You mean like how the rich pay more in taxes than anyone else? (both in percentage of income and in total amount)
To be honest, rich people do pay more taxes than anyone else, but those bigger taxes represent a smaller portion of their overall income and overall wealth than for poorer individuals. I think that is what irks most of the people that complain about that point.
Allow me to oversimplify: Take "rich" person A that makes 100K and pays 50% of income taxes. That's 50K in taxes. Then take "poor" person B that makes 50K and pays only 25% income tax; B is taking home 37.5K. A pays half of her income in taxes and still takes home more money than B. Some people feel that is unjust towards B.
Do yourself a favour and install Firefox with the Fox Replace add-on. You can define a list of your pet peeve words (and it also has regular expression matching) so they are replaced by the words you want to see. Its not perfect and won't correct every dumb mistake and typo but it will do wonders to keep your blood pressure down.
I use it to auto-correct retards that write 'rediculous' instead of ridiculous and some others, but I also replace 'god' by 'superman' and 'christian/muslim' for pastafarian with hilarious results:)
Well, it worked for that pope dude whatshisface some time ago, and for a couple of Romans whose names we still use in our calendar so it clearly can be done, but it gets increasingly more difficult as population grows.
Great points. I'd only add that the bit about "letting an advertisement company keep the index of content" is a complete red herring. Nobody is "letting" Google do anything. They just did it and built a good commercial model around it. Who would fill the gap if "we" stopped "letting" Google keep this index? Not Yahoo or Bing or Wolfram-Alpha or whathave you, they are all commercial. And nobody in their right mind would want some government of any country overseeing it either
Thats actually quite a nifty idea. I know I would have loved to study certain subjects in some sort of open -air amphitheater or maybe even the school gardens. Things like math probably do need some more seclusion because external distractions would make it even harder to concentrate... or maybe not. It would be worth a try.
I think the single biggest issue with education these days is that everybody wants to come up with a one size fits all approach when with a little statistics and time we could probably develop a handful of different approaches that fit more different styles (without falling on the extreme of trying to give everyone personalized education).
The first time Firefox is started up, it should display several popular search engines in a random order, and then let the user select the one to use as a default.
It's very much like the approach that Microsoft has been forced to use in Europe, to allow the user to select the default web browser (rather than just defaulting to IE).
Seriously Ballmer, wtf? If you go aaaaall the way up to the search bar and type on the little triangle arrow thingie next to the Google search box you get a drop down menu with several other engines. There, I have magnanimously given you what evil Mozilla corporation had wrongly denied you all this years. No, don't thank me, its a comunity service.
I think you're spot-on. And so is Murdoch, kinda. At least the part about this being just a new medium in which to deliver his product. I think the way he would like to price it isn't viable in the long run but that's just me being cheap. I get free news from reputable newspapers for free in my mobile and on the papers' websites. I even get the actual dead-tree version for free with my groceries purchase so any subscription of more than a couple of dollars for something intangible and pretty much ephimeral by its very nautre won't appeal. I'm guessing a very large and increasing group of people will be on the same boat.
But in the end, light is still faster, given the tracking ability possible with future tech it is pretty realistic to take it down. Or even just simply ramping up the power of the laser to do the job much quicker.
That sounded a bit like whishful thinking to me. Missile: real, here, now.
Future tech: left as an excercise for the reader
No, I'm saying like many marketing parasites he's misusing language to exaggerate and mislead. "Stunning" has specific meanings that both he and you are misusing.
From your link:
2. Beautiful, pretty.
That woman is stunning! 3. Amazing
That was amazing but stunning.
Both GP and I are choosing meaning 2: "That movie is stunning!". You disagree, which is fine, but then you try to dismiss dissenting opinions with value judgments, which isn't.
and no amount of shouting down and arm waving is going to make either of us correct.
Give it a rest. You're bullshitting and you know it.
That rebuttal does not really contribute anything to the discussion. You of course are within your right to believe we are wrong (after all, I believe you are). But in turning around and going "not true!" you seem to be saying we are wrong because you dislike the point rather than because you believe it to be inaccurate.
Marketing talk is not just cheap, it can have negative value. Free speech can be compromised just as much by too much noise as too little signal.
OTHO I agree with your sig completely, for whatever little it seems to be worth:) Sorry for the slow reply rate, my internet access has been patchy.
I see the point you're trying to make, but the difference between censoring a mash up of Smurfs and StarWars on YouTube and blocking access to human rights organizations is like the difference between me saying your momma is fat versus raping her.
Agreed, but they didn't find out about that post-facto. It's been widely known for years, and they kinda are in the business of information. Its very simple, you comply with the law. It has never been and it will never be optional. What was optional was for them to go into China to begin with, and that is a choice they shouldn't have made. The conditions existed and were known.
What if the gene pool that YOU choose to eliminate might save mankind one day?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sickle-cell_disease
>Since the gene is incompletely recessive, carriers can produce a few sickled red blood cells, not enough to cause symptoms, but enough to give resistance to malaria.
Better yet, what if HE has that same gene-polluting desease? People that love the US vs THEM talk always assume they are safely and soundly part of the "US" camp. It was easy when it was whiteys vs blackies, but in almost any other realm of discrimination differences aren't as clear-cut and you can just as easly fall in the same lot as the 'unclean'. If more people understood that, there would be less bigots of any type.
It found me twice - once in an apartment I lived in 5 years ago, for only one year. It said I lived there 5 years. The other address is my current address, it's got my length of residence right, but has my house valued at $1M. It's worth about 12% of that. It lists my wife on the current entry, but not the old apartment, despite the fact that we were married when we lived in the apartment. My wife's data is very wrong as well, differing from my own info in areas that should be common - home value (still inflated, but not as much) & length of residence.
What you all seem to be failing to grasp here is that, it seems to be improving over time. There are several comments stating that "I was there but it wasn't like so and so". And now they have the current data. And the more other venues start coming online and putting their freely accessible data out there, the more accurate it will become over time. There is one aggregator that collects this info, another that collects that one, and in a couple of years or more people like these will superaggreate them and get the full picture. Particularly when Govt agencies are supposed to be making a lot of the info available online.
and it was truly stunning... you will definitely notice how fantastic it looks
It doesn't look "stunning" or "fantastic", that's just marketing drivel. It looks a little better.
What you are saying, basically, is that your opinion is more valid/correct than GP's. Which, in my opinion, is false. More so since you admit it does look better, if even a little. I too would use the words "stunning" to describe more current 3D animation in BD as compared to DVD. But its a question of taste and appreciation, and no amount of shouting down and arm waving is going to make either of us correct.
This doesn't actually mean the translation is any better: all it means is that the Chinese generated by Babelfish is more easily translated back to english, perhaps because it makes even less sense in Chinese. A translation function could be conceived which is a strict, reversible bijection, so that playing this translation game would give you your original English back, word-for-word. Doesn't guarantee that the intermediate Chinese step is in any way comprehensible.
I thought your post was really interesting so I tried it myself. The following is the Spanish translation, with the bits that are off or don't make sense in italics and the way I would translate it in bold. The bits in bold parenthesis are omissions from the original translation...
"...(el) Rápido ascenso de Google paraa los escalones superiores de la traducción es un recordatorio de lo que puede suceder cuando Google libera su potencia de cálculo bruta vigor acontra/sobre problemas complejos. La red de centros de datos que se construyó para búsquedas en la Web puede ser ahora, anclados al suelo juntosconjuntamente, (el) equipo más grande del mundo. Google está utilizando la máquina para empujar los límites de la tecnología de traducción.
Feeding it back it's own translation:
"... Google's rapid rise to the upper echelons of the translation is a reminder of what can happen when Google releases its brute force computing power to complex problems.'s Network data center that was built to search the web may be now, when lashed together, the world's largest computer. Google is using the machine to push the limits of translation technology
Feeding it mine (removing the italics text and adding the bold)
"... Google's rapid rise to the upper echelons of the translation is a reminder of what can happen when Google released its raw computing power against complex problems. The network of data centers that was built to search the web can now, together, (be)the world's largest computer. Google is using the machine to push the limits of translation technology.
Either is way better than what comes out of Babblefish by a mile
This has to be, hands down, the best debate I've read in/. this year, kudos. I am male, hetero and about to get married (to a female for those slow on the uptake) and I used to be vaguely anti-gay marriage but strangely — while I agree with your proposal that it would be much better to abolish state-sponsored marriage incentives — I think I feel much more inclined now to side with the proponents of the same-sex marriage rights.
As others mentioned, while homosexuals might have available to them the same benefits through alternate channels, it is so contrived and time-consuming that is really an unfair imposition on them and in fact a very clear form of discrimination to make them go through such a grinder to acquire the same benefits I will get for free just by signing a paper.
"If we outlaw gay marriage, then we'll end up outlawing hetero marriages, and then we'll end up outlawing marriage to Jesus, and then we'd have no priests!"
See, slippery slope arguments work both ways.
That's not a bad counter-argument, except that it would require the other party to actually engage the brain to evaluate it and people that use theirs normally respond to less extreme forms of discourse. FWIW, priests are not married to Jesus, they are married to the Church (it's female). It's nuns that marry Jesus.
Government banning violent video games in Venezuela?!?
At least in video games it's virtual violence.
I see they fooled you too. No, mate, you see... you can access the Internet on a Wii or a PS3. Have you noticed any of their other efforts to silence, censor and control the media? He just wants to tell people what to think so he can eternalize himself in power. And for that, he needs to de-ethernalize the people. Ignorance is bliss (for the rulers). Same as as the rest of the western world, really, except that he's not as subtle. At least here I have to strike three times.
Hope it isn't too far away, having my google apps account telling me what I need to restock in the fridge (or even the apartment) would be friggin awesome. Then when cookingwithgoogle.com starts up, just writing the recipe I want could give me a grocery list, instant win.
Some of these services annoy me because I don't want to be a creature of habit in everything I do. I personally want some variety from time to time and being able to predict individual whims is so far out in the future its not even scifi, its plain fantasy. Or maybe there is an overall pattern there, something that says routine for 4 weeks, then 75% chance of a random choice of ingredients from Wed to Fri and 95% on weekends. But if there is, I don't want to know about it and more importantly, I don't want somebody else to find out either.
Besides, no algorithm of recomendations I've seen so far, including Netflix, Google or Amazon can propose to me something new I would really like so far. All they do is cater to the fat section of the bell curve and I can perfectly find stuff inside on my own. For example, whenever I exhaust my reading (I do use the Goog's reader) and I see their "recommendations", its full of crap, pap and bland. Just because the have classified one site I read as 'humour' they throw in every low-brow knuckledragging lolcat and dailyfailing site they index. Or because I have a Slashdor RSS feed they throw in every cnet and Tech for Illiterates blogs (what does that say about/. I wonder...)
Er, but I digress. My point was... personally I wouldn't want it to nag me about running out of milk, or much less, pre-order for me. Some times I want soy. Or some times I just don't want anything but water. And above all, most of the time I hate the feeling of being told what to do:)
But yeah, I do see the appeal for some so I'm not saying its an evil invasion of privacy or anything, just that it wouldn't be for everybody (although I suspect they would still want to profile every one)
I wonder if there is a dystopian piece of fiction they won't try. They've done 1984, Clockwork Orange, I bet they are filling up the flamethrowers for the Farenheit 451 LARP. I would rule out Brave New World because it thinks a bit too much of the children, ah, and drugs are like, evil.
Actually, you type "fertilizer + bomb" in to google.
It still gives you 106,000 results, completely invalidating his original point about how weeding out farmers gives you a usefully small search set.
Any terrorist with half a brain is going to use euphemisms, switched words, code, etc. About all you're going to reliably turn up is a list of every school boy in America, every news agency that's ever posted a story on a bomber using fertilizer and a crackpot on a compound in Arkansas who's only a danger to himself anyway.
They don't even need to obfuscate the terms. If they are outside the States they can just plain look it up in the most overt terms possible. And also, possibly in Arabic/Urdu/Korean/AnythingButEnglish. I routinely search terms in at least two languages other than English in Google (top dog in search, I'm told...) and search quality is considerably lower, even accounting for a smaller universe.
And even if they are in the USA and searching in English, they can just do it from a Starbucks two towns away, or their public library in a large city/suburb. People that don't want to get caught usually are very good at hiding or else they do get caught.
More ridiculous terrorism scare tactics used for attention.
"If you want to search for non-farmers who are discussing fertilizer..." Let's find non-doctors charging Medicare. Corrupt cops. Meth distributors. Human traffickers. Murderers. People who built technology just to make money using other people's personal data, and try and frame it using terrorism scare tactics. Oh wait...
That is actually a pretty good suggestion, except that unless you are the press who's gonna have the resources to run stuff like this? or the interest in outing these people and the stamina to stand behind their work and resist the counterattacks? All while claiming to have a legitimate interest in snooping on vast swaths of people to find out...
Accountability is not something anybody in power seems interested in, or likely to allow random people like you and I to wield over them.
Slashdot Mirror
"Tax breaks for the rich"
You mean like how the rich pay more in taxes than anyone else? (both in percentage of income and in total amount)
To be honest, rich people do pay more taxes than anyone else, but those bigger taxes represent a smaller portion of their overall income and overall wealth than for poorer individuals. I think that is what irks most of the people that complain about that point.
Allow me to oversimplify: Take "rich" person A that makes 100K and pays 50% of income taxes. That's 50K in taxes. Then take "poor" person B that makes 50K and pays only 25% income tax; B is taking home 37.5K. A pays half of her income in taxes and still takes home more money than B. Some people feel that is unjust towards B.
Do yourself a favour and install Firefox with the Fox Replace add-on. You can define a list of your pet peeve words (and it also has regular expression matching) so they are replaced by the words you want to see. Its not perfect and won't correct every dumb mistake and typo but it will do wonders to keep your blood pressure down.
I use it to auto-correct retards that write 'rediculous' instead of ridiculous and some others, but I also replace 'god' by 'superman' and 'christian/muslim' for pastafarian with hilarious results :)
Seriously, give it a go
Well, it worked for that pope dude whatshisface some time ago, and for a couple of Romans whose names we still use in our calendar so it clearly can be done, but it gets increasingly more difficult as population grows.
hahahaha, you sir, owe me a coffe and a new keyboard :)
But I just can't be mad at you, that's the best comment I've read in a long time, kudos!
You don't have to suffer from envy, mate. Install the Ubiquity add-on, is nothing short of amazing.
Great points. I'd only add that the bit about "letting an advertisement company keep the index of content" is a complete red herring. Nobody is "letting" Google do anything. They just did it and built a good commercial model around it. Who would fill the gap if "we" stopped "letting" Google keep this index? Not Yahoo or Bing or Wolfram-Alpha or whathave you, they are all commercial. And nobody in their right mind would want some government of any country overseeing it either
Thats actually quite a nifty idea. I know I would have loved to study certain subjects in some sort of open -air amphitheater or maybe even the school gardens. Things like math probably do need some more seclusion because external distractions would make it even harder to concentrate... or maybe not. It would be worth a try.
I think the single biggest issue with education these days is that everybody wants to come up with a one size fits all approach when with a little statistics and time we could probably develop a handful of different approaches that fit more different styles (without falling on the extreme of trying to give everyone personalized education).
The first time Firefox is started up, it should display several popular search engines in a random order, and then let the user select the one to use as a default.
It's very much like the approach that Microsoft has been forced to use in Europe, to allow the user to select the default web browser (rather than just defaulting to IE).
Seriously Ballmer, wtf? If you go aaaaall the way up to the search bar and type on the little triangle arrow thingie next to the Google search box you get a drop down menu with several other engines. There, I have magnanimously given you what evil Mozilla corporation had wrongly denied you all this years. No, don't thank me, its a comunity service.
I think you're spot-on. And so is Murdoch, kinda. At least the part about this being just a new medium in which to deliver his product. I think the way he would like to price it isn't viable in the long run but that's just me being cheap. I get free news from reputable newspapers for free in my mobile and on the papers' websites. I even get the actual dead-tree version for free with my groceries purchase so any subscription of more than a couple of dollars for something intangible and pretty much ephimeral by its very nautre won't appeal. I'm guessing a very large and increasing group of people will be on the same boat.
But in the end, light is still faster, given the tracking ability possible with future tech it is pretty realistic to take it down. Or even just simply ramping up the power of the laser to do the job much quicker.
That sounded a bit like whishful thinking to me. Missile: real, here, now.
Future tech: left as an excercise for the reader
No, I'm saying like many marketing parasites he's misusing language to exaggerate and mislead. "Stunning" has specific meanings that both he and you are misusing.
From your link: 2. Beautiful, pretty. That woman is stunning!
3. Amazing That was amazing but stunning.
Both GP and I are choosing meaning 2: "That movie is stunning!". You disagree, which is fine, but then you try to dismiss dissenting opinions with value judgments, which isn't.
and no amount of shouting down and arm waving is going to make either of us correct.
Give it a rest. You're bullshitting and you know it.
That rebuttal does not really contribute anything to the discussion. You of course are within your right to believe we are wrong (after all, I believe you are). But in turning around and going "not true!" you seem to be saying we are wrong because you dislike the point rather than because you believe it to be inaccurate.
Marketing talk is not just cheap, it can have negative value. Free speech can be compromised just as much by too much noise as too little signal.
OTHO I agree with your sig completely, for whatever little it seems to be worth :)
Sorry for the slow reply rate, my internet access has been patchy.
I see the point you're trying to make, but the difference between censoring a mash up of Smurfs and StarWars on YouTube and blocking access to human rights organizations is like the difference between me saying your momma is fat versus raping her.
Agreed, but they didn't find out about that post-facto. It's been widely known for years, and they kinda are in the business of information. Its very simple, you comply with the law. It has never been and it will never be optional. What was optional was for them to go into China to begin with, and that is a choice they shouldn't have made. The conditions existed and were known.
What if the gene pool that YOU choose to eliminate might save mankind one day?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sickle-cell_disease >Since the gene is incompletely recessive, carriers can produce a few sickled red blood cells, not enough to cause symptoms, but enough to give resistance to malaria.
Better yet, what if HE has that same gene-polluting desease? People that love the US vs THEM talk always assume they are safely and soundly part of the "US" camp. It was easy when it was whiteys vs blackies, but in almost any other realm of discrimination differences aren't as clear-cut and you can just as easly fall in the same lot as the 'unclean'. If more people understood that, there would be less bigots of any type.
It found me twice - once in an apartment I lived in 5 years ago, for only one year. It said I lived there 5 years. The other address is my current address, it's got my length of residence right, but has my house valued at $1M. It's worth about 12% of that. It lists my wife on the current entry, but not the old apartment, despite the fact that we were married when we lived in the apartment. My wife's data is very wrong as well, differing from my own info in areas that should be common - home value (still inflated, but not as much) & length of residence.
What you all seem to be failing to grasp here is that, it seems to be improving over time. There are several comments stating that "I was there but it wasn't like so and so". And now they have the current data. And the more other venues start coming online and putting their freely accessible data out there, the more accurate it will become over time. There is one aggregator that collects this info, another that collects that one, and in a couple of years or more people like these will superaggreate them and get the full picture. Particularly when Govt agencies are supposed to be making a lot of the info available online.
and it was truly stunning ... you will definitely notice how fantastic it looks
It doesn't look "stunning" or "fantastic", that's just marketing drivel. It looks a little better.
What you are saying, basically, is that your opinion is more valid/correct than GP's. Which, in my opinion, is false. More so since you admit it does look better, if even a little. I too would use the words "stunning" to describe more current 3D animation in BD as compared to DVD. But its a question of taste and appreciation, and no amount of shouting down and arm waving is going to make either of us correct.
This doesn't actually mean the translation is any better: all it means is that the Chinese generated by Babelfish is more easily translated back to english, perhaps because it makes even less sense in Chinese. A translation function could be conceived which is a strict, reversible bijection, so that playing this translation game would give you your original English back, word-for-word. Doesn't guarantee that the intermediate Chinese step is in any way comprehensible.
I thought your post was really interesting so I tried it myself. The following is the Spanish translation, with the bits that are off or don't make sense in italics and the way I would translate it in bold. The bits in bold parenthesis are omissions from the original translation...
"...(el) Rápido ascenso de Google para a los escalones superiores de la traducción es un recordatorio de lo que puede suceder cuando Google libera su potencia de cálculo bruta vigor a contra/sobre problemas complejos. La red de centros de datos que se construyó para búsquedas en la Web puede ser ahora, anclados al suelo juntos conjuntamente, (el) equipo más grande del mundo. Google está utilizando la máquina para empujar los límites de la tecnología de traducción.
Feeding it back it's own translation:
"... Google's rapid rise to the upper echelons of the translation is a reminder of what can happen when Google releases its brute force computing power to complex problems.'s Network data center that was built to search the web may be now, when lashed together, the world's largest computer. Google is using the machine to push the limits of translation technology
Feeding it mine (removing the italics text and adding the bold)
"... Google's rapid rise to the upper echelons of the translation is a reminder of what can happen when Google released its raw computing power against complex problems. The network of data centers that was built to search the web can now, together, (be)the world's largest computer. Google is using the machine to push the limits of translation technology.
Either is way better than what comes out of Babblefish by a mile
This has to be, hands down, the best debate I've read in /. this year, kudos. I am male, hetero and about to get married (to a female for those slow on the uptake) and I used to be vaguely anti-gay marriage but strangely — while I agree with your proposal that it would be much better to abolish state-sponsored marriage incentives — I think I feel much more inclined now to side with the proponents of the same-sex marriage rights.
As others mentioned, while homosexuals might have available to them the same benefits through alternate channels, it is so contrived and time-consuming that is really an unfair imposition on them and in fact a very clear form of discrimination to make them go through such a grinder to acquire the same benefits I will get for free just by signing a paper.
Just use the SMBC line:
"If we outlaw gay marriage, then we'll end up outlawing hetero marriages, and then we'll end up outlawing marriage to Jesus, and then we'd have no priests!"
See, slippery slope arguments work both ways.
That's not a bad counter-argument, except that it would require the other party to actually engage the brain to evaluate it and people that use theirs normally respond to less extreme forms of discourse. FWIW, priests are not married to Jesus, they are married to the Church (it's female). It's nuns that marry Jesus.
Stop being such a grammer nazi.
I invoke Goodwin on you, sir!
Government banning violent video games in Venezuela?!? At least in video games it's virtual violence.
I see they fooled you too. No, mate, you see... you can access the Internet on a Wii or a PS3. Have you noticed any of their other efforts to silence, censor and control the media? He just wants to tell people what to think so he can eternalize himself in power. And for that, he needs to de-ethernalize the people. Ignorance is bliss (for the rulers). Same as as the rest of the western world, really, except that he's not as subtle. At least here I have to strike three times.
...so far
Hope it isn't too far away, having my google apps account telling me what I need to restock in the fridge (or even the apartment) would be friggin awesome. Then when cookingwithgoogle.com starts up, just writing the recipe I want could give me a grocery list, instant win.
Some of these services annoy me because I don't want to be a creature of habit in everything I do. I personally want some variety from time to time and being able to predict individual whims is so far out in the future its not even scifi, its plain fantasy. Or maybe there is an overall pattern there, something that says routine for 4 weeks, then 75% chance of a random choice of ingredients from Wed to Fri and 95% on weekends. But if there is, I don't want to know about it and more importantly, I don't want somebody else to find out either.
Besides, no algorithm of recomendations I've seen so far, including Netflix, Google or Amazon can propose to me something new I would really like so far. All they do is cater to the fat section of the bell curve and I can perfectly find stuff inside on my own. For example, whenever I exhaust my reading (I do use the Goog's reader) and I see their "recommendations", its full of crap, pap and bland. Just because the have classified one site I read as 'humour' they throw in every low-brow knuckledragging lolcat and dailyfailing site they index. Or because I have a Slashdor RSS feed they throw in every cnet and Tech for Illiterates blogs (what does that say about /. I wonder...)
Er, but I digress. My point was... personally I wouldn't want it to nag me about running out of milk, or much less, pre-order for me. Some times I want soy. Or some times I just don't want anything but water. And above all, most of the time I hate the feeling of being told what to do :)
But yeah, I do see the appeal for some so I'm not saying its an evil invasion of privacy or anything, just that it wouldn't be for everybody (although I suspect they would still want to profile every one)
I wonder if there is a dystopian piece of fiction they won't try. They've done 1984, Clockwork Orange, I bet they are filling up the flamethrowers for the Farenheit 451 LARP. I would rule out Brave New World because it thinks a bit too much of the children, ah, and drugs are like, evil.
the benefits don't weigh out, and I have no interest in access to the data, so i don't think it's fair for others to demand it from me.
With that I can wholeheartedly agree. Too bad we don't get a say and/or whatever we say doesn't really count for much lately.
Actually, you type "fertilizer + bomb" in to google.
It still gives you 106,000 results, completely invalidating his original point about how weeding out farmers gives you a usefully small search set.
Any terrorist with half a brain is going to use euphemisms, switched words, code, etc. About all you're going to reliably turn up is a list of every school boy in America, every news agency that's ever posted a story on a bomber using fertilizer and a crackpot on a compound in Arkansas who's only a danger to himself anyway.
They don't even need to obfuscate the terms. If they are outside the States they can just plain look it up in the most overt terms possible. And also, possibly in Arabic/Urdu/Korean/AnythingButEnglish. I routinely search terms in at least two languages other than English in Google (top dog in search, I'm told...) and search quality is considerably lower, even accounting for a smaller universe.
And even if they are in the USA and searching in English, they can just do it from a Starbucks two towns away, or their public library in a large city/suburb. People that don't want to get caught usually are very good at hiding or else they do get caught.
More ridiculous terrorism scare tactics used for attention.
"If you want to search for non-farmers who are discussing fertilizer..." Let's find non-doctors charging Medicare. Corrupt cops. Meth distributors. Human traffickers. Murderers. People who built technology just to make money using other people's personal data, and try and frame it using terrorism scare tactics. Oh wait...
That is actually a pretty good suggestion, except that unless you are the press who's gonna have the resources to run stuff like this? or the interest in outing these people and the stamina to stand behind their work and resist the counterattacks? All while claiming to have a legitimate interest in snooping on vast swaths of people to find out...
Accountability is not something anybody in power seems interested in, or likely to allow random people like you and I to wield over them.