That isn't indicative of the US in general; your link is about a woman in South Carolina. If South Carolina weren't geographically located in United States, it'd probably be considered a third-world country like Zimbabwe. It's in many ways one of the most backwards states there.
Not bad, though when I read it I have to go over it twice to see that the last word isn't "Chomps".
I kind of like: GIANT REPTILIAN MONSTER ATTACKS TOKYO!!! and in other news, telling human generated chess moves from computer generated ones is bitchy.
Here in glorious America, we will naturally let Visa track every last penny spent, because the private sector is superior, and they will simply sell that data to law enforcement, among other interested stakeholders, as part of their process of 'monetizing consumer metrics'. Free as in 'Free Market'!
It's not like everyone's oblivious to the fact that when you use Visa your purchases can be tracked. I'm aware of it every single time. But right now I have a choice to use cash if I want some discretion.
1) Get ready for work! Don't just slump out of bed and jump in the chair. Eat breakfast, take a shower, get dressed. You'll be more productive, I guarantee it.
We're all different. I find that in the early morning I get more done if I jump straight into it. I eat an hour or so into things. I'd work in my underwear if the back of my chair didn't feel weird. If the above works for you, by all means do it. But it's not necessarily the best for everyone.
2) Don't get caught in the trap of working too much. When your work is at home it can be hard to walk away from it. If you're done for the day, stay done.
Again, we're all different. My middle of the day tends to be a lot of down time. No idea why. I kick off the day strong, sag in the middle, and then I get some great work done after the kids are in bed. If you don't need to be available at specific hours of the day, it can be nice to take a fat break in the middle of the day and take your kids to the park or just sit around and watch a movie. Just make sure you can control things enough that you still get your job done.
I haven't heard anyone use the British version of fanny (last used in 'Billy Elliot') except to laugh at loud Americans who say 'fanny' because they don't know the word has a sexual meaning in this country.
A friend of mine (fellow American) is married to a British woman. He likes to tell a story about one time his parents came to visit. They were living at the time in a somewhat remote place, and there was a 4 hour bus ride involved. His mother, somewhat sore from the long ride, asked his wife "How's your fanny?" Fortunately for him, his wife was aware of the American usage as well, but the incident still amuses him.
1) "I took my - you know - thing.... the thing thats sits on the round things.... you know - the THING.... yeah - with the keys and stuff - the THING. Anyway, I took the thing to the place... you know - where I do stuff... there's coffee and papers and stuff - the PLACE... and the guy who tells me what to do... you know - the PLACE."
- or -
2) "I drove my car to work."
#1. It tells me the chick is drunk enough for me to have a chance.
Agreed. The moderation of these comments, as of 9:33 PM EST, is fairly sad.
I would have to (mostly) disagree with that.
Let's look at them one at a time:
The 1st comment (schlachter, 4, Funny) is kind of just taking up space. It's a mildly amusing observation that also happens to be a very early comment on the story. We all know those and the replies to them get much more attention than later comments.
The 2nd comment (dynamo52, 5 Insightful) starts off well, pointing out that while they may have screwed up, at least they're willing to admit it. Goes downhill a bit with a potshot at FOX News. Five is too high but it's not exactly a travesty.
The 3rd comment (AC, 5 Insightful) calls him out on the potshot and gets full props for it.
The 4th comment (amiga3D, 1, Insightful) Wrongfully accuses dynamo52 of hypocrisy and gets slapped down for it.
The 5th comment (mooingyak, 4, Insightful) That's me! I call amiga3D on the hypocrisy. My main complaint with amiga3D's comment was that dynamo52's comment might have had any number of flaws with it, but being hypocritical wasn't one of them. FWIW, I was actually glad someone moderated my comment down from 5. It wasn't that good of a comment.
The 6th comment (AC, 1) bemoans the state of slashdot moderation and makes a weak effort at sounding intelligent about irony and hypocrisy.
You're #7, and I think this discussion is getting to the point where it's probably too old and not controversial enough for a downmod.
Yes. He did exactly what he said that FOX News would have done. Ironic, not to mention hypocritical.
How exactly did he do that?
Did dynamo52 make some other, invalid comment, only to be exposed by FOX News, so now he's attacking them?
He contrasted what happened here with what he expected to happen had it been FOX News instead. He might be wrong (or not. I make no claim to know), but he's not hypocritical.
I don't claim to know why google does what they do. Maybe it's a matter of unique pages hosted -- we have a very large number. Maybe it's something else. But I just ran a spot check and I'm north of 3 mil in yesterday's logs.
FWIW, we're in the same ballpark in terms of total traffic.
Agreed. I was thinking only 51%? I currently toss roughly 65% of my logs out when I'm calculating how much human traffic we've received.
The interesting thing is that 51% is identifiable as bots. What about bots that are designed to emulate real users?
I mention that because I have written some bots that are designed to emulate users as closely as possible, so as to not be noticed by paranoid webmasters. Mine follow valid workflow scenarios, and even pause appropriate amounts of time between post backs, so I am fairly certain that they have gone unnoticed.
I don't think that I am more clever than the average hacker, so I am sure that others are doing this sort of thing, too.
It depends on a few things.
First, how much do I actually care? If your bot is pulling down less than a thousand pages in a day, it's not going to be noticed by me, and it would have to get higher still for me to make an effort to filter it out. Second, did you fool my advertisers? I keep track of page views mostly to keep them honest. If there's a significant discrepancy between their numbers and mine, I'm going to find out why. I only block access in fairly extreme cases. I mostly just don't count bot requests as pages served, but still handle the HTTP request normally, so you would not be able to tell whether or not I've noticed you. Also, I have a huge amount of data on what my normal traffic looks like, whereas you're guessing as to what it looks like. Chances are high you're doing *something* that stands out.
This is assuming you've done some degree of randomization or obscuring on your IP and user agent. If you haven't done that, then it's damn near a given I can spot you if I'm looking for it.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't blame conservativism. The author himself is a "conservative Mormon," according to TFA.
Yeah that fits the bill. Rabidly anti-gay in particular. Should be fairly easy to find some juicy quotes from him on the topic.
That isn't indicative of the US in general; your link is about a woman in South Carolina. If South Carolina weren't geographically located in United States, it'd probably be considered a third-world country like Zimbabwe. It's in many ways one of the most backwards states there.
You're right. The headline should have been:
Chasing Chess Cheats Challenges Comps!
Not bad, though when I read it I have to go over it twice to see that the last word isn't "Chomps".
I kind of like:
GIANT REPTILIAN MONSTER ATTACKS TOKYO!!!
and in other news, telling human generated chess moves from computer generated ones is bitchy.
We understand your concern, citizen.
Here in glorious America, we will naturally let Visa track every last penny spent, because the private sector is superior, and they will simply sell that data to law enforcement, among other interested stakeholders, as part of their process of 'monetizing consumer metrics'. Free as in 'Free Market'!
It's not like everyone's oblivious to the fact that when you use Visa your purchases can be tracked. I'm aware of it every single time. But right now I have a choice to use cash if I want some discretion.
1) Get ready for work! Don't just slump out of bed and jump in the chair. Eat breakfast, take a shower, get dressed. You'll be more productive, I guarantee it.
We're all different. I find that in the early morning I get more done if I jump straight into it. I eat an hour or so into things. I'd work in my underwear if the back of my chair didn't feel weird. If the above works for you, by all means do it. But it's not necessarily the best for everyone.
2) Don't get caught in the trap of working too much. When your work is at home it can be hard to walk away from it. If you're done for the day, stay done.
Again, we're all different. My middle of the day tends to be a lot of down time. No idea why. I kick off the day strong, sag in the middle, and then I get some great work done after the kids are in bed. If you don't need to be available at specific hours of the day, it can be nice to take a fat break in the middle of the day and take your kids to the park or just sit around and watch a movie. Just make sure you can control things enough that you still get your job done.
I haven't heard anyone use the British version of fanny (last used in 'Billy Elliot') except to laugh at loud Americans who say 'fanny' because they don't know the word has a sexual meaning in this country.
A friend of mine (fellow American) is married to a British woman. He likes to tell a story about one time his parents came to visit. They were living at the time in a somewhat remote place, and there was a 4 hour bus ride involved. His mother, somewhat sore from the long ride, asked his wife "How's your fanny?" Fortunately for him, his wife was aware of the American usage as well, but the incident still amuses him.
Which makes the better point?
1) "I took my - you know - thing .... the thing thats sits on the round things.... you know - the THING.... yeah - with the keys and stuff - the THING. Anyway, I took the thing to the place... you know - where I do stuff... there's coffee and papers and stuff - the PLACE... and the guy who tells me what to do... you know - the PLACE."
- or -
2) "I drove my car to work."
#1. It tells me the chick is drunk enough for me to have a chance.
I'd probably be flagged and kicked outta here if I was as potty-mouthed as I am in daily life
There's not much fucking chance of that happening.
La-di-da-di-da, La-di-da-di-da, what's the name of that song?
So your complaint is that he didn't hit +5 inside of the 11 minutes between when you posted and when he posted?
Agreed. The moderation of these comments, as of 9:33 PM EST, is fairly sad.
I would have to (mostly) disagree with that.
Let's look at them one at a time:
The 1st comment (schlachter, 4, Funny) is kind of just taking up space. It's a mildly amusing observation that also happens to be a very early comment on the story. We all know those and the replies to them get much more attention than later comments.
The 2nd comment (dynamo52, 5 Insightful) starts off well, pointing out that while they may have screwed up, at least they're willing to admit it. Goes downhill a bit with a potshot at FOX News. Five is too high but it's not exactly a travesty.
The 3rd comment (AC, 5 Insightful) calls him out on the potshot and gets full props for it.
The 4th comment (amiga3D, 1, Insightful) Wrongfully accuses dynamo52 of hypocrisy and gets slapped down for it.
The 5th comment (mooingyak, 4, Insightful) That's me! I call amiga3D on the hypocrisy. My main complaint with amiga3D's comment was that dynamo52's comment might have had any number of flaws with it, but being hypocritical wasn't one of them. FWIW, I was actually glad someone moderated my comment down from 5. It wasn't that good of a comment.
The 6th comment (AC, 1) bemoans the state of slashdot moderation and makes a weak effort at sounding intelligent about irony and hypocrisy.
You're #7, and I think this discussion is getting to the point where it's probably too old and not controversial enough for a downmod.
Well, you've nailed irony for sure.
Yes. He did exactly what he said that FOX News would have done. Ironic, not to mention hypocritical.
How exactly did he do that?
Did dynamo52 make some other, invalid comment, only to be exposed by FOX News, so now he's attacking them?
He contrasted what happened here with what he expected to happen had it been FOX News instead. He might be wrong (or not. I make no claim to know), but he's not hypocritical.
I'd have trouble telling if the female flies had rejected me or not.
I don't claim to know why google does what they do. Maybe it's a matter of unique pages hosted -- we have a very large number. Maybe it's something else. But I just ran a spot check and I'm north of 3 mil in yesterday's logs.
FWIW, we're in the same ballpark in terms of total traffic.
My first thought was "How did anyone manage to visit such a remote location to study it?"
Or Jersey.
The NYC frogs just tend to jaywalk at every available opportunity.
The message was just "neutrino"? No sense of history. How about a nice "What hath God wrought?"
Agreed. I was thinking only 51%? I currently toss roughly 65% of my logs out when I'm calculating how much human traffic we've received.
The interesting thing is that 51% is identifiable as bots. What about bots that are designed to emulate real users?
I mention that because I have written some bots that are designed to emulate users as closely as possible, so as to not be noticed by paranoid webmasters. Mine follow valid workflow scenarios, and even pause appropriate amounts of time between post backs, so I am fairly certain that they have gone unnoticed.
I don't think that I am more clever than the average hacker, so I am sure that others are doing this sort of thing, too.
It depends on a few things.
First, how much do I actually care? If your bot is pulling down less than a thousand pages in a day, it's not going to be noticed by me, and it would have to get higher still for me to make an effort to filter it out.
Second, did you fool my advertisers? I keep track of page views mostly to keep them honest. If there's a significant discrepancy between their numbers and mine, I'm going to find out why.
I only block access in fairly extreme cases. I mostly just don't count bot requests as pages served, but still handle the HTTP request normally, so you would not be able to tell whether or not I've noticed you.
Also, I have a huge amount of data on what my normal traffic looks like, whereas you're guessing as to what it looks like. Chances are high you're doing *something* that stands out.
This is assuming you've done some degree of randomization or obscuring on your IP and user agent. If you haven't done that, then it's damn near a given I can spot you if I'm looking for it.
Last time I checked (which wasn't recent) googlebot only accounted for about 5-6 million a day of my total traffic.
They're not saying 50% are malicious, just non-human. I get a fairly large chunk of traffic from google's bots, which I don't consider malicious.
Any webmaster should already know this, probably way more than 51% for websites in existence for several years.
Agreed. I was thinking only 51%? I currently toss roughly 65% of my logs out when I'm calculating how much human traffic we've received.
I've always wondered, with regard to the accuracy of clocks like this, how can you actually tell how accurate it is?
[citation needed]
Sounds quite logical to me, what inconsistencies do you see in his theory?
"citation needed" doesn't mean that the whole thing is bullshit, just that somebody would like to see something other than speculation on the topic.
The idea that heavier objects fall faster is reasonable and logical too, it's just not correct.
To paraphrase, in the land of non-mooing bovines, the mooing yak is king.