1373 posts • joined 10 May 2011
Re: Televising courts
Another major problem in televising court cases is cherry-picking by the media. We all know the mainstream media have their own political agendas and biased reporting and selective coverage to present one side of the story is normal these days. So of course the MSM would leave out certain statements and replay others a dozen times, in the usual Trial By Media fashion.
If we allow this, then we have to add a stipulation that if a TV station wishes to broadcast a court case it must broadcast the ENTIRE hearing UNABRIDGED and UNEDITED. Otherwise we'll simply turn our justice system into a media-biased kangaroo court.
"I think that the wildly different content sought by searches for "Cat" and "Pussy" may be skewing the stats."
That may be true, but search engine analytics would be able to differentiate between searches for "pussy" by detecting whether the search is run with the family-friendly filter on or off...
"Australia's government is applying its customary confusion to the copyright debate"
There are times when I love our government for shit like this. As long as they are all running around like chooks with their heads cut off, none of this shit is going anywhere. It's only when they're all in agreement on things that we should start worrying!
I run Avast on my home PC and there is a simple way to stop the popup spam: set it to Silent/Gaming mode and leave it there. I've never seen a single advert or popup except for the once-a-year "you need to re-register" thing, at which point you just confirm your email address on the form and forget about it for another year.
"Of course, that contrasts with other ‘normal’ products; you can, for instance take a car you already own and use it in a movie without having to pay any more money."
Actually, you can't. Product placement in movies, TV shows and video games is subject to agreement with the brand or trademark owner. Car designs represent an intellectual-property factor as well. This is why you see notices in movie credits like "Vehicles provided by Ford" or similar, and why every single car you see in a movie (even ones incidentally parked or driving in the background) are all from the same manufacturer. It's why, when you see a movie character drinking a can of Coke, you can bet that Coca-Cola has had some say in its inclusion.
Any display, or even mention, of any recognisable product or brand name in a movie, TV show or video game, constitutes commercial use of that trademark, and if done without the trademark owner's permission, can render you liable for infringement action. This is why, for example, Quentin Tarantino uses his own made-up brands in his movies, like Big Kahuna Burger or Red Apple cigarettes.
Because of this, it would be almost impossible to make a live-action movie set in any inhabited area without inadvertently including a trademarked product or brand and thus having to contact the relevant trademark owners. CGI or animation is about the only way you could guarantee to avoid this exposure.
"I once found a slug in the office."
Does it talk?
Re: "...a well-educated populace..."
Upvoted by an Australian who agrees with you.
The fact of the people of this country willingly embracing the cloud wholesale, without any forethought or consideration of privacy, control of one's data, and the associated dangers, costs and consequences, show a distinct lack of education and a decidedly sheep-like follow-the-hype mentality indicative of your analysis.
Re: can I has all your data?
" If they remove the messaging feature from m.facebook.com then I think they'll lose a few customers, but they won't be bothered by it as the numbers will just be a drop in the ocean."
They probably won't lose any customers, since the advertising agencies that comprise Facebook's customer base aren't adversely affected by this feature change. However, Facebook may lose a fair few of the products they're selling to their customers...
Re: True, but
"What I don't understand is whether or not SQA is intended to replace the older radio telescopes."
There's also the question of instrument availability. There's already a queue a mile long of astronomers and related scientists waiting for time on the big telescopes, and this would be bottlenecked by pushing them all onto one instrument. Also, the SQA may be overkill for some projects, for which the Parkes telescope could be ideal, and shorten the queue by moving those scientists whose projects don't need the massive power of the SQA onto the Parkes dish.
"Would someone please post the "proper" heterogeneous mix"
Oh, that's easy: The "proper" mix in the "perfect" (read: politically correct) company is one whose board is entirely devoid of white males, regardless of what the race and gender mix actually is. As long as there are no white males.
After all, I'd love to see the gender and race makeup of the boards of, say, Huawei or Samsung or Aramco. I'd wager they consist mostly of Chinese, Korean, or Saudi Arabian males respectively. But notice how we're not seeing demands for more "diversity" on these companies' boards? Notice how it's only companies whose boards do consist mainly of white males who are being targeted? Nobody's harassing Samsung or Huawei or Mitsubishi or Foxconn or Aramco about the diversity of their boards. That's because they don't have any white males on them, so they're already politically correct.
Of course, I'll probably be accused of being a racist sexist bigot for pointing this out, but those who do so won't actually offer any reasoned argument as to why they think my perception of this is wrong.
Re: I'd also add...
"..a working magnetic core but I guess a little factor like that got overlooked in all the excitement."
And I'd wager a large moon is probably essential to the formation of said magnetic core. Note that of the terrestrials only Earth is equipped with a large moon to roil its interior with tidal forces and thus set up the conditions for the formation of a magnetic field. These tidal forces also create the conditions necessary for vulcanism and plate tectonics, both of which in turn maintain the carbon cycle and are also essential for life.
Without any large moons, Venus and Mercury lack these forces, and thus also lack the vlucanism and tectonics, and the magnetic fields necessary to protect life from solar radiation and prevent ablation of liquid water via solar wind.
If this is the case, then it's likely life-bearing planets are much less common than we might think, since besides being in the Goldilocks zone a planet would additionally need to have formed a large moon in a stable orbit to create the conditions required for life. And I would hazard that the number of terrestrials with large moons is significantly less than terrestrials in stars' Goldilocks zones, with the probability of both occurring being minute indeed.
...I cannot understand why it is correct for all your privacy to be invaded for a commercial purpose, but not by me to save your life.
Because, Mr. Irvine, despite your deceptive insistence to the contrary, your interest is not to save my life, your interest is solely to ensure my complete and unquestioning obedience to the letter of the law, regardless of how unjust, unreasonable or unfair that law may be. A society in which resistance to the established order is impossible is a society that has no need of freedom or civil liberties.
I thought this bullshit was covered
In movie and game credits towards the end there's a work-of-fiction disclaimer, usually something along the lines of:
"This is a work of fiction. All characters, places and events depicted in this motion picture are purely imaginary and no resemblance to actual events, places, or persons, living or dead, is intended or should be inferred."
or similar such wording. I have one on my own gallery to ensure people don't equate my pictures with anything in the real world. Do these disclaimers not carry any weight now? Do artists now have to make certain that their characters, places and events bear no resemblance whatsoever to anything or anyone in the real world? Because if this is passed, any form of creative expression other than the surreal or abstract is now dead, since it is not possible for any artist to vet their works against all 7+ billion people and the trillions of possible events in history to make sure there's no resemblance.
This shit needs to be stopped right now, otherwise we can forget any right of artistic expression.
Re: Yup.. rubbish permissions handling in Android
"MS specifically state that the location given is anonimised, but I am not sure how that makes sense if the app knows who you are."
It makes perfect sense, when you consider that MS is simply saying "It's anonymised" as placatory buzzword blurb intended only to allay your privacy concerns and get you to buy the product - or BE the product, as the case may be.
"Anonymised" doesn't actually mean anything to these people, to them it's just another meaningless buzzword that they've figured out that consumers like to hear, along with expressions like "scientifically proven" and "as seen on TV."
"arrange that hot date you've been dreaming of... Resembling the lovechild of a Dyson desk fan and a feminine massager... But at the price of about $500, your bank manager won't be too annoyed when you throw it out of the window."
And there I was thinking that someone had finally come up with a affordable and realistic latex-skinned robotic beauty that could BE the hot date I'd been dreaming of!
Oh well, guess I'll have to keep dreaming...
Re: Big deal
So by your reasoning, we should simply ignore every issue and problem in the world until the single worst one (as defined by you) has been solved, and thus resolve them one at a time in order of importance?
You are aware that there are enough people on this planet, that we can examine and solve multiple problems simultaneously, right?
Re: No surprise
"The legislation is appropriate. It's just the vocal minority that oppose it."
Ah, I seem to have found our phantom downvoter. I was wondering why the majority of comments in this thread all had a single downvote. Looks like that was you.
Funny how the self-righteous rationalise their bigotry by claiming their opponents are a minority. Some minority, when you felt it necessary to downvote nearly every comment in the thread. And that you also felt it necessary to hide your identity when expressing your opinion.
Re: Slowly slowly, little by little...
Anomalous Cowshed, I absolutely share your sentiments. So I fought back against this horrific future the only way I know how.
I refused to have any children.
that it's two women in a sexual harassment case. Who knows who's going to win this one?
If one of them was male - either the accuser or accused - it would be much more cut-and-dried: guilty by possession of a penis. But in this case the uncertainty is high enough that we could take bets on the outcome. Zhang or Shi? Boss or underling?
I'd probably put my money on Shi since allowing a defamation countersuit as a response to a sexual harassment claim would likely set an undesirable precedent in the eyes of the pro-feminist power base within the legal system.
In other words
VMWare have become aware of many Australian businesses' desire to avoid trusting their data to US hosted cloud servers, and seeks a way to sneak around this avoidance by "partnering" with Australian providers to create the impression that the data is hosted in Australia when there'll be a good chance it isn't.
Thanks but no thanks. I'll continue to run my own servers where I know exactly who has access to my data and where it's kept, thank you.
Re: Twelve o'clock flashers...
"...people too old to be able to work out how to program their VCR..."
Or, if they lived in Adelaide, people who got sick of resetting the clock all the time after the near-daily power cuts and dropouts that form a part of the backdrop of life in this benighted city.
"Judges be smoking crack"
Or collecting little brown envelopes quietly slipped through their mailboxes by Apple executives...?
Re: Her last film?
"Also check out her autobiography "My Head Whistles In a Crosswind"."
Fuck ya - you just made me snort coffee through my nose all over my keyboard.
Have a thumbs up for making me laugh so hard. I'm going to steal that line next time I need to insult someone's stupidity: "Heeelllloooo! Is your head whistling in a crosswind or something?!?"
"Then ask yourself if you own anything that old that's still working, never mind contactable after travelling more than 17 light hours through the radiation-wracked nastiness of space."
I still have my old Casio FX series pocket calculator from school from that era, sitting on my desk near the mouse. Still works too, after more than 3 decades. They certainly don't build them like they used to.
And while it hasn't endured the harsh conditions of radiation and space travel that Voyager has, it has endured the harsh conditions of my rotting-uneaten-lunch-and-leaky-cordial-bottle-toting schoolbag back then, and the coffee-and-Coke-spilled peril of my desk ever since - outlasting a few dozen keyboards in the process!
Re: Right to be forgotten. Absolutely.
What if you have a common name, like mine? There are over 240 people called "Steven Roper" in Australia alone (I was part of a survey some years back), any and all of whom could come up in a Google search of the name. I was surprised to learn a while ago that there's even a well-known American comic-book character with my name (Intrepid reporter Steve Roper and his sidekick Chief Wahoo) which will quickly dominate any search for it.
Which I'm actually quite glad about, since it makes it very hard for anyone to positively identify any search result with me personally, and gives me a nice level of plausible deniability should anyone decide to go digging up some dirt!
But in regard to this business of de-indexing my name, how would I tell Google which results relate to me, which to the well known doctor in America with my name, and which to the even better-known comic strip character? Do I have to supply every URL that contains the information I want removed? And if so, wouldn't I then be giving Google a list of everything I specifically want to hide?
Seems to me to be better if you just keep your mouth shut and ignore any detrimental references to your name on the internet. It seems better to keep the plausible deniability than to demand some dirt's removal and inextricably link yourself to it in some watchlist somewhere...
Re: Sahara etc
"Not sure about Australia."
Before European colonisation, much of Australia, except for the Nullarbor and inland deserts in the main body of the continent, was covered in eucalyptus forest, while the Murray-Darling Basin was mostly mallee. Mallee is a large bush or small tree, famed for its toughness and resilience, that in the wild forms an interlocked and impenetrable tangle of head-high scrub. Most of this was cleared for farmland during colonisation, although large swaths of it remain in places like the Sunset Country and Big Desert national parks.
Considering that mallee wood is as hard as steel and blunts axes and chainsaws with infuriating rapidity, clearing thousands of square miles of that shit was no mean feat!
We had two Muscovy ducks as pets when I was a kid back in the 70s. They were lovely as ducklings and we kids loved them. Then they grew up and covered the entire backyard in a 6-inch deep layer of duck shit, which Dad loved for the garden, until Mum slipped in it and hurt herself.
Whereupon the ducks were politely escorted off the premises and dumped in the Torrens to fend for themselves, since we kids refused outright to allow Dad to kill and cook them. A few months later, the Department of National Parks and Wildlife gassed all the feral ducks on the Torrens to allow the native species to return. So in the end they died anyway and we missed out on some roast duck for our sympathy!
I'd really like to rip these do-gooders a new one, but I'm currently suffering from rant fatigue and can't be arsed. Most of the regulars here know what my responses to this shit are anyway, and you've heard all the arguments before, so I'll just register my strong disapproval here and leave it at that.
Re: The most popular "bundled" software..
I classify Chrome as malware for exactly this reason. The only reason nobody rags on Google for this practice is because they're so big. Hopefully if CERT US have the authority or backing to take action on this underhanded and deceptive practice, that Google will also be targeted alongside the likes of Ask and Zango. They might even manage to get the practice made illegal. Hey, I can dream, can't I?
Re: Shocked FAA haven't been all over this or at leat updated their laws.
"Some law somewhere will be stuck to them with a nail gun."
Here in Australia, that would be the charge of "interfering with the operation of an aircraft", the same offence they slap the idiots who shine laser pointers at planes with. It's a terrorism-related offence, so getting slapped with that means you are in some very, very deep doo-doo.
"Frank Herbert's logorrhoeic idiot son"
Having read his extensions to the Dune saga recently, I have to agree with that assessment - in part. The three Butlerian Jihad books were pretty good, with just a few minor niggles (like the supernatural powers of the Sorceresses of Rossak.) Nor were the two post-Chapterhouse continuations too bad, although the final ending was a bit twee in a "happily ever after" kind of way. But the three House prequels set just before the events of Dune and the interquels were an atrocity. As far as I'm concerned, like the mythical Highlander II, they don't actually exist!
Re: If you can read it, you can copy it. End of.
This is exactly why DRM is snake oil, and those who sell it are the real thieves, not so much to us, the end-consumers, but to all the music and media companies they keep on selling the same lie to over and over.
In cryptographic terms, DRM is flawed because in any DRM scenario, Bob and Mallory are the same person. That is, in the usual cryptographic cast of characters where Alice, the sender, sends a message to Bob, the intended recipient and Mallory, the attacker, trying to intercept the message, DRM is treating the intended recipient as the attacker. But since Bob has to have the decryption key in order to read the message, it follows that DRM, by definition, is giving the key to Mallory to decrypt the message, since the recipient is ipso facto the attacker.
This principle is why DRM is a scam, no matter how the snake-oil merchants try to dress it up. Were I in power, I would have every staff member and shareholder of every DRM company arrested and charged with fraud for this reason.
Awwww, did I imply something bad about your idol and offend your delicate little PC sensitivities? Awwww, sowwy. Bless.
This is probably the most sensible post I've seen yet on the subject of feminism and misandry being used to incite rage and hate, and it's likely to remain so in the inevitable wave of bigotry and ranting that this thread is going to turn into.. Divide and conquer. Obviously the two brainwashed PC morons who downvoted you (as of this reply) lack the necessary brain cells to comprehend your point.
This is precisely why this hypocritical false "equality" exists - to enrage people and distract them from the real issue. White men are not privileged, any more than women or ethnic minorities are. The common PC furphy that because most privileged people are white men therefore all white men are privileged is the same as saying that because all boy-buggerers are gay therefore all gays must bhe boy-buggerers. What about privileged white women? Or privileged blacks - like Obama, currently the most powerful and privileged man on the planet? And what about all the "privileged" white men currently eating out of bins and sleeping in the gutters because they're so "privileged" they have no need of shelters, as women have?
I'll tell you what ALL privileged people have in common, and it's not gender, race or who they enjoy fucking. It's WEALTH and POWER. Nothing else. And they use this wealth and power to push bullshit like affirmative action and political correctness, pissing in the face of gender and race discrimination by doing so, for the express purpose of distracting the masses from the real issue, which is that 1% of the population controls 99% of the wealth.
Nowhere was this more clearly demonstrated than the undermining and eventual destruction of the Occupy movement. For a while, they were a real threat to the established order. They exposed the reality of the greed, hypocrisy and corruption of the ruling classes that make a mockery of the principles of democracy and freedom.
Then along came the feminists, anti-racists, and gay-rights activists. Funded and encouraged by the ruling elite, they flooded the Occupy movement with their gender, race and sexuality issues, effectively dividing it and distracting it from the real issue, which was, and has always been, CLASS. Not gender. Not race. Not sexuality. CLASS. And in so doing, they divided and discredited the entire Occupy movement in the eyes of the public.
Only when more people realise that affirmative action and its various supporters are being used as tools to disguise the real injustices of the world will those injustices ever be corrected. Playing hypocrite and fomenting hate as the IESF is doing here simply plays into the hands of the real criminals - those currently running every western nation.
I wish I could upvote you a thousand times. But alas, I have only one to give.
@Destroy All Monsters
More like, about time elected governments started roping in these parasitic money-grubbing corporations that think they're above the fucking law.
I believe the phenomenon you're looking for is something I call "rant fatigue". Any politically charged issue that incites people to post long internet rants on the topic eventually wears them out, so they give up trying for a while.
For example: Every so often, I find myself getting my knickers in a knot about feminism and misandry and the injustices visited upon men and so forth. To vent it, I go on an internet rampage, tearing into feminists and their supporters alike, composing and posting long missives concerning fallacies about male privilege, the gender pay gap myth, the hypocrisy of affirmative action, rant, rant, rant.
Then, when I've got it all out of my system, I find myself in a burnt-out state of mind where I simply don't care any more. I get to the point where I could read a blog entry by someone like Andrea Dworkin going on about how all men are rapists and child molesters and should be publicly castrated, and not give two shits about it. As to commenting on it? Fuck it, can't be arsed. Next site.
That mental state is what I call "rant fatigue." I've spent the last day or so ranting to strangers about my pet hate, and I'm too stuffed now to write any more about it.
In your scenario, it appears that the climate "deniers" charged in yesterday and burnt themselves out ranting about the evils of the climate change lobby - so the next day, all suffering from rant fatigue, they left the comments thread to the "believers" first.
That's my take on the subject, anyway.
Re: Can't see the gray area here
Glad to see Shakespearean euphemisms making their way back into modern jocular speech!
Re: Security Concerns
What's holding me back from giving a 3rd party all my data is the possibility of anyone rooting through it, state actor or no. That's why I would insist on all my data not being given to a 3rd party, and instead stored in-house on a computer under my control, where I can monitor and regulate any and all access to it. And that would make you think I'm not committed to data security?
"Real men", "man up"
AVoiceForMen has this to say about the kinds of manipulative scum who use these misandrist attacks to goad men into compliance with their schemes:
All your life you are told by others what it means to be a real man. And you are told how worthless you are if you don't measure up.
Just know this. Anyone, man or woman, sending you this message is trying to shame you into their service. They are manipulating you to carry their load, to take on their hardships; even to bleed and die for their cause... or their profit.
Don't buy the lie. No one but you can define you as a human being or measure your worth. Never trust anyone who puts an adjective in front of the word MAN.
No, we don't need to know everything our governments are doing in our name. We do, however, need to be able to know anything our governments are doing in our name. Transparency doesn't mean forcing everyone to constantly monitor governments' actions, it means having the ability to expose any action that people would have a good reason to object to.
You might not want to know the details, but those who have the means to stop the government from acting unjustly may need to know the details in order to prevent it from doing so.
Google, your megalomania is showing
"We want to just have a very consistent user experience, so if you have one TV in one room and another TV in another room and they both say Android TV, we want them to work the same and look the same."
Let me FTFY: "...we want them to work the same and look the same unless we, and only we, decide to change how it works."
What Google is doing is denying any design or creative input from any source other than themselves, as though only they knew how to design a user interface. It fits with the general mentality of micromanagement and absolute control that seems to be prevailing in corporate environments these days.
Re: While I may agree with many of your points,
"It's hackneyed to the point of uselessness, comes off as smug and superior, and turns away the very people you might hope to sway."
AKA "You catch more flies with honey than vinegar."
And it's amazing how many people these days forget this simple lesson. For example, I myself would probably be more supportive of the ideals of the various "equality" movements, were their proponents less disposed to snottily dismiss anyone who opposes them as an unenlightened overprivileged bigot, instead of logically explaining where they think the opponent is wrong. I wonder how much opposition to their causes results from this vinegar/honey effect, as opposed to genuine political disagreement with their ideas?
Re: I see
When I was a kid, an adult friend of the family once told me, "Everyone always has two reasons for doing anything: a good reason, and the real reason... So before you say yes to anyone, make sure you know what the real reason is."
Your post is a perfect illustration of that early life lesson!
Re: Slow on the uptake
"Next step: direct taps on the optic nerve."
Communal response: "We don't serve their kind in here. Your 'droids - they'll have to wait outside!" will extend to "cybers" as well...
Now maybe all those Brazilians will learn the lesson I learned
This is exactly why I no longer use any service Google provides, with the exception of the occasional search if I can't find what I'm looking for on DuckDuckGo (which is not often.) I learned that lesson with the demise of the iGoogle homepage.
My iGoogle homepage became for me a portal to the web. I had a news gadget, weather report, world clocks, currency converter, world sunlight map, dictionary/thesaurus, whois/IP lookup, and Wikpedia search all laid out conveniently in little boxes on my single home page. Then Google took it away, and I never found an adequate replacement; I feel to this day that the internet has taken a small step backwards for its loss. These days I just use the 9 preset 'quicklinks' Firefox displays when you open a new tab, to visit the sites that perform the equivalent functions, but it's not an adequate replacement for iGoogle.
But from this I learned the dangers of coming to rely on a service you do not control. It can be taken away, at any time, for any reason. This is exactly why I refuse to embrace cloud and SaaS - because it could be taken away at any time, and there's nothing you can do about it. Do all your graphics work in Adobe's Creative Cloud? Too bloody bad if Adobe shuts down or has problems. You lose all your work, everything. Keeping all your documents and reports on Office 365? Too bloody bad if Microsoft suddenly decides it doesn't want to provide the service any more. You lose everything.
And that is why I will now only work with software that is installed directly on my machine, that does not require any connection to the internet to keep working, has no expiry date or subscription-based bullshit, and saves its data only on my local drive.
So thank you Google, for teaching me this important lesson. I won't fall for that shit again.
"...but they keep electing stupid governments."
And in what way does that differentiate the people of WA from every other Australian state?
Re: According to other boffins, won't work
"None of the other places with big mountains have those mountains bordered by several thousand miles of ocean on one side and thousands of miles of low elevation flatland on the other."
Er... South America? Australia?
- Nokia: Read our Maps, Samsung – we're HERE for the Gear
- Kaspersky backpedals on 'done nothing wrong, nothing to fear' blather
- Episode 9 BOFH: The current value of our IT ASSets? Minus eleventy-seven...
- Too slow with that iPhone refresh, Apple: Android is GOBBLING up US mobile market
- NASA to reformat Opportunity rover's memory from 125 million miles away