Ahh, good old Sensenbrenner... he went to my high school and had my history teacher, who apparently thought him something of a moron. I prefer "hideous slug-creature", myself.
The thing that sticks with me the strongest about him is still the vehement assertion he made to myself and my friends when we met with him that Milwaukee couldn't have light rail under any circumstances, because of goose poop.
I think this actually needs just a LITTLE rephrasing, as I think de Selby was saying. It's not that much, but in formal logic, any little difference can make the entire outcome off. (And I apologize for my formal logic being rusty as well...)
The law is not saying, or is not meant to say, that every action a has an infinite number of reactions b, of which at least one is equal and opposite to a. It's saying, rather, that every action a has one (1!) corresponding reaction b, which is equal and opposite to a.
So, to disprove this, you'd have to go and find the action a whose reaction b was NOT equal and opposite. (And it would involve very tiny things and be extremely confusing to students.) Yes, there are an infinite number of actions a that can be performed, but as there's only one b which corresponds to every a, it can still be shown that each a tested is either in agreement with or disagreement with the theory.
I'd write this out in formal-logicy style, but I unfortunately can't remember the correct way to say that there is only one b that goes with each a. Curse you, formal logic!
When I visited an elementary school in southern Spain this spring, I had a chance to sit in on a lot of English classes for very young kids. I noticed that when they were doing possession, they were all taught to say "I've got a red ball", etc. I and all of the other Americans there thought this was really bizarre, but we did notice that they were learning British English - does anyone have firsthand knowledge of whether this construction is considered ok in the UK?
Marissa
I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
"There is a very hollow echo of a gaur in the birth of that animal to a cow in Iowa," said Kent Redford, an international program scientist with the Wildlife Conservation Society in New York. "To say that is a gaur is to disrespect all gaurs in all the places where gaurs live. That animal will never live its life in true gaurdom, to wander in the forests of India and frolic with other gaurs and die and let teak trees grow out of it. That's the gaur I'm working to save."
Have you ever said the word "gaur" so many times it lost all meaning?
Anyway, on to my real point. This may be a great thing, but there is no way it's going to be used responsibly. As the process becomes easier, people will worry less about extinction, because they'll always be able to bring the animals back. And there will be one less barrier to screwing with the ecosystem. Which is bad.
Marissa
I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
Well, naked geek thighs are not bad by themselves, (much better than other types of naked thighs, at least when you consider the person possessing the thighs) but the image of naked geek thighs with a floppy yellow keyboard on them is just...bleah!! *shudder*
Marissa I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
Katz is right. Sort of. While I agree that Metallica's behavior toward Napster users is rather sickening and should not continue, we ought to be careful not to act like we have the legal (or even moral) high ground here.
Going after users who appear to be offering Metallica MP3s that they might have a legal right to have isn't diplomatic. In fact, it's also very stupid, as the vast majority of Metallica fans aren't law-abiding citizens deeply concerned about the protection of intellectual property - at least, none of the ones I happen to know. But it is a legal action to take against people who are possibly violating the law.
Personally, I'm not going to buy anything at all connected to Metallica after this, and I urge everyone else to do the same thing. Just please don't get all indignant and righteous about your actions.
Marissa I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
When you try to access a blocked site using Cyber Patrol, (at least, with the proxy version my school uses) it displays a gray screen with the Cyber Patrol logo instead, and a little link that says "Visit Route 6-16 Instead". This is their filtered search engine, appropriate for ages 6-16. (their claim) There is no reason given as to why the site the user attempted to access is blocked.
Marissa I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
They made great RPG's (the real kind, with books and rules and GM's and total freedom of concept).
That's the ONLY kind of RPG, the others don't even deserve the title. It loses so much when you don't have the hazards of stepping on D4's in your bare feet or getting your character sheet drenched by spilled mountain dew.
...stuff like this is _always_ going to happen, whether libraries install blocking software or not. I know your example isn't meant to be realistic, but there are still going to be teenagers prevented from viewing certain things their parents don't approve of, however unfairly. Unblocked library internet access isn't going to "cure" this kind of parenting any more than gender identity centers "cure" gay people.
You know, there are many reasons to hate Katz OTHER than his use of Word. I don't like him either, but I make an effort to think of better reasons than what word processing program he uses. Yeah, it does look kinda stupid if he pulls an article because some of the punctuation is messed up, but it's better than having half of the comments on it talk about how Word sucks. (It does suck, but we already know that.)
Although considering the incredible paranoia people show whenever an article is pulled, maybe he still has something to learn about the/. mentality.
when he saw the cat was already out of the bag, he pulled the article in its entirety to prevent people from knowing he made it in Microsoft Word
Somehow, I don't think that was his primary motivation. If you're not willing to forgive him for using MS products and ignore the occasional errors, then you're not really interested in what he's saying.
*wipes up the Mountain Dew she spat out while laughing*
I work in a "famous" R&D lab
Then you should be enough of a scientist to realize that you can't make absurd generalizations and logical fallacies like this.
Your logic goes like this: 1. Women dropped out of your college math classes 2. There are few women in your R&D lab Therefore, 3. Women are bad at math
That's just as invalid as saying: 1. Women dropped out of your college math classes 2. There are few women in your R&D lab Therefore, 3. Women hate you.
I agree completely. I am personally offended by Katz's assumption that women are that intimidated by posts about sex with Natalie Portman. (Although I probably shouldn't be so upset.) Any woman with a grain of intelligence will see that those kind of possibly offensive things are rapidly moderated down, which indicates that the vast majority of/. doesn't consider them acceptable.
Maybe I'm just different from the majority of women, but I am not frightened by sex-obsessed idiots online. I understand that as a geeky female, I'm going to get hit on. I can _deal_ with it. Any woman who can't move on with her life after viewing the damaging horrors of a post involving *gasp* grits is not going to be able to survive in any forum, censored or not.
I agree completely. Despite the fact that the only french I speak comes from Monty Python, this still looks like a parody to me. Look under the "Sciences" section - They have UFOlogy, astronomy, and calculus. (At least I think that's what those words mean.) Whether a parody site should be ripping off Yahoo's graphics is a completely different argument.
If you look at the picture, it says "Watch Camera" right on the thing. It also has a very distinctive appearance. There's no way that any place with decent security is going to overlook one of these things. I could see it working at a rock concert, where you only have to go under the direct scrutiny of the security guards once, but trying to use it to get your competitors' secrets would be pretty much useless. With that much effort needed to avoid detection, (you'd have to keep covering the thing back up with your sleeve, etc) you might as well just get some other kind of spy-type camera.
...Acme Internet Filtering's software may be blocking arbitrary sites with which it has qualms; say, for instance, the owner of Acme hates feminism, so all feminist sites are blocked. If the parent's agree with this, that's their prerogative. If not, though, they're free to switch to another company's filtering product that blocks sites that they feel should be blocked or allows more custimization and control over what gets blocked.
Unfortunately for parents who like feminism but are against sadomasochistic pr0n, censorware companies DON'T release their lists of blocked sites. And, as has been proved by the studies posted at Censorware.org, unblocking certain categories won't help either because sites are frequently miscategorized.
Slashdot Mirror
Ahh, good old Sensenbrenner... he went to my high school and had my history teacher, who apparently thought him something of a moron. I prefer "hideous slug-creature", myself.
The thing that sticks with me the strongest about him is still the vehement assertion he made to myself and my friends when we met with him that Milwaukee couldn't have light rail under any circumstances, because of goose poop.
I think I'll quit being a dorky Wisconsinite now.
I think this actually needs just a LITTLE rephrasing, as I think de Selby was saying. It's not that much, but in formal logic, any little difference can make the entire outcome off. (And I apologize for my formal logic being rusty as well...)
The law is not saying, or is not meant to say, that every action a has an infinite number of reactions b, of which at least one is equal and opposite to a. It's saying, rather, that every action a has one (1!) corresponding reaction b, which is equal and opposite to a.
So, to disprove this, you'd have to go and find the action a whose reaction b was NOT equal and opposite. (And it would involve very tiny things and be extremely confusing to students.) Yes, there are an infinite number of actions a that can be performed, but as there's only one b which corresponds to every a, it can still be shown that each a tested is either in agreement with or disagreement with the theory.
I'd write this out in formal-logicy style, but I unfortunately can't remember the correct way to say that there is only one b that goes with each a. Curse you, formal logic!
Marissa
I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
Have you ever said the word "gaur" so many times it lost all meaning?
Anyway, on to my real point. This may be a great thing, but there is no way it's going to be used responsibly. As the process becomes easier, people will worry less about extinction, because they'll always be able to bring the animals back. And there will be one less barrier to screwing with the ecosystem. Which is bad.
Marissa
I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
Marissa
I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
Marissa
I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
Marissa
I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
Marissa
I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
Marissa
I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
Going after users who appear to be offering Metallica MP3s that they might have a legal right to have isn't diplomatic. In fact, it's also very stupid, as the vast majority of Metallica fans aren't law-abiding citizens deeply concerned about the protection of intellectual property - at least, none of the ones I happen to know. But it is a legal action to take against people who are possibly violating the law.
Personally, I'm not going to buy anything at all connected to Metallica after this, and I urge everyone else to do the same thing. Just please don't get all indignant and righteous about your actions.
Marissa
I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
Marissa
I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
Marissa
I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
Marissa
I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
Wait. This could be a good thing to have while reading Katz articles.
Marissa
I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
Marissa
I'm not really an elf, I just play one in AD&D.
That's the ONLY kind of RPG, the others don't even deserve the title. It loses so much when you don't have the hazards of stepping on D4's in your bare feet or getting your character sheet drenched by spilled mountain dew.
*sighs, reminiscing*
It's made by West End Games. Their website is kinda crummy (ok, very crummy), but I found some actual merchandise at Cyberdungeon.com.
...stuff like this is _always_ going to happen, whether libraries install blocking software or not. I know your example isn't meant to be realistic, but there are still going to be teenagers prevented from viewing certain things their parents don't approve of, however unfairly. Unblocked library internet access isn't going to "cure" this kind of parenting any more than gender identity centers "cure" gay people.
You know, there are many reasons to hate Katz OTHER than his use of Word. I don't like him either, but I make an effort to think of better reasons than what word processing program he uses. Yeah, it does look kinda stupid if he pulls an article because some of the punctuation is messed up, but it's better than having half of the comments on it talk about how Word sucks. (It does suck, but we already know that.)
Although considering the incredible paranoia people show whenever an article is pulled, maybe he still has something to learn about the /. mentality.
when he saw the cat was already out of the bag, he pulled the article in its entirety to prevent people from knowing he made it in Microsoft Word
Somehow, I don't think that was his primary motivation. If you're not willing to forgive him for using MS products and ignore the occasional errors, then you're not really interested in what he's saying.
I work in a "famous" R&D lab
Then you should be enough of a scientist to realize that you can't make absurd generalizations and logical fallacies like this.
Your logic goes like this:
1. Women dropped out of your college math classes
2. There are few women in your R&D lab
Therefore,
3. Women are bad at math
That's just as invalid as saying:
1. Women dropped out of your college math classes
2. There are few women in your R&D lab
Therefore,
3. Women hate you.
Actually, miniskirts really help when you're talking philosophy. They make it much easier to win, at least.
I agree completely. I am personally offended by Katz's assumption that women are that intimidated by posts about sex with Natalie Portman. (Although I probably shouldn't be so upset.) Any woman with a grain of intelligence will see that those kind of possibly offensive things are rapidly moderated down, which indicates that the vast majority of /. doesn't consider them acceptable.
Maybe I'm just different from the majority of women, but I am not frightened by sex-obsessed idiots online. I understand that as a geeky female, I'm going to get hit on. I can _deal_ with it. Any woman who can't move on with her life after viewing the damaging horrors of a post involving *gasp* grits is not going to be able to survive in any forum, censored or not.
I agree completely. Despite the fact that the only french I speak comes from Monty Python, this still looks like a parody to me. Look under the "Sciences" section - They have UFOlogy, astronomy, and calculus. (At least I think that's what those words mean.) Whether a parody site should be ripping off Yahoo's graphics is a completely different argument.
If you look at the picture, it says "Watch Camera" right on the thing. It also has a very distinctive appearance. There's no way that any place with decent security is going to overlook one of these things. I could see it working at a rock concert, where you only have to go under the direct scrutiny of the security guards once, but trying to use it to get your competitors' secrets would be pretty much useless. With that much effort needed to avoid detection, (you'd have to keep covering the thing back up with your sleeve, etc) you might as well just get some other kind of spy-type camera.
Marissa
Unfortunately for parents who like feminism but are against sadomasochistic pr0n, censorware companies DON'T release their lists of blocked sites. And, as has been proved by the studies posted at Censorware.org, unblocking certain categories won't help either because sites are frequently miscategorized.
Marissa