Yes, I did read the article. She started it as a joke, but still she continues to text and drive, despite near accidents. If she really thought it was stupid and dangerous, she wouldn't continue to do it. Having several near accidents should have been a wakeup call to her to modify her driving, but it hasn't. I suspect that she is the kind of person who will only learn the hard way, either by accident or by sudden increase in insurance due to traffic violations.
I pulled the description directly from the news article so you are really reaching trying to read my opinion on suicide. But you can read in what the authorities knew at the time they started searching for him which many people would consider serious if not emergency. It appears that the police are following a reasonable procedure when dealing with missing people. Could it be more formally and perhaps uniformly codified. Certainly. Could there be an abuse. Certainly. Could a third party nefariously trace someone? Obviously yes, by providing misleading and false information to authorities. All I'm saying is in this situation, the authorities don't seem out of line.
I read a lot of the comments and nobody has mentioned that the police did have reason to believe it was an emergency.
If you read the article, the fellow was distraught, hinting at suicide and didn't show up at a meeting with his mother as planned.
Of course the police acted.
A lot of people here are arguing from very abstract positions when the reality of the situation is a whole lot less intrusive.
...
whiny group that would desire a socialist nanny-state with breathalyzers in every car? I mean, sheeeesh!!! That's generally the goal of the left-wing not the right-wing.
He was hired to do a job. He created the items to fit Lucas' vision. It wasn't as if he created them and them sold them to Lucas. Did he negotiate for a piece of the profits then? No, he took a straight payment.
And Third - this being Slashdot, who actually needs facts before slamming the US. Give the poor Slashdotters the benefit of the doubt - they have such a good track record here.
Some are discovering that free wireless access increases the value of public spaces just as, well, street lamps do.
I feel a lot safer walking down a dark street at night knowing there is wifi, than a brightly light street with no internet connectively. Come on. WiFi is nice, but hardly critical for a local city to provide.
You also mix and match broadband and WiFi. I doubt that anyone could show any economic impact WiFi produces. Does anyone think municipalities that offer downtown WiFi see any return for their investment. Even if you belief it, how can you measure it.
A few weeks ago, didn't Slashdot run an article about a coffee shop that turned off WiFi on weekends and saw their sales go up?
A lot of jobs neither need WiFi or Broadband. Does the parking meter person need wifi?
As for broadband, I noticed your statement that we lagged behind urban China. So ALL of US lags a few cities in China.
A year ago I purchased a "dog" from the pet store. Since I paid money for this, I assumed it would perform better. I decided to test it against my cat.
First, I chained the dog using a 5 foot leash. I then spent the next hour trying to get the cat into a leash. Then I tested "fetch" by throwing a stick 10 feet away. Funny, neither cat nor dog returned with the stick.
It was a bit over the top humor, but it makes a point. Look at almost every slashdot thread. Someone invariably tries to tie in either a nefarious, sinister plot. Not every event that affects us is caused by a) George Bush b) Republicans c) Greenpeace d) Democrates e) Global Warming e) Political Payoffs f) Fox Network
Sometimes we need to be reminded of this, and while the post wasn't of the caliber of Swift's "A Modest Proposal", it tried to get a point across.
Don't limit it to Republicans or Catholics. Try espousing Libertarian views in San Francisco. Try suggesting that some of the political or economic problems the city faces are of their own making and you will be tuned out as a Republican apologist.
I agree with you about the Simpsons or South Park because both shows are willing to skewer all sides.
That still doesn't solve the "hacker" problem. How do you prevent someone taking over the box, generating false results, then replacing the OS with a clean OS at some point later? I'm not arguing that Open Source is the wrong solution, but being "Open Source" does not solve every problem. (Nor does Closed software). The whole process from start to finish must be defined and validated to assure the vote is correct, not just the OS.
Why, exactly, are we dumping a system like this for Diebold machines? It makes no sense at all unless someone is specifically looking for a way to fuck up the elections in their favor, or in favor of whomever happens to be paying them off.
I guess you forgot the 2000 election in Florida? Everyone was up in arms about paper ballot vote fraud and how the electronic ballot would be a magic bullet that saves us. This is the classic outcome of a knee-jerk response. I knew something like this would happen as nobody stopped to look at the problem and potential issues before mandating changes in the voting laws.
Let's not blame the Bush administration for this. If you read the article, even Mendel may have fudged his numbers. And the highest percentage of unethical behavior seems linked more to career or research advancement, which appears to be built into the current system of funding. To get grants or tenure you have to bring in the money, which means appealing to those who have the money to give, be it private or public money.
While I agree that the current administration appears to be most guilty of fudging numbers, I seriously doubt that they originated it or that previous administrations didn't fudge numbers elsewhere.
You emacs and vi users are such wimps. Using a screen editor. If you were REAL hackers, you would use ed! Who needs to edit more than a single line at one time anyway?
Your analogy is not quite right. The only way you would be hit is being in the spot where the bullet lands. It doesn't depend upon how may people are playing, one, two or billions. If you're not in the right (wrong) spot, you will not be hit.
Of course, the more people who stand on the field, the more likely that SOMEONE will be hit increases.
On the other hand, a picture of pretty women was posted on the web for 12 years before slashdot hit them.
It makes you wonder if/. crowd is slowing down.
I tried to verify this story. The only site that knows anything about it is boingboing.com. They won't give details because the source is "leery".
I hate to say this but reputable news requires confirmation of sources. This seems more like a "friend of a friend told me something..." Could it be a hoax to see how many people bite?
It worries me how many people on slashdot accept boingboing without noting how scant the evidence is. Where is the skepticism, the desire for proof, confirmation of the story. Every other link I could find ultimately went back to the same vague story.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I did read the article. She started it as a joke, but still she continues to text and drive, despite near accidents. If she really thought it was stupid and dangerous, she wouldn't continue to do it. Having several near accidents should have been a wakeup call to her to modify her driving, but it hasn't. I suspect that she is the kind of person who will only learn the hard way, either by accident or by sudden increase in insurance due to traffic violations.
I pulled the description directly from the news article so you are really reaching trying to read my opinion on suicide. But you can read in what the authorities knew at the time they started searching for him which many people would consider serious if not emergency. It appears that the police are following a reasonable procedure when dealing with missing people. Could it be more formally and perhaps uniformly codified. Certainly. Could there be an abuse. Certainly. Could a third party nefariously trace someone? Obviously yes, by providing misleading and false information to authorities. All I'm saying is in this situation, the authorities don't seem out of line.
I read a lot of the comments and nobody has mentioned that the police did have reason to believe it was an emergency. If you read the article, the fellow was distraught, hinting at suicide and didn't show up at a meeting with his mother as planned. Of course the police acted. A lot of people here are arguing from very abstract positions when the reality of the situation is a whole lot less intrusive.
... whiny group that would desire a socialist nanny-state with breathalyzers in every car? I mean, sheeeesh!!! That's generally the goal of the left-wing not the right-wing.He was hired to do a job. He created the items to fit Lucas' vision. It wasn't as if he created them and them sold them to Lucas. Did he negotiate for a piece of the profits then? No, he took a straight payment.
And Third - this being Slashdot, who actually needs facts before slamming the US. Give the poor Slashdotters the benefit of the doubt - they have such a good track record here.
I feel a lot safer walking down a dark street at night knowing there is wifi, than a brightly light street with no internet connectively. Come on. WiFi is nice, but hardly critical for a local city to provide.
You also mix and match broadband and WiFi. I doubt that anyone could show any economic impact WiFi produces. Does anyone think municipalities that offer downtown WiFi see any return for their investment. Even if you belief it, how can you measure it.
A few weeks ago, didn't Slashdot run an article about a coffee shop that turned off WiFi on weekends and saw their sales go up?
A lot of jobs neither need WiFi or Broadband. Does the parking meter person need wifi?
As for broadband, I noticed your statement that we lagged behind urban China. So ALL of US lags a few cities in China.
A year ago I purchased a "dog" from the pet store. Since I paid money for this, I assumed it would perform better. I decided to test it against my cat.
First, I chained the dog using a 5 foot leash. I then spent the next hour trying to get the cat into a leash. Then I tested "fetch" by throwing a stick 10 feet away. Funny, neither cat nor dog returned with the stick.
I'll post the rest of my results later.
It was a bit over the top humor, but it makes a point. Look at almost every slashdot thread. Someone invariably tries to tie in either a nefarious, sinister plot. Not every event that affects us is caused by a) George Bush b) Republicans c) Greenpeace d) Democrates e) Global Warming e) Political Payoffs f) Fox Network
Sometimes we need to be reminded of this, and while the post wasn't of the caliber of Swift's "A Modest Proposal", it tried to get a point across.
Let it be.
Don't limit it to Republicans or Catholics. Try espousing Libertarian views in San Francisco. Try suggesting that some of the political or economic problems the city faces are of their own making and you will be tuned out as a Republican apologist.
I agree with you about the Simpsons or South Park because both shows are willing to skewer all sides.
That still doesn't solve the "hacker" problem. How do you prevent someone taking over the box, generating false results, then replacing the OS with a clean OS at some point later? I'm not arguing that Open Source is the wrong solution, but being "Open Source" does not solve every problem. (Nor does Closed software). The whole process from start to finish must be defined and validated to assure the vote is correct, not just the OS.
I guess you forgot the 2000 election in Florida? Everyone was up in arms about paper ballot vote fraud and how the electronic ballot would be a magic bullet that saves us. This is the classic outcome of a knee-jerk response. I knew something like this would happen as nobody stopped to look at the problem and potential issues before mandating changes in the voting laws.
Let's not blame the Bush administration for this. If you read the article, even Mendel may have fudged his numbers. And the highest percentage of unethical behavior seems linked more to career or research advancement, which appears to be built into the current system of funding. To get grants or tenure you have to bring in the money, which means appealing to those who have the money to give, be it private or public money.
While I agree that the current administration appears to be most guilty of fudging numbers, I seriously doubt that they originated it or that previous administrations didn't fudge numbers elsewhere.
You emacs and vi users are such wimps. Using a screen editor. If you were REAL hackers, you would use ed! Who needs to edit more than a single line at one time anyway?
It will be also more current and probably not a duplicated.
This is a "digitally resurrected recreation" of a previous slashdot post.
Your analogy is not quite right. The only way you would be hit is being in the spot where the bullet lands. It doesn't depend upon how may people are playing, one, two or billions. If you're not in the right (wrong) spot, you will not be hit.
Of course, the more people who stand on the field, the more likely that SOMEONE will be hit increases.
We should find out if he's right-handed or left-handed. That way, there is still ONE more aviation record to break.
Goodbye.
On the other hand, a picture of pretty women was posted on the web for 12 years before slashdot hit them. It makes you wonder if /. crowd is slowing down.
Two positive thoughs on this.
One - if written and applied correctly in the US, at least it is a legal tool against some of the spyware, making it more costly for them.
Two - if it's somewhat successful, it may make Congress look back at CAN-SPAM and fix it.
Okay I'm optimistic here.
So the first 250,000 sheep are somehow smarter than the next million?
I tried to verify this story. The only site that knows anything about it is boingboing.com. They won't give details because the source is "leery".
I hate to say this but reputable news requires confirmation of sources. This seems more like a "friend of a friend told me something..." Could it be a hoax to see how many people bite?
It worries me how many people on slashdot accept boingboing without noting how scant the evidence is. Where is the skepticism, the desire for proof, confirmation of the story. Every other link I could find ultimately went back to the same vague story.
Ouch
Wouldn't this leave the apes in charge on the surface to enslave the rest of humanity who couldn't qualify for cave dwelling?
Aren't Arizona and Nevada nothing BUT Beach? No water, just beach.