I normally won't respond to ACs, but this one is interesting so I'm going to use it as a teaching example.
Note the implication that I called out the windows astroturfers because I dislike windows 8/10. Now read my original post; do I ever mention my opinion of windows? This is the tell; the AC is trying to take control of the narrative, framing it in a way to discredit the comment and undermine my position. It also serves to change the nature of the discussion from that of astroturfing to the more familiar "windows 8/10 hate" that is subjective and thus, easily distractable.
Of course, to those of us similarly trained, it's a dead give away to the previously mentioned astroturfing. That they're posting as AC means it's a "hit and run"; they only care about knocking down the point I made, and not actually using their "own" reputation.
Astroturfing has become something of the norm over the past 5 years; I've seen a huge spike in it on the various forums out there. Everything from MS's products ( Windows 8/10 trolls are somewhat infamous ) to politicians to celebrities.
Welcome to the future. I wanted flying cars, got this.
...equates violence toward women and children with sex and pain with pleasure...
Implying....men are the perpetrators, amirite?
I am tired of the implication that all men, everywhere, are just busting at the seams to violate and hurt women and children ( no one seems to imply or care if they hurt each other, after all ), only we don't out of some fear of punishment. That's incredibly disrespectful and sexist towards men AND it infantilizes women. As if neither gender has any agency of self.
It's still sexism if it's against men. Hell, it's sexism even if the men are white.
Women also end up having to deal with family issues more, in part because they care more about family and home, and in part because men are on average domestically flaky.
Whoa now, I get where you're coming with this, but your wording choice is poor. Time was there was a gendered based split of responsibilities; men brought home the cash, women took care of the children and house. That isn't men being "domestically flaky". Now a days that's even less true; more and more men are working their asses off, mixing child care duties with full time jobs. Still not "domestically flaky".
It's possibly worth noting here that "Game changing" does not necessitate "good". For instance, Windows 8 could be said to have been "Game changing", given how big a turd it was.
Are we trusting MS now? Between the "EVERYONE MUST HAVE WINDOWS 10" bs and Brad Smith saying we should let politicians decide what the balance is ( between encryption and personal freedoms ), I'm having a hard time with the whole notion that MS needs MORE of my security information, not less.
Maybe I'm just paranoid though. My tinfoil hat is probably 3 sizes too small.
It's worth noting here that all laws are, by their very definition, "evil". If such a term truly exists, then surely it applies to the deprivation of natural rights by a foreign body.
Now, in some cases the alternative is worse than the law; it's a necessary evil. We can all agree that a law prohibiting the taking of a human life for sport to be a better evil than the alternative. However, it doesn't diminish the threat laws impose upon the governed.
I wish more people understood this. At the very least, I wish our law makers understood this rather basic concept. If they did, we might never have to deal with idiotic laws like the one proposed.
Dear Assemblywoman Pamela R. Lampitt, I propose a new law; No legislating while drunk, which you so clearly are if you think this is a good use of the public's energy.
Good thing a big fancy place like a hospital, you know, with all that juicy mission critical data, has a solid and well tested disaster recovery plan, right?
However, this Chicken Little PR campaign is only working against their interests. You want to know the origins of Climate Change Deniers? It's not political; the GOP is only capitalizing on public sentiment. It comes from, and is fueled by, failed prediction after failed prediction to the point where we could have iron clad, easy to understand proof that the world will end tomorrow and no one would believe it. It's gone on long enough, in fact, that we could have LA and SF under 100 ft of water, and people would still doubt it was climate change. That's the legacy of this DoomsDay campaign.
I'll admit the media played a large role in this. They never could do science reporting right. However, having scientists publicly reinforce these perceptions is a huge issue.
This always hurts my head, when people point out the change from "Global Warming" to "climate change". Do you know WHY it was changed? Because virtually no one understands the term "Global Warming". Everyone assumes it means everywhere is getting hotter, so *any* weather event short of a drought is used to refute the problem.
"Global Warming" is still an apt term, if one understands that it implies that more energy is being put into the system ( or perhaps being retained ). I far prefer that phrase to "Climate Change" for no other reason than it's more accurate.
Pedantics aside, it'd be helpful if these folks would stop running around claiming the sky is falling unless/until it actually IS falling. I distinctly remember seeing videos in school about how new york would be under water by 2015. What struck me was the imagery of the torch on the Statue of Liberty peeking out from the ocean. All these predictions about how horrible the world would be by this point, yet here we are; no flying cars, no coastal apocalypses ( Katrina...maybe ), and yet another presidential election where the choices are a Douchebag or Turd Sandwich.
Just once I'd like for climate scientists to hold a press conference to admit they don't really know what they're doing yet. That climate science is *hard*. But here's a list of things that are never the less good ideas ( reducing/removing air pollution sources, keeping our water ways clean, ect... ).
I've with unions ( as IT ), and I've worked without. I *vastly* prefer without. Unions may provide job stability ( after you've been there long enough to have seniority on younger staff, mind you ), but then IT doesn't exactly get raises by being loyal anyway.
Unions only protect those who don't want to be bothered developing themselves to be more valuable, in my experience.
So let's pretend all companies, everywhere, comply with decryption requests. What do you think happens next?
It doesn't take rocket science to realize that the next step...the very next step..is for the "bad guys" to go off and roll their own encryption, based on very well known standards.. And then..you're right back where you started.
So, to the organizations who are fighting this, I say; let it happen. You have virtually nothing to loose. And, next week, when you are asked to decrypt something that you don't have any ability to, you can justifiably laugh in their fucking faces for being so fucking worthless.
1) I'd hardly call 25 "hardly an adult" ( although I would classify this particular 25 year old as "hardly an adult" given her sense of entitlement ). 2) I am an asshole, yes. Your point? Here's the thing: Society cares even less than I do. 3) Employers have absolutely NO obligation to do anything to/for their hard working employees. They have a whole HELL of a lot of encouragement, as good workers are worth their weight in gold, but they should be free to run their business however they wish.
Likewise, employees have absolutely NO obligation to work for crappy employers.
Freedom means consequence, suggesting we eliminate the consequence from the equation means getting rid of freedom ( for both employer AND employees ).
Are these managers forcing people off the street to take these jobs? Are they somehow being deceitful in their hiring practices?
Here's the thing most people don't seem to get; you aren't entitled to take any job and live off of it. There are a lot of jobs, and this sounds like one, where a better suited candidate might already have another income ( ie: spouse ), but is looking for some supplementary income plus some amazing medical ( from the sounds of it ).
One final point, and it's a bitter truth so strap in. Some positions just aren't that important. If you are a dime a dozen employee, why *should* you be paid more than minimum wage?
You can be forgiven in thinking that your examples match what we're talking about here, as the summary didn't actually link anything. For reference: https://medium.com/@taliajane/...
The "Open Letter" wasn't discussing offshoring, nor unsafe business practices. It was nothing more than entitled whining, and not even very inspired at that. It certainly wasn't what I'd expect from an english major, short of it's verbosity. But then, she never said she finished college, so I guess I might be expecting too much.
I especially like how she's now begging for someone to employ her. As if a whining entitled employee is right at the top of every employer's wish list.
I truly hope none of us here will express amazement that someone who criticized their employer, and blamed them for what are essentially her own poor life choices, got fired.
This is how the real world works, jr. You are not owed, or entitled, to shit.
Blacklivesmatter have shutdown multiple freeways over the past couple months, with little to no real punishment. And yes; They're "Black", not "African American". You very likely have never met a real "African American" ( duel citizenship ). If you had, you'd realize what a poor moniker it is for some of the whitest people you'll ever meet.
These hicks aren't getting any special treatment. We've just learned that if you wait long enough, the embarrassment begins to outweigh the self-righteousness.
Slashdot Mirror
I normally won't respond to ACs, but this one is interesting so I'm going to use it as a teaching example.
Note the implication that I called out the windows astroturfers because I dislike windows 8/10. Now read my original post; do I ever mention my opinion of windows? This is the tell; the AC is trying to take control of the narrative, framing it in a way to discredit the comment and undermine my position. It also serves to change the nature of the discussion from that of astroturfing to the more familiar "windows 8/10 hate" that is subjective and thus, easily distractable.
Of course, to those of us similarly trained, it's a dead give away to the previously mentioned astroturfing. That they're posting as AC means it's a "hit and run"; they only care about knocking down the point I made, and not actually using their "own" reputation.
Astroturfing has become something of the norm over the past 5 years; I've seen a huge spike in it on the various forums out there. Everything from MS's products ( Windows 8/10 trolls are somewhat infamous ) to politicians to celebrities.
Welcome to the future. I wanted flying cars, got this.
I want a redo.
...equates violence toward women and children with sex and pain with pleasure...
Implying....men are the perpetrators, amirite?
I am tired of the implication that all men, everywhere, are just busting at the seams to violate and hurt women and children ( no one seems to imply or care if they hurt each other, after all ), only we don't out of some fear of punishment. That's incredibly disrespectful and sexist towards men AND it infantilizes women. As if neither gender has any agency of self.
It's still sexism if it's against men. Hell, it's sexism even if the men are white.
Except that's not what he said, or what he's advocated.
Intolerance I can handle. Ignorance, however, is to be stamped out with prejudice.
Women also end up having to deal with family issues more, in part because they care more about family and home, and in part because men are on average domestically flaky.
Whoa now, I get where you're coming with this, but your wording choice is poor. Time was there was a gendered based split of responsibilities; men brought home the cash, women took care of the children and house. That isn't men being "domestically flaky". Now a days that's even less true; more and more men are working their asses off, mixing child care duties with full time jobs. Still not "domestically flaky".
Sharing responsibilities isn't being flaky.
That's more an indictment of the real world than jabber, wouldn't you say?
That said, I don't know how popular the openfire server is, but that uses the same protocol ( XMPP ) as jabber. I know I use it quite extensively.
Meanwhile, in the land of the XMPP protocol, we've been end to end encrypted for over a decade.
Seriously, why is it 2016 and this is NOT a standard feature of a chat protocol?
It's possibly worth noting here that "Game changing" does not necessitate "good". For instance, Windows 8 could be said to have been "Game changing", given how big a turd it was.
Certainly changed Sinofsky's game, at any rate.
Are we trusting MS now? Between the "EVERYONE MUST HAVE WINDOWS 10" bs and Brad Smith saying we should let politicians decide what the balance is ( between encryption and personal freedoms ), I'm having a hard time with the whole notion that MS needs MORE of my security information, not less.
Maybe I'm just paranoid though. My tinfoil hat is probably 3 sizes too small.
30 bucks per movie and I don't even get a copy to store?
So what happens when the service goes out of business? I lose everything I've bought?
Thank you, no.
It's worth noting here that all laws are, by their very definition, "evil". If such a term truly exists, then surely it applies to the deprivation of natural rights by a foreign body.
Now, in some cases the alternative is worse than the law; it's a necessary evil. We can all agree that a law prohibiting the taking of a human life for sport to be a better evil than the alternative. However, it doesn't diminish the threat laws impose upon the governed.
I wish more people understood this. At the very least, I wish our law makers understood this rather basic concept. If they did, we might never have to deal with idiotic laws like the one proposed.
Dear Assemblywoman Pamela R. Lampitt, I propose a new law; No legislating while drunk, which you so clearly are if you think this is a good use of the public's energy.
Good thing a big fancy place like a hospital, you know, with all that juicy mission critical data, has a solid and well tested disaster recovery plan, right?
Right?
hahahaahhaah
Here you go
Granted.
However, this Chicken Little PR campaign is only working against their interests. You want to know the origins of Climate Change Deniers? It's not political; the GOP is only capitalizing on public sentiment. It comes from, and is fueled by, failed prediction after failed prediction to the point where we could have iron clad, easy to understand proof that the world will end tomorrow and no one would believe it. It's gone on long enough, in fact, that we could have LA and SF under 100 ft of water, and people would still doubt it was climate change. That's the legacy of this DoomsDay campaign.
I'll admit the media played a large role in this. They never could do science reporting right. However, having scientists publicly reinforce these perceptions is a huge issue.
This always hurts my head, when people point out the change from "Global Warming" to "climate change". Do you know WHY it was changed? Because virtually no one understands the term "Global Warming". Everyone assumes it means everywhere is getting hotter, so *any* weather event short of a drought is used to refute the problem.
"Global Warming" is still an apt term, if one understands that it implies that more energy is being put into the system ( or perhaps being retained ). I far prefer that phrase to "Climate Change" for no other reason than it's more accurate.
Pedantics aside, it'd be helpful if these folks would stop running around claiming the sky is falling unless/until it actually IS falling. I distinctly remember seeing videos in school about how new york would be under water by 2015. What struck me was the imagery of the torch on the Statue of Liberty peeking out from the ocean. All these predictions about how horrible the world would be by this point, yet here we are; no flying cars, no coastal apocalypses ( Katrina...maybe ), and yet another presidential election where the choices are a Douchebag or Turd Sandwich.
Just once I'd like for climate scientists to hold a press conference to admit they don't really know what they're doing yet. That climate science is *hard*. But here's a list of things that are never the less good ideas ( reducing/removing air pollution sources, keeping our water ways clean, ect... ).
That is an awkward question, only because it's the wrong one to be asking.
Do you deserve to be part of the 1%? If you believe so, then yes you do.
"You don't get paid what you're worth, but rather what you hustle."
Um...ya...
I've with unions ( as IT ), and I've worked without. I *vastly* prefer without. Unions may provide job stability ( after you've been there long enough to have seniority on younger staff, mind you ), but then IT doesn't exactly get raises by being loyal anyway.
Unions only protect those who don't want to be bothered developing themselves to be more valuable, in my experience.
So I'll be the asshole who states the obvious...
So let's pretend all companies, everywhere, comply with decryption requests. What do you think happens next?
It doesn't take rocket science to realize that the next step...the very next step..is for the "bad guys" to go off and roll their own encryption, based on very well known standards.. And then..you're right back where you started.
So, to the organizations who are fighting this, I say; let it happen. You have virtually nothing to loose. And, next week, when you are asked to decrypt something that you don't have any ability to, you can justifiably laugh in their fucking faces for being so fucking worthless.
1) I'd hardly call 25 "hardly an adult" ( although I would classify this particular 25 year old as "hardly an adult" given her sense of entitlement ).
2) I am an asshole, yes. Your point? Here's the thing: Society cares even less than I do.
3) Employers have absolutely NO obligation to do anything to/for their hard working employees. They have a whole HELL of a lot of encouragement, as good workers are worth their weight in gold, but they should be free to run their business however they wish.
Likewise, employees have absolutely NO obligation to work for crappy employers.
Freedom means consequence, suggesting we eliminate the consequence from the equation means getting rid of freedom ( for both employer AND employees ).
Are these managers forcing people off the street to take these jobs? Are they somehow being deceitful in their hiring practices?
Here's the thing most people don't seem to get; you aren't entitled to take any job and live off of it. There are a lot of jobs, and this sounds like one, where a better suited candidate might already have another income ( ie: spouse ), but is looking for some supplementary income plus some amazing medical ( from the sounds of it ).
One final point, and it's a bitter truth so strap in. Some positions just aren't that important. If you are a dime a dozen employee, why *should* you be paid more than minimum wage?
You can be forgiven in thinking that your examples match what we're talking about here, as the summary didn't actually link anything. For reference: https://medium.com/@taliajane/...
The "Open Letter" wasn't discussing offshoring, nor unsafe business practices. It was nothing more than entitled whining, and not even very inspired at that. It certainly wasn't what I'd expect from an english major, short of it's verbosity. But then, she never said she finished college, so I guess I might be expecting too much.
I especially like how she's now begging for someone to employ her. As if a whining entitled employee is right at the top of every employer's wish list.
I truly hope none of us here will express amazement that someone who criticized their employer, and blamed them for what are essentially her own poor life choices, got fired.
This is how the real world works, jr. You are not owed, or entitled, to shit.
How do you have "advanced" mathematics ( or perhaps a better term might be "non-trivial" ) without at least a rudimentary writing system?
Sorry, but what?
Blacklivesmatter have shutdown multiple freeways over the past couple months, with little to no real punishment. And yes; They're "Black", not "African American". You very likely have never met a real "African American" ( duel citizenship ). If you had, you'd realize what a poor moniker it is for some of the whitest people you'll ever meet.
These hicks aren't getting any special treatment. We've just learned that if you wait long enough, the embarrassment begins to outweigh the self-righteousness.
That's...a really good point actually.