|
in bits of and in gates of if we are
possessed of what was then or now at hand
or know what is and what it is is for
and we are then as we were then before
the it that came upon us as we slept
the it that might be or it will become
the if it is that what we might be man's
obsession with the thing the if and can
the will still be or will not be the core
for bits and bits of mind forevermore -
if ifs and then's will still then tell the score
and more and more if more is more or more
the wars and loves and buts and whys of man
in bits of and by fate is all we can
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: the it that came upon us as we slept
if you can sleep at all when in IT 
|
|
|
|
|
forevermore
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
|
|
|
|
|
My worry is when driverless taxi's come out goggle or [absolute worst case] facebork will decide that's their next platform.
not sure I'm willing to swap the instantly forgettable random drivel of someone I'll never meet again for 'targeted' (actual def: "this is what we are paid to pitch at you") bullshit.
of course [traveling with your 'smart' phone] they're gonna know and learn more about you than yourself even before stepping in to the taxi - and you'll have to pay them for that pleasure.
I say train chimps to drive taxi's, yeah sure they like to throw their own dung at you
- but I'll take sh*t that washes off over paid sh*t that can't be unseen and wastes brain cells.
Oh and just to add even more detail to our bright futures
next we'll see farcebork and GM/Ford deciding to work together: giving us cheaper (i.e. 'sponsored') private cars ...
and soon after go on to make that the only option available ...
nobody's selling their souls to the devil anymore, we're paying him to take it.
Message Signature
(Click to edit ->)
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: driverless taxi's
that excludes Windows as their OS
|
|
|
|
|
|
There's no such thing as a free lunch but it seems the trend is to pay to have our privacy taken from us.
Technician
1. A person that fixes stuff you can't.
2. One who does precision guesswork based on unreliable data provided by those of questionable knowledge.
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
|
I never fully understood why that is so. Why almost everybody voluntarily gives up their privacy, to 1984 levels and beyond.
"Convenience". Like this friend of mine with an upper-teenage son, going for a 30 km bike trip before the dinner at his parents' house: "We followed him on google and saw that was somewhat delayed, so we knew that we should hold back the dinner for another half hour" - f**c, when I was that age, if I jumped off my bike to take a leak out there in the forest, I wouldn't want my parents to monitor me doing it! But this young man appearently had enabled that for his parents, he wanted it for himself, and for his parents.
Please! Leave me alone! Give me some closed space where noone else cares what I am doing. It is my life; you do not own it. You have no right to monitor it.
So I don't have an FB account. No Twitter. No Flickr. Most of my everyday expenses, I pay in cash - no plastic cards, no smartphone pay. I bought myself a bus card to get the discount (not quite half price, but almost), but paid it in cash, and I refill it by cash. The bus company can report to the authorities where some passenger using this card entered the bus, but they can't trace it to me personally. It is none of their business!
Eight years ago, we had the most serious (right-wing) terror attack in Norway - 69 persons killed and the government building destroyed by a bomb. When the terrorist was taken to court, the police presented a list of no less than ten thousand distinct incidents during his life that they considered relevant to the case. Sure, this guy had had some Internet activity, but the great majority of the ten thousand incidents had no Internet relation. They were like use of his payment plastic card and what he had paid for, his movements, who he had visited... The police claimed that they did not have any prior information pointing him out as suspectible, so all the ten thousand incidents was identified after the shootings/bombing.
So: If the police goes after me, can they, just as easily, pick up ten thousand evidences to be used as evidence against me? I am certainly not planning any terrorist attack, yet it gives me an uneasy feeling: Even if we think that the police we've got today are nice and friendly (at least if you are white, academic and wealthy!), you cannot trust that situation to last forever.
At the 2005 London subway bombings, police insisted that the bombers had not at all been monitored in advance, even though they were Moslems ... If you look at the timeline for when police revealed their findings, over the first 24-48 hours after the incident, believing that this would have been possible with absolutely no "prior information", as police claimed, is rather naive.
Cases like these scare me. 1984 style. So I deliberately try to reduce the amount of "privacy traces" I leave behind. I pay a lot in cash: Neither my beer prefence nor my toothpaste preference is anybodys business. I clear my browser log. I pay my public transportation travels in anonymous mode. I do not publish my private live on FB or other fora. I may leave my mobile phone at home - I do not depend on it, and my friends do not have a god-given right to get in contact with me at any time.
Sure, the 1984 style police will be able to get me, no matter what I do. But I would like to cut their evidence count from ten thousand to maybe one or two thousand. And I do not want anyone to be conserned about me jumping off my bike to take a leak when I am on a trip in the forest.
|
|
|
|
|
All well and good, every little bit helps but its other people selling my info that worries me.
Technician
1. A person that fixes stuff you can't.
2. One who does precision guesswork based on unreliable data provided by those of questionable knowledge.
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: my friends do not have a god-given right to get in contact with me at any time.
If only they realised that!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
lopatir wrote: targeted
I don't understand everyone's uproar over targeted ads. I'd much rather have an ad that is relevant than one that isn't. 
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
You fill in the ellipsis (today is Google's 21st birthday)
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
...it's also of age to be held criminally responsible for its shenanigans.
|
|
|
|
|
I think that occured three years ago. 
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
in many countries the legal drinking age is 18, whereas voting is only allowed from 21.
I guess they giving you a couple of years to figure out who is still sober enough to take the wheel.
I don't believe it's working though
Message Signature
(Click to edit ->)
|
|
|
|
|
... and metalinking to the thread two down ...
It's still not as old as my car.
'98 Toyota Camry V6 station wagon, almost 400,000 km on the clock. Made a loop round the moon, on the way back...
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Even in the US, there's often a quite significant difference between the age at which you can legally purchase alcohol, and the age at which you can legally drink alcohol.
Legal drinking age - Wikipedia[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Dude. I make the setup for a round of good jokes, and you fumble it with facts? Seriously. Are you having a cranky day?
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
I've finally got my hands on the movie "Rogue One", but unfortunately, there are 2 audio tracks, one in English, and one that is not in English. I can set VLC to have to play the English audio track, but I'd prefer just to rip out the non-English track so I don't have to worry about it in case I use a different player. I've got WinFF, but this doesn't seem to be able to do the job. Any ideas?
|
|
|
|
|
|
DING, DING! We have a winner.
AviDemux worked like a charm!
|
|
|
|
|
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Also love AviDemux. I sometimes post my dashcam videos online, and need to remove the sound track due to excessive swearing !
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
