Thank you. Too bad my mod points expired a couple days ago. In any case, I'm glad at least one other person noticed the new Slashdot low of the article not RTFA it's talking about. Didn't only not read it but completely missed the point of it. She was saying the she and her generation were not all that interested in owning Physical Media. She never said she wouldn't pay for music. In fact the whole point of her article was that there needs to be a service that made having access to songs easy and able to sync with any device While paying the artists!
I know nothing of David Lowery prior to this but he now strikes me as a reactionary prick with low reading comprehension. He's a perfect example of my biggest pet peeve. People who don't read what you wrote or listen to what you say but instead read or hear what they think you were going to say. And it seems like 95% of people who do that are unwilling to go look at it again because "I already know what it says!"
Whew, got a little ranty there.
An undemanding task that lets the mind wander... I think they're not wanting to come right out and admit that most people do their best thinking on the toilet.
Actually they would've shown up like that from the first call. When you call and there is any indication that someone is trying to break into your home with you present, they will respond swiftly indeed. It's something else entirely if you call to report that a burglary took place while you were gone and the thieves departed before you returned. If the scenario of the joke were real, things would quickly turn sour for whoever failed to dispatch the officers and they would find themselves under investigation for failure to perform their duties with a reckless disregard for the safety of the caller.
There's a long list of scientists that are also science fiction authors. Many of the best and brightest scientists were inspired to become scientists by the fiction they read. Even so, science fiction has long been treated as an unwanted step-child by both the literature and science crowds with neither taking it seriously. It's nice to see serious science magazines recognizing and supporting that important link.
More methods of emergency notification are likely to the good. Cell texting of emergency notices is good and my girlfriend's college does just that. However, claiming that TV is a ridiculous notification system because people turn it off is, well, a bit ridiculous. Aside from there being many people who do have their TV on for long periods of time either actively watching or for background noise, many people will turn to TV to find out how serious a situation is. My mother still calls me from several states over to tell me there is bad weather in my area so turn on the TV to find out if I need to take precautions. New ideas are good, but I don't think it serves the good to dismiss what's in place and known.
I believe in the UK they pay an annual license fee to watch tv broadcasts. So even though it's not 'critical', they'd better make sure they're providing the service. And if they've done something to disrupt that service themselves, they need to go to extreme lengths to fix it where needed. Oh, and television serves as an emergency notification system. So yes, some people might die without it.
It's common idiom in English too. Why would a translation cause you to think it was meant literally? For example if the non-idiomatic translation were, "I want you to go out and explode company x.", That still reads like corporate marketing speak not terrorist mastermind ordering the troops. Changing it from "blow away" to "explode" doesn't make it seem sinister at all.
While you're somewhat correct in that US courts (and lawmakers) sometimes act as if digital content is real property and that there are laws against unauthorized access to password protected content in the US and UK, what does that have to do with anything? The post to which you replied, and the article to which he refers, don't mention either country nor do the events related in the article take place in either country. There isn't even any mention in either of them about unauthorized access to password protected content. You could have responded with the proper care and feeding of goldfish and no matter how correct your information was, it would have been just as irrelevant.
Ability to recall is not ability to think and is not an indication of superiority.
I once knew a complete idiot with tremendous recall who told me he had a photogenic memory. I told him to recall the definition of photogenic and he turned very red. He asked me what word he was trying to think of and I told him to recall the words that started with 'photo' until he got to the right one. He paused for a second and said 'Oh, photographic!' While I sometimes envied his recall, I never envied his cognitive ability.
I don't think length of the class is the problem with students falling asleep so much as their interest in the subject matter. People generally don't have a problem staying awake for a two hour plus movie despite that it was once thought ridiculous that an audience would sit still for that long.
I think the issue is that most people approach learning before college as preparation for college and approach college as vocational preparation for a job. Learning is a job to them and they don't really care about the subject. This is why some people pick their school based on its sports team or party atmosphere or anything that has nothing to do with the education they will get there.
Geek culture is changing that to some degree, but not all that much.
I'd highly suspect that they got permission to do so in all cases. The named individual probably even got the service in exchange for the publicity as it mentions they contacted him after reading about his problem in the paper. If there was not a prior agreement then I'm sure there will soon be an article on Slashdot about the lawsuit. Your comment isn't insightful, it's silly. Many companies give away their services or products in exchange for the right to publicize. And considering that your average Joe on the street assumes that a dead drive means all information is lost forever, as the aforementioned comedian did, then I can see why this company would want to shout from the rooftops that their service even exists. People don't look for what they don't know exists. If the company followed your advice their client list would be limited to only technologically adept people and that would rule out the vast majority of people using computers.
Re:If you think that's scary...
on
Fraidy Cat Gamer
·
· Score: 1
I should check my email more often. Yes, the video quality is bad in that google video clip. It was not bad when it was aired on Friday May 6th of 2005 on Channel 4 in the U.K.
Derren Brown is well known in the U.K. and always controversial. How much of what he does is "real" is often debated. As to the specific problems you mention, they are rather easily dealt with. At the end of the show the unwitting participant is laughing as he watches video of himself. Since you also got to see the video he signed waivers to allow that to happen. While they may not hold up in court, most people won't sue if they signed a piece of paper to that effect. I would likely not know a paint gun. I've seen them in stores but never held or used one. In a normal setting I would likely figure it out quickly. When a split second before I'd been in a well lighted pub but am now in a darkened room where people are shambling towards me and not responding to my queries, I'm likely to pull the trigger and be satisfied with the response I get from it. No extra would do that. As someone else pointed out, the gun had no ammunition only CO2 propellant. Yes they were squibs. They showed the rather elaborate control room to which they took his friends to watch the action. I'm sure that was where they controlled the firing of the squibs from. As for the friends, Well as I said Derren is well known over there so I don't find it difficult to believe that when a celebrity who is known for interacting with the public comes up to you and says "I'm Derren Brown. Do exactly what I tell you." and finds themself in front of a TV camera that they do exactly what he tells them. I rather credit the girl in fact for looking uneasy about it. As to whether it was all "real" or not, I don't know. However, in the past, when Derren hoaxes the audience he reveals it. I think his reputation would be worth more than half an episode of his TV series.
http://www.mickgrierson.co.uk/?m=200505 This is the guy who designed the game. He hints that sound was part of inducing the trance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derren_Brown#Waking_D ead Gets a specific and sceptical mention.
If you think that's scary...
on
Fraidy Cat Gamer
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
Wizardry - Proving Grounds of the Mad Overlord on Virtual ][ on any of my macs
Is that the version with the Bishop cheat? Where you could repeatedly try to identify (I think it was) item #9 and when you eventually succeeded your bishop was level 99?
I only had the PC version. My favorite "cheats" were re-rolling until you got over 20 points to allocate to your new character and having a high level character take low level characters to repeatedly kill Murphy's Ghost for lots of levels with low risk.
I had a very similar incident with SBC about 18 years ago. I was living in a trailer in a small West Texas town and ordered phone service just before taking a series of trips. When I signed up I made very sure they had the physical address and the billing address correct even though the billing address was a P.O. box and it should be obvious that the phone was not physically installed there. I'm in and out over the next three months and pay whatever bills come in and when the phone gets turned off I realize I had not received a phone bill. I check with the Post Office and they pull my phone bills out of their undeliverable pile, all addressed to my physical address. I get ahold of SBC and they say "Oh, our mistake. We'll correct that." I then say I'll put the check for the past three months in the mail but could they turn the phone back on. To which I'm told they can't do that until they recieve the three months payment Plus Late Fees and Reconnect Charge. No matter who I spoke to I was told it was their fault and I could be reconnected as soon as I paid the bill plus the penalties. To which I told them that at this poin I was so pissed that I wasn't going to pay the bill at all. They said I'd be unable to get phone service until I did. I replied that the town was only a couple of miles across and I could walk or drive to anybody I needed to talk to. I did without phone service until I moved out of SBC's area five years later. I can carry a grudge for a long time.
I think you demonstrated very well that logic does apply. It's the aims and goals that are misunderstood. The GP thinks that the bill is intended to help parents shield their children from questionable content. You seem to think that the purpose of the bill is intended to help the authors and those who vote for it to get re-elected. I tend to lean towards your viewpoint precisely because it contains logical cynicism rather than the ineffectual altruism that is on the surface of the bill.
I know a lot of new age people and while there are some hot girls they "largely" tend to go the other way. My wife frequently asks me to attend new age events and I often opt out by saying I don't feel like whale watching that week. It's both true and funny to the point that she doesn't even get mad at me.
I doubt that those matters are more important and larger to Steve Rambam at the moment. Informed decisions are great, but you're relying on the very people who now have a history of withholding, distorting, and "creating" information to be the ones to give you the information on which you'll base your decision. Assuming our government and country does not collapse due to this egregious breach of trust, then I suspect we'll have a period of time where the government must make almost all information publicly accessible and the few bits it is allowed to keep to itself would have to undergo a review process by a limited few that the rest of us trust. All sarcasm aside, the fact that a large number of people are worried about the legalities of the federal law enforcement agents actions, rather than jumping to the conclusion that the arrested person must (at least appeared to) have crossed the legal line, demonstrates just how strained, if not outright broken, our current system is. My question to you, and to everyone is: At what point do we stop gathering information and move to action?
This is not a good point. While I feel the "hot coffee" thing was blown way out of proportion one could counter your particular point quite easily. Just about all content in games requires the user to make a choice and do several things to enable it. Be it the built in cheat codes or special modes (big head mode, disco mode, etc.) or even just cut scenes that you access as you play the game. They are all there and only available if you take certain actions. I don't think the "hot coffee" mod required much more work than many people go through to find cheat codes or walk-thrus that enable them to access all the content. I'd stick more to arguments about the absurdity of a little sex raising the rating of a game centered on extreme violence and criminal pursuits.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you. Too bad my mod points expired a couple days ago. In any case, I'm glad at least one other person noticed the new Slashdot low of the article not RTFA it's talking about. Didn't only not read it but completely missed the point of it. She was saying the she and her generation were not all that interested in owning Physical Media. She never said she wouldn't pay for music. In fact the whole point of her article was that there needs to be a service that made having access to songs easy and able to sync with any device While paying the artists! I know nothing of David Lowery prior to this but he now strikes me as a reactionary prick with low reading comprehension. He's a perfect example of my biggest pet peeve. People who don't read what you wrote or listen to what you say but instead read or hear what they think you were going to say. And it seems like 95% of people who do that are unwilling to go look at it again because "I already know what it says!" Whew, got a little ranty there.
An undemanding task that lets the mind wander... I think they're not wanting to come right out and admit that most people do their best thinking on the toilet.
Already happening and mentioned on /. http://politics.slashdot.org/story/12/04/13/1248221/us-unhappy-with-australians-storing-data-on-australian-shores
It is libel and defamation. That is what the judgement against her was for. http://www.scribd.com/doc/74870113/Crystal-Cox-Opinion http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2011/12/crystal_cox_oregon_blogger_isn.php
Actually they would've shown up like that from the first call. When you call and there is any indication that someone is trying to break into your home with you present, they will respond swiftly indeed. It's something else entirely if you call to report that a burglary took place while you were gone and the thieves departed before you returned. If the scenario of the joke were real, things would quickly turn sour for whoever failed to dispatch the officers and they would find themselves under investigation for failure to perform their duties with a reckless disregard for the safety of the caller.
There's a long list of scientists that are also science fiction authors. Many of the best and brightest scientists were inspired to become scientists by the fiction they read. Even so, science fiction has long been treated as an unwanted step-child by both the literature and science crowds with neither taking it seriously. It's nice to see serious science magazines recognizing and supporting that important link.
More methods of emergency notification are likely to the good. Cell texting of emergency notices is good and my girlfriend's college does just that. However, claiming that TV is a ridiculous notification system because people turn it off is, well, a bit ridiculous. Aside from there being many people who do have their TV on for long periods of time either actively watching or for background noise, many people will turn to TV to find out how serious a situation is. My mother still calls me from several states over to tell me there is bad weather in my area so turn on the TV to find out if I need to take precautions. New ideas are good, but I don't think it serves the good to dismiss what's in place and known.
I believe in the UK they pay an annual license fee to watch tv broadcasts. So even though it's not 'critical', they'd better make sure they're providing the service. And if they've done something to disrupt that service themselves, they need to go to extreme lengths to fix it where needed. Oh, and television serves as an emergency notification system. So yes, some people might die without it.
Congrats! You are monitoring your legal legitimate harmless innocent activities out of fear of your government. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect_(law)
It's common idiom in English too. Why would a translation cause you to think it was meant literally? For example if the non-idiomatic translation were, "I want you to go out and explode company x.", That still reads like corporate marketing speak not terrorist mastermind ordering the troops. Changing it from "blow away" to "explode" doesn't make it seem sinister at all.
While you're somewhat correct in that US courts (and lawmakers) sometimes act as if digital content is real property and that there are laws against unauthorized access to password protected content in the US and UK, what does that have to do with anything? The post to which you replied, and the article to which he refers, don't mention either country nor do the events related in the article take place in either country. There isn't even any mention in either of them about unauthorized access to password protected content. You could have responded with the proper care and feeding of goldfish and no matter how correct your information was, it would have been just as irrelevant.
Ability to recall is not ability to think and is not an indication of superiority. I once knew a complete idiot with tremendous recall who told me he had a photogenic memory. I told him to recall the definition of photogenic and he turned very red. He asked me what word he was trying to think of and I told him to recall the words that started with 'photo' until he got to the right one. He paused for a second and said 'Oh, photographic!' While I sometimes envied his recall, I never envied his cognitive ability.
I don't think length of the class is the problem with students falling asleep so much as their interest in the subject matter. People generally don't have a problem staying awake for a two hour plus movie despite that it was once thought ridiculous that an audience would sit still for that long. I think the issue is that most people approach learning before college as preparation for college and approach college as vocational preparation for a job. Learning is a job to them and they don't really care about the subject. This is why some people pick their school based on its sports team or party atmosphere or anything that has nothing to do with the education they will get there. Geek culture is changing that to some degree, but not all that much.
If you think other attorneys will get the message, you vastly underestimate the ego and chutzpah of the average lawyer.
I'd highly suspect that they got permission to do so in all cases. The named individual probably even got the service in exchange for the publicity as it mentions they contacted him after reading about his problem in the paper. If there was not a prior agreement then I'm sure there will soon be an article on Slashdot about the lawsuit. Your comment isn't insightful, it's silly. Many companies give away their services or products in exchange for the right to publicize. And considering that your average Joe on the street assumes that a dead drive means all information is lost forever, as the aforementioned comedian did, then I can see why this company would want to shout from the rooftops that their service even exists. People don't look for what they don't know exists. If the company followed your advice their client list would be limited to only technologically adept people and that would rule out the vast majority of people using computers.
Bombastic balding Bartholomew brazenly bandied alliteration.
I should check my email more often. Yes, the video quality is bad in that google video clip. It was not bad when it was aired on Friday May 6th of 2005 on Channel 4 in the U.K. Derren Brown is well known in the U.K. and always controversial. How much of what he does is "real" is often debated. As to the specific problems you mention, they are rather easily dealt with. At the end of the show the unwitting participant is laughing as he watches video of himself. Since you also got to see the video he signed waivers to allow that to happen. While they may not hold up in court, most people won't sue if they signed a piece of paper to that effect. I would likely not know a paint gun. I've seen them in stores but never held or used one. In a normal setting I would likely figure it out quickly. When a split second before I'd been in a well lighted pub but am now in a darkened room where people are shambling towards me and not responding to my queries, I'm likely to pull the trigger and be satisfied with the response I get from it. No extra would do that. As someone else pointed out, the gun had no ammunition only CO2 propellant. Yes they were squibs. They showed the rather elaborate control room to which they took his friends to watch the action. I'm sure that was where they controlled the firing of the squibs from. As for the friends, Well as I said Derren is well known over there so I don't find it difficult to believe that when a celebrity who is known for interacting with the public comes up to you and says "I'm Derren Brown. Do exactly what I tell you." and finds themself in front of a TV camera that they do exactly what he tells them. I rather credit the girl in fact for looking uneasy about it. As to whether it was all "real" or not, I don't know. However, in the past, when Derren hoaxes the audience he reveals it. I think his reputation would be worth more than half an episode of his TV series. http://www.mickgrierson.co.uk/?m=200505 This is the guy who designed the game. He hints that sound was part of inducing the trance. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derren_Brown#Waking_D ead Gets a specific and sceptical mention.
...just imagine if this happened to you. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-768895638 9104405762
I don't know whether to be envious of this guy or not.
Wizardry - Proving Grounds of the Mad Overlord on Virtual ][ on any of my macs
Is that the version with the Bishop cheat? Where you could repeatedly try to identify (I think it was) item #9 and when you eventually succeeded your bishop was level 99?
I only had the PC version. My favorite "cheats" were re-rolling until you got over 20 points to allocate to your new character and having a high level character take low level characters to repeatedly kill Murphy's Ghost for lots of levels with low risk.
I had a very similar incident with SBC about 18 years ago. I was living in a trailer in a small West Texas town and ordered phone service just before taking a series of trips. When I signed up I made very sure they had the physical address and the billing address correct even though the billing address was a P.O. box and it should be obvious that the phone was not physically installed there. I'm in and out over the next three months and pay whatever bills come in and when the phone gets turned off I realize I had not received a phone bill. I check with the Post Office and they pull my phone bills out of their undeliverable pile, all addressed to my physical address. I get ahold of SBC and they say "Oh, our mistake. We'll correct that." I then say I'll put the check for the past three months in the mail but could they turn the phone back on. To which I'm told they can't do that until they recieve the three months payment Plus Late Fees and Reconnect Charge. No matter who I spoke to I was told it was their fault and I could be reconnected as soon as I paid the bill plus the penalties. To which I told them that at this poin I was so pissed that I wasn't going to pay the bill at all. They said I'd be unable to get phone service until I did. I replied that the town was only a couple of miles across and I could walk or drive to anybody I needed to talk to. I did without phone service until I moved out of SBC's area five years later. I can carry a grudge for a long time.
I think you demonstrated very well that logic does apply. It's the aims and goals that are misunderstood. The GP thinks that the bill is intended to help parents shield their children from questionable content. You seem to think that the purpose of the bill is intended to help the authors and those who vote for it to get re-elected. I tend to lean towards your viewpoint precisely because it contains logical cynicism rather than the ineffectual altruism that is on the surface of the bill.
I know a lot of new age people and while there are some hot girls they "largely" tend to go the other way. My wife frequently asks me to attend new age events and I often opt out by saying I don't feel like whale watching that week. It's both true and funny to the point that she doesn't even get mad at me.
I doubt that those matters are more important and larger to Steve Rambam at the moment.
Informed decisions are great, but you're relying on the very people who now have a history of withholding, distorting, and "creating" information to be the ones to give you the information on which you'll base your decision. Assuming our government and country does not collapse due to this egregious breach of trust, then I suspect we'll have a period of time where the government must make almost all information publicly accessible and the few bits it is allowed to keep to itself would have to undergo a review process by a limited few that the rest of us trust.
All sarcasm aside, the fact that a large number of people are worried about the legalities of the federal law enforcement agents actions, rather than jumping to the conclusion that the arrested person must (at least appeared to) have crossed the legal line, demonstrates just how strained, if not outright broken, our current system is.
My question to you, and to everyone is: At what point do we stop gathering information and move to action?
This is not a good point. While I feel the "hot coffee" thing was blown way out of proportion one could counter your particular point quite easily. Just about all content in games requires the user to make a choice and do several things to enable it. Be it the built in cheat codes or special modes (big head mode, disco mode, etc.) or even just cut scenes that you access as you play the game. They are all there and only available if you take certain actions. I don't think the "hot coffee" mod required much more work than many people go through to find cheat codes or walk-thrus that enable them to access all the content.
I'd stick more to arguments about the absurdity of a little sex raising the rating of a game centered on extreme violence and criminal pursuits.
Nice way to not read your own FA. He worked for Fry's, not Home Depot.