We have laws for counterfeiting. We should enforce those instead of thinking up new redundant laws.
Problem is, this won't be the last time we hear of DRM being applied places it has no business being applied. The whole concept of DRM is a joke, invented b/c lawmakers were unwilling or unable to draft legislation that properly dealt with online filesharing and piracy.
manager understand the technical nature of whats going on is certainly an asset.. but ultimately I don't know if it's a necessity.
Point is, managers manage people. You are there to code.. not them
Top level managers have to be both good at managing people AND have at least a basic understanding of the code (or whatever) that his department is doing. Cringley isn't saying all IT managers should be hardcore programmers, his point is they have to have some cursory knowledge of the work they are making decisions upon.
He's right.
I understand that many today believe that managerial skills are completely transferable to any industry/profession. The idea is false. Yes, all managers need to know how to manage people, but that is not all they need to do their job.
Managers, especially upper level get paid alot of money, the way they earn it is to be good at alot of different things (including people skills).
If you operate under the assumption that the only thing that matters for a manager is their people managing skills, you get incompetent managers who basically have to rely solely on their support staff to tell them what to do.
What you get is the CEO of a horse racing company hired to direct FEMA (see: Katrina)
I understand your point but since the program is for k-12 it puts it in a different context.
Here's how: books will never be replaced. they don't need power, they don't get viruses, all a person needs to use on is literacy, they last indefinitely, and they're fairly indestructable.
In k-12 ed. you can't assume the student will have internet access after school. The logistics of getting kids to do things online are more difficult by orders of magnitude (i was a teacher for 4 years). In uni. internet access is ubiquitous.
Lastly, I am happy to put my tax money towards k-12 education for books. Our society needs it. I'm 100% in favor of a wiki-like science text.
If this program can save some money, great. But it makes no sense to use this in place of a textbook...it is best viewed as a supplement.
1. TFA states that this is for K-12, NOT college...so all the 'screw the Univ. for making me pay $200 for a textbook comments' are misguided
2. I like this idea as well, but let's not forget that an open textbook than anyone can edit about SCIENCE is bound to attract hordes of Intelligent Design trolls...imagine it...every church in Virginian tells its members to go home Sunday afternoon and edit the wiki-text book about evolution...this is big, big trouble
3. I'd rather see this opened to a pool of teachers, professors, scientists, etc that have been vetted for their qualifications.
These guys aren't anywhere near making anything as complex as actual biological life. What they're doing is more like biological engineering than biology. TFA reports they are close to making a very simple self-replicating system...
it's important to note that this thing they haven't made yet wouldn't be able to self-replicate without 'help' from the researchers once they actually DO make it. Of course, down the road they would like to get something that could be autonomous, but even then it wouldn't be able to survive outside the lab.
From TFA:
The replication isn't wholly autonomous, so it's not quite artificial life yet
and
What we're looking at is the origin of life in one aspect, and the other aspect is life as a small nanomachine on a single cell level
So we're really far off from what you're speculating about...but, to address your concerns, alarmism about this research along the same lines as the people who are afraid that CERN will open a black hole that will swallow the earth (not saying you are alarmist...but some are).
Bottom line is, once they make a self-replicating artificial organism that can also exist outside the lab we should put it in the same level of quarantine that we give the nastiest of the nasty biochem. weapons or diseases we keep for research. It's not like we don't know how to safely work with dangerous substances/organisms.
The only thing the world was waiting for was the right marketing to make it a reality.
There fixed that for you.
I was an 'early adopter' for mp3 players (a little out of character for me...don't have HD or blue-ray;) I always saw it as a data storage and music file compression issue more than anything. I completely agree that the ipod was evolutionary. I'd just go a little further to say it was Apple's marketing and design (click wheel) that made the technology blow up. Also the timing of the introduction of the ipod was very favorable.
And let's not forget itunes. In the late 90s I got all my music from friend's CD's or from p2p networks. itunes was a digital music delivery system that the RIAA could at least tolerate, which allowed Apple to launch a national advertising campaign to the masses, which in turn made the ipod the first mp3 player alot of people ever saw.
From TFA:
filed a patent for a digital music player that stored just three and a half minutes of music to a solid state chip
As others have pointed out, the idea of storing digital music on a portable player isn't really novel. Anyone who understands 1's and 0's could imagine it, but this guy actually had the will to build a prototype and patent it.
From TFA:
Kramer is now in talks with the company to agree on a compensation package
because she is pro-life, pro-creationist, and anti-gay
If that were true, the GOP would have had McCain pick Kay Baily Hutchison, Mitt Romney, or Mike Huckabee. McCain himself wanted to pick Lieberman, but was pursuaded at the last minute to pick Palin by Rove, etc. There were several more qualified, longer serving Governors, Senators, and Congressmen that would have been more qualified than Palin.
Palin got picked b/c she would take orders and appeal to this fictitious demographic of disgruntled Hillary supporters that the MSM invented.
All Palin will do in the end is energize Democrats and level headed independents. Only Neo-Con stalwart Repub's will support McCain now. Sure there was a (significantly smaller than the Dem's) convention full of GOP'ers cheering their heads off for Palin. That happens at EVERY convention these days. Delegates are the most committed party workers. They would cheer for a cardboard cut-out of Ronald Reagan in a cowboy hat if the GOP nominated it.
Fact is, the MSM got nervous b/c they didn't want to be accused of being 'sexist' (btw, all of the sudden people have forgotten what that word means) by the GOP. But slowly and surely they will start demanding of Palin what they demanded of Obama, and Palin will come up severely wanting.
it seems like GOP trolls have taken over moderation in the thread my comment started. My post was definitely on topic, and definitely based on fact and personal insight. When it was originally posted, I was moderated up "insightful" then other moderators took me down to troll-0. The fact is, I talked about palin's policy positions relating to technology, which is on-topic and not trolling. I was strong in my language, yes, but my comments were based on fact.
Now, if you look at the responses to my parent comment, several pro-Palin (or anti-Obama) comments that have NOTHING to do with technology are modded up. Also, several comments supporting my parent comment are modded down. This is unacceptable, but not unexpected unfortunately.
I'm tempted to say what I think. I see GOP or Repug. trolls who are using their mod. points to suppress any comment they deem unflattering to their cause. It's not a two way street. On/. I've noticed that GOP and Neo-Con loyalist sheeple are willing to moderate ANYTHING they disagree with down, OTOH, the Ron Paul supporters, Independents, and Democrats are showing in their comments a wilingness to discuss the reality of the situation, based on the facts. Sure there are Ron Paul trolls, Indep. trolls, and Obama trolls...but never on/. have I seen one small group so willing to throw fair minded behavior aside in order to silence anyone that doesn't say exactly what they are comfortable with hearing.
I'm tempted to say that...but I know I'd get modded down again by GOP hyper-trolls. Go ahead. My karma can take it...can yours?
I feel like this whole discussion about Palin and her policies is a big cosmic joke.
Fact is, she's going to do what she is told to do. Her convention speech was given to her. When she eventually goes to the media to answer questions about policy, she will say exactly what her handlders tell her to say.
Now, before the Trolls roll in and say, "But all politicians adhere to party platform, talking points, etc" I'm going to address that preemptively. It's like this: Palin is on another level of political servanthood. She is blatantly unqualified to be VP (or governor for that matter), but b/c of how the Rovian wing of the GOP works, she was chosen to be held up as an advertisement for how the GOP wants to be seen. It's all for image. No substance. She does not have the clout to stand on her own two feet as a policymaker (no matter what the GOP talking heads say).
As far as technology, it's a no-brainer to support technology in schools. Everyone knows this. It's like saying "I support driver's licenses."
Bottom line, Palin is going to do exactly what the GOP tacticians want her to do, just like Bush II.
Full disclosure: I supported Ron Paul in the GOP primary and Sen. Obama in the Dem's primary, and I support Obama in the general election. An Obama v. Paul general election would have generated real policy discussions. The McCain/Palin ticket is insulting.
If net neutrality came up as an issue, she would be against it, b/c that's the standard GOP line. She owes everything to party bosses and their Rovian tactics. She has no clout as an individual policymaker to do anything else.
Sarah Palin is not a libertarian, just because she uses *some* libertarian rhetoric doesn't mean she is. She is a pro-business and screw everyone else neo-con.
She is not anywhere near qualified to make policy decisions on technology. She does not have the good judgment and will required to appoint advisors who will give her real quality advice and guidance. She's a prop for the GOP. She's an advertisement. The decision to select her as VP was purely for the most nihilistically political reasons and has nothing to do with her operational capability as a policymaker.
More on-topic, Palin is going to support the legislation she is told to support by her handlers. TFA is ridiculous to conjecture that b/c she supported some pipeline regulations that she will be in favor of net neutrality. For every instance of Palin supporting a logical policy, there are 10 examples of her doing the opposite.
The only way Palin would support net neutrality or any other policy that protects from unfair business practices is IF the GOP people tell her to.
The investors lose big and have to sell their 2nd and 3rd homes, yacht, and their "investment grade" artwork at a loss. They retire early, move to farm country and spend their days trying to convert their old Saab from college to run on vegetable oil, while being supportive as their kids are in substance abuse rehab/divorce proceedings.
Advertisers nihilistically resign to their 9-5 fate. They start cheating on their wives after football season is over for excitement and then develop Erectile Disfunction when they find out their wives are cheating on them (wives knew all along). Their daughters get tattoos on their wrists and experiment with rebellious lifestyles. Later will contemplate suicide when son becomes gay or daughter is seen by golf buddy in amature pr0n video. AFter retirement they live in Florida or Arizona and stress out about who has the best backyard landscaping (maybe a waterfall?).
heh...I never accused facebook.com of making money
you can call it trends research, etc. but it's all based on clicks through their little links on the left side. Yes they tailor those links to keywords in your page, but it's all about clicks, pure and simple.
As an aside, I just have to express how hilarious it is to watch advertisers invent new, effusive language to describe their function. "branding" "trends research" etc...it's all just sales. Putting asses in the seats.
There's a button for that on your keyboard...it's often labeled "PgDn" or sometimes by it's full name "Page Down"
Also, with most browsers, you can push the biggest button. It's not labeled but it's big and hard to miss...most call it the "spacebar" and that will also "page down"
These functions will allow you to "scroll down" the internet page very rapidly.
Bonus! for extra credit, try pushing "shift"+"spacebar" to scroll up!
Yes. If you've looked at their redesign that will be implemented soon, you know what I mean. They basically split the functions of the site across 4 or 5 pages instead of just the one, so now you have to click more to see the same amount of content. The whole redesign is made to get more page views of their ads.
I hate it, but I'm old. I remember when the internet and the WWW came to suburbia back in the mid 90s. Almost all internet sites were free, if you had the hardware to access them, just like facebook.com is right now. It's free.
Somehow, someone who has no understanding of economics managed to convince themselves that facebook.com was worth hundreds of millions for investment. It's not. It never will be. It's a free website that has some cool widgets and lets you keep up with your friends. It's not like they have a patent on social networking.
Here's what will happen. Facebook will have to continually make its interface more intrusive in order to please their investors and advertisers. As that happens, they will loose users. Eventually another site will pop up that has the same functionality as facebook.com only without all the BS. People will begin to use it, and the internet circle of life continues.
Well, I'm out. I'll wait for something not developed by a company in that regime. Sure, I can't avoid China entirely, but I can do...well...what I can.
question: what percentage of the population was literate in the Lincoln/Douglas days?
I don't know exactly, but it was under 50%
I absolutely agree that many American's are ignorant. But I say ignorant in relation to what they could know based on what's available in our culture to inform and enrich their thinking today. By comparison, today's above average grad. student has more academic knowledge and philosophical understanding than almost anyone in America in the mid-1800s. Sure, the grad student wouldn't know how to milk a cow, but that skill could be learned easily. Try teaching a farmer with a 6th grade education from the 1800s how to use PowerPoint. There's no comparison.
We're smarter today than we were then, but not as smart as we need to be.
So, why don't you just tell me what system of government you think we should have?
more positrons than can be explained by known physics and that this excess exactly matches what dark matter particles would produce if they were annihilating each other at the center of the galaxy.
Yep, it's very much as you describe. Many of these models push the boundary of what can be called 'theory' in scientific terms, but they are the best we have so far. I think what's getting people excited is that the observations mentioned in TFA are predicted by a dark matter theory.
I think you and I would agree on alot of issues. I do not contend that the MSM is competent in its current incarnation. More on that below...
Democracy is the best idea yet for governance. Its flaws are less harmful than other options. I do not believe there is a 'perfect' solution to governance.
I don't agree when you say my argument is 'inductive' but otherwise I agree with your basic characterization. What our system does for us is give us the opportunity to do the right thing if we educate ourselves about the reality of the issues. We can vote and hold officeholders accountable if we want to. For me, that's power. The trick is, we have to use it. If you read my original post on this topic you'll see that I place *some* of the blame for the sad state of our country on us, the citizens.
Yes, I do think that many voters are severely ignorant. I do not think it is a conspiracy by the MSM (at least, most of the time it's not;), I think they are doing what they think will pull asses in the seats and get them advertising dollars. Some of the MSM is better than others, of course, but they all need improvement desperately. Yes, the inane MSM coverage of the news is dumbing down our society (or HAS dumbed down...) but at the core, as I said above, it is every citizen's repsonsibility to educate themselves, and with that responsibility comes the power to force government accountability (aka redress of greivances).
I'm a leftist libertarian, but I'm not a pure anarchist. I do see a proper function of a federal government.
So, my argument is: IF enough quantity of people will be able to discern truth from lies, THEN democracy can be the best system modern humans have come up with SO FAR, even though it won't ever be perfect.
If someone punches a cop and runs into a house, the cop doesn't need to get a written warrant to go into the house, b/c a crime has been committed. If they *think* someone is planning a crime, they have to get a written warrant.
Now you show yours indicating (quoting from your original post) "these people aren't violent anarchists, they are citizens protesting the government."
From this linkAlthough the protesters say they won't take the first swing, they vow to protect themselves The were preparing for self-defense only. Your original quote about 'red zones' even said as much. By the way, that link, which you quoted from liberally, was from a Minnesota Monitor article about the group, not from the group themselves. It was just put up on their site.
Everything from the actual group indicates civil disobedience that pledged not to be violent, only to defend themselves if/when the police started to violate their rights. Every citizen has the right to do these things. Nothing wrong...
I didn't bother to read your link to the 'search warrants' because TFA reported that these warrants were not served when the police searched the house. Sure they can whip up a warrant AFTER the fact, but that's not how the law works. To search a residence you need probable cause AND you have to serve the warrant when you go.
Lastly, they are protesting the RNC, yes...but their rights are being violated by the police. Don't try to obfuscate the issue. They were planning civil disobedience, not a 'riot' and the cops searched their houses without serving a warrant.
No, but the police, FBI, sheriff, etc. ARE part of the government. I didn't mention the RNC once in my post.
Second, yes they are anarchists
So what? Being an anarchist is not a crime. If you read TFA, you'd note that no search warrants were given, and that they were charged with 'conspiracy to riot.' I said they were not violent anarchists, in the sense that they were NOT planning violence or rioting.
"red zones" (prepared for "self-defense"), "yellow zones" (peaceful but assertive), and "green zones" (aiming to avoid risk of arrest.) I don't see how holding public property by force is at all non-violent.
I know that's not in TFA. Please cite a source. If you do not, then, well...
You are pushing my argument down the slippery slope. Sure the things you mention have varying levels of similarity to the MN arrests, but that does not invalidate my point.
Here's your worst line:
In Democracy, image -- how we communicate to a Crowd -- matters more than reality.
Bullshit. Of course image and perception matter, but it's not fundamental. Reality exists. Perception can closely mirror reality or be completely different from it. Here's another quote about democracy: "You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time."
Lastly, I've said it before on these boards and I'll say it again...
A restaurant can serve you a steaming pile of shit with garnish and a nice Chianti. They can put a little card next to it that says "Pasta Primavera." They can arrange for others around you to pretend that it's not shit. They can do alot to alter your perception. But no matter what they do, it's still a steaming pile of SHIT.
If perception is reality, then I suggest you take a big bite.
things have been like this before the Conventions since the '68 DNC Riots. Or did you not notice the guy who was arrested in Denver for checking into a hotel just before the DNC with a couple rifles?
Completely different circumstances.
'68 riots...they were actual RIOTS. In the cases in TFA they had done nothing except plan a legal protest. The charges are bullshit. "Fire code violation" my ass. You must have never had a bad run-in with the police. You have no idea what it is like to be in a position where the cops want to find something to charge you with. If they want to, they will...more often than not anyway. The reality of whether you actually did something worthy of being charged is meaningless in that situation.
As for the Denver people, they actually were committing a crime as well. They were meth dealers.
Slashdot Mirror
We have laws for counterfeiting. We should enforce those instead of thinking up new redundant laws.
Problem is, this won't be the last time we hear of DRM being applied places it has no business being applied. The whole concept of DRM is a joke, invented b/c lawmakers were unwilling or unable to draft legislation that properly dealt with online filesharing and piracy.
Top level managers have to be both good at managing people AND have at least a basic understanding of the code (or whatever) that his department is doing. Cringley isn't saying all IT managers should be hardcore programmers, his point is they have to have some cursory knowledge of the work they are making decisions upon.
He's right.
I understand that many today believe that managerial skills are completely transferable to any industry/profession. The idea is false. Yes, all managers need to know how to manage people, but that is not all they need to do their job.
Managers, especially upper level get paid alot of money, the way they earn it is to be good at alot of different things (including people skills).
If you operate under the assumption that the only thing that matters for a manager is their people managing skills, you get incompetent managers who basically have to rely solely on their support staff to tell them what to do.
What you get is the CEO of a horse racing company hired to direct FEMA (see: Katrina)
I understand your point but since the program is for k-12 it puts it in a different context.
Here's how: books will never be replaced. they don't need power, they don't get viruses, all a person needs to use on is literacy, they last indefinitely, and they're fairly indestructable.
In k-12 ed. you can't assume the student will have internet access after school. The logistics of getting kids to do things online are more difficult by orders of magnitude (i was a teacher for 4 years). In uni. internet access is ubiquitous.
Lastly, I am happy to put my tax money towards k-12 education for books. Our society needs it. I'm 100% in favor of a wiki-like science text.
If this program can save some money, great. But it makes no sense to use this in place of a textbook...it is best viewed as a supplement.
1. TFA states that this is for K-12, NOT college...so all the 'screw the Univ. for making me pay $200 for a textbook comments' are misguided
2. I like this idea as well, but let's not forget that an open textbook than anyone can edit about SCIENCE is bound to attract hordes of Intelligent Design trolls...imagine it...every church in Virginian tells its members to go home Sunday afternoon and edit the wiki-text book about evolution...this is big, big trouble
3. I'd rather see this opened to a pool of teachers, professors, scientists, etc that have been vetted for their qualifications.
These guys aren't anywhere near making anything as complex as actual biological life. What they're doing is more like biological engineering than biology. TFA reports they are close to making a very simple self-replicating system...
it's important to note that this thing they haven't made yet wouldn't be able to self-replicate without 'help' from the researchers once they actually DO make it. Of course, down the road they would like to get something that could be autonomous, but even then it wouldn't be able to survive outside the lab.
From TFA:
and
So we're really far off from what you're speculating about...but, to address your concerns, alarmism about this research along the same lines as the people who are afraid that CERN will open a black hole that will swallow the earth (not saying you are alarmist...but some are).
Bottom line is, once they make a self-replicating artificial organism that can also exist outside the lab we should put it in the same level of quarantine that we give the nastiest of the nasty biochem. weapons or diseases we keep for research. It's not like we don't know how to safely work with dangerous substances/organisms.
There fixed that for you.
I was an 'early adopter' for mp3 players (a little out of character for me...don't have HD or blue-ray ;) I always saw it as a data storage and music file compression issue more than anything. I completely agree that the ipod was evolutionary. I'd just go a little further to say it was Apple's marketing and design (click wheel) that made the technology blow up. Also the timing of the introduction of the ipod was very favorable.
And let's not forget itunes. In the late 90s I got all my music from friend's CD's or from p2p networks. itunes was a digital music delivery system that the RIAA could at least tolerate, which allowed Apple to launch a national advertising campaign to the masses, which in turn made the ipod the first mp3 player alot of people ever saw.
From TFA:
As others have pointed out, the idea of storing digital music on a portable player isn't really novel. Anyone who understands 1's and 0's could imagine it, but this guy actually had the will to build a prototype and patent it.
From TFA:
hope he gets a pantload of money.
hmm... DOA Volleyball... I'd say it doesn't improve any two people's sex lives
If that were true, the GOP would have had McCain pick Kay Baily Hutchison, Mitt Romney, or Mike Huckabee. McCain himself wanted to pick Lieberman, but was pursuaded at the last minute to pick Palin by Rove, etc. There were several more qualified, longer serving Governors, Senators, and Congressmen that would have been more qualified than Palin.
Palin got picked b/c she would take orders and appeal to this fictitious demographic of disgruntled Hillary supporters that the MSM invented.
All Palin will do in the end is energize Democrats and level headed independents. Only Neo-Con stalwart Repub's will support McCain now. Sure there was a (significantly smaller than the Dem's) convention full of GOP'ers cheering their heads off for Palin. That happens at EVERY convention these days. Delegates are the most committed party workers. They would cheer for a cardboard cut-out of Ronald Reagan in a cowboy hat if the GOP nominated it.
Fact is, the MSM got nervous b/c they didn't want to be accused of being 'sexist' (btw, all of the sudden people have forgotten what that word means) by the GOP. But slowly and surely they will start demanding of Palin what they demanded of Obama, and Palin will come up severely wanting.
this is offtopic but important...
it seems like GOP trolls have taken over moderation in the thread my comment started. My post was definitely on topic, and definitely based on fact and personal insight. When it was originally posted, I was moderated up "insightful" then other moderators took me down to troll-0. The fact is, I talked about palin's policy positions relating to technology, which is on-topic and not trolling. I was strong in my language, yes, but my comments were based on fact.
Now, if you look at the responses to my parent comment, several pro-Palin (or anti-Obama) comments that have NOTHING to do with technology are modded up. Also, several comments supporting my parent comment are modded down. This is unacceptable, but not unexpected unfortunately.
I'm tempted to say what I think. I see GOP or Repug. trolls who are using their mod. points to suppress any comment they deem unflattering to their cause. It's not a two way street. On /. I've noticed that GOP and Neo-Con loyalist sheeple are willing to moderate ANYTHING they disagree with down, OTOH, the Ron Paul supporters, Independents, and Democrats are showing in their comments a wilingness to discuss the reality of the situation, based on the facts. Sure there are Ron Paul trolls, Indep. trolls, and Obama trolls...but never on /. have I seen one small group so willing to throw fair minded behavior aside in order to silence anyone that doesn't say exactly what they are comfortable with hearing.
I'm tempted to say that...but I know I'd get modded down again by GOP hyper-trolls. Go ahead. My karma can take it...can yours?
I feel like this whole discussion about Palin and her policies is a big cosmic joke.
Fact is, she's going to do what she is told to do. Her convention speech was given to her. When she eventually goes to the media to answer questions about policy, she will say exactly what her handlders tell her to say.
Now, before the Trolls roll in and say, "But all politicians adhere to party platform, talking points, etc" I'm going to address that preemptively. It's like this: Palin is on another level of political servanthood. She is blatantly unqualified to be VP (or governor for that matter), but b/c of how the Rovian wing of the GOP works, she was chosen to be held up as an advertisement for how the GOP wants to be seen. It's all for image. No substance. She does not have the clout to stand on her own two feet as a policymaker (no matter what the GOP talking heads say).
As far as technology, it's a no-brainer to support technology in schools. Everyone knows this. It's like saying "I support driver's licenses."
Bottom line, Palin is going to do exactly what the GOP tacticians want her to do, just like Bush II.
Full disclosure: I supported Ron Paul in the GOP primary and Sen. Obama in the Dem's primary, and I support Obama in the general election. An Obama v. Paul general election would have generated real policy discussions. The McCain/Palin ticket is insulting.
If net neutrality came up as an issue, she would be against it, b/c that's the standard GOP line. She owes everything to party bosses and their Rovian tactics. She has no clout as an individual policymaker to do anything else.
Sarah Palin is not a libertarian, just because she uses *some* libertarian rhetoric doesn't mean she is. She is a pro-business and screw everyone else neo-con.
She is not anywhere near qualified to make policy decisions on technology. She does not have the good judgment and will required to appoint advisors who will give her real quality advice and guidance. She's a prop for the GOP. She's an advertisement. The decision to select her as VP was purely for the most nihilistically political reasons and has nothing to do with her operational capability as a policymaker.
More on-topic, Palin is going to support the legislation she is told to support by her handlers. TFA is ridiculous to conjecture that b/c she supported some pipeline regulations that she will be in favor of net neutrality. For every instance of Palin supporting a logical policy, there are 10 examples of her doing the opposite.
The only way Palin would support net neutrality or any other policy that protects from unfair business practices is IF the GOP people tell her to.
The investors lose big and have to sell their 2nd and 3rd homes, yacht, and their "investment grade" artwork at a loss. They retire early, move to farm country and spend their days trying to convert their old Saab from college to run on vegetable oil, while being supportive as their kids are in substance abuse rehab/divorce proceedings.
Advertisers nihilistically resign to their 9-5 fate. They start cheating on their wives after football season is over for excitement and then develop Erectile Disfunction when they find out their wives are cheating on them (wives knew all along). Their daughters get tattoos on their wrists and experiment with rebellious lifestyles. Later will contemplate suicide when son becomes gay or daughter is seen by golf buddy in amature pr0n video. AFter retirement they live in Florida or Arizona and stress out about who has the best backyard landscaping (maybe a waterfall?).
heh...I never accused facebook.com of making money
you can call it trends research, etc. but it's all based on clicks through their little links on the left side. Yes they tailor those links to keywords in your page, but it's all about clicks, pure and simple.
As an aside, I just have to express how hilarious it is to watch advertisers invent new, effusive language to describe their function. "branding" "trends research" etc...it's all just sales. Putting asses in the seats.
There's a button for that on your keyboard...it's often labeled "PgDn" or sometimes by it's full name "Page Down"
Also, with most browsers, you can push the biggest button. It's not labeled but it's big and hard to miss...most call it the "spacebar" and that will also "page down"
These functions will allow you to "scroll down" the internet page very rapidly.
Bonus! for extra credit, try pushing "shift"+"spacebar" to scroll up!
Yes. If you've looked at their redesign that will be implemented soon, you know what I mean. They basically split the functions of the site across 4 or 5 pages instead of just the one, so now you have to click more to see the same amount of content. The whole redesign is made to get more page views of their ads.
I hate it, but I'm old. I remember when the internet and the WWW came to suburbia back in the mid 90s. Almost all internet sites were free, if you had the hardware to access them, just like facebook.com is right now. It's free.
Somehow, someone who has no understanding of economics managed to convince themselves that facebook.com was worth hundreds of millions for investment. It's not. It never will be. It's a free website that has some cool widgets and lets you keep up with your friends. It's not like they have a patent on social networking.
Here's what will happen. Facebook will have to continually make its interface more intrusive in order to please their investors and advertisers. As that happens, they will loose users. Eventually another site will pop up that has the same functionality as facebook.com only without all the BS. People will begin to use it, and the internet circle of life continues.
Well, I'm out. I'll wait for something not developed by a company in that regime. Sure, I can't avoid China entirely, but I can do...well...what I can.
question: what percentage of the population was literate in the Lincoln/Douglas days?
I don't know exactly, but it was under 50%
I absolutely agree that many American's are ignorant. But I say ignorant in relation to what they could know based on what's available in our culture to inform and enrich their thinking today. By comparison, today's above average grad. student has more academic knowledge and philosophical understanding than almost anyone in America in the mid-1800s. Sure, the grad student wouldn't know how to milk a cow, but that skill could be learned easily. Try teaching a farmer with a 6th grade education from the 1800s how to use PowerPoint. There's no comparison.
We're smarter today than we were then, but not as smart as we need to be.
So, why don't you just tell me what system of government you think we should have?
From TFA:
Yep, it's very much as you describe. Many of these models push the boundary of what can be called 'theory' in scientific terms, but they are the best we have so far. I think what's getting people excited is that the observations mentioned in TFA are predicted by a dark matter theory.
I think you and I would agree on alot of issues. I do not contend that the MSM is competent in its current incarnation. More on that below...
Democracy is the best idea yet for governance. Its flaws are less harmful than other options. I do not believe there is a 'perfect' solution to governance.
I don't agree when you say my argument is 'inductive' but otherwise I agree with your basic characterization. What our system does for us is give us the opportunity to do the right thing if we educate ourselves about the reality of the issues. We can vote and hold officeholders accountable if we want to. For me, that's power. The trick is, we have to use it. If you read my original post on this topic you'll see that I place *some* of the blame for the sad state of our country on us, the citizens.
Yes, I do think that many voters are severely ignorant. I do not think it is a conspiracy by the MSM (at least, most of the time it's not ;), I think they are doing what they think will pull asses in the seats and get them advertising dollars. Some of the MSM is better than others, of course, but they all need improvement desperately. Yes, the inane MSM coverage of the news is dumbing down our society (or HAS dumbed down...) but at the core, as I said above, it is every citizen's repsonsibility to educate themselves, and with that responsibility comes the power to force government accountability (aka redress of greivances).
I'm a leftist libertarian, but I'm not a pure anarchist. I do see a proper function of a federal government.
So, my argument is: IF enough quantity of people will be able to discern truth from lies, THEN democracy can be the best system modern humans have come up with SO FAR, even though it won't ever be perfect.
I think you might be confusing probable cause with reasonable suspicion.
If someone punches a cop and runs into a house, the cop doesn't need to get a written warrant to go into the house, b/c a crime has been committed. If they *think* someone is planning a crime, they have to get a written warrant.
First...
From this link Although the protesters say they won't take the first swing, they vow to protect themselves The were preparing for self-defense only. Your original quote about 'red zones' even said as much. By the way, that link, which you quoted from liberally, was from a Minnesota Monitor article about the group, not from the group themselves. It was just put up on their site.
Everything from the actual group indicates civil disobedience that pledged not to be violent, only to defend themselves if/when the police started to violate their rights. Every citizen has the right to do these things. Nothing wrong...
I didn't bother to read your link to the 'search warrants' because TFA reported that these warrants were not served when the police searched the house. Sure they can whip up a warrant AFTER the fact, but that's not how the law works. To search a residence you need probable cause AND you have to serve the warrant when you go.
They were planning civil disobedience. Same asRosa Parks refusing to give up her seat on the bus.
Lastly, they are protesting the RNC, yes...but their rights are being violated by the police. Don't try to obfuscate the issue. They were planning civil disobedience, not a 'riot' and the cops searched their houses without serving a warrant.
You, sir are full of shit.
No, but the police, FBI, sheriff, etc. ARE part of the government. I didn't mention the RNC once in my post.
So what? Being an anarchist is not a crime. If you read TFA, you'd note that no search warrants were given, and that they were charged with 'conspiracy to riot.' I said they were not violent anarchists, in the sense that they were NOT planning violence or rioting.
I know that's not in TFA. Please cite a source. If you do not, then, well...
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just misunderstood my post. I said:
I do not approve of the actions of law enforcement in these cases. These people were not violent. They were not violent anarchists.
Let's say they are anarchists. That is not a crime (sometimes it's just common sense).
You are pushing my argument down the slippery slope. Sure the things you mention have varying levels of similarity to the MN arrests, but that does not invalidate my point.
Here's your worst line:
Bullshit. Of course image and perception matter, but it's not fundamental. Reality exists. Perception can closely mirror reality or be completely different from it. Here's another quote about democracy: "You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time."
Lastly, I've said it before on these boards and I'll say it again...
A restaurant can serve you a steaming pile of shit with garnish and a nice Chianti. They can put a little card next to it that says "Pasta Primavera." They can arrange for others around you to pretend that it's not shit. They can do alot to alter your perception. But no matter what they do, it's still a steaming pile of SHIT.
If perception is reality, then I suggest you take a big bite.
Completely different circumstances.
'68 riots...they were actual RIOTS. In the cases in TFA they had done nothing except plan a legal protest. The charges are bullshit. "Fire code violation" my ass. You must have never had a bad run-in with the police. You have no idea what it is like to be in a position where the cops want to find something to charge you with. If they want to, they will...more often than not anyway. The reality of whether you actually did something worthy of being charged is meaningless in that situation.
As for the Denver people, they actually were committing a crime as well. They were meth dealers.