3.57% of the computers hooked up to the internet maybe? I know at my house we have about 5 PCs, and only one is actively used for surfing the internet (and therefore only one has a plausible chance of being counted in this survey).
Your basic argument is that kids think acting like they are involved in world politics is "cool." Err... no. I was a child just a few years ago, and I recall nothing of the sort. The people who cared about politics did so because it was in their personalities. Just because they are young and often misguided in how to go about it (holding parties instead of listening to NPR) does not mean they are not trying.
I used to agree with what you are saying regarding Tibet, but I actually found that kids under 21 knew more about Tibet than the typical adult due to "Free Tibet" campaigns. They really do pick something up. Kids can't do much about anything in politics (they're not even allowed to vote), but that doesn't mean we should look down on them for trying. Remember, it sounds corny, but they are the future. By holding concerts and other crap that appeals to kids, this stuff is being made accessible to the youth.
And it's not like older generations are much better.
But it is still worth 1.65 billion dollars on the market. That is like saying "Yes honey, I bought a car without telling you, but I bought it with 20,000 dollars worth of Chinese yuan, which are undervalued, so it's OK!" In the market a dollar is a dollar is a dollar. Just because it is overvalued does not mean it's worth anything less *right now*
The only hitch in my reasoning is that selling 1.65 billion dollars worth of google stock would be a bit challenging:)
2 million pounds of tnt - that, I would imagine, would be really difficult to coordinate (not to mention detonating in a way to create a single cohesive explosion).
I could be wrong, I have never worked with TNT
Re:Analog vs Digital (was Re:BUTT UGLY)
on
Caller ID Watches
·
· Score: 1
A lot of people read digital watches in a similar manner that you read an analog. I can't explain it, but I usually don't "read" the time when I look at my digital watch. If you asked me what time it was right after I look at my watch , I would be able to tell you "around 2ish?" at best. It takes me a small fraction of a second to look at my watch.
I actually own a analog/digital Casio that displays both the time and day of week (date is a button away). Amazon has several, some that display the full date with the time. The only reason why I have the analog is so people stop considering me a nerd for having a digital watch - a decent compromise in my opinion. I am a recent college graduate and found people don't respect people with digital watches.
"If a legitimate copy is not bought within 30 days, the system will curtail functionality much further by restricting users to just the Web browser for an hour at a time, said Thomas Lindeman, Microsoft senior product manager."
That's about how long it would take me to find and download a crack;)
Digital watches are easier to read and far more functional - they aren't jewelry, but I'm a man, I don't wear jewelry. if anyone should understand the appeal, it should be a slashdot reader:)
"I'm not an advertising expert, but that sounds like a lot of people to me."
It's a lot of people not being advertised to. This is the most obvious problem with youtube - no good advertising model has arisen. The longer youtube remains ad free, the more angry people will be when ads do come around (when I talk about ads I mean video ads, I have adblock so I don't see traditional ads).
The article keeps emphasizing how hard it has been so far (to move over 100 computers, and 200 by the end of the year).
After reading all that, this seems like a lie: "Schiessl said it would be impossible to migrate all users to open source, but that 80 percent would move across by between late-2008 and mid-2009."
Perhaps his point was that 99% of the slashdot readers are judging this decision based off a 3 sentence summary and about 30 seconds of thought (if that), whereas educated people have been paid to put hours of thought into the decision, which may have some sort of long-term or tangential strategy. It's easy to judge the decision, but maybe there is more to what is going on than we know.
At the same time, my first reaction is that this is retarded.
As an honest student I can say for sure I never wasted a second on cheaters. I don't even understand how they could waste any of my time (unless it was a friend who needed my help, in which case it's not cheating and I'm fine doing it).
I see no reason why he has to be anonymous, as I would think this is the kind of thing that should be made more public. I don't know how much credibility this actually deserves.
In my personal experience with college, I would say less than 10% of the people regularly cheated (by which I mean copying assignments or programs from external sources or other students). Maybe 50% of the people I knew copied homeworks, and I only know of one person who ever cheated on an exam.
A lot of cheating is in a gray area. For example, getting help from other students could be considered cheating by some and not by others. I know it sounds corny, but the person who is hurt most by cheating is that student. Even in a curved class, most professors are a bit flexible with grading so other students are not too affected by cheating.
"Genuine" Italian food has the same ingredients and taste as something made in my asian friend's mom's kitchen. That doesn't mean her cooking is genuine italian food.
"Well, there is a direct correlation between bad grades and lack of attendance of lectures even if the notes and powerpoints are posted."
I have found a direct correlation between teachers who don't do everything they can to help their students learn information and bad teachers. The old excuse that they should be in class and paying attention doesn't apply to everyone for various reasons. Your job is to teach, not to hold your students' hands or teach them some sort of life lesson in paying attention to you.
I happen to learn from a textbook much better than lecture. I don't have time to both read chapters and attend lecture. I would likely not learn much your class (nothing personal, I think I have ADD). As a teacher this should bother you. I think I know your type - it probably doesn't.
Too bad he very clearly documented what he did and who he is. He didn't try hiding anything about himself. The fact that it was on the net won't protect him from court.
Jerry claims he has an open marriage. Can anyone confirm/deny this?
Edit: Update. Jerry and his "wife" contacted me on AIM Part I: Email conversation with Jerry
From Jerry@emailaddress.com
> You will remove the pictures of me from your stupid craigslist experiment.
> My wife and I have an open relationship, don\'t believe me? Contact her and
> ask her. But you will remove me, you have no right to post this kind of crap
> without first knowing the full details. Here is the bullshit i want you to
> remove: http://rfjason.livejournal.com/410835.html?thread= 7600851..t7600851
From Jason
Why should I?
From Jerry@emailaddress.com
Because I would appreciate it, because my wife and I have an open relationship
and I would never "cheat" on her. Because we play with others to enhance our
own relationship. Because she is fully aware of what goes on. And again
because I'd appreciate it.
I don't want to fight this out with you, I understand why you're doing
this - to husbands that actually cheat, however, I wouldn't do that - my wife
and I are fully participating swingers, now please remove the thread.
From Jason
Well, if anything, this should help you meet MORE people.
From Jerry@emailaddress.com
And it's not the way I want it done. So you have no intentions of removing it
then? That's fine, I'll ignore it and move on with my life.
From Jason
Wait, I thought you were going to sue me?
From Jerry@emailaddress.com
I'll look into all my options, and if I choose legal recourse, it
wouldn't be a
lawsuit. It would be a criminal case, if that didn't work, then I imagine I'd
have to settle for a civil suit. But either way, this is the last time I
communicate with you. I have nothing more to say - by even responding in the
first place I gave you what you want, and that was foolish of me.
Part II: IM Conversation with Jerry
[10:29] JrITadmin69: Just the man I was looking for.
[10:30] RFJason: Hi Jerry. I just replied to your e-mail.
[10:30] JrITadmin69: and i replied to yours
[10:30] JrITadmin69: Look, I understand what you're trying to do with your experiment.
[10:31] JrITadmin69: And I don't take offense, other then that you didn't attempt to get the whole story, and jumped to conclusions.
[10:31] RFJason: I didn't jump to any conclusions.
[10:31] JrITadmin69: And I learned my lesson as well, don't include my face anymore, assuming my wife and i decide to continue with our lifestyle.
[10:31] JrITadmin69: Sure you did, you assumed I was cheating on my
I really hate this guy. I don't know much about him, but I hope he spends some time in jail. I feel this way after reading about this guy who contacted him:
He has no empathy, and he is clearly trying to humiliate these people. Given the large number of people he angered (whose lives may be ruined because of it) and his very public profile, I am guessing he is going to have to go into hiding soon. In addition to a lack of empathy, he has a lack of common sense.
"But was any law actually broken? Fortuny obviously misrepresented himself under false pretenses, which is itself possibly actionable, but the privacy implications beyond that are very interesting. Does emailing someone your personal information act as an implicit waiver of your right to privacy? I'm not a lawyer, but as far as I can tell, no.
If taken to court, he's at risk of two primary civil claims. "Intentional infliction of emotional distress," while notoriously hard to prove in court, is certainly easier here based on his own writings. The second, more relevant claim, is "public disclosure of private facts." This Findlaw article on the Washingtonienne scandal sums it up nicely:
The disclosure must be public. The facts must be private. The plaintiff must be identified. The publication must be "highly offensive." And there must be an "absence of legitimate concern to the public" with respect to the publication.
It certainly seems like this clearly fits the criteria for a tort claim, but I'd love to hear some legal interpretation from the law bloggers out there. Does volunteering your information in a private context somehow invalidate your privacy rights? I don't think so. (For more information, see the EFF's Bloggers' FAQ on Privacy.)"
MP3 players are still changing at a fast enough rate that the new features in a given player are enough to make me want to upgrade. In addition, iPods are not very well built. I am actually going to be looking at a new player soon because the harddrive in mine is starting to fail sometimes. I know another person who upgraded recently due to size; the new flash based players are tiny in comparison to the 1st generation iPods.
"Wall Street is reportedly starting to worry that the bubble will burst."
Apple, in many ways, depends on the iPod for its current strength. If the iPod were to suddenly die, Apple would be very, very screwed (the only other product that has mass appeal is the macbooks, and those are not nearly at the same level due to pricing). This is why people have been watching "iPod killers" so closely.
Personally, this is the first time ever that I would not consider an iPod if I had to replace my current MP3 player (an iPod mini). The nanos are overpriced compared to competitors who offer more features and more space. I would seriously consider SanDisk's new player, for example.
And as the article mentions, cellphones are starting to become a feasible replacement. I could replace both my current cell phone and iPod with a single phone that takes a memory card. It wouldn't hold as much (that will come in a year, I predict), but it would take up a lot less pocket space.
When I first bought my iPod 2 years ago, none of these were feasible alternatives. Competitors had crappy flimsy products that were too big for my pocket, and cell phones that "tried to do it all" just sucked. Not anymore...
I could be wrong, but aren't a lot of landfills covered in feet of cement? Are you suggesting that in the future someone will crack them open to harvest plastic from pile of dangerous crap that is 99.99% non-plastic? My guess is in 100 years we will have a superior replacement for plastic that does not depend on oil. I would rather see the trash disposed of correctly right now than sitting on it for something as lame as plastic. The main reason is all the dangerous runoff from landfills that get in underground aquifers
Slashdot Mirror
Err... nothing. They are not really connected to the internet.
Understand my point yet?
3.57% of the computers hooked up to the internet maybe? I know at my house we have about 5 PCs, and only one is actively used for surfing the internet (and therefore only one has a plausible chance of being counted in this survey).
Your basic argument is that kids think acting like they are involved in world politics is "cool." Err... no. I was a child just a few years ago, and I recall nothing of the sort. The people who cared about politics did so because it was in their personalities. Just because they are young and often misguided in how to go about it (holding parties instead of listening to NPR) does not mean they are not trying.
I used to agree with what you are saying regarding Tibet, but I actually found that kids under 21 knew more about Tibet than the typical adult due to "Free Tibet" campaigns. They really do pick something up. Kids can't do much about anything in politics (they're not even allowed to vote), but that doesn't mean we should look down on them for trying. Remember, it sounds corny, but they are the future. By holding concerts and other crap that appeals to kids, this stuff is being made accessible to the youth.
And it's not like older generations are much better.
Yeah, I really hate it when kids care about world matters and politics.
I bet you you'd be just as dissapointed if those same teens didn't care at all.
But it is still worth 1.65 billion dollars on the market. That is like saying "Yes honey, I bought a car without telling you, but I bought it with 20,000 dollars worth of Chinese yuan, which are undervalued, so it's OK!"
:)
In the market a dollar is a dollar is a dollar. Just because it is overvalued does not mean it's worth anything less *right now*
The only hitch in my reasoning is that selling 1.65 billion dollars worth of google stock would be a bit challenging
2 million pounds of tnt - that, I would imagine, would be really difficult to coordinate (not to mention detonating in a way to create a single cohesive explosion).
I could be wrong, I have never worked with TNT
A lot of people read digital watches in a similar manner that you read an analog. I can't explain it, but I usually don't "read" the time when I look at my digital watch. If you asked me what time it was right after I look at my watch , I would be able to tell you "around 2ish?" at best. It takes me a small fraction of a second to look at my watch.
I actually own a analog/digital Casio that displays both the time and day of week (date is a button away). Amazon has several, some that display the full date with the time. The only reason why I have the analog is so people stop considering me a nerd for having a digital watch - a decent compromise in my opinion. I am a recent college graduate and found people don't respect people with digital watches.
"If a legitimate copy is not bought within 30 days, the system will curtail functionality much further by restricting users to just the Web browser for an hour at a time, said Thomas Lindeman, Microsoft senior product manager."
;)
That's about how long it would take me to find and download a crack
Digital watches are easier to read and far more functional - they aren't jewelry, but I'm a man, I don't wear jewelry. if anyone should understand the appeal, it should be a slashdot reader :)
"I'm not an advertising expert, but that sounds like a lot of people to me."
It's a lot of people not being advertised to. This is the most obvious problem with youtube - no good advertising model has arisen. The longer youtube remains ad free, the more angry people will be when ads do come around (when I talk about ads I mean video ads, I have adblock so I don't see traditional ads).
The article keeps emphasizing how hard it has been so far (to move over 100 computers, and 200 by the end of the year).
After reading all that, this seems like a lie:
"Schiessl said it would be impossible to migrate all users to open source, but that 80 percent would move across by between late-2008 and mid-2009."
Perhaps his point was that 99% of the slashdot readers are judging this decision based off a 3 sentence summary and about 30 seconds of thought (if that), whereas educated people have been paid to put hours of thought into the decision, which may have some sort of long-term or tangential strategy. It's easy to judge the decision, but maybe there is more to what is going on than we know.
At the same time, my first reaction is that this is retarded.
As an honest student I can say for sure I never wasted a second on cheaters. I don't even understand how they could waste any of my time (unless it was a friend who needed my help, in which case it's not cheating and I'm fine doing it).
No, the people who lose out are the ones who don't learn anything in college. They go to interviews and are laughed away by their meager knowledge.
I see no reason why he has to be anonymous, as I would think this is the kind of thing that should be made more public. I don't know how much credibility this actually deserves.
In my personal experience with college, I would say less than 10% of the people regularly cheated (by which I mean copying assignments or programs from external sources or other students). Maybe 50% of the people I knew copied homeworks, and I only know of one person who ever cheated on an exam.
A lot of cheating is in a gray area. For example, getting help from other students could be considered cheating by some and not by others. I know it sounds corny, but the person who is hurt most by cheating is that student. Even in a curved class, most professors are a bit flexible with grading so other students are not too affected by cheating.
No she is making italian food. According to your definition, the word genuine adds nothing to that first sentence.
Genuine *does* mean something!
"Genuine" Italian food has the same ingredients and taste as something made in my asian friend's mom's kitchen. That doesn't mean her cooking is genuine italian food.
"Well, there is a direct correlation between bad grades and lack of attendance of lectures even if the notes and powerpoints are posted."
I have found a direct correlation between teachers who don't do everything they can to help their students learn information and bad teachers. The old excuse that they should be in class and paying attention doesn't apply to everyone for various reasons. Your job is to teach, not to hold your students' hands or teach them some sort of life lesson in paying attention to you.
I happen to learn from a textbook much better than lecture. I don't have time to both read chapters and attend lecture. I would likely not learn much your class (nothing personal, I think I have ADD). As a teacher this should bother you. I think I know your type - it probably doesn't.
Too bad he very clearly documented what he did and who he is. He didn't try hiding anything about himself. The fact that it was on the net won't protect him from court.
In case it's taken down:
The Saga of Jerry and "Wife"
* Official thread
Jerry has already contacted me by e-mail, demanding I remove all traces of him from my post. This appears to be an anonymous reply from him in my LJ: http://rfjason.livejournal.com/410835.html?thread= 7629011#t7629011
Jerry claims he has an open marriage. Can anyone confirm/deny this?
Edit: Update. Jerry and his "wife" contacted me on AIM
Part I: Email conversation with Jerry
From Jerry@emailaddress.com
> You will remove the pictures of me from your stupid craigslist experiment.
> My wife and I have an open relationship, don\'t believe me? Contact her and
> ask her. But you will remove me, you have no right to post this kind of crap
> without first knowing the full details. Here is the bullshit i want you to
> remove: http://rfjason.livejournal.com/410835.html?thread= 7600851..t7600851
From Jason
Why should I?
From Jerry@emailaddress.com
Because I would appreciate it, because my wife and I have an open relationship
and I would never "cheat" on her. Because we play with others to enhance our
own relationship. Because she is fully aware of what goes on. And again
because I'd appreciate it.
I don't want to fight this out with you, I understand why you're doing
this - to husbands that actually cheat, however, I wouldn't do that - my wife
and I are fully participating swingers, now please remove the thread.
From Jason
Well, if anything, this should help you meet MORE people.
From Jerry@emailaddress.com
And it's not the way I want it done. So you have no intentions of removing it
then? That's fine, I'll ignore it and move on with my life.
From Jason
Wait, I thought you were going to sue me?
From Jerry@emailaddress.com
I'll look into all my options, and if I choose legal recourse, it
wouldn't be a
lawsuit. It would be a criminal case, if that didn't work, then I imagine I'd
have to settle for a civil suit. But either way, this is the last time I
communicate with you. I have nothing more to say - by even responding in the
first place I gave you what you want, and that was foolish of me.
Part II: IM Conversation with Jerry
[10:29] JrITadmin69: Just the man I was looking for.
[10:30] RFJason: Hi Jerry. I just replied to your e-mail.
[10:30] JrITadmin69: and i replied to yours
[10:30] JrITadmin69: Look, I understand what you're trying to do with your experiment.
[10:31] JrITadmin69: And I don't take offense, other then that you didn't attempt to get the whole story, and jumped to conclusions.
[10:31] RFJason: I didn't jump to any conclusions.
[10:31] JrITadmin69: And I learned my lesson as well, don't include my face anymore, assuming my wife and i decide to continue with our lifestyle.
[10:31] JrITadmin69: Sure you did, you assumed I was cheating on my
I really hate this guy. I don't know much about him, but I hope he spends some time in jail. I feel this way after reading about this guy who contacted him:
J ason_CL_Experiment
http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/index.php/RF
search for Part I: Email conversation with Jerry
also look at parts ii and iii
He has no empathy, and he is clearly trying to humiliate these people. Given the large number of people he angered (whose lives may be ruined because of it) and his very public profile, I am guessing he is going to have to go into hiding soon. In addition to a lack of empathy, he has a lack of common sense.
from tfa:
"But was any law actually broken? Fortuny obviously misrepresented himself under false pretenses, which is itself possibly actionable, but the privacy implications beyond that are very interesting. Does emailing someone your personal information act as an implicit waiver of your right to privacy? I'm not a lawyer, but as far as I can tell, no.
If taken to court, he's at risk of two primary civil claims. "Intentional infliction of emotional distress," while notoriously hard to prove in court, is certainly easier here based on his own writings. The second, more relevant claim, is "public disclosure of private facts." This Findlaw article on the Washingtonienne scandal sums it up nicely:
The disclosure must be public. The facts must be private. The plaintiff must be identified. The publication must be "highly offensive." And there must be an "absence of legitimate concern to the public" with respect to the publication.
It certainly seems like this clearly fits the criteria for a tort claim, but I'd love to hear some legal interpretation from the law bloggers out there. Does volunteering your information in a private context somehow invalidate your privacy rights? I don't think so. (For more information, see the EFF's Bloggers' FAQ on Privacy.)"
MP3 players are still changing at a fast enough rate that the new features in a given player are enough to make me want to upgrade. In addition, iPods are not very well built. I am actually going to be looking at a new player soon because the harddrive in mine is starting to fail sometimes. I know another person who upgraded recently due to size; the new flash based players are tiny in comparison to the 1st generation iPods.
It is potentially big news.
"Wall Street is reportedly starting to worry that the bubble will burst."
Apple, in many ways, depends on the iPod for its current strength. If the iPod were to suddenly die, Apple would be very, very screwed (the only other product that has mass appeal is the macbooks, and those are not nearly at the same level due to pricing). This is why people have been watching "iPod killers" so closely.
Personally, this is the first time ever that I would not consider an iPod if I had to replace my current MP3 player (an iPod mini). The nanos are overpriced compared to competitors who offer more features and more space. I would seriously consider SanDisk's new player, for example.
And as the article mentions, cellphones are starting to become a feasible replacement. I could replace both my current cell phone and iPod with a single phone that takes a memory card. It wouldn't hold as much (that will come in a year, I predict), but it would take up a lot less pocket space.
When I first bought my iPod 2 years ago, none of these were feasible alternatives. Competitors had crappy flimsy products that were too big for my pocket, and cell phones that "tried to do it all" just sucked. Not anymore...
I could be wrong, but aren't a lot of landfills covered in feet of cement? Are you suggesting that in the future someone will crack them open to harvest plastic from pile of dangerous crap that is 99.99% non-plastic? My guess is in 100 years we will have a superior replacement for plastic that does not depend on oil. I would rather see the trash disposed of correctly right now than sitting on it for something as lame as plastic. The main reason is all the dangerous runoff from landfills that get in underground aquifers