"Be aware that much of what you read on the editorial page of the newspaper, or what you hear on talk radio, is spin. Read the byline of the author carefully (also understand in many cases he/she is not really the author, just a respected person whose name is being used to promote a position)."
I read his replies with this in mind. My reply: go take a long walk on a short pier buddy. All the crap about 'expected influence' is big fat line, and there's a wall of evidence to support this.
I re-read the thread we were having, and I find it difficult to continue supporting my position without taking the extreme as the norm.
After thinking about your points some more, it's more accurate to say that until people change their lifestyles, they are continually going have a drug problem. Thinking about examples of people who have kicked it -- and except for extreme addiction cases --- people have kicked the habit only by changing their lifestyles permanently. I suppose I could also defend this by pointing out the number of people who have experimented vs. the number of people who really end up addicted.
Anyway, thanks for enduring the heated talk and changing my opinion.
Amphetamine has over 75 years of history documenting its safety and efficacy in treating ADD, depression, narcolepsy, and asthma. Millions upon millions of people in the US take the drug every day without any ill effects. Most are in fact children.
Yeah, and 75 years ago Thomas Kellog claimed that circumcision would cure the ills of masturbation. There's a laundry list of medical practices which were considered state-of-the-art decades ago and are now considered pointless and/or barbaric. Bad choice.
I am curious to see how we regard the (over)medicating of children in a few decades, especially with the downsides of amphetamine just as equally important. Don't forget that there is a HUGE money to be made of medicating everyone, the profit motive absolutely interfers.
Lets also not forget that ADD is a recent label. I feel something is wrong when we pump kids full of drugs as quick-fix. I'm skeptical that this is giving prozac to babies is smart. ADD is prety much a recent development, and it seems like a money-making scam. Scan the web for a few minutes and you'll see many arguments against medicating kids.
And I can't believe I was just tagged as a "gung ho prohibitionist".
Just like you said you never claimed to be pro-drug, I never claimed to be a prohibitionist.
I simply state that drugs can fuck you up bad, and since they impair your judgement, the individual cannot be the one to make the choice about their affect.
I feel no compulsion to take my prescription medication and go for extend periods of time (even a year) without taking it.
So you don't even need your drug, but then you consider yourself an anecdotal source/reference as a drug user and then pass judgement on addicts. That doesn't make sense, it sounds self-righteous.
Again, this all started from you claiming cocaine addiction was over-hyped. That was my problem. But you keep claiming how you have no problem with your drug, and you've never taken hard drugs, and that addicts are just a corner case who make the choice to keep doing drugs. I've done ritalin and other types of perscription amphetimines... they aren't even remotely close to the street stuff. and that's usually CUT with inert substances, which means it is a mere % of it's strength.
So if I'm misunderstanding your position on drug addiction, please let me know. I think that arguing that alchohol = crack = perscription drugs is a mistake.
Ahh, the old anecdotal evidence. The reason I mentioned so many famous users of the drugs was to counter such an assertion.
So what is your evidence? Emperical? Quantitative? Hardly. You are choosing anecdotal evidence from more popular people whom you admire, biasing your argument the same way I biased mine.
I never said I was pro drug
Not directly, but you're not helping people make informed decisions by dismissing the hazards of drug use.
I take it for months at a time, and notice little more than some fatigue when it wears off.
Like you said, purity is part of the problem. And now you're using the FDA to justify your "drug habit", which is effectively what it is. Perscription drugs are a commodotiy now, and makers will push the limit.
Like you said, Doctors used to prescribe cocaine, but why did they stop? I don't think it was prohibition...
I guess my main beef with your first email was how you glibly dismissed coke as not being that addictive, when that's not true at all. Trying to blame it on lifestyle is only part of the problem. Sure, the person made the choice to try the drug based on their lifestyle, but when the addiction kicks in, there is no choice.
Let me say that again a different way: THERE IS NO WALKING AWAY! Drugs ain't video games. How many people actually succeed quitting smoking? Since you've never tried any of the bad stuff, and there's no reason to, you can't understand how hard it is to stop.
I think a little experimentation in high school is important, but I've seen too many people carry a little teenage fun into their 40s and now they live in the parent's basements and barely make minumum wage.
It's sad sad sad, and I find it impossible to dismiss drug addiction as the primary contributor to their declines, regardless of their 'lifestyle choices'.
The addictive potential of the drug is highly overrated.
Speaking from years of personal experience, I painfully disagree with your "coke ain't so bad" dismisall. It is a bad, bad, dirty drug.
I know MANY people who get far more work done using stimulants than not...
Maybe for a year or two.
Check back on your superstar buddies in a few years. I've seen both crank and blow destroy MANY people, included ace programmers.
You're pro-drug bias needs to be reality checked, it sounds like you're probably too young to have witnessed your friends going down hard from drugs... hopefully you won't see that.
First of all there will always be smaller ISP's. If theres not, broadband is getting cheaper and we can start our own. Secondly- as long as Kazaa etc exist, we have our own network which is not controled by anyone, where anything can be exchanged.
Hmmm... I don't know about #1. Whatever happened to all the Baby Bells after the 80's phone deregulation?
What about the privatization of utilities (gas/electric/water) by a handful of companies?
FCC pretty much makes sure individual AM/FM radio broadcasters will never see the light of day.
I think it would be VERY easy for a decade of corporate funded legislation to simply drive out small ISPs. Very easy indeed.
So its a personal battle. Understood. I just want the fastest machine to render Maya scenes. That's Intel. I personally would not buy an inferior performing Apple just to make a point. That's why I compared it to a rebel attitude in the first post. I think we have different end goals: you want a continuum moral equality in the corporate world, I just want to get stuff done.
some loci are more succeptible to change than others. haemaglobin is the most robust gene ever, and one of the olders. others are very easily damaged (skin cancer, moles, for example)
seriously, no matter what you do, it will eventually turn to dust...
the only way to keep data safe would be to constantly keep massive RAID-4+ disk drives constantly checking and correcting mistakes as the disks degrade over time. only through active monitoring of the integrity of the data could you correct errors before they appear. and then spread redundant copies of this all over the known universe so that no planetary activity interferes.
You're user ID is way low (17,766), but it sounds like you are new to the argument:
Apple tried to be the top dog, but they boned it because they got greedier than Intel/M$: they made their arch. proprietary and charged people to use it. So you can't play the "apple is the good, intel is evil" card. Do you think if Apple had 90% of the CPU market they'd be all philanthropic?
Is there any option short of buying an used Apple Cube?
Yeah, give up your pointless rebel attitude and buy a low GHz celeron machine, I don't have a fan on my CPU (1GHz) and it's fine for Maya, Sonar, WC3, Q3, RTCW, etc...
please re-read my post, you missed my point entirely.
having an entire county decide to change history because it doesn't fit with their local culture is exactly the same thing as your examples of a madrassa, north korea or china.
is there a difference between (a) some New England school choosing a history book that focuses on the Contra Affiar and puts reagan in a negative light, or (b) the same textbook in Nebraska that ignores the Contra affair and focuses on Clintons perjury or (c) a textbook elsewhere that glosses over genocide of indians and slavery.
All three are examples of local government re-writing history. I equate this with all of your examples.
on an offtopic side-note about localized censorship, consider textbooks for high-schools. i used to have a neighbor who edited textbooks for a living. to my surprise, most history textbooks come with a basic core, and then about 30% of the material varies from state-to-state, mostly due to political or religious beliefs. this type of silent localized censorship is even more nefarious than Google, i think, especially when occuring in the US.
while i agree that a good programmer should "stay current", there isn't always the time. especially when you discover that an important piece of code is broken when you under a deadline. learning the language to debug the code may take more time than just re-writing the code.
then there's the question of why even waste the time? will that language be around? is it going anywhere? if i spend a weekend learning Python, and then don't touch it again for three months, i have to spend another weekend learning python.
i see your point, but sometimes it really is cost effective to stick to the status quo.
There's plenty of documentaiton on windows code (Richter's books come to mind). At least enough to get someone started doing what they want to do.
Sure there's linux source code, but you're argument seems to be the "training to click".
Linux is like having to memorize presidents and state capitols. (or when to use the word capital vs. capitol;-). Clicking is much easier then memorizing a laundry list of esoteric commands and their parameters.
I could use your paraphrase: learning the nuts of windows is just as much work as learning the nuts of Unix, but you can actually cell the cell-boundaries in Unix.
I don't think the O/S selection is going to stand in the way of any happy nerd learning more about the machinery.
In fact, I would argue that learning windows internal's would create a MORE well-informed group of nerds because they would have to disassemble and explore on their own.
Hey! Linux is like cliff notes!!! It's cheating!!;-_
also, i should probably state that i didn't intend do paint interns and drooling knuckle-draggers.
75% of interns do a great job, 5% are astonishingly competent, and 20% just aren't ready yet. hell, i was one for 3 years, and i've seen my code from then. eeew.
but it is amazing to watch how some interns have great resumes and interviews, but then just crash and burn when the get in the lab. reminds me of the MIT MSEE who tried to _wash_ a motherboard...
you're assuming I was the manager or had influence. it doesn't work the way you described. Sometimes managers are so hands off they don't care if the job is done without foresight in mind. Not all managers are brilliant software project managers. Sometimes code is just a tool.
I watched it all happen from the sidelines. His boss didn't really care, and the intern was simply convinced his way was better. He got the results, 'nuff said.
Slashdot Mirror
"Be aware that much of what you read on the editorial page of the newspaper, or what you hear on talk radio, is spin. Read the byline of the author carefully (also understand in many cases he/she is not really the author, just a respected person whose name is being used to promote a position)."
I read his replies with this in mind. My reply: go take a long walk on a short pier buddy. All the crap about 'expected influence' is big fat line, and there's a wall of evidence to support this.
Aww, man. I really wish organzations like the "Republic of Desire" existed at a time like this!
If it was flesh colored with a clit and an umbelical cord, it would look like Cronenbergs VR devices from Existenz.
Oh wait, if I had to grab a pair of breasts every time I needed to get some work done...
how about we introduce mr self-tought big-brain to a few pillowcases filled with doorknobs in the middle of the night?
I re-read the thread we were having, and I find it difficult to continue supporting my position without taking the extreme as the norm.
After thinking about your points some more, it's more accurate to say that until people change their lifestyles, they are continually going have a drug problem. Thinking about examples of people who have kicked it -- and except for extreme addiction cases --- people have kicked the habit only by changing their lifestyles permanently. I suppose I could also defend this by pointing out the number of people who have experimented vs. the number of people who really end up addicted.
Anyway, thanks for enduring the heated talk and changing my opinion.
Amphetamine has over 75 years of history documenting its safety and efficacy in treating ADD, depression, narcolepsy, and asthma. Millions upon millions of people in the US take the drug every day without any ill effects. Most are in fact children.
Yeah, and 75 years ago Thomas Kellog claimed that circumcision would cure the ills of masturbation. There's a laundry list of medical practices which were considered state-of-the-art decades ago and are now considered pointless and/or barbaric. Bad choice.
I am curious to see how we regard the (over)medicating of children in a few decades, especially with the downsides of amphetamine just as equally important. Don't forget that there is a HUGE money to be made of medicating everyone, the profit motive absolutely interfers.
Lets also not forget that ADD is a recent label. I feel something is wrong when we pump kids full of drugs as quick-fix. I'm skeptical that this is giving prozac to babies is smart. ADD is prety much a recent development, and it seems like a money-making scam. Scan the web for a few minutes and you'll see many arguments against medicating kids.
And I can't believe I was just tagged as a "gung ho prohibitionist".
Just like you said you never claimed to be pro-drug, I never claimed to be a prohibitionist.
I simply state that drugs can fuck you up bad, and since they impair your judgement, the individual cannot be the one to make the choice about their affect.
I feel no compulsion to take my prescription medication and go for extend periods of time (even a year) without taking it.
So you don't even need your drug, but then you consider yourself an anecdotal source/reference as a drug user and then pass judgement on addicts. That doesn't make sense, it sounds self-righteous.
Again, this all started from you claiming cocaine addiction was over-hyped. That was my problem. But you keep claiming how you have no problem with your drug, and you've never taken hard drugs, and that addicts are just a corner case who make the choice to keep doing drugs. I've done ritalin and other types of perscription amphetimines... they aren't even remotely close to the street stuff. and that's usually CUT with inert substances, which means it is a mere % of it's strength.
So if I'm misunderstanding your position on drug addiction, please let me know. I think that arguing that alchohol = crack = perscription drugs is a mistake.
Ahh, the old anecdotal evidence. The reason I mentioned so many famous users of the drugs was to counter such an assertion.
So what is your evidence? Emperical? Quantitative? Hardly. You are choosing anecdotal evidence from more popular people whom you admire, biasing your argument the same way I biased mine.
I never said I was pro drug
Not directly, but you're not helping people make informed decisions by dismissing the hazards of drug use.
I take it for months at a time, and notice little more than some fatigue when it wears off.
Like you said, purity is part of the problem. And now you're using the FDA to justify your "drug habit", which is effectively what it is. Perscription drugs are a commodotiy now, and makers will push the limit.
Like you said, Doctors used to prescribe cocaine, but why did they stop? I don't think it was prohibition...
I guess my main beef with your first email was how you glibly dismissed coke as not being that addictive, when that's not true at all. Trying to blame it on lifestyle is only part of the problem. Sure, the person made the choice to try the drug based on their lifestyle, but when the addiction kicks in, there is no choice.
Let me say that again a different way: THERE IS NO WALKING AWAY! Drugs ain't video games. How many people actually succeed quitting smoking? Since you've never tried any of the bad stuff, and there's no reason to, you can't understand how hard it is to stop.
I think a little experimentation in high school is important, but I've seen too many people carry a little teenage fun into their 40s and now they live in the parent's basements and barely make minumum wage.
It's sad sad sad, and I find it impossible to dismiss drug addiction as the primary contributor to their declines, regardless of their 'lifestyle choices'.
The addictive potential of the drug is highly overrated.
Speaking from years of personal experience, I painfully disagree with your "coke ain't so bad" dismisall. It is a bad, bad, dirty drug.
I know MANY people who get far more work done using stimulants than not...
Maybe for a year or two.
Check back on your superstar buddies in a few years. I've seen both crank and blow destroy MANY people, included ace programmers.
You're pro-drug bias needs to be reality checked, it sounds like you're probably too young to have witnessed your friends going down hard from drugs... hopefully you won't see that.
after microsoft licenses SCO, everyone else gets butt-reamed with patent infringement, and only M$ holds the license.
d'oh!
Mozilla Trans Am and Mozilla IROC-Z !!!
Sorry... Firebird takes me back to my gearhead days...
First of all there will always be smaller ISP's. If theres not, broadband is getting cheaper and we can start our own. Secondly- as long as Kazaa etc exist, we have our own network which is not controled by anyone, where anything can be exchanged.
Hmmm... I don't know about #1. Whatever happened to all the Baby Bells after the 80's phone deregulation?
What about the privatization of utilities (gas/electric/water) by a handful of companies?
FCC pretty much makes sure individual AM/FM radio broadcasters will never see the light of day.
I think it would be VERY easy for a decade of corporate funded legislation to simply drive out small ISPs. Very easy indeed.
"Lofty Metaphysics"??
Puh-lease! Lofty if you're a precious 16 year old!
Oh way, this is the work of a matrix fan, nevermind...
So its a personal battle. Understood. I just want the fastest machine to render Maya scenes. That's Intel. I personally would not buy an inferior performing Apple just to make a point. That's why I compared it to a rebel attitude in the first post. I think we have different end goals: you want a continuum moral equality in the corporate world, I just want to get stuff done.
some loci are more succeptible to change than others. haemaglobin is the most robust gene ever, and one of the olders. others are very easily damaged (skin cancer, moles, for example)
seriously, no matter what you do, it will eventually turn to dust...
the only way to keep data safe would be to constantly keep massive RAID-4+ disk drives constantly checking and correcting mistakes as the disks degrade over time. only through active monitoring of the integrity of the data could you correct errors before they appear. and then spread redundant copies of this all over the known universe so that no planetary activity interferes.
what am i smoking...
oh... right...
You're user ID is way low (17,766), but it sounds like you are new to the argument:
Apple tried to be the top dog, but they boned it because they got greedier than Intel/M$: they made their arch. proprietary and charged people to use it. So you can't play the "apple is the good, intel is evil" card. Do you think if Apple had 90% of the CPU market they'd be all philanthropic?
Is there any option short of buying an used Apple Cube?
Yeah, give up your pointless rebel attitude and buy a low GHz celeron machine, I don't have a fan on my CPU (1GHz) and it's fine for Maya, Sonar, WC3, Q3, RTCW, etc...
1. regexp error:
forgot global mod...
s/Jew/Arab/g
2. you mean Arab, not Terrorist, I don't think you intended to compare jews and terrosists, right?
please re-read my post, you missed my point entirely.
having an entire county decide to change history because it doesn't fit with their local culture is exactly the same thing as your examples of a madrassa, north korea or china.
is there a difference between (a) some New England school choosing a history book that focuses on the Contra Affiar and puts reagan in a negative light, or (b) the same textbook in Nebraska that ignores the Contra affair and focuses on Clintons perjury or (c) a textbook elsewhere that glosses over genocide of indians and slavery.
All three are examples of local government re-writing history. I equate this with all of your examples.
on an offtopic side-note about localized censorship, consider textbooks for high-schools. i used to have a neighbor who edited textbooks for a living. to my surprise, most history textbooks come with a basic core, and then about 30% of the material varies from state-to-state, mostly due to political or religious beliefs. this type of silent localized censorship is even more nefarious than Google, i think, especially when occuring in the US.
while i agree that a good programmer should "stay current", there isn't always the time. especially when you discover that an important piece of code is broken when you under a deadline. learning the language to debug the code may take more time than just re-writing the code.
then there's the question of why even waste the time? will that language be around? is it going anywhere? if i spend a weekend learning Python, and then don't touch it again for three months, i have to spend another weekend learning python.
i see your point, but sometimes it really is cost effective to stick to the status quo.
(hey! i used status quo in a sentence!)
Hmmm... i have to play devil's advocate here.
;-_
There's plenty of documentaiton on windows code (Richter's books come to mind). At least enough to get someone started doing what they want to do.
Sure there's linux source code, but you're argument seems to be the "training to click".
Linux is like having to memorize presidents and state capitols. (or when to use the word capital vs. capitol;-). Clicking is much easier then memorizing a laundry list of esoteric commands and their parameters.
I could use your paraphrase: learning the nuts of windows is just as much work as learning the nuts of Unix, but you can actually cell the cell-boundaries in Unix.
I don't think the O/S selection is going to stand in the way of any happy nerd learning more about the machinery.
In fact, I would argue that learning windows internal's would create a MORE well-informed group of nerds because they would have to disassemble and explore on their own.
Hey! Linux is like cliff notes!!! It's cheating!!
also, i should probably state that i didn't intend do paint interns and drooling knuckle-draggers.
75% of interns do a great job, 5% are astonishingly competent, and 20% just aren't ready yet. hell, i was one for 3 years, and i've seen my code from then. eeew.
but it is amazing to watch how some interns have great resumes and interviews, but then just crash and burn when the get in the lab. reminds me of the MIT MSEE who tried to _wash_ a motherboard...
you're assuming I was the manager or had influence. it doesn't work the way you described. Sometimes managers are so hands off they don't care if the job is done without foresight in mind. Not all managers are brilliant software project managers. Sometimes code is just a tool.
I watched it all happen from the sidelines. His boss didn't really care, and the intern was simply convinced his way was better. He got the results, 'nuff said.