okay there've been a number of negative opinions about blogs expressed here that I just have to laugh at...
common complaint: "I'm not interested in anyone else." Then why do you read slashdot? it's much like a set of interactive blogs... and yes some blogs are indeed interactive... people link back and forth.
Also, though they are a public forum for a person's thoughts, they really aren't intended for a huge growth in traffic... they're a place to keep one's thoughts...
Sure some are for the purpose of artistic expression, but my view of art is that it is mainly for the individual who creates it. Yeah yeah yeah, they're public so others can view it, but most wont... who cares?
Identity is not such a simple concept that a person is the same in every situation.. we all play roles which are different for different people or places. For me, sometimes I have a hard time keeping track of who I am all the time; by having a blog, I can help myself create some continuity... after all, it's just a journal, but one that I can update from anywhere, as long as I'm near a computer with web access.
but as many people have suggested here, I've probably already bored you, because you're not interested in what other people say... so off I go to my own thoughts again...
First of all, I think it's good that the ACLU is involved
Second of all, I'm wondering why the ACLU gets such a bad rap here on./, a place that seems to stand by some of the same basic principles that the organization swears by.
It's interesting how people tend to not like an organiztion which is interested primarily in defending some of the basic tenets of the US constitution.
The ACLU gets involved in many many issues which you do not hear about. Many of these are not "sexy" issues, which make news. For instance,
they were recently involved with protecting the rights of Haitian refugess, basically preventing people from being deported into deplorable situations. Sure, many of you don't like the idea of immigrants, even though 99.9% of you (in the US) are descended from immigrants, but it is the basic principles of protection from tyranny of the majority that the ACLU defends.
This particular issue is of direct relevance to/. as they are going after legislation which most here (rightly) hate. However, they exist largely to protect the public from the "mob mentality" that often ignores the rights of many groups whose opinions are in the minority.
Witness their actions regarding the USA PATRIOT act; a ridiculous bill which basically removes many basic freedoms guaranteed in the constitution under the rubrick of protecting us from enemies. Sure there may be a point to trying to be better protected, but I'm of the view that if you remove freedom, there's very little left to protect.
Sure the ACLU ends up getting involved with issues that may end up pissing off some their own constituencies (e.g. Skokie) but it's the principles of freedom that they stand for, not just the rhetoric.
If you're going to bash the ACLU, then provide an alternative.
Though I agree with your basic principle that we are often better served by moderation and less by screaming, I still hold that without radical groups to push the boundaries, nothing changes.
defining those you with whom you disagree as "wackos" serves as little as the manic behavior which you so disdain; this level of argument is pure ad hominem; it's a logical fallacy, worthy of types such as Rush Limbaugh, but reduces the level of discussion.
Sometimes there is a need for someone to yell, just to be heard at all, especially if their views are completely being ignored; this is the true point of a democracy... though developed through basic utilitarian principles for the greater good, we must also fear the "tyranny of the majority." The nature of a two-party system ends up limiting the level of debate, and ignoring principles which, though they may be the best or most logical, are left out because they don't fit into the artificially defined policy-space.
In this case the two major parties are the content-providers, who wish to maintain their monopolistic control on profits, and on the other side we are left with the "free-market" advocates, who think that all should be left up to consumer demand and technological innovation. These are hardly the only legitimate positions that one can have, but if they are left alone to dictate the debate, that is all with which we are left.
Again, I tend to dislike shouting matches, but I would not ever wish to remove the possibility that fringe voices should be able to be heard at all...
I think it's good that mainstream places like Walmart are offering alternatives to the Microsoft juggernaut, however it's kind of like fighting evil with evil.
I generally try to avoid Walmart if possible; the way that they treat their employees is unforgivable. As they continue to drive out competition, they make it harder and harder for people with grievances to do anything. Witness their union-busting practices.
"The Copyright Act in Section 107 enumerates four "fair use factors" that must be analyzed to determine whether a particular use of a copyrighted work, such as a parody, is fair use. These factors are the (1) purpose and character of the use, including whether the use is commercially motivated or instead is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) nature of the copyrighted work; (3) amount and substantiality of the portion used in the newly created work in relation to the copyrighted work; and (4) effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. A court when evaluating a fair-use defense takes into consideration each of the four factors as no single factor by itself is sufficient to prove or disprove fair use. "
I agree with your point about most Flash sites, however there's a way around this.
We discovered this when working with a client that wanted a fully interactive Flash site, but also wanted to track how people were using it.
Impossible, you say?
I thought so at first, but we came up with a solution... it inolved the use of frames (yech, I hate em, but they were useful in this case). We broke up the site into individual html files loaded into a seamless bottom frame, with each one an independent flash file, which could do a number of things (this was a music/entertainment oriented site, so we had a bit of leeway). There were a number of advantages to this:
1. Tracking of pages 2. The ability to bookmark individual sections of the site 3. It kept the flash file sizes nice and small, making them easier to use on slower connections.
Yes, it's a weird way of using the tools, but sometimes this kind of challenge can be fun!
true, you have a good point. I haven't had to use it for such large projects (we use Sybase where I work), but what part of "free" don't you understand?
I find it amusing how people will bash stuff for which they paid nothing.
actually I'd like to add junk mail to the mix; I have to pay for garbage disposal, and it actually costs almost as much as server space to get rid of, not to mention the damage it does to the environment.
don't think it's a problem? just try joining your local chamber of commerce and see how much junk mail you'll receive every day! Even if you quit, it keeps coming in. My house is a mess.
I'm not convinced that it is working; one quick way is to stop blocking users in your own email client... see whether or not the stuff that gets filtered to the deleted items folder stays consistent.
Without constant vigilance, I've found that if I don't continually add email addresses to this list, the amount of crap I receive starts to rise again. The spammers have gotten more clever (I wouldn't say "smarter"... I don't know how they think anyone will buy their useless products).
My current frustration is that I don't want to completely block domains like yahoo or hotmail, simply because I have friends that use those addresses, yet these places are some of the worst violators. I'm stuck continually blocking individual emails.
"Roth's dream is to see e-mail advertising sent only to those who have specifically agreed in advance to receive it. "
Indeed this sounds like a noble and fair approach, but it's much more of an ideal-typical fantasy; one of the big problem of the so-called "opt-in" lists is that once you are on one, you can never get off; largely because the "companies" (read: spammers) that gather these addresses, sell them to others. This is why they do it in the first place.
I still suffer from mistakes of four years ago, wherein I foolishly opted into some technology-related mailing lists, hoping I might find some valuable information in this way. Though I long ago removed myself from the original source, my address lives on in the second, third and nth generations of sold addresses. I still receive upwards of 200+ spams a day.... it's at the point where I have often lost real messages because it's buried in a sea of UCE. I have filters set up which catch approximately 2/3 of the spam, but I still must filter through some 50+ pieces of crap twice a day just to see if I've received an email from an old friend.
I'm finding it's actually easier to filter the real mail into separate folders than to filter out the spam!
... many of the least usable websites I've come across were designed by developers/techies.
It's an unfortunate side-effect of the view of the general public as clueless idiots who keep looking for the "any" key on their keyboard... I've actually heard this argument: "if they can't find it on the site, they must be stupid."
This is an extremely counter-productive approach to web design, at least if the people you are trying to reach are the general public (sites aimed at technically adept people can adhere to slightly looser guidelines), especially for e-commerce purposes. As much as we like to whine about the clueless masses, they are what provide the traffic to keep many of us employed.
We like to pick on "marketing types," most of the time for very good reasons (e.g. "they don't understand the products they are trying to sell", etc.), but a good understanding of how people's process information is extremely useful and should not be ignored... sometimes it is these people who can help us. Remember, they are much like the audiences many sites are trying to reach.
On another point, greyscale sites can be very good, but remember that most people process information visually; this means that clever use of graphics to draw attention to certain parts of a site can be very useful. Many people quickly lose interest if they see no pictures. Again, this depends on who the "target audience" is.
Essentially, all I'm saying is that have to be careful not to let our arrogance be our achilles heel.
realistically, one doesn't need high-tech methods to bring down the infrastructure... just the other day, the simple method of severing a telephone line took out much of the entire Boston area's communication networks...
it's really difficult to browse through online books. Used bookstores still serve an important role... when I'm looking for something to read, I don't necessarily know WHAT I want; I make a habit of reading a page or two to see if it's something in which I'd be interested. Granted, the online method is great for finding books you can't find elsewhere if you know what specifically you are seeking.
Slashdot Mirror
common complaint: "I'm not interested in anyone else."
Then why do you read slashdot? it's much like a set of interactive blogs... and yes some blogs are indeed interactive... people link back and forth.
Also, though they are a public forum for a person's thoughts, they really aren't intended for a huge growth in traffic... they're a place to keep one's thoughts...
Sure some are for the purpose of artistic expression, but my view of art is that it is mainly for the individual who creates it. Yeah yeah yeah, they're public so others can view it, but most wont... who cares?
Identity is not such a simple concept that a person is the same in every situation.. we all play roles which are different for different people or places. For me, sometimes I have a hard time keeping track of who I am all the time; by having a blog, I can help myself create some continuity... after all, it's just a journal, but one that I can update from anywhere, as long as I'm near a computer with web access.
but as many people have suggested here, I've probably already bored you, because you're not interested in what other people say... so off I go to my own thoughts again...
Second of all, I'm wondering why the ACLU gets such a bad rap here on ./, a place that seems to stand by some of the same basic principles that the organization swears by.
It's interesting how people tend to not like an organiztion which is interested primarily in defending some of the basic tenets of the US constitution.
The ACLU gets involved in many many issues which you do not hear about. Many of these are not "sexy" issues, which make news. For instance, they were recently involved with protecting the rights of Haitian refugess, basically preventing people from being deported into deplorable situations. Sure, many of you don't like the idea of immigrants, even though 99.9% of you (in the US) are descended from immigrants, but it is the basic principles of protection from tyranny of the majority that the ACLU defends.
This particular issue is of direct relevance to /. as they are going after legislation which most here (rightly) hate. However, they exist largely to protect the public from the "mob mentality" that often ignores the rights of many groups whose opinions are in the minority.
Witness their actions regarding the USA PATRIOT act; a ridiculous bill which basically removes many basic freedoms guaranteed in the constitution under the rubrick of protecting us from enemies. Sure there may be a point to trying to be better protected, but I'm of the view that if you remove freedom, there's very little left to protect.
Sure the ACLU ends up getting involved with issues that may end up pissing off some their own constituencies (e.g. Skokie) but it's the principles of freedom that they stand for, not just the rhetoric.
If you're going to bash the ACLU, then provide an alternative.
"Okay, then give me some skittles, and a six-pack of beer."
Don't laugh. It wouldn't be the first time an auto company did this kind of cost-benefit analysis. Remember the Ford Pinto?
defining those you with whom you disagree as "wackos" serves as little as the manic behavior which you so disdain; this level of argument is pure ad hominem; it's a logical fallacy, worthy of types such as Rush Limbaugh, but reduces the level of discussion.
Sometimes there is a need for someone to yell, just to be heard at all, especially if their views are completely being ignored; this is the true point of a democracy... though developed through basic utilitarian principles for the greater good, we must also fear the "tyranny of the majority." The nature of a two-party system ends up limiting the level of debate, and ignoring principles which, though they may be the best or most logical, are left out because they don't fit into the artificially defined policy-space.
In this case the two major parties are the content-providers, who wish to maintain their monopolistic control on profits, and on the other side we are left with the "free-market" advocates, who think that all should be left up to consumer demand and technological innovation. These are hardly the only legitimate positions that one can have, but if they are left alone to dictate the debate, that is all with which we are left.
Again, I tend to dislike shouting matches, but I would not ever wish to remove the possibility that fringe voices should be able to be heard at all...
I generally try to avoid Walmart if possible; the way that they treat their employees is unforgivable. As they continue to drive out competition, they make it harder and harder for people with grievances to do anything. Witness their union-busting practices.
More detail below:
Publaw.com
there is already established precedent which protects satire and parody. How else could Weird Al have a career? he'd be sued into oblivion.
that depends.... is it an african pelican or a european pelican?
or am I just being clue-free and irony-deficient?
We discovered this when working with a client that wanted a fully interactive Flash site, but also wanted to track how people were using it.
Impossible, you say?
I thought so at first, but we came up with a solution... it inolved the use of frames (yech, I hate em, but they were useful in this case). We broke up the site into individual html files loaded into a seamless bottom frame, with each one an independent flash file, which could do a number of things (this was a music/entertainment oriented site, so we had a bit of leeway). There were a number of advantages to this:
1. Tracking of pages
2. The ability to bookmark individual sections of the site
3. It kept the flash file sizes nice and small, making them easier to use on slower connections.
Yes, it's a weird way of using the tools, but sometimes this kind of challenge can be fun!
puh-leeze.
You might want to read Chomsky.
I find it amusing how people will bash stuff for which they paid nothing.
um... can't you use another app for that, such as Perl or PHP?
don't think it's a problem? just try joining your local chamber of commerce and see how much junk mail you'll receive every day! Even if you quit, it keeps coming in. My house is a mess.
Without constant vigilance, I've found that if I don't continually add email addresses to this list, the amount of crap I receive starts to rise again. The spammers have gotten more clever (I wouldn't say "smarter"... I don't know how they think anyone will buy their useless products).
My current frustration is that I don't want to completely block domains like yahoo or hotmail, simply because I have friends that use those addresses, yet these places are some of the worst violators. I'm stuck continually blocking individual emails.
Indeed this sounds like a noble and fair approach, but it's much more of an ideal-typical fantasy; one of the big problem of the so-called "opt-in" lists is that once you are on one, you can never get off; largely because the "companies" (read: spammers) that gather these addresses, sell them to others. This is why they do it in the first place.
I still suffer from mistakes of four years ago, wherein I foolishly opted into some technology-related mailing lists, hoping I might find some valuable information in this way. Though I long ago removed myself from the original source, my address lives on in the second, third and nth generations of sold addresses. I still receive upwards of 200+ spams a day.... it's at the point where I have often lost real messages because it's buried in a sea of UCE. I have filters set up which catch approximately 2/3 of the spam, but I still must filter through some 50+ pieces of crap twice a day just to see if I've received an email from an old friend.
I'm finding it's actually easier to filter the real mail into separate folders than to filter out the spam!
not if they can't figure out how to spend it...
It's an unfortunate side-effect of the view of the general public as clueless idiots who keep looking for the "any" key on their keyboard... I've actually heard this argument: "if they can't find it on the site, they must be stupid."
This is an extremely counter-productive approach to web design, at least if the people you are trying to reach are the general public (sites aimed at technically adept people can adhere to slightly looser guidelines), especially for e-commerce purposes. As much as we like to whine about the clueless masses, they are what provide the traffic to keep many of us employed.
We like to pick on "marketing types," most of the time for very good reasons (e.g. "they don't understand the products they are trying to sell", etc.), but a good understanding of how people's process information is extremely useful and should not be ignored... sometimes it is these people who can help us. Remember, they are much like the audiences many sites are trying to reach.
On another point, greyscale sites can be very good, but remember that most people process information visually; this means that clever use of graphics to draw attention to certain parts of a site can be very useful. Many people quickly lose interest if they see no pictures. Again, this depends on who the "target audience" is.
Essentially, all I'm saying is that have to be careful not to let our arrogance be our achilles heel.
okay... for a second I thought I saw them... just my mind playing tricks. I see the Fords!
realistically, one doesn't need high-tech methods to bring down the infrastructure... just the other day, the simple method of severing a telephone line took out much of the entire Boston area's communication networks...
also do the providers auction off prescriptions or price per visit? will they require minimum bids?
okay, I must have stepped into a new dimension
plus, used bookstores smell good.
and they usually have a cat.