Overall where I find this summary and blog post irritating is that the study presented very little evidence that e-readers were sub-standard to printed books (the fonts are intentionally quite similar), except an anecdote from a 'Neuroscience blogger'. As noted higher in the thread, the e-reader theoretical ability to support a harder-to-read font (my kindle only accepts three very clear standard fonts currently, but that's software) should, in the long run, make them better.
How do you figure? I admit, before a friend told me I was wrong, I also thought this. But unless the only definition of RPG is back to the old wizardry and might & magic games (man do I miss those!)... fundamentally speaking, ME pretty much works just like Dragon Age, from a mechanics perspective, except in space with guns. ME2 takes away the 'equipment' aspect of an RPG, for the most part, which is kinda wierd, but for the most part its very similar.
Thanks for that pointer.
One of the reviews was interesting:
'This is hardly a new phenomenon. Karl Popper devoted one volume of the "Open Society and its Enemies" to Plato, whose vision of an ideal society was one ruled by disinterested philosopher kings.'
That statement accurately describes the absentee-god that many people whine about; "If there was a god, why..."
although I'm not sure how disinterested Popper meant.
I can't speak for Popper, but as for Plato . . . he didn't mean so much 'disinterested' as 'unambitious'. Plato basically coined the concept that anybody who actually WANTS to rule, probably shouldn't be allowed to do so. For Plato the ideal philosopher-king is not unwilling, but takes on rulership out of a sense of duty, not a desire for the power rule brings him.
So we have organization that promotes having its supporters brandish weapons at its rallies, has its most prominatent supporters openly talk about advocate armed rebellion, and armed secession, and other defunct 19th century extremist ideas, demonizing a duly elected political opponent, and now we have her shot, and 9 others killed.
Actually, those are 18th century extremist ideas. That fucker Jefferson was just egging them on with that stuff about the right of the people to "alter or abolish" their government.
I just want to say, that as one of Rep. Gifford's constituents, I am personally offended that someone would dare try to overturn my district's vote with a gun. Actually, I'm pretty surprised at just how mortally offensive I truly find this. I've read about assassinations being offensive, and I've always been a little offended that people would try to assassinate an elected official. But I must confess that until someone tried to assassinate one of MY elected officials, I never realized just how much of a slap it really is. (I admit, I might be less offended if I wasn't someone who voted for her, but its pretty offensive to people in my district no matter how you look at it.)
Arizona is a state known for letting people concealed carry, and I don't think this will or should change that. That said, I feel fairly confident that most of my neighbors would be pretty offended if you suggested that their guns were for shooting people duly elected, in a contested race, by a majority of the voters of the district. Political debate can get harsh in Arizona, but I don't know anyone who feels it should go that far.
P.S. My thoughts and prayers go out to Rep. Giffords in hope of her recovery, and to her family and to the family of the staffers and the judge who got killed. The point of living in a democracy is so that you don't HAVE to die for your political beliefs, but anyone who does deserves respect.
and one more thing, its unconstitutional for the executive branch to order the military to go into a civilian USA city; the exception is bases, but that's federal property.
Note: Posse Comitatus applies only until the president determines that there is a state of insurrection occurring in that location. Refusal to obey the federal government is the definition of an insurrection;) And you have to admit, turning out the army against wall street is unlikely to be a politically unpopular move;)
So remind me again what we think of people who exploit bugs in WoW, or evercrack? Hell back in the MUD days about the only rule you could count on to be enforced in nearly any MUD you went to is "Please report any bugs you find, exploiting a bug will get you banned." or something similar. He paid to play a game not to "interact with the machine" and then cheated at it.
Don't get me wrong, the slot machine makers need to do better, but that doesn't change the fact that he was cheating and knew it.
The reason the US is so wishy-washy on this compared to european countries is the population density and public transit issues. When I lived in columbus ohio (Inside the beltway, but not in a city inside the beltway, not the city proper) THERE WERE NO SIDEWALKS ON MANY MAJOR STREETS. But, honestly, living inside the beltway, I mostly managed without using my car for a year[car was expensive to fix, and I decided to try a green lifestyle for a while] (the grocery store happened to be next door, which helped a lot) Where I live now its much, much harder.
Basically, the problem is that if you prevent someone from driving, in many places in the country its essentially impossible for them to either work or buy food. Which is why most adults without a license probably break the law regularly. For that matter, it would also greatly help if there were more places in this country where you could walk to the bar, like there are in most of the the countries with stricter enforcement -- that's why the 'socially acceptable' thing is kinda wishy-washy here.
Finally, in most states, driving under the influence of medication can get you zapped too, its just harder to detect.
and a decent yard between us and noisy neighbors who don't share my sleep cycle. Much better to sit in traffic a bit than to live in some city center.
I feel obliged to note here:
while most apartments are cheap as hell and you don't notice this, it is perfectly possible to design apartment buildings so the noise factor (from neighbors) is not an issue. While I've lived in a lot of worse places since, when I lived in Boston, one of my neighbors was a professional violin player, who practiced a great deal, but his playing could only be heard in the hall, not from neighboring units. It was actually almost a problem.... the noise insulation was so good, that the FIRE ALARM went off in the hall, and I could barely hear it in my bedroom.
Sadly, the noise insulation from the outside was not as good, but that was because it didn't have modern windows (which is an easy thing to do in a modern building)
Don't get me wrong, I mostly agree with you. But I felt obliged to note that it IS possible to make an apartment building which gives its tenants privacy, even if only so that people would know to look for one if they're stuck in the city.
Okay.... ummmm. I feel obliged to point out that the slave trade was actually a force AGAINST industrialization. And every worker in the lowell factories was free-born. (by that time, MA was a free state) while I'm sure some existed, I'm not actually aware of a single "company" that utilized slave labor. And, honestly, I doubt there were very many. Industrialization effectively ended the slave trade, because slaves are not economically feasible as industrial workers.
The southeast (that is the places where former slave owners live) has been one of the worst off areas of the country until this generation, and its because they were DECADES late starting a modern economy BECAUSE of the slave trade.
Final note: Props go to the UK here. The economics of slavery would not have been nearly so bad if the UK hadn't cut off the supply of new slaves from africa as quickly as they did.
So here's the problem with this: (From personal experience)
Someone steals my checkbook without my knowledge (we won't get into how). They write several thousand in checks to themselves. I find out next time I look at my statement. Those checks have cleared to another bank. Should my bank not be allowed, when I come in and report check fraud, to attempt to collect that money back? Otherwise the fraud perpetrator gets to keep the money? (actually he cashed them, so he got to keep the money anyhow, but you get my point.) Now you can make an argument that the bank should eat this, given that the signatures weren't even remotely close, but why should the perpetrator get to keep the money?
I have no idea why they agreed to host the servers in the first place (maybe they didn't think it would affect their end as much as it did?) but I completely understand why they decided to stop hosting them.
My understanding was that they didn't "Agree to host the servers" as a concious act. Wikileaks just set up an account and provisioned them automatically...
I agree with you, FWIW. While I have issues with the payment services cutting off donations, I have trouble objecting to what amazon did.
Its a huge difference. Its the same reason that we give higher scores to people who post with their accounts than an AC.
Speak for yourself, I don't value any post more because it was posted with e-ego attached. There's a lot of spam posted as AC for sure, but rating posts based on the name field is bad moderating.
Was referring to the base +1 granted for posting from your account, not my moderation habits. I moderate strictly based on content.
So the only difference is identity being revealed? Doesn't sound all too much different to me.
Its a huge difference. Its the same reason that we give higher scores to people who post with their accounts than an AC. A protest is standing forth and proclaiming "_I_ believe this is wrong (and so do these others with me)". Civil disobedience is going further and saying "I not only believe this is wrong, but I believe it enough to go to jail for my belief (though admittedly, for it to be standard civil disobedience, in the west you will probably just be in the overnight lockup.)
Honestly, if the people using LOIC knew that they could be tracked (which I kinda doubt, in the majority, or rather, some of them might think so if they were asked, but I doubt it occurred to them that anyone might want to) then I'd have more respect for them. That might actually turn it into a real civil disobedience protest, actually. I absolutely agree that being "on the internet" doesn't make it any less real, but if you do it anonymously, it absolutely does. Anonymous civil disobedience is just a pathetic form of terrorism.
I believe that someone who is the victim of abuses, governmental or otherwise, has the absolute right to justice. And frankly:
The US government has no business preventing the fair investigation and trial of people, Americans, government workers, or otherwise, accused of serious crimes
The US government has no business ordering its officers to commit crimes, in the US or abroad
No government official has any business committing serious crimes in any country, regardless of whether that official is "just following orders"
And if the US government is partially to blame for the crimes committed, there is absolutely no excuse for it trying to cover up the crime and deny the victims justice! If it believes its employees were "just following US government policy", then it might have a duty to compensate the officers involved to a certain degree, but following orders is not a get-out-of-Jail-free card, especially when it comes to kidnapping, torture, and unlawful killing.
I should perhaps have added, but didn't: While I have no objections to the US government behavior in this situation, that's not to say that the foreign governments in question should have caved. I could be wrong about the material, but I believe this is merely adding to the incidents we already knew about, that the US government asked foreign governments not to prosecute. As cover-ups went, this really wasn't a very successful one, certainly. If it was an illegal order, the agents in question should be tried in the US and punished accordingly. If the governments in question felt that that was not in the interests of justice, then they should have done something about it, but certainly the US government has an obligation to request that they handle matters internally. Honestly, I tend to think that foreign government often come off worse than the US government does from what I've heard.
The US government interfering in the justice system of TWO foreign powers in an attempt to COVER UP kidnapping, torture, and unlawful death is a MAJOR wrong
This honestly confuses me. I mean, I understand why the kidnapping etc. is wrong. But I have to say that I certainly expect, no DEMAND, that my country do its damnedest to protect its citizens. I most especially expect them to do so when those citizens are acting on policy, whether the policy was a good one or a bad one. I am not aware of (and highly doubt there exists) any diplomatic treaty or convention which says that we shouldn't do this. Again, I'm not justifying the act, merely the attempt to protect those committing it, provided they were acting on orders/policy. If they only THOUGHT they were, they should be tried in the US where the context of those orders is better understood.
Of course if it was songs, books or movies there'd be a massive outcry that Oracle didn't actually lose anything as they still have all the same cars, I mean software, as they did before.
I thought the hive mind's view was that information wanted to be free...
That's information created by ARTISTS, this was information created by ENGINEERS.
Actually, I think more to the point is that it wasn't like SAP was taking this material and posting it in free torrents. They were selling it.
Its been a long time since I studied the output of MS basic research labs, but I remember 12 years ago being given a summary and being quite impressed. Not all of their basic research is in the computer industry per se. They had some great solid state physics modeling going on. As to actual innovations, the one I remember best is the note that Clippy, when he was first put out, was the most advanced AI-like program commercially available, and was a direct result of their basic research into AI and natural language processing. Other than that I wasn't paying attention to boring shit about the computer industry, but the interesting physics stuff they were sponsoring.
Why is this modded troll? Its a little offtopic, but not much. Maybe you never work in an environment where you become overstressed and overtired, and mistake-prone.... If so please let me know, because I'd like to apply to work there. Soldiers live in that environment, when on the battlefield. Good software is often about making sure that, for people in that environment, their software is a useful tool, not another thing to make mistakes with. And oddly enough, if your software was last seen before going out the door by someone over-stressed and over-tired with no process to fall back on to remind him why cutting that particular corner of testing is never a good idea....
My company is in the process of converting from a maintenance-only shop to doing some original development. First off: All that process stuff people denigrate? I can't tell you how difficult it is to do maintenance on millions of lines of code written by other vendors without knowing the initial requirements, the overall design, and so forth.
Second, we've been feeling away through new processes for developing software the first time as opposed to just fixing other people's broken crap. Part of our guiding theories "what would we want to have seen when this software transitioned to maintenance?". Yes, there is a push for CMMI 3 compliance going on, but frankly that has nothing to do with why my team implemented it. Partially, of course, the customer wants to see some of these things. Mostly, we want to have them to discuss with the customer. Requirements are a lot about customer says x, you go back and say "did you mean y" etc. and documenting that is critical. And then design is working with developers and saying "the requirement reads y, does this design which does z do what you meant?" and so forth. Process should just be documenting that so everyone actually KNOWS the answers to these questions, as opposed to trying to remember what someone said in a meeting three months ago... You could call it CYA. Definitely part of this is so that the programmer doesn't get blamed for mistakes up the chain. But mostly? This is so, you know, when you deliver the software, people are actually HAPPY with it. Because the thing _I_ hated most as a programmer, was writing code nobody wanted to use -- not because my code didn't work, but because it solved the wrong problem. And curiously, we've found that those are pretty much the EXACT SAME documents we always wished our software had when we got it for maintenance...
So, I live in AZ, and as far as I know Amazon doesn't have an 'outpost' here. But they certainly collect taxes on every purchase I make for my Kindle....
A quick google of results cites This NCES study on SAT scores of education majors and education majors are pretty low. Another blog site cites another study on GRE scores with similarly dismal results, but I couldn't find the original source for that quickly.
Don't get me wrong, I absolutely agree that teachers are underpaid for their education level (which might also explain why the higher testing students tend to go into other majors, I might add.) My brother is an elementary special ed teacher, and you're right, he works insane hours, is paid today, with 6 years more experience in his field than I have now, and a masters degree, as much as I was paid while I was still working my way through the low end of the engineering pay scale, AND he has to pay for shit out of his pocket. And all that is wrong. (And, again, a reason why people who score higher often do not choose to go into teaching, thus reducing overall scores)
But it doesn't change the fact that that's the demographic we have teaching. There are exceptions, but on average, teachers are not our best and brightest by any means.
(Caveat here: The statistics I've looked at don't necessarily separate elementary from secondary education. And honestly, I'm not convinced that there's any reason you NEED to have an equivalent education and intelligence to an engineer to teach first grade. Another site from a specific university suggests that secondary education majors are, in fact, in the upper half of GRE scores, but primary are near the bottom, which may be how it should be)
It does hurt someone. It hurts the creators, who would otherwise get some of the money.
"Potential profit," then? For one thing, in order for it to explicitly hurt them, something that they previously owned must be taken from them.
Suppose someone decides not to buy a product from a store. Would the store have had more money if they did? Yes. Using the logic of those who utilize the potential profit argument, this would mean that they have 'stolen' potential profit from the store, and have therefore 'harmed' a legitimate business.
Suppose that someone tells all of their friends who were originally going to buy a product not to buy it. They ultimately decide not to buy it. Would the store have had more money if the person hadn't told their friends not to buy the product (or if the friends had given them their money anyway)? Yes. Using the same logic above, it can be concluded, then, that the business was 'hurt'.
It should be noted here, that while I am free to tell my friends not to buy a product, if I lie about the product while doing so, and they choose not to buy it, I can be sued for damaging the business (slander/defamation). So yes, under the law, and indeed laws that have been in our culture for longer than our country has existed, the business was indeed 'hurt'.
Likewise if , through negligence, make it impossible for a business to open their doors for a day, I may be liable for lost profits. For that matter, if I injure someone and make them unable to execute their livelihood, I may be liable for lost earning potential -- a concept which is enshrined in common law for many centuries.
So the point is that the idea that preventing someone from making money due to direct actions on your part may, under some circumstances, be direct harm to that person, is hardly a novel legal concept, and you shouldn't treat it as one.
Actually I think it was the form factors. I had a lenovo tablet 4 years ago, and one of the realizations was that it was just a bit too heavy, a bit too hot, to really want to be carrying it around in tablet form. I haven't used the iPad enough to know how it does with heat, but it has finally reach a form factor that's about the same as the paper tablet I carry about so, while I certainly don't use one myself, I can easily imagine how people love it.
I was thinking of substantial as being in the $20/wk range. That would be plenty to drive a multi-billion dollar porn industry.
A teen today making $20/wk. is likely to try to spend most of spending time with real people, and lame attempts at getting real sex, over porn, I think. That's basically one date a week..... (and only for a very teenager definition of date, I should add)
Slashdot Mirror
BBC article on the pre-published article
Overall where I find this summary and blog post irritating is that the study presented very little evidence that e-readers were sub-standard to printed books (the fonts are intentionally quite similar), except an anecdote from a 'Neuroscience blogger'. As noted higher in the thread, the e-reader theoretical ability to support a harder-to-read font (my kindle only accepts three very clear standard fonts currently, but that's software) should, in the long run, make them better.
How do you figure? I admit, before a friend told me I was wrong, I also thought this. But unless the only definition of RPG is back to the old wizardry and might & magic games (man do I miss those!)... fundamentally speaking, ME pretty much works just like Dragon Age, from a mechanics perspective, except in space with guns. ME2 takes away the 'equipment' aspect of an RPG, for the most part, which is kinda wierd, but for the most part its very similar.
Thanks for that pointer. One of the reviews was interesting:
'This is hardly a new phenomenon. Karl Popper devoted one volume of the "Open Society and its Enemies" to Plato, whose vision of an ideal society was one ruled by disinterested philosopher kings.'
That statement accurately describes the absentee-god that many people whine about; "If there was a god, why..."
although I'm not sure how disinterested Popper meant.
I can't speak for Popper, but as for Plato . . . he didn't mean so much 'disinterested' as 'unambitious'. Plato basically coined the concept that anybody who actually WANTS to rule, probably shouldn't be allowed to do so. For Plato the ideal philosopher-king is not unwilling, but takes on rulership out of a sense of duty, not a desire for the power rule brings him.
Actually, those are 18th century extremist ideas. That fucker Jefferson was just egging them on with that stuff about the right of the people to "alter or abolish" their government.
I just want to say, that as one of Rep. Gifford's constituents, I am personally offended that someone would dare try to overturn my district's vote with a gun. Actually, I'm pretty surprised at just how mortally offensive I truly find this. I've read about assassinations being offensive, and I've always been a little offended that people would try to assassinate an elected official. But I must confess that until someone tried to assassinate one of MY elected officials, I never realized just how much of a slap it really is. (I admit, I might be less offended if I wasn't someone who voted for her, but its pretty offensive to people in my district no matter how you look at it.)
Arizona is a state known for letting people concealed carry, and I don't think this will or should change that. That said, I feel fairly confident that most of my neighbors would be pretty offended if you suggested that their guns were for shooting people duly elected, in a contested race, by a majority of the voters of the district. Political debate can get harsh in Arizona, but I don't know anyone who feels it should go that far.
P.S. My thoughts and prayers go out to Rep. Giffords in hope of her recovery, and to her family and to the family of the staffers and the judge who got killed. The point of living in a democracy is so that you don't HAVE to die for your political beliefs, but anyone who does deserves respect.
Otherwise, we'll have community organizers signing up dolphins to vote in elections and lobbying for tax dollars to fund flipper-accessible housing.
They'll be pissed once the government starts demanding they fill out tax returns and pay income tax.
'Are you sure you only caught 3,765 fish in 2020, Mr Flipper?'
Hell. If they can come up with a way to pay taxes, I'd be perfectly happy to let them vote.
and one more thing, its unconstitutional for the executive branch to order the military to go into a civilian USA city; the exception is bases, but that's federal property.
Note: Posse Comitatus applies only until the president determines that there is a state of insurrection occurring in that location. Refusal to obey the federal government is the definition of an insurrection ;) And you have to admit, turning out the army against wall street is unlikely to be a politically unpopular move ;)
Don't get me wrong, the slot machine makers need to do better, but that doesn't change the fact that he was cheating and knew it.
Basically, the problem is that if you prevent someone from driving, in many places in the country its essentially impossible for them to either work or buy food. Which is why most adults without a license probably break the law regularly. For that matter, it would also greatly help if there were more places in this country where you could walk to the bar, like there are in most of the the countries with stricter enforcement -- that's why the 'socially acceptable' thing is kinda wishy-washy here.
Finally, in most states, driving under the influence of medication can get you zapped too, its just harder to detect.
and a decent yard between us and noisy neighbors who don't share my sleep cycle. Much better to sit in traffic a bit than to live in some city center.
I feel obliged to note here:
while most apartments are cheap as hell and you don't notice this, it is perfectly possible to design apartment buildings so the noise factor (from neighbors) is not an issue. While I've lived in a lot of worse places since, when I lived in Boston, one of my neighbors was a professional violin player, who practiced a great deal, but his playing could only be heard in the hall, not from neighboring units. It was actually almost a problem.... the noise insulation was so good, that the FIRE ALARM went off in the hall, and I could barely hear it in my bedroom.
Sadly, the noise insulation from the outside was not as good, but that was because it didn't have modern windows (which is an easy thing to do in a modern building)
Don't get me wrong, I mostly agree with you. But I felt obliged to note that it IS possible to make an apartment building which gives its tenants privacy, even if only so that people would know to look for one if they're stuck in the city.
The southeast (that is the places where former slave owners live) has been one of the worst off areas of the country until this generation, and its because they were DECADES late starting a modern economy BECAUSE of the slave trade.
Final note: Props go to the UK here. The economics of slavery would not have been nearly so bad if the UK hadn't cut off the supply of new slaves from africa as quickly as they did.
Someone steals my checkbook without my knowledge (we won't get into how). They write several thousand in checks to themselves. I find out next time I look at my statement. Those checks have cleared to another bank. Should my bank not be allowed, when I come in and report check fraud, to attempt to collect that money back? Otherwise the fraud perpetrator gets to keep the money? (actually he cashed them, so he got to keep the money anyhow, but you get my point.) Now you can make an argument that the bank should eat this, given that the signatures weren't even remotely close, but why should the perpetrator get to keep the money?
I have no idea why they agreed to host the servers in the first place (maybe they didn't think it would affect their end as much as it did?) but I completely understand why they decided to stop hosting them.
My understanding was that they didn't "Agree to host the servers" as a concious act. Wikileaks just set up an account and provisioned them automatically...
I agree with you, FWIW. While I have issues with the payment services cutting off donations, I have trouble objecting to what amazon did.
Its a huge difference. Its the same reason that we give higher scores to people who post with their accounts than an AC.
Speak for yourself, I don't value any post more because it was posted with e-ego attached. There's a lot of spam posted as AC for sure, but rating posts based on the name field is bad moderating.
Was referring to the base +1 granted for posting from your account, not my moderation habits. I moderate strictly based on content.
So the only difference is identity being revealed? Doesn't sound all too much different to me.
Its a huge difference. Its the same reason that we give higher scores to people who post with their accounts than an AC. A protest is standing forth and proclaiming "_I_ believe this is wrong (and so do these others with me)". Civil disobedience is going further and saying "I not only believe this is wrong, but I believe it enough to go to jail for my belief (though admittedly, for it to be standard civil disobedience, in the west you will probably just be in the overnight lockup.)
Honestly, if the people using LOIC knew that they could be tracked (which I kinda doubt, in the majority, or rather, some of them might think so if they were asked, but I doubt it occurred to them that anyone might want to) then I'd have more respect for them. That might actually turn it into a real civil disobedience protest, actually. I absolutely agree that being "on the internet" doesn't make it any less real, but if you do it anonymously, it absolutely does. Anonymous civil disobedience is just a pathetic form of terrorism.
Almost as if one were to decide to quit one's job and dedicate the majority of your time to the charitable works of a major foundation??
Then you and I have very different moral codes.
I believe that someone who is the victim of abuses, governmental or otherwise, has the absolute right to justice. And frankly:
And if the US government is partially to blame for the crimes committed, there is absolutely no excuse for it trying to cover up the crime and deny the victims justice! If it believes its employees were "just following US government policy", then it might have a duty to compensate the officers involved to a certain degree, but following orders is not a get-out-of-Jail-free card, especially when it comes to kidnapping, torture, and unlawful killing.
I should perhaps have added, but didn't: While I have no objections to the US government behavior in this situation, that's not to say that the foreign governments in question should have caved. I could be wrong about the material, but I believe this is merely adding to the incidents we already knew about, that the US government asked foreign governments not to prosecute. As cover-ups went, this really wasn't a very successful one, certainly. If it was an illegal order, the agents in question should be tried in the US and punished accordingly. If the governments in question felt that that was not in the interests of justice, then they should have done something about it, but certainly the US government has an obligation to request that they handle matters internally. Honestly, I tend to think that foreign government often come off worse than the US government does from what I've heard.
The US government interfering in the justice system of TWO foreign powers in an attempt to COVER UP kidnapping, torture, and unlawful death is a MAJOR wrong
This honestly confuses me. I mean, I understand why the kidnapping etc. is wrong. But I have to say that I certainly expect, no DEMAND, that my country do its damnedest to protect its citizens. I most especially expect them to do so when those citizens are acting on policy, whether the policy was a good one or a bad one. I am not aware of (and highly doubt there exists) any diplomatic treaty or convention which says that we shouldn't do this. Again, I'm not justifying the act, merely the attempt to protect those committing it, provided they were acting on orders/policy. If they only THOUGHT they were, they should be tried in the US where the context of those orders is better understood.
Of course if it was songs, books or movies there'd be a massive outcry that Oracle didn't actually lose anything as they still have all the same cars, I mean software, as they did before.
I thought the hive mind's view was that information wanted to be free...
That's information created by ARTISTS, this was information created by ENGINEERS.
Actually, I think more to the point is that it wasn't like SAP was taking this material and posting it in free torrents. They were selling it.
Its been a long time since I studied the output of MS basic research labs, but I remember 12 years ago being given a summary and being quite impressed. Not all of their basic research is in the computer industry per se. They had some great solid state physics modeling going on. As to actual innovations, the one I remember best is the note that Clippy, when he was first put out, was the most advanced AI-like program commercially available, and was a direct result of their basic research into AI and natural language processing. Other than that I wasn't paying attention to boring shit about the computer industry, but the interesting physics stuff they were sponsoring.
My company is in the process of converting from a maintenance-only shop to doing some original development. First off: All that process stuff people denigrate? I can't tell you how difficult it is to do maintenance on millions of lines of code written by other vendors without knowing the initial requirements, the overall design, and so forth.
Second, we've been feeling away through new processes for developing software the first time as opposed to just fixing other people's broken crap. Part of our guiding theories "what would we want to have seen when this software transitioned to maintenance?". Yes, there is a push for CMMI 3 compliance going on, but frankly that has nothing to do with why my team implemented it. Partially, of course, the customer wants to see some of these things. Mostly, we want to have them to discuss with the customer. Requirements are a lot about customer says x, you go back and say "did you mean y" etc. and documenting that is critical. And then design is working with developers and saying "the requirement reads y, does this design which does z do what you meant?" and so forth. Process should just be documenting that so everyone actually KNOWS the answers to these questions, as opposed to trying to remember what someone said in a meeting three months ago... You could call it CYA. Definitely part of this is so that the programmer doesn't get blamed for mistakes up the chain. But mostly? This is so, you know, when you deliver the software, people are actually HAPPY with it. Because the thing _I_ hated most as a programmer, was writing code nobody wanted to use -- not because my code didn't work, but because it solved the wrong problem. And curiously, we've found that those are pretty much the EXACT SAME documents we always wished our software had when we got it for maintenance...
So, I live in AZ, and as far as I know Amazon doesn't have an 'outpost' here. But they certainly collect taxes on every purchase I make for my Kindle....
Don't get me wrong, I absolutely agree that teachers are underpaid for their education level (which might also explain why the higher testing students tend to go into other majors, I might add.) My brother is an elementary special ed teacher, and you're right, he works insane hours, is paid today, with 6 years more experience in his field than I have now, and a masters degree, as much as I was paid while I was still working my way through the low end of the engineering pay scale, AND he has to pay for shit out of his pocket. And all that is wrong. (And, again, a reason why people who score higher often do not choose to go into teaching, thus reducing overall scores)
But it doesn't change the fact that that's the demographic we have teaching. There are exceptions, but on average, teachers are not our best and brightest by any means.
(Caveat here: The statistics I've looked at don't necessarily separate elementary from secondary education. And honestly, I'm not convinced that there's any reason you NEED to have an equivalent education and intelligence to an engineer to teach first grade. Another site from a specific university suggests that secondary education majors are, in fact, in the upper half of GRE scores, but primary are near the bottom, which may be how it should be)
It does hurt someone. It hurts the creators, who would otherwise get some of the money.
"Potential profit," then? For one thing, in order for it to explicitly hurt them, something that they previously owned must be taken from them.
Suppose someone decides not to buy a product from a store. Would the store have had more money if they did? Yes. Using the logic of those who utilize the potential profit argument, this would mean that they have 'stolen' potential profit from the store, and have therefore 'harmed' a legitimate business.
Suppose that someone tells all of their friends who were originally going to buy a product not to buy it. They ultimately decide not to buy it. Would the store have had more money if the person hadn't told their friends not to buy the product (or if the friends had given them their money anyway)? Yes. Using the same logic above, it can be concluded, then, that the business was 'hurt'.
It should be noted here, that while I am free to tell my friends not to buy a product, if I lie about the product while doing so, and they choose not to buy it, I can be sued for damaging the business (slander/defamation). So yes, under the law, and indeed laws that have been in our culture for longer than our country has existed, the business was indeed 'hurt'.
Likewise if , through negligence, make it impossible for a business to open their doors for a day, I may be liable for lost profits. For that matter, if I injure someone and make them unable to execute their livelihood, I may be liable for lost earning potential -- a concept which is enshrined in common law for many centuries.
So the point is that the idea that preventing someone from making money due to direct actions on your part may, under some circumstances, be direct harm to that person, is hardly a novel legal concept, and you shouldn't treat it as one.
Actually I think it was the form factors. I had a lenovo tablet 4 years ago, and one of the realizations was that it was just a bit too heavy, a bit too hot, to really want to be carrying it around in tablet form. I haven't used the iPad enough to know how it does with heat, but it has finally reach a form factor that's about the same as the paper tablet I carry about so, while I certainly don't use one myself, I can easily imagine how people love it.
I was thinking of substantial as being in the $20/wk range. That would be plenty to drive a multi-billion dollar porn industry.
A teen today making $20/wk. is likely to try to spend most of spending time with real people, and lame attempts at getting real sex, over porn, I think. That's basically one date a week..... (and only for a very teenager definition of date, I should add)