Yes, that was me. Thank you for making me famous, or perhaps infamous.
Anyway, before, when the cable cutting phenomenon was brand new, this assumption was stated:
Considering that historically these cables are cut or disabled only once a year
If you go back and read my posts carefully, you will notice that I calculated odds based on that assumption. Now, in the post above by phantomfive, he stated a different, and perhaps more accurate number for the rate of undersea cable cutting:
As a matter of fact, in an average year, around 50 undersea cables are broken
I would have calculated different odds with the latter number. I'm still not sure which is correct. However I calculated the odds with the best numbers I could find. You certainly never provided a better number yourself, nor did any one else at the time. If you like, I can redo the math with the knowledge of 50 cuts per year. This will indeed drop the likelihood of correlation between the events and consequently our expectation that the events are the result of malicious activity.
Now, the question remains: was I right? Well, I stand by my ability to do arithmetic, so I am confident my math was right. Of course, considering your excitable and non-scientific nature, I'm wondering what meaning you are going to ascribe to my confidence in my math.
This isn't about oil, or finding oil, or producing oil, or protecting a few square miles. It's about power and touting BS
You don't need to pump a bunch of filthy goo from the ground to power society and you know that.
Admit it. To you and your ilk, its about shitting all over the planet because in the bible god said its your duty to fuck everything and everyone as long as you keep spewing out cretin little children. Personally, I'm convinced they are going suffer in a boiling planet created by the reckless attitude of their parents.
If my post burns your ears, its because the earth is getting warmer.
And with the stroke of a pen some future Dhimmicreep President will place the entire area off limits to oil exploration forever. Klintoon did this with the Grand Staircase Escalante in Utah.
You mean the place in Utah that contains this piece of natural beauty was spared from being a pincushion for multinational oil companies? Thank you Clinton! You just made me a fan. Sorry that the fuel for your gas guzzling landrover is too expensive for you to make your 80 mile commute each day. Maybe the next non-democratically elected president can start a war with another middle east country and fix that for you.
Nice rant. But you forgot to mention that the American taxpayer will subsidize exploration and drilling but doesn't have a shot in hell at getting a return on his investment.
On the other hand, here is a shameless insertion of a new joke into the top of the/. heap:
In other news the newly formed state of Montkota is preparing to annex Saskatchewan and secede from the union. George bush has declared all Montkotans "terrorists" and is preparing to invade.
If mods were only smart enough to understand how funny you are. Hey idiot mods: AC WAS RESPONDING HUMOURSLY TO THE SIG! I guess this is a natural filtering of mod points as no karma was harmed here.
Reason its this way is that i reuse a lot of code from project to project [Windows] is a generic piece of IP that is licensed and relicensed.
Let me say the same thing yet again in a different way, but attempt to disagree with you by saying exactly what you said, but different and yet trying to make the exact opposite point, but not failing miserably because I will actually support my point:
You are wrong because the software would be general use and reusable so IP rights would need to be retained by the author.
From my personal experience with users in person and in forums, the "same person's" linux install would look pristine even after months of use. Pristine, except for the dozens of downloaded.EXE's all over the desktop.
I've ran this experiment on family members, getting them set up with ubuntu where they used to have windows. After a couple of years, and several thousand thank-yous, their machines are still running dandy. I think my brother went about 8 months between reboots and only had to reboot when I asked him to do it after he asked me for help with a "tar file". Turns out his router needed rebooting and I couldn't ssh into his box.
I'll help little old grannies across the road without mugging them, but when I play chess I'm ruthless. Funny, there isn't a cow around for miles, but I smell bullshit.
I agree. Instead of "Little Hitlers", they should have said "Little Napoleons". I wonder if overexpression of the AVPR1 gene also makes you seem short. That would explain a correlation between perceived height and incessant posturing, loud voices, and stomping around. That is to say, such behavior actually makes people seem shorter--I think it can actually take 2 to 3 inches off one's height. I've seen a 5'4" guy remark that a 5'5" guy had a Napolean's complex. I had to agree, the little Napolean that the 5'4" guy was referring to always seemed short while I never even thought about the 5'4" guy's height until that point (not a Little Napolean). But maybe we should cut Little Napoleans a break. Perhaps they can't help it, genetically speaking.
How is publishing his own original research a breach of ethics?
Its not. Either you misunderstood, or I wasn't too clear. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I meant that publishing someone else's original research is a breach of ethics.
Clearly, you have not taken any higher level college courses beyond the requirements for a bachelors degree.
I have a BS, MA, & PhD. Last count, I had about 12 research articles. My 3 first author papers have an average citation rate higher than the average Nature Journal article. I know a thing or two about the business of which I speak.
Professors teaching a doctorate, or sometimes even masters, level course most definitely teach based on their own original research.
In a classroom setting, this doesn't happen and is irresponsible at the very least. The research needs to be peer reviewed before its taught in a classroom. Your version of ethics may vary, but no one I know would do such a thing. Perhaps you are confusing teacher-student relationships with advisor-student. The latter do not occur in a classroom.
I will say that I do agree that this whole copyrighting of lecture notes is a bit crazy, but only when you consider that some entrepreneurial student might try to sell their lecture notes from this class, which I consider to be legally questionable in the first place, regardless of whether or not a professor is doing it himself.
I can't parse this, so I don't know whether to insult you or simply not respond. I'm a slashdotter, so my instinct is to argue. I have taught college level classes. If a student took my notes, polished them up to the point that they could be sold, sold them for a profit, and proved to me that she did it, I'd bump her final grade up a letter if she didn't already have an A.
It would be nice if some people who wrote some cool legacy programs released the source on those under an OSS license. I could think of half-a-dozen super cool ones in my field alone.
Making a "slavish" copy of the lecturers notes and then selling them is not allowed and impinges on the ability of the lecturer to sell his own work for publication.
You do realize the difference between what a professor might publish (original research) and what he might teach in class (standard knowledge in a field), don't you? Publishing the former would be considered a serious breach of ethics (though it does not stop some scientists from doing this). Publishing the latter is what the professor is already doing by making notes in the first place. Barring a professor's presenting information in some brilliant new way, he is probably just rehashing his notes from the courses he took in college or is rehashing them from a book. Either way, neither could be remotely considered original research. If he is losing money by someone publishing his notes, he needs to reexamine his priorities as an educator.
Could we by analogy compare this to paying a movie-goer to take notes during the movie, and provide a very detailed summary to a company planning on selling said summary?
In a word: no. The university has two objectives (1) create knowledge (i.e. research) and (2) disseminate knowledge (i.e. educating). TFA refers to the latter. The knowledge a university disseminates is not (should not be) intellectual property. Many borderline idiots will argue that students pay the university for this knowledge. These borderline idiots are confused. Students pay the university for the service of disseminating said knowledge to said students, providing a venue for said learning and, least of all, giving students tangible credit for the knowledge they have learned. If a professor disseminates knowledge that is considered intellectual property, then he is abusing his post or is teaching fiction (not in the "film studies" sense, etc.). In both cases, he is irresponsible. If a professor agrees to the type of contract mentioned in the TFA, then he has lost his priorities as an educator which is to adhere to the two main missions of a university.
You do understand the concept of a trap, don't you? If you don't know what I'm talking about, let me describe it: The long, open road that has 55 mph signs all of a sudden, when it gets out of the city limits and into the non-obvious shit-village, goes from 55 to 40 for no reason whatsoever. The sign that marked this transition was strategically placed behind a tree. A dipshit piece of shit cop with no life is sitting in a ditch with his cop car hidden from view. He pulls you over and writes you a ticket as he acts like a complete ass. Now, you have to pay $125 bucks in fines and lose a day of work driving to shit village for your court date because of the speed trap. Of course, you probably believe these things only exist on TV because you live in LA and never leave the city limits. But they do exist. This is what a speed trap warning system hopes to prevent, and personally, I hope it prevents people getting caught in speed traps because speed traps are wrong. They are even more wrong than speeding and I'd rather a speeder speed than a normally law abiding citizen get caught in an immoral and premeditated speed trap. Lets just say I don't give a fuck about the children on this issue.
Shifting gears, avoiding bad drivers, navigating a large truck through a shooting gallery of cell-phone chatting zombie drivers, while trying to find the right address.
I drive in LA every day and do these things without investing any thought in the process, just like the UPS drivers. So you need another example to make your point.
Actually, he makes a *VERY* good point. You don't.
Actually, you don't infer very well. My point is that all of the original questions were designed to detract from the real issue. This is an argument technique that any lawyer will be able to name. I can't name it, of course, because IANAL. However, as a result of my lack of knowledge of such terminology, I use a catchall word: "bullshit".
If one wants to ask some questions to make a point, he should ask relevant questions. So, in this case, instead of "Do UPS drivers need to vacuum their own seat cushions?", one should ask "Do programmers need to be able to choose and configure their own compilers?" Do you see how the latter is more relevant than the former and addresses the topic (and thus is not "bullshit")?
Slashdot Mirror
So that's why you volunteer for a tax audit every year, cuz, u no, you did yur taxes RIGHT, ROFLOL.
Oh, that's right, you don't volunteer for a tax audit every year because, you know, you're a hypocrite.
Yes, that was me. Thank you for making me famous, or perhaps infamous.
Anyway, before, when the cable cutting phenomenon was brand new, this assumption was stated:
Considering that historically these cables are cut or disabled only once a yearIf you go back and read my posts carefully, you will notice that I calculated odds based on that assumption. Now, in the post above by phantomfive, he stated a different, and perhaps more accurate number for the rate of undersea cable cutting:
As a matter of fact, in an average year, around 50 undersea cables are brokenI would have calculated different odds with the latter number. I'm still not sure which is correct. However I calculated the odds with the best numbers I could find. You certainly never provided a better number yourself, nor did any one else at the time. If you like, I can redo the math with the knowledge of 50 cuts per year. This will indeed drop the likelihood of correlation between the events and consequently our expectation that the events are the result of malicious activity.
Now, the question remains: was I right? Well, I stand by my ability to do arithmetic, so I am confident my math was right. Of course, considering your excitable and non-scientific nature, I'm wondering what meaning you are going to ascribe to my confidence in my math.
Yes, big bro has been around since Jesse James. I always wondered where Orwell got his idea for 1984, and now I just realized it.
You don't need to pump a bunch of filthy goo from the ground to power society and you know that.
Admit it. To you and your ilk, its about shitting all over the planet because in the bible god said its your duty to fuck everything and everyone as long as you keep spewing out cretin little children. Personally, I'm convinced they are going suffer in a boiling planet created by the reckless attitude of their parents.
If my post burns your ears, its because the earth is getting warmer.
You mean the place in Utah that contains this piece of natural beauty was spared from being a pincushion for multinational oil companies? Thank you Clinton! You just made me a fan. Sorry that the fuel for your gas guzzling landrover is too expensive for you to make your 80 mile commute each day. Maybe the next non-democratically elected president can start a war with another middle east country and fix that for you.
Nice rant. But you forgot to mention that the American taxpayer will subsidize exploration and drilling but doesn't have a shot in hell at getting a return on his investment.
On the other hand, here is a shameless insertion of a new joke into the top of the /. heap:
In other news the newly formed state of Montkota is preparing to annex Saskatchewan and secede from the union. George bush has declared all Montkotans "terrorists" and is preparing to invade.
If mods were only smart enough to understand how funny you are. Hey idiot mods: AC WAS RESPONDING HUMOURSLY TO THE SIG! I guess this is a natural filtering of mod points as no karma was harmed here.
Its already gone, bro.
The second was supposed to go to the other earth. It was an honest mistake you frigtard.
Let me say the same thing yet again in a different way, but attempt to disagree with you by saying exactly what you said, but different and yet trying to make the exact opposite point, but not failing miserably because I will actually support my point:
You are wrong because the software would be general use and reusable so IP rights would need to be retained by the author.
I've ran this experiment on family members, getting them set up with ubuntu where they used to have windows. After a couple of years, and several thousand thank-yous, their machines are still running dandy. I think my brother went about 8 months between reboots and only had to reboot when I asked him to do it after he asked me for help with a "tar file". Turns out his router needed rebooting and I couldn't ssh into his box.
You are not a chess player, my friend.
I agree. Instead of "Little Hitlers", they should have said "Little Napoleons". I wonder if overexpression of the AVPR1 gene also makes you seem short. That would explain a correlation between perceived height and incessant posturing, loud voices, and stomping around. That is to say, such behavior actually makes people seem shorter--I think it can actually take 2 to 3 inches off one's height. I've seen a 5'4" guy remark that a 5'5" guy had a Napolean's complex. I had to agree, the little Napolean that the 5'4" guy was referring to always seemed short while I never even thought about the 5'4" guy's height until that point (not a Little Napolean). But maybe we should cut Little Napoleans a break. Perhaps they can't help it, genetically speaking.
My bet is that will be a repackaged version of vista.
Its not. Either you misunderstood, or I wasn't too clear. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I meant that publishing someone else's original research is a breach of ethics.
Clearly, you have not taken any higher level college courses beyond the requirements for a bachelors degree.I have a BS, MA, & PhD. Last count, I had about 12 research articles. My 3 first author papers have an average citation rate higher than the average Nature Journal article. I know a thing or two about the business of which I speak.
Professors teaching a doctorate, or sometimes even masters, level course most definitely teach based on their own original research.In a classroom setting, this doesn't happen and is irresponsible at the very least. The research needs to be peer reviewed before its taught in a classroom. Your version of ethics may vary, but no one I know would do such a thing. Perhaps you are confusing teacher-student relationships with advisor-student. The latter do not occur in a classroom.
I will say that I do agree that this whole copyrighting of lecture notes is a bit crazy, but only when you consider that some entrepreneurial student might try to sell their lecture notes from this class, which I consider to be legally questionable in the first place, regardless of whether or not a professor is doing it himself.I can't parse this, so I don't know whether to insult you or simply not respond. I'm a slashdotter, so my instinct is to argue. I have taught college level classes. If a student took my notes, polished them up to the point that they could be sold, sold them for a profit, and proved to me that she did it, I'd bump her final grade up a letter if she didn't already have an A.
It would be nice if some people who wrote some cool legacy programs released the source on those under an OSS license. I could think of half-a-dozen super cool ones in my field alone.
You do realize the difference between what a professor might publish (original research) and what he might teach in class (standard knowledge in a field), don't you? Publishing the former would be considered a serious breach of ethics (though it does not stop some scientists from doing this). Publishing the latter is what the professor is already doing by making notes in the first place. Barring a professor's presenting information in some brilliant new way, he is probably just rehashing his notes from the courses he took in college or is rehashing them from a book. Either way, neither could be remotely considered original research. If he is losing money by someone publishing his notes, he needs to reexamine his priorities as an educator.
In a word: no. The university has two objectives (1) create knowledge (i.e. research) and (2) disseminate knowledge (i.e. educating). TFA refers to the latter. The knowledge a university disseminates is not (should not be) intellectual property. Many borderline idiots will argue that students pay the university for this knowledge. These borderline idiots are confused. Students pay the university for the service of disseminating said knowledge to said students, providing a venue for said learning and, least of all, giving students tangible credit for the knowledge they have learned. If a professor disseminates knowledge that is considered intellectual property, then he is abusing his post or is teaching fiction (not in the "film studies" sense, etc.). In both cases, he is irresponsible. If a professor agrees to the type of contract mentioned in the TFA, then he has lost his priorities as an educator which is to adhere to the two main missions of a university.
Oh, sorry. I though you were one of those dozens of righteous fucks on this page who claim they never got a ticket. I'm glad you lost your court case.
This is proof enough to me that you have never gotten a ticket. Your innocence is refreshing.
You do understand the concept of a trap, don't you? If you don't know what I'm talking about, let me describe it: The long, open road that has 55 mph signs all of a sudden, when it gets out of the city limits and into the non-obvious shit-village, goes from 55 to 40 for no reason whatsoever. The sign that marked this transition was strategically placed behind a tree. A dipshit piece of shit cop with no life is sitting in a ditch with his cop car hidden from view. He pulls you over and writes you a ticket as he acts like a complete ass. Now, you have to pay $125 bucks in fines and lose a day of work driving to shit village for your court date because of the speed trap. Of course, you probably believe these things only exist on TV because you live in LA and never leave the city limits. But they do exist. This is what a speed trap warning system hopes to prevent, and personally, I hope it prevents people getting caught in speed traps because speed traps are wrong. They are even more wrong than speeding and I'd rather a speeder speed than a normally law abiding citizen get caught in an immoral and premeditated speed trap. Lets just say I don't give a fuck about the children on this issue.
There. Fixed that for you.
Forgot to mention...
Shifting gears, avoiding bad drivers, navigating a large truck through a shooting gallery of cell-phone chatting zombie drivers, while trying to find the right address.I drive in LA every day and do these things without investing any thought in the process, just like the UPS drivers. So you need another example to make your point.
Actually, you don't infer very well. My point is that all of the original questions were designed to detract from the real issue. This is an argument technique that any lawyer will be able to name. I can't name it, of course, because IANAL. However, as a result of my lack of knowledge of such terminology, I use a catchall word: "bullshit".
If one wants to ask some questions to make a point, he should ask relevant questions. So, in this case, instead of "Do UPS drivers need to vacuum their own seat cushions?", one should ask "Do programmers need to be able to choose and configure their own compilers?" Do you see how the latter is more relevant than the former and addresses the topic (and thus is not "bullshit")?