An interesting point I've seen made too rarely is that of politics and partisanship. Currently the ISPs are, by and large, impartial providers of information and as such have little value to any group pushing its agenda.
If they gain the power to block sources they dislike... and as the pro-net neutrality gang pointed out, a Canadian ISP has already prevented access to a site hostile to it... then ISPs suddenly become a very valuable thing to have in your pocket.
So we have the telcos, giant corporations, claiming that they would not abuse their power for great financial gain?
This demands the rallying cry of the cynical, created for politics but apparently as applicable here:
Whenever a controversial law is proposed, and its supporters, when confronted with an egregious abuse it would permit, use a phrase along the lines of 'Perhaps in theory, but the law would never be applied in that way' - they're lying. They intend to use the law that way as early and as often as possible.
Since the company has demonstratedbyitsactions that it understands no language but that of the dollar, saying "Bad Starforce! Bad!" is clearly ineffective. Let's put it in terms they can get.
Can I ask everyone who's disgusted by this latest event and therefore swears to join the boycott and purchase no product with Starforce protection to say so?
Whoa there. Why are you talking in the past sense? When I became an active editor last week, the place seemed to be quite alive. Not getting half the number of new writeups it once had, but in business and without the decay that's common for declining sites.
I didn't see this incident, but according to what you've said I'd have done the same. You see, of the several million readers of Wikipedia there are a few dozen, tops, who know who lowkey is. Maybe a hundred or two if it's a large channel. To everyone else, there's no point to seeing the name. Just giving the name isn't a good example either, since it gives no information whatsoever of what the person does and what makes him a troll, and besides the article has plenty of examples already.
It's obvious that you're gravely underestimating the devilish obsession and ingenuity of the Internet pedophiles! This short-sighted irresponsible behavior is placing your children in grave danger!
Have you never thought of driving in letter-shaped patterns, or even jumping in morse code?
Can you afford to take that risk when they walk among us?!
Yes, I see why we should draw intelligent designers into this so we can ridicule them again, even though ID has nothing to do with this subject and we're all sick of it anyway.
Thanks. I've spent a lot of time on the fringes of the project, adding to the more esoteric areas of knowledge. I hadn't given that much thought, but when I did it seemed like a very likely prospect.
You know what? That strikes me as a very good argument for the article validation feature that's being readied for implementation as we speak. Wikipedia will soon have the possibility of producing stable versions of its articles.
Isn't the project predicated on the belief that more eyeballs make an article better, not worse?
Oh, yes. The theory is that more viewers/editors means more data, a larger potential workforce, more error-checking, etc.
The problem is that things like reconciling opposing viewpoints and verifying facts all take time. High traffic to a page can draw a large number of changes fast, making it far more likely for a viewer to encounter far more things like ongoing disputes, adjustments in progress and incomplete work while also demanding more of Wikipedia regulars - who are responsible for much of the cleanup.
Extremely popular articles, such as the London bombing one on the day it happened, are known to exemplify this by flying into an editing frenzy and often becoming chaotic until the flood of information subsides. Then they're sorted out and made prettier over a few days.
Then there's the fact that links from popular websites draw not only their fair share of vandals, but a number of new editors unfamiliar with the conventions of the Wikipedia. The latter are welcomed, but again: if their additions need work, it can't be done immediately.
That's pretty simple. I'd ask her to stop. Then I'd threaten to sue. Then I'd sue, and likely I'd seek some monetary compensation. The significant difference is that I wouldn't demand a ludicrous and dispropotional amount that the mother could never afford to pay. Not to make an example of her, not to punish her audacity, not just because I'm greedy, not for any of the possible reasons for this travesty.
Yes. I don't know about any of the others, but I consider the actual accuracy of the statements to be secondary in comparison the way the company has responded not by seeking 'appropriate punishment', as they say, but by screaming "OFF WITH HER HEAD!".
I also have significant anti-corporate sentiment, and have to wonder if
Activa does consider this appropriate for daring to defy them.
I don't see that as anything other than vandalism. The intent may be different, but the end result is just the same. Luckily, though, at least the English edition has a place for that kind of stupidity. I recommend the best picks section.
As a Finn myself I'm still skeptical about the international appeal. The film has received very good reviews and feedback, but it's all domestic. Speaking with the authoritative voice of a person who hasn't actually seen it yet, the fact is that In The Pirkinning makes extensive use of its Finnishness.
The subtitles of the previous installments don't seem to be there for allowing English-speakers to comprehend what's going on as much as compounding the funniness inherent in Star Trek in Finnish. They certainly don't work half as well on their own. Not only are a lot of nuances lost when converting Finno-Ugric speech into terse Latin-influenced Germanic writing, but someone relying on subtitles won't even notice the overtranslations - replacements for words that usually are just lifted from English - and has to skip a crucial part of the constant wordplay. Calling 'warp' 'twist' isn't funny. Calling 'warp' a Finnish word that can mean 'warp' 'twist' or 'perversion' while simultaneously displaying an English translation calling it 'twist' to an audience that fully well knows that it's 'warp'... that is funny precisely in the way that good jokes mess with your head. If you can't see why, that likely was my point.
As TNG episode "Darmok" tells us, even universal translators wouldn't guarantee full understanding, unless they were superadvanced subspace translators that interfaced directly with their users' brains feeding them required knowledge, but I digress. Even if the language barrier was removed the average outlander would hardly notice that Info's named after a bookstore chain, much less that his motto is from the old advertisements of said chain. He likely wouldn't have the right misconceptions about the Russian Mafia (even, or in fact especially, if he was actually Russian). Even if I was explaining the hilarious multi-faceted pun that is Garibaldi-equivalent's name I wouldn't know how. Juxtapositions are kinda lost on those who aren't familiar with both of the juxtees, too. And these things go on throughout the movie!
Don't get me started on the onslaught of sight gags or how much is conveyed by tone of voice.
That Star * battles work much better with sound might just have something to do with the way they're designed to use sound effects as integral parts of the experience. Others (far fewer, mind you) use the lack of sound to heighten tension or as an eerie or alien element. The former is better suited to light shows and action, the latter to drama.
Now, what I'd like to see is a soundless space battle where the "camera" moves freely around the carnage and at one point dives through a damaged ship, briefly replacing the silence with a cacophony of klaxons,
crackles and yells before it reaches the other end and all is quiet again. Suprise 'em with the unfamiliar.
Unfortunately this thing's effectiveness for native English speakers should be somewhat lower. In the past, quite a bit of Star Wreck humor has depended on the bare-faced overtranslation of Trek terms.
Congratulations! Our generations have achieved what man has long lusted after - immortalizing themselves in history. Those who are to come will never forget our deeds.
What? They have a huge container filled with trash, and they're apparently throwing it away?
No, bear with me here. This trash has been on the International Space Station, and on a shuttle on two occasions. What does that make it? Space trash!
How many people would pay for junk that has genuinely left the planet and support the space program at the same time? I'm thinking quite a few... it's not as if most trophies and decorations are more useful.
You left out "The President was asked a question about ID in an interview and without much eagerness gave a vague answer three sentences long before moving on. AAAAGH! THE BARBARIANS ARE AT THE GATES!"
Granted, it soon switches to one or more of the other ones, but just in the interest of accuracy.
Slashdot Mirror
An interesting point I've seen made too rarely is that of politics and partisanship. Currently the ISPs are, by and large, impartial providers of information and as such have little value to any group pushing its agenda.
If they gain the power to block sources they dislike... and as the pro-net neutrality gang pointed out, a Canadian ISP has already prevented access to a site hostile to it... then ISPs suddenly become a very valuable thing to have in your pocket.
Mod parent up.
This demands the rallying cry of the cynical, created for politics but apparently as applicable here:
Since the company has demonstrated by its actions that it understands no language but that of the dollar, saying "Bad Starforce! Bad!" is clearly ineffective. Let's put it in terms they can get.
Can I ask everyone who's disgusted by this latest event and therefore swears to join the boycott and purchase no product with Starforce protection to say so?
*Raises hand*
Whoa there. Why are you talking in the past sense? When I became an active editor last week, the place seemed to be quite alive. Not getting half the number of new writeups it once had, but in business and without the decay that's common for declining sites.
Is there something I'm missing here?
I didn't see this incident, but according to what you've said I'd have done the same. You see, of the several million readers of Wikipedia there are a few dozen, tops, who know who lowkey is. Maybe a hundred or two if it's a large channel. To everyone else, there's no point to seeing the name. Just giving the name isn't a good example either, since it gives no information whatsoever of what the person does and what makes him a troll, and besides the article has plenty of examples already.
It's obvious that you're gravely underestimating the devilish obsession and ingenuity of the Internet pedophiles! This short-sighted irresponsible behavior is placing your children in grave danger!
Have you never thought of driving in letter-shaped patterns, or even jumping in morse code?
Can you afford to take that risk when they walk among us?!
Yes, I see why we should draw intelligent designers into this so we can ridicule them again, even though ID has nothing to do with this subject and we're all sick of it anyway.
From what I see, it looks like he's telling the media they shouldn't present this as major news, since they'd be wrong.
Is there a problem here?
Thanks. I've spent a lot of time on the fringes of the project, adding to the more esoteric areas of knowledge. I hadn't given that much thought, but when I did it seemed like a very likely prospect.
You know what? That strikes me as a very good argument for the article validation feature that's being readied for implementation as we speak. Wikipedia will soon have the possibility of producing stable versions of its articles.
Isn't the project predicated on the belief that more eyeballs make an article better, not worse? Oh, yes. The theory is that more viewers/editors means more data, a larger potential workforce, more error-checking, etc.
The problem is that things like reconciling opposing viewpoints and verifying facts all take time. High traffic to a page can draw a large number of changes fast, making it far more likely for a viewer to encounter far more things like ongoing disputes, adjustments in progress and incomplete work while also demanding more of Wikipedia regulars - who are responsible for much of the cleanup.
Extremely popular articles, such as the London bombing one on the day it happened, are known to exemplify this by flying into an editing frenzy and often becoming chaotic until the flood of information subsides. Then they're sorted out and made prettier over a few days.
Then there's the fact that links from popular websites draw not only their fair share of vandals, but a number of new editors unfamiliar with the conventions of the Wikipedia. The latter are welcomed, but again: if their additions need work, it can't be done immediately.
What?
That's pretty simple. I'd ask her to stop. Then I'd threaten to sue. Then I'd sue, and likely I'd seek some monetary compensation. The significant difference is that I wouldn't demand a ludicrous and dispropotional amount that the mother could never afford to pay. Not to make an example of her, not to punish her audacity, not just because I'm greedy, not for any of the possible reasons for this travesty.
Yes. I don't know about any of the others, but I consider the actual accuracy of the statements to be secondary in comparison the way the company has responded not by seeking 'appropriate punishment', as they say, but by screaming "OFF WITH HER HEAD!".
I also have significant anti-corporate sentiment, and have to wonder if Activa does consider this appropriate for daring to defy them.
I don't see that as anything other than vandalism. The intent may be different, but the end result is just the same. Luckily, though, at least the English edition has a place for that kind of stupidity. I recommend the best picks section.
Indeed. Extroverted Finns look at your feet.
As a Finn myself I'm still skeptical about the international appeal. The film has received very good reviews and feedback, but it's all domestic. Speaking with the authoritative voice of a person who hasn't actually seen it yet, the fact is that In The Pirkinning makes extensive use of its Finnishness.
The subtitles of the previous installments don't seem to be there for allowing English-speakers to comprehend what's going on as much as compounding the funniness inherent in Star Trek in Finnish. They certainly don't work half as well on their own. Not only are a lot of nuances lost when converting Finno-Ugric speech into terse Latin-influenced Germanic writing, but someone relying on subtitles won't even notice the overtranslations - replacements for words that usually are just lifted from English - and has to skip a crucial part of the constant wordplay. Calling 'warp' 'twist' isn't funny. Calling 'warp' a Finnish word that can mean 'warp' 'twist' or 'perversion' while simultaneously displaying an English translation calling it 'twist' to an audience that fully well knows that it's 'warp'... that is funny precisely in the way that good jokes mess with your head. If you can't see why, that likely was my point.
As TNG episode "Darmok" tells us, even universal translators wouldn't guarantee full understanding, unless they were superadvanced subspace translators that interfaced directly with their users' brains feeding them required knowledge, but I digress. Even if the language barrier was removed the average outlander would hardly notice that Info's named after a bookstore chain, much less that his motto is from the old advertisements of said chain. He likely wouldn't have the right misconceptions about the Russian Mafia (even, or in fact especially, if he was actually Russian). Even if I was explaining the hilarious multi-faceted pun that is Garibaldi-equivalent's name I wouldn't know how. Juxtapositions are kinda lost on those who aren't familiar with both of the juxtees, too. And these things go on throughout the movie!
Don't get me started on the onslaught of sight gags or how much is conveyed by tone of voice.
That Star * battles work much better with sound might just have something to do with the way they're designed to use sound effects as integral parts of the experience. Others (far fewer, mind you) use the lack of sound to heighten tension or as an eerie or alien element. The former is better suited to light shows and action, the latter to drama.
Now, what I'd like to see is a soundless space battle where the "camera" moves freely around the carnage and at one point dives through a damaged ship, briefly replacing the silence with a cacophony of klaxons, crackles and yells before it reaches the other end and all is quiet again. Suprise 'em with the unfamiliar.
Capella has gone supernova! Repeat, Capella has gone supernova! Get to the jump node NOW!
Unfortunately this thing's effectiveness for native English speakers should be somewhat lower. In the past, quite a bit of Star Wreck humor has depended on the bare-faced overtranslation of Trek terms.
"Tulta kaikilla tuikkusäteillä!"
Allow me.
New kinds of businesses bullshit.
Odd, that. To me it sounded like "This large potential resource can only stay usable for a limited time."
Given that limited here equals ~1'000'000, I think I can stand behind that kind of reasoning.
Congratulations! Our generations have achieved what man has long lusted after - immortalizing themselves in history. Those who are to come will never forget our deeds.
What? They have a huge container filled with trash, and they're apparently throwing it away?
No, bear with me here. This trash has been on the International Space Station, and on a shuttle on two occasions. What does that make it? Space trash!
How many people would pay for junk that has genuinely left the planet and support the space program at the same time? I'm thinking quite a few... it's not as if most trophies and decorations are more useful.
- Kizor
You left out "The President was asked a question about ID in an interview and without much eagerness gave a vague answer three sentences long before moving on. AAAAGH! THE BARBARIANS ARE AT THE GATES!" Granted, it soon switches to one or more of the other ones, but just in the interest of accuracy.