Whatever this man means by the word "community" - it is not what most humans understand it to be.
If you're paying some people to participate, they will not be there for community. In fact, having a mixed paid/volunteer crowd creates a situation where it is almost impossible to maintain community activities without significant hiding of information. Either you have a group who gives freely and members benefit from the giving, or you have people who are being paid to contribute and they run a cost/benefit in their head for their time to participate. You really can't have both simultaneously and keep the group together.
Yes, but that is then a problem with the security of the operating system (which we already have), and the quality of the mail client software - and not just a gray Bayesian filtering problem that we are already losing.
Also, my suggestion above does not preclude current spam filtering.
Moving forward we MUST write software that is more robust against viruses. We've known this all along, but there has not been enough of a financial motivation or liability for software providers to include real prevention against viruses in the process of writing and deploying software. We do know how to do this, it's just harder that your typical - 2-month-out-the-door software dev. cycle.
After writing the post above, I put together my thoughts in a more coherent form in a (shudder) Microsoft Word Document: http://tinyurl.com/ytg78j Spam is not really my area of expertise, so I'd appreciate feedback.
Spam will effectively destroy email as we know it. Too many people, too many messages, and too easy to get to people.
We will migrate to a system where a sender must have a "key" before email is accepted, and those keys are under the control of the reciever.
This kind of system will work much like email, as it is so popular and so useful people will only migrate from it slowly. Default keys for new email users will be simple (like a "1"). Once someone is getting enough connection, enough email, then mail clients will communicate automatically with known good senders and create an individual, bidirectional keypair so that future communication with known friends continues, while spam is shut off. In the future, sharing someone's "contact" will be more akin to sharing the private key they have to connect to a person. Once you see a new email address use a known key of someone else, you would accept it once, automatically regnerate the key for the original person, and watch the behavior to determine if it was spam or a legitimate introduction of a friend to a friend. To most users this system could work exactly like email now - just need to add more functionality to the mail clients' spam processing ability.
This orgnization represents what is wrong with the software industry today. On top of unfair business practices and anti-competative monopolistic bullying -- they:
* write insecure products that people cannot fix themselves * delay patching their insecure products * try to prevent SOA/REST from emerging quickly; relying on obscene vendor lockin for revenue * build and use languages that promote and maintain poor programmming practices
They are the prototypical entrenched power monger, and they continue to pollute the industry with poor behavior, which is accepted only becuase they yield so much power with their cash.
Windows 2000 was their best product, everything else has just been a slow, painful death slide.
remember - there are 2 different kinds of truth: everyday truth and absolute truth
everyday truth is local to the facts at hand, and basically means "consistency". With the information that you have now (and believe), each fact is (everyday) true if it is consistent with the other facts you have. Unfortunately, this creates a catch-22, because you are never really sure of the other facts either and they are true. The only remedy for the catch-22 is to avoid isolation.
absolute truth is just that - validity of a fact not dependant on any single subset of other local facts. an absolute truth can be moved and bandied about between contexts and the validity of assertion remains unchanged. If inconsistency occurs, it is typically because the context is skewed, or you are not dealing with an absolute truth.
absolute truths do exist, but for all practical purposes it is far too large and far too complex for any human mind to grasp. If you pray to science, then all absolute truth is (is...) the position and momentum of all particles at each moment. EVERYTHING else is just a _story_, to a greater or lesser degree.
English uses the same word for both of these ideas, but philosophically, they are radically different.
The Buddhists figured this out more than 3000 years ago, and, well, most people lost (it) somewhere in all the killing we do.
no offense to Jeff - probably a great guy, but there is something seriously screwed with the structure of human society to have private individuals so rich they can finance startups that take people into outer space
Adjusted for the technology of the times, Eindows 2000 was the best OS they made.
The rest has been desparte grabs to retain their earnings. Microsoft is dead, and they know it.
Open systems, open formats and RESTful, web-based systems will make their busniess model no longer work. Even if they change their model to try and keep pace, they have lacked innovation for so long, there is no way they will maintain the revenues they need to pervent wall street from dumping them like last years fashion.
in America, money wins. period. you got it and you can do whatever you want, even (a la oj) get away with murder, literally.
this is the system the US has had since it was founded. Often the merchants with money own and run things, and they know it is only because the have money they get to stay in control.
so a few guys did a thing and got some money. woop do doo. a few hundred k. that's the game folks, at least in the US. grow up and either live with it, or work to change it, or leave.
now go out and get some for yourself or stop whining and complaining like hurt children. those developers chose to participate. they knew the deal, and took it. macheist folks were (mostly) OPEN about their books. most small business endeavors are not - they take all they can from everyone and most people NEVER KNOW just how much is taken.
frankly, I think money worship has gone way too far in the US, and I think the money-only game is sick and makes people unhappy. I am working to change it, but I don't complain any more.
this seems a natural result of closed-source software companies
I think it is a good thing: it goes to show that having closed systems puts information access at a premium instead of service and real, tangible results for your customers. Open source systems don't have this problem (they have others, 'bot' not this one).
god doesn't deserve a capital. in fact, humans would be much better off without god.
To anyone with an ounce of self respect and sense, it is obvious that "god" (as generally described in the west) is essentially a lie created by men to simultaneously instill both fear and hope in their fellow men. This lie grew with the success of the organizations that promoted it into the lynchpin of the major western/formal religions of today (except Buddhism).
This doesn't even start with some of the abhorrent things the Bible/Koran and other holy texts tells us to do, or the complete and total lack of reality in the stories promoted by the religious organizations. Simply by iteslf - the story of a sentient being that created the universe lacks credibility and consistency with observed reality.
I use a mac powerbook G4 laptop. After a quick scan of the wtmp.x files, my average time between reboots is about 7 or 8 days. Let me translate: I reboot my laptop once a week. Outside of reboots, it goes to sleep, and wakes up in 1-2 seconds. I almost never wait for my computer any more (since I got my new 2g -o- ram).
I think the real question here is not "why do reboots take so long?", but why do you need to reboot so often. The people who design your OS are working to minimize reboot time, but at some point you will have to do a fresh cold boot to set the system up from scratch.
The tools to save that state are not good on windows (see title). Why does so much of normal proceedure in Microsoft require a reeboot? (see title). Why are windows OS's so unstable? The answer to this is clear - see title above.
The meme that Google helps us find all the information is a huge marketing Spin.
Compared to "exactly the information you want, when and how you want it" - Google sucks. It is better that anything else now, but it still is not anywhere close to really solving the information access problem generally.
The character of online content is changing now rapidly. We used to be in an Internet where mostly only the site provider determined the content on the pages they served (/. being a notable, early exception). Now, with the rise of "2.0" systems, user-generated content, and empowerment of the individual - the content being served on many sites is coming into sites from wide groups, and being moderated and curated by those groups.
So... a thought: as user-submitted and group-moderated content continues to rise on the Internet - the main premise behind PageRank system will change. To remain relevant, Google will need to continue to evolve how they do their rankings to match the structure of data in the online world. Will/Can they?
FTA - "Its part of the continuing struggle between content owners and developers of technology, he said. People are trying to find out where the line is."
This is a very basic concept - the same people who invent technology are the types that create content. Broad-thinking creative types. The other type of people are the merchants: traditional business owners.
The battle between these SAME two factions drove founding of America. It was the traditional merchants who did not have enough power in 'old culture' Europe - so they left and came to the new world. They have been running things, yoking and squeezing the creative types ever since.
It is the same factors that drive the Shiite and Sunni conflict. It has lead to the most significant ideological gaps in human history.
Interestingly, the tide turned in the USA in November 2006. No longer is there any need for the small-minded, traditional merchants to run the system. Global communication, Web 2.0-mentality, and the empowering of the individual are all working together to eliminate the entrenched foothold by the merchants.
It will be great to see if the courts follow suit.
I wonder if there is much more that Novell could do to distance itself from the open source community than a wild backdoor romp in the sheets with Microsoft? Maybe they'll become the next FOSS SCOapegoat?
My readon this: For the most part, people won't be paid for their effort, and when they are, Reuters will decide if, when, and how much.
So if the for-profit company that takes money from your effort is not paying people, why would ANYONE send them juicy information, the best and most timely photos? (Other than corporate spin and marketing...) These suits do not understand human motivation at all. While many community/corporate models do work well - they work when the people who contribute significantly get something significant back for their participation in the community.
Stop letting your creativity be yoked by the merchants.
The only possible reason for people to upload is an individul's desire for the story/photo to get out - which puts even more bias on the distorted, biased coporate news process. Now everyone is "fighting" for what news is real - in an arena where people will always lose to the larger corporate profit motive.
Why wouldn't you send it to groups like Indymedia or other groups, collectives and nonprofits that have ideals more in line with the interests of individuals? Why wouldn't you post it to your own flickr account, craigslist, or make a blog post about it yourself? All these tools are available to anyone who can get the API working to upload it to Reuters, and work more in the individual's interest.
We no longer need merchants to control creative expression.
CNN launched a 'thing' like this too a while back (iReport, video)and it was laughed off the airwaves. They wanted you to "be the reporter!" and not pay you for your effort - while the whole time they make money off the ads your reports support. If people have a great story - post the video online with a site that allows you to share revenue from traffic, and includes real rewards for creating the content to those people who really create it.
The mention efficiency many times in the article, but do not mention the most important efficiency number - that is total energy in/out.
So, a quick calculation of efficiency:
FTA
Light in: 6 hours, 450 W light = 2.7 kWh
H energy out: 0.044 mL H... at 4.7 MJ/L (Wikipedia) * 1/1000 (L/mL) * 1/3.6e6 (kWh/J) * 1e6 (J/MJ) =
= 5.7 e -5 kWh
Disclaimer:
This probably has an error, please help me correct it.
It has been a really long time since I did physics or dimensional analysis.
I could not find in the paper the pressure for the 0.044 ml of generated hydrogen, nor it's weight, so I made a gross assumption the energy density listed in Wikipedia (at 700 bar) was close enough.
Regardless, if you put in 2.7 units of energy and get out 0.000057 units... that seems really (s)low.
Slashdot Mirror
Whatever this man means by the word "community" - it is not what most humans understand it to be.
If you're paying some people to participate, they will not be there for community. In fact, having a mixed paid/volunteer crowd creates a situation where it is almost impossible to maintain community activities without significant hiding of information. Either you have a group who gives freely and members benefit from the giving, or you have people who are being paid to contribute and they run a cost/benefit in their head for their time to participate. You really can't have both simultaneously and keep the group together.
See a recent talk I gave on what a community really is http://tinyurl.com/22j9fy
my daughter said something quite profound about a year ago: "Standing up to bullies is easy, you just stomp on their toes".
It is profound for several reasons. You shouldn't fight the bully head on, they are bigger and (in this case) control the White house and the Army.
But you make it hurt, a lot (you "stomp"), but you do it below the vision of most people watching.
You stand right up to the bully, to their face and make them face you. Most bullies are craven and will crumble at the first sign of real resistance.
Bush Psychology -- http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011807J.shtml
This is just the first step in a long, painful road to recovery for this nation.
Have you "illegally downloaded a full-length movie at some point in the past"?
Yes.
Yes, but that is then a problem with the security of the operating system (which we already have), and the quality of the mail client software - and not just a gray Bayesian filtering problem that we are already losing.
Also, my suggestion above does not preclude current spam filtering.
Moving forward we MUST write software that is more robust against viruses. We've known this all along, but there has not been enough of a financial motivation or liability for software providers to include real prevention against viruses in the process of writing and deploying software. We do know how to do this, it's just harder that your typical - 2-month-out-the-door software dev. cycle.
After writing the post above, I put together my thoughts in a more coherent form in a (shudder) Microsoft Word Document: http://tinyurl.com/ytg78j Spam is not really my area of expertise, so I'd appreciate feedback.
Spam will effectively destroy email as we know it. Too many people, too many messages, and too easy to get to people.
We will migrate to a system where a sender must have a "key" before email is accepted, and those keys are under the control of the reciever.
This kind of system will work much like email, as it is so popular and so useful people will only migrate from it slowly. Default keys for new email users will be simple (like a "1"). Once someone is getting enough connection, enough email, then mail clients will communicate automatically with known good senders and create an individual, bidirectional keypair so that future communication with known friends continues, while spam is shut off. In the future, sharing someone's "contact" will be more akin to sharing the private key they have to connect to a person. Once you see a new email address use a known key of someone else, you would accept it once, automatically regnerate the key for the original person, and watch the behavior to determine if it was spam or a legitimate introduction of a friend to a friend. To most users this system could work exactly like email now - just need to add more functionality to the mail clients' spam processing ability.
get Indi (http://getindi.com/)
"it is being monitored by military elements, keenly interested in applications of this material to front-line technologies"
I smell another 'non-lethal' crowd control option brewing.
"Keep them people down with webs, Private!"
This orgnization represents what is wrong with the software industry today. On top of unfair business practices and anti-competative monopolistic bullying -- they:
* write insecure products that people cannot fix themselves
* delay patching their insecure products
* try to prevent SOA/REST from emerging quickly; relying on obscene vendor lockin for revenue
* build and use languages that promote and maintain poor programmming practices
They are the prototypical entrenched power monger, and they continue to pollute the industry with poor behavior, which is accepted only becuase they yield so much power with their cash.
Windows 2000 was their best product, everything else has just been a slow, painful death slide.
remember - there are 2 different kinds of truth: everyday truth and absolute truth
everyday truth is local to the facts at hand, and basically means "consistency". With the information that you have now (and believe), each fact is (everyday) true if it is consistent with the other facts you have. Unfortunately, this creates a catch-22, because you are never really sure of the other facts either and they are true. The only remedy for the catch-22 is to avoid isolation.
absolute truth is just that - validity of a fact not dependant on any single subset of other local facts. an absolute truth can be moved and bandied about between contexts and the validity of assertion remains unchanged. If inconsistency occurs, it is typically because the context is skewed, or you are not dealing with an absolute truth.
absolute truths do exist, but for all practical purposes it is far too large and far too complex for any human mind to grasp. If you pray to science, then all absolute truth is (is...) the position and momentum of all particles at each moment. EVERYTHING else is just a _story_, to a greater or lesser degree.
English uses the same word for both of these ideas, but philosophically, they are radically different.
The Buddhists figured this out more than 3000 years ago, and, well, most people lost (it) somewhere in all the killing we do.
no offense to Jeff - probably a great guy, but there is something seriously screwed with the structure of human society to have private individuals so rich they can finance startups that take people into outer space
Adjusted for the technology of the times, Eindows 2000 was the best OS they made.
The rest has been desparte grabs to retain their earnings. Microsoft is dead, and they know it.
Open systems, open formats and RESTful, web-based systems will make their busniess model no longer work. Even if they change their model to try and keep pace, they have lacked innovation for so long, there is no way they will maintain the revenues they need to pervent wall street from dumping them like last years fashion.
let's cover the next warzone with depleted Hassium !
in America, money wins. period. you got it and you can do whatever you want, even (a la oj) get away with murder, literally.
this is the system the US has had since it was founded. Often the merchants with money own and run things, and they know it is only because the have money they get to stay in control.
so a few guys did a thing and got some money. woop do doo. a few hundred k. that's the game folks, at least in the US. grow up and either live with it, or work to change it, or leave.
now go out and get some for yourself or stop whining and complaining like hurt children. those developers chose to participate. they knew the deal, and took it. macheist folks were (mostly) OPEN about their books. most small business endeavors are not - they take all they can from everyone and most people NEVER KNOW just how much is taken.
frankly, I think money worship has gone way too far in the US, and I think the money-only game is sick and makes people unhappy. I am working to change it, but I don't complain any more.
this seems a natural result of closed-source software companies
I think it is a good thing: it goes to show that having closed systems puts information access at a premium instead of service and real, tangible results for your customers. Open source systems don't have this problem (they have others, 'bot' not this one).
are you a front end engineer? I'll hire you right now!
(only half joking)
god doesn't deserve a capital. in fact, humans would be much better off without god.
To anyone with an ounce of self respect and sense, it is obvious that "god" (as generally described in the west) is essentially a lie created by men to simultaneously instill both fear and hope in their fellow men. This lie grew with the success of the organizations that promoted it into the lynchpin of the major western/formal religions of today (except Buddhism).
This doesn't even start with some of the abhorrent things the Bible/Koran and other holy texts tells us to do, or the complete and total lack of reality in the stories promoted by the religious organizations. Simply by iteslf - the story of a sentient being that created the universe lacks credibility and consistency with observed reality.
I use a mac powerbook G4 laptop. After a quick scan of the wtmp.x files, my average time between reboots is about 7 or 8 days. Let me translate: I reboot my laptop once a week. Outside of reboots, it goes to sleep, and wakes up in 1-2 seconds. I almost never wait for my computer any more (since I got my new 2g -o- ram).
I think the real question here is not "why do reboots take so long?", but why do you need to reboot so often. The people who design your OS are working to minimize reboot time, but at some point you will have to do a fresh cold boot to set the system up from scratch.
The tools to save that state are not good on windows (see title).
Why does so much of normal proceedure in Microsoft require a reeboot? (see title).
Why are windows OS's so unstable? The answer to this is clear - see title above.
1 mac latop = $2400
1 audacity software package = $0
1 felony for secret recording = 2-4 in fed pen, thousands in fines
A clear audio recording your soon to be ex-wife telling you that she wants
you to have no access to your children = priceless
Victimless crime
Victimless crime
Victimless crime
The meme that Google helps us find all the information is a huge marketing Spin.
Compared to "exactly the information you want, when and how you want it" - Google sucks. It is better that anything else now, but it still is not anywhere close to really solving the information access problem generally.
Great article.
The character of online content is changing now rapidly. We used to be in an Internet where mostly only the site provider determined the content on the pages they served (/. being a notable, early exception). Now, with the rise of "2.0" systems, user-generated content, and empowerment of the individual - the content being served on many sites is coming into sites from wide groups, and being moderated and curated by those groups.
So... a thought: as user-submitted and group-moderated content continues to rise on the Internet - the main premise behind PageRank system will change. To remain relevant, Google will need to continue to evolve how they do their rankings to match the structure of data in the online world. Will/Can they?
I've written on this point exactly: here.
FTA - "Its part of the continuing struggle between content owners and developers of technology, he said. People are trying to find out where the line is."
This is a very basic concept - the same people who invent technology are the types that create content. Broad-thinking creative types. The other type of people are the merchants: traditional business owners.
The battle between these SAME two factions drove founding of America. It was the traditional merchants who did not have enough power in 'old culture' Europe - so they left and came to the new world. They have been running things, yoking and squeezing the creative types ever since.
It is the same factors that drive the Shiite and Sunni conflict. It has lead to the most significant ideological gaps in human history.
Interestingly, the tide turned in the USA in November 2006. No longer is there any need for the small-minded, traditional merchants to run the system. Global communication, Web 2.0-mentality, and the empowering of the individual are all working together to eliminate the entrenched foothold by the merchants.
It will be great to see if the courts follow suit.
I wonder if there is much more that Novell could do to distance itself from the open source community than a wild backdoor romp in the sheets with Microsoft? Maybe they'll become the next FOSS SCOapegoat?
My readon this: For the most part, people won't be paid for their effort, and when they are, Reuters will decide if, when, and how much.
So if the for-profit company that takes money from your effort is not paying people, why would ANYONE send them juicy information, the best and most timely photos? (Other than corporate spin and marketing...) These suits do not understand human motivation at all. While many community/corporate models do work well - they work when the people who contribute significantly get something significant back for their participation in the community.
Stop letting your creativity be yoked by the merchants.
The only possible reason for people to upload is an individul's desire for the story/photo to get out - which puts even more bias on the distorted, biased coporate news process. Now everyone is "fighting" for what news is real - in an arena where people will always lose to the larger corporate profit motive.
Why wouldn't you send it to groups like Indymedia or other groups, collectives and nonprofits that have ideals more in line with the interests of individuals? Why wouldn't you post it to your own flickr account, craigslist, or make a blog post about it yourself? All these tools are available to anyone who can get the API working to upload it to Reuters, and work more in the individual's interest.
We no longer need merchants to control creative expression.
CNN launched a 'thing' like this too a while back (iReport, video)and it was laughed off the airwaves. They wanted you to "be the reporter!" and not pay you for your effort - while the whole time they make money off the ads your reports support. If people have a great story - post the video online with a site that allows you to share revenue from traffic, and includes real rewards for creating the content to those people who really create it.
The mention efficiency many times in the article, but do not mention the most important efficiency number - that is total energy in/out.
... at 4.7 MJ/L (Wikipedia) * 1/1000 (L/mL) * 1/3.6e6 (kWh/J) * 1e6 (J/MJ) =
So, a quick calculation of efficiency:
FTA
Light in:
6 hours, 450 W light = 2.7 kWh
H energy out:
0.044 mL H
= 5.7 e -5 kWh
Disclaimer:
This probably has an error, please help me correct it.
It has been a really long time since I did physics or dimensional analysis.
I could not find in the paper the pressure for the 0.044 ml of generated hydrogen, nor it's weight, so I made a gross assumption the energy density listed in Wikipedia (at 700 bar) was close enough.
Regardless, if you put in 2.7 units of energy and get out 0.000057 units... that seems really (s)low.