That's one theory, but in practice, when you start small, they won't even pay attention to what you're serving up. And if it does well in the marketplace of ideas (and if you can get people to actually pay attention to your ideas and hopefully tell a few friends), then hopefully you can also find a way to increase what you can "afford".
Exactly my point. And these days, the market is more open than you'd think for new soapboxes, thanks to technology which frees us to publish to anyone in the world...if they care to come listen.
I think the real trick is to get people to actually want to hear what you are saying. If PSY's "Gangnam Style" can take the world by storm, it's not too farfetched to believe that a message people want to show their friends can do the same. If you have to get people to listen by delivering your message in an elevator lying beneath a pelvic thrusting "lewd dance" or while having a dance-off with a guy in a cheesy yellow suit, so be it.
Most people on soap-boxes have no idea how to sell their ideas, even if they're amazing ideas.
I agree on both the overuse of "Orwellian" and the appropriateness here. I think we can safely say Godwin's Law is pretty much invalidated at this point as well when discussing the federal government.
is anyone else as tired as I am of the government getting around the legislative branch by going through unaccountable agencies issuing "regulations" with the force of law? We have a constitution to prevent this nonsense.
The flaw in your reasoning here is that you are assuming two fallacies are true.
First, that people single-source their information. Even a given individual gets most of their news from the AP, for example, it doesn't mean they chose the AP. Perhaps they were linked most frequently to these articles. A method by which they probably are exposed to a great number of other information sources, but with the AP getting the most exposure for that individual.
Second, that the companies actually control the content that most people see. Facebook, for example, may be disturbingly Big Brotheresque in their policies, but their degree of censorship consists primarily of punishing breastfeeding mothers who post photos and deleting fan pages for Social Fixer, while allowing basically everything else but hardcore sex.
If you want more freedom of speech than the corporate providers are willing to provide, get your own server and promote it. Even in the days of Geocities, there were certain controls on your use of that space, and the alternative of running your own server has always been the primary way to ensure the freest of speech.
Well I agree, but the very idea of "unclassified" meaning "classified, but less so than CLASSIFIED" is an affront to the idea that somehow we are still a nation governed by We the People.
The released documents are not marked in such a manner. They are marked UNCLASSIFIED/FOUO. Typically, declassified documents display evidence of former classification. Admittedly, it seems contradictory that FOUO is also used, but unclassified is unclassified. Even if usage is restricted.
My office has been making the move to Windows 7 from XP where replacements are applied, with a spattering of Linux here and there (a couple minor-use print servers/file servers, my laptop and desktop, and one upcoming data entry station if they ever decide where to put it). One accidental Windows 8 point-of-sale system that my predecessor ordered by mistake, and everyone hates it, but the hassle of taking it down and getting the vendor to reinstall their software has put a Win7 reinstall on hold for that machine.
Sorry, but that must be total users. active users would be a very different measurement. I've got an account, and my wife has an account. We switched to Android, but I bet we're still being counted.
but only if we get benefit from it. I could have automated 90% of my job out of existence when I was working in managed technical services in California, but I didn't. A couple months of Python and almost all my responsibilities would have been out of sight, out of mind, and my user base would seldom see the problems they called me for. But I didn't. Why? I was paid by the billable hour, and even if I charged the fifteen-minute minimum to run a script manually once per call, my total income would slip to less than half what each of my sisters each made part-time at a smoothie shop, a pizza place, and a Starbucks.
Now I'm salaried, and I automate the hell out of our network's computers and their upkeep. But I'm well-aware that if I weren't in a one-man IT department, that could easily reduce the number of jobs available in our company. It might not get people fired, but it could certainly prevent new hiring when a job was vacated. Good for the company, but bad for those who need to make a living.
Commercial bootlegging and personal use copying are very different beasts. Unfortunately, in most countries, they are unreasonably treated as if they were identical. It would be nice to have some sort of way to prevent this from becoming a life-ruiner for personal-use downloaders, but the numbers will screw them every time.
Imagine a home user downloading all the episodes of the couple dozen shows they watch/have watched over the years on bittorrent (even though half of them are probably available on Netflix, but I digress). Due to the nature of the bittorrent system, now the 24 series at an average of 7 seasons of 26 episodes each (just to get ourselves a round figure here) will potentially give that home user enough episodes to be in the range of 4,368 counts all on their own. Add in a completely made-up number of 10 people having connected to download segments of each episode, and congratulations! You've got 43,680 counts of distribution of content against you as a defendant.
The physical, commercial bootleggers in the article are a different beast, but it's not far-fetched to imagine this agency growing and taking on home users simply out of a need to justify their existence. Particularly if they prove effective at putting the commercial guys out of business.
I'm waiting to see the trademark complaint from AMD when someone tries to use Thunderbird wine on an Intel processor, proving that AMD continues to protect its place as the leader in budget processors.
The thing about the Socratic method is that it requires instructors to be able to understand and shape the way a class is going to move if there is a specific topic's learning to be achieved. This requires the instructor to have resources, an expansive knowledge to prevent endless lack of answers, and a body of students who actually wish to get something out of the class. Not an easy recipe in many schools.
The key is, there's no reason to watch the video. Go to class and learn from the questions asked. What would be even more valuable is, instead of cramming 1 hour of lecture into each hour of class, take the first ten or fifteen minutes going over basics, and have the students discuss/ask/analyse what they have just been taught. Provide supplemental material for those who want to know more.
The most fatal flaw in most homework is that it assumes the student will understand the material sufficiently without someone to ask questions, and then expects them to turn it in for a grade following the push for completion without understanding.
One of my maths professors understood this, and would teach a subject, send us home with the homework, and start the next class day with the opportunity to ask questions about what was not understood. The actual homework was not due until two days later. Great method in comparison to what I have seen in most homework systems. I chose to take another maths class from him as a result of my positive experience in my first class with him.
It has a feel of "Germany 1930's, or Russia 1920's" as you put it because it's fundamentally no different. It's a government declaring an ideology or a people (Rather than a government or other clearly defined entity) to be an enemy against which they must be given absolute power to fight. And in the process, completely removing all methods of effective recourse against overreach.
I had a similar issue with a literature professor (freshman-level general requirement course, naturally taken in my final semester) who basically would spend 50% of our class-time bitching about how he didn't have enough time to properly teach the material required in the course. It's a good thing he wasn't tenured, he probably would have increased it to at least 90%
I could, but at that point, I may as well drive all the way to Philadelphia. And even if I did make that drive, then I'd still be stuck finding transportation to Canada to fly back to Dallas (or rather Monterey, where my car would be). And then another nine hours' drive back to Dallas.
That said, ever since 9/11, unless I'm on pretty severe time constraints, I've driven anywhere I was going to within CONUS. Both coasts, the rectangle states, the southwest, and through the South up to the northeast.
That works a bit better for those relatively near a border, but I doubt people in Oklahoma City and Denver are going to give up the convenience of flight. Down here in Dallas/Fort Worth, I've only flown two trips since 9/11. One of those trips, we missed our return flight due to the TSA lines being too long and understaffed. Both flights involved Love Field. I haven't been to DFW International since '94, and I was just passing through on a plane change that day.
Slashdot Mirror
That's one theory, but in practice, when you start small, they won't even pay attention to what you're serving up. And if it does well in the marketplace of ideas (and if you can get people to actually pay attention to your ideas and hopefully tell a few friends), then hopefully you can also find a way to increase what you can "afford".
Exactly my point. And these days, the market is more open than you'd think for new soapboxes, thanks to technology which frees us to publish to anyone in the world...if they care to come listen.
I think the real trick is to get people to actually want to hear what you are saying. If PSY's "Gangnam Style" can take the world by storm, it's not too farfetched to believe that a message people want to show their friends can do the same. If you have to get people to listen by delivering your message in an elevator lying beneath a pelvic thrusting "lewd dance" or while having a dance-off with a guy in a cheesy yellow suit, so be it.
Most people on soap-boxes have no idea how to sell their ideas, even if they're amazing ideas.
Wait, the market for news? That's not a market anymore. It's a genre.
I agree on both the overuse of "Orwellian" and the appropriateness here. I think we can safely say Godwin's Law is pretty much invalidated at this point as well when discussing the federal government.
is anyone else as tired as I am of the government getting around the legislative branch by going through unaccountable agencies issuing "regulations" with the force of law? We have a constitution to prevent this nonsense.
Separation of powers. Good stuff.
The flaw in your reasoning here is that you are assuming two fallacies are true.
First, that people single-source their information. Even a given individual gets most of their news from the AP, for example, it doesn't mean they chose the AP. Perhaps they were linked most frequently to these articles. A method by which they probably are exposed to a great number of other information sources, but with the AP getting the most exposure for that individual.
Second, that the companies actually control the content that most people see. Facebook, for example, may be disturbingly Big Brotheresque in their policies, but their degree of censorship consists primarily of punishing breastfeeding mothers who post photos and deleting fan pages for Social Fixer, while allowing basically everything else but hardcore sex.
If you want more freedom of speech than the corporate providers are willing to provide, get your own server and promote it. Even in the days of Geocities, there were certain controls on your use of that space, and the alternative of running your own server has always been the primary way to ensure the freest of speech.
I suspect it's because speed is no cure for stupidity.
Well I agree, but the very idea of "unclassified" meaning "classified, but less so than CLASSIFIED" is an affront to the idea that somehow we are still a nation governed by We the People.
The released documents are not marked in such a manner. They are marked UNCLASSIFIED/FOUO. Typically, declassified documents display evidence of former classification. Admittedly, it seems contradictory that FOUO is also used, but unclassified is unclassified. Even if usage is restricted.
My office has been making the move to Windows 7 from XP where replacements are applied, with a spattering of Linux here and there (a couple minor-use print servers/file servers, my laptop and desktop, and one upcoming data entry station if they ever decide where to put it). One accidental Windows 8 point-of-sale system that my predecessor ordered by mistake, and everyone hates it, but the hassle of taking it down and getting the vendor to reinstall their software has put a Win7 reinstall on hold for that machine.
Sorry, but that must be total users. active users would be a very different measurement. I've got an account, and my wife has an account. We switched to Android, but I bet we're still being counted.
but only if we get benefit from it. I could have automated 90% of my job out of existence when I was working in managed technical services in California, but I didn't. A couple months of Python and almost all my responsibilities would have been out of sight, out of mind, and my user base would seldom see the problems they called me for. But I didn't. Why? I was paid by the billable hour, and even if I charged the fifteen-minute minimum to run a script manually once per call, my total income would slip to less than half what each of my sisters each made part-time at a smoothie shop, a pizza place, and a Starbucks.
Now I'm salaried, and I automate the hell out of our network's computers and their upkeep. But I'm well-aware that if I weren't in a one-man IT department, that could easily reduce the number of jobs available in our company. It might not get people fired, but it could certainly prevent new hiring when a job was vacated. Good for the company, but bad for those who need to make a living.
Commercial bootlegging and personal use copying are very different beasts. Unfortunately, in most countries, they are unreasonably treated as if they were identical. It would be nice to have some sort of way to prevent this from becoming a life-ruiner for personal-use downloaders, but the numbers will screw them every time.
Imagine a home user downloading all the episodes of the couple dozen shows they watch/have watched over the years on bittorrent (even though half of them are probably available on Netflix, but I digress). Due to the nature of the bittorrent system, now the 24 series at an average of 7 seasons of 26 episodes each (just to get ourselves a round figure here) will potentially give that home user enough episodes to be in the range of 4,368 counts all on their own. Add in a completely made-up number of 10 people having connected to download segments of each episode, and congratulations! You've got 43,680 counts of distribution of content against you as a defendant.
The physical, commercial bootleggers in the article are a different beast, but it's not far-fetched to imagine this agency growing and taking on home users simply out of a need to justify their existence. Particularly if they prove effective at putting the commercial guys out of business.
I'm waiting to see the trademark complaint from AMD when someone tries to use Thunderbird wine on an Intel processor, proving that AMD continues to protect its place as the leader in budget processors.
I find it disturbing how many redacted gray boxes are found on something clearly marked "unclassified".
I didn't follow the trial. I also don't care.
The thing about the Socratic method is that it requires instructors to be able to understand and shape the way a class is going to move if there is a specific topic's learning to be achieved. This requires the instructor to have resources, an expansive knowledge to prevent endless lack of answers, and a body of students who actually wish to get something out of the class. Not an easy recipe in many schools.
The key is, there's no reason to watch the video. Go to class and learn from the questions asked. What would be even more valuable is, instead of cramming 1 hour of lecture into each hour of class, take the first ten or fifteen minutes going over basics, and have the students discuss/ask/analyse what they have just been taught. Provide supplemental material for those who want to know more.
The most fatal flaw in most homework is that it assumes the student will understand the material sufficiently without someone to ask questions, and then expects them to turn it in for a grade following the push for completion without understanding.
One of my maths professors understood this, and would teach a subject, send us home with the homework, and start the next class day with the opportunity to ask questions about what was not understood. The actual homework was not due until two days later. Great method in comparison to what I have seen in most homework systems. I chose to take another maths class from him as a result of my positive experience in my first class with him.
I think you're my new favourite troll.
It has a feel of "Germany 1930's, or Russia 1920's" as you put it because it's fundamentally no different. It's a government declaring an ideology or a people (Rather than a government or other clearly defined entity) to be an enemy against which they must be given absolute power to fight. And in the process, completely removing all methods of effective recourse against overreach.
It's also the beauty of a war on an undefined and vaguely-described enemy.
I had a similar issue with a literature professor (freshman-level general requirement course, naturally taken in my final semester) who basically would spend 50% of our class-time bitching about how he didn't have enough time to properly teach the material required in the course. It's a good thing he wasn't tenured, he probably would have increased it to at least 90%
I could, but at that point, I may as well drive all the way to Philadelphia. And even if I did make that drive, then I'd still be stuck finding transportation to Canada to fly back to Dallas (or rather Monterey, where my car would be). And then another nine hours' drive back to Dallas.
That said, ever since 9/11, unless I'm on pretty severe time constraints, I've driven anywhere I was going to within CONUS. Both coasts, the rectangle states, the southwest, and through the South up to the northeast.
I think we largely agree except on the terminology. Conceptually, we seem to be on the same page.
That works a bit better for those relatively near a border, but I doubt people in Oklahoma City and Denver are going to give up the convenience of flight. Down here in Dallas/Fort Worth, I've only flown two trips since 9/11. One of those trips, we missed our return flight due to the TSA lines being too long and understaffed. Both flights involved Love Field. I haven't been to DFW International since '94, and I was just passing through on a plane change that day.