And I'm glad. You see, this information comes from Edmonton. To get it to Slashdot, brave Canadian Voyageurs and their faithful Eskimo sidekicks must trek through millions of miles of frozen wastelands filled with polar bears, undead elk that thirst for dwarven blood, and the occasional crazed Frenchman. It is only the far and distant beacon of crack smoke billowing from the obsidian tower of Slashdot HQ that prevents them from getting lost in the soul-destroying wilds and eaten by madding tundra, a close cousin to the dread gazebo.
I think it's worth noting that Microsoft isn't unique in this respect; many companies make similar offers (including my present employer).
My last one too, sort of. One manager poached in some good people from his old job when he was hired, and his bosses loved him for it. A year later he found a better job, and poached almost all of them back out, with a few of ours added! I imagine the HR equivalent of Katamari Damacy, where eventually he'll have enough people to form his own company.
So I guess this means that the camera is going to Harass people taking Photos now?
Even better. It will call some rentacops and tell them that there's "suspected terroristic activity" taking place, and suddenly a tourist will get a taser up some orifice because "the computer" already labeled him a terrorist and therefore Osama's second in command.
but considering this is Sony, it is very likely that the headphones will overheat and explode in your ear, cause a commotion at a UN meeting, install a rootkit on anything you insert it in
Including your ears.
(Sadly, I'm sure the DRM-happy loons would root our ears if they could, so we can't hear people singing "Happy Birthday" unless they've paid the performance fee.)
What's the point. How is the possession of a GPS wristwatch going to protect their kids from muggers, abductors etc. How about they spend some 'quality time' with their own kids, instead of allowing an electronic device to substitute for a baby sitter.
It allows me to know where my kid is, so I know that when he's selling crack to schoolkids he's on school grounds, rather than some dark alley. Remember, location == safety!
alternative headline: company exploits parental concern to sell product
The same headline would have to be re-used on a regular basis, I'm afraid.:\
Sure kids are vulnerable. Bad things could and may happen to them. But there's such a thing of being too scared and too cautious.
And how. Sometimes kids get lost in the forest and then run/hide from search parties because said rescuers are strangers, and apparently dying of exposure or starvation is more attractive than whatever kids are being convinced EVERYONE is out to do to them.
Here's the thing people don't realize - if a kid gets lost, the BEST thing to do is (or was, before we all got lawsuit/arrest happy) ask someone for help. If a stranger approaches a kid and wants to take them away, odds are very high it's a person with ill intent. But if a child approaches a random person, the odds of it being a bad person is low. Society works because people are, by and large, fundamentally good.
Besides, the stranger-with-a-van stereotype is overplayed. It happens, but there's more danger from people the child (or his/her parents) trust. A statement like "Sure, little Johnny can spend some time with Father Campbell! He's a Catholic priest and serves God, what could he possibly do to hurt a little boy?" wasn't considered ironic at all for a LOT of years.
As someone who spends a lot of time around Mexico City (my wife's family lives there) I'd love to buy one of these for each of my kids.
That's good. Get a his-and-hers set for your wife and yourself while you're at it. As a device it has its uses, but that doesn't mean it's worth it for the populace in general. If I spent a lot of time in Afghanistan I'd love to buy a bulletproof vest, but I'm not going to wear one when the furthest I range is a drive into the North American suburban wasteland.
Imagine being the crippled rat and suddenly you can walk, but with a hitch.
"Hey Jack, look, I'm walking! I can walk again! But wait a second, I didn't want to walk. Damn, I'm walking for no reason! Jack, make it stop! My legs keep...Jack? I'm going on an unwanted vacation it seems. Nice knowing ya! Tell Martha I love her. You can have my cheese, okay?"
And then the second rat shows the walking rat to all the other rats, convinces them he did it through the power of God, then spends the rest of his life getting rich off donations. In exchange, he pushes the other rats over and tells them they're healed of whatever ailment the scientists gave them.
So what rights will parents have to prevent their children from being taught these falsehoods?
Same as they have now for abstinence-only sex education and evolution-hostile science. None.
But the parents aren't powerless. My mom, when I was young, made sure I knew a few things before going to school. One thing was that teachers are humans. Humans make mistakes. Humans do things that they think is the right thing but isn't. And some humans are just genuinely bad.
It served me well in school, through my mandatory religion (Catholicism) classes*, my broken science classes**, and my incredibly incompetent sex ed classes***. Still serves me well.
( * In a public school, no less.)
( ** Several memorable stories about that. One teacher didn't like the science book so never used it, just went off what she thought she remembered, because obviously her brain was perfect. Guess what? She didn't remember Newton's Laws of Motion correctly. Another prefixed the chapter on empirical knowledge and scientific method with a speech that could be summed up as "The scientific method is good, unless it finds something against God. Then God wins." The test for the chapter had a high-value question about the speech, of course.)
( *** The teacher had three kids, I was a teenage virgin. I was convinced I knew more about sex than she did. In fact, a decade or so along, I still think I knew more about sex than she did.)
b) The woman for opening it and infecting the computer?
Is this like that question in ethics class where we had to decide who was the most moral, a question seemingly designed to start fights? I'm no good at those - I say the goon at the end, but then people call me horrible.
Explanation in case it's not as universal as I thought....
A woman has to get to her wedding, but the only way is to ride with the boat captain, who will only accept sex for payment. She rides the bumpy boat to the church, makes it there on time. The groom ditches the bride at the altar when he learns what happened so she hires a goon to beat her would-be husband nearly to death, which he does while she laughs.
Who's the most moral? The bride, the groom, the boat captain, or the goon? I always figured the goon was the most moral because he's offering a business service in a free market, and seems to have a willingness to make sure the customer gets his or her money's worth. No one agreed with me.
Now we can just print the electronics http://www.gizmag.com/go/4749/ directly on the cardboard box and just re-use the shipping crate for the computer
Having seen the conditions of some shipping boxes after being shipped, I'm going to say that's a bad idea. Also, the computer needs to be protected against banging, so it would have to be put in Styrofoam, which in turn would have to be put... in a box.
Are the artists really for this? or is someone as ASCAP just being a douche?
Given that every time any sort of "performer's group" comes out with this sort of thing, at least one artist gets up and says "This wasn't our idea! Please don't hate us!" I don't think the artists are monolithically for it. I'm sure some of them see their audiences as nice little piles of dollar signs just begging to be wrung out, but I'm also sure there's artists who appreciate their fans and hate that the only way to make a living doing what they love is to give their souls, life's work, control over their destinies, and 95%-105% of their profits to the music industry.
It's still soon. The nasty infection only gave him some fever.
But my vast experience with infections tells me that as soon as the infection hit Madagascar, it started to mutate into something horrible. We're talking diarrhea, pulmonary edema, necrosis....
I seem to recall making that argument last time this topic came around:) "You drive more miles than anyone can possibly explain. You must be up to something illegal!"
His crop is already being irradiated...BY THE SUN.
Idiots. Sheesh.
The article is full of the sort of howlers I'd come to expect from the locals while living in the backwaters of Nova Scotia. Where do we start? "Shakes up the molecules" - clearly the phrasing of a person well versed in the concept of ionizing radiation! I'll use wi-fi all day and you can sit next to some cobalt 58 and we'll see what person's molecules get "shaken up" more.
"Moved to the country to get away from the pollution" - while it could be a valid statement, I more often hear it from either "chemical sensitives" or from hicks who think their little patch of mud is not polluted at all, that the seawater is crystal and the air is pure, that pollution and crime are "city problems", that dumping your old car in the pond isn't polluting because hey, there's no pollution in the country and the muskrats and fish are just dying from a disease.
And then, there's the gem that the county council backed him up against the wishes of almost everyone in the village stuck on dialup either because they know as little about science as this garlic farmer or because they're "sentimental"? SENTIMENTAL? This is why Sunday shopping in Nova Scotia was a contentious issue for my last years in NS (I moved 2 years ago). This is why they made the "heritage town" designation because Canso (and probably a few other towns) lost too much population to officially be called towns. So now they're still towns, because they used to be and we don't want the townsfolk to become villagefolk and bruise their egos. (Though I admit it's probably mostly so the government don't have to change the signs.) During the whole Pluto debate I jokingly suggested that Pluto be declared a "heritage planet to recognize its proud history and contributions to the solar system". Unsurprisingly, no one got the joke.
Man, I live in Edmonton now and every so often when I'm waiting at a stoplight or pass my third McDonalds in five minutes I think. "City life." This is followed quickly by "I'm living in a city." and a smile. Sometimes I even giggle. It'll be a cold day in Hell before I go back to the boonies.
Slashdot Mirror
editors are cracksmoke
And I'm glad. You see, this information comes from Edmonton. To get it to Slashdot, brave Canadian Voyageurs and their faithful Eskimo sidekicks must trek through millions of miles of frozen wastelands filled with polar bears, undead elk that thirst for dwarven blood, and the occasional crazed Frenchman. It is only the far and distant beacon of crack smoke billowing from the obsidian tower of Slashdot HQ that prevents them from getting lost in the soul-destroying wilds and eaten by madding tundra, a close cousin to the dread gazebo.
I think it's worth noting that Microsoft isn't unique in this respect; many companies make similar offers (including my present employer).
My last one too, sort of. One manager poached in some good people from his old job when he was hired, and his bosses loved him for it. A year later he found a better job, and poached almost all of them back out, with a few of ours added! I imagine the HR equivalent of Katamari Damacy, where eventually he'll have enough people to form his own company.
So I guess this means that the camera is going to Harass people taking Photos now?
Even better. It will call some rentacops and tell them that there's "suspected terroristic activity" taking place, and suddenly a tourist will get a taser up some orifice because "the computer" already labeled him a terrorist and therefore Osama's second in command.
but considering this is Sony, it is very likely that the headphones will overheat and explode in your ear, cause a commotion at a UN meeting, install a rootkit on anything you insert it in
Including your ears.
(Sadly, I'm sure the DRM-happy loons would root our ears if they could, so we can't hear people singing "Happy Birthday" unless they've paid the performance fee.)
When I see kids these days I'm not sure they're exposed to enough danger to make them think rather than freak out or panic when it happens.
Worst one I ever saw was a girl who, even as a teenager, would run towards the nearest person whenever she panicked.
Guess what happened when she saw a flasher one night while alone.
What's the point. How is the possession of a GPS wristwatch going to protect their kids from muggers, abductors etc. How about they spend some 'quality time' with their own kids, instead of allowing an electronic device to substitute for a baby sitter.
It allows me to know where my kid is, so I know that when he's selling crack to schoolkids he's on school grounds, rather than some dark alley. Remember, location == safety!
alternative headline: company exploits parental concern to sell product
The same headline would have to be re-used on a regular basis, I'm afraid.:\
Sure kids are vulnerable. Bad things could and may happen to them. But there's such a thing of being too scared and too cautious.
And how. Sometimes kids get lost in the forest and then run/hide from search parties because said rescuers are strangers, and apparently dying of exposure or starvation is more attractive than whatever kids are being convinced EVERYONE is out to do to them.
Here's the thing people don't realize - if a kid gets lost, the BEST thing to do is (or was, before we all got lawsuit/arrest happy) ask someone for help. If a stranger approaches a kid and wants to take them away, odds are very high it's a person with ill intent. But if a child approaches a random person, the odds of it being a bad person is low. Society works because people are, by and large, fundamentally good.
Besides, the stranger-with-a-van stereotype is overplayed. It happens, but there's more danger from people the child (or his/her parents) trust. A statement like "Sure, little Johnny can spend some time with Father Campbell! He's a Catholic priest and serves God, what could he possibly do to hurt a little boy?" wasn't considered ironic at all for a LOT of years.
As someone who spends a lot of time around Mexico City (my wife's family lives there) I'd love to buy one of these for each of my kids.
That's good. Get a his-and-hers set for your wife and yourself while you're at it. As a device it has its uses, but that doesn't mean it's worth it for the populace in general. If I spent a lot of time in Afghanistan I'd love to buy a bulletproof vest, but I'm not going to wear one when the furthest I range is a drive into the North American suburban wasteland.
Imagine being the crippled rat and suddenly you can walk, but with a hitch.
"Hey Jack, look, I'm walking! I can walk again! But wait a second, I didn't want to walk. Damn, I'm walking for no reason! Jack, make it stop! My legs keep...Jack? I'm going on an unwanted vacation it seems. Nice knowing ya! Tell Martha I love her. You can have my cheese, okay?"
And then the second rat shows the walking rat to all the other rats, convinces them he did it through the power of God, then spends the rest of his life getting rich off donations. In exchange, he pushes the other rats over and tells them they're healed of whatever ailment the scientists gave them.
I will change it to a ominous hum.
And some giggling teenager will change it to a loud burping noise.
So what rights will parents have to prevent their children from being taught these falsehoods?
Same as they have now for abstinence-only sex education and evolution-hostile science. None.
But the parents aren't powerless. My mom, when I was young, made sure I knew a few things before going to school. One thing was that teachers are humans. Humans make mistakes. Humans do things that they think is the right thing but isn't. And some humans are just genuinely bad.
It served me well in school, through my mandatory religion (Catholicism) classes*, my broken science classes**, and my incredibly incompetent sex ed classes***. Still serves me well.
( * In a public school, no less.)
( ** Several memorable stories about that. One teacher didn't like the science book so never used it, just went off what she thought she remembered, because obviously her brain was perfect. Guess what? She didn't remember Newton's Laws of Motion correctly. Another prefixed the chapter on empirical knowledge and scientific method with a speech that could be summed up as "The scientific method is good, unless it finds something against God. Then God wins." The test for the chapter had a high-value question about the speech, of course.)
( *** The teacher had three kids, I was a teenage virgin. I was convinced I knew more about sex than she did. In fact, a decade or so along, I still think I knew more about sex than she did.)
a) The man for emailing the spyware?
b) The woman for opening it and infecting the computer?
Is this like that question in ethics class where we had to decide who was the most moral, a question seemingly designed to start fights? I'm no good at those - I say the goon at the end, but then people call me horrible.
Explanation in case it's not as universal as I thought....
A woman has to get to her wedding, but the only way is to ride with the boat captain, who will only accept sex for payment. She rides the bumpy boat to the church, makes it there on time. The groom ditches the bride at the altar when he learns what happened so she hires a goon to beat her would-be husband nearly to death, which he does while she laughs.
Who's the most moral? The bride, the groom, the boat captain, or the goon? I always figured the goon was the most moral because he's offering a business service in a free market, and seems to have a willingness to make sure the customer gets his or her money's worth. No one agreed with me.
Attack of the well-grown tomatoes?
But tomatoes grown in a well would get much less radiation, wouldn't they?
I'm confused.
Only if the well was well-lined in lead, and then, well, your tomatoes won't grow well in the well.
Way to be the kind of person most folks are glad to see leave rural areas.
Thank you. I am as they made me, nothing more.
Edmonton has its share of loons, too.
Oh, absolutely. It's more about loons per capita, though.;)
Now we can just print the electronics http://www.gizmag.com/go/4749/ directly on the cardboard box and just re-use the shipping crate for the computer
Having seen the conditions of some shipping boxes after being shipped, I'm going to say that's a bad idea. Also, the computer needs to be protected against banging, so it would have to be put in Styrofoam, which in turn would have to be put... in a box.
My God. I hope he's not reading slashdot.
Oooh, say that again, but with less bolding and more italics....
I'll give them a free 30 second preview of the body part they can kiss. (Limited time only, restrictions apply, one per customer.)
In keeping with their standard MO, make sure to send them a bill for the free preview, then sue them for more after they pay it.
Are the artists really for this? or is someone as ASCAP just being a douche?
Given that every time any sort of "performer's group" comes out with this sort of thing, at least one artist gets up and says "This wasn't our idea! Please don't hate us!" I don't think the artists are monolithically for it. I'm sure some of them see their audiences as nice little piles of dollar signs just begging to be wrung out, but I'm also sure there's artists who appreciate their fans and hate that the only way to make a living doing what they love is to give their souls, life's work, control over their destinies, and 95%-105% of their profits to the music industry.
It's still soon. The nasty infection only gave him some fever.
But my vast experience with infections tells me that as soon as the infection hit Madagascar, it started to mutate into something horrible. We're talking diarrhea, pulmonary edema, necrosis....
I seem to recall making that argument last time this topic came around :) "You drive more miles than anyone can possibly explain. You must be up to something illegal!"
Probably where I stole it from.:)
He should stick to farming and leave the radio vs radiation science up to the smart people.
Really, at this point I think one could argue he should also leave the farming up to the farmers.
Ain't nothing healthier than all-natural.
I don't trust that organic stuff. So I make sure all the carbon in my garlic has been replaced by silicon. Makes it nice and crunchy, too.
His crop is already being irradiated...BY THE SUN. Idiots. Sheesh.
Yeah, and that radiation makes his crops grow to many times their original size! Exactly as 60s sci-fi predicts! So now who's the idiot, huh?
Attack of the well-grown tomatoes?
His crop is already being irradiated...BY THE SUN. Idiots. Sheesh.
The article is full of the sort of howlers I'd come to expect from the locals while living in the backwaters of Nova Scotia. Where do we start? "Shakes up the molecules" - clearly the phrasing of a person well versed in the concept of ionizing radiation! I'll use wi-fi all day and you can sit next to some cobalt 58 and we'll see what person's molecules get "shaken up" more.
"Moved to the country to get away from the pollution" - while it could be a valid statement, I more often hear it from either "chemical sensitives" or from hicks who think their little patch of mud is not polluted at all, that the seawater is crystal and the air is pure, that pollution and crime are "city problems", that dumping your old car in the pond isn't polluting because hey, there's no pollution in the country and the muskrats and fish are just dying from a disease.
And then, there's the gem that the county council backed him up against the wishes of almost everyone in the village stuck on dialup either because they know as little about science as this garlic farmer or because they're "sentimental"? SENTIMENTAL? This is why Sunday shopping in Nova Scotia was a contentious issue for my last years in NS (I moved 2 years ago). This is why they made the "heritage town" designation because Canso (and probably a few other towns) lost too much population to officially be called towns. So now they're still towns, because they used to be and we don't want the townsfolk to become villagefolk and bruise their egos. (Though I admit it's probably mostly so the government don't have to change the signs.) During the whole Pluto debate I jokingly suggested that Pluto be declared a "heritage planet to recognize its proud history and contributions to the solar system". Unsurprisingly, no one got the joke.
Man, I live in Edmonton now and every so often when I'm waiting at a stoplight or pass my third McDonalds in five minutes I think. "City life." This is followed quickly by "I'm living in a city." and a smile. Sometimes I even giggle. It'll be a cold day in Hell before I go back to the boonies.