Very insightful. I think this can be boiled down to:
Businesses write closed-source software that becomes monolithic and unmanageable because they need to add features to remain competitive in a market.
Open-source software stays small and relatively manageable (I'm sure the Linux kernel is still a bitch to sift through, as nice as it is compared to the Windows kernel) because developers know that if their code becomes unmanageable, they aren't going to be paid to manage it.
Plus, I think it's got something to do with being available to the public. I mean, if there was a giant billboard over your head that counted how many days it's been since you last brushed your teeth, would you skip it as often as you do?
Yeah, we all pay the same to use freeways, but all cars are allowed to reach the maximum speed.
To use your analogy of a freeway, this kind of throttling would be saying "All people with blue cars are allowed to drive 75 miles/km/whatever-units-you-want-to-use per hour, but people with red cars are only allowed to do 30."
So? You still need to look away from the road. And accidents don't take several minutes to happen. They happen in an instant. Looking away to read an incoming text, even if it's just five seconds, is about four and 3/4 seconds longer than you need to slam into the driver in front of you if they make a sudden stop.
Because to use your cell-phone for texting, you must look AWAY FROM THE ROAD and at a small screen to read texts.
When you're talking to a passenger, yeah, you're distracted, but talking and listening does not require that you take your eyes off the road. Nor does adjusting the radio, once you're used to using it.
Really, this is nothing more than an indicator that some people going into programming are clearly in the wrong field. Clearly, they belong in management.
But as a real-life software developer, you're going to have to deal with maintaining your code, adding features, optimizing the code, and porting it to various operating systems.
Most school courses require you to meet a fixed spec sheet, allow for terribly sloppy and inefficient code, and require no maintenance because they only last a semester.
Yes, you learn, but to follow your analogy, in college, you might learn all the nuances of getting food to your mouth with forks, spoons, and obscure African eating implements, but if you don't get practice chewing, you're still fucked.
But it's not censorship. We mods simply use the system in place to express our opinion that you are either a troll or making a redundant post, or something along those lines.
Your post is still on Slashdot servers and is still visible, unless someone chooses to browse at something above -1, which is the fault of that lone user.
That's because criminality IS flourishing. Plus, all the stories about how Joe Schmoe performed penetration testing and prevented a minor DoS attack would be boring and unintelligible to the average person. It's easier to headline "STUDENT BREAKS INTO SCHOOL AND STEALS INTERNETS FROM HARD DRIVES".
Don't mod this guy down. He's right. The reason people don't use public-private key cryptography is because they don't know what the hell it even is. Unfortunately, explaining why it's a good idea to a non-geek would be just as hard as explaining that even though that popup is flashy and says "Free Awesome Smileys", it's actually a Bad Thing.
I think this is an inaccurate analogy, because it implies that the kids not receiving as much cake/attention/funding/whatever as the 'dumb' kids don't NEED it.
If a kid doesn't receive attention, praise, reward for work well done, the kid won't want to do good work anymore. I know that my grades slipped during high school because nothing motivated me to do well. My teachers taught the same lessons and gave the same homework whether my last test was an A or an F.
So to fix your cake analogy: When sharing a cake, if you give more to hungrier students, the portions for those who are only less hungry have to be smaller.
So if you have nothing to hide, you would be perfectly comfortable with "THEM" listening/watching/observing all communications made between you and: your friends; your family; your significant other (God knows I don't want some NSA operative reading some of the pet names I have for mine)? You're okay with them having access to all information relating to you, including name, age, sexual orientation, date of birth, blood type, medical history, insurance history, credit history, dating history, and I would go on, but I'm having trouble thinking of more personal things "THEY" would be interested in.
There's a concept known as the "slippery slope" that basically mirrors the saying, "Give X and inch, and they'll take a mile." If we let "THEM" listen in on phone conversations so that "THEY" can prevent terrorism, it'll be a matter of time until we're asked to endure the wiretapping because there are 'harmful dissidents' in the country, trying to harm the nation. Actually, for a real-world tangible example where you can see the effects of allowing your government to invade your privacy, look at China. Yeah, you can call semi-Godwin's Law on me for citing Communists, but tell me that I'm wrong. They claim that the censorship, the firewall, and all that is to help keep the country safe and sane, but who really believes that?
Murderer says, "There's no way I could do that!" Kid Caught With Hand in Candy Jar says, "It wasn't me!" Philandering Neighbor Caught With Friend's Wife says, "This isn't what it looks like."
Hear hear. I'm all for tough love. My sister is one of those users whose eyes glaze over when you try to explain computer security, and once every year or two, I have to disinfect her computer. If I had my way, I'd make her live with it until she figured out how to clear it out herself and stop getting herself into the same damn situation.
But my point is that the author made the assumption that life cannot exist in any form BUT ours. In OUR universe: yes, carbon provides the most stable foundation for life, but the author is assuming that the universe was built for us rather than that we adapted to our universe.
In a universe where the strength of gravity is an umpteenth magnitude greater than electromagnetism, maybe silicon or lead or iron would be the most suitable base.
Slashdot Mirror
Very insightful. I think this can be boiled down to:
Businesses write closed-source software that becomes monolithic and unmanageable because they need to add features to remain competitive in a market.
Open-source software stays small and relatively manageable (I'm sure the Linux kernel is still a bitch to sift through, as nice as it is compared to the Windows kernel) because developers know that if their code becomes unmanageable, they aren't going to be paid to manage it.
Plus, I think it's got something to do with being available to the public. I mean, if there was a giant billboard over your head that counted how many days it's been since you last brushed your teeth, would you skip it as often as you do?
Yeah, we all pay the same to use freeways, but all cars are allowed to reach the maximum speed.
To use your analogy of a freeway, this kind of throttling would be saying "All people with blue cars are allowed to drive 75 miles/km/whatever-units-you-want-to-use per hour, but people with red cars are only allowed to do 30."
So? You still need to look away from the road. And accidents don't take several minutes to happen. They happen in an instant. Looking away to read an incoming text, even if it's just five seconds, is about four and 3/4 seconds longer than you need to slam into the driver in front of you if they make a sudden stop.
Because to use your cell-phone for texting, you must look AWAY FROM THE ROAD and at a small screen to read texts.
When you're talking to a passenger, yeah, you're distracted, but talking and listening does not require that you take your eyes off the road. Nor does adjusting the radio, once you're used to using it.
Face it. If you're posting on 4chan, nobody will care if your LOLcat is off-topic. You're going to get reamed anyway.
But as a real-life software developer, you're going to have to deal with maintaining your code, adding features, optimizing the code, and porting it to various operating systems.
Most school courses require you to meet a fixed spec sheet, allow for terribly sloppy and inefficient code, and require no maintenance because they only last a semester.
Yes, you learn, but to follow your analogy, in college, you might learn all the nuances of getting food to your mouth with forks, spoons, and obscure African eating implements, but if you don't get practice chewing, you're still fucked.
Pfft. Good luck getting McCain to die. All the Republicans have signed a pact with Satan to prolong their lifespan.
Seriously. Let's celebrate his life, rather than mourn his death. We shouldn't be sad. We should be boozing it up and ordering hookers for everyone!
This Carlin has ceased to be! He has gone to meet his maker! He is pushing up daisies!
But it's not censorship. We mods simply use the system in place to express our opinion that you are either a troll or making a redundant post, or something along those lines.
Your post is still on Slashdot servers and is still visible, unless someone chooses to browse at something above -1, which is the fault of that lone user.
That's because criminality IS flourishing. Plus, all the stories about how Joe Schmoe performed penetration testing and prevented a minor DoS attack would be boring and unintelligible to the average person. It's easier to headline "STUDENT BREAKS INTO SCHOOL AND STEALS INTERNETS FROM HARD DRIVES".
I'd mod you +1 Funny, if I hadn't already posted.
My girlfriend tells a joke about ducks. It goes:
"What's the difference between a grape and a duck?"
Answer: "Both are purple, except for the duck."
Yeah, it's stupid, but I laugh, and then she has sex with me.
Don't mod this guy down. He's right. The reason people don't use public-private key cryptography is because they don't know what the hell it even is. Unfortunately, explaining why it's a good idea to a non-geek would be just as hard as explaining that even though that popup is flashy and says "Free Awesome Smileys", it's actually a Bad Thing.
I think this is an inaccurate analogy, because it implies that the kids not receiving as much cake/attention/funding/whatever as the 'dumb' kids don't NEED it.
If a kid doesn't receive attention, praise, reward for work well done, the kid won't want to do good work anymore. I know that my grades slipped during high school because nothing motivated me to do well. My teachers taught the same lessons and gave the same homework whether my last test was an A or an F.
So to fix your cake analogy: When sharing a cake, if you give more to hungrier students, the portions for those who are only less hungry have to be smaller.
Was I the only one who originally thought that the armored bears didn't like Firefox?
Oh my god...I am SO stupid. Goodnight, gentlemen. I'm done.
So if you have nothing to hide, you would be perfectly comfortable with "THEM" listening/watching/observing all communications made between you and: your friends; your family; your significant other (God knows I don't want some NSA operative reading some of the pet names I have for mine)? You're okay with them having access to all information relating to you, including name, age, sexual orientation, date of birth, blood type, medical history, insurance history, credit history, dating history, and I would go on, but I'm having trouble thinking of more personal things "THEY" would be interested in.
There's a concept known as the "slippery slope" that basically mirrors the saying, "Give X and inch, and they'll take a mile." If we let "THEM" listen in on phone conversations so that "THEY" can prevent terrorism, it'll be a matter of time until we're asked to endure the wiretapping because there are 'harmful dissidents' in the country, trying to harm the nation. Actually, for a real-world tangible example where you can see the effects of allowing your government to invade your privacy, look at China. Yeah, you can call semi-Godwin's Law on me for citing Communists, but tell me that I'm wrong. They claim that the censorship, the firewall, and all that is to help keep the country safe and sane, but who really believes that?
"Watr: H20 2.0"
Murderer says, "There's no way I could do that!"
Kid Caught With Hand in Candy Jar says, "It wasn't me!"
Philandering Neighbor Caught With Friend's Wife says, "This isn't what it looks like."
Hear hear. I'm all for tough love. My sister is one of those users whose eyes glaze over when you try to explain computer security, and once every year or two, I have to disinfect her computer. If I had my way, I'd make her live with it until she figured out how to clear it out herself and stop getting herself into the same damn situation.
You all suck. I backup to Pluto.
But my point is that the author made the assumption that life cannot exist in any form BUT ours. In OUR universe: yes, carbon provides the most stable foundation for life, but the author is assuming that the universe was built for us rather than that we adapted to our universe.
In a universe where the strength of gravity is an umpteenth magnitude greater than electromagnetism, maybe silicon or lead or iron would be the most suitable base.