In seriousness, I think the main reason it didn't happen was more that the passengers on the plane were heroes. Or, that's the most pausible explanaiton to me.:)
The time and place to settle those, and similar, differences of opinion is in court. You settle those differences of opinion with polite words, articles in the newspaper, recall petitions against the DA and mayor, and civil rights lawsuits against the town. You do not settle those issues with bullets and fists. Not just because the cops have an infinite supply of both, but because it's just plain uncivilized for grown adults to settle their differences that way. Soap box, ballot box, jury box, ammo box. In that order.
That is one of the best worded explanations of civil behavior when faced with potential misconduct I've ever read. Thank you.
I've had a slightly different experience. I use DirecTV; while it's not the snappiest at changing channels, the channel listing menu is fairly responsive. In comparison, using my in-laws' (or my dad's) digital cable is like trying to use the application through a VPN into a slow windows ME box in Elbonia. Not only was it slow to change channels, the channel list itself had noticeable rendering latency and artifacts.
It wasn't until very recently that I encountered the Bash.org quote you mentioned. I'm curious which predates which, but I'm guessing it's the IRC quote rather than the comic.
He might well be, I don't know him. However, I've read a fair amount of his blog in the past, and several of his employee-related posts are about how to find good programmers (scratch that: Excellent programmers), and entice them to stay and work for you, because it's cheaper to pay one person well than to have constant turnover of mediocre or average or even above-average employees. So, he seems to put a lot of thought into how to make members feel like a valued part of a team.
It sounds like many of our employers don't do that, and therefore we are thankful for a time when we can get away from them mid-day.
My impression of Fog Freek software was that they tried really hard to find good people, and then KEEP them. So, they're a little different from most companies, in that while I'm sure Joel would fire people if he felt it necessary, he's picky enough about who he takes (and opinionated enough about the importance (and difficulty) of hiring Awesome People) that I doubt many things would lead to someone being fired or laid off there. It's probably cheaper for him to keep someone until they get more business than have to spend money hiring a replacement in six months.
With that perspective, it makes sense that they'd try hard to foster employee loyalty, as they already try to treat employees well. (Or, that's what his blog claims. I've never worked there.:))
Can you elaborate on this? I've never noticed anything like that, but then I've never been looking. I don't mean to sound contrary (I know I said earlier that I was skeptical of your claim), I'm merely curious and looking for something more informative, especially since I've never heard anything like that before.
What if you had two wireless networks: one that was publically available and open (and which you took documented precautious not to use), and one which was used by your computers? Then, then the police break in your door, you (or your lawyers) could point to the care you took to ensure that actions on that router were not taken by you.
Of course, reaching that point (door broken in by cops, computers confiscated, some DA talking to you about a plea bargain) is probably considered a failure condition by most people.
why do they go after individuals who download it rather than the sites that provide it? I thought the FBI was supposed to go after the big fish.
Let's put on our tin foil hats...
Because even letting the bits through your router or computer (or possessing media which displays things that even/look/ like CP) is a burning offense. Because the laws crucify anyone that was foolish enough to follow a shortened link to 4chan. Because it's easier to catch the small fish. Because the FBI/Police are (apparently?) about getting evidence to prosecutors so they can successfully prosecute a case, and prosecutors don't ever want to be perceived as "weak on pedophiles". Also, if they think they have you, they will likely try to get you to plea bargain in hopes of exposing the bigger fish you want them to catch.
Of these problems, I think the first two are the larger ones - few people are technically adept enough to recognize the difference between "this guy was trolled hard on a forum" and "this guy collects the icky stuff", and therefore err on the side of "well, the court will decide...". While this is conservative and safe, it also really screws you if you get caught up by mistake, or have a no-knock raid that busts in your door at 2 am and confiscates all of your computer hardware.
Trolls that get fed are only a problem if their behavior overloads your site's resources, or if their actions drive away legitemate customers/users. This is meant to solve the latter. If only trolls see trolling, then it doesn't matter if they feed each other in a neverending festival of trolling.
There is no effective Chess equivalent to a Zerg rush. (Thing's like the Fool's Mate don't count, they require active participation of both players.)
It's been a while since I played chess, as it was mainly in middle school and high school. However, I'm pretty sure that there IS an analogue to chess's complexity in an RTS. Let's talk more about Starcraft 2. Some tactics work well against poor players (like me), but skilled players know that there are a variety of openings, all of which you need to be able to defend against. There are several mid-game branchings of technology trees (magine if you didn't know whether your opponent was developing Bishops or Knights until they engaged you) which you can recognize based on timings of events in the game (buildings seen, units seen, etc). On top of that, some maps favor different tactics.
If you've never watch Day9's video blog on Starcraft 2 strategy (especially his videos on learning the timings of tech trees and what your opponent is working on), it's fascinating. It may change your mind about the relative complexity of chess versus SC2. SC2 has branching choices for what your opponent might do, combined with fog of war, resource management, and the very real problem of maintaining battlefield awareness (which I am terrible at) enough to recognize what your opponent is doing before he rolls into your base with something you're ill-prepared to defend against.
Day[9] Daily #132, Back to Basics: http://day9tv.blip.tv/file/3732340/ He rambles a bit at the start about Random Crap, but talks a lot about the fundamentals of the game, and such. (I wanted to find the video he did during the Starcraft 2 beta about recognizing your opponent's tech tree decisions based on the time at which you see certain telltale units, but I can't find it. If another poster knows what I'm referring to, can you link it?)
World of Warcraft costs me $14/month or so, with a $60 expansion every couple of years, so let's amortize that and say that I pay ~$16/month, or about $200/year.
Similar to eating fast food three times in a month, or once if I buy for the rest of the family too. Less than ordering pizza once a month. Less than seeing a movie with my wife, less than seeing two by myself. Equal to buying three and a half full-price games in a year.
For that price, I get more entertainment than Netflix, and don't generally feel tempted to buy (and regret) as many big name games.
So yes, playing WoW costs a bunch. Over six years, quite a bit. Then look at how much you spend on burgers or pizza in a year, and reconsider.
Slashdot Mirror
Many are just pessimistic enough to believe this would happen.
In seriousness, I think the main reason it didn't happen was more that the passengers on the plane were heroes. Or, that's the most pausible explanaiton to me. :)
Perhaps no one thought to upload and tag the photos until after the raid?
The time and place to settle those, and similar, differences of opinion is in court. You settle those differences of opinion with polite words, articles in the newspaper, recall petitions against the DA and mayor, and civil rights lawsuits against the town. You do not settle those issues with bullets and fists. Not just because the cops have an infinite supply of both, but because it's just plain uncivilized for grown adults to settle their differences that way. Soap box, ballot box, jury box, ammo box. In that order.
That is one of the best worded explanations of civil behavior when faced with potential misconduct I've ever read. Thank you.
Are you seriously telling me you looked at the picture (or the description) and didn't laugh? It's absurd, it's silly -- it's humor.
In Nevada, it's legal, so you could just spend some of that $5k on a trip there.
I've had a slightly different experience. I use DirecTV; while it's not the snappiest at changing channels, the channel listing menu is fairly responsive. In comparison, using my in-laws' (or my dad's) digital cable is like trying to use the application through a VPN into a slow windows ME box in Elbonia. Not only was it slow to change channels, the channel list itself had noticeable rendering latency and artifacts.
I thought he was referring to the obligatory Penny Arcade, iChoke-U: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/8/1/
It wasn't until very recently that I encountered the Bash.org quote you mentioned. I'm curious which predates which, but I'm guessing it's the IRC quote rather than the comic.
He might well be, I don't know him. However, I've read a fair amount of his blog in the past, and several of his employee-related posts are about how to find good programmers (scratch that: Excellent programmers), and entice them to stay and work for you, because it's cheaper to pay one person well than to have constant turnover of mediocre or average or even above-average employees. So, he seems to put a lot of thought into how to make members feel like a valued part of a team.
It sounds like many of our employers don't do that, and therefore we are thankful for a time when we can get away from them mid-day.
Habits are most effective when maintained, and insurance companies are less likely to reimburse you if your car wasn't locked.
My impression of Fog Freek software was that they tried really hard to find good people, and then KEEP them. So, they're a little different from most companies, in that while I'm sure Joel would fire people if he felt it necessary, he's picky enough about who he takes (and opinionated enough about the importance (and difficulty) of hiring Awesome People) that I doubt many things would lead to someone being fired or laid off there. It's probably cheaper for him to keep someone until they get more business than have to spend money hiring a replacement in six months.
With that perspective, it makes sense that they'd try hard to foster employee loyalty, as they already try to treat employees well. (Or, that's what his blog claims. I've never worked there. :))
Can you elaborate on this? I've never noticed anything like that, but then I've never been looking. I don't mean to sound contrary (I know I said earlier that I was skeptical of your claim), I'm merely curious and looking for something more informative, especially since I've never heard anything like that before.
That seems like a bit of a stretch.
To be fair, if someone will be driving slower than others (or the speed limit), the right lane IS the lane to do so, by convention.
I don't understand - how do people become wealthy in a communist system?
Just make sure they connect to the Upside-down-ternet.
What if you had two wireless networks: one that was publically available and open (and which you took documented precautious not to use), and one which was used by your computers? Then, then the police break in your door, you (or your lawyers) could point to the care you took to ensure that actions on that router were not taken by you.
Of course, reaching that point (door broken in by cops, computers confiscated, some DA talking to you about a plea bargain) is probably considered a failure condition by most people.
why do they go after individuals who download it rather than the sites that provide it? I thought the FBI was supposed to go after the big fish.
Let's put on our tin foil hats ...
Because even letting the bits through your router or computer (or possessing media which displays things that even /look/ like CP) is a burning offense.
Because the laws crucify anyone that was foolish enough to follow a shortened link to 4chan.
Because it's easier to catch the small fish.
Because the FBI/Police are (apparently?) about getting evidence to prosecutors so they can successfully prosecute a case, and prosecutors don't ever want to be perceived as "weak on pedophiles".
Also, if they think they have you, they will likely try to get you to plea bargain in hopes of exposing the bigger fish you want them to catch.
Of these problems, I think the first two are the larger ones - few people are technically adept enough to recognize the difference between "this guy was trolled hard on a forum" and "this guy collects the icky stuff", and therefore err on the side of "well, the court will decide ...". While this is conservative and safe, it also really screws you if you get caught up by mistake, or have a no-knock raid that busts in your door at 2 am and confiscates all of your computer hardware.
Steam predated it by roughly five years, and I'm sure there were earlier ones.
Trolls that get fed are only a problem if their behavior overloads your site's resources, or if their actions drive away legitemate customers/users. This is meant to solve the latter. If only trolls see trolling, then it doesn't matter if they feed each other in a neverending festival of trolling.
There is no effective Chess equivalent to a Zerg rush. (Thing's like the Fool's Mate don't count, they require active participation of both players.)
It's been a while since I played chess, as it was mainly in middle school and high school. However, I'm pretty sure that there IS an analogue to chess's complexity in an RTS. Let's talk more about Starcraft 2. Some tactics work well against poor players (like me), but skilled players know that there are a variety of openings, all of which you need to be able to defend against. There are several mid-game branchings of technology trees (magine if you didn't know whether your opponent was developing Bishops or Knights until they engaged you) which you can recognize based on timings of events in the game (buildings seen, units seen, etc). On top of that, some maps favor different tactics.
If you've never watch Day9's video blog on Starcraft 2 strategy (especially his videos on learning the timings of tech trees and what your opponent is working on), it's fascinating. It may change your mind about the relative complexity of chess versus SC2. SC2 has branching choices for what your opponent might do, combined with fog of war, resource management, and the very real problem of maintaining battlefield awareness (which I am terrible at) enough to recognize what your opponent is doing before he rolls into your base with something you're ill-prepared to defend against.
Day[9] Daily #132, Back to Basics: http://day9tv.blip.tv/file/3732340/
He rambles a bit at the start about Random Crap, but talks a lot about the fundamentals of the game, and such. (I wanted to find the video he did during the Starcraft 2 beta about recognizing your opponent's tech tree decisions based on the time at which you see certain telltale units, but I can't find it. If another poster knows what I'm referring to, can you link it?)
To be fair, I hear Portal 2 is really good. ;)
Offering them their choice of where to go allows them to choose to go someplace OTHER than their possibly-hostile home country.
How is an illegal act different from a criminal one? (curious, not being pedantic)
World of Warcraft costs me $14/month or so, with a $60 expansion every couple of years, so let's amortize that and say that I pay ~$16/month, or about $200/year.
Similar to eating fast food three times in a month, or once if I buy for the rest of the family too.
Less than ordering pizza once a month.
Less than seeing a movie with my wife, less than seeing two by myself.
Equal to buying three and a half full-price games in a year.
For that price, I get more entertainment than Netflix, and don't generally feel tempted to buy (and regret) as many big name games.
So yes, playing WoW costs a bunch. Over six years, quite a bit. Then look at how much you spend on burgers or pizza in a year, and reconsider.