How does the parental control check the content coming from Opera's proxy server? The entire reason why Opera Mini is so fast, is that all traffic passes through Opera's servers that clean, compress and otherwise preprocess it.
Look, casual people aren't capable of handling their own server and why should they be.
You don't have to have your own service to keep track of your own photos. Just keep a copy of your own photos on your own computer.
I can't fathom how someone can even ask that question: what happens to your photos when Facebook disappears? Well, you just upload your originals to whatever other photo service you want to use to share them. Not keeping the original is like sending your (old fashioned physical) photos to newspapers or magazines to publish them for you, and not keeping the negatives. It's like sending your original manuscript to a publisher rather than a copy (or maybe it's sending a copy and then burning the original). You can't keep control over your own data if you completely hand it over to outside forces that you don't control. Always keep your own copy.
I'm only objecting to the slippery slope argument because it's funny to use a slippery slope argument to do so. (Perhaps an unrelated joke in an otherwise serious comment wasn't the best idea.)
Should information obtained by unethical means be used. The Nazis KILLED people in medical research - should we use their research ?
If it's reliable, unbiased research, then yes, we should use it. After we punish those who did the research.
also - in these less severe cases - such as being discussed in the article above - one of the issues is that if you allow the use of the information - you encourage further unethical acts in later cases... (the old Slippery slope)
I don't know. If we accept one slippery slope argument, where will it end?
In any case, I stand by my position: we should make use of all accessible information if it's reliable. And we should punish those who commit crimes. If someone intentionally breaks the law in order to expose corruption, and is willing to do the time for it, then more power to him. That's what civil disobedience is all about. And if he's open and honest about it, I'm all for cutting him some slack.
now if you prosecute the people getting the information - the theory is that it wont stop the unethical acts - it will merely drive them underground - where as if you dont allow the use - it will prevent people bothering - because all it does is protect the guilty party.
It's not about prosecuting the people getting the information, it's about prosecuting the real corruption that has been exposed. That should be your primary concern.
Do you honestly want known corruption to continue? The only reason to do that is if you're one of the people profiting from that corruption. Your theory that investigating corruption that's been exposed through criminal means is less important than discouraging the criminal messenger from exposing corruption is completely backwards. Sure, prosecute the messengers too, but also go after the real crooks. They don't deserve your bureaucratic immunity.
HBGary I hope. I can see how some might think they deserve a whipping. Anonymous is at least standing up for something they believe in, and against corruption. They're not afraid to stand up to someone more powerful than they are. As a parent, if my kid was involved in something like that, we'd have a few good talks on ethics, but I'd also support him and be proud of him.
Some laws need to be broken. Also, this kind of corruption needs to be exposed, no matter how.
Isn't it weird that a group of anonymous vigilantes is more transparent than a government that's supposed to serve the people, or companies that work for that government or for politicians involved in it?
That's easy to say now, but at that time, all Android phones were rootable and moddable. Nobody expected the Milestone to be locked down like that. Also note that it's practically a clone of the Droid, which doesn't have the same limitation.
You can fetch the source from a git repository, compile it, flash it to your device and have a complete working OS stack. The majority of the software is OSI approved. How much more open do you want?
I'd like it to boot after all that. Though I admit it's not really the OS that's the problem here; it's the manufacturer.
I don't care. I admit that Motorola is technically capable of making very nice hardware, but as long as I regret ever giving them my money, I won't be giving them any more. My next phone will probably be something with Nexus in its name. Or maybe something from HTC.
Though like the unhacked PS3, you don't buy the locked-down phones if you want to flash them with unsigned ROMs. At that point you're just being a whiny bitch.
Only if you know in advance that it's locked down. When I bought my Milestone, there was no way I could have known it was crippled like that.
But a lot less open than every single PC OS. So it's valid criticism when you're discussing using it as a PC.
Besides, the Atrix is from Motorola, so expect everything to be locked down to a ridiculous degree. Motorola doesn't make devices for customers to own.
There's no single objective threshold when everybody is suddenly magically able to deal with it. Some people can handle it when they're 12, others can never handle it. So the limit is put at 18, because then you're an adult and it's your own responsibility to figure out what you can and can't deal with. Until that time, it's your parents' responsibility, and they can still buy an 18+ game for you and let you play it.
Only in Australia they seem to think gamers never grow up.
That's my experience too. When I'm playing a game and it's my turn, but I also need to go, I have a hard time figuring out what to do. I go to the toilet, and after I come back, the decision is suddenly very easy.
But rushing important life decisions doesn't sound like a terribly good idea.
When I need to pee and need to make a decision, I go to the bathroom first, and then make the decision. Much easier that way, and in my experience I make much better decisions.
It's not just cultural, but I do think that Microsoft has learned a very valuable lesson somewhere along the line. Life is easier when they love you than when they hate you.
The past couple of months MS definitely has been showing a more positive attitude. More positive than they had before, and definitely more positive than the one Sony has been showing us lately.
I'm not quite ready to become a fan, though. But the Kinect has certainly been the first product ever from Microsoft that has made me want to give them money.
That's what I thought. The company I work for has some interesting ideas for using the Kinect, but we were hoping for a good open source api. I'm afraid we're exactly the kind of people MS wants to see big money from.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a bit confused. Is it Charlie Sheen or Tom Cruise that doesn't have a messiah complex?
How does the parental control check the content coming from Opera's proxy server? The entire reason why Opera Mini is so fast, is that all traffic passes through Opera's servers that clean, compress and otherwise preprocess it.
The app allows you to access mature content. Apple does this across the board. - j
Then Safari should show a warning at some point too.
But Safari is installed by default, and a vital part of your iThingy. It's different. Really.
Look, casual people aren't capable of handling their own server and why should they be.
You don't have to have your own service to keep track of your own photos. Just keep a copy of your own photos on your own computer.
I can't fathom how someone can even ask that question: what happens to your photos when Facebook disappears? Well, you just upload your originals to whatever other photo service you want to use to share them. Not keeping the original is like sending your (old fashioned physical) photos to newspapers or magazines to publish them for you, and not keeping the negatives. It's like sending your original manuscript to a publisher rather than a copy (or maybe it's sending a copy and then burning the original). You can't keep control over your own data if you completely hand it over to outside forces that you don't control. Always keep your own copy.
I'm only objecting to the slippery slope argument because it's funny to use a slippery slope argument to do so. (Perhaps an unrelated joke in an otherwise serious comment wasn't the best idea.)
Should information obtained by unethical means be used.
The Nazis KILLED people in medical research - should we use their research ?
If it's reliable, unbiased research, then yes, we should use it. After we punish those who did the research.
also - in these less severe cases - such as being discussed in the article above - one of the issues is that if you allow the use of the information - you encourage further unethical acts in later cases... (the old Slippery slope)
I don't know. If we accept one slippery slope argument, where will it end?
In any case, I stand by my position: we should make use of all accessible information if it's reliable. And we should punish those who commit crimes. If someone intentionally breaks the law in order to expose corruption, and is willing to do the time for it, then more power to him. That's what civil disobedience is all about. And if he's open and honest about it, I'm all for cutting him some slack.
now if you prosecute the people getting the information - the theory is that it wont stop the unethical acts - it will merely drive them underground - where as if you dont allow the use - it will prevent people bothering - because all it does is protect the guilty party.
It's not about prosecuting the people getting the information, it's about prosecuting the real corruption that has been exposed. That should be your primary concern.
Do you honestly want known corruption to continue? The only reason to do that is if you're one of the people profiting from that corruption. Your theory that investigating corruption that's been exposed through criminal means is less important than discouraging the criminal messenger from exposing corruption is completely backwards. Sure, prosecute the messengers too, but also go after the real crooks. They don't deserve your bureaucratic immunity.
HBGary I hope. I can see how some might think they deserve a whipping. Anonymous is at least standing up for something they believe in, and against corruption. They're not afraid to stand up to someone more powerful than they are. As a parent, if my kid was involved in something like that, we'd have a few good talks on ethics, but I'd also support him and be proud of him.
Some laws need to be broken. Also, this kind of corruption needs to be exposed, no matter how.
Isn't it weird that a group of anonymous vigilantes is more transparent than a government that's supposed to serve the people, or companies that work for that government or for politicians involved in it?
My god... someone else fnord read that book? Amazing.
Who hasn't?
That's easy to say now, but at that time, all Android phones were rootable and moddable. Nobody expected the Milestone to be locked down like that. Also note that it's practically a clone of the Droid, which doesn't have the same limitation.
You can fetch the source from a git repository, compile it, flash it to your device and have a complete working OS stack. The majority of the software is OSI approved. How much more open do you want?
I'd like it to boot after all that. Though I admit it's not really the OS that's the problem here; it's the manufacturer.
I don't care. I admit that Motorola is technically capable of making very nice hardware, but as long as I regret ever giving them my money, I won't be giving them any more. My next phone will probably be something with Nexus in its name. Or maybe something from HTC.
Though like the unhacked PS3, you don't buy the locked-down phones if you want to flash them with unsigned ROMs. At that point you're just being a whiny bitch.
Only if you know in advance that it's locked down. When I bought my Milestone, there was no way I could have known it was crippled like that.
Android's more open than most other Phone OS's.
But a lot less open than every single PC OS. So it's valid criticism when you're discussing using it as a PC.
Besides, the Atrix is from Motorola, so expect everything to be locked down to a ridiculous degree. Motorola doesn't make devices for customers to own.
Sometimes when truth comes into contact with politics, cool stuff does happen.
I believe the consensus was that Democrats fail at doing good, whereas Republicans succeed at doing evil.
(It's not quite that black and white; some democrats are evil, and some republicans are incompetent.)
There's no single objective threshold when everybody is suddenly magically able to deal with it. Some people can handle it when they're 12, others can never handle it. So the limit is put at 18, because then you're an adult and it's your own responsibility to figure out what you can and can't deal with. Until that time, it's your parents' responsibility, and they can still buy an 18+ game for you and let you play it.
Only in Australia they seem to think gamers never grow up.
I just looked and realized that Slashdot doesn't support unicode.
A sad state of affairs indeed. However, Slashdot does have a preview button.
Another reason to sit down to urinate, rather than standing up.
A couple of decades ago, most houses weren't anywhere near as well insulated and heated as they are nowadays.
That's my experience too. When I'm playing a game and it's my turn, but I also need to go, I have a hard time figuring out what to do. I go to the toilet, and after I come back, the decision is suddenly very easy.
But rushing important life decisions doesn't sound like a terribly good idea.
When I need to pee and need to make a decision, I go to the bathroom first, and then make the decision. Much easier that way, and in my experience I make much better decisions.
It's not just cultural, but I do think that Microsoft has learned a very valuable lesson somewhere along the line. Life is easier when they love you than when they hate you.
The past couple of months MS definitely has been showing a more positive attitude. More positive than they had before, and definitely more positive than the one Sony has been showing us lately.
I'm not quite ready to become a fan, though. But the Kinect has certainly been the first product ever from Microsoft that has made me want to give them money.
That's what I thought. The company I work for has some interesting ideas for using the Kinect, but we were hoping for a good open source api. I'm afraid we're exactly the kind of people MS wants to see big money from.