I think we're mostly in agreement. I'm still excited to see anything you come up with.
Not being a programmer, for the/. case the best Dirty Hack (see other article today!) was to throw a +2 modifier at anything over 6 lines long. There are only about ten long trolls, and even those are a little funny. All the really stupid ones are short. Though yes there are key 1-liners that get missed, chances are when a post is 7 lines or longer someone put some work into it, so I like to read it.
I'd suggest you blend your vectoring with user-settable tweaks like that.
Nah, even the ordinary Naz aren't enough here. Companies as big as IBM always have a scary "Iridium Team" or such. You know, one guy is 6'11" with the eidetic memory who serves as the walking caselaw and the bombshell woman with the 228 IQ to run the speeches. They only serve one case per year and charge $666 per hour, but they end the nonsense.
Sideways responding to some posts above, we're saying that "wild doesn't scale." "Everything grows up" - when it gets big, people game it, forcing technical rules, thus forcing rules-hate.
Take/. for example. I have to read at 0 to get whole conversations, and then I start running into the Bad-Downed good posts mixed with the Bad-Upped bad posts. So for your Pedia2 or such, you have some math algs, but you still have to deal with the Troll MetaGame. I think we're at Web 2.1 or Web2.2 by now, perhaps with only 25% of the troll problem solved.
It would be fun if you allowed "original research". Make the site motto "Don't Cite Us" - meaning rankings can start to show value but explicitly noting that with so much "original material" floating in it, it's anyone's guess if there are errors.
So fix the cultural problems causing the women's leagues to be ignored. It basically IS "impossible" for women to compete vs men. Re: one poster above, "average men" vs. athlete women is a red herring.
For you, it's a statistical thing. Off the top of my head (and cut the citation-needed gang), it's like 12% chance of competition if you put a world class woman with a colossal physique vs. any of the 2nd-tier men.
It's not "0% aka no-chance", it's like a badly rigged bet at a carnival chance game. Yes, IF you had red one of those books on swindles, AND you know how to do lightning fast small-number arithmetic, AND you know that every time you "split your chances" or whatever the funky option is that you cede more %chance points, then YES you can compete and beat the carnie. But it's the same theme of not being a balanced-odds event. And that's when the carnie LIKES you and doesn't get even meaner by cheating.
This is not insightful, because the entire point of gender physiques is that men have physical advantages for muscle-endurance based sports. So collapsing the genders just means that virually no women will ever win again.
This is different from mental competitions where the factors are believed to be much more culturally meshed.
After some thought I picked the post above to attach to.
Could we be on the way to the copyright form of Nuclear Deterrence here? Suppose for a moment that DOJ wants the ruling to stand on a *temporary* basis, long enough to allow a Nuclear case in return. (Because if it is invalidated now, the strategy collapses.)
Trying to wade the tangled thorns of "whether any member of RIAA represents the whole in an infringement act"; Are we REALLY seeing themselves set up the scenario of Sufficient Sloppiness (say of 250 works when they get greedy to manufacture their next Hit Artist and need material and think no one will notice)? Wasn't there a story about the family of a high music official caught with unauthorized music?
What would be the punitive damages of the Org that started this mess getting nuked? It's $20 million by raw multiplication of Jammie's. But then for abuse of courts, of the entire country's justice dept at the highest levels, etc... call it 100 million. Wouldn't that get their attention?
Then someone would FINALLY decide to change a law or three, and we can thrash out a Post-RIAA copyright law that makes some sense.
Let's end that acronym's heyday, starting with you. I finally put my webpage where my whining is, and began a list of Slashdot Lawyers. I'm thinking of reversing my Friends List to only include them. That way I can see instantly who's a lawyer and who's not.
Here's my ugly hacked up list. It's under some Will-It-Blend of the permissive licenses, so if you can do better, I'll mirror your upgrade etc.
You're not on the list. So your acronym can go rest now.
In scary America: (Slight exaggeration) All data is now subordinated to Stopping Terrorists. All other uses are bonuses. Data must be disclosed upon request without the consent of the individual, unless legislation provides a reason not to share the data, AND no current executive order exists allowing the override of that legislation. Individuals have no right to access the info about them, subject to certain exceptions. Personal info must be kept longer than necessary, and may not be up to date.
Nah. There are several strategies unused. I'd like to start by not getting any foreign email. (I did accept some French spam on humor's sake, but any other language, forget it.)
Spellcheck. 80% of spam has beautifully awful spelling.
Gutsy, and I will, with an appalling lack of talent... because as you say, we can't get any good without stuff to mash about.
I really believe there's a science thesis in your comment, but it's one of those that's "5 years out". We all know what the **AA has been trumpeting, aka "the control group" (pun intended). You are a crisp example of the study group.
I would qualify your statement that there may be an elite category (like Disney's Mouse) that produces different effects. But I think you're right for midline content. Especially look at the recent movies that have critics wailing "Could have been an awesome movie if (someone) cut/changed about 20-40 minutes of it." Particularly both Transformers. I'd nuke half of the parental scenes.
I think "Linkware" is the honorable way to go. If I ever get inspired to put your work through some tortured pretzel machine, I'll drop you notice.
Let's see what their TOS are for Chrome. Since OS's are another crown jewel of computing, if they sufficiently open it up to really let the devs make a Baskins Robbins 31-Flavors (Service Mark) of Chrome, *without* trying to copy Apple's secrecy, *and give back to Debian core*, they could unleash a force of nature.
We might have to move towards "Triple-Blind" keys or such. Bruce Schneier had an article of the sort. "I don't know the key officer. I never did. It's remote-encrypted/etc".
Maybe you could store the key in a Schrodinger's Cat Lock.
"Not only do I not know the key, but I can only retrieve it if I have not been served a police demand. I am monitored by a live web-recorder with quad redundancy. If you serve me notice, the key will expire permanently."
"This is exactly the same with *music downloading* laws. You can't enforce it, but you can make consequences for breaking laws bad enough so people (delteted) *want* to break them."
Slashdot Mirror
I think we're mostly in agreement. I'm still excited to see anything you come up with.
Not being a programmer, for the /. case the best Dirty Hack (see other article today!) was to throw a +2 modifier at anything over 6 lines long. There are only about ten long trolls, and even those are a little funny. All the really stupid ones are short. Though yes there are key 1-liners that get missed, chances are when a post is 7 lines or longer someone put some work into it, so I like to read it.
I'd suggest you blend your vectoring with user-settable tweaks like that.
Of course not.
"An emergency Injunction was passed until a formal law could be passed."
The Censorship Nazgul don't give up that easily.
Nah, even the ordinary Naz aren't enough here. Companies as big as IBM always have a scary "Iridium Team" or such. You know, one guy is 6'11" with the eidetic memory who serves as the walking caselaw and the bombshell woman with the 228 IQ to run the speeches. They only serve one case per year and charge $666 per hour, but they end the nonsense.
Sideways responding to some posts above, we're saying that "wild doesn't scale." "Everything grows up" - when it gets big, people game it, forcing technical rules, thus forcing rules-hate.
Take /. for example. I have to read at 0 to get whole conversations, and then I start running into the Bad-Downed good posts mixed with the Bad-Upped bad posts. So for your Pedia2 or such, you have some math algs, but you still have to deal with the Troll MetaGame. I think we're at Web 2.1 or Web2.2 by now, perhaps with only 25% of the troll problem solved.
It would be fun if you allowed "original research". Make the site motto "Don't Cite Us" - meaning rankings can start to show value but explicitly noting that with so much "original material" floating in it, it's anyone's guess if there are errors.
So fix the cultural problems causing the women's leagues to be ignored. It basically IS "impossible" for women to compete vs men. Re: one poster above, "average men" vs. athlete women is a red herring.
For you, it's a statistical thing. Off the top of my head (and cut the citation-needed gang), it's like 12% chance of competition if you put a world class woman with a colossal physique vs. any of the 2nd-tier men.
It's not "0% aka no-chance", it's like a badly rigged bet at a carnival chance game. Yes, IF you had red one of those books on swindles, AND you know how to do lightning fast small-number arithmetic, AND you know that every time you "split your chances" or whatever the funky option is that you cede more %chance points, then YES you can compete and beat the carnie. But it's the same theme of not being a balanced-odds event. And that's when the carnie LIKES you and doesn't get even meaner by cheating.
Hi Mods.
This is not insightful, because the entire point of gender physiques is that men have physical advantages for muscle-endurance based sports. So collapsing the genders just means that virually no women will ever win again.
This is different from mental competitions where the factors are believed to be much more culturally meshed.
Wait, so they pay to be on the Truman Show?
You don't know certain women.
"How many times do I have to tell you..."
Hi NYCL.
After some thought I picked the post above to attach to.
Could we be on the way to the copyright form of Nuclear Deterrence here? Suppose for a moment that DOJ wants the ruling to stand on a *temporary* basis, long enough to allow a Nuclear case in return. (Because if it is invalidated now, the strategy collapses.)
Trying to wade the tangled thorns of "whether any member of RIAA represents the whole in an infringement act"; Are we REALLY seeing themselves set up the scenario of Sufficient Sloppiness (say of 250 works when they get greedy to manufacture their next Hit Artist and need material and think no one will notice)? Wasn't there a story about the family of a high music official caught with unauthorized music?
What would be the punitive damages of the Org that started this mess getting nuked? It's $20 million by raw multiplication of Jammie's. But then for abuse of courts, of the entire country's justice dept at the highest levels, etc... call it 100 million. Wouldn't that get their attention?
Then someone would FINALLY decide to change a law or three, and we can thrash out a Post-RIAA copyright law that makes some sense.
Hi amentajo.
Let's end that acronym's heyday, starting with you. I finally put my webpage where my whining is, and began a list of Slashdot Lawyers. I'm thinking of reversing my Friends List to only include them. That way I can see instantly who's a lawyer and who's not.
Here's my ugly hacked up list. It's under some Will-It-Blend of the permissive licenses, so if you can do better, I'll mirror your upgrade etc.
You're not on the list. So your acronym can go rest now.
http://taophoenix.xinix.in/Freedom/Slashdot_Lawyers.html
It's Burn-Karma-Friday!
In scary America: (Slight exaggeration)
All data is now subordinated to Stopping Terrorists. All other uses are bonuses.
Data must be disclosed upon request without the consent of the individual, unless legislation provides a reason not to share the data, AND no current executive order exists allowing the override of that legislation.
Individuals have no right to access the info about them, subject to certain exceptions.
Personal info must be kept longer than necessary, and may not be up to date.
Nah. There are several strategies unused. I'd like to start by not getting any foreign email. (I did accept some French spam on humor's sake, but any other language, forget it.)
Spellcheck. 80% of spam has beautifully awful spelling.
Gutsy, and I will, with an appalling lack of talent... because as you say, we can't get any good without stuff to mash about.
I really believe there's a science thesis in your comment, but it's one of those that's "5 years out". We all know what the **AA has been trumpeting, aka "the control group" (pun intended). You are a crisp example of the study group.
I would qualify your statement that there may be an elite category (like Disney's Mouse) that produces different effects. But I think you're right for midline content. Especially look at the recent movies that have critics wailing "Could have been an awesome movie if (someone) cut/changed about 20-40 minutes of it." Particularly both Transformers. I'd nuke half of the parental scenes.
I think "Linkware" is the honorable way to go. If I ever get inspired to put your work through some tortured pretzel machine, I'll drop you notice.
What rights are you reserving for your NYC movie? Can we remix it as we please?
Can we get a +1 Connecticut Yankee mod? Sam Clemens would have been proud.
Let's see what their TOS are for Chrome. Since OS's are another crown jewel of computing, if they sufficiently open it up to really let the devs make a Baskins Robbins 31-Flavors (Service Mark) of Chrome, *without* trying to copy Apple's secrecy, *and give back to Debian core*, they could unleash a force of nature.
Is LaTex affected?
L. Ron Hubbard's team would like to have a word with you. Just don't ask them about their Base-11 math.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlefield_Earth_(novel)
Copyright protects Novel ideas. Patents protect the Automatic Author machine that produces Novel ideas.
We might have to move towards "Triple-Blind" keys or such. Bruce Schneier had an article of the sort. "I don't know the key officer. I never did. It's remote-encrypted/etc".
Maybe you could store the key in a Schrodinger's Cat Lock.
"Not only do I not know the key, but I can only retrieve it if I have not been served a police demand. I am monitored by a live web-recorder with quad redundancy. If you serve me notice, the key will expire permanently."
Get the officials the Staples button.
Zero Wing is the key to the Encrypted Presidency!
I presume the demand is verbal and not written down. Otherwise a troupe of Citizen Muggers can forcibly take it from you, post it, then give it back.
"This is exactly the same with *music downloading* laws. You can't enforce it, but you can make consequences for breaking laws bad enough so people (delteted) *want* to break them."
Fixed that for Slashdot.
I'll look.
I used Yahoo because for a while they did have a couple nice privacy public announcements. I tried Ask, but that feels a little clunky for some uses.