as the token vegan and animal rights activist let me just say that I greatly appreciate the respect people give when comparing concerns about the treatment of animals that are capable of suffering (dogs, pigs, cows, etc) to...paramecium. Nothing says you know you're wrong better than overblowing a comparison to silly, extreme levels to try to defame your opponent.
uhh...it's worse than dog fights? You're trolling, right?
Dogs are social, self-aware beings that can solve complex problems, have emotions, form social bonds, suffer, experience joy, etc. Paramecium...are single-celled organisms. You might as well be concerned about torturing a rock, or air; they have no ability to feel pain, and certainly no ability to suffer.
problem with "democracy" is that it really just ends up meaning the ones with the most money, win. All you have to do is convince more gullible sheep than the other person running, and bam - there you are. Sure, sure, it's really just how we've implemented democracy, not democracy itself that is a problem...except, I disagree. There is no way to have the common man make wise, intelligent decisions that are good for themselves. They want instant gratification. The common man has as much business deciding on budgets, long term goals, etc as a 5yo child does in a household - let the parents/adults make those decisions, kktnx.
What economy has been growing at an astronomical speed? The one that is able to make quick and intelligent decisions (China) without worrying about the people it harms. There's a happy medium between the two things...and that happy medium was what we originally had; a system where only the educated could vote. Was it perfect? Hell know, but at least it wasn't farking stupid like the crap we have now. I've never understood why people so readily accept the brainwashing that democracy is the only right way...think about how horrible medical science would be if we let the "common man" make decisions about how to do treatments, what procedures would be most respected, etc. Think about how successful medicine would be if any actor, random dude on the street, or whatnot could suddenly declare themselves a surgeon.
There is a certain skillset and personality to being a real, honest politician. One that has little to do with reading polls daily. We'll never get that back here - ever. C'est la vie, I guess.
I know. I also know that there's no reason to attempt to scientifically prove a negative when you have no scientifically-justifiable things of which to look for the absence.
if there was something to test for, then ghosts would have been "found" by now. Things like "change in temperature" are only useful if a study has conclusively proven that ghosts can cause such a thing. Had that happened, you could measure for otherwise unexplained temperature changes and then have that as potential evidence.
It's a problem of there not having been a studied, known-good. IE, a situation where we almost all scientists could agree a ghost existed in a particular place, and that said ghost caused a particular list of manifestations/effects. Until such a thing happens, there's absolutely no reason to think a change in temperature isn't due to a gap in the floorboard that is letting air in from outside, which you're just not seeing; being cold, doesn't mean there is a ghost.
You just said I don't use delicious to share links.
In other words, you have already given up the social functions of Delicious, so it's not a factor to consider, not that other systems don't have them. Pull, versus push. I don't tweet about going to the bathroom, nor do I feel it makes any sense to push links out and let people know what I've tagged. But I might pull them - I know that Jim Somebody does vaguely what I do so I check out what he might have tagged as X and Y.
I don't push them. I pull them. I don't consider Delicious to be a site I would use for "social" aspects, no - I instead use it for information.
That does not make any sense. If you don't want bookmarks, then you don't need Delicious or anything like that.
Except delicious isn't bookmarks. Outlook has folders and mail goes in to folders, gmail has tags and mail gets tagged. In the same way, bookmarks have a hierarchy, delicious tags do not. Have you...used...delicious before?
Interesting... so if your social bookmarking site disappears, you are ok with your list of bookmarks going away? (snip) Especially sites or articles that might be subject to slashdotting, DDoS, government or hosting provider censorship. If my tagged links site goes away, I will lose the tags and subsequent associations. I'll have to look in to making my own personal backup of every single website I like - especially the ones that change constantly. Sounds like a great idea. Too bad we can't come up with some sort of data network designed to robustly handle wars, rogue governments, and overblown websites...
Smugly calling someone smug while insulting people who are smug on the internet makes baby Jesus cry.
I stated, in no unclear terms, why I remain on Facebook. My family knows my name, and knows how to find me on there. I'm on there for their benefit. They are also very happy to share all their info to a website that is selling that info. I put in false info to obfuscate the information other people are providing about me. And yes, I'm very technically illiterate. I barely know how to turn a gosh darn computer on!
uh...except I can't see what my friends tagged as both "linux" and "security" if I'm saving things locally...can't use any comp on the internet and get local copies...etc...
No. I do *not* want a tree. I do *not* want bookmarks. And if a link disappears, I'm ok with that. Why? Because generally speaking, it will be replaced with something or, it will weed out because it was likely just not something worth saving if it wasn't something worth a website staying up for.
what part of "I do not want bookmarks" was unclear? "nickname?" I may want to give something a dozen tags, not just one.
Also, I didn't say that's all I used it for, just how I primarily used it. Seeing what links a friend of mine has saved as "webcomic" is a great way to find a webcomic I might like:)
ps - I, and a lot of people I know, are also actively detaching themselves from Facebook, and making steps to limit any importance it has. Facebook sure as hell doesn't have anything that replaces delicious' primary functions. I still have a facebook account, but on it my wife is my brother (and yes, she's female in real life), an old co worker is my sister (he's female), my brother is my father, I'm widowed, I was born about 40 years earlier (makes for fun banner ads!), and I live in Beruit (versus living in northern San Diego). I only keep the account there because the old people in my family have figured it out, and they have fun sharing little things with the family. I have as much need for facebook in my life going forward as I do for a landline, or cable tv (no landline or cable for years...). There were two forks of the www; the "yay wall of junk and text php/geocities!" style sites that facebook is the crown jewel of, or the plain, non-hierarchical, nosql, functional, sites that understand that I'm dealing with more and more information each and every day, and the last thing I need is a distracting mess of a website that is supposed to be a tool in my life...ala, the simplistic interface of www.google.com, gmail, and yes - delicious. I'd say delicious is far less outdated, in principle, than facebook is. 10 years from now there will still be things that function/look more or less like delicious currently does; the same can't be said for facebook (if it's still around, it will look very, very different). Facebook is a website that tries (and fails) to make mobile apps; delicious is a REST api that fills a need/role, and is also a simple website if you need that too. As the platforms that people get online with change, so to will the www.
I don't use delicious to share links, I use it because I'm reading a handy article and I think "huh, in the future, I might want to find this in a few different types of situations...such as [tag name] or [tag name] or [tag name]."
isn't that the primary use of it? Merely sharing the links with others...meh. What about sharing it with myself? I don't want a bookmark tree with folders and subfolders and links saved to several spots. In my google account, I likewise don't have just the "inbox" label, and no others. I want to organize things by content (tags). Delicious is the best site around (that I know of, at least) for doing this.
I have a weak password I use at a lot of silly blog and news sites, short of two such sites (this one and fark...) that is just a trash thing. I don't use the same password at multiple places - duh - short of this weak password. I'm not going to remember dozens and dozens of passwords, and I don't put real info on that type of site anyway. I mean seriously...it's a celebrity gossip site. I just went there for probably the third time in my entire life, top story:
The golden couple of Disney breaks up on Vanessa's 22nd birthday. Katie Couric goes to a Bieber concert. Michael C. Hall divorces. Miley barters for her bong video with Macbooks. Tuesday gossip is always a trade-off. I mean hell, I wouldn't even use my real name or my established nick on a site like that. What the hell does it matter what the password is, at that point? I very minimal amount of security simply to allow for a very minor amount of distinction between posters, but if it's lost...
Anyway, the passwords used there shouldn't really be held against someone - just sayin.
None of you are asking the important question. Which is, of course, whether I should be going underwater off the far southern coast of Kalimdor, and looking for places to dig.
I don't have cable (like another commenter) but I do have a TV. It has a PS3 attached to it, and the PS3 has Netflix. I don't sit around talking about my favorite TV shows with people, so if I watch it a painful 15 days later - I won't care - especially since I only pop in to netflix every couple weeks anyway, when I've nothing else to do.
But then, I don't watch things like "Glee" or whatever it is people sit around talking about at the proverbial water cooler anyway.
it's so funny that you say "work" but then talk about doing things to your home computer. It's 2010; you don't need a silly LAN at your house, with fileservers you leave on 24/7. The coal mines called, they'd like to thank you for your support.
I suppose you never heard of delicious, or any of the mobile desktop settings services...
Yes, in an ideal world we could all have a few public IPs. Only, we can't - because we're out of IPv4, and tard monkeys won't move to IPv6 or some other option. We'd get *years* more life out of IPv4 though if MS would just add TLS support to WindowsXP.
that is a workaround, not a fix. You do this at work, you say? Go to one of the urls with your web browser, and look at the cert. What does it have on there? EVERYTHING. So if I have 20 clients I want to put on one server using SSL, gosh...I hope they don't mind that anyone that looks at their cert will see the name of the other 19 people. Also, I hope 19 of them don't mind not being the first one mentioned...
SAN is a hack job workaround. True TLS support, including SNI, is the only "fix"
wrong. I p2p from inside a NAT to others inside NATs on a regular basis. As is pointed out in subsequent comments, this actually helps ensure my privacy.
Slashdot Mirror
wish you could link the website...
yeah, great policy - give a tld to every whining, annoying group out there.
as the token vegan and animal rights activist let me just say that I greatly appreciate the respect people give when comparing concerns about the treatment of animals that are capable of suffering (dogs, pigs, cows, etc) to...paramecium. Nothing says you know you're wrong better than overblowing a comparison to silly, extreme levels to try to defame your opponent.
uhh...it's worse than dog fights? You're trolling, right? Dogs are social, self-aware beings that can solve complex problems, have emotions, form social bonds, suffer, experience joy, etc. Paramecium...are single-celled organisms. You might as well be concerned about torturing a rock, or air; they have no ability to feel pain, and certainly no ability to suffer.
can't the same thing be said about a glass of water? It will kill you, unless old age kills you first? That's a bit open-ended...
problem with "democracy" is that it really just ends up meaning the ones with the most money, win. All you have to do is convince more gullible sheep than the other person running, and bam - there you are. Sure, sure, it's really just how we've implemented democracy, not democracy itself that is a problem...except, I disagree. There is no way to have the common man make wise, intelligent decisions that are good for themselves. They want instant gratification. The common man has as much business deciding on budgets, long term goals, etc as a 5yo child does in a household - let the parents/adults make those decisions, kktnx.
What economy has been growing at an astronomical speed? The one that is able to make quick and intelligent decisions (China) without worrying about the people it harms. There's a happy medium between the two things...and that happy medium was what we originally had; a system where only the educated could vote. Was it perfect? Hell know, but at least it wasn't farking stupid like the crap we have now. I've never understood why people so readily accept the brainwashing that democracy is the only right way...think about how horrible medical science would be if we let the "common man" make decisions about how to do treatments, what procedures would be most respected, etc. Think about how successful medicine would be if any actor, random dude on the street, or whatnot could suddenly declare themselves a surgeon.
There is a certain skillset and personality to being a real, honest politician. One that has little to do with reading polls daily. We'll never get that back here - ever. C'est la vie, I guess.
I know. I also know that there's no reason to attempt to scientifically prove a negative when you have no scientifically-justifiable things of which to look for the absence.
if there was something to test for, then ghosts would have been "found" by now. Things like "change in temperature" are only useful if a study has conclusively proven that ghosts can cause such a thing. Had that happened, you could measure for otherwise unexplained temperature changes and then have that as potential evidence.
It's a problem of there not having been a studied, known-good. IE, a situation where we almost all scientists could agree a ghost existed in a particular place, and that said ghost caused a particular list of manifestations/effects. Until such a thing happens, there's absolutely no reason to think a change in temperature isn't due to a gap in the floorboard that is letting air in from outside, which you're just not seeing; being cold, doesn't mean there is a ghost.
Control-C, Control-D...? I know, I know, you can do blah blah blah instead...but no. It's just not as useful yet.
you keep wanting me to have local bookmarks. there's something between twitter and local bookmarks, ya know :)
You just said I don't use delicious to share links. In other words, you have already given up the social functions of Delicious, so it's not a factor to consider, not that other systems don't have them.
Pull, versus push. I don't tweet about going to the bathroom, nor do I feel it makes any sense to push links out and let people know what I've tagged. But I might pull them - I know that Jim Somebody does vaguely what I do so I check out what he might have tagged as X and Y.
I don't push them. I pull them. I don't consider Delicious to be a site I would use for "social" aspects, no - I instead use it for information.
That does not make any sense. If you don't want bookmarks, then you don't need Delicious or anything like that. Except delicious isn't bookmarks. Outlook has folders and mail goes in to folders, gmail has tags and mail gets tagged. In the same way, bookmarks have a hierarchy, delicious tags do not. Have you...used...delicious before?
Interesting... so if your social bookmarking site disappears, you are ok with your list of bookmarks going away? (snip) Especially sites or articles that might be subject to slashdotting, DDoS, government or hosting provider censorship.
If my tagged links site goes away, I will lose the tags and subsequent associations. I'll have to look in to making my own personal backup of every single website I like - especially the ones that change constantly. Sounds like a great idea. Too bad we can't come up with some sort of data network designed to robustly handle wars, rogue governments, and overblown websites...
Smugly calling someone smug while insulting people who are smug on the internet makes baby Jesus cry.
I stated, in no unclear terms, why I remain on Facebook. My family knows my name, and knows how to find me on there. I'm on there for their benefit. They are also very happy to share all their info to a website that is selling that info. I put in false info to obfuscate the information other people are providing about me. And yes, I'm very technically illiterate. I barely know how to turn a gosh darn computer on!
uh...except I can't see what my friends tagged as both "linux" and "security" if I'm saving things locally...can't use any comp on the internet and get local copies...etc... No. I do *not* want a tree. I do *not* want bookmarks. And if a link disappears, I'm ok with that. Why? Because generally speaking, it will be replaced with something or, it will weed out because it was likely just not something worth saving if it wasn't something worth a website staying up for.
what part of "I do not want bookmarks" was unclear? "nickname?" I may want to give something a dozen tags, not just one. :)
Also, I didn't say that's all I used it for, just how I primarily used it. Seeing what links a friend of mine has saved as "webcomic" is a great way to find a webcomic I might like
ps - I, and a lot of people I know, are also actively detaching themselves from Facebook, and making steps to limit any importance it has. Facebook sure as hell doesn't have anything that replaces delicious' primary functions. I still have a facebook account, but on it my wife is my brother (and yes, she's female in real life), an old co worker is my sister (he's female), my brother is my father, I'm widowed, I was born about 40 years earlier (makes for fun banner ads!), and I live in Beruit (versus living in northern San Diego). I only keep the account there because the old people in my family have figured it out, and they have fun sharing little things with the family. I have as much need for facebook in my life going forward as I do for a landline, or cable tv (no landline or cable for years...). There were two forks of the www; the "yay wall of junk and text php/geocities!" style sites that facebook is the crown jewel of, or the plain, non-hierarchical, nosql, functional, sites that understand that I'm dealing with more and more information each and every day, and the last thing I need is a distracting mess of a website that is supposed to be a tool in my life...ala, the simplistic interface of www.google.com, gmail, and yes - delicious. I'd say delicious is far less outdated, in principle, than facebook is. 10 years from now there will still be things that function/look more or less like delicious currently does; the same can't be said for facebook (if it's still around, it will look very, very different). Facebook is a website that tries (and fails) to make mobile apps; delicious is a REST api that fills a need/role, and is also a simple website if you need that too. As the platforms that people get online with change, so to will the www.
I don't use delicious to share links, I use it because I'm reading a handy article and I think "huh, in the future, I might want to find this in a few different types of situations...such as [tag name] or [tag name] or [tag name]."
isn't that the primary use of it? Merely sharing the links with others...meh. What about sharing it with myself? I don't want a bookmark tree with folders and subfolders and links saved to several spots. In my google account, I likewise don't have just the "inbox" label, and no others. I want to organize things by content (tags). Delicious is the best site around (that I know of, at least) for doing this.
I have a weak password I use at a lot of silly blog and news sites, short of two such sites (this one and fark...) that is just a trash thing. I don't use the same password at multiple places - duh - short of this weak password. I'm not going to remember dozens and dozens of passwords, and I don't put real info on that type of site anyway. I mean seriously...it's a celebrity gossip site. I just went there for probably the third time in my entire life, top story:
The golden couple of Disney breaks up on Vanessa's 22nd birthday. Katie Couric goes to a Bieber concert. Michael C. Hall divorces. Miley barters for her bong video with Macbooks. Tuesday gossip is always a trade-off.
I mean hell, I wouldn't even use my real name or my established nick on a site like that. What the hell does it matter what the password is, at that point? I very minimal amount of security simply to allow for a very minor amount of distinction between posters, but if it's lost...
Anyway, the passwords used there shouldn't really be held against someone - just sayin.
None of you are asking the important question. Which is, of course, whether I should be going underwater off the far southern coast of Kalimdor, and looking for places to dig.
what he said.
I don't have cable (like another commenter) but I do have a TV. It has a PS3 attached to it, and the PS3 has Netflix. I don't sit around talking about my favorite TV shows with people, so if I watch it a painful 15 days later - I won't care - especially since I only pop in to netflix every couple weeks anyway, when I've nothing else to do.
But then, I don't watch things like "Glee" or whatever it is people sit around talking about at the proverbial water cooler anyway.
ask doesn't do web searches anymore. Just fyi.
you use the cpu to employ insane compression algorithms and thus need to write a lot less to disk?
it's so funny that you say "work" but then talk about doing things to your home computer. It's 2010; you don't need a silly LAN at your house, with fileservers you leave on 24/7. The coal mines called, they'd like to thank you for your support.
I suppose you never heard of delicious, or any of the mobile desktop settings services...
Yes, in an ideal world we could all have a few public IPs. Only, we can't - because we're out of IPv4, and tard monkeys won't move to IPv6 or some other option. We'd get *years* more life out of IPv4 though if MS would just add TLS support to WindowsXP.
that is a workaround, not a fix. You do this at work, you say? Go to one of the urls with your web browser, and look at the cert. What does it have on there? EVERYTHING. So if I have 20 clients I want to put on one server using SSL, gosh...I hope they don't mind that anyone that looks at their cert will see the name of the other 19 people. Also, I hope 19 of them don't mind not being the first one mentioned...
SAN is a hack job workaround. True TLS support, including SNI, is the only "fix"
wrong. I p2p from inside a NAT to others inside NATs on a regular basis. As is pointed out in subsequent comments, this actually helps ensure my privacy.