Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Bah humbug censorship (Score 1) 307

by henni16 (#47847665) Attached to: Responding to Celeb Photo Leaks, Reddit Scotches "Fappening" Subreddit

Are you ready to take responsibility for the next real world victims who might have been willing to protect themselves despite it not being their responsibility in happy ideological lala-land, but who didn't know how to or weren't even aware of the danger because your knee-jerk "victim blame" reaction suppressed that information and finally managed to alienate the last one who would have been willing to help?

On a slightly (un)related note, on some website there recently were some very vocal habitual "Victim blamer! MRA!"-screaming hypocrites apparently living in homes without mirrors wondering where that backlash of "SJW"-screaming came from and why "social justice" could have become(!) an insult and how the environment and the "discussions" have become(!) more hostile.

Comment: Deaf people (Score 1) 235

by henni16 (#47381421) Attached to: Radar Changing the Face of Cycling

I had the same reaction at first ("useless") .

Then I remembered my father whose hearing has gotten pretty bad over the years.
When my parents were out together riding their bicycles somewhere, my mom noticed that he clearly didn't hear some cars approaching from behind. She said that it was kinda worrying in some situations.
I guess when your hearing gets gradually worse, you can sometimes forget that not hearing a car doesn't mean there isn't one close by.

And thinking a bit more about it, I've already seen ("heard" would be wrong) an incredibly silent hybrid car; the loudest noise it generated was the dirt being crushed between the tires and the asphalt.

Then again, turning your head now and then or some of those rear-view mirrors for the handlebars will be a lot cheaper.

Comment: Re:Lottery scratch tickets; not so random (Score 1) 166

by henni16 (#46276951) Attached to: Why Improbable Things Really Aren't

but this guy can tell which scratch tickets will pay off by by reading their serial numbers, winning wasn't as improbable as one is led to believe

CSB:
My elementary school set up a sort of lottery during a yearly festival.

So two classes were tasked with preparing the winning and losing lots for the lottery by writing the kind of price or something like "no win" on little paper squares.
They then folded the paper squares and stapled them shut so you couldn't tell what was written inside.
During the festivities the kids ran a stand were you could buy and draw the lots from a couple of big, open bowls.

Almost all of the prices went to a handful of kids from my class:
A couple of guys from my class drew winning lots for smallish stuff, noticed something that had escaped everyone else, came up with a theory and successfully put their theory to the test by buying more winners.
As 10-year-olds are, they bragged to their best friends about it who then proceeded to buy most of the remaining winners.

Well, the winning and losing lots had been prepared separately and, not thinking about it and lacking the direct comparison, the teachers in charge of the two groups had been unaware that their staplers were loaded with silver- and copper-colored staples respectively.
So by looking at the color of the staples, you were able to pick only winners out of the open bowls.

Comment: Re:Wooosh (Score 1) 166

by henni16 (#46276049) Attached to: Why Improbable Things Really Aren't

Furthermore, in some books the million-to-one-chance even has an embodiment of sorts as "The Lady", one of the Discworld Gods http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...

But yeah, Pratchett was mostly poking fun at the heroes in stories alway succeeding against all odds.
Another Discworld example would be a group of people being hesitant to attack a single guy if the guy looks harmless and smiles or if he shows characteristics in line with being a story's hero - because everybody just knows ta a vastly outnumbered hero always wins the fight.

Making fun of or playing with such story cliches is something that Practhett does a lot - to a point that such cliches have become something like a natural law and an (al)chemical element (Narrative causality / Narrativium) on the Discworld.

Some characters like the witches are even very aware of it and try to manipulate the narrative (e.g. Witches Abroad is a lot about stories (not) running their "natural" course).

Comment: Re:Really, they should make it easier to do (Score 1) 778

by henni16 (#44160285) Attached to: Firefox 23 Makes JavaScript Obligatory

If you're using Firefox or Seamonkey, you might like the "prefbar" addon.
It adds a freely customizable preferences toolbar that lets you add stuff like checkboxes and buttons for enabling/disabling Javascript, Java, Flash, Cookies, Popups, Images, Referrer sending/switching(*), website colors, navigation buttons ("back"/"forward" is handy for popups without navigation). clearing cookies, clearing cache, switching proxy servers .. you name it.
You can even alter existing or program your own buttons if what you want isn't already available for selection.

(*)
It pays to add Googlebot as a referrer because lots of (news) websites with registration/pay walls (e.g NYTimes) or sites that force you to enable Javascript will happily produce the content if you claim to be Google.

Comment: Re:What about small websites? (Score 1) 351

by henni16 (#43501895) Attached to: Google Gets Consumer Service Ultimatum From German Consumer Groups

You don't have to provide support that way.
It's more about being able to contact the operator of a website.
Google's problem isn't so much that they say "We don't provide end-user support via this email address", it's that they flat-out state "emails to this address won't be read".

It's like companies being required by law to have a valid postal address and Google is using a running paper shredder as its mailbox.

Comment: This is NOT about customer service (Score 2) 351

by henni16 (#43494399) Attached to: Google Gets Consumer Service Ultimatum From German Consumer Groups

If you provide a webservice - especially a commercial one - you are required to prominently display valid identity and contact information, including ways that provide quick and immediate ways to communicate with you (the laws especially mentions/requires "electronic post" ).

The background of that German law isn't really about forcing companies to provide customer service (besides making it clear who your business partner is - you have to be able to get hold of whoever is behind a website in case you pay them and they don't deliver).
You have to think about it more in terms of DMCA/cease&desist/law enforcement and it might make more sense to Americans:

"Oh, that DMCA complaint about some user using our service to provide a Super Bowl livestream? That went to our post box on the Bahamas. Three weeks later when it arrived at the main office and out internal mail processing had delivered it to our tech department, they immediately took down the stream."

Comment: Panzer *is* German for tank (Score 1) 106

by henni16 (#43006971) Attached to: Doctor Who's Dalek Designer Dies At 84
"Panzer" is the word Germans use for "tank".
And you're also right, "Panzer" means armor.
I don't know if the German military uses PKW as an abbreviation for Panzer, but I think it's highly unlikely because most Germans will definitely NOT think of a Panzer when they hear "PKW".

PKW is the very, very common abbreviation for "Personenkraftwagen", i.e. it refers to ordinary passenger cars.
A somewhat literal translation of PKW would be "people motor vehicle".
The most common and general way to classify cars in German is to distinguish between PKW and LKW - with LKW being an abbreviation referring to (heavy) freight trucks ("Lastkraftwagen" or short "Lastwagen" or "Laster" - see "Panzer" instead of "Panzerkampfwagen)

Disclaimer: IAAG ;-)

Btw: according to German wikipedia, the abbreviation for "Panzerkampfwagen" is "PzKpfw".

Comment: Re:But that's not the real problem. (Score 1) 1651

by henni16 (#41531341) Attached to: To Encourage Biking, Lose the Helmets

If you wear a helmet then you are significantly more likely to be involved in an accident.

There are several reasons for the last point. Cyclists wearing helmets subconsciously think that they are safer and take more risks. Drivers drive closer to cyclists with helmets because they perceive them as less fragile. Helmets upset the airflow around your head and so reduce your spacial and situational awareness.

AFAIK the biggest reason for this is likely that the ones most likely to take a risk and have an accident are more likely to wear one, i.e. if you have someone who does racing, does mountain biking, is a messenger, rides daily etc, then that someone is
a) more likely to have an accident serious enough to show up in reports/statistics
b) more likely to own and wear a helmet than someone who rides just now and then

So you might have (numbers courtesy of my backside) something like 10% of _all_ bikers wearing helmets, while the percentage for those who cycle the most miles or engage in riskier (not stupider, like riding without lights) forms of cycling might be 40%.
So you might end up with 15% of riders involved in accidents wearing a helmet while their number "should" only be 10%.

Comment: Re:Whack-A-Mole (Score 1) 360

by henni16 (#40887867) Attached to: Why Internet Pirates Always Win

Just change your browser's user-agent string to make it look like Google; helps to access others sites, too (e.g. every site of the Gawker-family: for those you either have to enable Javascript or pretend to be Googlebot)

If you use a Mozilla-based browser, there are plug-ins to make switching the string comfortable; user-agent switching is one of the things that I use "prefbar" for.

Comment: Re:European comisars (Score 5, Informative) 112

by henni16 (#40626839) Attached to: EU Commission: CETA 'Totally Different From ACTA'

To quote wikipedia:

One of the 27 is the Commission President proposed by the European Council[..] and elected by the European Parliament.
The Council then appoints the other 26 members of the Commission in agreement with the nominated President, and then the 27 members as a single body are subject to a vote of approval by the European Parliament.

So the parliament has an all-of-them-or-nobody right of approval for the whole commission whose members are picked by the heads of the member states' governments .

Money can't buy happiness, but it can make you awfully comfortable while you're being miserable. -- C.B. Luce

Working...