Now, I *am* making an assumption here, but...you're American, right?
Quite right. Halloween's a big holiday here-- in most places it's just kids dressing up in costume, going trick-or-treating door to door and getting candy.
But in the fun cities like San Francisco, New Orleans (sigh), the Florida Keys (double sigh) Halloween is a major event. In San Francisco, many people call it the City's "Unofficial Holiday", the Castro District has a party with 100,000 attendees.
It's also a good time to geek out with special effects-- there are all sorts of fun geeky projects for Halloween.
Halloween in real life is always much more interesting then Halloween in some computer game.
I'd like to see what you all are doing in REAL life for Halloween.
Not just Geeky Gadgets for parties, but what cool stuff are you geeks making for youselves? High-tech, low-tech it doesn't matter.
I usually submit an article asking this question every Halloween, but the editors always reject the submission.
Re:"Ma Bell" should be called "Big Brother" instea
on
Ma Bell is Back
·
· Score: 1
That is in fact exactly what they accused me of: murdering my wife and stashing her body under the bed after she had managed to dial 911 with her last dying breath or some sort of bullshit.
It sick, but police often ask this sort of question when responding to an emergency. These questions are designed to catch you offguard and provoke a response-- you probably reacted with disbelief and anger ("Uh, what are you doing here. No I didn't kill my wife what the fuck are you talking about.", which are the normal reactions. Someone who just committed a crime would probably be more paranoid and would respond differently.
And yes, I'm sure it was humiliating, and you have every right to be angry. I vaugely remember something similar happening to me many years ago.
Re:"Ma Bell" should be called "Big Brother" instea
on
Ma Bell is Back
·
· Score: 1
I do NOT want the police entering my home without my permission.
Tough. Emergency Services have an obligation to respond to what they believe is an emergency. They don't always need your permission.
You are directing alot of anger towards the police, but shouldn't some of the blame lay at the engineer who accidently connected your phoneline to 911?
If you don't like it, move somewhere remote where they can't find you.
Re:"Ma Bell" should be called "Big Brother" instea
on
Ma Bell is Back
·
· Score: 1
The officer who claimed they didn't need a warrant was either grossly mistaken or lying through his teeth.
That's right, because when a burglar shoots you in your own house and you're bleeding to death, the police need to go talk to a judge and obtain a warrant before entering your house.
Re:"Ma Bell" should be called "Big Brother" instea
on
Ma Bell is Back
·
· Score: 1
Last week the police came to my home and demanded immediate entry (they said they didn't need a warrant for "a case like this")
The police don't need a warrant to respond to what they believe is a 911 call. The emergency services are obligated to investigate ALL 911 calls. Normally the dispatcher will call you to assess the situation ("Sorry, my baby was playing with the phone"). However, in your case the lines were down-- the dispatcher probably tried to get in touch with you, but could not get through, and sent in the police will investigate.
This isn't big brother. It was the appropriate response. What else are they supposed to do? If this was a true emergency, they can't wait to receive a warrant or wait for the SBC techs to check on the situation. They respond first, ask questions later.
And you do realize that accidental emergency call may still happen with your Mobile Phone? I believe most false-911 calls are made from Mobile Phones.
If there was a true need for you to dial 911, the reponders will not know your exact address-- rather, they will know your general longitude & latitude and will need to search for you, which will slow down their response.
What Operating System are you using? This makes a big difference... there are dozens of free/OSS web development apps for Linux, but there are only a handful which run on Windows. Not sure about MacOSX.
You mentioned "Frontpage", so presumably you are running on Windows. But you need to be more clear.
Somehow I just can't envision millions of hardcore gamers wanting to get up off the cough, away from the precious entertainment source to go to watch video clips and listen to music in some sort of "concert".
I see gamers who would rather cross their legs and hop up-and-down instead of just going to the bathroom to pee. You need to have something very enticing to get these guys away from the magic box.
I never said Google was doing anything wrong. If anything, they are simply taking the concept of "Direct Marketing" to a higher level.
However, I feel like there is too much Google-hype on Slashdot. Most people still think that Google is simply a search engine-- but Google's business model is actually much more clever.
Same thing that Google does with Google Search, Gmail, Google Chat, Google Groups, etc.-- Google wants to analyze what people are looking for, and use that analysis to target additional content and (very importantly) their advertisements.
Indexing external sites is still a tricky and inexact business. If I'm shopping for something, I usually won't find the best deal in the top 10 or 20 results with a typical Google or Froogle search.
Google Base allows Google to more accurately index the browsing habits of the visitors.
Google is an advertising company first. All of Google's products-- from Google Chat to Google news else must serve the tracking needs of their advertising business.
I'm sorry, you can't just exclude certain words from a conversation because you find them inconvenient. You're making wild accusations based on your misinterpretation of certain key phrases, and are creating an argument out your imagination.
Truth be told, you don't even know what my ideology is-- you speak to me as if I was some large fuzzy socialist boogyman, but I'm not actually a socialist.
You said Wikipedia would fail due to some socialist leanings. I disagree.
Is it? I thought the ads were going to pay for Wikipedia's increased costs-- bandwidth, new servers, etc.
CDDB is similar in that CDDB took a community project and turned around to turn it into a commercial entity. That's different from this case, isn't it? As I understand this issue, a private company is taking Wikipedia and reselling it, and is giving some of the proceeds back to Wikipedia Foundation.
"You mean that people who contribute their time to a project for free tend to have a collectivist view of the world? Shocking. SHOCKING I tell you."
or this:
"Imagine that. Wikipedia reflects the bias of the thousands of people who are willing to share information, help others and collaborate on large projects together -- without any expectation of monetary payment (even if some wikipedians expect plenty of ego boosting)-- of course it has a socialist bias."
Neither of us said or implied anything like the only people who care enough about anything to do it without hope of monetary reward are liberals. Our statements contain phrases like "tend to have" and "bias", which have powerful, magical meanings.
Plenty non-liberals care enough to volunteer for their interests.
But you know that. You're just spreading misinformation. How does that straw taste?
I'm claiming that there are non-liberals who care about the world... and you claim I'm imagining things?
No. You misunderstand. Here's what you just said:
My point was that the whole allegation that "the only people who care enough about anything to do it without hope of monetary reward are liberals"
Nobody here made that allegation, and nobody said that that liberals are the only people who care. You pulled this out of thin air, and you keep repeating this argument-- I think it's called a straw man argument.
Perhaps you're confusing "things that good people do" with an intelligent philosophy of government.
I'm not talking about governments, or any organized movement at all. Everytime someone mentions the word socialism, a dozen people start screaming about the boogyman, conspiracies, failed governments, etc. The word "socialist" is a 4-letter word.
I'm just talking about parts of an ideology-- the vast majority of Wikipedians aren't big-S card carrying Socialists, but they are more likely to believe in some ideals which exist in socialist (and non-socialist) theory-- collective control over a shared resource, cooperation & collaboration, etc. The parent commenter was saying that these ideas "won't work" and will cause Wikipedia too "implode"-- I don't agree.
I agree with you that Wikipedia is not coersive-- but it can be a propoganda tool;)
That's the agenda of one organization. It is not "the entire socialist agenda". In addition, not everyone who believes in some socialist principals believes in an organized socialist movement, such as that promoted by the Democratic Socialists of America.
Yes it's against the rules. It's called "illegal interference". You can't purposely trip the other players either, and you can't tackle in basketball, etc.
My point was that the whole allegation that "the only people who care enough about anything to do it without hope of monetary reward are liberals" is false.
Yeah, but my point is that you're imagining things. Really, I can't tell if you're statements are merely the result of a misunderstanding, or if you are deliberately trying to spread misinformation and confusion for kicks. Who said that these people are all liberals? Nobody...
In fact, I really appreciate any non-liberals on Wikipedia. The documents can be really well written, and really help me to understand some of the non-Liberal and anti-Liberal views.
Of course, there are plenty of right-wingers (and left-wingers) who just like to spread disinformation. Rush Limbaugh doesn't actually believe most of the stupid shit he says, he's just malicious.
It can't be that there are people who care but realize socialist ideas don't work
Really? None of them? Things like sharing and collaboration don't work? Wikipedia is a failure? Are you perhaps confusing the word "socialism" with some right-wing scare tactic?
entire socialist agenda
There's a socialist agenda? Fuck, I must have missed a meeting or something!!! Please tell me what this socialist agenda encompases! Is this different then the Left-wing controlled media? I don't want to miss out!
Seriously, where do you find people like "EnronHaliburton2004"
People only need to look for the frothing mouth of some crazy right winger. I'm there to help him understand the difference between hype and reality. But again, sometimes I oversleep and miss the meetings. Sorry...
Slashdot Mirror
Vote Republican - they are tolerant of hot women in lingerie.
But if you watch closely, they are actually watching the guy in the tight pants over there.
Don't be silly.
College students can't afford hookers.
"I'll pay you with half-a-bud and some top-raman".
Well that's darn cool then. I was Hulk for Halloween in kindergarten. He was sooo coool!
Does Tux Racer at 300fps count as gaming? ;)
Now, I *am* making an assumption here, but...you're American, right?
Quite right. Halloween's a big holiday here-- in most places it's just kids dressing up in costume, going trick-or-treating door to door and getting candy.
But in the fun cities like San Francisco, New Orleans (sigh), the Florida Keys (double sigh) Halloween is a major event. In San Francisco, many people call it the City's "Unofficial Holiday", the Castro District has a party with 100,000 attendees.
It's also a good time to geek out with special effects-- there are all sorts of fun geeky projects for Halloween.
Yes indeed. You are the geek god, not because of your fancy Christmas lights, but because of your brilliant social engineering skills.
:O
I'm not sure if the Hulk is real
Halloween in real life is always much more interesting then Halloween in some computer game.
I'd like to see what you all are doing in REAL life for Halloween.
Not just Geeky Gadgets for parties, but what cool stuff are you geeks making for youselves? High-tech, low-tech it doesn't matter.
I usually submit an article asking this question every Halloween, but the editors always reject the submission.
That is in fact exactly what they accused me of: murdering my wife and stashing her body under the bed after she had managed to dial 911 with her last dying breath or some sort of bullshit.
It sick, but police often ask this sort of question when responding to an emergency. These questions are designed to catch you offguard and provoke a response-- you probably reacted with disbelief and anger ("Uh, what are you doing here. No I didn't kill my wife what the fuck are you talking about.", which are the normal reactions. Someone who just committed a crime would probably be more paranoid and would respond differently.
And yes, I'm sure it was humiliating, and you have every right to be angry. I vaugely remember something similar happening to me many years ago.
I do NOT want the police entering my home without my permission.
Tough. Emergency Services have an obligation to respond to what they believe is an emergency. They don't always need your permission.
You are directing alot of anger towards the police, but shouldn't some of the blame lay at the engineer who accidently connected your phoneline to 911?
If you don't like it, move somewhere remote where they can't find you.
The officer who claimed they didn't need a warrant was either grossly mistaken or lying through his teeth.
That's right, because when a burglar shoots you in your own house and you're bleeding to death, the police need to go talk to a judge and obtain a warrant before entering your house.
Last week the police came to my home and demanded immediate entry (they said they didn't need a warrant for "a case like this")
The police don't need a warrant to respond to what they believe is a 911 call. The emergency services are obligated to investigate ALL 911 calls. Normally the dispatcher will call you to assess the situation ("Sorry, my baby was playing with the phone"). However, in your case the lines were down-- the dispatcher probably tried to get in touch with you, but could not get through, and sent in the police will investigate.
This isn't big brother. It was the appropriate response. What else are they supposed to do? If this was a true emergency, they can't wait to receive a warrant or wait for the SBC techs to check on the situation. They respond first, ask questions later.
And you do realize that accidental emergency call may still happen with your Mobile Phone? I believe most false-911 calls are made from Mobile Phones.
If there was a true need for you to dial 911, the reponders will not know your exact address-- rather, they will know your general longitude & latitude and will need to search for you, which will slow down their response.
Can you recommend one for me?
What Operating System are you using? This makes a big difference... there are dozens of free/OSS web development apps for Linux, but there are only a handful which run on Windows. Not sure about MacOSX.
You mentioned "Frontpage", so presumably you are running on Windows. But you need to be more clear.
Somehow I just can't envision millions of hardcore gamers wanting to get up off the cough, away from the precious entertainment source to go to watch video clips and listen to music in some sort of "concert".
I see gamers who would rather cross their legs and hop up-and-down instead of just going to the bathroom to pee. You need to have something very enticing to get these guys away from the magic box.
Another imagined argument!
I never said Google was doing anything wrong. If anything, they are simply taking the concept of "Direct Marketing" to a higher level.
However, I feel like there is too much Google-hype on Slashdot. Most people still think that Google is simply a search engine-- but Google's business model is actually much more clever.
What are they planning to achieve with this?
Same thing that Google does with Google Search, Gmail, Google Chat, Google Groups, etc.-- Google wants to analyze what people are looking for, and use that analysis to target additional content and (very importantly) their advertisements.
Indexing external sites is still a tricky and inexact business. If I'm shopping for something, I usually won't find the best deal in the top 10 or 20 results with a typical Google or Froogle search.
Google Base allows Google to more accurately index the browsing habits of the visitors.
Google is an advertising company first. All of Google's products-- from Google Chat to Google news else must serve the tracking needs of their advertising business.
I'm sorry, you can't just exclude certain words from a conversation because you find them inconvenient. You're making wild accusations based on your misinterpretation of certain key phrases, and are creating an argument out your imagination.
Truth be told, you don't even know what my ideology is-- you speak to me as if I was some large fuzzy socialist boogyman, but I'm not actually a socialist.
You said Wikipedia would fail due to some socialist leanings. I disagree.
make money for a select group of people,
Is it? I thought the ads were going to pay for Wikipedia's increased costs-- bandwidth, new servers, etc.
CDDB is similar in that CDDB took a community project and turned around to turn it into a commercial entity. That's different from this case, isn't it? As I understand this issue, a private company is taking Wikipedia and reselling it, and is giving some of the proceeds back to Wikipedia Foundation.
But that line of thinking would really freak the lefists out... :-)
As a left-winger, I totally agree with you. These theories definately have some Judeo-Christian origins.
I think it's fine to promote such ideas-- it can serve as a method of bringing Christians and the Left together-- that can only be a good thing.
Nobody said this:
"You mean that people who contribute their time to a project for free tend to have a collectivist view of the world? Shocking. SHOCKING I tell you."
or this:
"Imagine that. Wikipedia reflects the bias of the thousands of people who are willing to share information, help others and collaborate on large projects together -- without any expectation of monetary payment (even if some wikipedians expect plenty of ego boosting)-- of course it has a socialist bias."
Neither of us said or implied anything like the only people who care enough about anything to do it without hope of monetary reward are liberals. Our statements contain phrases like "tend to have" and "bias", which have powerful, magical meanings.
Plenty non-liberals care enough to volunteer for their interests.
But you know that. You're just spreading misinformation. How does that straw taste?
I'm claiming that there are non-liberals who care about the world... and you claim I'm imagining things?
No. You misunderstand. Here's what you just said:
My point was that the whole allegation that "the only people who care enough about anything to do it without hope of monetary reward are liberals"
Nobody here made that allegation, and nobody said that that liberals are the only people who care. You pulled this out of thin air, and you keep repeating this argument-- I think it's called a straw man argument.
Perhaps you're confusing "things that good people do" with an intelligent philosophy of government.
;)
I'm not talking about governments, or any organized movement at all. Everytime someone mentions the word socialism, a dozen people start screaming about the boogyman, conspiracies, failed governments, etc. The word "socialist" is a 4-letter word.
I'm just talking about parts of an ideology-- the vast majority of Wikipedians aren't big-S card carrying Socialists, but they are more likely to believe in some ideals which exist in socialist (and non-socialist) theory-- collective control over a shared resource, cooperation & collaboration, etc. The parent commenter was saying that these ideas "won't work" and will cause Wikipedia too "implode"-- I don't agree.
I agree with you that Wikipedia is not coersive-- but it can be a propoganda tool
That's the agenda of one organization. It is not "the entire socialist agenda". In addition, not everyone who believes in some socialist principals believes in an organized socialist movement, such as that promoted by the Democratic Socialists of America.
Yes it's against the rules. It's called "illegal interference". You can't purposely trip the other players either, and you can't tackle in basketball, etc.
My point was that the whole allegation that "the only people who care enough about anything to do it without hope of monetary reward are liberals" is false.
Yeah, but my point is that you're imagining things. Really, I can't tell if you're statements are merely the result of a misunderstanding, or if you are deliberately trying to spread misinformation and confusion for kicks. Who said that these people are all liberals? Nobody...
In fact, I really appreciate any non-liberals on Wikipedia. The documents can be really well written, and really help me to understand some of the non-Liberal and anti-Liberal views.
Of course, there are plenty of right-wingers (and left-wingers) who just like to spread disinformation. Rush Limbaugh doesn't actually believe most of the stupid shit he says, he's just malicious.
It can't be that there are people who care but realize socialist ideas don't work
Really? None of them? Things like sharing and collaboration don't work? Wikipedia is a failure? Are you perhaps confusing the word "socialism" with some right-wing scare tactic?
entire socialist agenda
There's a socialist agenda? Fuck, I must have missed a meeting or something!!! Please tell me what this socialist agenda encompases! Is this different then the Left-wing controlled media? I don't want to miss out!
Seriously, where do you find people like "EnronHaliburton2004"
People only need to look for the frothing mouth of some crazy right winger. I'm there to help him understand the difference between hype and reality. But again, sometimes I oversleep and miss the meetings. Sorry...