Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 482 posts ] 

Board index : Music Talk : Rock/Pop

Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 20  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Thu May 06, 2010 10:48 am 
Offline
frostingspoon
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 3:59 pm
Posts: 24583
Location: On the gas and tappin' ass
Senator Lou Garra Wrote:


niiiiice

_________________
[quote="Bloor"]He's either done too much and should stay out of the economy, done too little because unemployment isn't 0%, is a dumb ingrate who wasn't ready for the job or a brilliant mastermind who has taken over all aspects of our lives and is transforming us into a Stalinist style penal economy where Christian Whites are fed into meat grinders. Very confusing[/quote]


Back to top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Thu May 06, 2010 12:04 pm 
Offline
Go Platinum

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 7:04 pm
Posts: 9783
Location: NOLA
When I went to take a shower this morning, only dead oil covered pelicans came out of the shower head.

_________________
I tried to find somebody of that sort that I could like that nobody else did - because everybody would adopt his group, and his group would be _it_; someone weird like Captain Beefheart. It's no different now - people trying to outdo ! each other in extremes. There are people who like X, and there are people who say X are wimps; they like Black Flag.


Back to top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Thu May 06, 2010 12:16 pm 
Offline
Gayford R. Tincture

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 12:22 pm
Posts: 13644
Location: The Weapon Store
Has there been any talk here about this little 1099 Easter egg in the healthcare bill?

http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/smallbu ... ax_change/


Back to top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Thu May 06, 2010 2:23 pm 
Offline
Go Platinum
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:41 pm
Posts: 9020
Cap'n Squirrgle Wrote:
billy g Wrote:
I'll leave the details of the software and gene isolation for you and Stone to debate. I'd guess that I still disagee with you but I'm not knowledgeable enough on the matter to understand the distinctions you and stone disagree on.



Just a quick note as someone who works near-ish the gene therapy stuff... Aaron is correct in saying that what was until recently allowed to be patented were somebody's naturally occurring genes. Company X didn't create them, and they isolated (found) them using someone else's method and tools, but they were allowed to claim any and all future use of said genes as theirs because they were the first to accurately and completely describe it... like it was a country they landed on. Essentially they were allowed to claim fundamental building blocks as their exclusive property, and from what I can see behind the curtain there is no honest reason for this other than profit protection, at the direct expense of innovation.


I think you are oversimplifying things here. I punted arguing about it from a legal standpoint because I recognize its a much less clear case than patenting a product invention and I am not educated enough on the legal authorities of the USPTO to understand really whether these were completely within their authority to issue. I think its a much more gray area than Haq or you would admit though. Yes, this was basic science but its the application of it where there is economic value. Not just the genes but the gene functions and the use of the knowledge about gene function for developing therapeutics.

I can't remember the name of the company that mapped the genome. It was almost 15 years ago. I can tell you though that they raised a boatload of money to do it though and that no one would have committed capital to it without patent protections for their discoveries. The government did have a competing project but they were taking longer. Was it really in the public interest for it to delay the advancement of science and presumably allow many people to suffer or die so that no one might make more in profits than you and Haq are comfortable with? If memory serves, this wasn't even a good financial investment. I think the stock crashed and lost about 90% of value in the early 90's.

You'll also have to explain to me how this was at the direct expense of innovation. The research wouldn't have occurred without patent protection. Furthermore, their business model was to license the rights to the discoveries to pretty much any drug company that wanted to use it to develop drug treatments? How does that do anything but encourage innovation?

I'm not sure of the legal justification for the patents but I don't agree with you on anything else here.


Back to top
 Profile WWW 
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Thu May 06, 2010 3:18 pm 
Offline
A True Aristocrat of Freedom

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:46 am
Posts: 22121
Location: a worn-out debauchee and drivelling sot
Drinky Wrote:
Has there been any talk here about this little 1099 Easter egg in the healthcare bill?

http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/smallbu ... ax_change/


Did the American Accountants Association put this in there? Good Chee--rist.

_________________
Throughout his life, from childhood until death, he was beset by severe swings of mood. His depressions frequently encouraged, and were exacerbated by, his various vices. His character mixed a superficial Enlightenment sensibility for reason and taste with a genuine and somewhat Romantic love of the sublime and a propensity for occasionally puerile whimsy.
harry Wrote:
I understand that you, of all people, know this crisis and, in your own way, are working to address it. You, the madras-pantsed julip-sipping Southern cracker and me, the oldman hippie California fruit cake are brothers in the struggle to save our country.

FT Wrote:
LooGAR (the straw that stirs the drink)


Back to top
 Profile WWW 
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Thu May 06, 2010 3:44 pm 
Offline
Gayford R. Tincture

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 12:22 pm
Posts: 13644
Location: The Weapon Store
Yeah, pretty insane.

I'm actually rooting for the Repubs to find us a way out of this one.


Back to top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Thu May 06, 2010 3:56 pm 
Offline
Go Platinum
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 1:20 pm
Posts: 7730
Location: Portland, OR
Interesting blog post about a product for musicians called BandCentral.


Back to top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Thu May 06, 2010 6:58 pm 
Offline
Go Platinum
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 7:37 pm
Posts: 5501
Location: Threadkill, CA
Nut shot.

_________________
Old's cool.


Back to top
 Profile WWW 
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Thu May 06, 2010 7:02 pm 
Offline
frostingspoon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:47 am
Posts: 13881
Location: parts unknown
Top 10 reasons to quit facebook as per some email newsletter i got today.

10. Facebook's Terms Of Service are completely one-sided

Let's start with the basics. Facebook's Terms Of Service state that not only do they own your data (section 2.1), but if you don't keep it up to date and accurate (section 4.6), they can terminate your account (section 14). You could argue that the terms are just protecting Facebook's interests, and are not in practice enforced, but in the context of their other activities, this defense is pretty weak. As you'll see, there's no reason to give them the benefit of the doubt. Essentially, they see their customers as unpaid employees for crowd-sourcing ad-targeting data.

9. Facebook's CEO has a documented history of unethical behavior

From the very beginning of Facebook's existence, there are questions about Zuckerberg's ethics. According to BusinessInsider.com, he used Facebook user data to guess email passwords and read personal email in order to discredit his rivals. These allegations, albeit unproven and somewhat dated, nonetheless raise troubling questions about the ethics of the CEO of the world's largest social network. They're particularly compelling given that Facebook chose to fork over $65M to settle a related lawsuit alleging that Zuckerberg had actually stolen the idea for Facebook.

8. Facebook has flat out declared war on privacy

Founder and CEO of Facebook, in defense of Facebook's privacy changes last January: "People have really gotten comfortable not only sharing more information and different kinds, but more openly and with more people. That social norm is just something that has evolved over time." More recently, in introducing the Open Graph API: "... the default is now social." Essentially, this means Facebook not only wants to know everything about you, and own that data, but to make it available to everybody. Which would not, by itself, necessarily be unethical, except that ...

7. Facebook is pulling a classic bait-and-switch

At the same time that they're telling developers how to access your data with new APIs, they are relatively quiet about explaining the implications of that to members. What this amounts to is a bait-and-switch. Facebook gets you to share information that you might not otherwise share, and then they make it publicly available. Since they are in the business of monetizing information about you for advertising purposes, this amounts to tricking their users into giving advertisers information about themselves. This is why Facebook is so much worse than Twitter in this regard: Twitter has made only the simplest (and thus, more credible) privacy claims and their customers know up front that all their tweets are public. It's also why the FTC is getting involved, and people are suing them (and winning).

Check out this excellent timeline from the EFF documenting the changes to Facebook's privacy policy.

6. Facebook is a bully

When Pete Warden demonstrated just how this bait-and-switch works (by crawling all the data that Facebook's privacy settings changes had inadvertently made public) they sued him. Keep in mind, this happened just before they announced the Open Graph API and stated that the "default is now social." So why sue an independent software developer and fledgling entrepreneur for making data publicly available when you're actually already planning to do that yourself? Their real agenda is pretty clear: they don't want their membership to know how much data is really available. It's one thing to talk to developers about how great all this sharing is going to be; quite another to actually see what that means in the form of files anyone can download and load into MatLab.

5. Even your private data is shared with applications

At this point, all your data is shared with applications that you install. Which means now you're not only trusting Facebook, but the application developers, too, many of whom are too small to worry much about keeping your data secure. And some of whom might be even more ethically challenged than Facebook. In practice, what this means is that all your data - all of it - must be effectively considered public, unless you simply never use any Facebook applications at all. Coupled with the OpenGraph API, you are no longer trusting Facebook, but the Facebook ecosystem.

4. Facebook is not technically competent enough to be trusted

Even if we weren't talking about ethical issues here, I can't trust Facebook's technical competence to make sure my data isn't hijacked. For example, their recent introduction of their "Like" button makes it rather easy for spammers to gain access to my feed and spam my social network. Or how about this gem for harvesting profile data? These are just the latest of a series of Keystone Kops mistakes, such as accidentally making users' profiles completely public, or the cross-site scripting hole that took them over two weeks to fix. They either don't care too much about your privacy or don't really have very good engineers, or perhaps both.

3. Facebook makes it incredibly difficult to truly delete your account

It's one thing to make data public or even mislead users about doing so; but where I really draw the line is that, once you decide you've had enough, it's pretty tricky to really delete your account. They make no promises about deleting your data and every application you've used may keep it as well. On top of that, account deletion is incredibly (and intentionally) confusing. When you go to your account settings, you're given an option to deactivate your account, which turns out not to be the same thing as deleting it. Deactivating means you can still be tagged in photos and be spammed by Facebook (you actually have to opt out of getting emails as part of the deactivation, an incredibly easy detail to overlook, since you think you're deleting your account). Finally, the moment you log back in, you're back like nothing ever happened! In fact, it's really not much different from not logging in for awhile. To actually delete your account, you have to find a link buried in the on-line help (by "buried" I mean it takes five clicks to get there). Or you can just click here. Basically, Facebook is trying to trick their users into allowing them to keep their data even after they've "deleted" their account.

2. Facebook doesn't (really) support the Open Web

The so-called Open Graph API is named so as to disguise its fundamentally closed nature. It's bad enough that the idea here is that we all pitch in and make it easier than ever to help Facebook collect more data about you. It's bad enough that most consumers will have no idea that this data is basically public. It's bad enough that they claim to own this data and are aiming to be the one source for accessing it. But then they are disingenuous enough to call it "open," when, in fact, it is completely proprietary to Facebook. You can't use this feature unless you're on Facebook. A truly open implementation would work with whichever social network we prefer, and it would look something like OpenLike. Similarly, they implement just enough of OpenID to claim they support it, while aggressively promoting a proprietary alternative, Facebook Connect.

1. The Facebook application itself sucks

Between the farms and the mafia wars and the "top news" (which always guesses wrong - is that configurable somehow?) and the myriad privacy settings and the annoying ads (with all that data about me, the best they can apparently do is promote dating sites, because, uh, I'm single) and the thousands upon thousands of crappy applications, Facebook is almost completely useless to me at this point. Yes, I could probably customize it better, but the navigation is ridiculous, so I don't bother. (And, yet, somehow, I can't even change colors or apply themes or do anything to make my page look personalized.) Let's not even get into how slowly your feed page loads. Basically, at this point, Facebook is more annoying than anything else.

Facebook is clearly determined to add every feature of every competing social network in an attempt to take over the Web (this is a never-ending quest that goes back to AOL and those damn CDs that were practically falling out of the sky). While Twitter isn't the most usable thing in the world, at least they've tried to stay focused and aren't trying to be everything to everyone.

I often hear people talking about Facebook as though they were some sort of monopoly or public trust. Well, they aren't. They owe us nothing. They can do whatever they want, within the bounds of the laws. (And keep in mind, even those criteria are pretty murky when it comes to social networking.) But that doesn't mean we have to actually put up with them. Furthermore, their long-term success is by no means guaranteed - have we all forgotten MySpace? Oh, right, we have. Regardless of the hype, the fact remains that Sergei Brin or Bill Gates or Warren Buffett could personally acquire a majority stake in Facebook without even straining their bank account. And Facebook's revenue remains more or less a rounding error for more established tech companies.

While social networking is a fun new application category enjoying remarkable growth, Facebook isn't the only game in town. I don't like their application nor how they do business and so I've made my choice to use other providers. And so can you.

Dan Yoder is a serial entrepreneur and the VP of Engineering at Border Stylo, a Hollywood-based social media startup. He can be reached on Twitter as @dyoder

_________________
http://www.geminicrow.com


Back to top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Thu May 06, 2010 7:17 pm 
Offline
Go Platinum
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:41 pm
Posts: 9020
I don't like how you have to keep such a close eye on Facebook's ever changing privacy policies and settings but I think anyone is nuts to share a lot of information that they really expect to stay private. It also seems a bit dubious to me to expect Facebook to offer the service and not look for ways to monetize our information. The dealbreaker for me would be if they started to charge me for having an account.


Back to top
 Profile WWW 
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Thu May 06, 2010 9:03 pm 
Offline
Go Platinum
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 1:20 pm
Posts: 7730
Location: Portland, OR
http://christineptran.com/2010/05/do-yo ... -facebook/

Some valuable links on that page on how to reduce your "connections" and opt-out of things. Facebook is a sneaky motherfucker, but like with anything in life, you gotta pay attention to what you're "agreeing" to.


Back to top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Thu May 06, 2010 10:59 pm 
Offline
Go Platinum
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 8:40 pm
Posts: 5289
Location: Jacksonville, FL
I'm gon' roast a hog next Satiday for 40 or so friends.

Image


Back to top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Fri May 07, 2010 10:59 am 
Offline
frostingspoon
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 3:59 pm
Posts: 24583
Location: On the gas and tappin' ass
billy g Wrote:
Cap'n Squirrgle Wrote:
billy g Wrote:
I'll leave the details of the software and gene isolation for you and Stone to debate. I'd guess that I still disagee with you but I'm not knowledgeable enough on the matter to understand the distinctions you and stone disagree on.



Just a quick note as someone who works near-ish the gene therapy stuff... Aaron is correct in saying that what was until recently allowed to be patented were somebody's naturally occurring genes. Company X didn't create them, and they isolated (found) them using someone else's method and tools, but they were allowed to claim any and all future use of said genes as theirs because they were the first to accurately and completely describe it... like it was a country they landed on. Essentially they were allowed to claim fundamental building blocks as their exclusive property, and from what I can see behind the curtain there is no honest reason for this other than profit protection, at the direct expense of innovation.


I think you are oversimplifying things here. I punted arguing about it from a legal standpoint because I recognize its a much less clear case than patenting a product invention and I am not educated enough on the legal authorities of the USPTO to understand really whether these were completely within their authority to issue. I think its a much more gray area than Haq or you would admit though. Yes, this was basic science but its the application of it where there is economic value. Not just the genes but the gene functions and the use of the knowledge about gene function for developing therapeutics.

I can't remember the name of the company that mapped the genome. It was almost 15 years ago. I can tell you though that they raised a boatload of money to do it though and that no one would have committed capital to it without patent protections for their discoveries. The government did have a competing project but they were taking longer. Was it really in the public interest for it to delay the advancement of science and presumably allow many people to suffer or die so that no one might make more in profits than you and Haq are comfortable with? If memory serves, this wasn't even a good financial investment. I think the stock crashed and lost about 90% of value in the early 90's.

You'll also have to explain to me how this was at the direct expense of innovation. The research wouldn't have occurred without patent protection. Furthermore, their business model was to license the rights to the discoveries to pretty much any drug company that wanted to use it to develop drug treatments? How does that do anything but encourage innovation?

I'm not sure of the legal justification for the patents but I don't agree with you on anything else here.


Good points. Quick answer:

What I was unhappy with wasn't the original cracking of the genome or any patents granted to the people who figure out how to do it. Also notice what you said about their announced intentions: to share it with anyone who wanted it, which is in the spirit of what Aaron and I are trying to say, not in the spirit of "I got the patent - fuck y'all dis mine." What I was unhappy with was the patentability of actual gene sequences from somebody. Like, if you gave a biopsy at a clinic one day, and it was tested at a lab and found to have a rare type of mutated cyst or something. Depending on what waiver you signed when you checked in at the clinic, the testing company may well have been able to analyze the cells, break down the genome sequence they cared about, and then patent that sequence. It was naturally occurring in you, they didn't create it. But they could patent it and have exclusive rights to any profits they make off of your cells. Just doesn't really seem correct to me.

_________________
[quote="Bloor"]He's either done too much and should stay out of the economy, done too little because unemployment isn't 0%, is a dumb ingrate who wasn't ready for the job or a brilliant mastermind who has taken over all aspects of our lives and is transforming us into a Stalinist style penal economy where Christian Whites are fed into meat grinders. Very confusing[/quote]


Back to top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Fri May 07, 2010 4:34 pm 
Offline
Go Platinum

Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 1:38 pm
Posts: 7979
at 8am, a director for a train system committed suicide by throwing himself in front of a train.
at 11am, there was a homicide/suicide at an old navy three blocks from my office.
at noon, two people were shot while driving on a highway.

what a morning...


Back to top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Fri May 07, 2010 4:43 pm 
Offline
Go Platinum
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:41 pm
Posts: 9020
Z Wrote:
at 8am, a director for a train system committed suicide by throwing himself in front of a train.
at 11am, there was a homicide/suicide at an old navy three blocks from my office.
at noon, two people were shot while driving on a highway.

what a morning...


damn. sounds like a luke haines song.


Back to top
 Profile WWW 
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Fri May 07, 2010 4:44 pm 
Offline
Go Platinum
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 5:48 pm
Posts: 8062
Location: yer ma
Image

_________________
toots Wrote:
COMPUTER...ENHANCE...


Back to top
 Profile WWW 
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Fri May 07, 2010 5:18 pm 
Offline
Go Platinum
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 7:37 pm
Posts: 5501
Location: Threadkill, CA
Z Wrote:
at 8am, a director for a train system committed suicide by throwing himself in front of a train.


Once I was on a train held up by a suicide. There just happened to be a group of train drivers sitting across the aisle from me and they got talking about suicides and I eavesdropped into the conversation.

Far from being mentally scared by something like that happening they were joking, laughing and comparing 'fighter ace scores'.

The oldest one, who looked to be near retirement age (perhaps early 60's) and could be assumed to have driven trains for 40+ years put the rest in the shade with his score of 12.

_________________
Old's cool.


Back to top
 Profile WWW 
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Fri May 07, 2010 5:28 pm 
Offline
Go Platinum

Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 1:38 pm
Posts: 7979
Finch Platte Wrote:
Z Wrote:
at 8am, a director for a train system committed suicide by throwing himself in front of a train.

I have a friend who works with trains. She says it's a total clusterfuck when someone commits suicide in front of a train.

So this guy knew what he was doing, yeah.

the story online says he was actually carrying the system's procedures for service disruptions after a suicide. how prescient...


Back to top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Fri May 07, 2010 6:14 pm 
Offline
Go Platinum
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 8:40 pm
Posts: 5289
Location: Jacksonville, FL
The aftermath of even a small car-set, like, say, a monorail, hitting a human being is really not a pretty sight. I know from experience, and I NEVER want to deal with that again.


Back to top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Fri May 07, 2010 6:44 pm 
Offline
Go Platinum
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 7:37 pm
Posts: 5501
Location: Threadkill, CA
Shit, I'd never make it to the house if I were delivering these.

_________________
Old's cool.


Back to top
 Profile WWW 
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Fri May 07, 2010 7:25 pm 
Offline
Go Platinum
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:37 pm
Posts: 7618
Location: Knee-deep and sinking
Finch Platte Wrote:
Shit, I'd never make it to the house if I were delivering these.


I've been to that brewery, and yes, they make a fine product.


Back to top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Sat May 08, 2010 5:35 pm 
Offline
Garage Band
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2008 11:50 am
Posts: 576
Location: Mundus illegitimis
Finch Platte Wrote:
Z Wrote:
at 8am, a director for a train system committed suicide by throwing himself in front of a train.


I have a friend who works with trains. She says it's a total clusterfuck when someone commits suicide in front of a train.

So this guy knew what he was doing, yeah.


This happened about 400 yards from my gym. Dude was going down for embezzlement.

_________________
Image


Back to top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Mon May 10, 2010 3:10 am 
Offline
Cutler Apologist
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 6:44 pm
Posts: 7978
Location: a secret lab underneath the volcano
Image

_________________
No. The beard stays. You go.



Image


Back to top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Mon May 10, 2010 10:36 am 
Offline
frostingspoon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:35 am
Posts: 14323
Location: cincy
"slept for two days"

lmao


Back to top
 Profile WWW 
 
 Post subject: Re: MAY RANDOM
PostPosted: Mon May 10, 2010 11:46 am 
Offline
KILLFILED

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:14 pm
Posts: 15027
Location: There n' here.
Image
Image

Law enforcement finally gets a seat on the high court.


Back to top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 482 posts ] 

Board index : Music Talk : Rock/Pop

Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 20  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Style by Midnight Phoenix & N.Design Studio
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.