It's just the way the human brain works: things that are found together with relatively high frequency, like Catholic priests and child abuse, or Christian "Conservatives" and unseemly acts in public restrooms, tend to conjure each other up.
Do you mean "found together" or "mentioned by the media together"? OK, its the same in this context, but I am not aware of any evidence that either of the things you mention happens more often in that particular group, its just that its a juicier story when it does.
They need an IT person to come in and lock it down tightly so damage is contained. The office manager was running as admin, right? Of course they will have to pay (unless you oblige), but it is a one off, and its either that or the viruses.
Oh, and use Linux. Windows is fine in a corporate environment where you have an IT department to look after all this, but for home (non-gaming) and small business (unless there is Windows only industry vertical software you need) it is much better to use something that does not need on-going maintenance: you can get someone to install it and then rely on it carrying on working.
If you RTFA properly the Pope said the transparency is a good thing. He was worried about the "digital divide"
The problem is that journalists only want the church to talk about sex (at the moment the scandal, but always about sex), so a long talk on the good and bad aspects of the internet was not interesting so they wrote up a negative story, which the Slashdot editors then distorted more to appeal to the prejudices of the atheist Slashdot audience.
The main difference between the church and other organisations that have done the same seem to be:
1) The press are more interested in covering church scandals. 2) The people responsible for the cover-ups by the church are made to resign when caught, those in government get away with it.
This only works if someone is searching for a business or product. Most searches are for information. There are LOTS of valuable websites run by individuals. You rank them all low?
Why on earth do we want rankings to reflect credit ratings? You can trust sources with good credit ratings more? Lots of businesses with good credit ratings one year, have ended up with their CEO in the dock the next (e.g. Enron).
You need a lot more data coverage than you have: you can cannot verify Glaxosmithkline, Vodafone (main corporate site - country sites you do), Freshfields (a major law firm) or Oxfam International (but you can verify Oxfam UK).
Nice idea, but your current implementation sucks (yes, it is alpha, but its not very encouraging). It is better than Cuil.
I totally agree. If people just start looking at each others data instead of verifying it, a lot of mistakes (or fraudulent data ) will never be caught.
On the other hand, a lot of errors in interpretation and statistical analysis will be caught.
Even babies just a few months old will prefer to look at a picture of someone with the same skin color as them.
Citation needed. The article said three years old, which is quite old enough to pick up biases from society. Even if you showed the response you claim it would need testing to establish whether it reflected racial bias or per se, or merely a preference for people who look like their parents: would a a child with red-headed parents prefer people with red hair for the same reason? Do children with one black and one white parent show bias?
My daughter did not regard skin colour as important at four or five years old - it was obvious from her conversation that she thought hair colour more important than skin colour.
There was also an experiment (I do no t know the name , I only saw it on TV), where (an entirely white group) kids were told that "blue eyed people are better" one day, and "brown eyed people are better" another day and absorbed it perfectly into their behaviour each time.
I made the argument a couple days ago that video codecs should not be directly supported in browsers.
Entirely different. Given the strong network effects in video codecs, a de facto standard will emerge: at the moment its flv, and widespread usage will be more important that its actual merits. The market does not work well.
Also, direct browser support of one codec does not prevent browser, or plugin, support of another. Browsers handle multiple image formats fine.
In this case, it sounds like the regulation is too heavy. There are no network effects, and mandating one technology may prevent the use of others.
Something (God) witnesses by hundreds of millions of people over thousands of years and cultures has evidence for its existence comparable to something (UFOs sightings that do not have a natural explanation) witnessed by small number of people, mostly a small number of cultures, and entirely in the last few decades?
Re:Can't buy the OS for $200?
on
Ubuntu on a Dime
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Last time I looked a Windows CD cost about $2 where I live...
Knowing your wireless card and webcam will work: Priceless
I've found that for the younger kids, the vast majority of their time spent playing anything Internet/web-based involves Shockwave Flash based sites Typically, on a kids' PC, they don't have that much important data to worry about losing anyway.
You need Windows because they use cross-platofrm software.
If they're doing most things on the net, the sites they use are saving their high scores, user profiles, and such.
There are lots of fun,useful and beneficial things that are not on the net. My six year old spends only a minority of her time of the net, and her (Linux) PC has lots of educational software on it - but we restrict time spent on games. Your argument assumes that alll kids will use their computers for is playing flash games - they are missing a lot..
My daughter uses:
1) Gcompris 2) Tuxpaint 3) Battle for Wesnoth (the only game she really plays much) 4) Abiword 5) Clestia 6) Kstars
and I am teaching her to program using Python,
and I have a load of other stuff installed I want to encourage her to try.
He does have a point on the importance of how the questions are asked. It is very easy to frame questions that, for example, force someone to choose between God as creator and evolution, without being able to answer both (the orthodox Christian view).
Living in one of the countries affected by the Boxing Day Asian Tsunnami, the problem was not lack of a way to reach people, but the lack of a mechanism to pass the message along. IN particular the people who had the warning, said they did not know how to contact the governments of some countries (which shows a worrying lack of resourcefulness, but that is another subject).
As you say, mobile phone penetration is easily high enough to work, but you will need to guard against hoax calls. A designated number of warnings would have to be well publicised.
Radio will work, but you hardly need to distribute them specially: just ask all radio and TV broadcasters to broadcast an emergency message. It may not work that well late in the night. For times like that vehicles with big speakers on them driving through towns with loud warnings should work well.
The laser idea is stupid: there are all kinds of lights in the sky to confuse people: I remember a huge number of people seeing "UFOs" in London in 1990 or 91 because someone said there was one on a popular radio station, so people started looking up and seeing all kinds of things they normally never noticed.
Actually the researcher interviewed for the Newsweek article is not trying to tell us anything, just positing a possibility:
"I don't know." He laughs again. "It's, um I don't think we have enough evidence to say."
The other link, to the personal page on Mindspring is less useful, one because of the lack of a link to a more authoritative source, secondly because the researcher seems to be setting out to undermine their value as evidence:
Irrespective of religous beliefs, NDE's are not evidence for life after death on simple logical grounds: death is defined as the final, irreversible end. Anyone who 'returned' did not, by definition, die - although their mind, brain and body may have been in a very unusual state.
That does not really make sense: if the reported experiences are real, they are strong evidence.
This is an area where is is hard to be entirely impartial, but making a silly argument for one side goes to far.
I currently use Quod Libet (good search, good for classical, simple UI, modifies data in tags in audio files rather than maintaining separate database).
Well okay but thats not very big by world standards.
A greater land area than Malaysia or the Philippines and nearly as big as Japan or the Congo is small by world standards.
Its not "very big" by world of Europeans standards, the point is that it has a small population relative to its size. Its population density is similar to that of New Zealand or Sudan. There are very few European or Asian countries with lower population densities, and its population density is much lower than India, or China or almost all other big countries (apart from Russia), so it is very lightly populated by world standards.
Re:The Benefits of Moving Backward
on
Gnome 2.30 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Gnome also dropped support for XSMP, breaking compatibility with almost any non Gnome app, to do it more like Windows (and a fatuous MS derived use case about closing laptop lids).
Then there is a centralised config database.
And people use Gnome because KDE is too much like Windows (i.e. the default theme has the panel at the bottom).
Slashdot Mirror
It's just the way the human brain works: things that are found together with relatively high frequency, like Catholic priests and child abuse, or Christian "Conservatives" and unseemly acts in public restrooms, tend to conjure each other up.
Do you mean "found together" or "mentioned by the media together"? OK, its the same in this context, but I am not aware of any evidence that either of the things you mention happens more often in that particular group, its just that its a juicier story when it does.
It is not reasonable to expect non-geeks to know who the well known AV providers are.
It is one more reason why using a reactive system like AV means you have already lost.
They need an IT person to come in and lock it down tightly so damage is contained. The office manager was running as admin, right? Of course they will have to pay (unless you oblige), but it is a one off, and its either that or the viruses.
Oh, and use Linux. Windows is fine in a corporate environment where you have an IT department to look after all this, but for home (non-gaming) and small business (unless there is Windows only industry vertical software you need) it is much better to use something that does not need on-going maintenance: you can get someone to install it and then rely on it carrying on working.
If you RTFA properly the Pope said the transparency is a good thing. He was worried about the "digital divide"
The problem is that journalists only want the church to talk about sex (at the moment the scandal, but always about sex), so a long talk on the good and bad aspects of the internet was not interesting so they wrote up a negative story, which the Slashdot editors then distorted more to appeal to the prejudices of the atheist Slashdot audience.
Everyone else covered up sexual abuse as well: governments, families schools. Here is one example I happen to have read about before
The main difference between the church and other organisations that have done the same seem to be:
1) The press are more interested in covering church scandals.
2) The people responsible for the cover-ups by the church are made to resign when caught, those in government get away with it.
This only works if someone is searching for a business or product. Most searches are for information. There are LOTS of valuable websites run by individuals. You rank them all low?
Why on earth do we want rankings to reflect credit ratings? You can trust sources with good credit ratings more? Lots of businesses with good credit ratings one year, have ended up with their CEO in the dock the next (e.g. Enron).
You need a lot more data coverage than you have: you can cannot verify Glaxosmithkline, Vodafone (main corporate site - country sites you do), Freshfields (a major law firm) or Oxfam International (but you can verify Oxfam UK).
Nice idea, but your current implementation sucks (yes, it is alpha, but its not very encouraging). It is better than Cuil.
I totally agree. If people just start looking at each others data instead of verifying it, a lot of mistakes (or fraudulent data ) will never be caught.
On the other hand, a lot of errors in interpretation and statistical analysis will be caught.
AT least rum and Coca-cola is one drink. It seems to have escaped the editors that Trinidad and Tobago are TWO islands, but one COUNTRY.
Even babies just a few months old will prefer to look at a picture of someone with the same skin color as them.
Citation needed. The article said three years old, which is quite old enough to pick up biases from society. Even if you showed the response you claim it would need testing to establish whether it reflected racial bias or per se, or merely a preference for people who look like their parents: would a a child with red-headed parents prefer people with red hair for the same reason? Do children with one black and one white parent show bias?
My daughter did not regard skin colour as important at four or five years old - it was obvious from her conversation that she thought hair colour more important than skin colour.
There was also an experiment (I do no t know the name , I only saw it on TV), where (an entirely white group) kids were told that "blue eyed people are better" one day, and "brown eyed people are better" another day and absorbed it perfectly into their behaviour each time.
I made the argument a couple days ago that video codecs should not be directly supported in browsers.
Entirely different. Given the strong network effects in video codecs, a de facto standard will emerge: at the moment its flv, and widespread usage will be more important that its actual merits. The market does not work well.
Also, direct browser support of one codec does not prevent browser, or plugin, support of another. Browsers handle multiple image formats fine.
In this case, it sounds like the regulation is too heavy. There are no network effects, and mandating one technology may prevent the use of others.
Something (God) witnesses by hundreds of millions of people over thousands of years and cultures has evidence for its existence comparable to something (UFOs sightings that do not have a natural explanation) witnessed by small number of people, mostly a small number of cultures, and entirely in the last few decades?
Last time I looked a Windows CD cost about $2 where I live...
Knowing your wireless card and webcam will work: Priceless
That would mean not using Vista or Win 7.
I've found that for the younger kids, the vast majority of their time spent playing anything Internet/web-based involves Shockwave Flash based sites Typically, on a kids' PC, they don't have that much important data to worry about losing anyway.
You need Windows because they use cross-platofrm software.
If they're doing most things on the net, the sites they use are saving their high scores, user profiles, and such.
There are lots of fun,useful and beneficial things that are not on the net. My six year old spends only a minority of her time of the net, and her (Linux) PC has lots of educational software on it - but we restrict time spent on games. Your argument assumes that alll kids will use their computers for is playing flash games - they are missing a lot..
My daughter uses:
1) Gcompris
2) Tuxpaint
3) Battle for Wesnoth (the only game she really plays much)
4) Abiword
5) Clestia
6) Kstars
and I am teaching her to program using Python,
and I have a load of other stuff installed I want to encourage her to try.
Let me correct that:
Microsott = Evil
Apple = Evil
Google = Somewhat less evil
Maybe this is why my friend emigrated to China.
For the slow witted, yes, a couple I know did emigrate from the UK to China, but I doubt its anything to do with piracy.
[quote]Even though X haters have been screaming for years that network transparency needs to go.[/quote]
Largely because they do not realise how useful it can be...
He does have a point on the importance of how the questions are asked. It is very easy to frame questions that, for example, force someone to choose between God as creator and evolution, without being able to answer both (the orthodox Christian view).
Some previous surveys have been badly framed that way, see my comments on the PEW survey
There are two problems with that solution:
1) Its already been done (at least in Sri Lanka), so there is no point suggesting it
2) Its too low tech and non-geeky, and does not user lasers.
Living in one of the countries affected by the Boxing Day Asian Tsunnami, the problem was not lack of a way to reach people, but the lack of a mechanism to pass the message along. IN particular the people who had the warning, said they did not know how to contact the governments of some countries (which shows a worrying lack of resourcefulness, but that is another subject).
As you say, mobile phone penetration is easily high enough to work, but you will need to guard against hoax calls. A designated number of warnings would have to be well publicised.
Radio will work, but you hardly need to distribute them specially: just ask all radio and TV broadcasters to broadcast an emergency message. It may not work that well late in the night. For times like that vehicles with big speakers on them driving through towns with loud warnings should work well.
The laser idea is stupid: there are all kinds of lights in the sky to confuse people: I remember a huge number of people seeing "UFOs" in London in 1990 or 91 because someone said there was one on a popular radio station, so people started looking up and seeing all kinds of things they normally never noticed.
Actually the researcher interviewed for the Newsweek article is not trying to tell us anything, just positing a possibility:
"I don't know." He laughs again. "It's, um I don't think we have enough evidence to say."
The other link, to the personal page on Mindspring is less useful, one because of the lack of a link to a more authoritative source, secondly because the researcher seems to be setting out to undermine their value as evidence:
Irrespective of religous beliefs, NDE's are not evidence for life after death on simple logical grounds: death is defined as the final, irreversible end. Anyone who 'returned' did not, by definition, die - although their mind, brain and body may have been in a very unusual state.
That does not really make sense: if the reported experiences are real, they are strong evidence.
This is an area where is is hard to be entirely impartial, but making a silly argument for one side goes to far.
The other article on Ketamine on the same site makes things look a bit different.
The personal experiences section of the site is quite convincing, but is not hard evidence of anything becuase of self-selection bias.
I used to use Amarok, I have never used Winamp.
I currently use Quod Libet (good search, good for classical, simple UI, modifies data in tags in audio files rather than maintaining separate database).
Apple is just as dangerous as Microsoft.
Is clearly false, because of this:
They (Apple) just haven't gotten to the market share level they need yet to take over the world as it were.
Lots of people want to take over the world. Its only worth worrying about the ones that have a reasonable chance of doing it.
8th largest country in Europe
Well okay but thats not very big by world standards.
A greater land area than Malaysia or the Philippines and nearly as big as Japan or the Congo is small by world standards.
Its not "very big" by world of Europeans standards, the point is that it has a small population relative to its size. Its population density is similar to that of New Zealand or Sudan. There are very few European or Asian countries with lower population densities, and its population density is much lower than India, or China or almost all other big countries (apart from Russia), so it is very lightly populated by world standards.
Gnome also dropped support for XSMP, breaking compatibility with almost any non Gnome app, to do it more like Windows (and a fatuous MS derived use case about closing laptop lids).
Then there is a centralised config database.
And people use Gnome because KDE is too much like Windows (i.e. the default theme has the panel at the bottom).
Okular and Evince on Linux also do not seem to support /Launch, and they are far more widely used than Acrobat Reader on Linux.