I think this is a case of us Americans going "ooooo, more is better" and taking the higher number without really thinking about it. Which would you choose: 2047 minutes free of AOL, or 1000 minutes from a plain jane competitor? I'd choose the latter.
Also, from what I hear, there are restrictions on that 1 gig offer from gmail. You can't send someone a 400mb file, for example, or even a 10mb file, for that matter. Also, you can actually sign up for yahoo without having to beg someone who's currently a member. Their invite only system with gmail and orkut really leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
I've used Yahoo without too many problems for some time. I've even paid for an upgraded account. Unfortunately, their site seems to be fucked at the moment, probably due to a DNS change. In any case, it's important to compare services over more than a single dimension. If I don't see the need for more than 50MB storage, why would I choose google, for example?
Well, such judgments of difficulty must be subjective to a degree, as they are facts about the person doing the job. My experience has been that 'A'-level work on a programming assignment is much more difficult than 'A'-level work on a similarly sized writing assignment. I've done both fairly well as I'm told.
I use school as reference since employers I've had since graduating don't really 'grade' me so concretely, and so serve as poor reference.
Sure, if Brown's arguments depend on his ability to discern such matters as an expert, that's fine. And arguments from ignorance are certainly an example of that. For instance, "I can't possibly see how Linus could have written the kernel all by himself." Such a statement would be mute without an expert standing behind it. And I admit, Brown is probably not one.
However, the original poster was using this as a foil to make the general point that PHD > MA, and strongly implied that we should side with Tanenbaum over Brown chiefly for this reason:
From what I read Brown has a B.A in English Literature... WOW, this is so not impressive.
I find the self-righteous B.A. types to be just that. You will never win an argument with them because they will never be able to ascertain when it is over. I think Andrew deserves a lot of credit for even writing a rebuttal to Ken's comments.
If that isn't gratuitous elitism, I don't know what is. Even if there are valid points to be made about the relative credentials, that little section was completely unnecessary.
Code is harder. Make a misspelling, or grammatical error in a novel? Oops, guess it'll be corrected for the next printing. But with code it's different. It's easy to slap down a bunch of code, but then to get it to compile, run, run correctly, run efficiently, etc. That takes more time. I'm not saying that writing novels is easy or trivial. It's not. Just that in my experience, writing philosophy, technical documentation, or whatever...has been much easier than actually writing programs. My writing probably wasn't the greatest, but then neither were my programs:)
The facts speak for themselves. We should be considering the facts of the case, not the facts about the people debating the case. Your comment smacks of elitism. Completely unnecessary elitism.
LOC is a terrible measure of...anything. It depends on your application, the algorithms used for it, how good of a coder you are, etc. I've ported projects where I ended up with less lines than I started! I must be a terrible coder as I was writing -5 lines of code a day.
OS software is hard. It's hard to write, it's hard to debug. Much harder than your typical RAD business app. So LOC in one means little to the other.
Finally, in pretty much any application, how difficult LOC are to write depend on how big the application is. So, lines 10,000 to 10,100 are much more difficult (typically) than lines 0 to 100. Even this is dependent, of course. Are you changing something that affects many modules, or is it a fairly independent new addition?
Anyway, just thought I'd try to clear this up a bit. 28 LOC a day may indeed be coding at "full steam", especially when you have subtle bugs that only pop up 0.0001% of the time and require reworking a function five times or so before they finally go away.
Is it really so hard to believe that spammers would prefer hiding behind infected machines? There certainly isn't a lack of infected machines to use. Just look at shady sites like this if you need some convincing.
"Fire!" in a crowded theater, kiddie porn, etc. There is no reason that these actvities should not be blocked in the electronic world as well.
All of those should remain illegal. However, just because something is illegal, it does not imply that we should do anything to stop it. I disagree with sharia, which involves chopping off hands of bread thiefs. Does this mean I think stealing bread is right? No. Here, I agree that child porn should be illegal, but I do not agree that it should be blocked in this manner.
And a less imperfect (though still pretty silly) analogy would be a taxi company refusing to drive you to a place for the purpose of obtaining child pornography.
Well, lets carry this analogy out. You ask to go to some place you have heard of, through whatever means, good or ill.
The taxi driver says, "I'm sorry, that place does not exist."
You say, "Does it really not exist, or are you just refusing to take me."
To which he replies, "I can't tell you that."
You say, "What other places will you not take me?"
to which he answers, again, "I can't tell you that."
In short, you are left in a position such that you cannot judge whether you are being blocked for good or bad reasons. This opens up the potential for abuse. As there is no oversight, abuse will eventually happen, as it always does where oversight is non-existent.
So yes, the taxi analogy is valid, but because it is valid we can use it to demonstrate exactly what's wrong with this situation.
Exchange = greater demand = more supply needed = more children affected.
The SCOTUS, at least, has barred this as a valid argument. Child pornography is illegal in the United States because it brings lasting harm to the specific victims involved. It has nothing to do with "feeding the market" of pedophiles.
This came up in the discussion of virtual representations of child pornography. That is, drawings, computer animation, other things that portray children having sex but actually do not involve real children. A law was passed to outlaw such things based on the "market" argument, and this law was eventually struck down by the SCOTUS.
Seriously, I would rather have not one child be sexually abused for losing one of those "inaliable rights" everyone loves.
I wouldn't. You're being too single minded. These "inalienable rights" are, quite frankly, much more important than stamping out 100% of child porn.
sitting on your ass in your mom's basement and complaining about losing rights when you have no clue how politics and laws work = bad
Complaining on a site that attracts thousands of visitors a day is not a non-contribution to politics. I complain about losing my freedoms and rights because I'm losing my freedoms and rights. I see no way of implementing these measures without allowing for the possibility (and eventual realization) of abuse. So I complain now.
And it's one thing to say, "no clue about how politics and laws work", but another for you to explain, oh one wise in the ways of politics, exactly what understanding those complaining lack. In fact, you have no realization of how politics works, and you prefer to sit in your mother's basement bitching about it instead. See, it's easy to do. Anyone can make such baseless claims.
Martin Luther King never was what he became without hard work, dillegence and direction.
You're really stretching to bring MLK into a discussion of child porn. Protesting doesn't always involve marching down main street as firefighters hose you down and police offers sic dogs on you. It's possible to wage politics online, and that's what people here are doing.
Your local Kwik-E-Mart is not going to be carrying Russian Lolitas Monthly next to the Playboys and Penthouses. Nor should they.
Well, that sounds nice, but it's an invalid analogy. A closer (yet still imperfect) analogy would be a car you bought that wouldn't let you drive to strip clubs. The problem people have with this move isn't that they think kiddy porn is OK, it's that this means of blocking the stuff is terrible. Will they publish the list of blocked sites? Almost certainly not. And then how will you know that the list is correct, and that the blocking that they perform does not have some other ulterior, possible political, motivation? You can't.
I disabled sound on my machine and the game ran flawlessly. So I think your suspicion is right. In case you figure anything out, here are the sound modules I have loaded in normal operation:
snd-seq-oss snd-seq-midi-event snd-seq snd-pc m-oss snd-mixer-oss snd-via82xx snd-pcm snd-ti mer snd-ac97-codec gameport snd-page-alloc snd -mpu401-uart snd-rawmidi snd-seq-device snd so undcore
My system: Linux linux1 2.6.3-7mdk-i686-up-4GB #1 Wed Mar 17 15:17:23 CET 2004 i686 unknown unknown GNU/Linux
It only happens after I play a few rounds of Pingu, but then it happens without fail. I'm not even close to maximizing the CPU, so that's definitely not it. I'm running MDK 10.0, but I had trouble on 9.x as well.
By chance I downloaded the newest version as I was reinstalling everything else too. But it still has "jerks" whenever I play a flash game. My slower windows box doesn't have this problem. The problem is reproducible on all three of my linux machines, no matter the processor speed. It makes it especially difficult to play a game like this since there are unexpected jerks in movement.
The problem is that many places sell chips separate of fans. For example, newegg.com. If I buy my chip and fan separately, why should I be penalized?
Re:15 Minutes Over in 3...2...1
on
Groklaw Turns One
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I'm not too familiar with moderation on Groklaw, but I would not be surprised to find your assessment correct. Moderation without accountability or transparency is rampant on the net. Outright deletions of trolling posts is a great way to win the battle but lose the war. Slashdot deserves mad props for being able to combat the trolls without resorting to mass post deletion. Some don't understand why this is so important. I was in a discussion with the owner of fark, and he saw outright deletions as just as "bad" as slashdot's moderation. The difference is that I can see everything pushed to -1, and feel confident that moderation is being applied correctly. In other systems, I have no idea if moderation is being abused.
To bring this back to the topic at hand, PJ should realize that the best way to fight ignorance and stupidity is with information, not moderation. Quashing the views of your opponents in any discussion makes you no better. The reason Groklaw has been so successful is in drudging up info that SCO would rather have had remained forgotten. The ultimate lesson should not be that SCO is bad, but that information is good. More information almost always leads us from deceit and error to truth and understanding.
-- As a final aside, I was so fed up with the abusive moderation on fark and other sites I've seen that I created my own to stand as a counter example of the way to run a web forum. It will likely never be very popular, but hey, it's better than just randomly bitching about such moderation. You can read more about it here.
The case is ongoing. You aren't allowed to publish details of ongoing cases that could taint a potential jury pool, and there's no doubt in my mind that that was the entire point of the ACLU's press release.
It seems that that could be justification to gag any case.
When the cases are over, the ACLU can say whatever the hell it wants.
Forcing the ACLU to wait until it's over is not justice--many cases go on for years. It would be too easy to abuse. You just file a suit, or commit an act that elicits a suit, and suddenly you can silence your critics.
It is always possible to rationalize wrongs. But that never makes them right. For example, "I should be allowed to speed because I might have an emergency," or "I should be allowed to torture because it might save lives," or "I should be able to invade privacy and bypass the checks and balances of justice because it might catch more terrorists."
But it's easier to just browse to about:config (sorry, can't make it linkable) and change the appropriate setting. Be sure to restart your browser. I'm not sure if it's necessary, but it's better safe than sorry.
Most criminals have very creative excuses as to why evidence implicating them just happened to be found in their home/car/computer/etc. This is only the latest excuse in a long series of excuses.
Certainly. But the real problem is that the incentive to accept a plea bargain can be so great that it is the most rational choice for someone even if he is not guilty. Accepting a guilty plea should never be the most adventagious choice for someone who is innocent. Otherwise, the whole plea system just serves as a run-around due process.
No, that doesn't do it for Mozilla build 2003120506. The nasty URL(lm.pleaseeat.us) still hijacks the browser. I'll try a newer build and reply to this.
Slashdot Mirror
I think this is a case of us Americans going "ooooo, more is better" and taking the higher number without really thinking about it. Which would you choose: 2047 minutes free of AOL, or 1000 minutes from a plain jane competitor? I'd choose the latter.
Also, from what I hear, there are restrictions on that 1 gig offer from gmail. You can't send someone a 400mb file, for example, or even a 10mb file, for that matter. Also, you can actually sign up for yahoo without having to beg someone who's currently a member. Their invite only system with gmail and orkut really leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
I've used Yahoo without too many problems for some time. I've even paid for an upgraded account. Unfortunately, their site seems to be fucked at the moment, probably due to a DNS change. In any case, it's important to compare services over more than a single dimension. If I don't see the need for more than 50MB storage, why would I choose google, for example?
Here's a link for those too lazy to search.
Well, such judgments of difficulty must be subjective to a degree, as they are facts about the person doing the job. My experience has been that 'A'-level work on a programming assignment is much more difficult than 'A'-level work on a similarly sized writing assignment. I've done both fairly well as I'm told.
I use school as reference since employers I've had since graduating don't really 'grade' me so concretely, and so serve as poor reference.
However, the original poster was using this as a foil to make the general point that PHD > MA, and strongly implied that we should side with Tanenbaum over Brown chiefly for this reason:
If that isn't gratuitous elitism, I don't know what is. Even if there are valid points to be made about the relative credentials, that little section was completely unnecessary.
Code is harder. Make a misspelling, or grammatical error in a novel? Oops, guess it'll be corrected for the next printing. But with code it's different. It's easy to slap down a bunch of code, but then to get it to compile, run, run correctly, run efficiently, etc. That takes more time. I'm not saying that writing novels is easy or trivial. It's not. Just that in my experience, writing philosophy, technical documentation, or whatever...has been much easier than actually writing programs. My writing probably wasn't the greatest, but then neither were my programs :)
The facts speak for themselves. We should be considering the facts of the case, not the facts about the people debating the case. Your comment smacks of elitism. Completely unnecessary elitism.
LOC is a terrible measure of...anything. It depends on your application, the algorithms used for it, how good of a coder you are, etc. I've ported projects where I ended up with less lines than I started! I must be a terrible coder as I was writing -5 lines of code a day.
OS software is hard. It's hard to write, it's hard to debug. Much harder than your typical RAD business app. So LOC in one means little to the other.
Finally, in pretty much any application, how difficult LOC are to write depend on how big the application is. So, lines 10,000 to 10,100 are much more difficult (typically) than lines 0 to 100. Even this is dependent, of course. Are you changing something that affects many modules, or is it a fairly independent new addition?
Anyway, just thought I'd try to clear this up a bit. 28 LOC a day may indeed be coding at "full steam", especially when you have subtle bugs that only pop up 0.0001% of the time and require reworking a function five times or so before they finally go away.
Is it really so hard to believe that spammers would prefer hiding behind infected machines? There certainly isn't a lack of infected machines to use. Just look at shady sites like this if you need some convincing.
"Fire!" in a crowded theater, kiddie porn, etc. There is no reason that these actvities should not be blocked in the electronic world as well.
All of those should remain illegal. However, just because something is illegal, it does not imply that we should do anything to stop it. I disagree with sharia, which involves chopping off hands of bread thiefs. Does this mean I think stealing bread is right? No. Here, I agree that child porn should be illegal, but I do not agree that it should be blocked in this manner.
Well, lets carry this analogy out. You ask to go to some place you have heard of, through whatever means, good or ill.
The taxi driver says, "I'm sorry, that place does not exist."
You say, "Does it really not exist, or are you just refusing to take me."
To which he replies, "I can't tell you that."
You say, "What other places will you not take me?"
to which he answers, again, "I can't tell you that."
In short, you are left in a position such that you cannot judge whether you are being blocked for good or bad reasons. This opens up the potential for abuse. As there is no oversight, abuse will eventually happen, as it always does where oversight is non-existent.
So yes, the taxi analogy is valid, but because it is valid we can use it to demonstrate exactly what's wrong with this situation.
This came up in the discussion of virtual representations of child pornography. That is, drawings, computer animation, other things that portray children having sex but actually do not involve real children. A law was passed to outlaw such things based on the "market" argument, and this law was eventually struck down by the SCOTUS.
Complaining on a site that attracts thousands of visitors a day is not a non-contribution to politics. I complain about losing my freedoms and rights because I'm losing my freedoms and rights. I see no way of implementing these measures without allowing for the possibility (and eventual realization) of abuse. So I complain now.
And it's one thing to say, "no clue about how politics and laws work", but another for you to explain, oh one wise in the ways of politics, exactly what understanding those complaining lack. In fact, you have no realization of how politics works, and you prefer to sit in your mother's basement bitching about it instead. See, it's easy to do. Anyone can make such baseless claims.
You're really stretching to bring MLK into a discussion of child porn. Protesting doesn't always involve marching down main street as firefighters hose you down and police offers sic dogs on you. It's possible to wage politics online, and that's what people here are doing.
I disabled sound on my machine and the game ran flawlessly. So I think your suspicion is right. In case you figure anything out, here are the sound modules I have loaded in normal operation:
c m-ossi merd -mpu401-uarto undcore
snd-seq-oss
snd-seq-midi-event
snd-seq
snd-p
snd-mixer-oss
snd-via82xx
snd-pcm
snd-t
snd-ac97-codec
gameport
snd-page-alloc
sn
snd-rawmidi
snd-seq-device
snd
s
I am using 3d accelerated Nvidia on two of my computers. GeForce5900SE (both), so I don't think that that's it.
My system:
Linux linux1 2.6.3-7mdk-i686-up-4GB #1 Wed Mar 17 15:17:23 CET 2004 i686 unknown unknown GNU/Linux
It only happens after I play a few rounds of Pingu, but then it happens without fail. I'm not even close to maximizing the CPU, so that's definitely not it. I'm running MDK 10.0, but I had trouble on 9.x as well.
What's your system?
By chance I downloaded the newest version as I was reinstalling everything else too. But it still has "jerks" whenever I play a flash game. My slower windows box doesn't have this problem. The problem is reproducible on all three of my linux machines, no matter the processor speed. It makes it especially difficult to play a game like this since there are unexpected jerks in movement.
The problem is that many places sell chips separate of fans. For example, newegg.com. If I buy my chip and fan separately, why should I be penalized?
I'm not too familiar with moderation on Groklaw, but I would not be surprised to find your assessment correct. Moderation without accountability or transparency is rampant on the net. Outright deletions of trolling posts is a great way to win the battle but lose the war. Slashdot deserves mad props for being able to combat the trolls without resorting to mass post deletion. Some don't understand why this is so important. I was in a discussion with the owner of fark, and he saw outright deletions as just as "bad" as slashdot's moderation. The difference is that I can see everything pushed to -1, and feel confident that moderation is being applied correctly. In other systems, I have no idea if moderation is being abused.
To bring this back to the topic at hand, PJ should realize that the best way to fight ignorance and stupidity is with information, not moderation. Quashing the views of your opponents in any discussion makes you no better. The reason Groklaw has been so successful is in drudging up info that SCO would rather have had remained forgotten. The ultimate lesson should not be that SCO is bad, but that information is good. More information almost always leads us from deceit and error to truth and understanding.
--
As a final aside, I was so fed up with the abusive moderation on fark and other sites I've seen that I created my own to stand as a counter example of the way to run a web forum. It will likely never be very popular, but hey, it's better than just randomly bitching about such moderation. You can read more about it here.
Forcing the ACLU to wait until it's over is not justice--many cases go on for years. It would be too easy to abuse. You just file a suit, or commit an act that elicits a suit, and suddenly you can silence your critics.
It is always possible to rationalize wrongs. But that never makes them right. For example, "I should be allowed to speed because I might have an emergency," or "I should be allowed to torture because it might save lives," or "I should be able to invade privacy and bypass the checks and balances of justice because it might catch more terrorists."
I had a similar problem. See above. Make sure you have downloaded and installed the latest build.
prefs.js
But it's easier to just browse to about:config (sorry, can't make it linkable) and change the appropriate setting. Be sure to restart your browser. I'm not sure if it's necessary, but it's better safe than sorry.
I just tried build 2004051107, and that does seem to work. So somewhere between those two dates, your browser can be vulnerable. Net users beware.
No, that doesn't do it for Mozilla build 2003120506. The nasty URL(lm.pleaseeat.us) still hijacks the browser. I'll try a newer build and reply to this.