That reasoning of "they're not really Democrats" opens the way for counterargument in the same vein -- "Bush wasn't fiscally conservative, thus he's not a real Republican, so the party can't be tarnished by his actions." I doubt anyone on/. would accept that line of reasoning for the Bush example, so why pursue it here?
Anyway, I thought it prudent to point out the complicity of both sides, especially in response to a parent post that was factually inaccurate.
I don't think they even need the "entire keyboard repeated in physical form" at all. I imagine typists would only need a thin strip that flips onto the home row to give an initial grounding to the iPad's key spacing. You could probably get away with just flip-on "nipples" for the F and J keys.
And it wasn't pretty Somebody points out that a tablet can only be a good primary computer if one's primary work is non-computer intensive, like an editor with a light workload; use-iPad-for-everything people get defensive about the technical rigor of their work, and computational significance of their needs; comments section gets shut down due to hurt feelings.
PR department playing telephone First person: "We have 1.2 billion transistors" Next person: "Wow, that's about 1 and a quarter billion transistors!" Next person: "Wait, 1 and quarter billion transistors? That's almost 1.5 billion!" Next person: "Holy shit, 1.5 billion transistors? That's nearly 2 billion!"
By GP's logic then I could make the argument that the particular kind of censorship in the US that is being critiqued in this thread is also a cultural phenomenon above all else, and that it should be best approached from that perspective of non-judgmental understanding of "US culture" despite anyone's objection that the "culture" is a result of brainwashing, and that the torrent of +5 Insightful morally indignant posts we see in this thread being directed at the US is in fact a manifestation of their ignorance of US culture.
There's probably a big difference between "building livable spaces" and "digging mine shafts". Drainage and moisture control will be a huge challenge. And you'll need active ventilation (can't just open a window and let the wind do it), the cost of which would offset your heating/cooling savings.
It is time to admit that the age of copyrights is over, and the longer we wait in developing a new method of monetizing creative works, the harder it will become.
I agree, but I have a rather bleak view of it. It seems to me that when confronted with competitors that have only production costs, the creative people will endeavor to make their money in the extremely short window of time before the counterfeiters can get into the market. I fear this would cause them to withhold their revolutionary ideas from the public, to release products with incremental improvement and an emphasis on mass appeal. We'd end up having shorter and shorter intervals of fads made to appeal to hundreds of millions over weeks and months. A few weeks after initial release, when counterfeiters are just catching up, the original creators would start the next fad. It would be like the fashion industry taking over games, music, movies, etc. And from the things we're seeing now, I think we're already heading in that direction.
Many Chinese people agree that government should restrict some hate speech.
..and you can find just as many supporters of that in the US, but if popular support doesn't legitimize it here then why should it in China? If we accept your premise that free speech falls under the rule of public sentiment, then this legitimizes these domain seizures even more, since it is the public votes the legislators who enact these ip protection laws.
This is at the DNS level, so if the DNS registers are US companies then it's conducted within US law. I'm pretty sure if the hosts for those sites are not located in the US, they're mostly likely still alive and accessible via their ip addresses. At worst, we can guess US is the same as China in the area of censoring ip infringement. As for overall difference between the two countries, Slashdot likes to talk about the fallacy of moral equivalence when defending something they like which the general public doesn't, so perhaps it's also a fallacy to make the same mistake here.
CoD is mainly a multiplayer game that requires authentication, you can pirate the single player experience but that's less than half of the game, and Skyrim is Skyrim, hyped for 3 years on top of the 3 years of Oblivion hype. Should Ubisoft either move into the multiplayer market, or put all their efforts into marketing its single most popular title like Bethesda? Not saying the rest of your post is wrong, but those examples aren't the best.
You mean "come spring 2016 or later." If you're applying to schools now or in the next year or so, picking up anything new isn't going to matter, it might even hurt your chances at the top schools. Not only do schools care about what you do but they also care about how long you stick with it -- they want motivated people who can slog through the tough times, rather than dilettantes who join in a popular season. Freshman year of high school is probably the last chance you have of boosting your extracurriculars in a meaningful way, unless you're really outstanding (state level recognition or higher).
Advice articles like these should be for parents with middle school aged students.
True, but how often does one install software from disc while away from home base? The drives are usually a $60 difference, and I find it more useful to have a 2nd battery in the optical bay instead, and get a $15 desktop burner in a $5 USB enclosure.
Firstly, you are conflating moral legitimacy in labor exploitation with legitimacy of having a competitive and distinct product in an open free market. Yes, Apple loses moral legitimacy when they source from exploitative suppliers. However, that is not in any way related to the sort of legitimacy under scrutiny when we speak of legitimacy in terms of foreign companies competing with domestic ones in the Chinese market. I'm happy to agree with you on the issue of Apple's moral failings, and I'm sure we'd rarely if ever butt heads in that arena, but I'm afraid you've either through will or ignorance used the multiple contexts of the word "legitimate" to segue into a wholly different topic.
Secondly, your pedant point is well taken and I share your annoyance at the imprecision of language especially in the media, but the semantic that is used is insignificant to the point that is being made. We may despair the unfortunate connotations of an anachronistic term, but consider: A rose by any other name would smell as sweet; and conversely, a parasite by any other name would be as odorous. We should hold parasitic content publishers to a standard of fairness, but so too should we hold pirates (or whatever we wish to call them) to a standard of fairness.
In any case, two wrongs don't make a right, and those who hound the US for its transgressions upon fairness and moral boundaries should also hound any other country which are exposed for doing the same or worse. I have a problem with those who embrace double standards, and who use the US as a yardstick for the rest of the world while at the same time use a morally/ethically pure archetype as a yardstick for the US. Either everyone is judged by the same standard and progress is made, or everyone points fingers at everyone else and nothing is done.
This is nothing like SOPA. The only similarity one can draw is that they're both using unethical methods to protect domestic businesses. However, the Chinese government is protecting their businesses from legitimate competition, whereas the US government is protecting their businesses from illegitimate competition (piracy).
You're right, of course. But consider that/. is also not "News for angry, poor, young people who can't think through the systemic consequences of mass loan default" at which point we must, if we are consistent with our own logic, conclude that neither of these stories belong here.
equivalence is irrelevant since it wasn't my point or GP's to begin with. The issue is what criteria govern what appears on this site -- GP offered right to free speech and peaceful protest, both of which were emphasized by TP demonstrators -- yet that did not impel slashdot to post TP related stories. The point is that GP's criteria are inadequate.
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't voxel a way of rendering rather than a way of representing? That is to say Minecraft world is represented by boxes or elemental chunks of in-game matter, but since those boxes are ostensibly still rendered using vertices, and their textures are still stuck on using coordinates based on those vertices, you can't really call it voxel-based in any way.
I think the phrase he was looking for was "totalitarian communist/socialist" and if you look at the films and rhetoric coming from a significant number of protesters, it is indeed that.
As an aside, I'd give a relevant nit-pick a +3, or +4 if it's really funny, but for a +5 you need to really add something to the discussion. The popularity contest in Slashdot moderation is really disappointing sometimes.
Firstly, it seems to me pecosdave made a well thought out post on what he saw as the pivotal link in the chain of corruption and how OWS has turned a blind eye to the effectiveness of concerted political action in favor of throwing a fit in public. Can you show where in his writing there is a logical equivalent to "I thenk that 2 + 2 = 5!" ?
Secondly, the AC reply linked to a blog concerning profits on financial transactions and the dubiousness of their utility, but how many OWS protesters make that their central issue of protest, or even one among their many issues of protest? If you go by their self-filmed youtube videos and occupywallst.org, none, which makes it a hollow argument in the context of what pecosdave has written.
Finally, I suspect you and those who have modded you up are inclined to dismiss those who have a different perspective as "stupid" and deserving of nothing more than insult. The tragedy to you and everyone who thinks like this is that it's often this sort of conceit that undoes a well-intentioned movement.
Yet Slashdot has never ran a story on the Tea Party. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan, but that very fact seems to counter the criterion you've offered for relevance on this website and its forums. Does this mean Slashdot has a double standard? does Slashdot practice self-censorship?
Slashdot Mirror
That reasoning of "they're not really Democrats" opens the way for counterargument in the same vein -- "Bush wasn't fiscally conservative, thus he's not a real Republican, so the party can't be tarnished by his actions." I doubt anyone on /. would accept that line of reasoning for the Bush example, so why pursue it here?
Anyway, I thought it prudent to point out the complicity of both sides, especially in response to a parent post that was factually inaccurate.
PROTECTIP was introduced by a Democrat
I don't think they even need the "entire keyboard repeated in physical form" at all. I imagine typists would only need a thin strip that flips onto the home row to give an initial grounding to the iPad's key spacing. You could probably get away with just flip-on "nipples" for the F and J keys.
And it wasn't pretty Somebody points out that a tablet can only be a good primary computer if one's primary work is non-computer intensive, like an editor with a light workload; use-iPad-for-everything people get defensive about the technical rigor of their work, and computational significance of their needs; comments section gets shut down due to hurt feelings.
PR department playing telephone
First person: "We have 1.2 billion transistors"
Next person: "Wow, that's about 1 and a quarter billion transistors!"
Next person: "Wait, 1 and quarter billion transistors? That's almost 1.5 billion!"
Next person: "Holy shit, 1.5 billion transistors? That's nearly 2 billion!"
I wouldn't call it a "barrier to entry" more like "shit deal nobody will want"
By GP's logic then I could make the argument that the particular kind of censorship in the US that is being critiqued in this thread is also a cultural phenomenon above all else, and that it should be best approached from that perspective of non-judgmental understanding of "US culture" despite anyone's objection that the "culture" is a result of brainwashing, and that the torrent of +5 Insightful morally indignant posts we see in this thread being directed at the US is in fact a manifestation of their ignorance of US culture.
Do we want to go down that path?
There's probably a big difference between "building livable spaces" and "digging mine shafts". Drainage and moisture control will be a huge challenge. And you'll need active ventilation (can't just open a window and let the wind do it), the cost of which would offset your heating/cooling savings.
I think if someone wants your sensitive information, they will bear the social stigma attached to wearing sunglasses indoors.
It is time to admit that the age of copyrights is over, and the longer we wait in developing a new method of monetizing creative works, the harder it will become.
I agree, but I have a rather bleak view of it. It seems to me that when confronted with competitors that have only production costs, the creative people will endeavor to make their money in the extremely short window of time before the counterfeiters can get into the market. I fear this would cause them to withhold their revolutionary ideas from the public, to release products with incremental improvement and an emphasis on mass appeal. We'd end up having shorter and shorter intervals of fads made to appeal to hundreds of millions over weeks and months. A few weeks after initial release, when counterfeiters are just catching up, the original creators would start the next fad. It would be like the fashion industry taking over games, music, movies, etc. And from the things we're seeing now, I think we're already heading in that direction.
Many Chinese people agree that government should restrict some hate speech.
..and you can find just as many supporters of that in the US, but if popular support doesn't legitimize it here then why should it in China? If we accept your premise that free speech falls under the rule of public sentiment, then this legitimizes these domain seizures even more, since it is the public votes the legislators who enact these ip protection laws.
This is at the DNS level, so if the DNS registers are US companies then it's conducted within US law. I'm pretty sure if the hosts for those sites are not located in the US, they're mostly likely still alive and accessible via their ip addresses. At worst, we can guess US is the same as China in the area of censoring ip infringement. As for overall difference between the two countries, Slashdot likes to talk about the fallacy of moral equivalence when defending something they like which the general public doesn't, so perhaps it's also a fallacy to make the same mistake here.
CoD is mainly a multiplayer game that requires authentication, you can pirate the single player experience but that's less than half of the game, and Skyrim is Skyrim, hyped for 3 years on top of the 3 years of Oblivion hype. Should Ubisoft either move into the multiplayer market, or put all their efforts into marketing its single most popular title like Bethesda? Not saying the rest of your post is wrong, but those examples aren't the best.
You mean "come spring 2016 or later." If you're applying to schools now or in the next year or so, picking up anything new isn't going to matter, it might even hurt your chances at the top schools. Not only do schools care about what you do but they also care about how long you stick with it -- they want motivated people who can slog through the tough times, rather than dilettantes who join in a popular season. Freshman year of high school is probably the last chance you have of boosting your extracurriculars in a meaningful way, unless you're really outstanding (state level recognition or higher).
Advice articles like these should be for parents with middle school aged students.
True, but how often does one install software from disc while away from home base? The drives are usually a $60 difference, and I find it more useful to have a 2nd battery in the optical bay instead, and get a $15 desktop burner in a $5 USB enclosure.
Firstly, you are conflating moral legitimacy in labor exploitation with legitimacy of having a competitive and distinct product in an open free market. Yes, Apple loses moral legitimacy when they source from exploitative suppliers. However, that is not in any way related to the sort of legitimacy under scrutiny when we speak of legitimacy in terms of foreign companies competing with domestic ones in the Chinese market. I'm happy to agree with you on the issue of Apple's moral failings, and I'm sure we'd rarely if ever butt heads in that arena, but I'm afraid you've either through will or ignorance used the multiple contexts of the word "legitimate" to segue into a wholly different topic.
Secondly, your pedant point is well taken and I share your annoyance at the imprecision of language especially in the media, but the semantic that is used is insignificant to the point that is being made. We may despair the unfortunate connotations of an anachronistic term, but consider: A rose by any other name would smell as sweet; and conversely, a parasite by any other name would be as odorous. We should hold parasitic content publishers to a standard of fairness, but so too should we hold pirates (or whatever we wish to call them) to a standard of fairness.
In any case, two wrongs don't make a right, and those who hound the US for its transgressions upon fairness and moral boundaries should also hound any other country which are exposed for doing the same or worse. I have a problem with those who embrace double standards, and who use the US as a yardstick for the rest of the world while at the same time use a morally/ethically pure archetype as a yardstick for the US. Either everyone is judged by the same standard and progress is made, or everyone points fingers at everyone else and nothing is done.
This is nothing like SOPA. The only similarity one can draw is that they're both using unethical methods to protect domestic businesses. However, the Chinese government is protecting their businesses from legitimate competition, whereas the US government is protecting their businesses from illegitimate competition (piracy).
You're right, of course. But consider that /. is also not "News for angry, poor, young people who can't think through the systemic consequences of mass loan default" at which point we must, if we are consistent with our own logic, conclude that neither of these stories belong here.
equivalence is irrelevant since it wasn't my point or GP's to begin with. The issue is what criteria govern what appears on this site -- GP offered right to free speech and peaceful protest, both of which were emphasized by TP demonstrators -- yet that did not impel slashdot to post TP related stories. The point is that GP's criteria are inadequate.
Oh boy. DOJ is part of the Executive branch. It reports to Obama and he exercises control in appointing its officers.
I just looked up wikipedia and it lists Minecraft as a voxel based game, so now I'm confused.
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't voxel a way of rendering rather than a way of representing? That is to say Minecraft world is represented by boxes or elemental chunks of in-game matter, but since those boxes are ostensibly still rendered using vertices, and their textures are still stuck on using coordinates based on those vertices, you can't really call it voxel-based in any way.
I think the phrase he was looking for was "totalitarian communist/socialist" and if you look at the films and rhetoric coming from a significant number of protesters, it is indeed that.
As an aside, I'd give a relevant nit-pick a +3, or +4 if it's really funny, but for a +5 you need to really add something to the discussion. The popularity contest in Slashdot moderation is really disappointing sometimes.
Firstly, it seems to me pecosdave made a well thought out post on what he saw as the pivotal link in the chain of corruption and how OWS has turned a blind eye to the effectiveness of concerted political action in favor of throwing a fit in public. Can you show where in his writing there is a logical equivalent to "I thenk that 2 + 2 = 5!" ?
Secondly, the AC reply linked to a blog concerning profits on financial transactions and the dubiousness of their utility, but how many OWS protesters make that their central issue of protest, or even one among their many issues of protest? If you go by their self-filmed youtube videos and occupywallst.org, none, which makes it a hollow argument in the context of what pecosdave has written.
Finally, I suspect you and those who have modded you up are inclined to dismiss those who have a different perspective as "stupid" and deserving of nothing more than insult. The tragedy to you and everyone who thinks like this is that it's often this sort of conceit that undoes a well-intentioned movement.
Yet Slashdot has never ran a story on the Tea Party. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan, but that very fact seems to counter the criterion you've offered for relevance on this website and its forums. Does this mean Slashdot has a double standard? does Slashdot practice self-censorship?