I'm surprised your comment hasn't been met with the usual Apple-fanboy defense for this one, "Oh, wait, remind me when Apple was convicted of abusing its monopoly? Oh wait, you can't! *smug*", like it's apparently okay to ride roughshod over user preferences unless that condition is met.
Anyway, Colbert is generally a positive influence. His "fake punditry" is pungent social comment, with the intent of nudging the his audience to think about these issues. While being funny, which keeps them coming back. All in all, a good thing. So I don't think naming a killer flu after him is appropriate. Entirely the wrong set of connotations, you see.
Funnily enough, I read a survey that showed that 27% of people who identified as conservative/Republican believed that "Colbert was making serious points, delivered in a humorous manner".
Yeah, so do I. And when I didn't check it? Lo and behold, it didn't make itself the default browser. Gah, FUD is bad, mmmkay, whichever direction it comes from.
You tried, but no cigar. My anecdote: XP Pro SP3, all auto-updates, upgraded to IE8 and left Firefox 3 as my default browser. I call troll on the article itself, from my anecdotal.
Oh, I know it's far from the best:) $109 is my 'charged rate'. Unfortunately Comcast has a lock here (Olympia, WA), I'm just out of DSL range, and FiOS is nowhere to be seen. At least living in Tacoma, there was a citywide cable initiative, that was nice.
That is pretty crappy:( I pay $109 a month at home for Comcast Business (which work pays for, since I work from home). 22mbps down, 5mbps up. 8 static IPs. No port blocking, throttling, limits or caps.
I think you'll find that the parents are suing the CHP for breaches of privacy laws, and breaches of duty of care in that regard in ensuring that such images would not be disseminated in breach of the CHP employee statutes, regulations, and applicable laws.
In theory, CHP could sue the employees for cost recovery and damages as a result of the infringement, but in reality (a) you don't sue your employees for that kind of thing, and (b) the police union would go apeshit, etc, etc.
The family let their drug affected daughter drive a car. Family don't let family drive drunk, not even the day after.
Parents said they had "taken keys to her car, but she managed to find keys to other car elsewhere in house" - apply usual grain of salt.
2. The cops use a digital camera. That sounds like something that give a very high risk for leaking photos, as well as evidence that is easy to tamper with.
I would venture that most digital cameras used by police departments use something like Canon's Digital Verification Module, which is designed for forensic work, to sign the image as it is stored in-camera, for a irrefutable "this is the image that was seen through the lens" statement.
And then to make matters worse, the original judge ruled that after one officer had been suspended, and the other quit "for other reasons" CHP no longer had any responsibility for the problem that had been created by their employees, and dismissed the case. How in the name of hell did he work with that "logic"?
"California law and vehicle code" states that "images taken at a crime scene as part of an investigation"...
The photos weren't taken by a member of the public, but either a) a police photographer, who you can be sure is covered both under the above, and also a stipulation in their employment contract that all images they create for and on behalf of the CHP are the property of CHP, or b) by a CHP officer, also subject to the above.
Re:"at war with my parents over who is in control"
on
Bringing Up Bill
·
· Score: 1
Nope. Was a mistake (and a big one). But MS is far from the only "personality-driven" company to have suffered such.
Tis a nice double standard, when you look at it. "It's a global market" scream the corporations, "if we can get labor cheaper in Mexico/China/Eastern Europe, we should be able to!". "It's a global market," scream the people, "if we can get our pharmaceuticals cheaper in Canada, the UK, Mexico, we should be able to!". "No, you shouldn't. And we'll lobby to make it illegal, under the guise of quality control, even if you are buying the exact same drug."
The US, and until recently, NZ, were the only countries in the world where you are allowed to advertise a prescription medication. It, of course, leads to the absurdity of "Ask your doctor about {drug}" style ads, not "Discuss with your doctor the symptoms of your ailment", of course not. So people go into their doctors, "So I saw this ad, and I matched a couple of the things they mentioned, "feeling tired, run down"... "so can you write me a script for {drug}".
Except in this case the defect IS "My Wii won't boot", and the defect was caused by "installation of hacked/custom software onto the firmware". Fairly simple, it'd seem.
Agreed. I was in the US in 2000. Simi Valley, just outside LA. Friend there had a 5mbps cable connection. Checked his ISP's site today out of curiosity. They -still- offer that plan, and it's still $50/month. Face it, this excuse is getting old. Connections that haven't been upgraded in a DECADE is not a problem of "OMG, but America is soooo BIG!".
I agree with half your post. "This article needs revision" is a little lazy. There are times when it is valid, when you may feel you don't have the ability to revise it somehow, whether your skills in English lack, or whatever, but most of the time, it's done by petty megalomaniacal types with a "red pen fetish".
But "citation needed", is in and of itself valid (but I do think that it should be used more sparingly, not machine gunned all over every second sentence of a page. That just looks stupid). While the original writer doesn't "own" the article or words they wrote (hmm), they do own responsibility for ensuring that those words meet the accepted community standards. It is not anyone else's job to "reverse-engineer" your statements and find sources that match. And even if you do, that is the ugliest and most irresponsible way of writing "professionally". You work from references that have validity, forward. You don't write and then cherry-pick references backwards to match statements, and nor should anyone else. That leads to a whole other debacle of "WP:RS" (reliable sources), and the farce that is watching peer-reviewed publications being described as "not an RS", but blogs being found to be "RS".
The problem isn't rampant inclusionism, or indeed, deletionism, in itself. The problem is the varying standards applied. That's why articles on the Bulgarian national weightlifting champion get deleted, because a couple of clowns editing WP from their mom's basement in Oklahoma decide that, because they've never heard of him, he couldn't possibly be WP:NOTE (noteworthy, for all you English-speakers). But that every single Magic:The Gathering playing card in existence, and every single Pokemon character in existence, and every single name mentioned in background in every single anime ever created has a short-story length article on them.
(And don't try the "but they fixed the Pokemon problem" on me - that's another travesty in and of itself, the supposedly "wholly independent for-profit Wikia" that just happens to share about 3/4 of its board with the non-profit WMF, that rents its office space from WMF - at substantially below market rates, and shares developers. The same Wikia that gets 'preferred partner' status on WP, and where all those articles were shunted without real discussion by anyone other than those who share roles at both WMF/WP and Wikia, a handy, convenient jump start for Jimbo's ailing and failing money-maker).
That's silly. You wrote the statement, you cite it. What am I meant to do? Research it for you and figure out by a process of Holmes-like deduction what source you used and cite it for you? You could have got it from anywhere. If you can't, and don't, cite it, don't write it in the first place.
That's leaving aside the fact that it might be your original research or synthesis. What, according to you, I'm "too fucking lazy" to spend hours on a wild goose chase around the Internet because you're not doing the right fucking thing in the first place.
Agreed. There is a reason why many refer to some of these people as "those who have drunk the Kool-aid". Who believe wholeheartedly in the Wiki-way, and hold whole conversations in TLAs. "NLT!", "NPA!", "POINT!", "DICK!", "NPOV!". Almost sounds like you could be listening to scientologists. Wikipedia Review, although inhabited by cranks of its own, was a very revealing look "under the rug" for me.
Especially by Wikipedia's OWN standards (not necessarily related to us living here in the real world). One of their acronyms, "NLT", "No Legal Threats" - users have been summarily blocked and banned for even so much as suggesting that a person who wrote something potentially damaging/defamatory about a third party "may wish to be cautious of the possible ramifications of this".
By their own language, it's a "legal threat". By other standards, perhaps not. But the Wikipedia-Way(TM) is that they are "different", and "new", and have evolved somehow. Either that, or there's a double standard somewhere...
Look at a contract at your local city, they pay around $50 an hour for a low level secretary.
Please.
Citation. I'll quit my job right now and go work anywhere in the US that is advertising for secretaries on $100K+ salaries. I'll even wear a short skirt if I have to.
I notice that although this is being defended (and rightly so), there's not the amazingly defensive and outraged fanboy rampage that you get when you see articles like "iPhone components cost $120! ZOMG!"...
You mean that thing they currently have no plans to bring to the market? I gotta hand it to Monsanto. Genes might spread, so they're evil. They develop terminator genes to prevent accidental genetic spread, so they're evil. They're damned either way, aren't they?
That thing that they pledged in 99 to never pursue, and then went ahead and bought a company in 2007 whose sole marketable product was that very thing, yeah, that.
Nice handy side effect of the terminator genes "helping" accidental genetic spread - means your farmer now has to buy orders of magnitude more seed. From you. (Realize that in many staple crops, Monsanto supplies between 70% and 100% of the commercially available seed). I think it's far more likely that "helping accidental genetic spread" is a side effect of "developing revenue maximization genetic technologies".
Interesting. The article claims no such thing. In fact, the article only mentions Greenpeace once, saying that "organizations such as Greenpeace warn that GM crops threaten biodiversity and might make subsistence farmers more dependent". Nice claims of 'willing to let people starve to death', though.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm surprised your comment hasn't been met with the usual Apple-fanboy defense for this one, "Oh, wait, remind me when Apple was convicted of abusing its monopoly? Oh wait, you can't! *smug*", like it's apparently okay to ride roughshod over user preferences unless that condition is met.
No, I haven't. And every day, I say a little thankyou to some unseen force for that small mercy.
Funnily enough, I read a survey that showed that 27% of people who identified as conservative/Republican believed that "Colbert was making serious points, delivered in a humorous manner".
Ye gods.
Yeah, so do I. And when I didn't check it? Lo and behold, it didn't make itself the default browser. Gah, FUD is bad, mmmkay, whichever direction it comes from.
You tried, but no cigar. My anecdote: XP Pro SP3, all auto-updates, upgraded to IE8 and left Firefox 3 as my default browser. I call troll on the article itself, from my anecdotal.
Oh, I know it's far from the best :) $109 is my 'charged rate'. Unfortunately Comcast has a lock here (Olympia, WA), I'm just out of DSL range, and FiOS is nowhere to be seen. At least living in Tacoma, there was a citywide cable initiative, that was nice.
That is pretty crappy :( I pay $109 a month at home for Comcast Business (which work pays for, since I work from home). 22mbps down, 5mbps up. 8 static IPs. No port blocking, throttling, limits or caps.
In theory, CHP could sue the employees for cost recovery and damages as a result of the infringement, but in reality (a) you don't sue your employees for that kind of thing, and (b) the police union would go apeshit, etc, etc.
Parents said they had "taken keys to her car, but she managed to find keys to other car elsewhere in house" - apply usual grain of salt.
I would venture that most digital cameras used by police departments use something like Canon's Digital Verification Module, which is designed for forensic work, to sign the image as it is stored in-camera, for a irrefutable "this is the image that was seen through the lens" statement.
And then to make matters worse, the original judge ruled that after one officer had been suspended, and the other quit "for other reasons" CHP no longer had any responsibility for the problem that had been created by their employees, and dismissed the case. How in the name of hell did he work with that "logic"?
The photos weren't taken by a member of the public, but either a) a police photographer, who you can be sure is covered both under the above, and also a stipulation in their employment contract that all images they create for and on behalf of the CHP are the property of CHP, or b) by a CHP officer, also subject to the above.
Nope. Was a mistake (and a big one). But MS is far from the only "personality-driven" company to have suffered such.
Tis a nice double standard, when you look at it. "It's a global market" scream the corporations, "if we can get labor cheaper in Mexico/China/Eastern Europe, we should be able to!". "It's a global market," scream the people, "if we can get our pharmaceuticals cheaper in Canada, the UK, Mexico, we should be able to!". "No, you shouldn't. And we'll lobby to make it illegal, under the guise of quality control, even if you are buying the exact same drug."
Mind blowing. Unbridled capitalism at its finest.
Except in this case the defect IS "My Wii won't boot", and the defect was caused by "installation of hacked/custom software onto the firmware". Fairly simple, it'd seem.
Agreed. I was in the US in 2000. Simi Valley, just outside LA. Friend there had a 5mbps cable connection. Checked his ISP's site today out of curiosity. They -still- offer that plan, and it's still $50/month. Face it, this excuse is getting old. Connections that haven't been upgraded in a DECADE is not a problem of "OMG, but America is soooo BIG!".
But "citation needed", is in and of itself valid (but I do think that it should be used more sparingly, not machine gunned all over every second sentence of a page. That just looks stupid). While the original writer doesn't "own" the article or words they wrote (hmm), they do own responsibility for ensuring that those words meet the accepted community standards. It is not anyone else's job to "reverse-engineer" your statements and find sources that match. And even if you do, that is the ugliest and most irresponsible way of writing "professionally". You work from references that have validity, forward. You don't write and then cherry-pick references backwards to match statements, and nor should anyone else. That leads to a whole other debacle of "WP:RS" (reliable sources), and the farce that is watching peer-reviewed publications being described as "not an RS", but blogs being found to be "RS".
(And don't try the "but they fixed the Pokemon problem" on me - that's another travesty in and of itself, the supposedly "wholly independent for-profit Wikia" that just happens to share about 3/4 of its board with the non-profit WMF, that rents its office space from WMF - at substantially below market rates, and shares developers. The same Wikia that gets 'preferred partner' status on WP, and where all those articles were shunted without real discussion by anyone other than those who share roles at both WMF/WP and Wikia, a handy, convenient jump start for Jimbo's ailing and failing money-maker).
That's leaving aside the fact that it might be your original research or synthesis. What, according to you, I'm "too fucking lazy" to spend hours on a wild goose chase around the Internet because you're not doing the right fucking thing in the first place.
Agreed. There is a reason why many refer to some of these people as "those who have drunk the Kool-aid". Who believe wholeheartedly in the Wiki-way, and hold whole conversations in TLAs. "NLT!", "NPA!", "POINT!", "DICK!", "NPOV!". Almost sounds like you could be listening to scientologists. Wikipedia Review, although inhabited by cranks of its own, was a very revealing look "under the rug" for me.
By their own language, it's a "legal threat". By other standards, perhaps not. But the Wikipedia-Way(TM) is that they are "different", and "new", and have evolved somehow. Either that, or there's a double standard somewhere ...
Please.
Citation. I'll quit my job right now and go work anywhere in the US that is advertising for secretaries on $100K+ salaries. I'll even wear a short skirt if I have to.
I notice that although this is being defended (and rightly so), there's not the amazingly defensive and outraged fanboy rampage that you get when you see articles like "iPhone components cost $120! ZOMG!"...
That thing that they pledged in 99 to never pursue, and then went ahead and bought a company in 2007 whose sole marketable product was that very thing, yeah, that.
Nice handy side effect of the terminator genes "helping" accidental genetic spread - means your farmer now has to buy orders of magnitude more seed. From you. (Realize that in many staple crops, Monsanto supplies between 70% and 100% of the commercially available seed). I think it's far more likely that "helping accidental genetic spread" is a side effect of "developing revenue maximization genetic technologies".
Interesting. The article claims no such thing. In fact, the article only mentions Greenpeace once, saying that "organizations such as Greenpeace warn that GM crops threaten biodiversity and might make subsistence farmers more dependent". Nice claims of 'willing to let people starve to death', though.