As long as you get to tell the computers what to do then you should just relax and exploit them to their maximum benefit. Don't give them to much power or self-awareness and they won't become as arrogant as the people who created them.
Groups tend to be a moderating influence on the individual. So extremes of genius and stupidity are tempered by peer pressure. In small groups it can be presumed (at least) that compatible mindsets of genius can outmatch individual mindsets of genius. Groupthink is only (wholly) bad if the premise of thought is flawed.
For "scientists" groupthink shouldn't even be an issue because "Groupthink is a type of thought exhibited by group members who try to minimize conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analyzing, and evaluating ideas." (Ref. Wikipedia). A group of individual scientists by definition would be the antithesis of Group Think, though irrationality often trumps education and ideals.
Having alternative opinions and personalities is often better than following one bad or mediocre idea. In business however, things are often dictatorial and goals are driven by shareholders whose goals are only abstractly reflected in a balance sheet.
If somebody wouldn't have invented the wheel before me then I would have become quite famous, although I'm sure the venture capitalists would have stolen the company from under my feet and probably sold my ideas to the Big Three.
In the US, I'm not sure if this is government planning, or media ineptitude. The media routinely focuses on non-essential topics, barely giving important political and governmental topics any airtime at all (and mostly mis-representing the facts when they do).
I remember watching a CNN special on torture. The host of the show said whenever the company airs episodes like that their ratings go down. As long as their are commercials on the news, then the news will be as shallow as the lowest common denominator.
It doesn't matter what the question is. The non-answers given (if at all) will be the same non-answers given by any public relations department of any government agency. A person cannot expect a serious and forthright answer from an employee who has an agenda to consider. My past experience in writing to governments speaks for itself.
The statement from Burnham is quite open that his priority is supporting the artists no matter what. When do the other 60 million of the population get their go?
Unless the government will guarantee that the artists get the majority of the income generated by these new and improved laws, instead of the record companies and their shareholders and executives, then Burnham is lying.
Perhaps, but neither is banging your head against a wall.
And neither is cynicism.
And often times reality is not a good thing. One can never really control the ebb and flow of oceans, but try to surf towards calmer waters. Revolutions usually end in violence, but sometimes small gestures of defiance can dampen the waves.
On the other hands if the artists are stupid enough to sign up on a contract that bad and don't try to go alone or start up something together with better benefits for them what's the problem?
That's the thing, being a good musician does not usually equate into financial or business acumen. Specialization of labour (or division of labour) is productive and advantageous for a business but not for the labourer. Considering the fact that (in the past at least, though things may be changing somewhat now) the music conglomerates had a virtual monopoly on success and could afford to create and manipulate artists with the promise of becoming rich.
Frame the issue as an emotion, not logic. Then emotion biases any interpretation of facts. Political people are very good at manipulation of peoples emotions.
I would presume that most people who buy a movie would be more interested in watching it than cracking it. That said, they would also prefer the options of making backups and storing it on hard disks, or whatever devices they may choose without having to worry about DRM issues.
The best way to manage programmers is to make sure their coffee cups are always full and that their are plenty of healthy (and free as in beer) snacks lying around in convenient locations. Make sure there are real plants in the office and make sure they are taken care of. Other than that keep out of their way, keep quiet and only speak to them when you are spoken to.
Well it looks like you win. Your ad hominems get modded up, and my observations get modded Troll and Flamebait. Congratulations. (Actually the only reason I'm posting this is so that more of the Troll modders here will waste their mod points). How low can my Karma go?
Egocentrism is a bitch and it has flawed your logic.
Half true; ego centrism is what most people possess, unfortunately they are only able to see it in other people and their ideas. Though I'm probably wasting my time here, as is usual. Maybe, just maybe somebody may be inspired to think beyond their Weltanschauung.
Just because YOU think something is "common sense" doesn't mean it works for everyone else.
True. But generally when I second guess myself I end up losing. People may think it's stupid to give up their cars, but in all hypocrisy I can see people blaming "socialists" in another 50 or so years when the run-away greenhouse effect is causing air conditioners to overheat, farms to turn into dust bowls, massive inflation and financial crises, etc. By that time my Karma will be so low that it would matter even less of what I thought.
This is especially true when comparing differences between Europe and the United States. Our big spacious suburbs can't work in the UK, and the nice U-bahn/S-bahn system in Germany won't work in the US. There is no "common sense" to apply, because nothing is common.
Funny, because when the German President visited Canada he was amazed at all the spacious land they have for wind farms and yet Canada only has a small fraction of wind farms compared to Germany. But yes, I understand, it's not everybody else who is wrong, it must be me. Because everybody else thinks differently from me then everybody else is apparently correct and I am apparently wrong and deserve to get modded Troll and Flamebait.
There is no "common sense" to apply, because nothing is common.
Aside from science, there are cultural issues to contend with, but I alluded to that originally when I talked about mindset and attitude.
Austin is considered to be one of the friendlier bike cities, yet on Tuesday it was 83F (28C), and then on Wednesday it was 30F (-1C). Good luck riding your bike in that. Oh yeah, and most of my coworkers live at least 20-30 miles from work.
-1 seems quite ideal for riding. 30 is a bit warm, but as long as you are dressed appropriately and have a suitable change of clothing for work everything should be good to go. The temp differences that you allude to aren't too unusual for where I live, but the ranges are usually spread out more over time. 20 to 30 miles is a perfect range for a bike ride. For hilly terrain one could supplement a motor on the back wheel. Of course in the long run it would be appropriate to make sure your politicians support mass transit, bike lanes, and make sure that the urban planners build businesses near residences (where feasible of course).
I know my ideas may sound radical to Americans, but it wouldn't help to at least have a few beers and try to open up your thinking a bit.
It's environmentally realistic. But attitude-wise it isn't. Take for example your argument:
Even if a man only lives 20 blocks from work, he'll reach an age where biking is simply impractical. What does he do then, just starve to death cold and alone in his crappy little apartment he left the suburbs for?
It's easy enough to counter: 1) Most people retire when they are too old to work 2) Most people have alternate means of transportation when their ideal source is unavailable.
It seems like people are going out of their way to create reasons why they can't do anything environmentally sustainable. People's attitudes are so negative on this issue that they are labeling my posts Troll and Flamebait. That's what I mean when I say it's an attitude problem. People won't even consider other arguments much less the reality there may very well be a run-away greenhouse effect within the next 50 years.
BTW, I note that YOU didn't bother moderating me Troll or Flaimbait in the parent post, but I've still noticed the Overrated mod and am pointing it out for the Metamoderators. You may continue to down mod me as long as you have mod points.
Slashdot Mirror
Having a government mandated filter would set a dangerous precedent. Free is fine, but caveats aren't free. Or do they mean free as in repressed?
As long as you get to tell the computers what to do then you should just relax and exploit them to their maximum benefit. Don't give them to much power or self-awareness and they won't become as arrogant as the people who created them.
Groups tend to be a moderating influence on the individual. So extremes of genius and stupidity are tempered by peer pressure. In small groups it can be presumed (at least) that compatible mindsets of genius can outmatch individual mindsets of genius. Groupthink is only (wholly) bad if the premise of thought is flawed.
For "scientists" groupthink shouldn't even be an issue because "Groupthink is a type of thought exhibited by group members who try to minimize conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analyzing, and evaluating ideas." (Ref. Wikipedia). A group of individual scientists by definition would be the antithesis of Group Think, though irrationality often trumps education and ideals.
Having alternative opinions and personalities is often better than following one bad or mediocre idea. In business however, things are often dictatorial and goals are driven by shareholders whose goals are only abstractly reflected in a balance sheet.
You're forgetting about the educational channels. Like on the Learning Channel for example, one can learn What Not to Wear.
He who markets the idea first reaps the rewards. Sales is everything. Humility and hard work are for the proletariat.
If somebody wouldn't have invented the wheel before me then I would have become quite famous, although I'm sure the venture capitalists would have stolen the company from under my feet and probably sold my ideas to the Big Three.
In the US, I'm not sure if this is government planning, or media ineptitude. The media routinely focuses on non-essential topics, barely giving important political and governmental topics any airtime at all (and mostly mis-representing the facts when they do).
I remember watching a CNN special on torture. The host of the show said whenever the company airs episodes like that their ratings go down. As long as their are commercials on the news, then the news will be as shallow as the lowest common denominator.
It doesn't matter what the question is. The non-answers given (if at all) will be the same non-answers given by any public relations department of any government agency. A person cannot expect a serious and forthright answer from an employee who has an agenda to consider. My past experience in writing to governments speaks for itself.
The statement from Burnham is quite open that his priority is supporting the artists no matter what. When do the other 60 million of the population get their go?
Unless the government will guarantee that the artists get the majority of the income generated by these new and improved laws, instead of the record companies and their shareholders and executives, then Burnham is lying.
Complacency is NOT a good thing
Perhaps, but neither is banging your head against a wall.
And neither is cynicism.
And often times reality is not a good thing. One can never really control the ebb and flow of oceans, but try to surf towards calmer waters. Revolutions usually end in violence, but sometimes small gestures of defiance can dampen the waves.
On the other hands if the artists are stupid enough to sign up on a contract that bad and don't try to go alone or start up something together with better benefits for them what's the problem?
That's the thing, being a good musician does not usually equate into financial or business acumen. Specialization of labour (or division of labour) is productive and advantageous for a business but not for the labourer. Considering the fact that (in the past at least, though things may be changing somewhat now) the music conglomerates had a virtual monopoly on success and could afford to create and manipulate artists with the promise of becoming rich.
Frame the issue as an emotion, not logic. Then emotion biases any interpretation of facts. Political people are very good at manipulation of peoples emotions.
It's Karma-whoring for the "real" world.
Learn a second language, you'll see there's no shortage of quality movies.
I think he means quality in terms of storyline, not special effects -:)
Yes, and I'm very disappointed that I can't get put an uncracked HD version of Space Chimps on a movie server.
I would presume that most people who buy a movie would be more interested in watching it than cracking it. That said, they would also prefer the options of making backups and storing it on hard disks, or whatever devices they may choose without having to worry about DRM issues.
As long as aliens don't try to record the movie and beam it back to us then the MPAA should leave them alone.
I don't think we want to be Trolling with aliens we never even met before. This seems seems potentially dangerous. Earth is going to lose Karma.
Remember, it's your team and if you don't take ownership/stewardship/responsibility for them then why should they or management care what happens?
Claiming ownership and alpha-male dominance of a team has nothing to do with teamwork and everything to do with American College Football.
How Do I Manage Seasoned Programmers?
The best way to manage programmers is to make sure their coffee cups are always full and that their are plenty of healthy (and free as in beer) snacks lying around in convenient locations. Make sure there are real plants in the office and make sure they are taken care of. Other than that keep out of their way, keep quiet and only speak to them when you are spoken to.
Congradulations. You still find the time to mod me down, even though I am pointing out your abuses.
Well it looks like you win. Your ad hominems get modded up, and my observations get modded Troll and Flamebait. Congratulations. (Actually the only reason I'm posting this is so that more of the Troll modders here will waste their mod points). How low can my Karma go?
There's some insight to you crazy ideas.
They're not as crazy as is apparent.
Egocentrism is a bitch and it has flawed your logic.
Half true; ego centrism is what most people possess, unfortunately they are only able to see it in other people and their ideas. Though I'm probably wasting my time here, as is usual. Maybe, just maybe somebody may be inspired to think beyond their Weltanschauung.
Just because YOU think something is "common sense" doesn't mean it works for everyone else.
True. But generally when I second guess myself I end up losing. People may think it's stupid to give up their cars, but in all hypocrisy I can see people blaming "socialists" in another 50 or so years when the run-away greenhouse effect is causing air conditioners to overheat, farms to turn into dust bowls, massive inflation and financial crises, etc. By that time my Karma will be so low that it would matter even less of what I thought.
This is especially true when comparing differences between Europe and the United States. Our big spacious suburbs can't work in the UK, and the nice U-bahn/S-bahn system in Germany won't work in the US. There is no "common sense" to apply, because nothing is common.
Funny, because when the German President visited Canada he was amazed at all the spacious land they have for wind farms and yet Canada only has a small fraction of wind farms compared to Germany. But yes, I understand, it's not everybody else who is wrong, it must be me. Because everybody else thinks differently from me then everybody else is apparently correct and I am apparently wrong and deserve to get modded Troll and Flamebait.
There is no "common sense" to apply, because nothing is common.
Aside from science, there are cultural issues to contend with, but I alluded to that originally when I talked about mindset and attitude.
Austin is considered to be one of the friendlier bike cities, yet on Tuesday it was 83F (28C), and then on Wednesday it was 30F (-1C). Good luck riding your bike in that. Oh yeah, and most of my coworkers live at least 20-30 miles from work.
-1 seems quite ideal for riding. 30 is a bit warm, but as long as you are dressed appropriately and have a suitable change of clothing for work everything should be good to go. The temp differences that you allude to aren't too unusual for where I live, but the ranges are usually spread out more over time. 20 to 30 miles is a perfect range for a bike ride. For hilly terrain one could supplement a motor on the back wheel. Of course in the long run it would be appropriate to make sure your politicians support mass transit, bike lanes, and make sure that the urban planners build businesses near residences (where feasible of course).
I know my ideas may sound radical to Americans, but it wouldn't help to at least have a few beers and try to open up your thinking a bit.
The above post is NOT Flamebaite.
It's environmentally realistic. But attitude-wise it isn't. Take for example your argument:
Even if a man only lives 20 blocks from work, he'll reach an age where biking is simply impractical. What does he do then, just starve to death cold and alone in his crappy little apartment he left the suburbs for?
It's easy enough to counter:
1) Most people retire when they are too old to work
2) Most people have alternate means of transportation when their ideal source is unavailable.
It seems like people are going out of their way to create reasons why they can't do anything environmentally sustainable. People's attitudes are so negative on this issue that they are labeling my posts Troll and Flamebait. That's what I mean when I say it's an attitude problem. People won't even consider other arguments much less the reality there may very well be a run-away greenhouse effect within the next 50 years.
BTW, I note that YOU didn't bother moderating me Troll or Flaimbait in the parent post, but I've still noticed the Overrated mod and am pointing it out for the Metamoderators. You may continue to down mod me as long as you have mod points.