All this time, with all the antitrust lawsuits, and it turns out all Microsoft needed was a stern talking to. Man, wish I could think outside the box like that...
Normally winter occurs because there's less sunlight than usual. I don't think they're going to be producing your imagined self heated clothing through solar panels any time soon.
Fantastic, now we have to deal with people stopping to gawk at accidents on the road AND on the internet. JUST DRIVE BY IT! DON'T LOOK! What's wrong with you people!?
How the hell can you put a price on jeopardising one of our constitutional rights? These people broke the law in a big way and lied about it, and they're getting off with this slap on the wrist? People should be put in jail for this.
Actually, had you read the article they asked if he agreed with the conservative's idea of a "liberal mainstream media". He said the idea they had was good, to build an audience, but that the idea that the media is a big liberal circle jerk which seems to be what you think is completely out of left field (or right field, I suppose.)
He's angry at the media for the way they handle news, but he has no idea really where he's going with this whole citizen journalism thing. Then ohmynews proceeds to preen itself for half a page. Afterwards, they talk about blogging, it's relationship to the mainstream media, and how that can influence citizen journalism. Dan Gillmore goes on the record as being skeptical of wikinews.
That's just it. There are two ways to look at this: One, you put your name on the package so you don't NEED to have your pictures taken. Two, you can put a fake name and address on your package. However, if you think the picture is going to catch the perpetrator (if the package was in some way illegal), well that person could just wear a mask. All you're doing is taking away the privacy of honest citizens.
Thanks, but I know for a fact that people who look like a foreigner are targeted more often than people who aren't at american airports. I went on a trip to Europe with a Russian friend of mind and I watched as he got stopped and pulled aside by security both in and out of the country while I breezed by with liqour in my backpack on the way into the country (I'm underage and importing liqour is illegal anyway). I also have arab friends and they've traveled too and I know how often they get stopped.
I am sick of people saying that any honest type of person wouldn't mind . Just because I'm an honest person doesn't mean I want pictures of every little thing I do kept by the government.
Say, you're an honest person, right? You wouldn't mind if the government kept logs of all your telephone conversations, would you? Or how about if they PUBLISHED the logs? I mean, you're honest and all, what do you have to hide? Say, since you're an honest person, would you mind if we put a bug on you and kept ALL your conversations?
This is not an example of a strawman fallacy, I'm simply showing how far this "you shouldn't mind it if you're not doing anything wrong" backward thinking can be taken.
I say that BECAUSE I'm an honest person, I don't want the government taking pictures of me when I send a package.
I don't know how anyone could claim that this is a necessary invasion of privacy. Taking pictures of us while we're sending mail? How often is the mail used in incidents of terrorism? Definitely not often enough to warrant photographing anyone who tries to send a package, and making it so that the machine doesn't work if you won't let your picture be properly taken.
Say your branch IS used for terrorist activities. Say a mail bomb, or anthrax threat. You can bet that if you're an arab you're going to be getting a visit from the FBI.
Re:Orson Scott Card
on
Emergence
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
No, no it's not. Now go find a sci-fi thread somewhere.
We start with the product group that developed the product, so they feel the pain first.
Man, truer words have never been spoken (at least by an MS executive.)
All jokes aside about it being dark underwater, this is going to be very helpful for research in large bodies of water. They can put a UAV with sensors and movement devices in say the Pacific and monitor the surface areas for long periods of time without ever needing to go back and "fill 'er up". We'll be able to monitor pollution levels, surface temperatures, ocean currents, all sorts of things much more efficiently.
Putting electrodes right next to the brain and using computational power to detect the VERY faint electrical signals within the brain is worlds and worlds apart from someone being able to pick up these electrical signals from the span of -- let's say two feet away to be fair -- THROUGH THE AIR and having it penetrate their skull, and then being able to interpret these electrical signals into meaningful thoughts. Keep in mind that since every mind is different, the electrical signals in one brain that signify a certain thought -- let's say something simple such as "I like cheese." can be fairly different from one person to the next because of the way the synapses are linked and pulse their electrochemical signals to make up said thought. I consider this to be an even greater obstacle than the electrical signals from the brain going through the air. The electrical signals to move a cursor are so much simpler than the simplest of thoughts (I like cheese).
I really don't understand the furor over this. It wouldn't be the first college degree mill out there, and it certainly won't be the last. The only one whom people who get this sort of degree are cheating is themselves. I mean, sure, at first it may seem like they are cheating employers that take this sort of thing at face value, but it'll be pretty obvious once they start fucking up their job royally because they don't know what they're doing.
One would think that as the information age continues to grind onward, illiteracy would become less and less of a problem, especially for people who WORK in IT (information technology, of course). It's pretty disheartening to see that it's still as prevalent as it was before the age of computers.
I suppose it's understandable that the government would want to keep better track of the people working for it, to help prevent spying and other such things. However, I can also see how one could make the argument that it'll be a slippery slope type situation, and that it won't be long until ALL of us have cards with biometric info and the government watching everything we do. It's a hard call.
Personally, I'd rather take the chance that a few spies might infiltrate the government and not risk a 1984 Big Brother scenario.
Slashdot Mirror
Man, this rant is all over the map...
But really, why would anyone be an all-terrain magnetic rail-gun ballistic missile nuclear launch system for their cell phone anyway?
Maybe it was a flashcrowd? (pertaining to yesterday's story)
All this time, with all the antitrust lawsuits, and it turns out all Microsoft needed was a stern talking to. Man, wish I could think outside the box like that...
Normally winter occurs because there's less sunlight than usual. I don't think they're going to be producing your imagined self heated clothing through solar panels any time soon.
Fantastic, now we have to deal with people stopping to gawk at accidents on the road AND on the internet. JUST DRIVE BY IT! DON'T LOOK! What's wrong with you people!?
How the hell can you put a price on jeopardising one of our constitutional rights? These people broke the law in a big way and lied about it, and they're getting off with this slap on the wrist? People should be put in jail for this.
Disgusting.
From server to rubble in 2.5 seconds.
Actually, had you read the article they asked if he agreed with the conservative's idea of a "liberal mainstream media". He said the idea they had was good, to build an audience, but that the idea that the media is a big liberal circle jerk which seems to be what you think is completely out of left field (or right field, I suppose.)
He's angry at the media for the way they handle news, but he has no idea really where he's going with this whole citizen journalism thing. Then ohmynews proceeds to preen itself for half a page. Afterwards, they talk about blogging, it's relationship to the mainstream media, and how that can influence citizen journalism. Dan Gillmore goes on the record as being skeptical of wikinews.
That's just it. There are two ways to look at this: One, you put your name on the package so you don't NEED to have your pictures taken. Two, you can put a fake name and address on your package. However, if you think the picture is going to catch the perpetrator (if the package was in some way illegal), well that person could just wear a mask. All you're doing is taking away the privacy of honest citizens.
Thanks, but I know for a fact that people who look like a foreigner are targeted more often than people who aren't at american airports. I went on a trip to Europe with a Russian friend of mind and I watched as he got stopped and pulled aside by security both in and out of the country while I breezed by with liqour in my backpack on the way into the country (I'm underage and importing liqour is illegal anyway). I also have arab friends and they've traveled too and I know how often they get stopped.
I am sick of people saying that any honest type of person wouldn't mind . Just because I'm an honest person doesn't mean I want pictures of every little thing I do kept by the government.
Say, you're an honest person, right? You wouldn't mind if the government kept logs of all your telephone conversations, would you? Or how about if they PUBLISHED the logs? I mean, you're honest and all, what do you have to hide? Say, since you're an honest person, would you mind if we put a bug on you and kept ALL your conversations?
This is not an example of a strawman fallacy, I'm simply showing how far this "you shouldn't mind it if you're not doing anything wrong" backward thinking can be taken.
I say that BECAUSE I'm an honest person, I don't want the government taking pictures of me when I send a package.
I don't know how anyone could claim that this is a necessary invasion of privacy. Taking pictures of us while we're sending mail? How often is the mail used in incidents of terrorism? Definitely not often enough to warrant photographing anyone who tries to send a package, and making it so that the machine doesn't work if you won't let your picture be properly taken.
Say your branch IS used for terrorist activities. Say a mail bomb, or anthrax threat. You can bet that if you're an arab you're going to be getting a visit from the FBI.
No, no it's not. Now go find a sci-fi thread somewhere.
I'd say if you're this into mathematics, than you'd be pretty lucky to have 100 women to choose from in your lifetime.
We start with the product group that developed the product, so they feel the pain first. Man, truer words have never been spoken (at least by an MS executive.)
Is best alluded to by this line from a movie: "Bullets! My only weakness! How did you know.... *falls over*"
All jokes aside about it being dark underwater, this is going to be very helpful for research in large bodies of water. They can put a UAV with sensors and movement devices in say the Pacific and monitor the surface areas for long periods of time without ever needing to go back and "fill 'er up". We'll be able to monitor pollution levels, surface temperatures, ocean currents, all sorts of things much more efficiently.
This is a great way to fix the system! They should patent it!
It's a hell of a lot more difficult to believe.
Putting electrodes right next to the brain and using computational power to detect the VERY faint electrical signals within the brain is worlds and worlds apart from someone being able to pick up these electrical signals from the span of -- let's say two feet away to be fair -- THROUGH THE AIR and having it penetrate their skull, and then being able to interpret these electrical signals into meaningful thoughts. Keep in mind that since every mind is different, the electrical signals in one brain that signify a certain thought -- let's say something simple such as "I like cheese." can be fairly different from one person to the next because of the way the synapses are linked and pulse their electrochemical signals to make up said thought. I consider this to be an even greater obstacle than the electrical signals from the brain going through the air. The electrical signals to move a cursor are so much simpler than the simplest of thoughts (I like cheese).
I really don't understand the furor over this. It wouldn't be the first college degree mill out there, and it certainly won't be the last. The only one whom people who get this sort of degree are cheating is themselves. I mean, sure, at first it may seem like they are cheating employers that take this sort of thing at face value, but it'll be pretty obvious once they start fucking up their job royally because they don't know what they're doing.
One would think that as the information age continues to grind onward, illiteracy would become less and less of a problem, especially for people who WORK in IT (information technology, of course). It's pretty disheartening to see that it's still as prevalent as it was before the age of computers.
I suppose it's understandable that the government would want to keep better track of the people working for it, to help prevent spying and other such things. However, I can also see how one could make the argument that it'll be a slippery slope type situation, and that it won't be long until ALL of us have cards with biometric info and the government watching everything we do. It's a hard call.
Personally, I'd rather take the chance that a few spies might infiltrate the government and not risk a 1984 Big Brother scenario.
Yeah, that's great an all, but will my dick still work at that point? If not, it's not worth it.