Because "education" as an academic field is mostly worthless. Fads, inept psychology, intuition masquerading as actual research, reliance on anecdotal evidence--why on earth would we expect a workable curriculum out of that?
If you asked the teachers in the trenches, they'd probably ask for their class sizes to be reduced about 60%. If you asked ME, which you didn't, I'd say to reduce the class day by several hours, and the school year by half. There is absolutely no need to subject young children to 8 hours a day for 9 months a year to teach a few elementary reading and mathematical skills. It's just cruel.
Traditionally courts have ruled that business methods can't be patented; this changed only recently, with State Street Bank & Trust vs. Signature Financial Group in 1998.
An extremely poor decision on the Court of Appeals part, I think.
Congratulations, you were just modded by an editor! There was no way that two reader-moderators just decided to mod you offtopic twice like that for no reason, without modding the similarly offtopic parent down. I watched as you went from 2 to 0 in a couple seconds. Looks like the fuckwad editors can't take criticism.
Didn't win, I notice. The problem with the Oscars is the winners are elected by the same people who produce all the drivel Hollywood churns out.
Look at the winners throught the 80s and 90s; there are several exceptional actors and actresses listed there, but there are also several hacks whose popularity got them the award, not their performance.
Nope, it's pretty much arbitrary. It's decided on how the votes come in, I think; if more people nominate him for best supporting actor than leading actor, that's how he's nominated by the academy.
Because psychotic characters are easy to portray, yet for some reason people think it's great acting if someone twitches for two hours.
There's a great quote by Jimmy Stewart on the subject; something about actors who could play a psychopath, but couldn't play a guy going to the store to buy a carton of milk. After scouring google I couldn't find it, but maybe someone else knows it...
It will be just idiotic if Ian McKellan doesn't win the best supporting actor award.
Of course, I think he had enough screen time to qualify for best actor, but they'd never nominate an elderly British actor that most people have never heard of. Have to think of the ratings.
1) They were NOT the first to come up with this. Loads of arcade games for instance have been using forced-feedback for many, many years.
That's why I prefaced my comment with an "if they were the first ones". The posters here seem to be criticizing the idea of patenting this kind of device, which I think is a little silly. This is absolutely nothing like BT's attempt to patent hyperlinks, and there's no basis for drawing an analogy. If there's prior art that's an entirely different criticism.
2) This patent is far too broad, and should have never been granted. How can you patent the concept of vibration?! I could see if they patented a certain type of motor that produced a specific form of vibration, and Sony & MS stole the plans, but they are suing because their controllers vibrate. As much as I dislike Sony & MS, this lawsuit is BS.
It's actually a very precisely worded patent:
A multifunction human digit control includes a rotating cylinder journalled in a movable bar slidable in a groove in a deflectable support track. Rotation of the cylinder by a thumb or finger generates a first motion signal and movement of either or both of the bar and the cylinder by tactile movement, generates a second motion signal, representing, for example, X-axis and Y-axis positions, respectively, of a cursor on a computer screen. Various types of motion detectors or encoders are disclosed to detect the various movements of the bar and cylinder. The mechanism also permits actuation of a switch or other motion detector in a Z-axis by deflection of any one of the bar, the cylinder or portions of the support track with respect to a support structure. In a preferred embodiment, the overall control has its digit-operated tactile surfaces exposed in an aperture contained in a device casing, such as an opening in a computer keyboard or in an instrument housing or control panel.
You have a link for that French story? Sounds interesting...
Apparently they pick submissions pretty much at random. And despite their complaining that they have to sift through hundreds of stories a day, they seem to reject mine a few minutes after I submit them.
What's so stupid about this? If they were the first to come up with the idea, then Microsoft or Sony shouldn't be allowed to take their idea without paying for it.
The problem is everyone on slashdot is so conditioned to react negatively to any patent claim that they'll jump to the attack, even when it's unwarranted.
This is exactly what the patent office was created for.
It's an idiotic situation that could be easily remedied through legislation; New York City has an organization called City Harvest that collects food from restaurants and stores, which aren't liable for any problems arising from the food.
What's your problem with it? They shouldn't teach it because it's not real SF? But they shouldn't teach SF either? Bradbury writes SF; just because his writing style is more similar to mainstream fiction doesn't negate that.
I've never heard of him trying to trick anyone into believing he wasn't.
So for 30 bucks you got to enjoy a great dinner, and several glasses of Veuve Clicquot. And the 25 bucks you knew you were going to spend to get home anyway, so spending it isn't exactly my fault.
I'm sure Eve made plenty of money in her time there, and the VCs lost plenty of it.
6. Divide profits generated before your arrival amongst your VC friends
That's not really a fair accusation by Eve; it sounds like the VCs brought in a lot more money than they spent. Which makes the claim of "they spent our profits" a little silly.
Don't forget the tendency of this community to interpret everything he says in as negative a way as possible.
If he disagrees with something, everyone starts screaming about he's a ranting ideologue who's bent on coercing everyone to follow his ideals. It doesn't matter how he phrases it, it's immediately translated by the anti-RMS crowd into some kind of insane crusade against whatever he's talking about.
Look at the current incident. Someone asks him a question that's based on faulty assumptions. He points out that the questioner might have some of his facts wrong, then says if they were right he'd disagree with it. Instantly the anti-RMS crowd comes out en masse, shrieking.
What's next? RMS order soup with his dinner, and we get the slashdot headline "RMS blasts salad as entree choice"?
I'm not sure why there's such a huge anti-RMS movement in the free software/open source communities. I have some theories though:
1. Stallman has the audacity not to uncritically support everything everyone else does in the open source arena.
2. He represents an older generation of programmers who did the real pioneering stuff, and young programmers today have self-esteem problems with recognizing anyone older than themselves.
Don't overgeneralize. There are plenty of Americans who know how the world works, and are as frustrated as the rest of the world over the actions of our government.
Slashdot Mirror
Because "education" as an academic field is mostly worthless. Fads, inept psychology, intuition masquerading as actual research, reliance on anecdotal evidence--why on earth would we expect a workable curriculum out of that?
If you asked the teachers in the trenches, they'd probably ask for their class sizes to be reduced about 60%. If you asked ME, which you didn't, I'd say to reduce the class day by several hours, and the school year by half. There is absolutely no need to subject young children to 8 hours a day for 9 months a year to teach a few elementary reading and mathematical skills. It's just cruel.
No, they haven't.
Traditionally courts have ruled that business methods can't be patented; this changed only recently, with State Street Bank & Trust vs. Signature Financial Group in 1998.
An extremely poor decision on the Court of Appeals part, I think.
Congratulations, you were just modded by an editor! There was no way that two reader-moderators just decided to mod you offtopic twice like that for no reason, without modding the similarly offtopic parent down. I watched as you went from 2 to 0 in a couple seconds. Looks like the fuckwad editors can't take criticism.
Woo, what do I win?
Let me guess, another 2 mods down!
I stand corrected.
Didn't win, I notice. The problem with the Oscars is the winners are elected by the same people who produce all the drivel Hollywood churns out.
Look at the winners throught the 80s and 90s; there are several exceptional actors and actresses listed there, but there are also several hacks whose popularity got them the award, not their performance.
Nope, it's pretty much arbitrary. It's decided on how the votes come in, I think; if more people nominate him for best supporting actor than leading actor, that's how he's nominated by the academy.
Because psychotic characters are easy to portray, yet for some reason people think it's great acting if someone twitches for two hours.
There's a great quote by Jimmy Stewart on the subject; something about actors who could play a psychopath, but couldn't play a guy going to the store to buy a carton of milk. After scouring google I couldn't find it, but maybe someone else knows it...
It will be just idiotic if Ian McKellan doesn't win the best supporting actor award.
Of course, I think he had enough screen time to qualify for best actor, but they'd never nominate an elderly British actor that most people have never heard of. Have to think of the ratings.
That's why I prefaced my comment with an "if they were the first ones". The posters here seem to be criticizing the idea of patenting this kind of device, which I think is a little silly. This is absolutely nothing like BT's attempt to patent hyperlinks, and there's no basis for drawing an analogy. If there's prior art that's an entirely different criticism.
2) This patent is far too broad, and should have never been granted. How can you patent the concept of vibration?! I could see if they patented a certain type of motor that produced a specific form of vibration, and Sony & MS stole the plans, but they are suing because their controllers vibrate. As much as I dislike Sony & MS, this lawsuit is BS.
It's actually a very precisely worded patent: Doesn't sound vague to me.
I thought business processes were already unpatentable...
You have a link for that French story? Sounds interesting...
Apparently they pick submissions pretty much at random. And despite their complaining that they have to sift through hundreds of stories a day, they seem to reject mine a few minutes after I submit them.
Just about everything that makes up your computer IS patented; the processor, the motherboard, even the case may be patented.
How would we be stuffed? Can you find a single appliance in your house that isn't patented? Did that prevent their adoption?
Nice analogies, too bad they don't match up with the issue at hand. And they don't really make sense.
Force feedback controllers are mechanical devices, and recent creations. They're precisely what the patent system was created to protect.
What's so stupid about this? If they were the first to come up with the idea, then Microsoft or Sony shouldn't be allowed to take their idea without paying for it.
The problem is everyone on slashdot is so conditioned to react negatively to any patent claim that they'll jump to the attack, even when it's unwarranted.
This is exactly what the patent office was created for.
Now that really puts the abnormal back in abnormal psychology...
It's an idiotic situation that could be easily remedied through legislation; New York City has an organization called City Harvest that collects food from restaurants and stores, which aren't liable for any problems arising from the food.
What's your problem with it? They shouldn't teach it because it's not real SF? But they shouldn't teach SF either? Bradbury writes SF; just because his writing style is more similar to mainstream fiction doesn't negate that.
I've never heard of him trying to trick anyone into believing he wasn't.
So for 30 bucks you got to enjoy a great dinner, and several glasses of Veuve Clicquot. And the 25 bucks you knew you were going to spend to get home anyway, so spending it isn't exactly my fault.
I'm sure Eve made plenty of money in her time there, and the VCs lost plenty of it.
6. Divide profits generated before your arrival amongst your VC friends
That's not really a fair accusation by Eve; it sounds like the VCs brought in a lot more money than they spent. Which makes the claim of "they spent our profits" a little silly.
Don't forget the tendency of this community to interpret everything he says in as negative a way as possible.
If he disagrees with something, everyone starts screaming about he's a ranting ideologue who's bent on coercing everyone to follow his ideals. It doesn't matter how he phrases it, it's immediately translated by the anti-RMS crowd into some kind of insane crusade against whatever he's talking about.
Look at the current incident. Someone asks him a question that's based on faulty assumptions. He points out that the questioner might have some of his facts wrong, then says if they were right he'd disagree with it. Instantly the anti-RMS crowd comes out en masse, shrieking.
What's next? RMS order soup with his dinner, and we get the slashdot headline "RMS blasts salad as entree choice"?
I'm not sure why there's such a huge anti-RMS movement in the free software/open source communities. I have some theories though:
1. Stallman has the audacity not to uncritically support everything everyone else does in the open source arena.
2. He represents an older generation of programmers who did the real pioneering stuff, and young programmers today have self-esteem problems with recognizing anyone older than themselves.
3. They don't like his political views.
1) It dilutes his power,
Oh come on. The constant attempts to make Stallman look like some sort of megalomaniac bent on dominating the world is just ludicrous.
So BSDers never have fun?
True. There's something profoundly silly about having a bunch of R2 droids picking berries, catching fish, and slaughtering animals for meat.
The post-9/11 action/terrorism movie is now a genre all of its own.
No it's not. There's one movie involving terrorism. And it was made well before 9/11. How is that a genre?
Let's see the average slashdotter take on Arnie on in any physical arena.
Don't overgeneralize. There are plenty of Americans who know how the world works, and are as frustrated as the rest of the world over the actions of our government.