It actually reminds me more of that ST:TNG episode with Yuta. They're able to take a picture with someone's face half-blocked out by scenery and other people. They're able to reconstruct the rest of the face based on the patterns that are there.
How about no ticket pre-sales at all? You show up at the door, buy a ticket, and immediately enter the venue. If you're buying tickets for a group of friends, they need to be with you.
If the venue needs to bump up the ticket price by 5% to make up for the present value they won't be getting with a pre-sale, fine. Better than then 250% scumbag markup that currently exists.
Every business I've ever worked for has had that one dusty 8086 off in a corner. It would run a single batch file every few hours. No one would touch it, because no one knew what it did-- just that whatever it did do was mission critical.
Thus, the US government should just consolidate everything down to a single batch program run by a 8086. I'm sure there's a spare closet in the White House or something they can use as a server room.
Additionally I'd argue it's none of the school's fucking business what candy OR illegal drugs the student was taking when he was not at school.
Agreed, but...
Let me preface this with "I personally think what the school board did was bloody wrong", and also with "parents should be taking responsibility for their kids' actions".
I can see how a system like this can get approved, put in place, and have the vast majority of the stakeholders agree that it's a good idea-- including the parents.
There's a perfect storm brewing in the administration side of schools these days. School boards are scared shitless of lawsuits. They're absolutely terrified of them, and will do anything, literally anything, to avoid them. Parents know this, and will drop a threat of a LS on absolutely anything they feel their child deserves.
Again, I know _you_ wouldn't, reader. Hopefully that commendable attitude remains when it's your kid in the crosshairs. But that's neither here nor there-- the fact remains there are a significant number of parents who will.
My fiance is a high-school teacher. In recent years, teachers have been expected to be responsible for the safety and well-being of their students even outside of the school setting. At a bar, and see your 16 year old student having a drink? You need to report that, or you will be held professionally liable for anything that may happen to that student.
Why liable? Because if anything does happen to Tipsy McStudent-- and Mr. and Mrs. McStudent find out that a teacher saw it-- well, dammnit, why wasn't someone looking out to make sure nothing bad happens to their kid? LAWSUIT!
It used to be parents would just threaten lawsuits when their student was failing (because it isn't the kids' fault...). Not anymore.
The current rumblings going through the administration is to make it a teacher's responsibility to patrol student's online activities, to prevent cyberbullying. Why? Because someone's kid was bullied online (outside of school, not using school equipment...), and invoked the magic word: "Lawsuit!"
And thus goes the perfect storm. Each time the administration folds to the parents, the harder the parents push, and the easier it is to get the administration to fold.
It's just a short leap of (diseased) logic from "You should have teachers protecting my kid on their facebook" to "Teachers should protect my child at all times, so nothing bad ever happens to them-- or I'll sue you."
And it becomes a short leap of (again, diseased) logic from "We need our teachers to watch the students" to "And now here's the tools to do it."
The rest is Pennsylvania.
As egregious as the administration's behaviour is in the PA case, the far worse crime is letting it get to this point. The only way out of this is for school boards everywhere to stand up to bullying parents (and that's what they are). Parent has an unreasonable demand? No, we will not do that. Parent threatens an lawsuit. BRING IT ON, MOTHERFUCKER! If any of them actually follow through, drag them through the system and make them make a fool of themselves in public record. Get a history of not taking shit, and getting favorable precedence on your side.
Parents (the good ones, Slashdot, the good ones), do your part, too. Join the PTA. Identify the troublesome parents. Do what it takes to get them to sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up. Vote them out of power. Publicly berate them for putting their child's entitlement ahead of everyone else's education. Start a class-action lawsuit against them for impeding everyone else's well being.
At your next parent teacher meeting, spend five minutes and as your kid's teacher about some of the ridiculous policies their expected to enforce.
Completely different market. With a computer game, the software is the product, it can be (illegally) copied very cheaply so the manufacturers need to find more creative ways to sustain their business models. With a car, the car is the product, and the software is just a component of it. And the car can't be copied cheaply so the existing business models work just fine.
And, to boot, every car manufacture supports and participates in the second-hand market. You can buy a used GM directly from a GM dealer. They will take trade-ins for new cars. Yes, there are independent second-hand dealers, but rather than stamping them out, the car companies compete with them. All the "official" dealers will sell their cars with added value (real or perceived) like extended warranties, "higher-quality" used cars, etc, etc.
If I could go to the Sony Store and buy a used copy of a PS3 game for a price comparable to EB/Gamestop, I would. (Well, for the sake of argument, I would...)
Every ATM has a camera built into it. Just show the camera your deposit before shoving it in. Sure, you could pull a switcheroo between the camera and the slot, but that-- combined with a good history with the bank-- should help. Oh, yeah, and not being a dick to the teller. If you storm in with a "your fucking machine stole my money!", well, what would you expect in return?
The salient quote from the judge - "the law recognises no positive obligation on any person to protect the copyright of another".
It's almost like the judge-- reads? {mindreel}
"There has grown in the minds of certain groups in this country the idea that just because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with guaranteeing such a profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary to public interest. This strange doctrine is supported by neither statute or common law. Neither corporations or individuals have the right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back."
Being handed over by a dying man? Well, that's even better. He's got nothing to lose anymore, so OBVIOUSLY releasing it before now would have brought the rage of the Illuminati down on him!
Underestimating the Illuminati's reach was the first mistake. Dying was the second.
Why is this guy living with his mom if he's such a great and skilled hacker?
Allow me to present a scenerio:
Super elite Chinese Hacker 1: Whoa, taking some heat from that Google thing. We need to lay low a bit.
Super elite Chinese Hacker 2: Or, look at this. The NYT is looking to interview a hacker to do an expose.
Super elite Chinese Hacker 1: How'd you find that out?
Super elite Chinese Hacker 2: We _are_ Super Elite Chinese Hackers, you know. It even says so in bold to the left.
Super elite Chinese Hacker 1: Shouldn't that be on top, since we're Chinese? And why are we speaking English?
Super elite Chinese Hacker 2: It's Slashdot. Everything's American. Look, are you going to argue about how I decorate the fourth wall, or do you want to hear my plan? Does that ignorant snot of a *ahem* programmer still work at your Uncle's factory?
Super elite Chinese Hacker 1: Cousin Shitface? Yes. Why?
Super elite Chinese Hacker 2: Invite him over for dinner in about a week, and tell him to bring his VB. I'll make sure the NYT are here to see just how scared they should be of 'Chinese hackers'
Later...
Tech-Illiterate American In Charge of CyberSecurity Funding: Whoa, that guy's really stupid. I guess we don't have to worry about the Chinese. Call off the e-hounds!
Super elite Chinese Hacker 2, Eavesdropping via hacked soundcard: Excellent.
If it's good, but needs a push, why not submit it for the Good Code Grant?
From the FAQ:
The Alliance for Code Excellence wants to help in its own small way. The $500 Good Code Grant could provide the one small spark that might ignite some bright idea gnawing at some developer somewhere. That idea, once enabled, could shine the light of code excellence around the worldwide code base.
Tell us about your current free and open source project or your idea for a new free and open source project. Be sure to describe how your idea or project decreases the propagation of bad code as it increases the excellence of the worldwide code base. Finally, let us know how you think that $500 grant will help your project blossom as it aligns with our vision for the future.
I've said it before, and I'll continue to say it - spam is an economic problem. Until something is done to address the money that spammers make, they will continue to find ways around these "effectively perfect" "discoveries"
Start a spam campaign of your own. Advertise free samples of m3dz. Only stupid people who buy from spam will be stupid enough to buy from your spam. Send arsenic pills.
Customer base for spammers will quickly approach 0. The gene pool will get a needed dash of chlorine.
There's already a near-perfect method for spam filter: Hire someone to read your email. If it's spam, they delete it. If it isn't, they pass it on to you to read.
For example, if you look at the themes on the exchange site for e17, a lot of these not what you'd call an every day sort of theme but appeal to a particular aesthetic
There's an important difference: layout familiarity.
Chances are anyone who uses a program enough to want to theme it is already familiar with all the control they will use. They've already associated "upper corner, second button from the left" with the "home" button. They can change the appearance of the button, because they don't rely on the visual representation for context anymore. (And if they did, there will be just a minor learning curve)
Plunking a new user in front of the themed version of the program (versus a "simplified UI" version) is different. They have to learn all the buttons from scratch, because they don't see the familiar, simple "home" button anymore. They'll just see the animated Steam-Blenching Blundurbuss-Widget.
I do wonder, though, if you took someone intimately familiar with (for example) steampunk, and dumped them in front of a steam-punk theme program, if they'd have an easier time learning than a simplified theme? After all, the underlying hypothesis here is that users will be less confused by easy-to-grok graphical representations. Cultural (or even sub-cultural) references might be easier to understand (at least for that culture)
Slashdot Mirror
[geek mode]
It actually reminds me more of that ST:TNG episode with Yuta. They're able to take a picture with someone's face half-blocked out by scenery and other people. They're able to reconstruct the rest of the face based on the patterns that are there.
How about no ticket pre-sales at all? You show up at the door, buy a ticket, and immediately enter the venue. If you're buying tickets for a group of friends, they need to be with you.
If the venue needs to bump up the ticket price by 5% to make up for the present value they won't be getting with a pre-sale, fine. Better than then 250% scumbag markup that currently exists.
Every business I've ever worked for has had that one dusty 8086 off in a corner. It would run a single batch file every few hours. No one would touch it, because no one knew what it did-- just that whatever it did do was mission critical.
Thus, the US government should just consolidate everything down to a single batch program run by a 8086. I'm sure there's a spare closet in the White House or something they can use as a server room.
[[ Interesting commentary waiting on permission from CmdrTaco, FTWinston, and the Italian Government ]]
His title? "Data Protection Supervisor"? Give me a break. Unless you're a Czar, you aren't qualified to weigh in on these things.
Agreed, but...
Let me preface this with "I personally think what the school board did was bloody wrong", and also with "parents should be taking responsibility for their kids' actions".
I can see how a system like this can get approved, put in place, and have the vast majority of the stakeholders agree that it's a good idea-- including the parents.
There's a perfect storm brewing in the administration side of schools these days. School boards are scared shitless of lawsuits. They're absolutely terrified of them, and will do anything, literally anything, to avoid them. Parents know this, and will drop a threat of a LS on absolutely anything they feel their child deserves.
Again, I know _you_ wouldn't, reader. Hopefully that commendable attitude remains when it's your kid in the crosshairs. But that's neither here nor there-- the fact remains there are a significant number of parents who will.
My fiance is a high-school teacher. In recent years, teachers have been expected to be responsible for the safety and well-being of their students even outside of the school setting. At a bar, and see your 16 year old student having a drink? You need to report that, or you will be held professionally liable for anything that may happen to that student.
Why liable? Because if anything does happen to Tipsy McStudent-- and Mr. and Mrs. McStudent find out that a teacher saw it-- well, dammnit, why wasn't someone looking out to make sure nothing bad happens to their kid? LAWSUIT!
It used to be parents would just threaten lawsuits when their student was failing (because it isn't the kids' fault...). Not anymore.
The current rumblings going through the administration is to make it a teacher's responsibility to patrol student's online activities, to prevent cyberbullying. Why? Because someone's kid was bullied online (outside of school, not using school equipment...), and invoked the magic word: "Lawsuit!"
And thus goes the perfect storm. Each time the administration folds to the parents, the harder the parents push, and the easier it is to get the administration to fold.
It's just a short leap of (diseased) logic from "You should have teachers protecting my kid on their facebook" to "Teachers should protect my child at all times, so nothing bad ever happens to them-- or I'll sue you."
And it becomes a short leap of (again, diseased) logic from "We need our teachers to watch the students" to "And now here's the tools to do it."
The rest is Pennsylvania.
As egregious as the administration's behaviour is in the PA case, the far worse crime is letting it get to this point. The only way out of this is for school boards everywhere to stand up to bullying parents (and that's what they are). Parent has an unreasonable demand? No, we will not do that. Parent threatens an lawsuit. BRING IT ON, MOTHERFUCKER! If any of them actually follow through, drag them through the system and make them make a fool of themselves in public record. Get a history of not taking shit, and getting favorable precedence on your side.
Parents (the good ones, Slashdot, the good ones), do your part, too. Join the PTA. Identify the troublesome parents. Do what it takes to get them to sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up. Vote them out of power. Publicly berate them for putting their child's entitlement ahead of everyone else's education. Start a class-action lawsuit against them for impeding everyone else's well being.
At your next parent teacher meeting, spend five minutes and as your kid's teacher about some of the ridiculous policies their expected to enforce.
So many buzzwords. What's wrong with just putting up a Geocities page like everyone else?
And, to boot, every car manufacture supports and participates in the second-hand market. You can buy a used GM directly from a GM dealer. They will take trade-ins for new cars. Yes, there are independent second-hand dealers, but rather than stamping them out, the car companies compete with them. All the "official" dealers will sell their cars with added value (real or perceived) like extended warranties, "higher-quality" used cars, etc, etc.
If I could go to the Sony Store and buy a used copy of a PS3 game for a price comparable to EB/Gamestop, I would. (Well, for the sake of argument, I would...)
@NRA tweets "Bob Smith at 142 Flower St., Green Park, MI is not at home. Visit for burglar-shaped target practice."
Homestarrunner.com. Or homestarrunner.org (it's Dot Com!)
PORSCHE DID 911!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He already did that. It was called Star Wars: Clone Wars (no, not that one).
It was absolutely awesome.
Every ATM has a camera built into it. Just show the camera your deposit before shoving it in. Sure, you could pull a switcheroo between the camera and the slot, but that-- combined with a good history with the bank-- should help. Oh, yeah, and not being a dick to the teller. If you storm in with a "your fucking machine stole my money!", well, what would you expect in return?
Excellent news. The Council of Elders will let the Internet know next time they go to Big Ben.
It's almost like the judge-- reads? {mindreel}
"There has grown in the minds of certain groups in this country the idea that just because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with guaranteeing such a profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary to public interest. This strange doctrine is supported by neither statute or common law. Neither corporations or individuals have the right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back."
- Heinlein, Life Line, 1939
Nope, we need to be fully afraid that it will destroy half the world. Hopefully the other half.
Underestimating the Illuminati's reach was the first mistake. Dying was the second.
(Coming next summer from Fox...)
Allow me to present a scenerio:
Super elite Chinese Hacker 1: Whoa, taking some heat from that Google thing. We need to lay low a bit.
Super elite Chinese Hacker 2: Or, look at this. The NYT is looking to interview a hacker to do an expose.
Super elite Chinese Hacker 1: How'd you find that out?
Super elite Chinese Hacker 2: We _are_ Super Elite Chinese Hackers, you know. It even says so in bold to the left.
Super elite Chinese Hacker 1: Shouldn't that be on top, since we're Chinese? And why are we speaking English?
Super elite Chinese Hacker 2: It's Slashdot. Everything's American. Look, are you going to argue about how I decorate the fourth wall, or do you want to hear my plan? Does that ignorant snot of a *ahem* programmer still work at your Uncle's factory?
Super elite Chinese Hacker 1: Cousin Shitface? Yes. Why?
Super elite Chinese Hacker 2: Invite him over for dinner in about a week, and tell him to bring his VB. I'll make sure the NYT are here to see just how scared they should be of 'Chinese hackers'
Later...
Tech-Illiterate American In Charge of CyberSecurity Funding: Whoa, that guy's really stupid. I guess we don't have to worry about the Chinese. Call off the e-hounds!
Super elite Chinese Hacker 2, Eavesdropping via hacked soundcard: Excellent.
So... don't find a LAN war in Asia?
From the FAQ:
Start a spam campaign of your own. Advertise free samples of m3dz. Only stupid people who buy from spam will be stupid enough to buy from your spam. Send arsenic pills.
Customer base for spammers will quickly approach 0. The gene pool will get a needed dash of chlorine.
There's already a near-perfect method for spam filter: Hire someone to read your email. If it's spam, they delete it. If it isn't, they pass it on to you to read.
There's an important difference: layout familiarity.
Chances are anyone who uses a program enough to want to theme it is already familiar with all the control they will use. They've already associated "upper corner, second button from the left" with the "home" button. They can change the appearance of the button, because they don't rely on the visual representation for context anymore. (And if they did, there will be just a minor learning curve)
Plunking a new user in front of the themed version of the program (versus a "simplified UI" version) is different. They have to learn all the buttons from scratch, because they don't see the familiar, simple "home" button anymore. They'll just see the animated Steam-Blenching Blundurbuss-Widget.
I do wonder, though, if you took someone intimately familiar with (for example) steampunk, and dumped them in front of a steam-punk theme program, if they'd have an easier time learning than a simplified theme? After all, the underlying hypothesis here is that users will be less confused by easy-to-grok graphical representations. Cultural (or even sub-cultural) references might be easier to understand (at least for that culture)
That'd be awesome! I can picture it now:
Except from Scene XXVI, after Bond disposes of villain's Red Matter
Daniel Craig-Bond: How did you persuade M to keep your secret?
Future/Alternate Uncanny Connery-Bond: I inferred that universe-ending paradoxes would ensue should she break her promise
Daniel Craig-Bond: You lied.
F/AU Connery-Bond: I implied.
It's expensive to send up lots of fully built people. It's better to send up a couple fully built humans of opposite genders...