I've always been concerned about people who can't see the negative side of all the "green", modern technologies today.
I buy a new phone about every 3 years, when my previous one is worn out. Most people do this every year or two. What a waste. The motors and battery (which needs to be replaced every X years) for your new Prius are not so great for the environment. Sure, it makes you feel good to not fill up at the gas pump, but what is the true environmental cost of that car? Same goes for windmills, etc. Are they really better for the environment than, say, nuclear power? This article shows what you're missing when you sign that lease, or buy that new iPhone.
I'm glad someone out there is forcing us to look at the downside of all of the technology we use. Kudos to them for doing it.
I have a Design BFA degree from a major 4-year school, and I am back in school for Electrical Engineering (having studied that prior to art originally). I am a software engineer and have been for years.
The design degree was complete bullshit. 90% of the time my work was being "critiqued" I could give a completely ridiculous explanation and it would be more acceptable than a well thought-out answer from the analytical side of my mind. Art History != Art.
Thus far I've found I haven't learned anything useful in either program.
That's all well and good, but which do you think we are more lacking in the world? a) Engineers with "perspective" on the world and people around them...or... b) non-engineers with highly critical thinking skills?
Surely this is obvious. For most engineers worth their salt, humanities exposure happens on their own time and in good measure. I can't say the same for non-engineers I work with, who receive little to no exposure to actual critical thinking of any variety.
It's frequently all too obvious that people critical of ideas that originated (or were perpetuated by) that woman have absolutely no understanding of the ideas and frequently haven't even read the books.
Love that phrasing, btw: "I'd like to work on mine and it would be nice if you would get out of the way".
You either have extremely poor reading comprehension skills or are just an idiot. Either way I'll take the bait.
Socialism does not fail because it "has made most of society's lives better". It failed because it DID NOT do that, and worse, always seems to result in an oppressive regime with the only goal of keeping itself in power. That is a failure. Don't you get frustrated when you can't do anything to fix whatever lousy situation you happen to be in? Now imagine it were legislated specifically so that you were unable to.
Next time try reading what I wrote, instead of twisting it to fit your bigoted, uneducated, and perhaps brainwashed view about opponents of socialism.
To be fair, there could be an example of an amazingly successful government (perhaps beaten into the ground by the evil freedom lovers somewhere in the world) that I'm unaware of, so please give me an example of a thriving socialist paradise where everyone is happy living out their lives for everyone else's benefit, since they're unable to influence their own lives through their own effort.
Not at all. But civilization doesn't have to always be the bureaucratic mess it is today, as perpetuated by the established "liberal" and "conservative" (that is, entirely anti-freedom and advancement of society on both sides) incumbents.
Socialism in particular fails because the only motivation inherent in the system is to improve the lives of others. The cool thing about making a society more democratic and less restrictive (that is, moving toward the libertarian sense of what a government should be) is that it makes it really obvious how you can benefit from the self-improvements of others, and how they can benefit from your own self-improvement at no cost to yourself.
Why does everyone always think that a libertarian ideal is completely geared around making money? It doesn't have to be. My ideal would be as much humanist as libertarian, and I expect that's more of what is being talked about with the "seasteading" project as well, since it seems to come from the Randian vision of how to define a model person.
Some of us try our best to live up to the standards set by the society we live in without being forced to, because it's in our own best interest. And sometimes that means you collect your own trash.
Socialism has been tried in the "modern era" and it failed-- why are so many people against trying the opposite? (To my knowledge it's never actually been tried in modern times, especially with only people who give a damn.)
Was it merely something not quite PC enough for today's crowd, or was it something truly grotesque and thus damning and beyond recovery?
Irrelevant.
I am back in school (at age 30) in no small part because of the excitement and interest that the Lewin physics lectures instilled in me. His alleged misconduct in any other arena is irrelevant. It's not even as if the content of the lectures could be perceived in some "bad" manner-- it's totally unrelated!
For those that haven't seen those lectures, I cannot recommend them highly enough.
This is a terrible move for MIT. They should be embarrassed.
Since when has Slashdot of all places become accepting of general mediocrity over personal excellence?
" Perhaps the advice-giver wants to sound smart, or simply wants to avoid the possiblity of having to admit they were wrong (if you make your advice hard to follow, that reduces the chance of somebody actually climbing that mountain and then pointing out to you if your suggestion didn't work). So it's not just that the advice-giver is being unhelpful, it's that they're being a dick."
Well, I'm glad the author cares about the overall performance of his advice across 'everyone'. Personally, when receiving advice, I prefer searching out and researching all reasonable options and choosing the best one for me rather than taking generic advice applicable to a wide range of people. And when I give advice I try to do it in such a way that leaves the advice-taker able to evaluate the options and take the best option for them, rather than giving them advice that may help "anyone" a little bit but won't help them in particular a whole lot. If the advice-seeker doesn't have the interest to look at the options and make a choice that's their problem.
+1 UI madness. For me the problem with git is the extreme un-usability of the standard command-line client.
There are countless ways of doing the same operations, all of which are confusing. Unless I use a specific command on a daily basis I end up having to look it up and sift through results with varying ways of doing the same thing. It is extremely frustrating. Some of the other dvcs solutions are far superior in this regard.
Architecturally, git is fantastic. It seems to me it shouldn't be that difficult to make the standard client app easier to use on the command line. Too bad this article is a joke, I would actually love to see it happen.
But wouldn't it be more useful to have a course that emphasizes critical thinking about all types of problems rather than focusing on one specific application of critical thinking? People usually seem to overlook that the important thing about working with computers is the ability to think critically about what you're doing, not the specifics of what you're doing.
Traditional science classes kind of broach the surface of critical thinking, but I suspect that it could be covered in much greater depth over a wide variety of problems, to much better effect.
This. Exactly. Terrorists are a sometimes-maybe-sorta threat. Government is much more terrifying because it is always there protecting itself rather than its citizens.
How do we fight this nonsense? It goes way beyond the role of groups like the EFF... What groups can I support to prevent nonsense like this?
Sometimes I swear Apple makes the Windows versions of their software terrible on purpose. It's still an uphill battle trying to use any of their software on a windows machine, as it always has been.
Why? Obviously when you're using their amazing iPhone or iPad or whatever other tacky Apple gadget, you'll start to feel that your PC isn't up to par and you should replace it with a Mac.
Total rubbish. People should avoid buying trashy Apple products at all costs, lest they support this fiefdom.
full disclosure: I have used Linux exclusively for the past 13 years. I only have to interact with Apple and Microsoft's junk when I have to sync my wife's iPad with her PC.
I've lived in apartments in the NYC area and the LA area over the past 5 years. In both places, the USPS has screwed up almost every package delivery, almost always without apology. (Frequently resulting in packages going back across the country with me never having even seen a missed delivery notice.) There's not even a useful way to complain to anyone higher up the food chain than the local postmaster, who, based on the three I've spoken with, is useless 100% of the time.
I, for one, am thrilled to see them dropping Saturday delivery of some items. They need to start running the operation like a business instead of a government agency if they intend to hang around much longer.
Agreed. Chamsys' or other commercial (or open source-- see OLA) tools have been around to do these sorts of things for years. This is really no big deal.The entertainment lighting industry does this all over the world, all the time.
Except there it's often previsualized in a computer months before anything is even assembled in the real world. There is no need to "debug" this sort of thing on the bridge itself. Simple video animations can drive 25k pixels without a problem and are very predictable in a simulation. This is simply a publicity stunt.
I don't see what the big deal is. Yes, it looks nice, but there is nothing even remotely exciting about this.
Wow. I hadn't seen this. Unbelievable. This is another great example of ridiculous government regulation.
I'd be interested to see a statistic of how many smokers are unaware that their habit (or indulgence, in the case of those who do in infrequently) is harmful to their health.
Does the government really think that people don't know this? Just another waste of money all around.
Actually, I have given reasons for why I hate California. I hate it because everything here is completely nonsensical.
California is ranked 49 out of 51 for unemployment (not good at all): http://money.cnn.com/interactive/economy/state-unemployment-rates/ And at 7.25%, California has the great distinction of having the highest minimum sales tax in the US. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sales_and_use_taxes_in_California)
And no, my objection is not baseless. It's based on the fact that government spending on something like this ridiculous textbook program is a waste when there are other alternatives out there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_textbook#Projects) already generating these things for free. Why should the state of California pour money into something that already exists? There are much more important issues to deal with (like that 10.6% unemployment rate, or being ranked #6 for state debt: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/24/states-debt-combined-may-exceed-4-trillion_n_1029162.html#s429797&title=6_California)
I have evidence backing up my claims. But go ahead and keep loving your socialist paradise while it continues to spend itself out of existence. At least I know I'll be moving back to sanity in a couple years.
Actually, my wife is here to attend a quality private institution that just happens to be located in this socialist state.
As for my "favorite little states", I am referring mostly to NY, which is half the population of but fares much, much better than California. And New Yorkers may much high taxes per capita than CA residences, so you haven't got much to complain about there. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state)
Probably because most of those east coast states have anywhere from half (think New York) to 1/75 (Vermont) the population of California. It is much easier to achieve consensus and compromise with less people. What you end up with are a lot of great intentions that are picked apart until they either fail or become a shell of the actual intent. That being said, California still leads the nation on many issues and is probably best considered a testing ground of potential national ideas.
The whole life situation in California is much crazier than anywhere else I've ever been. Are you saying that it's harder for people in CA to make good decisions than it is for the nation as a whole? I know it is nonsensical here because I've lived on both sides of the country, in big cities and small towns. Can you say the same? I recently renewed the registration on my car. After spending over an hour looking for the renewal form on the DMV website I gave up and just went to AAA. They told me it's not actually called a "renewal" form in California. Unfortunately the CA DMV site never explains that anywhere on their site, and worse, they don't link to the form from any of their informational pages about the process! Now go compare that to other states. It's pretty easy elsewhere (search for "NY DMV registration renewal" and see what I mean). Why is it harder here? I don't know, the state is just screwed up. No one thinks before they do things here.
Re: freely available educational material paid for by the government being a bad thing if not utilized
No it is not. Open access to material is always a good thing. If you don't like the way the Universities choose material for classes, then lobby the Universities directly or start your own University using the Open material.
Actually, you're just dead wrong here. A waste of money is a waste of money no matter how you look at it. If the CA government pays for these books to be developed and published and they aren't used, it is-- by any definition-- a waste of money [because the product of the expenditure is not being used]. I agree free access to educational material is a good thing (and if you had read my initial post you would know that), but I don't see this particular program benefiting anyone in any conceivable away unless it gains the support of the folks actually teaching the classes. [And again, how is the CA government going to head up the production of 50 text books for college courses if they can't even manage to have a proper link to a car registration renewal form online?]
We need to stop footing the bill for all the crappy southern states and instead demand a better return on the federal taxes paid by our residents.
Hmm. Or.. [stick with me here]... we could stop trying to spend money on worthless things like high speed trains between San Francisco and LA, textbook programs that won't impact anyone, and other useless expenditures before going after more dollars to waste!
The solution in government is never to get more money. That just drives inflation. The solution [for government, anyway] always needs to be keeping things as efficient as possible so that the government doesn't consume more of the income of the people it supports than absolutely necessary. Throwing money away on useless programs doesn't help at all. Making existing programs more efficient first, and then trying to do wonderful things like give away educational materials (which are already available for free elsewhere) is a good thing.
Slashdot Mirror
I've always been concerned about people who can't see the negative side of all the "green", modern technologies today.
I buy a new phone about every 3 years, when my previous one is worn out. Most people do this every year or two. What a waste.
The motors and battery (which needs to be replaced every X years) for your new Prius are not so great for the environment. Sure, it makes you feel good to not fill up at the gas pump, but what is the true environmental cost of that car?
Same goes for windmills, etc. Are they really better for the environment than, say, nuclear power?
This article shows what you're missing when you sign that lease, or buy that new iPhone.
I'm glad someone out there is forcing us to look at the downside of all of the technology we use. Kudos to them for doing it.
I have a Design BFA degree from a major 4-year school, and I am back in school for Electrical Engineering (having studied that prior to art originally).
I am a software engineer and have been for years.
The design degree was complete bullshit. 90% of the time my work was being "critiqued" I could give a completely ridiculous explanation and it would be more acceptable than a well thought-out answer from the analytical side of my mind.
Art History != Art.
Thus far I've found I haven't learned anything useful in either program.
That's all well and good, but which do you think we are more lacking in the world? ...or...
a) Engineers with "perspective" on the world and people around them
b) non-engineers with highly critical thinking skills?
Surely this is obvious.
For most engineers worth their salt, humanities exposure happens on their own time and in good measure. I can't say the same for non-engineers I work with, who receive little to no exposure to actual critical thinking of any variety.
It's always good when terrorist groups act like 13-year old haxxor boys.
I hope their god is proud of them.
Yes! This!
It's frequently all too obvious that people critical of ideas that originated (or were perpetuated by) that woman have absolutely no understanding of the ideas and frequently haven't even read the books.
Love that phrasing, btw: "I'd like to work on mine and it would be nice if you would get out of the way".
You either have extremely poor reading comprehension skills or are just an idiot. Either way I'll take the bait.
Socialism does not fail because it "has made most of society's lives better". It failed because it DID NOT do that, and worse, always seems to result in an oppressive regime with the only goal of keeping itself in power.
That is a failure. Don't you get frustrated when you can't do anything to fix whatever lousy situation you happen to be in? Now imagine it were legislated specifically so that you were unable to.
Next time try reading what I wrote, instead of twisting it to fit your bigoted, uneducated, and perhaps brainwashed view about opponents of socialism.
To be fair, there could be an example of an amazingly successful government (perhaps beaten into the ground by the evil freedom lovers somewhere in the world) that I'm unaware of, so please give me an example of a thriving socialist paradise where everyone is happy living out their lives for everyone else's benefit, since they're unable to influence their own lives through their own effort.
I'm waiting.
Not at all. But civilization doesn't have to always be the bureaucratic mess it is today, as perpetuated by the established "liberal" and "conservative" (that is, entirely anti-freedom and advancement of society on both sides) incumbents.
Socialism in particular fails because the only motivation inherent in the system is to improve the lives of others. The cool thing about making a society more democratic and less restrictive (that is, moving toward the libertarian sense of what a government should be) is that it makes it really obvious how you can benefit from the self-improvements of others, and how they can benefit from your own self-improvement at no cost to yourself.
Why does everyone always think that a libertarian ideal is completely geared around making money? It doesn't have to be. My ideal would be as much humanist as libertarian, and I expect that's more of what is being talked about with the "seasteading" project as well, since it seems to come from the Randian vision of how to define a model person.
So... you had a kid recently then?
Some of us try our best to live up to the standards set by the society we live in without being forced to, because it's in our own best interest.
And sometimes that means you collect your own trash.
Socialism has been tried in the "modern era" and it failed-- why are so many people against trying the opposite? (To my knowledge it's never actually been tried in modern times, especially with only people who give a damn.)
Was it merely something not quite PC enough for today's crowd, or was it something truly grotesque and thus damning and beyond recovery?
Irrelevant.
I am back in school (at age 30) in no small part because of the excitement and interest that the Lewin physics lectures instilled in me. His alleged misconduct in any other arena is irrelevant. It's not even as if the content of the lectures could be perceived in some "bad" manner-- it's totally unrelated!
For those that haven't seen those lectures, I cannot recommend them highly enough.
This is a terrible move for MIT. They should be embarrassed.
Since when has Slashdot of all places become accepting of general mediocrity over personal excellence?
" Perhaps the advice-giver wants to sound smart, or simply wants to avoid the possiblity of having to admit they were wrong (if you make your advice hard to follow, that reduces the chance of somebody actually climbing that mountain and then pointing out to you if your suggestion didn't work). So it's not just that the advice-giver is being unhelpful, it's that they're being a dick."
Well, I'm glad the author cares about the overall performance of his advice across 'everyone'. Personally, when receiving advice, I prefer searching out and researching all reasonable options and choosing the best one for me rather than taking generic advice applicable to a wide range of people. And when I give advice I try to do it in such a way that leaves the advice-taker able to evaluate the options and take the best option for them, rather than giving them advice that may help "anyone" a little bit but won't help them in particular a whole lot. If the advice-seeker doesn't have the interest to look at the options and make a choice that's their problem.
+1 UI madness.
For me the problem with git is the extreme un-usability of the standard command-line client.
There are countless ways of doing the same operations, all of which are confusing. Unless I use a specific command on a daily basis I end up having to look it up and sift through results with varying ways of doing the same thing. It is extremely frustrating. Some of the other dvcs solutions are far superior in this regard.
Architecturally, git is fantastic. It seems to me it shouldn't be that difficult to make the standard client app easier to use on the command line. Too bad this article is a joke, I would actually love to see it happen.
Yeah, this is great and all...
But wouldn't it be more useful to have a course that emphasizes critical thinking about all types of problems rather than focusing on one specific application of critical thinking? People usually seem to overlook that the important thing about working with computers is the ability to think critically about what you're doing, not the specifics of what you're doing.
Traditional science classes kind of broach the surface of critical thinking, but I suspect that it could be covered in much greater depth over a wide variety of problems, to much better effect.
This. Exactly.
Terrorists are a sometimes-maybe-sorta threat. Government is much more terrifying because it is always there protecting itself rather than its citizens.
How do we fight this nonsense?
It goes way beyond the role of groups like the EFF... What groups can I support to prevent nonsense like this?
Sometimes I swear Apple makes the Windows versions of their software terrible on purpose. It's still an uphill battle trying to use any of their software on a windows machine, as it always has been.
Why?
Obviously when you're using their amazing iPhone or iPad or whatever other tacky Apple gadget, you'll start to feel that your PC isn't up to par and you should replace it with a Mac.
Total rubbish. People should avoid buying trashy Apple products at all costs, lest they support this fiefdom.
full disclosure: I have used Linux exclusively for the past 13 years. I only have to interact with Apple and Microsoft's junk when I have to sync my wife's iPad with her PC.
Maybe they shouldn't have Coca-Cola deliver refreshments to their secret military installations? ;)
This sounds like what I've experienced with USPS.
Except I've had this sort of nonsense happen dozens of times with them.
I'm sorry... are you implying that restructuring the USPS would be in some way unethical or inhumane?
Yeah?
I've lived in apartments in the NYC area and the LA area over the past 5 years.
In both places, the USPS has screwed up almost every package delivery, almost always without apology. (Frequently resulting in packages going back across the country with me never having even seen a missed delivery notice.)
There's not even a useful way to complain to anyone higher up the food chain than the local postmaster, who, based on the three I've spoken with, is useless 100% of the time.
I, for one, am thrilled to see them dropping Saturday delivery of some items. They need to start running the operation like a business instead of a government agency if they intend to hang around much longer.
I never have a problem with UPS or Fedex.
Agreed. Chamsys' or other commercial (or open source-- see OLA) tools have been around to do these sorts of things for years.
This is really no big deal.The entertainment lighting industry does this all over the world, all the time.
Except there it's often previsualized in a computer months before anything is even assembled in the real world. There is no need to "debug" this sort of thing on the bridge itself. Simple video animations can drive 25k pixels without a problem and are very predictable in a simulation.
This is simply a publicity stunt.
I don't see what the big deal is. Yes, it looks nice, but there is nothing even remotely exciting about this.
Sounds to me like you're more interested in _Computer Science_ than programming or "IT".
Maybe you need to reconsider the program you are in, or attend a more serious education institution?
Wow. I hadn't seen this. Unbelievable.
This is another great example of ridiculous government regulation.
I'd be interested to see a statistic of how many smokers are unaware that their habit (or indulgence, in the case of those who do in infrequently) is harmful to their health.
Does the government really think that people don't know this?
Just another waste of money all around.
Actually, I have given reasons for why I hate California.
I hate it because everything here is completely nonsensical.
California is ranked 49 out of 51 for unemployment (not good at all): http://money.cnn.com/interactive/economy/state-unemployment-rates/
And at 7.25%, California has the great distinction of having the highest minimum sales tax in the US. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sales_and_use_taxes_in_California)
And no, my objection is not baseless. It's based on the fact that government spending on something like this ridiculous textbook program is a waste when there are other alternatives out there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_textbook#Projects) already generating these things for free. Why should the state of California pour money into something that already exists? There are much more important issues to deal with (like that 10.6% unemployment rate, or being ranked #6 for state debt: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/24/states-debt-combined-may-exceed-4-trillion_n_1029162.html#s429797&title=6_California)
I have evidence backing up my claims. But go ahead and keep loving your socialist paradise while it continues to spend itself out of existence. At least I know I'll be moving back to sanity in a couple years.
Actually, my wife is here to attend a quality private institution that just happens to be located in this socialist state.
As for my "favorite little states", I am referring mostly to NY, which is half the population of but fares much, much better than California.
And New Yorkers may much high taxes per capita than CA residences, so you haven't got much to complain about there.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state)
Probably because most of those east coast states have anywhere from half (think New York) to 1/75 (Vermont) the population of California. It is much easier to achieve consensus and compromise with less people. What you end up with are a lot of great intentions that are picked apart until they either fail or become a shell of the actual intent. That being said, California still leads the nation on many issues and is probably best considered a testing ground of potential national ideas.
The whole life situation in California is much crazier than anywhere else I've ever been. Are you saying that it's harder for people in CA to make good decisions than it is for the nation as a whole?
I know it is nonsensical here because I've lived on both sides of the country, in big cities and small towns. Can you say the same?
I recently renewed the registration on my car. After spending over an hour looking for the renewal form on the DMV website I gave up and just went to AAA. They told me it's not actually called a "renewal" form in California. Unfortunately the CA DMV site never explains that anywhere on their site, and worse, they don't link to the form from any of their informational pages about the process!
Now go compare that to other states. It's pretty easy elsewhere (search for "NY DMV registration renewal" and see what I mean). Why is it harder here? I don't know, the state is just screwed up. No one thinks before they do things here.
Re: freely available educational material paid for by the government being a bad thing if not utilized
No it is not. Open access to material is always a good thing. If you don't like the way the Universities choose material for classes, then lobby the Universities directly or start your own University using the Open material.
Actually, you're just dead wrong here. A waste of money is a waste of money no matter how you look at it. If the CA government pays for these books to be developed and published and they aren't used, it is-- by any definition-- a waste of money [because the product of the expenditure is not being used].
I agree free access to educational material is a good thing (and if you had read my initial post you would know that), but I don't see this particular program benefiting anyone in any conceivable away unless it gains the support of the folks actually teaching the classes. [And again, how is the CA government going to head up the production of 50 text books for college courses if they can't even manage to have a proper link to a car registration renewal form online?]
We need to stop footing the bill for all the crappy southern states and instead demand a better return on the federal taxes paid by our residents.
Hmm. Or.. [stick with me here]... we could stop trying to spend money on worthless things like high speed trains between San Francisco and LA, textbook programs that won't impact anyone, and other useless expenditures before going after more dollars to waste!
The solution in government is never to get more money. That just drives inflation. The solution [for government, anyway] always needs to be keeping things as efficient as possible so that the government doesn't consume more of the income of the people it supports than absolutely necessary.
Throwing money away on useless programs doesn't help at all. Making existing programs more efficient first, and then trying to do wonderful things like give away educational materials (which are already available for free elsewhere) is a good thing.