You do not have the right to play Devil's Advocate when the rule of law is supposed to be "innocent until proven guilty." Looking suspicious does not warrant an arrest.
In my opinion, I don't really see the debate here. It's very simple to me: whoever is at fault for exposing the personal data should be liable for all costs related to correcting the issue. If a consumer's data is compromised because they got phished, that's on them. If the VP of sales loses a laptop containing a million customer records, that's on the company.
Although your experience definitely shows that every computer science degree is not equal, it's not exactly an argument against the parent. Any CS degree that solely teaches someone to "code in one language" is a crap degree. Any reputable college/university would not offer such a worthless degree. My point is that CS vs IT is only one thing to look at when attempting to plan out your life... you should probably take a look at the college you are attending as well...
If there is a difference between the perception of Americans and the truth, then I'd find it hardly amusing (I'm backing you up here). I would hope to be enlightened, and would love to see that what I see is wrong. I'm not "picking a side" here, I'm merely calling it like I see it. Until I see otherwise, that perception won't change, not for me and not for the rest of America. It is true that we are on the outside looking in, and are therefore prone to misinformation, but when dead soldiers and daily suicide bombs are being downplayed by Dick Cheney and Tony Snow for no other reason other than to gain support for a failing war, I am not exactly listening to what they have to say, either.
Regardless of your beliefs, A few ranting posts (Prysorra'a posts, for a few examples) on slashdot insulting the "popular opinion" does not incite change, it fuels the opposition. A post free of anger and disdain would go a lot further to promote what you say to be true.
Maybe you'd have an easier time discussing with others if you weren't angry for no apparent reason. I never labeled anyone in Iraq as brainless nor do I think they are incompetent to answer a poll question. I listed two possible explanations that are far from insulting, and your (3) doesn't even attempt to answer what I suggested.
I blame myself for attempting to have a discussion with a closed minded jackass. You've done nothing to sway my beliefs (and I promise you, no one else's), and have done everything to discredit your own.
I am not dismissing your claims, but there are very smart people in very powerful positions who disagree. Blame the media if you will, but I have yet to see anything that backs your claim that Iraq is not in a state of civil war.
How can you have ANY percentage of a country think that they are in a civil war if in reality, they aren't? I will not attempt to claim I know what is going on in Iraq, because I'm not there. However, I'm not sure how the fact that over a quarter of the people polled said they believe a civil war is occurring can be disregarded simply because "their number is lower than ours."
Also, I'm not even sure what these numbers mean. What do the poll participants consider a "civil war" to be? We are completely different countries with very different beliefs. It would make sense to me that the number in Iraq is lower simply because (1) they are hoping beyond hope it has not come to that, or (2) they are more tolerant to the current fighting and do not believe it has gotten to that point.
I conceded to your points, I only said that you were making these points for no reason. You're completely missing MY point. Someone with no authority has no reason to be taking an ID from someone.
The poster above thinks it's ok because it prevents an underage drinker from becoming a liability. While I can't disagree that a lot is at stake for a bar if caught selling to minors, this is a moot point. The bar has a competent door man who obviously can tell the difference between a fake ID and a real one, and therefore this person should never gain entry. There is no hassle here, the doorman isn't going anywhere, and it takes about 5 seconds to send that wanna-be patron to the next bar. By taking the ID, the doorman creates a scene, the patron either begs for the ID back or fights for it back, and minutes go by. So, you're not saving time and you're not ridding the world of underage drinkers, you're just being an ass.
Also, your logic of being able to steal something from someone else because it's illegal and has no monetary value is stupid. First, I'd like to see all of the CDs your MP3s are from, or I'm stealing your computer, because it's illegal and I have that right. Second, I feel at liberty to steal your lucky penny because by your definition, it's not even petty theft. Give me a break.
db32, I don't understand your post. Points 1,2,3 and 4 are not even relevant, and 5 is incredibly pompous. Your arguments are sound, but have absolutely nothing to do with the parent. There was no cop present, no drugs either. If I have a real ID confiscated by a Mobil Mart employee who thinks s/he's a hotshot, I'm not going to act very rational either. And with you're strange tie-in with drugs, if the Mobil Mart employee decided to steal a bag of cocaine from the customer, s/he's getting arrested for possession.
The question here is for what reason would an employee at an establishment take someone's ID, whether it be a store clerk or a bouncer at a bar, other than to be an ass? If the ID was fake, another can be made, it's not like you're solving the "nation-wide underage drinking epidemic." It's just a bunch of lame people stuck in a job they hate exploiting the opportunity to make themselves feel powerful.
Oh yeah, massively pollute. Cities have no ground to stand on.
Your opinions on where you want to live and how much you mind paying for gas are fine, they are your opinions. However, saying that "Cities have no ground to stand on" is somewhat ignorant. Read this when you're bored, titled "NYC is the Greenest City in America." At least read the bold line from the passage below...
Most Americans, including most New Yorkers, think of New York City as an ecological nightmare, a wasteland of concrete and garbage and diesel fumes and traffic jams, but in comparison with the rest of America it's a model of environmental responsibility. By the most significant measures, New York is the greenest community in the United States, and one of the greenest cities in the world. The most devastating damage humans have done to the environment has arisen from the heedless burning of fossil fuels, a category in which New Yorkers are practically prehistoric. The average Manhattanite consumes gasoline at a rate that the country as a whole hasn't matched since the mid-nineteen-twenties, when the most widely owned car in the United States was the Ford Model T. Eighty-two per cent of Manhattan residents travel to work by public transit, by bicycle, or on foot. That's ten times the rate for Americans in general, and eight times the rate for residents of Los Angeles County. New York City is more populous than all but eleven states; if it were granted statehood, it would rank 51st in per-capita energy use.
Although I fully believe you that you know everyone on your list, I have been a myspace member for a while, have around 150 friends, and get at most one spammed account trying to get me to add them a week. That being said, myspace is a breeding ground for spam, especially pron sites, and I'm sure that soon enough it'll happen to me too.
For someone talking about scrips, you'd think you'd figure out why your getting so many friend requests. Don't become "friends" with people who aren't actually your friends. If you become friends with someone who has 123401234 friends because she looks hot and makes you look cool for having her in your top 8, you're going to have a lot of exposure, and people will spam you.
Kinda reminds me of the days of AOL, when mass mailers would just grab all the screen names of people in chat rooms to make their lists. Don't want spam? Don't go to the Pron chat room.
It's a fairly simple idea, the more people you're exposed to, the more friend requests from people you don't know. maybe you can write a script to delete all the "friends" you've never actually met? (this goes for bands, comedians, actors, etc as well)
I don't mean to single you out, but... Are you that worried about other slashdotters soaking you in gasoline and torching you because you visited myspace that you have to actually write "disclaimer: I have never visited the myspae site before this... and probably never will again? Everyone here is so afraid to say anything positive about myspace, and instead say how everyone on it is childish and "living in high school," yet here you are worried about how cool you look to everyone else on slashdot... If that's not high school...
Look, don't get me wrong, there are a ton of things about myspace you can pick apart, no one disputes that, including its most loyal users. You can hate on the poor site design. You can hate on the 12 year olds posting sparkling pictures, and the 60 year olds looking for them. But you can't hate on the concept, because guess what... IT WORKS. And not just for people under the age of 18.
Social networking is not online dating, which most people here seem to think is myspace's only purpose (and for some people, I'm sure it is). It's also easily connecting with people you know to do whatever it is you want to do. Hell, what do you think you're ALL doing right now? You're reading what other people are saying, getting a different point of view, on a topic about myspace no less. It is what you make of it.
It just so happens the general interest and attention here is focused on technology, so that's what people here discuss (er.. sometimes). Is it so bad that other people have interest in... OTHER PEOPLE as well?
In the real world, people move around. High school is graduated. College is graduated. Grad school is graduated. Jobs are moved..... do you mean to tell me that everyone here talking so much shit about myspace actually calls all 200 friends made along the way? No, you don't. And maybe you don't care, which is completely fine. Just shut up about it already, because some of us do, and we dont mind posting a picture of us for others that may or may not care as well. I realize that's scary for some people here... you get known for what you actually look like, who you hang out with, and things that actually happen in real life instead of just displaying your screen name.
You're kind of missing the point. If "little Jimmy" wants to go to a rave, and is willing to leave the phone behind to do so, it doesn't really matter whether mom and pop put a tracer on his phone, he would have gone anyway.
You'r making an extreme assumpion that all parents are stupid and will be using a service such as this to track their child's every move. Only ignorant parents will feel "falsely secure," and if it's not this service they use to try and control their kids it will be something else. A parent running to the computer as soon as the kids leave to check their every move is already untrusting and paranoid, and they'll undoubtedly be thinking about whether or not the kids gave their phone to a friend or shut it off anyway. You can't blame technology for this kind of behavior.
The debate here should have nothing to do with invasion of privacy (in the parent/child sense... I'm purposely avoiding the conspiracist's Big Brother issue here altogether), and it has nothing to do with "keeping a leash" on a child. It has to do with adding another level of safety in the event that something ever does happen to them. A good parent with a good relationship with their children can use this to their advantage against all the "bad sh*t" that's out there, not an attempt to run surveillance..
Parent's trying to keep their children on a tight leash have been around forever, this isn't going to change that.
I think you're taking his comment to the extreme. A statement like "the most poorestly chosen words in the history of language" cannot possibly be relevant unless GW is involved...
Slashdot Mirror
In large tournaments, antes and blinds are both used.
"I do not recall" will suffice, with a "I cannot recollect" thrown in once in a while for good measure.
You do not have the right to play Devil's Advocate when the rule of law is supposed to be "innocent until proven guilty." Looking suspicious does not warrant an arrest.
In my opinion, I don't really see the debate here. It's very simple to me: whoever is at fault for exposing the personal data should be liable for all costs related to correcting the issue. If a consumer's data is compromised because they got phished, that's on them. If the VP of sales loses a laptop containing a million customer records, that's on the company.
Although your experience definitely shows that every computer science degree is not equal, it's not exactly an argument against the parent. Any CS degree that solely teaches someone to "code in one language" is a crap degree. Any reputable college/university would not offer such a worthless degree. My point is that CS vs IT is only one thing to look at when attempting to plan out your life... you should probably take a look at the college you are attending as well...
If there is a difference between the perception of Americans and the truth, then I'd find it hardly amusing (I'm backing you up here). I would hope to be enlightened, and would love to see that what I see is wrong. I'm not "picking a side" here, I'm merely calling it like I see it. Until I see otherwise, that perception won't change, not for me and not for the rest of America. It is true that we are on the outside looking in, and are therefore prone to misinformation, but when dead soldiers and daily suicide bombs are being downplayed by Dick Cheney and Tony Snow for no other reason other than to gain support for a failing war, I am not exactly listening to what they have to say, either.
Regardless of your beliefs, A few ranting posts (Prysorra'a posts, for a few examples) on slashdot insulting the "popular opinion" does not incite change, it fuels the opposition. A post free of anger and disdain would go a lot further to promote what you say to be true.
Maybe you'd have an easier time discussing with others if you weren't angry for no apparent reason. I never labeled anyone in Iraq as brainless nor do I think they are incompetent to answer a poll question. I listed two possible explanations that are far from insulting, and your (3) doesn't even attempt to answer what I suggested.
I blame myself for attempting to have a discussion with a closed minded jackass. You've done nothing to sway my beliefs (and I promise you, no one else's), and have done everything to discredit your own.
I am not dismissing your claims, but there are very smart people in very powerful positions who disagree. Blame the media if you will, but I have yet to see anything that backs your claim that Iraq is not in a state of civil war.
How can you have ANY percentage of a country think that they are in a civil war if in reality, they aren't? I will not attempt to claim I know what is going on in Iraq, because I'm not there. However, I'm not sure how the fact that over a quarter of the people polled said they believe a civil war is occurring can be disregarded simply because "their number is lower than ours."
Also, I'm not even sure what these numbers mean. What do the poll participants consider a "civil war" to be? We are completely different countries with very different beliefs. It would make sense to me that the number in Iraq is lower simply because (1) they are hoping beyond hope it has not come to that, or (2) they are more tolerant to the current fighting and do not believe it has gotten to that point.
I conceded to your points, I only said that you were making these points for no reason. You're completely missing MY point. Someone with no authority has no reason to be taking an ID from someone.
The poster above thinks it's ok because it prevents an underage drinker from becoming a liability. While I can't disagree that a lot is at stake for a bar if caught selling to minors, this is a moot point. The bar has a competent door man who obviously can tell the difference between a fake ID and a real one, and therefore this person should never gain entry. There is no hassle here, the doorman isn't going anywhere, and it takes about 5 seconds to send that wanna-be patron to the next bar. By taking the ID, the doorman creates a scene, the patron either begs for the ID back or fights for it back, and minutes go by. So, you're not saving time and you're not ridding the world of underage drinkers, you're just being an ass. Also, your logic of being able to steal something from someone else because it's illegal and has no monetary value is stupid. First, I'd like to see all of the CDs your MP3s are from, or I'm stealing your computer, because it's illegal and I have that right. Second, I feel at liberty to steal your lucky penny because by your definition, it's not even petty theft. Give me a break.
db32, I don't understand your post. Points 1,2,3 and 4 are not even relevant, and 5 is incredibly pompous. Your arguments are sound, but have absolutely nothing to do with the parent. There was no cop present, no drugs either. If I have a real ID confiscated by a Mobil Mart employee who thinks s/he's a hotshot, I'm not going to act very rational either. And with you're strange tie-in with drugs, if the Mobil Mart employee decided to steal a bag of cocaine from the customer, s/he's getting arrested for possession.
The question here is for what reason would an employee at an establishment take someone's ID, whether it be a store clerk or a bouncer at a bar, other than to be an ass? If the ID was fake, another can be made, it's not like you're solving the "nation-wide underage drinking epidemic." It's just a bunch of lame people stuck in a job they hate exploiting the opportunity to make themselves feel powerful.
Your opinions on where you want to live and how much you mind paying for gas are fine, they are your opinions. However, saying that "Cities have no ground to stand on" is somewhat ignorant. Read this when you're bored, titled "NYC is the Greenest City in America." At least read the bold line from the passage below...
http://www.walkablestreets.com/manhattan.htm
An Excerpt:
Although I fully believe you that you know everyone on your list, I have been a myspace member for a while, have around 150 friends, and get at most one spammed account trying to get me to add them a week. That being said, myspace is a breeding ground for spam, especially pron sites, and I'm sure that soon enough it'll happen to me too.
For someone talking about scrips, you'd think you'd figure out why your getting so many friend requests. Don't become "friends" with people who aren't actually your friends. If you become friends with someone who has 123401234 friends because she looks hot and makes you look cool for having her in your top 8, you're going to have a lot of exposure, and people will spam you.
Kinda reminds me of the days of AOL, when mass mailers would just grab all the screen names of people in chat rooms to make their lists. Don't want spam? Don't go to the Pron chat room.
It's a fairly simple idea, the more people you're exposed to, the more friend requests from people you don't know. maybe you can write a script to delete all the "friends" you've never actually met? (this goes for bands, comedians, actors, etc as well)
I don't mean to single you out, but... Are you that worried about other slashdotters soaking you in gasoline and torching you because you visited myspace that you have to actually write "disclaimer: I have never visited the myspae site before this... and probably never will again? Everyone here is so afraid to say anything positive about myspace, and instead say how everyone on it is childish and "living in high school," yet here you are worried about how cool you look to everyone else on slashdot... If that's not high school...
Look, don't get me wrong, there are a ton of things about myspace you can pick apart, no one disputes that, including its most loyal users. You can hate on the poor site design. You can hate on the 12 year olds posting sparkling pictures, and the 60 year olds looking for them. But you can't hate on the concept, because guess what... IT WORKS. And not just for people under the age of 18.
Social networking is not online dating, which most people here seem to think is myspace's only purpose (and for some people, I'm sure it is). It's also easily connecting with people you know to do whatever it is you want to do. Hell, what do you think you're ALL doing right now? You're reading what other people are saying, getting a different point of view, on a topic about myspace no less. It is what you make of it.
It just so happens the general interest and attention here is focused on technology, so that's what people here discuss (er.. sometimes). Is it so bad that other people have interest in... OTHER PEOPLE as well?
In the real world, people move around. High school is graduated. College is graduated. Grad school is graduated. Jobs are moved..... do you mean to tell me that everyone here talking so much shit about myspace actually calls all 200 friends made along the way? No, you don't. And maybe you don't care, which is completely fine. Just shut up about it already, because some of us do, and we dont mind posting a picture of us for others that may or may not care as well. I realize that's scary for some people here... you get known for what you actually look like, who you hang out with, and things that actually happen in real life instead of just displaying your screen name.
You're kind of missing the point. If "little Jimmy" wants to go to a rave, and is willing to leave the phone behind to do so, it doesn't really matter whether mom and pop put a tracer on his phone, he would have gone anyway. You'r making an extreme assumpion that all parents are stupid and will be using a service such as this to track their child's every move. Only ignorant parents will feel "falsely secure," and if it's not this service they use to try and control their kids it will be something else. A parent running to the computer as soon as the kids leave to check their every move is already untrusting and paranoid, and they'll undoubtedly be thinking about whether or not the kids gave their phone to a friend or shut it off anyway. You can't blame technology for this kind of behavior. The debate here should have nothing to do with invasion of privacy (in the parent/child sense... I'm purposely avoiding the conspiracist's Big Brother issue here altogether), and it has nothing to do with "keeping a leash" on a child. It has to do with adding another level of safety in the event that something ever does happen to them. A good parent with a good relationship with their children can use this to their advantage against all the "bad sh*t" that's out there, not an attempt to run surveillance.. Parent's trying to keep their children on a tight leash have been around forever, this isn't going to change that.
I think you're taking his comment to the extreme. A statement like "the most poorestly chosen words in the history of language" cannot possibly be relevant unless GW is involved...