0
stringlengths 9
22.1k
|
|---|
you've failed to read my and see it in it's entirity.
I don't see how. You are arguing that conversations are dying (getting shorter) and point to teen use of social media as an example for the trend. If you acknowledge that your examples don't really mean anything, then save some time and don't use them. I mean you use twitter as an example of how teens are being molded into making quick comments, but one of the links you just posted mentioned that teens don't really use twitter (only 8%). Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I didn't read your post...
I take issue with that and with your point that conversations are getting shorter. Do you remember using BBS's? Do you remember what your conversations consisted of, and their length, when you were a teen? Did you have a livejournal? I mean, I don't really remember too many long blog posts by people on that stuff. Mostly it was pretty short.
>You also didn't read anything about what Johnathan Zittrain argues about the internet and where it's going.
No, you assumed I didn't. What exactly do you expect me to comment on? I've read his blog before. Some things I agree with, some I don't.
As for your links:
The first link states that teen blogs aren't as popular as when we were younger. This shouldn't surprise anyone since fads change with each generation. The fact that they're not blogging doesn't mean they're not having long conversations.
I don't know what your point is with the second link. It just talks about social networks and a little thing about blogging. It says nothing about conversation length or what the teens are talking about (though they do seem to visit a whole lot of news sites, and 38% share art/stories/videos).
No one is denying that people are using the technology around us, so I'm not sure what your point is with the third one as well. Of course people are texting and using the phone more... what does that have to do with people connecting more but not having conversations? How does your argument support the article you posted?
Teens not blogging as much doesn't tell me anything about how they're communicating. Maybe instead of a blog they do videos on youtube, or posting in a chat room, or even posting on a forum. I've never had a blog and I still have long conversations with people online... with people of all ages. |
Having gone to an Illinois school with a huge LE program, I can conclusively say that the people who endeavor to be Chicago cops are the biggest bunch of power-tripping douchebags you can imagine. Which is to say, they match the current officer profile very well. I have no question that they will use this and all their other taxpayer-funded goodies to their own sadistic amusement. |
I was at the G20 protests. They only rolled this stuff out for groups that didn't have permits or unlawful gatherings of people obviously looking to enjoy a good mob. When the actual marches went through downtown, the cops stood by and let them march through the city and do their speeches.
Lots of people probably don't realize that Pittsburgh had two "riots" during the last two superbowl wins where the cops were utterly outmatched by the number of people in the streets. I personally got to crowd surf off flipped cars and people were setting fires in the streets for shits and giggles. The mayor clearly didn't want the same thing to happen during the G20, so lots of cops came in from out of state, and they basically acted as temporary security guards while the most powerful people in the world came to hang out. Perfectly understandable response to a situation where it was obvious that people were going to protest and try to riot if possible.
At one point I was waiting on Liberty Ave for the protests to come down toward the Strip District. There was a line of over a hundred police shipped to the intersection by buses, all armed with different types of non-lethal crowd control weapons, with an LRAD in the centre. The protesters knocked a dumpster down the hill toward the cops, which hit some cars on the way, and some folks stood a few hundred feet away singing protest songs and obviously not sure what to do. The rest of the group went back up through north oakland where the cops surrounded them, sounded the LRADs, and used tear gas to disperse people. The LRADs were mostly used for their dispersal announcements, they used a lot more tear gas to break the group up into sections and get them to scatter. It was surreal to be in the middle of, but when they cops got toward me, I just motioned toward my camera and let them know I was documenting stuff and not there to protest, they were all nice to me, and many of them took time out to chat and pose for photos when things weren't dicey. |
I always hate it when these things are blown out of proportions. I hate Apple as much as the next but here a quick "German courts, how it works".
Lawsuit value > 5000 € = first instance is the regional court (LG)
you get an appeal if you are disadvantaged by the ruling for more then 600 € to the OLG (Higher Regional Court)
if you loose there again and the rules disadvantages you for more then 20.000 € you can appeal again to the BGH (Federal Court of Justice).
and this isnt the end of the line either and this is a very easy way to describe it, but i dont want to bore you here |
Quit being a condescending prick, a handshake completely alone isnt making you thousands. True a deal could be worth thousands and the conclusion of the deal is a handshake but there is much more work involved that just a simple handshake.
Also assuming you live 75 years, 5 seconds is 2.1E-7% of your life. Just because you dont care about those 5 seconds doesnt mean you cant cherish time spent here. |
It follows: How our (German) government and foreign minister are responsible for the unproportionally weak role Germany plays in foreign policy right now.
Our current foreign minister Guido Westerwelle is perhaps the worst foreign minister the Bundesrepublik Deutschland ever had. Three points:
1) So far EVERY SINGLE foreign minister of Germany recieved higher approval ratings during their incumbency then before. Until Guido Westerwelle, that is. He is the first to manage to become far less popular after inauguration.
2) You remember the Wikileaks US embassy cables? They called Westerwelle conceited and incompetent, and that's exactly how his own people see him, too.
3) No foreign minister did indeed a worse job than him. They always had a broad presence. Westerwelle just started to completely disappear. In pretty much every international panel he was responsible for, Germany lost power even though it would have been a good time to shine. His own diplomats complain, too, and he distributes these offices more due to party affiliation than due to competence (oh irony, for the same is true for his own job...)
~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~
Some sidenotes about his party background
He is member of the neoliberal FDP. In terms of their economic policy they are very much like the Republicans -even though they cannot be half as loud about that, because their position is not very popular in Germany-, but they are also liberal about civil rights (pro gay rights and such). Which however is far less important in Germany, because every party that has enough votes to be part of the German parliament (>5%) thinks so at least to the biggest part. Which is why the FDP is mostly judged by their economic politics.
The FDP won 15% during the last elections and formed a liberal-conservative government with the conservative CDU/CSU. Ever since they are part of the government they dropped below 5% in the Landtag elections and federal surveys, which means the worst results they ever had. They made themselves unpopular because their first laws already revealed that they merely are a clientele party - one of their first acts was to reduce taxes for the hotel business, which before the elections gifted them millions.
I would say that exactly what Bill Clinton warned of in the Daily Show, how ideology makes you aim for a solution before you know the facts of the problems, is the biggest issue with the FDP. Other parties would keep officials in high ranks when they did a good job regardless of party affiliation. The FDP said they would promote a small government and small ministeries, when actually they just kicked out people of other parties and hired even more of their own people... And many long serving clerks say that it's exactly those guys who have no clue what they are doing. |
This information may not be assumed to be correct until proven
The problem is actually common to digital photography and is called chromatic aberration, otherwise known as "purple fringing." The image distortion is especially evident when a strong specular light source, like the sun or a flashlight, is present in or near the image.
As with all optical elements in a camera's lens array, light is bent at different angles as it passes through the substrate, usually some form of glass or plastic, to converge at a single point on the focal plane. In the case of digital cameras, the focal plane is the unit's imaging sensor which, in the case of the iPhone 5, is of the backside-illuminated CMOS variety.
At issue is a lens array's refractive index which numerically represents the manner in which light, or more specifically wavelengths of light, moves through the optics system. Ideally, a lens will focus all colors, or wavelengths, at a single point on the focal plane, thus creating a near-perfect replication of an image. In practice, however, lenses don't allow for wavelengths to meet at a convergence point, creating what is called chromatic aberration.
Due to a number of factors, including reference tuning, architecture of digital sensors and relatively high focal lengths in smaller camera systems, chromatic aberration usually presents itself in shorter wavelengths like violet.
High-end lenses can be adjusted to deal with axial chromatic aberrations, those that cause color fringing, and are called apochromatic lenses, though these types of systems are costly and bulky as additional glass elements are added to the array. Another form of compensating for the distortion are aspherical lenses that are specially designed to reform light to achieve more accurate focus. These elements are also costly, however, as a multitude of steps are needed to manufacture the glass.
In the end, the iPhone 5's camera most likely has no tangible design flaws and is only a victim of the intrinsic qualities of photography. Perhaps a specialized algorithm can be instituted to compensate for the violet push, though any changes made to the existing post-processing flow will likely throw off other finely tuned aspects of the system. |
The only way there would be geographic-based management levels is if you were in a sales capacity, or contracting. Or you're lying. Even when you're in another country, you still have a similar management structure (you might have ONE extra hop due to a region manager, but below him, the structure remains the same).
There just simply cannot be that many people in between. It's impossible. There aren't enough people for that to be a worthwhile strategy. If there were only 2 people under each manager, it'd be 2^14 - 1 which is 16384. That's a little more reasonable, sure, but even a lead will have at least 3 people under him, and the higher you go, the more people you have as direct reports. So even with 3^14 -1 we arrive at 4782968. At a more reasonable 7 levels in between Ballmer and a first-level IC, we are at a more reasonable 3^7 - 1 = 2186. More realistically, there's about 7 people directly under someone, and about 6 levels to Ballmer, at which point, the number reaches around 7^6 - 1 = 117648, which is a lot more realistic. |
NO ONE GIVES A SHIT, SO WHY DO YOU?
No really, get off the Internet and go get a life. |
Hmm? No. The USA has massive dark-fibre infrastructure which was built in the mid 90s and has yet to be used, IIRC it's primarily fibre-optics too, not copper cabling. It isn't used because the telecoms control it, and have no incentive to improve their services.
(I can't find the name of the act which allowed this to pass, but a bit of Googling might yield some results.)
EDIT --
is a better explanation than I could ever give. Prepare to be pissed when you read it--the |
I guess I could have clarified a little more. my actual first modem was a 300 (.3k or 300 bytes/sec) baud for the Commodore 64. From that, 1200 / 2400 baud. First PC modem was a 9600 Hayes; I think with compression I might equal a whopping 1k a second.
I just never really thought of a fast modem til 56k hit the scene. I remember the 28.8 / 48.6k days of the internet and AOL, before Mosaic browsers and the WWW came into effect :) |
Not exactly correct.
The internet service has two components. The installation fee, and the actual service.
When a customer pays for the installation fee, google gives them the internet service for free - up to 7 years. If the customer does not wish to pay for the upfront fee, they will charge 70$ a month and provide a connection of 1Gbps, but will pay for the costs of the installation. |
They didn't shoot the rapist though... So even though you mock my british slang you got the |
I disagree. I have never seen anyone use that word outside of reddit
I've seen it used many times, both outside of Reddit on other social networking sites and in the outside world. Consider that the only relevant instances it would be used are in other conversations similar to these, or during specific psychology classes, discussions, seminars, etc. With that in mind, you never hearing it isn't much of a surprise. Just because you haven't heard it used doesn't mean its use doesn't occur.
> a community that goes wild with upvotes and comments every time a picture with a hint of young girl is posted. A community that thrives on misogyny, rape jokes, racism and paedophilia.
Ignoring the fact that this observation appears fueled primarily by your own biases and assertions and not necessarily what is true of all members of Reddit, the same can be argued about other communities, both online and off. Hell, it could be argued about modern society, if you want to just keep generalizing. Misogyny is still a huge problem in business; Racism is a by-product of cultural ignorance, and I personally believe everyone is capable of it to some degree; Rape jokes are hit and miss and can be in poor taste, but they are just that: jokes. I don't personally know of any statistics on this (if they even exist), but I'd be willing to bet the vast majority (maybe 80-90%) of jokes are either at the expense of someone and/or their culture, or based around real life occurrences/personal experiences...and it's my opinion that if you can laugh at or make any joke within that context or spectrum, it shouldn't be wrong to laugh at/make ones in others.
As for paedophilia...well, based on the beliefs you've portrayed up to now, I wouldn't go so far as to say this community thrives on or supports it.
> I have been forced to assume that people are making that distinction because they are guilty paedophiles, as that seems like the only logical possibility.
I'd like to know how you came to that conclusion logically; in fact, I'd be willing to believe you need to look up the definition of "logical", because I don't think it means what you think it means.
Again, ignoring that these assumptions being "forced" on you seem based on your own biases and not anything actually being stated by the people making the distinctions, let's look at what we know. Do Redditors invent psychological terms? No (Unless some of Reddit's members are revered psychologists, which given Reddit's popularity and size, is very much possible). These distinctions between paedophilia, hebephilia, and ephebophilia exist because the scientific community that studies psychology deemed it necessary. To sloppily segway into your last comment and continue my thought process...
> If you have other reasons they would insistently make this distinction every time a paedophilia related comment comes up I would love to hear it.
...Because it needs to be made. I'm sorry, but there's no better reason than that. As I said before, the distinctions are made because there's a difference to begin with, not because it's an attempt to create the difference only to justify their preferences. In fact, you already proved this in another comment you made pointing out the exclusivity of the term ephebophilia. If you want another reason, I'll go ahead and point out the elephant in the room: you don't have any undeniable evidence to prove they are arguing these distinctions because of some underlying guilt; you only have your assumptions based on implications you invented...unless you ran a study or survey to prove your theory correct, which I find doubtful.
One final thing: we live in a society (or at least I do; American here) where sensationalist media thinks it's okay to incite panic whenever controversial topics pop back up, then appeal to the ignorance of their audience to gain popularity. So video gamers and gun owners become potential serial killers, consumer backlash becomes entitled whining, Muslims become terrorists, the LGBT community becomes godless child molesters, and the body's natural, instinctual, hormonal attraction to sexually mature adolescents becomes the desire to rape children. |
This is from the Ambiguously Gay Duo, an old Saturday Night Live segment. |
I never understood this mentality. We're talking about a GRAPHICAL User Interface, right? So why do I need to TYPE to use it effectively?!
I've always been amazed that some people (not talking about you here) can't figure out the obvious: if you categorize your apps on the start menu in All Programs then you all of a sudden can find exactly what you're looking for quickly and easily. Then, you take the dozen or so apps that you use most frequently and pin them to the start menu. Put nothing on the desktop or even the taskbar. Guess what you have then? You launch all your apps from one place, not three potentially, 95% of the time you're doing so in two clicks (one on the start button itself and one to launch the app) and the other 5% of the time you can find what you're looking for quickly and easily... and maybe that 5% is really 4% and 1% of the time you type to search.
Point being, it's incredibly simple and efficient and is still using the power of the GUI.
But, guess what? With Windows 8, you can't do that. You can kinda/sorta get close by putting the same dozen or so apps that I pin to the start menu on the start screen and relegating everything else to all programs, but it really breaks down when you hit that 5% because now you're in the all programs screen and scrolling like mad with terrible visual cues breaking up groups (that's the problem with the "minimalist UI" fad everyone is following now: shit blends together too much, there's no visual breaks for the eyes to key off of). Or, I could just type instead... but again... it's a frigging GUI, typing is a cop-out if I have to do it with any sort of regularity. |
People already comment far too often without actually reading the article. This just gives them more reason not to. Sure, it's useful to provide a few major points from it, but they're pretty meaningless without context, and it's just going to a lead to a lot of stupid debates of someone who read the article arguing with someone who read the |
The way I see it, the college rush is an adaptive response to HR departments requiring Bachelor's degrees for positions for reasons other than establishing competency (i.e. an easy way to cull candidates as well as to emphasize the "cultural fit" of remaining candidates).
To compensate, more candidates began to seek Bachelor's degrees, and to seek them as a commodity item. If any Bachelor's degree would do, then why shouldn't they get the most reasonably priced one? Hence the rise in for-profit colleges...
Instead of realizing that using degrees as culling devices might not have been a good idea, too many HR departments just doubled down on their previous bet, requiring Master's degrees for postions where a Bachelor's wasn't an effective enough culling tool.
The candidates respond by seeking a Master's as a commodity item (repeat 2nd paragraph,just substitute Master's for Bachelor's) |
Should be valid for like 120 years or something. Some sites (gmail) have you set up a backup email, which can be used to reset the password. If your backup email gets given away, someone who knows enough about you can get into your primary email, which potentially means they can reset other passwords (PayPal, bank), and steal your money. |
From what I understand they didn't, but the hardware they chose allows them to do this, theoretically the same thing could be done with almost any phone, assuming of course that it is under-utilizing its hardware.
Like the CPU on your computer the phone has a variable clock. (this is generally incorporated into the SOC) and for mobile devices it's not uncommon for the cpu to be underclocked. This is because phones are in a constant battle between performance and battery life. If you increase your clock speed you drain power faster if you decrease clock speed power consumption decreases. Many recent SOCs designed for mobile applications actually have scaling clock speeds, like the snapdragon even though it can be non trivial to implement. In theory a scaling clock lets you drop the phone down to 50MHz or so while idle, then clock up to 300MHz-2GHz while in use giving you a power profile that scales with your requirements.
What Samsung does from how I understand it, is design software to watch until a benchmark app is running, then if one is it sets the cpu clock rate higher than it would ever go over the course of typical use, for this phone that seems to be what ever it's hardware specified maximum is. In this case a whopping 2.3GHz, (for reference the apple A6 operates at 1.3 GHz) For benchmarks they are essentially skewing the performance battery life trade off entirely toward performance. So while the phone might go dead in 10 minutes while operating like that, it has a temporary boost in processing power that far outdoes other phones. Since the snap dragon also has a scaling GPU, so I wouldn't be surprised if they clocked that up as well. |
I think dual booting or at least mode changing (an OS that supports a mobile mode and a dock/desktop mode) is the real issue with the phone wars. Microsoft is losing ground because they are trying to compete in a theater they have had little success in and are having a hard time gaining traction. at the same time they are conforming their primary product to the mobile market without considering the consequences that people don't want to use it that way ALL the time.
Apple at least did it rite with OSX and integrating in touch support into the PC software rather than lumping IOS in with their core product and souring the whole experience. the take away from the apple example is there is a clean division of intended uses, emphasis on clean.
the difference between Androids success on mobile and Windows failures on PC with a comparable interface is that they don't mesh. its painfuly difficult to do much of anything on Android with a keyboard as it lacks full keyboard (and generic user interface device) support while Microsoft has an entire API dedicated to advanced desktop publishing that is underutilized on a mobile device and frankly un-needed if that is the intended modis-operendi.
furthermore there is the issue of compatibility that should be addressed, Microsoft has been at lagerheads with the Linux community in not being forthcoming with its proprietary code, even in releasing closed source binaries that would require licensing or accommodating hardware to run (most of which is done threw intel directly or minor development grants from Microsoft for few, yet notable, open source contributions to the GNU)
I also feel that Metro is a good interface for phones however when they included it on the PC release of Windows it left a bad taste in my mouth when I was restricted to running apps in mobile land and the desktop was demoted to a second class UI (with independent settings) the way they are going about it can be described as a break in continuity rather than a division as the two halves of windows only play well together at the data level of the software not at the kernel level since software can not be run between interfaces unless a lot is changed by the user.
I currently use a few Metro apps on Windows 7 thanks to widgets that let me run them in windows on the desktop. if I had a slate, I'd much rather have one installed with Win7 and a psudo Win8 touch centric theme so I can easily switch between the efficiency of a desktop or the ease of use of touching the screen. the problem being that the approach would be a hack and even on a high end [$1200] tablet it would waste resources. This needs to be a priority for microsoft to get this particular user willing to upgrade.
I don't see this courtship going well for Microsoft unless they get a budget build phone out of the deal and they will have to do a lot of software work to make functional, getting them farther away from the beneficial changes they need to make to the software. |
Something's been on my mind for a long time now. I think some of you are already thinking it, some of you will just dismiss it as paranoia.
Apart from FaceBook and Twitter, one of the best candidates for spying has to be Reddit. Reddit is where, in the course of a year or two, people reveal what school they went to, how many people are in their family, what area they live in, things they have done that may have been illegal, things they have seen, their job, etc etc. even photos of relatives and family.
I suspect almost anyone who's been on Reddit for over a year is identifiable, and I suspect that right now the NSA, CIA, and anyone who wants to are constantly processing Reddit entries. Note that they don't have to hack your account (Though they can if they want) just browsing your posts is probably enough to identify you.
It's not just passive surveillance, either. When you see questions like "when have you put something over the police" or "What drugs do you use" you have to wonder who is really asking the question.
Try this: Pick a one-year Reddit user. Go through his/her posts and see what information you can find about them. Now combine that with a governmental database of names, birthdates, family, photos, info etc and imagine how identifiable you are. |
dont be silly, no one reads articles. we just |
The end result is a distributed method of obtaining address information. You either need to use something like DNS which points to wherever your virtual machines are, or you need a client that is able to discover the swarm through the DHT ( |
It makes no sense to pay limited resources in exchange for an unlimited good.
This is a shitty argument. The only thing that makes money limited is the government. If the laws against counterfeiting weren't so stringently enforced and the respective technology not so actively suppressed there would be numerous counterfeiting sites selling perfect copies of any paper currency you might want. Money and intellectual property have that in common, government-backed artificial scarcity.
Unfortunately, the rest of your arguments are just as weak (comparing naturally-occurring phenomena that predate humanity to commercial products that would not exist without individual labor etc). |
I use google for searching a specific site if that sites search doesn't function well. I used to use it on reddit before they fixed their search tool. This really doesn't make a difference, I just have to look ten items down before I get what I searched for instead of google giving it as the first search result. |
This is a shitty argument.
No, it isn't.
>The only thing that makes money limited is the government.
Except that's untrue.
Fiat currencies are backed by the economic power of the institution behind it. You can't print infinite money... if you do it would lose its value and be worthless.
Unlike digital media.
>If the laws against counterfeiting weren't so stringently enforced and the respective technology not so actively suppressed there would be numerous counterfeiting sites selling perfect copies of any paper currency you might want.
Yes.
And that would devalue the currency. Unlike digital media. Which doesn't lose value when copied. It already had no value as it isn't backed by value.
It isn't tied to labour, it isn't tied to economic potential, it isn't tied to reserves. It just exists.
> Money and intellectual property have that in common, government-backed artificial scarcity.
Except the two things aren't even remotely comparable.
>Unfortunately, the rest of your arguments are just as weak (comparing naturally-occurring phenomena that predate humanity to commercial products that would not exist without individual labor etc).
Non of my arguments is weak. You not understanding them doesn't invalidate them. Spoiler: Your simplistic approach does not represent my position.
However: The only argument you made is invalid.
In the meantime you have the burden of proof. Which makes this a rather lousy round on your part, don't you think?
> |
I've been with T-Mobile since 2008, and my parents had me on their t-mobile plan from 2001-2005, so I've seen T-mobile throughout their ups and downs. Hell, my parents were with Voicestream before that switched to T-mobile (not sure if they got bought by t-mobile, or were the original t-mobile, but whatever)...
T-mobile has always had EXCELLENT customer service. But, about a year and a half ago, maybe 2 years ago, there was a shift. a disturbance in the force if you will.
I worked in the ATT warranty department for a short while (inbound calls at a call center, pretty boring stuff) and was trained to handle calls in a certain way (not at all like the way T-mobile handles their customer calls). All of a sudden a couple years ago, I started noticing T-mobile's customer service trends were sounding rather familiar. Then I started to hear the rumors that ATT wanted to buy up T-Mobile. I was pissed. I was ready to cancel because I KNOW how badly ATT treats their customers (granted, I did everything in my power to make sure that MY customers got treated, you know, like human beings...) and I was about ready to straight cancel my account.
Then I guess it was the US Department of Justice that stepped in and put a halt to it, and suddenly T-mobile's stellar customer service came back! Luckily, since I was used to ATT's loopholes and stupid regulations, I was actually able to get 2 months of my bill paid, because T-mobile's employees were being trained to act like ATT employees for a little while there. Or at least, that's the way it seemed. Either way, it worked for me...
and now, ATT is really feeling the hurt. maybe they realized that T-mobile would be this big of a threat that early on, and wanted to acquire it before it was a problem for them? assimilate! assimilate! |
Honestly I think people need to just forget the notion that anonymity can be used as a form of protection. Sensors will be tracking every minute of our lives, privacy is dead . Accepting that coming reality and writing laws that protect individuals from being taken advantage of by corporations and governments is what we should be focusing on.
Personally I view the loss of privacy as a largely positive thing, crime becomes much harder when every inch of the earth is being tracked monitored and recorded. People freak out about the notion of the government tracking us but they forget that as these tools become cheaper it turns into a two-way street. If they can track us, we can track them. All of these opinions aren't really based on hard data so feel free to rip em apart. |
Except Target's credit records had a redundant backup system called credit protection so that's an example of a system that still worked. I could post my credit card information all over Reddit today, let you go on a spending spree and I wouldn't be liable for a dime. Were there identity problems that came out of it? Maybe. Was it a global catastrophe? I'll let you answer that.
Is it possible there will small isolated hacking events? Probably. Are they going to kill 1.2 Million people every year like our current traffic system does? No. Even if your Hollywood event somehow happens that will still be a single isolated event. |
He could have invented oxygen, but if he can't lead a company without a PR shitstorm, you probably shouldn't be leading the company to begin with. Leadership isn't about being nice, or fair. He could very well have his opinions and we never know, but if he was a good leader, he would have been able to stop this stuff from affecting him and the business. He failed to do this, so he's gone. |
It is one thing to say that people should tolerate others beliefs if they disagree with their own. It's entirely a different thing to tolerate a belief that directly contradicts your own rights and freedoms.
I DO NOT tolerate individuals who do not believe that I, an American citizen, am eligible for the same rights as they are. I do not tolerate people who "disapprove of my lifestyle." I am a human being, and I deserve respect.
Eich would be CEO of a large open source organization. It's one thing to be a random guy with shitty beliefs, but it's another thing to be the leader of a large organization with millions of dollars, and impact. After all, we learned today that money is the freest form of speech. |
The thing is, he was the target of an online crusade. Let's remember that he made this contribution six years ago!
Yep, it's ridiculous that people decided to pick this, of all things, as their issue. But the fact remains, the Board at Mozilla must have felt that this was damaging to their image or could lead to a less efficient/effective work environment, or they wouldn't have gone out of their way to post that letter to their web site. And it should serve as a reminder to people that their employers are not their friends, and won't necessarily back you up if the shit hits the fan, even if you've done absolutely nothing wrong. It's almost always a purely cost-benefit analysis when it comes to business, no matter what a company actually says about their policies and corporate culture. I mean, look at Google. It's all bring your dogs to work and we'll not do evil together on a cloud of perky rainbows. Meanwhile, we'll collude with Apple and a bunch of other companies to institute very broad anti-competitive employee solicitation agreements that the [DOJ ends up investigating]( It basically added up to: Oh, you work at my buddy/arch-rival's company? We won't recruit you, or hire you even if you apply here, because it will make my buddy/arch-rival very sad or mad. And we won't tell you that this is the reason. All of these agreements will be secret and we will be minimizing our paper trail because this may not be legal. |
Neither economic issues or social issues are cut and dried, and you can find a lot of honest disagreement, lies, and propaganda for pretty much any social or economic policy.
However, where you stand on social policies is easier to determine than where you stand on economic ones. And more importantly, a gay person (or a person who thinks gays will destroy the world and lead us all to Hell) is directly affected by these social issues. Like immediately, a law passes and suddenly you can get married, another law passes and you can't even mention the word gay in a classroom. Compare that to economic issues, a new economic policy is passed (Glass-Steagal) and while it has may have massive repercussions for many people, it won't have an immediately notable effect on most.
Many of the people who deride this focus on social vs economic issues are the kind of people for whom the social policies don't have any direct, immediate affect. You can see that in the comments of people here who say things like "I'm for gay marriage, but...". |
Social mores are becoming malleable due to the power of crowd sourcing and lobbying. We live in a democracy, but you can lose your job and risk losing friends if you proclaim politically incorrect sensitivities.
There are many people who are against gay marriage, but they wouldn't dare speak publically for fear of repercussions and social ostracism. Who would risk tarnishing their Wiki profile by editing the article and inserting a more conservative viewpoint? A famous person being publically against gay marriage would get so much hate on Twitter, there would be campaigns against them and newspaper articles written condemning them, their livelihoods would be at risk. |
violence has declined and tolerance for views and lifestyles have been gained through the ages, especially starting with the enlightenment and democratic society.
Admittedly I haven't read the book, but for one thing I would suggest that the reason violence is declining in our society is that we have established a state monopoly on violence that is more effectively enforced than at other periods in history.
People often suggest we're entering a post-bigotry world. But that's not what we actually see happening. In fact, I would submit that at every point in the Western world we see culture on a track from racism to homophobia to to biphobia to transphobia. People will probably always find something to be prejudiced about.
At the end of the day though, I don't think this is a freedom of speech issue. I know you didn't say that it was, but I think that's a really important common ground to focus on. Freedom of speech means you have a right against government censorship, it means you have a right against censorship by intimidation by threat of violence. But free speech isn't a right for people to like you, nor is it a right for society to be nice about its disagreements with you. Eich got to speak, he got to donate money to fight equal marriage, no one stopped him and no one will stop him from doing it again. |
Imagine if they had done it differently from the beginning, though. Imagine if they had designed this entire system for a forensic purpose: To prosecute international criminals. Then it would have been designed from the ground up in a way that tags and preserves evidence.
Oh shit. Hang on. That is exactly how this was supposed to be designed: With a forensic purpose. |
I can only assume you're mocking me or speaking in tongues, and in either case I assure you everything will be okay. I've already called the exorcist and he's on the way (but you have to pay him in cash, sorry.) |
I was looking for a similar system to digitize my notes and allow for eBooks. I prefer hand writing my notes over typing them but most tablets I found just didn't seem "right" when using a stylus.
Last year I found the ASUS VivoTab Note 8 which is their 8 inch windows 8 tablet, for $329. The reason I went with it over others is because it had the special Wacom Digitizer Pen. I was surprised at how accurate and precise the hand writing was when using it.
I am currently using OneNote for all of my handwriting notes and since it is running a full version of Windows 8 I have access to all of my eBooks and such.
While I am very happy with the product, I have found ASUS very difficult to deal with tech and customer support wise. An issue arose with my tablet regarding the touch screen not responding to my finger. Turn around time to get the issue diagnosed and my tablet repaired/returned was around 2 months. |
There are 2 parts: (1) They still need those chips to be produced and already have commitments requiring those chips so they need the technology to continue, and (2) Bundled with this deal, IBM gets to take a nearly $5B tax write-off. So assuming they are paying 28% corporate tax, there is your $1.5B right there. |
The most important quote is:
> “But the question remains: are we going to allow a means of communications which it simply isn’t possible to read. My answer to that question is: ‘No we must not’.
Cameron is ignorant of the effects such an act would have, even if he means far less. Almost all modern cryptographic techniques are realistically impossible to decode without a key, and they are used worldwide to secure everything on the planet. It would be monumentally stupid to create such a law. What Cameron likely wants to revive is the Communications Data Bill, which is somewhat different. One of the problems with that bill is that it forces "communications service provider" to collect information above and beyond what is necessary for business. The public, knowing how securely many companies store customer data, think that this is a bad idea, and were against it by a very wide margin. |
Retards are a global plague, but in most of the time they're on opposing sides fighting each other so it isn't too bad and they keep each other occupied, however this mother fucker needs to get out of office before I steal a car and run him the fuck down, but he's not going to, because somehow he's the least retarded son of a bitch we can actually elect to lead us. |
Walmart makes its money by baiting you in with low cost groceries that competition cannot match
Actually, there are several competitors (per example ALDI) that not only "match" but beat Walmart's pricing (not to mention better quality) on groceries -- and those firms are also highly profitable.
The point being that Wal-Mart didn't go into the grocery biz as a "loss leader" -- they already had huge traffic base even w/o the grocery -- the grocery was simply an expansion of product that was necessary for same store sales growth (every other possible market niche having already been pretty much maxed-out and optimized).
Plus, there are all kinds of "tricks" (financial shenanigans with REIT's and so forth) that make the "profitability" of specific local stores appear to be much lower than they actually are (i.e. the |
DS9 stole its entire set up from B5, as the lawsuit made clear, which is why they had no idea what they were doing in the first few seasons. And while DS9 got MUCH better when they finally moved in their own direction in the later seasons, that doesn't challenge my position.
Every series got worse and worse as the accountant in charge wanted to make sure nothing got too far away from "Star Trek" as a generic franchise. That was indeed Paramount's mandate from day 1.
Need proof? Check out the original design documents for Star Trek Voyager (if you can get your hands on them) and then compare those with what the show actually debuted as.
Or didn't you notice that when all was said and done two entirely different quadrants of the galaxy turned out to have spaceships and technology that looked exactly the same as each other?
The whole point of Voyager was supposedly hitting the reset button on Star Trek, but it got vetoed piece by piece during development until what we all got was generic bland rehashed pap. |
err, that's not how 3d rendering works. The rendering part, the graphics card, takes a 3d scene and renders it into a 2d scene for your monitor. In order to do a slightly different view for each eye it needs to render the same scene twice from slightly different perspectives. |
It seems that according to the RIAA once something is copied and given away for free that copy becomes extremely more valuable, e.g., one copy of a song (approximately a $1 value originally) being worth $382,353. What this means is that one (photo)copy of a dollar bill should be worth $382,353 to the RIAA, therefore we can pay the $382 trillion in copied bills.
EDIT: |
I think he's someone who is quite a techie (he spelled pseudo as sudo, for instance), and is using his technical knowledge to make something up that is so incredibly wrong that people feel compelled to ask, WTF?! It's poetry I tell ya, poetry. |
You quote another confused & [long time ago debunked nonsense]( which confuses thorium in LFTR and in water cooled reactors, and makes many more factual errors. Nevertheless, despite IEER claims of welcoming feedback, [they didnt correct their erroneous statements after being asked multiple times.]( |
ISPs don't buy data by the byte and resell it. ISPs have a connection to a backbone and they can push a certain amount of bytes per second through it. They resell throughput, and they are already charging for that: you pay more for a faster connection
This is true, but unless you understand the difference between peak and sustained usage, and unless you have a good enough grasp of statistics to understand the consequences of the fact that ISPs have many customers, the conclusion you draw from this will be absolutely wrong. ISPs want to give their customers nice fast connections so that the customers will have enough bandwidth to do the things they want to do and be happy, but the fast connection isn't the primary good that the ISP is selling you any more than the size of the pipe going into your house is the selling-point of a water company. You want your water main to be big enough that you can take a shower, wash the dishes, and whatever else it is that you need to do, but as long as your water pressure doesn't drop from your regular use, how big the pipe is doesn't matter to you, and it's not what you pay for.
Furthermore, if everyone in a city were to turn on their faucets, showers, and dishwashers, water their lawns, and flush their toilets all at the same time, the whole system would break down and no one would get an acceptable level of service. That's because while the water company gives each customer the ability to use water at some rate X, they don't have the ability for all of their customers to use X amount of water at the same time . They give you a nice big pipe for your convenience, but the health of the system depends on the fact that while you use all of that water some of the time, most of the time you're hardly using any at all. Statistically, only a certain fraction of the people in a city are placing a demand on the water supply at any given time, so they can get away with the fact that the aggregate capacity is less than the sum of the individual capacities that they offer to each customer.
With ISPs, it's fundamentally the same. You and all of your neighbors may have a 20Mbit/s downstream available to you, but if all of you were to use 20Mbit/s at the same time , then somewhere upstream of you, a link would become saturated, packets would start to get dropped, and throughput would drop like a stone, and none of you would receive acceptable service.
The reason your monthly usage enters into this is statistics. After all, figures like "20 Mbit/s" and a figures like "250 MB/month" are in commensurate units. 20 Mbit/s equates to about 6.25 TB/mo. If you use 20 Mbit/s 100% of the time, you will accumulate 6.25TB of usage over the course of a month. If customers use less than 6.25 TB per month, then they must be using 20Mbit/s less than 100% of the time , which means that (through statistical tools) the expected peak load on the system is less than 20Mbit/s/customer. In fact it's possible to model distributions of usage among customers (taking into account different habits of different classes of users, daily and weekly variations in usage, and other details that I haven't had time to treat here) and graph a direct functional relationship between the "per month" demand of the average user and the "per second" amount of bandwidth you need to buy from upstream to satisfy constraints for acceptable service (like <X% packet loss, <X ms average latency, etc.). |
Yes. There are conceivable a great many different approaches to computation. How arrogant is one to be if one thinks that consciousness isn't reducible to one or more of those computational forms. Your Von Neumann device probably isn't going to do it for ya, there, but perhaps a less classical approach to quantum state computing might enable your consciousness to become a kind of localized "superstate"? who knows! |
Foreword: I hate myself for replying to your inane list of replies that quotes my every sentence just to put them out of context of their paragraphs. Reply to paragraphs.
If you had any reading comprehension, you'd know that my saying "Next thing I know you're gonna say the Nazis were fucking right" implies that I think the Nazis were wrong because they disregarded ethics and morals in their actions, thus "ethical implications" are relevant, which is at odds with the comment that spawned this fucking wall of text.
My point about Nazis being people and not interstellar gamma rays is that people who kill other people because those people belong to a different ethnicity are worthless cunts. Gamma rays who kill other people are a force of nature, thus, no people can be claimed responsible. (I know that current society can blame leaders for "not protecting" them, but that's a different sort of thing)
You did. You said the Nazis were neither right or wrong, but the nazis gassed people in concentration camps. Thus you implied that gassing people in c.camps is "neither right nor wrong". Of course, you also implied that everything else the Nazis can be blamed for is neither right nor wrong.
No, it does not depend on what you're trying to judge. The act of judging something is inherently subjective. Thus all actions taken by other sentient beings(i.e. humans only, at this point) can be judged. If I'm crazy I can even judge non-sentient things, like kicking a cat for stretching my furniture, or God for not granting my prayers or a tsunami for fucking happening.
It's relevant by pointing out that any behavior can be reasoned away with "logical argumentations" because "logical argumentations" are as malleable as the belief systems they're based on. Thus logically argumenting your behaviour does not make your actions "neither right nor wrong". It merely establishes that your actions are considered "right" from your viewpoint. If they weren't "right" you would not consider them logical. If you think this is a false dychotomy, you're welcome to give examples or "neither right nor wrong logically argumented actions". |
So I made an overnight prototype of this about 2 years ago as a side project from my day job. It has since grown into a startup and I'm proud to be associated with a great team. We have been working very hard the last few months to build a beta search and analysis tool and to show off a good public sampling of the capabilities of the platform we have developed. We hope to gain some exposure to secure second round funding for upcoming offerings and some commentary we need to improve.
It still has some rough edges which we very much hope you all can help us work out. As we obviously want to monetize parts of our platform in time, we want to listen to the community to create the best tool possible. To that end, we have already open sourced some of the libraries behind Tawlk via and we welcome any contributions or forks. We very much believe in the "Open source -Almost- Everything" model.
Also worth nothing about this demo, is that to make good use of our current limited server resources and to avoid hitting API and CPU limitations, we are utilizing many relatively new techniques including combinations of WebSockets, HTML5 localStorage, HTML5 App Caching, and direct browser-side data collection to make it work.
I hope you find the beta interesting and intuitive. I look forward to your comments or questions.
If you find bugs, please screenshot them with steps to reproduce so they can be taken care of quickly and please be nice to our servers :-) |
I guess I'm just mad about this because of the implications it has for people who live in these areas. Some people go home to these neighborhoods, some people even like their homes in these areas but it feels kinda shitty when someone tells you they're afraid to walk around in your neighborhood, when it's something you do every day. When people have the image of 'ghetto' being a place where menacing people live and kill each other every day it's a pretty gross generalization where you associate a neighborhood with pure evil and a place you'd rather just pretend doesn't even exist, when there are many many good people and families who live here and get by but often their lives are ignored by the rest of society because they live in a place most people think is nasty. |
Before we get into this, it's worth noting that, while non-Hispanic whites have neither the [highest educational attainment]( out of all ethnic/racial groups nor the [highest average salaries]( they do have the highest employment rates [with]( college degrees and the [lowest poverty rates]( at 10.6% as of 2010. It is worth noting that, for whites, skills and education underpredict employment and overpredict poverty in the United States compared to every other race. Which means it's kind of inaccurate to use them as a comparison just because they're the majority.
> Hispanics are 3.3 times more likely to be in prison than whites; they are 4.2 times more likely to be in prison for murder, and 5.8 times more likely to be in prison for felony drug crimes.
That's cool and all, but...
> Research on sentencing decisions in which incarceration is an
option suggests that discrimination occurs in some cases. For example, black and Hispanic
males who are young and unemployed have been incarcerated more severely than similarly
situated white males, even when severity of the offense and criminal history were taken into
account (for reviews, see Kansal 2005; Spohn 2000).
You said:
> Hispanics drop out of high school at three times the white rate and twice the black rate.
You're ignoring that, according to your own chart, the drop-out rate for 3rd generation immigrants is half that of their grandparents and nearing that of blacks.
But about that...
> [65.4% of households in which family members report having specific learning disabilities have an annual income of less than $25,000 as compared with 38.8% of the general population.](
And...
[This study]( shows evidence that low income and learning disabilities interact positively to increase the likelihood of dropping out of school.
Which makes this...
> 60% of adults with severe literacy problems have previously undetected or untreated learning disabilities.(
Sound reasonable.
And then there's this...
> Sixty percent of teenagers who become pregnant are living in poverty at the time of the birth (Alan Guttmacher Institute 1994). More than 40 percent of teenage mothers report living in poverty by age 27 (Moore 1995).
Which is explained by this...
> [High rates of youth poverty precede high rates of teenage childbearing. Teens residing in communities with high rates of poverty, welfare use, and single-mother households are at higher risk for early pregnancy.](
You said...
> From 1992 to 2003, Hispanic illiteracy in English rose from 35 percent to 44 percent.
[And yet the rate of illegal immigration had been increasing dramatically until 2007.]( Incredible..
> The average Hispanic 12th-grader reads and does math at the level of the average white 8th-grader.
Would that be because of the high levels of non-English speaker immigration or the poorly-identified learning disabilities and lack of access to healthcare pursuant? Flip a coin.
But now there's [this](
We'll see what happens.
> At 43 percent, the Hispanic illegitimacy rate is twice the white rate and Hispanic women have abortions at 2.7 times the white rate.
Well...
> ...High rates of youth poverty precede high rates of teenage childbearing....
Of course.
Also:
> [ Difficulty with reading comprehension and following a systematic birth control plan are among the top reasons teenage girls identified for NOT using birth control aids.] (
Then you said:
> Hispanics are three times more likely than whites not to have medical insurance, and die from AIDS and tuberculosis at three times the white rate.
And...wow, Hispanics are not only almost three times as likely to be in poverty and three times as likely not to have health insurance and die from AIDS and tuberculosis at three times the white rate.
What. A. Coincidence.
> In California, the cost of free medical care for illegal aliens forced 60 hospitals to close between 1993 and 2003.
[Well, 78% of illegal immigrants are Hispanic.]( And they are usually poor...because it they weren't poor, they wouldn't be illegal immigrants . Most legal immigrants are middle-class or wealthier. |
Where's the |
I wish articles had |
What stuck out to me in this story is the fact that the dad went to the closest Target and started chewing out in the in-store manager, like that guy has any power over what coupons go out to what houses. Yes the dad had a right to be angry, but talk about taking it out on the wrong person. And because it's corporate that poor manager had to profusely apologize and take the ranting over something he has utterly no control over.
Many years ago I worked for a corporate restaurant and this older couple would come in several times a week. They asked for all this extra and special order stuff (they wanted their mashed potatoes on a separate plate because they were convinced the kitchen would give them more that way, for example), were generally rude, and always used a buy-one-get-one-free coupon at the end of it all, as the company was basically papering the city with those things. Their $35 somethingish check became around $17 and some change, they'd give you a 20 and tell you to keep the rest, an awesome 8% tip on the original total. So one night they come in, are their usual pain-in-the-ass selves, and at the end of it all demand to talk to a manager because they hadn't received a coupon on what had become an expected regular basis. The manager apologized and said that we had no control over how the coupons go out, that's all corporate headquarters, and she gave them all the information to contact them on the issue. They hemmed and hawed and basically were still expecting us to discount their check, which my manager thankfully refused to do. |
In 2008 another successful teleportation experiment was conducted by a team of scientists from the Joint Quantum Institute (JQI) at the University of Maryland.](
why do you need F |
And multitasking with great ease will probably be more important if a big part of your memory is externalized. We'd be retarded farmers compared to future teenagers. |
I think you're probably just falling for confirmation-bias. (the video proves what you already believe.)
You don't say what you're age is,.. but I'm gonna guess late teens or somewhere-20's. (fairly safe bet since that's the demographic of Reddit).
The type of relationship struggles you describe (people not knowing how to have healthy relationships) is fairly typical for that age,.. and you're going to find a higher sample size of humans who aren't yet fully sexually mature/experienced enough to know what's appropriate sexual behavior. |
I do several things to prevent such addictions...
First, I have sex with someone at least once as week. Usually more.
Second, I read erotic fiction instead of viewing porn most of the time.
Third, I utilize softcore images/videos sometimes.
Fourth, I explore fetishes, both with others and by myself.
Fifth, I utilize sex toys.
Sixth, I utilize a variety of porn from various sources.
Seventh, I abstain from all sexual activity for several days.
Eighth, I actively rotate as to what I do to get off, utilizing the above. |
Most of them are somewhat attractive. Some of them are definitely not.
Don't get me wrong. If the ones I found attractive wanted to sleep with me, I'd... Hmm. I'd actually be strongly conflicted. Some of my closest friends have been torn apart because they tried dating each other. Though I know my dick would want to get all up in that.
But anyway! I didn't start hanging out with them because of how they looked. There are much more "attractive" females that I could go for if that were what I was looking for. Nope, I started hanging out with them cuz they were fucking hilarious. And kept hanging out. And though I'd enjoy the prospect of sleeping with them, it would be a side benefit. Not a main benefit. |
Someone want to |
Actually, the single hardest thing for intelligence services and law enforcement back in the old days was tracking people's social networks - it was trivial to bug a phone or intercept e-mails, but building up a comprehensive picture of "who knows who, and how do they know them" was all but impossible, requiring months or years of close scrutiny and surveillance and guesswork.
The FBI, NSA and other agencies spent literally millions on enormous computing clusters designed to trawl through data and draw probabilistic conclusions and hypothetical social networks for people of interest - guesswork, but at least a starting point for extensive, time-consuming further investigation.
Then one day sites like MySpace and Facebook began popping up, and all of a sudden people were falling over themselves to provide this information, voluntarily and authoritatively, and in a handy database format that could be subpoenaed or otherwise accessed and queried at will.
I've read interviews with intelligence analysts who described the advent of Facebook et al as being "like Christmas". |
Watson couldn't distinguish between polite language and profanity
That's because words are just words. They're not inherently good or evil, they're just things that have some definition. If you understand a sentence, then the words inside it were chosen correctly. This fact about Watson really illustrates why it's so absurd for people to get bent out of shape from hearing particular words being used. |
Exactly. In a language where there is no concept of subroutines, GOTO is the only way to control logic flow. All "modern" languages now compile/interpret down to either assembly or some sort of byte code that really all translate into JUMPs or GOTOs. |
Yes, it is a form of an AI but it does not "understand" the meaning of the information in its memory. So it's not "intelligent" in the sense that we usually mean.
The programming is "really good". Its parallel processors look for "answers" that are "close to" the "question". Yeah, that's a lot of quotes, because the terms don't mean what they normally do.
"Close to" is most likely something along the lines of "the minimum cosine difference distance in a lower dimensional vector space". There's a lot of matrix math involved.
"Question" and "answer" would both be vectors in that lower dimensional space.
"Really good" is that there are parallel processors, running several different prediction algorithms, and for each algorithm, several versions (with different values of some constants, like the actual number of "lower dimensions"). |
I once wrote a script that used a dictionary I found online to generate random titles and descriptions for products on a test website.
The stuff it came up with was magical. In about 1000 products, I saw tons of swear words of course, which lead me to finding a dictionary of curse words. This is how I learned the term twat waffle.
Even after the filtering, there were still phrases that are clean initially but when combined aren't, eg. blue waffle. |
This is true only because windows 8 has no new features worth mentioning. The market hasn't changed. People would still buy a new computer if they were getting something out of it, but with win 8 they aren't.
Win8 is just a half thought out strategy to get into the tablet market. All they did was make windows not-unusable on a tablet. It gives you no reason to buy a windows 8 desktop if you have win7 and no reason to buy a windows 8 tablet over any other tablet, for that matter. |
Really solid reply. I was initially replying to the split between retailer, publisher, and dev (and also first party whom a lot of people forget). Looking at how the industry works financially, that particular split isn't feasible. Devs tend to get a lot of support on reddit, many times without the recognition of the value publishers bring to the industry. Having worked in the industry for close to 10 years now, I can tell you that publishers are as important in delivering content to the masses as any dev.
In reference to your point, I tend to agree. Used game retailers and pubs/devs have long had a tenuous relationship. On the one hand, pubs/devs need retailers to get their products to consumers and retailers need new games to support their bottom line. Notice how purely used game retailers don't exist. On the other hand, retailers make a ton of money off of used games, not one penny goes to pub/dev. This obviously gives retailers the advantage, and is something that has generated a lot of resentment towards used game retailers among pubs/devs, Gamestop in particular. However, what we're seeing now is the advantage shifting towards pubs/devs for two reasons.
1) The casual market has shifted from the Nintendo products to mobile products. The Wii made gaming accessible to all groups of people, not just "gamers". However, the rise of mobile gaming due to the proliferation of powerful smartphones and tablets have essentially taken Nintendo's audience away from them. Not so coincidentally, the fall of Nintendo coincides almost exactly with the rise of mobile gaming. That's a huge revenue stream that Gamestop will never see.
2) The second reason is consolidation among core games due to high production costs and diminishing returns. 5 years ago, the gaming market was strong enough to support midcore type games. Games that were created for a relatively efficient spend, with efficient marketing, and decent sales. Those games are gone. You can't make a title that will be appealing to consumers for under $25 million. Add another $10m in marketing, plus another $7m to 1st party and retailers, you're talking about a significant and improbable financial hurdle. As much as gamers bitch about why people don't just make "good games" or "games for me", the simple reason is because people won't buy it in sufficient volume. Again, another revenue stream lost to Gamestop. That's not to say mid-core gaming is gone, but when it comes back, it'll be geared towards tablets, not consoles. |
I don't think its as simple as conformity equals higher values. Yes that plays a role, but I think it plays a role different than what your are suggesting.
The conformity you are looking for is with the market. Houses in a home owner association follow strict rules in order to make all the houses in the neighborhood desirable. If you know the neighbors are going to take care of their property then you are willing to pay a little more for a house, than if you were buying next to a person that paints their lawn hot pink. Unless you really like Barbie, but lets assume the market in general doesn't like Barbie.
Now, what if the HOA required everyone to have pink lawns? Sure there would be conformity within the neighborhood, but the market in general hates Barbie, so the values of the homes are not increased by this type of conformity. Now, when people deviate to a traditional green lawn it doesn't automatically reduce the value, it actually increases. |
Because I, a human, said so, and as a species we can eliminate all life on this planet if we so choose. That is how nature works. The strong and dominant are just that, dominant. It is our planet because we can make it ours, end of story. When the fucking celery begins making bows and arrows, then we can talk. Why do I feel so self-entitled you ask? Because it is utterly ridiculous to believe that anything can possibly be more valuable than us. I have no feelings for inanimate objects or organisms that are not sapient (or at least sentient.) If it does not understand that it is even alive, then it won't know if it dies, and probably wouldn't care.
So why do I think it is not only acceptable but necessary to use and manipulate the environment around us to achieve our goals? Because nobody else can or will. And if nobody does, then nobody has truly appreciated it, sort of like a gift. This universe will die. Wanting to keep everything the way it is right now forever sounds great, but it's a pile of shit, here's why: When the end comes for our species, none of what was 'guarded' would have ever truly been appreciated, it would have gone to waste. Because we did not experience it. |
And wearing a hoodie, and driving a van, and paying in cash, and using a VPN, and being a Christian, and being libertarian, and [a bazillion other things]( |
If you read the bill youll see that all the oppositions concerns are addressed in it. Most importantly it has a provision that the government can not use personally identifiable information and it defines exactly what information can and cannot be shared.
1104.(C)'(4)PROTECTION OF SENSITIVE PERSONAL DOCUMENTS- The Federal Government may not use the following information, containing information that identifies a person, shared with the Federal Government in accordance with subsection (b):
`(A) Library circulation records.
`(B) Library patron lists.
`(C) Book sales records.
`(D) Book customer lists.
`(E) Firearms sales records.
`(F) Tax return records.
`(G) Educational records.
`(H) Medical records.
1104.(h)`(4) CYBER THREAT INFORMATION-
(A) IN GENERAL- The term cyber threat information' means information directly pertaining to--
`(i) a vulnerability of a system or network of a government or private entity;
`(ii) a threat to the integrity, confidentiality, or availability of a system or network of a government or private entity or any information stored on, processed on, or transiting such a system or network;
`(iii) efforts to deny access to or degrade, disrupt, or destroy a system or network of a government or private entity; or
`(iv) efforts to gain unauthorized access to a system or network of a government or private entity, including to gain such unauthorized access for the purpose of exfiltrating information stored on, processed on, or transiting a system or network of a government or private entity. |
so you can be super hipster now with all the other camera features, like black and white and sepia (!!!), but the one thing i've suggested still hasn't come out, which would be a timer for the camera. Neither my girlfriend nor I have a digital camera, and having a timer would be awesome for pictures of us when no one is around or available to take our picture. wtf apple. |
I am not saying they are evil if they don't do anything.
Again: IMHO, all these companies have to comply with local laws, whatever they might be. It happens that the US seem to have a rather discutable one which forced these firms to provide some (or a lot of) information. It's not pretty, but it's probably not these firms' choice.
They will in the future have to ponder their transparency reports and shouldn't expect their users to trust them as much as they wanted to. But using these reports as a way to say that they never were instrumental in breach of privacies is fallacious. That's white-washing. |
Here's some reading:
[MI5 branded former communist Royle Family star 'a political thug'](
>In 1972, shortly after its formation, UCATT along with the GMWU and TGWU, two sister unions involved in construction and civil engineering, was involved in a major national joint industrial dispute. For the first time in the building industry, workers all over the country went on strike, demanding a minimum wage of £30 a week, along with a campaign to abolish the 'Lump Labour Scheme', which institutionalised casual cash-paid daily labour without employment rights. The strike took the form of a 12-week stoppage which affected many major sites, effectively forcing employers to negotiate.
>Unionised workers used flying pickets to seek support from workers on the lump. On 6 September 1972, UCATT and TGWU bussed members from North Wales and Chester to picket building sites in Shrewsbury. Despite confrontations with site management, the police made no arrests on the day.
>Five months after the strike, at a time when some of the strikers' aims had been largely settled, a number of building workers were investigated for acts of sabotage and vandalism during the dispute. Some of these were subject to high profile police investigation, under pressure from major contractors and politicians anxious to suppress the emergence of organised labour in the building industry. 24 building workers were convicted and six jailed as a result of their picketing activities. The longest sentences were given to Ricky Tomlinson, a plasterer and TGWU strike leader, and Des Warren, a steel fixer and leading lay official of UCATT, who became known as the "Shrewsbury Two". At Shrewsbury Crown Court, they refused to testify against fellow strikers. Charges of affray were dropped, but they were found guilty of "conspiracy to intimidate" under the Conspiracy Act 1875, which had not been used for 98 years. Warren was sentenced to three years in prison, and Tomlinson to two.
>The whole of the trade union movement saw common cause with the Shrewsbury strikers, and it was widely felt that the trial and prosecution had been a miscarriage of justice, based more upon industrial and political revenge from the Heath Government than sound principle.
>In the intervening years, Des Warren developed serious health problems, which his supporters attribute to overdoses of medication administered whilst in solitary confinement. Tomlinson, who went on to become a successful entertainer, took the case to the TUC Annual Congress with others in 1975, with little result. In 2004, Des Warren died without the pardon that various activists and trade unionists had campaigned for ever since.
>In 2012 Tomlinson and others sought to have the convictions overturned by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. |
It's also my opinion that fiber is going to be kind of a waste of money once 5G comes out.
If it follows in line with current technologies, such as 3G and 4G, higher bandwidth certainly doesn't mean lower latency. Imagine it in the sense of a delivery service. The delivery service might have invested in bigger lorries to deliver larger packages, but they still have to travel the same distance to get from the warehouse to your house. If you are using a technology such as the web, which splits resources over multiple requests, then things aren't going to load any faster than it already does with 3G. If you want to reap the benefits of 4G or this future 5G for the web, you'd either have to rewrite the web altogether, or do what Opera did, and implement a middleware which will fetch the websites for you and compress it into a single request.
Additionally, if you're using it on a mobile device, a radio transceiver is among the most battery-intensive hardware you have, usually second to the screen. That is why the transceiver is often turned off while not in use, and it usually takes over half a minute to turn it back on again. |
Ahaha, no. Absolutely not. Dedicated, isolated communication channels such as fiber or cable are always superior in reliability and bandwidth to wireless communications. Wireless communications utilize a shared channel that is subject to limited bandwidth, fading, multipath, interference, blocking, etc. The base stations are connected by fiber anyway.
Also, there has been some mention of latency. Time of flight latency in wireless networks is not significantly greater than for wired networks. However, contention in the shared channel as well as sources of interference and loss generate retransmissions. These are a much larger source of delay and these basically do not exist in dedicated links. |
I think along with the 'UpVote' - 'DownVote' system. There should be a 'Cheer' and 'Boooo!' system. To initially clarify public feelings, as well as its relevance to the /r/. Of course that is what the comment sections are for, but there are still the |
I find interesting that you argue (correctly) that there is no one person behind this. But then you seem to imply there is a unified, concerted desire to corrupt this.
Sadly it's the opposite, governments always want to do the greater good, but in their disorganization sow corruption, slowness and the complete opposite of which they which to achieve. It's a basic human nature, good dead paving the way to hell and all that. Sadly there's [mathematical theorems]( that could imply that you can't ever have total, perfect order, you need chaos and destruction, and no one has ever even considered a government that wasn't the complete opposite of it.
I agree with you the governments will turn against people. It's not that power corrupts, it's not even that absolute power corrupts. But power attracts the people who love power, and corruption is nothing but a trick to gain even more power. Power attracts the corrupt.
The US has especially had a serious case of this. As a foreigner living in the US I've noticed the ego-centrism here being huge. It feeds into so much, the paranoia and fear feed of the belief that anything bad that happens to you HAD to be by someone specifically against YOU (what else would anyone else care about more?). If the world turns around you, of course anything bad is directed intentionally against you.
NOTE: I'm not saying YOU or any individual are like this, but when you aggregate everyone you get this kind of attitude. (Like no one really has 2.2 kids, that's impossible)
The problem is that because of that you see the problem as someone else. You assume that the problem is that someone is evil and is trying to hurt you intentionally. It might be democrats, it might be republicans, it might be the government, it might be Christians, it might be black people, it might be the intellectuals, it might be Mexicans, it might be Muslims, it might be the Chinese, it might be the ignorant, maybe it's a mix or all of them. See you assume that these persons are the cause and they wish to be.
If we only sit back and see it openly, no one wants things to go as they are happening right now. But good intentions rarely work the way they're supposed too (as you might have guessed I'm extremely wary of good intentions, and generally avoid people with a lot of good intentions). See everyone thinks they are doing the best solution. Or justifies that they never really had a choice (it was that or starve) no one really thinks themselves evil.
So you are like the government: implying that social welfare is about controlling people (which history shows the opposite: the less welfare the more oppression). You also claim that the US should give less benefits, when it is the country with the least benefits given to people (no social medical care, wages way below living rates, abusive work schedules that take over your life), seeing history it shouldn't surprise us that the US is also a country that is being pushed into a more domineering country as it goes.
But you would probably argue for more freedom and less regulation of companies. Which is also where we are going, and what promotes the government to grow so much. You, without knowing it, are promoting the growth of the government.
And you, with your good intentions, extend your power all the time, and with good intentions you do the whole set-up for the same problems all the time.
And so do I, I abuse power and constantly feed of it. And just like it's hard to live with barely enough food to make it by, it is with barely enough power.
I am part of the problem, aren't I? I am guilty seeking safer places, and would pay extra for a neighborhood were the police gave more patrols (isn't that me begging for more government with my money?). I promote checks and controls for the government, that make it like a snake that feeds on itself and always grows bigger. I constantly scream against injustices in the world, is that not pushing for a bigger international influence? And as the UN shows, influence with no military power is little influence at all. So I am promoting the military-corporate complex.
See we are looking for people to stop, we think there is few people behind it and that stopping them will solve the problem. Sometimes we find leaders and kill them and are surprised when 5 more pop-up. It almost seems as it's human nature, as if civilization were mere weak scaffolding that supports the delusion of greatness when we are really just animals in the mud. And that's the thing: we are, and we can't change human nature that easily.
But we can make the scaffolding better. We can change the way we treat ourselves and our government. But that means some more drastic changes in the system, and an objective look into ourselves. I don't think I know how to do it, but I believe that there are still people working on it. |
Well when you have one single application server that might be true, but if you want to use auto-scaling for example, you may have servers starting and stopping regularly. Though where exactly the SSL would come into play would be dependent on the how the app was designed, and only the web-facing load balancers may deal with it so that could make my argument moot... |
That's not how the science works.
The stream cipher used in PFS is generated from a PRG which culls it's random pool from the massive amount of entropy generated by Google's servers. Even Google itself cannot crack it's own implementation of the cipher. And btw if we are talking 256 bit encryption, then nobody on earth can crack it.
I am a bit of an industry insider when it comes to netsec and I can assure you that Google has been working for years to develop measures that are far beyond the abilities of any proposed system including quantum systems (of which Google has the first actual quantum computer).
Lawful or otherwise, the math dictates the reality of the system. They use Intel entropy systems that rely on the random propagation of electrons through a semiconductor which they cannot predict nor monitor. The "tap" in this system would require hundreds of thousands of specialized taps to be integrated into their server chipsets... which would cost billions and require complete redesigns and redeployment of their hardware. |
Electrical engineer here. The Register article glosses over some very important points:
The transmitter is obviously using very tight beamforming so the inverse square law is a lot less useful. You can't use the physical distance to the transmitter to calculate the r in 1/ r ^2 unless it's a point source and that's not the case here.
As far as I can tell they aren't operating on the 2.4GHz band (all their patents are for beamforming at 5.8Ghz) so the 4W EIRP max is irrelevant, and even if they were that 4W isn't the statistic that would determine how much power they could emit.
As far as I can tell from the [FCC regulation 15-407.3]( it's perfectly clear that the limit is 1W in the 5.8GHz space.
>(3) For the band 5.725–5.825 GHz, the maximum conducted output power over the frequency band of operation shall not exceed the lesser of 1 W or [something irrelevant]
The real important information (which the company conveniently doesn't release) is the antenna performance information. If we knew how the transmitter and receiver behaved even in broad terms you could determine everything about the system.
If you make wildly optimistic assumptions about them (30dBi transmitter, 15dBi receiver) you can [work out]( that they'd have to push 17.3W of power into the transmitter to get 1W at 10 feet assuming perfect antenna alignment.
Take it as you will. They could still pull it off by some miraculous antenna but the narrower the projected beam the harder it is to track objects, and I have extreme doubts they can manufacture a 3,000 transmitter active phased array at a price a normal homeowner could afford. |
Why won't it work? Mostly fundamental engineering reasons...
Splitting the motherboard into so many pieces, and adding adjoining connectors/plastic cases/a sandwich plate, is bulky even if done optimally. The phone would be much chunkier than current smartphones.
Having a universal pin bus connecting all the parts is a NIGHTMARE. Some components communicate at low speed, some at very high speeds. Some need to transfer large amounts of data in a burst. Many of them need to operate concurrently. Low connector pin count, high bandwidth requirements, variable clock speeds between devices and high concurrency on a single bus... this would be a major speed bottleneck.
In the end, you're not going to get much use out of having such a high degree of component separation. Smartphone components are effectively out of date (not broken, just obsolete) in a few years anyway, so you're not saving all that much money unless you're okay with a dinosaur phone.
There are many more engineering problems, cbb listing them all, it'd take several screens of text.
A much better solution to the problems this phone is meant to address would be:
1) use something closer to a standard smartphone body, but make it super easy to swap out the memory (most common upgrade), screen (most common breakage) and battery. Not hard to do.
2) instead of having a mess of tiny bloks, have just one detachable block, an all-in-one peripherals unit. That way you can do sane things like put them all on one PCB and interface with a high-pin-count, high-speed bus. The device could still be built within smartphone dimensions. Third parties could manufacture peripheral blocks: a traditional general-purpose smartphone peripherals unit; a sweet-camera-and-flash unit; a bus pirate with a few wire hookup points; a high-powered communications block; etc. |
Well this will just make the safety announcement 2 minutes longer. You may use approved electronics devices like cameras , laptops but no cell phones, unless they are on airplane modem data shut off or no cell communication :)
Here is the kicker, people rarely know about airplane mode we know, we are on reddit, but most people don't, and now they are allowed to keep they phones up playing a game or taking a picture, which before the rule the flight attendants would spot a phone and say shut off not matter what, now they won't say anything, o say is it on airplane mode? Which people will say yes |
One time I had an urgent message I was trying to send off. We were still at the gate and the door of the plane was just closing so I attempted to quickly type it out and turn the phone off. The VERY huge and muscular man sitting next to me started commanding me to turn it off and when I didn't he then began yelling loudly as if he were my father. I obliged because I was afraid he would turn my head into a smashed can of tomatos. The rest of the flight was akward silence. |
One time I was on a plane and a pilot sat next to me (not this plane's pilot obviously). He was young (30ish) and was tapping away on his phone and listening to Kid Rock loudly on his headphones. He was whispering the lyrics under his breath. It was pretty funny. After the flight attendant came on and asked us all to put our devices away, he kept texting and listening. Plane took off....still texting and listening. He kept texting until we got up to a certain altitude where he couldn't get signal. Also, while we were still ascending, he unbuckled and walked up to the bathroom. And THIS is why I don't give a flip about these rules. |
Even more, GM has a bizarre split personality in some ways where genius engineers are forced to implement stupid decisions by the suits higher up. The Chevy Volt is a really good example of this. When it was announced 5 years ago, I was REALLY excited. I've wanted a plug-in range-extended electric vehicle for a long time. If you ask anyone who has a Nissan Leaf, the reliability of the vehicle is off the charts. Almost nothing can go wrong with a truly electric drivetrain, the Leaf just goes and basically all you have to do for maintenance is rotate the tires and then swap out the battery at 100,000 miles. Yes, that's not cheap, figure around $5,000 after trade-in. But, once you swap it, you now have a virtually NEW car. There's no transmission at all (just a fixed ratio reduction gear set that never shifts) so the main "high-mileage breakdown" concerns like replacing the transmission or having major drivetrain issues or an engine rebuild simply don't exist in electric vehicles. They last for ridiculously long lifespans, you can buy one and expect to drive it for 500,000 miles as long as you don't crash it, just replacing the $5,000 battery 5 times.
The Volt was SUPPOSED to be that with the simple addition of a gas engine/generator module that would produce electricity to give you unlimited range. You'd primarily use battery power for efficiency, but could make more whenever you needed more.
Then it's like some suits at GM said "wait a minute, this is FAR to reliable and long-life of a design! We NEED to complicate this immediately" so they physically integrated the gas engine with the rest of the drivetrain. So it was released with an insanely complex planetary/sun gear transmission system that is only warranted for 100,000 miles. (At first people think "great, that's better than the usual 60,000" but they are not grasping that this drivetrain is FAR more complex than a gas car.
Anyway, I'm waiting for the BMW i3 since they are releasing as a truly battery/electric drivetrain vehicle (exactly like the Leaf) that has an OPTION for a range extender module that will fit in a reserved space under the hood. (It's actually a BMW motorcycle engine with a generator.) So the BMW will probably last 500,000 miles, only need battery replacement 5 times like the Leaf, and (this part is fun) if you do have a problem with the gas module, you can drive in electric mode to the dealer, have them pull the module out, then drive away in electric mode for however many days they need to fix it, then drive back and have them put it in.
Point is, GM could have released exactly that two years ago. But apparently because of a "wow, our dealers will be furious that there is no maintenance and even more furious that it lasts haf a million miles" concern, they built it in an insanely complex way. GM takes an absolutely ingenuous idea: "let's make a car like the Leaf but add a range extending module" and then completely blows it. Apparently for "planned obsolescence" reasons. It's just absurd.
The only THEORETICAL argument in favor of what they did with Volt is the idea that turning gas into electricity then into motion is (at a purely mathematical level) less efficient than turning gas directly into motion. True, but we don't live in a lab. We live in a real world where the total lifespan of the car is radically more important to me than a "in theory this provides some tiny percent improved mpg in the (ironically quite rare...) occasions you are running in gas mode."
Seriously, GM found the most intelligent and sophisticated way to implement to most idiotic and overly-complex design you could have imagined. That's why I'd rather drive something from Google. They don't have 50 layers of management at odds with each other. They don't have a dichotomy between "do we make the customer happy with a long life vehicle or do we make the dealers happy with a short one." |
Easier said than done. Writing the self-drive software from scratch is a mindbogglingly complicated undertaking that requires some of the most talented developers in the world. It's highly unlikely GM has any managers who know where to find these people, how to interview them, and how to convince them to work at GM when Google is offering more money, better perks, better location, etc.
Assuming they are able to build a team capable of delivering such a system they now have to make it happen. This requires project managers, dev leads, testers, integration specialists, etc. Now go hire all of these people.
Finally, you need management who actually believes in the project and is willing to let it be run by the people who know what they're doing. GM has a history of mismanaging itself into the ground. Do you really expect them to stand on the sidelines while the new talent takes all the glory?
(Note: I made many references to GM but that could easily be replaced with Ford or any other car company) |
The idea is that there will be fewer cars in existence at any given time because each car is being used constantly and to maximum efficiency. Cars will hit half a million miles in a few years and hit the end of their useful life (something few current cars achieve).
Think of it this way. The human population has X miles that need to be driven per year. Those X miles are spread out over Y cars and most cars achieve an average of 150,000 miles before their lifespan is up (pulling that number out of my ass, assuming scrapped wrecks and shitty 90's GMs that fall apart at 80k).
With self-driving cars, not everyone owns a car, because not everyone needs to drive all the time. Let's say the number of cars are cut by 2/3. Each of these cars gets to 500,000 miles before getting scrapped, thanks to fewer accidents, standard maintenance, and much less inactivity (which is pretty bad for cars). All the driving is being done by these cars. The same number of miles are being driven each year, but they're being driven more efficiently by cars that are using significantly fewer resources per mile (in terms of fabrication), regardless of how many years it takes them to hit their limit and get scrapped. |
Maybe if we stopped bailing out quasi-obsolete companies because people would lose their jobs, and also stopped getting in the way of technological innovation, we could have self-driving cars.
But I guess people don't get that ex-GM workers could build the self-driving cars for google. |
Laptops are one area where Apple can do really well, because there is no standardized form factor nor is there a large consumer market for individual components.
Apple differentiates itself from the competition through the use of a lot of gimmicks: early adoption of draft wireless standards (802.11ac) long before there is a large market for compatible devices, early adoption of hardware interfaces (Thunderbolt), as well as putting a lot of focus into aesthetics and shrinking sizes.
When you ask for a non-Apple laptop with the specs you provided (which are horribly incomplete, might I add) we come across a problem:
Most pre-built computer vendors select a particular build, offer very little variation, and mass produce that one build for a year or so before changing it. Finding an exact match is nigh impossible.
What you forgot to mention:
The only sub-$1000 laptop Apple offers is the 11" MacBook Air, and the actual battery life is up to 9 hours.
The actual specs for that unit are:
CPU: Unknown Haswell i5 @ 1.3GHz (probably the i5-4250U?)
RAM: 1x4GB DDR3-1600MHz
GPU: Integrated Intel HD 5000
Storage: 128GB SSD, unknown spec
Wireless: 802.11ac, unknown spec
2x USB3.0 ports
1x Thunderbolt port
Now, the biggest hurdle to overcome was finding something that supported both the draft 802.11ac standard and Thunderbolt. Outside of Apple, few companies offer Thunderbolt outside of their highest end models, and fewer still are willing to accept a draft standard before it is refined and finalized (remember how long it took for 802.11n?)
If you needed 802.11ac now , and you needed Thunderbolt, and it had to be under $1000, then Apple would be your only option.
However, dropping that sub-$1000 restriction opens up a world of Apple-crushing possibilities.
Here's an example... find me ANY Apple computer (that's including desktops) that can match or beat a 17.3" Sager NP9390 with the following specs, for under $2,500:
CPU: i7-4700MQ @ 2.4GHz
RAM: 2x8GB DDR3-1600MHz
GPU: GTX 780M w/ 4GB GDDR5
Storage: 256GB Samsung 840 Pro SSD + 1TB 5400RPM HDD
Wireless: Intel Dual-Band Wireless-AC 7260 (802.11ac)
4x USB3.0
1x Thunderbolt
1x eSATA
1x HDMI 1.4a
9-in-1 card reader
I'll actually save you the time: you can't. The 27" iMac is the only system Apple offers that can match the NP9390's GPU and beat its CPU, but then the NP9390 still has eSATA, HDMI, Blu-Ray read/write and a storage advantage over the over-budget, $2,600-as-configured desktop computer... not to mention that you can unplug the NP9390 and use it on the go.
The not-yet-released Mac Pro starts at $3,100 so it's out the door from the start. |
You know what's silly? Talking about CPU cores at all.
A core is not a core anymore and people should face it. Not too long ago everyone simply looked at the frequency of a CPU to say which one is better and it took a while for people to realize that multiple cores can, in some cases, mean better performance and in some cases not but it will make the overall experience of a desktop PC better.
And now that people look at the frequency AND the cores we shift away from knowing what a core is. On the bulldozer architecture there are some semi-cores which share some units with other cores and they share some memory with something and they are connected with something else. You simply can't say what a core is anymore because a processor becomes more and more complex and stuff gets mixed and melted together because that's how you improve your performance. |
Most useful and informative comment I found:
> [This graph is all post in the last year on /r/technology with "NSA" in the title or body and a karama break down by post.](
> It's... odd... there's definitely a noticeable change after 8/22/2013, after that date there is never more than 1 post on the same day, and rarely more than 1 post a week, and for 3 months not a single post stayed..
> I'm going dig a little deeper and see how the chart looks over more than just one year. If anyone's interested I [here's the excel file with this data and their respective links (1397460002951.xls)](
> edit: [here's the data on a non-logarithmic scale](
> edit 2: here's over a 6 year period: [Log]( and [Standard]( it's pretty clear they have "black out" days, where there's a surge of popularity there is also a total shut off for several days.
> For those who are curious about that lone towering 100k karma beast on 6/11/2013, [here's the link]( -but of course, who else would it be...
> edit 3: [I've made a gallery of different search term and their results](
> I've added a couple control groups so you can get a better idea of what uncensored post stats should look like.
> Interesting side note, I tried to use Tesla as a control but it looks like for a couple of months Tesla was throttled down completely as well, I can only speculate on what might have happened there.
> Regardless, it is very clear something is wrong. As /u/creq suggested, /r/technology started censuring post around august of last year, about that time all of the search terms on /u/creq list i've checked so far have disproportionately dropped off the sub.
> you're welcome to re-post [this gallery]( to what ever subs you think will leave it up.
> EDIT 4:
> [the program I used to check subreddits is now available for everyone to use]( |
I don't have the links handy to provide proof and evidence, but the gist of the situation is this:
/r/technology has/had a setup that caused AutoModerator to remove all posts with titles containing one or more of a list of banned keywords.
/r/technology's mods refused to release this list, even though everybody knew it existed and there was a pretty good understand of roughly what was on it.
/u/maxwellhill and /u/anutensil started being generally corrupt douchebags, including removing other moderators and going crazy on removing posts.
A lot of the lower section of the moderator team was revised, including a number of mods who resigned and a number of new mods who were brought on board.
Somewhere along the line, /u/anutensil got removed a couple times, but /u/maxwellhill put him/her back.
I think that's all the important stuff. Basically, |
Because the admins don't want to deal with mod-sovereignty. The feudal system of subreddit ownership puts the responsibility of upkeep on the mods, and in return the mods have almost total autonomy as long as they work within the confines of reddit's rules. The admins don't mess with subs as long as they're not breaking the rules or making the site look really bad. Admins only currently remove inactive top mods when it's requested by under-mods.
The thing is, I'd imagine the admins don't want to have to deal with every single cry of mod-abuse. If they were to step in now and remove /u/maxwellhill or /u/anutensil, they'd have to deal with every complaint of bad moderation. As it stands they don't have to deal with it. The policy now is to tell people "Go make your own subreddit if you don't like it." They don't want to give themselves the responsibility of ensuring good moderation, because it'd be a mountain of work.
So instead they've shown they'll now strip default status from subs with a bad moderation team. Like they did with /r/atheism, /r/politics, and now /r/technology. While that's a punishment, it doesn't affect the subscribers who are already there so much. |
It's more complicated than that. Half the mods of /r/technology didn't ever lift a finger for moderating. The ones that did wanted to be more strict on the political stuff, because this is about technology after all. Long story short, they used to automoderator more and more to be able to keep up, and wanted to add new mods to help them out. Max and anu ignored all discussion, any consensus reached by the active mods was revered without comment from max and anu, and when the active mods added new mods they where thrown out. So one of the active mods, after discussion with the others, threw out anu, on the basis that she just did what she wanted without consensus or discussion. Then permissions where taken away from the active mods, anu was readded, and some new mods from /r/worldnews were brought in. This is all just IIRC from reading some of the big posts from the people involved. |
Honestly at this point it seems like it would be best to trash this subreddit and start completely new. I just have horrible visions of cutting off this head, and two more grow back. But, because that is kind of an extreme solution, I say go for it, yes. |
Not sure what drama caused this. Never subscribed to this, it was just default. But people being "mods", or having "admin", and having a power trip is endemic on the internet in general. Reddit, game servers, IRC (admin pls!), etc. Tired of seeing posts on the front page about how /r/technology is going to hell. Don't involve me in your petty neckbeard drama. And don't ruin a good thing, usually that sub is the first place the entire web (world) hears about new, cool, and groundbreaking stuff. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.