In the end, the graphical representation of data is nearly always skewed, whether intentionally or not and in the end, as long as the underlying data is available (and many time, especially in government it is not) you can do you own charts to determine what is correct.
While the layperson (or CEO) likes pretty pictures and big flashy dashboards that have little green and red and black arrows to show what's going on, it's not transparent until you can get your hands on the data itself. Being that I have fought with local governments and state/federally funded groups for years to give me the underlying data (and not some self-created aggregation), I applaud any effort to give us what we need.
Umm no, the City Councilmembers changing their tone has nothing to do w/them agreeing with me--because they don't. They just know that someone is paying attention, including those that voted them in, and they are concerned about FUTURE votes for sure but it's a lot quicker turn around to have stuff happen now than 2 to 4 years from now.
The only control you have is your vote on a few elected officials who you hope will have your interest in mind when making decisions. However, there is nothing forcing them to hold your interest or even protect them.
A local city which I cover at length on my website due to their poor decisions on a variety of matters, including public safety staffing and funding, is one which I should highlight here based on what you say above. Because this particular city has decided that funding a $20 million public arts center, which is losing money like you cannot believe due to poor third party management, they have decided to cut back on public safety funding and have watched as crime (of many different types) has skyrocketed. Now, based on their poor decisions and the public disapproval, brought to light by those that frequent my site--including the city staff and councilmembers themselves, they have started to pay attention to what is being said outside of their little black hole.
So, even though you claim that the only way you can influence the way things are handled in your city is through your vote (which was true in year's past), it's no longer true. The news media has moved away, in droves--probably due to their own funding issues and lack of staffing, from investigative reporting to fluff created by the PR machines inside cities themselves. It's now up to the public to replace what should be considered a failure of traditional media's mandate to bring attention and force change before election years.
Thankfully, at least in a small part, it has been working so far.
The information might have been publicly available but there was a certain amount of affort required to collect it.
I'm sorry, did you misunderstand what publicly available information means? You talk as if you're one of the people I deal with daily in local government. I am probably considered one of those "one-percenters", people who are doing their due diligence to request the information of government that is to be posted for the public to see but the government elects to make extremely difficult to retrieve. I spend hours every week trying to retrieve the information which local governments are hiding from public view (I don't bother with pictures of police officers because, well, that's not my thing) but constantly run into roadblocks because, while this information should just be posted for the public to read, city staff and councilmembers really don't want you to know what they're doing w/your money.
So for you, as a member of the general public, to say that it's completely ok to put up these roadblocks to protect the safety of officers, is exactly the reason that they use for everything else. This is something which you should be championing against and certainly not supporting. City governments need to realize that information must be free (god, where have we heard that before?) and they should preempt the public by posting it on their own sites instead of allowing third-parties become the central location for documents and information they really don't want disseminated.
Guess it depends on where you live. It's exactly the opposite for me--like how it took until 2004 for T-mobile to have service between Madison and the Illinois border where my AT&T phone was just fine. I've been traveling through rural MN with full AT&T service (two weeks ago) and found my T-mobile phone w/a big fat X.
You know why I won't do it (again)? Because after two weeks applications stop working. You click the icon and it opens and then immediately closes. You delete the application and reinstall it and that issue moves to another application. Before long your phone icon or Safari icon stop working and you're forced to reinstall everything on the phone. Yeah, Jailbreaking is cool and I love the fact that you can run apps you normally cannot but I really do need the most basic functionality of the iPhone to work too.
BTW, I realize that this doesn't happen to everyone at all times but it happened to me more than enough times to make it not worth it to do again. I've been happily running my standard iPhone for the last 8 months w/o issue. YMMV.
Maybe they already have a solution which is higher and they are just being dicks? Maybe they aren't dicks at all and want to see the best team win? Maybe they think that their solution is unbeatable?
Whatever it is, it is certainly a lot more interesting than I thought it'd ever be. Kudos to the groups that have broken the 10% barrier!
Microsoft created the disease. Microsoft is the cancer on software--and I'm sure we all have heard Microsoft claim Linux is a cancer on software.
I used to be like you. I really cared about all the drama that surrounds Microsoft vs Linux and then later, in my mid-twenties and continuing into my thirties, I stopped giving a shit. Why? Because it just doesn't matter anymore. I suggest you listen to Linus' words and take heed. The man is a visionary. He wants you to stop concentrating on the bullshit and start concentrating on what matters--supporting what you want to support.
I can definitely drink to that and I think I will. Bell's Lager FTW. Cheers.
Why did bars think this system was a necessity in the first place?
Because those boxes store the personal information of the IDs that are scanned, usually in an XLS file which are easily shared across businesses or used for selling information to third parties--that's why.
These bands do have labels, many are RIAA (The Grateful Dead), but they also allow their shows to trade freely. Apparently I didn't make myself clear, hope that helps.
The RIAA has worn me out. I hate all music now. I never want to buy any of their crap again.
I have been saying for *YEARS* (long before the RIAA was pulling the bullshit they are now) that you should be listening to free music. There are plenty of bands that allow the release of their live stuff on the web and no, we're not talking about crappy Indy artists that you've never heard about before. We're talking real bands that care more about their fans and who actually tour rather than live off the royalties of overprocessed studio shit.
I suggest supporting those bands by buying their records and/or going to their shows instead of paying for music that sucks and that has no chance of expanding what is freely available out there.
The difference is a few dollars at most so unless this really changes the pricing structure (it won't unless mandatory caps are set, which won't happen) then this is nothing but political fluff.
BTW, I saved $12 a year by telling them that we drive less than 20 miles weekly. I am now at the lowest cost insurance for my age bracket and insurance coverage. A whole $12, wow.
The answer is pretty simple DO NOT RUN ANY APPS!!!
Yeah, the answer to the drug problem is simple: don't buy any drugs!!! Unfortunately just because someone is accepting payment in return for illegal drugs does not mean it's legal. Thus, just because Canadian Facebook users have the option not to run applications doesn't mean that they don't/won't.
You're welcome to like Jacko, but don't assume everyone else does and assume that if they don't they're from the wrong generation. I distinctly remember even at the time friends were pretty split about him - sure some loved him, but there were still plenty that hated him even when he was in his prime.
I hated what the idiot did in the public eye (just like plenty of the rockers and their friends that you mention) but I must admit that I loved his older stuff (especially from the Jackson 5) and it would appear that plenty of others did too.
or should we be cherishing them and making sure they don't see Janet Jackson's nipple?
Well at least we now have a Supreme Court decision that stops overzealous administrators and staff from seeing children's nipples in search of non-existent over-the-count drugs. Now, if only the administrators were actually held liable for their stupid decisions.
That would, in turn, force us to raise and eat fewer cows.
Wrong, it would cause more cows to be raised because people have become accustomed to eating more meat (doesn't matter what variety) than any other time in our history. Because of this, the demand would remain high and more cows would need to be raised on a natural diet (I eat grass fed beef, free range chicken and pork BTW) to keep up with what everyone has been doing for the last 20 years.
I find it funny that Boston is on both the best and worst list.
I recently was in Boston for the first time on business. I thought it was a great city as there was plenty of good food and night life as well as viable mass transit. Unfortunately there were the downsides too. I thought the city was "old" and "dirtier" than what I am accustomed to in Minneapolis and I definitely didn't feel terribly safe wandering around by myself at night. Would I live there compared to Minneapolis? Probably not but do I see why it's on both the best and the worst, yes.
Slashdot Mirror
In the end, the graphical representation of data is nearly always skewed, whether intentionally or not and in the end, as long as the underlying data is available (and many time, especially in government it is not) you can do you own charts to determine what is correct.
While the layperson (or CEO) likes pretty pictures and big flashy dashboards that have little green and red and black arrows to show what's going on, it's not transparent until you can get your hands on the data itself. Being that I have fought with local governments and state/federally funded groups for years to give me the underlying data (and not some self-created aggregation), I applaud any effort to give us what we need.
Yay.
Mmmm fermented pumpkins: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ikH9ZRcF2Q
Umm no, the City Councilmembers changing their tone has nothing to do w/them agreeing with me--because they don't. They just know that someone is paying attention, including those that voted them in, and they are concerned about FUTURE votes for sure but it's a lot quicker turn around to have stuff happen now than 2 to 4 years from now.
The only control you have is your vote on a few elected officials who you hope will have your interest in mind when making decisions. However, there is nothing forcing them to hold your interest or even protect them.
A local city which I cover at length on my website due to their poor decisions on a variety of matters, including public safety staffing and funding, is one which I should highlight here based on what you say above. Because this particular city has decided that funding a $20 million public arts center, which is losing money like you cannot believe due to poor third party management, they have decided to cut back on public safety funding and have watched as crime (of many different types) has skyrocketed. Now, based on their poor decisions and the public disapproval, brought to light by those that frequent my site--including the city staff and councilmembers themselves, they have started to pay attention to what is being said outside of their little black hole.
So, even though you claim that the only way you can influence the way things are handled in your city is through your vote (which was true in year's past), it's no longer true. The news media has moved away, in droves--probably due to their own funding issues and lack of staffing, from investigative reporting to fluff created by the PR machines inside cities themselves. It's now up to the public to replace what should be considered a failure of traditional media's mandate to bring attention and force change before election years.
Thankfully, at least in a small part, it has been working so far.
The information might have been publicly available but there was a certain amount of affort required to collect it.
I'm sorry, did you misunderstand what publicly available information means? You talk as if you're one of the people I deal with daily in local government. I am probably considered one of those "one-percenters", people who are doing their due diligence to request the information of government that is to be posted for the public to see but the government elects to make extremely difficult to retrieve. I spend hours every week trying to retrieve the information which local governments are hiding from public view (I don't bother with pictures of police officers because, well, that's not my thing) but constantly run into roadblocks because, while this information should just be posted for the public to read, city staff and councilmembers really don't want you to know what they're doing w/your money.
So for you, as a member of the general public, to say that it's completely ok to put up these roadblocks to protect the safety of officers, is exactly the reason that they use for everything else. This is something which you should be championing against and certainly not supporting. City governments need to realize that information must be free (god, where have we heard that before?) and they should preempt the public by posting it on their own sites instead of allowing third-parties become the central location for documents and information they really don't want disseminated.
Guess it depends on where you live. It's exactly the opposite for me--like how it took until 2004 for T-mobile to have service between Madison and the Illinois border where my AT&T phone was just fine. I've been traveling through rural MN with full AT&T service (two weeks ago) and found my T-mobile phone w/a big fat X.
They're afraid the AP will come after them for quoting 50 words.
You know why I won't do it (again)? Because after two weeks applications stop working. You click the icon and it opens and then immediately closes. You delete the application and reinstall it and that issue moves to another application. Before long your phone icon or Safari icon stop working and you're forced to reinstall everything on the phone. Yeah, Jailbreaking is cool and I love the fact that you can run apps you normally cannot but I really do need the most basic functionality of the iPhone to work too.
BTW, I realize that this doesn't happen to everyone at all times but it happened to me more than enough times to make it not worth it to do again. I've been happily running my standard iPhone for the last 8 months w/o issue. YMMV.
Because I live within walking distance to work and walk to work, I don't need a car. At all. Ever.
Well, you probably don't "need" a car, at all, ever but you certainly do want one.
"no stock price."
Yet.
Maybe they already have a solution which is higher and they are just being dicks? Maybe they aren't dicks at all and want to see the best team win? Maybe they think that their solution is unbeatable?
Whatever it is, it is certainly a lot more interesting than I thought it'd ever be. Kudos to the groups that have broken the 10% barrier!
Microsoft created the disease. Microsoft is the cancer on software--and I'm sure we all have heard Microsoft claim Linux is a cancer on software.
I used to be like you. I really cared about all the drama that surrounds Microsoft vs Linux and then later, in my mid-twenties and continuing into my thirties, I stopped giving a shit. Why? Because it just doesn't matter anymore. I suggest you listen to Linus' words and take heed. The man is a visionary. He wants you to stop concentrating on the bullshit and start concentrating on what matters--supporting what you want to support.
I can definitely drink to that and I think I will. Bell's Lager FTW. Cheers.
Why did bars think this system was a necessity in the first place?
Because those boxes store the personal information of the IDs that are scanned, usually in an XLS file which are easily shared across businesses or used for selling information to third parties--that's why.
How about if they try to offer something better than the pirates?
They can never beat free, sorry.
archive.org's Live Music Archive or http://bt.etree.org should get you where you need to go.
These bands do have labels, many are RIAA (The Grateful Dead), but they also allow their shows to trade freely. Apparently I didn't make myself clear, hope that helps.
The RIAA has worn me out. I hate all music now. I never want to buy any of their crap again.
I have been saying for *YEARS* (long before the RIAA was pulling the bullshit they are now) that you should be listening to free music. There are plenty of bands that allow the release of their live stuff on the web and no, we're not talking about crappy Indy artists that you've never heard about before. We're talking real bands that care more about their fans and who actually tour rather than live off the royalties of overprocessed studio shit.
I suggest supporting those bands by buying their records and/or going to their shows instead of paying for music that sucks and that has no chance of expanding what is freely available out there.
The difference is a few dollars at most so unless this really changes the pricing structure (it won't unless mandatory caps are set, which won't happen) then this is nothing but political fluff.
BTW, I saved $12 a year by telling them that we drive less than 20 miles weekly. I am now at the lowest cost insurance for my age bracket and insurance coverage. A whole $12, wow.
The answer is pretty simple DO NOT RUN ANY APPS!!!
Yeah, the answer to the drug problem is simple: don't buy any drugs!!! Unfortunately just because someone is accepting payment in return for illegal drugs does not mean it's legal. Thus, just because Canadian Facebook users have the option not to run applications doesn't mean that they don't/won't.
I suppose thats our job as 'informed' citizens though.. to constantly second guess our government.
Yes, it is because 99 times out of 100 there is some sort of bullshit going on that will never see the light of day.
1. It's Qwest.
2. It's not available everywhere and to everyone (including where I currently reside).
3. In my experience they force you to bundle data with telephone service (no, I don't want a land line anymore).
4. 20mbit service is only available in some areas, Comcast has much faster offerings (2x as much) in my area.
You're welcome to like Jacko, but don't assume everyone else does and assume that if they don't they're from the wrong generation. I distinctly remember even at the time friends were pretty split about him - sure some loved him, but there were still plenty that hated him even when he was in his prime.
I hated what the idiot did in the public eye (just like plenty of the rockers and their friends that you mention) but I must admit that I loved his older stuff (especially from the Jackson 5) and it would appear that plenty of others did too.
or should we be cherishing them and making sure they don't see Janet Jackson's nipple?
Well at least we now have a Supreme Court decision that stops overzealous administrators and staff from seeing children's nipples in search of non-existent over-the-count drugs. Now, if only the administrators were actually held liable for their stupid decisions.
That would, in turn, force us to raise and eat fewer cows.
Wrong, it would cause more cows to be raised because people have become accustomed to eating more meat (doesn't matter what variety) than any other time in our history. Because of this, the demand would remain high and more cows would need to be raised on a natural diet (I eat grass fed beef, free range chicken and pork BTW) to keep up with what everyone has been doing for the last 20 years.
I find it funny that Boston is on both the best and worst list.
I recently was in Boston for the first time on business. I thought it was a great city as there was plenty of good food and night life as well as viable mass transit. Unfortunately there were the downsides too. I thought the city was "old" and "dirtier" than what I am accustomed to in Minneapolis and I definitely didn't feel terribly safe wandering around by myself at night. Would I live there compared to Minneapolis? Probably not but do I see why it's on both the best and the worst, yes.