"you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink (want a bet?)"
Short of violence and/or other behavior that most would consider animal abuse? Go figure that normal people exclude that as a valid solution to the 'problem'.
"doesn't have the horse sense to stay out of the rain"
(clearly never owned horses, they will seek shelter from rain -[...]"
"Horse sense" is a synonym for "good sense" or "sound judgment". The implication is that horses WILL stay out of the rain, and otherwise exhibit good sense. You mis-understood the proverb completely; and it means the opposite of what you think.
"you'll catch more flies with honey than with vinegar" (try that with a fly trap).
Fine you win one, sort of... if you get to pick the species of fly in question. Yes certain species of fruit flies are attracted to the scent of vinegar. Other species not so much.
but it seems like you're denigrating what those other people did
I certainly don't mean to denigrate any of them. They all were very brave, and yup, MLK was assassinated but that's kind of my point... he was at risk but only at risk to outright illegal activities. They had to resort to assassination to kill him because they couldn't really act openly against him, they had no legal grounds to simply throw him into isolation and toss the keys forever.
With Snowden, they don't need to resort to a secret conspiracy against him, they can act in the open, with the full force of the law. It's a completely different threat level.
MLK could go on "Sunday talk shows" to paraphrase someone up in the thread. (Hell, that's one of the safest places he could be.) But Snowden would be a fool to try that; they'd pick him up immediately, and he'd never set a free foot down again.
What everybody is unhappy about is that the government wants to force people who DON'T want to try programming to do it.
what the fuck are you talking about? where do you morons come from?
can we stop with this nonsense please? it is similar to idiots who oppose teaching all kids programming
restricting access to developing a skillset which just builds on abstract reasoning is a joke, nothing more. it's as if lots of people making lots of programs somehow hurts good programs and good programmers. how? can someone define me how that works? there has to be a formal logical fallacy for what this low iq idea suggests. it's like saying gays getting married somehow hurts heterosexual marriage. and we see how well that mental diarrhea has persuaded
lots of people trying programming only hurts mediocre programmers. the only kind of people who take this nonissue seriously. it's popularity on slashdot therefore does not bode very well for the readership of this website
meanwhile, i welcome anyone who wants to try programming and i wish them well. it can be fun, it can be infuriating. and if in your quest you wind up being more skilled and hired to replaced than the kind of weak mouth breather who wants to somehow magically limit the pursuit of programming to some of kind of bullshit guild, this a surefire win
Can we buy it with funding via kickstarter? How much do we need to raise?
Whatever the sum...if you can start a rumor that Bennett Haselton is a viable competing bidder for the site you'll hit the needed Kickstarter goal in no time.
He is not on the same level as Rosa Parks, Susan B Anthony or Martin Luther King Jr.
I don't think you grasp just how different Snowden is from Parks.
What, pray tell was the maximum penalty Rosa Parks faced for failing to comply with a Montgomery city ordinance? Legally? She wasn't in any real danger. A modest fine, or a couple nights in jail.
Her only real risk was that she could have been beaten (illegally) by police in an era and region where the people beating her would have gotten away with it.
King Jr? Arrested several times. No serious charges, and no serious penalties. Like Parks his greatest risk was illegal beatings and vigilantism. There's certainly no question what he did took courage. But the authority of the government itself wasn't really a threat to him. And the government wasn't going to threaten to shoot down a passenger plane he was on just to get their hands on him.
How about Susan B Anthony? She was arrested, and fined $100. (A lot more then than now, but still... small potatoes.)
You are right, Parks, Anthony and King Jr aren't on the same level as Snowden. He's in a level of trouble so much greater; those others never even scratched the surface.
No, Snowden is up there with Ben Franklin and the like. People who resisted their government at the very highest levels, people who would have hanged for their activities if they'd allowed themselves to get caught.
Nobody of any authority has even mentioned the death penalty. The US government hasn't executed anyone for crimes other than murder in 50 years.
I hope CmdrTaco buys it back for $250. God damn would that be funny.
I love how fast it is, and that I don't have to hand my CC over.
I use tap to pay WITH my credit card. Its even more convenient and faster than getting out my phone. I can't even really imagine why I'd ever prefer to setup and use tap-to-pay with my phone.
I for one can't wait to play video games on my new Quantum computer.
The downside is that the games will only run when the computer is turned off.
The opposite of "online privacy," in many cases, is "personal brand value." I'm not sure that maximizing privacy online makes a lot of sense for most people.
Agreed. The trouble arises though when the personal brand and the person don't always mix.
I had a young real estate mortgage broker once, who as part of her attempt to develop her personal brand and maintain contact with clients sent everyone in her contact list an invitation to follow her on her then new twitter feed.
I never followed her, but I clicked on the link once some months later to review her tweets and see how it had worked out. Naturally it was a disaster.
She started out with the odd tweet about relevant news, interest rate changes, those common sense tips but as it was under name and clearly all her friends and family followed her, precisely the sort of thing one would have wanted or expected from following it. But it quickly devolved into a rapidfire feed where she used it to comment on everything from restaurants, concerts, clothes, politics, retweets of cat videos, argue with friends, etc. There's no way anyone whose only connection to her was her mortgage brokerage services would have even the slightest desire to constantly receive this stuff, and it certainly did nothing to improve her 'personal brand'.
The upshot is that the idea that she'd have a twitter account in her name to develop her personal brand wasn't a bad idea. But it ended up being a far to direct window into her personal life, which her clients neither needed (nor wanted) to see. She needed an anonymous twitter feed disconnected from her personal brand to shoot the shit with her friends with.
Last time I checked she no longer has twitter on her mortgage broker website.