I agree, I don't think I've ever had Flash crash my system. And I've used it on dozens of computers pretty much since the day it first came out. About the worst I've seen was some jerkiness on systems that didn't have enough muscle to run the latest/greatest version. But that's true of all software.
Obviously, you don't have any personal experience with this subject.
I'd say it's *much* more obvious that you don't. If you think I'm exaggerating, just scroll up and read until your little naive heart's content. I didn't even put the REAL bad stuff that I've seen in there.
It's about how men are shit on in pretty much any divorce case.
Wife alleges you hit her? Off to jail, guilty until proven innocent buddy.
Wife alleges you molested the kids? Say goodbye to your kids forever, pal. Maybe if you're lucky we'll let you see them for a few hours once a month with a supervisor present.
Wife wants child support? We don't care that she's spending all the money on her new ex-con boyfriend's meth lab, you'll pay it or it's jail for you, sparky!
Wife is a drug addict who neglects the kids? Tough luck pal, she's still getting full custody over you. That's what you get for showing up to court with a penis.
Wife won't let YOU have the kids during your court-appointed custody days? File this paperwork. We'll look into it in about a year, if you're lucky.
You won't let HER have the kids during her court-appointed custody days? Freeze, motherfucker! Get you're hands on your head NOW! ON THE GROUND, ASSHOLE! DON'T MAKE ME SHOOT YOU!
I'm convinced they gave Saturn the axe because it made all the other divisions look bad.
No, they gave it the axe for two reasons:
1) Americans started buying ridiculously oversized SUV's. And so GM, in all its wisdom, decided to put EVERYTHING into its SUV's because hey, that trend is never going to end, right?
2) Saturns were all made in a non-union plant, and the unions were pushing back.
No kidding. I had a new Chevrolet back in the 80's that was a total turd (because I was still all naive and patriotic and wanted to buy American). When I got a new Toyota in the 90's (after the Chevy piece-of-shit had fallen to pieces after less than 8 years), it was a revelation. Since then, it's been Toyota exclusively for me. I'm glad American autos have finally caught up, but I'm afraid it was way too late for them to keep me as a customer.
Well building an unprecedentedly epic-sized space elevator based on technology that only exists so far in science fiction should be no different than building a big dam. I'm placing a huge buy order on their stock even as we speak.
Students have to be careful carrying a Sharpie, they could get cut!
If you have seen the sheer amount of graffiti in your average inner city school, you would understand that this rule is not as silly as it sounds. If you want to create a positive educational environment, one of the first steps is not having gang tags splayed on every open surface in your school.
It's questionable whether running schools like a business is helpful.
That's true, but most of the areas where these charter schools are being implemented are neighborhoods where the existing public school system has been an abysmal failure in the past. A debate over how to best change the existing system may be warranted, but it is unquestionably clear that the existing system MUST be changed. And with teacher's unions and political interests strongly invested in the existing system, sometimes charter schools are pretty much the only option for any change.
Ideally, you wouldn't need that. A principal could just go into a failing school, fire all the bad teachers, hire better ones, and make the changes needed to make a better school. But under the existing system in many of these districts, you simply can't do that.
You think they don't make a profit off of these charter schools?
Well, the NewSchools Venture Fund certainly doesn't. AFAIK they're a non-profit and give grants, not loans.
The most important rule taught, is if you have a lot of money, you can do whatever you want regardless of rules
The summary indicated that the student body in these schools is made up almost entirely the impoverished. So I seriously doubt there are any Richy Rich's in these schools buying their way out of anything. I suspect the fines are just a way of punishing the kids without resorting to old school techniques like spanking them, or disruptive techniques like suspension (which would take them out of class and disrupt the whole goal of their education). It's a bit unconventional, but considering how poorly the traditional system has worked in Chicago in the past, I can hardly blame them for trying something different.
Frankly, I suspect the whole impetus behind these complaints isn't coming from the parents of these kids so much as from the teacher's unions who want to smear the very idea of charter schools.
No, but I don't think they are (well, at least no more than they rule everything else). The summary makes two HUGE jumps here. It starts by saying that the NewSchools Venture Fund is giving grants to charter schools. Then it attempts to smear the very idea by criticizing one particular practice of one particular group of charter schools in Chicago. Then it makes an even bigger jump by equating this with billionaires "ruling" our schools (as if individual donors to this fund created this one controversial policy, or even had any idea that it existed). I think that whoever wrote this summary is being unfairly critical of charter schools, and even more unfair to those rich donors who are actually *trying* to help (as opposed to those who just hoard their money and or just their wealth to buy new Ferraris).
In an era where the rich are able to get by paying so few taxes in the U.S., I think that those who still CHOOSE to help our ailing schools should be praised, not chastised, for the policies of one particular charter school (and I don't even find their policy that egregious in the first place). It's nice to know that not *all* rich people are just greedy pricks who would say "fuck all" to the poor.
Ideally, the U.S. would have a system where this kind of charity isn't necessary in the first place. But until that day, I don't think we should turn away any help just because it comes from Bill Gates.
I trust Google with way too much as it is. And practices like this only make me even more determined to avoid them as much as reasonably possible. It's bad enough that pretty much every website out there now is feeding them tracking data (seriously, use Firefox with NoScript and just look at all the sites using Google-analytics, it's *everywhere*). I certainly am *not* about to let them takeover my entire browser too.
They'll have to content themselves with just reading my gmail.
I like to use the unicorn comparison. When anyone gives me the "Well, that doesn't prove that this thing ISN'T true," I challenge them to prove to me that unicorns DON'T exist.
real understanding as that which he is trying to debunk
The "real understanding" is that it's bullshit. And he does a masterful job of exposing it as such, and helping people become better equipped to resist con men who would prey on them.
Slashdot Mirror
I like that analogy. Greece: The loser brother-in-law of the EU.
Oh, you think the U.S. is giving that up just because you say so? Or sign some treaty just because you threaten them with...what?
Why Isn't Flash Dead Yet?
Try to stream some DRM-protected videos with just HTML5 sometime and you'll see.
Flash has always simply worked.
I agree, I don't think I've ever had Flash crash my system. And I've used it on dozens of computers pretty much since the day it first came out. About the worst I've seen was some jerkiness on systems that didn't have enough muscle to run the latest/greatest version. But that's true of all software.
the US seems to be doing its hardest to make sure that it isn't first in particle physics research.
In all fairness, we're also abandoning a lot of other areas of scientific research too.
Wanna buy a space shuttle? We can cut you a deal.
Obviously, you don't have any personal experience with this subject.
I'd say it's *much* more obvious that you don't. If you think I'm exaggerating, just scroll up and read until your little naive heart's content. I didn't even put the REAL bad stuff that I've seen in there.
the bias of man who married with their dick in mind
Lol. Oh, you think you think only the *pretty* girls turn nuts when they get divorced?
It's about how men are shit on in pretty much any divorce case.
Wife alleges you hit her? Off to jail, guilty until proven innocent buddy.
Wife alleges you molested the kids? Say goodbye to your kids forever, pal. Maybe if you're lucky we'll let you see them for a few hours once a month with a supervisor present.
Wife wants child support? We don't care that she's spending all the money on her new ex-con boyfriend's meth lab, you'll pay it or it's jail for you, sparky!
Wife is a drug addict who neglects the kids? Tough luck pal, she's still getting full custody over you. That's what you get for showing up to court with a penis.
Wife won't let YOU have the kids during your court-appointed custody days? File this paperwork. We'll look into it in about a year, if you're lucky.
You won't let HER have the kids during her court-appointed custody days? Freeze, motherfucker! Get you're hands on your head NOW! ON THE GROUND, ASSHOLE! DON'T MAKE ME SHOOT YOU!
Welcome to the world of divorce court, Mark.
I'm convinced they gave Saturn the axe because it made all the other divisions look bad.
No, they gave it the axe for two reasons:
1) Americans started buying ridiculously oversized SUV's. And so GM, in all its wisdom, decided to put EVERYTHING into its SUV's because hey, that trend is never going to end, right?
2) Saturns were all made in a non-union plant, and the unions were pushing back.
No kidding. I had a new Chevrolet back in the 80's that was a total turd (because I was still all naive and patriotic and wanted to buy American). When I got a new Toyota in the 90's (after the Chevy piece-of-shit had fallen to pieces after less than 8 years), it was a revelation. Since then, it's been Toyota exclusively for me. I'm glad American autos have finally caught up, but I'm afraid it was way too late for them to keep me as a customer.
Yeah, but none of those things is indicative of a bad design, just bad luck.
I wish them luck and hope the technology is ready before I'm too old to ride the thing.
With any luck, you'll live until 2050, when you can see another company announce plans to build a space elevator in 2100.
I'll be in my early 70's
Don't worry, by then you will have completely forgotten this project. And so will have everyone else.
Well building an unprecedentedly epic-sized space elevator based on technology that only exists so far in science fiction should be no different than building a big dam. I'm placing a huge buy order on their stock even as we speak.
Google on Monday said that IE's privacy protection, called P3P, is unprofitable to comply with."
Students have to be careful carrying a Sharpie, they could get cut!
If you have seen the sheer amount of graffiti in your average inner city school, you would understand that this rule is not as silly as it sounds. If you want to create a positive educational environment, one of the first steps is not having gang tags splayed on every open surface in your school.
It's questionable whether running schools like a business is helpful.
That's true, but most of the areas where these charter schools are being implemented are neighborhoods where the existing public school system has been an abysmal failure in the past. A debate over how to best change the existing system may be warranted, but it is unquestionably clear that the existing system MUST be changed. And with teacher's unions and political interests strongly invested in the existing system, sometimes charter schools are pretty much the only option for any change.
Ideally, you wouldn't need that. A principal could just go into a failing school, fire all the bad teachers, hire better ones, and make the changes needed to make a better school. But under the existing system in many of these districts, you simply can't do that.
You think they don't make a profit off of these charter schools?
Well, the NewSchools Venture Fund certainly doesn't. AFAIK they're a non-profit and give grants, not loans.
The most important rule taught, is if you have a lot of money, you can do whatever you want regardless of rules
The summary indicated that the student body in these schools is made up almost entirely the impoverished. So I seriously doubt there are any Richy Rich's in these schools buying their way out of anything. I suspect the fines are just a way of punishing the kids without resorting to old school techniques like spanking them, or disruptive techniques like suspension (which would take them out of class and disrupt the whole goal of their education). It's a bit unconventional, but considering how poorly the traditional system has worked in Chicago in the past, I can hardly blame them for trying something different.
Frankly, I suspect the whole impetus behind these complaints isn't coming from the parents of these kids so much as from the teacher's unions who want to smear the very idea of charter schools.
Should billionaires rule our schools?
No, but I don't think they are (well, at least no more than they rule everything else). The summary makes two HUGE jumps here. It starts by saying that the NewSchools Venture Fund is giving grants to charter schools. Then it attempts to smear the very idea by criticizing one particular practice of one particular group of charter schools in Chicago. Then it makes an even bigger jump by equating this with billionaires "ruling" our schools (as if individual donors to this fund created this one controversial policy, or even had any idea that it existed). I think that whoever wrote this summary is being unfairly critical of charter schools, and even more unfair to those rich donors who are actually *trying* to help (as opposed to those who just hoard their money and or just their wealth to buy new Ferraris).
In an era where the rich are able to get by paying so few taxes in the U.S., I think that those who still CHOOSE to help our ailing schools should be praised, not chastised, for the policies of one particular charter school (and I don't even find their policy that egregious in the first place). It's nice to know that not *all* rich people are just greedy pricks who would say "fuck all" to the poor.
Ideally, the U.S. would have a system where this kind of charity isn't necessary in the first place. But until that day, I don't think we should turn away any help just because it comes from Bill Gates.
This is /. so I'm going to need a car analogy.
If they convicted everyone there who was a thief, who would be left?
I trust Google with way too much as it is. And practices like this only make me even more determined to avoid them as much as reasonably possible. It's bad enough that pretty much every website out there now is feeding them tracking data (seriously, use Firefox with NoScript and just look at all the sites using Google-analytics, it's *everywhere*). I certainly am *not* about to let them takeover my entire browser too.
They'll have to content themselves with just reading my gmail.
I like to use the unicorn comparison. When anyone gives me the "Well, that doesn't prove that this thing ISN'T true," I challenge them to prove to me that unicorns DON'T exist.
real understanding as that which he is trying to debunk
The "real understanding" is that it's bullshit. And he does a masterful job of exposing it as such, and helping people become better equipped to resist con men who would prey on them.
Penn and Teller make pretty good money too. Good for him, good for them. I have no objection at all to someone making HONEST money.