I really can't stand assholes like this either...I was in a chair for about a year but could walk with crutches for short amounts of time (like a few hours a day max), and even then I didn't use the handicapped spots. I figured someone with more need probably could use them (even if that meant I needed to walk a block further).
Sadly, it was generally overpriveledged yuppies or 18 year old punks that needed them more...
"When did "passing notes" or "not submitting to authority figures" become against the law?"
Probably like 200 years ago...disorderly conduct is at least a misdemeanor in any state in the nation.
Why? Because the law should not have to enumerate EVERY single problem out there. Sometimes, an authority figures job is to walk up to you and tell you to knock it off...and if you do, everything is fine...if you tell them to fuck off and continue to be a disturbance, well then expect to get a disorderly thrown against you. Occasionally, the disorderly conduct is a protected one...handing out fliers on a street might be annoying, especially ones where you are protesting something or someone right in front of their residence...but any (rational) court would consider it protected behavior so long as you are not on private property or a danger to others. Other forms of disorderly conduct are not protected...texting in a classroom is not. Either one can get you arrested, one can get you fined while the other can have false arrest charges given against the officer (at least put on the record which will have dire effects against promotion and retention...regardless of what you hear on these sorts of sites)...
So yeah, the police officer is doing something that is on the law books, something they are trained to do and protecting people from selfish idiots that ruin an education for everyone (I know I have been annoyed in my classes by people texting...and probably have done the same back...I have always put my phone away the minute an instructor asks and generally never pull it out in their class again).
"Would you be willing to spend the big bucks to go to the Olympics if you knew that they grabbed some average joe off the street, put him in front of a machine"
There is a BIG difference between creativity and shows of athletic prowess.
There is a BIG difference between someone using autotune creatively and one that doesn't. I can't sing. I had voice therapy to just speak well for the first 16 years of my life. Funny, no one seems to notice these days except that I articulate some things in an accent neutral / correct way that just doesn't seem natural. Still, I can't sing. If I'm doing a demo for someone that requires vocals, I break out the Autotune (actually, I use melodyne, but it is the same sort of thing...I can use this one a little more creatively though).
I'm a musician, and I approach this stuff from a musical way. The creativity involved has to do more with the mind of the musician than the technical prowess. Technical prowess may allow for more range, but not always. Expressed creativity is also limited quite a bit by lack of technical prowess. Today? One doesn't have to let the latter be a factor.
Again, it has a LOT to do with the music...a lot of crap out there just sucks. The artists doing this would suck regardless if it is autotune or the same three chords everyone else is doing. Other artists can take three chords and make it sound like nothing heard before.
Music is not athletic prowess, it should not be equated in any form to the olympics or other event. Music is music...
"If I had some sort of electronic device that could complete automate surgeries by taking control of my hands and arms (and without me having to think,) I think it would be very disingenuous for me to call myself a surgeon"
Yes, but if you had an electronic device that helped you control your hands so that you didn't cut through the wrong tissue, knowing exactly what tissue you needed, that allowed you a little more time to do it right as opposed to flying by the seat of your pants (which most do), you would be.
I got to play with one such tool that a friend was a part of the development team that used a circuit flow as opposed to a blade, but could detect different tissue types and stop you from doing just this. Or you can, but you have to push it much greater. More or less, it only gives you a little more help in which one needs to use their own judgments to do what is needed. Somethings that required great skill 20 years ago, don't today...and it means one can focus on other areas of knowledge. Technology always changes the equation and allows for this give and take.
The skills one needs to be a surgeon today are not the skillset one will need in 20 years from now. Things that are simple today will be out of the grasp of those doing it in the future because there will be no institutional memory of it. In my current field (psychology), there is a greater emphasis on medication and less so on psychotherapy. Some of the fundamental techniques that have shown just as much effectiveness (or more) are not known by the general public...50 years from now, the medical aspects will be far more advanced to the point that these techniques might not be as effective (and there are some mental disease that have been shown to clear up almost instantly with the appropriate medical treatment).
In music, my old profession, a pianist might know how to score, but probably only for his own instrument...these days, keyboardist are expected to be able to play a dozen or more style of instruments that were not specifically designed to be played from a keyboard interface and do so faithfully, live. A guitarist is expected to be part engineer to get the appropriate sound in that the specific sound of the recordings had more to do with those in the control rooms. Engineers are expected to be critics and composers and audiophiles that aren't just pushing sliders and tweaking knobs but working in other aspects.
Our traits change, our skill sets change and our mindsets change. At the end of the day, we have to adjust or we become whiny little bitches that hold onto the past at the risk of losing new opportunities. Bad musicians are an eternal truth...just as the critics who have never contributed to popular culture but need to feel worthy by trying to convince others of their truths.
What the fuck is authentic these days? I'm sick of the notion that creative output needs to have an olympic mentality to it. It is like the guys that can play 64th note riffs on guitars and then act as if anyone that cannot approach their technical ability has no business playing.
In my case, I was a professional musician for a number of years. Toured nationally with a Grammy winning group. Had to get out of it because I developed severe arthritis that impacted my ability to play (it is an autoimmune disease as opposed to just bad technique...put me in a wheel chair for a year bad). I *STILL* compose and play somewhat, and went on to work with the same artist on the next album...some of my work ended up on it as I had left it as opposed to being replaced by other artists. Since I used a sequencer and samples, some would say this is inauthentic. So, if someone is robbed of technical ability (or never had any), their creative output means NOTHING?
Of course, quite a few musicians trade the autotune 'perfect' output as an alternative to creativity...so long as everything hits on the right notes, it will sell. I don't believe in that either. Creativity involves falling outside of the lines occasionally. And sometimes it involves being right on the line. Personally, I don't get the folks that think perfect technique has anything to do with musicality...some of my favorite works come from non-musicians with absolutely no training or technique but had something to say and used ANY possibility they could to get it up there. Far more authentic than most of the instrumental / technique bands I could ever hear...those guys are as coldly robotic as any autotune could be.
"Why not "Old, successfulBand"? They don't need the one thing the label can give them: publicity?"
I've worked with "Old, successfulBand" before and one hit doesn't mean anything. Or 20. It is all about the next hit.
I knew one guy that had multiplatinum albums dating to the 70s until the early 90s...decided to go it himself. For 15 years, he sold practically nothing. Yeah, the profits were actually decent considering all of this, but he couldn't sell out huge concert halls any more. For an artist, this is where the real money comes into play. Along with licensing, which isn't going to happen if his songs aren't getting heard by the public (an indie artist might get a song played with just critical buzz alone, but an established one won't...if it is only buzz, the tastemakers are going to pass it up for something unknown).
Lots more reasons, but that's all I got tonight...
The problem with this is that vicarious social learning theories from times BEFORE video games have pretty much proven that while one can never 100% prove correlation / causation, it is well established that it is highly likely that there is a link.
Psychological studies are not the same as physics...only because we have to deal with morality (there was one group in history that was actually were able to dispense with these moral conundrums and prove a lot more...but I'm not going to mention the name of this group because according to the rules of/. I will have already lost the argument).
The problem is, he is preaching to people that have no clue about psychological theories because it has nothing to do with ones and zeros. Video games do lead to higher aggression...so do a lot of activities. The fact that nerds can't see this is beyond me. Probably just like pervs refuse to believe / or admit that pornography leads to higher incidence of violence to women. I like both videogames and porn...but know that in the hands of children, a lot of this stuff would be bad...
But again, I'm preaching to those that will never agree with me because it goes against their predefined goals. 15 years from now when they have kids, it will be different...
"Nobody could really be as lame as the guy in this video."
I hate to say this, but I ended up having a 10 minute conversation with the guy in that video last week...Dan was actually a pretty cool guy and I think he understood the cheesiness of it all. The software is aimed at being a quick and dirty sketch pad, mostly for those with little musical talent. As a musician, sometimes I use toys like this to bring out ideas and brainstorm...
But you might be right...he was very complementary of Apple when I mentioned it would be a cool little app if it could be ported to the iPhone (I showed him a few of these and he seemed to know about them). Maybe he is a top secret Apple scheme!
Either way, looking at his CV, it looks as though he would be the kinda nerd that/. would embrace. He isn't just the spokes model, but one of the programmers / researchers behind this application.
"A long time ago when I was in an class someone told that all quotes had to be attributed and you could only quote one paragraph from each source, and you had to add some sort of original commentary..."
That is a good rule of thumb when you are trying to get students to do, say, a 3 page paper. I.e., something that could be knocked out in a half hour by a competent writer that has read the material and synthesized the information into something new.
Then again, I've never actually quoted more than a sentence or two from a single source in a row, if I have to go more than that, I do the relevant sections '...' and then the end relevant area. I can't imagine the need to do an entire paragraph. In this instance, it it more about getting students to learn to quote relevantly as opposed to just using others words to pad the pages. In larger academic works where one is not judged by the paper length but by the accuracy and relevance of the information, a lot more quotes from single sources can be admitted under some circumstances (though I still can't imagine lifting large chunks of paragraphs at a time).
The point was, the idea was floated from GWB...his party agreed that this was the right thing to do. It was only the minor details that were disagreed upon. The Dems simply took the president's idea and formed it into their own screwed up logic.
Then again, the Dems believe there should be market forces at work...this is right inline with their belief system. The Republicans believe the markets should take care of its own...the dems stayed true to their ideas...the republicans abandoned everything they believed about the free market as soon as they started losing money.
Again, the market respects consistency over ideology. People are becoming billionaires in communist and former communist nations. If you have a rulebook that doesn't change the minute something becomes inconvenient, it is not that hard to play the game. I don't agree with the bailout, but I'm not going to fault the dems for doing what they were elected to do.
The markets are showing signs that they WANT to be under the guise of Obama over McCain and will react accordingly. The worst thing in a market is having someone lording over that you can't predict. Regardless of what you think of the Dems, they are easy to predict...even if I disagree with a lot of their stances. Doesn't matter if the guy who might be in charge has condemned them...I'd actually want someone in power that isn't coddling the individuals that caused the crisis over greed.
Heck, banks are already talking about using the stimulus package money to buy MORE banks and reconsolidate...which is what was the cause in the first place, and not to start opening loans up again -- which was the idea. They are already opening the money given to them for the annual bonuses to executives who are arguing that in their line of work, this is where the real pay is much like a waitress with a $2 an hour job that doesn't even get paychecks because of the taxes deducted from the tips. I'm sorry, but when you are making a base of $200k, you don't need to get any more tips regardless of your lifestyle. I made six figures before when I was working in entertainment, but I got out to do something that was meaningful to society and make a fraction of what I did educating your kids. If I can live life fully on thirty some thousand $$$ a year, these guys can do with the meager amount they are making.
I'm sorry, but the guy in charge NEEDS to be doing nothing but condemning these people. Making money isn't bad, but when you are given an economic bailout that effectively took money out of MY pocket and everyone else in this country, you owe it to these people to use it wisely. Having said this, I'd have sooner had the gov't not take ANY action and let the markets deal with it...but it was both parties agreeing that the basis of what was done was right (even if they quibbled over the details).
The point is, Obama is going to be a known entity and stable with his actions with the market...which even if he is wrong, the players can always figure out the new ground rules as long as they aren't going to change every few months.
"What kind of retard thinks that one of the responsibilities of the president of the United States is to control the price of gasoline?"
The kind that is smarter than you?
The President of the US is supposed to make policy that positively impacts the economy, who doesn't have the dollar drop lower and lower every stupid mistake he makes and doesn't squander a sound financial market with instability by overextending our reach into areas of the world that have no effect on us. Doing almost exactly the opposite of what this idiot has done would have strengthened the dollar...gas prices might actually have gone up, but a strong dollar would have meant that we are paying less for what the rest of the world is paying more.
A good president is a figurehead...not a wannabe dictator. One that inspires markets and not one that destabilizes them. A good president doesn't need to actively do anything to the markets...he leads with sound policy and the markets react accordingly.
Personally, high gas prices affected me a little, but as you said, you make choices in what is important. Cable TV was less important than being able to travel (and in this time, I discovered Hulu which I formerly thought sucked...much cheaper than cable!) So many ways to live differently in this economy...but it still means we have to make choices we didn't a few years ago.
"If you can't work to make your company grow then you need to find a new one."
No, I'm insubordinate when folks want to do things that are contrary to the stated goals of the organization -- and when folks take work that was not done on their time and usurp it for their own needs.
I work hard for my CLIENTS...not the organization. The clients are students. A lot of folks I deal with are not interested in anything but themselves. I personally, work hard for the people that make my organization exist...if everyone did the same, we'd all be better off.
"If he refuses to help on the patent application after being instructed to do so, he's being insubordinate."
That is what I was told at my company...err...university. And I almost was....
Then again, I'm use to being insubordinate each and every day, so I refused to help the situation. The last one ended up as a big fight with our technology transfer team because the patentable material was a side project that I did on my time away from the university and I had my then boss sign an agreement that the university was welcome to use the work -- but it was my copyright.
In the end, these things are enough of a team effort that the patents went through each and every time but without my name on them. Even the last one, they worked around the fact that this was my code (all agreed to this) and patented it in a way that took care of XYZ Application Interfacing With ZYX Application, ensuring that no one else will be able to do this without them (someone else came through and integrated the connecting pieces).
The funny thing is one of my best friends is a patent attorney...I believe in software patents because in this day and age, what the hell does a mechanical patent have to do with ANYTHING. We aren't trying to protect some new wheat combine...software patents are essentially the same thing that we protected 200 years ago. I just think most are overly broad -- and in my situation, I was working for a state university, on projects that were designed to help students both in grade schools and beyond, with grants paid in part by the federal gov't through tax dollars...I just didn't find it right to take what was supposed to be for the common good and lock it away most likely selling the exclusive rights to a single entity that will never use it to its full potential.
But yeah, if you work for an organization and refuse to take part in this activity, you can be fired or reprimanded. I barely survived the last fight...and I know it has affected promotion because I'm considered someone hard to work with (ok...everyone knew this, but it gave HR actual tangible evidence!)
"Unfortunately, many students fail to realize this when being given the full court press by an "admissions" officer."
This is why I tell all my friends to get things like Graduation Rate. Stats on Employment. Stats on First Year Salaries. And then I tell them to get a print out of all this -- if you are a fully accredited university / college / trade school -- you have this. If they do not want to give this out...or only want to make verbal statements...they have something to hide.
I can safely say that my first degree wouldn't pay anywhere near close enough to pay my student loans. I kinda knew this was the case, but I had a career that I could fall back on when everything else went bad. And it was the first stop to grad school...so you have to be an informed consumer like anything else in life. If you only take what people throw at you, you'll also think fast food is good for ya!
"Fine then, we'll put a webcam in whatever room(s) in your house has/have your computer(s),"
Did you get the memo? No one is forcing you to do this. You can unplug it anytime you want. It is only for testing. Don't want to be monitored, go to a proctored environment. Like near me? I can have you come into my office for a small fee and watch that you aren't cheating.
"Won't that day of reckoning come when you show up to your first job and the boss asks you to modify a Java program and you give him a blank stare?"
No, when it get known that universities are putting out students that can't do the job, they are penalized for this.
Students don't sign up for the universities -- they would if they could because they think it is an easy degree, but parents generally pay the bills and they research this stuff.
Beyond this, a lot of post-graduation research goes into assessing a program. How much is the average student making? How quickly do they find jobs? Are they still holding a job in their field at 1 year, 5 years, 10 years?
The gov't gets involved because they back student loans. Lots of defaults on student loans. If a university has a default rate of say 50% (I'm making up this number), they stop getting loans sent to them. A good friend wanted to go to an experimental psychological program this fall -- only to find that he can't get a loan. Not going to happen.
My day job is in student testing...I get to hear all of this every day...we get all the blame if students are doing poorly, but never any of the credit. I don't like what the law is doing, but it is a start. It is the start of accountability. Beyond that, I really don't think anyone lives anywhere that is all that inconvenient to get to some place that can proctor an exam with the exception of those whom are disabled. Heck, I gave a few exams with a web cam for a student in Iraq this year (I also had a ranking officer present to make certain that what I couldn't see was still legit!)
So lots of reasons for the gov't to get involved. As a tax payer, I hope they are only propping up universities that are churning out students that are qualified...and you should expect the same.
"Pet peeve of mine that 'social contract" theory... see, contracts have to be voluntarily entered by all parties, and last I checked, we're all held to social contracts whether we want to or not. Even for those of us happy to "sign", the social contract is being changed unilaterally, which with normal contracts is something that is almost never permitted."
Social contracts are enforceable by those in power. In a democracy, it is simply the majority. In other systems, it may be chosen by other means.
I'm not a big fan of democracies...I'm not a big fan of 'one man, one vote'. But at the very same time, it is much more preferred than almost any other system to date. As such, as much as I disagree with a lot of rules, I don't see how being limited to not downloading games or popular music is infringing on my right to life, liberty and happiness (of which this actually meant more about 'home ownership' by the founding fathers than an emotion).
Personally, I think the copyright laws ARE out of wack...but I also believe that as a content creator, I have expectations about my work that I wish others would follow. I wouldn't want someone using my works to advertise something I didn't care for. I wouldn't want someone I disagreed with to associate themselves with it. But these are my own rules and I can't expect to be able to force others into this...even if it were nice. Society has come up with a way to set standards on what can be expected...in the US it was done with a majority of the representatives we elected.
"Because anybody who thinks that something intangible is "property" has shit for brains."
Bull fucking shit.
I believe that trees are common property of everyone. It is good for the world and I don't care who's land it belongs on...thus anything made of wood should be up for the taking. Anyone that thinks something tangible should be property has shit for brains. I don't care how you frame it, the only thing that belongs to any of us are our thoughts. As such, the only real property is intellectual property.
You see how this works?
Just because you can create an opinion doesn't make it so. Property is a social contract in ANY sense of the word. You don't believe in it. So what. Doesn't matter. You belong to a society that has enacted rules and regulations that say it is property, thus it is. Again, it is a social contract. As a part of society, you can disagree with a rule, but that doesn't make it any less of a rule unless that rule is changed.
So the point is, grow the fuck up. You want YOUR intellectual property given away for free, GPL it. Or CC it. Or otherwise. Maybe if enough others feel the same, you can turn the tide, but that doesn't make the fact that you own your ideas any less significant.
There has to be a reason I don't come to Slashdot any more. It is pretty bad when Digg and Reddit has more mature comments these days...
"I got the clutch working by stealing about 4 feet of wire from a fence, and winding it back and forth between the pedal lever and the clutch release arm."
Hell...I did something similar with my last car...the part was $300 from Saturn, and I was like BULLSHIT because it was a tiny piece of the part that broke. Ended up drilling two holes, grabbing some wire (this is where you caught me...I had fencing wire in my garage...nice heavy gauge) and wove it between the two pieces. I kept it that way until I bought my new car and the gears never seemed so smooth before this hack.
Unfortunately, when I traded it in, I thought I better tell the mechanic -- they gave me all of $500 for trade-in value because it was held together with duct tape and wire. Should not have said anything at all...
"First of all, you copy as many people as possible to CYA..."
At least CC'ing anyone directly responsible for the work. I know I have to deal with several departments on projects and I need others to sign off on changes...or at least be in the loop so that if they don't like the changes, I can tell them they were notified 3 months earlier and it is their own damn problem they didn't respond then.
"I was the only person in my circle of correspondance that trimmed my replies..."
In corporate email, I'd probably be pretty pissed if I got a message trimmed without all the details. C'mon...it is 2008...even a few hundred lines of text are not taking up that much space on the server. I generally trim the parts that need responding to and prepend them to my message with my comments or action items that I or others need to take care of. The previous writing is left intact below for context.
All in all, it isn't CYA, it is clarity in the situation. Some people look at the negative side of things and I've had bosses that would come back to me 6 months to a year later and ask why something was done or wasn't done...and yeah, I've had to pull out the CYA and show them where THEY changed the rules (only to 'forget' about the request), but 'CYA' is far too negative an approach. Consider it documentation for the future in as unambiguous means as possible.
"Each person has some predefined cost that they are willing to pay for certain items."
And if it isn't worth it to you, don't consume it. My point is, people will buy what they have to. My friend who bought the light version will most likely buy the full version, but I'm convinced he is hoping a crack will come out addressing his issues first. In the meantime, he is doing a disservice to the folks that offered a version of the software that does 90% of what he needs -- and most likely 100% of what he needs if he'd actually learn to use it.
You won't buy water. So if stranded and nothing to drink and thirsting to death and someone came by and offered you water you wouldn't pay? You have a pocket full of money and this will inconvenience your sense of morality, but you won't die if you buy it. But you expect the guy to give it to you out of the kindness of his heart. If you are willing to die for your morals, more power to you. I'm pulling out a buck fifty out of my pocket and thanking him for having the foresight to realize someone was going to need something at a reasonable price.
Once we get into ENTERTAINMENT, hell no I'm not going to spend money on what comes out of the tap. I watch movies, but I'm not going to go see something that is crappy simply because it is there. And then demand my money back because it is crappy. Or steal it because I didn't think it was worth while in the first place. If it is crappy, I don't buy it. I don't rent it. I don't go to the theater. I'm sure as hell not going to say HEY THIS IS CRAPPY AND WORTHLESS, BUT I'M WILLING TO PUT IT ON A TORRENT SO OTHERS CAN SEE HOW CRAPPY IT IS. That is just plain hypocritical. If I don't think it is worth the money, I ignore it.
So, no...you do not refute my claims at all. You simply state that if you don't want to buy something, you don't buy it. How is that any different than what I said. Sounds like we think pretty similarly beyond the hyperbole. I absolutely don't take what is not mine, and all the software I own is legitimate. I use 'substitute' software all the time...I use photoshop at work because it is paid for and it is a decent app. At home? Hell no...not worth it. I'm not going to get a cracked version...I'll get something else, either free or cheap. If the free or cheap didn't do what I needed, I'd find a legal way to use Photoshop -- either going into work and using it after hours, or sucking it up and buying it.
"the people pirating your movies WOULD NOT PAY FOR THEM OTHERWISE"
Bullshit.
I hear this argument all the time, and know people that pirate their movies / songs / whatever and they ALWAYS tell me this same thing. But the minute it becomes impossible to get whatever through elicit means, they seems to come up with the money for it.
My last girlfriend would always get her movies from some Russian warez site...but if one of the films wasn't there she'd begrudgingly see the new release (and complain it wasn't badly translated). A good friend seems to be able to buy tons of music equipment, but never pays for his software. His argument is ART SHOULD BE FREE. The software is no more art than the guitars. I WOULDN'T PAY FOR IT ANYWAYS is his mantra, because again, he never pays for 'art'. Yet, when his favorite cracked software seemed to not work right with his audio interface, and he had to step down to his soundblaster quality card (I don't even know if they make soundblasters anymore)...he complained that he had to spend $800 on his audio card and why should he have to pay another $500 for software (errr...because they are made by two separate companies????) And then proceeded to complain for weeks that he ended up having to buy the light version for $100 and it didn't do half of what he needed and screamed they will never get another cent from him because they ripped him off -- even after I TOLD him it wouldn't do what he needed and offered to give a slightly older version of the software for free (but he would have had to relearn it...which wouldn't have been hard because it would have come with manuals).
Each and every time someone says someone won't pay for it, it means they simply don't want to pay for it and will avoid it at all costs, unless of course they can't and in which case, they will pay for it.
Personally, I think bills like this in Congress are asinine. Then again, congress is made up of people. And people are idiots for the most part. One set of idiots trying to balance out a wrong from a bunch of cheap assholes that seem to think programmers and musicians and actors should work for free. Of course it is going to be counterbalanced by a bunch of jackasses that think they need to have retinal scans mandatory for every DVD viewing to make it possible keep unauthorized people from watching their products. It is the natural counterbalance to INFORMATION, SPECIFICALLY YOUR INFORMATION, WANTS TO BE FREE AND IF IT DOESN'T I'LL CRACK IT AND BRAINWASH IT UNTIL IT DOES.
"Which is why I don't buy Dell. Quality == teh suck"
And probably why you are an idiot.
I buy BUSINESS CLASS Dells and they work PERFECTLY. I've had maybe one system out of a few hundred I had to send back. Most last a lot longer than they should in an environment like mine.
Then again, my main computer is a MacBook Pro. Got rid of my own Dell, but still use the HUGE Dell monitor attached to my Mac. Even that doesn't look bad.
Windows? Can't stand it. Don't like it. Have a few testing apps and psychometric tools I need that run on it...for which most of the time I use Parallels to run Windows silently. But Dell? Especially the business class stuff? It does what it is advertised. Then again, any idiot that buys the home class stuff and complains really deserves what they get. I mean, what did you expect from a $300 computer??? I'd expect a $300 Mac to suck too...
Then again, I might just like calling people idiots...so take that as it may!
Slashdot Mirror
I really can't stand assholes like this either...I was in a chair for about a year but could walk with crutches for short amounts of time (like a few hours a day max), and even then I didn't use the handicapped spots. I figured someone with more need probably could use them (even if that meant I needed to walk a block further).
Sadly, it was generally overpriveledged yuppies or 18 year old punks that needed them more...
"When did "passing notes" or "not submitting to authority figures" become against the law?"
Probably like 200 years ago...disorderly conduct is at least a misdemeanor in any state in the nation.
Why? Because the law should not have to enumerate EVERY single problem out there. Sometimes, an authority figures job is to walk up to you and tell you to knock it off...and if you do, everything is fine...if you tell them to fuck off and continue to be a disturbance, well then expect to get a disorderly thrown against you. Occasionally, the disorderly conduct is a protected one...handing out fliers on a street might be annoying, especially ones where you are protesting something or someone right in front of their residence...but any (rational) court would consider it protected behavior so long as you are not on private property or a danger to others. Other forms of disorderly conduct are not protected...texting in a classroom is not. Either one can get you arrested, one can get you fined while the other can have false arrest charges given against the officer (at least put on the record which will have dire effects against promotion and retention...regardless of what you hear on these sorts of sites)...
So yeah, the police officer is doing something that is on the law books, something they are trained to do and protecting people from selfish idiots that ruin an education for everyone (I know I have been annoyed in my classes by people texting...and probably have done the same back...I have always put my phone away the minute an instructor asks and generally never pull it out in their class again).
"Would you be willing to spend the big bucks to go to the Olympics if you knew that they grabbed some average joe off the street, put him in front of a machine"
There is a BIG difference between creativity and shows of athletic prowess.
There is a BIG difference between someone using autotune creatively and one that doesn't. I can't sing. I had voice therapy to just speak well for the first 16 years of my life. Funny, no one seems to notice these days except that I articulate some things in an accent neutral / correct way that just doesn't seem natural. Still, I can't sing. If I'm doing a demo for someone that requires vocals, I break out the Autotune (actually, I use melodyne, but it is the same sort of thing...I can use this one a little more creatively though).
I'm a musician, and I approach this stuff from a musical way. The creativity involved has to do more with the mind of the musician than the technical prowess. Technical prowess may allow for more range, but not always. Expressed creativity is also limited quite a bit by lack of technical prowess. Today? One doesn't have to let the latter be a factor.
Again, it has a LOT to do with the music...a lot of crap out there just sucks. The artists doing this would suck regardless if it is autotune or the same three chords everyone else is doing. Other artists can take three chords and make it sound like nothing heard before.
Music is not athletic prowess, it should not be equated in any form to the olympics or other event. Music is music...
"If I had some sort of electronic device that could complete automate surgeries by taking control of my hands and arms (and without me having to think ,) I think it would be very disingenuous for me to call myself a surgeon"
Yes, but if you had an electronic device that helped you control your hands so that you didn't cut through the wrong tissue, knowing exactly what tissue you needed, that allowed you a little more time to do it right as opposed to flying by the seat of your pants (which most do), you would be.
I got to play with one such tool that a friend was a part of the development team that used a circuit flow as opposed to a blade, but could detect different tissue types and stop you from doing just this. Or you can, but you have to push it much greater. More or less, it only gives you a little more help in which one needs to use their own judgments to do what is needed. Somethings that required great skill 20 years ago, don't today...and it means one can focus on other areas of knowledge. Technology always changes the equation and allows for this give and take.
The skills one needs to be a surgeon today are not the skillset one will need in 20 years from now. Things that are simple today will be out of the grasp of those doing it in the future because there will be no institutional memory of it. In my current field (psychology), there is a greater emphasis on medication and less so on psychotherapy. Some of the fundamental techniques that have shown just as much effectiveness (or more) are not known by the general public...50 years from now, the medical aspects will be far more advanced to the point that these techniques might not be as effective (and there are some mental disease that have been shown to clear up almost instantly with the appropriate medical treatment).
In music, my old profession, a pianist might know how to score, but probably only for his own instrument...these days, keyboardist are expected to be able to play a dozen or more style of instruments that were not specifically designed to be played from a keyboard interface and do so faithfully, live. A guitarist is expected to be part engineer to get the appropriate sound in that the specific sound of the recordings had more to do with those in the control rooms. Engineers are expected to be critics and composers and audiophiles that aren't just pushing sliders and tweaking knobs but working in other aspects.
Our traits change, our skill sets change and our mindsets change. At the end of the day, we have to adjust or we become whiny little bitches that hold onto the past at the risk of losing new opportunities. Bad musicians are an eternal truth...just as the critics who have never contributed to popular culture but need to feel worthy by trying to convince others of their truths.
AMEN to this.
What the fuck is authentic these days? I'm sick of the notion that creative output needs to have an olympic mentality to it. It is like the guys that can play 64th note riffs on guitars and then act as if anyone that cannot approach their technical ability has no business playing.
In my case, I was a professional musician for a number of years. Toured nationally with a Grammy winning group. Had to get out of it because I developed severe arthritis that impacted my ability to play (it is an autoimmune disease as opposed to just bad technique...put me in a wheel chair for a year bad). I *STILL* compose and play somewhat, and went on to work with the same artist on the next album...some of my work ended up on it as I had left it as opposed to being replaced by other artists. Since I used a sequencer and samples, some would say this is inauthentic. So, if someone is robbed of technical ability (or never had any), their creative output means NOTHING?
Of course, quite a few musicians trade the autotune 'perfect' output as an alternative to creativity...so long as everything hits on the right notes, it will sell. I don't believe in that either. Creativity involves falling outside of the lines occasionally. And sometimes it involves being right on the line. Personally, I don't get the folks that think perfect technique has anything to do with musicality...some of my favorite works come from non-musicians with absolutely no training or technique but had something to say and used ANY possibility they could to get it up there. Far more authentic than most of the instrumental / technique bands I could ever hear...those guys are as coldly robotic as any autotune could be.
"Why not "Old, successfulBand"? They don't need the one thing the label can give them: publicity?"
I've worked with "Old, successfulBand" before and one hit doesn't mean anything. Or 20. It is all about the next hit.
I knew one guy that had multiplatinum albums dating to the 70s until the early 90s...decided to go it himself. For 15 years, he sold practically nothing. Yeah, the profits were actually decent considering all of this, but he couldn't sell out huge concert halls any more. For an artist, this is where the real money comes into play. Along with licensing, which isn't going to happen if his songs aren't getting heard by the public (an indie artist might get a song played with just critical buzz alone, but an established one won't...if it is only buzz, the tastemakers are going to pass it up for something unknown).
Lots more reasons, but that's all I got tonight...
The problem with this is that vicarious social learning theories from times BEFORE video games have pretty much proven that while one can never 100% prove correlation / causation, it is well established that it is highly likely that there is a link.
Psychological studies are not the same as physics...only because we have to deal with morality (there was one group in history that was actually were able to dispense with these moral conundrums and prove a lot more...but I'm not going to mention the name of this group because according to the rules of /. I will have already lost the argument).
The problem is, he is preaching to people that have no clue about psychological theories because it has nothing to do with ones and zeros. Video games do lead to higher aggression...so do a lot of activities. The fact that nerds can't see this is beyond me. Probably just like pervs refuse to believe / or admit that pornography leads to higher incidence of violence to women. I like both videogames and porn...but know that in the hands of children, a lot of this stuff would be bad...
But again, I'm preaching to those that will never agree with me because it goes against their predefined goals. 15 years from now when they have kids, it will be different...
"Nobody could really be as lame as the guy in this video."
I hate to say this, but I ended up having a 10 minute conversation with the guy in that video last week...Dan was actually a pretty cool guy and I think he understood the cheesiness of it all. The software is aimed at being a quick and dirty sketch pad, mostly for those with little musical talent. As a musician, sometimes I use toys like this to bring out ideas and brainstorm...
But you might be right...he was very complementary of Apple when I mentioned it would be a cool little app if it could be ported to the iPhone (I showed him a few of these and he seemed to know about them). Maybe he is a top secret Apple scheme!
Either way, looking at his CV, it looks as though he would be the kinda nerd that /. would embrace. He isn't just the spokes model, but one of the programmers / researchers behind this application.
"A long time ago when I was in an class someone told that all quotes had to be attributed and you could only quote one paragraph from each source, and you had to add some sort of original commentary..."
That is a good rule of thumb when you are trying to get students to do, say, a 3 page paper. I.e., something that could be knocked out in a half hour by a competent writer that has read the material and synthesized the information into something new.
Then again, I've never actually quoted more than a sentence or two from a single source in a row, if I have to go more than that, I do the relevant sections '...' and then the end relevant area. I can't imagine the need to do an entire paragraph. In this instance, it it more about getting students to learn to quote relevantly as opposed to just using others words to pad the pages. In larger academic works where one is not judged by the paper length but by the accuracy and relevance of the information, a lot more quotes from single sources can be admitted under some circumstances (though I still can't imagine lifting large chunks of paragraphs at a time).
I don't agree with the bailout at all.
The point was, the idea was floated from GWB...his party agreed that this was the right thing to do. It was only the minor details that were disagreed upon. The Dems simply took the president's idea and formed it into their own screwed up logic.
Then again, the Dems believe there should be market forces at work...this is right inline with their belief system. The Republicans believe the markets should take care of its own...the dems stayed true to their ideas...the republicans abandoned everything they believed about the free market as soon as they started losing money.
Again, the market respects consistency over ideology. People are becoming billionaires in communist and former communist nations. If you have a rulebook that doesn't change the minute something becomes inconvenient, it is not that hard to play the game. I don't agree with the bailout, but I'm not going to fault the dems for doing what they were elected to do.
The markets are showing signs that they WANT to be under the guise of Obama over McCain and will react accordingly. The worst thing in a market is having someone lording over that you can't predict. Regardless of what you think of the Dems, they are easy to predict...even if I disagree with a lot of their stances. Doesn't matter if the guy who might be in charge has condemned them...I'd actually want someone in power that isn't coddling the individuals that caused the crisis over greed.
Heck, banks are already talking about using the stimulus package money to buy MORE banks and reconsolidate...which is what was the cause in the first place, and not to start opening loans up again -- which was the idea. They are already opening the money given to them for the annual bonuses to executives who are arguing that in their line of work, this is where the real pay is much like a waitress with a $2 an hour job that doesn't even get paychecks because of the taxes deducted from the tips. I'm sorry, but when you are making a base of $200k, you don't need to get any more tips regardless of your lifestyle. I made six figures before when I was working in entertainment, but I got out to do something that was meaningful to society and make a fraction of what I did educating your kids. If I can live life fully on thirty some thousand $$$ a year, these guys can do with the meager amount they are making.
I'm sorry, but the guy in charge NEEDS to be doing nothing but condemning these people. Making money isn't bad, but when you are given an economic bailout that effectively took money out of MY pocket and everyone else in this country, you owe it to these people to use it wisely. Having said this, I'd have sooner had the gov't not take ANY action and let the markets deal with it...but it was both parties agreeing that the basis of what was done was right (even if they quibbled over the details).
The point is, Obama is going to be a known entity and stable with his actions with the market...which even if he is wrong, the players can always figure out the new ground rules as long as they aren't going to change every few months.
"What kind of retard thinks that one of the responsibilities of the president of the United States is to control the price of gasoline?"
The kind that is smarter than you?
The President of the US is supposed to make policy that positively impacts the economy, who doesn't have the dollar drop lower and lower every stupid mistake he makes and doesn't squander a sound financial market with instability by overextending our reach into areas of the world that have no effect on us. Doing almost exactly the opposite of what this idiot has done would have strengthened the dollar...gas prices might actually have gone up, but a strong dollar would have meant that we are paying less for what the rest of the world is paying more.
A good president is a figurehead...not a wannabe dictator. One that inspires markets and not one that destabilizes them. A good president doesn't need to actively do anything to the markets...he leads with sound policy and the markets react accordingly.
Personally, high gas prices affected me a little, but as you said, you make choices in what is important. Cable TV was less important than being able to travel (and in this time, I discovered Hulu which I formerly thought sucked...much cheaper than cable!) So many ways to live differently in this economy...but it still means we have to make choices we didn't a few years ago.
"If you can't work to make your company grow then you need to find a new one."
No, I'm insubordinate when folks want to do things that are contrary to the stated goals of the organization -- and when folks take work that was not done on their time and usurp it for their own needs.
I work hard for my CLIENTS...not the organization. The clients are students. A lot of folks I deal with are not interested in anything but themselves. I personally, work hard for the people that make my organization exist...if everyone did the same, we'd all be better off.
Sorry this ruins your snarky comment through...
"If he refuses to help on the patent application after being instructed to do so, he's being insubordinate."
That is what I was told at my company...err...university. And I almost was....
Then again, I'm use to being insubordinate each and every day, so I refused to help the situation. The last one ended up as a big fight with our technology transfer team because the patentable material was a side project that I did on my time away from the university and I had my then boss sign an agreement that the university was welcome to use the work -- but it was my copyright.
In the end, these things are enough of a team effort that the patents went through each and every time but without my name on them. Even the last one, they worked around the fact that this was my code (all agreed to this) and patented it in a way that took care of XYZ Application Interfacing With ZYX Application, ensuring that no one else will be able to do this without them (someone else came through and integrated the connecting pieces).
The funny thing is one of my best friends is a patent attorney...I believe in software patents because in this day and age, what the hell does a mechanical patent have to do with ANYTHING. We aren't trying to protect some new wheat combine...software patents are essentially the same thing that we protected 200 years ago. I just think most are overly broad -- and in my situation, I was working for a state university, on projects that were designed to help students both in grade schools and beyond, with grants paid in part by the federal gov't through tax dollars...I just didn't find it right to take what was supposed to be for the common good and lock it away most likely selling the exclusive rights to a single entity that will never use it to its full potential.
But yeah, if you work for an organization and refuse to take part in this activity, you can be fired or reprimanded. I barely survived the last fight...and I know it has affected promotion because I'm considered someone hard to work with (ok...everyone knew this, but it gave HR actual tangible evidence!)
"Unfortunately, many students fail to realize this when being given the full court press by an "admissions" officer."
This is why I tell all my friends to get things like Graduation Rate. Stats on Employment. Stats on First Year Salaries. And then I tell them to get a print out of all this -- if you are a fully accredited university / college / trade school -- you have this. If they do not want to give this out...or only want to make verbal statements...they have something to hide.
I can safely say that my first degree wouldn't pay anywhere near close enough to pay my student loans. I kinda knew this was the case, but I had a career that I could fall back on when everything else went bad. And it was the first stop to grad school...so you have to be an informed consumer like anything else in life. If you only take what people throw at you, you'll also think fast food is good for ya!
"Fine then, we'll put a webcam in whatever room(s) in your house has/have your computer(s),"
Did you get the memo? No one is forcing you to do this. You can unplug it anytime you want. It is only for testing. Don't want to be monitored, go to a proctored environment. Like near me? I can have you come into my office for a small fee and watch that you aren't cheating.
"Won't that day of reckoning come when you show up to your first job and the boss asks you to modify a Java program and you give him a blank stare?"
No, when it get known that universities are putting out students that can't do the job, they are penalized for this.
Students don't sign up for the universities -- they would if they could because they think it is an easy degree, but parents generally pay the bills and they research this stuff.
Beyond this, a lot of post-graduation research goes into assessing a program. How much is the average student making? How quickly do they find jobs? Are they still holding a job in their field at 1 year, 5 years, 10 years?
The gov't gets involved because they back student loans. Lots of defaults on student loans. If a university has a default rate of say 50% (I'm making up this number), they stop getting loans sent to them. A good friend wanted to go to an experimental psychological program this fall -- only to find that he can't get a loan. Not going to happen.
My day job is in student testing...I get to hear all of this every day...we get all the blame if students are doing poorly, but never any of the credit. I don't like what the law is doing, but it is a start. It is the start of accountability. Beyond that, I really don't think anyone lives anywhere that is all that inconvenient to get to some place that can proctor an exam with the exception of those whom are disabled. Heck, I gave a few exams with a web cam for a student in Iraq this year (I also had a ranking officer present to make certain that what I couldn't see was still legit!)
So lots of reasons for the gov't to get involved. As a tax payer, I hope they are only propping up universities that are churning out students that are qualified...and you should expect the same.
Next you know, someone is going to tell me I can't have free speech in someone else's home!
If I can't go into random people's houses, and in privately owned property and say what I want, you are oppressing me!!!
"Pet peeve of mine that 'social contract" theory... see, contracts have to be voluntarily entered by all parties, and last I checked, we're all held to social contracts whether we want to or not. Even for those of us happy to "sign", the social contract is being changed unilaterally, which with normal contracts is something that is almost never permitted."
Social contracts are enforceable by those in power. In a democracy, it is simply the majority. In other systems, it may be chosen by other means.
I'm not a big fan of democracies...I'm not a big fan of 'one man, one vote'. But at the very same time, it is much more preferred than almost any other system to date. As such, as much as I disagree with a lot of rules, I don't see how being limited to not downloading games or popular music is infringing on my right to life, liberty and happiness (of which this actually meant more about 'home ownership' by the founding fathers than an emotion).
Personally, I think the copyright laws ARE out of wack...but I also believe that as a content creator, I have expectations about my work that I wish others would follow. I wouldn't want someone using my works to advertise something I didn't care for. I wouldn't want someone I disagreed with to associate themselves with it. But these are my own rules and I can't expect to be able to force others into this...even if it were nice. Society has come up with a way to set standards on what can be expected...in the US it was done with a majority of the representatives we elected.
Anyhooo.....
"Because anybody who thinks that something intangible is "property" has shit for brains."
Bull fucking shit.
I believe that trees are common property of everyone. It is good for the world and I don't care who's land it belongs on...thus anything made of wood should be up for the taking. Anyone that thinks something tangible should be property has shit for brains. I don't care how you frame it, the only thing that belongs to any of us are our thoughts. As such, the only real property is intellectual property.
You see how this works?
Just because you can create an opinion doesn't make it so. Property is a social contract in ANY sense of the word. You don't believe in it. So what. Doesn't matter. You belong to a society that has enacted rules and regulations that say it is property, thus it is. Again, it is a social contract. As a part of society, you can disagree with a rule, but that doesn't make it any less of a rule unless that rule is changed.
So the point is, grow the fuck up. You want YOUR intellectual property given away for free, GPL it. Or CC it. Or otherwise. Maybe if enough others feel the same, you can turn the tide, but that doesn't make the fact that you own your ideas any less significant.
There has to be a reason I don't come to Slashdot any more. It is pretty bad when Digg and Reddit has more mature comments these days...
"I got the clutch working by stealing about 4 feet of wire from a fence, and winding it back and forth between the pedal lever and the clutch release arm."
Hell...I did something similar with my last car...the part was $300 from Saturn, and I was like BULLSHIT because it was a tiny piece of the part that broke. Ended up drilling two holes, grabbing some wire (this is where you caught me...I had fencing wire in my garage...nice heavy gauge) and wove it between the two pieces. I kept it that way until I bought my new car and the gears never seemed so smooth before this hack.
Unfortunately, when I traded it in, I thought I better tell the mechanic -- they gave me all of $500 for trade-in value because it was held together with duct tape and wire. Should not have said anything at all...
"First of all, you copy as many people as possible to CYA..."
At least CC'ing anyone directly responsible for the work. I know I have to deal with several departments on projects and I need others to sign off on changes...or at least be in the loop so that if they don't like the changes, I can tell them they were notified 3 months earlier and it is their own damn problem they didn't respond then.
"I was the only person in my circle of correspondance that trimmed my replies..."
In corporate email, I'd probably be pretty pissed if I got a message trimmed without all the details. C'mon...it is 2008...even a few hundred lines of text are not taking up that much space on the server. I generally trim the parts that need responding to and prepend them to my message with my comments or action items that I or others need to take care of. The previous writing is left intact below for context.
All in all, it isn't CYA, it is clarity in the situation. Some people look at the negative side of things and I've had bosses that would come back to me 6 months to a year later and ask why something was done or wasn't done...and yeah, I've had to pull out the CYA and show them where THEY changed the rules (only to 'forget' about the request), but 'CYA' is far too negative an approach. Consider it documentation for the future in as unambiguous means as possible.
"Each person has some predefined cost that they are willing to pay for certain items."
And if it isn't worth it to you, don't consume it. My point is, people will buy what they have to. My friend who bought the light version will most likely buy the full version, but I'm convinced he is hoping a crack will come out addressing his issues first. In the meantime, he is doing a disservice to the folks that offered a version of the software that does 90% of what he needs -- and most likely 100% of what he needs if he'd actually learn to use it.
You won't buy water. So if stranded and nothing to drink and thirsting to death and someone came by and offered you water you wouldn't pay? You have a pocket full of money and this will inconvenience your sense of morality, but you won't die if you buy it. But you expect the guy to give it to you out of the kindness of his heart. If you are willing to die for your morals, more power to you. I'm pulling out a buck fifty out of my pocket and thanking him for having the foresight to realize someone was going to need something at a reasonable price.
Once we get into ENTERTAINMENT, hell no I'm not going to spend money on what comes out of the tap. I watch movies, but I'm not going to go see something that is crappy simply because it is there. And then demand my money back because it is crappy. Or steal it because I didn't think it was worth while in the first place. If it is crappy, I don't buy it. I don't rent it. I don't go to the theater. I'm sure as hell not going to say HEY THIS IS CRAPPY AND WORTHLESS, BUT I'M WILLING TO PUT IT ON A TORRENT SO OTHERS CAN SEE HOW CRAPPY IT IS. That is just plain hypocritical. If I don't think it is worth the money, I ignore it.
So, no...you do not refute my claims at all. You simply state that if you don't want to buy something, you don't buy it. How is that any different than what I said. Sounds like we think pretty similarly beyond the hyperbole. I absolutely don't take what is not mine, and all the software I own is legitimate. I use 'substitute' software all the time...I use photoshop at work because it is paid for and it is a decent app. At home? Hell no...not worth it. I'm not going to get a cracked version...I'll get something else, either free or cheap. If the free or cheap didn't do what I needed, I'd find a legal way to use Photoshop -- either going into work and using it after hours, or sucking it up and buying it.
"the people pirating your movies WOULD NOT PAY FOR THEM OTHERWISE"
Bullshit.
I hear this argument all the time, and know people that pirate their movies / songs / whatever and they ALWAYS tell me this same thing. But the minute it becomes impossible to get whatever through elicit means, they seems to come up with the money for it.
My last girlfriend would always get her movies from some Russian warez site...but if one of the films wasn't there she'd begrudgingly see the new release (and complain it wasn't badly translated). A good friend seems to be able to buy tons of music equipment, but never pays for his software. His argument is ART SHOULD BE FREE. The software is no more art than the guitars. I WOULDN'T PAY FOR IT ANYWAYS is his mantra, because again, he never pays for 'art'. Yet, when his favorite cracked software seemed to not work right with his audio interface, and he had to step down to his soundblaster quality card (I don't even know if they make soundblasters anymore)...he complained that he had to spend $800 on his audio card and why should he have to pay another $500 for software (errr...because they are made by two separate companies????) And then proceeded to complain for weeks that he ended up having to buy the light version for $100 and it didn't do half of what he needed and screamed they will never get another cent from him because they ripped him off -- even after I TOLD him it wouldn't do what he needed and offered to give a slightly older version of the software for free (but he would have had to relearn it...which wouldn't have been hard because it would have come with manuals).
Each and every time someone says someone won't pay for it, it means they simply don't want to pay for it and will avoid it at all costs, unless of course they can't and in which case, they will pay for it.
Personally, I think bills like this in Congress are asinine. Then again, congress is made up of people. And people are idiots for the most part. One set of idiots trying to balance out a wrong from a bunch of cheap assholes that seem to think programmers and musicians and actors should work for free. Of course it is going to be counterbalanced by a bunch of jackasses that think they need to have retinal scans mandatory for every DVD viewing to make it possible keep unauthorized people from watching their products. It is the natural counterbalance to INFORMATION, SPECIFICALLY YOUR INFORMATION, WANTS TO BE FREE AND IF IT DOESN'T I'LL CRACK IT AND BRAINWASH IT UNTIL IT DOES.
Anyhoo...
"Which is why I don't buy Dell. Quality == teh suck"
And probably why you are an idiot.
I buy BUSINESS CLASS Dells and they work PERFECTLY. I've had maybe one system out of a few hundred I had to send back. Most last a lot longer than they should in an environment like mine.
Then again, my main computer is a MacBook Pro. Got rid of my own Dell, but still use the HUGE Dell monitor attached to my Mac. Even that doesn't look bad.
Windows? Can't stand it. Don't like it. Have a few testing apps and psychometric tools I need that run on it...for which most of the time I use Parallels to run Windows silently. But Dell? Especially the business class stuff? It does what it is advertised. Then again, any idiot that buys the home class stuff and complains really deserves what they get. I mean, what did you expect from a $300 computer??? I'd expect a $300 Mac to suck too...
Then again, I might just like calling people idiots...so take that as it may!