boredguy8

Works wonders for long passages.

People's arguments that you have an expectation of privacy are irrelevant: you have a genuine expectation of privacy in your home. If the state shows there's a compelling interest to enter your home (i.e. obtains a warrant), you can't stop them. Similarly, you can't stop them from decrypting your data. Well, you can, but you're going to suffer as a result.

Similarly, you don't have to show your hiding places. Suppose you had an encrypted folder structure and one of the folders was hidden to someone who doesn't understand how to see hidden folders. You don't have to say "there's a hidden folder", just like you don't have to say, "There's a false floor." Encryption isn't a 'hiding place': they've found the data.

Encryption is a locked door. The state wants to know what's behind it. Opening your front door to the police holding a warrant isn't self-incrimination (i.e. it in no way points to your guilt or innocence). Similarly, entering the password to your encrypted drive isn't self incrimination if the state has proved you're the sole possessor of the device.

Although the only way the password content can be incriminating is via the language of the password, the fact that a password works on a particular machine may be incriminating. This is the only line of argument that could work, for what it's worth, and none of these 'privacy' lines of argument. "Your honor, the state has no compelling basis for thinking my client had possession or knowledge of the drive in question. Compelling my client to enter a password on the chance it could unlock the files would prove that they did have possession or knowledge of the drive." &c. But once the state can show it's your encrypted data, it's game over. Fortunately, it's this "foregone conclusion" line of argument that the EFF actually pursues, and not the 'Privacy' line that seems to be popular in these replies.

But it doesn't seem to me that we'd expect to see an immediate bump in iPhone's numbers from Verizon for at least three reasons unrelated to the platform's (potential) desirability:

1) The iPhone has a lot more competition among Verizon customers. For a while, if you wanted a good smartphone with AT&T, you were getting an iPhone. We wouldn't expect to see "auto-flocking" to the iPhone on Verizon like there was on AT&T for that reason.

2) Contract rollover inhibits fast reaction to new developments. I know a substantial number of people who went Android with the Motorola Droid release in November, 2009. For a 2 year contract, that means November, 2011 is when those customers will be reevaluating their smartphone brand.

3) For some people who wanted an iPhone, they probably bought an iPhone regardless of the network. iPhone on Verizon was (or will be) a chance for some people to change carriers and keep the phone they love.

I think those three factors inhibit a massive switch to iPhone simply because of its availability on a new carrier. Other factors may play a role, too. For instance, AT&T put a lot of their own advertising weight behind the iPhone. Verizon hasn't platformed the iPhone in the same way.

Using Google's example: If I have a biking group and a work group, there's probably someone in the intersection of those two groups. I might want to share something with my biking group but not share it with my work group. There's not a mechanism to do that, that I can find, in Google+.

On the other hand, in Facebook, if I post something but restrict it from my work group, people that are in my work group won't see the post even if they're also in another group that does have permission.

This is a vastly superior approach, it seems to me.

No, you have years of experience in a medium that prepared you to interpret that event a certain way.

"it was because you were prepped by playing the game to experience that scene in a particular way."

That's like saying, "Yeah, I jumped into the Iliad at the funeral games for Patroclus, and I just don't get it: it didn't have an impact at all." Duh. The literary experience leading up to that event leads to a connection to the characters that has little weight if you skip it. Saying the same thing applies to video games isn't an argument as to why video games can't be expressive. It means they can, and you have to invest in them to have that experience, much like reading a book.

And the best games aren't "built around" movie-like cutscenes. But suppose they were, and that those scenes were evocative. How, exactly, is that a bad thing? It's not, unless you've a priori decided it is.

I think at their best, video games do better than "shitty movies". If someone made a list of "Top 10 Moments" from film & video games, I'm betting Aeris' death at the hands of Sepiroth makes that list.

It seems to me that Hulu is way worse for cable companies than Netflix, as Hulu lets me watch current shows nearly immediately. If I didn't have Hulu, I might get basic cable for current shows.

At that point, it's just a game of 'guess the password'. http://lesswrong.com/lw/iq/guessing_the_teachers_password/

She also led the Win 7 overhaul, for which I'm forever thankful if only because of the changes to how title bars work (being able to drag to maximize or cover 1/2 the screen, for instance). It was so intuitive that one day I was complaining about how Windows DIDN'T do that, but was on a Win7 box and it worked. I know Jobs likes to use the word "magic", but that was the first time I experienced it with a UI.

I'm wary of the changes I see outlined here, but I think that might, again, be the consequence of having adapted myself to bad design that's been prevalent. Past experience has me hoping I'm wrong to be wary, and I'll be delighted if I am.

That's not true. Just empirically not true. Additionally, you didn't include fully-loaded costs in your blog. Trivially: how many hours go into testing and deploying updates? What is your AV update subscription annual cost? Those are just the first two I noticed without really re-thinking the problem.

I'm now in the habit of accepting and reflecting. Not only is it generous, it also tends to be true. "Wow, Bob, you got N done really fast and you did a great job, thanks!" "My pleasure, Steve - I couldn't have done it without Mary's help." Getting in the habit of forcing myself to give others credit _really_ opened my eyes to how solo efforts are still group efforts: "My pleasure, Steve - I couldn't have done it without Mary picking up my other clients' work during this project."

Worst case scenario, where you're convinced it really is solo work or where deflecting 'correctly' takes too much explanation, accept and deflect to the praiser. "My pleasure, Steve. Thanks for saying something."

I'm not sure this approach is "right", but it's what I've been doing in the face of the dilemma you mention.

Some more nuanced advice would have been nice, so I'll toss this out there: my current effort is to avoid over-qualifying what I say. Because I care about precision & nuance (and being 'actually right'), I can end up taking 90 seconds to say something that a 'normal person' can say in 15. "I thought it was a pretty good movie" turns into, "Though the cinematography seemed like it was trying too hard to be cinematography (though it resulted in some moments of beautiful film,), I thought the actors did great. Obviously not his best acting, but pretty good, really, considering that..."

Conversational negotiation demands shorter transactions: if the other person wants to know more they'll ask, "Oh, what did you like about it?"

It's hard stuff :)

Thanks for the additional info, though: having the follow-up links makes me less sad I posted it.

Your kids can be punished and rewarded in ways that matter. It's hard to imagine, though, someone with the Ring of Gyges staying moral for very long. And with strong AI, that being could easily be equally free from repercussions.

If AI Blue can't be socially ostracized or punished, your "it's just a kid" story quickly breaks down. And it turns out "follow these examples" runs into problems when you ask "why?" about 3 to 5 times.

I like this one because the two left-right components switch the period of the beat on the 5th and 9th rows (themselves also alternating pitch and period) while not breaking the base beat.

I do with the "make link" would let you 'bookmark' a phase: the way it started out went through some cool sequences before stabilizing into this.

I also dislike the lack of points because I find myself voting things down more than I would before. In the past, if something were at 0 or -1 points, usually I'd think, "They probably get the point." Now I find myself downvoting things that probably don't need one more down vote.

And I've often wished for an LA->LV option that wasn't either shady or as expensive as the cost of a Southwest ticket.