that they are not detaining you, in which case you are not legally obligated to stick around. Doing so completely clarifies the legal situation. Just walking away before doing so is NOT a good idea.
Touche. At the same time, that's all the more reason for people of color to videotape *every* police encounter and know exactly what to say when they are stopped by a cop.
Basically, don't talk to the police without a lawyer present. Period. I mean, I'm not going to stonewall a cop that pulls me over for a broken taillight, but if the line of questioning goes any further than what's immediately relevant to said taillight, that's when I shut up. And you can guarantee that I will be videotaping the entire encounter! Cops are under no obligation to tell you the truth about anything; it's up to you to know what your rights are in a given situation and assert them.
Now why would I want my wife to know that when I say "I'll do it in five minutes" I really mean "not important, get to it when I can, probably quicker to do it yourself"?
Japanese? Cue a spin-off app called "Real Time Engrish".
How about a wife translator? Give me a program that accurately parses "I'm not mad" into "no sex for you for a month," "it's not important" into "this should be number 1 on your priority list," etc. etc.
I don't know if it gets any easier than just handing my CPA a box full of receipts. ;)
I despised Windows 8 until I installed Classic Shell and set the OS to boot straight to the desktop. Now it's fine.
It's all cost-benefit. It would take me at least a full working day to prepare everything on my own (I'm self-employed, with investments and several income streams from a couple of different countries), and my CPA charges less to do my taxes than I can make by spending the same amount of time working. I dunno, if your situation is very simple then doing it all yourself probably makes more sense, but as soon as it starts to get more complicated it's likely easier and more economically feasible to hire someone. (Not a CPA, by the way; no horse in this race.)