Yes, in fact i speak english quite fluently. However "whose" and "who's" happen to be phonetically identical, and i doubt even you could identify tokens of one over the other either. Unfortunately like most people i do on occasion mix up such phonetically similar words in writing. Especially when writing quickly (as one often does on slashdot, in order that one's comments will actually be read).
Actually, i'd like someone to lose their job over this. Fuck ups this bad not only make the judiciary committee and the government at large look bad, but actively hinder the willingness of future whistle-blowers from stepping up. This really is a disaster, especially with an administration who is absolutely brazen in their willingness to retaliate against perceived political foes.
Why exactly do we have to make an IT gaff, even as massive as this one, partisan? Do we know who's staffers actually sent out the email? You do understand that the Judiciary committee does have Republican members right? Beyond the fact that Republicans don't seem to do inquiries into the Bush Administration, it's not like this wouldn't have happened if Republicans were in charge of the judiciary committee.
Then what on earth do you mean by FPS, if it doesn't mean "a game with a first person perspective, in which one's primary interface with the world is, in fact, shooting"? Sure Metroid isn't Doom, it's not Quake, nor is it Halo[1..3]. So you actually have objectives, and have to, god forbid, explore. So what? Does that disqualify it as an FPS?
I think you are highlighting an important distinction.
The discussion that needs to be had is not "Why aren't women as good at science, math, and technology as men are?", which is based on the faulty assumption that men and women are vastly different in capability, but rather "Why aren't women as interested in science, math, and technology as men are?".
A lot of arrogant male geeks will knee-jerk respond "because they're not as good at it!", but that really cuts to the heart of the bad argument here. There are plenty of people who pile into fields that they're not good at, because they want to be in that industry. People have to suffer all sorts of idiots every day in the industries in which they work. People don't have to be good at something to be attracted to it.
Why is it that women aren't interested in being in IT? (Male hostility is clearly a factor as every slashdot thread on sexism proves).
Re a: I get discriminated against by stupid, pretty female culture a LOT more than women get discriminated against by stupid male geek culture. I am willing to be that most geeks feel the same way.
You want a cease fire? Fine. start playing fair with us and we might play fair with you.
Your pronoun use indicates that you do not consider yourself part of women (or perhaps you could scope it to say that you're not part of women fashionistas, although i wouldn't say that's the initial common sense reading). Nor do you consider women, part of "we", or your post would have been written much differently. Also your presumed assumption that women ("you") are making the request to be treated fairly, rather than TBL, about whom the article was written.
In short, you're a little too defensive, and a bit too knee-jerk to be a) a woman, or b) in possession of a calm well-reasoned perspective.
How many people have sacrificed a weekend out partying to rebuild a Linux cluster? How many women want to sacrifice cute outfits to sling greasy wrenches under cars all day?
Way to base your argument on your conclusion. The assumption that girls would rather keep their "cute outfits" clean than work on cars, is a cultural assumption. It's a cultural norm that can (and should) change (yes i'm skipping over the argument why it should change, which i'd like to think in modern society i can take for granted). The question you should ask yourself is a) what can you do to change the norm and b) what are you doing to reinforce stereotypes like these (suggestion: posting comments like the one you just did;) )?
I don't think willingness to sacrifice social life for an interesting problem is something male nerds & geeks have a monopoly on. And again, it's damaging to these sorts of discussions to assume so.
An eye for an eye, and pretty soon the whole world is blind...
I hope you see the irony in your blatantly sexism, conflating the shallow fashionistas with ALL womankind, including the non-shallow, potentially brilliant females who people like you are driving out of the industry. Just cause you've been discriminated against by someone, doesn't make it okay for you to discriminate against anyone you like!
I can't believe nobody has called anybody on this.
Learning and education should be entertaining. Or at least, you should have the option of having an interesting and educational experience. I understand that there's stuff that one has to learn simply to have a job and function on a day to day basis in society, but if you receive no joy from learning new things in some sphere (i don't care if it's baseball statistics, esoteric poetry, how to make model ferraris or whatever), somewhere, then you probably live a sad static life.
The problem is that this is a functional analysis. Even if they don't have your legitimate contact details, they know what you've been browsing, and if at some point they can attach it to your legitimate contact details, then boom they've got the whole shebang. This is a privacy unfriendly move. It makes it more difficult for you to maintain your anonymity. Services like bug-me-not are insufficient because it requires you to try out multiple contact details, and maintain a list of valid contact details (which can be made all the more difficult of the organization is active in closing these accounts).
Even if you think people should be more privacy conscious, this is a bad move, that makes everyone less private. The irony of the situation is really the only thing that makes it notable. Stupid NYT.
No if you're a political candidate you don't have control of your own image. Since you're a subject for legitimate public debate, you can't simply issue C&D letters to people, just the same way you can't sue people for reporting news about you that you don't like. Now if this guy was misrepresenting himself, and say taking people's donations as the Obama campaign, that's fraud, and a wholly different situation (and the damaged parties are the people making donations). But the Obama campaign doesn't have grounds to compel anyone to get this account, but MySpace seems to have taken their side on this (and there's not much that the guy can do 'bout it, since it's MySpace's data).
I'm not clear that this would fall under RICO, and none of my lawyer (or law student) friends are awake at this hour. I'm not clear that you're allowed to take payment for someone who has not given you the right to do so. I'm certain that such a scheme could be legalized by the US Government (i.e. designate a single authority to handle some particular issue [ICANN for instance]), but a random corporation just reaching out and grabbing it is pretty fucking brazen. But given their relations with their sock puppets over at FCC, it's still a possibility i suppose.
Well, one major difference is Google's continuing commitment to openness. They let you get your data. You can take your business elsewhere. Microsoft is notorious for trying to lock their customers into their products and services. Google doesn't do that.
Why should it? I mean, isn't the point of javascript content that responds dynamically to the intentions of an agent? The googlebot, although an extremely complicated AI agent, isn't intentional. It doesn't know what it's doing on a site, and so i figure probably shouldn't just be allowed out to wreak havoc. Also, wouldn't that allow one an opportunity to fork-bomb the googlebot then as well?
Yeah, but so what? I've got like 8 domains w/ RegisterFly, and honestly i hadn't had a single problem with them ever (well there was a payment oddity, but that's cause the "country" drop down on their payment page wants the country you are submitting the form from, not the country the credit card you're using is from). I was extremely surprised to get the eNom letter notifying me that i had to transfer to them or my domains would be orphaned. I thought it was a phishing attempt at first.
Now that it seems like RegisterFly is getting back on the right track, i'll probably stick with them for the domains that i have that are actually registered through them (and not eNom).
Your argument can be extrapolated ad infinitum. What about religion? What about supernatural phenomenas? And UFOs? No proof of the above for the non *believers*, though try to convince a beliver otherwise.
Once you get into the realm of BELIEFS, no rational/scientific proof/disproof is useful.
Yeah, i'm okay with that. I just think that there are benign irrational beliefs that i don't care about (spirituality, or whatever generally), or find harmless (not to say that there aren't religious beliefs that i find horrible and/or inhuman). Once people make statements that are demonstrably crazy, and start taking irreversible courses of action based on said crazy beliefs, then i've got problems (and you should too).
Let me state to all who haven't realized yet: This is a crazy, crazy world.
I find your statements entirely consistent with mine.
Great... You've just reinvented Dr. Esperanto's argument for universal language.
Language is not the barrier. Mutual consensus is. It was plainly obvious to anyone who has a brain that the intelligence used to justify an invasion of Iraq was faulty. It didn't ever pass the smell test, and yet there was a broad base of support for it among a large number of Americans. There are still Americans who believe that Saddam Hussein supported Al Qaeda, and there's no proof of that what so ever.
It is possible for people to believe what they want to believe regardless of how much fact you throw at them. That is the power of denial. That is the power of the cult of personality. That is the power of ends justifying their means.
Demystifying language barriers is a paltry bulwark against the convolutions of the human mind.
As far as i am aware these aren't new allegations, i remember hearing about this back as far as 2 years ago at least. Some casual googling turns up documents from that time period.
This is a really bad idea. One of the nice parts of innovating, hopefully, is that you're not restricted by previous classification. If you're forced to shoe horn your patents into a preexisting category to get it approved, then there will be all sorts of mis-classified patents, or people disguising things that would be obvious in another domain in other domains. And on top of that, what about cross-disciplinary patents? Where do you file if your ideas bridge patent areas?
Actually the major concern for DDT is environmental. There are other suitably effective insecticides with much less harmful environmental effects that would (do) save children's lives every year. The major problem is that there is a significant lack of funding for mosquito eradication programs in places that need it. Americans spray frequently, and the scariest thing we have to deal with is the West Nile Virus, while large portions of Africa and Asia are crippled by malaria.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, in fact i speak english quite fluently. However "whose" and "who's" happen to be phonetically identical, and i doubt even you could identify tokens of one over the other either. Unfortunately like most people i do on occasion mix up such phonetically similar words in writing. Especially when writing quickly (as one often does on slashdot, in order that one's comments will actually be read).
So please, pedant me further, "motherfucker".
Actually, i'd like someone to lose their job over this. Fuck ups this bad not only make the judiciary committee and the government at large look bad, but actively hinder the willingness of future whistle-blowers from stepping up. This really is a disaster, especially with an administration who is absolutely brazen in their willingness to retaliate against perceived political foes.
Nice inflammatory title line!
Why exactly do we have to make an IT gaff, even as massive as this one, partisan? Do we know who's staffers actually sent out the email? You do understand that the Judiciary committee does have Republican members right? Beyond the fact that Republicans don't seem to do inquiries into the Bush Administration, it's not like this wouldn't have happened if Republicans were in charge of the judiciary committee.
That said, this is absolutely unacceptable.
Because we all know that online polls are reliable. Just look at slashdot's.
Then what on earth do you mean by FPS, if it doesn't mean "a game with a first person perspective, in which one's primary interface with the world is, in fact, shooting"? Sure Metroid isn't Doom, it's not Quake, nor is it Halo[1..3]. So you actually have objectives, and have to, god forbid, explore. So what? Does that disqualify it as an FPS?
That's the cache not catching up quickly enough. There's no way nintendo would bail on a MarioKart game.
I think you are highlighting an important distinction.
The discussion that needs to be had is not "Why aren't women as good at science, math, and technology as men are?", which is based on the faulty assumption that men and women are vastly different in capability, but rather "Why aren't women as interested in science, math, and technology as men are?".
A lot of arrogant male geeks will knee-jerk respond "because they're not as good at it!", but that really cuts to the heart of the bad argument here. There are plenty of people who pile into fields that they're not good at, because they want to be in that industry. People have to suffer all sorts of idiots every day in the industries in which they work. People don't have to be good at something to be attracted to it.
Why is it that women aren't interested in being in IT? (Male hostility is clearly a factor as every slashdot thread on sexism proves).
Please explain what silly reasoning you have for claiming I am a. male or b. Stupid.
:D
Okay!
Re b: my earlier comment
Re a:
I get discriminated against by stupid, pretty female culture a LOT more than women get discriminated against by stupid male geek culture. I am willing to be that most geeks feel the same way.
You want a cease fire? Fine. start playing fair with us and we might play fair with you.
Your pronoun use indicates that you do not consider yourself part of women (or perhaps you could scope it to say that you're not part of women fashionistas, although i wouldn't say that's the initial common sense reading). Nor do you consider women, part of "we", or your post would have been written much differently. Also your presumed assumption that women ("you") are making the request to be treated fairly, rather than TBL, about whom the article was written.
In short, you're a little too defensive, and a bit too knee-jerk to be a) a woman, or b) in possession of a calm well-reasoned perspective.
How many people have sacrificed a weekend out partying to rebuild a Linux cluster? How many women want to sacrifice cute outfits to sling greasy wrenches under cars all day?
;) )?
Way to base your argument on your conclusion. The assumption that girls would rather keep their "cute outfits" clean than work on cars, is a cultural assumption. It's a cultural norm that can (and should) change (yes i'm skipping over the argument why it should change, which i'd like to think in modern society i can take for granted). The question you should ask yourself is a) what can you do to change the norm and b) what are you doing to reinforce stereotypes like these (suggestion: posting comments like the one you just did
I don't think willingness to sacrifice social life for an interesting problem is something male nerds & geeks have a monopoly on. And again, it's damaging to these sorts of discussions to assume so.
An eye for an eye, and pretty soon the whole world is blind...
I hope you see the irony in your blatantly sexism, conflating the shallow fashionistas with ALL womankind, including the non-shallow, potentially brilliant females who people like you are driving out of the industry. Just cause you've been discriminated against by someone, doesn't make it okay for you to discriminate against anyone you like!
Way to be a negative example!
I can't believe nobody has called anybody on this.
Learning and education should be entertaining. Or at least, you should have the option of having an interesting and educational experience. I understand that there's stuff that one has to learn simply to have a job and function on a day to day basis in society, but if you receive no joy from learning new things in some sphere (i don't care if it's baseball statistics, esoteric poetry, how to make model ferraris or whatever), somewhere, then you probably live a sad static life.
Sale? I'll do you one better. I've got some land for lease! Guaranteed Prime Florida Coastline! *#%
depending on parcel, may be any or all of the following:
* Protected Wetlands
# Under Water
% On Fire
(sigh, this would be funnier if i could style my text, stupid slashdot.)
BTW, don't check your business email or log in to the corporate VPN from China. You know the story: "all your trade secrets are blong to us".
Uh, isn't this what encryption is for? (God help you if your company doesn't encrypt it's VPN)
The problem is that this is a functional analysis. Even if they don't have your legitimate contact details, they know what you've been browsing, and if at some point they can attach it to your legitimate contact details, then boom they've got the whole shebang. This is a privacy unfriendly move. It makes it more difficult for you to maintain your anonymity. Services like bug-me-not are insufficient because it requires you to try out multiple contact details, and maintain a list of valid contact details (which can be made all the more difficult of the organization is active in closing these accounts).
Even if you think people should be more privacy conscious, this is a bad move, that makes everyone less private. The irony of the situation is really the only thing that makes it notable. Stupid NYT.
No if you're a political candidate you don't have control of your own image. Since you're a subject for legitimate public debate, you can't simply issue C&D letters to people, just the same way you can't sue people for reporting news about you that you don't like. Now if this guy was misrepresenting himself, and say taking people's donations as the Obama campaign, that's fraud, and a wholly different situation (and the damaged parties are the people making donations). But the Obama campaign doesn't have grounds to compel anyone to get this account, but MySpace seems to have taken their side on this (and there's not much that the guy can do 'bout it, since it's MySpace's data).
Try again, AC :P
I'm not clear that this would fall under RICO, and none of my lawyer (or law student) friends are awake at this hour. I'm not clear that you're allowed to take payment for someone who has not given you the right to do so. I'm certain that such a scheme could be legalized by the US Government (i.e. designate a single authority to handle some particular issue [ICANN for instance]), but a random corporation just reaching out and grabbing it is pretty fucking brazen. But given their relations with their sock puppets over at FCC, it's still a possibility i suppose.
Well, one major difference is Google's continuing commitment to openness. They let you get your data. You can take your business elsewhere. Microsoft is notorious for trying to lock their customers into their products and services. Google doesn't do that.
Why should it? I mean, isn't the point of javascript content that responds dynamically to the intentions of an agent? The googlebot, although an extremely complicated AI agent, isn't intentional. It doesn't know what it's doing on a site, and so i figure probably shouldn't just be allowed out to wreak havoc. Also, wouldn't that allow one an opportunity to fork-bomb the googlebot then as well?
Yeah, but so what? I've got like 8 domains w/ RegisterFly, and honestly i hadn't had a single problem with them ever (well there was a payment oddity, but that's cause the "country" drop down on their payment page wants the country you are submitting the form from, not the country the credit card you're using is from). I was extremely surprised to get the eNom letter notifying me that i had to transfer to them or my domains would be orphaned. I thought it was a phishing attempt at first.
Now that it seems like RegisterFly is getting back on the right track, i'll probably stick with them for the domains that i have that are actually registered through them (and not eNom).
Great... You've just reinvented Dr. Esperanto's argument for universal language.
Language is not the barrier. Mutual consensus is. It was plainly obvious to anyone who has a brain that the intelligence used to justify an invasion of Iraq was faulty. It didn't ever pass the smell test, and yet there was a broad base of support for it among a large number of Americans. There are still Americans who believe that Saddam Hussein supported Al Qaeda, and there's no proof of that what so ever.
It is possible for people to believe what they want to believe regardless of how much fact you throw at them. That is the power of denial. That is the power of the cult of personality. That is the power of ends justifying their means.
Demystifying language barriers is a paltry bulwark against the convolutions of the human mind.
As far as i am aware these aren't new allegations, i remember hearing about this back as far as 2 years ago at least. Some casual googling turns up documents from that time period.
This is a really bad idea. One of the nice parts of innovating, hopefully, is that you're not restricted by previous classification. If you're forced to shoe horn your patents into a preexisting category to get it approved, then there will be all sorts of mis-classified patents, or people disguising things that would be obvious in another domain in other domains. And on top of that, what about cross-disciplinary patents? Where do you file if your ideas bridge patent areas?
Actually the major concern for DDT is environmental. There are other suitably effective insecticides with much less harmful environmental effects that would (do) save children's lives every year. The major problem is that there is a significant lack of funding for mosquito eradication programs in places that need it. Americans spray frequently, and the scariest thing we have to deal with is the West Nile Virus, while large portions of Africa and Asia are crippled by malaria.