That is a very flimsy argument in support of selling them. He said he didn't want to be a shill or look like one, so selling off the freely received reviewed products for a chunk of their retail value would effectively be no different from the company giving him money up front.
Given that such things already exist at phone companies, I would say yes.
It's not in the same vein of "listen in to feed you ads" but it's still listening in nonetheless. The phone companies even get paid for providing such services to government agencies.
I'm guessing you haven't had the pleasure of working in the typical firm where the company's years-old ENTIRE lifetime of work and data is passed around e-mail as a 80MB Excel attachment.
His point was that industry systems in the US (and outside of Iran) are also prone to attack, and that it's not just some security paranoia that the site manager could just brush off so he can get to the admin controls via Remote Desktop.
For videos that do not allow skipping, its more time efficient to flip to a different window while the ad plays.
Screw that, I'll just not watch it or watch the 5 or so reuploads that are suggested to me on the sidebar. I/might/ consider it if I could mute individual browser tabs but I don't think that's possible yet.
Iraq on the other hand wasn't attached to China, and didn't have a comeback during the war where MacArthur got too close to China and nearly got chased out of the country for it.
Switching to DVDs probably just encourages bloat (e.g. GNOME3) when there are plenty of usable alternatives that fit current restrictions.
Automatically switching constraints to fit inside the next largest available media is like buying pants with larger and larger waists as you grow fatter and fatter. Sure, sometimes you need to actually get bigger pants (e.g. during a growth spurt when you're 12) but there comes a time when what you have is going to be good enough for a loooooong time (or at least, should be).
You don't see people yelling at others for wanting to fit in the pants they've been wearing for a while. Why is optical media any different? If your installer and default desktop environment is too big to fit in 700MB of space, then somebody's (or some bodies are) doing it wrong.
It's not just about constraints in resources, it's about the principle: I want my pants to fit forever, and so does Debian.
The best way to fix the PHP problem at this point is to make the alternatives so outstanding that the choice of the better hammer becomes obvious.
I think he's proposing that somebody starts a marketing campaign to trick/convince all the PHP developers to switch to something better because clearly, Outstanding = Great PR.
I hear that this Streisand guy does a great job of bringing things to the attention of the general public; he'd be perfect for the job.
In English, we have a fallacy: "If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear from our snooping. Thus, it's okay to snoop on your communication channels."
Am I the only one who thinks that this GTLD craze is going a little bit too far? (Along with the repetitive coverage on Slashdot telling us every day how many applications there were)
Soon, people everywhere are going to have a tough time trying to remember if their favourite cat website's URL was whether slashdot.cat, slashdot.cats, slashdot.kitty, slashdot.kitten, etc. and whether they should go to slashdot.pets, slashdot.pound, slashdot.rescue, or slashdot.shelter to find a new animal to bring into their home.
I'm (mostly) kidding but I'm getting the same headache I usually get when somebody tries to explain to me how I should "refactor a system to be completely object-oriented because it's better".
Probably going to be just another craze that'll blow over after a couple years and everybody will go back to using the "old" TLDs like.com,.org,.net, because they "look more legitimate" (or because they're too cheap/lazy).
If you read the GP's post, he clearly said that the system restore feature had a minimal restore option (which he used to wipe the garbage), not that the laptop didn't come with bloatware.
Maybe your laptop had something similar. Who knows, you're just an AC.
The way I see it, I think the main reason that post triggered the spam filter is because it name-dropped a lot. You've probably seen a lot of spam where they go
"Are you a stay-at-home programmer dad getting fed up with Google+, Tumblr, Facebook, Blogspot, Twitter, LiveJournal, Slashdot, 4chan, Reddit, MySpace, Xanga, and Angelfire? Come to this new site at http COLON SLASH SLASH www DOT ${SITE}.cm/referrals.php?user=dr_blurb&userid=676176 (type it out in your address bar!) and get ahead of the Internet Revvolushun while making BIG BUCK$$$!! At ${SITE}, you can become the next Google or Micro$oft or Paypal or eBay and make lots of money like Donald Trump and Zuckerberg and Bill Gates!!"
That combined with a couple other/proprietary/ heuristics, and you have yourself a nice false positive (assuming his rant is actually a false positive).
Are you still insistent that the best way to do anything is in C?
Given that a lot of the newfangled interpreted languages compile to C...I don't see what's wrong with that. That is, of course, begging the question that everybody's favourite new language (Python, Java, etc.) kitchen sink or otherwise (Ruby, PHP, etc.) is/actually/ better to work with for your particular application than C or assembly. And languages like MATLAB are basically reincarnations of old languages like Fortran (with extra features and standard libraries) that people like to mock and make fun of.
The way I see, trend-chasing in your field is like being a music hipster chasing indie bands instead of focusing on what's actually good. I think you should be damn well competent and be able to do anything required of you in your field, job, and maybe specialty but you shouldn't have to be all "HEY I HAVE 5 YEARS EXPERIENCE IN THIS NEW HIP LANGUAGE, C SUCKS".
That and get the whole "C is old and useless" idea out of your head. There's a reason it is still used by a large chunk of the industry not involved with web-dev (*coughinterpretedlanguage*cough) and it's not because the companies are too stupid or too dependent on C to switch.
Personally, I think it'd be nice to have a usable landline available within reachable distance from my position in case there is interference (wireless, concussive, or otherwise) that prevents my cell phone from working when I actually need to use a phone, no matter the rarity of the occasion.
Your post reminds me of the Tennesee man who didn't pay his firefighter fees and was upset the firefighters didn't help his house from not burning down despite offering to pay for it no matter the cost.
On the other hand, expensive touchscreens in public phone booths is just asking for trouble.
> Lastly, this, in a small way, Google's fault. Their algorithm is fooled by stuff the human curating process would've had a much harder time being fooled by.
I think the inherent problem is figuring out whether posts made on several websites are made by the same person or more than one person with the same name (or different names + same person, etc.). And even if it's not one person behind the attack, it could be a group of people conspiring to do the same thing (and then you ask where you draw the line between "purposefully harmful" and "honest message that needs to get out").
I don't think a human curating process would be able to comb through as much data as quickly OR be able to do a better job than Google at figuring out whether a set of websites is run by people trying to undermine the spirit and the assumptions that the search algorithm makes or if it's an actual trend that's starting to emerge.
In my opinion, blaming Google would be like blaming a technical solution for not solving a social problem. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to solve the problem, just that blaming it for not solving an inherently hard problem is just too...knee-jerk-like in the reaction. If a bunch of ACs starting attacking you and talking shit about you while criticizing your post(s), you wouldn't be able to confidently say "this is all done by one guy" or "a lot of people have legitimate reason to criticize my post".
The headline is too alarmist anyway for an issue with a known solution: If it was one guy paying off several sockpuppets to go around the town and spread nasty rumours (or just gossip a lot with people who can't shut up about "scandals" over coffee or bridge) about a specific person or group that are false and ask the target/victim to pony up money to squash the false rumours, it'd be a clear-cut case of blackmail and libel. I really doubt there is a freedom of speech issue at all.
Slashdot Mirror
That is a very flimsy argument in support of selling them. He said he didn't want to be a shill or look like one, so selling off the freely received reviewed products for a chunk of their retail value would effectively be no different from the company giving him money up front.
Ahh, the good ol' CADT model of development.
Given that such things already exist at phone companies, I would say yes.
It's not in the same vein of "listen in to feed you ads" but it's still listening in nonetheless. The phone companies even get paid for providing such services to government agencies.
"I never worked in a company with normal people."
I'm guessing you haven't had the pleasure of working in the typical firm where the company's years-old ENTIRE lifetime of work and data is passed around e-mail as a 80MB Excel attachment.
His point was that industry systems in the US (and outside of Iran) are also prone to attack, and that it's not just some security paranoia that the site manager could just brush off so he can get to the admin controls via Remote Desktop.
You're just one step closer to the dystopian future of the all-despising baby skull: http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2490
It's not like anybody clicks the link anyway.
For videos that do not allow skipping, its more time efficient to flip to a different window while the ad plays.
Screw that, I'll just not watch it or watch the 5 or so reuploads that are suggested to me on the sidebar. /might/ consider it if I could mute individual browser tabs but I don't think that's possible yet.
I
Iraq on the other hand wasn't attached to China, and didn't have a comeback during the war where MacArthur got too close to China and nearly got chased out of the country for it.
Others are college student roboteers, working on their entry in a regional IEEE robotics contest.
(Emphasis mine)
Seriously, it's "roboticist". How can you screw that up? You're a goddamn editor.
Next thing you know, you'll be calling coders "Programeers" because they work on programs.
Switching to DVDs probably just encourages bloat (e.g. GNOME3) when there are plenty of usable alternatives that fit current restrictions.
Automatically switching constraints to fit inside the next largest available media is like buying pants with larger and larger waists as you grow fatter and fatter. Sure, sometimes you need to actually get bigger pants (e.g. during a growth spurt when you're 12) but there comes a time when what you have is going to be good enough for a loooooong time (or at least, should be).
You don't see people yelling at others for wanting to fit in the pants they've been wearing for a while. Why is optical media any different? If your installer and default desktop environment is too big to fit in 700MB of space, then somebody's (or some bodies are) doing it wrong.
It's not just about constraints in resources, it's about the principle: I want my pants to fit forever, and so does Debian.
The trapped cops were getting plenty of food and water throughout the ordeal. They were essentially jailed...in the pit.
Make sure to balance your diet so that you don't suffer from Rabbit starvation
The best way to fix the PHP problem at this point is to make the alternatives so outstanding that the choice of the better hammer becomes obvious.
I think he's proposing that somebody starts a marketing campaign to trick/convince all the PHP developers to switch to something better because clearly, Outstanding = Great PR.
I hear that this Streisand guy does a great job of bringing things to the attention of the general public; he'd be perfect for the job.
Humans make mistakes, robots should not.
In English, we have a fallacy: "If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear from our snooping. Thus, it's okay to snoop on your communication channels."
It's the government overhead.
Am I the only one who thinks that this GTLD craze is going a little bit too far? (Along with the repetitive coverage on Slashdot telling us every day how many applications there were)
Soon, people everywhere are going to have a tough time trying to remember if their favourite cat website's URL was whether slashdot.cat, slashdot.cats, slashdot.kitty, slashdot.kitten, etc. and whether they should go to slashdot.pets, slashdot.pound, slashdot.rescue, or slashdot.shelter to find a new animal to bring into their home.
I'm (mostly) kidding but I'm getting the same headache I usually get when somebody tries to explain to me how I should "refactor a system to be completely object-oriented because it's better".
Probably going to be just another craze that'll blow over after a couple years and everybody will go back to using the "old" TLDs like .com, .org, .net, because they "look more legitimate" (or because they're too cheap/lazy).
Obligatory Penny Arcade comic: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/12/05
If you read the GP's post, he clearly said that the system restore feature had a minimal restore option (which he used to wipe the garbage), not that the laptop didn't come with bloatware.
Maybe your laptop had something similar. Who knows, you're just an AC.
The way I see it, I think the main reason that post triggered the spam filter is because it name-dropped a lot. You've probably seen a lot of spam where they go
"Are you a stay-at-home programmer dad getting fed up with Google+, Tumblr, Facebook, Blogspot, Twitter, LiveJournal, Slashdot, 4chan, Reddit, MySpace, Xanga, and Angelfire? Come to this new site at http COLON SLASH SLASH www DOT ${SITE}.cm/referrals.php?user=dr_blurb&userid=676176 (type it out in your address bar!) and get ahead of the Internet Revvolushun while making BIG BUCK$$$!! At ${SITE}, you can become the next Google or Micro$oft or Paypal or eBay and make lots of money like Donald Trump and Zuckerberg and Bill Gates!!"
That combined with a couple other /proprietary/ heuristics, and you have yourself a nice false positive (assuming his rant is actually a false positive).
Are you still insistent that the best way to do anything is in C?
Given that a lot of the newfangled interpreted languages compile to C...I don't see what's wrong with that. That is, of course, begging the question that everybody's favourite new language (Python, Java, etc.) kitchen sink or otherwise (Ruby, PHP, etc.) is /actually/ better to work with for your particular application than C or assembly. And languages like MATLAB are basically reincarnations of old languages like Fortran (with extra features and standard libraries) that people like to mock and make fun of.
The way I see, trend-chasing in your field is like being a music hipster chasing indie bands instead of focusing on what's actually good. I think you should be damn well competent and be able to do anything required of you in your field, job, and maybe specialty but you shouldn't have to be all "HEY I HAVE 5 YEARS EXPERIENCE IN THIS NEW HIP LANGUAGE, C SUCKS".
That and get the whole "C is old and useless" idea out of your head. There's a reason it is still used by a large chunk of the industry not involved with web-dev (*coughinterpretedlanguage*cough) and it's not because the companies are too stupid or too dependent on C to switch.
This is to everybody's advantage, as it reduces friction and increases response times.
Personally, I would want to decrease response times, not increase them.
Personally, I think it'd be nice to have a usable landline available within reachable distance from my position in case there is interference (wireless, concussive, or otherwise) that prevents my cell phone from working when I actually need to use a phone, no matter the rarity of the occasion.
Your post reminds me of the Tennesee man who didn't pay his firefighter fees and was upset the firefighters didn't help his house from not burning down despite offering to pay for it no matter the cost.
On the other hand, expensive touchscreens in public phone booths is just asking for trouble.
> Lastly, this, in a small way, Google's fault. Their algorithm is fooled by stuff the human curating process would've had a much harder time being fooled by.
I think the inherent problem is figuring out whether posts made on several websites are made by the same person or more than one person with the same name (or different names + same person, etc.). And even if it's not one person behind the attack, it could be a group of people conspiring to do the same thing (and then you ask where you draw the line between "purposefully harmful" and "honest message that needs to get out").
I don't think a human curating process would be able to comb through as much data as quickly OR be able to do a better job than Google at figuring out whether a set of websites is run by people trying to undermine the spirit and the assumptions that the search algorithm makes or if it's an actual trend that's starting to emerge.
In my opinion, blaming Google would be like blaming a technical solution for not solving a social problem. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to solve the problem, just that blaming it for not solving an inherently hard problem is just too...knee-jerk-like in the reaction. If a bunch of ACs starting attacking you and talking shit about you while criticizing your post(s), you wouldn't be able to confidently say "this is all done by one guy" or "a lot of people have legitimate reason to criticize my post".
The headline is too alarmist anyway for an issue with a known solution: If it was one guy paying off several sockpuppets to go around the town and spread nasty rumours (or just gossip a lot with people who can't shut up about "scandals" over coffee or bridge) about a specific person or group that are false and ask the target/victim to pony up money to squash the false rumours, it'd be a clear-cut case of blackmail and libel. I really doubt there is a freedom of speech issue at all.