I seem to remember that. When the thing first rolled out, there was backlash on the forums. Of course with the even newer betterer design, I can't even figure out WTF happened to the discussion forums. Oh wait, there it is. Jesus what a catastrophe!
Actually, some vaccinations do not offer herd immunity. For instance, the pneumococcal vaccine does not provoke a mucosal immunity. Consequently, carrier rates can still be high. It might be that all polysaccharide vaccines work this way. I'm no expert, though.
I came here to say the same thing as well. I hardly use flickr at all anymore. Used to be a great community and a fun place to get feedback on your photos. I was even a paying pro member for years. It started with minor annoyances like "partners" offering services, even on pro account photos (which had strictly forbidden advertising). Now it's just way to Bing-y all the way around. Can't find a damn thing, and flowing all the photos in different sizes and shapes is just terrible. We need white (or black) space.
It seems like Yahoo! really doesn't try to get any feedback from their users before doing shit like this. Google's no better at getting feedback, but at least they're not so god awful about the execution.
We had one looney calculus professor who would start the class with 6 [chalk/white]boards full of notes, examples, assignments, etc. Nearly as soon as the class would start, she would begin erasing and writing more stuff. There was no way to take notes on the lecture, and write down all of her examples unless you didn't have class before hers and could show up to copy.
One day, an enterprising engineering student showed up with a Polaroid and sold prints to the more desperate students, or the ones that would show up late. He switched majors to business the next semester.
I remember taking notes on a computer in comp sci. It was great. By the time the lecture was over I had finished the assignments for the next class and emailed (Pine?) myself the annotated code. The prof was really attentive, too. So if you were playing a game or IM'ing, he'd shut you down, or worse, make your chat window visible on everybody's screen. Fun times.
If they're going to be putting up ads anyway, I would rather they track me. I'd much rather see an ad relating to something I viewed or purchased a few weeks ago rather than random ads. I'm more likely to click and less likely to be annoyed if you show me an ad for a plush companion cube instead of immigrant legal advice. I would love it if TV could track me and only show me ads I'm interested in. New sci-fi movie coming out? Great! New brand of feminine hygiene product? N/A.
That being said, there's no reason people shouldn't have a choice in the matter. If Mozilla didn't allow users to be tracked that would be a different issue.
No. I don't think it's a myth, it's just not what people think it is. I have a talent for picking up a musical instrument and being mediocre at it almost instantly: brass, winds, keyboards, strings, percussion, you name it. Some people don't have that. With practice, I can make it to "pretty good" status. But even with my better instruments, all the practice in the world wouldn't make me an international-star level player.
On the other hand, some people who started out playing the horn or piano or guitar much worse that I ever sounded, got way better than I ever could. Some pianists can't improvise, some arrangers can't compose, some programmers can't draw, some artists can't tie their shoes. Some kids can innately dribble a soccer ball. Some people (raises hand) never get good at it even with practice. Everything is innate talent. Everything is learned skill.
I don't think I would ever send money to a company that didn't put a statement date on their invoice. That sounds like a total scam to me. Of course, I also wouldn't pay late fees on a bill that never arrived. Then again, my credit rating can afford a few hits.
Wow... that was with a credit card company? I have had billing issues twice, once with Discover and once with Cit Mastercard. Both times I got to deal with actual Human Beings (TM) and they were fairly rational and helpful. In all honesty, it turned out the Mastercard thing was my fault (reading comprehension fail on their autopay website), but even then, they met me half way. I've never had problems with a water bill or the like. Look, there are federal laws to prevent this sort of shenanigans, and several state ones, to boot. If you let them know that you know that, they'll normally find a way to fix it.
Not just USPS. The FedEx guy in my neighborhood has been known to abscond with things (including Aggie football tickets, which I think makes you eligible for the death penalty in Texas). We're all at the mercy of our fellow human beings not being assholes. No wonder people turn to religion...
I think GP is comparing the mail carrier making a ring versus the individual recipients making the star. So the efficiency of 25 neighbors driving an extra 0.2 miles or whatever (depending on layout of the neighborhood), would end up as a net negative. Don't think that argument holds up for most suburban neighborhoods, but I see how it could make matters worse in some rural areas.
Maybe; it depends on the location of the cluster and layout of the houses. But also, it depends on the mail collection habits of the individuals. my neighborhood has one of these clusters, and we normally only bother to pick up our mail two or three times a week. I suspect many of my neighbors are the same way. Besides, we either pick it up while on an evening walk, or on our way home from work/church/gym/whatever.
You realize these clusters are locked, right? Not that it's fool proof, but if they're going to be picking a mailbox lock, they're just as likely to drive through a neighborhood and collect mail from unlocked boxes.
I thought of a pretty good example of when people (men anyway) would pick virtual over real. Lesbians. Internet lesbians are invariably hotter than the real-world kind. Every Portia has her Ellen. Besides, real lesbians wouldn't be content for you to just watch.
Ah! I see. We are talking two different things. You are specifically referring to Internet porn. I suspect it may be true that there is a difference between the print variety and the electronic tube-clogging kind.
I don't think this is what you had in mind, but I think the underlying societal ill that drives censorship laws is called religious puritanicalism. But maybe I'm over-simplifying things. I'm sure there are a number of atheist, think-of-the-children types as well. You think that kid whose dad made a big fuss about porn on the used XBox he got for Christmas was more harmed by the porn, or by his parent's going ballistic and calling the news?
What I don't think is that the desire to view some "base" activity for gratification is some sort of societal illness. To me it's all in good fun, just like football, spin-the-bottle, competitive eating, amusement parks, and WWE. Even Groklaw arguably fits that bill. I think that is where our difference on the good/evil scale comes in. The only downside I see to pornography is that there are people who feel trapped in it as a career.* I'm sure there are many. But I think making it less taboo to talk about would actually help those girls (and guys) to find a way to a different profession.
* - Again, that line of argument would apply to several other things (football comes to mind).
I'll admit, I am working off memory here. I dare not Google search "pornography addiction" form my work computer. Ha! But there have been quite a few studies showing the opposite. Some of which were commissioned by the US and other governments during the 70s.
I'm not saying there isn't such a thing as a porn addiction. I'm saying that exposure to pornography is not negative in and of itself. If you are predisposed to addictive behavior like alcoholism or compulsive gambling, exposures to booze and slot machines have a much different effect than on non-addictive personalities. I can watch porn or not, I can drink a beer or not, I can play craps or not.
So maybe I just don't see what the big deal is with all these "for their own good" types of laws. I'm not a big Ron Paul fan (I know, heresy), but his take on "Please Mr. lawmaker, please make heroine illegal so I won't shoot up all the time!" is spot on. Look we're all big girls and boys now. We can kill time however we see fit.
If you were worried about everything that "destroys relationships" you'd be anti-video game, anti-TV, anti-Facebook, anti-Ironman, anti-football, anti-hunting, anti-fashion, anti-smoking, anti-debt, anti-not asking directions when you get lost, anti-fat, and just about anti everything. Oh yeah, and anti-divorce.
I fail to see how "nothing good can come of it for us as a species." They used to say the same thing about rock-and-roll and women's suffrage. There are some beautifully done, yet hardcore, pornographic films. There are marriages that have been saved because "oh... *that's* how you do that!!" There are friendships that arise amongst film stars, rapport among fans, financial benefits from the industry, and social benefits to being able to openly talk about formerly taboo topics. If this amounts as "nothing good" then I guess we have a different definition of good.
I thought my hyperbolic choice of words would have been enough to trigger even the weakest sarcasm detector. We don't fling feces or eat our own vomit. Why would we desire to emulate other ape-like behaviors?
Massive ramifications? Citation? Several major studies have been commissioned with the intention of proving this point, but all they have shown is that exposure to pornography does not have negative psychological or physiological effects. Most sociological impact is due to negative views on sexuality in general, and cannot be attributed to the pornography per se. In the few cases where it has been shown to have negative psychological effects, those were normally traced to religious or cultural taboo.
People have sex. It's an important and fun part of life. Why shouldn't it be part of entertainment, too? Oh right, it's supposed to be some sacred union between a man and a woman in love. I guess we all have Paul to thank for all that anti-sex mumbo jumbo in the New Testament. Hello!? Solomon had hundreds of wives and half as many concubines. I can't even comprehend numbers like that, when it comes to sexual encounters.
And don't get me started on feminists. If they really wanted to empower women, they'd do like the bonobos and wield their vaginas as a mighty weapon for peace and community integration. But whatever.
Slashdot Mirror
I seem to remember that. When the thing first rolled out, there was backlash on the forums. Of course with the even newer betterer design, I can't even figure out WTF happened to the discussion forums. Oh wait, there it is. Jesus what a catastrophe!
Actually, some vaccinations do not offer herd immunity. For instance, the pneumococcal vaccine does not provoke a mucosal immunity. Consequently, carrier rates can still be high. It might be that all polysaccharide vaccines work this way. I'm no expert, though.
depends, do you have any ore?
I came here to say the same thing as well. I hardly use flickr at all anymore. Used to be a great community and a fun place to get feedback on your photos. I was even a paying pro member for years. It started with minor annoyances like "partners" offering services, even on pro account photos (which had strictly forbidden advertising). Now it's just way to Bing-y all the way around. Can't find a damn thing, and flowing all the photos in different sizes and shapes is just terrible. We need white (or black) space.
It seems like Yahoo! really doesn't try to get any feedback from their users before doing shit like this. Google's no better at getting feedback, but at least they're not so god awful about the execution.
I think you mean: That's a wooshing problern.
Whippersnappers and their fancy phones.
We had one looney calculus professor who would start the class with 6 [chalk/white]boards full of notes, examples, assignments, etc. Nearly as soon as the class would start, she would begin erasing and writing more stuff. There was no way to take notes on the lecture, and write down all of her examples unless you didn't have class before hers and could show up to copy.
One day, an enterprising engineering student showed up with a Polaroid and sold prints to the more desperate students, or the ones that would show up late. He switched majors to business the next semester.
I remember taking notes on a computer in comp sci. It was great. By the time the lecture was over I had finished the assignments for the next class and emailed (Pine?) myself the annotated code. The prof was really attentive, too. So if you were playing a game or IM'ing, he'd shut you down, or worse, make your chat window visible on everybody's screen. Fun times.
If they're going to be putting up ads anyway, I would rather they track me. I'd much rather see an ad relating to something I viewed or purchased a few weeks ago rather than random ads. I'm more likely to click and less likely to be annoyed if you show me an ad for a plush companion cube instead of immigrant legal advice. I would love it if TV could track me and only show me ads I'm interested in. New sci-fi movie coming out? Great! New brand of feminine hygiene product? N/A.
That being said, there's no reason people shouldn't have a choice in the matter. If Mozilla didn't allow users to be tracked that would be a different issue.
Sum Ting Wong
No. I don't think it's a myth, it's just not what people think it is. I have a talent for picking up a musical instrument and being mediocre at it almost instantly: brass, winds, keyboards, strings, percussion, you name it. Some people don't have that. With practice, I can make it to "pretty good" status. But even with my better instruments, all the practice in the world wouldn't make me an international-star level player.
On the other hand, some people who started out playing the horn or piano or guitar much worse that I ever sounded, got way better than I ever could. Some pianists can't improvise, some arrangers can't compose, some programmers can't draw, some artists can't tie their shoes. Some kids can innately dribble a soccer ball. Some people (raises hand) never get good at it even with practice. Everything is innate talent. Everything is learned skill.
You can kill someone with 300mA DC judiciously applied. You wouldn't even heat up 24AWG with that little current.
This! I HATE plugging in my damn phone charger under any conditions short of operating room spotlights.
I don't think I would ever send money to a company that didn't put a statement date on their invoice. That sounds like a total scam to me. Of course, I also wouldn't pay late fees on a bill that never arrived. Then again, my credit rating can afford a few hits.
Wow... that was with a credit card company? I have had billing issues twice, once with Discover and once with Cit Mastercard. Both times I got to deal with actual Human Beings (TM) and they were fairly rational and helpful. In all honesty, it turned out the Mastercard thing was my fault (reading comprehension fail on their autopay website), but even then, they met me half way. I've never had problems with a water bill or the like. Look, there are federal laws to prevent this sort of shenanigans, and several state ones, to boot. If you let them know that you know that, they'll normally find a way to fix it.
Now Verizon, on the other hand. >=[
Not just USPS. The FedEx guy in my neighborhood has been known to abscond with things (including Aggie football tickets, which I think makes you eligible for the death penalty in Texas). We're all at the mercy of our fellow human beings not being assholes. No wonder people turn to religion...
You're lucky, then. In our old neighborhood, they only took your outgoing mail if you had incoming mail. And sometimes not even then. Red flag or no.
I think GP is comparing the mail carrier making a ring versus the individual recipients making the star. So the efficiency of 25 neighbors driving an extra 0.2 miles or whatever (depending on layout of the neighborhood), would end up as a net negative. Don't think that argument holds up for most suburban neighborhoods, but I see how it could make matters worse in some rural areas.
Maybe; it depends on the location of the cluster and layout of the houses. But also, it depends on the mail collection habits of the individuals. my neighborhood has one of these clusters, and we normally only bother to pick up our mail two or three times a week. I suspect many of my neighbors are the same way. Besides, we either pick it up while on an evening walk, or on our way home from work/church/gym/whatever.
You realize these clusters are locked, right? Not that it's fool proof, but if they're going to be picking a mailbox lock, they're just as likely to drive through a neighborhood and collect mail from unlocked boxes.
I thought of a pretty good example of when people (men anyway) would pick virtual over real. Lesbians. Internet lesbians are invariably hotter than the real-world kind. Every Portia has her Ellen. Besides, real lesbians wouldn't be content for you to just watch.
Been great fun bantering with you, btw. :-)
Ah! I see. We are talking two different things. You are specifically referring to Internet porn. I suspect it may be true that there is a difference between the print variety and the electronic tube-clogging kind.
I don't think this is what you had in mind, but I think the underlying societal ill that drives censorship laws is called religious puritanicalism. But maybe I'm over-simplifying things. I'm sure there are a number of atheist, think-of-the-children types as well. You think that kid whose dad made a big fuss about porn on the used XBox he got for Christmas was more harmed by the porn, or by his parent's going ballistic and calling the news?
What I don't think is that the desire to view some "base" activity for gratification is some sort of societal illness. To me it's all in good fun, just like football, spin-the-bottle, competitive eating, amusement parks, and WWE. Even Groklaw arguably fits that bill. I think that is where our difference on the good/evil scale comes in. The only downside I see to pornography is that there are people who feel trapped in it as a career.* I'm sure there are many. But I think making it less taboo to talk about would actually help those girls (and guys) to find a way to a different profession.
* - Again, that line of argument would apply to several other things (football comes to mind).
I'll admit, I am working off memory here. I dare not Google search "pornography addiction" form my work computer. Ha! But there have been quite a few studies showing the opposite. Some of which were commissioned by the US and other governments during the 70s.
I'm not saying there isn't such a thing as a porn addiction. I'm saying that exposure to pornography is not negative in and of itself. If you are predisposed to addictive behavior like alcoholism or compulsive gambling, exposures to booze and slot machines have a much different effect than on non-addictive personalities. I can watch porn or not, I can drink a beer or not, I can play craps or not.
So maybe I just don't see what the big deal is with all these "for their own good" types of laws. I'm not a big Ron Paul fan (I know, heresy), but his take on "Please Mr. lawmaker, please make heroine illegal so I won't shoot up all the time!" is spot on. Look we're all big girls and boys now. We can kill time however we see fit.
If you were worried about everything that "destroys relationships" you'd be anti-video game, anti-TV, anti-Facebook, anti-Ironman, anti-football, anti-hunting, anti-fashion, anti-smoking, anti-debt, anti-not asking directions when you get lost, anti-fat, and just about anti everything. Oh yeah, and anti-divorce.
I fail to see how "nothing good can come of it for us as a species." They used to say the same thing about rock-and-roll and women's suffrage. There are some beautifully done, yet hardcore, pornographic films. There are marriages that have been saved because "oh... *that's* how you do that!!" There are friendships that arise amongst film stars, rapport among fans, financial benefits from the industry, and social benefits to being able to openly talk about formerly taboo topics. If this amounts as "nothing good" then I guess we have a different definition of good.
I thought my hyperbolic choice of words would have been enough to trigger even the weakest sarcasm detector. We don't fling feces or eat our own vomit. Why would we desire to emulate other ape-like behaviors?
Massive ramifications? Citation? Several major studies have been commissioned with the intention of proving this point, but all they have shown is that exposure to pornography does not have negative psychological or physiological effects. Most sociological impact is due to negative views on sexuality in general, and cannot be attributed to the pornography per se. In the few cases where it has been shown to have negative psychological effects, those were normally traced to religious or cultural taboo.
People have sex. It's an important and fun part of life. Why shouldn't it be part of entertainment, too? Oh right, it's supposed to be some sacred union between a man and a woman in love. I guess we all have Paul to thank for all that anti-sex mumbo jumbo in the New Testament. Hello!? Solomon had hundreds of wives and half as many concubines. I can't even comprehend numbers like that, when it comes to sexual encounters.
And don't get me started on feminists. If they really wanted to empower women, they'd do like the bonobos and wield their vaginas as a mighty weapon for peace and community integration. But whatever.
We discussed it on Slashdot here.