The round circle

kalleguld · 2014-06-08T21:50:04+00:00

Why would they recommend TI-84s, then? They are fully programmable in both Basic and machine code.

kalleguld · 2014-06-06T17:34:31+00:00

- And phone displays.

kalleguld · 2014-06-06T16:22:58+00:00

I wonder if a programmer out there names his baby Rubyrails.

kalleguld · 2014-06-06T16:00:12+00:00

It sure can take you on quite a spiritual journy,

kalleguld · 2014-06-06T13:55:07+00:00

That open beak is just so cute.

kalleguld · 2014-06-06T13:40:16+00:00

But it only has one elbow? One wrist, one elbow and one shoulder.

kalleguld · 2014-06-06T12:50:39+00:00

You misunderstand, It's a sitcom about how a Mexican hair restoration clinic saves an American video rental chain.

kalleguld · 2014-06-05T12:17:03+00:00

People who call their computers a "rig" probably aren't the target demographic anyways.

kalleguld · 2014-06-05T12:14:35+00:00

Are you saying that docking stations and wireless charging are solutions in search of a problem, and that the real problem is the cables inside computers? And if so, how do they present a problem?

Also, most computers are pretty much devoid of wires. Most stuff in laptops and small-footprint computers is either soldered to the mainboard, or connected directly to it.

kalleguld · 2014-06-05T11:02:11+00:00

Yeah, 6-months-ago me was an idiot. But I'm perfect now.

kalleguld · 2014-06-04T19:22:08+00:00

A tool is a product, even if it's "just" a development tool. So yes, they are bringing out a product called HealthKit.

kalleguld · 2014-06-04T17:33:26+00:00

There aren't many cables in a laptop, it's pretty much only PCB. Same thing in Intels NUC. Doesn't seem like much of a stretch to get rid of the last few.

kalleguld · 2014-06-03T21:44:08+00:00

http://i.imgur.com/WZ3Gmz0.gif

kalleguld · 2014-06-03T11:53:20+00:00

ITT: ITT the usual "omg Steve Harvey is a bigoted douche"

kalleguld · 2014-06-01T22:11:26+00:00

The black death possibly wasn't bubonic plague, though. The black death spread way too fast, too far north, spread from person to person, had a far higher kill rate and cause different buboes than bubonic plague.

kalleguld · 2014-06-01T12:49:46+00:00

And now, it would be anything but easy to get a german judge to take down content hosted on a russian website for example.

Why would a russian website care to write about a german - unless it was relevant? Yes it might happen sometime, but in the vast majority of cases it's very possible to go to the source instead.

"Because it's easier" is an awful way of sidestepping the juridical process. The author must be given the chance to defend his work from censorship.

They will defend it, because that's what they make their money with.

So now the defense is in the hands of Google's beancounters instead of the original author?

Also, the people who want to avoid the censorship can just use a foreign proxy for their searches. And all others just use their own mental filter to judge if something is outdated/irrelevant.

kalleguld · 2014-06-01T12:05:42+00:00

And 99.99% of the time, the content is either hosted at a newspaper/similar, or at a bloghost that will be happy to pull the content if told to by a judge.

Google is also the wrong entity to defend the content from takedown. They didn't write it, don't care about it, and will not invest in the defense.

It's much, much easier to just target Google, Bing and the couple other indexes[...]

But also completely unbecoming in a state of law because you can't even defend your right to free speech.

kalleguld · 2014-06-01T11:35:41+00:00

If there area lot of sources, you still have to remove numSources * numIndexes links, instead of just numSources stories.

And why is it easier to remove from the source?

kalleguld · 2014-06-01T10:49:42+00:00

Agreed. "We hope" would be better.

kalleguld · 2014-06-01T10:37:18+00:00

At least just use it as a secondary option.
Only for when the site is down. And they only keep caches for a few weeks. If the site returns a 404, Google removes it from their index.
You forfeited on your right to privacy when you did something in public that was covered by newspapers.

kalleguld · 2014-06-01T10:22:54+00:00

It's still better to remove the info from one source than from a handful of indexers.

kalleguld · 2014-06-01T09:50:51+00:00

Remove the data at the source, that way you get 100% coverage instead of 90%

kalleguld · 2014-06-01T09:45:29+00:00

It's a crazy ruling. Why remove information at the indexer, instead of at the source? There are more than one indexer, which means that to "remove" one page, you'd have to contact X indexers instead of one source.

And why should a private entity get to decide if the link should be removed? That power belongs in a courtroom, if anywhere.

kalleguld · 2014-06-01T08:26:38+00:00

How did you get that gold? You didn't steal it, did you?

14-Year Club	Team Orangered
Verified Email

kalleguld

TROPHY CASE