I'm one of those guys. I can hear some CRTs squeal. Everybody else thinks I'm crazy. It's like a bad case of tinnitus. Luckily, CRTs are few and far between these days.
Favorite quote mining: "So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself.... Jesus said, 'go thou, and do likewise.'" Of course there's a book and a half represented by an ellipsis, but that's cool, right?
I fired Verizon because they overcharged me $0.02. Then I was stuck getting screwed by AT&T for two years. Real bright move. Sometimes it's better just to pay the bill and be done with it. My time is worth more than that.
You guys are missing the worst part of the story. This principal, Matt Smith -- mailto:msmith@gkb.k12.in.us -- is one of us. He's a nerd. He got a BS in math. Also, the idiots running their website don't know how to load a thumbnail image, instead of scaling a big one. How did the world come to this. Maybe this kid is actually a jock who picks on nerds, and Mr. Smith decided to get even with him out of some misguided sense of justice. Maybe Mattie here got too many wedgies in school.
You obviously don't follow a lot of these "school does stupid shit" cases. There's a 50/50 chance the school will double down and actually make their spying system more aggressive. There's also a pretty good chance the Supreme Court will never touch the case, or might make some bizarre decision. Remember, the last high schooler case they took, they ended up deciding that a principal who strip searched a 14 year old girl couldn't get sued, even though the search was illegal.
While I agree that the punishment is going too far (though there may be more to the story), if it was a school computer there should be no expectation of privacy. Kids should buy their own laptop if they don't agree with the school's policies.
It's not about expectation of privacy. He posted to Twitter, so obviously privacy's not the point. The question is whether the school has a right to infringe on a student's speech if that speech does not hinder the other students in any way. The Supreme Court has normally said that schools need a pretty good reason to limit free speech rights, although there are no hard and fast rules.
The point isn't that it's not copyright-able, but that this particular work, based on the same theme as another work, did not infringe on the earlier work. This is just common sense, and good application of copyright law (if there can be such a thing). For instance, if I arrange Beethoven's 5th for brass quintet, and you come by a year later and also arrange Beethoven's 5th for brass quintet, you haven't infringed my copyright. If, however, you transcribe my arrangement and turn it into a work for strings, you have (arguably) infringed my copyright. Something like this may be hard to prove, but it makes perfect sense to musicians.
The point is that the "idea" or "form" of a work may not be copyrighted. But the actual work can. The combination of notes, rhythms, harmonies, tone colors, etc. all come together form the copyrighted work. If I take the same harmonic and rhythmic structure of the Pi Symphony and simply change the "melody" (if you can call it that) to e rather than pi, then I may still have infringed on Erickson's copyright. That's another grey area. I would at least consider it borrowing. Then again, there are entire genres entirely defined by their harmonic and rhythmic structure (e.g. blues), so it would be a hard argument to win.
Wait... Obama's not an evil Republican? But he hires cronies, flaunts the Bill of Rights in the name of national security, goes to war in oil-rich countries, and gives tax breaks to the rich. I'm so confused. Is there such a word as DINO? I know the right-wing nutjobs say "RINO" (it means any Republican who dares to talk about raising taxes, or a Senate Republican willing to confirm an Obama-nominated official, or a governor who enacts a health insurance overhaul).
The FTC has a Bureau of Consumer Protection. The Dodd-Frank bill just set up a financial consumer protection board, but it took Obama a long time to get it staffed, thanks to Republican shenanigans. (Not saying the Dems would have done any different to a Bush appointee.) The answer to your question of actively defending consumers is pretty much a resounding "no." Most actual protection is left up to the state AGs. I live in Texas, and every now and then some bad actor will get smacked with a lawsuit (I'm looking at you, Sony). But they generally settle out of court, and the consumer rarely sees a penny of it. We're expected to fend for ourselves and do the whole "class-action lawsuit" thing.
This is frustrating. You're the only person so far to point out that This American Life is not NPR. But you got it wrong. It is distributed by Public Radio International. PRI is not APM, and neither of those are NPR. The only reason most people think they're all the same is that they're normally on the same local radio station.
That's pretty easy. Just trade serial numbers with a random person in line. It works for eSlate... as long as I can find somebody else in line as paranoid as I am. Expect a lot of scowling from old ladies.
Given the amount of time it would take me to copy a Stephen King novel, I'd say it would be more expensive to do it your way. You have to put some value on your time. Or are you one of those people who drives across town to save 2 cents per gallon on gas?
I think that's probably what he meant, that Democrats stifle technology. It's probably not true, but at least it makes more sense as an argument. Of course, once he said anti-science, he realized it had a good resonance in the echo chamber. So I'm sure there's going to be plenty more where that came from.
By revelation of these emails, Fred Singer's respect in peer reviewed literature has dropped to slightly lower than the asshole liars who used to publish "peer reviewed" studies backed by tobacco companies claiming that tobacco smoke isn't related to cancer...
Um... You do realize you're saying that "Fred Singer's respect in peer reviewed literature has dropped to slightly lower than Fred Singer," right?
[Classical music] can be as intrusive and offensive as blazingly loud gangsta rap would be.
Exactly why I keep really loud classical music cued up in the CD player on my commute. Should anybody be blasting (most often "screwed") rap, I can hit them with some Widor. The only thing that would make it more fun is if I could actually have a real 32' contrafaggot stop strapped to the roof of my Accord. BWAHAHAHAHA!!!! That would be the acoustic equivalent of an EMP.
Augmented 4th? When a guitarist does it, it's called an 11th. And it's almost always augmented. Otherwise it's a sus4.
Adding the seventh to a perfect cadence has been quite common since the 16th century, so I would hardly call that novel. Ninths and major sevenths are a fairly common occurrence in baroque music, though primarily as a passing dissonance for dramatic effect. The same could be said for 11th's and 13th's, too.
I don't think you are consistent by comparing "popular" classical works with the likes of Hendrix. If you take the whole of popular music today, you have maybe 80% of them using the same four or five chords (or two chords in some godforsaken cases). Most musicians are not Hendrix, and Hendrix is hardly "unchallenging."
So let's not pretend that Romantic music with its wild variations in tone and volume, and Classical music with its deceptive cadences and Neapolitan chords are anywhere near as boring and monotonous as the vast majority of crap that passes for "popular" music these days. You can either compare accessible music of both time periods, or cutting-edge brain-melting bad-ass-shit from both time periods.
That's essentially what inflation is. It's a guarantee that your money will not be worth as much ten years from now as it is today. If you have one hundred dollars in the bank today, three of them have an expiration date of one year from now. That's why so much effort goes into making sure the inflation rate stays positive. Once deflation sets in, hoarding begins. An alternative means to expire money would be to tax wealth instead of income, but that would piss off a lot of rich people, so the politicians will never do it.
Absolutely. I found a direct correlation between the amount of information at your fingertips, and the difficulty of the exam. We had an advanced calc final that was a take home test. Yes. A take home final. It didn't help. I think I scored like a 60 (which apparently put me near the top of the class). Even the guys that were known cheaters fared poorly. The questions were worded in such interesting fashion that you basically had to schlepp to the prof's office and ask her what the hell she was even talking about. We all ended up having to get extra credit by helping her and her girlfriend move houses.
In order of descending difficulty: Open book, open note; open book; single note-sheet; no notes; no calculators.
The author of the article says "My wife and I want education causation and not just correlation." My question is, why? Correlation is just fine for prediction. If certain statistics are highly correlated with successful students, use those statistics as a predictive measure. There is no reason to prove causality unless you are actually trying to change the system. If you can prove correlation, that is good enough.
If there is a correlation between a certain shoe size and good cooking skills, and I want to marry a good cook, I will seek out potential mates with that shoe size. Of course they won't all be good cooks, but I've improved my chances of finding a good cook. On the other hand, if a girl finds that I'm interested in women of a certain shoe size, and she has surgery to meet that requirement, it won't make her a good cook. (It would make her a psycho, though.)
Of course, the irony is that the things he lists are just more correlations. They're just better correlations than the standard ones he mentions.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm one of those guys. I can hear some CRTs squeal. Everybody else thinks I'm crazy. It's like a bad case of tinnitus. Luckily, CRTs are few and far between these days.
Favorite quote mining: "So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself.... Jesus said, 'go thou, and do likewise.'" Of course there's a book and a half represented by an ellipsis, but that's cool, right?
As a non-FB person, how are they going to fix the bug of other people tagging me in photos?
I fired Verizon because they overcharged me $0.02. Then I was stuck getting screwed by AT&T for two years. Real bright move. Sometimes it's better just to pay the bill and be done with it. My time is worth more than that.
Fine. They'll just jack the prices all up, and you'll end up paying the same thing anyway.
You guys are missing the worst part of the story. This principal, Matt Smith -- mailto:msmith@gkb.k12.in.us -- is one of us. He's a nerd. He got a BS in math. Also, the idiots running their website don't know how to load a thumbnail image, instead of scaling a big one. How did the world come to this. Maybe this kid is actually a jock who picks on nerds, and Mr. Smith decided to get even with him out of some misguided sense of justice. Maybe Mattie here got too many wedgies in school.
You obviously don't follow a lot of these "school does stupid shit" cases. There's a 50/50 chance the school will double down and actually make their spying system more aggressive. There's also a pretty good chance the Supreme Court will never touch the case, or might make some bizarre decision. Remember, the last high schooler case they took, they ended up deciding that a principal who strip searched a 14 year old girl couldn't get sued, even though the search was illegal.
While I agree that the punishment is going too far (though there may be more to the story), if it was a school computer there should be no expectation of privacy. Kids should buy their own laptop if they don't agree with the school's policies.
It's not about expectation of privacy. He posted to Twitter, so obviously privacy's not the point. The question is whether the school has a right to infringe on a student's speech if that speech does not hinder the other students in any way. The Supreme Court has normally said that schools need a pretty good reason to limit free speech rights, although there are no hard and fast rules.
And let's put this into the proper perspective. This man insuted another man.
No. He insulted another man on the interwebs. And everybody knows that's way worse.
He was found guilty of inciting racial hatred by a jury of his peers.
And yes, we take that pretty seriously over here.
That's funny. Over here, we call it running for president.
The point isn't that it's not copyright-able, but that this particular work, based on the same theme as another work, did not infringe on the earlier work. This is just common sense, and good application of copyright law (if there can be such a thing). For instance, if I arrange Beethoven's 5th for brass quintet, and you come by a year later and also arrange Beethoven's 5th for brass quintet, you haven't infringed my copyright. If, however, you transcribe my arrangement and turn it into a work for strings, you have (arguably) infringed my copyright. Something like this may be hard to prove, but it makes perfect sense to musicians.
The point is that the "idea" or "form" of a work may not be copyrighted. But the actual work can. The combination of notes, rhythms, harmonies, tone colors, etc. all come together form the copyrighted work. If I take the same harmonic and rhythmic structure of the Pi Symphony and simply change the "melody" (if you can call it that) to e rather than pi, then I may still have infringed on Erickson's copyright. That's another grey area. I would at least consider it borrowing. Then again, there are entire genres entirely defined by their harmonic and rhythmic structure (e.g. blues), so it would be a hard argument to win.
Wait... Obama's not an evil Republican? But he hires cronies, flaunts the Bill of Rights in the name of national security, goes to war in oil-rich countries, and gives tax breaks to the rich. I'm so confused. Is there such a word as DINO? I know the right-wing nutjobs say "RINO" (it means any Republican who dares to talk about raising taxes, or a Senate Republican willing to confirm an Obama-nominated official, or a governor who enacts a health insurance overhaul).
The FTC has a Bureau of Consumer Protection. The Dodd-Frank bill just set up a financial consumer protection board, but it took Obama a long time to get it staffed, thanks to Republican shenanigans. (Not saying the Dems would have done any different to a Bush appointee.) The answer to your question of actively defending consumers is pretty much a resounding "no." Most actual protection is left up to the state AGs. I live in Texas, and every now and then some bad actor will get smacked with a lawsuit (I'm looking at you, Sony). But they generally settle out of court, and the consumer rarely sees a penny of it. We're expected to fend for ourselves and do the whole "class-action lawsuit" thing.
This is frustrating. You're the only person so far to point out that This American Life is not NPR. But you got it wrong. It is distributed by Public Radio International. PRI is not APM, and neither of those are NPR. The only reason most people think they're all the same is that they're normally on the same local radio station.
That's pretty easy. Just trade serial numbers with a random person in line. It works for eSlate... as long as I can find somebody else in line as paranoid as I am. Expect a lot of scowling from old ladies.
Given the amount of time it would take me to copy a Stephen King novel, I'd say it would be more expensive to do it your way. You have to put some value on your time. Or are you one of those people who drives across town to save 2 cents per gallon on gas?
I think that's probably what he meant, that Democrats stifle technology. It's probably not true, but at least it makes more sense as an argument. Of course, once he said anti-science, he realized it had a good resonance in the echo chamber. So I'm sure there's going to be plenty more where that came from.
By revelation of these emails, Fred Singer's respect in peer reviewed literature has dropped to slightly lower than the asshole liars who used to publish "peer reviewed" studies backed by tobacco companies claiming that tobacco smoke isn't related to cancer...
Um... You do realize you're saying that "Fred Singer's respect in peer reviewed literature has dropped to slightly lower than Fred Singer," right?
Not here in the good US of A. Somebody might see a nipple. And then, the terrorist have won!!!
[Classical music] can be as intrusive and offensive as blazingly loud gangsta rap would be.
Exactly why I keep really loud classical music cued up in the CD player on my commute. Should anybody be blasting (most often "screwed") rap, I can hit them with some Widor. The only thing that would make it more fun is if I could actually have a real 32' contrafaggot stop strapped to the roof of my Accord. BWAHAHAHAHA!!!! That would be the acoustic equivalent of an EMP.
Augmented 4th? When a guitarist does it, it's called an 11th. And it's almost always augmented. Otherwise it's a sus4.
Adding the seventh to a perfect cadence has been quite common since the 16th century, so I would hardly call that novel. Ninths and major sevenths are a fairly common occurrence in baroque music, though primarily as a passing dissonance for dramatic effect. The same could be said for 11th's and 13th's, too.
I don't think you are consistent by comparing "popular" classical works with the likes of Hendrix. If you take the whole of popular music today, you have maybe 80% of them using the same four or five chords (or two chords in some godforsaken cases). Most musicians are not Hendrix, and Hendrix is hardly "unchallenging."
So let's not pretend that Romantic music with its wild variations in tone and volume, and Classical music with its deceptive cadences and Neapolitan chords are anywhere near as boring and monotonous as the vast majority of crap that passes for "popular" music these days. You can either compare accessible music of both time periods, or cutting-edge brain-melting bad-ass-shit from both time periods.
That's essentially what inflation is. It's a guarantee that your money will not be worth as much ten years from now as it is today. If you have one hundred dollars in the bank today, three of them have an expiration date of one year from now. That's why so much effort goes into making sure the inflation rate stays positive. Once deflation sets in, hoarding begins. An alternative means to expire money would be to tax wealth instead of income, but that would piss off a lot of rich people, so the politicians will never do it.
Absolutely. I found a direct correlation between the amount of information at your fingertips, and the difficulty of the exam. We had an advanced calc final that was a take home test. Yes. A take home final. It didn't help. I think I scored like a 60 (which apparently put me near the top of the class). Even the guys that were known cheaters fared poorly. The questions were worded in such interesting fashion that you basically had to schlepp to the prof's office and ask her what the hell she was even talking about. We all ended up having to get extra credit by helping her and her girlfriend move houses.
In order of descending difficulty: Open book, open note; open book; single note-sheet; no notes; no calculators.
The author of the article says "My wife and I want education causation and not just correlation." My question is, why? Correlation is just fine for prediction. If certain statistics are highly correlated with successful students, use those statistics as a predictive measure. There is no reason to prove causality unless you are actually trying to change the system. If you can prove correlation, that is good enough.
If there is a correlation between a certain shoe size and good cooking skills, and I want to marry a good cook, I will seek out potential mates with that shoe size. Of course they won't all be good cooks, but I've improved my chances of finding a good cook. On the other hand, if a girl finds that I'm interested in women of a certain shoe size, and she has surgery to meet that requirement, it won't make her a good cook. (It would make her a psycho, though.)
Of course, the irony is that the things he lists are just more correlations. They're just better correlations than the standard ones he mentions.
You mean for the corporation people or the people people?
What are you? Some kind of racist?