Do you need to ask? [Why some are alleging the World Cup is not really a WORLD cup]
Yes, obviously. That's why I did, and why I explained what makes the World Cup a world cup.
So... what you want is a second-tier tournament for the weaker teams? That's fine, but no one wants to be the king of the slum. I don't know where you are from, but in the USA, the NCAA college basketball tournament is a big deal, and just earning a ticket in is an honor for many schools. Winning is a very big deal, and everyone loves seeing a low seed make an unlikely deep run. There is also the NIT, a tournament comprised of teams who weren't good enough to make it into the NCAA tournament. No one cares about the NIT, no one, and it is not unheard of for teams to reject invitations to the tournament. If you have a fair chance of getting it but can't win, get better, or don't bother. The competition itself is fair, poor [but unbiased] officiating aside. I'm sorry if you are troubled by Trinidad-Tobago, Nepal, Gabon, and Canada not being any good, but they're just not.
"It's not really a World Cup, it's a European-South American Cup with a couple countries from other continents invited."
What makes you say that? Because the bulk of the entries come from Europe and South America? Or because that is where the winners come from, because they play the best football? The World Cup is open to all nations who ware willing to play by FIFA rules, meaning FIFA rules of the game and no (major) political interference with the tournament. In fact, I think FIFA would love it if more Asian countries put forth serious entries and improved their level of play. The increasingly strong representation of Africa in recent years has been welcomed by all, and fans around the world enjoyed seeing Ghana defeat the USA and battle Uruguay to a shoot-out, in a game they should have won. That is not to mention that both Japan and South Korea advanced past group play, Australia missed only missed out on goal differential, New Zealand were not beaten, and two CONCACAF representatives, USA and Mexico (not Honduras), faired okay.
It is a World Cup, and open to all countries with a team good enough to earn a spot by winning some qualifying matches and showing a dedication to and respect for the beautiful game. Bangladesh or Cambodia should not be handed a ticket to Brazil in 2014 just so Asia will have more teams, they have to earn it by competing and succeeding. More competitive play could garner more regional teams in the final tournament. Until then, sorry.
Yes, it appears that a lot of us relied on the summary to be inaccurate, even knowing that is a big no-no here. The summary is misleading, and they used the non-open source Google Docs, which sucks. I prefer Open Office, the version of MS Office we use at work always looses me with its stupid interface, and though I'm a Google fan I have no use for the office products. If Google Docs were the first "free" software I used, and had to give up something I was comfortable with, I might have a negative opinion of free software, too.
When I was an unexperienced driver at 18 years-old, and had never owned a car, I bought one with the first manual transmission I'd ever touched. The first day was nearly a disaster, stalling repeatedly, lurching and shaking about, and requiring multiple attempts get moving from stops on hills. Simply driving was inefficient and slow (despite the car being a pretty nice old sports car), and required all of my attention. But I got used to it -- so much so that the next four cars I bought also had manual transmissions, and one was a newer, nicer version of that same car. Like the free and open source software mentioned here, manual transmissions take a bit of practice, but they are cheaper and can be at least as efficient (more mpg than older automatics, less maintenance), and being more in control is nice. A one-day test is a nice start, but that is nothing to make a decision on.
I'm trying to recall the last time I've seen a physical series configuration; but I just realized my old-ass flashlight counts as one.
( it's been replaced years ago by a proper wind-up for emergency cases and a decent Maglite-like one with a rechargable set for more frequent/high intensity beam use )
I recently went on a 4-night camping/concert trip, and took along my trusty wind-up light so I could find my way to/from the porta-johns at night. And guess what - it doesn't work anymore. It produces a tiny bit of light while I frantically crank it, and immediately ceases to do so as soon as I stop cranking. So my awesome emergency tool is useless. Good thing I took along a cheap generic Maglite, too. I guess I'll continue to suffer with AA batteries, and wonder how to put them in right, until MS comes to my rescue again.
It's amazing how the dress and look of common trash becomes popular. Yes, tattoos and piercings make one look like trash. It's really hard to take some seriously when there's shit sticking out of their eyebrows, ear lobe things that make one look like a yuppie Bush tribesmen, and a tongue piercing.
So you think all tattoos are piercings, and result in shit sticking out of people's faces? I thought this started off as a discussion of what sort of nerdy tattoo someone might want to put somewhere on his body. What a twisted, closed-minded way to think bout this.
And since black culture drives fashion, music and everything else that's cool in this country, folk's tattoos are about to look REAL dated.
That's another bold, ignorant statement based on a very narrow personal opinion, and bordering on racist. And assuming you are speaking of the USA, I should inform you that tattoos are also quite popular now in urban Canada, much of Europe, and many other parts of the world. Also, just because something seems like a new phenomenon to you, that does not necessarily make it a fad that will pass next week.
Tattoos aren't in and of themselves lame. People get all sort of lame tattoos, however. There's an awful lot of really beautiful stuff out there too.
I couldn't agree more, though what you said seems to be lost on most folks here. Yeah, a "tramp stamp" of a dolphin on an already trashy-looking slut who has never seen the ocean is obviously a bad idea, and skulls and daggers look dumb unless you are actually a hardcore biker or something. But if you have a neat idea, get a good artist, and put it in the right spot, tattoos can be really cool. Just make sure it is unique, will be well drawn and shaded by a professional with a good portfolio, and doesn't consist of a language you can't read or anything "tribal," and you are on the right track. And a first tattoo should definitely be somewhere that is covered by a short-sleeved shirt, just in case of any regrets.
My final advice: NO neck tattoos, unless you are a bona fide thug, and no murals of wolves or poems you wrote.
A good test is to think about your favorite thing when you were one half your current age.
Irrelevant. If he is say, 26 (or anything in that ballpark, or greater), this is crazy. You are comparing the decision making abilities and foresight of a 13 year-old child to those of an adult. The poster has certainly been thinking this over and wants to get at tattoo. No one is advising him to get a dragon screwing a pentagram on his forehead and skulls and swear words on his hands. There's nothing wrong with a tattoo (especially a clever one) if it is well done and located where it can be either displayed or hidden as desired. Live a little, and don't worry about every single thing you do today being so significant as to possibly, maybe, some day, somehow completely ruining your life.
Really!?!? Tattoos don't wash off, and should not simply be applied on a whim??? Thank!!!!!!!!1 And thanks to everyone who modded this insightful! Maybe you can answer my question: is water a good beverage, and should I consume it, or other beverages based on water? Thanks, because this is not plainly obvious to everyone!
Ya know that saying? "People may believe your stupid, but there's no reason to open your mouth and prove it."?
I don't know that one. People may believe my stupid? Perhaps you should have taken your own advice.
People may believe you're a nerd, but there's no reason to tattoo equations on your body and prove it.
Why not? Are you ashamed to be a nerd? Some of us aren't, and we don't all necessarily wear pocket protectors or otherwise look the part. I know quite a few people with tattoos, a few of which look really bad, though some of them are quite interesting. Modern American society has moved beyond the time when tattoos were only worn by sailors, bikers, and ignorant white trash. If your answer to "What tattoo should I get?", is nothing better than "I don't like tattoos.", then just don't get any. For the record, I have no ink on my body, though I've never ruled out coming up with an idea I'd like to wear forever, and I believe some level of discretion should be exercised when selecting a tattoo and a location for it.
I don't think anyone was suggesting that it is necessarily the right thing to do. But if ICQ *is* in fact used extensively by criminal and terrorist networks, and unfettered government access to it is actually essential to national security, then its seizure could certainly be defended. If that is the case (which is the part we don't know), then not seizing it now would be a Homeland Defense failure. I'm not that concerned about it, since seizing it would just alert the criminals tot he fact that it is heavily monitored, driving them elsewhere rather than exposing their every word. A lot of "ifs" there, and some other forms of communication are faster or more secure, but this is certainly a topic worth discussing.
Please cut out any rape or nazi analogies, okay? This is "vaguely unsettling," while there is nothing vague or merely unsettling about rape. That shit is not cool. And if you install a Bing icon, which Google is pretty unlikely to do any time soon, you deserve to be raped by nazis anyway.
Seriously, just because there is remote install functionality in the OS doesn't mean that it's there for malicious or secret use -- it's most likely part of a user facing feature.
For the most part, I trust Google, T-Mobile, and even Microsoft. I don't question their intentions, or their desire to keep us and the networks as secure as is reasonably possible. But sometimes things go awry, and capabilities for remotely forced installs could of course theoretically be co-opted by someone with more malicious intentions. That's the bit about all this that scares me.
Dang it, I'm much happier with T-Mobile (except for the lack of 3G at home) than I ever was with AT&T, but now I really want an N900 (even more than I did yesterday). I've also been considering switching to Credo Mobile, since the liberal-progressive/ethical niche they've been claiming suits my own beliefs. Just not sure about using a smaller company, even though they apparently use Sprint's network, or shelling out a bunch for a new phone when I'm mostly happy with mine. Too much information! Go back!!!!
Hmm, I'm sure the indie ROM folks are working on this already. I've so far resisted screwing around with my G1, though I've thought about it. This makes me want to root and go with a non-standard firmware, if it will keep my phone mine.
Slashdot headline would have been:
"Evil Apple Hides Secret Rootkit Installer on All iPhones"
Well, that's essentially how we are taking this news, right? Same difference, but Android users don't need the more colorful language to comprehend what's going on. The reporting was spot on, and we get it, without alarmism.
If this happens, what will follow is a crackdown on jaywalking and other everybody crimes
Oh, so New York will be following Seattle's lead, you say? Not sure how that will go over, because even in NYC cops don't generally like punching girls in the face. Maybe the fuzz in Rochester, Jamestown, Oswego, and Saratoga Springs have more time on their hands and are in need of more fights.
Of course no one knows what the significance of this is, but best brush up on your drills just in case.
I know what it means: the guy who broadcast that frequency from his garage died. He was 41 when he started, it has been 28 years since he started, he died of congestive heart failure and liver disease at the age of 69, and his electricity was later shut off due to non-payment. Which just serves to prove my point: when something trivial happens, or ceases to happen, after 28 years, there is probably not a huge conspiracy involved. And Germans love David Hasselhoff.
Why have your cake if you are not going to eat it? Having a fancy internet media device and not using it much (to keep within data limits) is like having a Ferrari but only driving it on the second sunday of every other month so you don't scratch it. Why bother? If I'm going to pony up the dough, I only want a daily driver, or at least something I can take to the track once in a while.
Hate to do this, but:
1. Too big to be a good phone, too small and slow to be anything else.
2. Resolution is no good for a "tablet."
3. AT&T blows.
4. Many people still hate touch-screen keyboards.
5. Android 1.6. Are you serious? No, really. You are serious? Oh. Wow. And it's a non-standard version. M'kay.
Haven't seen one yet, don't need to. The Streak will be another big brown streak for AT&T and Dell. FAIL
It sounds like a very possible cause thing to investigate
Why is it possible? Cell phones operate on fairly low power radio frequencies that have never been shown to have any effect on anything living unless perhaps they are within a foot of it, and even that is debatable and not agreed upon. Why would honeybees possibly be affected by this? I say it could be unicorns eating all the bees, does that make it possible? Or maybe it is grey ETs stealing them in order to produce honey on the planet Zebularious. God doesn't like bees?
You have anti-technology conspiracy theorists making claims without any evidence and before studies have been done, and people believe these nut jobs and jump to conclusions. Perhaps we should do some good, scientific studies (rather than this crap with only two hives that gives us absolutely NO statistically relevant data) just to prove the wackos wrong, though they won't believe anything that contradicts their magical thinking anyway. You don't like cell phones, so you are looking for reasons to ban them, and your prejudice is showing. We don't need a "follow up," we need something that is designed from the ground up to follow good scientific methods and that will result in usable data. Until then, business as usual. Gotta go, my cell phone is ringing, and I need to text my mom because we're out of Hot Pockets - I'll check this thread later, from my phone.
Have they not heard of "science," or are they completely untrained and new to it? *TWO* hives, with the phones *IN* the hives, and we're supposed draw conclusions? Good lord, how do this ever get printed? Hello, peer review? Oh, I suppose there is no peer review process for idiot pseudo-scientist quacks. The Telegraph needs a new editor, I think.
I'm in the US, in a somewhat outlying suburb but certainly not in the "country," and still waiting for 3G at home. Verizon seems to have 3G coverage here (I will not use them), AT&T's 3G is very spotty, while T-Mobile and Sprint have no 3G coverage here. How about bringing the networks up to date before hyping the crap out of the next technology?
Slashdot Mirror
Do you need to ask? [Why some are alleging the World Cup is not really a WORLD cup]
Yes, obviously. That's why I did, and why I explained what makes the World Cup a world cup.
So... what you want is a second-tier tournament for the weaker teams? That's fine, but no one wants to be the king of the slum. I don't know where you are from, but in the USA, the NCAA college basketball tournament is a big deal, and just earning a ticket in is an honor for many schools. Winning is a very big deal, and everyone loves seeing a low seed make an unlikely deep run. There is also the NIT, a tournament comprised of teams who weren't good enough to make it into the NCAA tournament. No one cares about the NIT, no one, and it is not unheard of for teams to reject invitations to the tournament. If you have a fair chance of getting it but can't win, get better, or don't bother. The competition itself is fair, poor [but unbiased] officiating aside. I'm sorry if you are troubled by Trinidad-Tobago, Nepal, Gabon, and Canada not being any good, but they're just not.
"It's not really a World Cup, it's a European-South American Cup with a couple countries from other continents invited."
What makes you say that? Because the bulk of the entries come from Europe and South America? Or because that is where the winners come from, because they play the best football? The World Cup is open to all nations who ware willing to play by FIFA rules, meaning FIFA rules of the game and no (major) political interference with the tournament. In fact, I think FIFA would love it if more Asian countries put forth serious entries and improved their level of play. The increasingly strong representation of Africa in recent years has been welcomed by all, and fans around the world enjoyed seeing Ghana defeat the USA and battle Uruguay to a shoot-out, in a game they should have won. That is not to mention that both Japan and South Korea advanced past group play, Australia missed only missed out on goal differential, New Zealand were not beaten, and two CONCACAF representatives, USA and Mexico (not Honduras), faired okay.
It is a World Cup, and open to all countries with a team good enough to earn a spot by winning some qualifying matches and showing a dedication to and respect for the beautiful game. Bangladesh or Cambodia should not be handed a ticket to Brazil in 2014 just so Asia will have more teams, they have to earn it by competing and succeeding. More competitive play could garner more regional teams in the final tournament. Until then, sorry.
Yes, it appears that a lot of us relied on the summary to be inaccurate, even knowing that is a big no-no here. The summary is misleading, and they used the non-open source Google Docs, which sucks. I prefer Open Office, the version of MS Office we use at work always looses me with its stupid interface, and though I'm a Google fan I have no use for the office products. If Google Docs were the first "free" software I used, and had to give up something I was comfortable with, I might have a negative opinion of free software, too.
When I was an unexperienced driver at 18 years-old, and had never owned a car, I bought one with the first manual transmission I'd ever touched. The first day was nearly a disaster, stalling repeatedly, lurching and shaking about, and requiring multiple attempts get moving from stops on hills. Simply driving was inefficient and slow (despite the car being a pretty nice old sports car), and required all of my attention. But I got used to it -- so much so that the next four cars I bought also had manual transmissions, and one was a newer, nicer version of that same car. Like the free and open source software mentioned here, manual transmissions take a bit of practice, but they are cheaper and can be at least as efficient (more mpg than older automatics, less maintenance), and being more in control is nice. A one-day test is a nice start, but that is nothing to make a decision on.
I'm trying to recall the last time I've seen a physical series configuration; but I just realized my old-ass flashlight counts as one. ( it's been replaced years ago by a proper wind-up for emergency cases and a decent Maglite-like one with a rechargable set for more frequent/high intensity beam use )
I recently went on a 4-night camping/concert trip, and took along my trusty wind-up light so I could find my way to/from the porta-johns at night. And guess what - it doesn't work anymore. It produces a tiny bit of light while I frantically crank it, and immediately ceases to do so as soon as I stop cranking. So my awesome emergency tool is useless. Good thing I took along a cheap generic Maglite, too. I guess I'll continue to suffer with AA batteries, and wonder how to put them in right, until MS comes to my rescue again.
It's amazing how the dress and look of common trash becomes popular. Yes, tattoos and piercings make one look like trash. It's really hard to take some seriously when there's shit sticking out of their eyebrows, ear lobe things that make one look like a yuppie Bush tribesmen, and a tongue piercing.
So you think all tattoos are piercings, and result in shit sticking out of people's faces? I thought this started off as a discussion of what sort of nerdy tattoo someone might want to put somewhere on his body. What a twisted, closed-minded way to think bout this.
And since black culture drives fashion, music and everything else that's cool in this country, folk's tattoos are about to look REAL dated.
That's another bold, ignorant statement based on a very narrow personal opinion, and bordering on racist. And assuming you are speaking of the USA, I should inform you that tattoos are also quite popular now in urban Canada, much of Europe, and many other parts of the world. Also, just because something seems like a new phenomenon to you, that does not necessarily make it a fad that will pass next week.
Tattoos aren't in and of themselves lame. People get all sort of lame tattoos, however. There's an awful lot of really beautiful stuff out there too.
I couldn't agree more, though what you said seems to be lost on most folks here. Yeah, a "tramp stamp" of a dolphin on an already trashy-looking slut who has never seen the ocean is obviously a bad idea, and skulls and daggers look dumb unless you are actually a hardcore biker or something. But if you have a neat idea, get a good artist, and put it in the right spot, tattoos can be really cool. Just make sure it is unique, will be well drawn and shaded by a professional with a good portfolio, and doesn't consist of a language you can't read or anything "tribal," and you are on the right track. And a first tattoo should definitely be somewhere that is covered by a short-sleeved shirt, just in case of any regrets.
My final advice: NO neck tattoos, unless you are a bona fide thug, and no murals of wolves or poems you wrote.
A good test is to think about your favorite thing when you were one half your current age.
Irrelevant. If he is say, 26 (or anything in that ballpark, or greater), this is crazy. You are comparing the decision making abilities and foresight of a 13 year-old child to those of an adult. The poster has certainly been thinking this over and wants to get at tattoo. No one is advising him to get a dragon screwing a pentagram on his forehead and skulls and swear words on his hands. There's nothing wrong with a tattoo (especially a clever one) if it is well done and located where it can be either displayed or hidden as desired. Live a little, and don't worry about every single thing you do today being so significant as to possibly, maybe, some day, somehow completely ruining your life.
Really!?!? Tattoos don't wash off, and should not simply be applied on a whim??? Thank!!!!!!!!1 And thanks to everyone who modded this insightful! Maybe you can answer my question: is water a good beverage, and should I consume it, or other beverages based on water? Thanks, because this is not plainly obvious to everyone!
Ya know that saying? "People may believe your stupid, but there's no reason to open your mouth and prove it."?
I don't know that one. People may believe my stupid? Perhaps you should have taken your own advice.
People may believe you're a nerd, but there's no reason to tattoo equations on your body and prove it.
Why not? Are you ashamed to be a nerd? Some of us aren't, and we don't all necessarily wear pocket protectors or otherwise look the part. I know quite a few people with tattoos, a few of which look really bad, though some of them are quite interesting. Modern American society has moved beyond the time when tattoos were only worn by sailors, bikers, and ignorant white trash. If your answer to "What tattoo should I get?", is nothing better than "I don't like tattoos.", then just don't get any. For the record, I have no ink on my body, though I've never ruled out coming up with an idea I'd like to wear forever, and I believe some level of discretion should be exercised when selecting a tattoo and a location for it.
I don't think anyone was suggesting that it is necessarily the right thing to do. But if ICQ *is* in fact used extensively by criminal and terrorist networks, and unfettered government access to it is actually essential to national security, then its seizure could certainly be defended. If that is the case (which is the part we don't know), then not seizing it now would be a Homeland Defense failure. I'm not that concerned about it, since seizing it would just alert the criminals tot he fact that it is heavily monitored, driving them elsewhere rather than exposing their every word. A lot of "ifs" there, and some other forms of communication are faster or more secure, but this is certainly a topic worth discussing.
Please cut out any rape or nazi analogies, okay? This is "vaguely unsettling," while there is nothing vague or merely unsettling about rape. That shit is not cool. And if you install a Bing icon, which Google is pretty unlikely to do any time soon, you deserve to be raped by nazis anyway.
Seriously, just because there is remote install functionality in the OS doesn't mean that it's there for malicious or secret use -- it's most likely part of a user facing feature.
For the most part, I trust Google, T-Mobile, and even Microsoft. I don't question their intentions, or their desire to keep us and the networks as secure as is reasonably possible. But sometimes things go awry, and capabilities for remotely forced installs could of course theoretically be co-opted by someone with more malicious intentions. That's the bit about all this that scares me.
Dang it, I'm much happier with T-Mobile (except for the lack of 3G at home) than I ever was with AT&T, but now I really want an N900 (even more than I did yesterday). I've also been considering switching to Credo Mobile, since the liberal-progressive/ethical niche they've been claiming suits my own beliefs. Just not sure about using a smaller company, even though they apparently use Sprint's network, or shelling out a bunch for a new phone when I'm mostly happy with mine. Too much information! Go back!!!!
Hmm, I'm sure the indie ROM folks are working on this already. I've so far resisted screwing around with my G1, though I've thought about it. This makes me want to root and go with a non-standard firmware, if it will keep my phone mine.
Slashdot headline would have been: "Evil Apple Hides Secret Rootkit Installer on All iPhones"
Well, that's essentially how we are taking this news, right? Same difference, but Android users don't need the more colorful language to comprehend what's going on. The reporting was spot on, and we get it, without alarmism.
If this happens, what will follow is a crackdown on jaywalking and other everybody crimes
Oh, so New York will be following Seattle's lead, you say? Not sure how that will go over, because even in NYC cops don't generally like punching girls in the face. Maybe the fuzz in Rochester, Jamestown, Oswego, and Saratoga Springs have more time on their hands and are in need of more fights.
Of course no one knows what the significance of this is, but best brush up on your drills just in case.
I know what it means: the guy who broadcast that frequency from his garage died. He was 41 when he started, it has been 28 years since he started, he died of congestive heart failure and liver disease at the age of 69, and his electricity was later shut off due to non-payment. Which just serves to prove my point: when something trivial happens, or ceases to happen, after 28 years, there is probably not a huge conspiracy involved. And Germans love David Hasselhoff.
Why have your cake if you are not going to eat it? Having a fancy internet media device and not using it much (to keep within data limits) is like having a Ferrari but only driving it on the second sunday of every other month so you don't scratch it. Why bother? If I'm going to pony up the dough, I only want a daily driver, or at least something I can take to the track once in a while.
Hate to do this, but:
1. Too big to be a good phone, too small and slow to be anything else.
2. Resolution is no good for a "tablet."
3. AT&T blows.
4. Many people still hate touch-screen keyboards.
5. Android 1.6. Are you serious? No, really. You are serious? Oh. Wow. And it's a non-standard version. M'kay.
Haven't seen one yet, don't need to. The Streak will be another big brown streak for AT&T and Dell. FAIL
Tag this story !science, because it certainly does not cite anything scientific, only a huge pile of crap from which no conclusion can be drawn.
It sounds like a very possible cause thing to investigate
Why is it possible? Cell phones operate on fairly low power radio frequencies that have never been shown to have any effect on anything living unless perhaps they are within a foot of it, and even that is debatable and not agreed upon. Why would honeybees possibly be affected by this? I say it could be unicorns eating all the bees, does that make it possible? Or maybe it is grey ETs stealing them in order to produce honey on the planet Zebularious. God doesn't like bees?
You have anti-technology conspiracy theorists making claims without any evidence and before studies have been done, and people believe these nut jobs and jump to conclusions. Perhaps we should do some good, scientific studies (rather than this crap with only two hives that gives us absolutely NO statistically relevant data) just to prove the wackos wrong, though they won't believe anything that contradicts their magical thinking anyway. You don't like cell phones, so you are looking for reasons to ban them, and your prejudice is showing. We don't need a "follow up," we need something that is designed from the ground up to follow good scientific methods and that will result in usable data. Until then, business as usual. Gotta go, my cell phone is ringing, and I need to text my mom because we're out of Hot Pockets - I'll check this thread later, from my phone.
Have they not heard of "science," or are they completely untrained and new to it? *TWO* hives, with the phones *IN* the hives, and we're supposed draw conclusions? Good lord, how do this ever get printed? Hello, peer review? Oh, I suppose there is no peer review process for idiot pseudo-scientist quacks. The Telegraph needs a new editor, I think.
Yes, and of course CDMA is non-migratory.
I'm in the US, in a somewhat outlying suburb but certainly not in the "country," and still waiting for 3G at home. Verizon seems to have 3G coverage here (I will not use them), AT&T's 3G is very spotty, while T-Mobile and Sprint have no 3G coverage here. How about bringing the networks up to date before hyping the crap out of the next technology?