I can't think of a case in recent history where the actions of a single individual have had such far-reaching, global consequences. At the very least awarding Snowden the peace prize would be a political black-eye for the Obama administration and would help to cast these lickspittles and apologists and other assorted voices of Sauron as being ethically retarded. It would also go towards repairing the prize's failing reputation, especially in light of the 2009 award.
I'm going to come out right now and say it: Snowden is a fucking hero. However pure or impure his intentions were, the fact remains that a lot of very powerful people are now having to go into damage control and make excuses and otherwise cover their asses. It remains to be seen whether this will have long-lasting political ramifications. Although, given that the American political system is fundamentally corrupt - the political parties are basically two sides of the same filthy coin - I have my doubts.
Yeah but what about BRAINS!? mm-mm, love me some brains.
In that case, give me a more realistic antagonist - just not fucking zombies. Or maybe give a zombie a speaking role, or at least a song and dance number. Gentlemen, it's time.
I thought you were taking the piss, and then I realized you were being dead serious, that in fact this Max Brooks of World War Z fame is none other than the son of Mel Brooks. Now I think the world is taking the piss. Nothing Mel Brooks ever wrote or directed was as silly as any given scene in World War Z. Zounds.
What the fuck is the deal with this fascination with zombies? Especially among relatively intelligent people (i.e. nerds). I don't get it. Fundamentally it's a dumb idea, at least how it's presented 95% of the time. The only time for me that it works is as parody or as allegory, but taken as a natural phenomenon it doesn't have legs, feet, torso, etc. to stand on. A few exceptions where the genre works, it is attributable to external agency (e.g,. supernatural, alien). Very little of zombie lore withstands even superficial scrutiny. Why always so hungry when lacking a functioning digestive system? How are limbs able to hunt without sensory organs? Or move without a circulatory system? Why be only an asshole to the living and not to your fellow zombies? Also, how do they decide who to eat and who to indoctrinate into the zombie horde? No, no. It's just plain stupid.
on a related note I have a teenage niece who has some pretty neat ideas about optimizing her cell phone bandwidth access when making facebook status updates ("hold it upside-down").
Paid airline wi-fi access for one, especially for short-haul flights. Also reckon it was getting hard to justify the ban on all electronic devices with many airlines keeping the pay-per-view screens on during take-off and landing.
Like the war on water, it's largely been about control and government rules abetting private interests. I suppose in this case airlines and the faa and whoever the fuck else stands to make a buck off of this realized it is more profitable to let the monkeys paw their gadgets 100% of the time, instead of the usual 96%.
All these revelations and new about the fcc, nsa, tsa, etc etc all serve to hammer home the same point: rules are for suckers, rules are for idiots, rules are for everyone else.
As you as you reach a certain level of power, you ascend into a special clique where the only rules that matter are those that pertain to that clique. So break and bend the laws of the land, yes fine, but heaven help you if you transgress the pre-existing power matrix, that you commit some unforgivable faux pas at the dinner party, because then fuck you.
I know all this - I've known it for years: the world is a dirty place filled with filthy, corrupt, disgusting characters where morals and regulations and laws are put in place largely to maintain order, not justice. And yet stories like this still never fail to fill me with an indescribable loathing.
Most of the material I need to look up is fairly recent and therefore available via preprint archives. Also it is fairly easy to contact authors directly to ask questions, and have colleagues in parts of the world with access to the paid stuff. Basically Springer and their ilk are very much on the wrong side of history. They're dead in the water and all their activity from now on is basically trying to die, not with dignity, but with disgrace, leeching off as much money as can be had before the inevitable demise.
That's the true goal of these companies, and a big reason they're all so keen on H1B1.
These big tech fucks move into a town, drive the real estate prices sky-high so you basically have to be upper management to own a place outside the "campus", and if not then you must either live well outside the critical radius and spend at least an hour commuting (good luck with your family), or opt to live within company provided housing ( http://www.sfgate.com/business/bottomline/article/Facebook-partner-to-build-Menlo-Park-housing-4860826.php ).
To summarize: if you're not selling the next big thing in the next product cycle - no matter how big you are, and Apple is literally the biggest - then you will face certain doom.
Frankly that sounds like all kinds of ridiculous. I don't particularly like Apple, but I don't sense any sort of stagnation, they have a fairy wide portfolio of products, and have they committed any serious foibles in recent history. They could afford not coming up with the next two big things and still not suffer mightily. Some might point at Microsoft, Nokia and Blackberry as cautionary tales of not innovating. To which I would respond: Microsoft's current ills can be largely attributed not to not innovating, but to half-assed innovation at the expense of its core businesses (while if it had stayed boring it wouldn't presently be undergoing so much restructuring); Nokia was and is largely a phone maker which did not diversify enough when it had a chance while also making a wrong bet on the future of phones, while Blackberry, ah... Blackberry is a monkey in the time of chimpanzees.
Closer still, the problem is people. The pervasiveness of religion betrays a basic need felt by nearly all humans to understand the world, not merely in a cause-effect sense, but in an origination and ontological sense. Where did I come from? Why am I here?. Religion is the institutionalization and politicization of spirituality, not inherently evil but prone to egregious abuse. There are many on this earth who recognize this basic need - often not being able to distinguish it from their own personal beliefs - and exploit it for their worldly ends, often for money and political power. Therein lies the evil.
Private enterprise is the only way. Which is not to say that it will succeed, since this would essentially redefine the meaning of long-term business goals. However, under the current business zeitgeist in which the health of companies is gauged on a quarterly basis, in which "shareholder value" and "fiduciary responsibility" are code words for huge profits NOW or clearly something is fundamentally wrong with the business model - and it's time to send in the management consultants and equity fund boys for a healthy restructuring - I don't see it happening.
Slashdot Mirror
More like a minifesto.
I can't think of a case in recent history where the actions of a single individual have had such far-reaching, global consequences. At the very least awarding Snowden the peace prize would be a political black-eye for the Obama administration and would help to cast these lickspittles and apologists and other assorted voices of Sauron as being ethically retarded. It would also go towards repairing the prize's failing reputation, especially in light of the 2009 award.
I'm going to come out right now and say it: Snowden is a fucking hero. However pure or impure his intentions were, the fact remains that a lot of very powerful people are now having to go into damage control and make excuses and otherwise cover their asses. It remains to be seen whether this will have long-lasting political ramifications. Although, given that the American political system is fundamentally corrupt - the political parties are basically two sides of the same filthy coin - I have my doubts.
Yeah but what about BRAINS!? mm-mm, love me some brains.
In that case, give me a more realistic antagonist - just not fucking zombies. Or maybe give a zombie a speaking role, or at least a song and dance number. Gentlemen, it's time.
I thought you were taking the piss, and then I realized you were being dead serious, that in fact this Max Brooks of World War Z fame is none other than the son of Mel Brooks. Now I think the world is taking the piss. Nothing Mel Brooks ever wrote or directed was as silly as any given scene in World War Z. Zounds.
What the fuck is the deal with this fascination with zombies? Especially among relatively intelligent people (i.e. nerds). I don't get it. Fundamentally it's a dumb idea, at least how it's presented 95% of the time. The only time for me that it works is as parody or as allegory, but taken as a natural phenomenon it doesn't have legs, feet, torso, etc. to stand on. A few exceptions where the genre works, it is attributable to external agency (e.g,. supernatural, alien). Very little of zombie lore withstands even superficial scrutiny. Why always so hungry when lacking a functioning digestive system? How are limbs able to hunt without sensory organs? Or move without a circulatory system? Why be only an asshole to the living and not to your fellow zombies? Also, how do they decide who to eat and who to indoctrinate into the zombie horde? No, no. It's just plain stupid.
ugh. you just won't go away, will ya? like gnats on a camping trip.
Huehue. Keep trying.
I see your ass is well spoken for.
is he an engineer? technician? no? huh.
on a related note I have a teenage niece who has some pretty neat ideas about optimizing her cell phone bandwidth access when making facebook status updates ("hold it upside-down").
argh! someone hasn't been paying attention in class! ever heard of regulatory capture (cf. yesterdy's article on new fcc chair)?
Paid airline wi-fi access for one, especially for short-haul flights. Also reckon it was getting hard to justify the ban on all electronic devices with many airlines keeping the pay-per-view screens on during take-off and landing.
Like the war on water, it's largely been about control and government rules abetting private interests. I suppose in this case airlines and the faa and whoever the fuck else stands to make a buck off of this realized it is more profitable to let the monkeys paw their gadgets 100% of the time, instead of the usual 96%.
Wouldn't matter if it were a 1000 Watt beacon. This is a land where no one listens to the radio.
As being able to mod-up your own comments on Slashdot. I said almost
Have you been to Iowa? Sure don't smell fresh.
All these revelations and new about the fcc, nsa, tsa, etc etc all serve to hammer home the same point: rules are for suckers, rules are for idiots, rules are for everyone else.
As you as you reach a certain level of power, you ascend into a special clique where the only rules that matter are those that pertain to that clique. So break and bend the laws of the land, yes fine, but heaven help you if you transgress the pre-existing power matrix, that you commit some unforgivable faux pas at the dinner party, because then fuck you.
I know all this - I've known it for years: the world is a dirty place filled with filthy, corrupt, disgusting characters where morals and regulations and laws are put in place largely to maintain order, not justice. And yet stories like this still never fail to fill me with an indescribable loathing.
Most of the material I need to look up is fairly recent and therefore available via preprint archives. Also it is fairly easy to contact authors directly to ask questions, and have colleagues in parts of the world with access to the paid stuff. Basically Springer and their ilk are very much on the wrong side of history. They're dead in the water and all their activity from now on is basically trying to die, not with dignity, but with disgrace, leeching off as much money as can be had before the inevitable demise.
(it's a rather large fly).
That's the true goal of these companies, and a big reason they're all so keen on H1B1.
These big tech fucks move into a town, drive the real estate prices sky-high so you basically have to be upper management to own a place outside the "campus", and if not then you must either live well outside the critical radius and spend at least an hour commuting (good luck with your family), or opt to live within company provided housing ( http://www.sfgate.com/business/bottomline/article/Facebook-partner-to-build-Menlo-Park-housing-4860826.php ).
But this has been done before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_town. Sigh. So wearisome.
To summarize: if you're not selling the next big thing in the next product cycle - no matter how big you are, and Apple is literally the biggest - then you will face certain doom.
Frankly that sounds like all kinds of ridiculous. I don't particularly like Apple, but I don't sense any sort of stagnation, they have a fairy wide portfolio of products, and have they committed any serious foibles in recent history. They could afford not coming up with the next two big things and still not suffer mightily. Some might point at Microsoft, Nokia and Blackberry as cautionary tales of not innovating. To which I would respond: Microsoft's current ills can be largely attributed not to not innovating, but to half-assed innovation at the expense of its core businesses (while if it had stayed boring it wouldn't presently be undergoing so much restructuring); Nokia was and is largely a phone maker which did not diversify enough when it had a chance while also making a wrong bet on the future of phones, while Blackberry, ah... Blackberry is a monkey in the time of chimpanzees.
And still no decent alternative. Well how about it, science?!
Or, in the parlance of the wise old birds, whooper-snappers.
Is the realization that the differences between Russia and the US are no longer a matter of type, but of degree.
Closer still, the problem is people. The pervasiveness of religion betrays a basic need felt by nearly all humans to understand the world, not merely in a cause-effect sense, but in an origination and ontological sense. Where did I come from? Why am I here?. Religion is the institutionalization and politicization of spirituality, not inherently evil but prone to egregious abuse. There are many on this earth who recognize this basic need - often not being able to distinguish it from their own personal beliefs - and exploit it for their worldly ends, often for money and political power. Therein lies the evil.
Private enterprise is the only way. Which is not to say that it will succeed, since this would essentially redefine the meaning of long-term business goals. However, under the current business zeitgeist in which the health of companies is gauged on a quarterly basis, in which "shareholder value" and "fiduciary responsibility" are code words for huge profits NOW or clearly something is fundamentally wrong with the business model - and it's time to send in the management consultants and equity fund boys for a healthy restructuring - I don't see it happening.