and it's google blocking it, since I'm in the states unlike their blog where they make it sound like it's china blocking before the search gets to them, which is untrue.
How about actually clicking "search anyway" when prompted with the popup? You'd see that it actually searched anyway and turned up the term in question.
Probably because in the US there's no Chinese government sitting between you and the loading of your search results -- unlike in China.
Looks like every other tech blog out there. Will we come one day soon to find the slashdot home page covered with tiled pictures in Metro style as seems to be the new (and unusable) norm for many popular tech sites?
Holy crap, it's too late -- they've already done it.
Looks like every other tech blog out there. Will we come one day soon to find the slashdot home page covered with tiled pictures in Metro style as seems to be the new (and unusable) norm for many popular tech sites?
At least the summary you posted here (and I'm guessing this didn't go through firehose) admits that the headline has a question that can't be answered. Since it can't be answered, why post it? We'll find out how Windows 8 does when Windows 8 is released.
Why is "slashcloud" added while basic things like 'related articles' are still broken? (Seriously - "Rand Paul has a Quick Fix for TSA" is related to this article in some way? Not to mention that the Related links all seem to pull from the same pool of five articles.)
I can understand what leads to laws such as this, or the recent NY attempt to eliminate anonymous posting. I don't entirely support the logic, but I can understand it:
We've always had the ability to be anonymous in our insults. We can shout our insults from the crowd or dress up in white robes and a hood to attend the KKK rally. But the major difference is that in those cases, we are not so easily free of the consequences of our actions. It is easy now to post pretty much anywhere under a false or nonexistent identity, and to rarely have to face any consequences. Yes, it's easy (or it should be) for someone to ignore the comments, but that isn't the point -- it's more about being willing to take responsibility for what you write and say. If real names were attached to the things we all said, many people would think twice about saying them. (As I recall there were some studies a few years back that demonstrated just that).
So to directly answer your question:
I still don't get why people seem to insist on different laws for "cyber" something versus "in real life" something.
I think that they're trying to put them on equal footing in a way that they presently are not (it's easier to insult/bully online then in 'real life'; this law and those like it seek to change that.
Like I said, I don't entirely support this logic as it can lead to a lot of abuse in the end. But I can understand how they arrived there.
The problem with online petitions is that they send a clear message: someone cares precisely enough to click a button anonymously on the Internet - and not one iota more.
Yes. Comp sci is currently out of vogue in the US - which means a higher percentage of people who study it are actually interested in it and have an aptitude for it -- as opposed to using it to get a better paycheck, which was what we commonly saw in the 90s. In India and other nations used for cheap outsourcing, it is one of the best paths out of poverty -- thus providing a *strong* incentive for people without any aptitude to get into the field.
All I have to back this up is many, many years of experience working with multiple different offshore contracting companies, and speaking directly to the relatively rare skilled developers and the relatively common unskilled "developers" to get a better picture of the culture that leads them into the field.
More frustrating is that the really skilled developers with the larger consulting houses are frequently pushed into management - development becomes a dead-end career path for them.
In practice that means getting ~250 million people to vote. Good luck with that.
In addition, the vote is not on user-provided alternatives. Instead, "you will be provided alternatives". So the folks at "our-policy.org" are basically participating in a nice exercise in mental masturbation.
The thing is that the proposal is just user-proposed alternatives -- however nowhere in FB's terms does it obligate itself to accept suggestions/proposals from its users. Instead (emphasis added):
If more than 7,000 users comment on the proposed change, we will also give you the opportunity to participate in a vote in which you will be provided alternatives. The vote shall be binding on us if more than 30% of all active registered users as of the date of the notice vote.
So - first, the only alternatives we'll see are those given by FB. Second - they've pretty well protected themselves with the "30% of all active registered users" clause, since there's no practical way 30% of all active users will vote at all, never mind in the same way.
Just the permissions they seem to require on Android - unlimited access to Internet and device information opens the door to a lot of data siphoning.
My point was more that developers should take the time to be aware of this; and many do not even consider the ramifications of including those kind of third party components (ad networks, usage monitoring, etc) gathering data across multiple applications.
such as: 'My company deals with financial services. We are not allowed to access Dropbox either.' So why isn't Linux the first choice for all financial services?
Wait, what? What does one have to do with the other?
To answer the question - based on my own time served working in the financial industry - it comes down to support. They want the security of the big-time support contracts. Sure, there is Red Hat and others - but frankly, Red Hat's marketing machine isn't nearly as good as Microsoft's.
That being said: we upgraded to Windows 2000 on employee desktops from OS/2 Warp. At that time, enterprise Linux didn't have the same maturity that it does now. By the time we looked again, we had built a very involved application ecosystem using VC++ and MFC. The cost of porting it (or replacing it, which would have been better) was in the tens if not hundreds of millions. There's no way anybody was going to make the call to do that - better to go with the flow.
More importantly - Windows XP (finished upgrading a couple-few years ago) and even 2000 simply did not present us with major security flaws in any way that put our business at significant risk. All of our users had locked down non-admin privileges, and were tightly restricted in what they were allowed to do. The vast majority of these users (and we're talking 10s of thousands) didn't even have email access. Internet access was to a small list of whitelisted sites.
Windows, like Linux, is secure when properly managed. And until recently, Windows provided better tools for easily managing a secure installation on an enterprise scale.
Re:It's not just specialization, there is also fea
on
Where's HAL 9000?
·
· Score: 1
While there is fear, it's not really relevant to the lack of progress. The people who have this fear are not the same as the ones who are doing the research to advance the technology; or if they are, it's certainly not inhibiting them.
Bioethicists are the self-proclaimed philosophers of the digital age. We should pay attention to what they have to say, to a degree commensurate with the volume of their digital voices, and the breadth of the digital footprint- for if they speak loudly and often, surely they must be important.
Why is this modded insightful and not OT or Flamebait? The degree to which you agree with his snark-filled one-liner doesn't affect its relevance to the actual conversation in this thread.
Slashdot Mirror
I would argue that if you need yet another layer to simply track the location of errors in a browser-based environment, you've Done It Wrong.
Thepoint is that this won't stop them from trying- and imposing more draconian measures. After all, it never has before.
and it's google blocking it, since I'm in the states unlike their blog where they make it sound like it's china blocking before the search gets to them, which is untrue.
How about actually clicking "search anyway" when prompted with the popup? You'd see that it actually searched anyway and turned up the term in question.
Probably because in the US there's no Chinese government sitting between you and the loading of your search results -- unlike in China.
Because none of those words have the same starkly emotional impact across such a wide demographic.
Can Windows 8 succeed in a cloud-based world where ISP/carrier bandwidth caps are becoming prevalent?
Can the cloud-based world succeed in a world where ISP/carrier bandwidth caps/overages are become prevalent?
Looks like every other tech blog out there. Will we come one day soon to find the slashdot home page covered with tiled pictures in Metro style as seems to be the new (and unusable) norm for many popular tech sites?
Holy crap, it's too late -- they've already done it.
Looks like every other tech blog out there. Will we come one day soon to find the slashdot home page covered with tiled pictures in Metro style as seems to be the new (and unusable) norm for many popular tech sites?
At least the summary you posted here (and I'm guessing this didn't go through firehose) admits that the headline has a question that can't be answered. Since it can't be answered, why post it? We'll find out how Windows 8 does when Windows 8 is released.
Why is "slashcloud" added while basic things like 'related articles' are still broken? (Seriously - "Rand Paul has a Quick Fix for TSA" is related to this article in some way? Not to mention that the Related links all seem to pull from the same pool of five articles.)
4ormat? How is that pronounced? Forormat?
I bought a kill-a-watt meter a while back when I started dabbling in Bitcoin mining and it was a real eye-opener.
It's a very similar problem to OP's situation since Bitcoin mining and gaming both use high performance video cards.
You can't say that and leave us hanging - did it cost more in electricity than you gained by mining bitcoins?
I can understand what leads to laws such as this, or the recent NY attempt to eliminate anonymous posting. I don't entirely support the logic, but I can understand it:
We've always had the ability to be anonymous in our insults. We can shout our insults from the crowd or dress up in white robes and a hood to attend the KKK rally. But the major difference is that in those cases, we are not so easily free of the consequences of our actions. It is easy now to post pretty much anywhere under a false or nonexistent identity, and to rarely have to face any consequences. Yes, it's easy (or it should be) for someone to ignore the comments, but that isn't the point -- it's more about being willing to take responsibility for what you write and say. If real names were attached to the things we all said, many people would think twice about saying them. (As I recall there were some studies a few years back that demonstrated just that).
So to directly answer your question:
I still don't get why people seem to insist on different laws for "cyber" something versus "in real life" something.
I think that they're trying to put them on equal footing in a way that they presently are not (it's easier to insult/bully online then in 'real life'; this law and those like it seek to change that.
Like I said, I don't entirely support this logic as it can lead to a lot of abuse in the end. But I can understand how they arrived there.
The problem with online petitions is that they send a clear message: someone cares precisely enough to click a button anonymously on the Internet - and not one iota more.
Yes. Comp sci is currently out of vogue in the US - which means a higher percentage of people who study it are actually interested in it and have an aptitude for it -- as opposed to using it to get a better paycheck, which was what we commonly saw in the 90s. In India and other nations used for cheap outsourcing, it is one of the best paths out of poverty -- thus providing a *strong* incentive for people without any aptitude to get into the field.
All I have to back this up is many, many years of experience working with multiple different offshore contracting companies, and speaking directly to the relatively rare skilled developers and the relatively common unskilled "developers" to get a better picture of the culture that leads them into the field.
More frustrating is that the really skilled developers with the larger consulting houses are frequently pushed into management - development becomes a dead-end career path for them.
In practice that means getting ~250 million people to vote. Good luck with that.
In addition, the vote is not on user-provided alternatives. Instead, "you will be provided alternatives". So the folks at "our-policy.org" are basically participating in a nice exercise in mental masturbation.
The thing is that the proposal is just user-proposed alternatives -- however nowhere in FB's terms does it obligate itself to accept suggestions/proposals from its users. Instead (emphasis added):
If more than 7,000 users comment on the proposed change, we will also give you the opportunity to participate in a vote in which you will be provided alternatives. The vote shall be binding on us if more than 30% of all active registered users as of the date of the notice vote.
So - first, the only alternatives we'll see are those given by FB. Second - they've pretty well protected themselves with the "30% of all active registered users" clause, since there's no practical way 30% of all active users will vote at all, never mind in the same way.
Just the permissions they seem to require on Android - unlimited access to Internet and device information opens the door to a lot of data siphoning.
My point was more that developers should take the time to be aware of this; and many do not even consider the ramifications of including those kind of third party components (ad networks, usage monitoring, etc) gathering data across multiple applications.
Damnit. Why would you go and ruin my inflated sense of indignation by being all civil and shit?
Look at me! I can promote my idea on slashdot for free! All I need to do is submit an interview that contains the words "python" and "django"!
In the real world, marketing unfortunately counts for much among decision makers.
such as: 'My company deals with financial services. We are not allowed to access Dropbox either.' So why isn't Linux the first choice for all financial services?
Wait, what? What does one have to do with the other?
To answer the question - based on my own time served working in the financial industry - it comes down to support. They want the security of the big-time support contracts. Sure, there is Red Hat and others - but frankly, Red Hat's marketing machine isn't nearly as good as Microsoft's.
That being said: we upgraded to Windows 2000 on employee desktops from OS/2 Warp. At that time, enterprise Linux didn't have the same maturity that it does now. By the time we looked again, we had built a very involved application ecosystem using VC++ and MFC. The cost of porting it (or replacing it, which would have been better) was in the tens if not hundreds of millions. There's no way anybody was going to make the call to do that - better to go with the flow.
More importantly - Windows XP (finished upgrading a couple-few years ago) and even 2000 simply did not present us with major security flaws in any way that put our business at significant risk. All of our users had locked down non-admin privileges, and were tightly restricted in what they were allowed to do. The vast majority of these users (and we're talking 10s of thousands) didn't even have email access. Internet access was to a small list of whitelisted sites.
Windows, like Linux, is secure when properly managed. And until recently, Windows provided better tools for easily managing a secure installation on an enterprise scale.
While there is fear, it's not really relevant to the lack of progress. The people who have this fear are not the same as the ones who are doing the research to advance the technology; or if they are, it's certainly not inhibiting them.
Did you vote for him?
Bioethicists are the self-proclaimed philosophers of the digital age. We should pay attention to what they have to say, to a degree commensurate with the volume of their digital voices, and the breadth of the digital footprint- for if they speak loudly and often, surely they must be important.
This guy, he's like Socrates or some shit.
Why is this modded insightful and not OT or Flamebait? The degree to which you agree with his snark-filled one-liner doesn't affect its relevance to the actual conversation in this thread.
See, this is why they should block posting from new uids for at least six months.
1) Clean up your link. We don't need google's click-tracking, thanks.
2) Whoosh.
Thank you for posting anonymously.