recording public spaces is similar to littering the motorway with speed cameras...
it's not really similar at all. The road cameras are usually for safety rather than surveillance. And you need to be licensed and follow strict laws if you want the privilege to drive. Walking down the street only requires legs, and doesn't put you in control of a lethal chunk of metal. The cameras on the roads have been used to enforce safety rules (unlike the ones on the street), and I haven't heard anything about them being used for untoward surveillance.
If we do live in a democroacy then the people who put the survalence systems in were elected officials who we have decided are compenant to make improtant decisions.
Not really. All this stuff "attempts" to do is what nature gave us naturally.* The only thing that we have difficulty with is memory, and some people do a much better job, than others.
That doesn't mean it's either legal or ethical. It's illegal to stalk people, for example. Yes, much of this stuff could be done without digital technology. But it was never considered a good thing back then, either.
Exactly why should humans go around spying on each other?
But now it is bad, bad technology, go sit in the corner bad.
The technology is not good or bad. It can be used for good or bad things. Does anyone on Slashdot think that technology is a universally good thing? Not sure where you get that idea, because bad technology gets regularly dissed on Slashdot.
But they aren't physically covering features. It's basically a joke or an artistic statement, depending on how you look at it. They are taking footage from their cameras with the face revealed, and digitally covering the faces with the black stripe. It's a philosophical comment, not a technological one.
Who are you to say what is important information vs. what's trivial, for anyone else?
That's not what the other poster was talking about. No matter how important it is to some people, journalling about your daily activities is called "writing a diary."
Weblog has a specific meaning - it's a diary, but it's a diary of web-surfing. Like a list of interesting links and websites you visited that day, with a brief description (or sometimes just a list of links.)
Today, people use blogs to describe diaries, news sites and discussion boards. We already had perfectly good terms for those things - and they were descriptive, useful, and didn't sound ugly. Of what use is it to replace this with a generic term? So now, when someone says "blog" it doesn't mean anything - so you don't know what to expect when you vist a "blog."
Some people say this is meaningless semantics. I agree that it is semantics, but not meaningless. This type of language use is making people more stupid and ignorant, and less capable of communicating meaningfully.
That should read "news discussion board" - not "new discussion board." Although "news/discussion/special interest" might be a more complete description.
Slashdot isn't a blog. It's a new discussion board. What woluld be perhaps known in the past as a "BBS." In fact, many of the sites that are labeled "blogs" today don't actually resemble blogs (a personal diary of your web surfing activities).
As far as I know, pajamas uses serious political blogs rather than "daily diary" sorts of things.
Actually, the people they are paying appear to be fraudulent hacks, not serious writers or commentators. I have also heard allegations that they are claiming other blogs as "their members" who are not associated in any way, and do not wish to be associated with pajamas media. They are claiming non-member blogs as their own as a way of trying to gain credibility and seriousness. Pajamas media reminds me of the people who abuse Wikipedia.
With $105 billion in this type of crime in 2005, I'm glad the Department of Homeland Security has had their budget cut to $16 million. That should stop those crooks!
Given the lack of competence of DHS, eliminating their funding can only be a good thing. They only seem to make things worse, and haven't really shown any evidence of being effective at doing anything other that waste money and erode civil liberties.
Well, it's supposed to be. Obviously the designers failed at their job.
There have been plenty of campaigns that have had the effect over the years. The United Colors of Benetton, or Vogue's fashion photography and associated advertising. TIME Magazine, National Geographic, etc. Apple's print and outdoor advertising.
So how is it desktop publishing? The "desktop" refers to the GUI desktop as well as the physical desktop. Usually command-line interfaces are not called desktops. And of what use is a desktop publishing application that doesn't allow you to see your work before you print it?
The term has always been associated with the WYSIWYG interface that made it practical.
Somehow I doubt this keeps Bill Gates up at night.
New Zealand has a ton of very smart math and computing people for its size. Regardless of size, it is still the idea that there are Western countries, developed and wealthy who choose not to use Windows. And in fact, that if an entire modern country can live without Windows, why should anyone else need it?
Be thankful it does not require a _region-coded_ floppy drive!!!
Didn't they have those on Amiga floppy drives? I swear, once I had this boot block that must have been from Uzbekistan. Then there was this one floppy where the the corrupt data looked like a map of Finland. Linus, was that you writing Amiga viruses back in the day?
There are a number of acronyms that can be just as "sexy" as marketdroid made-up name. Think MP3, PC or IBM.
The difference is that those describe the actual thing you're getting, (MPEG layer 3 file, Personal Computer, International Business Machines) while RSS describes a protocol. You don't want to 'get an RSS' - you want to get the news, or the latest podcast. The protocol is totally irrelevant. People don't say "I'm using the TC/IP networks" they say "I'm browsing the web." they don't say "I'm looking for HTML files" they say they are looking for articles or blogs or whatever.
It really is astounding how bad geeks are at naming things. How many more acronyms do we want in life, anyway? I don't even like the "sexy" ones you describe, and they are better than 99% of the acronyms out there.
MP3 is a little off in that it describes a file format, but at least it is not just a protocol - and using the term was useful to describe compatibility back in the days when an MP3 was really an MP3. Now the term is rather obsolete as a general term for music. Which is another problem with "RSS" - you have to update the term if the technology changed. When the HTML specification changes or becomes XML, we don't have to change the word "web" to describe what the new specification does.
Instead, I suspect that only 4 percent of the public uses RSS because those 4 percent are exactly what they sound like -- a small and inconsequential minority.
You misread the article. It said only 4% knowingly use it. So there may be many more who are using RSS, but do not know what it is. They just think "newsreader" or something.
People don't like information to be pushed at them. They want to retrieve (pull) it themselves.
Do you have any evidence to back that up? It's the opposite of my experience working in the media. Who are the people you are talking about, and how did you survey them?
I realize this doesn't sound like much of a change, but for many less sophisticated internet users, the concept of having the news come to you rather than having to go to the news is not familiar.
That doesn't make a lot of sense, because before the internet, the news always came to you. You get the newspaper delivered to the door, you switch on broadcast TV. It has always been "push." So why would normal users be more comfortable looking for news, when they didn't used to?
In the meantime, geeks have been used to the hassles of searching for and surfing multiple information sources that are hard to find. So maybe you have it backwards?
But just about every blog (well every one taken seriously) does give acccreditation. I'm not a big fan of blogs myself, but don't try to make stuff up. The place where blogs do a better job than many mainstream outlets is in editorial and opinion writing. Which is nearly as important as the actual news gathering. Furthermore, some bloggers have out-investigated the "MSM" - such as the blackbox voting investigation into Diebold.
Same thing here. I use only a few RSS feeds and feel quite comfortable (/., kde, b92 news (from serbia), and that's it.).
So, the conclusion would be that high-end slashdot users don't have much use for podcasting and RSS. Which is the opposite to what the other person said - that it was mainly high end users trying it. So, if the high-end users don't use it, then where are the all the subscribers coming from?
are only targetting the high-end users of the Internet, and these are the users that only sign-up once, try it for a min or two, then dump it and move on to the next greatest thing.
That's just not true. Many ordinary users listen to their favourite radio shows via podcasting, regularly. They don't care what the technology is. I don't see why it is only "high end" users when you can just click on iTunes' podcast tab and choose what you want from the directory. Or if you are listening to broadcast radio, go to the radio station's website for the podcast after they hear it being mentioned on-air.
It's a feature, not a bug. HarperCollins should change their name to HyperCollins, and include a free sachet of insant coffee or methamphetamine with each book.
Slashdot Mirror
it's not really similar at all. The road cameras are usually for safety rather than surveillance. And you need to be licensed and follow strict laws if you want the privilege to drive. Walking down the street only requires legs, and doesn't put you in control of a lethal chunk of metal. The cameras on the roads have been used to enforce safety rules (unlike the ones on the street), and I haven't heard anything about them being used for untoward surveillance.
Maybe because that's where people run red lights?
What if we don't?
That doesn't mean it's either legal or ethical. It's illegal to stalk people, for example. Yes, much of this stuff could be done without digital technology. But it was never considered a good thing back then, either.
Exactly why should humans go around spying on each other?
The technology is not good or bad. It can be used for good or bad things. Does anyone on Slashdot think that technology is a universally good thing? Not sure where you get that idea, because bad technology gets regularly dissed on Slashdot.
But they aren't physically covering features. It's basically a joke or an artistic statement, depending on how you look at it. They are taking footage from their cameras with the face revealed, and digitally covering the faces with the black stripe. It's a philosophical comment, not a technological one.
That's not what the other poster was talking about. No matter how important it is to some people, journalling about your daily activities is called "writing a diary."
Weblog has a specific meaning - it's a diary, but it's a diary of web-surfing. Like a list of interesting links and websites you visited that day, with a brief description (or sometimes just a list of links.)
Today, people use blogs to describe diaries, news sites and discussion boards. We already had perfectly good terms for those things - and they were descriptive, useful, and didn't sound ugly. Of what use is it to replace this with a generic term? So now, when someone says "blog" it doesn't mean anything - so you don't know what to expect when you vist a "blog."
Some people say this is meaningless semantics. I agree that it is semantics, but not meaningless. This type of language use is making people more stupid and ignorant, and less capable of communicating meaningfully.
That should read "news discussion board" - not "new discussion board." Although "news/discussion/special interest" might be a more complete description.
Slashdot isn't a blog. It's a new discussion board. What woluld be perhaps known in the past as a "BBS." In fact, many of the sites that are labeled "blogs" today don't actually resemble blogs (a personal diary of your web surfing activities).
Actually, the people they are paying appear to be fraudulent hacks, not serious writers or commentators. I have also heard allegations that they are claiming other blogs as "their members" who are not associated in any way, and do not wish to be associated with pajamas media. They are claiming non-member blogs as their own as a way of trying to gain credibility and seriousness. Pajamas media reminds me of the people who abuse Wikipedia.
Given the lack of competence of DHS, eliminating their funding can only be a good thing. They only seem to make things worse, and haven't really shown any evidence of being effective at doing anything other that waste money and erode civil liberties.
Many supermarkets in Australia (Coles at least) seem to sell the Matrix for about AU$9.95, FYI.
Well, it's supposed to be. Obviously the designers failed at their job.
There have been plenty of campaigns that have had the effect over the years. The United Colors of Benetton, or Vogue's fashion photography and associated advertising. TIME Magazine, National Geographic, etc. Apple's print and outdoor advertising.
The term has always been associated with the WYSIWYG interface that made it practical.
New Zealand has a ton of very smart math and computing people for its size. Regardless of size, it is still the idea that there are Western countries, developed and wealthy who choose not to use Windows. And in fact, that if an entire modern country can live without Windows, why should anyone else need it?
Didn't they have those on Amiga floppy drives? I swear, once I had this boot block that must have been from Uzbekistan. Then there was this one floppy where the the corrupt data looked like a map of Finland. Linus, was that you writing Amiga viruses back in the day?
The difference is that those describe the actual thing you're getting, (MPEG layer 3 file, Personal Computer, International Business Machines) while RSS describes a protocol. You don't want to 'get an RSS' - you want to get the news, or the latest podcast. The protocol is totally irrelevant. People don't say "I'm using the TC/IP networks" they say "I'm browsing the web." they don't say "I'm looking for HTML files" they say they are looking for articles or blogs or whatever.
It really is astounding how bad geeks are at naming things. How many more acronyms do we want in life, anyway? I don't even like the "sexy" ones you describe, and they are better than 99% of the acronyms out there.
MP3 is a little off in that it describes a file format, but at least it is not just a protocol - and using the term was useful to describe compatibility back in the days when an MP3 was really an MP3. Now the term is rather obsolete as a general term for music. Which is another problem with "RSS" - you have to update the term if the technology changed. When the HTML specification changes or becomes XML, we don't have to change the word "web" to describe what the new specification does.
You misread the article. It said only 4% knowingly use it. So there may be many more who are using RSS, but do not know what it is. They just think "newsreader" or something.
Do you have any evidence to back that up? It's the opposite of my experience working in the media. Who are the people you are talking about, and how did you survey them?
That doesn't make a lot of sense, because before the internet, the news always came to you. You get the newspaper delivered to the door, you switch on broadcast TV. It has always been "push." So why would normal users be more comfortable looking for news, when they didn't used to?
In the meantime, geeks have been used to the hassles of searching for and surfing multiple information sources that are hard to find. So maybe you have it backwards?
But just about every blog (well every one taken seriously) does give acccreditation. I'm not a big fan of blogs myself, but don't try to make stuff up. The place where blogs do a better job than many mainstream outlets is in editorial and opinion writing. Which is nearly as important as the actual news gathering. Furthermore, some bloggers have out-investigated the "MSM" - such as the blackbox voting investigation into Diebold.
So, the conclusion would be that high-end slashdot users don't have much use for podcasting and RSS. Which is the opposite to what the other person said - that it was mainly high end users trying it. So, if the high-end users don't use it, then where are the all the subscribers coming from?
That's just not true. Many ordinary users listen to their favourite radio shows via podcasting, regularly. They don't care what the technology is. I don't see why it is only "high end" users when you can just click on iTunes' podcast tab and choose what you want from the directory. Or if you are listening to broadcast radio, go to the radio station's website for the podcast after they hear it being mentioned on-air.
The what do we do about all the Vietnamese restaurants? Do they just freeze to death in winter?
It's a feature, not a bug. HarperCollins should change their name to HyperCollins, and include a free sachet of insant coffee or methamphetamine with each book.