Asking your wife how her day was was hardly a sample.
Actually I'd say it's a great sample. I covered my entire wife population.
If there are onlt 23 faculty members, why do you even need a survey?
I'll make it even easier. Take 10 people, now schedule a 1 hour meeting sometime in the next month. Every person must attend, but this meeting is not their highest priority, nor is everything they do listed on their calendar. Wouldn't conducting a survey of those people with respect to their preferred times which they are available be useful in picking a date and time?
Or go back to the 23 faculty members, wouldn't it be interesting if their response to: do you feel that our security police is adequate came back with a 100% no response?
How would you learn that if you didn't conduct a survey. Frankly if there are more than 3 people, and you are attempting to make decisions which are based on, or will affect them, I'd consider conducting a survey.
Just ask a long enough series of questions, randomize them so that you aren't asking them in a way to expect any sort of pattern in the responses.
Is your name John Smith? Expect yes Did you attend wrong school name? Expect no Did you get married? Did you have any children? Did you have 1 child Did you have 2 children. Was your mother's name...
And so on.
You can look into the rate at which your 'yes' or 'no' indicators happen. If it is him moving his thumb, when not being asked questions, or when being stimulated with sounds, does his thumb indicate yes more often than no, if so, how much?
You use that as a factor for determining what should be the neutral response. If it were binary random chance, you would expect a result of 50% correct to 50% incorrect after you apply your modifiers.
(You also have to factor in the person having brain damage and memory loss/dementia so it would be hard to determine how much correct is correct. You could even have a person who is fully cognitive but simply does not remember)
What the filmmaker thinks of his films has little to do with how much I like them
I loathe what I often put forward to my managers and customers. I think what I put forward is some of the most half-hearted and slapdash pieces of crap that I ever created.
Yet they love them, say I'm doing an amazing job, and keep giving me raises/bonuses. It is quite possible that as the creator of these things, I am accutely aware of their flaws, imperfections, and areas in which they failed to live up to my expectations, yet for the people I am delivering to (who I always INSIST must give me a deadline, otherwise I'd never finish) they are unaware of these flaws and enjoy my work.
I'd imagine it is quite similar for any creator of content. It is just VERY hard for me to like anything I create until I hear that it is enjoyed by others.
If you're only sending out 23 surveys you need to take a remedial statistics course. And actually an almost 25% return rate is very good for any survey. Most folks are lucky to get a 10% return.
Yet he was also shown to be able to answer yes/no questions by moving his foot. What you are referring to is facilitated communication and while THAT is dubious, I think a lot of the people here are jumping on the hoax bandwagon without really understanding the situation.
If you're only sending out 23 surveys you need to take a remedial statistics course. And actually an almost 25% return rate is very good for any survey. Most folks are lucky to get a 10% return.
What if you only have 23 faculty members?
Damn, you know last night I asked my wife how her day was. What a fool I was. How could I ever get valid results with such a small sample pool.
This is one of those terrible fears. It's great that they have found a way to communicate with someone in this state, but at the same time this type of story makes me ponder how horrific that must be for the person.
a lvl10 human charging a lvl 80 orc in full epic gear is pretty retarded.
It's a problem with the concept of gear, and not skill. Lets face it, intelligence doesnt really factor into a game where a 'level 80' singular entity can walk up to a fortified city and literally walk around as a god as thousands of soldiers are unable to do anything to combat them. I call it the Van Cleef effect. So here is a guy who can manage to organize the near overthrow of an entire kingdom, has armies AND a budding navy at his disposal but can be killed by a level 60 mage using no spells but his bare hands? (Yes I took my level 60 mage and had fisticuffs with VanCleef.)
But back on topic:
A level 10 soldier SHOULD be charging a level 80 orc regardless of his armor. It is just an Orc in armor. The fact that it is completly pointless is just an artifact of the mechanisms which WoW uses to keep your progression (satisfaction) slow.
Why pay $0.99 for a song when I'm not only entitled to it, but can receive that entitlement for free?
I am entitled to it. I (being a member of the People) just voluntarily allow only you (the content creator) to manage it for a limited period of time.
That said, I view copyrights longer than 30 years as simply invalid and a breach of the social contract. I'd petition to change the laws, but I simply don't have the cash to do that.
... Don't tell me you never played Diablo 2 or Starcraft on Battle.net
Actually I never did, and I loved Starcraft. I played it on LANS and other similar things (dial up networking).
I don't disagree with you, but the big thing on Blizzard's plate at the moment is a 10 million person subscription service. And as PC gaming slowly becomes a port of console games, (and developers being purchased by traditional offenders) I can see it becoming an issue.
1. They often have cheaper versions 2. I switch computers a lot, and simply having to type in my user ID and have it load up all my games is nice. 3. I like that my games are automatically patched. It drove me nuts years ago when I reinstalled a game only to find I had to download x number of patches from possibly defunct or poorly maintained websites.
Those ARE features/services they provide to me. There is a lot that is wrong with Steam, but to say that there isn't a service being provided is being intentionally blind.
My biggest complaints
1. Online connectivity (don't give me the bullshit that you can activate your games for offline play, that can be a pain in the ass if you forget to do it and find yourself in an airport or lobby w/o access.)
2. No ability to lend games. Sure I could give someone my ID, but that is tied to ALL my games. It is WRONG that someone can't play a game I have purchased while I am playing another game.
3. Same as 3 above, sometimes I don't WANT my games patched, or I will wish to modify them to suit my tastes.
4. Killswitches and license revocation. Hasn't happened to me, but I don't like the idea that someone else can control that.
There is a lot wrong with steam, but there is also some service being provided.
I think searches are necessary, scans are necessary, etc. I am also from the middle east and more pron to profiling - and guess what - if it keeps the plane safer that is great. Keeping in line with my "practical thought-process" I do think these machines are a bit invasive and they can be modified to be more respectful of folks
You may think that they are necessary, but it has been proven that they are ineffective. They will NOT prevent someone from smuggling enough explosives to bring down a plane. As a result, if it is ineffective then it isn't worthwhile to implement.
You also mention that you feel they are invasive, and they are. They are exactly equivalent to taking you one at a time into a back room and having you strip nude. Just because the guy is sitting in a room by himself doesn't make it any different than him looking directly at you. You also can't make it less 'invasive' because doing so would result in the scan being even more useless than it already is.
There is simply no way of preventing someone who has acquired explosive materials from bringing those on board a plane without doing a full body & cavity search. A metal detector is enough to eliminate most personally dangerous items (knives, guns, etc) and frankly, I'm fine with that. By the time the guy is already in the security line and you are relying on a scan or pat down, it is TOO LATE. If he can access enough explosives to bring down a plane he already can do plenty that would screw up anyone's day.
Up until they passed the smoking ban in restaurants (at least in philadelphia) anytiem I would go to a restaurant/bar/club I would be exposed against my consent.
Why would someone keep this private and/or secret for so long?
Probably saw it on TV the next day and figured it nothing special. This was before the internet, and judging by the age of the guy, he probably never accessed much media beyond his neighbors and the local paper.
I don't remember NASA ever asking for other videos, and from the footage, it seemed that they had much higher quality stuff to analyze.
Then we get into the idea that this was a betamax camera, it is also possible that it sat in his things for years, and when his younger grandson or nephew realized what was on the tape, persuaded his granddad (great granddad?) to post it up to the internet/NASA.
Lots of valid reasons why this never saw the light of day until now, and I'm most comfortable with the idea that he never thought about it or thought he had anything special. He probably thought there were thousands of such videos from other amateurs in Florida.
It is sad that someones addiction/habit hurts innocent bystanders and we stand by and let them do it.
In very few cases is anyone exposed to tobacco smoke in any significant quantity these days without their consent. Your logic is being used by nosy busybodies who use even the slightest cost to any government program as justification for broad reaching legislation and taxes.
These taxes are incredibly regressive, hitting lower income citizens harder. And last I checked, freedom should be applied equally to all regardless of economic or social status.
Even worse, such taxes are inevitably collected as part of the general funds and then become a part of the revenue stream for the government. The government becomes vested in seeing the activity continue so that it has a politically easy way of collecting more taxes from people. And trust me, they will never give up a revenue stream. Remember the Spanish-American War in the 1800s? A tax was levied to pay for that and it remained until beyond 2000, a portion of it still exists today.
I can't wait until the government has its hands in every aspect of my life that is deemed 'unpopular' or 'costly'. With the way things are going, I can only hope that my personal liberties... err I mean vices as they like to call them, are popular enough that I don't have to be taxed back into the proper kind of citizen.
Shooting out the question.....Does anyone know where we can complain? I am not a citizen of the UK, but I need to travel there. And well to be honest, this is another example of Government going TOO FAR! So, where can I complain? I can not vote there, but I can sure as hell make sure that I reduce/eliminate my travel plans to that country. At the end of the day, they will not understand anything untill they see tourists/travellers numbers decline, revenues plummet....then they will maybe begin to think....err maybe we went a tad too far on this
Call your representative. Write to your paper. Call your embassy.
If you 'have' to travel there for work. Complain to your company's HR. Basically get in the hair of everyone who is 'responsible' for you going there. Hell, even call the tourism bureau of the UK. Explain that you are not going to visit there until this is stopped.
Until the technology improves (actually it is already better than what you have seen).
Sigh...
Just because something isn't possible now, doesn't mean that it won't be possible later. I said this in an earlier thread. 20 years ago it would have been impossible to consider that the Government would monitor every phone conversation in the US. Yet now? 10 years from now?
So yeah, tell me again those images are always going to be blurry monocrome and anonymous.
If I'm running a party at my house and asking people to chip in to help pay for snacks and beer, how am I detracting from the NFL's profits?
You aren't detracting from their profits. They just want some of your profits.
It is their attempt to expand their ownership of copyright. It would be no different than a painter charging you for publicly displaying his work that you already paid for.
NASA's budget is too small of a percentage of government spending to have that kind of effect on the future economy.
A lot of things are a small percentage of government spending. That doesn't mean it is money wisely spent. I'm not saying that I want to see NASA's budget cut, just to point out that your argument isn't airtight.
Every device which I purchase needs to give me the option to stop the manufacturer from interfering with the device at some point after the sale.
The ONLY purpose for not allowing the owner of the device to lock out the manufacturer is so that the manufacturer may behave like a monopoly at some point in the future.
BFD -- if you don't like it then jailbreak for free and do what you want or just don't buy it.
BFD? Apple would love nothing more than having jailbreaking defined as an illegal activity.
And 'just don't buy it' is pointless. It doesn't matter if every developer on Earth doesn't buy it, if the USERS buy it then the developers don't have much of a choice. They either buy it, or they don't develop.
Your 'solution' is like telling an Car Mechanic to not buy expensive diagnostic tools which are required to repair modern cars. The Mechanic can choose not to buy those items, but at the same time, he is choosing to not have any customers, which isn't exactly a choice now is it?
Slashdot Mirror
Asking your wife how her day was was hardly a sample.
Actually I'd say it's a great sample. I covered my entire wife population.
If there are onlt 23 faculty members, why do you even need a survey?
I'll make it even easier. Take 10 people, now schedule a 1 hour meeting sometime in the next month. Every person must attend, but this meeting is not their highest priority, nor is everything they do listed on their calendar. Wouldn't conducting a survey of those people with respect to their preferred times which they are available be useful in picking a date and time?
Or go back to the 23 faculty members, wouldn't it be interesting if their response to: do you feel that our security police is adequate came back with a 100% no response?
How would you learn that if you didn't conduct a survey. Frankly if there are more than 3 people, and you are attempting to make decisions which are based on, or will affect them, I'd consider conducting a survey.
Just ask a long enough series of questions, randomize them so that you aren't asking them in a way to expect any sort of pattern in the responses.
Is your name John Smith? Expect yes
Did you attend wrong school name? Expect no
Did you get married?
Did you have any children?
Did you have 1 child
Did you have 2 children.
Was your mother's name...
And so on.
You can look into the rate at which your 'yes' or 'no' indicators happen. If it is him moving his thumb, when not being asked questions, or when being stimulated with sounds, does his thumb indicate yes more often than no, if so, how much?
You use that as a factor for determining what should be the neutral response. If it were binary random chance, you would expect a result of 50% correct to 50% incorrect after you apply your modifiers.
(You also have to factor in the person having brain damage and memory loss/dementia so it would be hard to determine how much correct is correct. You could even have a person who is fully cognitive but simply does not remember)
What the filmmaker thinks of his films has little to do with how much I like them
I loathe what I often put forward to my managers and customers. I think what I put forward is some of the most half-hearted and slapdash pieces of crap that I ever created.
Yet they love them, say I'm doing an amazing job, and keep giving me raises/bonuses. It is quite possible that as the creator of these things, I am accutely aware of their flaws, imperfections, and areas in which they failed to live up to my expectations, yet for the people I am delivering to (who I always INSIST must give me a deadline, otherwise I'd never finish) they are unaware of these flaws and enjoy my work.
I'd imagine it is quite similar for any creator of content. It is just VERY hard for me to like anything I create until I hear that it is enjoyed by others.
If you're only sending out 23 surveys you need to take a remedial statistics course. And actually an almost 25% return rate is very good for any survey. Most folks are lucky to get a 10% return.
Yet he was also shown to be able to answer yes/no questions by moving his foot. What you are referring to is facilitated communication and while THAT is dubious, I think a lot of the people here are jumping on the hoax bandwagon without really understanding the situation.
If you're only sending out 23 surveys you need to take a remedial statistics course. And actually an almost 25% return rate is very good for any survey. Most folks are lucky to get a 10% return.
What if you only have 23 faculty members?
Damn, you know last night I asked my wife how her day was. What a fool I was. How could I ever get valid results with such a small sample pool.
This is one of those terrible fears. It's great that they have found a way to communicate with someone in this state, but at the same time this type of story makes me ponder how horrific that must be for the person.
Practice those lucid dreams.
a lvl10 human charging a lvl 80 orc in full epic gear is pretty retarded.
It's a problem with the concept of gear, and not skill. Lets face it, intelligence doesnt really factor into a game where a 'level 80' singular entity can walk up to a fortified city and literally walk around as a god as thousands of soldiers are unable to do anything to combat them. I call it the Van Cleef effect. So here is a guy who can manage to organize the near overthrow of an entire kingdom, has armies AND a budding navy at his disposal but can be killed by a level 60 mage using no spells but his bare hands? (Yes I took my level 60 mage and had fisticuffs with VanCleef.)
But back on topic:
A level 10 soldier SHOULD be charging a level 80 orc regardless of his armor. It is just an Orc in armor. The fact that it is completly pointless is just an artifact of the mechanisms which WoW uses to keep your progression (satisfaction) slow.
Why pay $0.99 for a song when I'm not only entitled to it, but can receive that entitlement for free?
I am entitled to it. I (being a member of the People) just voluntarily allow only you (the content creator) to manage it for a limited period of time.
That said, I view copyrights longer than 30 years as simply invalid and a breach of the social contract. I'd petition to change the laws, but I simply don't have the cash to do that.
... Don't tell me you never played Diablo 2 or Starcraft on Battle.net
Actually I never did, and I loved Starcraft. I played it on LANS and other similar things (dial up networking).
I don't disagree with you, but the big thing on Blizzard's plate at the moment is a 10 million person subscription service. And as PC gaming slowly becomes a port of console games, (and developers being purchased by traditional offenders) I can see it becoming an issue.
That means more customers for Nintendo and Blizzard Entertainment / Activision then...
You are really using Blizzard as an example of a non-pay for multiplayer company?
As you said, it is a service.
1. They often have cheaper versions
2. I switch computers a lot, and simply having to type in my user ID and have it load up all my games is nice.
3. I like that my games are automatically patched. It drove me nuts years ago when I reinstalled a game only to find I had to download x number of patches from possibly defunct or poorly maintained websites.
Those ARE features/services they provide to me. There is a lot that is wrong with Steam, but to say that there isn't a service being provided is being intentionally blind.
My biggest complaints
1. Online connectivity (don't give me the bullshit that you can activate your games for offline play, that can be a pain in the ass if you forget to do it and find yourself in an airport or lobby w/o access.)
2. No ability to lend games. Sure I could give someone my ID, but that is tied to ALL my games. It is WRONG that someone can't play a game I have purchased while I am playing another game.
3. Same as 3 above, sometimes I don't WANT my games patched, or I will wish to modify them to suit my tastes.
4. Killswitches and license revocation. Hasn't happened to me, but I don't like the idea that someone else can control that.
There is a lot wrong with steam, but there is also some service being provided.
The definition of DRM is not "restriction on use of software you've bought," so that's a meaningless statement.
Only if we use your very limited definition.
Why is a CD check not DRM?
I think searches are necessary, scans are necessary, etc. I am also from the middle east and more pron to profiling - and guess what - if it keeps the plane safer that is great. Keeping in line with my "practical thought-process" I do think these machines are a bit invasive and they can be modified to be more respectful of folks
You may think that they are necessary, but it has been proven that they are ineffective. They will NOT prevent someone from smuggling enough explosives to bring down a plane. As a result, if it is ineffective then it isn't worthwhile to implement.
You also mention that you feel they are invasive, and they are. They are exactly equivalent to taking you one at a time into a back room and having you strip nude. Just because the guy is sitting in a room by himself doesn't make it any different than him looking directly at you. You also can't make it less 'invasive' because doing so would result in the scan being even more useless than it already is.
There is simply no way of preventing someone who has acquired explosive materials from bringing those on board a plane without doing a full body & cavity search. A metal detector is enough to eliminate most personally dangerous items (knives, guns, etc) and frankly, I'm fine with that. By the time the guy is already in the security line and you are relying on a scan or pat down, it is TOO LATE. If he can access enough explosives to bring down a plane he already can do plenty that would screw up anyone's day.
Up until they passed the smoking ban in restaurants (at least in philadelphia) anytiem I would go to a restaurant/bar/club I would be exposed against my consent.
Did you have to go to the restaurant/bar/club?
Why would someone keep this private and/or secret for so long?
Probably saw it on TV the next day and figured it nothing special. This was before the internet, and judging by the age of the guy, he probably never accessed much media beyond his neighbors and the local paper.
I don't remember NASA ever asking for other videos, and from the footage, it seemed that they had much higher quality stuff to analyze.
Then we get into the idea that this was a betamax camera, it is also possible that it sat in his things for years, and when his younger grandson or nephew realized what was on the tape, persuaded his granddad (great granddad?) to post it up to the internet/NASA.
Lots of valid reasons why this never saw the light of day until now, and I'm most comfortable with the idea that he never thought about it or thought he had anything special. He probably thought there were thousands of such videos from other amateurs in Florida.
It is sad that someones addiction/habit hurts innocent bystanders and we stand by and let them do it.
In very few cases is anyone exposed to tobacco smoke in any significant quantity these days without their consent. Your logic is being used by nosy busybodies who use even the slightest cost to any government program as justification for broad reaching legislation and taxes.
These taxes are incredibly regressive, hitting lower income citizens harder. And last I checked, freedom should be applied equally to all regardless of economic or social status.
Even worse, such taxes are inevitably collected as part of the general funds and then become a part of the revenue stream for the government. The government becomes vested in seeing the activity continue so that it has a politically easy way of collecting more taxes from people. And trust me, they will never give up a revenue stream. Remember the Spanish-American War in the 1800s? A tax was levied to pay for that and it remained until beyond 2000, a portion of it still exists today.
I can't wait until the government has its hands in every aspect of my life that is deemed 'unpopular' or 'costly'. With the way things are going, I can only hope that my personal liberties... err I mean vices as they like to call them, are popular enough that I don't have to be taxed back into the proper kind of citizen.
Shooting out the question.....Does anyone know where we can complain? I am not a citizen of the UK, but I need to travel there. And well to be honest, this is another example of Government going TOO FAR! So, where can I complain? I can not vote there, but I can sure as hell make sure that I reduce/eliminate my travel plans to that country. At the end of the day, they will not understand anything untill they see tourists/travellers numbers decline, revenues plummet....then they will maybe begin to think....err maybe we went a tad too far on this
Call your representative. Write to your paper. Call your embassy.
If you 'have' to travel there for work. Complain to your company's HR. Basically get in the hair of everyone who is 'responsible' for you going there. Hell, even call the tourism bureau of the UK. Explain that you are not going to visit there until this is stopped.
Until the technology improves (actually it is already better than what you have seen).
Sigh...
Just because something isn't possible now, doesn't mean that it won't be possible later. I said this in an earlier thread. 20 years ago it would have been impossible to consider that the Government would monitor every phone conversation in the US. Yet now? 10 years from now?
So yeah, tell me again those images are always going to be blurry monocrome and anonymous.
After losing their lunch they can do rectal exam on you.
That's why I always go for the megaburrito with extra sour cream for my pre-flight meal. No reason I shouldn't share the fun of lactose intolerance.
So they spend millions preventing a rare event, yet allow sale of tobacco that kills millions a year
It is sadly ironic that you complain about a government limitation of your freedom by suggesting that they limit your freedom.
If I'm running a party at my house and asking people to chip in to help pay for snacks and beer, how am I detracting from the NFL's profits?
You aren't detracting from their profits. They just want some of your profits.
It is their attempt to expand their ownership of copyright. It would be no different than a painter charging you for publicly displaying his work that you already paid for.
End just one war and there will be more than enough money to fund NASA.
I'd much rather see our government contract than maintain the status quo of a budget.
NASA's budget is too small of a percentage of government spending to have that kind of effect on the future economy.
A lot of things are a small percentage of government spending. That doesn't mean it is money wisely spent. I'm not saying that I want to see NASA's budget cut, just to point out that your argument isn't airtight.
Why does every device need to be geek friendly?
Every device which I purchase needs to give me the option to stop the manufacturer from interfering with the device at some point after the sale.
The ONLY purpose for not allowing the owner of the device to lock out the manufacturer is so that the manufacturer may behave like a monopoly at some point in the future.
BFD -- if you don't like it then jailbreak for free and do what you want or just don't buy it.
BFD? Apple would love nothing more than having jailbreaking defined as an illegal activity.
And 'just don't buy it' is pointless. It doesn't matter if every developer on Earth doesn't buy it, if the USERS buy it then the developers don't have much of a choice. They either buy it, or they don't develop.
Your 'solution' is like telling an Car Mechanic to not buy expensive diagnostic tools which are required to repair modern cars. The Mechanic can choose not to buy those items, but at the same time, he is choosing to not have any customers, which isn't exactly a choice now is it?