Talk:XML/DTD: Difference between revisions

Talk:XML/DTD (edit)

Revision as of 00:57, 26 April 2003

976 bytes added , 26 April 2003

objections

Anonymous user

142.177.75.22

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-And a real-live-person DTD is critical to ensure that anyone who participates in an extremely offensive production process can be excluded across all of a buyer's purchasing decisions, regardless of what shell companies or front groups are in use for them to hide behind.  A small number of individuals tend to be involved in decisions that lead to Indonesian rainforest devastation, or similar problems in Brazil and Congo.  These people must be identified and very reliably targetted so that their participation becomes poisonous to any commercial effort anywhere in the world, and others get the message that they will economically suffer if their name is linked in any way to ecologically devastating activity.
+And a real-live-person DTD is critical to ensure that anyone who participates in an '''extremely offensive''' production process (or is clearly responsible for spreading something like [http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=SARS SARS] and contributing to a [http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Toronto_respiratory_health_crisis major crisis] now affecting all humans) can be excluded across all of a buyer's purchasing decisions, '''regardless''' of what shell companies or front groups are in use for them to hide behind.  A small number of individuals tend to be involved in decisions that lead to Indonesian rainforest devastation, or similar problems in Brazil and Congo.  These people must be identified and very reliably targetted so that their participation becomes poisonous to any commercial effort anywhere in the world, and others get the message that they will economically suffer if their name is linked in any way to ecologically devastating activity.
 :Whoa. Hold your horses.
@@ Line 80: / Line 80: @@
 ----
 ==About [[m:person_DTD]]==
-I'm moving this stuff about [[m:person_DTD]] here, because Consumerium project needs to be pragmatic and sensible, which in my mind means for one thing that we are not going to get 100% accurate information in the system most of the time. The key to pulling this whole project off is that we have to convince people that we '''TRY''' to provide them reasonably reliable information and the possibility of [[disinformation]] is something that people should keep in mind, but not let it bother them too much. Otherwise we might just as well be trying to modify lottery machines to run [[nuclear]] power plants --[[User:Consumerium|Consumerium]] 20:15 Apr 25, 2003 (EEST)
+I'm moving this stuff about [[m:person_DTD]] here, because Consumerium project needs to be pragmatic and sensible,
+:you are making it useless, not pragmatic, not sensible, by ignoring this and making it impossible to target people or groups who get away with horrors.
+ which in my mind means for one thing that we are not going to get 100% accurate information in the system most of the time.
+:you don't need it, balance of probability is fine in a weighted decision.  if all I get out at the end is a 'buy or don't buy' or 'try substitute' decision then I don't even have to reveal the data involved.
+The key to pulling this whole project off is that we have to convince people that we '''TRY''' to provide them reasonably reliable information and the possibility of [[disinformation]] is something that people should keep in mind, but not let it bother them too much. Otherwise we might just as well be trying to modify lottery machines to run [[nuclear]] power plants --[[User:Consumerium|Consumerium]] 20:15 Apr 25, 2003 (EEST)
+:this makes no sense to me at all - you stop disinformation by reducing the total number of data items you use and focusing strictly on those, making it easy to dispute what is said about those, NOT by having a lot of data.  to focus on people more than processes reduces the data items and makes the whole process more reliable.
 ===persons ===