So that seems any better when your lawyer is there? Are you meant to make up some form of alibi? Are you supposed to try and make up a place where you weren't?
No, you're supposed to shut up. My whole point is that you cannot win when talking to the police.
Let me repeat that: you do not have anything to gain when talking to the police, you can only lose. If you think the risk is small, then sure, talk to the police.
But the summary mentioned a murder inquiry. Why would you want to get involved in such an investigation? You have nothing to win. If you're such a champion of justice, then vote for the local politician that promises more cops on the street.
You've got a couple of weird points and I'd like to reply since you normally have very good posts.
I can only begin to guess at what a horrible job it must be most of the time.
Well, they like their job. What a strange thing to assume they hate their job, and you feel like offering them some relief of their horrible job.
And if you make it hard for them to do their job then the only people left doing the job are the ones who don't take your sort of shit lightly.
Are you sure you're making it harder? He already touched the hood. He still wants to talk to you for some reason you don't know. What is your reason for talking to the officer?
It would be much more like: LEO: "Have you seen this little girl?" You: "No". LEO: "Where were you around this and that time?" You: "Alone, here in the house." LEO: "Can anybody confirm that?" You:...
Do you see what I mean? What looks like a simple question, could actually turn into an unpleasant conversation of which your lawyer would tell you to stop explaining yourself.
Seriously, do not ever again help the police. Sure, follow their instructions when within the law. But helping the police does not help YOU at all and might seriously endanger yourself. If the samples were contaminated or mixed up, you could have found yourself in jail.
I've even wondered if it would be possible to expand that to cover the other senses, for example, playing a unique sound with the error
You're going about this the wrong way. You don't make the user remember, you make their colleagues remember. Supply your users with a 5.1 sound system attached to their PC and when the user encounters an error, the speakers blast "HEY EVERYBODY, I'M WATCHING PORNO OVER HERE".
One of the quirks I've noticed is when a business makes, or invents something, then uses the Wiki to advertise. I can't help but wonder is this could also be considered a form of vandalism?
It's advertising if they use advertisement text. Recently, I edited the article on the LEON processor. It originally had texts like: "It offers all basic functions of a pipelined in-order processor, making it a good experimentation vehicle."
"Making it a good experimentation vehicle" for who? What type of experiments? What is good? How is it measured?
It's very interesting if the bot could see the difference between such texts.
On the other hand, Google hides nothing. Just google for 'client login' or 'customer login' plus maybe some random word such as 'enterprise', or 'sales' or what have you.
I can guarantee you that in the first fifty results, you are in. Just fill in as the username:
In general I agree with you. In this case, I think you have it wrong on Bob and he's really a tool.
My mom knows jack sh1t about computers, and jack just left town. But multiple times, she surprised me by mentioning how she called the bank when experiencing something dodgy, deleting strange mails, rather used the laptop when her desktop displayed strange behavior, etc. She notices, like most human beings, when something is out of the ordinary. Bob noticed, too -- but with copious amounts of stupidity, managed to do the wrong thing.
Reading back, my post had a high yes-but value. Anyway, it might work well to set a goal. It might also work well to just fix an existing problem. You could say that your goal is to fix problems, but that's not what I meant.
For the distinction to be clear, let me give an example. Programmer A is best when he sets a lofty goal to implement a framework. Programmer B might work better fixing bugs. Then there is the remainder of programmers who will not code anything unless it saves them real, concrete effort in one way or another.
Not everybody works well with goals. In fact, only about 30% of people find motivation by setting goals. The rest need to find a specific problem that they can fix. They're problem solvers. Then there is the remainder who cannot find motivation in that, either. They need to set up the situation for success.
As an example of this, you could as a night guard, make yourself walk 2 km through the snow just to check that door. Alternatively, you could put a piece of hardware there, code up a piece of software to read out the remote sensor and save yourself the walk through the snow.
Yeah, the SSD bucks are well spent. The stuff is outperforming normal disks on almost every front and the disk sizes are big enough to hold most data. And I've got to agree on the RAM, especially now since Windows will properly gobble it all up and spend it on disk buffering if you don't use it for apps.
When I got into the whole podcast thing, I downloaded basically everything that had to do with either mobile tech, Apple and Linux. To my surprise, most Linux-related podcasts are really, really bad. The quality was often lacking in almost every area, be it pacing, sound quality, speakers, intro/outro, interviews you name it. This all in sharp contrast with podcasts that are related to mobile news and Apple or iPhone.
So I'm very interested in this (for me new) podcast, but it better have at least some semblance of quality.
With a tiny effort on the part of Evil Corporate America, privacy could be guaranteed. They don't, and we don't trust them for it.
We don't trust Evil Corporate America with nuclear power plants either, so these are guarded by a net of rules. And being the/. crowd, we know that modern pellet plants have a very small risk of exploding anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
So that seems any better when your lawyer is there? Are you meant to make up some form of alibi? Are you supposed to try and make up a place where you weren't?
No, you're supposed to shut up. My whole point is that you cannot win when talking to the police.
Let me repeat that: you do not have anything to gain when talking to the police, you can only lose. If you think the risk is small, then sure, talk to the police.
But the summary mentioned a murder inquiry. Why would you want to get involved in such an investigation? You have nothing to win. If you're such a champion of justice, then vote for the local politician that promises more cops on the street.
You've got a couple of weird points and I'd like to reply since you normally have very good posts.
I can only begin to guess at what a horrible job it must be most of the time.
Well, they like their job. What a strange thing to assume they hate their job, and you feel like offering them some relief of their horrible job.
And if you make it hard for them to do their job then the only people left doing the job are the ones who don't take your sort of shit lightly.
Are you sure you're making it harder? He already touched the hood. He still wants to talk to you for some reason you don't know. What is your reason for talking to the officer?
It's a good question. There are several ways of looking at it/p>
There's still another way of looking at it. You don't have to talk to the police to be helpful. You could instead just help your neighbors directly.
doesnt mean its true though or proper or right, but LOL you belived a police man LOL (not you strictly but OP)
Are you 14 or something? This is slashdot, home of geeks between 20 and 70. Could you please turn up the spelling knob?
That is a laughably simplistic question.
It would be much more like: ...
LEO: "Have you seen this little girl?"
You: "No".
LEO: "Where were you around this and that time?"
You: "Alone, here in the house."
LEO: "Can anybody confirm that?"
You:
Do you see what I mean? What looks like a simple question, could actually turn into an unpleasant conversation of which your lawyer would tell you to stop explaining yourself.
Seriously, do not ever again help the police. Sure, follow their instructions when within the law. But helping the police does not help YOU at all and might seriously endanger yourself. If the samples were contaminated or mixed up, you could have found yourself in jail.
Watch the presentations by Professor James Duane of Stanford University:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=NL&v=i8z7NC5sgik
Whatever happened to the previous language named Go? Did the creator settle with Google, or did Google just ignore him?
The previous version was renamed into in "Go, Next Edition". It's GoNE.
Oh, and please try the fish.
I've even wondered if it would be possible to expand that to cover the other senses, for example, playing a unique sound with the error
You're going about this the wrong way. You don't make the user remember, you make their colleagues remember. Supply your users with a 5.1 sound system attached to their PC and when the user encounters an error, the speakers blast "HEY EVERYBODY, I'M WATCHING PORNO OVER HERE".
As I said, make it a memorable experience.
If anyone is interested, here is a summary of the study in a presentation form (PDF):
COFAM study result http://www.who.int/peh-emf/meetings/archive/en/vanrongen_tno.pdf
One of the quirks I've noticed is when a business makes, or invents something, then uses the Wiki to advertise. I can't help but wonder is this could also be considered a form of vandalism?
It's advertising if they use advertisement text. Recently, I edited the article on the LEON processor. It originally had texts like:
"It offers all basic functions of a pipelined in-order processor, making it a good experimentation vehicle."
"Making it a good experimentation vehicle" for who? What type of experiments? What is good? How is it measured?
It's very interesting if the bot could see the difference between such texts.
You're right.
On the other hand, Google hides nothing. Just google for 'client login' or 'customer login' plus maybe some random word such as 'enterprise', or 'sales' or what have you.
I can guarantee you that in the first fifty results, you are in. Just fill in as the username:
' or 'a'!='
Nitpick ;-)
Google doesn't make it a secret. MagicJack does.
Thus, they're creeps.
Bob isn't an idiot, he's a typical windows user.
In general I agree with you. In this case, I think you have it wrong on Bob and he's really a tool.
My mom knows jack sh1t about computers, and jack just left town. But multiple times, she surprised me by mentioning how she called the bank when experiencing something dodgy, deleting strange mails, rather used the laptop when her desktop displayed strange behavior, etc. She notices, like most human beings, when something is out of the ordinary. Bob noticed, too -- but with copious amounts of stupidity, managed to do the wrong thing.
Reading back, my post had a high yes-but value. Anyway, it might work well to set a goal. It might also work well to just fix an existing problem. You could say that your goal is to fix problems, but that's not what I meant.
For the distinction to be clear, let me give an example. Programmer A is best when he sets a lofty goal to implement a framework. Programmer B might work better fixing bugs. Then there is the remainder of programmers who will not code anything unless it saves them real, concrete effort in one way or another.
unlearn it and learn it again!
Through copious amounts of glue!
Program something for real. Be goal-oriented.
Not everybody works well with goals. In fact, only about 30% of people find motivation by setting goals. The rest need to find a specific problem that they can fix. They're problem solvers. Then there is the remainder who cannot find motivation in that, either. They need to set up the situation for success.
As an example of this, you could as a night guard, make yourself walk 2 km through the snow just to check that door. Alternatively, you could put a piece of hardware there, code up a piece of software to read out the remote sensor and save yourself the walk through the snow.
we get dread 100,000 strong botnet krakens which rise to the surface and drag sites under with all hands lost.
Ah, yes. Good ole' Mustakrakish. http://dethklok.wikia.com/wiki/Mustakrakish
Yeah, the SSD bucks are well spent. The stuff is outperforming normal disks on almost every front and the disk sizes are big enough to hold most data. And I've got to agree on the RAM, especially now since Windows will properly gobble it all up and spend it on disk buffering if you don't use it for apps.
We live in great times :-)
*shrug*
Windows 7, 64 bit here. 8GB RAM. Intel X25-M SSD. Seems like nothing I do can make my computer "sluggish".
C//
Car analogy follows.
*Shrug* Ford F-450 SD Crew Cab here. Reinforced deer catcher. 4x4 wheel drive. Seems like not a single pedestrian can slow me down.
Yep, Leo Laporte's work is great. I heard his This Week In Tech and TWiGoogle shows, and hadn't heard about the FLOSS Weekly show, thanks for that.
When I got into the whole podcast thing, I downloaded basically everything that had to do with either mobile tech, Apple and Linux. To my surprise, most Linux-related podcasts are really, really bad. The quality was often lacking in almost every area, be it pacing, sound quality, speakers, intro/outro, interviews you name it. This all in sharp contrast with podcasts that are related to mobile news and Apple or iPhone.
So I'm very interested in this (for me new) podcast, but it better have at least some semblance of quality.
These two views are not opposing.
With a tiny effort on the part of Evil Corporate America, privacy could be guaranteed. They don't, and we don't trust them for it.
We don't trust Evil Corporate America with nuclear power plants either, so these are guarded by a net of rules. And being the /. crowd, we know that modern pellet plants have a very small risk of exploding anyway.
Well maybe if your boss is younger. But really?
I'd consider getting a managing position as being demoted.
Does your wife agree?