It is not verbatum copying, it is taking key points, re-wording them, and passing them off as originally sourced. That happens all the time, especially to decent blogging and discussion forums. And it happens on the low level. For example if a lazy journalist wants to make a Japan related story, they need only visit Japundit, pick something interesting, and re-word it. And in the majority of cases no attribution is given. That's what I mean by bad form.
Also as a publisher of a small Online Community Newspaper, I hope that Gannett and the other big news publishing companies follow suit. It's win win for me.
I often see how independent small publishers break stories, only for larger organisations to source from, but not attribute their source, several days later. This is especially true of quality blogs and online communities in niche interest or geographical areas - I run one of these. Not attributing and mandatory charging for a derivative work is not good form.
I would like to know the IP range that Murdoch companies use, in order to block them from my content.
The sky is an eerie dark shade of brightness right here, near but not under the path of the current solar eclipse, high in the sky, but as if the brightness setting of a monitor has been turned right down, none of the hue of sunset. I believe this makes a good analogy to the GP's point.
Re:Postal addresses identify houses!I
on
P.I.I. In the Sky
·
· Score: 1
I think you identified they key point well: It's not what PII is, or what something judged 'not-PII' is, it is what is done with any piece of information collected. That should be well defined, and if usage of PII or non-PII data is in breach of an agreement (for example whether and IP address is PII or isn't PII, if a service decide to sniff me on an IP address, as an example, as a result of my using their service, that should be changeable, rather than whether or not an IP address is PII).
I've had my ISP's DNS cache occasionally fail to return results, or return an invalid cached result a few times. Doing it for a site as big as Google is embarrassing, but not unheard of.
It's kinda unusual for it to happen blanket across all DNS's at the same instant, following a critical piece of reportage on Google by the government owned television network (which received a 40bn Yuan advertising revenue gift from arch-rival Baidu shortly before the Google critical piece, and shortly after a critical piece on them).
Perhaps require evidence of participation in an open source project: direct code analysis and track-record of a person's drive and communication. I've used this in the past, it's a great screener (and doesn't require I waste time like you cited above).
Hmmm, I find few British people have the same sentiment about the US than Americans have about China. And by your analogy the should be, well, analogous.
And sadly it's nothing special. When typing a URL that doesn't resolve on a mainland China ISP a Baidu-sponsored search page (full of ads, no simple search box) appears.
It was only in 2006 when google.com itself was redirected to baidu.com by some ISPs some of the time.
Some of the country (in major cities, forget the countryside) has the facade of development, but with basic corruption endemic at the bottom and top levels, it has a whole lot further to go.
Happens here too, but 'a while' tends to be after 6 hours of surfing. I'd put a lot of weight on the plugins, mine are Firebug, Flash Player, British English Dictionary, Chinese Pera-kun (that's it). All are essential to my surfing. But having to force a shut down isn't a big hassle, the OS keeps running, and that's fine.
With regards to the catch-all email, is there any way to configure something like that, and interface it with GMail?
I have a catch-all forwarding to an a real email account, which I then forward to GMail (and GMail then puts this real email address, pointing to my domain, in the header of send mails). This is really useful behaviour:
GMail can be configured with rules so any email sent to a certain address (for example, facebook.com@mydomain.com) skips the Inbox and gets auto-tagged via a filter. It's possible to set up a filter on the reply-to field of an email, but when some domains use different reply-to addresses for essentially the same purpose (at least as it seems to me, as the receiver of the email) I find this a better method.
Finding out who is selling my email address. I use a unique address for each site I register at, so it's easy to see who is being unethical with my email address. This was more important in the late 90s and early 00s, anti-spam has advanced to the level it's more a curiosity factor than a practical matter any more.
Branding. For a personal domain this is less important, but for a small or one-man business a catch-all forwarding to a single address means an email mis-sent to sales@domainname.com still gets delivered (and spam filtered), and a sale opportunity/enquiry is not missed, and can be replied to from a branded email address (just set up alternate email addresses as reply-to in GMail).
And of course, using a domain and free GMail means no lock-in (stuck with the same address) of the sort email hosts can impose should they wish (this doesn't apply to catch-all addresses, just personal domains in general, but is the reason I went with a personal domain for email).
I receive around 700 spams per day all filtered correctly (in GMail's 'spam' folder) and around 1 spam per day in my Inbox. The domain is 11 years old. As another poster above pointed out, using a domain and variations on multiple/catch-all addresses also means you have a variety and flexibility in your approach to using email that a single address, especially an address not on a domain you own, doesn't provide.
I guess if in a salaried environment and 'not nitpicking and actually having something useful to say' were built into a package you'd say something more useful than the above.
Well here in the UK, a 50,000 pound dummy rocket is regarded as quite expensive. You'd think a dummy would be a lot cheaper than that. I'm sure I saw one on eBay for a half-a-dozen monkeys.
Not everyone does it, as well as being illegal it's a big reputational risk. Living in China I find it quite fascinating seeing the differences large international companies, small international/foreign companies, and large/small local companies work. This topic is an example of such.
[Cue Slashdot car analogy.] Large international corporations often do not let their senior foreign staff own a car, even if such staff state a preference to do so. A rented car and driver are cheap. The risk to the reputation of the company (and international companies often hire on their reputation for being well backed financially, esp. in white collar sectors) should a senior staff member have a well publicised accident are sufficiently high to cause this behaviour. Many more examples exist.
Aside from other concerns like IT security, backdoors in commonly pirated software, lack of availability of software updates, the reputation with the OP's customers is at risk. Perhaps that is how the home office could be persuaded to put some force on the foreign office.
Outsourcing brings with it cost cutting - legal software may appear highly expensive to the overseas office. It MAY BE THE CASE that the manager of the overseas office is pocketing the money, or will pocket the money if legal software is demanded, and providing fake receipts. This is not unusual. The home office should audit all software. China provides an environment where QQ (a hugely popular instant messaging program) or other software may be installed on machines and local IT/security staff have lower standards than that of the home office. Again, an audit and remote administration should be mandatory.
I would point out that this case is not unique to China, all developing economies share work and cultural environments which may surprise, disorientate or confuse the home country office. A professional consultancy* can often be hired at good rates to ensure best practice is maintained in any developing or unfamiliar situation, helping to avoid potentially costly mistakes and lapses in judgement.
*I run such a company but I'm not going to astroturf. Slashdot is for my fun time.
I'm all for teaching evolution but would someone please explain to me what the issue was with teaching the strengths and weaknesses?
If science teaches us anything it is that we should always continue to question and refine our studies, not idly stand by and accept them as fact.
I absolutely agree. The Scientific Method should certainly be taught as part of any High School science curriculum, and perhaps before.
But it shouldn't be focussed on one branch of science and ignored from all others. That the earth orbits the moon is as subject to the Scientific Method as evolution, as Black Holes exist and that a chemical reaction does not happen because the Flying Spaghetti Monster makes it so.
Scientific Method should be taught as it relates to all of science. Not singled out on any single branch by Special Interest Groups, whatever that branch of science, or special interest, that may be.
"$50 - you lost $50 plus the cost of eventual replacement"
Actually, $50 should be deducted from the cost of a replacement. And if you want to get really picky, that $50 should be depreciated over the expected remaining life of the device.
I agree with your comments regarding getting otherwise unpublished stuff published. Yet does it fit the Wiki model? Of an editor, or several other contributes coming along and changing a bunch of stuff? I think this is more down the Everything2, or general group-accredited blogging route, though none of them have had the success of Wikipedia.
Wikipedia, in this most testing of Economic times, belt-tightening, and a period when many are worrying about their financial and career future, has reached it's target. So why the talk of ads? It has it's funding and doesn't need further. IMHO it's a great thing that they've raised their target and will be able to provide services for the coming year, and lay foundations further into the future.
Wikipedia, and Wikimedia, are non-profits with a well defined remit. They've achieved target funding, far better than many non-profits do, they can pay for a core staff and bandwidth. Great. Shouldn't this story be about giving them a pat on the back instead of waving a $100million/month!!!! carrot in front of their face?
I certainly wouldn't contribute there if they received that much, because they don't need that much. Wikipedia needs a core staff and a community of interested contributors. I do not want it turned into the equivalent of a paid blog site.
Video from that site streams terribly. It is slow. It doesn't cache when put on pause and doesn't even cache to rewind back to - reloads all over again.
Just stick it on YouTube and be done with it.
Slashdot Mirror
It is not verbatum copying, it is taking key points, re-wording them, and passing them off as originally sourced. That happens all the time, especially to decent blogging and discussion forums. And it happens on the low level. For example if a lazy journalist wants to make a Japan related story, they need only visit Japundit, pick something interesting, and re-word it. And in the majority of cases no attribution is given. That's what I mean by bad form.
I often see how independent small publishers break stories, only for larger organisations to source from, but not attribute their source, several days later. This is especially true of quality blogs and online communities in niche interest or geographical areas - I run one of these. Not attributing and mandatory charging for a derivative work is not good form.
I would like to know the IP range that Murdoch companies use, in order to block them from my content.
The sky is an eerie dark shade of brightness right here, near but not under the path of the current solar eclipse, high in the sky, but as if the brightness setting of a monitor has been turned right down, none of the hue of sunset. I believe this makes a good analogy to the GP's point.
I think you identified they key point well: It's not what PII is, or what something judged 'not-PII' is, it is what is done with any piece of information collected. That should be well defined, and if usage of PII or non-PII data is in breach of an agreement (for example whether and IP address is PII or isn't PII, if a service decide to sniff me on an IP address, as an example, as a result of my using their service, that should be changeable, rather than whether or not an IP address is PII).
*all ISPs, not all DNS's, that would make sense.
It's kinda unusual for it to happen blanket across all DNS's at the same instant, following a critical piece of reportage on Google by the government owned television network (which received a 40bn Yuan advertising revenue gift from arch-rival Baidu shortly before the Google critical piece, and shortly after a critical piece on them).
Perhaps require evidence of participation in an open source project: direct code analysis and track-record of a person's drive and communication. I've used this in the past, it's a great screener (and doesn't require I waste time like you cited above).
Hmmm, I find few British people have the same sentiment about the US than Americans have about China. And by your analogy the should be, well, analogous.
And sadly it's nothing special. When typing a URL that doesn't resolve on a mainland China ISP a Baidu-sponsored search page (full of ads, no simple search box) appears. It was only in 2006 when google.com itself was redirected to baidu.com by some ISPs some of the time. Some of the country (in major cities, forget the countryside) has the facade of development, but with basic corruption endemic at the bottom and top levels, it has a whole lot further to go.
Happens here too, but 'a while' tends to be after 6 hours of surfing. I'd put a lot of weight on the plugins, mine are Firebug, Flash Player, British English Dictionary, Chinese Pera-kun (that's it). All are essential to my surfing. But having to force a shut down isn't a big hassle, the OS keeps running, and that's fine.
I have a catch-all forwarding to an a real email account, which I then forward to GMail (and GMail then puts this real email address, pointing to my domain, in the header of send mails). This is really useful behaviour:
I receive around 700 spams per day all filtered correctly (in GMail's 'spam' folder) and around 1 spam per day in my Inbox. The domain is 11 years old. As another poster above pointed out, using a domain and variations on multiple/catch-all addresses also means you have a variety and flexibility in your approach to using email that a single address, especially an address not on a domain you own, doesn't provide.
I guess if in a salaried environment and 'not nitpicking and actually having something useful to say' were built into a package you'd say something more useful than the above.
People that appreciate/quote/use/follow xkcd... XKCD followers to XKCD are much like mud to a mud-guard.
I believe we should look at these diagrams to truly understand blocking of intersections. Link: http://is.gd/ovSB
2^6*10^5 drachm for 120 pony ain't cheap.
Isn't a pint 568ml?
Simple: a really big lump of plasticine sufficiently soft to absorb stuff, and sufficiently solid to stay in one piece.
Not everyone does it, as well as being illegal it's a big reputational risk. Living in China I find it quite fascinating seeing the differences large international companies, small international/foreign companies, and large/small local companies work. This topic is an example of such.
[Cue Slashdot car analogy.] Large international corporations often do not let their senior foreign staff own a car, even if such staff state a preference to do so. A rented car and driver are cheap. The risk to the reputation of the company (and international companies often hire on their reputation for being well backed financially, esp. in white collar sectors) should a senior staff member have a well publicised accident are sufficiently high to cause this behaviour. Many more examples exist.
Aside from other concerns like IT security, backdoors in commonly pirated software, lack of availability of software updates, the reputation with the OP's customers is at risk. Perhaps that is how the home office could be persuaded to put some force on the foreign office.
Outsourcing brings with it cost cutting - legal software may appear highly expensive to the overseas office. It MAY BE THE CASE that the manager of the overseas office is pocketing the money, or will pocket the money if legal software is demanded, and providing fake receipts. This is not unusual. The home office should audit all software. China provides an environment where QQ (a hugely popular instant messaging program) or other software may be installed on machines and local IT/security staff have lower standards than that of the home office. Again, an audit and remote administration should be mandatory.
I would point out that this case is not unique to China, all developing economies share work and cultural environments which may surprise, disorientate or confuse the home country office. A professional consultancy* can often be hired at good rates to ensure best practice is maintained in any developing or unfamiliar situation, helping to avoid potentially costly mistakes and lapses in judgement.
*I run such a company but I'm not going to astroturf. Slashdot is for my fun time.
I'm all for teaching evolution but would someone please explain to me what the issue was with teaching the strengths and weaknesses? If science teaches us anything it is that we should always continue to question and refine our studies, not idly stand by and accept them as fact.
I absolutely agree. The Scientific Method should certainly be taught as part of any High School science curriculum, and perhaps before.
But it shouldn't be focussed on one branch of science and ignored from all others. That the earth orbits the moon is as subject to the Scientific Method as evolution, as Black Holes exist and that a chemical reaction does not happen because the Flying Spaghetti Monster makes it so.
Scientific Method should be taught as it relates to all of science. Not singled out on any single branch by Special Interest Groups, whatever that branch of science, or special interest, that may be.
Easy answer... SSH everything to a server the UK has no jurisdiction over.
It's not that hard.
"$50 - you lost $50 plus the cost of eventual replacement"
Actually, $50 should be deducted from the cost of a replacement. And if you want to get really picky, that $50 should be depreciated over the expected remaining life of the device.
I agree with your comments regarding getting otherwise unpublished stuff published. Yet does it fit the Wiki model? Of an editor, or several other contributes coming along and changing a bunch of stuff? I think this is more down the Everything2, or general group-accredited blogging route, though none of them have had the success of Wikipedia.
Wikipedia, in this most testing of Economic times, belt-tightening, and a period when many are worrying about their financial and career future, has reached it's target. So why the talk of ads? It has it's funding and doesn't need further. IMHO it's a great thing that they've raised their target and will be able to provide services for the coming year, and lay foundations further into the future.
Wikipedia, and Wikimedia, are non-profits with a well defined remit. They've achieved target funding, far better than many non-profits do, they can pay for a core staff and bandwidth. Great. Shouldn't this story be about giving them a pat on the back instead of waving a $100million/month!!!! carrot in front of their face?
I certainly wouldn't contribute there if they received that much, because they don't need that much. Wikipedia needs a core staff and a community of interested contributors. I do not want it turned into the equivalent of a paid blog site.
Video from that site streams terribly. It is slow. It doesn't cache when put on pause and doesn't even cache to rewind back to - reloads all over again. Just stick it on YouTube and be done with it.
You RTFA and never the comments? You must be unusual here.