I agree. Technology is getting integrated into the lives of everyday people more and more. Yet many people don't know how to use it. I think there are some pretty good opportunities here.
And as far as infrastructure goes... as more and more of it gets built, we're ending up with a huge base with some very diverse maintenance needs. All kinds of languages, proprietary technologies, domains.
It's kind of like the physical infrastructure of New York. It's very organic, a hodgepodge of fiber optics and 70-year-old relay-based switching stations that control entire subway lines. Keeping it all working employs a huge number of people.
It is true that the notion of "private property" is a well established legal principle. But that doesn't necessarily make it "right".
Most private property in the U.S. originally became that way because it was taken by force (i.e. stolen). So basically, every deed to land in this country has a tainted history. All ownership is suspect.
The AC's opinion does matter. True, he probably lives in a jurisdiction where vandalism is illegal, so there are consequences if he violates these rules and gets caught. But if he chooses to, he can exercise his ability to violate the law and either accept the consequences or escape them, depending on his ability in that regard.
And judging by the state of the exteriors of most buildings in, say, New York City, there are a lot of urban dwellers who agree with his opinion.
Many Europeans truly can not understand the re-election of President Bush and some of his policies.
Trust me, many Americans can't understand it, either... about half of us.
Just like, for example, many Americans truly can not understand ethical policy in my home country The Netherlands or French politics in general.
Ultimately, the split comes down to secular humanism vs. fervent religion. In the U.S., the split is about half and half. Many people are religious, but also believe that religion has no place in government, and support secular policies as a result. This group, together with the agnostics and atheists, make up one side of the split. The other side does not really believe in separation of church and state. They always try to make the state enforce their moral codes.
Despite a nearly 50-50 split in the population, the religionists have influence beyond their numbers because they are better organized. So American policies are biased more towards this fervent religion.
As I understand it, European countries also have this religious/secular split, but instead of a roughly 50-50 split like we have in the U.S., the split is closer to 70-30, in favor of the secular humanists, so European policies reflect more of the secular humanist approach.
...Home biological garbage disposals, like a fast-paced compost pile... Of course I am ignoring the possibilities of abuse. They are both endless and quite horrifying.
Abuse, accident, or bad design...
It would really suck if the biological goo in my garbage disposal got out of its containment unit and came after me. Reminds me a bit of the grey goo scenario.
The U.S. Government does not want you to know this, but all the studies that have been done regarding the effect of marijuana on driving show that it has very little impact on driving performance.
Personally, I'm of the opinion that killing someone while driving drunk should be treated on the same level as premeditated murder. Afterall, you made several concious decisions leading up to the point where you killed that person. I don't care how OK you feel, or what antecdotal evidence you have about driving drunk, there's enough science to back up the claim that you are impared, you're just too stupid to accept it.
I'm of the opinion that killing (or severely injuring) someone while driving should be treated the same, regardless. No "excuses" and no "enhancements" to the penalty. If you hit me in your car and make me a paraplegic, I'm not going to care what excuse you might have. I'm not going to care if you were talking on your cell phone, drinking a bottle of vodka, dealing with your screaming kids in the back, or if you just didn't sleep enough last night. The end result is still the same. I still won't be able to walk again.
So I looked at the Heritage Foundation's map of Economic Freedom, and you know what countries come out on top?
Places like Sweden. Finland. Canada. Denmark. The Netherlands. The UK. The U.S. and Australia are in this category as well, plus a smattering of smaller countries like Luxembourg, Chile, and Ireland.
Most of these countries have strong social safety nets and workers have extensive and well-established rights. A strong social safety net benefits both society and business, as these countries have figured out.
Throw that away, and you'll have robber baron capitalism, and we know how good that is for a country's standard of living (look at Russia after the fall of the USSR).
Can you name a country that has no social safety net, little government regulation of industry, and at the same time, has a high standard of living? There are a lot of countries that fit the first two criteria, but they're in the third world.
I responded to that thread, but I did not state that a college degree was worthless.
A college degree is supposed to represent something, namely an "education". Ideally, an "educated person" should be a well-rounded individual, with a solid understanding of civilization and how it came to be that way. This includes a basic understanding of a wide variety of subjects, from economics to biology to history to mathematics, with no major "holes" in this liberal arts foundation. An educated person should have a well-developed ability to think critically, and should have established a solid rapport with the innate self-education apparatus that all humans are born with.
Learning how to self-educate is the most important lesson of college, because that skill will be valuable throughout life. It involves using whatever resources you can get your hands on. Those might be classes, books, newspaper articles, people, the Internet(s), trial-and-error experiences, etc. Each resource has a lesson to teach.
In today's world, however, more people go to college than ever before, and as a result, the degree has been "dumbed down" to the point where it no longer means that a person is "educated".
A college degree is not (and never has been) the one true path to the end result of being "educated". There are many other ways to get there, and this is what people forget in our metrics-obsessed society.
We were discouraged from learning programming at our elementary school, too. I was in third grade at the time. They said "you'll have to wait till you're in high school" and that only made it more appealing. They say the forbidden fruit never falls far from the tree.
Like many others, the idea of writing games was what got me really interested. There were some older kids into hacking, such as it was, and I wanted to be able to do what they did. There were still older kids in high school that we viewed almost like wizards, sorcerers, or legends... and then there were the warez pirates.
It was all an adventure, and perhaps that appealed to me most of all.
You know, I did say it was "just a TV show". Perhaps I need to bold my qualifiers or something. I couldn't say whether the show is fixed or not. Not enough information is given. I can't assume that it's honest, or that it's not... but it doesn't really matter, it's just entertainment to me. It's shamelessly commercialized. It's funny, but there's still some value to it.
Working for 4 years as a programmer at a company instead of going to college may not qualify as "street smart", but that's only one of many possible scenarios.
Here's another: A friend of mine went to a well-known college (and did well at it) for several years, then she had a traumatic event that forced a realignment of priorities. She decided that traveling the world for a couple of years would be a better educational value. After that, she went to work in the commercial sector and found that experience to be a much better use of time than sitting in a classroom. She constantly reads and learns new things, always expanding her skill set.
This person may or may not be me, with or without certain details changed, just like a TV show... you decide!
Re:I hate college
on
Defining Google
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Of course, one does not imply the other.
There are many people with degrees who are terrible workers, and plenty of people without degrees who are excellent workers. (Or spellers.) For what it's worth, I don't think using any sort of blanket disqualification is a good idea, either ethically or from a business perspective.
The new Apprentice starts up in a few weeks, and it pits the "book smarts" against the "street smarts" (those with degrees vs. those without). Granted, it's just a TV show, but I'll still find it interesting.
1) Paint the car with fake paint. 2) File a claim with the insurance company. 3) Go home, wash off the fake paint. 4) Deposit the check, and... PROFIT!!!
I can't even get reliable cell phone service in my house, which is in a first-world city. And voice packets over a cell network are pretty low-bandwidth.
Perhaps one day, I'll be able to travel across my county, state, country, and planet with uninterrupted, crystal-clear cell access, for free.
I'll agree with the grandparent that IP is one of the great lies of our time, and with the parent that this applies to IP *as currently implemented*.
The question is, what can be done about it? My idea won't get implemented for a million years, but here it is anyway...
Physical property rights don't come for free. If I own an acre of land, I pay an annual tax on it. Much of that tax goes to miscellaneous government expenses, but the essence of property tax is this: I pay an annual fee to the government, and in exchange, the government will recognize and protect my claim to the property.
Intellectual property should be similarly taxed. If Disney wants to continue to have an exclusive right to use Mickey Mouse, fine. But every year, they should be paying a yearly tax on that intellectual property. As the system currently stands, the government has to recognize and protect IP with no fee to offset the cost of this protection. This is just another form of corporate welfare.
One possible formula would be "Tax = K * Y * R" where K is some constant, Y is the number of year since the IP was registered, and R is the previous year's revenue that the IP owner received as a result of having government recognition of that IP. If they cared to place the IP in the public domain, no more taxation! There might even be a way to work a tax deduction.
If I go to the store and buy a widget, there are all kinds of hidden levies that I have to pay:
* Levy for shoplifted items. * Levy for customer returns. * Levy for items damaged during shipping, stocking, etc.
In the case of CDs, there are some additional hidden levies:
* Levy for the record labels's attempts to promote the 90% of artists that do not generate any profit for the label. * And I'm sure that part of the price paid for a CD already covers potential copyright infringement.
I agree that having a levy on recordable media is "double dipping". Placing a levy on the equipment used to make a copy is then "triple dipping".
Making fair use copies illegal by imposing copy protection means that this levy that I have paid *three times* is just extra profit.
Hmmm... I pay Social Security, my parents receive it. Times two. Nor do I have to worry about paying their medical bills, thanks to Medicare.
Of course, I could just let them starve/bleed/freeze to death, but I'd rather not. No one deserves to starve/bleed/freeze to death, especially when something so trivial can be done to stop it.
I get something back for my "investment", as does the rest of society.
Not only that, but Walmart also contributes a lot to Republicans, who in turn are actively pursuing the destruction of the american middle class, the 40 hour work week, and employer paid health care, as you said.
Why shop at stores that contribute to the destruction of the American way of life? Check out buyblue.org and choosetheblue.com and shop accordingly...
Like you, I'm offended by seeing bush on TV. It's just as bad when I see dick on TV. Seeing bush and dick together at the same time is especially obscene.
Hopefully the FCC will take action quickly to stop this pollution of our airwaves.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. Technology is getting integrated into the lives of everyday people more and more. Yet many people don't know how to use it. I think there are some pretty good opportunities here.
And as far as infrastructure goes... as more and more of it gets built, we're ending up with a huge base with some very diverse maintenance needs. All kinds of languages, proprietary technologies, domains.
It's kind of like the physical infrastructure of New York. It's very organic, a hodgepodge of fiber optics and 70-year-old relay-based switching stations that control entire subway lines. Keeping it all working employs a huge number of people.
It is true that the notion of "private property" is a well established legal principle. But that doesn't necessarily make it "right".
Most private property in the U.S. originally became that way because it was taken by force (i.e. stolen). So basically, every deed to land in this country has a tainted history. All ownership is suspect.
The AC's opinion does matter. True, he probably lives in a jurisdiction where vandalism is illegal, so there are consequences if he violates these rules and gets caught. But if he chooses to, he can exercise his ability to violate the law and either accept the consequences or escape them, depending on his ability in that regard.
And judging by the state of the exteriors of most buildings in, say, New York City, there are a lot of urban dwellers who agree with his opinion.
DVD blanks are 42 cents each at Costco right now, probably cheaper online. This strategy would work fine with DVDs as well.
Amazing, isn't it? They get cheaper by the week, so next time I need some more blanks, they'll probably be half the price they are now.
Many Europeans truly can not understand the re-election of President Bush and some of his policies.
Trust me, many Americans can't understand it, either... about half of us.
Just like, for example, many Americans truly can not understand ethical policy in my home country The Netherlands or French politics in general.
Ultimately, the split comes down to secular humanism vs. fervent religion. In the U.S., the split is about half and half. Many people are religious, but also believe that religion has no place in government, and support secular policies as a result. This group, together with the agnostics and atheists, make up one side of the split. The other side does not really believe in separation of church and state. They always try to make the state enforce their moral codes.
Despite a nearly 50-50 split in the population, the religionists have influence beyond their numbers because they are better organized. So American policies are biased more towards this fervent religion.
As I understand it, European countries also have this religious/secular split, but instead of a roughly 50-50 split like we have in the U.S., the split is closer to 70-30, in favor of the secular humanists, so European policies reflect more of the secular humanist approach.
Abuse, accident, or bad design...
It would really suck if the biological goo in my garbage disposal got out of its containment unit and came after me. Reminds me a bit of the grey goo scenario.
Let me set the record straight. This site has links to various recent studies on this topic.
The U.S. Government does not want you to know this, but all the studies that have been done regarding the effect of marijuana on driving show that it has very little impact on driving performance.
UK: Cannabis May Make You A Safer Driver (2000)
University Of Toronto Study Shows Marijuana Not A Factor In Driving Accidents (1999) (To be fair, this one is a "study of studies")
Australia: Cannabis Crash Risk Less: Study (1998)
Believe it or not, there's even one from the United States!
Personally, I'm of the opinion that killing someone while driving drunk should be treated on the same level as premeditated murder. Afterall, you made several concious decisions leading up to the point where you killed that person. I don't care how OK you feel, or what antecdotal evidence you have about driving drunk, there's enough science to back up the claim that you are impared, you're just too stupid to accept it.
I'm of the opinion that killing (or severely injuring) someone while driving should be treated the same, regardless. No "excuses" and no "enhancements" to the penalty. If you hit me in your car and make me a paraplegic, I'm not going to care what excuse you might have. I'm not going to care if you were talking on your cell phone, drinking a bottle of vodka, dealing with your screaming kids in the back, or if you just didn't sleep enough last night. The end result is still the same. I still won't be able to walk again.
Lots of them, here and here.
The 12% number is off, but the 25% number is correct. The US does have the largest prison population in the world, both as an absolute number and in percentage terms. More than China and Russia, and 5 to 8 times the rates of Canada and Western European countries. And a lot of people are there for nonviolent drug offenses, including this 25-year-old who's going to be in prison until age 81, with no chance of parole.
I wish this insanity would stop, although I don't hold out much hope at the rate things are going.
According to some, Eminem is not just punishment, it's torture!
Sorry, dude. You just broke the first law of Slashdot commenting .. READ THE ARTICLE
ROTFL...
Except that politicians usually commit their evil deeds in back-room meetings or in the Oval Office. Not on the streets...
So I looked at the Heritage Foundation's map of Economic Freedom, and you know what countries come out on top?
Places like Sweden. Finland. Canada. Denmark. The Netherlands. The UK. The U.S. and Australia are in this category as well, plus a smattering of smaller countries like Luxembourg, Chile, and Ireland.
Most of these countries have strong social safety nets and workers have extensive and well-established rights. A strong social safety net benefits both society and business, as these countries have figured out.
Throw that away, and you'll have robber baron capitalism, and we know how good that is for a country's standard of living (look at Russia after the fall of the USSR).
Can you name a country that has no social safety net, little government regulation of industry, and at the same time, has a high standard of living? There are a lot of countries that fit the first two criteria, but they're in the third world.
I responded to that thread, but I did not state that a college degree was worthless.
A college degree is supposed to represent something, namely an "education". Ideally, an "educated person" should be a well-rounded individual, with a solid understanding of civilization and how it came to be that way. This includes a basic understanding of a wide variety of subjects, from economics to biology to history to mathematics, with no major "holes" in this liberal arts foundation. An educated person should have a well-developed ability to think critically, and should have established a solid rapport with the innate self-education apparatus that all humans are born with.
Learning how to self-educate is the most important lesson of college, because that skill will be valuable throughout life. It involves using whatever resources you can get your hands on. Those might be classes, books, newspaper articles, people, the Internet(s), trial-and-error experiences, etc. Each resource has a lesson to teach.
In today's world, however, more people go to college than ever before, and as a result, the degree has been "dumbed down" to the point where it no longer means that a person is "educated".
A college degree is not (and never has been) the one true path to the end result of being "educated". There are many other ways to get there, and this is what people forget in our metrics-obsessed society.
That was my main point.
We were discouraged from learning programming at our elementary school, too. I was in third grade at the time. They said "you'll have to wait till you're in high school" and that only made it more appealing. They say the forbidden fruit never falls far from the tree.
Like many others, the idea of writing games was what got me really interested. There were some older kids into hacking, such as it was, and I wanted to be able to do what they did. There were still older kids in high school that we viewed almost like wizards, sorcerers, or legends... and then there were the warez pirates.
It was all an adventure, and perhaps that appealed to me most of all.
You know, I did say it was "just a TV show". Perhaps I need to bold my qualifiers or something. I couldn't say whether the show is fixed or not. Not enough information is given. I can't assume that it's honest, or that it's not... but it doesn't really matter, it's just entertainment to me. It's shamelessly commercialized. It's funny, but there's still some value to it.
Working for 4 years as a programmer at a company instead of going to college may not qualify as "street smart", but that's only one of many possible scenarios.
Here's another: A friend of mine went to a well-known college (and did well at it) for several years, then she had a traumatic event that forced a realignment of priorities. She decided that traveling the world for a couple of years would be a better educational value. After that, she went to work in the commercial sector and found that experience to be a much better use of time than sitting in a classroom. She constantly reads and learns new things, always expanding her skill set.
This person may or may not be me, with or without certain details changed, just like a TV show... you decide!
Of course, one does not imply the other.
There are many people with degrees who are terrible workers, and plenty of people without degrees who are excellent workers. (Or spellers.) For what it's worth, I don't think using any sort of blanket disqualification is a good idea, either ethically or from a business perspective.
The new Apprentice starts up in a few weeks, and it pits the "book smarts" against the "street smarts" (those with degrees vs. those without). Granted, it's just a TV show, but I'll still find it interesting.
I think what he meant was...
1) Paint the car with fake paint.
2) File a claim with the insurance company.
3) Go home, wash off the fake paint.
4) Deposit the check, and... PROFIT!!!
I can't even get reliable cell phone service in my house, which is in a first-world city. And voice packets over a cell network are pretty low-bandwidth.
Perhaps one day, I'll be able to travel across my county, state, country, and planet with uninterrupted, crystal-clear cell access, for free.
We'll talk then...
I'll agree with the grandparent that IP is one of the great lies of our time, and with the parent that this applies to IP *as currently implemented*.
The question is, what can be done about it? My idea won't get implemented for a million years, but here it is anyway...
Physical property rights don't come for free. If I own an acre of land, I pay an annual tax on it. Much of that tax goes to miscellaneous government expenses, but the essence of property tax is this: I pay an annual fee to the government, and in exchange, the government will recognize and protect my claim to the property.
Intellectual property should be similarly taxed. If Disney wants to continue to have an exclusive right to use Mickey Mouse, fine. But every year, they should be paying a yearly tax on that intellectual property. As the system currently stands, the government has to recognize and protect IP with no fee to offset the cost of this protection. This is just another form of corporate welfare.
One possible formula would be "Tax = K * Y * R" where K is some constant, Y is the number of year since the IP was registered, and R is the previous year's revenue that the IP owner received as a result of having government recognition of that IP. If they cared to place the IP in the public domain, no more taxation! There might even be a way to work a tax deduction.
If I go to the store and buy a widget, there are all kinds of hidden levies that I have to pay:
* Levy for shoplifted items.
* Levy for customer returns.
* Levy for items damaged during shipping, stocking, etc.
In the case of CDs, there are some additional hidden levies:
* Levy for the record labels's attempts to promote the 90% of artists that do not generate any profit for the label.
* And I'm sure that part of the price paid for a CD already covers potential copyright infringement.
I agree that having a levy on recordable media is "double dipping". Placing a levy on the equipment used to make a copy is then "triple dipping".
Making fair use copies illegal by imposing copy protection means that this levy that I have paid *three times* is just extra profit.
Hmmm... I pay Social Security, my parents receive it. Times two. Nor do I have to worry about paying their medical bills, thanks to Medicare.
Of course, I could just let them starve/bleed/freeze to death, but I'd rather not. No one deserves to starve/bleed/freeze to death, especially when something so trivial can be done to stop it.
I get something back for my "investment", as does the rest of society.
So that's what George W. Bush meant by "internets"... he's part of it and he let it slip out!
Not only that, but Walmart also contributes a lot to Republicans, who in turn are actively pursuing the destruction of the american middle class, the 40 hour work week, and employer paid health care, as you said.
Why shop at stores that contribute to the destruction of the American way of life? Check out buyblue.org and choosetheblue.com and shop accordingly...
Like you, I'm offended by seeing bush on TV. It's just as bad when I see dick on TV. Seeing bush and dick together at the same time is especially obscene.
Hopefully the FCC will take action quickly to stop this pollution of our airwaves.
I would really love some these "wackos" walk us through their individual thought process. I think it would be fascinating.
Thought process? You mean they actually think?