Following the case of James Yee, a Muslim chaplain that served at Guantanamo's Camp Delta facility significant changes were made to procedures related to the chaplain, but to find that you'd need to read the entire diff. The chaplain is not allowed any access to detainees during their first two weeks, possibly four. The chaplain has been removed from the library committee which approves reading material. The chaplain may no longer recommend reading material for the library.
The library is also impacted. Periodicals, dictionaries, language instruction books, technology or medical update information, and geography were added to the banned list.
If you just read the first dozen or so pages you'll not get the whole story, but you do get the added rules for detainees.
Comply with all rules and regulations. You are subject to disciplinary action if you disobey any rule or commit any act, disorder, or neglect that is prejudicial to good order and discipline.
You must immediately obey all orders of U.S. personnel. Deliberate disobedience, resistance, or conduct of a mutinous or riotous nature will be dealt with by force. Be respectful of others. Derogatory comments toward camp personnel will not be tolerated.
You may not have any articles that can be used as a weapon in your possession at any time. If a weapon is found in your possession, you will be severely punished. Gambling is strictly forbidden.
Being truthful and compliance will be rewarded. Failure to comply will result in loss of privileges.
All trash will be returned immediately to U.S. personnel when you are finished eating. All eating utensils must be returned after meals.
No detainee may conduct or participate in any form of military drill, organized physical fitness, hand-to-hand combat, or martial arts style training.
The camp commander will ensure adequate protection for all personnel. Any detainee who mistreats another detainee will be punished. Any detainee that fears his life is in danger, or fears physical injury at the hands of another person can report this to U.S. personnel at any time.
Medical emergencies should be brought to the guards' attention immediately.
Your decision whether or not to be truthful and comply will directly affect your quality of life while in this camp.
I have around 20,000 edits on one of the projects; were I to throw the toys out of the pram in this manner there'd be at least 50-100 articles need deleted. I hate seeing information being destroyed - when you start editing Wikipedia you're embracing its goals, "sum of all human knowledge freely available" and all that.
The parent post? I mean, c'mon "It's Mike Godwin... He must be evil... He's a lawyer and I don't believe what he says."
Both the summary and the blog post incorrectly characterise how Wikipedia can change license. The only way is the "or later" clause, which would be the next version of the GFDL. How changes to that would be implemented to make it compatible with CC-BY-SA is something I'm not going to speculate on, but the doom-sayers already assume the worst.
That's just like saying Jimmy Wales should never have started Wikipedia in the first place because it would attract trolls and vandals.
There are two issues. The first is that a lot of fancruft and garage band stuff is inappropriately entered. Zapping stuff like that kinda numbs the admins to deletion, it becomes a routine thing to do.
Along comes someone wanting to create an entry on Wikipedia about a comic, but they haven't a clue how to cite references - or where the media has failed - actually know that you should source everything in an encyclopedia.
So, you now have a rather crufty "Comic X" article, which comes to the attention of this deletion-numb admin. Knows nothing about the subject, plugs it into Google, gets a few hits but not a lot. It gets tagged for deletion, when perhaps it should have been tagged as lacking sources. This last option is a step away from deletion and a far better solution.
Oh, and *please* do donate. Wikipedia is the 9th most visited site on the Internet, and the Wikimedia Commons is growing at a rate of 5,000 images a day.
First off, what the hell is wrong with/.? I can't find the post a reply message here with Firefox.
Then, to respond to the parent, I tend to agree with much of what you say. There is a progressive minority within the country that would admit to the Armenian genocide, become more secular, and embrace European ideals.
But they're just that, a minority. Turkey isn't ready to join the European Union, and this is just one of the indicators that shows it.
What is this doing on the front page? It is just one more ISP listening to their marketing division and turning their mickey-mouse search engine into a source of revenue.
The reference to OpenDNS is a non-sequitur, in fact the whole article is a steaming pile of WTF?
Well, if the guys that set up Skype and sold it for billions are going to have a go at the on-demand TV over IP market, then I'd bet on them. I've seen completely computer-illiterate people set up Skype and make calls.
The various teasing articles around the subject suggest they've got deals that mean they will have content from the mainstream as well as ads (and presumably whatever they can steal from YouTube). There's absolutely nothing on how they'll integrate ads and mainstream content, but the content is to be streamed so you'll have no choice about getting the ads if they go that way.
Nobody has said if there will be a requirement to pay for the service is the one thing that gets me, I can't decide whether to go chase the kids off my lawn or complain about how paying for cable TV was supposed to eliminate adverts.
Guys, when you set this up give users the option of making a micropayment for add-free TV shows.
And for those who go the extra mile and check the old slashdot story and its link to Business Week, this service was supposed to be up and running by the end of this year. Only 12 days to go people!
Hey look! Someone who can define Apple as uber sneaky/cool by be being secretive and not blogging more BS for him to drool over. Not forgetting the side swipe that Microsoft sells you a future they don't have, and that's vapourware.
Enough with links to blogs of people who - in Wikipedia terms - are not notable.
Whilst the casual description of the deletion process, illustrated with random examples, is presented in a fairly lighthearted manner, it is an admission that there are some quality procedures in place at Wikipedia.
You do have to wonder if they chose their examples to try and give them the notability they lack.
Religious people of pretty much any flavour seem to be normal people until you hit that one spot where the gears seem to just mash into each other and they go haywire.
This guy shouldn't be teaching, particularly not history. Any loon who tries to tell a bunch of kids that (a) Noah's ark was real and (b) There were dinosaurs on it should have their license to teach revoked.
Marx was right, it is an opiate, because there certainly seem to be a fair share of the users acting like they're on something.
You bet they'll see a drop in traffic, try googling for site http://www.lesoir.be/ on google.be, or news.google.be. You don't just get the ruling, you get a message that thousands of results have been deleted. Dutch-language papers, such as http://www.hln.be/ are still available and in the cache.
If you do the right search in Google, you'll turn up the following message:
In response to a legal request submitted to Google, we have removed 1260 result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read more about the request at ChillingEffects.org.
I'm not sure if the examples you offer are the sort of convergence discussed in the book. A TV with built in VCR is a combination device which doesn't bring about the audience-producer interaction that this seems to be related to.
The case studies mentioned in the review are instances where a corporate culture has encountered an independent culture that has sprung up around a product such as a TV show, book, game, or some gadget.
The geek example most people can probably follow is early Microsoft and the computer hobbyists who didn't see anything wrong with sharing software. Microsoft's big win was commercially when they landed the IBM PC deal, the hobbyists got the OS with the machine and went on to provide many of the applications that made IBM's machine useful, thus selling more Microsoft OS licenses. Fast forward to now and you discover Microsoft long ago made it harder than the "free" copy-one-floppy upgrade. The hobbyists now have other alternatives, that include Free software.
The BBC article is quite clear, August 6 was when the World Wide Web became possible due to the release of source code on Usenet. The summary indicates a poor understanding that WWW and Internet are not the same thing, whoever wrote the BBC article gets this, and has put together an interesting synopsis of events surrounding the birth of the web.
You don't suck up to politicians and hope they'll be nice to you, and civil disobedience over video games would just be met with, "see, it does make people violent".
Watch this man in a suit tackle the same issue over censorship in music, and realise it is the same circus from the entertainment branch of big business.
We've never had an unbreakable DRM. Will we really have an undernet that can't be spied on?
The issue here isn't spying, it is blocking and these guys have proposed a way to circumvent the blocks for a little while.
It will be inconvenient for western proxy server providers as every time their IP address changes they'll have to notify everyone of the new address.
The garbage about a secure financial network really is garbage, they're using https and assuming port 443 won't be blocked.
My question for these three is, what's to stop the Chinese censors from using a dial-up spam blacklist to block more than 90% of the machines that could potentially run this software?
This is Noddy stuff, if you're leaving college or university and can't get hold of good sample letters you might need to buy this book. I had a halfway competent careers officer in my school and this book doesn't sound much better. I think I can also safely assume that the bullshit it is suggested you peddle to get your first job isn't going to work beyond that, and a lot of people who read Slashdot are beyond that somehwat awkward phase in career development.
Are these people just repackaging news from the mainstream news sources?
These people have an entire encyclopedia for reference material, and many who follow news in a particular area will have background knowledge that a mainsteam journalist would be expected to add to a newswire report.
Wikinews is a bit more than just an agregator of news, people do bring other knowledge to the article than just what is listed in the Associated Press or CNN stories. Look at some of the coverage for issues in the Australian parliament, wikinews contributors are doing the research that any news organisation would have to do and sometimes beating the mainstream press to it with stories.
Where wikinews may fall down is the application of the infamous NPOV to news articles. There's a very short timeframe to get an article published while it is still news, and you don't have the same luxury as you do on an encyclopedia to tag and discuss at leisure.
Slashdot Mirror
This isn't ominous... It's Steven Hawkings taking his revenge. Just don't ask what the cult did to piss him off.
The library is also impacted. Periodicals, dictionaries, language instruction books, technology or medical update information, and geography were added to the banned list.
If you just read the first dozen or so pages you'll not get the whole story, but you do get the added rules for detainees.
The Register hates Wikipedia and at every opportunity seeks to spin the tiniest thing into major news that is negative about Wikipedia.
I don't know why they do this, penis envy?
Talk about dramatic?
I have around 20,000 edits on one of the projects; were I to throw the toys out of the pram in this manner there'd be at least 50-100 articles need deleted. I hate seeing information being destroyed - when you start editing Wikipedia you're embracing its goals, "sum of all human knowledge freely available" and all that.
The parent post? I mean, c'mon "It's Mike Godwin... He must be evil... He's a lawyer and I don't believe what he says."
Both the summary and the blog post incorrectly characterise how Wikipedia can change license. The only way is the "or later" clause, which would be the next version of the GFDL. How changes to that would be implemented to make it compatible with CC-BY-SA is something I'm not going to speculate on, but the doom-sayers already assume the worst.
That's just like saying Jimmy Wales should never have started Wikipedia in the first place because it would attract trolls and vandals.
Where are mod points when you need them?
There are two issues. The first is that a lot of fancruft and garage band stuff is inappropriately entered. Zapping stuff like that kinda numbs the admins to deletion, it becomes a routine thing to do.
Along comes someone wanting to create an entry on Wikipedia about a comic, but they haven't a clue how to cite references - or where the media has failed - actually know that you should source everything in an encyclopedia.
So, you now have a rather crufty "Comic X" article, which comes to the attention of this deletion-numb admin. Knows nothing about the subject, plugs it into Google, gets a few hits but not a lot. It gets tagged for deletion, when perhaps it should have been tagged as lacking sources. This last option is a step away from deletion and a far better solution.
Oh, and *please* do donate. Wikipedia is the 9th most visited site on the Internet, and the Wikimedia Commons is growing at a rate of 5,000 images a day.
First off, what the hell is wrong with /.? I can't find the post a reply message here with Firefox.
Then, to respond to the parent, I tend to agree with much of what you say. There is a progressive minority within the country that would admit to the Armenian genocide, become more secular, and embrace European ideals.
But they're just that, a minority. Turkey isn't ready to join the European Union, and this is just one of the indicators that shows it.
XML is simple... It's like violence. If it didn't work, you didn't use enough of it.
What is this doing on the front page? It is just one more ISP listening to their marketing division and turning their mickey-mouse search engine into a source of revenue.
The reference to OpenDNS is a non-sequitur, in fact the whole article is a steaming pile of WTF?
Well, if the guys that set up Skype and sold it for billions are going to have a go at the on-demand TV over IP market, then I'd bet on them. I've seen completely computer-illiterate people set up Skype and make calls.
The various teasing articles around the subject suggest they've got deals that mean they will have content from the mainstream as well as ads (and presumably whatever they can steal from YouTube). There's absolutely nothing on how they'll integrate ads and mainstream content, but the content is to be streamed so you'll have no choice about getting the ads if they go that way.
Nobody has said if there will be a requirement to pay for the service is the one thing that gets me, I can't decide whether to go chase the kids off my lawn or complain about how paying for cable TV was supposed to eliminate adverts.
Guys, when you set this up give users the option of making a micropayment for add-free TV shows.
And for those who go the extra mile and check the old slashdot story and its link to Business Week, this service was supposed to be up and running by the end of this year. Only 12 days to go people!
Hey look! Someone who can define Apple as uber sneaky/cool by be being secretive and not blogging more BS for him to drool over. Not forgetting the side swipe that Microsoft sells you a future they don't have, and that's vapourware.
Enough with links to blogs of people who - in Wikipedia terms - are not notable.
Whilst the casual description of the deletion process, illustrated with random examples, is presented in a fairly lighthearted manner, it is an admission that there are some quality procedures in place at Wikipedia.
You do have to wonder if they chose their examples to try and give them the notability they lack.
You can't really buy friends until Apple sells them
The iFriends.
Religious people of pretty much any flavour seem to be normal people until you hit that one spot where the gears seem to just mash into each other and they go haywire.
This guy shouldn't be teaching, particularly not history. Any loon who tries to tell a bunch of kids that (a) Noah's ark was real and (b) There were dinosaurs on it should have their license to teach revoked.
Marx was right, it is an opiate, because there certainly seem to be a fair share of the users acting like they're on something.
Those three clips have been up and down like a yo-yo, you bet Fox would like to see them gone so they can run "edited highlights".
If you do the right search in Google, you'll turn up the following message: and the following link and comparison
Look, CNET is running an example of Yellow journalism.
Or is it an advert for the Disney "find the kid" phone?
I'm to lazy to find out if their sponsors are fearmongering politicians or money-grubbing marketeers.
The case studies mentioned in the review are instances where a corporate culture has encountered an independent culture that has sprung up around a product such as a TV show, book, game, or some gadget.
The geek example most people can probably follow is early Microsoft and the computer hobbyists who didn't see anything wrong with sharing software. Microsoft's big win was commercially when they landed the IBM PC deal, the hobbyists got the OS with the machine and went on to provide many of the applications that made IBM's machine useful, thus selling more Microsoft OS licenses. Fast forward to now and you discover Microsoft long ago made it harder than the "free" copy-one-floppy upgrade. The hobbyists now have other alternatives, that include Free software.
The BBC article is quite clear, August 6 was when the World Wide Web became possible due to the release of source code on Usenet. The summary indicates a poor understanding that WWW and Internet are not the same thing, whoever wrote the BBC article gets this, and has put together an interesting synopsis of events surrounding the birth of the web.
Without using the word "tubes".
ssh root@dahmer.vistech.net
password: password
You might want to Nmap the machine first, there's something screwy with it though.
You don't suck up to politicians and hope they'll be nice to you, and civil disobedience over video games would just be met with, "see, it does make people violent".
Watch this man in a suit tackle the same issue over censorship in music, and realise it is the same circus from the entertainment branch of big business.
- It will be inconvenient for western proxy server providers as every time their IP address changes they'll have to notify everyone of the new address.
- The garbage about a secure financial network really is garbage, they're using https and assuming port 443 won't be blocked.
My question for these three is, what's to stop the Chinese censors from using a dial-up spam blacklist to block more than 90% of the machines that could potentially run this software?This is Noddy stuff, if you're leaving college or university and can't get hold of good sample letters you might need to buy this book. I had a halfway competent careers officer in my school and this book doesn't sound much better. I think I can also safely assume that the bullshit it is suggested you peddle to get your first job isn't going to work beyond that, and a lot of people who read Slashdot are beyond that somehwat awkward phase in career development.
Wikinews is a bit more than just an agregator of news, people do bring other knowledge to the article than just what is listed in the Associated Press or CNN stories. Look at some of the coverage for issues in the Australian parliament, wikinews contributors are doing the research that any news organisation would have to do and sometimes beating the mainstream press to it with stories.
Where wikinews may fall down is the application of the infamous NPOV to news articles. There's a very short timeframe to get an article published while it is still news, and you don't have the same luxury as you do on an encyclopedia to tag and discuss at leisure.