1. There was more than a hidden url, the post blatantly said that a person could find out, before they were supposed to, the admission decision, and revealed a back door. It wasn't as though he encouraged others to do so in an attempt to make others do the same thing for some dumb reason. It was the posting of a hack.
2. Robbing a bank might be clearly against the law, but who says law has to do with morality? Hiding behind the word of a law is a failing of a week moral character that allows others ideals determine what one does. Rules or not, some things are not blatantly benign. Breaking the standard protocol in a field that is already rife with corruption might be a standard thing to do, and there might be no laws specifically written against it, but the lack of an obvious punishment doesn't make it right to do something.
I really wouldn't be surprised if the perpetrators sued, as the (mispelled) parent topic suggests, because it would show the same general lack of self-responsibility that is evident in many facets of exploitative business models today, and also a concern with the letter of the law defining what one can get away with without punishment. And if punishment is the only motivator for someone behaving, what's to stop a person who arrives in a position of economic power (as undoubtedly most of the grads of HBS will) from manipulating a system (lobbying might be expensive, but is less expensive than bankruptcy) for their own and their companies benefit--at the detriment of many others--just because they know that in the end their power will allow them to dodge the bullet? Harvard did right by blacklisting these people. And if someone didn't know it might be wrong? These applicants have been applying for stuff all their lives. If they weren't familiar with adhering to admission deadlines, then they got as much as they deserve anyways.
Summers never said anything that was his own opinion. He didn't really make that available. His speech was based around the research that was given to him at the conference. A better account of story reads that he suggested these things as possible causes. Furthermore, he said these things at a women in science conference. Which was attended largely by women. He wouldn't be dumb enough to say those things without an ulterior motive. One can't really take what he said at face value. Also, probably what he wanted people to realize, it's stupid to focus on what he said, rather than on trying to change it.
"Remmember Hitler & germany in 1937-1940 ? they had plenty of Strength."
If you are referring to relative strength, you missed something in your History courses. Hitler and Germany were not strong until well after they subjugated half of Europe. At any point in time a major power back then could have intervened and crushed his forces. But do to the lessons we mislearned from WWI, the world thought it would be best to let the situation work its own way out. Thus appeasement came about. Eventually people came to realize that Hitler's promises that he'd be done with his expansion after 'just this one last country' were hollow. By then it was too late.
Another problem arises from your idea of respect. In difference cultures, respect arises in different ways, and to label it as you have would be similar to saying that every country in the world is socialist. A majority might live under such a doctrine, but it makes the original statement no less true.
It would probably be easier if you described how the US is disrespected. You start to do this, but don't really develop the thought: you try to set up a contrast with your previous statement, but you really dont include enough information to make it worthwhile.
All of this is not really meant for the post I replied to. It is a general criticism of all posts that are Anti-US. Criticize our leadership, criticize prominant individuals that are in our country, but please don't criticize the country that I love and label all the citizens as evil with such spurious points. Don't just errantly spread your opinion without strong backing; next time post your train of thought so that everyone can follow. Perhaps have it with specific points, and a coherent conclusion with some remedies to the problem. That way those of us that feel love for our countries, ideals, or practices can address a specific concern.
When I clicked the video link, a "Server too busy" error returned. Does that mean that we/.'d Microsoft's servers til they couldn't handle the load? It'd be great if we did.
I am also from Maine, and concur with everything above. Maine is a different sort of place, and often can only be described accurately with anecdotal evidence. The smallest Maine towns (less than 500 people in many places) are a great place to start anew. In these towns, most are simple, happy, and sociable people. The existing state in these towns is that trust is something that can be lost, not something to be earned; everyone already knows everyone and has an established opinion. Children raised in this environment never see adults be wary of other adults. So children themselves often don't learn to be wary of anyone in the town. From this, it is common for a bored child to go visit neighbors who are doing yardwork and such, even when the child is not acquainted with the person. In most of these places, township doesn't exist, because the town is too small to be autonomous from the state. So the state/county has control over the town, and doesn't inform the members of the town of any sex offenders who move in. It is very possible that all this together would result in parents allowing their kids to visit pedophiles. In fact, this does happen, and the results are not always good. The online registry help parents better do exactly what they always did in these situations: tell their kids to not be alone with that person in a way that will protect the kid and not harm the offender. In a final note, the offender in these small towns is rarely, if ever, treated in the ill manner that many of these posts have described. It is not harder for them to get a job compared to other residents, the local stores still and other businesses treat them the exact same way they do any other customers, and everyone still associated with the person. I don't claim this will be the same in other, larger, parts of Maine, but it will hold true in many of the smallest towns, and is a worthy point to consider.
Another great alternative to a DVD burner is a firewire hard drive. Last I checked, a person can get a fairly decent 160GB firewire or USB2.0 hard drive for the same amount as a DVD burner. It reads and writes quite a bit faster, too. Not quite as portable as a DVD, but it's great at LAN parties.
Slashdot Mirror
1. There was more than a hidden url, the post blatantly said that a person could find out, before they were supposed to, the admission decision, and revealed a back door. It wasn't as though he encouraged others to do so in an attempt to make others do the same thing for some dumb reason. It was the posting of a hack.
2. Robbing a bank might be clearly against the law, but who says law has to do with morality? Hiding behind the word of a law is a failing of a week moral character that allows others ideals determine what one does. Rules or not, some things are not blatantly benign. Breaking the standard protocol in a field that is already rife with corruption might be a standard thing to do, and there might be no laws specifically written against it, but the lack of an obvious punishment doesn't make it right to do something.
I really wouldn't be surprised if the perpetrators sued, as the (mispelled) parent topic suggests, because it would show the same general lack of self-responsibility that is evident in many facets of exploitative business models today, and also a concern with the letter of the law defining what one can get away with without punishment. And if punishment is the only motivator for someone behaving, what's to stop a person who arrives in a position of economic power (as undoubtedly most of the grads of HBS will) from manipulating a system (lobbying might be expensive, but is less expensive than bankruptcy) for their own and their companies benefit--at the detriment of many others--just because they know that in the end their power will allow them to dodge the bullet? Harvard did right by blacklisting these people. And if someone didn't know it might be wrong? These applicants have been applying for stuff all their lives. If they weren't familiar with adhering to admission deadlines, then they got as much as they deserve anyways.
Summers never said anything that was his own opinion. He didn't really make that available. His speech was based around the research that was given to him at the conference. A better account of story reads that he suggested these things as possible causes. Furthermore, he said these things at a women in science conference. Which was attended largely by women. He wouldn't be dumb enough to say those things without an ulterior motive. One can't really take what he said at face value. Also, probably what he wanted people to realize, it's stupid to focus on what he said, rather than on trying to change it.
"Remmember Hitler & germany in 1937-1940 ? they had plenty of Strength."
If you are referring to relative strength, you missed something in your History courses. Hitler and Germany were not strong until well after they subjugated half of Europe. At any point in time a major power back then could have intervened and crushed his forces. But do to the lessons we mislearned from WWI, the world thought it would be best to let the situation work its own way out. Thus appeasement came about. Eventually people came to realize that Hitler's promises that he'd be done with his expansion after 'just this one last country' were hollow. By then it was too late.
Another problem arises from your idea of respect. In difference cultures, respect arises in different ways, and to label it as you have would be similar to saying that every country in the world is socialist. A majority might live under such a doctrine, but it makes the original statement no less true.
It would probably be easier if you described how the US is disrespected. You start to do this, but don't really develop the thought: you try to set up a contrast with your previous statement, but you really dont include enough information to make it worthwhile.
All of this is not really meant for the post I replied to. It is a general criticism of all posts that are Anti-US. Criticize our leadership, criticize prominant individuals that are in our country, but please don't criticize the country that I love and label all the citizens as evil with such spurious points. Don't just errantly spread your opinion without strong backing; next time post your train of thought so that everyone can follow. Perhaps have it with specific points, and a coherent conclusion with some remedies to the problem. That way those of us that feel love for our countries, ideals, or practices can address a specific concern.
When I clicked the video link, a "Server too busy" error returned. Does that mean that we /.'d Microsoft's servers til they couldn't handle the load?
It'd be great if we did.
I am also from Maine, and concur with everything above. Maine is a different sort of place, and often can only be described accurately with anecdotal evidence. The smallest Maine towns (less than 500 people in many places) are a great place to start anew. In these towns, most are simple, happy, and sociable people. The existing state in these towns is that trust is something that can be lost, not something to be earned; everyone already knows everyone and has an established opinion. Children raised in this environment never see adults be wary of other adults. So children themselves often don't learn to be wary of anyone in the town. From this, it is common for a bored child to go visit neighbors who are doing yardwork and such, even when the child is not acquainted with the person. In most of these places, township doesn't exist, because the town is too small to be autonomous from the state. So the state/county has control over the town, and doesn't inform the members of the town of any sex offenders who move in. It is very possible that all this together would result in parents allowing their kids to visit pedophiles. In fact, this does happen, and the results are not always good. The online registry help parents better do exactly what they always did in these situations: tell their kids to not be alone with that person in a way that will protect the kid and not harm the offender. In a final note, the offender in these small towns is rarely, if ever, treated in the ill manner that many of these posts have described. It is not harder for them to get a job compared to other residents, the local stores still and other businesses treat them the exact same way they do any other customers, and everyone still associated with the person. I don't claim this will be the same in other, larger, parts of Maine, but it will hold true in many of the smallest towns, and is a worthy point to consider.
Another great alternative to a DVD burner is a firewire hard drive. Last I checked, a person can get a fairly decent 160GB firewire or USB2.0 hard drive for the same amount as a DVD burner. It reads and writes quite a bit faster, too. Not quite as portable as a DVD, but it's great at LAN parties.