I wonder why two people modded you as a troll? Is it because they don't believe you it's a commercial? Or is it because everyone knows this is a commercial and there is no need to mention it?
"The owner of the car can simply refuse and say that no-one is allowed to use the data, in which case it shouldn't affect the owner in any way."
I don't know about Sweden, but in the US -- When some data can not be used in a court of law, the data is used illegally anyway to great effect. For instance, when a prosecutor implies that there was a confession and when the judge orders the jury to disregard what they've heard because the confession was extracted illegally -- the jury never disregards this vital piece of information and almost always uses it in its final determination (and in some cases, it's even worst, because they don't actually get to hear the confession, they just know that there is one).
If it's the syntax you don't like. You can generate your own XSLT from your favorite language, or your can manipulate it using one of the numerous tools that are becoming available. Soon enough, everyone will be using XSLT and few of us will have to remember all of its clunky syntax.
I've never even seen a Walmart, let alone shopped in one. Walmart will never be able to kill off Netflix because Walmart will never cover the large metropolitan areas. Walmart will never be able to kill of Netflix because Walmart will never allow that much porn.
The more intelligent you are, the most you were influenced by your environment. When there is a PR campaign, an advertisement blitz, or a political manipulation; we, the people who read/listen/watch the most -- are the ones that are also the most exposed.
It doesn't matter that we're better critical thinkers.
For every factual BS that we detect, there are hundreds and thousands of made-up facts that go by us undetected.
When I grew up in France, the idea, that a Nerd could be different from a Jock, was foreign to me. Most school kids I knew who did well in sports also did well in school. Now, because of the US influence, that stereotype is firmly implanted there as well.
The Tipping Point was indeed an insightful book. It would be great to apply the same kind of epidemiological analysis to the spread of television and the same kind of epidemiological analysis to the spread of "immoral" behaviors.
As common sense would suggest and as the article confirms, television made its way into the royal family long before it got to any of its citizens. Looking at it from this perspective, and assuming just for a minute, that television does indeed create corruption. Is it better to have the entire population stay innocent, while the royal family and the government (which has access to television and other things) become more and more corrupt?
Personally, as a former innocent person, I say no. I do not like to see my leaders corrupt. I can not stand to be the willing victim of my leaders, and I've welcomed my own personal entry into corruption.
When people don't have TVs, they share it. I remember seeing this repeatedly in many pictures one of my Professor of Anthropology brought back from Mainland China. By having 30 or 40 people watching each television, then the numbers might start to make sense.
The suicide bombers in Palestine may be uneducated, but the 911 hijackers were educated.
There is a great bit of difference between those two groups of people. The first group is desperate, uneducated, and behaving just like a wounded animal. And the other group is educated, altruistic, and behaving just like a cunning predator. In the case of the latter group, I believe it takes quite a bit of intellectual maturity to make a connection between political action and personal sacrifice.
And in the case of the first group, you can call them ignorant if you will (it shows your bias), but I don't think ignorance is the root of their problem. Considering most of those suicide bombers were refugees and most had previously lost everything just before their act; their homes, their families, and their self-respect -- I can certainly understand why they would want to blow themselves and everyone up.
It gets even more confusing. Try looking up "Protocols of Zion", a fictional account of a Jewish conspiracy. Apparently, the term was anti-semitic at some point, and then it was appropriated by Jewish people as a symbol of their oppression.
It would be like African-Americans starting an organization called "N_____ of America" just to constantly remind themselves and everyone else that they were once called the N word.
Chavez was elected by the overwhelming majority of Venezuelans. The fact that he has socialist tendencies, or that he was supporting a tyrannical dictator, shouldn't be held against him. The US supports tyrannical dictators and the replacement the US had in mind for Chavez was definitly going to be a tyrannical dictator.
If the US should attack whomever is "communist", then my original point stands. The "communist" non-puppet government of Brazil is also in danger of the US Empire.
In any case, I'm afraid you're missing some of the bigger picture. The reason Chavez was almost taken out was because he was also supporting Saddam Hussein. On April 5th,
Saddam Hussein withholds oil. April 8th, Venezuelan oil dockers go on strike [same article, third paragraph]. On April 11th, a coup is attempted and Clever George goes on National TV saying that "Chavez deserved it". Coincidence, I think not -- especially, if you believe the additional rumors of US-military involvement.
Try explaining this to your mother, your client, your technophobe, your boss, your college Professor, and your local government office. Some people can't even change the ink cartridge in their printer. It's not that they can't do it. It's more like they think they can't do it. Not only you need to convince those people, that the procedure you describe is as easy as it sounds, but depending on the power relationship you have with those people -- you also need to give them a sound reason why you're not using the same software that everyone else is using.
Now if you add in (special to Brazil's case) that the second baker is a member of a rival clan (USA)
You can say that again. If Venezuela falls, Brazil will be next. Our new US administration made this clear. Since OPEC fell, the United States of South America is the next biggest threat to US dominion.
As a Slashdot thread on a programming language progresses, the probability of someone claiming that "Lisp already does that" approaches unity.
The previous times the people who said LISP could do *everything* were arrogant fools. LISP can do everything, yes, but it could only do those things in a very annoying fashion.
In this case however, this guy took all the features that LISP had and he took all the annoyances that LISP had and he basicely copied the entire thing. He goes out of his way not to mention Lisp and yet he went to Carnegie-Mellon, a Lisp school. This guy is a copier and a liar.
If anyone gets excited about the benefits of his "invention", I'd recommend XSLT. XSLT is just like Lisp. XSLT can do everything Lisp can do. And unlike Lisp, everybody pretty much uses the same version of XSLT.
I wouldn't be surprised if DotNet could do this already in its underlying form. The translation of its syntactic languages would be much more manageable if it were in a tree form.
I was thinking the same thing. What's the difference between this and LISP or XSLT? I don't think this guy is an inventor of anything. A reinventor and possibly a brilliant marketer, yes. An inventor, I don't think so.
Another issue for us is that the max upload speed we're getting is 33K -- try e-mailing pix of the baby to parents on the left coast with THAT!! It takes *hours*.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder why two people modded you as a troll? Is it because they don't believe you it's a commercial? Or is it because everyone knows this is a commercial and there is no need to mention it?
I guess they own most of the land already, so my example didn't really work -- but you get the general idea of what I was trying to say.
I don't know about Sweden, but in the US -- When some data can not be used in a court of law, the data is used illegally anyway to great effect. For instance, when a prosecutor implies that there was a confession and when the judge orders the jury to disregard what they've heard because the confession was extracted illegally -- the jury never disregards this vital piece of information and almost always uses it in its final determination (and in some cases, it's even worst, because they don't actually get to hear the confession, they just know that there is one).
The arrogance of foreign legislators never ceases to amaze me.
I find it amusing that out of the 200+ companies that are lobbying the South Australian government, there isn't a single one that is Australian.
Now, let's not all sell our Transmetta stock at the same time...
If it's the syntax you don't like. You can generate your own XSLT from your favorite language, or your can manipulate it using one of the numerous tools that are becoming available. Soon enough, everyone will be using XSLT and few of us will have to remember all of its clunky syntax.
I've never even seen a Walmart, let alone shopped in one. Walmart will never be able to kill off Netflix because Walmart will never cover the large metropolitan areas. Walmart will never be able to kill of Netflix because Walmart will never allow that much porn.
It doesn't matter that we're better critical thinkers. For every factual BS that we detect, there are hundreds and thousands of made-up facts that go by us undetected.
When I grew up in France, the idea, that a Nerd could be different from a Jock, was foreign to me. Most school kids I knew who did well in sports also did well in school. Now, because of the US influence, that stereotype is firmly implanted there as well.
As common sense would suggest and as the article confirms, television made its way into the royal family long before it got to any of its citizens. Looking at it from this perspective, and assuming just for a minute, that television does indeed create corruption. Is it better to have the entire population stay innocent, while the royal family and the government (which has access to television and other things) become more and more corrupt?
Personally, as a former innocent person, I say no. I do not like to see my leaders corrupt. I can not stand to be the willing victim of my leaders, and I've welcomed my own personal entry into corruption.
When people don't have TVs, they share it. I remember seeing this repeatedly in many pictures one of my Professor of Anthropology brought back from Mainland China. By having 30 or 40 people watching each television, then the numbers might start to make sense.
It sounds like the guy was going to be accountable anyhow. 60 mph in a residential neighborhood is still extreme reckless driving.
May be those things still happened, but those things were not talked about and not reported before television.
There is a great bit of difference between those two groups of people. The first group is desperate, uneducated, and behaving just like a wounded animal. And the other group is educated, altruistic, and behaving just like a cunning predator. In the case of the latter group, I believe it takes quite a bit of intellectual maturity to make a connection between political action and personal sacrifice.
And in the case of the first group, you can call them ignorant if you will (it shows your bias), but I don't think ignorance is the root of their problem. Considering most of those suicide bombers were refugees and most had previously lost everything just before their act; their homes, their families, and their self-respect -- I can certainly understand why they would want to blow themselves and everyone up.
People are also egotistical. Most people find the idea that television can affect them insulting.
It would be like African-Americans starting an organization called "N_____ of America" just to constantly remind themselves and everyone else that they were once called the N word.
Some people are just idiots.
If the US should attack whomever is "communist", then my original point stands. The "communist" non-puppet government of Brazil is also in danger of the US Empire.
In any case, I'm afraid you're missing some of the bigger picture. The reason Chavez was almost taken out was because he was also supporting Saddam Hussein. On April 5th, Saddam Hussein withholds oil. April 8th, Venezuelan oil dockers go on strike [same article, third paragraph]. On April 11th, a coup is attempted and Clever George goes on National TV saying that "Chavez deserved it". Coincidence, I think not -- especially, if you believe the additional rumors of US-military involvement.
Try explaining this to your mother, your client, your technophobe, your boss, your college Professor, and your local government office. Some people can't even change the ink cartridge in their printer. It's not that they can't do it. It's more like they think they can't do it. Not only you need to convince those people, that the procedure you describe is as easy as it sounds, but depending on the power relationship you have with those people -- you also need to give them a sound reason why you're not using the same software that everyone else is using.
You can say that again. If Venezuela falls, Brazil will be next. Our new US administration made this clear. Since OPEC fell, the United States of South America is the next biggest threat to US dominion.
The previous times the people who said LISP could do *everything* were arrogant fools. LISP can do everything, yes, but it could only do those things in a very annoying fashion.
In this case however, this guy took all the features that LISP had and he took all the annoyances that LISP had and he basicely copied the entire thing. He goes out of his way not to mention Lisp and yet he went to Carnegie-Mellon, a Lisp school. This guy is a copier and a liar.
If anyone gets excited about the benefits of his "invention", I'd recommend XSLT. XSLT is just like Lisp. XSLT can do everything Lisp can do. And unlike Lisp, everybody pretty much uses the same version of XSLT.
I wouldn't be surprised if DotNet could do this already in its underlying form. The translation of its syntactic languages would be much more manageable if it were in a tree form.
I was thinking the same thing. What's the difference between this and LISP or XSLT? I don't think this guy is an inventor of anything. A reinventor and possibly a brilliant marketer, yes. An inventor, I don't think so.
Have you tried compressing the pictures?