Soooo, apparently the argument was: why are foreign languages "so super-duper-duper good that you should spend two years of your life doing them and specifically better than something else like coding?"
OK, that's a valid question!! And perhaps the foreign language requirement should be removed if the subject is not that important.
But to conclude, "no, foreign language is not that important; therefore, we will define another academic subject entirely to be a foreign language," is nonsensical. By that logic, if history isn't that important either, should biology be considered a form of history?
According to the World Resources Institute report just released within the last week (!): - Claims for biofuel potential have been exaggerated - Their production is costly and inefficient - There are better alternatives to fossil fuels already available for achieving lower carbon - Research funding has led to little progress compared to alternatives, and that is unlikely to change - And biofuel production has caused unintended disruptions on the food markets
Their secrets are theirs, not mine, but nice try in moving the goal posts. I really have no secrets, because it's so much easier that way. Transparency is more important than privacy.
If that works for you, great, and I respect that. Where you extrapolate and then feel you are justified to impose your way of being on everyone else and forbid any other person in the country from having anything they want to keep public from anyone is where you elicit my indignation.
And you do know that in the Snowden docs, there are actual examples of agents misusing their powers to surveil personal acquaintances and read their secrets, right? Government abuse of surveillance power to harm people is not a hypothetical concern.
This is akin to saying, "go ahead, put public webcams in ALL bathrooms". You are truly a fucking moron when logic and awareness meet up.
Comparing Google or the government reading my email to a peeping tom with a webcam is kind of stupid, don't you think?
Not really, Barbara. You've written that I shouldn't feel ashamed of anything if I'm not doing anything bad. But shame is very different than feeling a sense of privacy about some things. The obvious analogy here is exactly this: Everybody poops! There is nothing to be ashamed of in pooping. And yet [almost] no one, wants to poop while people are watching. The logical extension of your argument is webcams in bathrooms; after all, when everywhere else is surveilled, it will be the bathrooms where terrorists do their plotting. So we better have cameras in there. And if all you're doing is pooping and peeing, like everybody else, why should you be worried?
But far before that, there are many things in ordinary life that are just plain personal. The Sony hack to me was very sad because of the doxxing of innocent employees who had personal emails and medical records divulged, like the woman whose miscarriage was posted on the Internet. She shouldn't be ashamed of having a miscarriage, and yet privacy dictates that that is personal and she has been violated by having it outed. There are myriad examples of this. If I'm writing or speaking on the phone with a close friend about my conflicted feelings during the last moments of my mom's life as she died of cancer, that is something I have a right to share only with the people I choose to. If I'm talking with my girlfriend about how I want to bite her nipples and spank her ass tonight while dressed in black leather assless chaps, I don't want the world listening in because that is private between us. If I'm telling someone about my medical condition that causes me to be sometimes incontinent and why I therefore need to wear adult diapers, I don't want my colleagues at the office to be in the loop.
These are normal things that people must be able to share with their confidants.
While I agree with you, I find that people coming from a place of fear are not swayed by these philosophical, "high-minded" arguments. They tend to think constitutional principles are all well and good in theory, but in this new, scary world, it's better to spy on everyone to prevent terrorism. I trust the reader will understand I am describing a common opinion, not defending it. For people who think like this, you have to find a way to show the harm and make them feel personal *fear* of the surveillance to counter the fear motivating their support for it, and I think Glenn's question does that.
I heard a good quote from Glenn Greenwald. When talking with friends and others about mass surveillance, people often respond, "Well, if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about." To this, he replies, "Well, you're not doing anything wrong, right? So you wouldn't mind giving me the password to all your email accounts, and I will go through there and look for anything I find interesting and want to write about?" This makes people realize PRIVACY is not about HIDING bad stuff but about our fundamental write to keep our private communications from our private lives PRIVATE!
Why all the venom for Google? You don't see Microsoft releasing patches for Windows XP.
Windows XP wasn't released on July 24, 2013.
And upgrades from Windows XP to Vista/7/8 also weren't free.
But they were at least POSSIBLE, unlike Android upgrades from 4.3 to 4.4 on widely deployed hardware! It can't be called free if you have to buy a new phone to do it. (Two
Here it is verbatim from Google on January 12: "If the affected version [of WebView] is before 4.4, we generally do not develop the patches ourselves, but welcome patches with the report for consideration. Other than notifying OEMs, we will not be able to take action on any report that is affecting versions before 4.4 that are not accompanied with a patch."
That's not even a reason. It's a meaningless restatement of the question: "Why are you not developing a patch for 4.3?" "Because 4.3 is before 4.4. Thank you for your question. That's all the time we have."
What do people think of the security of using Windows 7's Virtual PC feature with "undo hard disks"? Is this an effective VM? It sure is simpler to get running than a separate VirtualBox or similar.
1) I have run avast real-time for years. I'm a pretty wary, sophisticated user. But it has occasionally blocked malicious elements on webpages. And it once blocked a zip attachment that I got sucked in on with a phishing email before any harm was done. I have also had it give me a few false positives over the years, which are a bit disconcerting to see and annoying until you can get things sorted out.
2) Second, I run malwarebytes scans from time to time.
3) Other prevention: adblock plus and noscript plugins.
4) For seemingly dangerous websites that I still want to be able to access, I use a Sandboxie sandbox for the browser.
Don't forget flu vaccine though! People think of the flu as like a cold, but influenza is the eighth leading cause of death among all Americans!!! It mostly kills older people (7th leading cause among them) and young people, who often are at high risk from the vaccine and can't take the vaccine! The flu vaccine is a huge example of the need for herd immunity to protect these people. But no one thinks about their choice not to get a flu vaccine as literally being a matter of life and death for others in their community.
Yes, yes, yes... the vaccine's not perfect at prevention, doesn't always match the strains, some people don't think it works, some people say they "get the flu" from the vaccine (which is not accurate). But the fact is, it saves lives the more people get the flu vaccine every year.
Is this applicable to other drugs as well? I'm intrigued by the idea, but doesn't this sound like a way to just make an addicted person have an insatiable craving? I mean, it doesn't get rid of the root causes and the urge to take the drug. It just prevents the drug from working, leading to no reduction in the withdrawal symptoms.
Kiyosaki is a huckster and fraud. He has nothing to do with either book mentioned above (one of which isn't even about making money). So what are you talking about?!
Imagine you walk into a room, and the room is dynamic. And with your permission and all of that, you are interacting with the things going on in the room.
Wow. Does he realize how completely out of touch with reality that sounds? He says *imagine* when in the future, with [my] technology, you will be able to "interact with the things going on in the room."
NEWS FLASH! I can now, Eric Schmidt. And anyone can. All you have to do it turn off your cell phone and begin interacting!
Oh yeah, that is a problem. Those companies paying lesser salaries should pay more, like Google and Facebook.
Yes, but, this would severely stifle innovation in the industry for teen sex hookup and digital dick pick exchange apps. (sarcasm) Clearly, there is a shortage of STEM labor since the tech industry is unable to afford all of the world-improving innovation they would like to do if they weren't limited by those gosh darn benefit-hungry, wage-commensurate-with-experience whiny American workers.
If someone is willing to do the job for cheaper, why do you think you deserve it? Popping out of a womb that happens to be within some arbitrary lines on a map isn't a compelling reason.
Because cost of living also happens to coincide with those arbitrary lines on a map. That's why Americans don't take jobs in India or Mexico to send money home.
Slashdot Mirror
No "of" after comprise. But at least you didn't use its meaning incorrectly like most people.
http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Comprise == consists of
Soooo, apparently the argument was: why are foreign languages "so super-duper-duper good that you should spend two years of your life doing them and specifically better than something else like coding?"
OK, that's a valid question!! And perhaps the foreign language requirement should be removed if the subject is not that important.
But to conclude, "no, foreign language is not that important; therefore, we will define another academic subject entirely to be a foreign language," is nonsensical.
By that logic, if history isn't that important either, should biology be considered a form of history?
I suppose they should copy the slashdot moderation system. =)
Biofuel is dead! Didn't they hear the news?
http://www.wri.org/tags/biofue...
According to the World Resources Institute report just released within the last week (!):
- Claims for biofuel potential have been exaggerated
- Their production is costly and inefficient
- There are better alternatives to fossil fuels already available for achieving lower carbon
- Research funding has led to little progress compared to alternatives, and that is unlikely to change
- And biofuel production has caused unintended disruptions on the food markets
Their secrets are theirs, not mine, but nice try in moving the goal posts. I really have no secrets, because it's so much easier that way. Transparency is more important than privacy.
If that works for you, great, and I respect that. Where you extrapolate and then feel you are justified to impose your way of being on everyone else and forbid any other person in the country from having anything they want to keep public from anyone is where you elicit my indignation.
And you do know that in the Snowden docs, there are actual examples of agents misusing their powers to surveil personal acquaintances and read their secrets, right? Government abuse of surveillance power to harm people is not a hypothetical concern.
This is akin to saying, "go ahead, put public webcams in ALL bathrooms". You are truly a fucking moron when logic and awareness meet up.
Comparing Google or the government reading my email to a peeping tom with a webcam is kind of stupid, don't you think?
Not really, Barbara. You've written that I shouldn't feel ashamed of anything if I'm not doing anything bad. But shame is very different than feeling a sense of privacy about some things. The obvious analogy here is exactly this: Everybody poops! There is nothing to be ashamed of in pooping. And yet [almost] no one, wants to poop while people are watching. The logical extension of your argument is webcams in bathrooms; after all, when everywhere else is surveilled, it will be the bathrooms where terrorists do their plotting. So we better have cameras in there. And if all you're doing is pooping and peeing, like everybody else, why should you be worried?
But far before that, there are many things in ordinary life that are just plain personal. The Sony hack to me was very sad because of the doxxing of innocent employees who had personal emails and medical records divulged, like the woman whose miscarriage was posted on the Internet. She shouldn't be ashamed of having a miscarriage, and yet privacy dictates that that is personal and she has been violated by having it outed. There are myriad examples of this. If I'm writing or speaking on the phone with a close friend about my conflicted feelings during the last moments of my mom's life as she died of cancer, that is something I have a right to share only with the people I choose to. If I'm talking with my girlfriend about how I want to bite her nipples and spank her ass tonight while dressed in black leather assless chaps, I don't want the world listening in because that is private between us. If I'm telling someone about my medical condition that causes me to be sometimes incontinent and why I therefore need to wear adult diapers, I don't want my colleagues at the office to be in the loop.
These are normal things that people must be able to share with their confidants.
While I agree with you, I find that people coming from a place of fear are not swayed by these philosophical, "high-minded" arguments. They tend to think constitutional principles are all well and good in theory, but in this new, scary world, it's better to spy on everyone to prevent terrorism. I trust the reader will understand I am describing a common opinion, not defending it. For people who think like this, you have to find a way to show the harm and make them feel personal *fear* of the surveillance to counter the fear motivating their support for it, and I think Glenn's question does that.
Ah, our fundamental write..?
I see what you did there...
Ah ahha. Actually was just really tired, and made a typo. Noticed it too late.
I heard a good quote from Glenn Greenwald. When talking with friends and others about mass surveillance, people often respond, "Well, if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about." To this, he replies, "Well, you're not doing anything wrong, right? So you wouldn't mind giving me the password to all your email accounts, and I will go through there and look for anything I find interesting and want to write about?" This makes people realize PRIVACY is not about HIDING bad stuff but about our fundamental write to keep our private communications from our private lives PRIVATE!
Why all the venom for Google? You don't see Microsoft releasing patches for Windows XP.
Windows XP wasn't released on July 24, 2013.
And upgrades from Windows XP to Vista/7/8 also weren't free.
But they were at least POSSIBLE, unlike Android upgrades from 4.3 to 4.4 on widely deployed hardware! It can't be called free if you have to buy a new phone to do it.
(Two
The "excuse" was omitted in the Slashdot post...
Here it is verbatim from Google on January 12:
"If the affected version [of WebView] is before 4.4, we generally do not develop the patches ourselves, but welcome patches with the report for consideration. Other than notifying OEMs, we will not be able to take action on any report that is affecting versions before 4.4 that are not accompanied with a patch."
That's not even a reason. It's a meaningless restatement of the question:
"Why are you not developing a patch for 4.3?"
"Because 4.3 is before 4.4. Thank you for your question. That's all the time we have."
What about from a security perspective though? It works well enough for me for the rare times I need it, but I wonder if it is effective at isolation?
What do people think of the security of using Windows 7's Virtual PC feature with "undo hard disks"?
Is this an effective VM? It sure is simpler to get running than a separate VirtualBox or similar.
I'm on Windows 7. Here are my tips:
1) I have run avast real-time for years. I'm a pretty wary, sophisticated user. But it has occasionally blocked malicious elements on webpages. And it once blocked a zip attachment that I got sucked in on with a phishing email before any harm was done. I have also had it give me a few false positives over the years, which are a bit disconcerting to see and annoying until you can get things sorted out.
2) Second, I run malwarebytes scans from time to time.
3) Other prevention: adblock plus and noscript plugins.
4) For seemingly dangerous websites that I still want to be able to access, I use a Sandboxie sandbox for the browser.
Yes Yes Yes! =)
Don't forget flu vaccine though! People think of the flu as like a cold, but influenza is the eighth leading cause of death among all Americans!!!
It mostly kills older people (7th leading cause among them) and young people, who often are at high risk from the vaccine and can't take the vaccine!
The flu vaccine is a huge example of the need for herd immunity to protect these people. But no one thinks about their choice not to get a flu vaccine as literally being a matter of life and death for others in their community.
Yes, yes, yes... the vaccine's not perfect at prevention, doesn't always match the strains, some people don't think it works, some people say they "get the flu" from the vaccine (which is not accurate). But the fact is, it saves lives the more people get the flu vaccine every year.
And THAT'S, one to grow on. =)
References: http://freakonomics.com/2015/0...
Is this applicable to other drugs as well?
I'm intrigued by the idea, but doesn't this sound like a way to just make an addicted person have an insatiable craving? I mean, it doesn't get rid of the root causes and the urge to take the drug. It just prevents the drug from working, leading to no reduction in the withdrawal symptoms.
Kiyosaki is a huckster and fraud. He has nothing to do with either book mentioned above (one of which isn't even about making money). So what are you talking about?!
False, false, and false. FUD
Effective herd immunization can eradicate disease completely. See smallpox and polio.
An attenuated virus vaccine does not "spread" between people.
False, false, and false. FUD
Imagine you walk into a room, and the room is dynamic. And with your permission and all of that, you are interacting with the things going on in the room.
Wow. Does he realize how completely out of touch with reality that sounds? He says *imagine* when in the future, with [my] technology, you will be able to "interact with the things going on in the room."
NEWS FLASH! I can now, Eric Schmidt. And anyone can. All you have to do it turn off your cell phone and begin interacting!
Viktor Frankl? Man, we have the same libraries. =)
I was only kidding around, but I agree with your philosophy. Read "The Millionaire Next Door". Great book!
Oh yeah, that is a problem. Those companies paying lesser salaries should pay more, like Google and Facebook.
Yes, but, this would severely stifle innovation in the industry for teen sex hookup and digital dick pick exchange apps. (sarcasm) Clearly, there is a shortage of STEM labor since the tech industry is unable to afford all of the world-improving innovation they would like to do if they weren't limited by those gosh darn benefit-hungry, wage-commensurate-with-experience whiny American workers.
If someone is willing to do the job for cheaper, why do you think you deserve it? Popping out of a womb that happens to be within some arbitrary lines on a map isn't a compelling reason.
Because cost of living also happens to coincide with those arbitrary lines on a map. That's why Americans don't take jobs in India or Mexico to send money home.