Or....you retire at 50-60, come back as a contractor, and pocket the whole rate (less income & self-employment taxes of course) because you've got benefits through your retirement or your spouse. At least that's what controls engineers seem to do.
Your users' happiness--that is happiness in general, not just positive metrics related to your product--is a threat to your business model.
I see some folks chasing more/better/different. The people selling these things tell you "Congratulations on your purchase of your new widget". See? You're winning. But if I ask the more/better/different folks "Do you have enough", they take offence.
If their users have *enough* they will stop sending you money. A wealthy man has everything he needs. A poor man doesn't have enough.
This is deliberate. This is not new. It's been this way for a *very* long time. The solution is simple--if you don't the rat race all you have to do is realize when you've had. The solution is not *easy*. But it is simple.
Justice isn't about impartiality or facts. That's not its job; that's science's job. Justice's job is to regulate society so we can all get along. If some of us have to be sacrificed, so be it. Society needs a degree of certainty in order to function. If we all agree on something--and if they courts say we agree, then we agree--then we have certainty. The case can be resolved, the guilty punished, and society can move on.
The courts do NOT, and have not for a very long time if ever, had the patience or resources to give everyone accused of a crime "a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."
Do you seriously believe every dope dealer, thief, rapist, etc. is entitled to that? Yes, it was promised to you a long time ago, but you've been living in a cave if you really expect it when you show up.
Take the plea, do the time, pay the fine, and move on. You are guilty. If you drag it to a trial you've already pissed off all the other people in the room with the possible exception of your own lawyer. Don't look to them for help.
There are people who care about the quality of the facts that appear in court, but only in the abstract. Google "forensics on trial" and follow your nose. These people have about the same appeal to the process as any other scientist: Lawyers and the law are only interested in "facts" when they agree with theory; this is not a character defect; it's the nature of an adversarial legal system. It's supposed to be that way.
The concept that science should be valid in court is not important--only that it is *accepted* (by the court) and that it proves *my* point. Or at least gives a quick answer so we can all get outta here. (well, except for the guilty).
The "innocence" project is not called the Justice project. They're just as adversarial as any other legal organization.
Face it, folks--it's like a no-longer-mentionable comedian said: "Mama doesn't want justice. Mama wants quiet!"
Heard an interview with one of the employees on the radio earlier this week. The way it was done was a deliberate slap in the face to the employees.
There's some debate already whether Joe Ricketts violated labor laws. I've no doubt he can show internet journalism isn't profitable. And anyone paying attention in 2008 (when he got into it) knew that, too. The benefit Joe Ricketts gets from a "newspaper" is a place to shout from and a tax write off. It was never going to be profitable.
It was done a week after writers unionized and the last message shouted from the "newspaper" was crystal fscking clear: You vote union? We vote scorched earth.
Now. Anybody else who still has a job--do you want a union?
My Dad told me about one of his friends, a cardiologist, who had a patient in for a triple-bypass. Dr. L. went to check on his patient and found him laying in the *hospital* bed smoking cigarettes. Dr. L. canceled the surgery immediately. Risk due to performing the surgery on that day was significantly greater than the risk due to NOT performing the surgery on that day.
If the surgery is "non-urgent" this means that the risk due to NOT performing the surgery *today* is trivial.
Do they even take that oath anymore? Does anyone still take it seriously?
winner! winner! chicken dinner! A plain metal key is all that's needed--sometimes *more* than is needed for security.
more than needed refers to some jobs where you park your car and take public transport to the site. normally you take all your valuables out of the car and leave it unlocked. that way when the thieves make their rounds they don't have to break the window to see what you got in there
Yah airports have cameras. some people take a crew boat to work.
tl/dr: We've had since September to come up with one and still ain't figured it out. So, let's start with you.
----------------------
There oughta be a law against clickbait? Which is legally defined as...? OK, so what does that get you? Let's say it (clickbait) is "distracting and not true". Let's assume we can legally define those things. That means that government (at least the one where I live) now can make a law "...abridging..." it. Completely absurd assumptions, but that's the 'discussion' you asked for, so fine, then--what if there was a law?
How 'bout we start with agents provocateur that drag up an endlessly discussed topic without adding *anything new* and invite the community to "leave your best thoughts". It does run up the numbers. So your plan goes like this, does it? "Let's threaten our readership--who let's face it--tends to think of ourselves as intellectually independent with an authority that will tell them what they can read. Push their buttons; watch them feed the ratings."
So, yeah--if you think there oughta be a law, let's start with you. Delete your clickbait topic. It ain't news, it ain't for nerds, and it doesn't matter.
I also don't like clickbait, but I'm feeding the troll here--even by calling him out as a troll. My decision certainly looks stupid or hypocritical at least one other person. It may look stupid to someone else called me-1-day-from-now.
This would be an *excellent* moonshot. Same as going to the moon is a great thing--but the *real* benefit is all we learned about organization, science, and technology (and sociology) along the way.
Go ahead.
I'm not a power guy, but I am an engineer (PLCs mostly). I work for a small engineering firm and have for 20+ years. We've got talented folks that can help.
FTH (and FTA): "Fortunately, all these separate parts are not autonomous agents. They are highly interconnected, all working in harmony to create one unique being: you."
Almost none of that is true: You aren't unique. You aren't particularly highly interconnected. You aren't in self-harmony. You aren't a single "being". In fact, there are more bacterial cells in "you" human cells in "you"...and many peer-reviewed papers confirm that those bacteria do contribute to determining "your" behavior. And those autonomous agents inside of you? They are pretty darned autonomous.
My freshman psych professor explained it to us this way: "There are a whole lot of different behaviors we can observe. Different parts of the organism have different jobs. One of those jobs is to make up stories. We call that one consciousness. The illusion that each healthy uninjured human body has one integrated consciousness is a complete fantasy. Injuries and other pathologies expose this fact in interesting ways, but fragmented and incomplete consciousness is the normal way of being for all of us."
A good way to see the separation is to compare desire vs behavior. If there was one fully integrated and aware "consciousness", then desire and behavior would always be consistent. They're not. Not even close. Consider things we do even though we'd prefer not to: Habits, compulsions, and addictions. Tobacco smoking could be any of those. It's not hard to find a smoker who will tell you "I want to stop smoking". Or neurological phenomena, for example "the yips" (google it, it's a golf thing). On a more positive note, consider practiced skills--like touch-typing, playing musical instruments, batting a baseball, rollerblading, etc. You can't consciously decide "I will skillfully perform this act" and *poof* it's done. There's something in you that does (or does not) those things. But it's not the thing that's speaking to the person next to you.
Lovecraft put it quite nicely: “The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far.”
Headline: "T-Mobile Won't Stop Claiming Its Network Is Faster Than Verizon's "
Article: "T-Mobile says it will continue to claim it has the country’s fastest LTE network even after the National Advertising Division, a telecom industry watchdog group, “recommended” that it stop doing so in print, TV, and web advertisements."
Those are two *very different* assertions. Saying your "the best" in some way means absolutely nothing. Saying you're "better than some specific competitor" is comparative advertising, and does actually mean something. Which is why you see it far less often than the other.
Presenting a misleading headline to an audience that you *know* is already sensitized to BS just tells us to ignore "The Verge" as a source of useful information.
...you must first invent the universe. (Carl Sagan)
Technology is just applied knowledge--from yourself (and where did *you* get that knowledge?) or those immediately around you. Separating yourself from technology or from society is a matter of degree and a matter of choice.
The article answers the question: "Few of us would be willing to give up modern shelter, food, clothing, medicine, entertainment or transportation. Most of us would say the trade-offs are more than worth it." (yes I did rtfa)
Many of my neighbors (I live near Middlefield, OH; there are a lot of Amish) have made a decision to give up what some of us call "technology" and isolate themselves from what some of us call "society". But it's just a matter of degree. Horse-and-buggy is still technology. Paying "english" for rides or taking money from us for work is participation in what we call "society". "Society" here gets quotes around it because obviously Amish people DO participate in society--just not exactly the same one that some other people might.
Many of us are not aware that we have a choice and a most of the rest of us us don't want to be responsible for the choice we've made.
One last thing--The article cites as an example of the futility of ignoring technology: "Eventually, those who preferred to live as foragers — such as the American Indians — no longer had a choice." This is wrong in so many, many ways. Rather than preach about other folks current and past way of life I invite anyone who's curious what might be wrong with that statement to use the device you're reading this on to look around a little.
Only the natural fleece comes from sheep. There is also artificial fleece. Any material that behaves like the natural fleece (or more specifically its source) won't be a problem; your body processes things like that and they will pass...usually at night.
Yep, same here. LSD just sets the "awesome" bit unconditionally. No matter now mundane an idea or an object is, when I was on acid, it was awesome. On the one hand I knew intellectually this (whatever it was) was ordinary. But my perception of it at that moment was "this is awesome". The 'this is awesome' feeling was very persistent. Even knowing a thing was mundane at that moment didn't make a difference; it still felt very profound and significant.
The really weird part was that knowing it was really bs, the sensation got annoying. 'Yeah, that light bulb is awesome. And that rock. And snow. And cold air from the window. It's all awesome. Whatever' and at the same time i was bored and annoyed by the experience i was also in awe of it.
I had heard so many good things about acid i really wanted it to be as good as folks said, so tried it another time or two; similar result each time.
My experience was that acid no more "opens the mind to greater truths" than a magnet "opens a crt to greater colors".
Sorry, kids--there are no shortcuts to enlightenment.
When Tanya and I started paying back student loans, the *FIRST* thing we did was write each creditor and ask them for the loan documentation, and we specifically asked they show us the original agreement and copy of the signature. We also asked for documentation proving they now own the debt and that when we pay it off it will be done done.
If you don't do this, you run a damned good chance of having to pay the loan more than once.
Pretty much all of them were able to schlep up copies of paper signed years ago, along with who bought what debt from whom all the way down to the current owner. This tells me that they know they don't get paid if they screw this up.
Only one or two couldn't produce; we told them "well, if you come up with the docs, contact us; otherwise, sorry--we don't know you!".
Everything about ubuntu has been fscking awesome so far. Sound is just annoying. Everybody has at least ways to fix it and none of them work. On about 1/2 to 2/3 of reboots, ubuntu finds the sound on my laptop. Once it goes back in my bag, I roll the dice again.
Read the forums, the official troubleshooting procedure, random articles found in google, etc. a *lot* of people seem to have this problem, and have been for a long time.
How can they do everything else so well and sound so poorly?
Some software actually helps produce, but 6 trillion bucks worth of apps is gonna hard to justify as "worth" anything near that. A bunch of vigorous activity, but doesn't actually produce any beef...shoes...steel...tires...tortillas...whatever.
I remember watching the episode and thinking Gee--it would be great to be one of the people with the active immune system. Of course it would suck for my neighbors, friends, and family--but that's their problem.
You have to hold a license in order to practice medicine. Same as any other professional license, except crappy doctors usually kill their victims one-by-one; crappy civil engineers can kill orders of magnitude more people in one disaster. This ain't anything new, folks.
You have certain ethical responsibilities when you get your MD, DO, DDS, etc--it's spelled out and regulated (in the us) by state. Yes, it's really the state medical board they get their authority by statute.
It doesn't matter *what* diagnostic tools you're using--if you're practicing medicine, you're the gatekeeper.
The FDA will tell you what's approved or not approved--but they do not regulate *everything*.
Your employer makes you use some cheapass screening tool to grind a hundred patients through diagnosis where you'd only get ten of them through if you did it right. Fine--they have profit to think of.
It's your responsibility as the practicioner to say "No, this is bad medicine and I won't do it."
It's really a no-brainer for the practicioner, too--you're going to lose your license and get sued if you go along with this kind of crap.
Slashdot Mirror
And I've known 64 year old java programmers who programmed the pants off younger workers with a few years experience.
Is that how you get their pants off? Well, I never learned Java, so who knew?
Or....you retire at 50-60, come back as a contractor, and pocket the whole rate (less income & self-employment taxes of course) because you've got benefits through your retirement or your spouse.
At least that's what controls engineers seem to do.
After four it doesn't really matter.
Your users' happiness--that is happiness in general, not just positive metrics related to your product--is a threat to your business model.
I see some folks chasing more/better/different. The people selling these things tell you "Congratulations on your purchase of your new widget". See? You're winning. But if I ask the more/better/different folks "Do you have enough", they take offence.
If their users have *enough* they will stop sending you money.
A wealthy man has everything he needs. A poor man doesn't have enough.
This is deliberate. This is not new. It's been this way for a *very* long time.
The solution is simple--if you don't the rat race all you have to do is realize when you've had.
The solution is not *easy*. But it is simple.
it intensifies your personality.
But...what if you're an a------e?
Of course your secrets will not be used against you. Only the oppressors will be outed and held accountable.
Justice isn't about impartiality or facts. That's not its job; that's science's job. Justice's job is to regulate society so we can all get along. If some of us have to be sacrificed, so be it. Society needs a degree of certainty in order to function.
If we all agree on something--and if they courts say we agree, then we agree--then we have certainty. The case can be resolved, the guilty punished, and society can move on.
The courts do NOT, and have not for a very long time if ever, had the patience or resources to give everyone accused of a crime "a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."
Do you seriously believe every dope dealer, thief, rapist, etc. is entitled to that? Yes, it was promised to you a long time ago, but you've been living in a cave if you really expect it when you show up.
Take the plea, do the time, pay the fine, and move on. You are guilty. If you drag it to a trial you've already pissed off all the other people in the room with the possible exception of your own lawyer. Don't look to them for help.
There are people who care about the quality of the facts that appear in court, but only in the abstract. Google "forensics on trial" and follow your nose. These people have about the same appeal to the process as any other scientist: Lawyers and the law are only interested in "facts" when they agree with theory; this is not a character defect; it's the nature of an adversarial legal system. It's supposed to be that way.
The concept that science should be valid in court is not important--only that it is *accepted* (by the court) and that it proves *my* point. Or at least gives a quick answer so we can all get outta here. (well, except for the guilty).
The "innocence" project is not called the Justice project. They're just as adversarial as any other legal organization.
Face it, folks--it's like a no-longer-mentionable comedian said:
"Mama doesn't want justice. Mama wants quiet!"
Heard an interview with one of the employees on the radio earlier this week.
The way it was done was a deliberate slap in the face to the employees.
There's some debate already whether Joe Ricketts violated labor laws.
I've no doubt he can show internet journalism isn't profitable. And anyone paying attention in 2008 (when he got into it) knew that, too.
The benefit Joe Ricketts gets from a "newspaper" is a place to shout from and a tax write off. It was never going to be profitable.
It was done a week after writers unionized and the last message shouted from the "newspaper" was crystal fscking clear:
You vote union? We vote scorched earth.
Now. Anybody else who still has a job--do you want a union?
Yes, absolutely.
First do no harm.
My Dad told me about one of his friends, a cardiologist, who had a patient in for a triple-bypass. Dr. L. went to check on his patient and found him laying in the *hospital* bed smoking cigarettes. Dr. L. canceled the surgery immediately.
Risk due to performing the surgery on that day was significantly greater than the risk due to NOT performing the surgery on that day.
If the surgery is "non-urgent" this means that the risk due to NOT performing the surgery *today* is trivial.
Do they even take that oath anymore? Does anyone still take it seriously?
winner! winner! chicken dinner!
A plain metal key is all that's needed--sometimes *more* than is needed for security.
more than needed refers to some jobs where you park your car and take public transport to the site.
normally you take all your valuables out of the car and leave it unlocked.
that way when the thieves make their rounds they don't have to break the window to see what you got in there
Yah airports have cameras. some people take a crew boat to work.
tl/dr:
We've had since September to come up with one and still ain't figured it out. So, let's start with you.
----------------------
There oughta be a law against clickbait? Which is legally defined as...?
OK, so what does that get you? Let's say it (clickbait) is "distracting and not true". Let's assume we can legally define those things. That means that government (at least the one where I live) now can make a law "...abridging..." it. Completely absurd assumptions, but that's the 'discussion' you asked for, so fine, then--what if there was a law?
How 'bout we start with agents provocateur that drag up an endlessly discussed topic without adding *anything new* and invite the community to "leave your best thoughts". It does run up the numbers. So your plan goes like this, does it? "Let's threaten our readership--who let's face it--tends to think of ourselves as intellectually independent with an authority that will tell them what they can read. Push their buttons; watch them feed the ratings."
So, yeah--if you think there oughta be a law, let's start with you. Delete your clickbait topic. It ain't news, it ain't for nerds, and it doesn't matter.
I also don't like clickbait, but I'm feeding the troll here--even by calling him out as a troll.
My decision certainly looks stupid or hypocritical at least one other person. It may look stupid to someone else called me-1-day-from-now.
But...it is *my* decision.
This would be an *excellent* moonshot.
Same as going to the moon is a great thing--but the *real* benefit is all we learned about organization, science, and technology (and sociology) along the way.
Go ahead.
I'm not a power guy, but I am an engineer (PLCs mostly).
I work for a small engineering firm and have for 20+ years. We've got talented folks that can help.
Where should I have my boss send the resumes?
So. Show me some shit.
FTH (and FTA):
"Fortunately, all these separate parts are not autonomous agents. They are highly interconnected, all working in harmony to create one unique being: you."
Almost none of that is true: You aren't unique. You aren't particularly highly interconnected. You aren't in self-harmony. You aren't a single "being". In fact, there are more bacterial cells in "you" human cells in "you"...and many peer-reviewed papers confirm that those bacteria do contribute to determining "your" behavior. And those autonomous agents inside of you? They are pretty darned autonomous.
My freshman psych professor explained it to us this way: "There are a whole lot of different behaviors we can observe. Different parts of the organism have different jobs. One of those jobs is to make up stories. We call that one consciousness. The illusion that each healthy uninjured human body has one integrated consciousness is a complete fantasy. Injuries and other pathologies expose this fact in interesting ways, but fragmented and incomplete consciousness is the normal way of being for all of us."
A good way to see the separation is to compare desire vs behavior. If there was one fully integrated and aware "consciousness", then desire and behavior would always be consistent. They're not. Not even close.
Consider things we do even though we'd prefer not to: Habits, compulsions, and addictions. Tobacco smoking could be any of those. It's not hard to find a smoker who will tell you "I want to stop smoking".
Or neurological phenomena, for example "the yips" (google it, it's a golf thing).
On a more positive note, consider practiced skills--like touch-typing, playing musical instruments, batting a baseball, rollerblading, etc. You can't consciously decide "I will skillfully perform this act" and *poof* it's done.
There's something in you that does (or does not) those things. But it's not the thing that's speaking to the person next to you.
Lovecraft put it quite nicely:
“The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far.”
Headline:
"T-Mobile Won't Stop Claiming Its Network Is Faster Than Verizon's "
Article:
"T-Mobile says it will continue to claim it has the country’s fastest LTE network even after the National Advertising Division, a telecom industry watchdog group, “recommended” that it stop doing so in print, TV, and web advertisements."
Those are two *very different* assertions.
Saying your "the best" in some way means absolutely nothing.
Saying you're "better than some specific competitor" is comparative advertising, and does actually mean something. Which is why you see it far less often than the other.
Presenting a misleading headline to an audience that you *know* is already sensitized to BS just tells us to ignore "The Verge" as a source of useful information.
then chickened out.
...you must first invent the universe. (Carl Sagan)
Technology is just applied knowledge--from yourself (and where did *you* get that knowledge?) or those immediately around you.
Separating yourself from technology or from society is a matter of degree and a matter of choice.
The article answers the question: "Few of us would be willing to give up modern shelter, food, clothing, medicine, entertainment or transportation. Most of us would say the trade-offs are more than worth it." (yes I did rtfa)
Many of my neighbors (I live near Middlefield, OH; there are a lot of Amish) have made a decision to give up what some of us call "technology" and isolate themselves from what some of us call "society". But it's just a matter of degree. Horse-and-buggy is still technology. Paying "english" for rides or taking money from us for work is participation in what we call "society". "Society" here gets quotes around it because obviously Amish people DO participate in society--just not exactly the same one that some other people might.
Many of us are not aware that we have a choice and a most of the rest of us us don't want to be responsible for the choice we've made.
One last thing--The article cites as an example of the futility of ignoring technology: "Eventually, those who preferred to live as foragers — such as the American Indians — no longer had a choice." This is wrong in so many, many ways. Rather than preach about other folks current and past way of life I invite anyone who's curious what might be wrong with that statement to use the device you're reading this on to look around a little.
> your fleece jacket or other synthetic clothing,
Fleece's come from sheep.
Only the natural fleece comes from sheep. ...usually at night.
There is also artificial fleece.
Any material that behaves like the natural fleece (or more specifically its source) won't be a problem; your body processes things like that and they will pass
Yep, same here.
LSD just sets the "awesome" bit unconditionally. No matter now mundane an idea or an object is, when I was on acid, it was awesome. On the one hand I knew intellectually this (whatever it was) was ordinary. But my perception of it at that moment was "this is awesome". The 'this is awesome' feeling was very persistent. Even knowing a thing was mundane at that moment didn't make a difference; it still felt very profound and significant.
The really weird part was that knowing it was really bs, the sensation got annoying. 'Yeah, that light bulb is awesome. And that rock. And snow. And cold air from the window. It's all awesome. Whatever' and at the same time i was bored and annoyed by the experience i was also in awe of it.
I had heard so many good things about acid i really wanted it to be as good as folks said, so tried it another time or two; similar result each time.
My experience was that acid no more "opens the mind to greater truths" than a magnet "opens a crt to greater colors".
Sorry, kids--there are no shortcuts to enlightenment.
??? ;),
Bought one last week from Dell with Win7 preinstalled.
Shortly after it arrived it also had GWX control panel installed
On that point--which do you prefer? GWXCP or Never10?
When Tanya and I started paying back student loans, the *FIRST* thing we did was write each creditor and ask them for the loan documentation, and we specifically asked they show us the original agreement and copy of the signature. We also asked for documentation proving they now own the debt and that when we pay it off it will be done done.
If you don't do this, you run a damned good chance of having to pay the loan more than once.
Pretty much all of them were able to schlep up copies of paper signed years ago, along with who bought what debt from whom all the way down to the current owner. This tells me that they know they don't get paid if they screw this up.
Only one or two couldn't produce; we told them "well, if you come up with the docs, contact us; otherwise, sorry--we don't know you!".
Everything about ubuntu has been fscking awesome so far.
Sound is just annoying. Everybody has at least ways to fix it and none of them work.
On about 1/2 to 2/3 of reboots, ubuntu finds the sound on my laptop. Once it goes back in my bag, I roll the dice again.
Read the forums, the official troubleshooting procedure, random articles found in google, etc.
a *lot* of people seem to have this problem, and have been for a long time.
How can they do everything else so well and sound so poorly?
Some software actually helps produce, but 6 trillion bucks worth of apps is gonna hard to justify as "worth" anything near that.
A bunch of vigorous activity, but doesn't actually produce any beef...shoes...steel...tires...tortillas...whatever.
funny money.
must be maintained forever
I remember watching the episode and thinking Gee--it would be great to be one of the people with the active immune system.
Of course it would suck for my neighbors, friends, and family--but that's their problem.
Right?
You have to hold a license in order to practice medicine.
Same as any other professional license, except crappy doctors usually kill their victims one-by-one; crappy civil engineers can kill orders of magnitude more people in one disaster. This ain't anything new, folks.
You have certain ethical responsibilities when you get your MD, DO, DDS, etc--it's spelled out and regulated (in the us) by state.
Yes, it's really the state medical board they get their authority by statute.
It doesn't matter *what* diagnostic tools you're using--if you're practicing medicine, you're the gatekeeper.
The FDA will tell you what's approved or not approved--but they do not regulate *everything*.
Your employer makes you use some cheapass screening tool to grind a hundred patients through diagnosis where you'd only get ten of them through if you did it right. Fine--they have profit to think of.
It's your responsibility as the practicioner to say "No, this is bad medicine and I won't do it."
It's really a no-brainer for the practicioner, too--you're going to lose your license and get sued if you go along with this kind of crap.
Sure enough, the pic at amazon shows fabric palmrests.
The keys themselves don't seem to be fabric.
To quote Alfred E. Neuman, "yecch".
I guess if MS can convince people to chuck 'em and buy an new one every few months it's not a problem.
As I'm not trying to impress people with a luxury handbag, Mr. Neuman's most famous statement comes to mind.