Anyway, Oprah didn't actually choose the Surface. It was selected by one of her producers (probably after prodding by Microsoft) and shown to Oprah for a grand total of about 2 minutes. Why did she then choose it? Probably because of the kickstand and the magnetic keyboard attachment.
Or perhaps simply because tablets are cool and no one offered a truckload of iPads to their production company.
Lifting weights never killed anyone in this age group (at least I don't think)
Yeah.. no one dares to bully someone who outperforms in that...
If the kids actually cared about excelling in their subject of choice, they wouldn't care about being bullied, I can think of a chess person, and a chem person who are testaments to this from back in HS
How many unexplainable deaths did you have in your class before everyone realized that it's better not to bully the chem guy? and did you ever find out what that chess guy did?
If you post something on FB and then FB removes it, that's just censorship.
Facebook removes something on Facebook. Still sounds pretty much like "self" to me.
I would agree with you if FB had any legal, contractual or other obligation to publish your content. Don't start with moral obligations. Not as long as they can be sued for lack of due diligence by their shareholders if they value "moral" over money. And I'm pretty sure they ruled out ANY obligation in the TOS.
Setting and enforcing house rules is NOT censorship.
especially since more and more public spaces are actually commercial ventures.
And THAT'S the root problem.
If moderators wouldn't have the possibility to enforce some board rules by deleting off-topic or banning trolls, every single forum would become 4chan. And whoever sets up a board gets to choose the topic, the netiquette and how strict it is enforced. It's a simple trade-off between not-censoring but still keeping signal-to-noise ratio high.
That's perfectly fine and it won't be a problem as there are _real_ public spaces where the rules allow for open discussion and are not the result of some private companys mainstreamed traget audience model.
From "free speech" you can not derive a right to speak (or write) in someone elses newspaper, tv station or website.
Of course you can. There's no inherent reason why power - which money is just a form of - shouldn't come with responsibilities. A popular enough website could certainly be deemed influential enough that allowing it to practice censorship causes a public harm. It's simply a matter of priorities.
You mixed up cause and symptom again.
No single website should become important enough that their publishing policy effects overall plurality of opinions.
And you didn't completly read my argument. I was talking about all media. Is there something that makes websites so special that they have to publish (in your opinion) every troll and stuff not matching that stations/site/papers policy? Would a TV station, if it became infleuntial, have to broadcast each viewers political rant? I don't think so. Or did Fox/ABC/BBC ever broadcast mine? No. Is this a limitation of free speech? I don't think so.
Censorship usually refers to limitations of free speech.
Setting and enforcing house rules is NOT censorship. From "free speech" you can not derive a right to speak (or write) in someone elses newspaper, tv station or website.
"Love thy neighbor as thyself" is only one line from one Testament, from one half of the book. There's plenty of arguments in Christian scripture for being an asshole too, and lots of Christians use those to justify the very behavior you say they shouldn't engage in.
But in gerenral, that "Love thy neighbour" is considered as a bugfix for those older "eye for an eye" rules.
And how is an outsider to distinguish between a Christian and someone just calling themselves one?
There is 100% sign: Anyone who calims to know God's will is more subject to hybris than to christian teachings. Christians should take responsibility for their actions and not blame them on "God's will".
By the way, who decides this shit? Can the prudes at least learn a little consistency?
Oh that's simply. Facebook decides what is acceptable on facebook, twitter decides what is acceptable on twitter. You neither have to agree with nor use their service. And as you're free to run your own website, this isn't even censorship. The internet is much bigger as facebook, you know?
And in Italy there was a measurable slowdown in development JUST AFTER INTRODUCTION of patents for medicines. Profits went up, new drugs went down.
That's a bad measurement. Currently, pharma companies drown the market with slightly altered medicines as a pretext to rise the prices, as they are "new and improved" versions, but aren't required to proof a better effect than the previous, less expensive version.
This wasn't meant as a comparision of better and worse. Just as a set of specific risk for digital archives.
Go and try to read your letters from a 5.25'' floppy disc with your VizaWrite-files from just a few years ago. Wouldn't have happend with paper printouts. On the other hand, go to a movie archive and see the first cellulose movies lost due to simply rotting away... wouldn't have happened with DVDs Then again, if there's no DVD player left....
A form of archiving, that needs special knowledge (file formats) or devices (media) adds an additional long term risk. But of course it also greatly reduces other risks. (When the Amalia-library in Weimar burned down a few years ago, lots of invaluable books were destroyed. Google Books could simply restore an offsite backup). It's simply a tradeoff. as always.
And this is in no way a new problem. (Pulling this from the back of my mind, corrections welcome)
The Sumerians used soft clay slabs for rather unimportant, temporary stuff as it could be erased easily. "cultural treasures" like the Gilgamesh epic were stored on valuable parchment. Now guess what survived a series of fires..... Hint: we have tons of shopping lists to work with....
But stone & clay slabs of the Sumerians and papyrus of the Egyptians survived until today, but the original data feed of the Apollo missions are lost forever because they were thrashed when no one had the equipment to read the old data tapes.
LYRICS?? I thought the reason why death metal won't become mainstream is because it sounds like someone throwing up over a microphone. I could settle for the rest of the music.
Slashdot Mirror
You're reasoning this the wrong way around. Is your boss tracking you with an RFID chip? Would you like it if he did? I guess not, (...)
you're guessing wrong.
I clock in, sit at my desk, and clock out again.
I did that both with magnetic stripe cards and rfid cards. And *SHOCKING* one of my emplyoers even made me wear my badge!
I doubt that this system here is much different from clocking in to the lessons.
I bet it'll be a rock that is surprisingly earth-like and wouldn't be the least intresting if it had been found in, say, Iowa.
or were there any "attacks" worse than the usual script-kiddie ddos on a poor, unimportant webserver?
But commonly *nix refers to a wide range of OSes.
That's not the point.
Common data formats and apis are important.
I'd bet that whatever App WinRT and Windows8 use for e.g. calendar, the event form will have matching fields.
Android has a *nix base..... and the rest is OS independant "in" "the" "cloud".
Anyway, Oprah didn't actually choose the Surface. It was selected by one of her producers (probably after prodding by Microsoft) and shown to Oprah for a grand total of about 2 minutes. Why did she then choose it? Probably because of the kickstand and the magnetic keyboard attachment.
Or perhaps simply because tablets are cool and no one offered a truckload of iPads to their production company.
I'd get the one matching my desktop OS
Lifting weights never killed anyone in this age group (at least I don't think)
Yeah.. no one dares to bully someone who outperforms in that...
If the kids actually cared about excelling in their subject of choice, they wouldn't care about being bullied, I can think of a chess person, and a chem person who are testaments to this from back in HS
How many unexplainable deaths did you have in your class before everyone realized that it's better not to bully the chem guy? and did you ever find out what that chess guy did?
true, but not the point.
The defacto facebook monopoly sucks.
And you should not trust that a free service offered by a for profit company has any interest to secure your constitutional rights.
Freedom of speech that no one is allowed to stop your public speech, but noone needs to publish it for you. That's YOUR legwork you have to do.
If you post something on FB and then FB removes it, that's just censorship.
Facebook removes something on Facebook. Still sounds pretty much like "self" to me.
I would agree with you if FB had any legal, contractual or other obligation to publish your content. Don't start with moral obligations. Not as long as they can be sued for lack of due diligence by their shareholders if they value "moral" over money. And I'm pretty sure they ruled out ANY obligation in the TOS.
especially since more and more public spaces are actually commercial ventures.
And THAT'S the root problem.
If moderators wouldn't have the possibility to enforce some board rules by deleting off-topic or banning trolls, every single forum would become 4chan. And whoever sets up a board gets to choose the topic, the netiquette and how strict it is enforced. It's a simple trade-off between not-censoring but still keeping signal-to-noise ratio high.
That's perfectly fine and it won't be a problem as there are _real_ public spaces where the rules allow for open discussion and are not the result of some private companys mainstreamed traget audience model.
Of course you can. There's no inherent reason why power - which money is just a form of - shouldn't come with responsibilities. A popular enough website could certainly be deemed influential enough that allowing it to practice censorship causes a public harm. It's simply a matter of priorities.
You mixed up cause and symptom again.
No single website should become important enough that their publishing policy effects overall plurality of opinions.
And you didn't completly read my argument. I was talking about all media. Is there something that makes websites so special that they have to publish (in your opinion) every troll and stuff not matching that stations/site/papers policy? Would a TV station, if it became infleuntial, have to broadcast each viewers political rant? I don't think so. Or did Fox/ABC/BBC ever broadcast mine? No. Is this a limitation of free speech? I don't think so.
But it also considers self-censorship to be different enough from "ordinary" censorship to give it its own lemma: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-censorship
I think we're at a point where we would need to decide on an authorative source for a definition first...
At least wikipedia distinguishes between censorship and self-censorship. Facebook supressing things on facebook only qualifies for the latter.
I can't see a big difference between Facebook not publishing a user posting and a newspaper not publishing a letter to the editor.
Not quite right: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDsQtwIwAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DxNApzUegikg&ei=wlqqUNycIcbfsgarroGYDQ&usg=AFQjCNFClfKjBVIJkBsBwOO4BX6JmK5p6w
Censorship usually refers to limitations of free speech.
Setting and enforcing house rules is NOT censorship. From "free speech" you can not derive a right to speak (or write) in someone elses newspaper, tv station or website.
"Love thy neighbor as thyself" is only one line from one Testament, from one half of the book. There's plenty of arguments in Christian scripture for being an asshole too, and lots of Christians use those to justify the very behavior you say they shouldn't engage in.
But in gerenral, that "Love thy neighbour" is considered as a bugfix for those older "eye for an eye" rules.
And how is an outsider to distinguish between a Christian and someone just calling themselves one?
There is 100% sign: Anyone who calims to know God's will is more subject to hybris than to christian teachings. Christians should take responsibility for their actions and not blame them on "God's will".
By the way, who decides this shit?
Can the prudes at least learn a little consistency?
Oh that's simply. Facebook decides what is acceptable on facebook, twitter decides what is acceptable on twitter. You neither have to agree with nor use their service. And as you're free to run your own website, this isn't even censorship. The internet is much bigger as facebook, you know?
And in Italy there was a measurable slowdown in development JUST AFTER INTRODUCTION of patents for medicines. Profits went up, new drugs went down.
That's a bad measurement. Currently, pharma companies drown the market with slightly altered medicines as a pretext to rise the prices, as they are "new and improved" versions, but aren't required to proof a better effect than the previous, less expensive version.
I heard the same from butchers and glassblowers.
This wasn't meant as a comparision of better and worse. Just as a set of specific risk for digital archives.
Go and try to read your letters from a 5.25'' floppy disc with your VizaWrite-files from just a few years ago. Wouldn't have happend with paper printouts.
On the other hand, go to a movie archive and see the first cellulose movies lost due to simply rotting away... wouldn't have happened with DVDs
Then again, if there's no DVD player left....
A form of archiving, that needs special knowledge (file formats) or devices (media) adds an additional long term risk. But of course it also greatly reduces other risks. (When the Amalia-library in Weimar burned down a few years ago, lots of invaluable books were destroyed. Google Books could simply restore an offsite backup). It's simply a tradeoff. as always.
And this is in no way a new problem. (Pulling this from the back of my mind, corrections welcome)
The Sumerians used soft clay slabs for rather unimportant, temporary stuff as it could be erased easily. "cultural treasures" like the Gilgamesh epic were stored on valuable parchment. Now guess what survived a series of fires..... Hint: we have tons of shopping lists to work with....
But stone & clay slabs of the Sumerians and papyrus of the Egyptians survived until today, but the original data feed of the Apollo missions are lost forever because they were thrashed when no one had the equipment to read the old data tapes.
LYRICS?? I thought the reason why death metal won't become mainstream is because it sounds like someone throwing up over a microphone. I could settle for the rest of the music.
Why would someone with learning disability need FOOD DONATIONS??