I usually work in research and I find this paradigm to be extremely appealing. The 9-5 think in research is complete bull. You don't get more insightful or innovative while being force to sit at your desk staring at a screen
I go to the University of Waterloo in Canada and we have no such censorship in the least. They occasionally clamp down on people on the residence internal network who share a ton of copyrighted material but by and large you can torrent and such (assuming you have the bandwidth) all you want. There's even a rez DC++ channel for intra-residence file sharing. As for blocking sites, no sites are blocked. You can look at porn in the CS lab if you want (and i'm sure some do).
Firstly, Democritus was the first one to muse about some threshold for indivisibility of matter. Secondly, much of physics (most notably QM) has come from ignoring 'peanut gallery' philosophers and following the math and data. Thirdly, as a physicist-in-training (not done grad yet) myself I find it quite irritating when philosophers who have no grounding in math weigh in with an opinion on math based theories, reading scientific american or 'elegant universe' doesn't actually mean you know anything about the theories mentioned. Fourthly, attributing the discovery of atomic properties by people like rutherford to democritus is a kin to attributing the Cold War to Nostradamus. Democritus presented one of many metaphysical views on some metaphysical issue and no one in early atomic physics was setting out to prove him right or probably cared the slightest bit about him. It's like saying that if there is a myth in some ancient shamanistic culture called 'X' where they believed that an animal god filled the world with tiny loops of twine to create the world then culture X is responsible for string theory and knew about it long before everyone else clued in and we should listen to culture X more often. Metaphysical rambling is not the spring board to a complex mathematical theory. Finally, I'd love to hear how string theory was first proposed by philosophers. If anyone could be attributed as some far reaching figure from the past who inspired string theory it would most definetly be Leonard Euler.
Slashdot Mirror
I usually work in research and I find this paradigm to be extremely appealing. The 9-5 think in research is complete bull. You don't get more insightful or innovative while being force to sit at your desk staring at a screen
I go to the University of Waterloo in Canada and we have no such censorship in the least. They occasionally clamp down on people on the residence internal network who share a ton of copyrighted material but by and large you can torrent and such (assuming you have the bandwidth) all you want. There's even a rez DC++ channel for intra-residence file sharing. As for blocking sites, no sites are blocked. You can look at porn in the CS lab if you want (and i'm sure some do).
Firstly, Democritus was the first one to muse about some threshold for indivisibility of matter. Secondly, much of physics (most notably QM) has come from ignoring 'peanut gallery' philosophers and following the math and data. Thirdly, as a physicist-in-training (not done grad yet) myself I find it quite irritating when philosophers who have no grounding in math weigh in with an opinion on math based theories, reading scientific american or 'elegant universe' doesn't actually mean you know anything about the theories mentioned. Fourthly, attributing the discovery of atomic properties by people like rutherford to democritus is a kin to attributing the Cold War to Nostradamus. Democritus presented one of many metaphysical views on some metaphysical issue and no one in early atomic physics was setting out to prove him right or probably cared the slightest bit about him. It's like saying that if there is a myth in some ancient shamanistic culture called 'X' where they believed that an animal god filled the world with tiny loops of twine to create the world then culture X is responsible for string theory and knew about it long before everyone else clued in and we should listen to culture X more often. Metaphysical rambling is not the spring board to a complex mathematical theory. Finally, I'd love to hear how string theory was first proposed by philosophers. If anyone could be attributed as some far reaching figure from the past who inspired string theory it would most definetly be Leonard Euler.