It works the same way in Los Angeles. Child Welfare and Animal Control are both *required* to "investigate all complaints" even when the complaint (and the complainer) is KNOWN to be spurious, and Child Welfare will remove children solely on the basis of such complaints, regardless of the circumstances or any evidence that the children are well-cared-for. Animal Control has historically been a bit saner, but I expect that will change now that a PETA supporter heads the department.
The worst part is, anonymous complaints are not only allowed but encouraged, are regarded as solid evidence by the courts, and you have NO right to face your accuser in court. And you are regarded as guilty by default, with little or no chance of proving your innocence.
Speaking as a professional dog trainer, this sort of crap just fuels every sort of problem people can have with their pets, including the notion that it's okay to just confiscate dogs because you don't like their owners.
Plus he's supporting the "animal rights" loons by his willingness to be part of this outright theft. They're NOT about being good to animals; they're about depriving people of *human* rights. Hmm... they say dogs are equivalent to children, and it's okay to steal a dog if they don't like how it's kept. What if "activists" don't like how you raise your kids, should they be allowed to just take them??
I got along okay with Katz until he was a party to stealing that dog.
I wonder if the original owner knows where his dog is.
As to "Orson", my experience is that if the dog is the least little bit "off", people like Katz make the dog's behaviour vastly worse than it would be in the hands of someone who actually knows what they're doing. And THESE are the people "rescuing" dogs -- often dogs that are psychologically marginal in the first place (there *is* inherited psychosis in dogs).
One has to wonder how much of this is by DESIGN, to cause people to fear their pets and be more willing to give them up. After all, PETA and HSUS both have a stated goal of ELIMINATION OF PET OWNERSHIP.
I liked TRON too, but having worked with Jeff Bridges on 8 Million Ways to Die... lordy, talk about being unable to follow a script. (Well, when that film HAD a script.)
I had a similar thought, involving writers of bad checks.
Still, no matter the tech, high or low, new or ancient, there can always be found some lowlife using it for nefarious purposes. If one stopped research and progress from fear of misuse, we'd have not yet picked up one stone to hammer another with, lest Og use it to bash Gronk's head.
I suspect the "need two printers" issue, while presently real, will eventually go away, as it makes sense to combine the "temporary printer" with a traditional "permanent printer" for an all-in-one device. Same for an "unprinter" (eraser) as someone suggested for user-controllable fading.
The paper itself could be marked (perhaps by the printer). And perhaps eventually the process will be ink-only, so you just select which ink the printer uses -- temporary or permanent -- and use ordinary paper.
It may become possible to "permanentize" it, too -- if the printed page hasn't already faded, run it thru a "fixer" so the ink *becomes* permanent. Again, this could be a function of the same printer.
(We're talking office megaprinters here, not consumer printers. Being multifunction already comes with the territory.)
The main difficulty I see is that paper paths will need to be VERY reliable and capable of self-correcting for damaged paper. As anyone who ever recycles paper by turning it over and running it back thru the printer soon learns, paper that's been thru the printer once already becomes a lot more likely to jam, even if it hasn't visibly rippled or curled.
The printer itself could mark the paper with a NON-fading indicator -- as simple as adding a number across the top, each time the page was run through the printer.
So after 5 uses you'd see a small
1 2 3 4 5
across the top of the page.
As you say, very simple and easy for anyone to figure out.
Alternatively, the paper might START with 10 numbers, and the printer zaps one each time the page is processed. This might be more practical for something like another poster suggested -- paper that can be "printed" and "unprinted" at the user's will, by running it thru an "unprinter" (to zap the ink with UV or whatever). Each time the paper is unprinted, the "times left" marker gets faded to the next number down.
I think it accurately reflects what's really going on here.
Knowledge is power. Denying knowledge to others keeps them dependent on you. And organised religion has, historically, been very largely about maintaining its own power.
Based on my observations over the past decade, I think you are entirely correct. Excellent post on how the Real World of FOSS presently works.
If more people would view FOSS from such a realworld perspective, methinks FOSS would go further, rather than being ants randomly attacking the elephant.
I've personally observed the behaviour you describe, whenever someone is accustomed to being the big fish in a little pond and feels that their dominance is threatened by Evil Outsiders. It applies equally to any relatively insular group, whether that be a culture (or some small portion thereof, as would seem the case here since there are some 600,000 people in the tribal group), a club, a BBS, whatever.
The other motivation is probably just golddigging. "You pay us enough money and we'll give you rights to our language." -- That's right up there with patents on mathematical principles.
If I were M$, I'd be rethinking whether market penetration for minor languages is worth the hassle, and whether being allowed to do business in Chile brings enough profit to cover the spate of similar legal action they will no doubt encounter in the future. Imagine if every minor language got into the act!!
And if I were a Mapuche, I'd be having similar thoughts about such "activists" (who in my observation, very seldom speak for the majority, and often have no power at all unless said majority are *kept* ignorant), and whether it's in my best interests to let someone else dictate whether I'm ALLOWED to use Windows in my native tongue.
Actually, that was my point: who the hell appointed them Heap Big Chief with authority to state for ALL Mapuche people what is or isn't allowed with their language, and whether they ought to be kept "in the dark" by way of not having a version of Windows they can comfortably use in their native tongue?
I believe another poster nailed it squarely on the head, when they opined that it has nothing to do with who "owns" the language, and a great deal to do with keeping *control* by maintaining cultural isolation. Big fish in a little pond syndrome... plus a good chunk of golddigging on the side. http://politics.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=20812 4&cid=16969490
I've personally seen this at work with groups that feel culturally threatened -- they'd rather their culture died out entirely than have it "polluted" by influences they can't control.
If they're complaining that it wasn't done in a public manner -- why not invent their own words as needed, and suggest them to M$? Same with whatever else they don't like about the written version.
But that opens another can of worms: WHICH tribesmen have the authority to do so? just the elders, or the whole tribe? Fact is, that might have caused such a protracted fight that only a neutral 3rd party could solve it.
Regardless, I think another poster is right, that at root this is just golddigging -- since on the one hand they complain about being "under-represented" and on the other they complain about being represented at ALL. Make up our minds!!
One does suspect it'll be the last time M$ signs a "support all languages" contract with anyone...
OTOH, Microsoft could decide that offering Windows in such a minor language isn't worth the cost and effort, especially considering the trivially small customer base for that language, and simply decline to sell it at all.
I've done that on a bike too... completely different from the "one-eyed nap". With both eyes shut (or both hands off the handlebars) there's a pressing a need to keep track of your motion, yet you're able to relax and absorb from other senses in a different way than when your eyes/hands are involved. It teaches you to be more generally aware of your balance and more sensitive to your total surroundings. Ever notice how you could soon tell if you're passing a telephone pole? you do become aware of subtle changes in air pressure around such obstacles.
We've all seen blind people who navigate the world almost as well as if they were fully sighted, doubtless by way of the same sort of sensory "exercise". Similarly, cats navigate in the dark primarily by sensing such air pressure gradients (not the objects themselves) against their whiskers. In fact often the only symptom when a cat goes blind is that it'll start carrying its whiskers cranked all the way forward ALL the time.
The one-eye-shut pseudo-nap wasn't trained; it was discovered by accident. It worked this way the very first time I did it. (I even remember where I was at the time.... on I-90 going from Billings to Bozeman MT.) I was rather surprised, as the "nap" effect was quite unexpected, and wasn't noticed til I opened the eye and had that "suddenly refreshed" feeling you get when you wake up from a good light nap.
The nearest previous anything was walking to Jr.High with BOTH eyes shut (like another poster, I could take a "snapshot" and walk blind for some distance -- most of a city block when I was in practice) but the effect is NOT the same. Both eyes shut is somewhat relaxing, but results in heightened awareness, not naptime.
"Hm. I wouldn't try this on the road. Mind, it's mostly because I can see with only one eye;) It's a shame it's been since my birth, otherwise my brain wouldn't have wired to accommondate this and I'd be half-asleep all the time. -- Err, on a second thought this might explain why I nod off at every single lecture:-)"
I wonder if that was my problem in the 9th grade... sleepwalking to school:)
I know the physiology. But the *effect* seems to be that part of the brain feels free to shut down for a while, simulating a nap. When it works (which isn't 100%) the result is quite definite.
An AC relates a tale of walking with one's eyes shut:
"Funny, I do something similar when walking and very tired (and wearing sunglasses too, btw). I aim a straight line with no people or obstacles and close *both* eyes for some 10-15 seconds, then open up to correct track and re-scan the surroundings. It's amazingly relaxing, but works best where there the ground is all flat and there's not much people around."
I did this all the time when walking to school as a kid. I got to where I could go the most part of a city block (on the sidewalk or in the alley) on a single "snapshot" (I never once ran into anything, either). It is indeed relaxing, and hones your "location sense" as well.
I still do it sometimes while walking down my own rather long driveway (300 feet to the gate).
Per TFA, it sounds kindof like it induces the "walking sleep" stage that WW1 and WW2 footsoldiers would experience on long marches.
Maybe a bit related -- I can sometimes tell that I'm brainwise "asleep" -- something in my brain has switched off for the night (usually meaning about 8pm), even tho I walk and talk and seem perfectly functional.
Outside my area of interest, but would appear to show that pleasure is largely related to self-control and anticipation, rather than just barging right on through. Probably a good general philosophy at that.
Remember, if you smoke after sex, you're doing it too fast.:)
My normal sleep cycle is a little over 2.5 hours long. Two cycles runs about 5:15.
I've found that I can scrape by (for months or even years) on two sleep cycles per day, but then I've *got* to have that half-hour afternoon nap.
If I only get a single sleep cycle, then I've *got* to make it up, and don't sleep as well (ie. don't get as much out of it) until that's done.
I really need 3 sleep cycles (almost 8 hours) to be at my best, and better yet, timed so I can rise at the butt-crack of dawn. Actually SEEING the sun come up makes a big difference in how I feel for the day.
[pro dog breeder hat] Same with puppies. When they're growing fast, it happens "overnight", and they also sleep a lot more when they're in a rapid growth phase. My understanding is that deep sleep is *necessary* to proper growth and body-repair (and growth is kindof "repair in advance") so it makes sense.
I've noticed that grasshoppers and spiders exhibit "sleep" -- not only inactive, but insensible to their surroundings.
Ordinarly it's tough to sneak up on a grasshopper, but if it's "asleep" you can literally just bend over and pick it up, and it may not even try to get away. Spiders do more of a startle reaction if you catch them "asleep", contrasted to their normal just-move-away behaviour.
(Yes, I was one of those kids who always had a jarful of grasshoppers and/or spiders.:)
That was me. I'll close one eye for about half an hour, and the effect is as if I've taken a nap. It apparently works by shutting off input to half of the brain, letting that half relax.
It's more effective if I shut the right eye, albeit leading to terror in the passenger seat.:)
(I also take more-ordinary naps at home, which tend to hover at the edge of sleep. And I'm naturally a *very* light sleeper, and a sunrise person.)
Slashdot Mirror
It works the same way in Los Angeles. Child Welfare and Animal Control are both *required* to "investigate all complaints" even when the complaint (and the complainer) is KNOWN to be spurious, and Child Welfare will remove children solely on the basis of such complaints, regardless of the circumstances or any evidence that the children are well-cared-for. Animal Control has historically been a bit saner, but I expect that will change now that a PETA supporter heads the department.
The worst part is, anonymous complaints are not only allowed but encouraged, are regarded as solid evidence by the courts, and you have NO right to face your accuser in court. And you are regarded as guilty by default, with little or no chance of proving your innocence.
Speaking as a professional dog trainer, this sort of crap just fuels every sort of problem people can have with their pets, including the notion that it's okay to just confiscate dogs because you don't like their owners.
Plus he's supporting the "animal rights" loons by his willingness to be part of this outright theft. They're NOT about being good to animals; they're about depriving people of *human* rights. Hmm... they say dogs are equivalent to children, and it's okay to steal a dog if they don't like how it's kept. What if "activists" don't like how you raise your kids, should they be allowed to just take them??
I got along okay with Katz until he was a party to stealing that dog.
I wonder if the original owner knows where his dog is.
As to "Orson", my experience is that if the dog is the least little bit "off", people like Katz make the dog's behaviour vastly worse than it would be in the hands of someone who actually knows what they're doing. And THESE are the people "rescuing" dogs -- often dogs that are psychologically marginal in the first place (there *is* inherited psychosis in dogs).
One has to wonder how much of this is by DESIGN, to cause people to fear their pets and be more willing to give them up. After all, PETA and HSUS both have a stated goal of ELIMINATION OF PET OWNERSHIP.
I liked TRON too, but having worked with Jeff Bridges on 8 Million Ways to Die... lordy, talk about being unable to follow a script. (Well, when that film HAD a script.)
I had a similar thought, involving writers of bad checks.
Still, no matter the tech, high or low, new or ancient, there can always be found some lowlife using it for nefarious purposes. If one stopped research and progress from fear of misuse, we'd have not yet picked up one stone to hammer another with, lest Og use it to bash Gronk's head.
I suspect the "need two printers" issue, while presently real, will eventually go away, as it makes sense to combine the "temporary printer" with a traditional "permanent printer" for an all-in-one device. Same for an "unprinter" (eraser) as someone suggested for user-controllable fading.
The paper itself could be marked (perhaps by the printer). And perhaps eventually the process will be ink-only, so you just select which ink the printer uses -- temporary or permanent -- and use ordinary paper.
It may become possible to "permanentize" it, too -- if the printed page hasn't already faded, run it thru a "fixer" so the ink *becomes* permanent. Again, this could be a function of the same printer.
(We're talking office megaprinters here, not consumer printers. Being multifunction already comes with the territory.)
The main difficulty I see is that paper paths will need to be VERY reliable and capable of self-correcting for damaged paper. As anyone who ever recycles paper by turning it over and running it back thru the printer soon learns, paper that's been thru the printer once already becomes a lot more likely to jam, even if it hasn't visibly rippled or curled.
The printer itself could mark the paper with a NON-fading indicator -- as simple as adding a number across the top, each time the page was run through the printer.
So after 5 uses you'd see a small
1 2 3 4 5
across the top of the page.
As you say, very simple and easy for anyone to figure out.
Alternatively, the paper might START with 10 numbers, and the printer zaps one each time the page is processed. This might be more practical for something like another poster suggested -- paper that can be "printed" and "unprinted" at the user's will, by running it thru an "unprinter" (to zap the ink with UV or whatever). Each time the paper is unprinted, the "times left" marker gets faded to the next number down.
On a similar note, check out this post:
2 4&cid=16969490
http://politics.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2081
I think it accurately reflects what's really going on here.
Knowledge is power. Denying knowledge to others keeps them dependent on you. And organised religion has, historically, been very largely about maintaining its own power.
Based on my observations over the past decade, I think you are entirely correct. Excellent post on how the Real World of FOSS presently works.
If more people would view FOSS from such a realworld perspective, methinks FOSS would go further, rather than being ants randomly attacking the elephant.
I've personally observed the behaviour you describe, whenever someone is accustomed to being the big fish in a little pond and feels that their dominance is threatened by Evil Outsiders. It applies equally to any relatively insular group, whether that be a culture (or some small portion thereof, as would seem the case here since there are some 600,000 people in the tribal group), a club, a BBS, whatever.
The other motivation is probably just golddigging. "You pay us enough money and we'll give you rights to our language." -- That's right up there with patents on mathematical principles.
If I were M$, I'd be rethinking whether market penetration for minor languages is worth the hassle, and whether being allowed to do business in Chile brings enough profit to cover the spate of similar legal action they will no doubt encounter in the future. Imagine if every minor language got into the act!!
And if I were a Mapuche, I'd be having similar thoughts about such "activists" (who in my observation, very seldom speak for the majority, and often have no power at all unless said majority are *kept* ignorant), and whether it's in my best interests to let someone else dictate whether I'm ALLOWED to use Windows in my native tongue.
Actually, that was my point: who the hell appointed them Heap Big Chief with authority to state for ALL Mapuche people what is or isn't allowed with their language, and whether they ought to be kept "in the dark" by way of not having a version of Windows they can comfortably use in their native tongue?
2 4&cid=16969490
I believe another poster nailed it squarely on the head, when they opined that it has nothing to do with who "owns" the language, and a great deal to do with keeping *control* by maintaining cultural isolation. Big fish in a little pond syndrome... plus a good chunk of golddigging on the side. http://politics.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2081
I've personally seen this at work with groups that feel culturally threatened -- they'd rather their culture died out entirely than have it "polluted" by influences they can't control.
If they're complaining that it wasn't done in a public manner -- why not invent their own words as needed, and suggest them to M$? Same with whatever else they don't like about the written version.
But that opens another can of worms: WHICH tribesmen have the authority to do so? just the elders, or the whole tribe? Fact is, that might have caused such a protracted fight that only a neutral 3rd party could solve it.
Regardless, I think another poster is right, that at root this is just golddigging -- since on the one hand they complain about being "under-represented" and on the other they complain about being represented at ALL. Make up our minds!!
One does suspect it'll be the last time M$ signs a "support all languages" contract with anyone...
OTOH, Microsoft could decide that offering Windows in such a minor language isn't worth the cost and effort, especially considering the trivially small customer base for that language, and simply decline to sell it at all.
See, this sort of thing works both ways...
Let that be a warning about closed-source hardware!
I've done that on a bike too... completely different from the "one-eyed nap". With both eyes shut (or both hands off the handlebars) there's a pressing a need to keep track of your motion, yet you're able to relax and absorb from other senses in a different way than when your eyes/hands are involved. It teaches you to be more generally aware of your balance and more sensitive to your total surroundings. Ever notice how you could soon tell if you're passing a telephone pole? you do become aware of subtle changes in air pressure around such obstacles.
We've all seen blind people who navigate the world almost as well as if they were fully sighted, doubtless by way of the same sort of sensory "exercise". Similarly, cats navigate in the dark primarily by sensing such air pressure gradients (not the objects themselves) against their whiskers. In fact often the only symptom when a cat goes blind is that it'll start carrying its whiskers cranked all the way forward ALL the time.
The one-eye-shut pseudo-nap wasn't trained; it was discovered by accident. It worked this way the very first time I did it. (I even remember where I was at the time.... on I-90 going from Billings to Bozeman MT.) I was rather surprised, as the "nap" effect was quite unexpected, and wasn't noticed til I opened the eye and had that "suddenly refreshed" feeling you get when you wake up from a good light nap.
The nearest previous anything was walking to Jr.High with BOTH eyes shut (like another poster, I could take a "snapshot" and walk blind for some distance -- most of a city block when I was in practice) but the effect is NOT the same. Both eyes shut is somewhat relaxing, but results in heightened awareness, not naptime.
An AC says,
;) It's a shame it's been since my birth, otherwise my brain wouldn't have wired to accommondate this and I'd be half-asleep all the time. -- Err, on a second thought this might explain why I nod off at every single lecture :-)"
:)
"Hm. I wouldn't try this on the road. Mind, it's mostly because I can see with only one eye
I wonder if that was my problem in the 9th grade... sleepwalking to school
I know the physiology. But the *effect* seems to be that part of the brain feels free to shut down for a while, simulating a nap. When it works (which isn't 100%) the result is quite definite.
An AC relates a tale of walking with one's eyes shut:
"Funny, I do something similar when walking and very tired (and wearing sunglasses too, btw). I aim a straight line with no people or obstacles and close *both* eyes for some 10-15 seconds, then open up to correct track and re-scan the surroundings. It's amazingly relaxing, but works best where there the ground is all flat and there's not much people around."
I did this all the time when walking to school as a kid. I got to where I could go the most part of a city block (on the sidewalk or in the alley) on a single "snapshot" (I never once ran into anything, either). It is indeed relaxing, and hones your "location sense" as well.
I still do it sometimes while walking down my own rather long driveway (300 feet to the gate).
Per TFA, it sounds kindof like it induces the "walking sleep" stage that WW1 and WW2 footsoldiers would experience on long marches.
Maybe a bit related -- I can sometimes tell that I'm brainwise "asleep" -- something in my brain has switched off for the night (usually meaning about 8pm), even tho I walk and talk and seem perfectly functional.
Nonsense. I only do it with my right eye. ;)
Outside my area of interest, but would appear to show that pleasure is largely related to self-control and anticipation, rather than just barging right on through. Probably a good general philosophy at that.
:)
Remember, if you smoke after sex, you're doing it too fast.
My normal sleep cycle is a little over 2.5 hours long. Two cycles runs about 5:15.
I've found that I can scrape by (for months or even years) on two sleep cycles per day, but then I've *got* to have that half-hour afternoon nap.
If I only get a single sleep cycle, then I've *got* to make it up, and don't sleep as well (ie. don't get as much out of it) until that's done.
I really need 3 sleep cycles (almost 8 hours) to be at my best, and better yet, timed so I can rise at the butt-crack of dawn. Actually SEEING the sun come up makes a big difference in how I feel for the day.
[pro dog breeder hat] Same with puppies. When they're growing fast, it happens "overnight", and they also sleep a lot more when they're in a rapid growth phase. My understanding is that deep sleep is *necessary* to proper growth and body-repair (and growth is kindof "repair in advance") so it makes sense.
I've noticed that grasshoppers and spiders exhibit "sleep" -- not only inactive, but insensible to their surroundings.
:)
Ordinarly it's tough to sneak up on a grasshopper, but if it's "asleep" you can literally just bend over and pick it up, and it may not even try to get away. Spiders do more of a startle reaction if you catch them "asleep", contrasted to their normal just-move-away behaviour.
(Yes, I was one of those kids who always had a jarful of grasshoppers and/or spiders.
That was me. I'll close one eye for about half an hour, and the effect is as if I've taken a nap. It apparently works by shutting off input to half of the brain, letting that half relax.
:)
It's more effective if I shut the right eye, albeit leading to terror in the passenger seat.
(I also take more-ordinary naps at home, which tend to hover at the edge of sleep. And I'm naturally a *very* light sleeper, and a sunrise person.)