I'll bet you $10,000 that you can't take a part-time position at a community college, teach one section of basic programming (less than 50 hours of instruction), and get everyone to pass a test in it. Because no one's every succeeded at that in the history of programming. Thus: Your assertions are wild insane ravings in the face of hard facts known for decades.
False. "Wilding" in general, and that famous NYC case, were totally fictitious bullshit made up by wild-eyed media and cops. The convictions of the juveniles were overturned years later, when a single man confessed and also had DNA evidence confirm it. Ken Burns had a documentary on their story at Cannes just last year. Exemplary case study of the great fraud that is our law-enforcement and security apparatus.
Inability to access is still not a violation of ability to sell. Of course, the main thing is that any proposed analogy has to deal with the fact that Sony's product idea does have a physical change to some part of the data (more like: a newspaper partly written in disappearing ink). Hypothetically, if the one-time-code-chip was replaced by an ultra-cheap dedicated wireless receiver, which checked against an online account for access permission, then I can't imagine that would make any legal difference.
I buy a bottle of juice and drink all of its contents. Do I have a right to resell it? Sure. The fact that it's been used up and no one would want to buy it is not a violation of law. Cue golden-shower jokes.
I'm not even that old but I can remember within my lifetime that it was just considered common-sense knowledge that obviously boys outperformed girls in school, and transparently had more of the traits of "attentiveness, task persistence, eagerness to learn, learning independence, flexibility and organization". Yes, in the college math classes I currently teach most often the best work is being done by girls. But to look at that and say that there's some intrinsic property of girls that makes them more school-oriented is the most tunnel-visioned, provincial bullshit that I've read in some time.
The best comment I've seen so far is that the character of schools has changed, i.e.: over-protectiveness, lack of recess, rough sports, physical activity. There's some clear changes in schooling that have likely made a difference in the very recent past. The other thing I'd say is that all my acquaintances today let their children run around uncontrolled and screaming all the time, which is not something I ever saw growing up (i.e., restaurant last week: two separate families kids under the tables, pulling on curtains, handprints all over the mirrored walls, etc.). In the past boys got some real serious discipline; now I'd say that seems to be reduced, and perhaps they suffer more for it.
When I graduated from high school the top 5 students were all boys as I recall. When my sister graduated from the same school two years later, 7 of the top 10 were girls. Of course that's anecdotal, but it broadly seems to synch up with the sea-change that I've seen in my short life.
A Microsoft VP is not really that special (it's not like he's the #2 guy at the company). In fact, every separate division has its own President -- President of Skype, President of MS Office, President of Online Services, President of Interactive Entertainment, President of Server & Tools, President of Business Solutions, etc. (link)
There are something like 15 Vice-Presidents at Microsoft. There are so many that different sub-categories of VP exist: Senior Vice President, Corporate Vice President, etc., and they get reorganized from time to time (link).
So if it helps you can tell yourself, "MS hands out the VP title like candy to any department head, and this guy is the head of legal, so the title is VP of Legal Affairs, which is consistent with how they do things at a lot of large companies".
I call bullshit on this article. What this is: Cheer-leading and whitewashing for a U.S. government press release that promises more entanglement and "anti-terror" activity (by way of the UN) in foreign countries. Here is the meat of the article, all the way at the very end of the article, if you have the patience to get there:
At least on the African continent, change is coming. In addition to aid from the U.S. and others, groups like the Cyber Security Africa and the International Institute for Counter Terrorism (ICT) are setting up regional workshops and conventions to address problems like cyber crime in Africa.
Western nations are helping out, also. In December, the U.S. Department of State has granted $250,000 to combat transnational cybercrime in East African nations. That money will be used to train law enforcement, judges and prosecutors on cyber crime prosecution, with cooperation from the US Justice Department. Still, a State Department spokesperson said the money will be spent on "fundamentals" - laying the groundwork for intra-government and international cooperation on cyber crime, as well as 'basic laws that criminalize cybercrime conduct, laws on handling electronic evidence."
It approvingly portrays a Kenyan push to require static IPs on all mobile devices to better permit tracking:
The Communication Commission of Kenya (CCK) is pushing for mobile operators to assign static IP addresses to smart phones and tablets to "help track and monitor user activity," according to statements from Bitange Ndemo, the Information and Communication Permanent Secretary there.
It includes delightful broken-window fallacies, basically in support of US-based Microsoft products, like this paragraph:
Pirated software is also used commonly throughout the continent, creating an avenue for malicious software and sapping local economies of money and jobs that would stem from a legal market for business and personal software.
This article is originally based on "State Dept throws $250,000 at UN effort to combat cybercrime in Africa" from the Daily Caller. (link from end).
That article, in turn, is originally based on "U.S. Department of State Funds UN Anti-Cybercrime Training for Africa" from the U.S. State Department website (link from that article).
Part of me cheered the first time I read that article. But: The shuttle program doesn't exist anymore (in some sense it's a fundamentally failed project). Other services have taken over the LEO launch industry. NASA in general is basically on the decline. What has clearly won the day is just-barely-tolerable, first-to-market software production. Something like Facebook or other modern web companies or cheap mobile devices. Generally overseen by a charismatic and domineering cult of personality (Brin, Zuckerburg, Jobs, Bezos).
I don't like it. I don't want it. I don't have the heart to participate in it anymore. But that's clearly what has won the day and gets the job done. Leaders of men are usually assholes but their legacy overshadows that.
"Only in the socially retarded world of/. is this sort of behaviour lauded because the best behaviour that I described above seems too goddamned difficult to manage."
Tut, tut, good sir. Next time please do try to deliver your observations in more civilized and diplomatic language.
A tantrum such as from the OP suggests to me "special" in the sense of maybe-dyslexic or something; some notable abnormality in being able to spell and format correctly.
I'm surprised that no one's brought it up yet, but -- One of the most common spam email profiles that I get these days has the name of a Facebook friend in "From", my name in "Subject", and the body being just a single hyperlink. Pretty clearly, something is scooping up names of friends from Facebook (and recall email address is required there), so there's no need for any personal computer involved to be hacked. And I'm getting these things with the names of some friends I've never had any contact with except through Facebook, so it's easy to deduce that's the source. I would think.
"At the extreme you'd be able to have everyone not interested in doing anything useful sitting in their robot-built homes..."
This is the techie BS about giving everyone 10-hour work weeks that has come up empty for over a century now. If Mr. X owns a house-building robot, why would he have it build Ms. Y a house for free?
"There's a possible good solution, which is to invest HEAVILY in robotics, and by proxy EVEN MORE heavily in sustainable energy sources to power them, so that we can at some point replace the currently required exponent growth of goods/services-producing people with tons upon tons of goods/services-producing robots."
Yes, with the added implication that those robots are nationalized/ controlled by the state/ heavily taxed such that their production benefits the people. That is: socialized. Of which I am in favor, but it's a total pipe dream in a place like the USA (capitalists would rather "poison pill" us before relinquishing control).
I have basic arithmetic students at my college who can only divide 22 by 2 if they count on their fingers (2, 4, 6, 8... then see how many steps it took to get to 22... onoes, ran out of fingers). More generally, about 1/3 of this lowest-level class never memorized the one-digit multiplication table. Do they need to go to college? Does the state need to fund the attempt with financial aid?
I agree that society should support higher education, but I think by necessity there has to be some criteria by which one qualifies for it, else it's a massive waste of resources. If I'm not crazy, then maybe the society that I'm living in is.
Contempt for bachelors degrees is part of the mechanics that drive up the cost of college degrees. The fact that bachelors are the new high school diploma is why so many people now need a Master's to distinguish themselves in any way.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll bet you $10,000 that you can't take a part-time position at a community college, teach one section of basic programming (less than 50 hours of instruction), and get everyone to pass a test in it. Because no one's every succeeded at that in the history of programming. Thus: Your assertions are wild insane ravings in the face of hard facts known for decades.
False. "Wilding" in general, and that famous NYC case, were totally fictitious bullshit made up by wild-eyed media and cops. The convictions of the juveniles were overturned years later, when a single man confessed and also had DNA evidence confirm it. Ken Burns had a documentary on their story at Cannes just last year. Exemplary case study of the great fraud that is our law-enforcement and security apparatus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Park_Jogger_case
Inability to access is still not a violation of ability to sell. Of course, the main thing is that any proposed analogy has to deal with the fact that Sony's product idea does have a physical change to some part of the data (more like: a newspaper partly written in disappearing ink). Hypothetically, if the one-time-code-chip was replaced by an ultra-cheap dedicated wireless receiver, which checked against an online account for access permission, then I can't imagine that would make any legal difference.
"Technically correct" does overlap with "Correct but useless".
I buy a bottle of juice and drink all of its contents. Do I have a right to resell it? Sure. The fact that it's been used up and no one would want to buy it is not a violation of law. Cue golden-shower jokes.
I'm not even that old but I can remember within my lifetime that it was just considered common-sense knowledge that obviously boys outperformed girls in school, and transparently had more of the traits of "attentiveness, task persistence, eagerness to learn, learning independence, flexibility and organization". Yes, in the college math classes I currently teach most often the best work is being done by girls. But to look at that and say that there's some intrinsic property of girls that makes them more school-oriented is the most tunnel-visioned, provincial bullshit that I've read in some time.
The best comment I've seen so far is that the character of schools has changed, i.e.: over-protectiveness, lack of recess, rough sports, physical activity. There's some clear changes in schooling that have likely made a difference in the very recent past. The other thing I'd say is that all my acquaintances today let their children run around uncontrolled and screaming all the time, which is not something I ever saw growing up (i.e., restaurant last week: two separate families kids under the tables, pulling on curtains, handprints all over the mirrored walls, etc.). In the past boys got some real serious discipline; now I'd say that seems to be reduced, and perhaps they suffer more for it.
When I graduated from high school the top 5 students were all boys as I recall. When my sister graduated from the same school two years later, 7 of the top 10 were girls. Of course that's anecdotal, but it broadly seems to synch up with the sea-change that I've seen in my short life.
"If I'm senior coder, than that means I set the standard."
Your standard for if/then statements must be delightful.
A Microsoft VP is not really that special (it's not like he's the #2 guy at the company). In fact, every separate division has its own President -- President of Skype, President of MS Office, President of Online Services, President of Interactive Entertainment, President of Server & Tools, President of Business Solutions, etc. (link)
There are something like 15 Vice-Presidents at Microsoft. There are so many that different sub-categories of VP exist: Senior Vice President, Corporate Vice President, etc., and they get reorganized from time to time (link).
So if it helps you can tell yourself, "MS hands out the VP title like candy to any department head, and this guy is the head of legal, so the title is VP of Legal Affairs, which is consistent with how they do things at a lot of large companies".
Standardization is nice, but it requires either hard work or tyrannical power.
Not to belittle the work that our tyrants do for us.
I call bullshit on this article. What this is: Cheer-leading and whitewashing for a U.S. government press release that promises more entanglement and "anti-terror" activity (by way of the UN) in foreign countries. Here is the meat of the article, all the way at the very end of the article, if you have the patience to get there:
At least on the African continent, change is coming. In addition to aid from the U.S. and others, groups like the Cyber Security Africa and the International Institute for Counter Terrorism (ICT) are setting up regional workshops and conventions to address problems like cyber crime in Africa.
Western nations are helping out, also. In December, the U.S. Department of State has granted $250,000 to combat transnational cybercrime in East African nations. That money will be used to train law enforcement, judges and prosecutors on cyber crime prosecution, with cooperation from the US Justice Department. Still, a State Department spokesperson said the money will be spent on "fundamentals" - laying the groundwork for intra-government and international cooperation on cyber crime, as well as 'basic laws that criminalize cybercrime conduct, laws on handling electronic evidence."
It approvingly portrays a Kenyan push to require static IPs on all mobile devices to better permit tracking:
The Communication Commission of Kenya (CCK) is pushing for mobile operators to assign static IP addresses to smart phones and tablets to "help track and monitor user activity," according to statements from Bitange Ndemo, the Information and Communication Permanent Secretary there.
It includes delightful broken-window fallacies, basically in support of US-based Microsoft products, like this paragraph:
Pirated software is also used commonly throughout the continent, creating an avenue for malicious software and sapping local economies of money and jobs that would stem from a legal market for business and personal software.
This article is originally based on "State Dept throws $250,000 at UN effort to combat cybercrime in Africa" from the Daily Caller. (link from end).
That article, in turn, is originally based on "U.S. Department of State Funds UN Anti-Cybercrime Training for Africa" from the U.S. State Department website (link from that article).
This thing's going right into the Uncanny Valley for me. What an awful and ridiculous idea... yeah, because everyone was terrified of their Roomba.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley
Part of me cheered the first time I read that article. But: The shuttle program doesn't exist anymore (in some sense it's a fundamentally failed project). Other services have taken over the LEO launch industry. NASA in general is basically on the decline. What has clearly won the day is just-barely-tolerable, first-to-market software production. Something like Facebook or other modern web companies or cheap mobile devices. Generally overseen by a charismatic and domineering cult of personality (Brin, Zuckerburg, Jobs, Bezos).
I don't like it. I don't want it. I don't have the heart to participate in it anymore. But that's clearly what has won the day and gets the job done. Leaders of men are usually assholes but their legacy overshadows that.
"Only in the socially retarded world of /. is this sort of behaviour lauded because the best behaviour that I described above seems too goddamned difficult to manage."
Tut, tut, good sir. Next time please do try to deliver your observations in more civilized and diplomatic language.
And a police-state presence in every school. And a registry tracking all people treated for mental disorders. But not a registry on guns.
Hell, I'd consider firing you for being unable to use conventional English capitalization. My eyes are now crossed.
A tantrum such as from the OP suggests to me "special" in the sense of maybe-dyslexic or something; some notable abnormality in being able to spell and format correctly.
Well... he may be pretty smart at PR, whipping up attention for his research through the media like that.
I'm surprised that no one's brought it up yet, but -- One of the most common spam email profiles that I get these days has the name of a Facebook friend in "From", my name in "Subject", and the body being just a single hyperlink. Pretty clearly, something is scooping up names of friends from Facebook (and recall email address is required there), so there's no need for any personal computer involved to be hacked. And I'm getting these things with the names of some friends I've never had any contact with except through Facebook, so it's easy to deduce that's the source. I would think.
"At the extreme you'd be able to have everyone not interested in doing anything useful sitting in their robot-built homes..."
This is the techie BS about giving everyone 10-hour work weeks that has come up empty for over a century now. If Mr. X owns a house-building robot, why would he have it build Ms. Y a house for free?
"There's a possible good solution, which is to invest HEAVILY in robotics, and by proxy EVEN MORE heavily in sustainable energy sources to power them, so that we can at some point replace the currently required exponent growth of goods/services-producing people with tons upon tons of goods/services-producing robots."
Yes, with the added implication that those robots are nationalized/ controlled by the state/ heavily taxed such that their production benefits the people. That is: socialized. Of which I am in favor, but it's a total pipe dream in a place like the USA (capitalists would rather "poison pill" us before relinquishing control).
"What the fuck do microsoft think makes them so special?"
(a) $70B annual revenue, (b) $230B market cap, (c) almost ubiquitous use of their office suite for personal and business document creation.
If you don't think that's leverage for negotiating a better deal, then you have even less business sense than I do (which is pretty terrible).
^ This is one of those uncomfortable cases where I think that's satire, but I'm not totally sure.
I have basic arithmetic students at my college who can only divide 22 by 2 if they count on their fingers (2, 4, 6, 8... then see how many steps it took to get to 22... onoes, ran out of fingers). More generally, about 1/3 of this lowest-level class never memorized the one-digit multiplication table. Do they need to go to college? Does the state need to fund the attempt with financial aid?
I agree that society should support higher education, but I think by necessity there has to be some criteria by which one qualifies for it, else it's a massive waste of resources. If I'm not crazy, then maybe the society that I'm living in is.
Contempt for bachelors degrees is part of the mechanics that drive up the cost of college degrees. The fact that bachelors are the new high school diploma is why so many people now need a Master's to distinguish themselves in any way.
"why not use the concept in universities and other educational institutions?"
At first glance I read that as, "why not use that to corrupt universities and other educational institutions?"