Are university nicknames somehow mandated by law? Or why are they searching for one? Searching a mascott, ok. But there's nothing more pathetic that someone trying to give himself a nickname.
So how is this different from the "facebook-like" database US agencies are creating on the Chinese government employees? (Assuming they're doing their job right)
Or is someone really surprised that Chinese intelligence is doing their job?
And why not enrich this data by actual facebook data? If someone you know works for the gouvernment "friends" his colleagues on facebook, they don't need to give their employer there explicitly.
While I like that colleges are becoming more open to the idea of reducing tuition, this ever-increasing push to send every man, woman, and houseplant on a quest for higher education may have unintended consequences.
Yes. But that's the only way to hide for a few more years that you can't send people into manual labor or other jobs with lower qualification requirements, as they either become outsourced or automated. Sending them on the fruitless "quest for higher education" may be desperate, but slightly better than increasingly sending them into unemployment and welfare.
No, what it does is create a mass of young people that have a sense of self entitlement where they suddenly believe others will pick up the costs for them Many students go to college that shouldn't be there, as what the hell someone else is paying.
Well, everyone (who qualifies) gets a try. I don't see anything wrong with that. But speaking on that sense of entitlement, you're wrong. It rather shows that you're only entitled to a university degree if you WORK for it, not if you pay for it.
If anything creates a wrong feeling of entitlement it's those astronomical tuition fees at so-called "elite" universities. It's not unusual to get something after paying that much money for it.
..but who is (in general) happy to pay for something that the whole economy/country profits from. (and is negligible to the amounts of tax money wasted somewhere else)
Facebook was using people's posts and likes as unauthorized advertising, which really annoyed people. Suddenly you're doing product endorsements instead of just clicking "Like" on a posting by Coke.
Secondly, "like" conveys.. well, "like", not "follow" or "acknowledge" or "important but awful".
Really, if you see a story which says "school shooting, 30 dead"... "like" just isn't the appropriate verb.
That's why I don't hit "like" in such a situation.
People want to acknowledge the story without saying "gee, I'm really in favor of school shootings".
Yes, I fully understand that, but facebook doesn't offer such an option (yet). But you're still hitting a button that's clearly and obviously marked with "I like". Happening what's labeled on a button should be no surprise. People might tread a toilet flush like a drinking water dispenser or a fire alarm like a funny noise generator to scare animals away - but they should not be surprised if one day an actual fire brigade shows up. Or a doorbell making a ringing sound - even if it was broken for years.
You may have seen "Out of order" signs on button that were not working as labeled, but have you ever seen a warning "Caution: Button works as labeled"? Probably followed by a "The above sign is meant literally" and a "Yes, that's true"
In the context of Facebook, "like" means "I wish to receive updates on this", but they've always treated it like "I endorse this", which has always demonstrated a certain cluelessness about how people were actually using it.
Yes, but when push comes to shove, it's the written word that is binding, not what you thought it meant. Of course, things might gather additional meanings over time, but you can't take away the original meaning. It is still completly correct to call the feeling you get when seeing a decorated Christmas tree "gay".
Community may call that button what they want to call it - butthis won't change the meaning of the button.
I remember a lawsuit few years ago where someone hit the "like" button to join in a discussion about whatever it was with some critical remarks, and then sued facebook for stating "user x likes y" to his "friends". His argument also was that "the community" does not use the like button exclusively as a "like" button.
I'm all in for creative misuse of features, but complaining when someone uses or interprets a feature in the intended way is exclusively their own problem. You have to take on responsibility when you're using something out of spec.
Yes, but THEN it would be a Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance or Planescape movie and leave the question unanswered how you would make a movie on generic D&D
If someone could be trusted to take an existing class of device and turn it into a product that's everyone wants and that sets the design rules that everyone will copy for the next 10 years, it would be Apple.Usually they do things right that are so obvious that the existing designers didn't event know that they were doing something wrong as they simply took the current ways for granted.
I'm not the usual Apple fanboi. I well know that "Apple" or Jobs never invented jack. But I give them credit for being the ones that take existing devices and for some reason, to them right.
Well I'm sure it's not bad to have an alternative at hand when for dietary or other reasons you can't eat eggs.
But normally, producers of the Real Thing (here: eggs) should NOT HAVE to worry THAT much about artificial replacements. Then again, for some reason, we have more than enough people who are more than ready to replace natural products with some cocktail of chemicals. Like the invention of artificial sweeteners. Overall effect wasn't just cutting back on sugar, no. Finally, we could have EVERY food tasting two times as sweet as it should! Hooray! And we only had to increase our aspertam and other sugar replacements to a level where... well, just call it "regular digestion".
Well, kind of, but take into account that a switchs front side is almost completly network sockets, so anywhere on the front, it would have been directly above or below a network socket. (You don't want it to be on any other side than the front side for a racked device)
- If I travel for business, which is now, thankfully rare, I use a carry on only and iron my business clothes in my hotel room
Ah. So you're one of those who are always hogging the overhead bins with their suitcase-sized, so-called carry-ons.
I wish that at least cases with wheels would automatically NOT QUALIFY as carry-on anymore!
Well, I can't really blame anyone for avoiding paying extra to have their checked baggage destroyed, lost or stolen, which currently the three service options are that airlines are offering for that extra money they're grabbing. But it would be really nice if we could get back to a state where you had in your carry-on only what you needed during your travel and perhaps if your luggage was a day late. (Which, to me, includes a bottle of water!)
Bullshit. Some games don't have DRM, but all the AAA ones do, and they aren't playable until they are blessed by Steam, which can't happen until Steam is blessed by Valve's servers, which can't happen until the installer says that it's been fully updated
So... is this a Steam issue or an issue of the AAA studio's DRM? What would happen to your shiny game CD when the studios DRM servers go down? Expensive coaster. And somehow it's steam taking the heat here. That's usually called "shooting the messenger"
Also, I have never used Steam -- do they have a contingency for when they go out of business?
I have to admit that I came to peace with the idea of no, difficult or not perfect contingency as an inherent drawback of online game distribution as long as they share the inherent advantages of online game distribution with me, too. Read: as long as games are cheap enough to easily write them off when or if steam may go out of business.
It's nothing more than different risk sets for different media types: Book/CD/DVD: absolutely safe from distributor going out of business, varying risk of technical deprecation (Do you still have a VHS Player for that movies you absolutely had to own in the 90s instead of renting them out?) and HIGH RISK of physical damage. (Storage temperature/moisture, fire, water damage, damage during moving your collection when moving house, little kids, dogs, ex-gf getting back on you by taking revenge on your PS4 games that you spend more time with then her....) Steam/Kindle/and DRM: absolutely safe from physical damage, high risk of distributor going out of business.
It's a trade-off either way and if keeping away from DRM is an easy solution, that's simply because you're ignoring one half of the risks.
I had to throw out half of my PC games due to space limitations a few months ago. Kept those classics with nice boxes to display, and bought 4 of them that still have replay value on steam for 3$ each anyway! Left me with hours of play time compared hours of tinkering time to get VM/Dosbox set up to get them running at all.
On the other hand, I insist on buying CDs if i enjoy more than a single song.
I want to be able to watch the movies that I have access to forever, not simply for the time that a particular service temporarily has rights.
That's not what I care for. I want transparency and that I get what I paid for. Same service for the same price might be a good deal if it works and is marketed like an "all-you-can-watch" season pass at Blockbuster, that lets you rent out and watch as many videos as you want to. But it is misleading at best if they pretend you're actually "buying" something. And it's an outright scam when they call $3 for "buying" an online movie that will end up in the Walmart bin for $9 a few weeks later to really buy and own.
You're missing basic logic here. Your point was that unexpected behavior IS identical to unsafe behavior. That was was falsified by a counter example.
I never claimed that (inherently safer) driving maneuvers might never lead to wrong and harmful reactions from other drivers. But your example again supports my point: You're expecting that other drivers might panic under certain circumstances. Expecting that DOES NOT render a solid panic into a anything like a "safe" operating mode. So to conclude:
Expected behaviour is not always safe. (We have to expect people to panic or to break without reason or not seeing and running that red light. Expected, but not safe)
Unexpected behaviour is not unsafe by itself. In a critical situation, we might expect a driver to break as a reflex, but a skilled driver (or autonomous car) could floor the gas pedal and evade an oncoming car preventing the accident.
Of course there is unexpected and unsafe stuff (like parking your car in the middle of the interstate, driving blindfolded or whatever stupid surprises our fellow drivers might come up with.)
But there is NO GENERAL CONNECTION between safety and expectation of certain situations. Correlation, yes.but remember: Correlation does not imply causation
So you're saying if a car is coming at you at a speed and distance that one couldn't expect it to be stopped (by a human driver), and (e.g. LIDAR supported) CPU manages to stop it anyway before it hits you, you would call this UNSAFE as it is unexpected? I think that falsifies your point.
The article summary isn't very good. If the software is programmed in a way that causes a car to behave in a way that's dangerous, it IS the software's fault.
That's trivial but true.
It becomes interesting when the software has the car behaving in a way that is SAFE, but unexpected.
On my desk, only one device (PC) wants to be plugged into an ethernet.
What's eating up my router ethernet ports are: Hue gateway, NAS, TV and game console. (granted, the last two could share a cable using a switch as you described, but they are not at my desk.)
The US has the most accessible and permissive immigration laws in the world.
To the point of treating every tourist at the border as a potential legal or illegal immigrant. It's always amusing to see a CBP agent at immigrations at the airport bewildered to the idea that someone might actually look forward to go back to their home country other than the US after their holidays....
Slashdot Mirror
Bada-Ching!
Are university nicknames somehow mandated by law? Or why are they searching for one? Searching a mascott, ok. But there's nothing more pathetic that someone trying to give himself a nickname.
who would type mizzouinto his address bar?
So how is this different from the "facebook-like" database US agencies are creating on the Chinese government employees? (Assuming they're doing their job right)
Or is someone really surprised that Chinese intelligence is doing their job?
And why not enrich this data by actual facebook data? If someone you know works for the gouvernment "friends" his colleagues on facebook, they don't need to give their employer there explicitly.
While I like that colleges are becoming more open to the idea of reducing tuition, this ever-increasing push to send every man, woman, and houseplant on a quest for higher education may have unintended consequences.
Yes. But that's the only way to hide for a few more years that you can't send people into manual labor or other jobs with lower qualification requirements, as they either become outsourced or automated. Sending them on the fruitless "quest for higher education" may be desperate, but slightly better than increasingly sending them into unemployment and welfare.
Sad, but true.
No, what it does is create a mass of young people that have a sense of self entitlement where they suddenly believe others will pick up the costs for them Many students go to college that shouldn't be there, as what the hell someone else is paying.
Well, everyone (who qualifies) gets a try. I don't see anything wrong with that. But speaking on that sense of entitlement, you're wrong. It rather shows that you're only entitled to a university degree if you WORK for it, not if you pay for it.
If anything creates a wrong feeling of entitlement it's those astronomical tuition fees at so-called "elite" universities. It's not unusual to get something after paying that much money for it.
..but who is (in general) happy to pay for something that the whole economy/country profits from. (and is negligible to the amounts of tax money wasted somewhere else)
Sorry.. Had to quote those from memory and forgot the ones I usually don't receive :-)
Well, there's two things here:
Facebook was using people's posts and likes as unauthorized advertising, which really annoyed people. Suddenly you're doing product endorsements instead of just clicking "Like" on a posting by Coke.
Secondly, "like" conveys .. well, "like", not "follow" or "acknowledge" or "important but awful".
Really, if you see a story which says "school shooting, 30 dead" ... "like" just isn't the appropriate verb.
That's why I don't hit "like" in such a situation.
People want to acknowledge the story without saying "gee, I'm really in favor of school shootings".
Yes, I fully understand that, but facebook doesn't offer such an option (yet). But you're still hitting a button that's clearly and obviously marked with "I like". Happening what's labeled on a button should be no surprise. People might tread a toilet flush like a drinking water dispenser or a fire alarm like a funny noise generator to scare animals away - but they should not be surprised if one day an actual fire brigade shows up. Or a doorbell making a ringing sound - even if it was broken for years.
You may have seen "Out of order" signs on button that were not working as labeled, but have you ever seen a warning "Caution: Button works as labeled"? Probably followed by a "The above sign is meant literally" and a "Yes, that's true"
In the context of Facebook, "like" means "I wish to receive updates on this", but they've always treated it like "I endorse this", which has always demonstrated a certain cluelessness about how people were actually using it.
Yes, but when push comes to shove, it's the written word that is binding, not what you thought it meant. Of course, things might gather additional meanings over time, but you can't take away the original meaning. It is still completly correct to call the feeling you get when seeing a decorated Christmas tree "gay".
What about:
funny
overrated
insightfull
intresting
underrated
and troll?
If as you say, "most folks are on it at least 1-2x a day, if not longer" then clearly it is relevant news to "most folks".
And whoever says that completely mixes up frequency and duration! Come on, this used to be news for Nerds!
Community may call that button what they want to call it - butthis won't change the meaning of the button.
I remember a lawsuit few years ago where someone hit the "like" button to join in a discussion about whatever it was with some critical remarks, and then sued facebook for stating "user x likes y" to his "friends". His argument also was that "the community" does not use the like button exclusively as a "like" button.
I'm all in for creative misuse of features, but complaining when someone uses or interprets a feature in the intended way is exclusively their own problem. You have to take on responsibility when you're using something out of spec.
Yes, but THEN it would be a Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance or Planescape movie and leave the question unanswered how you would make a movie on generic D&D
If someone could be trusted to take an existing class of device and turn it into a product that's everyone wants and that sets the design rules that everyone will copy for the next 10 years, it would be Apple.Usually they do things right that are so obvious that the existing designers didn't event know that they were doing something wrong as they simply took the current ways for granted.
I'm not the usual Apple fanboi. I well know that "Apple" or Jobs never invented jack. But I give them credit for being the ones that take existing devices and for some reason, to them right.
Well I'm sure it's not bad to have an alternative at hand when for dietary or other reasons you can't eat eggs.
But normally, producers of the Real Thing (here: eggs) should NOT HAVE to worry THAT much about artificial replacements. Then again, for some reason, we have more than enough people who are more than ready to replace natural products with some cocktail of chemicals. Like the invention of artificial sweeteners. Overall effect wasn't just cutting back on sugar, no. Finally, we could have EVERY food tasting two times as sweet as it should! Hooray! And we only had to increase our aspertam and other sugar replacements to a level where... well, just call it "regular digestion".
Well, kind of, but take into account that a switchs front side is almost completly network sockets, so anywhere on the front, it would have been directly above or below a network socket. (You don't want it to be on any other side than the front side for a racked device)
- If I travel for business, which is now, thankfully rare, I use a carry on only and iron my business clothes in my hotel room
Ah. So you're one of those who are always hogging the overhead bins with their suitcase-sized, so-called carry-ons.
I wish that at least cases with wheels would automatically NOT QUALIFY as carry-on anymore!
Well, I can't really blame anyone for avoiding paying extra to have their checked baggage destroyed, lost or stolen, which currently the three service options are that airlines are offering for that extra money they're grabbing. But it would be really nice if we could get back to a state where you had in your carry-on only what you needed during your travel and perhaps if your luggage was a day late. (Which, to me, includes a bottle of water!)
Bullshit. Some games don't have DRM, but all the AAA ones do, and they aren't playable until they are blessed by Steam, which can't happen until Steam is blessed by Valve's servers, which can't happen until the installer says that it's been fully updated
So... is this a Steam issue or an issue of the AAA studio's DRM?
What would happen to your shiny game CD when the studios DRM servers go down? Expensive coaster.
And somehow it's steam taking the heat here. That's usually called "shooting the messenger"
Also, I have never used Steam -- do they have a contingency for when they go out of business?
I have to admit that I came to peace with the idea of no, difficult or not perfect contingency as an inherent drawback of online game distribution as long as they share the inherent advantages of online game distribution with me, too. Read: as long as games are cheap enough to easily write them off when or if steam may go out of business.
It's nothing more than different risk sets for different media types:
Book/CD/DVD: absolutely safe from distributor going out of business, varying risk of technical deprecation (Do you still have a VHS Player for that movies you absolutely had to own in the 90s instead of renting them out?) and HIGH RISK of physical damage. (Storage temperature/moisture, fire, water damage, damage during moving your collection when moving house, little kids, dogs, ex-gf getting back on you by taking revenge on your PS4 games that you spend more time with then her....)
Steam/Kindle/and DRM: absolutely safe from physical damage, high risk of distributor going out of business.
It's a trade-off either way and if keeping away from DRM is an easy solution, that's simply because you're ignoring one half of the risks.
I had to throw out half of my PC games due to space limitations a few months ago. Kept those classics with nice boxes to display, and bought 4 of them that still have replay value on steam for 3$ each anyway! Left me with hours of play time compared hours of tinkering time to get VM/Dosbox set up to get them running at all.
On the other hand, I insist on buying CDs if i enjoy more than a single song.
I want to be able to watch the movies that I have access to forever, not simply for the time that a particular service temporarily has rights.
That's not what I care for. I want transparency and that I get what I paid for. Same service for the same price might be a good deal if it works and is marketed like an "all-you-can-watch" season pass at Blockbuster, that lets you rent out and watch as many videos as you want to. But it is misleading at best if they pretend you're actually "buying" something. And it's an outright scam when they call $3 for "buying" an online movie that will end up in the Walmart bin for $9 a few weeks later to really buy and own.
You're missing basic logic here. Your point was that unexpected behavior IS identical to unsafe behavior. That was was falsified by a counter example.
I never claimed that (inherently safer) driving maneuvers might never lead to wrong and harmful reactions from other drivers. But your example again supports my point:
You're expecting that other drivers might panic under certain circumstances. Expecting that DOES NOT render a solid panic into a anything like a "safe" operating mode. So to conclude:
Expected behaviour is not always safe. (We have to expect people to panic or to break without reason or not seeing and running that red light. Expected, but not safe)
Unexpected behaviour is not unsafe by itself. In a critical situation, we might expect a driver to break as a reflex, but a skilled driver (or autonomous car) could floor the gas pedal and evade an oncoming car preventing the accident.
Of course there is unexpected and unsafe stuff (like parking your car in the middle of the interstate, driving blindfolded or whatever stupid surprises our fellow drivers might come up with.)
But there is NO GENERAL CONNECTION between safety and expectation of certain situations. Correlation, yes.but remember: Correlation does not imply causation
So you're saying if a car is coming at you at a speed and distance that one couldn't expect it to be stopped (by a human driver), and (e.g. LIDAR supported) CPU manages to stop it anyway before it hits you, you would call this UNSAFE as it is unexpected? I think that falsifies your point.
The article summary isn't very good. If the software is programmed in a way that causes a car to behave in a way that's dangerous, it IS the software's fault.
That's trivial but true.
It becomes interesting when the software has the car behaving in a way that is SAFE, but unexpected.
On my desk, only one device (PC) wants to be plugged into an ethernet.
What's eating up my router ethernet ports are: Hue gateway, NAS, TV and game console. (granted, the last two could share a cable using a switch as you described, but they are not at my desk.)
The US has the most accessible and permissive immigration laws in the world.
To the point of treating every tourist at the border as a potential legal or illegal immigrant. It's always amusing to see a CBP agent at immigrations at the airport bewildered to the idea that someone might actually look forward to go back to their home country other than the US after their holidays....