Curious: Are you atheist / agnostic? I got into the site way back when after filing out their gigantic questionnaire, but it does seem like the site tends toward a certain type of person.
Me either. This would be an interesting experiment to try; do people realize that certain "superfluous" words are missing without being told to look for them, or do they mentally fill them in subconsciously?
Fuck you too, buddy. Sometimes it's as simple as, I don't like bars or trying to find women in random groups of people, and like having the added matching capability of a site like OkCupid. I'm pretty sure my wife would agree with me.
I'm not sure why you're so cynical (I might have been at one point) but there's a difference between being pissed off, and assuming your view of reality as affected by your incredible cynicism is accurate.
Haha, I didn't realize OkCupid was bought by Match. That makes one of the questions in their initial "dating type" quiz incredibly ironic (I believe they were saying that if you had an STD, you should "go here" where "here" was a link to match.com). Anyone know if that question is still part of the quiz?
Coming from Ontario, I am in fact the one who is down with the OPP. Well, not really, I've never interacted with them. It helps that in Canada, speeding is usually accepted up to around 20kph over the limit on highways.
My theory is that since online dating has a lower barrier to entry, it attracts people who wouldn't otherwise be "ready" to find their soulmate. It's like PHP; it can be a powerful tool, but because it's easy there's a lot of crap code out there.
Disclaimer: Met my wife and soulmate on OkCupid.:^)
Yeah, they don't care. You can play your stupid games in a jail cell while they wait. There's no time limit on contempt, so if you don't remember, that's fine, you'll just sit in jail literally the rest of your life.
Eh. Companies need people to do taxes. Companies need people to fill legal forms and do low-level accounting. Companies need people to do background checks once a potential employee has passed muster. Companies need people to do payroll. Small companies, especially, can't afford to have lawyer or an accountant (or have the time for the CEO to) do everything. That's where I see HR people fitting.
I absolutely agree with you that at the first level of hiring they shouldn't get involved.
The game will be available again before they have to respond. Trying to argue the lost value of two days of game play in front of a judge would be... difficult.
IANAL but AFAIK as long as you're not implying in any way that you are in any way connected to or sponsored by the Super Bowl you should be OK. The problem is that the NFL doesn't really care what the laws say because they can intimidate you into doing what they want regardless.
And that does include voting for something because they're "the lesser of two evils". There are more than two people running, and if there truly aren't any candidates that match your views, you should either be pushing to get someone who does to run, or run yourself.
Weird Al asks for permission and doesn't release the song if he doesn't get permission (though he still plays them at concerts, of which there are a few, which is a good reason to see his shows if you're a fan!), but legally speaking, parody is absolutely and explicitly protected under fair use. He only asks for permission because he personally feels it's the ethical thing to do.
And I say this as a K-1 family class immigrant. Look, immigration in the US can suck if you're not one of the favoured classes but let's not lie about it.
But my question is, how does Twitter instituting the censorship affect the Thai government's enforcement of lese majeste at all? They'd have exactly the same set of data that they did before the censorship occurred.
Not all legislation is driven by Hollywood lobbyists, is it?
Not at all! You forgot about defense lobbyists, telecom lobbyists, and IP lobbyists. Pretty much anyone with lobbyists, actually. Note that this almost certainly does not include you or me.
Perhaps. But then, perhaps an all or nothing approach would harm more than it would help here. Twitter has been used in revolutions, after all; by maintaining enough diplomatic relations with a government, perhaps Twitter is staving off the country from going completely dark to the global web, as they may do if nobody plays along (at least on the surface) with their crazy censorship rules. If we can keep a discussion going, perhaps we can convince them otherwise.
Or maybe I'm just naive. One just has to remember that the users are not the ones doing the censorship here, but they'll be the ones ultimately punished if Twitter decides not to play along.
Forgive me if I don't understand what's happening here, and I may not, but from what I've read:
- Twitter gives governments the right to block Tweets from appearing in their country.
And that's it. They don't actually search for specific content, like YouTube does on video uploads. So wouldn't it ultimately be up to the Thai government to find these Tweets anyway? In which case, how is this in any way tied with Twitter, other than that they're blocking the Tweets from appearing to Thai residents (possibly allowing them not to get arrested)? Furthermore, Twitter provides a very easy workaround in that you can override their detection of your country and set it to something else (like, say, the US), and be able to see the "censored" Tweets.
Yes, what they're doing is unethical, but Twitter isn't doing much to contribute here.
Slashdot Mirror
Curious: Are you atheist / agnostic? I got into the site way back when after filing out their gigantic questionnaire, but it does seem like the site tends toward a certain type of person.
Me either. This would be an interesting experiment to try; do people realize that certain "superfluous" words are missing without being told to look for them, or do they mentally fill them in subconsciously?
It means if you are using one, you are a freak.
Fuck you too, buddy. Sometimes it's as simple as, I don't like bars or trying to find women in random groups of people, and like having the added matching capability of a site like OkCupid. I'm pretty sure my wife would agree with me.
I'm not sure why you're so cynical (I might have been at one point) but there's a difference between being pissed off, and assuming your view of reality as affected by your incredible cynicism is accurate.
Haha, I didn't realize OkCupid was bought by Match. That makes one of the questions in their initial "dating type" quiz incredibly ironic (I believe they were saying that if you had an STD, you should "go here" where "here" was a link to match.com). Anyone know if that question is still part of the quiz?
Coming from Ontario, I am in fact the one who is down with the OPP. Well, not really, I've never interacted with them. It helps that in Canada, speeding is usually accepted up to around 20kph over the limit on highways.
My theory is that since online dating has a lower barrier to entry, it attracts people who wouldn't otherwise be "ready" to find their soulmate. It's like PHP; it can be a powerful tool, but because it's easy there's a lot of crap code out there.
Disclaimer: Met my wife and soulmate on OkCupid. :^)
Yeah, they don't care. You can play your stupid games in a jail cell while they wait. There's no time limit on contempt, so if you don't remember, that's fine, you'll just sit in jail literally the rest of your life.
Eh. Companies need people to do taxes. Companies need people to fill legal forms and do low-level accounting. Companies need people to do background checks once a potential employee has passed muster. Companies need people to do payroll. Small companies, especially, can't afford to have lawyer or an accountant (or have the time for the CEO to) do everything. That's where I see HR people fitting.
I absolutely agree with you that at the first level of hiring they shouldn't get involved.
The game will be available again before they have to respond. Trying to argue the lost value of two days of game play in front of a judge would be... difficult.
IANAL but AFAIK as long as you're not implying in any way that you are in any way connected to or sponsored by the Super Bowl you should be OK. The problem is that the NFL doesn't really care what the laws say because they can intimidate you into doing what they want regardless.
*points to signature*
And that does include voting for something because they're "the lesser of two evils". There are more than two people running, and if there truly aren't any candidates that match your views, you should either be pushing to get someone who does to run, or run yourself.
Yeah, I thought it could be an attempt at a joke, but didn't seem funny enough to be one.
Uh... what?
Plus it really pisses off us real engineers.
Yeah, and that's why we keep doing it. You guys are fun when you're mad! (Unlike the rest of the time.)
Weird Al asks for permission and doesn't release the song if he doesn't get permission (though he still plays them at concerts, of which there are a few, which is a good reason to see his shows if you're a fan!), but legally speaking, parody is absolutely and explicitly protected under fair use. He only asks for permission because he personally feels it's the ethical thing to do.
OK, wait. You're right if you only count family classes, but you're entirely discounting every other way to get one, and those don't even count the dual intent visas that allow one to adjust status to Permanent Resident (i.e. get a green card) which is how most work-related green card holders get them anyway.
And I say this as a K-1 family class immigrant. Look, immigration in the US can suck if you're not one of the favoured classes but let's not lie about it.
Watch for this to be used in stealth ageism.
I think this story illustrates that the RFID is completely unnecessary.
There should be a "Promote to Article" button for posts like the parent.
But my question is, how does Twitter instituting the censorship affect the Thai government's enforcement of lese majeste at all? They'd have exactly the same set of data that they did before the censorship occurred.
I inferred a lot of sarcasm in the initial post. If I'm wrong about that, I apologize, but when the parent said
...then we had better boycott *all* Chinese-produced products and not just those shiny Apple toys.
I interpreted it as a sarcastic excuse to not care.
Sounds like IRC to me.
Not all legislation is driven by Hollywood lobbyists, is it?
Not at all! You forgot about defense lobbyists, telecom lobbyists, and IP lobbyists. Pretty much anyone with lobbyists, actually. Note that this almost certainly does not include you or me.
Perhaps. But then, perhaps an all or nothing approach would harm more than it would help here. Twitter has been used in revolutions, after all; by maintaining enough diplomatic relations with a government, perhaps Twitter is staving off the country from going completely dark to the global web, as they may do if nobody plays along (at least on the surface) with their crazy censorship rules. If we can keep a discussion going, perhaps we can convince them otherwise.
Or maybe I'm just naive. One just has to remember that the users are not the ones doing the censorship here, but they'll be the ones ultimately punished if Twitter decides not to play along.
Forgive me if I don't understand what's happening here, and I may not, but from what I've read:
- Twitter gives governments the right to block Tweets from appearing in their country.
And that's it. They don't actually search for specific content, like YouTube does on video uploads. So wouldn't it ultimately be up to the Thai government to find these Tweets anyway? In which case, how is this in any way tied with Twitter, other than that they're blocking the Tweets from appearing to Thai residents (possibly allowing them not to get arrested)? Furthermore, Twitter provides a very easy workaround in that you can override their detection of your country and set it to something else (like, say, the US), and be able to see the "censored" Tweets.
Yes, what they're doing is unethical, but Twitter isn't doing much to contribute here.