The biggest danger is medicine and biology. These fields have totally trapped themselves in their own model. Take blood draws, for example. If the reaction caused by puncturing your dermis and collecting blood creates a temporary level of reactivity (hormone reactions: epinephrine, for example, and unknown subtle reactions caused by psychological relationships), they could have a complete systemic error in their model. They don't know how to counter for this, because they really have NO model for human health. NONE.
It is unlike physics which has a model for explaining the cosmos, medicine has none. And it likely never will, because ITS A LIVING SYSTEM: it reacts to being probed and put in a box for the convenience of people who wear white coats.
Science may have been really wrong with this: empiricism. It might be that there is a complex interaction between consciousness and physics. Physics takes both their senses and the 3-d universe for granted, as neither can be proven nor have been explained.
Newtonian mechanics can't explain the flat structure of spiral galaxies -- you either have to posit another dimension miraculously imposing an incredible amount of order on random bits of energized reactions in a incredibly random spot in the universe OR some complex interaction with consciousness that man doesn't understand.
There are indeed major, gaping problems in physics: it cannot explain the origin of the Big Bang any better than Christians can explain God AND it has not used its *own* methods to account for the Creation story: multiple dimensions of Time can account for 5000 years of Biblical history -- or even a billion years of natural history occurring in 1 day of Biblical time. Such resolutions solve much of the discord between science and religion.
Sorry for the typos, a restart of the third sentence in the second paragraph::In short, all you need is + and - 1 and then a >>vote-to-top and vote-to-bottom button (use something like tape recorder symbol for fast forward, etc).
And to clarify the last sentence of that paragraph, add or subtract the voter's reputation when they use the vote-to-top and vote-to-bottom buttons.
All of slashdot's problems stem from inadequacies of the voting model, including the influx of competitors (hackernews@ycombinator) into its domain of "news for nerds".
There's been considerable new work done in this domain. Stackexchange has been leading the pack here. In short, all + and - 1, and then a vote-to-top and vote-to-bottom. In absence of a long conversation of how to do this perfectly, I'll give you the imperfect short-cut: add or subtract the voter's total reputation from that item's vote count.
The other thing is to clean out your tag system. Make a sensible hierarchy of topics.
My gosh, the Agency has taken a pounding for spying on American citizens? Why?
If the NSA wants to do these deeds, all I ask as an American citizen, is that it get written approval from the current incumbent President. That's all.
The issue: you can't use the same tools for physical goods for non-physical goods -- they just don't fit. They've different rules.
Sooner or later people have to realize that were in the middle of a planetary shift called the End of Growth. The whole notion of freedom changes when anything you do in the real world affects everybody else -- independence must give way to collaboration. The Internet is the ground for a new economy and it will have it's own currency system and its own "crowd control". Why does every national leader have its head up its ass wondering why there's an economic crisis?
The amount of heat produced directly by all human activity combined is tiny compared to the heat applied by the sunlight the earth receives..
This may be tiny now but with exponential growth, parity (and its subsequent depletion) always occurs in linear time. In the case of energy consumption growth rates, it's only about 400 years into the future to reach parity with total solar input....
Asking for voting reform in America is a red herring, the real issue is to get the Internet to fix the imbalances that weren't anticipated when the Constitution was formulated, edge cases which, at the end of growth, have now become major crisiis. The "Founding Fathers" could have never anticipated the rise of media technology and how it would affect the democratic need for an informed citizenry. The Internet could be the basis for a true "Fourth Estate" as well provide a new basis for value generation to get us out of the destructive, top-heavy, Industrial paradigm.
What will really test whether the Open Company is successful or not is whether (or how) the founder will respond if (likely someday) another person starts to get ranked higher than he....But, then, this is generally true in any company, open or not.
On another note, the issue of "less-liked" tasks like "cleaning the bathroom" becomes moot if the metric is designed properly; jobs will start to pay more the more they are needed. In other words, those who like having clean toilets will start to put up their own rank-votes to get the work done. Someone make a pile of shit in the toilet? then rank up the need so that the reward can incentivise motion.
There should be no need to special-case any work. Let the silent and invisible laws of evolution do the work...
Engineers tend to have a drill-down type of intelligence which allows them to be good at figuring out how things work. This is the same type of intelligence as any type of hacker or terrorist (or in the natural world: root systems which know how to bond and navigate to crack through cement building foundations). The basic m.o. for all of these is that their power comes from below, in contrast to the politician, CEO, or alphadog.
In other words, "Terrorism" is just a dysphemism used by those wanting to maintain power and control from above. Engineering becomes a terrorist act as soon as the engineers learn how to build a better society than the one current imposed by the those power holders above. And it's only these engineering types from below (in their various guises) who have the knowledge to do that.
FTA: "Since random development would not create such unifying trends, we concluded that the observed development was deterministic, not random," said Professor Benjamin Podbilewicz from the Technion Faculty of Biology."
Perhaps I'm missing something, but a unifying trend, while affirming against randomness does not necessary affirm determinism any more than the fact that I prefer and tend to choose apple pie over others. IOW, it would seem to allow the possibility of directed evolution a la Lamark....?
I salute and thank you for being sufficiently caring to get angry and want to do something about it. I bemoan the cynics who sit in their intellectual safehouse and let dreams die for lack of courage and belief in themselves and their fellow beings on the planet to get out of their coffeehouses and do something to manifest a dream.
Beyond finding the faults in the current system, I join those who are creating a new vision for humanity that is so beautifully compelling that the whole of humanity is moved along with it. No revolution necessary--the idea of the nation-state in an educated, globally-connected world will inevitably become irrelevant, particularly in light of a better dream. It is already counter-productive, producing unnecessary dangers and volatility that are well beyond the worries of gathering food (the fear/impetus that started this experiment with "civilization").
I see slashdot and other such online community forums as grand experiments in evolving a new form of decentralized, organic, real-time, self-organizing forms of governance. It seems nature and evolution solved this problem eons ago when it created complex multi-cellular bodies. Should be interesting in any case....
The industry is obviously and demonstrably powerful enough to create legislation when the "invisible hand" of the market doesn't do what they want.
Your comment that "it's not like the government is trying to force hardware manufacturers to do this" seems to ignore this obvious trend. Have you forgotten the V-Chip which the FCC now REQUIRES in all TV's larger than 13"?
Slashdot Mirror
The biggest danger is medicine and biology. These fields have totally trapped themselves in their own model. Take blood draws, for example. If the reaction caused by puncturing your dermis and collecting blood creates a temporary level of reactivity (hormone reactions: epinephrine, for example, and unknown subtle reactions caused by psychological relationships), they could have a complete systemic error in their model. They don't know how to counter for this, because they really have NO model for human health. NONE.
It is unlike physics which has a model for explaining the cosmos, medicine has none. And it likely never will, because ITS A LIVING SYSTEM: it reacts to being probed and put in a box for the convenience of people who wear white coats.
Try the next one: 398.
Science may have been really wrong with this: empiricism. It might be that there is a complex interaction between consciousness and physics. Physics takes both their senses and the 3-d universe for granted, as neither can be proven nor have been explained.
Newtonian mechanics can't explain the flat structure of spiral galaxies -- you either have to posit another dimension miraculously imposing an incredible amount of order on random bits of energized reactions in a incredibly random spot in the universe OR some complex interaction with consciousness that man doesn't understand.
There are indeed major, gaping problems in physics: it cannot explain the origin of the Big Bang any better than Christians can explain God AND it has not used its *own* methods to account for the Creation story: multiple dimensions of Time can account for 5000 years of Biblical history -- or even a billion years of natural history occurring in 1 day of Biblical time. Such resolutions solve much of the discord between science and religion.
When you want that solved, call me.
Sorry for the typos, a restart of the third sentence in the second paragraph: :In short, all you need is + and - 1 and then a >>vote-to-top and vote-to-bottom button (use something like tape recorder symbol for fast forward, etc).
And to clarify the last sentence of that paragraph, add or subtract the voter's reputation when they use the vote-to-top and vote-to-bottom buttons.
All of slashdot's problems stem from inadequacies of the voting model, including the influx of competitors (hackernews@ycombinator) into its domain of "news for nerds".
There's been considerable new work done in this domain. Stackexchange has been leading the pack here. In short, all + and - 1, and then a vote-to-top and vote-to-bottom. In absence of a long conversation of how to do this perfectly, I'll give you the imperfect short-cut: add or subtract the voter's total reputation from that item's vote count.
The other thing is to clean out your tag system. Make a sensible hierarchy of topics.
Done.
My gosh, the Agency has taken a pounding for spying on American citizens? Why?
If the NSA wants to do these deeds, all I ask as an American citizen, is that it get written approval from the current incumbent President. That's all.
Everyone wins!
Mark
Tacoma, WA
Two things:
1) An accumulation of best practices that the Internet provides,
2) An ability to go from idea to prototype in a short time with low cost/effort.
The issue: you can't use the same tools for physical goods for non-physical goods -- they just don't fit. They've different rules.
Sooner or later people have to realize that were in the middle of a planetary shift called the End of Growth. The whole notion of freedom changes when anything you do in the real world affects everybody else -- independence must give way to collaboration. The Internet is the ground for a new economy and it will have it's own currency system and its own "crowd control". Why does every national leader have its head up its ass wondering why there's an economic crisis?
Does anyone not see the bias present in the story?
"A lush peach (non-organic) can easily contain for vitamins than an unripe (organic) one."
Are you kidding, comparing ripe fruit to unripe fruit is the major dependent variable here, not whether pesticide was used.
The amount of heat produced directly by all human activity combined is tiny compared to the heat applied by the sunlight the earth receives. .
This may be tiny now but with exponential growth, parity (and its subsequent depletion) always occurs in linear time. In the case of energy consumption growth rates, it's only about 400 years into the future to reach parity with total solar input....
Asking for voting reform in America is a red herring, the real issue is to get the Internet to fix the imbalances that weren't anticipated when the Constitution was formulated, edge cases which, at the end of growth, have now become major crisiis. The "Founding Fathers" could have never anticipated the rise of media technology and how it would affect the democratic need for an informed citizenry. The Internet could be the basis for a true "Fourth Estate" as well provide a new basis for value generation to get us out of the destructive, top-heavy, Industrial paradigm.
What will really test whether the Open Company is successful or not is whether (or how) the founder will respond if (likely someday) another person starts to get ranked higher than he. ...But, then, this is generally true in any company, open or not.
On another note, the issue of "less-liked" tasks like "cleaning the bathroom" becomes moot if the metric is designed properly; jobs will start to pay more the more they are needed. In other words, those who like having clean toilets will start to put up their own rank-votes to get the work done. Someone make a pile of shit in the toilet? then rank up the need so that the reward can incentivise motion.
There should be no need to special-case any work. Let the silent and invisible laws of evolution do the work...
marcos
Engineers tend to have a drill-down type of intelligence which allows them to be good at figuring out how things work. This is the same type of intelligence as any type of hacker or terrorist (or in the natural world: root systems which know how to bond and navigate to crack through cement building foundations). The basic m.o. for all of these is that their power comes from below, in contrast to the politician, CEO, or alphadog.
In other words, "Terrorism" is just a dysphemism used by those wanting to maintain power and control from above. Engineering becomes a terrorist act as soon as the engineers learn how to build a better society than the one current imposed by the those power holders above. And it's only these engineering types from below (in their various guises) who have the knowledge to do that.
Happy hacking!
Perhaps I'm missing something, but a unifying trend, while affirming against randomness does not necessary affirm determinism any more than the fact that I prefer and tend to choose apple pie over others. IOW, it would seem to allow the possibility of directed evolution a la Lamark....?
I salute and thank you for being sufficiently caring to get angry and want to do something about it. I bemoan the cynics who sit in their intellectual safehouse and let dreams die for lack of courage and belief in themselves and their fellow beings on the planet to get out of their coffeehouses and do something to manifest a dream.
Beyond finding the faults in the current system, I join those who are creating a new vision for humanity that is so beautifully compelling that the whole of humanity is moved along with it. No revolution necessary--the idea of the nation-state in an educated, globally-connected world will inevitably become irrelevant, particularly in light of a better dream. It is already counter-productive, producing unnecessary dangers and volatility that are well beyond the worries of gathering food (the fear/impetus that started this experiment with "civilization").
I see slashdot and other such online community forums as grand experiments in evolving a new form of decentralized, organic, real-time, self-organizing forms of governance. It seems nature and evolution solved this problem eons ago when it created complex multi-cellular bodies. Should be interesting in any case....
marcos
The industry is obviously and demonstrably powerful enough to create legislation when the "invisible hand" of the market doesn't do what they want.
Your comment that "it's not like the government is trying to force hardware manufacturers to do this" seems to ignore this obvious trend. Have you forgotten the V-Chip which the FCC now REQUIRES in all TV's larger than 13"?