I have read the many responses that object to content filtering but I fear many forget that:
- you can not know what complete responsibility you have for another human being until you have your own children - pedophiles etc have an addiction and/or psychological problem and they do not reason the same way as a sane person - you can't let the very people who profit from attracting people to sites to self regulate, that is where the government has to step in
Parents are not internet experts. They do not have the skills to implement content filtering. The experts are the internet companies; but they have a vested interest in not filtering. So that leaves government and the content filtering software companies (but parents don't have the skills to select which program to buy - we just have to do our best).
Filtering is an imperfect science. A progressive percentage reduction in accessibility is how you break down the grouping the internet has given to otherwise isolated cases of pedophiles etc. There will be sites blocked which should not. Considering how little of the complete internet is actually viewed by any individual, I can't imagine how you would know the difference - it certainly wasn't there a mere 15 or so years ago. Companies web sites will change how they operate and check their site availability in advance - not unlike registering a business. Businesses have to manage these sorts of hurdles all the time - it is a risk of business and hence the source of return.
It is correct for governments to classify the content of material at the internet companies and ISPs. Magazines are controlled this way - the creator (hence profit maker) and distribution chain (the other profit makers) had to meet Australian standards. The most obvious example is 'sealed section' magazines and their location within newsagencies. The internet companies are not fighting for your freedom; they want to avoid the restriction that was placed on print media.
The other complaint about the Australian system is that the black list is confidential. I feel this is wrong, but thinking about it - how else could it work? Making the list public defeats the purpose. I know people, as I, believe there should be freedoms. But there is certainly material that definitely should not be available to children and, on an internet scale, a huge number of adults.
Probably the biggest problem was that the Governments reacted too slowly and it is painful to fix the problem now. But it was done for TV and print. The fact of the matter is that the amount of unrestricted extreme material has exploded since the internet.
Because language is one of the most powerful tools, spell-check is fallible, and you expand your vocabulary in the process.
Spent my life in cold-hard research and development. Grammar and spelling are used much more than any mathematical formulae (Slashdot spell-check does not catch that one!). The higher the 'level' you go, the more abstract concepts become. Hence, the more the language semantics matter.
Not only that, it is much more professional when you present documents with the correct spelling. You might not care; but the person who notices might be important to your future.
Computers are not open ended. Maybe it seems so to programmers (and programmers are limited by hardware, who are limited by applied physics/chemistry etc etc).
In may ways, paper is just as open ended.
The openness is also distorted by the commercial aspects of the company making the device. They effectively limit the openness by wanting to hit time-to-market dates and limit the complexity of design.
I doubt that the computer skills will be relevant - the technology moves on. No school predicted the requirement computers skills; and they will not predict the next skill needed by preschoolers.
The common skill you need is thinking and initiative.
Think about it. Why do we use * for multiply?
The use of * is a typical programmer's idea - we actually need an x (multiply symbol not letter) - can't use x, oh * is close enough. The missing divide symbol key is another stupidity.
Some people will argue "job-security through obscurity", but if your job depends on other people not understanding what you do, it's bound to end sooner rather than later anyway.
So how do you explain the continued existence of doctors and lawyers?
Otherwise I agree with your post. Just wanted to question that one bit.
I do contract work for a company that does what you need. They are based in Sydney, Australia; but work internationally.
They handle ideas to production, and provide a business structure for R&D development. Tell them Chris Alfred referred you. To contact me use catuff1@gmail.com
Web site:
http://www.capitaltechnic.com/index.htm
Contact:
http://www.capitaltechnic.com/toppage1.htm
I thought so too. Unless you are transcribing prose, handwriting seems to be quicker than typing.
We switched to paper for descriptive fault reports to be filled-out. The throughput was markedly increased. Similar results have now been observed in other departments. Of course this is only useful if you rarely need to analyse the data - if not, use a computer!
I am not exactly sure why. Maybe the navigation (e.g. mouse positioning) is the problem. Maybe the direct connection of the hand to the written word is better when combined with thinking. Maybe it is the ability to 'write in the gaps and margins.' Maybe they spend too much time editing.
Handwriting would certainly be much faster with symbols used for sciences and mathematics.
I can't believe how obsessed the world is with computers - especially schools. They madly add computers everywhere. Schools do not seem to realise that paper and computers satisfy different needs.
Computers are slow to put the information in (typing) but fast to retrieve (searching).
Paper is the opposite: quick to enter (writing) and slow to retrieve (filing).
As you are in an exam you need to enter the information quickly; and the information is only read once (marking). Paper is the better choice.
Your statement is an example why we have Project (and other) Managers. The 'programming project' is only part of the objectives of the business.
As you have a hostile view towards management, it would be correct for the Project Manager (and Software Manager) to isolate you from the upper management so you can work how you like with your view.
There is nothing wrong with your view. A Project Manager would just have a tougher job ensuring everything gets done and getting status from you as you would feel they are interfering and incompetent.
As a Project Manager, you just accommodate the different personalities. The trick is to get everything required out of the team without them knowing I am doing it.
Slashdot Mirror
We did - we send/receive the u-boot serial data via UDP in parallel with the serial port.
This was used to change environment variables on remote systems.
I have read the many responses that object to content filtering but I fear many forget that:
- you can not know what complete responsibility you have for another human being until you have your own children
- pedophiles etc have an addiction and/or psychological problem and they do not reason the same way as a sane person
- you can't let the very people who profit from attracting people to sites to self regulate, that is where the government has to step in
Parents are not internet experts. They do not have the skills to implement content filtering. The experts are the internet companies; but they have a vested interest in not filtering. So that leaves government and the content filtering software companies (but parents don't have the skills to select which program to buy - we just have to do our best).
Filtering is an imperfect science. A progressive percentage reduction in accessibility is how you break down the grouping the internet has given to otherwise isolated cases of pedophiles etc. There will be sites blocked which should not. Considering how little of the complete internet is actually viewed by any individual, I can't imagine how you would know the difference - it certainly wasn't there a mere 15 or so years ago. Companies web sites will change how they operate and check their site availability in advance - not unlike registering a business. Businesses have to manage these sorts of hurdles all the time - it is a risk of business and hence the source of return.
It is correct for governments to classify the content of material at the internet companies and ISPs. Magazines are controlled this way - the creator (hence profit maker) and distribution chain (the other profit makers) had to meet Australian standards. The most obvious example is 'sealed section' magazines and their location within newsagencies. The internet companies are not fighting for your freedom; they want to avoid the restriction that was placed on print media.
The other complaint about the Australian system is that the black list is confidential. I feel this is wrong, but thinking about it - how else could it work? Making the list public defeats the purpose. I know people, as I, believe there should be freedoms. But there is certainly material that definitely should not be available to children and, on an internet scale, a huge number of adults.
Probably the biggest problem was that the Governments reacted too slowly and it is painful to fix the problem now. But it was done for TV and print. The fact of the matter is that the amount of unrestricted extreme material has exploded since the internet.
Unless its death metal
Because language is one of the most powerful tools, spell-check is fallible, and you expand your vocabulary in the process.
Spent my life in cold-hard research and development. Grammar and spelling are used much more than any mathematical formulae (Slashdot spell-check does not catch that one!). The higher the 'level' you go, the more abstract concepts become. Hence, the more the language semantics matter.
Not only that, it is much more professional when you present documents with the correct spelling. You might not care; but the person who notices might be important to your future.
Computers are not open ended. Maybe it seems so to programmers (and programmers are limited by hardware, who are limited by applied physics/chemistry etc etc).
In may ways, paper is just as open ended.
The openness is also distorted by the commercial aspects of the company making the device. They effectively limit the openness by wanting to hit time-to-market dates and limit the complexity of design.
I doubt that the computer skills will be relevant - the technology moves on. No school predicted the requirement computers skills; and they will not predict the next skill needed by preschoolers.
The common skill you need is thinking and initiative.
Do I do this while walking along a white line with one finger on my nose?
All organized religion should be treated with utter contempt.
Hear! Hear! What we need is more disorganised religion.
It isn't religion that is the problem
I disagree. Religions all require you to believe in things that cannot be proven, despite their being unlikely.
What? Like the universe was created from a big bang from out of nowhere?
That is why religion and science still co-exist. We just can't know everything.
I bet Nigerian scam artists must marvel at how the CoS created such a fanciful story. How many clues do people need that CoS is a scam?
.... and leave the USA t-shirt at home. It's easier to just shout 'I'm a tourist.'
Think about it. Why do we use * for multiply? The use of * is a typical programmer's idea - we actually need an x (multiply symbol not letter) - can't use x, oh * is close enough. The missing divide symbol key is another stupidity.
So how do you explain the continued existence of doctors and lawyers? Otherwise I agree with your post. Just wanted to question that one bit.
He is referring to people in the same profession.
Alien wrote TLDR
Walt Disney here, where's my money?
Well, that sort of happened with the pharaohs.
I do contract work for a company that does what you need. They are based in Sydney, Australia; but work internationally. They handle ideas to production, and provide a business structure for R&D development. Tell them Chris Alfred referred you. To contact me use catuff1@gmail.com Web site: http://www.capitaltechnic.com/index.htm Contact: http://www.capitaltechnic.com/toppage1.htm
That would be great! How do we make all of them text instead of talk?
Not typos, just those bloody bit errors on your acoustically coupled 300 baud modem
Hey Linux users, there is no such thing as slash and backslash, there is only virgule and reverse virgule.
Can't wait for the APL support. Reorganising my keyboard keys in anticipation.
Dear Google, people go to Athens to see the Parthenon which is on top of the Acropolis, has no roads to it, and not visible from street level.
If you can't go on holiday. There are many books and sites that are much better.
Three greedy parties fighting to pay lawyers.
We switched to paper for descriptive fault reports to be filled-out. The throughput was markedly increased. Similar results have now been observed in other departments. Of course this is only useful if you rarely need to analyse the data - if not, use a computer!
I am not exactly sure why. Maybe the navigation (e.g. mouse positioning) is the problem. Maybe the direct connection of the hand to the written word is better when combined with thinking. Maybe it is the ability to 'write in the gaps and margins.' Maybe they spend too much time editing.
Handwriting would certainly be much faster with symbols used for sciences and mathematics.
I can't believe how obsessed the world is with computers - especially schools. They madly add computers everywhere. Schools do not seem to realise that paper and computers satisfy different needs.
Computers are slow to put the information in (typing) but fast to retrieve (searching). Paper is the opposite: quick to enter (writing) and slow to retrieve (filing).
As you are in an exam you need to enter the information quickly; and the information is only read once (marking). Paper is the better choice.
Your statement is an example why we have Project (and other) Managers. The 'programming project' is only part of the objectives of the business. As you have a hostile view towards management, it would be correct for the Project Manager (and Software Manager) to isolate you from the upper management so you can work how you like with your view. There is nothing wrong with your view. A Project Manager would just have a tougher job ensuring everything gets done and getting status from you as you would feel they are interfering and incompetent. As a Project Manager, you just accommodate the different personalities. The trick is to get everything required out of the team without them knowing I am doing it.