I've been getting back into both programming and coding lately. This is after a nearly 10 year hiatus or a 15 year coasting period. I really haven't done much since about 2001. Some small stuff online, that's it. I did some stuff with SMF for a while, was on their team actually, and I stopped that in 2007 or 2008.
The thing I've noticed is how much has changed. Oh wow... But, to be more specific and lend what I can, I've noticed that there's a JavaScript library for everything. There's also a Java library for everything. I'd have never guessed it. In 2007, I was kind of hoping JS would die. I knew that Java in the browser, as applets, was gonna go away. (No, I'm not confusing the two, I'm referencing them both at the same time. I know the difference.)
I did some C++ but I was most proficient in C. I never learned all the new things - I'd hired professionals by then and my code was being written for me, more often than not, by around 1998. So, for what it's worth, I'd ignore the JavaScript and go with Java - unless you're planning on doing web development. If you're going to do web dev then JavaScript is the way to go. If you're gonna write apps and things that you write once and run everywhere, then Java's not bad. I'm told you can nearly do that with C now but I've not looked into it much deeper than just listening to someone describe it for me.
I'm also assuming you are not confusing the two, as well. Chances are pretty good, however, that you know more than I and are far more adept than I so I'm making sure that you know that I'm not confusing 'em. Strangely, lots of people do confuse them. One was for the annoying applets and the other was for the scrolling text and falling rainbow crap that littered GeoSomethingOrOther pages. Thankfully, those types of things have gone away but we seem to have somehow kept JavaScript around.
What's even stranger, some people are doing some neat things with it by mashing up stuff from other people's sites. Of course, each web page is now 2.9 MB in size - even with ads blocked. You have to allow third party scripts to run to actually click links on some of the pages. But, damn, it's trendy... Also, I admit, some of it is kind of cool. I might be old, I'm just not a relic stuck in his own time. It is kind of neat what they're able to do.
Me? I'm gonna stick with bashing other people's PHP into shape and probably learn some JavaScript and more of the new, to me, CSS and HTML5 stuff. I'm also brushing up on my C. Even that has changed. There's a billion libraries - and they're all free. It's awesome! The thing is, with JavaScript - if you want to build a robot that runs JavaScript - someone's figured it out. Hell, someone's written a library to make it a robotic cat with three legs, a broken tail, and a horrendous mewing sound whenever someone walks by - based on accelerometers that they desoldered from a cell phone.
I'm not actually sure when this happened but JavaScript grew up when I wasn't looking. At the same time, Java has done pretty well for itself too. It's eating up a lot of my time but that's a great thing and what I wanted.
Also, there's this caveat... I never actually took any formal classes in programming. I just did it because I had to. Computers didn't really do anything useful back then, not unless you knew how to tell it what to do. So, I had no choice in the matter. It worked but I'd not lay claim to being good. With that and the fact that I've not really done a whole lot in a while - and am just getting productive as of late, weigh my opinion accordingly. But, there it is if you want it.
I'd argue that they also need to learn the history of computing and networking as well as the physical components (how they actually work - physically) and the basics of safe hex. I'd say that those are just as essential as any use is at this point in time. A good grounding in real computer science should actually cover the science of computing, no? They should actually know that what they're using is a tool and, like all tools, it should be operated both with skill and safety. In order to do that, one needs to truly understand the reasons that things are the way they are.
Beyond that, or along side that, they could learn the software aspects that you're suggesting. However, learning to program is not learning computer science. Learning to program does have value but that would be greatly improved by actually having a healthy dose of computer science so that they can tie it all together. If we just want cheap code monkeys, we can go buy those. If we want people who are actually skilled, we have to teach that.
I think that one, without the other, is not nearly as valuable as both of them combined. Someone who understands what ring 0 is actually might understand why code that doesn't race is imperative. Someone who understands the history, will know what mistakes have been made and learn from them. Someone who has an understanding of the networking, how it physically works, might actually be able to code with security in mind. Someone who knows the actual physical aspects of memory will understand that buffer overruns are bad - and why. Then, they will know who, what, when, where and how they worked to avoid them. They'll understand what sanity checking actually means and why it's essential.
And those that can't? Well, someone's gotta work help desk, manage, and be QA.
While you meant that to be snark, the reality is - dumb people don't use difficult tools.
That said, it's not hard to use Linux. I use Linux. Every day - and no, not on my phone. As in, Linux is my desktop OS of choice as it is on my servers. I like it.
I do notice a couple of things... I see them both here, on this site, but this site is not the only place I see it...
It doesn't solve every problem. It's no good.
It doesn't work for me, it doesn't work for anyone.
I don't like it, nobody likes it.
I like it, if you don't like it you're an idiot.
I can do it better than that. I just haven't done it yet.
I am smarter than they are. Yes, I work help desk but that's because of other people.
I will not be responsible for my actions and I'm offended that you suggested I actually think before acting.
People seek affirmation. It's prevalent here but it exists on other sites as well. I think the traits are more prevalent here for reasons I'm not going to bother getting into but reasons that should be obvious. Now, I admit, some of those didn't really need to be on the list for today's conversation BUT that doesn't make them any less valid.
Want to see healthy and intelligent? Watch this... Are you ready? Okay, hold my beer and watch this:
I use Linux. I like it. I prefer it. I don't really care what operating system you use but I do hope that you were intelligent enough to make an informed choice and that you formed your own opinion based on your own individual needs. The computer is the tool you use to accomplish goals. You should use the tool that works best for your own individual needs. I feel no need to pressure others into doing the things I do. I do not need affirmation or to be on the side of the majority.
It is like security, a process and not an application. You decide how much risk you'll take to accomplish your goals. In this case, you decide what overhead you'll accept to accomplish your goals. Well, ideally you will. Chances are that a good number of people haven't actually taken the time to learn other things and then make an informed choice to use what works best for them. They do what they think is the "in" thing to do or, a few of them, do the "out" thing just to be contrary. That's unfortunate because they'd be better served knowing more about the things they deride and then make an informed decision that is based on objectivity and logic.
For me, that choice is currently Linux. I am happy using Linux because it enables me to accomplish my goals in a manner that is both stable and secure enough for my needs. I am comfortable with the operating system and I'm glad that I made the choice that I did. I've used many other operating systems (and I do mean many) over the years and I prefer Linux. I hope that you are using the operating system that suits your needs best. If you're not then that's unfortunate and you should spend some time devoted to learning new things and then deciding what meets your needs or wants and enables you to be the most efficient...
For me, that's Lubuntu. I don't actually give a shit what you use but I hope, for your sake, that you've made an informed choice and are willing to be held accountable, and able to be responsible, for your choice. You have myriad tools to learn about the many options and the freedom to decide which, of any, compute devices will serve your individual needs best.
The politicians have something we regular citizens lack. That is solidarity. Hurt one of them and they all jump to their defense. Harm one of us, and we try hardest to see who can piss on the body.
The thing about a union is solidarity. That whole all for one and one for all? Yeah... We gave that up. I'm not sure we ever really had it. The bit about we hang together or separately? Yeah, if there's a riot we're busy trying to steal television sets.
Seriously... Watch what happens when a politician gets shot. Then watch what happens when it's "that body down the street who's been asking for trouble." Nah, one of us dies and we fight over who gets to take their sneakers. One of them dies and they mourn together.
Solidarity... We don't have it. It's probably intentional. We keep fighting over which political football team we want to win. We keep fighting over what rights we're going to take from the other guy. We keep fighting about who has what and how much they should be giving to others. We keep fighting because someone does something that we don't like - even if it caused no harm to us. We keep fighting because we don't share the same opinions, beliefs, music style, operating system, text editor, color, manner of dress, speech patterns, and more. We keep fighting because someone has more than us. We keep fighting because someone's getting more than us.
We keep fighting because that's what we're trained to do. It stops us from taking the time to look at the things we have in common. It stops us from taking the time to think logically. We want want want want and want some more. But we give nothing back. We all pay too much and get too little and we'll be damned if we're not righteously indignant about any cause du jour. We all want to take each others liberties and impose restrictions and penalties on those we don't like. We never stop to think that those same liberties and penalties apply to us.
We are not a one people. We are not a one nation. We're a bunch of childish, greedy, petty, cowards. Welcome to America, can I take your order please?
Who the hell moderated you -1? It appears that someone's fixed it (I've been on the page for a while - off doing other things and just clicked your score) but how the fuck is your post 'trolling?' Did anyone, besides me, actually watch the video? Well, I didn't watch it but it was on and I listened while I was working on a project. (It's kind of strange whenever I see a familiar face at a TED talk, by the way. I'd no idea Adam had done one.)
At any rate, it's not a bad video and I know the presenter personally. Actually, just yesterday or the day before, I was mentioning a place up near Fort Ave. and he lives right in the area. I've "known" him for a while now. Sort of... There's a familial familiarity but we're not friends or anything of the sort. It's kind of odd when things like that happen online but that's neither here nor there.
What I'm curious is how the hell is your post translated as a trolling post? You presented a fairly logical opinion. You didn't stress that anyone should be mandated to such. You opined about some risks and some benefits. You didn't even urge the degradation of rights. In fact, if anything, you indicated that there were problems and that, in order for it to work, it would have to be optional.
I can certainly say that I'd not welcome or be willing to live in a society like that. However, you're not suggesting that I do so, nor are you suggesting that everyone should. How the fuck is your post trolling? Hell, you even went on to talk about the actual problem which is crime. Yes, terrorism is a crime people. It's not some magic word that makes it something else. Terrorists commit crimes. That's kind of what they do. Blowing people up? Yeah, that's a crime. Even blowing just yourself up is technically a crime. Car bombs? Yup, that's a crime too.
So, you actually get to the root of the problem (the fact that people commit crimes) and link to a TED talk where someone talks about ways of preventing crime - with intervention and actively working to solve the problems before people are harmed by the justice system and subject to the penalties associated with that.
All I can think of is that the idiot who moderated you a troll is too stupid to realize that terrorism is a crime. "Oh no! It's something WORSE than that!!!" No folks... It's not. It's just a crime. The fact that a whole slew of idiots ramp it up a notch and want to believe it is more than a crime doesn't make it actually worse than a crime. That's how you get idiotic overreactions resulting in things like, I suspect, the moderation and stupid shit like DHS, TSA, and the very fucking subject of this thread - our own government surveilling us.
In fact, seeing as I'm here, it's BECAUSE we treat terrorism as more than what it is that we end up with knee-jerk responses and stupidity. It's because we freak the fuck out that they take the opportunity to reduce our liberties. It's because we treat it as something bigger than it is that we end up with draconian legislation and tyrannical governance. The sad thing is, your moderator is just as guilty as those who cheered on the Patriot Act. Your moderator is just as bad as those who would treat it as more than a crime.
Folks... When you treat terrorists and terrorism as more than just your ordinary criminal offense, you end up doing stupid shit. That's how they "win." They spend very little and get a huge response. They spend very little and get scads of media attention, overreaction, and fear. Treat it like the crime it is, and that includes intervention, and stop shitting your pants every time some whackjob blows up a bus full of kids. All you're doing is giving them the power to control your emotions and that's not bright.
Maybe we should stop calling them terrorists and just start calling them criminals. That's what they are. Of course, that would mean you silly humans would have to stop being panicky herd animals and there would be far fewer calls for oppressive legislation so that's right out of the question. Nah, we can't be calm, collected, rational, and show stoic resignation. Nope... We gotta run around with soiled undergarments and moralize each other to see who can most aggrieved. Damn it... We humans really are a bunch of stupid mother-fuckers. *sighs*
You look silly with that hook in your mouth. I'd almost say that there's no way in hell that they could honestly hold those opinions but, sadly, there are those who do. However, in this particular case, they're just tossing some cheap bait out there and hoping for a couple of strikes. Now you're sitting here with a hook dangling from your lip and looking silly.;-)
Once upon a time there was an Amendment to the Constitution. It was rather specific, it basically said that the powers that weren't granted to the federal government (by the Constitution) were left to the people or to the individual States. Why do I mention that?
What that Amendment meant was that it was, at one time, interpreted to mean that if the Constitution did not specifically allow for it that it was not something that the Federal Government was allowed to do. In other words, if the Constitution did not give them permission then it was not allowed and the rights were reserved for the individual or for the State.
Somewhere along the road that changed. Now, the interpretation is the other way around. Now, it's read that if the Constitution doesn't expressly disallow it that it's allowed. It's pretty much exactly the opposite of the intent and we, the citizens, have not only allowed this misinterpretation but have actively cheered it on when it was "our side" that was doing it.
I don't know exactly how or when it happened but there are a few key places to look. I think it was over several events and has gotten progressively worse.
Heh... I'm partially colorblind and it appears to be getting worse with age. I can usually still recognize patterns but I have issues with certain colors and various shades. I have, on the other hand, learned to not argue with people when they tell me something is a different color than what I said it was. At first, I thought people were just fucking with me. It wasn't too bad when I was younger but it's not that great now. Blue, gray? Yellow, orange? Red, orange? Fucked if I can be certain. I seriously thought people were just fucking with me at first. But no, no... I'm partially colorblind.
That's a good point, by the way. I hadn't thought of that. The poster below adds to it as well... It's not like the usage was hidden so I'm not sure why anyone would be embarrassed. Ah well. Their culture's quite different as is their politics.
I'm not sure it's really private - as in, I witnessed people using them as I walked through outdoor areas and could see browser extensions. I've also discussed them, specifically, because I found the concept weird. (I'll touch on that in a moment.)
So, I don't really think it's all that private. An AC mentioned an interesting point below - that he'd surely visited the pages in preparation for his talk. He should have already known. Then again, maybe he'd told someone to have it unblocked for him by the time he was doing his talk and someone dropped the ball? Who knows. We'll, quite likely, never find out.
Now... I found it odd, the whole censorship thing. They know they're being censored. It's sort of openly discussed. At least nobody had any problems talking with me about it. It's odd enough that I don't really know how to describe it. I've been all over the place and every culture there are many similarities but some are just so unusual that I didn't have time to adjust - it would probably take me years to do so.
Hmm... How do I try to explain it? Well... I'll try it this way.
They pretend to believe the government and the government pretends that the citizens believe them.
At least that's my impression. Keep in mind, I've only spent a total of about three months in China - ever. That's spread out over three separate visits with the longest one being two months where I'd hired a guide and we traveled around. We even flew up north. Beautiful area(s) by the way. Some of China is absolutely stunning.
But, the lack of time to really adjust and my being a foreigner means there's probably someone more qualified to speak about it. But that's what it seemed like to me. They seemed well aware of the censorship and propaganda. It was openly discussed with me on numerous occasions. Once you get out of the major metropolitan areas, it's almost like little fiefdoms anyhow. But that's just my impression. At any rate, once you get out of the cities and tourist areas, they seem to care more about the local government more than they do the national government.
I don't know if there's much oversight or not but it certainly seemed like local officials, in the smaller areas, carried some big sticks. (Figuratively.) I had the occasion to talk with two different folks and dine with another, which I'd liken to a mayor or maybe a city councilman, and they carry themselves aloof and "regular" citizens seemed to speak of them with greater "respect" or reverence than they did the State government. I'm not really sure what lines are drawn where or how to reference their politicians.
Like I said, there's probably someone here who is more adept at explaining it and more familiar with it than I. It was really unusual for me, almost eerie and almost creepy. The last two times that I visited were much different than the first time I visited. The first time was in the 1990s and the last two were just within the past six years. I was last there in 2012.
Then again, maybe it's "face" if you're an upper-crust and you have to use a VPN? They didn't appear to hide their use and I openly discussed it on more than on occasion with people. There were a surprising number of people with a little onion icon.;-)
Yeah, it doesn't *have* to be turning it into an echo chamber. There's no reason that it has to end that way - at least not in the majority of cases. For those who want one, well... Let 'em have it.
I don't block anyone here. I read at -1. There are other sites where I'd consider it but I usually don't. I could understand blocking the idiots that don't contribute anything but that doesn't mean that you'll be stuck in an echo chamber. How you use it is up to you.
I'm not sure that I'd block anyone here. I do have some sort-of pressing issues to figure that out, however. I'm in the process of starting a site (or a group of them) meant for civil discourse which is why the subject makes me curious. We will be blocking those who can't remain civil but that will be via moderation. You can discuss anything and be civil about it. I know because I do it. I know because I've had lots of civil conversations with people who had very different opinions/beliefs than I.
Heck, one of the people who's been kind of helping out (at least keeping me motivated) is a Mormon. Yeah... We have fine conversations. I'm a secular Buddhist and not even a *good* Buddhist. I'm sure as hell not a monk. Nah, we get along just fine.
So he just happened to have a VPN and an account all ready and set to go or is this a normal thing? I'm guessing it's the latter. I'm not sure why you'd be embarrassed about it. It's not like he just happened to notice while being shown live. He had one already there, installed, and an account configured.
By the way, I've been to China and, as near as I can tell, everyone that I met had a VPN - usually one of the 'free' ones that you load up in your browser as an extension. And no, they didn't seem embarrassed about it. Then again, they weren't live and the person who configured the firewall.
I guess, it might be different as they're a business but I'm not entirely sure that it is. I don't think it's been tested anywhere and things default to legal and not illegal?
I'm almost completely certain that I can start a site that bans anyone who discloses they're gay - and only bans those who discloses they're gay. Obviously, I'd have no way of telling if they're gay. I guess I could have a 'real name' and 'sworn affidavit' policy. But yeah, I'm pretty sure I don't have to let people use my site if I don't want to. Is Reddit publicly traded or anything?
Heck, I could probably start a site and say, "NO WHITE PEOPLE!" if I wanted. Or, maybe, one that disallowed black people, Jewish people, gays, and Gypsies. I kind of want to do something like that now and see what happens. I'm thinking a good test would be a site that disallows women and a sibling site that disallows men. Then we can see which one gets more hate mail or who takes what to court.
Is it really that bad, to you, if someone follows you around on the 'net and calls you names? 'Cause I have had that happen and I really didn't find it all that traumatizing. Hell, they then went on to say they were going to moderate all of my posts down. Well, I make a whole lot of posts. Needless to say, they were unable to do that. Eventually, it appears that meta-mod got them here - I don't think they get mod points at all any more.
At any rate, yeah... They followed me around and were quite aggressive for a while. It didn't actually bother me at all. It meant that I was the one in charge. It meant that I was the one controlling their responses. They were giving me their most precious asset - their time.
And no, I didn't lose sleep. I didn't worry. I didn't care except to be amused by it. They've kind of stopped posting while logged in now. Hell, I even invited 'em to dinner once. They didn't come. They were not the best of stalker and they gave up way too early for my taste.
Does it really bother you if someone calls you names online? Does it matter if they "target" you? 'Cause, I've had this happen and it wasn't much more than a great ego boost. They dedicated a whole bunch of time to me and my doings. I kind of miss 'em.
I don't have any experience with Reddit so I don't really know what they'll consider harassment or whatnot but I don't see anything particularly egregious about this tool. Not really, at least not in my current thinking - someone's welcome to try to change that. I don't see why this has to be an echo chamber.
It's possible to hold dissenting opinions and to discuss any topic without being offensive. It's possible to have a conversation that remains civil, regardless of the positions held. I know this is true, I do it nearly every single day. In fact, you might say that my current post is contrarian. I have held meaningful, civil, discussions - even debates, with all sorts of people. Some of those people were the least favored folks on the planet. Some of them have held beliefs that are truly ignorant but the conversations remained civil throughout.
Of course, not every conversation is going to turn out that way. In fact, I'm guilty of being uncivilized in my responses. But, the thing is, it doesn't *have* to be that way. It doesn't have to be an echo chamber. I voice contrary opinions on a regular basis, probably nearly every single day. Hell, I don't even mind systemd (legitimately, I do not mind - it even has come in handy) and I share and defend that position politely. Some of the spittle flecked responders lack the capacity for civil discourse but they're an exception and not the rule.
So, perhaps Reddit is different than every place I've ever been in the real world or online. I'd not know, I've never posted there. I've been there a couple of times but I don't think I've read a full thread there. There is a "KGIII" there but they're not me.
Slashdot Mirror
That's fine. It's not the Special Olympics. You don't need to worry about being invited. ;-)
No, it sounds like EWE have a problem with it!
Typical homophone!
Heh... If we're lucky they'll pretend to listen. ;-)
That's funny. You're not that naive. I know you're not. So, I gotta ask... You really don't think you're allowed to make the rules, do you?
Is that true? ½ ¼ ¥ € £ © ® etc... I thought those were early Unicode. It does make sense, though.
LOL That's lower than even *I* was went.
I've been getting back into both programming and coding lately. This is after a nearly 10 year hiatus or a 15 year coasting period. I really haven't done much since about 2001. Some small stuff online, that's it. I did some stuff with SMF for a while, was on their team actually, and I stopped that in 2007 or 2008.
The thing I've noticed is how much has changed. Oh wow... But, to be more specific and lend what I can, I've noticed that there's a JavaScript library for everything. There's also a Java library for everything. I'd have never guessed it. In 2007, I was kind of hoping JS would die. I knew that Java in the browser, as applets, was gonna go away. (No, I'm not confusing the two, I'm referencing them both at the same time. I know the difference.)
I did some C++ but I was most proficient in C. I never learned all the new things - I'd hired professionals by then and my code was being written for me, more often than not, by around 1998. So, for what it's worth, I'd ignore the JavaScript and go with Java - unless you're planning on doing web development. If you're going to do web dev then JavaScript is the way to go. If you're gonna write apps and things that you write once and run everywhere, then Java's not bad. I'm told you can nearly do that with C now but I've not looked into it much deeper than just listening to someone describe it for me.
I'm also assuming you are not confusing the two, as well. Chances are pretty good, however, that you know more than I and are far more adept than I so I'm making sure that you know that I'm not confusing 'em. Strangely, lots of people do confuse them. One was for the annoying applets and the other was for the scrolling text and falling rainbow crap that littered GeoSomethingOrOther pages. Thankfully, those types of things have gone away but we seem to have somehow kept JavaScript around.
What's even stranger, some people are doing some neat things with it by mashing up stuff from other people's sites. Of course, each web page is now 2.9 MB in size - even with ads blocked. You have to allow third party scripts to run to actually click links on some of the pages. But, damn, it's trendy... Also, I admit, some of it is kind of cool. I might be old, I'm just not a relic stuck in his own time. It is kind of neat what they're able to do.
Me? I'm gonna stick with bashing other people's PHP into shape and probably learn some JavaScript and more of the new, to me, CSS and HTML5 stuff. I'm also brushing up on my C. Even that has changed. There's a billion libraries - and they're all free. It's awesome! The thing is, with JavaScript - if you want to build a robot that runs JavaScript - someone's figured it out. Hell, someone's written a library to make it a robotic cat with three legs, a broken tail, and a horrendous mewing sound whenever someone walks by - based on accelerometers that they desoldered from a cell phone.
I'm not actually sure when this happened but JavaScript grew up when I wasn't looking. At the same time, Java has done pretty well for itself too. It's eating up a lot of my time but that's a great thing and what I wanted.
Also, there's this caveat... I never actually took any formal classes in programming. I just did it because I had to. Computers didn't really do anything useful back then, not unless you knew how to tell it what to do. So, I had no choice in the matter. It worked but I'd not lay claim to being good. With that and the fact that I've not really done a whole lot in a while - and am just getting productive as of late, weigh my opinion accordingly. But, there it is if you want it.
I'd argue that they also need to learn the history of computing and networking as well as the physical components (how they actually work - physically) and the basics of safe hex. I'd say that those are just as essential as any use is at this point in time. A good grounding in real computer science should actually cover the science of computing, no? They should actually know that what they're using is a tool and, like all tools, it should be operated both with skill and safety. In order to do that, one needs to truly understand the reasons that things are the way they are.
Beyond that, or along side that, they could learn the software aspects that you're suggesting. However, learning to program is not learning computer science. Learning to program does have value but that would be greatly improved by actually having a healthy dose of computer science so that they can tie it all together. If we just want cheap code monkeys, we can go buy those. If we want people who are actually skilled, we have to teach that.
I think that one, without the other, is not nearly as valuable as both of them combined. Someone who understands what ring 0 is actually might understand why code that doesn't race is imperative. Someone who understands the history, will know what mistakes have been made and learn from them. Someone who has an understanding of the networking, how it physically works, might actually be able to code with security in mind. Someone who knows the actual physical aspects of memory will understand that buffer overruns are bad - and why. Then, they will know who, what, when, where and how they worked to avoid them. They'll understand what sanity checking actually means and why it's essential.
And those that can't? Well, someone's gotta work help desk, manage, and be QA.
His professor was the reincarnated Cantor.
While you meant that to be snark, the reality is - dumb people don't use difficult tools.
That said, it's not hard to use Linux. I use Linux. Every day - and no, not on my phone. As in, Linux is my desktop OS of choice as it is on my servers. I like it.
I do notice a couple of things... I see them both here, on this site, but this site is not the only place I see it...
People seek affirmation. It's prevalent here but it exists on other sites as well. I think the traits are more prevalent here for reasons I'm not going to bother getting into but reasons that should be obvious. Now, I admit, some of those didn't really need to be on the list for today's conversation BUT that doesn't make them any less valid.
Want to see healthy and intelligent? Watch this... Are you ready? Okay, hold my beer and watch this:
I use Linux. I like it. I prefer it. I don't really care what operating system you use but I do hope that you were intelligent enough to make an informed choice and that you formed your own opinion based on your own individual needs. The computer is the tool you use to accomplish goals. You should use the tool that works best for your own individual needs. I feel no need to pressure others into doing the things I do. I do not need affirmation or to be on the side of the majority.
It is like security, a process and not an application. You decide how much risk you'll take to accomplish your goals. In this case, you decide what overhead you'll accept to accomplish your goals. Well, ideally you will. Chances are that a good number of people haven't actually taken the time to learn other things and then make an informed choice to use what works best for them. They do what they think is the "in" thing to do or, a few of them, do the "out" thing just to be contrary. That's unfortunate because they'd be better served knowing more about the things they deride and then make an informed decision that is based on objectivity and logic.
For me, that choice is currently Linux. I am happy using Linux because it enables me to accomplish my goals in a manner that is both stable and secure enough for my needs. I am comfortable with the operating system and I'm glad that I made the choice that I did. I've used many other operating systems (and I do mean many) over the years and I prefer Linux. I hope that you are using the operating system that suits your needs best. If you're not then that's unfortunate and you should spend some time devoted to learning new things and then deciding what meets your needs or wants and enables you to be the most efficient...
For me, that's Lubuntu. I don't actually give a shit what you use but I hope, for your sake, that you've made an informed choice and are willing to be held accountable, and able to be responsible, for your choice. You have myriad tools to learn about the many options and the freedom to decide which, of any, compute devices will serve your individual needs best.
The politicians have something we regular citizens lack. That is solidarity. Hurt one of them and they all jump to their defense. Harm one of us, and we try hardest to see who can piss on the body.
The thing about a union is solidarity. That whole all for one and one for all? Yeah... We gave that up. I'm not sure we ever really had it. The bit about we hang together or separately? Yeah, if there's a riot we're busy trying to steal television sets.
Seriously... Watch what happens when a politician gets shot. Then watch what happens when it's "that body down the street who's been asking for trouble." Nah, one of us dies and we fight over who gets to take their sneakers. One of them dies and they mourn together.
Solidarity... We don't have it. It's probably intentional. We keep fighting over which political football team we want to win. We keep fighting over what rights we're going to take from the other guy. We keep fighting about who has what and how much they should be giving to others. We keep fighting because someone does something that we don't like - even if it caused no harm to us. We keep fighting because we don't share the same opinions, beliefs, music style, operating system, text editor, color, manner of dress, speech patterns, and more. We keep fighting because someone has more than us. We keep fighting because someone's getting more than us.
We keep fighting because that's what we're trained to do. It stops us from taking the time to look at the things we have in common. It stops us from taking the time to think logically. We want want want want and want some more. But we give nothing back. We all pay too much and get too little and we'll be damned if we're not righteously indignant about any cause du jour. We all want to take each others liberties and impose restrictions and penalties on those we don't like. We never stop to think that those same liberties and penalties apply to us.
We are not a one people. We are not a one nation. We're a bunch of childish, greedy, petty, cowards. Welcome to America, can I take your order please?
Who the hell moderated you -1? It appears that someone's fixed it (I've been on the page for a while - off doing other things and just clicked your score) but how the fuck is your post 'trolling?' Did anyone, besides me, actually watch the video? Well, I didn't watch it but it was on and I listened while I was working on a project. (It's kind of strange whenever I see a familiar face at a TED talk, by the way. I'd no idea Adam had done one.)
At any rate, it's not a bad video and I know the presenter personally. Actually, just yesterday or the day before, I was mentioning a place up near Fort Ave. and he lives right in the area. I've "known" him for a while now. Sort of... There's a familial familiarity but we're not friends or anything of the sort. It's kind of odd when things like that happen online but that's neither here nor there.
What I'm curious is how the hell is your post translated as a trolling post? You presented a fairly logical opinion. You didn't stress that anyone should be mandated to such. You opined about some risks and some benefits. You didn't even urge the degradation of rights. In fact, if anything, you indicated that there were problems and that, in order for it to work, it would have to be optional.
I can certainly say that I'd not welcome or be willing to live in a society like that. However, you're not suggesting that I do so, nor are you suggesting that everyone should. How the fuck is your post trolling? Hell, you even went on to talk about the actual problem which is crime. Yes, terrorism is a crime people. It's not some magic word that makes it something else. Terrorists commit crimes. That's kind of what they do. Blowing people up? Yeah, that's a crime. Even blowing just yourself up is technically a crime. Car bombs? Yup, that's a crime too.
So, you actually get to the root of the problem (the fact that people commit crimes) and link to a TED talk where someone talks about ways of preventing crime - with intervention and actively working to solve the problems before people are harmed by the justice system and subject to the penalties associated with that.
All I can think of is that the idiot who moderated you a troll is too stupid to realize that terrorism is a crime. "Oh no! It's something WORSE than that!!!" No folks... It's not. It's just a crime. The fact that a whole slew of idiots ramp it up a notch and want to believe it is more than a crime doesn't make it actually worse than a crime. That's how you get idiotic overreactions resulting in things like, I suspect, the moderation and stupid shit like DHS, TSA, and the very fucking subject of this thread - our own government surveilling us.
In fact, seeing as I'm here, it's BECAUSE we treat terrorism as more than what it is that we end up with knee-jerk responses and stupidity. It's because we freak the fuck out that they take the opportunity to reduce our liberties. It's because we treat it as something bigger than it is that we end up with draconian legislation and tyrannical governance. The sad thing is, your moderator is just as guilty as those who cheered on the Patriot Act. Your moderator is just as bad as those who would treat it as more than a crime.
Folks... When you treat terrorists and terrorism as more than just your ordinary criminal offense, you end up doing stupid shit. That's how they "win." They spend very little and get a huge response. They spend very little and get scads of media attention, overreaction, and fear. Treat it like the crime it is, and that includes intervention, and stop shitting your pants every time some whackjob blows up a bus full of kids. All you're doing is giving them the power to control your emotions and that's not bright.
Maybe we should stop calling them terrorists and just start calling them criminals. That's what they are. Of course, that would mean you silly humans would have to stop being panicky herd animals and there would be far fewer calls for oppressive legislation so that's right out of the question. Nah, we can't be calm, collected, rational, and show stoic resignation. Nope... We gotta run around with soiled undergarments and moralize each other to see who can most aggrieved. Damn it... We humans really are a bunch of stupid mother-fuckers. *sighs*
You look silly with that hook in your mouth. I'd almost say that there's no way in hell that they could honestly hold those opinions but, sadly, there are those who do. However, in this particular case, they're just tossing some cheap bait out there and hoping for a couple of strikes. Now you're sitting here with a hook dangling from your lip and looking silly. ;-)
Once upon a time there was an Amendment to the Constitution. It was rather specific, it basically said that the powers that weren't granted to the federal government (by the Constitution) were left to the people or to the individual States. Why do I mention that?
What that Amendment meant was that it was, at one time, interpreted to mean that if the Constitution did not specifically allow for it that it was not something that the Federal Government was allowed to do. In other words, if the Constitution did not give them permission then it was not allowed and the rights were reserved for the individual or for the State.
Somewhere along the road that changed. Now, the interpretation is the other way around. Now, it's read that if the Constitution doesn't expressly disallow it that it's allowed. It's pretty much exactly the opposite of the intent and we, the citizens, have not only allowed this misinterpretation but have actively cheered it on when it was "our side" that was doing it.
I don't know exactly how or when it happened but there are a few key places to look. I think it was over several events and has gotten progressively worse.
Heh... I'm partially colorblind and it appears to be getting worse with age. I can usually still recognize patterns but I have issues with certain colors and various shades. I have, on the other hand, learned to not argue with people when they tell me something is a different color than what I said it was. At first, I thought people were just fucking with me. It wasn't too bad when I was younger but it's not that great now. Blue, gray? Yellow, orange? Red, orange? Fucked if I can be certain. I seriously thought people were just fucking with me at first. But no, no... I'm partially colorblind.
That you, not logged in, Karmashock?
That's a good point, by the way. I hadn't thought of that. The poster below adds to it as well... It's not like the usage was hidden so I'm not sure why anyone would be embarrassed. Ah well. Their culture's quite different as is their politics.
I'm not sure it's really private - as in, I witnessed people using them as I walked through outdoor areas and could see browser extensions. I've also discussed them, specifically, because I found the concept weird. (I'll touch on that in a moment.)
So, I don't really think it's all that private. An AC mentioned an interesting point below - that he'd surely visited the pages in preparation for his talk. He should have already known. Then again, maybe he'd told someone to have it unblocked for him by the time he was doing his talk and someone dropped the ball? Who knows. We'll, quite likely, never find out.
Now... I found it odd, the whole censorship thing. They know they're being censored. It's sort of openly discussed. At least nobody had any problems talking with me about it. It's odd enough that I don't really know how to describe it. I've been all over the place and every culture there are many similarities but some are just so unusual that I didn't have time to adjust - it would probably take me years to do so.
Hmm... How do I try to explain it? Well... I'll try it this way.
They pretend to believe the government and the government pretends that the citizens believe them.
At least that's my impression. Keep in mind, I've only spent a total of about three months in China - ever. That's spread out over three separate visits with the longest one being two months where I'd hired a guide and we traveled around. We even flew up north. Beautiful area(s) by the way. Some of China is absolutely stunning.
But, the lack of time to really adjust and my being a foreigner means there's probably someone more qualified to speak about it. But that's what it seemed like to me. They seemed well aware of the censorship and propaganda. It was openly discussed with me on numerous occasions. Once you get out of the major metropolitan areas, it's almost like little fiefdoms anyhow. But that's just my impression. At any rate, once you get out of the cities and tourist areas, they seem to care more about the local government more than they do the national government.
I don't know if there's much oversight or not but it certainly seemed like local officials, in the smaller areas, carried some big sticks. (Figuratively.) I had the occasion to talk with two different folks and dine with another, which I'd liken to a mayor or maybe a city councilman, and they carry themselves aloof and "regular" citizens seemed to speak of them with greater "respect" or reverence than they did the State government. I'm not really sure what lines are drawn where or how to reference their politicians.
Like I said, there's probably someone here who is more adept at explaining it and more familiar with it than I. It was really unusual for me, almost eerie and almost creepy. The last two times that I visited were much different than the first time I visited. The first time was in the 1990s and the last two were just within the past six years. I was last there in 2012.
Then again, maybe it's "face" if you're an upper-crust and you have to use a VPN? They didn't appear to hide their use and I openly discussed it on more than on occasion with people. There were a surprising number of people with a little onion icon. ;-)
Yeah, it doesn't *have* to be turning it into an echo chamber. There's no reason that it has to end that way - at least not in the majority of cases. For those who want one, well... Let 'em have it.
I don't block anyone here. I read at -1. There are other sites where I'd consider it but I usually don't. I could understand blocking the idiots that don't contribute anything but that doesn't mean that you'll be stuck in an echo chamber. How you use it is up to you.
I'm not sure that I'd block anyone here. I do have some sort-of pressing issues to figure that out, however. I'm in the process of starting a site (or a group of them) meant for civil discourse which is why the subject makes me curious. We will be blocking those who can't remain civil but that will be via moderation. You can discuss anything and be civil about it. I know because I do it. I know because I've had lots of civil conversations with people who had very different opinions/beliefs than I.
Heck, one of the people who's been kind of helping out (at least keeping me motivated) is a Mormon. Yeah... We have fine conversations. I'm a secular Buddhist and not even a *good* Buddhist. I'm sure as hell not a monk. Nah, we get along just fine.
So he just happened to have a VPN and an account all ready and set to go or is this a normal thing? I'm guessing it's the latter. I'm not sure why you'd be embarrassed about it. It's not like he just happened to notice while being shown live. He had one already there, installed, and an account configured.
By the way, I've been to China and, as near as I can tell, everyone that I met had a VPN - usually one of the 'free' ones that you load up in your browser as an extension. And no, they didn't seem embarrassed about it. Then again, they weren't live and the person who configured the firewall.
*plonk*
In Soviet Union, hugbox circles you!
Hmm... Are you sure about that?
I guess, it might be different as they're a business but I'm not entirely sure that it is. I don't think it's been tested anywhere and things default to legal and not illegal?
I'm almost completely certain that I can start a site that bans anyone who discloses they're gay - and only bans those who discloses they're gay. Obviously, I'd have no way of telling if they're gay. I guess I could have a 'real name' and 'sworn affidavit' policy. But yeah, I'm pretty sure I don't have to let people use my site if I don't want to. Is Reddit publicly traded or anything?
Heck, I could probably start a site and say, "NO WHITE PEOPLE!" if I wanted. Or, maybe, one that disallowed black people, Jewish people, gays, and Gypsies. I kind of want to do something like that now and see what happens. I'm thinking a good test would be a site that disallows women and a sibling site that disallows men. Then we can see which one gets more hate mail or who takes what to court.
Is it really that bad, to you, if someone follows you around on the 'net and calls you names? 'Cause I have had that happen and I really didn't find it all that traumatizing. Hell, they then went on to say they were going to moderate all of my posts down. Well, I make a whole lot of posts. Needless to say, they were unable to do that. Eventually, it appears that meta-mod got them here - I don't think they get mod points at all any more.
At any rate, yeah... They followed me around and were quite aggressive for a while. It didn't actually bother me at all. It meant that I was the one in charge. It meant that I was the one controlling their responses. They were giving me their most precious asset - their time.
And no, I didn't lose sleep. I didn't worry. I didn't care except to be amused by it. They've kind of stopped posting while logged in now. Hell, I even invited 'em to dinner once. They didn't come. They were not the best of stalker and they gave up way too early for my taste.
Does it really bother you if someone calls you names online? Does it matter if they "target" you? 'Cause, I've had this happen and it wasn't much more than a great ego boost. They dedicated a whole bunch of time to me and my doings. I kind of miss 'em.
I don't have any experience with Reddit so I don't really know what they'll consider harassment or whatnot but I don't see anything particularly egregious about this tool. Not really, at least not in my current thinking - someone's welcome to try to change that. I don't see why this has to be an echo chamber.
It's possible to hold dissenting opinions and to discuss any topic without being offensive. It's possible to have a conversation that remains civil, regardless of the positions held. I know this is true, I do it nearly every single day. In fact, you might say that my current post is contrarian. I have held meaningful, civil, discussions - even debates, with all sorts of people. Some of those people were the least favored folks on the planet. Some of them have held beliefs that are truly ignorant but the conversations remained civil throughout.
Of course, not every conversation is going to turn out that way. In fact, I'm guilty of being uncivilized in my responses. But, the thing is, it doesn't *have* to be that way. It doesn't have to be an echo chamber. I voice contrary opinions on a regular basis, probably nearly every single day. Hell, I don't even mind systemd (legitimately, I do not mind - it even has come in handy) and I share and defend that position politely. Some of the spittle flecked responders lack the capacity for civil discourse but they're an exception and not the rule.
So, perhaps Reddit is different than every place I've ever been in the real world or online. I'd not know, I've never posted there. I've been there a couple of times but I don't think I've read a full thread there. There is a "KGIII" there but they're not me.