Out-of-touch managers often think a carrot and a stick accomplish the same thing. The plan is: "beat them into submission". The result is: "provoke them into action". Happens over and over again in business... and history.
During the American Revolutionary war, the British consistantly believed that the colonies were full of loyalist supporters. When they found far fewer loyalists than they hoped for, they hired indians to fight for them. Suddenly, the large number of people in the middle swung over to support... the rebels. Oops.
So. A well-funded dissident seeking automomy in a far away land assembles an threatening army. The old Republic (an inefficient, but fundamentally peaceful democracy) is manipulated into giving Supreme Authority to a politician with questionable allegiances. In the process, the republic slowly becomes a royal, military dictatorship (or empire).
I hope this reminds someone of the events since 911.
I know, I know, that's different, not the same thing at all, etc, etc. But the similarities are obvious and disturbing.
I know this is just another slick tactic, but... what of they are right? If their code does get "opened", what are the odds that someone will find a really dangerous hole and exploit it?
Think about who uses Windows. Hospitals. Air traffic controllers. Firemen. Power providers. The police. EMTs. The fricking military.
I am NOT saying they should get away with this. Microsoft's lawyers are undoubtedly certified dog boogers. But,... what if they are (accidentally) right?
Your Honor, we at Microsoft believe that if we ever revealed the source code for MS Windows, more children would immediately start taking drugs. Husbands would start to beat their wives. Small animals would become uncontrollable, staining many expensive carpets. Certain food-groups would become more perishable. 2nd law of thermodynamics would be repealled. Finally, a giant hole would open up in space time, causing the end of the universe.
Your honor, it is a matter or national security, no international security, no galactic security, that we be allowed to continue our profitable monopoly.
you do realize that if these sites are deemed illegal, then sites with bomb-making instructions, sites dealing with anything that disses a group, majority or minority could be deemed illegal. It could even end up that some company that didn't like bad press, and had lots of money **cough**Micro$oft**cough** could convince the courts to make slashdot illegal because we are "abusing" the internet to display our distaste in their quality of software, practices and policies. Now would you want that? Would you want the government to start filtering the internet because something is or could be "illegal"?
You make an good argument. You probably argue better than me. But that does not make you right.
The old addage goes: "your right to swing your fist ends at my nose". In short "do no harm". I contend that this site is an implied invasive threat and it does real harm.
This group puts up personal information about the families of these workers, including the schools which their children attend. Do you consider this political expression? Or is it intended to intimidate? And is intimidation (especially to children) harmful? Please be honest.
How would you react if your family was physically threatoned by religious zealots? (To be interesting, let's say they were muslim.) If your co-workers were assalted, even killed? And then your name appeared on the list? Your parent's home? Your children's school? Is this protected speech?
To return to my original point: would their be any debate if this was a list of the members of congress?
This is a work of fiction. The author wanted to create sympathetic characters, so he created a huge faceless enemy.
The story only works when the enemy is faceless. As soon as you put a face on the bad guys, they become human, and less bad. And yes, the good guys become less good.
In morality tales, the world is black and white, drawn with wide lines. As soon as you add color, details, ambiguity, faces to the bad guys, the story falls apart. (This applies to the devils of history as well. Examine a devil closely enough and you find a man.)
I think this discussion is very valuable, in that it might help us to more carefully examine whether or not we live in an empire, complete with an aristocracy, client states, installed local goveners, etc.
and there is considerable dissent among the judges over whether a website can or cannot meet that standard.
If someone put up a similar site for judges, (and their families) then started picking them off one by one in their homes, I think there might be less dissent.
These people are nazis hiding behind the 1st ammendment.
Of course web sites can constitute a true threat. Any way to transmit information can. The internet is a tool. Tools can be abused. This site is way, way over the line.
The same applies in spades to all the cable modem, ADSL, and prepaid dialup plans we see getting post-hoc restrictions placed on them. To me, this looks like the service provider is an incompetent cretin that can't do their sums, work out how much capacity they've *bought*, how much they *need* to service their paying customers, and charge appropriately right off the bat.
This is a new twist, suggesting that pr0n is bad and not deserving of our expensive bandwidth. You paid for it, but you don't deserve to use it.
Imagine the airlines saying: "to make more money, we overbooked your flight, assuming that some of you would not show, but since you all did, we have decided that travel for immoral purposes is now restricted. Will the following people please de-plane at the front exit:...."
"When will they learn that these memos always come back to haunt them..."
They won't, because memos don't always get out. You only hear about the ones that do.
The really incriminating stuff never gets typed up in the first place. Verbal only. (The CIA manual on assassination offers similar advice. Never put anything seriously incriminating in writing. Verbal only.)
Even if something seriously incriminating did make it to writing, it might never see the light of day. (Ask Reagan's archivists.) And if it did see the light of day, it might not be admissable in court. And even if it is admissable, it might be countered with any of 20 tactics, (like a loud "so what").
Good story over at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A56556-20 02Apr15
"The most public allegation of transcript sanitizing was last September, when White House press secretary Ari Fleischer warned that Americans "need to watch what they say." The phrase did not at first appear in the White House transcript."
The whitehouse routinely releases sanitized transscripts of the president's comments. He makes so many mistakes that he reads like a real idiot in print, if taken literally.
Quite a few factual errors, mis-spoken dates, names of foriegn leaders and nations, mistaking "inflation" for "deflation", invented words, etc.
On tape, when speaking (not reading, which he does painfully), he's kind of a boob, a bumbler. In print, it's been cleaned up and what a difference, he is statesman-like, mature, respectable.
At a speech in Bridgeport, Conn., President Bush declared that he wanted each American to volunteer for "4,000 years," a variation of his usual call for "4,000 hours" that produced guffaws in the audience. Later, at a fundraiser, Bush bestowed a new name on Connecticut's lieutenant governor, Jodi Rell. "I appreciate Lieutenant Governor Judi Kell for being here," he said. "Great to see you again, Judi."
Whatever, says Cathleen Hinsch, a spokeswoman for Rell. "You don't correct the president."
But the White House does. Both goofs, and accompanying laughter, were stricken from the record -- deus ex machina -- in the official White House transcripts.
I guess they don't want people to misunderestimate him.
History gets sanitized every day, in many quarters.
Winston Smith, Ministry of Truth, Oceania
Perhaps come up with a one-CD, bootable Linux distro specific for high school. It doesn't have to have 6 word processord and apache and 4 window managers and etc, etc, just a very few workable apps. Bare bones, simple, clean, works on "typical" school hardware.
Sounds like we might see more schools systems (with Mac + Linux and no Windows at all) bragging about the money they saved and the purchases they made with these savings. It would be nice if they could network and share expertise. Might also be nice if Macs and Linix interfaced a little more seamlessly.
=brian
PS: This might be another occasion where Microsoft's aggressive policies work for us and against them. If they really are hard-assed about this "all or nothing" licensing, several schools systems will choose to opt out, especially those that are Mac-heavy.
Wouldn't know about how the private sector is handling these rough times; our agency has never had a RIF. It is at times like this I appreciate being recruited by the fed. Sounds like it is more attractive everyday: employment for life + great benefits + transfer anywhere in country (and some foreign posts) + good wages.
What is the trade-off? Stability often leads to stagnation. Govt work is often extremely high stress. (Always a good turnout for national
"take a gun to work" day.) Paperwork, bureaucracy, red tape, carrerrism, human speed bumps, etc. The frustration levels can be very high, getting little things done is a nightmare; big things are simply impossible. Sure, you get a job for life, but so does Wally, the human water-cooler, who retired at his desk 10 years ago. Perhaps he's your boss. Random drugs tests. Bizarro politics. Absurd regulations. "Snow Crash" paints a pretty close picture. And after a few years of getting your ass handed to you, you learn to keep your head down and just cover your ass. Like Wally. 10 more (irreplacable) years of your life and you too can retire.
Yes, there are definitely very real pluses, but these don't detract from the minuses. They are real too.
Management's first responsibility is... to keep people to manage.
If they hack the salaries of the company's best and brightest, at least some of these people will leave, perhaps many of them, but the dead wood remains. Morale spirals. Product quality declines.
If a company is in such deep schmutz that they must enhance their revenues by scalping their own employees, it is time to leave.
Many people have trouble leaving bad jobs because they have stock options in the company which they very much hope will someday be worth something. Waiting for the next wave before jumping ship. This is a terrible pressure, a monkey trap, a pyramid scheme where the senior management swindle their own employees. This actually gives management an incentive to keep stock prices low, for fear of suddenly hemoraging their best.
All of which does very little to inspire the stock market or potential customers.
I am more impressed with what Steve Jobs did: waved his salary for a year, all of it. That adds up to quite a few employees who didn't take a cut. And sets a good example. He won't be jumping ship.
Is the CIA ethically above faking an "cyber-attack" from a foreign power? It would justify an increase in the CIA's powers, perhaps to institute a national firewall or other measures to further control the Internet. All in the name of national security, of course.
I don't trust the Chinese People's Army at all, but I trust the CIA even less. Which has done more real harm in the world? Pretty close call.
Many people have commented that our ability to make tools and manipulate technology has far ourpaced our ability to make sound judgements.
"We spent so much effort asking how to do the thing that we never asked if we should do it."
I wish classes on ethics were mandatory. Instead, we effectively have classes on blindly following orders.
I learn a lot about our species by going to the zoo and watching the primates. Everything our organizations do, I see there, simplified, in minature: peer pressure, struggle for dominance, envy, aggression and so on. Are we really so far from them, so superior to them?
I would not trust anyone with the power to destroy everything, whether with nuclear weapons or nano tech or anything else. We are still primates.
=brian
China, rant.
on
On Hacktivism
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Re: China...
If I said I could *quadruple* the living standard of the poorest 20% of the globe in less than 3 decades, would you laugh? If I really did it, might you be impressed?
The Chinese govt did just that between 1972 and 2000. Quadrupled the average income of the nation from about $800 to $3,600. Without spilling buckets of blood (see Stalin, Mao South America). http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ ch.html
Yep, their govt is corrupt from stem to stern, a true cleptocracy. But it is undergoing change much more rapidly than gov't in the west, (which are selling their children's health and souls to big corporations).
Can you really claim they the Chinese persecution is worse that the US war on drugs? Or the Israeli's treatment of the Palestinians? Or the US in central America?
Don't fight them, wait, watch, keep perspective. Change is happening.
The Oxblood essay is kind, progressive and well intentioned. But if you want to make a huge change in people's lives, stop playing in the Internet, go where help is needed and pick up a shovel. Or sign a check to feed a starving kid. Or help develop a better strain of rice. Or...
It's easy to be Robbin Hood. High-profile heroics is more fun than the hard work, but doesn't feed more people. Which, oddly enough, is what the chinese govt has been doing with amazing success.
If enough customers get fed up with it, they will jump ship and Telecom, Inc will lose serious market share to someone who sells "all you can eat" bandwidth.
Telecom Inc's board of directors will likely spank the CEO until tiny little bunny tears appear in the corners of his eyes. Then the policy will change, again.
Given time, the free market will likely take care of this.
The Forever War is a great book, won the hugo and nebula that year. I suspect it'll make an awful mini-series. The politics at the heart of the book would prevent it from ever getting much air.
Just as Heinlein's Starship Troopers was written throught the eyes of a WWII veteran, the Forever War is a pretty naked retelling of Haledman's his experiences in Viet Nam. His protaginist becomes increasingly jaded, cynical and disgusted with the government and the military, until he comes to see them as the enemy, not the aliens he is supposed to be fighting.
And at the end of the book, we discover that the military actually started the war (and were not just responding to agression). A story was fabricated, and the war kept the military industrial complex in power and the population under control, while feeding millions of people into an unstoppable meat-grinder. This is not far off from what happened in Viet Nam . (and Germany and Japan and...)
Throw in lots of casual sex, drug use, actual homosexuality, etc, and you have a very unpalitable combination.
Given the current policical climate of panic-induced patriotism, this show seems doomed to failure, unless they turn it into something more like Starship Troopers; glory in death, blood in your hands, flag-waving heroism and xenophobia.
I wish them luck and hope they stay true to the nature and tone of the book.
Slashdot Mirror
Out-of-touch managers often think a carrot and a stick accomplish the same thing. The plan is: "beat them into submission". The result is: "provoke them into action". Happens over and over again in business ... and history.
It's a metaphor.
=brian
During the American Revolutionary war, the British consistantly believed that the colonies were full of loyalist supporters. When they found far fewer loyalists than they hoped for, they hired indians to fight for them. Suddenly, the large number of people in the middle swung over to support ... the rebels. Oops.
=brian
So. A well-funded dissident seeking automomy in a far away land assembles an threatening army. The old Republic (an inefficient, but fundamentally peaceful democracy) is manipulated into giving Supreme Authority to a politician with questionable allegiances. In the process, the republic slowly becomes a royal, military dictatorship (or empire).
I hope this reminds someone of the events since 911.
I know, I know, that's different, not the same thing at all, etc, etc. But the similarities are obvious and disturbing.
=brian
I know this is just another slick tactic, but ... what of they are right? If their code does get "opened", what are the odds that someone will find a really dangerous hole and exploit it?
Think about who uses Windows. Hospitals. Air traffic controllers. Firemen. Power providers. The police. EMTs. The fricking military.
I am NOT saying they should get away with this. Microsoft's lawyers are undoubtedly certified dog boogers. But,... what if they are (accidentally) right?
=brian
Your Honor, we at Microsoft believe that if we ever revealed the source code for MS Windows, more children would immediately start taking drugs. Husbands would start to beat their wives. Small animals would become uncontrollable, staining many expensive carpets. Certain food-groups would become more perishable. 2nd law of thermodynamics would be repealled. Finally, a giant hole would open up in space time, causing the end of the universe.
Your honor, it is a matter or national security, no international security, no galactic security, that we be allowed to continue our profitable monopoly.
Think she'll buy it?
=brian
You make an good argument. You probably argue better than me. But that does not make you right.
The old addage goes: "your right to swing your fist ends at my nose". In short "do no harm". I contend that this site is an implied invasive threat and it does real harm.
This group puts up personal information about the families of these workers, including the schools which their children attend. Do you consider this political expression? Or is it intended to intimidate? And is intimidation (especially to children) harmful? Please be honest.
How would you react if your family was physically threatoned by religious zealots? (To be interesting, let's say they were muslim.) If your co-workers were assalted, even killed? And then your name appeared on the list? Your parent's home? Your children's school? Is this protected speech?
To return to my original point: would their be any debate if this was a list of the members of congress?
=brian
This is a work of fiction. The author wanted to create sympathetic characters, so he created a huge faceless enemy.
The story only works when the enemy is faceless. As soon as you put a face on the bad guys, they become human, and less bad. And yes, the good guys become less good.
In morality tales, the world is black and white, drawn with wide lines. As soon as you add color, details, ambiguity, faces to the bad guys, the story falls apart. (This applies to the devils of history as well. Examine a devil closely enough and you find a man.)
I think this discussion is very valuable, in that it might help us to more carefully examine whether or not we live in an empire, complete with an aristocracy, client states, installed local goveners, etc.
=brian
If someone put up a similar site for judges, (and their families) then started picking them off one by one in their homes, I think there might be less dissent.
These people are nazis hiding behind the 1st ammendment.
Of course web sites can constitute a true threat. Any way to transmit information can. The internet is a tool. Tools can be abused. This site is way, way over the line.
=brian
Neither would asprin or alchohol or sunlight.
We live in a world with silly regulations. They even apply to technology.
=brian
This is a new twist, suggesting that pr0n is bad and not deserving of our expensive bandwidth. You paid for it, but you don't deserve to use it.
Imagine the airlines saying: "to make more money, we overbooked your flight, assuming that some of you would not show, but since you all did, we have decided that travel for immoral purposes is now restricted. Will the following people please de-plane at the front exit: ...."
If this is the case (big "if"), they are awful.
=brian
They won't, because memos don't always get out. You only hear about the ones that do.
The really incriminating stuff never gets typed up in the first place. Verbal only. (The CIA manual on assassination offers similar advice. Never put anything seriously incriminating in writing. Verbal only.)
Even if something seriously incriminating did make it to writing, it might never see the light of day. (Ask Reagan's archivists.) And if it did see the light of day, it might not be admissable in court. And even if it is admissable, it might be countered with any of 20 tactics, (like a loud "so what").
=brian
"The most public allegation of transcript sanitizing was last September, when White House press secretary Ari Fleischer warned that Americans "need to watch what they say." The phrase did not at first appear in the White House transcript."
The whitehouse routinely releases sanitized transscripts of the president's comments. He makes so many mistakes that he reads like a real idiot in print, if taken literally.
Quite a few factual errors, mis-spoken dates, names of foriegn leaders and nations, mistaking "inflation" for "deflation", invented words, etc.
On tape, when speaking (not reading, which he does painfully), he's kind of a boob, a bumbler. In print, it's been cleaned up and what a difference, he is statesman-like, mature, respectable.
At a speech in Bridgeport, Conn., President Bush declared that he wanted each American to volunteer for "4,000 years," a variation of his usual call for "4,000 hours" that produced guffaws in the audience. Later, at a fundraiser, Bush bestowed a new name on Connecticut's lieutenant governor, Jodi Rell. "I appreciate Lieutenant Governor Judi Kell for being here," he said. "Great to see you again, Judi."
Whatever, says Cathleen Hinsch, a spokeswoman for Rell. "You don't correct the president."
But the White House does. Both goofs, and accompanying laughter, were stricken from the record -- deus ex machina -- in the official White House transcripts.
I guess they don't want people to misunderestimate him.
History gets sanitized every day, in many quarters. Winston Smith, Ministry of Truth, Oceania
Perhaps come up with a one-CD, bootable Linux distro specific for high school. It doesn't have to have 6 word processord and apache and 4 window managers and etc, etc, just a very few workable apps. Bare bones, simple, clean, works on "typical" school hardware.
Sounds like we might see more schools systems (with Mac + Linux and no Windows at all) bragging about the money they saved and the purchases they made with these savings. It would be nice if they could network and share expertise. Might also be nice if Macs and Linix interfaced a little more seamlessly.
=brian
PS: This might be another occasion where Microsoft's aggressive policies work for us and against them. If they really are hard-assed about this "all or nothing" licensing, several schools systems will choose to opt out, especially those that are Mac-heavy.
Hippopocrates wrote the oath because the physicians of his time abused their knowledge, became vindictive, capricious and arbitrary.
Say, you don't think a sys-admin would ever do that, do you?
=brian
What is the trade-off? Stability often leads to stagnation. Govt work is often extremely high stress. (Always a good turnout for national "take a gun to work" day.) Paperwork, bureaucracy, red tape, carrerrism, human speed bumps, etc. The frustration levels can be very high, getting little things done is a nightmare; big things are simply impossible. Sure, you get a job for life, but so does Wally, the human water-cooler, who retired at his desk 10 years ago. Perhaps he's your boss. Random drugs tests. Bizarro politics. Absurd regulations. "Snow Crash" paints a pretty close picture. And after a few years of getting your ass handed to you, you learn to keep your head down and just cover your ass. Like Wally. 10 more (irreplacable) years of your life and you too can retire.
Yes, there are definitely very real pluses, but these don't detract from the minuses. They are real too.
=brian
Management's first responsibility is ... to keep people to manage.
If they hack the salaries of the company's best and brightest, at least some of these people will leave, perhaps many of them, but the dead wood remains. Morale spirals. Product quality declines.
If a company is in such deep schmutz that they must enhance their revenues by scalping their own employees, it is time to leave.
Many people have trouble leaving bad jobs because they have stock options in the company which they very much hope will someday be worth something. Waiting for the next wave before jumping ship. This is a terrible pressure, a monkey trap, a pyramid scheme where the senior management swindle their own employees. This actually gives management an incentive to keep stock prices low, for fear of suddenly hemoraging their best.
All of which does very little to inspire the stock market or potential customers.
I am more impressed with what Steve Jobs did: waved his salary for a year, all of it. That adds up to quite a few employees who didn't take a cut. And sets a good example. He won't be jumping ship.
=brian
Is the CIA ethically above faking an "cyber-attack" from a foreign power? It would justify an increase in the CIA's powers, perhaps to institute a national firewall or other measures to further control the Internet. All in the name of national security, of course.
I don't trust the Chinese People's Army at all, but I trust the CIA even less. Which has done more real harm in the world? Pretty close call.
=brian
Interesting reactions to the article.
Many people have commented that our ability to make tools and manipulate technology has far ourpaced our ability to make sound judgements.
"We spent so much effort asking how to do the thing that we never asked if we should do it."
I wish classes on ethics were mandatory. Instead, we effectively have classes on blindly following orders.
I learn a lot about our species by going to the zoo and watching the primates. Everything our organizations do, I see there, simplified, in minature: peer pressure, struggle for dominance, envy, aggression and so on. Are we really so far from them, so superior to them?
I would not trust anyone with the power to destroy everything, whether with nuclear weapons or nano tech or anything else. We are still primates.
=brian
Re: China...
/ ch.html
...
If I said I could *quadruple* the living standard of the poorest 20% of the globe in less than 3 decades, would you laugh? If I really did it, might you be impressed?
The Chinese govt did just that between 1972 and 2000. Quadrupled the average income of the nation from about $800 to $3,600. Without spilling buckets of blood (see Stalin, Mao South America). http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos
Yep, their govt is corrupt from stem to stern, a true cleptocracy. But it is undergoing change much more rapidly than gov't in the west, (which are selling their children's health and souls to big corporations).
Can you really claim they the Chinese persecution is worse that the US war on drugs? Or the Israeli's treatment of the Palestinians? Or the US in central America?
Don't fight them, wait, watch, keep perspective. Change is happening.
The Oxblood essay is kind, progressive and well intentioned. But if you want to make a huge change in people's lives, stop playing in the
Internet, go where help is needed and pick up a shovel. Or sign a check to feed a starving kid. Or help develop a better strain of rice. Or
It's easy to be Robbin Hood. High-profile heroics is more fun than the hard work, but doesn't feed more people. Which, oddly enough, is
what the chinese govt has been doing with amazing success.
rant over,
=brian
So, if I understand this,
It is illegal to spy on someone to get your jollies off.
It is legal to spy on someone to put them in jail.
If some lonely shut-in spies on you, you might get embarassed.
If Big Brother spies on you, it might cost you your job, your children, your home, or your freedom.
Her bill purports to be about preserving basic human dignity, but it misses the world's largest abuser of the right to privacy: the govt itself.
If she really cared about privacy, she would go after Ashcroft's USA Patriot act. Instead she obcesses about the sanctity of the lady's washroom.
Can't we have an IQ test for govt officials?
=brian
If enough customers get fed up with it, they will jump ship and Telecom, Inc will lose serious market share to someone who sells "all you can eat" bandwidth.
Telecom Inc's board of directors will likely spank the CEO until tiny little bunny tears appear in the corners of his eyes. Then the policy will change, again.
Given time, the free market will likely take care of this.
=brian
Wasn't there an old Star Trek about this?
Do some of us have to report to out local disintegration chambers now?
=brian
Thank you sincerely for (finally) a thoughtful, rational, well-expressed perspective. You get +50 points of Real World karma.
=brian
The Forever War is a great book, won the hugo and nebula that year. I suspect it'll make an awful mini-series. The politics at the heart of the book would prevent it from ever getting much air.
...)
Just as Heinlein's Starship Troopers was written throught the eyes of a WWII veteran, the Forever War is a pretty naked retelling of Haledman's his experiences in Viet Nam. His protaginist becomes increasingly jaded, cynical and disgusted with the government and the military, until he comes to see them as the enemy, not the aliens he is supposed to be fighting.
And at the end of the book, we discover that the military actually started the war (and were not just responding to agression). A story was fabricated, and the war kept the military industrial complex in power and the population under control, while feeding millions of people into an unstoppable meat-grinder. This is not far off from what happened in Viet Nam . (and Germany and Japan and
Throw in lots of casual sex, drug use, actual homosexuality, etc, and you have a very unpalitable combination.
Given the current policical climate of panic-induced patriotism, this show seems doomed to failure, unless they turn it into something more
like Starship Troopers; glory in death, blood in your hands, flag-waving heroism and xenophobia.
I wish them luck and hope they stay true to the nature and tone of the book.
=brian
I see. Does the program then track doen its creator and kill him?
"I want more life, fscker." =brian