prev <-> next
[2010-04-27 14:45:56] - xpovos: branzburg is a complicated precedent to begin with, if I'm reading it correctly. it's certainly not obvious whether it applies to the level of "press" that exists in the modern era with blogging. - pierce
[2010-04-27 14:31:13] - mig: I'll accept that about the police, maybe. Certainly there is reason to believe they'd at least throw the ball into a judge's court as a kind of hail mary pass. But I can't think of any competent judge who would issue such a warrant in the face of Branzburg v. Hayes among other prominent court cases. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-27 14:08:42] - essentially what I think happened is that a bunch of non-tech-savvy people saw this as a traditional stolen property case applied to some dude who happens to have a website. after the police raid, they were informed that there may be journalistic shield laws at play, so they halted the investigation while they try to reframe their original case in that light. - pierce
[2010-04-27 14:04:32] - xpomig: I would not put it on the police at all to analyze the nuanced legal issues of defining journalism in the modern era, even if they had those particular bits of california law memorized (which they probably didn't). a warrant, on the other hand, is clear as crystal. - pierce
[2010-04-27 14:02:02] - xpovos: a lot of lawyerly people aren't tech-savvy. they may not have seen the home of someone with a web page to be comparable to the newsroom at the L.A. Times. - pierce
[2010-04-27 13:59:22] - xpovos: from my observations, "it's illegal" has rarely been a deterrent for the police to pursue confiscation of property. - mig
[2010-04-27 13:59:10] - I do wonder if they're underestimating what they have to lose as the techie community turns against them. yes, most people who buy apple products probably won't be aware of the legal woes of gizmodo editors. but the people who tell those people about apple products are going to be unhappy about this even if they think the gizmodo folks were being jerks. - pierce
[2010-04-27 13:57:55] - pierce: The follow-on question that has to be asked is why the judge issued the warrant if he knew the law, and why the police requested and then enforced the warrant if they knew the law. This isn't just Apple. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-27 13:56:23] - after all, it was a criminal case the police were pursuing. the people who have their ass on the line if this can't be prosecuted are those at the DA's office. apple can get off scott-free except for the bad publicity. - pierce
[2010-04-27 13:53:54] - mig: well I may be wrong in my analysis, or apple may not have been aware of how difficult it will be to prosecute, or they may be aware but are fine with losing the case if it means creating a chilling effect on anyone who might consider reporting on leaked apple products. - pierce
[2010-04-27 13:51:47] - I'm guessing this is all in an effort to try and out the seller, but still seems execessive. - mig
[2010-04-27 13:51:36] - but it's interesting to see this case as an example of the death of "journalist" as a special case for certain laws. by objective standards, there's no conceptual difference between my livejournal and gizmodo and washingtonpost.com. - pierce
[2010-04-27 13:51:06] - pierce: if it is going to be difficult to prosecute, I'm not sure really what apple is getting out of this, aside from general ill-will from the media community. After all the original article states that chen did eventually return the device. - mig
[2010-04-27 13:45:53] - on the other hand, the journalist can't legally keep the stolen item or resell it except to another journalist, so maybe this isn't broadly applicable enough to be worth worrying about. - pierce
[2010-04-27 13:42:26] - ...even though I don't think this falls under the spirit of journalistic shield laws. essentially, this makes any journalist a perfect fence for stolen goods, based on a law that was supposed to protect information. - pierce
[2010-04-27 13:39:43] - based on my reading, I'd say anything relevant to the stolen property investigation is definitely going to qualify as long as chen is an eligible journalist, and I'd say he pretty clearly is an "editor" or "reporter" for a "periodical publication" or "press association". I think this is going to be very difficult to prosecute. - pierce
[2010-04-27 13:36:38] - relevant law: California Penal Code § 1524(g) (scroll to "g") says no warrant shall be issued for items described in California Evidence Code § 1070. - pierce
[2010-04-27 13:23:58] - If yes, then is Gawker's Chen a blogger, or just a muckraker? And if yes again, we're to my points, which is that it was illegal, but probably shouldn't have been. Free speech and freedom of the press are paramount, but that doesn't make them free to steal and get undue protection after committing those crimes so brazenly. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-27 13:22:21] - pierce: The way I see it is that even if a journalist commits a crime in the act of his reporting he is immune to warranted searches, and such requirements of property and documents have to be done through subpoenas. I think that's probably overkill in general, but the question of the specific is: is a blogger a journalist? -- Xpovos
[2010-04-27 13:19:35] - xpovos: I don't think that's clear yet, but it's definitely up for discussion. - pierce
[2010-04-27 13:09:36] - pierce: But, technically, so was the execution of the search warrant. Hurrah. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-27 12:58:01] - pierce: I agree. IMO, the legality of the situation is clear. It was illegal. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-27 12:44:52] - xpovos: it seems like you're assuming "scoop" is a legally rigorous term... they didn't buy documents or photographs that they then translated into a story, they bought a physical object which is valuable on its own merits. that it also revealed information that made for a good story is irrelevant; the phone-as-electronics shouldn't be eligible for shield laws. - pierce
[2010-04-27 12:35:45] - pierce: Given that they paid a substantial amount of money for the phone on the belief that it might be a prototype, I think the weight of evidence is clearly backing them in the goal of buying a scoop. The morality of that is in question, but the legality is pretty clear. I think the 'attempt' will probably end up hurting them more. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-27 12:19:53] - meanwhile, they have to have the numbers of people within apple given what they do for a living, and they had the name of the person who lost the phone and didn't contact him until after they'd broken the thing apart and photographed it. - pierce
[2010-04-27 12:18:13] - even if you accept gizmodo's version of events at face value, they seem to have a weak case for having made "reasonable" attempts to return it. supposedly they contacted apple customer support, which is pretty weak. low-level support isn't going to know about or be able to confirm a leaked prototype. - pierce
[2010-04-27 11:49:04] - And once again, I'm a half-sentence away from a signature line. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-27 11:48:24] - gurkie: CA law defines lost property that is reasonably expected to be wanted to be returned to be stolen. It's grand larceny for such items of over $400 value. Obviously it's a more difficult thing to prove, but I doubt they'll have any problem with that part. As pierce noted, the question is whether Cheng can make the argument successfully that he was buying the info.
[2010-04-27 11:39:30] - I dont get how its "stolen" property if it was really found at a bar thats not stolen! ~gurkie
[2010-04-27 10:02:09] - the question for the court will probably come down to whether chen paid money for information or for the physical phone itself. if it's the latter, then it comes down to whether it was stolen property by CA statute. if so, then chen's probably in trouble, otherwise not. - pierce
[2010-04-27 10:00:42] - pierce is a marketing shill. now more than ever. there are lots of explanations, though i agree the likelihood has dropped. ~a
[2010-04-27 10:00:07] - xpovos: yeah, involving law enforcement would take this so far beyond the territory even of "extremely hardball PR" that I don't even consider it a real possibility without some other evidence. as for the legal question, I agree that it's interesting but it'll probably play out along straightforward lines. - pierce
[2010-04-27 09:54:27] - pierce: Unless Apple is playing extremely hardball PR. But I think the evidence is pretty strongly on the side of the actual leak, particularly given Apple's history. To me the more interesting side of this now is the legal development of serving a warrant against a potential journalist for the purpose of his potential journalism. Very interesting. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-27 09:48:38] - police have raided the home and seized the computers of the gizmodo editor who posted the leaked iphone story... seems safe to assume this was an actual leak instead of a "controlled" leak at this point. - pierce
[2010-04-27 09:24:23] - racecarp
- vinnie[2010-04-27 08:56:46] - http://www.olivepixel.com/misc/kitten/ a really cute series of photos about a woman in shanghai finding a stray cat - aaron
[2010-04-26 21:49:30] - a: yeah that's not bad. this is for work and it's all automated so ti's good if nobody finds out about dok's sexual orientation - aaron
[2010-04-26 19:20:09] - aaron: yeah exactly. it's what passwords on aporter.org come from. jubasebud, jozijojub, dokisafag (lol), buwejuner, fihohamif, that sort of thing. i have the benefit of being able to see the passwords as i send them out, so the obviously bad ones i can generate again (regenerate?). ~a
[2010-04-26 19:02:58] - a: that generates random 9-letter wordish things? like "robopenis"? that's kind of like what my algorithm did, although it used a markov chainer so the words looked really englishy - aaron
[2010-04-26 18:38:54] - aaron: my @vowels=qw/a e i o u/; my @consonants=qw/b c d f g h j k l m n p r s t v w z/; foreach(1..4) {print $consonants[int(rand(scalar(@consonants)))], $vowels[int(rand(scalar(@vowels)))];} print $consonants[int(rand(scalar(@consonants)))], "\n"; from 2001. ~a
[2010-04-26 18:21:21] - hmph, i caved in and replaced my "profanity generator" with something more sensible
now it just generates compound words like "rudemole33", "ironperch64", "racecarp71". much lower likelihood of profanity - aaron[2010-04-26 17:22:35] - plaunve_stephen: what does sh*t mean? is that a wildcard expansion? so, like, shit or shat would fit? if so, you might want to use "sh?t" instead of "sh*t" because otherwise longer words like shelterbelt would match your expression. ~a
[2010-04-26 16:01:13] - a: The url pretty much said it all anyway, though. -Paul
[2010-04-26 16:00:49] - a: Ah, cool, I didn't know about the "permanent link" link. I'll use that next time. -Paul
[2010-04-26 15:53:01] - paul: look for the "permanent link" link on the left. vandalism doesn't stick around long enough for us to see what you were referring to. here is your link ~a
[2010-04-26 15:37:45] - Anyway, the reason I was checking out that site was because I was wondering if the "Victoria Jackson is a nutjob" camp thinks that Bush was a fascist, or if Keith Olbermann is a nutjob. -Paul
[2010-04-26 15:36:40] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#WARNING.21_WRITTEN_BY_A_SOCIALIST._MAY_CONTAIN_EXAGGERATION. Heh. -Paul
[2010-04-26 15:02:40] - xpovos: victoria jackson wasn't just saying that in her song, she has said it across many platforms including talk shows. i think she truly believes he's a communist, which makes her a nut job. -nina
[2010-04-26 13:41:08] - The shit is the voice. - Mr. Hanky
[2010-04-26 13:28:16] - plaunve: At least sh*t isn't telling you you're the voices. - Stephen
[2010-04-26 13:27:18] - title: voices tell me i'm sh*t -plaunve
[2010-04-26 12:27:45] - a: voted same as mom in 2010 for pres. -Daniel
[2010-04-26 12:06:14] - It would probably be more telling on a local level. I've never voted for the same presidential candidate as either of my parents. But we have voted for several of the same local candidates. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-26 11:53:06] - both my parents expressed the possibility that they were going to vote for obama at some point during the campaign. I would say with 80% confidence that neither of them did. - pierce
[2010-04-26 11:52:58] - heck I probably voted the same as everyone in the neighborhood I grew up in.... ~gurkie
[2010-04-26 11:51:54] - voted for obama, as both my parents did - vinnie
[2010-04-26 11:50:39] - a: yes I voted for the same as both my parents, all three of my sisters and my brother in law... so far as I know
~gurkie[2010-04-26 11:30:57] - a: I'm pretty sure I've never voted for the same presidential candidate as my parents. I do think that our political views are generally (60-70%?) similar (although often in wildly different degrees). -Paul
[2010-04-26 11:21:50] - errr. replace 2010 with 2008. haha. ~a
[2010-04-26 11:21:38] - I don't remember anyone voting for Perot in my elementary school's mock election. I also doubt Perot got a lot of real votes in McLean. - Stephen
[2010-04-26 11:21:26] - so, everybody: did you vote the same president in 2010 as ONE (or more) of your parents? i'm guessing you libertarians (including the ones who didn't vote) are going to say no. i vote yes. ~a
[2010-04-26 11:17:00] - Yea Perot totally killed in our mock election... I dont remember who came in second and third. But the Perot team cleaned up. ~gurkie
[2010-04-26 11:15:57] - My parents are both more conservative than I am, in the modern Republican sense. Similar source, but wildly different outcomes. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-26 11:13:27] - yes, our little group might be different from the norm. ~a
[2010-04-26 11:10:44] - I'm the same as Daniel. - Stephen
[2010-04-26 11:08:43] - my politics are very different from both my parents'. - pierce
[2010-04-26 11:03:28] - My politics are similar to my mothers but very different from my dad. -Daniel
[2010-04-26 10:52:01] - xpovos: children of what age? you mean any age, right? like 30? it's not often that children's political affiliations change much from their parents. my political orientation isn't much different from my parents though you wouldn't know that from hearing us argue about (err discuss) politics. ~a
[2010-04-26 10:47:44] - Xpovos: Yeah, I don't even remember voting, but I assume I must've voted for Bush since I don't recall being any kind of "rebel" in Catholic school.
-Paul[2010-04-26 10:44:26] - Paul: We had one of those too, which really didn't do much, because children of that age are so influenced by their parents politics--usually. I was one of three who 'voted' for Perot. Clinton got about 30 and Bush Sr. ~470. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-26 10:37:14] - Gurkie: At the Catholic grade school I went to, we had a mock presidential vote for the 1992 election and I think Clinton got 2 votes... which was less than Ross Perot.
-Paul[2010-04-26 10:36:00] - gurkie: ...and cursive in kindergarten. - pierce
[2010-04-26 10:32:45] - Gurkie: Only at our weird private school where they also taught Japanese in first grade... - Stephen
[2010-04-26 10:23:24] - xpovos: dont you know public figures that arent liberals are all nut jobs? I thought they taught that in first grade... ~gurkie
[2010-04-26 09:53:19] - xpovos: but most people I've seen who hold some subset of those views, seem to hold them as part of a nutjobby system of beliefs so the looser standard is moot in practice.
- pierce[2010-04-26 09:50:52] - xpovos: if you don't have a public platform I hold you to a looser standard. for non-public figures I tend to think of it as a system of beliefs and why those particular opinions are held, rather than any particular factually incorrect belief. - pierce
[2010-04-26 09:48:53] - Xpovos: I'd say that anyone who believes that Obama is a closet Muslim or non-U.S.-citizen is a nut job, given the lack of evidence for the former and absolute proof that the latter is not true. Saying that Obama is a socialist doesn't make you a nut job, though. - Stephen
[2010-04-26 09:45:55] - pierce: Is the average TPer who believes and claims Obama is a socialist/communist/closet Muslim/non-U.S.-citizen, and professes as much at one of these rallies, but without the prestige required to do so from a stage also a nut job? -- Xpovos
[2010-04-26 09:43:56] - a: I don't think I ever saw her on SNL, but given the wiki entry, I think she might be less crazy now. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-26 09:41:02] - vinnie: full circle. maybe she was less crazy in 92. "Jackson became most famous for her appearances on Weekend Update with Dennis Miller, again reciting poetry while doing backbends or handstands on the desk, with Miller cracking a sexually suggestive comment at the end." nice. ~a
[2010-04-26 09:36:05] - xpovos: okay, I guess it also matters that you believe your own factually incorrect statement. I think Victoria Jackson probably believes Obama is a communist. she pursues that claim in a public forum despite the fact that it's factually incorrect. that makes her a nutjob, imo. - pierce
[2010-04-26 09:35:27] - Lyndon LaRouche may or may not be a nut job. If he's doing it out of a self-aware desire for a cult; that's the least nut job explanation. Anything else and he gets progressively more 'nut job'-y -- Xpovos
[2010-04-26 09:33:10] - victoria jackson was on SNL
- vinnie[2010-04-26 09:32:51] - But even flat out lying in one of those first two examples isn't inherently 'nut job'. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-26 09:31:53] - pierce: Any literature or even journalistic-type of editorial that claims Obama is either communist or socialist is factually incorrect. Someone demogoguing that, or putting it into a song--substantially less so. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-26 09:27:39] - pierce: artforms like saturday night live make "factually incorrect statements" all the time. it's often for comedic effect. ~a
[2010-04-26 09:24:22] - xpovos: calling obama a communist is not an exaggeration. it's false. when you have a public platform and you use it to make factually incorrect statements then that's pretty nutjobby. - pierce
[2010-04-26 09:22:28] - a: Consistency is one thing, but I'm consistent on the other. I wouldn't call either protestor a nut-job. Particularly not from song form, where artistic things like metaphor come into play. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-26 09:16:22] - xpovos: if i made a song using exaggeration to make a point more impressive or effective in the other direction, the main line of my song would be: "george bush ... is a war criminal ... send him to jail. he broke international law ... send him to jail." you'd rightly call me a nut-job. ~a
[2010-04-26 09:07:57] - a: So, does exaguration to make a point more impressive or effective always result in the person being a nut job, or is it something more related to this nut job and her specific erroneous points? -- Xpovos
[2010-04-26 09:06:07] - too bad, though, that we couldn't buy a phone that was unlocked to a provider. ~a
[2010-04-26 09:04:15] - yes and yes. i think anybody calling obama a communist is misinformed. was she being ironic? i doubt it. was she just using an entertaining song to get her point across? maybe. ~a
[2010-04-26 08:59:09] - a: Bummer...at least it makes my decision to get the HTC Incredible easy! - Stephen
[2010-04-26 08:47:04] - a: So, she's a nutjob for saying it? Believing it? Or for believing the underlying semantics, instead of the strict meaning of the words? -- Xpovos
[2010-04-26 08:11:47] - stephen: last night google took the nexus-one-verizon off of the "coming soon" section of this page. ~a
[2010-04-25 22:30:57] - xpovos: there's a communist living in the whitehouse. ~a
[2010-04-25 22:13:45] - aaron: Jimmy from Degrassi is apparently a rapper named Drake now... I recognized him in a Sprite commercial... ~gurkie
[2010-04-25 22:03:56] - nina: OK, I'll bite. Which bit makes her a nut job? -- Xpovos
[2010-04-25 21:53:41] - i did notice. but . . . i thought it might just be someone who looked and sounded like her. ~a
[2010-04-25 21:40:41] - aaron & a: did you notice Victoria Jackson (of UHF and SNL) was there. who knew she was such a nut job? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_jackson -nina
[2010-04-25 15:27:31] - agreed. he didn't seem to be trying to hide his biases. ~a
[2010-04-25 12:58:17] - at least the interviewer didn't try to hide his bias though. it ticks me off when interviewers like that try to paint themselves as like, a "man on the street" interviewer while exhibiting obvious bias - aaron
[2010-04-25 12:54:46] - nina: it looks like there's a mix of people in that crowd... some people who know what the movement stands for and some people who don't understand anything at all. a lot of people seem really upset that they're paying more in taxes under the obama administration
and a lot of people think they'll go to jail for being uninsured... - aaron[2010-04-25 06:57:34] - nina: some of that was pretty cool, but i felt bad when he kept pressing that timid lady to give him specifics. ~a
[2010-04-24 22:31:32] - amy: I'd seen most of those before, but the write-up was still funny as hell. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-23 20:14:43] - 15 unintentionally(?) perverted toys for children. http://www.cracked.com/article_18494_15-unintentionally-perverted-toys-children_p2.html i thought this was even funnier than the 10 toys that made you gay -amy
[2010-04-23 16:11:23] - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbyFeFhUTmI&feature=player_embedded -nina
[2010-04-23 15:48:18] - aaron: hmm okay then they did have symbols though
albeit its only one symbol... I liked that round although if I rushed too much I would mess up... ~gurkie[2010-04-23 15:39:44] - mig: ahhahaha. i can't believe it picked the number 69 for that. you're right that one's pretty bad - aaron
[2010-04-23 15:38:01] - though i guess most of the people who would have "gotten" are probably more likely to chuckle than get offended. - mig
[2010-04-23 15:36:50] - rappery69 is actually pretty vile if you think about it for a bit. - mig
[2010-04-23 15:26:00] - gurkie: i was so bad at that round! it was 8 numbers only, and i still couldn't do it. they didn't even have letters! - aaron
[2010-04-23 15:25:36] - gurkie: it's also easier to say over the phone. i think "pooment" and "finduck" actually have very unambiguous spellings. if you were to tell them to me over the phone i'd probably spell them right first try - aaron
[2010-04-23 15:25:21] - aaron: I bet you could remember that for 10 seconds... hmm they should update big brain academy to have a 10 second lag time from when u see the number sequence to when you type it... It will be training for real life
~gurkie[2010-04-23 15:23:17] - gurkie: well it's easier to type for me when i'm in vi, and i know it's finduck76. i can at least remember those for the 10 seconds it takes me to type it in, which is an improvement over E76A-B1FB - aaron
[2010-04-23 15:20:07] - heck I think finduck is a bit questionable... also I dont know how memorable they really are for a person who is going to report an error... ~gurkie
[2010-04-23 15:18:59] - aaron: that made me lol irl. - pierce
[2010-04-23 15:17:20] - pierce: yeah but if you google "pooment" you don't get... oh god... oh god!!! - aaron
[2010-04-23 15:16:41] - aaron: "they only have meaning if you give them meaning" well that's kind of the definition of profanity right there. doesn't mean it doesn't exist as a concept.
- pierce[2010-04-23 15:14:49] - pierce: here are some other dirty-sounding generated words: pooment42, diceass42, dictint77, manchic12, ablower78, weenjor24, suncest67, tateets84, gastard87, rappery69... but i really have to search for them. and they're not that bad. i think they only have meaning if you give them meaning you know? - aaron
[2010-04-23 15:07:55] - pierce: on the contrary! i think fartain sounds very distinguished. his highness, william fartain iii - aaron
[2010-04-23 15:03:56] - http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/The-Automated-Curse-Generator.aspx - mig
[2010-04-23 14:59:13] - aaron: you don't think "fartain23" might cause some blowback? - pierce
[2010-04-23 14:51:10] - i think part of it stems from having a lot more opportunities and options than in childhood or college life. therefore more things to become interested in and fill your time with etc. -amy
[2010-04-23 14:50:05] - ...drop the ball on them, but all of them put together gives me a lot of things i have to juggle and just really take up space in my mind. obv these are my decisions and everyone here has a diff life and diff things you do with your time but i was wondering if others might feel same. -amy
[2010-04-23 14:49:00] - nina: that's a good point. i think i personally have a lot of things going on because of the decisions i make. besides my actual job, trying to schedule with photographers, practicing for upcoming conventions, personal projects like videos and songs and albums and costumes... these things aren't high pressure in the sense that there are drastic consequences if i... -amy
[2010-04-23 14:46:38] - pierce: i trained it on this list of 1000 common english words which fortunately doesn't include words like "penis". but it does nclude "open", "evening", and "finished", so it's possible
- aaron[2010-04-23 14:42:42] - pierce: btw here's a few random IDs that my algorithm generates: finduck26, wereses96, muchaps77, wideshy96, talords42, fartain23... it turns out "uck" is in actually in my dictionary of markov-chainer tuples! but fortunately "fuc" isn't, so at least i'm safe from that particular word - aaron
[2010-04-23 14:39:56] - amy: more complicated or more stressful? i think the complexities of adult life aren't necessarily more complicated, but the implications of messing them up or letting balls drop can lead to more serious consequences, and is therefore, more stressful. i.e. failing a test vs. losing a client. -nina
[2010-04-23 14:38:24] - actually for the next 22 minutes as of 2:38. - pierce
[2010-04-23 14:37:21] - $68 bucks for a 1TB drive on Amazon Gold Box for the next half hour (as of 2:37pm) if anyone needs cheap storage. - pierce
[2010-04-23 14:31:38] - there were just too many things going on, even though it probably takes a few minutes to figure out a schedule and send out invite, it's like my brain can't handle thinking about just one more thing. thus i delegated that task to vinnie. btw vin how is that going? -amy
[2010-04-23 14:30:59] - it could be just the nature of my job. instead of answering to one boss, i have 40 customers to handle, any of which could call me with specific concerns outside of my usual working hours. but even the fun stuff seems overwhelming to me. i guess i take on a lot of random projects. anyway this is part of how i dropped the ball on karaoke (sorry .( )... -amy
[2010-04-23 13:32:29] - amy: I think I agree, although I think a lot of it is based on decisions I have made (taking Tae Kwon Do, being on my HOA board, buying a house, etc) rather than it being necessary that life gets more complicated as you get older. -Paul
[2010-04-23 13:19:51] - amy: i think it probably peaked around college, and it's flatlined since then. i have a lot to worry about now, but i had a lot to worry about in college too. - aaron
[2010-04-23 13:18:38] - obviously there are some things that do make life more complicated. home ownership or having kids seem like the big examples. but the complexity of those things is fudgable to an extent... you can get by with less effort, you'll just have a crappier-looking home or a poorly-adjusted kid. - pierce
[2010-04-23 13:16:10] - amy: I dunno. I think once a complicated thing is in the past it's really easy to paper over the complexity of it in your mind. after all, it can't have been that complicated since you were able to do it, right? I think there's a real chance that life doesn't get much more complicated but it will always seem to get more complicated in our minds. - pierce
[2010-04-23 12:43:35] - it's not just you, it's a lot of people. but that does not describe my life. i fill my life with fun things, so stuff is often rather simple. . . . sometimes i make the wrong choices. ~a
[2010-04-23 12:37:34] - does anybody else feel that as you get older, life gets more complicated with more things to keep track of, and it's increasingly difficult to keep track of the things you have to take care of? or is that just me? -amy
[2010-04-23 09:19:33] - diplomacy. ~a
[2010-04-23 08:06:38] - a: are you talking about diplomacy or sc2? - mig
[2010-04-22 23:35:21] - paul/mig/aaron/xpovos: the game appears to be running now. ~a
[2010-04-22 16:22:40] - mig: I accepted the game invite again. -Paul
[2010-04-22 16:21:59] - http://www.cnbc.com//id/36719101 MLB Games to Stream Live on PS3 -Paul
[2010-04-22 16:10:53] - for anyone who was curious the reason the game startup didn't work before was because I had left the "game name" blank, which was supposedly an optional field but caused the creation mechanism to barf when it tried to create it. - mig
[2010-04-22 16:06:28] - Brewers 20, Pirate 0. lol. - mig
[2010-04-22 15:15:23] - mig: yeah, I just found it out. Then I researched it and found out that only the first two gens were backwards compatible. The compatibility didn't even really make it out of the first year of production. That's sad. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-22 15:07:12] - xpovos: was there some recent news about this or was this something you just found out? - mig
[2010-04-22 15:01:53] - aaron: you mean another excuse to own 2 ps2s... now you need 3 ps3s... just to keep it going ~gurkie
[2010-04-22 15:01:31] - but not the skinny PS2s, cause those aren't backwards compatible with the 4-player adapter that you need for amplitude/frequency
we found that one out when kaleb was visiting, kind of a buzzkill - aaron[2010-04-22 15:00:49] - xpovos: amplitude, parappa, um jammer, frequency, and la pucelle/disgaea... i still go back to those every couple months. it's annoying that my PS3 isn't backwards compatible but i guess just another excuse to own a PS2 - aaron
[2010-04-22 14:52:02] - mig: I'll admit, I'd miss my PS1 games more than my PS2 games. About the only PS2 game I still have reason to play is FFX. But it's the principle of the thing. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-22 14:46:39] - I still have a 1st gen model, but i haven't made much use of my ps2 games for a very long time. If I for some reason had to get a slim I probably wouldn't miss it much. - mig
[2010-04-22 14:45:43] - basically, there's been no ps2 support for the ps3 models since 2008. - mig
[2010-04-22 14:36:41] - xpovos: the ps3 gave up on its backwards compatability a while ago. My model will play most ps2 games though (and maybe ps1 games). - mig
[2010-04-22 14:31:50] - aaron: some contacts rotate, I have a stigmatism so mine are weighted so they will sit in the right place... I imagine it would be quite easy to weight someones that didnt need to be weighted... ~gurkie
[2010-04-22 14:30:21] - More whoa. Whoa, whoa whoa! PS3s are no longer backwards compatable? WTF? -- Xpovos
[2010-04-22 14:27:14] - The contacts being created. I'm 99.9% sure that's not a photoshop. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-22 14:23:17] - xpovos: heh heh it's gotta be a photoshop. how else would they stay upright? don't contacts rotate as you wear them? - aaron
[2010-04-22 14:08:12] - xpovos: tech has gone far enough in terms of ... the contacts being created or the eyes being photoshopped? ~gurkie
[2010-04-22 13:56:53] - Whoa. I think technology has officially gone far enough. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-22 13:48:09] - i'm surprised cbs kept it the ncaa tourney, it seemed almost certain it was going to espn a few weeks ago. - mig
[2010-04-22 13:00:48] - March Madness goes from 65 to...68...teams. I'm sure that'll bring in lots of new revenue. - Stephen
[2010-04-22 11:53:01] - http://linuxoniphone.blogspot.com/2010/04/ive-been-working-on-this-quietly-in.html android os put on the iphone. - mig
[2010-04-22 11:10:10] - I realize the Steelers and the Rooneys in particular have a "character" thing they value a lot but it seems trading ben would be a little knee-jerky. - mig
[2010-04-22 10:46:09] - I'll send an email about the game, most likely i think at this point i may have to recreate it
[2010-04-22 10:33:00] - pierce: No fair, she wasn't ready, she didn't even have a client yet! Cheater. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-22 10:31:19] - pierce: i think aba already has a bunch of marines waiting for you. ~a
[2010-04-22 10:20:33] - *** pierce zergling rushes aba
[2010-04-22 10:10:56] - a: i'd prefer to test using the mac client that blizzard is developing for a more authentic experience. - aba
[2010-04-22 10:03:53] - Xpovos: Yeah, although McNair had been retired at the time AND had been in Baltimore for a few years. I would totally take the second coming of McNair, though. -Paul
[2010-04-22 09:43:37] - Paul: That would be damn scary for the rest of the AFC South. Particularly the Texans, as there's a lot of concern there about the lost of K. Shanahan. And I have faith that Fischer could ride herd on Roetty for a while at least--though McNair clearly had his issues with the mistresses. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-22 09:33:41] - Xpovos: Would be awesome if the Titans got him somehow. I have never been a huge fan of Vince Young, even if he has played well in spurts. -Paul
[2010-04-22 09:33:23] - Fairfax Diplomacy Game #5 does not seem to be up yet? Try it again, or might it be because the donation bucket is looking a little red? -- Xpovos
[2010-04-22 09:28:25] - Rumors are that the Steelers are looking to trade Roethlisberger now. Makes me really wish we hadn't traded for McNabb. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-22 00:01:37] - mig: I'm with you on the Big Ben deal, although I actually do feel a little sorry for him, since it seems like he didn't do anything illegal. It seems like he is being punished for partying and sleeping around. I have to imagine if the DA had any evidence that a rape occured, he would go foward with a trial. -Paul
[2010-04-21 23:40:51] - well wine runs on the mac too! ~a
[2010-04-21 23:01:52] - i have a sc2 beta key but there's no mac version yet.
- aba[2010-04-21 22:56:43] -
excellent. so . . . what's up, yo? ~a[2010-04-21 22:53:45] - a: http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=19376 -aba
[2010-04-21 22:31:11] - but will sc2 play in wine? ~a
[2010-04-21 20:21:19] - for anyone interested, if you pre-order starcraft 2 from gamestop, they will give you a beta key invite with the pre-order. you can't cancel your order once you use your key though. - mig
[2010-04-21 17:06:52] - Don't get me wrong, I think he's one of the best QBs in the league, I was on the bandwagon pre-draft. But this is at least the third serious lapse of judgement he's had. I think 6 games is extremely harsh, but that's a level of enforcement rather than enforcing or not argument. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-21 17:05:19] - As long as the comissioner is making it very clear that Roethlisberger is being suspended for being arrested for a serious crime, which itself is evidence of poor judgements which are inherently against the personal conduct policy, AND he follows it up with similar suspensions for future player offenses, I think it's probably a good thing. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-21 16:50:26] - nina: lots of people have names that correspond to their profession. just look at dick armey. - pierce
[2010-04-21 16:44:44] - a: really? his last name is Schiller?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shill -nina
[2010-04-21 16:43:49] - the NFL's goal as a business is to promote profits. their personal conduct policy is in service to that goal, not the other way around. if an offense (legal or otherwise) is high-profile then it is a bigger deal to them than a lower-profile offense that may be worse morally - pierce
[2010-04-21 16:37:10] - a: yep no hypocrisy there i'm sure. - mig
[2010-04-21 16:36:04] - aaron: did you get my email earlier? -Daniel
[2010-04-21 16:35:05] - mig: the last sentence is the best: "The Playboy app remains in the App Store, as does the Sports Illustrated app, because they come from 'more reputable companies,' according to Apple’s vice president of marketing, Phil Schiller." ~a
[2010-04-21 16:31:45] - aaron: or a lawsuit by the affected player, i guess. - mig
[2010-04-21 16:29:10] - mig: well, goodell does still have to answer to the fans, to the nfl office, he can't just do whatever he want. if he made a completely unfair decision there would be repercussions right? - aaron
[2010-04-21 16:22:56] - a: slipper slides are way more fun than slippery slopes. -nina
[2010-04-21 16:22:00] - mig: yeah, no kidding. just do a search for "NFL Football Player Rape" and a whole slew of players names come up. I doubt most of them got anything similar to what Ben got here. -nina
[2010-04-21 16:21:27] - http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/I-m-a-bit-uncomfortable-with-Goodell-s-limitless?urn=nfl,235749 hmmm, why didn't i find this earlier, I think this article more eloquently addresses my concerns. - mig
[2010-04-21 16:20:33] - i mean the personal conduct policy has already had enough consistency problems as it is even before this. - mig
[2010-04-21 16:18:37] - slippery slide! yaaaay. ~a
[2010-04-21 16:18:30] - but now the NFL commish is essentially saying that he can unilaterally suspend someone if he subjectively feels they "harmed" the league's image. I'm not feeling sorry for Ben here, but I can't help feeling this will cause some consistency problems for the NFL down the road. - mig
[2010-04-21 16:18:20] - mig: it's a slippery slide, and i agree that's kind of messed that there isn't a real code, but an arbitrary one dependent on the politics of the day and the good ole' boy network. -nina
[2010-04-21 16:17:14] - that can remotely be described as admirable, responsible, or consistent with either the values of the league or the expectations of our fans.” -nina
[2010-04-21 16:17:00] - Mig: i do like the fact that the NFL does hold their players to a higher standard - see quote from article "“My decision today is not based on a finding that you violated Georgia law, or on a conclusion that differs from that of the local prosecutor. That said, you are held to a higher standard as an NFL player, and there is nothing about your conduct in Milledgeville....
[2010-04-21 16:13:09] - nina: well the thing is there's no clear guidelines on what Ben is being suspended for. There's a personal conduct policy, but it's very vaguely written and up until now the "unofficial" guideline has been if you are arrested or charged with a crime, you probably are going to get suspended...
[2010-04-21 16:11:56] - Mig: he wasn't suspended for anything criminal / illegal. The nfl felt there was enough stuff in the testimony to warrant a punishment even if the DA didn't think there was enough evidence to get a conviction. Is the bad precedent that the NFL is punishing someone who wasn't found guilty of something? -Daniel
[2010-04-21 16:09:00] - mig: NFL players and many pro athletes are notorious for getting away with a variety of crimes. i think it's admirable that the NFL is taking such action. on the other hand, i probably would feel differently if this was the Redskin's QB. -nina
[2010-04-21 16:02:24] - nfl_talk: http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=Ap85RLqvjzJh3kVHU4h0adtDubYF?slug=ap-roethlisberger-suspension anyone else troubled by the roethlisberger suspension? I honestly think it sets a really awful precedent. - mig
[2010-04-21 15:21:51] - I don't know if I'm scared, or proud, of how few of these people I've heard of. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-21 15:21:50] - you know, if it was technically feasible to make a camera that did that I wouldn't be surprised if apple jumped on the bandwagon. they'd probably market it as a way to prevent your kids from sexting. - pierce
[2010-04-21 15:18:14] - aaron: there's a camera that automatically adds black bars? -nina
[2010-04-21 15:16:50] - pierce: they better disable the camera too. or at least make it add those black bars - aaron
[2010-04-21 15:12:03] - pierce: way to confirm my statement "porn users already know where they can and can't get porn" -nina
[2010-04-21 15:01:18] - "The Lost creators" and "J.J. Abrams" are both on there. /facepalm - pierce
[2010-04-21 15:00:56] - vinnie: heh heh remember when john linnell got ninth in People Magazine's most beautiful people of 1998 poll? and i think he got beaten by hank the angry, drunken dwarf - aaron
[2010-04-21 14:58:56] - stephen: lol. if there's ever a poll you could call a popularity contest. susan boyle? the penny arcade guys? - vinnie
[2010-04-21 14:55:43] - you're not #26, you're looking at the wrong list - aaron
[2010-04-21 14:54:20] - #26? but... i'm awesome
[2010-04-21 14:51:31] - http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1972075_1976159,00.html It would have been hilarious if Yu-Na Kim had won. - Stephen
[2010-04-21 14:51:18] - I anxiously await Apple's announcement that they're disabling Safari for the iPhone because it can be used to access porn. - pierce
[2010-04-21 14:49:27] - nina: oh i understand it. I just thought there were much better ways to put it then saying, "go buy an android instead". - mig
[2010-04-21 14:46:04] - xpovos: maybe just let internet/cable get regulated on a state-level, and whichever state does the best job gets promoted to america! - aaron
[2010-04-21 14:45:25] - xpovos: yeah, i'm on the fence on that one. stuff like internet providers, cable providers - in one sense you're right, you can't "shop around". in another sense those are luxuries, so maybe that's OK. we're getting to the age where internet is less of a luxury. i'm not sure how to figure that one out. - aaron
[2010-04-21 14:41:58] - aaron: Perhaps shockingly, I'd posit that in general the natural monopolies are not regulated sufficiently well. In most cases, they could do with more regulation and in the rest, smarter regulation. We hate cable companies. Why? Because they don't really have to respond to market forces--instead they respond to ineffective governmental regulation. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-21 14:41:50] - mig: i think jobs is trying to take the moral high ground. porn users already know where they can and can't get porn. -nina
[2010-04-21 14:40:43] - aaron: you're too agreeable. disagree with someone! (not me) - pierce
[2010-04-21 14:39:50] - and miguel's right, there are a lot of industries that do great without regulation, and the US government has been smart not to try and regulate those industries that don't need it, so props to them - aaron
[2010-04-21 14:38:45] - i think pierce is right, some things like water you just have to regulate. beachfront property, jetties, you have to regulate that. some markets just don't regulate themselves, or they regulate themselves very poorly and you end up with stuff like the dust bowl - aaron
[2010-04-21 14:33:40] - and indeed, we have a HUGE regulatory system designed to address that very issue: copyright/patent/trademark law. - pierce
[2010-04-21 14:32:44] - mig: yeah, it's an industry that does well with little regulation because it has very few of the problems I mentioned before. really, the only inconsistency it has with the traditional capitalist model is that incremental costs (production/distribution) are ridiculously tiny compared to other industries. - pierce
[2010-04-21 14:30:28] - I'm no businessman, but I can't imagine it's ever a good idea to tell people to go buy your competitor's product. - mig
[2010-04-21 14:27:35] - http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/04/steve-jobs-porn as an aside, lol, Apple. - mig
[2010-04-21 14:22:05] - mig: I think the biggest barrier to entry with IT is the groupthink of the enduser. I can't fault Microsoft (or any other company) for that. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-21 14:18:55] - I mean we can look at the IT industry. It's is for the most part fairly unregulated, though at one point most of us feared Microsoft was going to impose a new world order on it, but I don't think the barrier to entry there was ever that high even when Microsoft was at its highest peak of power. - mig
[2010-04-21 14:18:42] - xpovos: I don't think there's a strict order. I think it depends on the industry in question. - pierce
[2010-04-21 14:16:05] - pierce: Jumping ahead then, order them, Three Laws of Robotics style, then? -- Xpovos
[2010-04-21 14:15:52] - xpovos: yes. I believe it's logical to regulate natural monopolies. - pierce
[2010-04-21 14:15:05] - I'm in favor of regulatory requirements for building a power plant because of the unknown/undisclosed side effects (specifically, environmental concerns). however, implementing those regulations makes it more expensive to build a power plant, which increases the barrier to competition. - pierce
[2010-04-21 14:14:07] - mig: ah, and there's where the "smart regulation" issue comes in, because sometimes those goals are mutually exclusive. - pierce
[2010-04-21 14:13:15] - pierce: Ok, to re-phrase and perhaps clarify, you are promoting the idea that it is logical to regulate a natural monopoly? -- Xpovos
[2010-04-21 14:11:27] - xpovos: I believe clean running water is, for most purposes, a necessity in the modern age. since customers can't be expected to opt out of the product altogether, and may be very limited in terms of possible suppliers, they are inflexible in the sense that they can't necessarily promote efficiency of production by "voting with their dollars". - pierce
[2010-04-21 14:10:49] - i don't follow #1 either, because I do find regulations definitely place artificial barriers of entries to various markets (and we were just talking about that with the ca energy crisis). - mig
[2010-04-21 14:10:06] - Pierce: I'm saying that it's easy to pass off something as "deregulation" just because the sheer number of regulations decrease, when in fact the "deregulation" is more harmful. -Paul
[2010-04-21 14:09:00] - and I'm in favor of regulating utilities, which I basically define as anything that provides a function that's necessary for modern life or which has an infrastructure cost that would create artificial inertia against seeking out a better provider. - pierce
[2010-04-21 14:08:39] - Pierce: Can you get an example for #3? I'm not sure I followed that one. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-21 14:07:48] - aaron: I'm a big fan of very strictly controlling Flash. I try not to install it, (or any other Adobe product) and if I do have to, I do my best to ensure they only run on demands from an end-user (me) not because some other program thinks they should. -- Xpovos
[2010-04-21 14:06:50] - so for example, I think the FDA mandating nutrition labels and setting guidelines for recommended values is awesome regulation because dying of a heart attack at 60 is not something a reasonable consumer might see as part of the cost of buying a product that's loaded with sodium and fat. (undisclosed/unknown side effects) - pierce
[2010-04-21 14:06:37] - nina: I probably shouldn't, but I find that hilarious. Verizon has been working on getting FiOS into our townhouse development for a year or more, it seems. Still not here. I wonder if that's why. No idea if it'll be at my new place. Can't afford it anyway.
-- Xpovos[2010-04-21 14:04:39] - the way I see it, regulation is beneficial when it addresses the common failings of the theoretical capitalist model. the most common failings I see are: 1. artificial barriers to competition (barriers to entry, monopolistic practices); 2. uninformed consumers (complicated legal agreements, undisclosed side effects); 3. inflexible consumers (necessary utilities) - pierce
[2010-04-21 14:02:31] - xpovos: honestly i'm not sure. probably a hole in flash. i read about a user who was affected in this slashdot thread, it was news to me. - aaron
[2010-04-21 14:02:16] - stephen: i'm jealous that you get fios. especially since verizon came out and said they weren't going to expand fios because they think the Obama administration will cover their costs to expand anyway. So they're just going to sit back and wait. -nina
[2010-04-21 14:00:08] - paul: the number of actual regulatory rules is not the level of regulation. if I read it correctly, your statement was either assuming dumber regulations that increased the level of overall regulation, or you agree with me that increasing the level of regulation can sometimes be good. - pierce
[2010-04-21 14:00:06] - pierce: Alright, I'll acknowledge that and let's see if we can play the string along a little to get some common ground. A zero regulation environment is very likely not ideal for much of anything, as I'm not a true anarchist, I agree to this. In those circumstances, more regulation is a good thing. -- Xpovos
prev <-> next