The casino might succeed in taking your money, but the reason that you can't get theirs is security. You could definitely prevent crimes with security in a number of scenarios.
I have to say that I agree with both your and the parent's point of view, but I think that you're taking what the parent is saying a bit too far.
The parent is speaking of company-wide decisions. It makes a lot more sense to write a video game in C than in PHP, in the general case. It makes a lot more sense to write a web site in PHP, than in C, in the general case. You don't want to force your developers into an awkward scenario by having a company standard tool.
You, surely, can picture the conversation where the writer of the interpreter from your game is told that he cannot use LEX/YACC, because his company standardized on C++. You can't? I was once told this at a meeting.
On your point, however, I can also agree. Needlessly writing code in other languages makes debugging a pain, and reduces your ability to share code inside the project, a place where I imagine that the most reuse is likely to take place.
Still. I can't really see the need for a company-wide decision to standardize on a single language for all of their development.
Linus doesn't seem too hung up on the idea that all software should be free.
He developed firmware professionally and used BitKeeper to store the Linux kernel. I'm not stating an opinion on his actions, however, if actions speak louder than words, than Linus's actions say that he's rather ambivalent to whether or not software should be free across the board. Stallman, on the other hand, has written at great length regarding his views on free software.
1) There is an open source initiative to share code between government contractors. I don't recall the name, it hadn't really taken off when I was doing contract work. 2) The robot may run Linux, but that doesn't mean that any of its sensitive code is GPL'd. They might just be using the OS. 3) iRobot is Rodney Brook's company. Rodney Brooks is the director of the computer science and artificial intelligence laboratory at MIT. A good deal of what this robot does may or may not be found in tech from that lab, most of which is probably published in publicly available academic journals. Even if this specific robots software is not, Linux enthusiasts can find all kinds of papers on robotics work and implement it in Linux. Want a start? I've done some research on the topic in the past, was a member of a DARPA Grand Challenge Team, and am looking for future research in the area. I can give you a stack of papers to get you started.
And you want me to pay for your child care, education and protection. That's great. I don't want to.
Where did I say that? I imagine that our income will be fine on its own. I never even alluded to such a thing.
Women are finding the reason they get paid less in some situations is because they have kids and don't come back. Companies are finding that women are costlier to keep on their payroll because of the retraining costs. The market is providing for what the consumer wants. You can't have your cake and eat it to.
I don't want to discuss women's issues. I'm not a specialist on the topic. I'm quite sure that the women on faculty here are there because they stand at the top of the field, and require no retraining. This includes, especially, those who are prolific researchers, excellent teachers, and, in general, top professors. This school isn't losing a dime by having them as faculty.
I find it terrible that people tied to their jobs 24/7 believe they have a right to have children and have me pay for the consequence of their un-thought out action. In my experience, every single girl I dated before the age of 25 that went through 4 years of college and more years of graduate school put themselves into a few years of work before retiring to have children. Every one of them. I commend them for doing the right thing for their families.
You were 25. The woman did 4 years of college, plus (arguably average) 5 years of PhD, plus (arguably average) a year or two of postdoc... only to retire having never gone into a faculty position or full-time research outside of postdoc. She then dated you, with the clearly stated goal of retiring and having kids in her 30's, having never held a job that could fund her retirement.
All of that aside, what do you think the income of 2 professors is? Why do you think that, somehow, they are burdening society and your paycheck to raise their kids? Assuming that there are no changes in current laws, they're not draining any more out than the average couple with children.
Of course I shoot a glare down my nose at people who expect me to pay for their responsibilities. I give 10%+ to various churches in my community to help people in MY community. I don't want to pay for people in other communities, I can't hold them accountable.
Dude, what are you talking about? I'm saying that you're shooting a glare down your nose and people who can't afford private schooling for their children. That was the core argument. They can't afford private schooling. I said nothing about a scenario that involves pumping you for cash. I'm talking about distinctly average, common people, the group that you said you are a member of earlier.
If I can't hold you accountable for spending my money and my time, I don't want to give you that money or time. Why should you force me to?
My stocks and paycheck cover me fine. My paycheck is the result of several large research grants. Trust me, I'm not forcing you to give me a dime. As for time, you can feel free to stop posting your point of view any time, and I'll stop replying. I have research to work on anyway, and no, I'm not on the clock at the moment.
Warrants are a necessary check. Without them, courts wouldn't have appropriate oversight over the process. Requiring a warrant isn't just a delay tactic. It isn't like you see on TV. The police who are following procedures correctly will get a warrant in advance unless they feel it isn't needed. If there is an obvious and immediate action required, saying "you need a warrant" won't stop anything, the police are allowed to act in such scenarios.
An example? Your face is covered in white powder and they can see over your shoulder that your buddy is doing a couple of lines. They're allowed to check that out without a warrant.
They go into a University library asking to steal the computer lab? I'm sure that the librarian wasn't thinking "oh no, they'll catch the one of multiple thousands of students who did this!"
Most of the women that I meet these days are in graduate school, or are researchers. I make it a policy not to date inside my department, but I imagine that if I ever get married, that it will probably be to a professor or researcher. In such a scenario, I imagine that I probably will marry someone who becomes a researcher or a professor. I can't imagine asking her to give up her career to cater to the needs of our offspring, but I imagine that I will eventually want kids (and will seek a mate who has the same goal).
There are many professors in this department who are married to other professors, and have children... but being a professor is a 24/7 job. Certainly, they aren't sitting at home with their children. While I don't dive into their personal lives (unless they offer up details, which I wouldn't share on Slashdot anyway), I imagine that they all have their childcare situations well in hand.
That aside, you still haven't address that you pretty blatantly shot a glare down your nose at people who just can't afford such things, especially ironic given that your blog states that you had a rough and tumble upbringing, and that you vend... what is it, computer hardware? This is hardly a job that separates you from the common man unless you're selling it in Lichtenstein. Do you hold all of your clientele in such disdain?
It's not much of an argument, but it's not a straw man argument. A straw man argument would be me taking your argument, and saying that it really translates to another argument that is easily disproven. Eh, I guess I could see where you would say it's such a device. I would argue that the Lindbergs suffered a similar situation in the kidnapping of their child, however, and hired PIs and whatnot to sort it out.
I find it reprehensible that you would take this callous attitude that the parents of kidnapping victims are somehow at fault for the kidnapping.
As for the public school system. I didn't like public school, but I went. Sure, it's not great, but it's all that most people can afford. How did I turn out? Well enough to not need to get into a contest over the matter. Did many of the students at the University that I research at at the moment attend private school? Most of them attended top-notch prep schools. Would I have liked a prep school? Yes, it would have been great. Do I look down on families who don't have the money to send their kids to private school? No. Do I curse my parents for not having the money to send me to a prep school. No.
You sounded a bit like you're looking down your nose and people who can't afford such things for their kids.
Also, I don't see how someone could kidnap my child if I was a good parent and actually parented the child at all times, as a parent should.
Wow. So, your kid is at school, and someone runs in and grabs the first kid near the door... who happens to be your kid. You view that as a shortcoming on your part as a parent?
They're called question answering systems. Check out the literature on them if you're interested in the state of the art. A search for "question answering systems" would be a good start.
Of course, your system would have to enumerate all facts, and then verify them. Enumerating facts comes out of the Message Understanding Conferences (MUC).
Put the two together and you have a system that can do what you want... within a certain probability (it's up to you to find out how good that probability is;-))
So, if you were eligible for welfare, but believed that welfare is too lenient... perhaps the restrictions should be such that they place you just outside their reach. Would you collect the check anyway?
Under that argument, I'm being prevented from driving fast by an Illuminati hell-bent on my destruction. They place high prices on sports cars, after all.
Someone on dial-up can't get Ubuntu as well as their broadband cousin now. This bit of action on the part of the telephone companies wouldn't change that.
The guy with dialup can't download Ubuntu as well as their broadband cousin because the dialup line can't carry that bandwidth.
I really don't see what you're driving at now. Are you arguing that subscribing to a dialup provider is to voluntarily submit to a form of Internet censorship?
The dude on AOL will get whatever service plan AOL bought from the telphone company.
He'll receive all of the same content, it just might come a bit slower.
It's a completely different issue. One is censorship, where content actually isn't available, the other has to do with the ability of the providers of the network infastructure to charge rate plans based on priorities placed on packets going over the network. You still get all of the content.
The issue at hand is the use of a multi-tiered network model that charges a premium for superior service.
So, the telephone company might have a "consumer" tier, where consumers pay for Internet access, and then a "commercial" and a "really expensive." On top of that, you might split the network... high speed media lines with fast downstream, but slow upstream.
It's completely different from censoring out certain websites because they have "freedom" written on them.
Actually, I'm fairly sure that most food is a seething mass of microbes inside the packaging.
Not that it matters much to me. I eat delivery for almost every meal in order to make more time for research/studying/so forth. To cut down on price, I eat from some pretty sketchy places. The thing that keeps me healthy is my immune system:-D
Well. I dunno. Having had a day to rethink everything, I suppose that my cavalier attitude was a bit too much. I wanted to be funny, but, in all seriousness, these folks are trying to do something.
If people had given up on me every time something that I did didn't work at first, then I would be nowhere.
I should also add that I'm not really one to speak from a position where I don't have most of the facts.
The facts here:
1) MS has been litigated against multiple times for monopolistic tactics... sure 2) The EU pushed some litigation... sure 3) "Open your protocols!"
Counterargument... why not just NOT USE MS products? If their intention was to move from MS, they wouldn't be seeking a way to tie thousands of products to MS infastructure. 4) MS publishes source code 5) EU says, "ok" -- Yet to be seen, but I think that that's what's coming 6) Nothing happens -- A bit speculative
See, if the intention really is to move Microsoft out of the picture, adopting their protocols and so forth has nothing to do with the solution. People can compete with Microsoft by... adding still more compatible software to the mix? If anything, this strategy sounds as if it would embed MS more thoroughly into the mire, making it nearly impossible to remove.
Well, I'd like to add that I'm sorry that the matter is one that strikes you so bitterly. But, like I said, it just doesn't strike me that anything is actually going to come of this. You're mistaking a lot of what I'm saying as taking sides. I'm looking at it and asking "what will the end result of this be?" I know that there are people in the EU driving for something that will really change something, but, I don't see it.
I mean, honestly, we all know where you stand on this... what do you expect will happen out of it? My prediction? MS still won't publish anything that changes their business strategy. The EU will continue purchasing Windows on all of their machinery, and the world will march along as if this never happened. I don't even view this matter as an opportunity for disruptive change, and, certainly, nothing that will cause any hardships on the part of MS.
I should qualify, in case any professors are reading, that this isn't something that I spend a lot of time on. I just generally finish posting on Slashdot feeling somewhat wiped from the experience. When other students discuss the matter with me, they say "yeah, I sink a lot of time in that site." I think that most of us pretty much swear posting and even reading off during high-stress periods. Since I'm starting one at the moment, I really should have just stayed like a turtle.
Slashdot Mirror
Ever been in a casino?
The casino might succeed in taking your money, but the reason that you can't get theirs is security. You could definitely prevent crimes with security in a number of scenarios.
I have to say that I agree with both your and the parent's point of view, but I think that you're taking what the parent is saying a bit too far.
The parent is speaking of company-wide decisions. It makes a lot more sense to write a video game in C than in PHP, in the general case. It makes a lot more sense to write a web site in PHP, than in C, in the general case. You don't want to force your developers into an awkward scenario by having a company standard tool.
You, surely, can picture the conversation where the writer of the interpreter from your game is told that he cannot use LEX/YACC, because his company standardized on C++. You can't? I was once told this at a meeting.
On your point, however, I can also agree. Needlessly writing code in other languages makes debugging a pain, and reduces your ability to share code inside the project, a place where I imagine that the most reuse is likely to take place.
Still. I can't really see the need for a company-wide decision to standardize on a single language for all of their development.
...the muppets demonstrating the Big Bang!
Oh, Hansen, not Henson.
Not to challenge your view, but how do you suppose the research should be paid for?
Linus doesn't seem too hung up on the idea that all software should be free.
He developed firmware professionally and used BitKeeper to store the Linux kernel. I'm not stating an opinion on his actions, however, if actions speak louder than words, than Linus's actions say that he's rather ambivalent to whether or not software should be free across the board. Stallman, on the other hand, has written at great length regarding his views on free software.
A couple of interesting notes:
1) There is an open source initiative to share code between government contractors. I don't recall the name, it hadn't really taken off when I was doing contract work.
2) The robot may run Linux, but that doesn't mean that any of its sensitive code is GPL'd. They might just be using the OS.
3) iRobot is Rodney Brook's company. Rodney Brooks is the director of the computer science and artificial intelligence laboratory at MIT. A good deal of what this robot does may or may not be found in tech from that lab, most of which is probably published in publicly available academic journals. Even if this specific robots software is not, Linux enthusiasts can find all kinds of papers on robotics work and implement it in Linux. Want a start? I've done some research on the topic in the past, was a member of a DARPA Grand Challenge Team, and am looking for future research in the area. I can give you a stack of papers to get you started.
And you want me to pay for your child care, education and protection. That's great. I don't want to.
Where did I say that? I imagine that our income will be fine on its own. I never even alluded to such a thing.
Women are finding the reason they get paid less in some situations is because they have kids and don't come back. Companies are finding that women are costlier to keep on their payroll because of the retraining costs. The market is providing for what the consumer wants. You can't have your cake and eat it to.
I don't want to discuss women's issues. I'm not a specialist on the topic. I'm quite sure that the women on faculty here are there because they stand at the top of the field, and require no retraining. This includes, especially, those who are prolific researchers, excellent teachers, and, in general, top professors. This school isn't losing a dime by having them as faculty.
I find it terrible that people tied to their jobs 24/7 believe they have a right to have children and have me pay for the consequence of their un-thought out action. In my experience, every single girl I dated before the age of 25 that went through 4 years of college and more years of graduate school put themselves into a few years of work before retiring to have children. Every one of them. I commend them for doing the right thing for their families.
You were 25. The woman did 4 years of college, plus (arguably average) 5 years of PhD, plus (arguably average) a year or two of postdoc... only to retire having never gone into a faculty position or full-time research outside of postdoc. She then dated you, with the clearly stated goal of retiring and having kids in her 30's, having never held a job that could fund her retirement.
All of that aside, what do you think the income of 2 professors is? Why do you think that, somehow, they are burdening society and your paycheck to raise their kids? Assuming that there are no changes in current laws, they're not draining any more out than the average couple with children.
Of course I shoot a glare down my nose at people who expect me to pay for their responsibilities. I give 10%+ to various churches in my community to help people in MY community. I don't want to pay for people in other communities, I can't hold them accountable.
Dude, what are you talking about? I'm saying that you're shooting a glare down your nose and people who can't afford private schooling for their children. That was the core argument. They can't afford private schooling. I said nothing about a scenario that involves pumping you for cash. I'm talking about distinctly average, common people, the group that you said you are a member of earlier.
If I can't hold you accountable for spending my money and my time, I don't want to give you that money or time. Why should you force me to?
My stocks and paycheck cover me fine. My paycheck is the result of several large research grants. Trust me, I'm not forcing you to give me a dime. As for time, you can feel free to stop posting your point of view any time, and I'll stop replying. I have research to work on anyway, and no, I'm not on the clock at the moment.
Warrants are a necessary check. Without them, courts wouldn't have appropriate oversight over the process. Requiring a warrant isn't just a delay tactic. It isn't like you see on TV. The police who are following procedures correctly will get a warrant in advance unless they feel it isn't needed. If there is an obvious and immediate action required, saying "you need a warrant" won't stop anything, the police are allowed to act in such scenarios.
An example? Your face is covered in white powder and they can see over your shoulder that your buddy is doing a couple of lines. They're allowed to check that out without a warrant.
They go into a University library asking to steal the computer lab? I'm sure that the librarian wasn't thinking "oh no, they'll catch the one of multiple thousands of students who did this!"
Most of the women that I meet these days are in graduate school, or are researchers. I make it a policy not to date inside my department, but I imagine that if I ever get married, that it will probably be to a professor or researcher. In such a scenario, I imagine that I probably will marry someone who becomes a researcher or a professor. I can't imagine asking her to give up her career to cater to the needs of our offspring, but I imagine that I will eventually want kids (and will seek a mate who has the same goal).
There are many professors in this department who are married to other professors, and have children... but being a professor is a 24/7 job. Certainly, they aren't sitting at home with their children. While I don't dive into their personal lives (unless they offer up details, which I wouldn't share on Slashdot anyway), I imagine that they all have their childcare situations well in hand.
That aside, you still haven't address that you pretty blatantly shot a glare down your nose at people who just can't afford such things, especially ironic given that your blog states that you had a rough and tumble upbringing, and that you vend... what is it, computer hardware? This is hardly a job that separates you from the common man unless you're selling it in Lichtenstein. Do you hold all of your clientele in such disdain?
It's not much of an argument, but it's not a straw man argument. A straw man argument would be me taking your argument, and saying that it really translates to another argument that is easily disproven. Eh, I guess I could see where you would say it's such a device. I would argue that the Lindbergs suffered a similar situation in the kidnapping of their child, however, and hired PIs and whatnot to sort it out.
I find it reprehensible that you would take this callous attitude that the parents of kidnapping victims are somehow at fault for the kidnapping.
As for the public school system. I didn't like public school, but I went. Sure, it's not great, but it's all that most people can afford. How did I turn out? Well enough to not need to get into a contest over the matter. Did many of the students at the University that I research at at the moment attend private school? Most of them attended top-notch prep schools. Would I have liked a prep school? Yes, it would have been great. Do I look down on families who don't have the money to send their kids to private school? No. Do I curse my parents for not having the money to send me to a prep school. No.
You sounded a bit like you're looking down your nose and people who can't afford such things for their kids.
Also, I don't see how someone could kidnap my child if I was a good parent and actually parented the child at all times, as a parent should.
Wow. So, your kid is at school, and someone runs in and grabs the first kid near the door... who happens to be your kid. You view that as a shortcoming on your part as a parent?
and that her ass doesn't look big in those jeans (when it does)?
Don't tell that to Jennifer Lopez. She paid for a little extra junk in her trunk.
They're called question answering systems. Check out the literature on them if you're interested in the state of the art. A search for "question answering systems" would be a good start.
;-))
Of course, your system would have to enumerate all facts, and then verify them. Enumerating facts comes out of the Message Understanding Conferences (MUC).
Put the two together and you have a system that can do what you want... within a certain probability (it's up to you to find out how good that probability is
Eh, I could see that point of view. Touche.
So, if you were eligible for welfare, but believed that welfare is too lenient... perhaps the restrictions should be such that they place you just outside their reach. Would you collect the check anyway?
Under that argument, I'm being prevented from driving fast by an Illuminati hell-bent on my destruction. They place high prices on sports cars, after all.
Someone on dial-up can't get Ubuntu as well as their broadband cousin now. This bit of action on the part of the telephone companies wouldn't change that.
The guy with dialup can't download Ubuntu as well as their broadband cousin because the dialup line can't carry that bandwidth.
I really don't see what you're driving at now. Are you arguing that subscribing to a dialup provider is to voluntarily submit to a form of Internet censorship?
Not following the analogy.
For Gen Xers 9/11 was our JFK is perhaps a bit better analogy, don't you think?
9/11 and Challenger both happened during our lifetimes, both were tragedies... but they're not even similar.
Challenger was a really terrible accident. 9/11 has a hostile action against the US.
I don't really see where you're coming from man. It's like saying, "For Generation Xers, the Whopper was our Chicken McNugget." Both are fast food.
No man, it's completely different.
The dude on AOL will get whatever service plan AOL bought from the telphone company.
He'll receive all of the same content, it just might come a bit slower.
It's a completely different issue. One is censorship, where content actually isn't available, the other has to do with the ability of the providers of the network infastructure to charge rate plans based on priorities placed on packets going over the network. You still get all of the content.
The issue at hand is the use of a multi-tiered network model that charges a premium for superior service.
So, the telephone company might have a "consumer" tier, where consumers pay for Internet access, and then a "commercial" and a "really expensive." On top of that, you might split the network... high speed media lines with fast downstream, but slow upstream.
It's completely different from censoring out certain websites because they have "freedom" written on them.
Actually, I'm fairly sure that most food is a seething mass of microbes inside the packaging.
:-D
Not that it matters much to me. I eat delivery for almost every meal in order to make more time for research/studying/so forth. To cut down on price, I eat from some pretty sketchy places. The thing that keeps me healthy is my immune system
Well. I dunno. Having had a day to rethink everything, I suppose that my cavalier attitude was a bit too much. I wanted to be funny, but, in all seriousness, these folks are trying to do something.
If people had given up on me every time something that I did didn't work at first, then I would be nowhere.
I should also add that I'm not really one to speak from a position where I don't have most of the facts.
The facts here:
1) MS has been litigated against multiple times for monopolistic tactics... sure
2) The EU pushed some litigation... sure
3) "Open your protocols!"
Counterargument... why not just NOT USE MS products? If their intention was to move from MS, they wouldn't be seeking a way to tie thousands of products to MS infastructure.
4) MS publishes source code
5) EU says, "ok" -- Yet to be seen, but I think that that's what's coming
6) Nothing happens -- A bit speculative
See, if the intention really is to move Microsoft out of the picture, adopting their protocols and so forth has nothing to do with the solution. People can compete with Microsoft by... adding still more compatible software to the mix? If anything, this strategy sounds as if it would embed MS more thoroughly into the mire, making it nearly impossible to remove.
Well, I'd like to add that I'm sorry that the matter is one that strikes you so bitterly. But, like I said, it just doesn't strike me that anything is actually going to come of this. You're mistaking a lot of what I'm saying as taking sides. I'm looking at it and asking "what will the end result of this be?" I know that there are people in the EU driving for something that will really change something, but, I don't see it.
:-D
I mean, honestly, we all know where you stand on this... what do you expect will happen out of it? My prediction? MS still won't publish anything that changes their business strategy. The EU will continue purchasing Windows on all of their machinery, and the world will march along as if this never happened. I don't even view this matter as an opportunity for disruptive change, and, certainly, nothing that will cause any hardships on the part of MS.
Also, I should add that I play Vampire too
I should qualify, in case any professors are reading, that this isn't something that I spend a lot of time on. I just generally finish posting on Slashdot feeling somewhat wiped from the experience. When other students discuss the matter with me, they say "yeah, I sink a lot of time in that site." I think that most of us pretty much swear posting and even reading off during high-stress periods. Since I'm starting one at the moment, I really should have just stayed like a turtle.
Oh well, sorry if anyone got twisted funny.