Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:You cannot be surprised? (Score 1) 111

In the age of the internet, if you have to pay someone to sit you in a room and teach you like a trained monkey you have serious problems that go way beyond education.

I went to college to meet chicks.

"If you want to to get laid, go to college. If you want an education, go to the library." - Frank Zappa

"Where's the college library?"

Strat

Comment: Re:Turn it around: (Score 5, Interesting) 111

right to free speech does not mean a university has to provide the publishing infrastructure to make that speech.

But this isn't about publishing. This is about web access. What was your point again?

Also Fred Phelps is not a defender of free speech , he's a serial pest who harrases people at family funerals

The man is a freaking icon of free speech. Only hateful, harmful, ugly, disagreeable speech needs any protection in the first place. I can't think of a living speaker who offends my more than that guy has. If you don't support his right to free speech, you're simply unclear on the concept.

Comment: Re:The real crime here (Score 1) 413

by JesseMcDonald (#47732907) Attached to: 33 Months In Prison For Recording a Movie In a Theater

I don't think anyone here disagrees that what he did was wrong and he should be punished...

For what this person is accused of (distributing information contrary to censorship laws), even fines and community service would be disproportionately severe. Social responses are fine, up to and including complete ostracism—people have the right to do that anyway without any special justification. He can be barred from the theater, or even all theaters, if they so choose; if he agreed to a deposit or performance bond in exchange for his ticket then that would obviously be forfeit. However, as he has infringed on no one else's legitimate property rights, his own remain inviolate.

The proportional response for a deliberate violation of anothers' rights is that you lose any claim to those specific rights. The murderer forfeits his own right to life; the thief cannot complain when others take "his" property. The proportionate response to copyright infringement is merely that the offender can no longer claim copyright. But unlike self-ownership, and to a lesser extent property rights, copyright is asymmetric, favoring some and harming others. For most, giving up any claim to it is a reasonable price for not being subject to others' claims.

Businesses

When Customer Dissatisfaction Is a Tech Business Model 227

Posted by Soulskill
from the friendly-until-they-have-your-money dept.
jammag writes: A new trend has emerged where tech companies have realized that abusing users pays big. Examples include the highly publicized Comcast harassing service call, Facebook "experiments," Twitter timeline tinkering, rude Korean telecoms — tech is an area where the term "customer service" has an Orwellian slant. Isn't it time customer starting fleeing abusive tech outfits?

Comment: Re:A futile effort (Score 2) 81

by lgw (#47731405) Attached to: What's After Big Data?

It's like trainspotting, but for advertising memes.

Gartner is the king/pusher of course. But I think they were actually insightful about this 5 or so years ago. They predicted about 3 year of all hype, no product "cloud", another 3 years of practical, useful cloud infrastructure with nothing really taking advantage of it, and only after that would we see startups (and VC investment opportunities) making use of the cloud to make actual products. I think we're almost there.

Even for hobby programming, the cloud is becoming quite appealing. For example, take a look at this remarkable Mabdelbrot zoom to 10^275. This required 6 core-years to render (6 months wall clock). If you have the patience, the machines sitting idle (perhaps discarded bitcoin rigs) and no fear of power bills, then sure, turn on 3 old high-CPU towers for 6 months. But if you're good at massively parallel coding (and Mabdelbrot rendering is great to learn that!) you can usually get AWS Spot machines for under a penny per core-hour. That means you can get that 6 core-years of CPU for about the price of a midrange geek PC, and you can get thousands of cores in parallel, and be done rendering in a day.

For a hobby project it might be hard to justify spending $hundreds this way, but for a start-up it makes perfect sense. So there's something to the "cloud" IMO if you're trying to do supercomputer parallelism on a shoestring budget, something that's really only become possible in the past couple of years. I'm not sure how cheap 10000 core-hours for $100 is, really, but 10000 cores in parallel for an hour for $100 is something wonderful.

Comment: Re:Too much good content is deleted at Wikipedia. (Score 1) 236

by JesseMcDonald (#47730931) Attached to: Latest Wikipedia Uproar Over 'Superprotection'

I happen to think a notability test is a good idea, but not after one or more contributors have put significant effort into the page. The test should come when the page is first created; whoever thinks the page is notable should justify it (with references) subject to a general review. Once a topic has been accepted as notable, the contents and history of the page should remain online and open to the public indefinitely.

Comment: Re: yeah (Score 1) 334

by lgw (#47729139) Attached to: FCC Warned Not To Take Actions a Republican-Led FCC Would Dislike

Oh, don't be naive about the local governemnts though. This is a federal politician owned by Comcast standing up against local politicians who would like to receive large donations from a new utility company (or who have a nephew they'd give the business to, or whatever), since they held out for too large a bribe from Comcast themselves and came up empty.

But it's getting pretty crazy that the "last mile" isn't a public utility.

United Kingdom

UK Police Warn Sharing James Foley Killing Video Is a Crime 370

Posted by samzenpus
from the do-not-pass-go dept.
An anonymous reader points out that UK authorities have warned that sharing the video of the James Foley murder could lead to prosecution under anti-terror laws. Scotland Yard has warned internet users they could be arrested under terrorism legislation if they viewed or shared the video of James Foley's murder, as Twitter and YouTube attempted to remove all trace of the footage from the web. Twitter suspended dozens of accounts that published the graphic footage while YouTube tried to remove several copies of the video, which was first uploaded on Tuesday night. Twitter CEO Dick Costolo tweeted: "We have been and are actively suspending accounts as we discover them related to this graphic imagery. Thank you." The unprecedented social media clampdown came as the Metropolitan police warned that even viewing the video could constitute a criminal offence in the UK. The force said in a statement: "The MPS counter-terrorism command (SO15) is investigating the contents of the video that was posted online in relation to the alleged murder of James Foley. We would like to remind the public that viewing, downloading or disseminating extremist material within the UK may constitute an offence under terrorism legislation."

After an instrument has been assembled, extra components will be found on the bench.

Working...