Japanese newspapers said police had noticed that Ms Lin's fingers had unnatural scars when she was arrested last month for allegedly faking a marriage to a Japanese man.
Seems like until they can get rid of the circular scars around their fingertips, they aren't going to fool anyone. From now on, when officials notice circular scars or other shaped scars around fingertips, they will probably have the person undergo further testing.
As far as iris switching...I don't think so. I have a feeling that the permanent blindness that likely follows(though I am not an ophthalmologist, so I can't be sure as to what is possible) will override any benefits that come from the short term gains of biometrics trickery.
Not only have I played Phoenix Wright, but also SimCity and Civilization. I'm pretty sure that qualifies me for President in 2012. I'm also fairly certain I know the cheatcode to fix the economy.
Just don't just cass too many times when trying to fix the budget...
If it comes down to the lesser of evils, Microsoft wins by a big margin. If Microsoft challenges Google's ad-based search dominance, the consumer benefits. If Google succeeds in making operating systems completely locked down with a single company's products, the consumer loses out! (Some would also say that Google's harvesting of personal data for advertising and marketing purposes is a far greater evil than not releasing the source to an operating system.)
Microsoft may be a Megacorp, but it's still far less harmful than Google. I say we side with Microsoft and use it to knock Google down a few more pegs.
See, unlike yourself, I don't trust Google. Not to say that I trust AT&T, Sprint, or Verizon either. I don't trust any of them. Currently, I even place less trust in Google than I do in many other corporations. The fact that my privacy means very little to it irritates me. I dislike advertising, which is another notch down for the company.
Something about Google is just...eerie. They go into a type of business, and by sheer weight they eventually win out. Some of their ideas are interesting, I agree. But some of them piss the hell out of me. No folders in Gmail? I can't get used to it. Sure, there are labels. But I want folders. But Google is insistent that they know what is best for me. Google knows best, no need to question it.
The thing that is really eerie, at least to me, about Google is that they are slowly becoming everywhere in society. The fact that searching online for something is now referred to as 'googling' something should tell you something. I mean, when you use your computer, do you windows it(well, around here, linux it?)? No, you simply use it. If you drive your car, do you mustang around town? The fact that the company has become a verb unsettles me.
Perhaps it is just me. Maybe I am being overly paranoid. I just get a weird feeling when I hear about Google going into a new type of business in order to 'conquer' it.
Yes, manipulation is a tool. However, reading The Prince does not automatically make you a good manipulator, debator, or leader. To become powerful in these skills, one must practice, debating anything and everything from all points of view. You must be able to debate your point of view as well as your strongest enemy's point of view with equal passion and knowledge. You must read constantly, gaining knowledge of all sides of a debate. You must talk with people on the opposite side of the debate, to find out why they feel the way they do, and figure out (internally), how to come out over them. However, while you are talking to them, you do not try to win them over. You listen. They talk. You must engage in discussion after discussion, debate after debate, read book after book, listen to person after person.
After spending years honing your skills, you can try to lead some sort of small movement. But until you gain that necessary experience, you simply come off like a high school student who doesn't have the logical experience necessary to enact any real change on something as big as copyright. Sorry, but it is true.
What irritates the hell out of me is that these pirates hurt me, the consumer. You mentioned pirating games because of the lack of dedicated servers. I have refused to buy a certain game I was looking forward to buying because of the lack of dedicated servers. I have not bought it, but neither have I pirated it. My individual boycott has been drowned out because people who have no real morality or intelligence when it comes to trying to change something for the better. Because people like headkase(who I have a feeling is probably still in his teens) choose to pirate things that aren't exactly how they want it, people who actually have a backbone and simply refuse to buy it are instead ignored by those who would have the ability to actually make changes. To the publishers and developers, people aren't buying new products because they just don't want to pay for them, rather than the fact that many of us actually don't like developers and publishers stripping features out of games that have long been a mainstay in the industry.
So, I must say, thanks headkase. Get off of your soapbox and actually do something, if you care so much about it. Don't just talk about it. And don't say you are liberating artists when you are only stealing. You don't actually care about copyright. You only care about being a mouthpiece for pirates who want to make it seem like they are the good guys. If all the pirates in the world simply stopped pirating, and simply didn't buy the products they despise so much, the various **IAs would have much of their argument simply stripped away, and real change could happen. But no, you are greedy. So, thank you, for contributing to the death of culture.
You keep bringing up the Gates arrest, seemingly claiming that it was all the officer's fault. You do realize that:
1.) Gates' neighbor called the police after seeing 2 backpack wearing men push open the front door hard. (The door was jammed, so Gates asked the driver to help him push it in, and so the man used his shoulder to push in the door, hence the 911 call).
2.) The responding officer saw a man inside, and, with the 911 call, presumed a crime was in progress. He asked Gates to step outside to talk. Gates called the officer a racist and said that the reason he was being asked to step outside was for being a black man in America.
3.) Gates refused to step outside.
4.) The officer told Gates he was investigating a possible break-in. Gates said that that was ridiculous. He then said that it was his house, and he was a Harvard professor.
5.) The officer asked if there was anyone else inside, to which Gates said that it was none of the officer's business.
6.) The officer asked to see his ID. From inside the house, Gates showed his Harvand ID. When asked to step outside again, Gates said that he would speak to the officer's mama outside.
7.) Gates demanded the officer's badge number, accusing him of racial bigotry, yelling wildly that the officer had not heard the last of him.
8.) A crowd started to gather, the officer told Gates that he was becoming disorderly. Gates continued to act as he had before.
9.) The officer handcuffed Gates, and took him to jail for several hours.
Thankfully, I can save your post that threatens to do this, and when they show up, show it to them, pointing out that your claims are unsubstantiated. Most people in my town know me, and will give a positive character witness report on me. Also, I have known some of the officers in my town since we were kids, so I doubt they will break in my door. However, they will still need to do an investigation. Since my town has a K-9 officer, they will do a sweep of my house, find that there is nothing there. As I have no real experience in law, can only imagine the next steps. I imagine that they will then look up your number, connect your name to it, work with your local PD on a false reporting of a crime charge, placing your name is a database on person not to be trusted with tips, give you a record, among other things.
By the way, the proper term is "rifle" not "riffle".
>>>I would place more trust in what a police officer says is or is not illlegal.
Yeah because the police have NEVER arrested anyone who was innocent. We can trust the goose-stepp..... I mean black-suited thu..... I mean the uniformed Gesta..... oh never mind.
As opposed to the mob? I mean, the mob has never gone on awitchhuntbefore.
As far as whether or not the police have ever arrested an innocent before:
Yes. They have. There have been people who have been arrested because the evidence at that point in time point to a specific individual. Sometimes, further evidence found exonerates them, and they are let go. Other times, no evidence is found later to prove their innocence. However, those arrested who were innocent of the crime at least have the option of going to trial. Those taken by the mob are often beaten or killed. I for one would much rather be taken by the police than by the mob.
Wait, the police are allowed to decide whether a crime is/might be taking place? Don't they have a worldwide bad track record for making those decisions?
I would place more trust in what a police officer says is or is not illlegal. In my experience, random people on the street(or internet) know only what their friends/family have told them, or they simply assume something is or is not illegal based on their own brand of logic. Last time I checked, police officers actually have knowledge and experience of the law in their area. They are actually trained in criminology and the laws and ordinances of their area.
As far as your comment about the police having a worldwide bad track record for making those decisions, I would have to say that they only have a bad track record according to those who are anti-police(which generally correlates to anti-government). Of course, this also only based on my experience, and your experience may vary.
I could go on, but I have a feeling that it still wouldn't convince you. Global Warming is not a myth. True, the Earth does go through cycles. I don't dispute that. However, the rate of climate change is far faster than previous cyclic rates. The rate now versus that of the pre-industrial age is much, much faster. The global ecology cannot adapt fast enough to the change. What used to take thousands of years now takes hundreds, and increasingly, decades. There is plenty of research all around to find. Pretty much the only studies that disagree with the idea of global warming are those that are done by the oil companies and their allies.
One thing to remember, however, is that the carbon that is being dissolved into the oceans is doing huge amounts of damage to the ecosystems there. While the oceans have always pulled carbon into it, the vast increase in CO2 has led to the oceans becoming more acidic, which can cause the coral reefs to dissolve, which will lead to the destruction of the habitats of thousands of kinds of oceanic creatures, doing massive damage to the global ecosystem.
While I realize that this is very ideological of myself, but why don't the various search engines just tell China to fuck off? I mean, why does the rest of the world put up with China's bullshit? Whether it is economic warfare on the rest of the world by artificially devaluing its currency, to their lack of basic human rights, to the fact that without a basic freedom to read opposing views, nothing is due to change anytime in the near future, China is a problem to everyone else.
By the way, I do realize that one of the main reasons that the search engines are not telling China to fuck off is pure and simple: money. There is a lot of ad revenue to be had by companies like Google and Bing.
Well, it appears I misread your post. When I first read it, I read it with a completely different tone. Rereading it, I can see your point. My mistake. I apologize.
I do see your point about Photoshop laying claim to the standard to which all others should strive for. While I have grown used to it, I still get irritated with features that it claims help, but in many cases, irritate the hell out of me. Such as when I try to fill an empty object, and its 'smart fill' leaves a tiny white ring around the area I had just filled, because photoshop loves gradient fill. I often find that a very basic paint program is far more useful than photoshop because I often have more control on a pixel by pixel basis than I ever could with photoshop.
If it is just a plugin, it can always be removed. Why bash it if it will get more people to cross over? They can use the plugin until they begin to get used to the various way of doing things, and if they wish, they can simply remove the plugin and begin to use it the normal way. Having a photoshop plugin would do much more for increasing the user base of the gimp than all the advertising in the world would do. My parents would be more apt to use the gimp if it had an interface more like photoshop's.
For me, that is the litmus test of if a piece of software is easy to use: If my parents can use it without my help. I installed the gimp on their computer, but soon after that, they were asking me about photoshop(which they had used on an old computer of mine). I had to show them very little on photoshop, but I found myself being asked much more about the gimp than I ever was about photoshop.
Note: I haven't used the photoshop plugin in gimp, so if my idea about what it is like it completely wrong, disregard above comments.
Slashdot Mirror
When it comes to reality tv, I think it is safe to say that it is all fiction.
Japanese newspapers said police had noticed that Ms Lin's fingers had unnatural scars when she was arrested last month for allegedly faking a marriage to a Japanese man.
Seems like until they can get rid of the circular scars around their fingertips, they aren't going to fool anyone. From now on, when officials notice circular scars or other shaped scars around fingertips, they will probably have the person undergo further testing.
As far as iris switching...I don't think so. I have a feeling that the permanent blindness that likely follows(though I am not an ophthalmologist, so I can't be sure as to what is possible) will override any benefits that come from the short term gains of biometrics trickery.
Not only have I played Phoenix Wright, but also SimCity and Civilization. I'm pretty sure that qualifies me for President in 2012. I'm also fairly certain I know the cheatcode to fix the economy.
Just don't just cass too many times when trying to fix the budget...
If you release it, you had better release it under the GPL, or it really will be an unethical release...
If it comes down to the lesser of evils, Microsoft wins by a big margin. If Microsoft challenges Google's ad-based search dominance, the consumer benefits. If Google succeeds in making operating systems completely locked down with a single company's products, the consumer loses out! (Some would also say that Google's harvesting of personal data for advertising and marketing purposes is a far greater evil than not releasing the source to an operating system.)
Microsoft may be a Megacorp, but it's still far less harmful than Google. I say we side with Microsoft and use it to knock Google down a few more pegs.
Sorry, no can do on ignoring that. Posters on Slashdot who ignore their typos deserve what they get, and get what they deserve.
So what you are basically trying to say, is that Sarah Palin lip syncs?
See, unlike yourself, I don't trust Google. Not to say that I trust AT&T, Sprint, or Verizon either. I don't trust any of them. Currently, I even place less trust in Google than I do in many other corporations. The fact that my privacy means very little to it irritates me. I dislike advertising, which is another notch down for the company.
Something about Google is just...eerie. They go into a type of business, and by sheer weight they eventually win out. Some of their ideas are interesting, I agree. But some of them piss the hell out of me. No folders in Gmail? I can't get used to it. Sure, there are labels. But I want folders. But Google is insistent that they know what is best for me. Google knows best, no need to question it.
The thing that is really eerie, at least to me, about Google is that they are slowly becoming everywhere in society. The fact that searching online for something is now referred to as 'googling' something should tell you something. I mean, when you use your computer, do you windows it(well, around here, linux it?)? No, you simply use it. If you drive your car, do you mustang around town? The fact that the company has become a verb unsettles me.
Perhaps it is just me. Maybe I am being overly paranoid. I just get a weird feeling when I hear about Google going into a new type of business in order to 'conquer' it.
unless the foreign components are later found to cause cancer themselves.
Or vampirism.
Yes, manipulation is a tool. However, reading The Prince does not automatically make you a good manipulator, debator, or leader. To become powerful in these skills, one must practice, debating anything and everything from all points of view. You must be able to debate your point of view as well as your strongest enemy's point of view with equal passion and knowledge. You must read constantly, gaining knowledge of all sides of a debate. You must talk with people on the opposite side of the debate, to find out why they feel the way they do, and figure out (internally), how to come out over them. However, while you are talking to them, you do not try to win them over. You listen. They talk. You must engage in discussion after discussion, debate after debate, read book after book, listen to person after person.
After spending years honing your skills, you can try to lead some sort of small movement. But until you gain that necessary experience, you simply come off like a high school student who doesn't have the logical experience necessary to enact any real change on something as big as copyright. Sorry, but it is true.
What irritates the hell out of me is that these pirates hurt me, the consumer. You mentioned pirating games because of the lack of dedicated servers. I have refused to buy a certain game I was looking forward to buying because of the lack of dedicated servers. I have not bought it, but neither have I pirated it. My individual boycott has been drowned out because people who have no real morality or intelligence when it comes to trying to change something for the better. Because people like headkase(who I have a feeling is probably still in his teens) choose to pirate things that aren't exactly how they want it, people who actually have a backbone and simply refuse to buy it are instead ignored by those who would have the ability to actually make changes. To the publishers and developers, people aren't buying new products because they just don't want to pay for them, rather than the fact that many of us actually don't like developers and publishers stripping features out of games that have long been a mainstay in the industry.
So, I must say, thanks headkase. Get off of your soapbox and actually do something, if you care so much about it. Don't just talk about it. And don't say you are liberating artists when you are only stealing. You don't actually care about copyright. You only care about being a mouthpiece for pirates who want to make it seem like they are the good guys. If all the pirates in the world simply stopped pirating, and simply didn't buy the products they despise so much, the various **IAs would have much of their argument simply stripped away, and real change could happen. But no, you are greedy. So, thank you, for contributing to the death of culture.
Please don't change the subject
of commodore64_love's response, something tells me that commodore64_love's other account had some mod points available...
And yes, this post is offtopic, unlike my above post.
You keep bringing up the Gates arrest, seemingly claiming that it was all the officer's fault. You do realize that:
1.) Gates' neighbor called the police after seeing 2 backpack wearing men push open the front door hard. (The door was jammed, so Gates asked the driver to help him push it in, and so the man used his shoulder to push in the door, hence the 911 call).
2.) The responding officer saw a man inside, and, with the 911 call, presumed a crime was in progress. He asked Gates to step outside to talk. Gates called the officer a racist and said that the reason he was being asked to step outside was for being a black man in America.
3.) Gates refused to step outside.
4.) The officer told Gates he was investigating a possible break-in. Gates said that that was ridiculous. He then said that it was his house, and he was a Harvard professor.
5.) The officer asked if there was anyone else inside, to which Gates said that it was none of the officer's business.
6.) The officer asked to see his ID. From inside the house, Gates showed his Harvand ID. When asked to step outside again, Gates said that he would speak to the officer's mama outside.
7.) Gates demanded the officer's badge number, accusing him of racial bigotry, yelling wildly that the officer had not heard the last of him.
8.) A crowd started to gather, the officer told Gates that he was becoming disorderly. Gates continued to act as he had before.
9.) The officer handcuffed Gates, and took him to jail for several hours.
Just a thought.
Thankfully, I can save your post that threatens to do this, and when they show up, show it to them, pointing out that your claims are unsubstantiated. Most people in my town know me, and will give a positive character witness report on me. Also, I have known some of the officers in my town since we were kids, so I doubt they will break in my door. However, they will still need to do an investigation. Since my town has a K-9 officer, they will do a sweep of my house, find that there is nothing there. As I have no real experience in law, can only imagine the next steps. I imagine that they will then look up your number, connect your name to it, work with your local PD on a false reporting of a crime charge, placing your name is a database on person not to be trusted with tips, give you a record, among other things.
By the way, the proper term is "rifle" not "riffle".
>>>I would place more trust in what a police officer says is or is not illlegal.
Yeah because the police have NEVER arrested anyone who was innocent. We can trust the goose-stepp..... I mean black-suited thu..... I mean the uniformed Gesta..... oh never mind.
As opposed to the mob? I mean, the mob has never gone on a witch hunt before.
As far as whether or not the police have ever arrested an innocent before:
Yes. They have. There have been people who have been arrested because the evidence at that point in time point to a specific individual. Sometimes, further evidence found exonerates them, and they are let go. Other times, no evidence is found later to prove their innocence. However, those arrested who were innocent of the crime at least have the option of going to trial. Those taken by the mob are often beaten or killed. I for one would much rather be taken by the police than by the mob.
Wait, the police are allowed to decide whether a crime is/might be taking place? Don't they have a worldwide bad track record for making those decisions?
I would place more trust in what a police officer says is or is not illlegal. In my experience, random people on the street(or internet) know only what their friends/family have told them, or they simply assume something is or is not illegal based on their own brand of logic. Last time I checked, police officers actually have knowledge and experience of the law in their area. They are actually trained in criminology and the laws and ordinances of their area.
As far as your comment about the police having a worldwide bad track record for making those decisions, I would have to say that they only have a bad track record according to those who are anti-police(which generally correlates to anti-government). Of course, this also only based on my experience, and your experience may vary.
The only thing I can think of would be:
I am a former law enforcement officer.
If you hated Clippy, imagine every single application having Google's version. You can't turn it off. It is always there.
"It looks like you are writing a letter. Would you like to know where you can get cheap ink, paper, and envelopes, all for one low price?"
"It sounds like you are playing music! Click here to get the latest album from the Number 1 Top 40 band this week!"
"Are you watching a movie? Click here to find where to get movie tickets to a theater near you!"
It makes me shudder just to think about it.
Not in my lifetime.
But maybe mine. I plan on living to be at least 500, hopefully more. So far, so good.
How about http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8233632.stm
Or maybe http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=a5LmlZgQzoPQ&refer=australia
And http://www.azocleantech.com/details.asp?newsID=3740
Then there is http://ecobridge.org/content/g_evd.htm#Disintegration
Also http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/07/29/coral-reefs-glue.html
Of course there is also the http://www.coral.org/resources/about_coral_reefs/threats_to_coral_reefs
I could go on, but I have a feeling that it still wouldn't convince you. Global Warming is not a myth. True, the Earth does go through cycles. I don't dispute that. However, the rate of climate change is far faster than previous cyclic rates. The rate now versus that of the pre-industrial age is much, much faster. The global ecology cannot adapt fast enough to the change. What used to take thousands of years now takes hundreds, and increasingly, decades. There is plenty of research all around to find. Pretty much the only studies that disagree with the idea of global warming are those that are done by the oil companies and their allies.
One thing to remember, however, is that the carbon that is being dissolved into the oceans is doing huge amounts of damage to the ecosystems there. While the oceans have always pulled carbon into it, the vast increase in CO2 has led to the oceans becoming more acidic, which can cause the coral reefs to dissolve, which will lead to the destruction of the habitats of thousands of kinds of oceanic creatures, doing massive damage to the global ecosystem.
While I realize that this is very ideological of myself, but why don't the various search engines just tell China to fuck off? I mean, why does the rest of the world put up with China's bullshit? Whether it is economic warfare on the rest of the world by artificially devaluing its currency, to their lack of basic human rights, to the fact that without a basic freedom to read opposing views, nothing is due to change anytime in the near future, China is a problem to everyone else.
By the way, I do realize that one of the main reasons that the search engines are not telling China to fuck off is pure and simple: money. There is a lot of ad revenue to be had by companies like Google and Bing.
Well, it appears I misread your post. When I first read it, I read it with a completely different tone. Rereading it, I can see your point. My mistake. I apologize.
I do see your point about Photoshop laying claim to the standard to which all others should strive for. While I have grown used to it, I still get irritated with features that it claims help, but in many cases, irritate the hell out of me. Such as when I try to fill an empty object, and its 'smart fill' leaves a tiny white ring around the area I had just filled, because photoshop loves gradient fill. I often find that a very basic paint program is far more useful than photoshop because I often have more control on a pixel by pixel basis than I ever could with photoshop.
If it is just a plugin, it can always be removed. Why bash it if it will get more people to cross over? They can use the plugin until they begin to get used to the various way of doing things, and if they wish, they can simply remove the plugin and begin to use it the normal way. Having a photoshop plugin would do much more for increasing the user base of the gimp than all the advertising in the world would do. My parents would be more apt to use the gimp if it had an interface more like photoshop's.
For me, that is the litmus test of if a piece of software is easy to use: If my parents can use it without my help. I installed the gimp on their computer, but soon after that, they were asking me about photoshop(which they had used on an old computer of mine). I had to show them very little on photoshop, but I found myself being asked much more about the gimp than I ever was about photoshop.
Note: I haven't used the photoshop plugin in gimp, so if my idea about what it is like it completely wrong, disregard above comments.
We will not share individual user information with third parties unless the user has specifically approved the release of that information.