"Yeah, that's just plain bad editing. I'm pretty sure the word they were looking for is trawled which is a homophone as it is pronounced the same as "troll." Having done a lot of fishing in my youth this is a common mistake and I actually thought that internet 'trolling' was called that because it's like fishing for a response in the open waters of the internet. I know that's not the case but it seems a more appropriate origin than some fantasy description of a grotesque creature."
You are aware that "trolling" and "trawling" are both methods of fishing, distinct from one another? The internet usage has it's roots in the 1st word.
Not exactly. They are using new engines; it would cost more to re-manufacture old engines up to spec, not to mention reconfiguring them with modern fuel systems, etc. I'm a big fan of re-using VW engines, but some things don't make sense.
Although perhaps I missed the point - if the engines really do come from West Virginia, they'll run fine with duct tape and JB Weld.
What I was trying to point out was that the original call was of an average citizen calling in someone with an "ak-47" walking down the street. Although a "proper" AK-47 is a machine gun (although, to be REALLY technical, it is an "assault rifle" or "automatic rifle" in the military sense), the colloquial definition includes semi-automatic variants of the AK-47 base design. In fact, outside of a minority of military and gun buffs, the populace AND the police would never know to make the distinction. And anyone with that level of discrimination wouldn't have called the police in the first place.
I would bet a reasonable sum of money that neither the caller, nor the 911 operator, nor the commander that organized the operation thought that someone was carrying a machine gun (as defined by the WA state code). The original caller wasn't thinking at all - they just wet their pants at the sight of a gun and called it an "AK-47" because that's what they hear on the news and in the movies. And the 911 operator and the police thought it was a run of the mill semi-auto AK-47 clone.
They overreacted. They were not justified in their actions. Just because we can theorize some way in which their actions were justified is the equivalent of the police arresting someone falsely and then digging up some unrelated charge to cover their asses.
"Then how do you explain shows like Entertainment Tonight and all of these magazines and Web sites devoted entirely to completely useless celebrity trivia? Y'know, the ability to obsess over the personal life of someone you have never met and will never personally know, merely because they can sing or act, should be recognized as a pathology. Voyeurism only seems to partly explain it"
But is it really voyeurism if no sex is involved? I mean, it's one thing to know that Lindsay Lohan is a slut, but bid deal.
Show me primetime video of her being bent over a car hood by her boi/gurl/whatever friend, THAT's voyeurism. (And quality TV, to boot.)
I think the best formulation would be "Humans tend to freely share information, unless it's private. And they tend to share other people's private information even more."
Wait, we still talk about linux here? I though the "Politics" category replaced it in 2000 and it never got resurrected.
"Since he did not specify what sort of information, and did not say "each and every possible form of information", I'm wondering what the use is of pointing this out."
Hmmm, let me re-read the OP.
any sort of information
[emphasis added]
Ok. From Websters:
* Main Entry: 1any
* Pronunciation: \e-n\
* Function: adjective
* Etymology: Middle English, from Old English ænig; akin to Old High German einag any, Old English n one -- more at one
* Date: before 12th century
1 : one or some indiscriminately of whatever kind: a : one or another taken at random b : every --used to indicate one selected without restriction 2 : one, some, or all indiscriminately of whatever quantity: a : one or more --used to indicate an undetermined number or amount b : all --used to indicate a maximum or whole c : a or some without reference to quantity or extent 3 a : unmeasured or unlimited in amount, number, or extent b : appreciably large or extended
And from the American Heritage Dictionary of Idioms:
"Each and every one": Also, every last one; every single one. Every individual in a group, as in Each and every student must register by tomorrow, or I've graded every last one of the exams, or Every single one of his answers was wrong. All of these phrases are generally used for emphasis. The first, although seemingly redundant, has replaced all and every, first recorded in 1502. The first variant dates from the late 1800s, and both it and the second are widely used. Also see every tom, dick, and harry. Every mother's son (late 1500s) and every man Jack (mid-1800s) are earlier versions that refer only to males.
So, it appears that the definition of "any" effectively includes the definition of "each and every."
As for your "actual" comment:
"Even private information is routinely shared. You're just careful about with whom it is shared, preferring to restrict it to people you trust or to people who have a legitimate need to know. If you read the GP's text and immediately thought only of "gee I sure wouldn't want my credit card numbers plastered all over the WWW" then you're taking a deliberately narrow interpretation of a much broader point."
What point would that be? I believe that his point was that DRM/whatever will fail because of the natural tendency of humans to spread information. I believe his point is valid, but for the fact that his formulation was overly broad. You seem to think his point was "humans tend to spread information freely, but for certain classes of information which are shared in a more regulated manner". Which is in accordance with my interpretation, and is simply a subset of my more general criticism of the formulation of his statement.
In summary, if you are going to make a practice of pedantry, at least be good at it. If this is the best you can do, stop trying.
"Currently we tend to think of any sort of information as something to be shared freely. It's what we as a species do. I think that tendency to swap data among ourselves is what led us to amass the information that makes up our present culture and technology. It's a pretty basic thing in human beings. "
Not exactly. Your statement most definitely doesn't apply to private information. Or else what would we talk about the other half of the time on Slashdot?
"Right, but in this instance the police acted appropriately... They were alerted to a potential threat, contained it, discovered it wasn't a threat at all and left. No charges were filed, and a suggestion was given that would result in a whole lot of police and Bungie staff not having their time wasted."
The problem is that Washington State allows open carry of firearms.
For those who are intellectually opposed to PDF's, the last are training documents from actual police departments telling officers that openly carrying a weapon is legal in the state. The type of weapon reported - an "ak47" is legal in the state. They had no probable cause to act.
The closest they could have come is the following:
"It is unlawful to carry, exhibit, display or draw any firearm in such a way as to manifest an intent to intimidate another. This does not apply to persons in their own home or place of business or to instances of self-defense or acting in furtherance of one's official duties. "
Except that's not what he was doing - he was walking down the street. If he was pointing it at people, sure - take him down.
A person's rights should not be curtailed because someone else is frightened.
Just last night I saw a long commercial with 3 women sitting around a couch watching a birth control commercial and having an in depth discussion about birth control options. Of course, my wife says that's total bullshit and no one she knows does that, but hey - it's on TV so it must be true. So inviting my friends and neighbors to come over to my house, have some snacks, and watch how Win7 handles disk caching so much better will increase sales eleventy gajillion percent.
"Child A is taught to be inquisitive about everything around him. As he encounters things in his daily life he figures out how they work, rather than accepting them as magical black boxes.
Child B sits in a classroom with 40 other students doing multiplication tables until he has them all memorized.
Who do you think is going to be a better engineer someday?
Obviously, Child A needs to learn his multiplication tables too."
So, how does Child A learn his multiplication tables? It's still rote learning - it's just happening one on one.
I don't have a problem with the theory of unschooling, but the practice. Theoretically, it shouldn't matter HOW kids get an education, as long as they gain a certain minimal level of knowledge to be whatever they want to be. So, how is that measured? Typically, you test for the knowledge. Oh, wait - everyone hates NCLB because of...testing to make sure there is some minimal level of knowledge.
There is a middle ground between "unschooling" and "teaching to the test". As for the "Who do you think is going to be a better engineer someday?" question, if I was forced to choose I'd really rather have an engineer that gets his math right than one who is original and creative but can't get the damned thing to work because he can't do the calculations correctly.
I'm reminded of the last episode of Project Runway (go ahead, laugh, but at least I have a wife to watch something with). One of the "designers" was full of ideas and plans that would have been beautiful. One problem - he couldn't sew. So no matter how stylish his designs WOULD have been, they wound up looking like total crap because the finishing was so poor.
Instead of farm animals, use PETA members. Vegetarian fed, good health (a bit stringy, though) and, lets face it, who's going to object to them putting their bodies where there mouths are?
"And when it comes to rocketry, sure, the shuttle is getting a little long in the tooth, but is there any other vehicle capable of either servising Hubble, or bringing anything down?"
That's the entire point - NASA knew that the shuttle would not last forever, yet did very little on the next generation of heavy lifters. If they had diverted more resources into LEO lifting from other programs, we may not have as many probes, but we'd be able to go up and repair Hubble, etc.
Lack of foresight IS a sin, especially when the clues are beating you over the head.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure the position of "peg boy" is wide open.
The comet's shape was revealed to be rectilinear, with an aspect ratio comprising the squares of the first 3 non-zero positive primes.
You are aware that "trolling" and "trawling" are both methods of fishing, distinct from one another? The internet usage has it's roots in the 1st word.
Not alive? And I was going to try to win "Best Dad Ever!" over the guy who built the canon.
Not exactly. They are using new engines; it would cost more to re-manufacture old engines up to spec, not to mention reconfiguring them with modern fuel systems, etc. I'm a big fan of re-using VW engines, but some things don't make sense.
Although perhaps I missed the point - if the engines really do come from West Virginia, they'll run fine with duct tape and JB Weld.
Of course there is - even a whore doesn't want to fuck everybody.
Oooh, I like it. But no.
What I was trying to point out was that the original call was of an average citizen calling in someone with an "ak-47" walking down the street. Although a "proper" AK-47 is a machine gun (although, to be REALLY technical, it is an "assault rifle" or "automatic rifle" in the military sense), the colloquial definition includes semi-automatic variants of the AK-47 base design. In fact, outside of a minority of military and gun buffs, the populace AND the police would never know to make the distinction. And anyone with that level of discrimination wouldn't have called the police in the first place.
I would bet a reasonable sum of money that neither the caller, nor the 911 operator, nor the commander that organized the operation thought that someone was carrying a machine gun (as defined by the WA state code). The original caller wasn't thinking at all - they just wet their pants at the sight of a gun and called it an "AK-47" because that's what they hear on the news and in the movies. And the 911 operator and the police thought it was a run of the mill semi-auto AK-47 clone.
They overreacted. They were not justified in their actions. Just because we can theorize some way in which their actions were justified is the equivalent of the police arresting someone falsely and then digging up some unrelated charge to cover their asses.
But is it really voyeurism if no sex is involved? I mean, it's one thing to know that Lindsay Lohan is a slut, but bid deal.
Show me primetime video of her being bent over a car hood by her boi/gurl/whatever friend, THAT's voyeurism. (And quality TV, to boot.)
I always use 20001. Pretty sure it covers the White House and Congress.
I think the best formulation would be "Humans tend to freely share information, unless it's private. And they tend to share other people's private information even more."
Wait, we still talk about linux here? I though the "Politics" category replaced it in 2000 and it never got resurrected.
Hmmm, let me re-read the OP.
[emphasis added]
Ok. From Websters:
Not exactly. Your statement most definitely doesn't apply to private information. Or else what would we talk about the other half of the time on Slashdot?
Not exactly.
The problem is that Washington State allows open carry of firearms.
http://opencarry.org/wa.html
AND, the police know it:
http://www.opencarry.org/pdf/FederalWay.pdf
http://www.opencarry.org/pdf/KingCountySheriffsBulletin.pdf
For those who are intellectually opposed to PDF's, the last are training documents from actual police departments telling officers that openly carrying a weapon is legal in the state. The type of weapon reported - an "ak47" is legal in the state. They had no probable cause to act.
The closest they could have come is the following:
Except that's not what he was doing - he was walking down the street. If he was pointing it at people, sure - take him down.
A person's rights should not be curtailed because someone else is frightened.
Oh - I thought you meant this:
http://www.webscription.net/p-328-pyramid-scheme.aspx
It's an insane fantasy with very little chance of ever actually occurring, so I think it more appropriate.
(Good read, though. and DRM FREE!)
Just last night I saw a long commercial with 3 women sitting around a couch watching a birth control commercial and having an in depth discussion about birth control options. Of course, my wife says that's total bullshit and no one she knows does that, but hey - it's on TV so it must be true. So inviting my friends and neighbors to come over to my house, have some snacks, and watch how Win7 handles disk caching so much better will increase sales eleventy gajillion percent.
So, how does Child A learn his multiplication tables? It's still rote learning - it's just happening one on one.
I don't have a problem with the theory of unschooling, but the practice. Theoretically, it shouldn't matter HOW kids get an education, as long as they gain a certain minimal level of knowledge to be whatever they want to be. So, how is that measured? Typically, you test for the knowledge. Oh, wait - everyone hates NCLB because of...testing to make sure there is some minimal level of knowledge.
There is a middle ground between "unschooling" and "teaching to the test". As for the "Who do you think is going to be a better engineer someday?" question, if I was forced to choose I'd really rather have an engineer that gets his math right than one who is original and creative but can't get the damned thing to work because he can't do the calculations correctly.
I'm reminded of the last episode of Project Runway (go ahead, laugh, but at least I have a wife to watch something with). One of the "designers" was full of ideas and plans that would have been beautiful. One problem - he couldn't sew. So no matter how stylish his designs WOULD have been, they wound up looking like total crap because the finishing was so poor.
Instead of farm animals, use PETA members. Vegetarian fed, good health (a bit stringy, though) and, lets face it, who's going to object to them putting their bodies where there mouths are?
You were lucky. Most of us got the random hardons in class. To misquote Eddie Murphy:
"Mr. R2.0, can you go to the blackboard and solve the problem?"
"No, I don't think so. I'll take the zero"
Did they measure blood flow? Because all that blood going to the penis has got to come from somewhere.
"The shuttles have taught us a great deal about what you need to be designing into a SHUTTLE rather than a single use rocket."
Absolutely correct. The main lesson? DON'T BUILD MORE SHUTTLES!
"How many bits does it take to kill a human? Bits of what is the real question?"
Stupidity: it only takes one small little bit to kill you.
"And when it comes to rocketry, sure, the shuttle is getting a little long in the tooth, but is there any other vehicle capable of either servising Hubble, or bringing anything down?"
That's the entire point - NASA knew that the shuttle would not last forever, yet did very little on the next generation of heavy lifters. If they had diverted more resources into LEO lifting from other programs, we may not have as many probes, but we'd be able to go up and repair Hubble, etc.
Lack of foresight IS a sin, especially when the clues are beating you over the head.
"So, either I cannot find the right sources, or we have another example of shoddy Slashdot journalism."
It can't be both?
Is there anything they can't do?
(And I know the "proper" company defined term is Lego blocks. Fuck you.)
As of the time of this posting, Gmail Mobile is working.