Just because you disagree with the price of something (especially something that you don't need!), doesn't give you the right to steal it.
Agreed. I have made that point here before. Nobody seems to disagree with that, except the 1337 script kiddies whose opinion doesn't matter anyhow. What the intelligent people always disagree with me on are the semantics of the word "steal". It seems a lot of people don't feel that making duplicates of an mp3 file is stealing because you did not take something tangible. Yes, information wants to be free (so they say), and since mp3 files are computer files and therefore are information, they should be free. It's the same faulty logic you see when anyone takes a line of reasoning way further than it was intended to be taken. You know, if a little vitamin C is good for me, then I should take megadoses every day, and stupid logic like that.
Going OT now...
Tom Waits... His wonderful music...
ugh, are you serious? I downloaded a few songs from Orphans, Brawlers, and Bawlers... from eMusic. Every stinking review was glowing, so I blindly downloaded a few tracks. Is there some hobo musical genre I have missing out on? What is the appeal of some guy pretending(?) to be a hobo balladeer? I mean, why not go down to the local railyard with an 8 track recorder and record that? I am very open minded about music, but I don't get Tom Waits. Can you explain to me what you like about it? I am trying real hard here, but I just can't dig it. I know it's an opinion and that music is very subjective, but *everyone* gave it a good review (except me). What gives?
I mean, c'mon. I'll bet my bottom dollar this is just some stupid hoax. It reads just like one of those eMails your mom sends you telling you to avoid Pseudoephedrine and that you should send this to EVERYONE in your address book ASAP.
Me, I like to put my programming stuff on one monitor (IDE, browser,/., etc) and the secondary crap on the second monitor (like eMail, IM, documentation). I can also stretch out browser windows to see how my pages work in extreme window sizes, I can do better side by side comparisons, and I can code and look at the resulting web page, read the manual, etc at the same time.
Two monitors has provided me with more of a productivity boost than any other piece of hardware or software I can think of.
If you need to justify it beyond the productivity angle (such as a time cost per day) then I feel bad for you. First, because as the saying goes "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts". If you are more productive, that should be enough reason. It's not like you are requesting some major expense. Second, because two monitors *does* increase productivity and is therefore better. Several studies confirm this. If your company is not aware of this, then they should be.
One more angle you could play, especially if that monitor is an oldie: monitors have life expectancies. If you are using an old one (say 5-7 years old), perhaps its ROI has already been realized. Meaning, they would never give it to a new employee because it is beyond life expectancy. So you are in essence saving it from the scrap heap, squeezing every last bit of life out of it, and at the same time boosting your productivity.
First we let the machines do physical work, then some number crunching, and finally they do the thinking for us and keep us isolated. As we work toward to the automation of everything, I can see why people are scared by this...because it's really not that far out there.
I definitely plan to finish reading that later. Makes me want to get back into reading Asimov...
Honestly, I'd rather have someone with disabilities doing this than bagging my groceries (and smashing my eggs).
I have a family member who is mentally handicapped. It is very hard for her to find a job that she can do well. I think it's insulting to let someone handicapped do a job in a sub-par fashion. Handicapped people should be able to do a job, obviously, with reasonable accommodations, in order to keep the job. And yet, mentally handicapped people need jobs; it's an important factor of a sense of self-worth. And everyone deserves a measure of self-worth. It's a real dilemma. Very good idea you have here.
Yes, and they have but one moustache and keep passing it around. They also wear black and white striped shirts. Could you really fathom a beowulf cluster of the Frenchie boys?
I read a couple of pages. This is obviously sci-fi. Very interesting sci-fi, actually. I read two pages and it was quite gripping. Well done.
Your post is the second reference to this story, and both times it was implied that it is a real story. But, it refers to the year 2009 in the past tense. Not entirely implausible, but also not a real historical account...unless I slept a LONG time last night.
Forgive me if I'm being captain obvious, here, and this story about manna is well know by a subset of/. readers. This was the first I've heard of it. Clicking on the link, I was under the impression I was in for a real story.
If you have ever written a web page that uses a JSON service, what is being said should make immediate sense.
The question is, how big of a deal is this really? On one hand, you can see how it could be a huge deal if you put sensitive data in a JSON service. I have been a huge fan of AJAX for a while now, but I don't think that it should be used to make complex apps (such as eMail software) for several reasons, and this is one more reason.
If you need to store authentication (User session id's etc), store them in a variable within the javascript.
So what then, you pass the userid, sessionid, etc via the querystring? I don't that is making things more secure.
The problem here is that at some point the service has to cough up the data to the caller. If the caller has malicious intent, then what can you do? Meditate on this, I shall. That, or wait for prototype to fix it.
AJAX allows you to create service oriented applications (SOA). The JSON, XML, etc is a service. Which means that conceivably anyone could access it. It's by design. That's why someone insightfully said "One man's attack is another man's mashup". I don't think it's a huge deal, but I can see where this could get you in trouble if you are serving private data via JSON.
I wonder if there's a way to make the service read the cookie from the calling website? Maybe that's the fix that prototype and others are putting in?
Oh, I forgot to add...in response to your last three paragraphs...
If the Church were a secular organization, I'd applaud them for their work. Please note that the basis of my criticism is the fact that they claim to represent the Bible, which, if you cannot tell, I respect. When an organization claims to be a religious organization, they will be and should be held to a higher standard.
Anyhow, thanks for the nice reply. Like I said, I am not trying to offend anyone. I nowhere used hate speech, or implied that catholics are bad people, I am just pointing out what I believe to facts based on what I have seen, heard, and read. I was raised Catholic as well, and I never witnessed abuse by priests. Yet, it happens, even if in just a very small percentage of cases. That is a problem, yes, but the real problem has been the church's response.
"It's interesting that you say, and what bothers me most, in one post that the church should 'listen to scripture', and allow priests to marry, and this would somehow alleviate the child abuse problem. But in another post you say they're a business and they do whatever makes them popular and makes people give them money. Let's face it - these are contradictory statements if ever there were any"
I didn't say that they *should* be run like a business. I said that because according to my perception that's what they are. The two statements do not contradict. If they followed scripture, they wouldn't be a business and priests could marry.
You said it. They should stop masquerading as a religious institution. They give God and the Bible a bad name.
I have personally talked to several people, including my father, who is a funeral director, who have confirmed my story. My father has been a funeral director for 25 years, and he tells me that when a minister, protestant or catholic shows up, all they care about is who is going to pay. They won't do a thing without a check.
I talked to another couple who wanted a marriage annulled, and the priest wanted an exorbitant amount of money to perform the service. I mean, what is that? The Bible says marriage is forever, so annullment should not be an option. But if you pay enough, guess what?
When you start hearing anecdote after anecdote it starts to become empirical.
In many countries around the world it is the only organization that brings some hope and help to the poorest of the poorest, the most ardent Catholics normally have very little to give to the Church, so your idiotic portrayal can be debunked with ease.
Not saying they don't do some good. The problem is that they make a bunch of rice Christians who have no real founding in their faith. Get a history lesson and read up on Rwanda, and find out how that was a Catholic country. Read how priests and nuns participated in the slaughter. They do good, but the good is outweighed by the bad.
In the US, who is leading the trend of child molestation? And when a priest is accused of these crimes, they have been moved to another parish. Yes, they have a shortage of priests, so they need to keep what they have. If they obeyed the scriptures and allowed priests to marry then perhaps they would have more priests and they could lop off the ones who are abject perverts. A decent institution indeed. They are just as crooked as the protestants.
You call my argument idiotic, but yours is blind to the facts.
I'm Samuel L Jackson, and I want to take a moment to tell you about a film that's near and dear to my heart, SNAKES ON A PLANE! SNAKES ON A PLANE just might be the BEST film ever made! Grab yo homegirl, stop combin' that FUNKY HAIRDO, and GO SEE SNAKES ON A PLANE!!!
No, I can't argue with you on that. You are right. It's all a question of how you want to get ripped off. Want to go to Catholic church? Well, be prepared to pay up if you want your dead family members prayed out of purgatory. Rather go be a Baptist or Pentecostal? Well, that's ok too. There you will be have all kinds of scare tactics used on you about an evil god who burns people in hell. Become a protestant of another stripe and instead of receiving bible teachings, you get pseudo-theology which is really just feel-good psychology. And so on.
Not that they don't do some good. But the damage the churches cause outweighs the good they do. I mean no offense to anyone, but the churches have totally deviated from what they purport to teach. If you want to teach people social gospel or use scare tactics on people, then fine, but don't claim that the bible supports that stuff.
Like I said, I don't mean to offend anyone. Just speaking my mind.
Heck yes! Back when I was just a road kid to a rum dum, I took on the moniker. Since then, after he caught a westbound, and many bone polishers later, I am still on the run. Were it not for wi-fi, why I'd never be able to talk to you.
The 802.11j specification (designed for the unique geometry of the common boxcar) has been a real lifesaver to us enlightened hobos.
The Catholic church did not write the Bible, as another poster pointed out. The Catholic church got its start from a bastardized form of Christianity. Things like the trinity, the clergy/laity division, priestly celibacy, and political intermeddling aren't supported by the Bible. The Catholic church has introduced these things based on their own ideas. They have, to paraphrase 1 Cor 4:6, gone beyond the things written.
Why? Because Christianity as taught in the Bible is a horrible money-making scheme, and it doesn't get you very far in the political-power-grubbing department either. The Catholic church therefore needed to resort to something else.
Thanks for the well thought out reply. I understand the points you are making, but one part in particular intrigued me, specifically about genetic algorithms. I might like to explore that a bit. Any idea where I could start? Know any good books, etc?
Slashdot Mirror
And what, you are here scouting it out for them?
Agreed. I have made that point here before. Nobody seems to disagree with that, except the 1337 script kiddies whose opinion doesn't matter anyhow. What the intelligent people always disagree with me on are the semantics of the word "steal". It seems a lot of people don't feel that making duplicates of an mp3 file is stealing because you did not take something tangible. Yes, information wants to be free (so they say), and since mp3 files are computer files and therefore are information, they should be free. It's the same faulty logic you see when anyone takes a line of reasoning way further than it was intended to be taken. You know, if a little vitamin C is good for me, then I should take megadoses every day, and stupid logic like that.
Going OT now...
ugh, are you serious? I downloaded a few songs from Orphans, Brawlers, and Bawlers... from eMusic. Every stinking review was glowing, so I blindly downloaded a few tracks. Is there some hobo musical genre I have missing out on? What is the appeal of some guy pretending(?) to be a hobo balladeer? I mean, why not go down to the local railyard with an 8 track recorder and record that? I am very open minded about music, but I don't get Tom Waits. Can you explain to me what you like about it? I am trying real hard here, but I just can't dig it. I know it's an opinion and that music is very subjective, but *everyone* gave it a good review (except me). What gives?
any way to mod parent -1 Hoax?
I mean, c'mon. I'll bet my bottom dollar this is just some stupid hoax. It reads just like one of those eMails your mom sends you telling you to avoid Pseudoephedrine and that you should send this to EVERYONE in your address book ASAP.
Gimme a break.
Agreed, good points.
/., etc) and the secondary crap on the second monitor (like eMail, IM, documentation). I can also stretch out browser windows to see how my pages work in extreme window sizes, I can do better side by side comparisons, and I can code and look at the resulting web page, read the manual, etc at the same time.
Me, I like to put my programming stuff on one monitor (IDE, browser,
Two monitors has provided me with more of a productivity boost than any other piece of hardware or software I can think of.
If you need to justify it beyond the productivity angle (such as a time cost per day) then I feel bad for you. First, because as the saying goes "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts". If you are more productive, that should be enough reason. It's not like you are requesting some major expense. Second, because two monitors *does* increase productivity and is therefore better. Several studies confirm this. If your company is not aware of this, then they should be.
One more angle you could play, especially if that monitor is an oldie: monitors have life expectancies. If you are using an old one (say 5-7 years old), perhaps its ROI has already been realized. Meaning, they would never give it to a new employee because it is beyond life expectancy. So you are in essence saving it from the scrap heap, squeezing every last bit of life out of it, and at the same time boosting your productivity.
I see.
First we let the machines do physical work, then some number crunching, and finally they do the thinking for us and keep us isolated. As we work toward to the automation of everything, I can see why people are scared by this...because it's really not that far out there.
I definitely plan to finish reading that later. Makes me want to get back into reading Asimov...
I agree with you 100%.
Honestly, I'd rather have someone with disabilities doing this than bagging my groceries (and smashing my eggs).
I have a family member who is mentally handicapped. It is very hard for her to find a job that she can do well. I think it's insulting to let someone handicapped do a job in a sub-par fashion. Handicapped people should be able to do a job, obviously, with reasonable accommodations, in order to keep the job. And yet, mentally handicapped people need jobs; it's an important factor of a sense of self-worth. And everyone deserves a measure of self-worth. It's a real dilemma. Very good idea you have here.
No, you see, the USPO has what they affectionately call "The Mechanical Texan"...
Yes, and they have but one moustache and keep passing it around. They also wear black and white striped shirts. Could you really fathom a beowulf cluster of the Frenchie boys?
And if you need to get a clue, here you go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLAamUlu-H8
Dude, I don't need manna.
I have leprechauns who tell me to burn things.
Where do you live?
I read a couple of pages. This is obviously sci-fi. Very interesting sci-fi, actually. I read two pages and it was quite gripping. Well done.
/. readers. This was the first I've heard of it. Clicking on the link, I was under the impression I was in for a real story.
Your post is the second reference to this story, and both times it was implied that it is a real story. But, it refers to the year 2009 in the past tense. Not entirely implausible, but also not a real historical account...unless I slept a LONG time last night.
Forgive me if I'm being captain obvious, here, and this story about manna is well know by a subset of
If you have ever written a web page that uses a JSON service, what is being said should make immediate sense.
The question is, how big of a deal is this really? On one hand, you can see how it could be a huge deal if you put sensitive data in a JSON service. I have been a huge fan of AJAX for a while now, but I don't think that it should be used to make complex apps (such as eMail software) for several reasons, and this is one more reason.
So what then, you pass the userid, sessionid, etc via the querystring? I don't that is making things more secure.
The problem here is that at some point the service has to cough up the data to the caller. If the caller has malicious intent, then what can you do? Meditate on this, I shall. That, or wait for prototype to fix it.
AJAX allows you to create service oriented applications (SOA). The JSON, XML, etc is a service. Which means that conceivably anyone could access it. It's by design. That's why someone insightfully said "One man's attack is another man's mashup". I don't think it's a huge deal, but I can see where this could get you in trouble if you are serving private data via JSON.
I wonder if there's a way to make the service read the cookie from the calling website? Maybe that's the fix that prototype and others are putting in?
Oh, I forgot to add...in response to your last three paragraphs...
If the Church were a secular organization, I'd applaud them for their work. Please note that the basis of my criticism is the fact that they claim to represent the Bible, which, if you cannot tell, I respect. When an organization claims to be a religious organization, they will be and should be held to a higher standard.
Anyhow, thanks for the nice reply. Like I said, I am not trying to offend anyone. I nowhere used hate speech, or implied that catholics are bad people, I am just pointing out what I believe to facts based on what I have seen, heard, and read. I was raised Catholic as well, and I never witnessed abuse by priests. Yet, it happens, even if in just a very small percentage of cases. That is a problem, yes, but the real problem has been the church's response.
"It's interesting that you say, and what bothers me most, in one post that the church should 'listen to scripture', and allow priests to marry, and this would somehow alleviate the child abuse problem. But in another post you say they're a business and they do whatever makes them popular and makes people give them money. Let's face it - these are contradictory statements if ever there were any"
I didn't say that they *should* be run like a business. I said that because according to my perception that's what they are. The two statements do not contradict. If they followed scripture, they wouldn't be a business and priests could marry.
You said it. They should stop masquerading as a religious institution. They give God and the Bible a bad name.
I have personally talked to several people, including my father, who is a funeral director, who have confirmed my story. My father has been a funeral director for 25 years, and he tells me that when a minister, protestant or catholic shows up, all they care about is who is going to pay. They won't do a thing without a check.
I talked to another couple who wanted a marriage annulled, and the priest wanted an exorbitant amount of money to perform the service. I mean, what is that? The Bible says marriage is forever, so annullment should not be an option. But if you pay enough, guess what?
When you start hearing anecdote after anecdote it starts to become empirical.
If there is one who is misinformed, it's you.
Not saying they don't do some good. The problem is that they make a bunch of rice Christians who have no real founding in their faith. Get a history lesson and read up on Rwanda, and find out how that was a Catholic country. Read how priests and nuns participated in the slaughter. They do good, but the good is outweighed by the bad.
In the US, who is leading the trend of child molestation? And when a priest is accused of these crimes, they have been moved to another parish. Yes, they have a shortage of priests, so they need to keep what they have. If they obeyed the scriptures and allowed priests to marry then perhaps they would have more priests and they could lop off the ones who are abject perverts. A decent institution indeed. They are just as crooked as the protestants.
You call my argument idiotic, but yours is blind to the facts.
This is the obligatory post grousing about the aprilfools tag. It spoils the joke, don't you know?
Quick! Mod this post insightful!
I'm Samuel L Jackson, and I want to take a moment to tell you about a film that's near and dear to my heart, SNAKES ON A PLANE! SNAKES ON A PLANE just might be the BEST film ever made! Grab yo homegirl, stop combin' that FUNKY HAIRDO, and GO SEE SNAKES ON A PLANE!!!
No, I can't argue with you on that. You are right. It's all a question of how you want to get ripped off. Want to go to Catholic church? Well, be prepared to pay up if you want your dead family members prayed out of purgatory. Rather go be a Baptist or Pentecostal? Well, that's ok too. There you will be have all kinds of scare tactics used on you about an evil god who burns people in hell. Become a protestant of another stripe and instead of receiving bible teachings, you get pseudo-theology which is really just feel-good psychology. And so on.
Not that they don't do some good. But the damage the churches cause outweighs the good they do. I mean no offense to anyone, but the churches have totally deviated from what they purport to teach. If you want to teach people social gospel or use scare tactics on people, then fine, but don't claim that the bible supports that stuff.
Like I said, I don't mean to offend anyone. Just speaking my mind.
Heck yes! Back when I was just a road kid to a rum dum, I took on the moniker. Since then, after he caught a westbound, and many bone polishers later, I am still on the run. Were it not for wi-fi, why I'd never be able to talk to you.
The 802.11j specification (designed for the unique geometry of the common boxcar) has been a real lifesaver to us enlightened hobos.
That, or the name just sounded funny to me.
The Catholic church did not write the Bible, as another poster pointed out. The Catholic church got its start from a bastardized form of Christianity. Things like the trinity, the clergy/laity division, priestly celibacy, and political intermeddling aren't supported by the Bible. The Catholic church has introduced these things based on their own ideas. They have, to paraphrase 1 Cor 4:6, gone beyond the things written.
Why? Because Christianity as taught in the Bible is a horrible money-making scheme, and it doesn't get you very far in the political-power-grubbing department either. The Catholic church therefore needed to resort to something else.
Thanks for the well thought out reply. I understand the points you are making, but one part in particular intrigued me, specifically about genetic algorithms. I might like to explore that a bit. Any idea where I could start? Know any good books, etc?
Just messing with you, nothing more. I guess that was harsh.
wow...it's good you got a break from the trailer park to type your post. Was mom on Jerry Springer or Judge Judy recently?
Oh, and are you still sporting the mullet?