"What I'm concerned about is a fragmented Internet where ISPs only let you access content they control. Or are you completely okay with that? Whatever, I kinda think you are trolling anyway."
Nice straw man. You should leanr how to have a discussion without resorting to gross logical fallacies. I would answer you, but I'm CERTAIN you're an asshole, so I won't waste my time.
Whenever someone speak the truth, the troll mods come out.
In this case it was deserved, but you'll notice the only response is the troll mod, with not a single one of you owning up to your ridiculous slurping of karma whores.
So mod me troll til your finger hurts. It doesn't change the fact that you're not bright enough to see when some jackass is pushing your buttons.
And you can mod this one down too. All that does is prove that your incapapble of formulating a coherent response to a legitimate question.
"What? He called attention to the fact that most of the people here are easily manipulated pseudo-intellectuals who aren't aware enough to realize they're being duped? TROLL!!!"
The federal government has stomped all over state proclamations like this before, either by hook or by crook. What makes anyone think it won't happen again?
What have YOU done to imrpove meaningful public discourse? When was the last time YOU organized a discussion group, scheduled a protest, created a PAC, or did ANYTHING other than whine about it?
You're the worst kind of politico. You've got the spiel down, and in dishing it out, you get people so riled up, they fail to notice all you've done is actually bitch and moan while accomplishing exactly ZERO.
I'll never understand why all you slashtards fall for this shit. For a group of people who are constantly suspicious of everything, guys like the parent manipulate you very easily.
Mod me down, I deserve it. but that's just because I'm tired of the same chicken little sky is falling garbage getting modded straight up, with no regard to the fact that's it's been said a THOUSAND TIMES BEFORE.
THERE'S NOTHING INSIGHTFUL OR INTERESTING ABOUT REPEATING THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER.
"Let's see, what have I been doing with the last 18 years of my life... Ooh! Ooh! I've been NOT becoming a suit!"
You say that as though "becoming a suit" is derogatory somehow. Please explain the source of your disdain for the people who actually run the business that pays you? Or is this more slashtroll anti-corporate bite the hand that feeds you-ism?
"I don't have to fucking TOUCH business or management!"
Then you are unemployed, or your job isn't important. Otherwise, "business and management" should be a part of every department, and every employee should "touch" the policies in some way.
"I can sit back and do engineering and research without having to do any of the bullshit that McNealy and Schwartz have to do."
Great, now have you thanked them for the opportunity? Because the only reason you get to do what you do is because they do what they do better than the vast majority who attempt it. You on the other hand, have as much value as someone in your position typically has (meaning, essentially, none).
"Do they make more money? Yes. Do I care? Amazingly enough, not so much."
Sure. I'm not going to call you a liar, but I'll strongly imply it.
"Sounds like I chose the right path."
Actually, it sounds like you're another self important kid who has no clue.
All you've done is demonstrate the hubris of youth. Everyone who is young has it, and everyone who is old has been bitten by it.
"but they are all governed by one rule: How many students can we graduate?"
I read your original post in this thread, and said to myself "what the fuck?" but it was this statement that forced me to respond.
You're completely wrong. Scholls don't give two shakes how many students they graduate, and in fact would be very happy if only the very best graduated.
No, schools are interested in how many students they can ENROLL. No part of graduating from a university helps the university, and if they are graduating mediocre students, that devalues their program over time.
However, if the schools enroll everyone, yet graduate only the students who deserve it, then they get the best of bith worlds, that being a large (paying) student body, but a small (qualified) groups of graduates.
Second, the MMPI for example is over 500 questions and takes in excess of four hours to complete.
"A truly deceitful person will fly under the radar because they know the test and know the answers."
This is very difficult. There are no correct answers for them to know.
You appear to be basing your understanding of these tests on the Meyers-Briggs, which, as you probably agree, is garbage in all it's variations.
There are, however, many other tests, such as the MMPI and TAT that are actually reasonably accurate.
I suggest you read a little more about them. You'll find what I'm saying is true, and some of the tests are genuinely amazing in their descriptive ability.
As to this particular test, I haven't seen it, but it's most probably useless, as the very good tests require extensive training for administration and scoring.
"You could give them the Meyers-Briggs type/Keirsey temperment desired and they could answer the questions perfectly to hit it on the spot every time."
That would give them away. The very good tests include questions to gauge the accuracy of the answers. In your example, many of the tests would show the person being tested was deceitful.
"Why is it that every time this issue comes up someone pops up with a supposed 'realistic worldview' defense of these companies?"
Because they're right. How many US companies were in China 50 years ago? How much access did the average Chinese citizen have to western media and ideas 50 years ago?
The presence of foreign business in China has caused obvious and dramatic changes. These changes have led to far more freedom than before.
Businesses did that by playing by the rules. And as long as they continue to do so, freedom creeps in in ways that the Chinese government can't police.
You're actually thinking about this, and because of that, I would guess you also read the article.
In either case, you're not qualified to comment as long as you are actually using your brain to process this information.
Once you've stopped doing that, you may give input. We don't want anyone to see that the sky isn't actually falling, so keep your informed, intelligent, well thought out opinion to yourself.
"If Linux snobs where a problem with the wider adoption of Linux then people who are interested in buying Ford or Dodge trucks would be put off by the hostility that each side has towards the other, etc. But yet there are millions of Ford and Dodge truck owners."
I hate car analogies. I hate analogies in general, but car analogies are always among the worst. Yours is an example.
People usually know how to operate a car when they buy it. The same is not true of Linux.
Nowhere in any of that is a passenger going to be able to communicate useful information in the tenth of a second the driver has to react to a dangerous situation.
You're attempting to show that a cell phone is more distracting than a passenger, to which I would ask, do you pay attention to body language while talking on a cell phone? Of course not. That's just silly it's a phone.
Do you pay attention to body language an occasionally glance at your passenger while talking to them? If you're like most people yes. If you're lying, then you'll say no.
"Any competent driver knows this and can corroborate this statement."
I'm highly competent, and I won't corroborate. (In fact, I'll put my driving record up against anyone's, one ticket when I was 16 for 45 in a 35, and nothing in the twenty years since)
If you're incapable of monitoring the road and other drivers, that is the problem. Cell phones are simply the latest excuse.
"Go ahead and eat french fries, sip coffee,"
And when you spill them in your lap? Right not distracting at all. Your post stinks of yet another screed fueled by sound bites and blurbs, but devoid of reason and fact.
"The fact that it's well know removes it from the noise category."
It's not well known, that's the point.
It's an article about an insignificant happening that matters to almost no one. Couple that with the fact that most people have never heard of the guy ( which refutes your well known argument) and your assertion that's it's not noise is nonsense.
It's noise, it's clutter, and wiki is better off without it.
"It's interesting that you believe that your opinion of a topic should preempt a wider audience"
It's even more interesting that you believe people should waste time and resources managing an article of no practical use whatsoever, for no reason other than to satisfy you.
Wiki isn't a storage house of everything that has ever happened. This guy is a nothing, and should be treated as such.
"Not buying a product for the sole reason that you dont want the profits to go to another country (and make that country richer/more powerful) is xenophobia at work (fear or hatred of foreigners; in this case, fear)."
Fine then, what are we afraid of?
You can expand the definition of xenophobia all you like, and mis-apply it to any number of inappropriate situations.
But this isn't one of them. In this case, it's not a matter of being afraid or hating anyone. It's a matter of spending my money in support of a company that meets my expectations for quality and value.
Lenovo has neither of those.
As others have said, it's not that "lenovo" is a minus, but rather "IBM" is a big plus.
And it's certainly not xenophobia, no matter how much you insist otherwise.
Slashdot Mirror
"What I'm concerned about is a fragmented Internet where ISPs only let you access content they control. Or are you completely okay with that? Whatever, I kinda think you are trolling anyway."
Nice straw man. You should leanr how to have a discussion without resorting to gross logical fallacies. I would answer you, but I'm CERTAIN you're an asshole, so I won't waste my time.
"The main topic of conversation was the latest bill from congress, the Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancements Act of 2006."
How topical. Why is it that the main topic of conversation is POTENTIAL net censorship when very real censoship is occurring in China as we speak?
Did they solve that problem while I wasn't paying attention?
Whenever someone speak the truth, the troll mods come out.
In this case it was deserved, but you'll notice the only response is the troll mod, with not a single one of you owning up to your ridiculous slurping of karma whores.
So mod me troll til your finger hurts. It doesn't change the fact that you're not bright enough to see when some jackass is pushing your buttons.
And you can mod this one down too. All that does is prove that your incapapble of formulating a coherent response to a legitimate question.
"What? He called attention to the fact that most of the people here are easily manipulated pseudo-intellectuals who aren't aware enough to realize they're being duped? TROLL!!!"
At least I'm not a fucking sheep.
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/wireless/rfidenabled-ca sino-chips-162845.php
Poker chips have RFID chips in them now (or soon will).
The federal government has stomped all over state proclamations like this before, either by hook or by crook. What makes anyone think it won't happen again?
What have YOU done to imrpove meaningful public discourse? When was the last time YOU organized a discussion group, scheduled a protest, created a PAC, or did ANYTHING other than whine about it?
You're the worst kind of politico. You've got the spiel down, and in dishing it out, you get people so riled up, they fail to notice all you've done is actually bitch and moan while accomplishing exactly ZERO.
I'll never understand why all you slashtards fall for this shit. For a group of people who are constantly suspicious of everything, guys like the parent manipulate you very easily.
Mod me down, I deserve it. but that's just because I'm tired of the same chicken little sky is falling garbage getting modded straight up, with no regard to the fact that's it's been said a THOUSAND TIMES BEFORE.
THERE'S NOTHING INSIGHTFUL OR INTERESTING ABOUT REPEATING THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER.
He's a troll, but he's right.
"Let's see, what have I been doing with the last 18 years of my life... Ooh! Ooh! I've been NOT becoming a suit!"
You say that as though "becoming a suit" is derogatory somehow. Please explain the source of your disdain for the people who actually run the business that pays you? Or is this more slashtroll anti-corporate bite the hand that feeds you-ism?
"I don't have to fucking TOUCH business or management!"
Then you are unemployed, or your job isn't important. Otherwise, "business and management" should be a part of every department, and every employee should "touch" the policies in some way.
"I can sit back and do engineering and research without having to do any of the bullshit that McNealy and Schwartz have to do."
Great, now have you thanked them for the opportunity? Because the only reason you get to do what you do is because they do what they do better than the vast majority who attempt it. You on the other hand, have as much value as someone in your position typically has (meaning, essentially, none).
"Do they make more money? Yes. Do I care? Amazingly enough, not so much."
Sure. I'm not going to call you a liar, but I'll strongly imply it.
"Sounds like I chose the right path."
Actually, it sounds like you're another self important kid who has no clue.
All you've done is demonstrate the hubris of youth. Everyone who is young has it, and everyone who is old has been bitten by it.
"but they are all governed by one rule: How many students can we graduate?"
I read your original post in this thread, and said to myself "what the fuck?" but it was this statement that forced me to respond.
You're completely wrong. Scholls don't give two shakes how many students they graduate, and in fact would be very happy if only the very best graduated.
No, schools are interested in how many students they can ENROLL. No part of graduating from a university helps the university, and if they are graduating mediocre students, that devalues their program over time.
However, if the schools enroll everyone, yet graduate only the students who deserve it, then they get the best of bith worlds, that being a large (paying) student body, but a small (qualified) groups of graduates.
What you said simply isn't accurate, period.
"Quite frankly, if it makes even *one* person think before hitting the submit button"
It didn't work for you, and based on the absolute uselessness of your comment, I suspect yours would be exactly the
"comment that no one really cares about"
What if the editors bitchslap the wrong person? Of course, that could never happen...
Okay, first I said the good tests, not this one.
Second, the MMPI for example is over 500 questions and takes in excess of four hours to complete.
"A truly deceitful person will fly under the radar because they know the test and know the answers."
This is very difficult. There are no correct answers for them to know.
You appear to be basing your understanding of these tests on the Meyers-Briggs, which, as you probably agree, is garbage in all it's variations.
There are, however, many other tests, such as the MMPI and TAT that are actually reasonably accurate.
I suggest you read a little more about them. You'll find what I'm saying is true, and some of the tests are genuinely amazing in their descriptive ability.
As to this particular test, I haven't seen it, but it's most probably useless, as the very good tests require extensive training for administration and scoring.
"You could give them the Meyers-Briggs type/Keirsey temperment desired and they could answer the questions perfectly to hit it on the spot every time."
That would give them away. The very good tests include questions to gauge the accuracy of the answers. In your example, many of the tests would show the person being tested was deceitful.
"It ain't the Bureau of Native American Affiars, a symptom of what little regard is given to the North American Natives."
I think that's more of a case of little regard being given to current social convention.
But, while you're ranting, what does the "C" in NAACP stand for? Why haven't they changed that?
Probably for the same reason. There's no legitimate reason to change it. And no, hurting your feelings doesn't count as a legitimate reason.
"Why is it that every time this issue comes up someone pops up with a supposed 'realistic worldview' defense of these companies?"
Because they're right. How many US companies were in China 50 years ago? How much access did the average Chinese citizen have to western media and ideas 50 years ago?
The presence of foreign business in China has caused obvious and dramatic changes. These changes have led to far more freedom than before.
Businesses did that by playing by the rules. And as long as they continue to do so, freedom creeps in in ways that the Chinese government can't police.
"I can't believe I'm actually having this discussion."
I certainly can. Over the course of your posting history, you've made things up, distorted facts, and outright lied.
I don't find it difficult to believe you'd fail to acknowledge when you're obviously, demonstrably wrong.
And you are, as MANY others have already shown.
Do yourself a favor, let the matter drop before you make a bigger fool of yourself.
You're actually thinking about this, and because of that, I would guess you also read the article.
In either case, you're not qualified to comment as long as you are actually using your brain to process this information.
Once you've stopped doing that, you may give input. We don't want anyone to see that the sky isn't actually falling, so keep your informed, intelligent, well thought out opinion to yourself.
How that's different than the current situation, where I don't even need to steal your RFID information to steal your identity?
"If Linux snobs where a problem with the wider adoption of Linux then people who are interested in buying Ford or Dodge trucks would be put off by the hostility that each side has towards the other, etc. But yet there are millions of Ford and Dodge truck owners."
I hate car analogies. I hate analogies in general, but car analogies are always among the worst. Yours is an example.
People usually know how to operate a car when they buy it. The same is not true of Linux.
Do you see now why your analogy is so terrible?
Sorry, but this is ridiculous.
Here's how the situation really goes
Driver: BLAH BLAH BLAH
Passenger: BLAH BLAH BLAH
Driver: BLAH BLAH BLAH
Passenger: BALH BLAH BLAHHHHH!!!!!
CRASH!!!
Nowhere in any of that is a passenger going to be able to communicate useful information in the tenth of a second the driver has to react to a dangerous situation.
You're attempting to show that a cell phone is more distracting than a passenger, to which I would ask, do you pay attention to body language while talking on a cell phone? Of course not. That's just silly it's a phone.
Do you pay attention to body language an occasionally glance at your passenger while talking to them? If you're like most people yes. If you're lying, then you'll say no.
"Any competent driver knows this and can corroborate this statement."
I'm highly competent, and I won't corroborate. (In fact, I'll put my driving record up against anyone's, one ticket when I was 16 for 45 in a 35, and nothing in the twenty years since)
If you're incapable of monitoring the road and other drivers, that is the problem. Cell phones are simply the latest excuse.
"Go ahead and eat french fries, sip coffee,"
And when you spill them in your lap? Right not distracting at all. Your post stinks of yet another screed fueled by sound bites and blurbs, but devoid of reason and fact.
"Studies have shown that it's the concentration one needs to carry on a cell conversation"
That's exactly what GP said. It's not the phone, it's the failure to attend to driving. The distraction, as you said.
"And what about this ominous free speech all those americanos seem to be so hang up upon? Well, good riddance to that travesty of a human right."
What idiots modded THIS up?
What the hell is wrong with you people that you AGREE with garbage like this?
"The fact that it's well know removes it from the noise category."
It's not well known, that's the point.
It's an article about an insignificant happening that matters to almost no one. Couple that with the fact that most people have never heard of the guy ( which refutes your well known argument) and your assertion that's it's not noise is nonsense.
It's noise, it's clutter, and wiki is better off without it.
"It's interesting that you believe that your opinion of a topic should preempt a wider audience"
It's even more interesting that you believe people should waste time and resources managing an article of no practical use whatsoever, for no reason other than to satisfy you.
Wiki isn't a storage house of everything that has ever happened. This guy is a nothing, and should be treated as such.
"Not buying a product for the sole reason that you dont want the profits to go to another country (and make that country richer/more powerful) is xenophobia at work (fear or hatred of foreigners; in this case, fear)."
Fine then, what are we afraid of?
You can expand the definition of xenophobia all you like, and mis-apply it to any number of inappropriate situations.
But this isn't one of them. In this case, it's not a matter of being afraid or hating anyone. It's a matter of spending my money in support of a company that meets my expectations for quality and value.
Lenovo has neither of those.
As others have said, it's not that "lenovo" is a minus, but rather "IBM" is a big plus.
And it's certainly not xenophobia, no matter how much you insist otherwise.