The only way to do that is never use facebook at all
Bingo!
perhaps the solution I should adopt myself, but it's a bit too late.
Only for older information.
The problem I have been having is what other people in my network post about me. I have no control over that and no right to demand it be removed other than politely asking but most people dont listen
You've got no control over what people say about you period, beyond the ability perhaps to sue (which is one way to solve the problem, sue all your friends and pretty soon you have none).
to such requests because they dont understand why someone might care.
Some people just aren't as paranoid.
Apart from being tagged in numerous photos most of the events i go to are listed as having me invited regardless of the fact I never read the invites.
My wife and I have asked people generally not to tag photos of our infant son, and with only a couple of exceptions, they've been good about it.
Basically from a careful computer aided study of facebook you can find out for the average user:
A 3d model of their whole body with especially detailed facial features
From blurry facebook photos. Now I KNOW you're paranoid. Been watching too many episodes of CSI with it's infinite zoom cameras.
Their location a percentage of the time without variable certainty
That's true of any event you decide to sign up for, any club you regularly join, any church you go to, any gym, any restaurant etc. You don't need Facebook.
A fairly accurate weighted graph of most of their associates and friends (plus all the listed information about those people)
HAHAHAHA. I'm friends with everyone on Facebook. People I barely know. If you based your profile of me on Facebook, even with some detailed intelligence associated, you'd get a pretty inaccurate view of who I am.
A rough idea of their habits, personality and political leaning
I'm getting that from this post! Habits: Paranoia. Personality: None. Political Leaning: Slightly Left of Tin Foil Hat Brigade.
I am no privacy nut
Could've fooled me.
but this is more information than i want about me on the web.
What's so special about the web? Anyone that wants to use this against you can get this information from the local community.
Have you ever posted a resume? Are you in the phone book? Is your membership at any organisation you are part of publicly listed? Do your neighbours, friends, waiters, baristas, gym/dance/karate instructor know you by name?
I think people fail to understand how much can be extrapolated from a massive database of small details.
Extrapolation is always possible but the accuracy depends on quality of data, and for most purposes there are better sources than Facebook.
Now in that case it still seems fairly clear that the privacy concern should come first
Does it? Why are you posting on slashdot? You can't delete your posts once posted! I think once you post something you make it public. No take backs allowed. It's not a privacy concern. If I run out and tell everyone I eat worms, I don't get to destroy everyone else's memories if I decide I want to take it back. If I print an ad in the newspaper I can't ask for all copies of the paper destroyed if I change my mind.
It's only a privacy issue if you never intentionally made the information public in the first place. If you disclosed it to just one friend on Facebook and others can see it when that wasn't the status of the post in the first place, that's a problem. If Facebook made it reasonable to expect it was so that's a problem (I'm not talking about fools who jump on the net without understanding the difference between a public and private post. I'm talking about someone experience being duped). If you made no effort to make it private and you want to take it back, well tough luck.
There was one guy there that everyone (even other scientists from prestigious universities) talked about with awe. He could keep a thousand details in his head. He developed his software quickly, it worked, and was mathematically correct. However, it was difficult to use or re-use his code. It just didn't have the organization or modularity needed. It takes artistic talent (for want of a better term) as well as mathematical ability to develop good software.
If it wasn't modular it wasn't good software. It may have been an elegant and correct solution to the problem, but it was not good software.
An interesting proposition. Why doesn't he submit a suggestion for such a tool to be included with the Linux kernel or popular distro?
Because the response to this would be to make the Linux kernel (or any other product that does this) illegal. Perhaps classify possession as a terrorism crime. Perhaps classify the software as a munition.
Yes, the law says you can make and keep a backup copy of your DVD. But since the law also says that making or delivering a tool to do that is illegal, what are consumers expected to do?
This is exactly why I purchased my own copy of AnyDVD HD with a lifetime license (does not expire). Slysoft update's the ripping program at least once every two weeks, so you know many bugs are being worked out with ripping DVDs and BD disks.
I would highly suggest purchasing this program before it becomes illegal to do so. If not by Slysoft, by some other company.
Sounds like it already is illegal, in which case downloading updates just implicates you as a criminal whether or not the main program becomes unavailable.
Someone please stop this madness. The current laws are the epitome of turning the law against the people.
More robust media would actually mean that the media in question should come with it's own backup, in a burnable format so that a consumer could make a duplicate of the DVD/BlueRay/CD/etc *when* that physical media gets scratched or damaged in such a way as to make it non-playable on the intended media reader.
No it doesn't. A backup is available even after the original fails no matter how durable that original was. If I have my collection on MyRobustMedia, and my house burns down, my collection is gone.
46.18% of players were Pacifists: "The total number of their deaths varies a lot but their completion times are below average and their help requests are minimal indicating a certain amount of skill at playing the game.... the Pacifists are experts in terms of navigation and move rapidly through the virtual environment, but also respond badly to threats that are moveable or unexpected"
They might be below average but with 46.18% they'd have to be very close to the median;-)
That feature is already available in Texas. When the spelling checker pops up and offers the choices "Accept, Add To Dictionary, Ignore, Ignore Once", you shoot the computer.
Lumping violent repeat rapists in with people who pee in the woods when they think they're alone, and claiming that "it's for the children" is 100% completely and totally emotional^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HBAT SHIT INSANE, and therefor about as far from rational as you can get.
I'm Australian and I second the vote for the Kennedy Space Center. I went in 1998 as part of a coder's boot camp type arrangement after I joined a major consultancy as a graduate. We didn't get much time off. Everyone else in the team went to Epcot, Disney World, and NYC but I am so incredibly glad I took the opportunity to go. For my trouble I got to see a Saturn V rocket on it's side in stages (huge!) and a lunar lander module (tiny!). I don't know if they still have those displays or what it's like since the Sept 11 madness but I'll always remember my visit there fondly.
From what I see in people, the only reason why cat haters appear more frequent is because a cat is basically helpless against human (it can only run away...which further induces/strengthens some kind of sick joy in some people); it probably won't strike back, and definitely won't be a threat.
You're kidding right? My ex-girlfriend's cat use to respond to kindness by clawing when you least expected it. I don't doubt it had something to do with the way it's owner was treating it but the idea that a cat is helpless is nonsense. A small dog is much more helpless than a large cat.
I perceive cat-hatred as one of the things that show our true nature as a species.
It's in our nature to be violent. But we're also capable of kindness beyond anything any other animal ever did.
But it's much harder to be openly a dog hater. Some potential over-the-top ones learn quickly that it won't do them any good
Still don't see why though. There are passionate cat lovers too. I guess the one form of dog hatred I'm most familiar with is those that seek to use barking as a crutch to getting rid of a neighbour's dog.
I think it boils down to the fact that a well treated dog will usually be friendly but the same is not always true of a cat.
BTW, not sure how it is @your place, but here (central European country) cats outnumber the dogs.
If you want generic questions to ask all employers, consider questions like "Who are your competitors?" or "What specifically in my CV/resume interested you?"
Bad idea. Unless you've gone into the interview cold you should be able to tell them who their competitors are (especially for a larger company) and if you don't know what about your CV interested them based on the job description they gave you should run. (In my experience you only get to know what they really thought 6 months down the track IF you got the job).
In my personal experience, unless you're so in demand that you really don't need an interview anyway, the first person who mentions a monetary figure loses, and if it's the potential employee it's usually worse.
By that logic the only way to go forward is not never agree to a salary and never be paid. It is only the employee that loses out if they talk money first.
The reasons for this is rather simple. If you underbid, you lose out on cash, no employer on earth will offer you more than you asked for. If you overbid, especially if it's by too much, you risk alienating the employer and are likely to end up not getting what you want.
That's why you go through an employment agency. The employer has to make the offer. You have no control over what they'll pay. The employer does. So long as you stay realistic their job is to determine your worth and filter out jobs that are not going to meet your requirements. When they ask it doesn't come across as greedy since at most it'll mean a modest increase to their commission.
Salary questions are definitely important, but they're not the be all and end all of getting a job. I value a whole bunch of things above straight dollar figures(so long as the dollars are reasonable of course). Even more importantly, unless you're really strapped for time and don't need the job, negotiating them after they've made an offer will put you in a much stronger position.
An offer usually comes with a figure attached. You may push it up 5% relatively easily (provided that the company's rules allow). 10% is a bigger stretch. 20% will only happen if they're desperate to have you (which should sound alarm bells). In this economy you may not get even 5%. It's still not a good idea to talk money too early. However if the job isn't something you want to do even 10% shouldn't sway you unless YOU are desperate.
I don't know if that's a valid argument. Even after several thousand years, domesticated cats are no more useful now then they have ever been. They're hunters of domestic pests, no more. Dogs, on the other hand, have been bred for hunting, where they point, retrieve, and flush out game. They've been bred for herding, rounding up cattle and sheep on command. They've been bred for guard duty.
I'm going to requisition 1 cat and 5 dogs for the office. We could use one to deal with each function above. But if I must choose, I think I'll go with the herding dog. Sounds like a good way to keep sheeple in line.
There's no reason we can't have a Schrödinger's dog too.
Yes there is. Dogs don't instill intense hatred in a significant portion of the population the way cats do. I know very few people who are dog haters (a few that are scared of them, but people who specifically hate dogs are rare). In contrast I've had plenty of people tell me a good cat is a dead cat.
Kalev's questions came across as ignorant and belligerent, but Stroustrup answered all of them intelligently, thoroughly and patiently. It's good to know that there are men like Stroustrup still working hard on C++, even though I no longer do much work in it.
It's called being a professional. Rare these days, I know. Good to see though.
I claim to have invented fire. Do I now claim to have invented everything using fire - the internal combustion engine, fission, fusion, grilling, etc.? No.
According to patent law if you patent the processes for starting a fire, then the internal combustion engine and the rest of the derived inventions would violate your patent if they use those processes.
Patents are themselves a terrible invention and they do more to stifle innovation than help it along. Just imagine if patent law were around when the basics were being invented. You'd have to pay to use fire, the wheel, anything with a blade etc.
Basically, the invention here is the inclusion of information that lets third-party programs better understand what to do with the format. You can imagine, for example, if HTML included something like this. The del ('strikethrough') tag might be written:
Ahhh so Microsoft claims to have invented metadata.
Ahhh, now I see. Really dumbed down metadata that follows no obvious format. It's going to be harder for a developer to code for that than to just code for the feature. Really what you need is some sort of a formal metadata language, which the software interpretting the hint has to be able to interpret. Then the other tool that didn't implement the feature has to implement this metadata language. It's going to be less work to just implement the features.
Now, whether that's still new and nonobvious, I don't know
You could have provided the article in question you submitted along with your summary.
Otherwise, it just reads as bitter criticism.
Yeah much better to be accused of off topic bitter criticism, than just bitter criticism. I'd actually argue if I'd provided a specific article, it'd be grousing. I was speaking generally.
Actually, just the fact that Twitter is a centralized service makes it easier to block. If I were looking for a channel that was "unblockable," the first thing I would look at is P2P networking, followed by Usenet, followed by email.
At work they manage to block all of the above just fine.
Slashdot Mirror
The only way to do that is never use facebook at all
Bingo!
perhaps the solution I should adopt myself, but it's a bit too late.
Only for older information.
The problem I have been having is what other people in my network post about me. I have no control over that and no right to demand it be removed other than politely asking but most people dont listen
You've got no control over what people say about you period, beyond the ability perhaps to sue (which is one way to solve the problem, sue all your friends and pretty soon you have none).
to such requests because they dont understand why someone might care.
Some people just aren't as paranoid.
Apart from being tagged in numerous photos most of the events i go to are listed as having me invited regardless of the fact I never read the invites.
My wife and I have asked people generally not to tag photos of our infant son, and with only a couple of exceptions, they've been good about it.
Basically from a careful computer aided study of facebook you can find out for the average user:
A 3d model of their whole body with especially detailed facial features
From blurry facebook photos. Now I KNOW you're paranoid. Been watching too many episodes of CSI with it's infinite zoom cameras.
Their location a percentage of the time without variable certainty
That's true of any event you decide to sign up for, any club you regularly join, any church you go to, any gym, any restaurant etc. You don't need Facebook.
A fairly accurate weighted graph of most of their associates and friends (plus all the listed information about those people)
HAHAHAHA. I'm friends with everyone on Facebook. People I barely know. If you based your profile of me on Facebook, even with some detailed intelligence associated, you'd get a pretty inaccurate view of who I am.
A rough idea of their habits, personality and political leaning
I'm getting that from this post! Habits: Paranoia. Personality: None. Political Leaning: Slightly Left of Tin Foil Hat Brigade.
I am no privacy nut
Could've fooled me.
but this is more information than i want about me on the web.
What's so special about the web? Anyone that wants to use this against you can get this information from the local community.
Have you ever posted a resume? Are you in the phone book? Is your membership at any organisation you are part of publicly listed? Do your neighbours, friends, waiters, baristas, gym/dance/karate instructor know you by name?
I think people fail to understand how much can be extrapolated from a massive database of small details.
Extrapolation is always possible but the accuracy depends on quality of data, and for most purposes there are better sources than Facebook.
Now in that case it still seems fairly clear that the privacy concern should come first
Does it? Why are you posting on slashdot? You can't delete your posts once posted! I think once you post something you make it public. No take backs allowed. It's not a privacy concern. If I run out and tell everyone I eat worms, I don't get to destroy everyone else's memories if I decide I want to take it back. If I print an ad in the newspaper I can't ask for all copies of the paper destroyed if I change my mind.
It's only a privacy issue if you never intentionally made the information public in the first place. If you disclosed it to just one friend on Facebook and others can see it when that wasn't the status of the post in the first place, that's a problem. If Facebook made it reasonable to expect it was so that's a problem (I'm not talking about fools who jump on the net without understanding the difference between a public and private post. I'm talking about someone experience being duped). If you made no effort to make it private and you want to take it back, well tough luck.
There was one guy there that everyone (even other scientists from prestigious universities) talked about with awe. He could keep a thousand details in his head. He developed his software quickly, it worked, and was mathematically correct. However, it was difficult to use or re-use his code. It just didn't have the organization or modularity needed. It takes artistic talent (for want of a better term) as well as mathematical ability to develop good software.
If it wasn't modular it wasn't good software. It may have been an elegant and correct solution to the problem, but it was not good software.
This is open-washing.
Yes Several: Lies, FUD, Bullshit, Horseshit, Marketing
An interesting proposition. Why doesn't he submit a suggestion for such a tool to be included with the Linux kernel or popular distro?
Because the response to this would be to make the Linux kernel (or any other product that does this) illegal. Perhaps classify possession as a terrorism crime. Perhaps classify the software as a munition.
Yes, the law says you can make and keep a backup copy of your DVD. But since the law also says that making or delivering a tool to do that is illegal, what are consumers expected to do?
Wittle their own from Licoln Logs.
If we wanted the laws to be followed to the letter, we would have coded up an Judge system in Lisp by now
It appears we coded them in brainF#$k instead.
This is exactly why I purchased my own copy of AnyDVD HD with a lifetime license (does not expire). Slysoft update's the ripping program at least once every two weeks, so you know many bugs are being worked out with ripping DVDs and BD disks.
I would highly suggest purchasing this program before it becomes illegal to do so. If not by Slysoft, by some other company.
Sounds like it already is illegal, in which case downloading updates just implicates you as a criminal whether or not the main program becomes unavailable.
Someone please stop this madness. The current laws are the epitome of turning the law against the people.
More robust media would actually mean that the media in question should come with it's own backup, in a burnable format so that a consumer could make a duplicate of the DVD/BlueRay/CD/etc *when* that physical media gets scratched or damaged in such a way as to make it non-playable on the intended media reader.
No it doesn't. A backup is available even after the original fails no matter how durable that original was. If I have my collection on MyRobustMedia, and my house burns down, my collection is gone.
46.18% of players were Pacifists: "The total number of their deaths varies a lot but their completion times are below average and their help requests are minimal indicating a certain amount of skill at playing the game. ... the Pacifists are experts in terms of navigation and move rapidly through the virtual environment, but also respond badly to threats that are moveable or unexpected"
They might be below average but with 46.18% they'd have to be very close to the median ;-)
Finally spellcheck will quit flagging "Y'all"
That feature is already available in Texas. When the spelling checker pops up and offers the choices "Accept, Add To Dictionary, Ignore, Ignore Once", you shoot the computer.
Lumping violent repeat rapists in with people who pee in the woods when they think they're alone, and claiming that "it's for the children" is 100% completely and totally emotional^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HBAT SHIT INSANE, and therefor about as far from rational as you can get.
Fixed it for you.
I'm Australian and I second the vote for the Kennedy Space Center. I went in 1998 as part of a coder's boot camp type arrangement after I joined a major consultancy as a graduate. We didn't get much time off. Everyone else in the team went to Epcot, Disney World, and NYC but I am so incredibly glad I took the opportunity to go. For my trouble I got to see a Saturn V rocket on it's side in stages (huge!) and a lunar lander module (tiny!). I don't know if they still have those displays or what it's like since the Sept 11 madness but I'll always remember my visit there fondly.
From what I see in people, the only reason why cat haters appear more frequent is because a cat is basically helpless against human (it can only run away...which further induces/strengthens some kind of sick joy in some people); it probably won't strike back, and definitely won't be a threat.
You're kidding right? My ex-girlfriend's cat use to respond to kindness by clawing when you least expected it. I don't doubt it had something to do with the way it's owner was treating it but the idea that a cat is helpless is nonsense. A small dog is much more helpless than a large cat.
I perceive cat-hatred as one of the things that show our true nature as a species.
It's in our nature to be violent. But we're also capable of kindness beyond anything any other animal ever did.
But it's much harder to be openly a dog hater. Some potential over-the-top ones learn quickly that it won't do them any good
Still don't see why though. There are passionate cat lovers too. I guess the one form of dog hatred I'm most familiar with is those that seek to use barking as a crutch to getting rid of a neighbour's dog.
I think it boils down to the fact that a well treated dog will usually be friendly but the same is not always true of a cat.
BTW, not sure how it is @your place, but here (central European country) cats outnumber the dogs.
Here dogs outnumber cats by almost double.
http://www.acac.org.au/pet_care.html
If you want generic questions to ask all employers, consider questions like "Who are your competitors?" or "What specifically in my CV/resume interested you?"
Bad idea. Unless you've gone into the interview cold you should be able to tell them who their competitors are (especially for a larger company) and if you don't know what about your CV interested them based on the job description they gave you should run. (In my experience you only get to know what they really thought 6 months down the track IF you got the job).
In my personal experience, unless you're so in demand that you really don't need an interview anyway, the first person who mentions a monetary figure loses, and if it's the potential employee it's usually worse.
By that logic the only way to go forward is not never agree to a salary and never be paid. It is only the employee that loses out if they talk money first.
The reasons for this is rather simple. If you underbid, you lose out on cash, no employer on earth will offer you more than you asked for. If you overbid, especially if it's by too much, you risk alienating the employer and are likely to end up not getting what you want.
That's why you go through an employment agency. The employer has to make the offer. You have no control over what they'll pay. The employer does. So long as you stay realistic their job is to determine your worth and filter out jobs that are not going to meet your requirements. When they ask it doesn't come across as greedy since at most it'll mean a modest increase to their commission.
Salary questions are definitely important, but they're not the be all and end all of getting a job. I value a whole bunch of things above straight dollar figures(so long as the dollars are reasonable of course). Even more importantly, unless you're really strapped for time and don't need the job, negotiating them after they've made an offer will put you in a much stronger position.
An offer usually comes with a figure attached. You may push it up 5% relatively easily (provided that the company's rules allow). 10% is a bigger stretch. 20% will only happen if they're desperate to have you (which should sound alarm bells). In this economy you may not get even 5%. It's still not a good idea to talk money too early. However if the job isn't something you want to do even 10% shouldn't sway you unless YOU are desperate.
I don't know if that's a valid argument. Even after several thousand years, domesticated cats are no more useful now then they have ever been. They're hunters of domestic pests, no more. Dogs, on the other hand, have been bred for hunting, where they point, retrieve, and flush out game. They've been bred for herding, rounding up cattle and sheep on command. They've been bred for guard duty.
I'm going to requisition 1 cat and 5 dogs for the office. We could use one to deal with each function above. But if I must choose, I think I'll go with the herding dog. Sounds like a good way to keep sheeple in line.
There's no reason we can't have a Schrödinger's dog too.
Yes there is. Dogs don't instill intense hatred in a significant portion of the population the way cats do. I know very few people who are dog haters (a few that are scared of them, but people who specifically hate dogs are rare). In contrast I've had plenty of people tell me a good cat is a dead cat.
Kalev's questions came across as ignorant and belligerent, but Stroustrup answered all of them intelligently, thoroughly and patiently. It's good to know that there are men like Stroustrup still working hard on C++, even though I no longer do much work in it.
It's called being a professional. Rare these days, I know. Good to see though.
I don't want my porn garbage collected thank you very much. Who died and made you king of deciding what's garbage.
I propose the name "STD detection neuron pathway". Now hand me that cream and leave me alone.
I claim to have invented fire. Do I now claim to have invented everything using fire - the internal combustion engine, fission, fusion, grilling, etc.? No.
According to patent law if you patent the processes for starting a fire, then the internal combustion engine and the rest of the derived inventions would violate your patent if they use those processes.
Patents are themselves a terrible invention and they do more to stifle innovation than help it along. Just imagine if patent law were around when the basics were being invented. You'd have to pay to use fire, the wheel, anything with a blade etc.
Basically, the invention here is the inclusion of information that lets third-party programs better understand what to do with the format. You can imagine, for example, if HTML included something like this. The del ('strikethrough') tag might be written:
Ahhh so Microsoft claims to have invented metadata.
Ahhh, now I see. Really dumbed down metadata that follows no obvious format. It's going to be harder for a developer to code for that than to just code for the feature. Really what you need is some sort of a formal metadata language, which the software interpretting the hint has to be able to interpret. Then the other tool that didn't implement the feature has to implement this metadata language. It's going to be less work to just implement the features.
Now, whether that's still new and nonobvious, I don't know
Really? You've never seen metadata in XML?
You could have provided the article in question you submitted along with your summary.
Otherwise, it just reads as bitter criticism.
Yeah much better to be accused of off topic bitter criticism, than just bitter criticism. I'd actually argue if I'd provided a specific article, it'd be grousing. I was speaking generally.
Actually, just the fact that Twitter is a centralized service makes it easier to block. If I were looking for a channel that was "unblockable," the first thing I would look at is P2P networking, followed by Usenet, followed by email.
At work they manage to block all of the above just fine.