Correct. Documentation takes about 40% of the time.
Design takes about 50%.
And implementation takes about 60%.
These are not performed concurrently, which is why software is always late. Except when you leave out the design phase... But we all know what kind of software that spawns.
What you describe doesn't sound like a development process at all. It sounds like a documentation burr... A development process is a pretty ethereal animal (those that may or may not exist, depending on whom you ask).
I've personally not worked on open source projects (yet) but I imagine that they are vastly different than any commercial effort. Seems to me that managing gratis developers is like herding cats - if you try to control them, they'll simply leave.
But, I would strongly recommend Steve McConnell's book on Rapid Development, and Code Complete while you're at it.
The RD book - well, eat it. Read it cover to cover twice, and with that knowledge in your head, use what fits your project and developers.
Your people may like to do thorough design up front, and follow the traditional 'waterfall' process, but that doesn't stand up well to changing specs.
Incremental development seems to work well where I work. We have a small team, and in-house users, so feedback and even design changes can happen pretty quickly..
You'll need to look at the risks your project is facing as well as a number of other factors - i.e. do you subcontract, buy COTS stuff, use strict CM and are you subject to stringent V&V?? Who are your users, how skilled are your people? Look where you fall on the Capability Maturity Model (1.1 release) hierarchy and how you rank per ISO 9000-3. If nothing else, you'll get some ideas.
I think an argument can be made, that Linux is the product of a single mind - massively parallel, multitasking, and widely distributed - but singular in purpose.
OTOH, committee design seeks to accomplish something that no one finds objectionable. In the movie industry this takes on the shape of 'recipe' films, politically correct, predictable and reliant totally on the 'hot new tech'.
In the case of BWP, the initial mind of the directors and actors (and some post production) was singular. Once people started getting paid 'acceptable' wages for advertising and such, the inspiration is lost and profitability takes over.
The article by Jon Katz, as always, picks up on the 'hot new buzz' of interest to slashdot readers, but fails to contribute to it. He seems to serve as a funnel for opinion, with minimal contribution to the din.
Look kids, it's JonKatz again. This time he is trying to perform opinion-fellatio on the movie-going segment of/. readership. Yet, somehow he manages to say nothing that isn't obvious.
Indie films have been around for ever. Most are lo-tech, due to lack of funds. BWP is no different. The producers begged, borrowed and quite probably stole, to make this film a reality. The amazing thing is that they somehow showed it to the right people who decided to take a risk by taking the film to the screens. Makes you wonder how many other independent gems got lost along the way.
Katz, once again, misses the point. The movie isn't a huge hit because it's frightening beyond the means of FX. It's a hit because it's completely different than what the movie going public is used to. It's the product of a single mind, rather than a committee... Unlike Katz articles. But now that we've seen it, a sequel just won't cut it. Not even if it's done as gamelan or kabuki. We've seen the original, any sequel will be shunned for being a fad, a recipe and a Zircon. We'll pay $8 to see something original - after that it damn better look fancy.
The really cool thing about BWP, that Katz of course glances off of and proceeds away from the point tangentially, is that the BW legend was planted and took root in the cultural gulibility. Had the release waited for the myth to spread, the movie would have been an even greater success. The triumph of BWP is in the meme contagion it caused. They created a Yeti. People were driving through Maryland LOOKING FOR THE WITCH!! Katz never mentions this once.
When will JonKatz have an original thought? When will he say something that actually makes people think? When will he spawn a mutant meme, rather than spraying us with a homogenized culture of engineered ones?
Well, with the apparent upsurgence of creativity outside of Hollywood (ain't that right Jon?), maybe someone will make a short film about a pundit who isn't trying to suck off the mainstream majority, but rather synthesizes something new from the cultural gestalt... Now THAT would be a great work of fiction.
I personally couldn't care less about what he did at this point. If it was wrong, he should have been in jail years ago. If it wasn't wrong, he should have been free, years ago.
It's outrageous that he was held without trial, for what? Three years??? Simply because the justice system is inadequate to handle computer crime. His trespass was too sophisticated to prosecute. So while the D.A. tried to study the issue, Mitnick was sitting in a cell, wasting years of time. Damn! He could have been making $100k for each of those years, honestly..
It is shameful that there probably wasn't a law against what he did, when he did it. But now, I'm sure there is. This is a constitutional matter at this point. Where is the speedy trial? What about HIS RIGHTS? What about the precedent this is setting?
My girlfriend and I live an hour apart, and see each other only on the weekends. We go a week between 'encounters' and then have plenty of opportunity to make up for it. That's the disclaimer.
Now the point. Techies, with their long hours and cranial leanings, are no different in the relationship department then any other cerebral-oriented discipline. Scientists, college professors, engineers... We all have better things to do than each other. For that matter, artists (arguably the most passionate profession, second only to that which is oldest) would rather create than procreate.
Why does the media seek so desperately to make us into asexual deviants, simply because we prefer to think about things other than sex. The average male thinks about sex what? 80 times a day?? What about above average? Do they think about it more? Or like us, do they think about it LESS???
We try to live lives of contentment, of productivity and of benefit to the community. We get gratification out of coding, seeing a system come together, and the occasional 'OhMiGawd!'.
Let's not be judged by the standards of the average politician - after all, WE don't expect THEM to think rationally, and WE don't GET interns.;)
Only truly valuable people would have to 'defect' to other companies..:)
And effort/productivity would be rewarded financially, or at least materially. Still the Capitalist model of economics, but your basic needs would be a benefit of employment.
This wasn't only done in Eastern Europe. Company housing and 'The Company Store' are very American in nature. But back then we had single purpose (more or less) companies.
Being a citizen of a corporation would not be much different than being the citizen of a country. You can still borrow stuff, and get into debt, and have to work it off... Ultimatelly be exiled into contractor land, and have a lien placed on your future income until you're debt free.
We'd need rules of engagement, and humance employee treatment treaties among the mega-corps.. Something like the Geneva Convention. Maybe the Wal-Mart Treaty or something.
A self regulating nation of 2000 citizens, in which every citizen heads a department? 100% of the population works for the government? ha!
The boundaries of nations are being re-drawn alright, but not by grass-roots opportunists such as these. They're being redrawn by the mega-corps. What did Gibson call them? Zaibatsu?
Think of it, through a series of mergers and acquisitions, a corporation becomes self-sustaining.. It's own transportation system, communication network, food supply, health-care, manufacturing system... An ATT/TWA/Fleet/Purina/Blue Cross/Exxon/GM buys up trackts of land all over the world and declares independence. All it's employees become citizens and have their needs take care of by the parent company - driving a company-made car, wearing company-made clothes, shopping in company stores stocked with company food... Vacationing on remote corporate properties.
Distributed nations. See Gibson - Count Zero and Sterling - Islands in the Net.
I should have said in the original post, that from the moment I drove away from the girl, through my interview with the police, I totally understood their rationale. Yes, she had every right to be scared - though IMHO she was overly so (subjective, I know).
Yes, they were doing their job - prudently. I wish all the reports they have to follow-up on are as benign (while one was taking my statement, nicely as pie, the other was getting my cat to chase his flashlight up the wall - they both had fun). I sincerely hope that her 'encounter' with me is the worst thing that ever happens to her.
What struck and thoroughly frustrated me, was that good intentions are simply not assumed by anyone. Everyone expects to get screwed by everyone. I somehow saw this as a judgement of my character. I know what my intentions were - but as you point out - no one else does.
It's like being asked to take a drug test before getting a job offer. To me, it's an offense against my integrity, since I do not do that. The company is just trying to protect itself. Ah well, what can you do?
Still, it would be nice to change something, that fundamental something.. I don't know if it's a factor of being human, or if it's a uniquely American phenomenon. I'm originally from Poland, and this would have never been an issue there, so I have to wonder.
But anyway, I wish there was something that we could all do, to make sure that the world is less hostile (perceivably as well as actually) for our kids. I'd prefer that my child didn't have to face a similar situation from either perspective.
Agreed on the cause --> effect sequence. The same [c|w]ould happen in an anarchy, so the government doesn't impart the fear.
My take on the government 'will to power' draws on Nitsche's Zarathustra however. As stated, governments are composed of individuals. Individuals are hungry for power, and being in a position to enforce one's will simply provides the means. A corrupt politician is the example. So is 'you can't fight city hall'. If you call their motives or reasoning into question, you are undermining their means to retain (or continue to gain) power - the resonse is driven by self-preservation. {tangent!! Ooga! Ooga!}
This is why Communism failed {IMHO}. Individuals were handed means, and their individual interests overpowered the ideology.
So, same conclusion: We should prevent (through inspection, peer-review, whatever) individuals and interest-homogenous groups of individuals (government, corporations, special interests, ethnicities, religions, earning brackets... umm.. thin ice?) from achieving too much power over other individuals or groups thereof.
Thomas Jefferson said that a majority has no more right to enforce it's will onto an individual than an individual does to enforce his will onto a majority. This was said in the context of tyranny vs democracy. Oddly, Jefferson was a slave owner. Go figure!:)
It's funny, yes... But I wonder how the CIA, FBI, NSA, IMF, KGB, etc (Echelon et al) would stand up to full disclosure. After all, the government is composed of citizens, and the citizens have the right to know. They should know. Everything. I'm installing a pressure sensor under my toilet seat right now!!
Could the NSA and company HANDLE a denial of service data flood? Any spooks out there care to comment? Comon guys... We know you're listening... Don't be shy.
Ok, a lot to reply to here, so I'll be terse. No offense intended.
Really, who gives a fuck if you are insulted or think I'm rude as long as I am still alive and okay?
I refuse to live in that level of fear. I think that quality of life matters as much as it's continuance.
Sorry that some police did the prudent thing by checking you out. Sorry that you were offended that they did their job. Sorry that some girl was afraid of stopping in a dark road [...] some guy she does not know.
Not at all. 7:30pm is light, road was busy, but that's besides the point. I'm glad the police followed up, although I was surprised. I'm surprised that the sense of threat was her first impression.
Finally, how exactly were you punished? Were you crucified? I don't think so. So just chill down and get off your offended high horse.
My name is now on a police report. It's not an official 'record', but it's in a computer. I wasn't crucified, but I wouldn't be surprised if it came back to bite me. Say I try to get a job working on a government security project. Guess what the background check will turn up... I guess the paranoia is contagious.
As for my high horse... Apologies. Next time I'll be sure to be more sensitive to your personal point of view, and tailor mine so as to not offent you. After all, it's your world - I just get to live in it.
You weren't punished in any way. So don't try to pretend that you were.
Not as such, no. But I ended up feeling like an idiot, and boarderline criminal, for trying to help. Does the name Pavlov ring a bell? I've formed an association now, and if you're broken down along my highway, I'm not likely to stop to help anymore.
Point well taken, but as I see it, the two issues are strongly interconnected.
I agree that distrust of the establishment is the duty of all citizens. After all, the gummint is there to represent US, it is there to work for US and to carry out our orders. We tell the gov what we want by voting. [If politicians tell us what we want to hear to get elected, and then do their thing, the system fails, but that's another matter]
But as people are distrustful of the gov, their distrust is unfocusable. It becomes a heat-seeker, and targets the strange, the unknown and the different. A black family in a white neighborhood, or the smiling stranger in a faceless crowd.
My point is that the overall level of distrust in the country is such, that it is out of control. It should be applied rationally, but there's simply too much of it. Each day we hear about murders, molesters, shooting sprees... Who has time to think through the latest anti-encryption legislation and what it really means, when they're worried about "road rage", Tim McVeigh and the kids in the local high-school??
The government is (intentionally or not) playing the same game that makes the insurance companies tick. The probability of any given individual being a homocidal freak is small, but eveyone has to pay [with their liberties] to provide some semblance of security. This is why kids have to pass through metal detectors on their way into a school. They are uniformly subjected to heavy-handed authoritative behavior control, to protect them from the freak. But the message they receive is that any one of them might be a freak, and so they should be afraid of everyone.
Our rights and liberties are being reduced to the lowest common denominator level. It's akin to political correctness - you're not allowed to do anything that someone, somewhere, somehow, might construe as offensive or threatening. You can no longer extend your hand to a stranger, because there is the potential that you will hit them. So if you hold out your hand, you're likely to get a hand-cuff on your wrist as a result.
Looking back, I truly regret making that girl nervous enough to call the police - the thought never crossed my 'eager to help' mind. But more importantly, I'm sorry that she lives with so much fear in her life. I'm sorry she'll pass it on to her kids and friends and co-workers - just because some freak tried to flag her down on the highway.
I'm sorry that she's so concerned about her immediate safety, about the threat of another individual, that she doesn't think rationally, and is therefore likely to vote for a liberty abridging ordinance to settle her worried little mind. And this, Kaa, is how being paranoid of individuals is connected to being paranoid of the government - at least in this freak's head.
This is somewhat off-topic, but pertinent to the larger theme we're seeing here...
It's not about rights and liberties, it's about fear. It's about the expectation of the worst overshadowing the fact that people are inherently not evil. Bear with me...
Last night, while driving home from a class, I saw a car on the highway, spewing smoke out the back end. Not from the tailpipe, but from underneath the engine. It was coming out so much that when I pulled behind it, I got dropplets of oil on my windshield.
I tried to get the driver (a girl my age) to pull over. I flashed my lights, turned on my directionals and hazzards intermittently, and tried to get this girl to pull over, since I thought she might like to know that she stood to loose the engine if she didn't keep an eye on the oil level. Silly me.
Well, after a couple of minutes, and three lane changes later, the girl wasn't getting the point, and she seemed to be getting upset. So, I wrote a note on a piece of paper that said "leaking oil", showed it to her, and went on my way.
About an hour later, two state cruisers, two troopers and dog show up at my house to take my statement. Apparently, the girl thought I was trying to run her off the road, and kill her, and rape her and whatever else. So much for good intentions.
Well, they took my statement, looked at my car for damage (I should have had them look at the oil splattered on the windshield, but in the moment, it didn't come to mind - I should have kept the note, but I tossed it at a gas station since I didn't need it anymore), and left.
It made me understand how people can stand by and watch as someone gets beaten or killed in the street, and not lift a finger. It's not worth the hassle to go out of your way for another person anymore. It's not worth watching out for your 'fellow man' anymore.
I'm a parochially schooled, college degreed, well paid professional software engineer. I have a steady girlfriend, a nice car, a normal life, and (god forbid!) good intentions. But, with the rampant paranoia (at least in the U.S.) these days, it's hadly worth the hassle of watching out for anyone buy the proverbial 'number one'. It's a mistake I'll have to be careful not to make again.
And how does this pertain to the article subject matter? Well, as long as the government insists on making us feel insecure in our own country, with Commies, and Iraqi terrorists, and biological weapons around every corner, we will keep suspecting each other of cruel intentions. As long as we keep being afraid, the government will keep trying to protect us from each other. As long as the government keeps trying to keep us safe, we will feel our rights erode, and we will be even more paranoid.
We need common sense, and good upbringing. We need to NOT be punished for trying to help. We need to stop crucifying good Samaritans, and start acting like them. We need to stop looking over our shoulder, and start looking into our common good - not just as individuals, but as a nation, and as a world.
And if someone who can afford a satellite phone wants to sneak information past Echelon, they can hire a personal courier.
0) You don't do anything unexpected. 1) You don't use a valid account to get in. 2) You only use ports 19, 24, 88 and 666. 3) You only use Microsoft products to do it. 4) You don't tell anyone. 5) You tell us (see rule #4)
Are they kidding?? The first thing a hacker/cracker would do is something unorthodox. Where do they get off thinking that you can test the security of a system by imposing rules of engagement.
That's what you get when you let your lawyers dictate procedure to your techies.
The 'up to the minute' web-cam image is 4 days old. There goes investor credibility. They can't deliver on their own marketting ploy. If their advertizing gimick fails to advertize, how can they produce anything?
And as for producing 'content', well... This is either a business school term project gone awry (a bunch of overly enthusiastic co-eds) or we'll be looking at 'NY/NJ models investing all of their ass-ets'.
Or at least a whole bunch of highly radioactive oil that NOBODY would be able to use for hundreds of thousands of years. What a way to keep the 'other guy' from getting at it.
The 2038 problem stems from the fact that a 32-bit UNIX system stores time in a 32-bit integer. Time 0 was 01/01/70, also referred to as the 'biginning of the epoch'.
Each second, the 32-bit integer is incremented by 1 bit, counting time, in seconds, since the beginning of the epoch. (The term epoch is official, and found throughout UNIX documentation w.r.t. time)
The problem comes when the seconds number fills up. The full 32-bit value is 4294967295, so this many seconds from 01/01/70, the second's counter will fill up. This falls in 2038 - mis spring I think.
We're not quite sure how systems will react when this happens. It's very much a y2k type issue. Hope this clarifies the matter.
On a related note. Other exciting opportunities looming in the future are the Sept, 9, 1999 problem, the GPS problem, and the phone-space problem.
In some systems 9999 is a special sequence. While most of these use dates of 09/09/99, there's the potential for trouble.
The 24 Global Positioning System satellites count off the number of weeks since (I think) 1/1/80, in a single 8-bit byte. This byte will rollover this fall. Everything should be ok afterwards, but at the moment of rollover there is potential for trouble as well. This issue is limited to how ground stations interpret their GPS input. If, for example, an airplane computer suddenly thinks that it's falling (even for just a second) this may cause it's autopilot to freak.
A few years into the next decade, we will run out of phone numbers. With everyone having multiple lines into their home, fax machines, lines dedicated to the PC, cell phones and beepers - it's easy to see how this might happen. We will have to come up with a new phone number system before the number of available numbers runs out.
I've known for a long time that the web sites mentioned on/. are orders of magnitude slower than the rest of the Internet. I always thought that this was to compensate for the audiences unusually long attention spans, and attention to detail. I saw this as a courtesy.
After all, good things are worth waiting for, so when I see that 'loading' bar zip back and forth across the bottom of my browser, I know I'm in for some good reading. And every time I get that little 'no response from server' pop-up, my anticipation just builds. The best sites, by far, are the ones that allow you ample time to get a coffee - and to indulge in the comforts of a physiological break. Sites like the 'world's smallest web server' are enough to make me pee my pants, and at work that would be embarassing. So I really do appreciate the significant delay these sites provide - as a courtesy.
So, you see, there's nothing to balk at in this new-fangled scheme. It's a value added for the customer. Sort of like PIII enabled sites.
But why invest in special hardware and software, when the CableCos could just submit the sites they want to slow down, as/. articles?
To be socially elite, one must posses things that society values above others. Money and power come to mind. Money can buy virtually all posessions, power included. Good looks open doors to money, since they make people tend to be nice to you. Connections, who you know and how much they like you, this matters. Intelligence is required to make use of looks and money, otherwise they don't last, but it's a means, not an end.
To be socially elite, one must endeavor to be upwardly mobile through the strata of society. One must have the drive to achieve the things that society values.
Geeks don't got that drive.
There's a difference in mentality, ideology and set of ethics. To a geek, doing the job right is key. Achieving a clever solution, producing, earning merit - these are the things that drive geeks. And of course, the challenge of it all.
The 'popular kids' are always looking for the easy way out, the free ride, the thing they can hold up to the Joneses face and say "Lookee what I got, and you don't!" They strut around, looking good, spending money and time on being popular. They are living in a world of things, of material possessions. Their world is defined by what they have (money, clothes, a jet, an Esq after their name, a trust fund, an Ivy league diploma, a trophy wife, etc).
A geek's world is defined by what they think. Geeks don't particularly care about the brand of their sneakers, or cars. They'd rather have a good conversation with their wife, than watch someone watch her on a tennis court. They define themselves by the life they lead inside their head, and in the heads of other geeks. They share ideas, and if they can share them as code, all the better, because it codifies their cleverness.
Can a geek really even begin to relate to a former cheerleader? What would a geek choose - a week in Aspen of a PalmV.
Don't get me wrong, geeks like nice things too. But geeks get nice things for themselves, and for the utility they provide. Not for show. I think that was the point.
Hellraiser (in all it's gory) is exactly what we (I) wouldn't want to see Neuromancer become. Hellraiser is an example of precisely what people are afraid Neuromancer will be.
A movie full of visuals, ad nauseum, effects upon effects, wich obviously accounted for 90% of the film's budget. Very BAD acting, no plot to speak of whatsoever. Some miniscule interaction between characters that is so vague that it could fit into ANY movie in the genre...
If Neuromancer becomes Hellraiser in Cyberspace, Gibson should commit hari-kari for ever letting it be made.
C'mon now. There's potential to make a 2001, and you have me expecting Event Horizon.
Heinlein - Stranger in a Strange Land LeGuin - Left Hand of Darkness (speaking of the human condition) Asimov - Foundation I-III, personal favorites Herbert - Dune Stephenson - Snow Crash [I forgot] - Gravity's Rainbow
And certainly not least Straczynski - Babylon 5 - Absolutely Brilliant!!
BTW: Gibson - Olga's Seashell.. in Burning Chrome collection. read it.
Sometime in the middle of the next decade, we'll all be sitting around a virtual cafe, talking on our cellular iPhones, paying for our Java applets with eCash, comparing notes on our vacations.
Say, Buffy, tell us again about how you were slummin' it with that computer illiterate English Lit major... Is it true that he really didn't know how to use Linux?? And did he really use one of those... umm, those, you know. Them keyboard things without a monitor... You know, where what you type goes right onto paper, and there's no UNDO or anything.. Man, I'll tell you what! That's down right arcane. Let them use T-1's is what I say.
So, Trevor ol'chap! How's that new IPv6 multicast router project coming along? Have you uploaded your IPO proposal to First Virtual Bank yet.. Oh, hold on, my PalmPilot is beeping: [aside: talking to live vid on PalmX] Hi hon, no, no, yes.. Well just email the grocery store and have them deliver another gallon of milk then.
No thanks! The upper crusties will always and forever be the rich, pretty, Ivy and ascot types. We're Morlocks, and now and again we'll get to eat us an Eloi debutante. And that's fine.
Let THEM eat their damn cake. Let them play their golf and go to their cheese and wine shindigs. We have more substantial and satisfying things with which to occupy our craniums than social politics.
If we ever become da'shit, we'll probably be to busy to notice.
Slashdot Mirror
Correct. Documentation takes about 40% of the time.
Design takes about 50%.
And implementation takes about 60%.
These are not performed concurrently, which is why software is always late. Except when you leave out the design phase... But we all know what kind of software that spawns.
What you describe doesn't sound like a development process at all. It sounds like a documentation burr... A development process is a pretty ethereal animal (those that may or may not exist, depending on whom you ask).
I've personally not worked on open source projects (yet) but I imagine that they are vastly different than any commercial effort. Seems to me that managing gratis developers is like herding cats - if you try to control them, they'll simply leave.
But, I would strongly recommend Steve McConnell's book on Rapid Development, and Code Complete while you're at it.
The RD book - well, eat it. Read it cover to cover twice, and with that knowledge in your head, use what fits your project and developers.
Your people may like to do thorough design up front, and follow the traditional 'waterfall' process, but that doesn't stand up well to changing specs.
Incremental development seems to work well where I work. We have a small team, and in-house users, so feedback and even design changes can happen pretty quickly..
You'll need to look at the risks your project is facing as well as a number of other factors - i.e. do you subcontract, buy COTS stuff, use strict CM and are you subject to stringent V&V?? Who are your users, how skilled are your people? Look where you fall on the Capability Maturity Model (1.1 release) hierarchy and how you rank per ISO 9000-3. If nothing else, you'll get some ideas.
As you can guess, there's a huge number of variables that go into defining a successful process. The Software Engineering Institute at Carnegie-Mellon University may prove helpful, but I would recommend the aforementioned book (RD) first.
I think an argument can be made, that Linux is the product of a single mind - massively parallel, multitasking, and widely distributed - but singular in purpose.
OTOH, committee design seeks to accomplish something that no one finds objectionable. In the movie industry this takes on the shape of 'recipe' films, politically correct, predictable and reliant totally on the 'hot new tech'.
In the case of BWP, the initial mind of the directors and actors (and some post production) was singular. Once people started getting paid 'acceptable' wages for advertising and such, the inspiration is lost and profitability takes over.
The article by Jon Katz, as always, picks up on the 'hot new buzz' of interest to slashdot readers, but fails to contribute to it. He seems to serve as a funnel for opinion, with minimal contribution to the din.
Look kids, it's JonKatz again. This time he is trying to perform opinion-fellatio on the movie-going segment of /. readership. Yet, somehow he manages to say nothing that isn't obvious.
Indie films have been around for ever. Most are lo-tech, due to lack of funds. BWP is no different. The producers begged, borrowed and quite probably stole, to make this film a reality. The amazing thing is that they somehow showed it to the right people who decided to take a risk by taking the film to the screens. Makes you wonder how many other independent gems got lost along the way.
Katz, once again, misses the point. The movie isn't a huge hit because it's frightening beyond the means of FX. It's a hit because it's completely different than what the movie going public is used to. It's the product of a single mind, rather than a committee... Unlike Katz articles. But now that we've seen it, a sequel just won't cut it. Not even if it's done as gamelan or kabuki. We've seen the original, any sequel will be shunned for being a fad, a recipe and a Zircon. We'll pay $8 to see something original - after that it damn better look fancy.
The really cool thing about BWP, that Katz of course glances off of and proceeds away from the point tangentially, is that the BW legend was planted and took root in the cultural gulibility. Had the release waited for the myth to spread, the movie would have been an even greater success. The triumph of BWP is in the meme contagion it caused. They created a Yeti. People were driving through Maryland LOOKING FOR THE WITCH!! Katz never mentions this once.
When will JonKatz have an original thought? When will he say something that actually makes people think? When will he spawn a mutant meme, rather than spraying us with a homogenized culture of engineered ones?
Well, with the apparent upsurgence of creativity outside of Hollywood (ain't that right Jon?), maybe someone will make a short film about a pundit who isn't trying to suck off the mainstream majority, but rather synthesizes something new from the cultural gestalt... Now THAT would be a great work of fiction.
I personally couldn't care less about what he did at this point. If it was wrong, he should have been in jail years ago. If it wasn't wrong, he should have been free, years ago.
It's outrageous that he was held without trial, for what? Three years??? Simply because the justice system is inadequate to handle computer crime. His trespass was too sophisticated to prosecute. So while the D.A. tried to study the issue, Mitnick was sitting in a cell, wasting years of time. Damn! He could have been making $100k for each of those years, honestly..
It is shameful that there probably wasn't a law against what he did, when he did it. But now, I'm sure there is. This is a constitutional matter at this point. Where is the speedy trial? What about HIS RIGHTS? What about the precedent this is setting?
My girlfriend and I live an hour apart, and see each other only on the weekends. We go a week between 'encounters' and then have plenty of opportunity to make up for it. That's the disclaimer.
;)
Now the point. Techies, with their long hours and cranial leanings, are no different in the relationship department then any other cerebral-oriented discipline. Scientists, college professors, engineers... We all have better things to do than each other. For that matter, artists (arguably the most passionate profession, second only to that which is oldest) would rather create than procreate.
Why does the media seek so desperately to make us into asexual deviants, simply because we prefer to think about things other than sex. The average male thinks about sex what? 80 times a day?? What about above average? Do they think about it more? Or like us, do they think about it LESS???
We try to live lives of contentment, of productivity and of benefit to the community. We get gratification out of coding, seeing a system come together, and the occasional 'OhMiGawd!'.
Let's not be judged by the standards of the average politician - after all, WE don't expect THEM to think rationally, and WE don't GET interns.
Only truly valuable people would have to 'defect' to other companies.. :)
And effort/productivity would be rewarded financially, or at least materially. Still the Capitalist model of economics, but your basic needs would be a benefit of employment.
This wasn't only done in Eastern Europe. Company housing and 'The Company Store' are very American in nature. But back then we had single purpose (more or less) companies.
Being a citizen of a corporation would not be much different than being the citizen of a country. You can still borrow stuff, and get into debt, and have to work it off... Ultimatelly be exiled into contractor land, and have a lien placed on your future income until you're debt free.
We'd need rules of engagement, and humance employee treatment treaties among the mega-corps.. Something like the Geneva Convention. Maybe the Wal-Mart Treaty or something.
Especially when you have a floating country! But then you don't need to be virtual at all... You'd just have a lot of expatriates.
A self regulating nation of 2000 citizens, in which every citizen heads a department? 100% of the population works for the government? ha!
The boundaries of nations are being re-drawn alright, but not by grass-roots opportunists such as these. They're being redrawn by the mega-corps. What did Gibson call them? Zaibatsu?
Think of it, through a series of mergers and acquisitions, a corporation becomes self-sustaining.. It's own transportation system, communication network, food supply, health-care, manufacturing system... An ATT/TWA/Fleet/Purina/Blue Cross/Exxon/GM buys up trackts of land all over the world and declares independence. All it's employees become citizens and have their needs take care of by the parent company - driving a company-made car, wearing company-made clothes, shopping in company stores stocked with company food... Vacationing on remote corporate properties.
Distributed nations. See Gibson - Count Zero and Sterling - Islands in the Net.
I should have said in the original post, that from the moment I drove away from the girl, through my interview with the police, I totally understood their rationale. Yes, she had every right to be scared - though IMHO she was overly so (subjective, I know).
Yes, they were doing their job - prudently. I wish all the reports they have to follow-up on are as benign (while one was taking my statement, nicely as pie, the other was getting my cat to chase his flashlight up the wall - they both had fun). I sincerely hope that her 'encounter' with me is the worst thing that ever happens to her.
What struck and thoroughly frustrated me, was that good intentions are simply not assumed by anyone. Everyone expects to get screwed by everyone. I somehow saw this as a judgement of my character. I know what my intentions were - but as you point out - no one else does.
It's like being asked to take a drug test before getting a job offer. To me, it's an offense against my integrity, since I do not do that. The company is just trying to protect itself. Ah well, what can you do?
Still, it would be nice to change something, that fundamental something.. I don't know if it's a factor of being human, or if it's a uniquely American phenomenon. I'm originally from Poland, and this would have never been an issue there, so I have to wonder.
But anyway, I wish there was something that we could all do, to make sure that the world is less hostile (perceivably as well as actually) for our kids. I'd prefer that my child didn't have to face a similar situation from either perspective.
Agreed on the cause --> effect sequence. The same [c|w]ould happen in an anarchy, so the government doesn't impart the fear.
:)
My take on the government 'will to power' draws on Nitsche's Zarathustra however. As stated, governments are composed of individuals. Individuals are hungry for power, and being in a position to enforce one's will simply provides the means. A corrupt politician is the example. So is 'you can't fight city hall'. If you call their motives or reasoning into question, you are undermining their means to retain (or continue to gain) power - the resonse is driven by self-preservation. {tangent!! Ooga! Ooga!}
This is why Communism failed {IMHO}. Individuals were handed means, and their individual interests overpowered the ideology.
So, same conclusion: We should prevent (through inspection, peer-review, whatever) individuals and interest-homogenous groups of individuals (government, corporations, special interests, ethnicities, religions, earning brackets... umm.. thin ice?) from achieving too much power over other individuals or groups thereof.
Thomas Jefferson said that a majority has no more right to enforce it's will onto an individual than an individual does to enforce his will onto a majority. This was said in the context of tyranny vs democracy. Oddly, Jefferson was a slave owner. Go figure!
It's funny, yes... But I wonder how the CIA, FBI, NSA, IMF, KGB, etc (Echelon et al) would stand up to full disclosure. After all, the government is composed of citizens, and the citizens have the right to know. They should know. Everything. I'm installing a pressure sensor under my toilet seat right now!!
Could the NSA and company HANDLE a denial of service data flood? Any spooks out there care to comment? Comon guys... We know you're listening... Don't be shy.
Ok, a lot to reply to here, so I'll be terse. No offense intended.
Really, who gives a fuck if you are insulted or think I'm rude as long as I am still alive and okay?
I refuse to live in that level of fear. I think that quality of life matters as much as it's continuance.
Sorry that some police did the prudent thing by checking you out. Sorry that you were offended that they did their job. Sorry that some girl was afraid of stopping in a dark road [...] some guy she does not know.
Not at all. 7:30pm is light, road was busy, but that's besides the point. I'm glad the police followed up, although I was surprised. I'm surprised that the sense of threat was her first impression.
Finally, how exactly were you punished? Were you crucified? I don't think so. So just chill down and get off your offended high horse.
My name is now on a police report. It's not an official 'record', but it's in a computer. I wasn't crucified, but I wouldn't be surprised if it came back to bite me. Say I try to get a job working on a government security project. Guess what the background check will turn up... I guess the paranoia is contagious.
As for my high horse... Apologies. Next time I'll be sure to be more sensitive to your personal point of view, and tailor mine so as to not offent you. After all, it's your world - I just get to live in it.
You weren't punished in any way. So don't try to pretend that you were.
Not as such, no. But I ended up feeling like an idiot, and boarderline criminal, for trying to help. Does the name Pavlov ring a bell? I've formed an association now, and if you're broken down along my highway, I'm not likely to stop to help anymore.
Point well taken, but as I see it, the two issues are strongly interconnected.
I agree that distrust of the establishment is the duty of all citizens. After all, the gummint is there to represent US, it is there to work for US and to carry out our orders. We tell the gov what we want by voting. [If politicians tell us what we want to hear to get elected, and then do their thing, the system fails, but that's another matter]
But as people are distrustful of the gov, their distrust is unfocusable. It becomes a heat-seeker, and targets the strange, the unknown and the different. A black family in a white neighborhood, or the smiling stranger in a faceless crowd.
My point is that the overall level of distrust in the country is such, that it is out of control. It should be applied rationally, but there's simply too much of it. Each day we hear about murders, molesters, shooting sprees... Who has time to think through the latest anti-encryption legislation and what it really means, when they're worried about "road rage", Tim McVeigh and the kids in the local high-school??
The government is (intentionally or not) playing the same game that makes the insurance companies tick. The probability of any given individual being a homocidal freak is small, but eveyone has to pay [with their liberties] to provide some semblance of security. This is why kids have to pass through metal detectors on their way into a school. They are uniformly subjected to heavy-handed authoritative behavior control, to protect them from the freak. But the message they receive is that any one of them might be a freak, and so they should be afraid of everyone.
Our rights and liberties are being reduced to the lowest common denominator level. It's akin to political correctness - you're not allowed to do anything that someone, somewhere, somehow, might construe as offensive or threatening. You can no longer extend your hand to a stranger, because there is the potential that you will hit them. So if you hold out your hand, you're likely to get a hand-cuff on your wrist as a result.
Looking back, I truly regret making that girl nervous enough to call the police - the thought never crossed my 'eager to help' mind. But more importantly, I'm sorry that she lives with so much fear in her life. I'm sorry she'll pass it on to her kids and friends and co-workers - just because some freak tried to flag her down on the highway.
I'm sorry that she's so concerned about her immediate safety, about the threat of another individual, that she doesn't think rationally, and is therefore likely to vote for a liberty abridging ordinance to settle her worried little mind. And this, Kaa, is how being paranoid of individuals is connected to being paranoid of the government - at least in this freak's head.
This is somewhat off-topic, but pertinent to the larger theme we're seeing here...
It's not about rights and liberties, it's about fear. It's about the expectation of the worst overshadowing the fact that people are inherently not evil. Bear with me...
Last night, while driving home from a class, I saw a car on the highway, spewing smoke out the back end. Not from the tailpipe, but from underneath the engine. It was coming out so much that when I pulled behind it, I got dropplets of oil on my windshield.
I tried to get the driver (a girl my age) to pull over. I flashed my lights, turned on my directionals and hazzards intermittently, and tried to get this girl to pull over, since I thought she might like to know that she stood to loose the engine if she didn't keep an eye on the oil level. Silly me.
Well, after a couple of minutes, and three lane changes later, the girl wasn't getting the point, and she seemed to be getting upset. So, I wrote a note on a piece of paper that said "leaking oil", showed it to her, and went on my way.
About an hour later, two state cruisers, two troopers and dog show up at my house to take my statement. Apparently, the girl thought I was trying to run her off the road, and kill her, and rape her and whatever else. So much for good intentions.
Well, they took my statement, looked at my car for damage (I should have had them look at the oil splattered on the windshield, but in the moment, it didn't come to mind - I should have kept the note, but I tossed it at a gas station since I didn't need it anymore), and left.
It made me understand how people can stand by and watch as someone gets beaten or killed in the street, and not lift a finger. It's not worth the hassle to go out of your way for another person anymore. It's not worth watching out for your 'fellow man' anymore.
I'm a parochially schooled, college degreed, well paid professional software engineer. I have a steady girlfriend, a nice car, a normal life, and (god forbid!) good intentions. But, with the rampant paranoia (at least in the U.S.) these days, it's hadly worth the hassle of watching out for anyone buy the proverbial 'number one'. It's a mistake I'll have to be careful not to make again.
And how does this pertain to the article subject matter? Well, as long as the government insists on making us feel insecure in our own country, with Commies, and Iraqi terrorists, and biological weapons around every corner, we will keep suspecting each other of cruel intentions. As long as we keep being afraid, the government will keep trying to protect us from each other. As long as the government keeps trying to keep us safe, we will feel our rights erode, and we will be even more paranoid.
We need common sense, and good upbringing. We need to NOT be punished for trying to help. We need to stop crucifying good Samaritans, and start acting like them. We need to stop looking over our shoulder, and start looking into our common good - not just as individuals, but as a nation, and as a world.
And if someone who can afford a satellite phone wants to sneak information past Echelon, they can hire a personal courier.
You are free to break our system provided that:
0) You don't do anything unexpected.
1) You don't use a valid account to get in.
2) You only use ports 19, 24, 88 and 666.
3) You only use Microsoft products to do it.
4) You don't tell anyone.
5) You tell us (see rule #4)
Are they kidding?? The first thing a hacker/cracker would do is something unorthodox. Where do they get off thinking that you can test the security of a system by imposing rules of engagement.
That's what you get when you let your lawyers dictate procedure to your techies.
The 'up to the minute' web-cam image is 4 days old. There goes investor credibility. They can't deliver on their own marketting ploy. If their advertizing gimick fails to advertize, how can they produce anything?
And as for producing 'content', well... This is either a business school term project gone awry (a bunch of overly enthusiastic co-eds) or we'll be looking at 'NY/NJ models investing all of their ass-ets'.
Shazam! It's a sham, it's is a sham.
Or at least a whole bunch of highly radioactive oil that NOBODY would be able to use for hundreds of thousands of years. What a way to keep the 'other guy' from getting at it.
The 2038 problem stems from the fact that a 32-bit UNIX system stores time in a 32-bit integer. Time 0 was 01/01/70, also referred to as the 'biginning of the epoch'.
Each second, the 32-bit integer is incremented by 1 bit, counting time, in seconds, since the beginning of the epoch. (The term epoch is official, and found throughout UNIX documentation w.r.t. time)
The problem comes when the seconds number fills up. The full 32-bit value is 4294967295, so this many seconds from 01/01/70, the second's counter will fill up. This falls in 2038 - mis spring I think.
We're not quite sure how systems will react when this happens. It's very much a y2k type issue. Hope this clarifies the matter.
On a related note. Other exciting opportunities looming in the future are the Sept, 9, 1999 problem, the GPS problem, and the phone-space problem.
In some systems 9999 is a special sequence. While most of these use dates of 09/09/99, there's the potential for trouble.
The 24 Global Positioning System satellites count off the number of weeks since (I think) 1/1/80, in a single 8-bit byte. This byte will rollover this fall. Everything should be ok afterwards, but at the moment of rollover there is potential for trouble as well. This issue is limited to how ground stations interpret their GPS input. If, for example, an airplane computer suddenly thinks that it's falling (even for just a second) this may cause it's autopilot to freak.
A few years into the next decade, we will run out of phone numbers. With everyone having multiple lines into their home, fax machines, lines dedicated to the PC, cell phones and beepers - it's easy to see how this might happen. We will have to come up with a new phone number system before the number of available numbers runs out.
I've known for a long time that the web sites mentioned on /. are orders of magnitude slower than the rest of the Internet. I always thought that this was to compensate for the audiences unusually long attention spans, and attention to detail. I saw this as a courtesy.
/. articles?
After all, good things are worth waiting for, so when I see that 'loading' bar zip back and forth across the bottom of my browser, I know I'm in for some good reading. And every time I get that little 'no response from server' pop-up, my anticipation just builds. The best sites, by far, are the ones that allow you ample time to get a coffee - and to indulge in the comforts of a physiological break. Sites like the 'world's smallest web server' are enough to make me pee my pants, and at work that would be embarassing. So I really do appreciate the significant delay these sites provide - as a courtesy.
So, you see, there's nothing to balk at in this new-fangled scheme. It's a value added for the customer. Sort of like PIII enabled sites.
But why invest in special hardware and software, when the CableCos could just submit the sites they want to slow down, as
It does make sense on a certain level.
To be socially elite, one must posses things that society values above others. Money and power come to mind. Money can buy virtually all posessions, power included. Good looks open doors to money, since they make people tend to be nice to you. Connections, who you know and how much they like you, this matters. Intelligence is required to make use of looks and money, otherwise they don't last, but it's a means, not an end.
To be socially elite, one must endeavor to be upwardly mobile through the strata of society. One must have the drive to achieve the things that society values.
Geeks don't got that drive.
There's a difference in mentality, ideology and set of ethics. To a geek, doing the job right is key. Achieving a clever solution, producing, earning merit - these are the things that drive geeks. And of course, the challenge of it all.
The 'popular kids' are always looking for the easy way out, the free ride, the thing they can hold up to the Joneses face and say "Lookee what I got, and you don't!" They strut around, looking good, spending money and time on being popular. They are living in a world of things, of material possessions. Their world is defined by what they have (money, clothes, a jet, an Esq after their name, a trust fund, an Ivy league diploma, a trophy wife, etc).
A geek's world is defined by what they think. Geeks don't particularly care about the brand of their sneakers, or cars. They'd rather have a good conversation with their wife, than watch someone watch her on a tennis court. They define themselves by the life they lead inside their head, and in the heads of other geeks. They share ideas, and if they can share them as code, all the better, because it codifies their cleverness.
Can a geek really even begin to relate to a former cheerleader? What would a geek choose - a week in Aspen of a PalmV.
Don't get me wrong, geeks like nice things too. But geeks get nice things for themselves, and for the utility they provide. Not for show. I think that was the point.
Hellraiser (in all it's gory) is exactly what we (I) wouldn't want to see Neuromancer become. Hellraiser is an example of precisely what people are afraid Neuromancer will be.
A movie full of visuals, ad nauseum, effects upon effects, wich obviously accounted for 90% of the film's budget. Very BAD acting, no plot to speak of whatsoever. Some miniscule interaction between characters that is so vague that it could fit into ANY movie in the genre...
If Neuromancer becomes Hellraiser in Cyberspace, Gibson should commit hari-kari for ever letting it be made.
C'mon now. There's potential to make a 2001, and you have me expecting Event Horizon.
Let's not forget:
Heinlein - Stranger in a Strange Land
LeGuin - Left Hand of Darkness (speaking of the human condition)
Asimov - Foundation I-III, personal favorites
Herbert - Dune
Stephenson - Snow Crash
[I forgot] - Gravity's Rainbow
And certainly not least Straczynski - Babylon 5 - Absolutely Brilliant!!
BTW: Gibson - Olga's Seashell.. in Burning Chrome collection. read it.
Oddly, in his native Poland, Lem's books are considered on par with Asimov, that is to say, geared towards boys in their early teens.
Couldn't tell you what qualifies as 'mature' SF there. So much has changed.
Sometime in the middle of the next decade, we'll all be sitting around a virtual cafe, talking on our cellular iPhones, paying for our Java applets with eCash, comparing notes on our vacations.
Say, Buffy, tell us again about how you were slummin' it with that computer illiterate English Lit major... Is it true that he really didn't know how to use Linux?? And did he really use one of those... umm, those, you know. Them keyboard things without a monitor... You know, where what you type goes right onto paper, and there's no UNDO or anything.. Man, I'll tell you what! That's down right arcane. Let them use T-1's is what I say.
So, Trevor ol'chap! How's that new IPv6 multicast router project coming along? Have you uploaded your IPO proposal to First Virtual Bank yet.. Oh, hold on, my PalmPilot is beeping:
[aside: talking to live vid on PalmX] Hi hon, no, no, yes.. Well just email the grocery store and have them deliver another gallon of milk then.
No thanks! The upper crusties will always and forever be the rich, pretty, Ivy and ascot types. We're Morlocks, and now and again we'll get to eat us an Eloi debutante. And that's fine.
Let THEM eat their damn cake. Let them play their golf and go to their cheese and wine shindigs. We have more substantial and satisfying things with which to occupy our craniums than social politics.
If we ever become da'shit, we'll probably be to busy to notice.