Installing a keylogger and backdoor on someone's computer, discovering their passphrase and downloading their wallet, with no chance for compensation: priceless.
Organised criminals have proven that "laundering" real money remains trivial - well, easy enough to get away with, anyway.
So governments implement anti-fraud legislation to require various people involved in large transactions to report them. This reduces national laundering but cross-border laundering continues.
Oh, what's that, you're completely safe if you just keep your money under your mattress^W^W^Won your HDD? Plus ca change.
If you had invested in Bitcoins a year or so ago when they were worth a penny, your investment would be worth 100 times more by now.
Perhaps a currency which flows freely without borders,
Freely? So what the hell does this mean in the FAQ: "a public list of all the previous transactions is collectively maintained by the network of Bitcoin nodes, and before each transaction the coinâ(TM)s unusedness will be checked."
artificial restrictions
There is a plan for there to never be more than 21 million coins! How is that not the most fucking retarded artificial restriction for a currency? Why in the name of fuck would anyone propose a currency which would only just cover one coin each per resident of New York?
or monitoring by governments and tax collectors
Where are the computers and networks outside of the reach of monitoring by governments and tax collectors, please?
What I meant was that I like a clean, simple, low-colour UI. I find the eye candy of modern operating systems (especially OS X) to be horribly distracting - especially the dark-grey-on-light-grey text which is difficult to read when compared with simple monochrome.
You go to a restaurant. You've had a nice meal. I take away your credit card. I swipe it, then record its details to clone it. I return the original to you. I make a clone and withdraw the cash advance limit from a cash point. Where is the consent? Sure, you consented for me to take the card to settle the bill, and you were foolish to let the card out of your sight, but that doesn't mean you consented to everything else.
Your argument is the white collar equivalent of, "They were fondling each other and 10 minutes later she was passed-out drunk so the following sexual intercourse was consenting." In some way she consented to some interaction, and she was foolish to drink so much, but she absolutely never said OK to sex. Perhaps this is "better" than rape at gunpoint, but it's still rape.
When I think white collar crimes, I think of those which deprive you of savings, home, identity, etc., ultimately damaging your and your family's health, safety and prospects. The emotional impact is obvious and visible.
But the amount of money white collar criminals have to put a positive PR spin on what they do exceeds that available to rapists. If a few powerful people decided to take up public serial rape, I'm sure ten years of media tweaking would get a chunk of the unwashed mass to start supporting the sport of casual rape. Then some crude intellectual would paint a philosophy which justified rape and students, always yearning for an ideal to excuse their behaviour, would gather on-side: grass roots rape!
It worked for Catholics, Marxists and Objectivists. Surprisology, anyone?
Funny, I see just the opposite, people get impressed by things you could do on a apple product already in the -80s.
This was true between 1992 and 1995 for people whose only exposure to computers was IBM AT clones running DOS.
's 2011 now.
Well true a NeXT computer was even better,
Yes, it was one of the better Smalltalk wannabes.
plug n play. Better name would have been plug n pray. But all this was something a mac user took for granted then.
Which was the standard expansion bus on a 1995 Mac to which any of a virtually infinite number of cards/peripherals could be easily connected?
Oh, 1MB of ram was possible with a tweak.
Oh, you're thinking of the specific case of DOS on an IBM AT clone - like I said, ignorance of alternatives is what leads Apple users to become excessively impressed. Anyway, a couple dozen lines of assembler to enable gate A20 and switch to unreal mode isn't the end of the world.
Apple user at that time had computers that could do 128MB ram, if they just afforded it.
My early '90s MicroVAX has 256MB! And everyone could have had one of them if only they could afford it...
Network, Something that exploded on the PC side in mid -90s. Something that apple users been doing over a decade.
Mm, I recall the BBC Econet network from my school in the mid '80s... oh, wait, not PC.
High resolution screens over 640x480... an other things that was natural to a Apple user.
I liked Apple's high resolution monochrome. Pity they started colouring things up then fucked up royally with OS X. At least they've been progressively black-and-whitening it again. Shame it's gone mostly dark grey instead and the distracting eye candy remains.
It's more been that the rest of the industry has been catching up on Apple, and yes in some areas they passed Apple tech, but Apple is back developing aggressively.
No, it's integrating and marketing aggresively. It's very good at that.
Graphical user interface are not for real computer users... it's just a toy etc etc etc, 10 years later they started to do the same.
It is just a toy when compared to a text interface. It's just that the average person cannot afford the time to learn a more efficient way of navigating and applying his computer. This is fair enough - computers are very mainstream now. Like Apple said, "for the rest of us."
I have consistently found that users of Apple products have very low standards (and are very easily impressed, mostly thanks to ignorance of existing technology unless it's been marketed right down their throats). It's no surprise that this massive problem hasn't affected Apple much.
In other news, alcoholics still buy cheap alcohol.
How do you deal with the biggest problem the US faces, internally and externally: its abuse of military power to dominate rather than to defend? The military is naturally federal.
The increase in power of the state (with technical solutions to oppress dissent) was inevitable. The choice was between a Soviet state which plays the stern nanny and a "capitalist" state which makes you a servant of the corporations which sponsor it. Why is the latter so much better, America?
There is no surprise that a human wants this power.
It's just the thing they do. All social groupings and all people who lead them lust for power. Obama is no exception.
Think about it: if you are a member of a group and aren't crazed with power-lust, you will be crushed by another member who is. So we have a system where only the most maniacal, greedy, authoritarian-minded can get into power. Democracy?...
...well, at least it exists for government. Its detractors will insist that people are stupid or misled, because they cannot stand facing up to the fact that - for the vast majority of people - what we have today is more than good enough.
Sigh, another pointless arms race brought on by businessman-academics selling snake-oil.
I wonder how long it will take to overcome the "message appears when a particular specific combination of recompression settings is chosen" anti-fraud-or-something technique. I mean, it's such a novel idea and there are so few alternative combinations of recompression settings.
Then move aside for those scientists who are more interested in science and are only interested in the chance to do science. They'll work for less, as long as they have enough for food and shelter, and their dedication will be greater. Which is one of several reasons why the businessman-scientist is consistently disappointed.
It's a contest. It IS a contract with terms.
There's a sleazy law firm somewhere and it wants to subscribe to your newsletter.
Why enter a contest you're not going to get a fair shot at, when you could do whatever else you want instead.
For the fun of challenging yourself. For the opportunity to learn from other entrants. For the enjoyment of a geeky social environment and the chance to get to know fellow enthusiasts.
Policemen stop the engineers' offices getting ransacked and their partners getting raped. Politicians negotiate between power interests to give engineers the freedom to practice. Lawyers allow everyone access to the law, including engineers. Bankers allocate funds to engineers. Cleaners stop engineers dying of dysentery before you've even graduated.
And while all these people are needed before you can build a rocket, we could all get along without rockets. Indeed, without a whole society to ensure we make sensible decisions on where they come down, we'd be better off without them.
Get over yourself. Few people want your technocratic utopia. They have tried, but repeatedly failed, because people prefer freedom.
as soon as someone else gets to specify that work (whether through employment or through some other inducement such as the chance of winning a contest), I expect remuneration according to the terms of the inducement.
Is your inducement the chance to do science (i.e. food, shelter, office, equipment and contacts) or the money you take home each month?
So if the terms of the science fair are that the project is judged on its own merits
If you think a science fair should be some sort of contract with "terms", you're already lost.
He probably expects to earn more than someone who didn't have to invest as much time
I know people who invest almost every free hour reconditioning and tweaking old DEC equipment. Does this obsessive and dedicated investment in time deserve massive remuneration?
and doesn't have his mental ability.
Rewarding those declared mighty by some central standard is... well, you know what it is. China's half way to it. A good society provides a sound argument to its citizens that it is working in everyone's interests, reflected in popular support for science grants (not to businessman-scientists whose primary motivation is cash reward) and other welfare programmes, and the opportunity for equitable trade.
If you don't want science jobs exported, you have to adjust regulations so that (i) offshoring is no longer artificially beneficial in tax and transport costs; and (ii) account is taken of the human cost of employing people in regimes less liberal and kind to the worker than your own.
But, as you say, the banker under capitalism will always get more than the scientist. Experts in the flow of capital are rewarded with access to more capital, which (if people are paying attention and regulating their behaviour carefully) will allow them to make further wise investments. Such as to scientists.
I believe you are misleading us by not posting your requirements.
What do you consider a reasonable wage and working hours? What working conditions do you require in order to take a job?
To say you have "been out of work for 3 of the last 6 years" may say as much or more about you than the job marketplace. It's trivially true that, as a science PhD, you could get some job - so you are clearly turning down much of what's on offer.
All we know so far is that you want to do what you "love", but you seem to complain that what you love doesn't coincide with whatever actually happens to be in demand. So, tell us, what do you think you deserve yet are not getting? Have you considered moving to China?
I'm a judge of character, and I want to say.... your interpersonal and motivational skills are CRAP... prepare for an irrelevant job as a minor technical functionary following by a lonely old age ending in a death noticed by none.
Slashdot Mirror
Installing a keylogger and backdoor on someone's computer, discovering their passphrase and downloading their wallet, with no chance for compensation: priceless.
Organised criminals have proven that "laundering" real money remains trivial - well, easy enough to get away with, anyway.
So governments implement anti-fraud legislation to require various people involved in large transactions to report them. This reduces national laundering but cross-border laundering continues.
Oh, what's that, you're completely safe if you just keep your money under your mattress^W^W^Won your HDD? Plus ca change.
If you had invested in Bitcoins a year or so ago when they were worth a penny, your investment would be worth 100 times more by now.
Perhaps a currency which flows freely without borders,
Freely? So what the hell does this mean in the FAQ: "a public list of all the previous transactions is collectively maintained by the network of Bitcoin nodes, and before each transaction the coinâ(TM)s unusedness will be checked."
artificial restrictions
There is a plan for there to never be more than 21 million coins! How is that not the most fucking retarded artificial restriction for a currency? Why in the name of fuck would anyone propose a currency which would only just cover one coin each per resident of New York?
or monitoring by governments and tax collectors
Where are the computers and networks outside of the reach of monitoring by governments and tax collectors, please?
Why no one time pad with index lookup?
What I meant was that I like a clean, simple, low-colour UI. I find the eye candy of modern operating systems (especially OS X) to be horribly distracting - especially the dark-grey-on-light-grey text which is difficult to read when compared with simple monochrome.
You go to a restaurant. You've had a nice meal. I take away your credit card. I swipe it, then record its details to clone it. I return the original to you. I make a clone and withdraw the cash advance limit from a cash point. Where is the consent? Sure, you consented for me to take the card to settle the bill, and you were foolish to let the card out of your sight, but that doesn't mean you consented to everything else.
Your argument is the white collar equivalent of, "They were fondling each other and 10 minutes later she was passed-out drunk so the following sexual intercourse was consenting." In some way she consented to some interaction, and she was foolish to drink so much, but she absolutely never said OK to sex. Perhaps this is "better" than rape at gunpoint, but it's still rape.
Please add more detail to that remark (so I can point out your mistake).
When I think white collar crimes, I think of those which deprive you of savings, home, identity, etc., ultimately damaging your and your family's health, safety and prospects. The emotional impact is obvious and visible.
But the amount of money white collar criminals have to put a positive PR spin on what they do exceeds that available to rapists. If a few powerful people decided to take up public serial rape, I'm sure ten years of media tweaking would get a chunk of the unwashed mass to start supporting the sport of casual rape. Then some crude intellectual would paint a philosophy which justified rape and students, always yearning for an ideal to excuse their behaviour, would gather on-side: grass roots rape!
It worked for Catholics, Marxists and Objectivists. Surprisology, anyone?
So it's not the rapist's fault, it's... Mother Nature's? God's?
Funny, I see just the opposite, people get impressed by things you could do on a apple product already in the -80s.
This was true between 1992 and 1995 for people whose only exposure to computers was IBM AT clones running DOS.
's 2011 now.
Well true a NeXT computer was even better,
Yes, it was one of the better Smalltalk wannabes.
plug n play. Better name would have been plug n pray. But all this was something a mac user took for granted then.
Which was the standard expansion bus on a 1995 Mac to which any of a virtually infinite number of cards/peripherals could be easily connected?
Oh, 1MB of ram was possible with a tweak.
Oh, you're thinking of the specific case of DOS on an IBM AT clone - like I said, ignorance of alternatives is what leads Apple users to become excessively impressed. Anyway, a couple dozen lines of assembler to enable gate A20 and switch to unreal mode isn't the end of the world.
Apple user at that time had computers that could do 128MB ram, if they just afforded it.
My early '90s MicroVAX has 256MB! And everyone could have had one of them if only they could afford it...
Network, Something that exploded on the PC side in mid -90s. Something that apple users been doing over a decade.
Mm, I recall the BBC Econet network from my school in the mid '80s... oh, wait, not PC.
High resolution screens over 640x480... an other things that was natural to a Apple user.
I liked Apple's high resolution monochrome. Pity they started colouring things up then fucked up royally with OS X. At least they've been progressively black-and-whitening it again. Shame it's gone mostly dark grey instead and the distracting eye candy remains.
It's more been that the rest of the industry has been catching up on Apple, and yes in some areas they passed Apple tech, but Apple is back developing aggressively.
No, it's integrating and marketing aggresively. It's very good at that.
Graphical user interface are not for real computer users... it's just a toy etc etc etc, 10 years later they started to do the same.
It is just a toy when compared to a text interface. It's just that the average person cannot afford the time to learn a more efficient way of navigating and applying his computer. This is fair enough - computers are very mainstream now. Like Apple said, "for the rest of us."
let other people make their own choices. It's not like it has any effect on you in any way.
This is absurd nonsense. Capitalism and democracy are popularity contests.
I have consistently found that users of Apple products have very low standards (and are very easily impressed, mostly thanks to ignorance of existing technology unless it's been marketed right down their throats). It's no surprise that this massive problem hasn't affected Apple much.
In other news, alcoholics still buy cheap alcohol.
How do you deal with the biggest problem the US faces, internally and externally: its abuse of military power to dominate rather than to defend? The military is naturally federal.
Child abuse begins, and usually ends, at home.
The increase in power of the state (with technical solutions to oppress dissent) was inevitable. The choice was between a Soviet state which plays the stern nanny and a "capitalist" state which makes you a servant of the corporations which sponsor it. Why is the latter so much better, America?
There is no surprise that a human wants this power.
It's just the thing they do. All social groupings and all people who lead them lust for power. Obama is no exception.
Think about it: if you are a member of a group and aren't crazed with power-lust, you will be crushed by another member who is. So we have a system where only the most maniacal, greedy, authoritarian-minded can get into power. Democracy? ...
"natural selection"
How much longer are these 'scientist' tossers who run labs going to run with this bullshit?
www.intelligentdesign.org
There IS no chance mutation. There is no mutation, period.
Sigh, another pointless arms race brought on by businessman-academics selling snake-oil.
I wonder how long it will take to overcome the "message appears when a particular specific combination of recompression settings is chosen" anti-fraud-or-something technique. I mean, it's such a novel idea and there are so few alternative combinations of recompression settings.
Both, of course.
Then move aside for those scientists who are more interested in science and are only interested in the chance to do science. They'll work for less, as long as they have enough for food and shelter, and their dedication will be greater. Which is one of several reasons why the businessman-scientist is consistently disappointed.
It's a contest. It IS a contract with terms.
There's a sleazy law firm somewhere and it wants to subscribe to your newsletter.
Why enter a contest you're not going to get a fair shot at, when you could do whatever else you want instead.
For the fun of challenging yourself. For the opportunity to learn from other entrants. For the enjoyment of a geeky social environment and the chance to get to know fellow enthusiasts.
Policemen stop the engineers' offices getting ransacked and their partners getting raped. Politicians negotiate between power interests to give engineers the freedom to practice. Lawyers allow everyone access to the law, including engineers. Bankers allocate funds to engineers. Cleaners stop engineers dying of dysentery before you've even graduated.
And while all these people are needed before you can build a rocket, we could all get along without rockets. Indeed, without a whole society to ensure we make sensible decisions on where they come down, we'd be better off without them.
Get over yourself. Few people want your technocratic utopia. They have tried, but repeatedly failed, because people prefer freedom.
as soon as someone else gets to specify that work (whether through employment or through some other inducement such as the chance of winning a contest), I expect remuneration according to the terms of the inducement.
Is your inducement the chance to do science (i.e. food, shelter, office, equipment and contacts) or the money you take home each month?
So if the terms of the science fair are that the project is judged on its own merits
If you think a science fair should be some sort of contract with "terms", you're already lost.
He probably expects to earn more than someone who didn't have to invest as much time
I know people who invest almost every free hour reconditioning and tweaking old DEC equipment. Does this obsessive and dedicated investment in time deserve massive remuneration?
and doesn't have his mental ability.
Rewarding those declared mighty by some central standard is... well, you know what it is. China's half way to it. A good society provides a sound argument to its citizens that it is working in everyone's interests, reflected in popular support for science grants (not to businessman-scientists whose primary motivation is cash reward) and other welfare programmes, and the opportunity for equitable trade.
If you don't want science jobs exported, you have to adjust regulations so that (i) offshoring is no longer artificially beneficial in tax and transport costs; and (ii) account is taken of the human cost of employing people in regimes less liberal and kind to the worker than your own.
But, as you say, the banker under capitalism will always get more than the scientist. Experts in the flow of capital are rewarded with access to more capital, which (if people are paying attention and regulating their behaviour carefully) will allow them to make further wise investments. Such as to scientists.
/. is full of people who say they are geeks but are really just businessmen. Who gives a fuck whether the underprivileged guy gets the rosette?
Do the work because you enjoy the learning and get satisfaction from the end product, not because you enjoy remuneration.
I believe you are misleading us by not posting your requirements.
What do you consider a reasonable wage and working hours?
What working conditions do you require in order to take a job?
To say you have "been out of work for 3 of the last 6 years" may say as much or more about you than the job marketplace. It's trivially true that, as a science PhD, you could get some job - so you are clearly turning down much of what's on offer.
All we know so far is that you want to do what you "love", but you seem to complain that what you love doesn't coincide with whatever actually happens to be in demand. So, tell us, what do you think you deserve yet are not getting? Have you considered moving to China?
I'm a judge of character, and I want to say.... your interpersonal and motivational skills are CRAP... prepare for an irrelevant job as a minor technical functionary following by a lonely old age ending in a death noticed by none.