Fighting these sorts of things largely on free speech seems to imply that that video games are actually responsible for some sort of mayhem
If someone tells me to stop writing derisive articles about government policy because it is not in the national interest, am I, by appealing to my right to free speech, implying that he is correct? Rather, I think I am arguing that whatever damage I may do, if any, is less than the damage censorship would cause. Likewise, video games might well cause some damage, or at least it would be difficult to prove the never do, under any circumstance. However, an argument appealing to free speech requires the government to demonstrate that the damage they cause, if any, is greater than the damage caused by censoring them. This places the burden of proof on opponents of free speech, where it belongs.
Maybe I'm naive, but I figure StrongWebmail.com might be the best webmail site to use for security right now because they're in a heightened state of alert. Kinda like flying after right after 9/11.
I'm building a webmail service packed with so many sql injection opportunities that it gets hacked by accident, just so you can put your mind at ease.
The size of the prize -- $10,000 -- indicates that the company thought it reasonably possible that they'd get hacked, and/or desired to avoid motivating any serious hacking attempt. Neither explanation gives me much confidence in their product.
And wow did it ever backfire. Normally they do these kinds of promotions in the hopes that nobody will bother, so that the company can later say "We offered a wheelbarrow of cash, and still nobody hacked us!". As if that was equivalent to a real security audit.
Perhaps they'll fix their software by simply offering a lower prize.
"Hack our software, and win a free small soda with purchase of any McDonald's value meal!"
We will wake up one day and find that keys to our doors only work from the outside.
I dunno about you, but my locks already only take keys on the outside. See, on the inside, I have this nice little knob I can use to lock the door without the key.
mine has the knob on the outside, and the keyhole on the inside. it's like a hardware version of DRM.
if it's always sexism, how do you explain results like this, in which success on the trading floor correlates with exposure to testosterone, such that those with the highest developmental exposure earn five times more than those with the lowest?
I operate a business that may be able to help you: we're a group of seedy-looking middle-aged men who drive around in unmarked, windowless vans, following small children and offering them candy. For five dollars a month, you can call our dispatcher at any time to know where your child is, and whether he presently prefers sweet tarts or jawbreakers.
Here's what you say about a rich man considering the plight of a poor man:
He has no context or even a remote claim to empathy with that person.
Now you say about people in general, presumably including FDR:
You can empathize with someone all you want
I'm going to hypothesize that what you believe is that there are some experiences that one can only have first hand, and that cannot be communicated objectively (through a book, etc.). If they could be so communicated, then any rich white guy could read about them and be just as well versed as if he had had the experiences first hand. The problem is that using such definitively subjective experience in making judgments damages the impartiality required for a just decision. An individual can only experience directly the life of one person. Using objective information gained from this perspective in a judgment is fine, but then again, objective information is available to any conscientious judge. Using subjective information about this perspective necessarily means you are failing to be impartial, because you cannot balance this information with subjective information from other points of view.
A judiciary in which a bunch of partial judges make decisions based on subjective experience would be a disaster, not least of all because their opinions would not be communicable, but would roughly state: "You don't know! You weren't there!"
Correct me if I'm wrong: The iPhone doesn't have background applications, so the student has to go to class, sit down, run the app to locate his or herself. Couldn't they then could quit the app, get up and leave?
yeah they should do this using a windows smartphone. by the time the app finishes running, the class will be over.
are or how dumb you think it is. The facts are given: This is not your university, chances are this isn't even your culture, and attendance IS mandatory there.
Some universities are harder than others.
That's true. for all we know, this is place is called Attendance University, and these are all 4th year doctoral students in a graduate course in the science of showing up at 9AM.
In this case, the professors are merely helping hone students' ability to spoof attendance using the latest modern technology. (Furthermore, as far as we know, the most promising candidates in this program go on to do valuable research into the problem of Dog Ate My Homework.)
FDR is a great example. Clearly FDR didn't need to grow up poor to empathize with the poor and see their side of things. The claim that anyone is incapable of seeing the perspective of some other group solely on the grounds that he didn't grow up in the same environment is simply without merit.
Part of being a judge is the capability see an issue from multiple points of view, and if you're giving more weight to the point of view with which you're most familiar, or to which you have some personal attachment, and you do not recuse yourself, you're a lousy judge, regardless of whether you come from Hamptons or Harlem.
I agree with her statement. You expect a rich white man who lives in the Hamptons or Bel Air, and spends his days doing nothing but politicking and playing golf to be able to hand down a just sentence on someone who comes from a completely different part of society? You expect him to fairly judge someone who is starving, homeless, and steals a loaf of bread, and (I shudder at the thought) some baby formula? He has no context or even a remote claim to empathy with that person. He exists completely outside that part of the world and society.
You expect him to be suited for telling a young woman that she has to bear the child of a man who raped her, despite never being in a situation where someone he knew/loved was raped? This is a very real possibility for this judge to have to face.
He'd be fine for passing sentences on white collar offenders, but for those who live in the ghettos, someone from the ghettos will be better suited.
Bollocks. There are plenty of people from privileged backgrounds who can empathize with the underprivileged, and do so, even to the point of giving up many of their privileges in order to assist people who are less fortunate. Many of the greatest catalysts of social change throughout history (e.g. Gandhi, Siddhartha) come from the ranks of people who use their education and status for broader benefit. Making blanket generalizations about capabilities based on upbringing is certainly no less foolish than making blanket generalizations based on race.
However, the alternative is worse: if newspapers don't find a way to make money online soon, they'll start seriously blending advertising inside news content. I don't want that to happen!
Oh I agree, it's time for newspapers to get their fair share. I mean, compare a newspaper to a manufacturer of fine computers, like Dell, whose products are unrivaled, and offer a great bargain for the buck. Dell is a thriving business despite their low, low prices, and the fact that they have a sale going on right now at dell.com. It's only reasonable that newspapers get compensated for their work in the same way as company like Dell, that dauntless innovator and technology powerhouse behind the new economy.
Now, we have things that are designed specifically to try and hit the sweet spot between durability and cost
by that definition, my walmart deck lounger is the most precisely engineered piece of equipment in the history of mankind. Whenever I sit down, I feel like it's half a hamburger away from catastrophic failure. (that's one croissant in metric units)
In my city there's a comic book shop, focusing on comic books.
Damn! You city is way better than mine. In my city there's a comic book shop, focusing on feminine hygene products.
I'd much rather shop at you comic book shop.
I'd rather shop at yours.
"Hey there, good lookin'! So... shopping for yeast infection medicine, huh? Vagisil -- great choice. Clearly you're a woman of class. The kind of lady I'd like to take out on Friday night, say, 8 o'clock, Denny's? I'd pick you up, but my mom needs the car."
Slashdot Mirror
Fighting these sorts of things largely on free speech seems to imply that that video games are actually responsible for some sort of mayhem
If someone tells me to stop writing derisive articles about government policy because it is not in the national interest, am I, by appealing to my right to free speech, implying that he is correct? Rather, I think I am arguing that whatever damage I may do, if any, is less than the damage censorship would cause. Likewise, video games might well cause some damage, or at least it would be difficult to prove the never do, under any circumstance. However, an argument appealing to free speech requires the government to demonstrate that the damage they cause, if any, is greater than the damage caused by censoring them. This places the burden of proof on opponents of free speech, where it belongs.
Maybe I'm naive, but I figure StrongWebmail.com might be the best webmail site to use for security right now because they're in a heightened state of alert. Kinda like flying after right after 9/11.
I'm building a webmail service packed with so many sql injection opportunities that it gets hacked by accident, just so you can put your mind at ease.
The size of the prize -- $10,000 -- indicates that the company thought it reasonably possible that they'd get hacked, and/or desired to avoid motivating any serious hacking attempt. Neither explanation gives me much confidence in their product.
And wow did it ever backfire. Normally they do these kinds of promotions in the hopes that nobody will bother, so that the company can later say "We offered a wheelbarrow of cash, and still nobody hacked us!". As if that was equivalent to a real security audit.
Perhaps they'll fix their software by simply offering a lower prize.
"Hack our software, and win a free small soda with purchase of any McDonald's value meal!"
No.
Let P1 = the probability of a human pilot, mechanic, or inspector screwing up. Let P2 = the probability of a meteor intersecting an airplane midflight
P1 is much, much, much, much, much, much greater than P2.
maybe God is very bored, and has very good aim.
I've heard that cocaine traffickers screw with drug dogs using capsicum powder. maybe the same thing would work here using copies of Gigli.
he's absolutely right. why are we needlessly giving these jobs to dogs when we could be employing the blind?
"Are you sure you want to withdraw this money?"
"Will you spend it wisely?"
the first operating system that prevents people from buying itself
My PIN is 7117, what then?
you have nothing to worry about, since your bank account is now empty.
score one for social engineering!
That word is so much more annoying now that I know what it means.
these days, I think the same thing about "change"
We will wake up one day and find that keys to our doors only work from the outside.
I dunno about you, but my locks already only take keys on the outside. See, on the inside, I have this nice little knob I can use to lock the door without the key.
mine has the knob on the outside, and the keyhole on the inside. it's like a hardware version of DRM.
if it's always sexism, how do you explain results like this, in which success on the trading floor correlates with exposure to testosterone, such that those with the highest developmental exposure earn five times more than those with the lowest?
as a male, I support equality between the sexes by consistently underachieving in every area of my life.
I operate a business that may be able to help you: we're a group of seedy-looking middle-aged men who drive around in unmarked, windowless vans, following small children and offering them candy. For five dollars a month, you can call our dispatcher at any time to know where your child is, and whether he presently prefers sweet tarts or jawbreakers.
He has no context or even a remote claim to empathy with that person.
Now you say about people in general, presumably including FDR:
You can empathize with someone all you want
I'm going to hypothesize that what you believe is that there are some experiences that one can only have first hand, and that cannot be communicated objectively (through a book, etc.). If they could be so communicated, then any rich white guy could read about them and be just as well versed as if he had had the experiences first hand. The problem is that using such definitively subjective experience in making judgments damages the impartiality required for a just decision. An individual can only experience directly the life of one person. Using objective information gained from this perspective in a judgment is fine, but then again, objective information is available to any conscientious judge. Using subjective information about this perspective necessarily means you are failing to be impartial, because you cannot balance this information with subjective information from other points of view.
A judiciary in which a bunch of partial judges make decisions based on subjective experience would be a disaster, not least of all because their opinions would not be communicable, but would roughly state: "You don't know! You weren't there!"
Correct me if I'm wrong: The iPhone doesn't have background applications, so the student has to go to class, sit down, run the app to locate his or herself. Couldn't they then could quit the app, get up and leave?
yeah they should do this using a windows smartphone. by the time the app finishes running, the class will be over.
It's targeted advertisement based on your distinct psychological profile. I personally don't see anything.
apparently you are some sort of zen master
are or how dumb you think it is. The facts are given: This is not your university, chances are this isn't even your culture, and attendance IS mandatory there.
Some universities are harder than others.
That's true. for all we know, this is place is called Attendance University, and these are all 4th year doctoral students in a graduate course in the science of showing up at 9AM.
In this case, the professors are merely helping hone students' ability to spoof attendance using the latest modern technology. (Furthermore, as far as we know, the most promising candidates in this program go on to do valuable research into the problem of Dog Ate My Homework.)
FDR is a great example. Clearly FDR didn't need to grow up poor to empathize with the poor and see their side of things. The claim that anyone is incapable of seeing the perspective of some other group solely on the grounds that he didn't grow up in the same environment is simply without merit.
Part of being a judge is the capability see an issue from multiple points of view, and if you're giving more weight to the point of view with which you're most familiar, or to which you have some personal attachment, and you do not recuse yourself, you're a lousy judge, regardless of whether you come from Hamptons or Harlem.
I agree with her statement. You expect a rich white man who lives in the Hamptons or Bel Air, and spends his days doing nothing but politicking and playing golf to be able to hand down a just sentence on someone who comes from a completely different part of society? You expect him to fairly judge someone who is starving, homeless, and steals a loaf of bread, and (I shudder at the thought) some baby formula? He has no context or even a remote claim to empathy with that person. He exists completely outside that part of the world and society.
You expect him to be suited for telling a young woman that she has to bear the child of a man who raped her, despite never being in a situation where someone he knew/loved was raped? This is a very real possibility for this judge to have to face.
He'd be fine for passing sentences on white collar offenders, but for those who live in the ghettos, someone from the ghettos will be better suited.
Bollocks. There are plenty of people from privileged backgrounds who can empathize with the underprivileged, and do so, even to the point of giving up many of their privileges in order to assist people who are less fortunate. Many of the greatest catalysts of social change throughout history (e.g. Gandhi, Siddhartha) come from the ranks of people who use their education and status for broader benefit. Making blanket generalizations about capabilities based on upbringing is certainly no less foolish than making blanket generalizations based on race.
However, the alternative is worse: if newspapers don't find a way to make money online soon, they'll start seriously blending advertising inside news content. I don't want that to happen!
Oh I agree, it's time for newspapers to get their fair share. I mean, compare a newspaper to a manufacturer of fine computers, like Dell, whose products are unrivaled, and offer a great bargain for the buck. Dell is a thriving business despite their low, low prices, and the fact that they have a sale going on right now at dell.com. It's only reasonable that newspapers get compensated for their work in the same way as company like Dell, that dauntless innovator and technology powerhouse behind the new economy.
Now, we have things that are designed specifically to try and hit the sweet spot between durability and cost
by that definition, my walmart deck lounger is the most precisely engineered piece of equipment in the history of mankind. Whenever I sit down, I feel like it's half a hamburger away from catastrophic failure. (that's one croissant in metric units)
while they are weak, they are the strongest international organization I know of that is supposed to be impartial.
now there's a ringing endorsement
In my city there's a comic book shop, focusing on comic books.
Damn! You city is way better than mine. In my city there's a comic book shop, focusing on feminine hygene products.
I'd much rather shop at you comic book shop.
I'd rather shop at yours.
"Hey there, good lookin'! So... shopping for yeast infection medicine, huh? Vagisil -- great choice. Clearly you're a woman of class. The kind of lady I'd like to take out on Friday night, say, 8 o'clock, Denny's? I'd pick you up, but my mom needs the car."
Soon, the dark lord controlling Psystar, revealed shall be. mmmm.
BEGUN THE CLONEWARS HAVE
Some people here would fuck anything that moves. What's your point?
Actually, I consider mobility to be a deal breaker. It makes it easier for them to get away.