Communication by social networking has advantages
on
Kids Say Email is Dead
·
· Score: 1
Facebook is frequently more reliable for communication among younger people. At work you can always send something to name@business.net, and you know that it will show up at the machine of the recipient who likely has an email client open constantly. Teenagers and college students tend to change email addresses more frequently; instead of having to maintain an updated contact list (which I'd have to somehow share between my different imap/webmail accounts), a Facebook message requires only a lookup by name from my friends list. Also, when your message recipients have a tendancy to hop around public terminals where they don't have email apps set up, it's good to be able to send to a web-accessible system which is checked most often, the Facebook.
I went to college to get an education, not training.
Amen. I am astonished by the general public which advocates liberal arts education for general self-betterment, while condoning learning in computer science only if it "gets you a job." I learn CS theory and practice software development because I love it. The side-effect that it keeps me employed is an added bonus. I am not earning my degree as a permit to enter the workforce. I study computer science because I want to.
This is why I find these Slashdot discussions on education amusing; so many commenters try to make statements as to "what universities should teach." A university is a seller which should pander only to its clients - the students attending it. As such, the only thing that should be taught is what the students want to learn.
My question is WHY they would need or want to specifically restrict Bittorrent traffic. If the high volume is the concern, why not implement some generic controls to allow higher-speed burst traffic (things like website downloads), while gradually throttling-down high-bandwidth users (which would naturally include things like Bittorrent)? This generally just seems like it would be an effective policy.
Also consider who can afford to drink regularly (and afford healthcare)... Or perhaps the simple confound that people who drink moderately tend to also take other things in moderation (cholesterol, smoking, etc.)
My guess is that it was an attempt on the part of law enforcement to come out of the situation looking a bit less dumb... "He wasn't a terrorist, but we did catch a pedophile/hatemongerer."
We do not have to choose between enjoying life or trying to preserve it. It IS possible, and wise, to spend some of our energy looking to keeping the human race alive in the future, while simultaneously not wasting our own lives today.
You've hit the nail on the head. As long as a blurry nipple can bump a game up to an M rating, there's no way I can consider taking ESRB ratings seriously.
When a game publisher is not legally allowed to sell its product to someone who wishes to purchase it (say, an M-rated game to a 15-year-old), that is censorship. It is a legitimate commercial transaction which is unconstitutionally blocked by government interference.
In other news, the children's movie Bambi is being re-rated to R. When questioned about the decision, officials have stated it is because "Bambi has parents, and the only way parents can have children is through sex. The implication that parents at one point engaged in sexual relations is unacceptable for our youth."
Well, it does allow me to accomplish my favorite Oblivion hobby: Murdering people in their own homes, leaving them disrobed in sexual positions, covering their bodies with fruit, and adding their housekeys to my collection.
But I guess I'd be doing the serial-killer thing regardless of any potential to remove clothing...
Thus leads the way to a bold new scientific experiment: Many different prayer groups, each praying to a different god, and let the gods compete as to who can save the most heart patients! That will settle it once at for all... a good old-fashioned pray-off.
Ever consider that he just encourages his children to seek out better products (such as portable music players), rather than the one that got popular due to heavy marketing?
Re:Backups shouldn't be fair use.
on
Region-free PS3
·
· Score: 1
Back when it was easy to have your electronic media easily destroyed at no fault to you, a backup exemption made sense. We no longer live in the age of VCRs eating tapes
And when your children render a disc unreadable just by mishandling it? Cd/dvd is still a fairly easy medium to destroy, and it doesn't require any exceptional means.
What is it about cell phones that he thinks will be innately better than other machines? I think the majority of us don't realize that the "cheap" phones we carry around are generally several-hundred-dollar devices that we've paid for through inflated service costs.
Some sort of wireless infrastructure, yes. But phones? How about just taking that $100 laptop and slapping an RF transmitter on it?
My school, being one of those institutions with "Technology" in its title, requires computer ownership. We depend heavily on email for communication. My calculus textbook is online, because the professor is still in the process of writing it; the book isn't just cheaper than a published book - the published book doesn't exist yet.
That being said, requiring laptops is unnecessary. I can't imagine what an instructor would do in lecture every day that would require it. Oh yeah, ISU wants to "support learner-centered, knowledge-centered, assessment-centered and community-centered learning environments." Um... I guess that = portable computing, somehow.
You're missing out on the transitive nature of language if you think that calling someone a "fag" is bigotry. Such words, for better or worse, have passed into common vocabulary - and they no longer retain their original literal meanings. "Idiot" is medical term referring to someone with a low IQ, but that is scarcely what it means today; when someone uses that as an insult, do you criticize them for insulting the mentally handicapped?
If you shoot someone with a rocket launcher, and the competitor you just pwned calls you a gay nigger - why in the world would you think that he has the literal meanings in mind? You have done nothing to remotely indicate your sexuality or ethnicity; clearly, this is just a demonstration of how words lose their old meanings and turn into generic insults.
I'm tired of seeing people shoot down analogies just because they're analogies, while the actual point of the statement goes right over your head because you just didn't bother thinking about it.
Someone stated that presence of data in one's machine does not imply that the computer owner is responsible for them being there, because hackers can place data onto other's machines. I mentioned a similar situation in meatspace to demonstrate that the issue is not unique to cyberspace. There IS a similarity between the two worlds. In legal investigations today, you can't assume that possession implies responsibility 100% of the time; the same goes for data on a machine. In both situations, it requires some critical analysis to determine what can really be discerned from evidence, and you can't make sweeping generalizations.
You can't just dismiss the similaries between two things because of their differences. Especially when the analogy is just being used to describe an idea, not to prove it.
Slashdot Mirror
Facebook is frequently more reliable for communication among younger people. At work you can always send something to name@business.net, and you know that it will show up at the machine of the recipient who likely has an email client open constantly. Teenagers and college students tend to change email addresses more frequently; instead of having to maintain an updated contact list (which I'd have to somehow share between my different imap/webmail accounts), a Facebook message requires only a lookup by name from my friends list. Also, when your message recipients have a tendancy to hop around public terminals where they don't have email apps set up, it's good to be able to send to a web-accessible system which is checked most often, the Facebook.
"PC LOAD METAL"? What the fuck does that mean?
The key is... they've finally replaced all their old tubes with a big dump truck.
Amen. I am astonished by the general public which advocates liberal arts education for general self-betterment, while condoning learning in computer science only if it "gets you a job." I learn CS theory and practice software development because I love it. The side-effect that it keeps me employed is an added bonus. I am not earning my degree as a permit to enter the workforce. I study computer science because I want to.
This is why I find these Slashdot discussions on education amusing; so many commenters try to make statements as to "what universities should teach." A university is a seller which should pander only to its clients - the students attending it. As such, the only thing that should be taught is what the students want to learn.
My question is WHY they would need or want to specifically restrict Bittorrent traffic. If the high volume is the concern, why not implement some generic controls to allow higher-speed burst traffic (things like website downloads), while gradually throttling-down high-bandwidth users (which would naturally include things like Bittorrent)? This generally just seems like it would be an effective policy.
Also consider who can afford to drink regularly (and afford healthcare)... Or perhaps the simple confound that people who drink moderately tend to also take other things in moderation (cholesterol, smoking, etc.)
My guess is that it was an attempt on the part of law enforcement to come out of the situation looking a bit less dumb... "He wasn't a terrorist, but we did catch a pedophile/hatemongerer."
Yep... my friends were definitely using proxies to giggle at pictures of boobies in class some 7 years ago. Not new AT ALL.
This is what we call the "false choice" fallacy.
We do not have to choose between enjoying life or trying to preserve it. It IS possible, and wise, to spend some of our energy looking to keeping the human race alive in the future, while simultaneously not wasting our own lives today.
The post that simply states an opinion against breeding is modded flamebait, and the response that ridicules it is +5 insightful...
Are all naive religious points of view really flamebait? Some people actually believe them.
You've hit the nail on the head. As long as a blurry nipple can bump a game up to an M rating, there's no way I can consider taking ESRB ratings seriously.
When a game publisher is not legally allowed to sell its product to someone who wishes to purchase it (say, an M-rated game to a 15-year-old), that is censorship. It is a legitimate commercial transaction which is unconstitutionally blocked by government interference.
In other news, the children's movie Bambi is being re-rated to R. When questioned about the decision, officials have stated it is because "Bambi has parents, and the only way parents can have children is through sex. The implication that parents at one point engaged in sexual relations is unacceptable for our youth."
Well, it does allow me to accomplish my favorite Oblivion hobby: Murdering people in their own homes, leaving them disrobed in sexual positions, covering their bodies with fruit, and adding their housekeys to my collection.
But I guess I'd be doing the serial-killer thing regardless of any potential to remove clothing...
Thus leads the way to a bold new scientific experiment: Many different prayer groups, each praying to a different god, and let the gods compete as to who can save the most heart patients! That will settle it once at for all... a good old-fashioned pray-off.
Snapper. Is. Awesome.
Ever consider that he just encourages his children to seek out better products (such as portable music players), rather than the one that got popular due to heavy marketing?
What is it about cell phones that he thinks will be innately better than other machines? I think the majority of us don't realize that the "cheap" phones we carry around are generally several-hundred-dollar devices that we've paid for through inflated service costs.
Some sort of wireless infrastructure, yes. But phones? How about just taking that $100 laptop and slapping an RF transmitter on it?
My school, being one of those institutions with "Technology" in its title, requires computer ownership. We depend heavily on email for communication. My calculus textbook is online, because the professor is still in the process of writing it; the book isn't just cheaper than a published book - the published book doesn't exist yet.
That being said, requiring laptops is unnecessary. I can't imagine what an instructor would do in lecture every day that would require it. Oh yeah, ISU wants to "support learner-centered, knowledge-centered, assessment-centered and community-centered learning environments." Um... I guess that = portable computing, somehow.
You're missing out on the transitive nature of language if you think that calling someone a "fag" is bigotry. Such words, for better or worse, have passed into common vocabulary - and they no longer retain their original literal meanings. "Idiot" is medical term referring to someone with a low IQ, but that is scarcely what it means today; when someone uses that as an insult, do you criticize them for insulting the mentally handicapped?
If you shoot someone with a rocket launcher, and the competitor you just pwned calls you a gay nigger - why in the world would you think that he has the literal meanings in mind? You have done nothing to remotely indicate your sexuality or ethnicity; clearly, this is just a demonstration of how words lose their old meanings and turn into generic insults.
I'm tired of seeing people shoot down analogies just because they're analogies, while the actual point of the statement goes right over your head because you just didn't bother thinking about it.
Someone stated that presence of data in one's machine does not imply that the computer owner is responsible for them being there, because hackers can place data onto other's machines. I mentioned a similar situation in meatspace to demonstrate that the issue is not unique to cyberspace. There IS a similarity between the two worlds. In legal investigations today, you can't assume that possession implies responsibility 100% of the time; the same goes for data on a machine. In both situations, it requires some critical analysis to determine what can really be discerned from evidence, and you can't make sweeping generalizations.
You can't just dismiss the similaries between two things because of their differences. Especially when the analogy is just being used to describe an idea, not to prove it.