Yes, you're right. However the headline uses "hacker" in a restricted, negative sense. I always keep in mind the broader sense of the word, and there are plenty of times when I've seen people use it appropriately when referring to "Black Hats" or "crackers." A bigger problem is websites like Slashdot, whom many in the mainstream press would take as representative of nerds like us, using it in the strict sense. Most of all though it was annoying, and disappointing, to see what I thought was an interesting headline, and learn it's just another article about something I don't really care about.
You're suggesting I just change my mind? You haven't been reading what I wrote. I've made a judgment about it and I don't have to defend it to you, nor take it as a sign of my abilities. I don't like it --- and I don't have to like it --- and I know there are other places where people agree with me. I've got enough dissent in my life; it's just getting old.
I just expect more from Slashdot; I expect Slashdot editors not to give in to "the public" you speak of. I'm getting pretty tired of Slashdot, so I'll just take my reading elsewhere.
I really wish Slashdot headlines would stop using "Hacker" in the sense of "computer-oriented criminal." I clicked on this thinking it would be an interesting story about new hardware developments. It's just another boring story about what might be a problem for law enforcement. Who cares?
I mean really, sure the kids will learn about all this fancy electrical engineering and maybe one day they will figure out how to provide clean drinking water, build good hospitals and all that, but what's really important is shoving these kids into cubicals in Mumbai so they can code spambots. When are people going to learn that idealism is great but what really matters is greed and making money NOW. Not to mention, what kids really want is games: can you play Grand Theft Auto on one of these cheap laptops? That's what the kids want.
That's not plagiarism, it's permission
on
Plagiarism Inc.
·
· Score: 1
It's not plagiarism if the author encourages you to pass off the stuff as your own. It's not theft if you pay somebody for something and then call it yours, right Slashdot?
Nor is it plagiarism to reuse your own work in a different academic contribution.
One of the only ads I saw during the Super Bowl (I was much more interested in the dip at the party) was for an Android phone that included a clip of "David After Dentist." Since Youtube users don't give up the rights, Youtube (or Motorola or whoever's ad it was) would have to obtain rights from the owners (the kid's despicable parents) somehow.
This is truly disgusting and overall sad. Videos of intoxicated adults are rarely funny, but videotaping a child on drugs and selling it is completely pornographic. These parents ought to be ashamed of themselves. They ought to get their child privileges revoked right away. Right on to adosch and wcrowe.
I get really irritated when I hear people making these concessions in the name of "providing a good experience." What they're talking about is staying competitive so that they can keep making money. There's nothing wrong with that, morally, ethically or otherwise. So why can't they just say it? Record companies are the same way: they always do this silly stuff in the name of people enjoying the content. For once I would like to hear some corporation just say "We'd like to support X, but for now we think the better way for us to make money is to support Y."
The contributor didn't assume everyone on Slashdot knows his name, just that some of us would. It's safe to assume that those who have heard of him know what he has done in his career, and fully comprehend his awesomeness.
And make sure no one has trademark rights to or a patent on the one you choose: don't use Ax=\lamda x or Match.com may sue your left shoulder.
This is my way of saying that although I declined to get my own tattoo, I'm glad that you're thinking of something intellectually worthy instead of getting an Apple, Inc tattoo or something else terribly impermanent. I actually read a b log post from a disgruntled "lifelong Mac user" who had recently switched to Ubuntu; he had an Apple tattoo.
Presenting at a conference and then publishing is done all the time. Most people make enough changes that no one could say "you've already presented this" anyway.
On the other hand, if somebody else has already presented it at a conference and the editors have seen it, it will look mighty suspicious if he submits it as original material. It will only mean rejection, but that would be the kind of thing where they'd say "this has already been presented elsewhere."
It's not THAT simple. First it has to get past the editor, which usually means you need a cover letter. More importantly, you must use a style in line with what the journal requests, adhere to all their guidelines or anything can be used as grounds for rejection.
Furthermore, if the editor doesn't know who you are, and you can't suggest reviewers, and you don't hold an academic position, he could reject it outright. Keep in mind that prejudice can creep in at any point in this process. In other words, it's not just about producing a good paper. Trust me, PLENTY of good papers get rejected for very unclearly stated reasons.
My suggestion is still to talk to someone who's experienced in producing scholarly material, and experienced in the publishing process.
I would suggest you go to someone who you know in an academic or technical field that has published papers of this sort, and ask that person to help you publish it. If there's no university nearby, ask local friends if they know anybody --- if you're not in a similar situation, someone will remember a computer science or applied math professor from college.
You will probably need to improve your material with their help, too and that may mean sharing credit. As long as you establish up front that you mean to be the lead author, things should go well.
It depends on what you mean by "support." My university doesn't "support" GNU/Linux in the sense that they wouldn't fix your daughter's laptop if the screen fell off, but they might give her the relevant data she needs for networking. And then everything is done through the web, so she won't be missing anything essential for class. This is the very reason the web was built in the first place.
I use a GNU/Linux workstation and have had no problems. I don't know any undergrads who use GNU/Linux laptops, but my fellow grad students who do have not had any problems that they've told me about.
Network connectivity is the big one.
The other important one would be special applications, like Mathematica that she might be required to use for a class. IN that case I just run it off the nearest GNU/Linux cluster in an X server using ssh. Teach her how to do that and she'll be set.
Unfortunately people do shove proprietary software down the throats of every undergrad here; it's really disappointing. They're convinced that they have two choices when it comes to computing.
I agree with your main point: Apple didn't invent this idea. However, have you not noticed the useful programs? I guess Emacs, The Gimp, Firefox and all that other stuff isn't that usable. !!!Sarcasm!!! Get real, dude. What is this usable people are always talking about? How is it that my three year old can use this supposedly "unusable" operating system?
I quickly made my presence as a LaTeX user known when I started grad school. My lab-mate and a postdoc in the lab also use LaTeX, but our advisor has been a Word user for decades. After the subject came up once, the Postdoc (who has a Ph.D. in math) says to me "Just so you know, the new equation editor in Word can use the LaTeX formula markup," as if that was supposed to make up for the fact that after using Word for 15 years, I still didn't know why it never behaved the way it said it did, nor why the documentation was stupid and useless, or that the output looked like crap.
It's not that I can quickly make pretty formulas in LaTeX, it's that since LaTeX is (mostly) not a commercial product, and its used almost entirely by intellectuals, the help files are actually useful, and I can actually find out how to do something in LaTeX. On top of that, I can edit the files in plain text using any editor.
I think the biggest problem is that a lot of people don't understand what plain text is. People think if it looks like letters on the screen, it's text. Then they wonder why they can't open the same file on a Mac as they could on a machine with Windows. I switched from using Stata's do-file editor to Emacs, and my supervisor was shocked: he thought you had to use the IDE-esque do-file editor.
And the best part is that the output actually looks like something I would want to read. I was never satisfied with the output from Word: it both looks like what is on the screen, and departs from it in radical ways. I could never tell where the pagebreaks would actually be when I used word processors. After using LaTeX it hit me that what goes on the screen and what comes out of the printer really ought to be two different things, instead of being in denial and thinking they should be the same on screen as on paper. I would spend hours formatting Word documents, and the help files had no explanation for why it everything would change in other sections when I changed the formatting of one section. Formatting is not my problem! The typesetting program should take care of that.
And as to these changes, Word will always look like crap as long as it's the fare of the masses.
Just what is the desktop that these debaters keep referring to? Is it desktop machines? Is it desktop use, as in a certain set of applications?
I disagree with the RedHat CEO: I've used all of the above-mentioned distros, some worked better than others, but all make a good desktop at home and at work. I use Slackware at work, for my Unix-like environment, and I use Kubuntu at home. Multimedia, networking and web-browsing as well as office applications work just fine: so what is this desktop he's referring to?
RedHat has made it particularly clear over the years that they do not care about the "desktop market" whatever that refers to. They care about Big Iron. That's where they make their money. And they shouldn't care about anything else. I do want the opportunity to set up a networked office when I have my own lab, and I don't know who i'll turn to when the time comes, but probably not RedHat. Probably someone who does Slackware, like myself.
And to Mr. "It's all about the apps": which apps are you referring to? I don't think you're talking about the ones I use, because Emacs, LaTeX, R, and gcc work best on GNU/Linux.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, you're right. However the headline uses "hacker" in a restricted, negative sense. I always keep in mind the broader sense of the word, and there are plenty of times when I've seen people use it appropriately when referring to "Black Hats" or "crackers." A bigger problem is websites like Slashdot, whom many in the mainstream press would take as representative of nerds like us, using it in the strict sense. Most of all though it was annoying, and disappointing, to see what I thought was an interesting headline, and learn it's just another article about something I don't really care about.
You're suggesting I just change my mind? You haven't been reading what I wrote. I've made a judgment about it and I don't have to defend it to you, nor take it as a sign of my abilities. I don't like it --- and I don't have to like it --- and I know there are other places where people agree with me. I've got enough dissent in my life; it's just getting old.
I just expect more from Slashdot; I expect Slashdot editors not to give in to "the public" you speak of. I'm getting pretty tired of Slashdot, so I'll just take my reading elsewhere.
I really wish Slashdot headlines would stop using "Hacker" in the sense of "computer-oriented criminal." I clicked on this thinking it would be an interesting story about new hardware developments. It's just another boring story about what might be a problem for law enforcement. Who cares?
I mean really, sure the kids will learn about all this fancy electrical engineering and maybe one day they will figure out how to provide clean drinking water, build good hospitals and all that, but what's really important is shoving these kids into cubicals in Mumbai so they can code spambots. When are people going to learn that idealism is great but what really matters is greed and making money NOW. Not to mention, what kids really want is games: can you play Grand Theft Auto on one of these cheap laptops? That's what the kids want.
It's not plagiarism if the author encourages you to pass off the stuff as your own. It's not theft if you pay somebody for something and then call it yours, right Slashdot?
Nor is it plagiarism to reuse your own work in a different academic contribution.
And do you have children kikito?
This is how they should spend the money: a vasectomy for dad, therapy for the kid in twenty years, college fund, and a parenting coach.
One of the only ads I saw during the Super Bowl (I was much more interested in the dip at the party) was for an Android phone that included a clip of "David After Dentist." Since Youtube users don't give up the rights, Youtube (or Motorola or whoever's ad it was) would have to obtain rights from the owners (the kid's despicable parents) somehow.
This is truly disgusting and overall sad. Videos of intoxicated adults are rarely funny, but videotaping a child on drugs and selling it is completely pornographic. These parents ought to be ashamed of themselves. They ought to get their child privileges revoked right away. Right on to adosch and wcrowe.
"YouTube have pretty much come down on the side of Flash having major issues with the lack of features that the HTML5 tag has and may never have."
Perhaps the author isn't American; did you think of that?
I get really irritated when I hear people making these concessions in the name of "providing a good experience." What they're talking about is staying competitive so that they can keep making money. There's nothing wrong with that, morally, ethically or otherwise. So why can't they just say it? Record companies are the same way: they always do this silly stuff in the name of people enjoying the content. For once I would like to hear some corporation just say "We'd like to support X, but for now we think the better way for us to make money is to support Y."
The contributor didn't assume everyone on Slashdot knows his name, just that some of us would. It's safe to assume that those who have heard of him know what he has done in his career, and fully comprehend his awesomeness.
Seriously, the US Air Force has had this technology since 1946 and now we're just catching up?
And make sure no one has trademark rights to or a patent on the one you choose: don't use Ax=\lamda x or Match.com may sue your left shoulder.
This is my way of saying that although I declined to get my own tattoo, I'm glad that you're thinking of something intellectually worthy instead of getting an Apple, Inc tattoo or something else terribly impermanent. I actually read a b log post from a disgruntled "lifelong Mac user" who had recently switched to Ubuntu; he had an Apple tattoo.
F = ma baby!
Presenting at a conference and then publishing is done all the time. Most people make enough changes that no one could say "you've already presented this" anyway.
On the other hand, if somebody else has already presented it at a conference and the editors have seen it, it will look mighty suspicious if he submits it as original material. It will only mean rejection, but that would be the kind of thing where they'd say "this has already been presented elsewhere."
It's not THAT simple. First it has to get past the editor, which usually means you need a cover letter. More importantly, you must use a style in line with what the journal requests, adhere to all their guidelines or anything can be used as grounds for rejection.
Furthermore, if the editor doesn't know who you are, and you can't suggest reviewers, and you don't hold an academic position, he could reject it outright. Keep in mind that prejudice can creep in at any point in this process. In other words, it's not just about producing a good paper. Trust me, PLENTY of good papers get rejected for very unclearly stated reasons.
My suggestion is still to talk to someone who's experienced in producing scholarly material, and experienced in the publishing process.
Did he say his goal was to share his knowledge or to stifle others' creativity and go into a litigation career?
I would suggest you go to someone who you know in an academic or technical field that has published papers of this sort, and ask that person to help you publish it. If there's no university nearby, ask local friends if they know anybody --- if you're not in a similar situation, someone will remember a computer science or applied math professor from college.
You will probably need to improve your material with their help, too and that may mean sharing credit. As long as you establish up front that you mean to be the lead author, things should go well.
It depends on what you mean by "support." My university doesn't "support" GNU/Linux in the sense that they wouldn't fix your daughter's laptop if the screen fell off, but they might give her the relevant data she needs for networking. And then everything is done through the web, so she won't be missing anything essential for class. This is the very reason the web was built in the first place.
I use a GNU/Linux workstation and have had no problems. I don't know any undergrads who use GNU/Linux laptops, but my fellow grad students who do have not had any problems that they've told me about.
Network connectivity is the big one.
The other important one would be special applications, like Mathematica that she might be required to use for a class. IN that case I just run it off the nearest GNU/Linux cluster in an X server using ssh. Teach her how to do that and she'll be set.
Unfortunately people do shove proprietary software down the throats of every undergrad here; it's really disappointing. They're convinced that they have two choices when it comes to computing.
I agree with your main point: Apple didn't invent this idea. However, have you not noticed the useful programs? I guess Emacs, The Gimp, Firefox and all that other stuff isn't that usable. !!!Sarcasm!!! Get real, dude. What is this usable people are always talking about? How is it that my three year old can use this supposedly "unusable" operating system?
I quickly made my presence as a LaTeX user known when I started grad school. My lab-mate and a postdoc in the lab also use LaTeX, but our advisor has been a Word user for decades. After the subject came up once, the Postdoc (who has a Ph.D. in math) says to me "Just so you know, the new equation editor in Word can use the LaTeX formula markup," as if that was supposed to make up for the fact that after using Word for 15 years, I still didn't know why it never behaved the way it said it did, nor why the documentation was stupid and useless, or that the output looked like crap.
It's not that I can quickly make pretty formulas in LaTeX, it's that since LaTeX is (mostly) not a commercial product, and its used almost entirely by intellectuals, the help files are actually useful, and I can actually find out how to do something in LaTeX. On top of that, I can edit the files in plain text using any editor.
I think the biggest problem is that a lot of people don't understand what plain text is. People think if it looks like letters on the screen, it's text. Then they wonder why they can't open the same file on a Mac as they could on a machine with Windows. I switched from using Stata's do-file editor to Emacs, and my supervisor was shocked: he thought you had to use the IDE-esque do-file editor.
And the best part is that the output actually looks like something I would want to read. I was never satisfied with the output from Word: it both looks like what is on the screen, and departs from it in radical ways. I could never tell where the pagebreaks would actually be when I used word processors. After using LaTeX it hit me that what goes on the screen and what comes out of the printer really ought to be two different things, instead of being in denial and thinking they should be the same on screen as on paper. I would spend hours formatting Word documents, and the help files had no explanation for why it everything would change in other sections when I changed the formatting of one section. Formatting is not my problem! The typesetting program should take care of that.
And as to these changes, Word will always look like crap as long as it's the fare of the masses.
Nobody's penetrating my wife's netbook without my permission, or at least letting me watch. I'm the system administrator.
Just what is the desktop that these debaters keep referring to? Is it desktop machines? Is it desktop use, as in a certain set of applications?
I disagree with the RedHat CEO: I've used all of the above-mentioned distros, some worked better than others, but all make a good desktop at home and at work. I use Slackware at work, for my Unix-like environment, and I use Kubuntu at home. Multimedia, networking and web-browsing as well as office applications work just fine: so what is this desktop he's referring to?
RedHat has made it particularly clear over the years that they do not care about the "desktop market" whatever that refers to. They care about Big Iron. That's where they make their money. And they shouldn't care about anything else. I do want the opportunity to set up a networked office when I have my own lab, and I don't know who i'll turn to when the time comes, but probably not RedHat. Probably someone who does Slackware, like myself.
And to Mr. "It's all about the apps": which apps are you referring to? I don't think you're talking about the ones I use, because Emacs, LaTeX, R, and gcc work best on GNU/Linux.