I think you're right; once surveillance is in place, no legal means will EVER get rid of it.
However, maybe a few dozen determined students, wearing ski masks and armed with baseball bats (or BB guns for those in recessed spots)... if it happened often enough, maybe they'd give up replacing the surveillance cameras... and might just discover that lo and behold, the school doesn't fall down the next day. Amazing!
CSS is a lot of why [bitch of the day] realtor.com has lately gone from something that had some issues but could be beaten into working, to a site that I have entirely abandoned, preferring to fight with the local IDX (lousy search mechanism, but at least everything works).
realtor.com's notion of CSS means that crap moves around the page without regard for consistent or expected locations; that control buttons/links/tabs are sometimes entirely absent; that to make a next-page link work, I have to aim EXACTLY at the ***tiny*** number in the middle of the box, rather than clicking anywhere in the box THAT LOOKS LIKE A BUTTON; etc, etc, etc. Not to mention it's now slow even on broadband, and that the number of relevant results produced has dropped dramatically.
Oh, and now the damned thing looks like a Fischer-Price toy... as if whoever designed it had just discovered WinXP's default colours and interface.
This morning I had an argument on the phone with someone from realtor.com management, but she didn't have the vaguest idea what I was talking about, and tho she promised to "escalate" my complaint, I feel quite certain that nothing will come of it.
A perfect example of how JUST BECAUSE YOU *CAN* "UPDATE" A SITE'S INTERFACE DOESN'T MEAN YOU *SHOULD*.
Another point -- show me where graphics would in any way improve useit.com?? It has no need for them; it's informative reading material that generally needs no illustration. So regardless about what he says about his own site, IMO it largely follows his own rules -- it keeps things simple and streamlined *wherever there is no need to make them complex*. (As a visitor, my only real complaint is that the Alertbox Archive link needs to be more prominent, cuz I can never remember what it's called when I'm looking for it.)
I just got done waving a few Alertbox columns at realtor.com, which in the 7-8 years I've been using it has never been a paragon, but a few days ago went live with a new interface that has cut the site's functionality in half: A great many things that used to work no longer work (and relevancy of search results is now a fraction of what it used to be, probably as a result of interfacing more poorly with the database); the interface has somehow become cluttered enough that a lot of control points are now hard to see; and it now runs/loads at a small fraction of its former already-ponderous speed. I had quite an argument on the phone this morning with someone from realtor.com's management. But they've invested a "whole year" in the new interface, and by damn they're keeping it, no matter how many people can't even figure out how to complain about it!!
(I can tell you why they're "not getting any complaints" -- the feedback popup is small enough that the Submit button isn't visible, AND it doesn't scroll. You have to know enough to enlarge the WINDOW before you can see the Submit button at all. Yet the window has no visible controls -- you have to know enough to drag the corner. How many people expect that of a web popup?)
In layman's terms -- in general, a virus in your blood does nothing "bad". You only get sick when it starts replicating *inside* your cells -- out of the direct reach of any blood filtering mechanism.
I thought of the emergency HIV-needle-stick treatment too, but as you say if there is an antibody available, that would probably be more of a sure thing. Still, might the filter be more generic?
What it might be useful for is something like viral cancers, resistant bacteria, etc. where your chances are best if ALL potential reservoirs of infection are thoroughly "scrubbed".
Not so much a bad idea, as presently a solution looking for a problem.
Welcome. Hopefully no more jerks will come your way.
Once in a while I've had someone follow me around downmodding everything I say (no way to escape that!), but if I've had any reply-trolls, they've evaded my notice. But I don't see replies rated -1, either. IIRC I have my threshold set at 0, where I put it cuz once in a while an AC does make a good point that I'd regret not reading.
I think this works, but haven't tried it myself: if you mark someone as a foe, then auto-downmod foes to -1, theoretically they vanish from your ken. Unless, of course, you read at -1.
"Why not allow the people in those systems to set their characters to automatically ignore (not see at all) other characters who have not provided some link to their Real World selves? I know this might not be easy, but it's the easiest way for the other users to avoid the harassment from the anonymous griefers."
That sounds like a good concept. It could be set just like the three basic levels of spamfilter: Allow only known-good; allow those not known to be bad; allow anyone. And at all levels, with the ability to customize the filter.
That's actually a good question. If virtual rape is a crime, then why wouldn't virtual murder, virtual robbery, virtual etc. also be crimes?? After all these likewise damage your online character.
The concept of virtual crime also feeds into the "I couldn't hang up the phone because he made me keep talking" concept, same as if the "victim" is physically restrained. At what point is it your own damn responsibility to disconnect from such a situation? I say, immediately. After all, no one is holding a gun to your head, making you keep playing.
Very small cars would also be at risk. Anything raised or cobble-like could cause a loss of traction, especially when wet. (I've even experienced that in my pickup, on the cobbles these morons in SoCal use as intersection markers.)
I suppose a motorcycle lane would help, but you can't always make it into your desired lane as it is...
Another thought: induction panels, akin to road sensors. If you have enough of them in a high-traffic area, would they generate enough power to be worth tapping? I have no idea if this is an utter fantasy, but since you can pave over the sensor panels that are in use now, and they have no real impact on road safety...
While I'm visiting the Ministry of Silly Thoughts... How about bicycle tunnels that utilize the wind from passing cars? Bikes are a lot more fun to ride when you have a good tailwind, and aren't exposed in bad weather.
Hell, a bike tunnel could have directional roof scoops and utilize existing or roadway-generated air currents.
The link is not a comprehensive list, and says as much ("selected contributors"). And as someone else pointed out, there's some overlap between HP the corporation, and HP the charitable foundation. If Greenpeace is really being all that pure, shouldn't they reject money from corp-connected foundations?
Regardless, Greenpeace has long since passed into the realm of environmental theatre, and I trust 'em about as far as I could toss their annual budget.
Yep -- would work best for suburban parking lots. I'd guess outfits with big parking lots, Walmarts and malls and such, could generate enough to cut their operation costs over the long haul. Would probably pull some heat out of the parking lot too, so the blacktop wouldn't cook your feet right through your shoes. Likely not so practical for downtown areas where highrise buildings shade the pavement for half the sun-useful day.
As to the heated parking facility... probably not practical due to insulation costs on big open buildings, but still a novel idea that probably has its uses.
Montana State University runs its own steam plant, and has some heated sidewalks. Pretty obvious when in midwinter they're the only dry pavement in sight.:)
Be sure to take note of the connections mentioned in the "motivations" section.
=======
"I had no idea that after I left in 1986 they would evolve into a band of scientific illiterates. Clearly, my former Greenpeace colleagues are either not reading the morning paper or simply don't care about the truth." -- Patrick Moore, Greenpeace co-founder, writing in Canada's National Post
Generally good idea, but you'd lose more in drag (and increased fuel usage) than you'd gain back in gnerated power. However -- if you put these in areas where people want to slow down *anyway*, such as off-ramps, the small but definite drag would NOT be unwanted; if anything it would save on brakes. If cleverly designed, it could even let cars coast to a halt, by supplying just the right drag for average commuter cars.
That's a damn good idea.... any reason this water, essentially heated for free, couldn't be piped off to generate power? at the very least, it would save much of the heating costs for steam turbines.
ISTM it could be a largely closed system, with the cooled water being returned to the under-tarmac pipes.
When you have war, you have absent fathers, which is a known cause of violent "acting out" in young teen males.
When you have war, parents often feel uncertain about their future, and take it out on their kids, by imposing needless restrictions "for your own safety", which would be deemed ludicrous if there weren't "terrorists and perverts lurking on every street corner". Kids chafing under unfair restrictions often overreact and express their frustrations through violence (if only by beating up their little brother).
As to all the fads and trends that OMFG are sure to cause the downfall of society!! this is hardly new either. The ancient Greeks and Romans wrote about it in almost exactly the same terms as we see today.
Also consider that such shooting sprees are hardly new. The first one that I know of in the U.S. happened in the 1800s, when someone went to a school and started blazing away. (I don't recall the details.) Unless he was a time traveller, I doubt video games had anything to do with it.
The only same comment I've ever seen on these shooting sprees came from a priest in SoCal who works with neglected teens. He said quite bluntly that these incidents are NOT murders. They are LOUD, MESSY SUICIDES, where the idea is to make everyone suffer the same way the shooter feels he has suffered, so that everyone will know and share his pain.
Many kids who have contemplated suicide have also considered "taking them all with me, because that'll teach 'em". But most kids don't act out their fantasies of revenge, because they never get quite that desperate (or manage to escape the situation before it comes to that). And when someone does snap, it isn't necessarily even an indication of pre-existing mental illness. It's more likely that they reached the end of their rope, and saw nowhere to go and no way for their lives to ever get better.
"I'm actually not that aggressive. But violent games, anime, and movies probably have given me more of a capacity for violence."
Same here. However, from these same sources, I've gained a larger measure of self-control.
What it works out to is that thanks to being attacked by and killing countless pixels, I've developed more skill at rapidly assessing a situation and reacting appropriately. If the correct reaction is violence, then I'm more able to react that way without hesitation. On the flip side, since I'm less likely to react without such an assessment, I'm also overall less likely to react aggressively.
Perhaps there's something else going on, tho. Consider this theory, which I made up this very instant, but is based on observation of people under various kinds of pressure:
In everyday life, most people don't have much call for fight-or-flight reactions. So when something happens that triggers it, they really don't have any experience in how to react. Their reaction is therefore more likely to be irrational and unconsidered, or they may simply freeze and be unable to react at all.
Whereas a violent-games gamer gets a ton of experience at dealing with their own fight-or-flight reactions. So when they encounter it in Real Life, they're more likely to be able to make a rapid and accurate judgment about the situation.
Rather like how a SWAT team has to learn to assess the field of combat and determine on the instant who are innocent bystanders, and who are targets. A green civilian, run through the same training course, will shot as many bystanders as they will perps.
=========
Regardless, if you take away my violent games, I'll kill you;)
Seriously, I likewise do not think these sorts of risks (if they exist at all) are worth the many downsides of a nanny state. There will always be loons and losers, and if anything, the nanny state encourages their survival by coddling along these people who otherwise couldn't make it. Which is not so good for normal folk.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you're right; once surveillance is in place, no legal means will EVER get rid of it.
... if it happened often enough, maybe they'd give up replacing the surveillance cameras... and might just discover that lo and behold, the school doesn't fall down the next day. Amazing!
However, maybe a few dozen determined students, wearing ski masks and armed with baseball bats (or BB guns for those in recessed spots)
CSS is a lot of why [bitch of the day] realtor.com has lately gone from something that had some issues but could be beaten into working, to a site that I have entirely abandoned, preferring to fight with the local IDX (lousy search mechanism, but at least everything works).
realtor.com's notion of CSS means that crap moves around the page without regard for consistent or expected locations; that control buttons/links/tabs are sometimes entirely absent; that to make a next-page link work, I have to aim EXACTLY at the ***tiny*** number in the middle of the box, rather than clicking anywhere in the box THAT LOOKS LIKE A BUTTON; etc, etc, etc. Not to mention it's now slow even on broadband, and that the number of relevant results produced has dropped dramatically.
Oh, and now the damned thing looks like a Fischer-Price toy... as if whoever designed it had just discovered WinXP's default colours and interface.
This morning I had an argument on the phone with someone from realtor.com management, but she didn't have the vaguest idea what I was talking about, and tho she promised to "escalate" my complaint, I feel quite certain that nothing will come of it.
A perfect example of how JUST BECAUSE YOU *CAN* "UPDATE" A SITE'S INTERFACE DOESN'T MEAN YOU *SHOULD*.
Not til you figure out how to put a proper HEAD on your pages' shoulders, at least ;)
Another point -- show me where graphics would in any way improve useit.com?? It has no need for them; it's informative reading material that generally needs no illustration. So regardless about what he says about his own site, IMO it largely follows his own rules -- it keeps things simple and streamlined *wherever there is no need to make them complex*. (As a visitor, my only real complaint is that the Alertbox Archive link needs to be more prominent, cuz I can never remember what it's called when I'm looking for it.)
I just got done waving a few Alertbox columns at realtor.com, which in the 7-8 years I've been using it has never been a paragon, but a few days ago went live with a new interface that has cut the site's functionality in half: A great many things that used to work no longer work (and relevancy of search results is now a fraction of what it used to be, probably as a result of interfacing more poorly with the database); the interface has somehow become cluttered enough that a lot of control points are now hard to see; and it now runs/loads at a small fraction of its former already-ponderous speed. I had quite an argument on the phone this morning with someone from realtor.com's management. But they've invested a "whole year" in the new interface, and by damn they're keeping it, no matter how many people can't even figure out how to complain about it!!
(I can tell you why they're "not getting any complaints" -- the feedback popup is small enough that the Submit button isn't visible, AND it doesn't scroll. You have to know enough to enlarge the WINDOW before you can see the Submit button at all. Yet the window has no visible controls -- you have to know enough to drag the corner. How many people expect that of a web popup?)
In layman's terms -- in general, a virus in your blood does nothing "bad". You only get sick when it starts replicating *inside* your cells -- out of the direct reach of any blood filtering mechanism.
I thought of the emergency HIV-needle-stick treatment too, but as you say if there is an antibody available, that would probably be more of a sure thing. Still, might the filter be more generic?
What it might be useful for is something like viral cancers, resistant bacteria, etc. where your chances are best if ALL potential reservoirs of infection are thoroughly "scrubbed".
Not so much a bad idea, as presently a solution looking for a problem.
Couldn't have said it better.
Welcome. Hopefully no more jerks will come your way.
Once in a while I've had someone follow me around downmodding everything I say (no way to escape that!), but if I've had any reply-trolls, they've evaded my notice. But I don't see replies rated -1, either. IIRC I have my threshold set at 0, where I put it cuz once in a while an AC does make a good point that I'd regret not reading.
I think this works, but haven't tried it myself: if you mark someone as a foe, then auto-downmod foes to -1, theoretically they vanish from your ken. Unless, of course, you read at -1.
"Why not allow the people in those systems to set their characters to automatically ignore (not see at all) other characters who have not provided some link to their Real World selves? I know this might not be easy, but it's the easiest way for the other users to avoid the harassment from the anonymous griefers."
That sounds like a good concept. It could be set just like the three basic levels of spamfilter: Allow only known-good; allow those not known to be bad; allow anyone. And at all levels, with the ability to customize the filter.
That's actually a good question. If virtual rape is a crime, then why wouldn't virtual murder, virtual robbery, virtual etc. also be crimes?? After all these likewise damage your online character.
The concept of virtual crime also feeds into the "I couldn't hang up the phone because he made me keep talking" concept, same as if the "victim" is physically restrained. At what point is it your own damn responsibility to disconnect from such a situation? I say, immediately. After all, no one is holding a gun to your head, making you keep playing.
Very small cars would also be at risk. Anything raised or cobble-like could cause a loss of traction, especially when wet. (I've even experienced that in my pickup, on the cobbles these morons in SoCal use as intersection markers.)
I suppose a motorcycle lane would help, but you can't always make it into your desired lane as it is...
Another thought: induction panels, akin to road sensors. If you have enough of them in a high-traffic area, would they generate enough power to be worth tapping? I have no idea if this is an utter fantasy, but since you can pave over the sensor panels that are in use now, and they have no real impact on road safety...
While I'm visiting the Ministry of Silly Thoughts... How about bicycle tunnels that utilize the wind from passing cars? Bikes are a lot more fun to ride when you have a good tailwind, and aren't exposed in bad weather.
Hell, a bike tunnel could have directional roof scoops and utilize existing or roadway-generated air currents.
Looks to me like what qualifies as a mandatory precedent is itself open to judgment calls -- as to what constitutes sufficiently similar facts etc.
Altho the ability to show some, er, judgment is part of why we have judges in the first place...
The link is not a comprehensive list, and says as much ("selected contributors"). And as someone else pointed out, there's some overlap between HP the corporation, and HP the charitable foundation. If Greenpeace is really being all that pure, shouldn't they reject money from corp-connected foundations?
Regardless, Greenpeace has long since passed into the realm of environmental theatre, and I trust 'em about as far as I could toss their annual budget.
Yep -- would work best for suburban parking lots. I'd guess outfits with big parking lots, Walmarts and malls and such, could generate enough to cut their operation costs over the long haul. Would probably pull some heat out of the parking lot too, so the blacktop wouldn't cook your feet right through your shoes. Likely not so practical for downtown areas where highrise buildings shade the pavement for half the sun-useful day.
:)
As to the heated parking facility... probably not practical due to insulation costs on big open buildings, but still a novel idea that probably has its uses.
Montana State University runs its own steam plant, and has some heated sidewalks. Pretty obvious when in midwinter they're the only dry pavement in sight.
Yeah... trouble with such an outfit working up to a big budget, is that the drive to fund itself eventually becomes the leading motivation. :(
Yeah... I had the thought whilst RTFA'ing that what Greenpeace is really after is a chunk of green out of Apple's coffers.
One suspects they'd consider Apple more "green" should Apple provide them with an infusion of cash.
l s.cfm/oid/131
http://www.activistcash.com/organization_financia
You might want to read http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview. cfm/oid/131
Be sure to take note of the connections mentioned in the "motivations" section.
=======
"I had no idea that after I left in 1986 they would evolve into a band of scientific illiterates. Clearly, my former Greenpeace colleagues are either not reading the morning paper or simply don't care about the truth."
-- Patrick Moore, Greenpeace co-founder, writing in Canada's National Post
A better question would be ... which construction contractors are creaming themselves at the prospect of being chosen to implement this??
Generally good idea, but you'd lose more in drag (and increased fuel usage) than you'd gain back in gnerated power. However -- if you put these in areas where people want to slow down *anyway*, such as off-ramps, the small but definite drag would NOT be unwanted; if anything it would save on brakes. If cleverly designed, it could even let cars coast to a halt, by supplying just the right drag for average commuter cars.
That's a damn good idea.... any reason this water, essentially heated for free, couldn't be piped off to generate power? at the very least, it would save much of the heating costs for steam turbines.
ISTM it could be a largely closed system, with the cooled water being returned to the under-tarmac pipes.
When you have war, you have absent fathers, which is a known cause of violent "acting out" in young teen males.
When you have war, parents often feel uncertain about their future, and take it out on their kids, by imposing needless restrictions "for your own safety", which would be deemed ludicrous if there weren't "terrorists and perverts lurking on every street corner". Kids chafing under unfair restrictions often overreact and express their frustrations through violence (if only by beating up their little brother).
As to all the fads and trends that OMFG are sure to cause the downfall of society!! this is hardly new either. The ancient Greeks and Romans wrote about it in almost exactly the same terms as we see today.
Also consider that such shooting sprees are hardly new. The first one that I know of in the U.S. happened in the 1800s, when someone went to a school and started blazing away. (I don't recall the details.) Unless he was a time traveller, I doubt video games had anything to do with it.
The only same comment I've ever seen on these shooting sprees came from a priest in SoCal who works with neglected teens. He said quite bluntly that these incidents are NOT murders. They are LOUD, MESSY SUICIDES, where the idea is to make everyone suffer the same way the shooter feels he has suffered, so that everyone will know and share his pain.
Many kids who have contemplated suicide have also considered "taking them all with me, because that'll teach 'em". But most kids don't act out their fantasies of revenge, because they never get quite that desperate (or manage to escape the situation before it comes to that). And when someone does snap, it isn't necessarily even an indication of pre-existing mental illness. It's more likely that they reached the end of their rope, and saw nowhere to go and no way for their lives to ever get better.
"I'm actually not that aggressive. But violent games, anime, and movies probably have given me more of a capacity for violence."
Same here. However, from these same sources, I've gained a larger measure of self-control.
What it works out to is that thanks to being attacked by and killing countless pixels, I've developed more skill at rapidly assessing a situation and reacting appropriately. If the correct reaction is violence, then I'm more able to react that way without hesitation. On the flip side, since I'm less likely to react without such an assessment, I'm also overall less likely to react aggressively.
Perhaps there's something else going on, tho. Consider this theory, which I made up this very instant, but is based on observation of people under various kinds of pressure:
;)
In everyday life, most people don't have much call for fight-or-flight reactions. So when something happens that triggers it, they really don't have any experience in how to react. Their reaction is therefore more likely to be irrational and unconsidered, or they may simply freeze and be unable to react at all.
Whereas a violent-games gamer gets a ton of experience at dealing with their own fight-or-flight reactions. So when they encounter it in Real Life, they're more likely to be able to make a rapid and accurate judgment about the situation.
Rather like how a SWAT team has to learn to assess the field of combat and determine on the instant who are innocent bystanders, and who are targets. A green civilian, run through the same training course, will shot as many bystanders as they will perps.
=========
Regardless, if you take away my violent games, I'll kill you
Seriously, I likewise do not think these sorts of risks (if they exist at all) are worth the many downsides of a nanny state. There will always be loons and losers, and if anything, the nanny state encourages their survival by coddling along these people who otherwise couldn't make it. Which is not so good for normal folk.