The citizens of the US and England are arguably the most propagandized in the known history of mankind. It takes a lot of effort to resist even mediocre propaganda if it is persistent and long-lasting enough.
It isn't a matter of stupidity. It's a matter of how easy it is to hack people's brains. And no one, even those who expend the effort, is immune.
Case in point: thinking that your fellow citizens are stupider than you are is a sign that at least that aspect of the over propaganda effort has worked on you.
Meh. Microsoft has been a bad actor in the industry for so many decades that I have a serious problem trying to imagine anything that would make me feel sorry for them.
Personally, though, I actually don't mind it. Any potential employer that thinks lack of a social media account has any bearing on social character is one that is too stupid to safely work for. So they're pretty much saving me from dodgy employers.
Re: Re: Re: Response to: zpmcsucks@gmail.com on Jun 24th, 2016 @ 10:01am
In all fairness, though...
When you look at the history of the Supreme Court, one of the things that is remarkable is just how common it is that the way a given judge tends to rule is rather different from the inclinations of the President that appointed them.
Lots of judges actually are all about technical accuracy and impartial interpretation of the law. I would bet that most of them probably have at least that sort of self-image.
I think lawyers who tend to be considered for the Supreme Court are ones that are more likely to be the nerds of the lawyer world: concerned with technical accuracy and the correct application of the ruleset rather than the question of whether the rules in that set are great ideas or not.
Everyone has their own biases, of course, and so a person's political view clearly has to color their thinking to some degree, but it seems that the sort of person likely to become a Supreme Court judge tends to be the sort of legalistic nerd that would be less affected by that stuff than most.
"Note that both a "not for profit" and a "nonprofit" are allowed to make a profit."
I left out qualifiers here that might be important -- they are allowed to make a profit within limited circumstances. For example, the last time I bones up on this stuff, a "not for profit" could only show a profit two years out of any five. If it exceeded that, then it could lose its status.
The terms "not for profit" and "nonprofit" only have rigid definitions with the IRS.
The IRS makes the distinction like this: a "not for profit" is an organization whose main purpose is not commerce, but might make money anyway. The classic example is a hobby. A nonprofit is an organization whose main purpose is commerce, but not to actually make a profit.
Note that both a "not for profit" and a "nonprofit" are allowed to make a profit. The difference between the two (and other kinds of companies) essentially boil down to the tax ramifications if/when profit is made.
Practically speaking, there are few meaningful differences between the two.
I'm pretty sure of that. At least, I'm seeing more high quality music being produced now, of greater variety, than I can remember in my lifetime. And I buy more of music now than ever before.
I imagine that an awful lot of official correspondence takes place with people who are not using State Department email addresses (at the very least because they aren't part of the State Department), so that wouldn't come close to covering it.
Your point is well taken. Nonetheless, if a government agency wants to detain or surveil me, they don't have to rely on me coming up on a list -- they know where I live and work and can just stop on by.
Just to be clear, I am not making a "if you're not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear" argument here (that argument is, in my opinion, 100% bullshit), and I think those lists are pretty obviously bad things.
The patent being discussed here is a design patent. Design patents are intended to be pretty much just as you describe. They are not at all like the patents usually discussed (utility patents), in that they aren't about new inventions. They're about distinctive design.
In many ways, they're more like trademarks than patents.
It could be, but "monkey" is quite often used as an insult in ways that have nothing whatsoever to do with race. Particularly in my part of the country, which favors different racial slurs than that particular one.
Re: I don't see what the problem with what the FBI did
"A better analogy would be if a person called someone else on a telephone asking for illegal pictures and the FBI agent was standing right next to the receiver listening in."
A more accurate analogy would be to say that because someone was using a telephone to break the law, that means the cops should be allowed to plant surveillance equipment inside the person's home without a warrant.
Nah. I'm just a boring, albeit mouthy, software engineer with no power or following to worry them.
Besides, I am already known to both the feds and military anyway, since at various points in my career I have been vetted by both of them. They already know where to find me to spring their trap.
When Dweezil, Moon, and Ahmet have been asked about what it was like having those names (I don't remember Diva ever commenting on it, so I'm omitting her) they have all said that they didn't get as much grief as kids as people assume that they did, and they are fine with the names they were given.
Moon Unit got asked the question more than the others since her name is the strangest, but she actually had the least weird name when you think of it. She goes by "Moon", which is not actually unique in California.
On the post: With The Brexit In The Bag, 'Vote Leave' Starts Vanishing Away Its Promises And Faulty Math
Re: Why do you care?
Not true. It will greatly affect North America, both economically and politically.
"don't all you guys complain about TPP and NAFTA all the time?"
I complain about specific aspects of them, yes. I don't object to the notion of treaties and economic agreements generally, though.
On the post: With The Brexit In The Bag, 'Vote Leave' Starts Vanishing Away Its Promises And Faulty Math
Re: Re:
I meant "overall propaganda effort". Ack.
On the post: With The Brexit In The Bag, 'Vote Leave' Starts Vanishing Away Its Promises And Faulty Math
Re:
It isn't a matter of stupidity. It's a matter of how easy it is to hack people's brains. And no one, even those who expend the effort, is immune.
Case in point: thinking that your fellow citizens are stupider than you are is a sign that at least that aspect of the over propaganda effort has worked on you.
On the post: Hillary Clinton's Tech Policy Plan Includes Some Empty Broadband Promises And A Continued War On Encryption
Re: Trump doesn't drink.
On the post: Hillary Clinton's Tech Policy Plan Includes Some Empty Broadband Promises And A Continued War On Encryption
Re:
On the post: After Multi-Month Tone Deaf Shitshow, Microsoft Finally Lets Users Control Obnoxious Windows 10 Upgrade
Re: Almost feel sorry for Microsoft
On the post: DHS Wants Travelers Entering The US To Include Their Social Media Handles... Just Because
Re: Re: Re: Re: Absolutely, totally voluntary... today
Personally, though, I actually don't mind it. Any potential employer that thinks lack of a social media account has any bearing on social character is one that is too stupid to safely work for. So they're pretty much saving me from dodgy employers.
On the post: Tying Rights To Useless 'Terrorist Watchlists' Is A Terrible Idea
Re: Re: Re: Response to: zpmcsucks@gmail.com on Jun 24th, 2016 @ 10:01am
When you look at the history of the Supreme Court, one of the things that is remarkable is just how common it is that the way a given judge tends to rule is rather different from the inclinations of the President that appointed them.
Lots of judges actually are all about technical accuracy and impartial interpretation of the law. I would bet that most of them probably have at least that sort of self-image.
I think lawyers who tend to be considered for the Supreme Court are ones that are more likely to be the nerds of the lawyer world: concerned with technical accuracy and the correct application of the ruleset rather than the question of whether the rules in that set are great ideas or not.
Everyone has their own biases, of course, and so a person's political view clearly has to color their thinking to some degree, but it seems that the sort of person likely to become a Supreme Court judge tends to be the sort of legalistic nerd that would be less affected by that stuff than most.
On the post: As CBS/Paramount Continue Lawsuit Over Fan Film, It Releases Ridiculous & Impossible 'Fan Film Guidelines'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I left out qualifiers here that might be important -- they are allowed to make a profit within limited circumstances. For example, the last time I bones up on this stuff, a "not for profit" could only show a profit two years out of any five. If it exceeded that, then it could lose its status.
On the post: As CBS/Paramount Continue Lawsuit Over Fan Film, It Releases Ridiculous & Impossible 'Fan Film Guidelines'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The IRS makes the distinction like this: a "not for profit" is an organization whose main purpose is not commerce, but might make money anyway. The classic example is a hobby. A nonprofit is an organization whose main purpose is commerce, but not to actually make a profit.
Note that both a "not for profit" and a "nonprofit" are allowed to make a profit. The difference between the two (and other kinds of companies) essentially boil down to the tax ramifications if/when profit is made.
Practically speaking, there are few meaningful differences between the two.
On the post: New T-Shirt: Home Cooking Is Killing Restaurants
Re:
Most of it isn't coming from the labels, though.
On the post: Emails Show Hillary Clinton's Email Server Was A Massive Security Headache, Set Up To Route Around FOIA Requests
Re: Re: Why the Vitriol?
On the post: Tying Rights To Useless 'Terrorist Watchlists' Is A Terrible Idea
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Please check your facts.
Just to be clear, I am not making a "if you're not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear" argument here (that argument is, in my opinion, 100% bullshit), and I think those lists are pretty obviously bad things.
On the post: General Mills Granted A Design Patent On A Tortilla Bowl Because Why Even Pretend Anymore?
Re:
In many ways, they're more like trademarks than patents.
On the post: Super Slimey: Comodo Tries To Trademark 'Let's Encrypt' [Updated]
Re:
On the post: Oculus Reverses DRM Course After Public Backlash
Re: Enjoy!
On the post: As Republicans Turn Off House Live Feed, Reps & C-SPAN Turn To Periscope And Facebook Live Video To Cover Sit In
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Judge Says FBI Can Hack Computers Without A Warrant Because Computer Users Get Hacked All The Time
Re: I don't see what the problem with what the FBI did
A more accurate analogy would be to say that because someone was using a telephone to break the law, that means the cops should be allowed to plant surveillance equipment inside the person's home without a warrant.
On the post: Tying Rights To Useless 'Terrorist Watchlists' Is A Terrible Idea
Re: Re: Re: Please check your facts.
Besides, I am already known to both the feds and military anyway, since at various points in my career I have been vetted by both of them. They already know where to find me to spring their trap.
On the post: Dweezil Zappa Renames His Tour Again: Dweezil Zappa Plays Whatever The F@%k He Wants; The Cease & Desist Tour
Re: Re: Frank Zappa would be pleased
Moon Unit got asked the question more than the others since her name is the strangest, but she actually had the least weird name when you think of it. She goes by "Moon", which is not actually unique in California.
Next >>