As many readers have commented, this does not seem like such a big deal. Shared stuff being public? Who cares? Don't do it, ya morons! And so on.
I don't use GMail, or Google's reader. However, from TFA and the complaints, it appears as though there was a service where you could aggregate and re-publish feeds through a link that was not (automatically) published anywhere. Google changed the semantics of this, to mean that these "shared" feeds are now automatically available to everyone in your contact list. This (rightfully) has pissed off many existing users, who have invested their time into a system that they must now abandon, because most people have the concept of "mixed company." You don't talk about certain topics in certain groups -- you might be fine making dirty jokes around your regular friends, for example, but you behave yourself when you're at a professional lunch.
So, this is not a matter of not using it -- it's a matter of bait-and-switch. The rules got changed out from under the user's feet, and that leads to a feeling of betrayal in the case where embarrassing information gets leaked. Google gave the impression that you were just hanging out with your friends, and then let in your stuffy colleagues while you were in the middle of telling The Aristocrats Joke.
IRC 911! AIM 911! <insert TCP/IP based message system> 911!
People don't seem to understand that IP phones are just like any of these other piece of software... they just do a better job of making you think they're hardware:).
Just to illustrate...
Pretend, for a moment, that we had a popular set of E-mail servers. These servers assign customers (US only) 10 digit numbers for their accounts. Pretend a little more, and picture that the common mode of communication over these servers is zipped WAV files.
No one in their right mind would force these mail servers to have a 911@ that could respond to emergencies at the sender's location.
Even if we took it another step and put a modem in all the client's machines that called them up and played back the WAV files, then recorded a response and mailed a return... it *looks* like a phone system, but it just isn't.
Don't blame your "friends" when you put *yourself* in a dangerous position. No one is forcing you into their home, nor forcing you to assume the risk of not having 911. It's your choice to visit them, and by extension, your choice to assume the risk when you visit.
Now, if they don't have 911 service and also do not inform you of this, *then* it is their "personal choice" that is putting you in danger.
First off: The government should subsidize Free Softwarenot open source software as a whole, if it subsidizes anything.
Second: I don't think that the governemt should have any direct control over Free Software or the manufacture therof. Police and fire departments, as well as schools and other public institutions, are completely government controlled. I don't want the government to be able to make arbitrary rules for the code that I want to write as Free Software, which could feasibly happen if the government subsidized Free Software in the same way as the aforementioned institutes are.
Another thing to remember: Free Software is Free Speech, not Free Beer. Programmers can (and do) make money off of thier Free Software. Should the government subsidize commercial entities? I don't particularly agree with airline bailouts or other corporate gimmes that the government spends my tax money on; I would disagree just as much if the government was giving me money to write and sell Free Software as a subsidation (if I were selling it for profit as well.)
Now, I do agree that it would be nice to set up something like a grant system for Free Software programmers. I could write the government with a proposal for such-and-such program, get a government endorsement and some grant money, and write the code up. It would also be great if there were government coding standards that participants would have to keep to (think GNU coding standards.) This would garuntee that the taxpayer's money is going to a good quality product.
But I trust the government as far as I can throw it. The implementation I described would be ideal, but I'm sure that if the government got into software, it would just make a mess. The government is already creating enough of a problem as far as intellectual "property" laws and software patents. I don't think I want it meddling with my development plans any more.
Carry a short range jammer (FCC would LOVE that e.e)
Destroy the tags in the device (DMCA/ protection curcumvention? Who know with the asinine rulings that are going on...)
Line your house with lead/concrete/other RF-impenitrable material (Yeah, right..)
But I do think that radio jammers and/or seeking out and destroying tags (after you buy the item, of course) are probably the best options for handling these things.
But hey, no matter what, thier batteries have to run out sometime, right?;p
Man oh man... You know, I can just see these companies all together in a locker room, having the following conversation:
IBM: Mines smaller!
AMD: Oh yeah, well mine gets done faster!
Intel: Mine gets done faster than yours!
AMD: Does not!
Motorolla: Well, mi...
(AMD, IBM, Intel): Shut up, you fruit!
Intel: I can sooo finish before you, AMD......
The major problem with Segways is that they don't fit into any of the current transportation channels that are available. They're too big and too fast for sidewalks, but they're too slow for bike lanes or the street.
Personally, I bike to work every day (~3 miles, 1.5 uphill, 1.5 down) with a 3-day hiking pack on my back full of all kinds of crap (~25 lbs on average).
Now, cycling has the same problem as Segways, to some degree; cycles are too slow for the road and too fast for the sidewalks. I usually end up on sidewalks because there are no bike lanes in my commute (or really anywhere in my city) and it's far too dangerous on the road.
Now, where a bike has an advantage over a segway: - I can get off the bike and pass people at a walk.There's plenty of room for people to pass. - No charging (no electricity, no gas, just food+water in and CO2/organic waste out) - Keeps you healthy - Costs little to buy - Almost everything on a bike can be fixed with simple tools
Now... why is there even a market for these things? With busses, taxis, personal cars and motorbikes for motorized vehicles? With bikes and, I dunno, feet for personal transport? Why do we need something completely incompatible with all of the useful pavement we already have down?
As for using it to get around malls/ workplaces/ etc... you know all of the signs that say NO (insert whelled device here)? I'm sure that segways are not going to be allowed in these places before bikes are.
Do the people buying these things know that they are being trakced? Is there a disclaimer or fine print or anything? Do the dolls have unique IDs? Could they be linked to a credit card number to allow the tracking of specific people? Could these people be 'followed' to thier rooms and have thier identities discovered that way if they paid in cash?
</paranoia>
A slightly more amusing question: Are the dolls getting thier voice data from the checkpoints, or are the blurbs preprogrammed? I think it would be funny to set up a checkpoint on a busy road that triggered Micky to start swearing at the hapless tourists he's travelling with;)
Weee. Sarcasm. Right. Joke. Funny.
Note to self: don't post while sleep deprived.
I cant even complain about the drug testing because it makes me "guilty" to the asswipes who say "bring it on, i've got nothing to hide."
Somewhere along the line, we lost the idea of "Innocent until proven guilty." And no one seems to even vaugely recall the phrase "beyond a shadow of a doubt."
Be careful... that plan could backfire. You might end up with relatives flying to you... sleeping in your house, eating your food, and still irritating the hell out of you - but at your expense;)
Oh, whoopee. Yes, let's fuck freedom. Let's start a witch hunt war on terror and start an inquisition protecting citizens from said terrorists.
And as for the urine samples: I have never done drugs. Ever. And I would never submit to a urine sample, even if it cost me my job. Why? Because I'm a goddamn fucking Americain and I will never forget the sacrifices made by the people that came before me to earn this freedom. If you want to fuck freedom, you're no better than the asses that flew the planes into the towers and put us in this mess in the first place.
Honestly, I think that the government has bailed out the airline industry enough times to make me think that the two are becoming pretty much one entity.
Think about it... federal funds are propping them up, federal enforment agents have been sent in to help out with the so-called security... now the government wants to use thier new asset to find persons of interest to them.
Now, I say persons of interest, because we all know this "terrorist" excuse is just a load of bullshit that the government is using (yet again) to get thier fingers into things that they should not be in. Why enforce existing laws to take care of the issues when you can use the panic and fear of the public to take more power for yorself, neh? They'll use that system to find whomever they please, and then 'justify' (read: make an excuse) thier actions later.
I'm sure that as soon as our backs are turned, they'll alowly and quietly loosen the limits on the system until they have the system working in accordance with thier original plan.
But hey, if I trusted the government to act morally and use this tool properly, I'd think it would be a good idea.
Slashdot Mirror
As many readers have commented, this does not seem like such a big deal. Shared stuff being public? Who cares? Don't do it, ya morons! And so on.
I don't use GMail, or Google's reader. However, from TFA and the complaints, it appears as though there was a service where you could aggregate and re-publish feeds through a link that was not (automatically) published anywhere. Google changed the semantics of this, to mean that these "shared" feeds are now automatically available to everyone in your contact list. This (rightfully) has pissed off many existing users, who have invested their time into a system that they must now abandon, because most people have the concept of "mixed company." You don't talk about certain topics in certain groups -- you might be fine making dirty jokes around your regular friends, for example, but you behave yourself when you're at a professional lunch.
So, this is not a matter of not using it -- it's a matter of bait-and-switch. The rules got changed out from under the user's feet, and that leads to a feeling of betrayal in the case where embarrassing information gets leaked. Google gave the impression that you were just hanging out with your friends, and then let in your stuffy colleagues while you were in the middle of telling The Aristocrats Joke.
IRC 911! AIM 911! <insert TCP/IP based message system> 911!
People don't seem to understand that IP phones are just like any of these other piece of software... they just do a better job of making you think they're hardware :).
Just to illustrate...
Pretend, for a moment, that we had a popular set of E-mail servers. These servers assign customers (US only) 10 digit numbers for their accounts. Pretend a little more, and picture that the common mode of communication over these servers is zipped WAV files.
No one in their right mind would force these mail servers to have a 911@ that could respond to emergencies at the sender's location.
Even if we took it another step and put a modem in all the client's machines that called them up and played back the WAV files, then recorded a response and mailed a return... it *looks* like a phone system, but it just isn't.
Don't blame your "friends" when you put *yourself* in a dangerous position. No one is forcing you into their home, nor forcing you to assume the risk of not having 911. It's your choice to visit them, and by extension, your choice to assume the risk when you visit. Now, if they don't have 911 service and also do not inform you of this, *then* it is their "personal choice" that is putting you in danger.
First off: The government should subsidize Free Software not open source software as a whole, if it subsidizes anything.
Second: I don't think that the governemt should have any direct control over Free Software or the manufacture therof. Police and fire departments, as well as schools and other public institutions, are completely government controlled. I don't want the government to be able to make arbitrary rules for the code that I want to write as Free Software, which could feasibly happen if the government subsidized Free Software in the same way as the aforementioned institutes are.
Another thing to remember: Free Software is Free Speech, not Free Beer. Programmers can (and do) make money off of thier Free Software. Should the government subsidize commercial entities? I don't particularly agree with airline bailouts or other corporate gimmes that the government spends my tax money on; I would disagree just as much if the government was giving me money to write and sell Free Software as a subsidation (if I were selling it for profit as well.)
Now, I do agree that it would be nice to set up something like a grant system for Free Software programmers. I could write the government with a proposal for such-and-such program, get a government endorsement and some grant money, and write the code up. It would also be great if there were government coding standards that participants would have to keep to (think GNU coding standards.) This would garuntee that the taxpayer's money is going to a good quality product.
But I trust the government as far as I can throw it. The implementation I described would be ideal, but I'm sure that if the government got into software, it would just make a mess. The government is already creating enough of a problem as far as intellectual "property" laws and software patents. I don't think I want it meddling with my development plans any more.
Oh well. Just my 2c.
Well, they are just radio waves after all ;)
But I do think that radio jammers and/or seeking out and destroying tags (after you buy the item, of course) are probably the best options for handling these things.
But hey, no matter what, thier batteries have to run out sometime, right? ;p
If we could only have all of the software glitches malfunction... then there wouldn't be a problem ;)
Man oh man... You know, I can just see these companies all together in a locker room, having the following conversation: IBM: Mines smaller! AMD: Oh yeah, well mine gets done faster! Intel: Mine gets done faster than yours! AMD: Does not! Motorolla: Well, mi... (AMD, IBM, Intel): Shut up, you fruit! Intel: I can sooo finish before you, AMD... ...
The major problem with Segways is that they don't fit into any of the current transportation channels that are available. They're too big and too fast for sidewalks, but they're too slow for bike lanes or the street.
Personally, I bike to work every day (~3 miles, 1.5 uphill, 1.5 down) with a 3-day hiking pack on my back full of all kinds of crap (~25 lbs on average).
Now, cycling has the same problem as Segways, to some degree; cycles are too slow for the road and too fast for the sidewalks. I usually end up on sidewalks because there are no bike lanes in my commute (or really anywhere in my city) and it's far too dangerous on the road.
Now, where a bike has an advantage over a segway:
- I can get off the bike and pass people at a walk.There's plenty of room for people to pass.
- No charging (no electricity, no gas, just food+water in and CO2/organic waste out)
- Keeps you healthy
- Costs little to buy
- Almost everything on a bike can be fixed with simple tools
Now... why is there even a market for these things? With busses, taxis, personal cars and motorbikes for motorized vehicles? With bikes and, I dunno, feet for personal transport? Why do we need something completely incompatible with all of the useful pavement we already have down?
As for using it to get around malls/ workplaces/ etc... you know all of the signs that say NO (insert whelled device here)? I'm sure that segways are not going to be allowed in these places before bikes are.
Anyhow, my 2c.
'nuff said
Note to self: don't post while sleep deprived. Somewhere along the line, we lost the idea of "Innocent until proven guilty." And no one seems to even vaugely recall the phrase "beyond a shadow of a doubt."
Be careful... that plan could backfire. You might end up with relatives flying to you... sleeping in your house, eating your food, and still irritating the hell out of you - but at your expense ;)
Oh, whoopee. Yes, let's fuck freedom. Let's start a witch hunt war on terror and start an inquisition protecting citizens from said terrorists.
And as for the urine samples: I have never done drugs. Ever. And I would never submit to a urine sample, even if it cost me my job. Why? Because I'm a goddamn fucking Americain and I will never forget the sacrifices made by the people that came before me to earn this freedom. If you want to fuck freedom, you're no better than the asses that flew the planes into the towers and put us in this mess in the first place.
They hated freedom just as much as you seem to.
Honestly, I think that the government has bailed out the airline industry enough times to make me think that the two are becoming pretty much one entity. Think about it... federal funds are propping them up, federal enforment agents have been sent in to help out with the so-called security... now the government wants to use thier new asset to find persons of interest to them. Now, I say persons of interest, because we all know this "terrorist" excuse is just a load of bullshit that the government is using (yet again) to get thier fingers into things that they should not be in. Why enforce existing laws to take care of the issues when you can use the panic and fear of the public to take more power for yorself, neh? They'll use that system to find whomever they please, and then 'justify' (read: make an excuse) thier actions later. I'm sure that as soon as our backs are turned, they'll alowly and quietly loosen the limits on the system until they have the system working in accordance with thier original plan. But hey, if I trusted the government to act morally and use this tool properly, I'd think it would be a good idea.