It may be their computer, just like it is their office, and their desk that the paper magazine is sitting on. The folder and file is mine, just as the briefcase and paper picture is mine. Of course that is if you don't buy into "on a computer" being something entirely different than real life stuff.
"except i am not doing work"
And that is why i say "poor management". Instead of dealing directly with people not doing their jobs, they blame the technology, and push the job of getting employees to do their job off on to a sys admin. It is not a sys admin's job to manage the work of the employees. It is also very often the case that the sys admin is even less qualified to manage the employees than the incompetent manager.
"So under your thinking my IT department at work should not be able to read my e-mail or this post before it lets the network traffic be sent to/.?"
Under MY thinking, that is absolutely true. I was very disappointed when I realized that we were going to lose that privacy. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people still believe that "if it's on a computer its something entirely different". Thus, they don't see "E" mail as the same thing as mail.
Of course, the obsessive nature of most (not all, but most) admins, and poor management, to grab as much petty power as they can, has led to huge costs for businesses. With the right to monitor, and the fact that they did monitor, came the requirement to monitor, and the liability if they don't. When the whole monitoring issue first gained traction, I would argue that a picture of a naked woman on a computer is no different than one on paper. Thus, there is no reason to treat a password protected folder differently than a locked brief case. If someone in the office sees it, and is offended, does it matter if it is on paper or screen? Of course because it was "on a computer", most people decided it was completely different, so the company could monitor it.
Now they have saddled themselves with the huge cost of monitoring, and liability if they don't catch it. Short sighted power grab leading to long term costs. Nothing they there.
This is just bad science again. The major difference between an M and a W is that one has been spun around 180 degrees. They are the same symbol. This became an issue for me over the past year, as my 3 year old started reading. He would confuse "b", "d", "p", and "q". He would also confuse "6" and "9". Why? because he would look at the symbol and recognize it, irrelevant of it's orientation. This also means he can read a book whether it is upside down, sideways, or right side up. It also means that he is very good at puzzles. When he sees a puzzle piece, he sees it as it's shape. Not it's orientation.
Clear thinking is as much about disregarding the irrelevant, as it is about recognizing the relevant. Just play the "Why" game with a small child to find out why in the end you must disregard irrelevant information. The fact that conservatives pressed the button on W more often doesn't tell us anything useful. I can think of several reasons this could happen just off the top of:
*Conservatives recognize that M and W are the same shape, while the liberals don't.
*Conservatives act more out of habit than liberals.
*Conservatives have faster reaction times, so they are pressing the button before anyone can recognize the symbol
*Conservatives are slower to recognize the orientation of the symbol so they guess at the button in the amount of time the liberal recognizes it
*etc, etc, etc...
It is just as likely that liberals are easier to confuse and disorient. Thus, they used the confusion as an internal trigger to indicate when to press the button when the orientation changes, as it is that the conservatives couldn't tell the difference. If that is the case, it is actually the "liberals" that have the more rigid thinking, and inability to accept new ideas.
Of course, since that wouldn't fit with the "researchers" biases, it is not likely to be the explanation they use in their paper.
Lets not forget that peoples political affiliation is often influenced by community, and thus geography. This could also explain a difference in reaction time. Are people raised in a rural area more likely to be conservative, AND dismiss orientation than people raised in a large metropolitan area?
You know... that is a very insightful post. I tend to think along those lines every time we hear a "man arrested for using open Wifi access point" story, but your analogy is much better than the ones I usually think of.
There was a feature to protect against brute force attacks. Each time you entered a wrong password, a longer and longer pause would be put in before it would try to authenticate.
As many scifi stories have pointed out. There is a very good argument that exterminating or sterilizing large portions of the human population would be better for the human race as a whole in the long run. And, no I don't mean based on race, religion, hair color, or any other specific criteria. Simply based on numbers. As with any animal population, over population leads to all sorts of problems.
So, an ultra intelligent machine, just might come to the conclusion that we would be better off it there were only a few million humans on the planet.
Lets get this straight: AMD is a corporation, and thus has no ethics, good or bad. Only the single minded goal of making as much money for share holders as possible. They present a reporter with an NDA. The reporter is a human who does have ethics, good or bad. The reporter judges the NDA to be evil, and makes a big deal about the company doing evil. This obviously is an attempt to make the ethicless company lose money if it continues on the same path. Since the company's sole goal is to make money, it will adjust it's business practices to that end.
This means that this is not "where it stops." It is important to for people to get outraged when company do evil, because customers getting outraged over evil behavior is the mechanism that makes doing good instead of evil, the path of most profit for companies. Corporations being evil is the result of customers not being outraged in our "Corporates are required to maximize profits society".
I agree with you to an extent, but I take exception to the "QUIT BEING CHEAP AMERICA!" Statement. It should be "QUIT BEING STUPID AMERICA!". The fact is, the argument that the phone companies need to recoup their costs, and thus put you under contract that requires you pay for the full price of the phone over time means that IT IS NOT A FEE PHONE. Thats right. If you are contractually obliged to pay for the whole phone through a service contract. It is not free.
The first thing that needs to be done is require companies to stop their blatant false advertising, and lying in contracts. They should require the companies to state that the phone is "financed" instead of allowing them to call it "free". Of course, it would be nice if the music and movie industry were required to say "license" instead of "buy" as well, and music downloads should be requried to be called "rentals".
Until the NewSpeak is stopped, we will continue to have these kinds of problems.
No it's not. We just need property tax on this so called intellectual property. We let the "owner" decide it's value. If they claim it is worth a billion dollars, then they pay property taxes on a billion dollars worth of property each year. If they say it is worth $10 to reduce there taxes, then that is what it is worth in the courtroom.
The beauty is it would work with copyright as well.
It makes me wonder about the properties of the dust and storm. The first time the Rover's panels got cleaned, everyone seemed suprised. What is it that is making a dust storm that is expected to cake on the Rovers, instead clean them? Air speed? Particle size? Luck?
I second that. I was right in there with the heavy TV watching, although, not quite as much during the week. I also let my child watch lots of television. I attribute part of his extreme intelligence to television. We truly live in a golden age for children's television. There is more quality kids shows on in a day now than was produced in a year when I was a kid (early 70s). Unfortunatly, our primary education source, public schools, are on a downward slide.
Using TV as an excuse for ill behaved kids is just more of modern societies insistence on blaming other people for their crappy parenting. It also doesn't help that there is a constant stream of "experts" advising parents who seem to think that good parenting is done by retarding kids.
Of course poor attention spans are not limited to kids. I have found that most adults cannot grasp an explanation that takes more than three sentences.
Re:Opiate of the Masses
on
Why Myths Persist
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Not silly, just treating the religious the same as everyone else. If I believe in invisible people, talk to them, and think they talk to me, I am declared crazy, and it is automatically considered negative to my well being. If I call them Jesus and God, somehow this is supposed to make me not crazy? Now, THAT is silly.
Well, that's just because all of you brunettes haven't figured out just how much fun it is to paint a monitor with whiteout. Pfft... And they call us dumb...
The reason that a fertilized egg is referred to as a "Potential" human life is because it is not a human. No bias needed.
"If you don't believe that full personhood begins at conception, then when do you believe it begins?"
It happens gradually. There is no magic point that you are instantly human. That is why we DO err on the side of caution, and don't allow abortions a week before a due date. While we might not know exactly when the line is crossed between organ and human, we do know that it is not even close to conception.
"The problem is that for all the applications you like to run to run Windows needs to backwards compatable with older versions of itself,"
This keeps getting repeated over and over. It is absolutely untrue. Microsoft bought VirtualPC. They can run a complete version of every previous version of Windows in a virtual machine. This would give darn near perfect backward compatibility, and 0 extra overhead for any new applications moving forward. Add to this the fact that Vista just doesn't have that good of compatibility.
Correct. At least here in California, Notaries are specifically instructed not to even look at what is being signed. It is not their job to deal with what is in the document. They can actually get themselves in trouble if they do. The job is strictly limited to doing due diligence on making sure the person signing is who they say they are. It is perfectly acceptable for a Notary Public to Notarize a document that is written in a language that they do not speak.
Ok, You got me... I guess I've seen too many people that are dead serious and say the same exact same thing in the exact same way. I though I might of heard something whizzing right over my head. Good to know it was a joke, and not a rock.
At first I thought you were kidding, but your sig really does link to a misandry site. If you were kidding, then you got me. If not, then I can hope that kind will be called out for being the bigots you are, just as other bigots have been in the past.
I remember when you got the whole OS in it full retail box... With manuals no less. Heckpirate., I remember when MS was spouting that getting your manuals was a primary reason not to illegally copy your software.
That is correct. I am also a parent that is willing to give up things for the betterment of my child. I will also be homeschooling my child. And my wife also stopped working. There is no way a public (or private) school is going to be willing to deal with a child that started reading at two, and at three and a half has a better vocabulary than some 9 and 10 year olds. Since we made the decision, I have talked to many people about home schooling, and the only argument that the pro-public/private school folks seem to have is that "kids need to learn how to socialize". I ask you this... Do you really want your kids social skills developed by a part time government employee?
From what I experienced when I was in school, and what I've seen since, virtually all of the things that kids "learn" about socialization in public schools are how to deal with problems that only exist in public schools. Where else in society can one person walk up to another person, punch them in the nose, and not get arrested?
The US public schools system is simply broken from the ground up. From the parents who see it as a babysitter, and the true parents of their offspring, to the teachers who don't seem to understand mathematics well enough to figure out what their hourly pay is, to administration that seems to be able to make huge amounts of money just disappear, to local, state and federal officials that use the 'protect the children' line to get reelected, to the president of the United States who referred to the smart kids as 'the nerd patrol'.
The US public school system is a perfect candidate for the old adage... "follow the money".
Yes, you are correct. You collect from your insurance company. They pay you, and it is now their problem as to whether they can collect from Dell. If they do, it becomes Dells problem as to whether or not they can collect from Sony. This goes down the chain until someone decides the cannot collect enough money to make it worth while, or there isn't enough responsibility left to collect from the next person down the line.
That isn't really what I was saying. While I agree with the Nadar quote, my point was about people that WERE taking their votes elsewhere. They were taking them to the garbage. It should be far easier to convince people who don't vote because the dislike the choices, to vote for a third party than it is to convince people who feel they must vote, even if they must vote for someone they don't like. The first group have literally nothing to lose. They already have decide that they are not voting for a major candidate.
The Nadar quote was aimed at people who were voting. Many of them people who were afraid to "throw away their vote".
You are doing it all wrong. You should vote. You should just vote for a third party. The reason people are afraid to vote for a third party candidate is that they have been convinced that they are "throwing away their vote". If you are actually advocating literally throwing away your vote, you can double the effectiveness by voting third party. There is little to no chance that the third party candidate will win, so it doesn't matter what the candidate stands for. Besides, they are unlikely to be a bigger problem than either of the two major candidates.
If you think that 20% voter turn out will get the governments attention, just imagine what a 70% turnout would do to them with 30% of the votes going to third party candidates! So, don't encourage your family and friends not to vote at all. Don't try to convince them that they should think a third party will get elected. Just explain that if they are going to withhold/throw away their votes, withhold them from the possible winners by putting them on a third party.
If not voting is supposed to be the death by a thousand cuts, voting for a third party is the salt you rub into the wounds.
Slashdot Mirror
It may be their computer, just like it is their office, and their desk that the paper magazine is sitting on. The folder and file is mine, just as the briefcase and paper picture is mine. Of course that is if you don't buy into "on a computer" being something entirely different than real life stuff.
"except i am not doing work"
And that is why i say "poor management". Instead of dealing directly with people not doing their jobs, they blame the technology, and push the job of getting employees to do their job off on to a sys admin. It is not a sys admin's job to manage the work of the employees. It is also very often the case that the sys admin is even less qualified to manage the employees than the incompetent manager.
"So under your thinking my IT department at work should not be able to read my e-mail or this post before it lets the network traffic be sent to /.?"
Under MY thinking, that is absolutely true. I was very disappointed when I realized that we were going to lose that privacy. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people still believe that "if it's on a computer its something entirely different". Thus, they don't see "E" mail as the same thing as mail.
Of course, the obsessive nature of most (not all, but most) admins, and poor management, to grab as much petty power as they can, has led to huge costs for businesses. With the right to monitor, and the fact that they did monitor, came the requirement to monitor, and the liability if they don't. When the whole monitoring issue first gained traction, I would argue that a picture of a naked woman on a computer is no different than one on paper. Thus, there is no reason to treat a password protected folder differently than a locked brief case. If someone in the office sees it, and is offended, does it matter if it is on paper or screen? Of course because it was "on a computer", most people decided it was completely different, so the company could monitor it.
Now they have saddled themselves with the huge cost of monitoring, and liability if they don't catch it. Short sighted power grab leading to long term costs. Nothing they there.
This is just bad science again. The major difference between an M and a W is that one has been spun around 180 degrees. They are the same symbol. This became an issue for me over the past year, as my 3 year old started reading. He would confuse "b", "d", "p", and "q". He would also confuse "6" and "9". Why? because he would look at the symbol and recognize it, irrelevant of it's orientation. This also means he can read a book whether it is upside down, sideways, or right side up. It also means that he is very good at puzzles. When he sees a puzzle piece, he sees it as it's shape. Not it's orientation.
Clear thinking is as much about disregarding the irrelevant, as it is about recognizing the relevant. Just play the "Why" game with a small child to find out why in the end you must disregard irrelevant information. The fact that conservatives pressed the button on W more often doesn't tell us anything useful. I can think of several reasons this could happen just off the top of:
*Conservatives recognize that M and W are the same shape, while the liberals don't.
*Conservatives act more out of habit than liberals.
*Conservatives have faster reaction times, so they are pressing the button before anyone can recognize the symbol
*Conservatives are slower to recognize the orientation of the symbol so they guess at the button in the amount of time the liberal recognizes it
*etc, etc, etc...
It is just as likely that liberals are easier to confuse and disorient. Thus, they used the confusion as an internal trigger to indicate when to press the button when the orientation changes, as it is that the conservatives couldn't tell the difference. If that is the case, it is actually the "liberals" that have the more rigid thinking, and inability to accept new ideas.
Of course, since that wouldn't fit with the "researchers" biases, it is not likely to be the explanation they use in their paper.
Lets not forget that peoples political affiliation is often influenced by community, and thus geography. This could also explain a difference in reaction time. Are people raised in a rural area more likely to be conservative, AND dismiss orientation than people raised in a large metropolitan area?
You know... that is a very insightful post. I tend to think along those lines every time we hear a "man arrested for using open Wifi access point" story, but your analogy is much better than the ones I usually think of.
There was a feature to protect against brute force attacks. Each time you entered a wrong password, a longer and longer pause would be put in before it would try to authenticate.
As many scifi stories have pointed out. There is a very good argument that exterminating or sterilizing large portions of the human population would be better for the human race as a whole in the long run. And, no I don't mean based on race, religion, hair color, or any other specific criteria. Simply based on numbers. As with any animal population, over population leads to all sorts of problems. So, an ultra intelligent machine, just might come to the conclusion that we would be better off it there were only a few million humans on the planet.
Lets get this straight: AMD is a corporation, and thus has no ethics, good or bad. Only the single minded goal of making as much money for share holders as possible. They present a reporter with an NDA. The reporter is a human who does have ethics, good or bad. The reporter judges the NDA to be evil, and makes a big deal about the company doing evil. This obviously is an attempt to make the ethicless company lose money if it continues on the same path. Since the company's sole goal is to make money, it will adjust it's business practices to that end. This means that this is not "where it stops." It is important to for people to get outraged when company do evil, because customers getting outraged over evil behavior is the mechanism that makes doing good instead of evil, the path of most profit for companies. Corporations being evil is the result of customers not being outraged in our "Corporates are required to maximize profits society".
Unfortunately, racism in America isn't dead. It just changed sides.
I agree with you to an extent, but I take exception to the "QUIT BEING CHEAP AMERICA!" Statement. It should be "QUIT BEING STUPID AMERICA!". The fact is, the argument that the phone companies need to recoup their costs, and thus put you under contract that requires you pay for the full price of the phone over time means that IT IS NOT A FEE PHONE. Thats right. If you are contractually obliged to pay for the whole phone through a service contract. It is not free.
The first thing that needs to be done is require companies to stop their blatant false advertising, and lying in contracts. They should require the companies to state that the phone is "financed" instead of allowing them to call it "free". Of course, it would be nice if the music and movie industry were required to say "license" instead of "buy" as well, and music downloads should be requried to be called "rentals".
Until the NewSpeak is stopped, we will continue to have these kinds of problems.
No it's not. We just need property tax on this so called intellectual property. We let the "owner" decide it's value. If they claim it is worth a billion dollars, then they pay property taxes on a billion dollars worth of property each year. If they say it is worth $10 to reduce there taxes, then that is what it is worth in the courtroom.
The beauty is it would work with copyright as well.
It makes me wonder about the properties of the dust and storm. The first time the Rover's panels got cleaned, everyone seemed suprised. What is it that is making a dust storm that is expected to cake on the Rovers, instead clean them? Air speed? Particle size? Luck?
I second that. I was right in there with the heavy TV watching, although, not quite as much during the week. I also let my child watch lots of television. I attribute part of his extreme intelligence to television. We truly live in a golden age for children's television. There is more quality kids shows on in a day now than was produced in a year when I was a kid (early 70s). Unfortunatly, our primary education source, public schools, are on a downward slide.
Using TV as an excuse for ill behaved kids is just more of modern societies insistence on blaming other people for their crappy parenting. It also doesn't help that there is a constant stream of "experts" advising parents who seem to think that good parenting is done by retarding kids.
Of course poor attention spans are not limited to kids. I have found that most adults cannot grasp an explanation that takes more than three sentences.
Not silly, just treating the religious the same as everyone else. If I believe in invisible people, talk to them, and think they talk to me, I am declared crazy, and it is automatically considered negative to my well being. If I call them Jesus and God, somehow this is supposed to make me not crazy? Now, THAT is silly.
Well, that's just because all of you brunettes haven't figured out just how much fun it is to paint a monitor with whiteout. Pfft... And they call us dumb...
The reason that a fertilized egg is referred to as a "Potential" human life is because it is not a human. No bias needed.
"If you don't believe that full personhood begins at conception, then when do you believe it begins?" It happens gradually. There is no magic point that you are instantly human. That is why we DO err on the side of caution, and don't allow abortions a week before a due date. While we might not know exactly when the line is crossed between organ and human, we do know that it is not even close to conception.
"The problem is that for all the applications you like to run to run Windows needs to backwards compatable with older versions of itself,"
This keeps getting repeated over and over. It is absolutely untrue. Microsoft bought VirtualPC. They can run a complete version of every previous version of Windows in a virtual machine. This would give darn near perfect backward compatibility, and 0 extra overhead for any new applications moving forward. Add to this the fact that Vista just doesn't have that good of compatibility.
Correct. At least here in California, Notaries are specifically instructed not to even look at what is being signed. It is not their job to deal with what is in the document. They can actually get themselves in trouble if they do. The job is strictly limited to doing due diligence on making sure the person signing is who they say they are. It is perfectly acceptable for a Notary Public to Notarize a document that is written in a language that they do not speak.
Ok, You got me... I guess I've seen too many people that are dead serious and say the same exact same thing in the exact same way. I though I might of heard something whizzing right over my head. Good to know it was a joke, and not a rock.
At first I thought you were kidding, but your sig really does link to a misandry site. If you were kidding, then you got me. If not, then I can hope that kind will be called out for being the bigots you are, just as other bigots have been in the past.
I remember when you got the whole OS in it full retail box... With manuals no less. Heckpirate., I remember when MS was spouting that getting your manuals was a primary reason not to illegally copy your software.
That is correct. I am also a parent that is willing to give up things for the betterment of my child. I will also be homeschooling my child. And my wife also stopped working. There is no way a public (or private) school is going to be willing to deal with a child that started reading at two, and at three and a half has a better vocabulary than some 9 and 10 year olds. Since we made the decision, I have talked to many people about home schooling, and the only argument that the pro-public/private school folks seem to have is that "kids need to learn how to socialize". I ask you this... Do you really want your kids social skills developed by a part time government employee?
From what I experienced when I was in school, and what I've seen since, virtually all of the things that kids "learn" about socialization in public schools are how to deal with problems that only exist in public schools. Where else in society can one person walk up to another person, punch them in the nose, and not get arrested?
The US public schools system is simply broken from the ground up. From the parents who see it as a babysitter, and the true parents of their offspring, to the teachers who don't seem to understand mathematics well enough to figure out what their hourly pay is, to administration that seems to be able to make huge amounts of money just disappear, to local, state and federal officials that use the 'protect the children' line to get reelected, to the president of the United States who referred to the smart kids as 'the nerd patrol'.
The US public school system is a perfect candidate for the old adage... "follow the money".
At AmiWest 2006, Carl Sassenrath said that he regularly gets calls from lawyers for just that reason.
Yes, you are correct. You collect from your insurance company. They pay you, and it is now their problem as to whether they can collect from Dell. If they do, it becomes Dells problem as to whether or not they can collect from Sony. This goes down the chain until someone decides the cannot collect enough money to make it worth while, or there isn't enough responsibility left to collect from the next person down the line.
That isn't really what I was saying. While I agree with the Nadar quote, my point was about people that WERE taking their votes elsewhere. They were taking them to the garbage. It should be far easier to convince people who don't vote because the dislike the choices, to vote for a third party than it is to convince people who feel they must vote, even if they must vote for someone they don't like. The first group have literally nothing to lose. They already have decide that they are not voting for a major candidate.
The Nadar quote was aimed at people who were voting. Many of them people who were afraid to "throw away their vote".
You are doing it all wrong. You should vote. You should just vote for a third party. The reason people are afraid to vote for a third party candidate is that they have been convinced that they are "throwing away their vote". If you are actually advocating literally throwing away your vote, you can double the effectiveness by voting third party. There is little to no chance that the third party candidate will win, so it doesn't matter what the candidate stands for. Besides, they are unlikely to be a bigger problem than either of the two major candidates.
If you think that 20% voter turn out will get the governments attention, just imagine what a 70% turnout would do to them with 30% of the votes going to third party candidates! So, don't encourage your family and friends not to vote at all. Don't try to convince them that they should think a third party will get elected. Just explain that if they are going to withhold/throw away their votes, withhold them from the possible winners by putting them on a third party.
If not voting is supposed to be the death by a thousand cuts, voting for a third party is the salt you rub into the wounds.