"The laws are pretty clear that your online activity can only be recorded if the police specifically ask your ISP."
@Zouden since the legislation was signed yesterday have you personally looked at it?
I haven't but I've scanned through the discussion paper [0], "The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security has commenced an inquiry into potential reforms of national security legislation." from the 'Joint Parliamentary Committee on Intelligence and Security'. [1] This legislation is simply a rubber stamp to update the Telecommunications act 79, 97, the ASIO act 97 and the Intelligence services act 2001. The outcome of the specific changes are not clear at the moment but the big picture is clear. Lets make it easier to collect and gather intelligence and share it between stakeholders - a nasty word that means intelligence, law enforcement and revenue collection at state & federal level.
''There is a big risk that we will in the future not be able to undertake even basic investigations...
from our perspective data retention is a must. We seriously would not be able to do the majority
of investigations without it' AFP, High Tech Crime Centre, Neil Gaughan. [2]
Future changes to the legislation make the ideas in the discussion paper and potentially the legislation (which I have yet to read) passed dangerous because an objective of the report is to identify & store information of online of all Australian individuals.
"... What's amazing to me isn't that/. has carried on this long, but rather that the comment quality on here hasn't gone the way of most social new sites...."
I am surprised/. has survived. The place pretty much as it was back when it started in '97.
This is my first post for a couple of years. But there was a time when I lived here. I remember when/. was sold & CmdrTaco said all he wanted to do was run it I'm sure I for one didn't believe he'd still be at it now. The sig/noise is still bad if you trawl below the +2 level. But at +5 it's readable. I think the combination of moderation, ability to filter comments (text, best comments at top), culture and relationships have helped shape the site into something *still* readable. HackerNews [0], where I sort of trawl now exhibits all of the same sorts of growing pains/. had to go through.
Yes, because the images they extracted from the wii flickr feed was not filtered for images tagged with CC licenses restricting commercial use. It's been corrected without fuss but is stirring up the natives a bit
(sousveillance) '... watchful vigilance from underneath...' [0] and (shootback) turn camera back on them
Steve Mann [1] has a lot of intelligent things to say on surveillance [2], sousveillance [3] and the intersection of technology & privacy. The earliest I can find is in a 1995 paper [4]. In an article predating the Austrians, Mann advocates shooting back (with your own camera) [5].
Reference [0] Steve Mann, 'definition from Sousveillance as an alternative balance': http://wearcam.org/sousveillance.htm [Accessed Tuesday, 3 January 2006]
try pydoc by Ka-Ping Yee
on
Guido Goes Google
·
· Score: 2, Informative
`... Python get some better
documentation tools as well so that
it'd be easy to generate documentation
on par with the Java and.NET
documentation....`
I make this same mistake everytime I program in python. If you dont read the docs [1] & other peoples code you can write functional code, but with a third to a half bloat penalty. That is of course unless you read lots of example code or the docs...
So check again. Because PyDoc [2] is a tool that displays the documentation, from the source. It is pretty much on par with Java and.Net.
Reference [1] google on `PyDoc the module`, `look for Ka-Ping Yee and PyDoc`: http://www.google.com/search?q=pydoc [Accessed Friday, 23 December 2005]
[2] PyDoc, `The python documentation module by Ka-Ping Yee and PyDoc`: http://del.icio.us/goon/pydoc [Accessed Friday, 23 December 2005]
`... I tried to add that some people believed that Bomis is in fact not "glamour photography" but "pornography", and found myself accused of vandalism and given the boot....`[1]
I saw this doing a quick check on the history of Bomis. Here is the reference to the changes [2].
There are real problems in the way wikipedia allow rewrites on articles. Wikipedia itself doesn`t take any responsibility for inaccuracies, when there are technical measures that could be implemented to do this. Wikipedia does not identify who makes the changes. Making it difficult to verify if a change was malicious or valid.
It would not be difficult for users to gain XP [3] through group validated approvals to information, like in perlmonks. [4]
[3] XP or experience points are gained by group validation of posts. They are rewarded for good or acceptable behaviour and removed for the converse.
[4] perlmonks, `Perlmonks is a place where you can discuss Perl intelligently. Users start off as novices and work their way to Master gaining experience points gained through intelligent posts, articles etc.`: http://www.perlmonks.org/ [Accessed Wednesday, 21 December 2005]
[5] wikipedia watch, `We are interested in them because they have a massive, unearned influence on what passes for reliable information.`: http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/ [Accessed Wednesday, 21 December 2005]
`...What kind of advice -- both technical and theoretical -- would you give us on conducting a deep and objective study on the Unix desktop?...`
Improve apon betterdesktop. The site is a collection of usability data with a focus on Linux apps. The front page gives more detail...
`... is a project dedicated to sharing usability data with Linux developers. Over the past year, we have conducted many usability tests on different parts of the KDE and GNOME desktops. We created this site to serve as a place where developers can watch videos of these tests. Here you will find over 200 videos of people using Mozilla Firefox, Evolution, Open Office, Banshee, F-Spot and other applications....`
`... David only did this as a bit of fun - he deserves credit for producing something that's fun, with little profit (if any) for an awful lot of hard work...`
I hang my head in shame when I read some of the posts here. Isn't the journey of hacking together some technology from design to completion what/. is (was) about?
; Bits in SetDig tell which digit's being set ; NotSet equ 0 ; not in set mode H24Set equ 1 ; setting hours HrsSet equ 2 ; setting hours
Did anyone comment on the firmware? or even look at it & wonder how the watch works at code level? To me the biggest leap D made was a)making the firmware hackable & b)taking the trouble of getting a 3D designer to redisgn the cosmetics & rebuild the guts to fit into the case. Masterpiece.
I've added the url to Make blog where they really do get off on making things from scratch. Instead of worring about trivial things like fashion trends & consumer item aesthetics:P
`... Linus in my observation is usually the most humble and least obnoxious of those four...`
Yeah I tend to not get hot under the collar reading stuff like this. Remember/. and the other media feed off emotive articles. Thats why I attempt to use humour to make my point. Its only software after all. I tend to agree with your post. But I never really worry about `leaders`. I haven`t voted fot them yet:)
'... Brian: I'm not the Messiah! Will you please listen? I am not the Messiah, do you understand? Honestly! Woman: Only the true Messiah denies His divinity!...' [0]
The only statements Linus make that I listen to or really care about is ones concerning the kernel.[1] Everything else I temper with the knowledge that Linus like all of us have personal preferences. His prefereces are not mine. So while I might read about them I certainly don?t waste sleep over them.
'... I think it was, "Blessed are the cheesemakers."...' [1]
But thats not to say we shouldn?t question them. The Gnome Vs KDE debate has raged ever since KDE has used Qt. And for good reason. If we frame the debate slightly differently say wrt to freedom. You can see there is always going to be a clash between software having the latest functionality, usability and niceness with restrictions and the freedom of doing anything you want without restrictions.
'..."He's not the messiah; he's a very naughty boy."...' [2]
The error of choice Linus makes (his own to make) is that he wants the pragmatic solution to a problem. This is his strength in developing the kernel. It is also his weakness. If taken at a personal level there is nothing wrong with it.
'... He has given us... his shoe!...' [3]
When you get the followers picking up their thongs and shouting in agreement and aping their leader this a problem.
'... You've got to think for yourself! You are all individuals!...' [4]
So say after me kiddies, You are all different! Make your own choose when it comes to desktops. Dont listen to Linus, Choose your own.
Reference [0] Wikiquote, `Monty Python Life of Brian quotes: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Monty_Python%27s_Life _of_Brian [Accessed Wednesday, 14 December 2005] [1] The Linux Kernel Archives, `Kernel HQ the origin of everything wrt the Linux Kernel. Where it is dicussed, disseminated to death. Where Linus really is the the Messiah sometimes & a naughty boy most of the times.`: http://www.kernel.org [Accessed Wednesday, 14 December 2005] [2] Wikiquote, Life of Brian, Ibid. [Accessed Wednesday, 14 December 2005] [3] Wikiquote, Life of Brian, Ibid. [Accessed Wednesday, 14 December 2005] [4] Wikiquote, Life of Brian, Ibid. [Accessed Wednesday, 14 December 2005]
The Senator you are refering to is (ex) Senator Brian Harridine [0]. You can read here an interview on ABC Radio, AM (22 June, 2005) [1] on his Senate retirement. Harridine was a independent hardliner from Tasmania. The Senator you refer to is Richard Alston, Liberal Party Hack & now gracing the powers of London as Australia's High Comissioner in the UK.
'... Thankfully Alston lost his powerseat during following elections...'
No it has to do with fixed terms in the senate. You can read this in reference 1.
'... Alston was exposed as the luddite nutjob he trully was and the sun once again shone....'
No (unfortunately). He was among other things appointed 'Adjunct Professor in the Faculty of Information Technology at Bond University in Queensland'.
'... kill, and eat emus during his frequent, clandestine trips to Australia....'
No need. You can get emu in the supermarket along with Kangaroo, Crocs, Buffallo, Camel etc. I'd be a lot more impressed with hunting Taipan, Hoop snakes & Dropbears in season.
'... This isn't an article on how great
Google is. This is an article by
somebody in Google management trying to
explain how Google handles its
employees, and why it has been
sucessful....'
Full marks for citing the authors but this is not Journalism and should not be paraded as such.
This article is spin. Avoid the hard questions. Tell your story, repeat the lines you want the market to hear. Repeat it often.
The way it works in real journalism is balance. Test the assertions made by Schmidt with critical questions. Get them to answer the hard questions like cookie privacy and copyright. Where is the Journalist asking the hard questions to the CEO & paid consultant?
You wont get this with the self serving fluff you are reading. I wouldn`t bat an eyelid if this article was on the google blog page.
Appearing on Newsweek requires a different set of standards.
'... Even the CEO shared an office at Google for several months after he arrived....'
`Packem in`, but not too tight. No mention of google`s corporate niceness is complete without mentioning googlewatch.org [1]. I wouldn`t necessarily be so cynical but look at the *cough* authors.
What was the last time you read a CEO`s penned article for a Magazine?
This alone should send out a warning sign to readers of the article. The `Data drive decisions` line is a crock. No amount of data will allow accurate future decision making and is illustrated clearly by Clayton Christiansen`s talk on ITConversation, Capturing the Upside [2].
One of the things that has always puzzled me is why google has to communicate the `dont be evil line` everytime they get a chance. My interpretation of this is spin. Google has to enforce the perception they are not some intelligence gathering tool for the state. [3] The data they collect from you (if you allow them) wont be sold as a backoffice feed for advertisers. This is conjecture. But this is fact. The golden rule for PR is repeat a short message, loud and often. Repeat it so often, perception becomes reality.
By the way Googles current market cap is US$118. [4]
"... Help-desk staff were named as the worst
offenders, followed by those working in
technology start-ups, many of whom had
continued to wear T-shirts to work as a
consequence of the casual web culture
of the '90s...." [1]
`... More than 150 tech professionals
attended a corporate fashion show in
Sydney last night as organisers
officially dubbed the industry "the
worst dressed" in Australia.... Short
sleeved shirts, man-made fibres and the
wrong coloured socks were some of the
most common fashion faux-pas cited by
corporate stylist, Melanie Moss, who
hosted the event....` [2]
I reflect on this dressed in running shorts, Oxford blue shirt, vendorware tee shirt & black socks at my terminal. It`s a constant bone of contention to my better half who says I should dress a bit smarter. But I digress. I read an article a couple of months ago that confirmed my choice of dress.
It was by Kathy Sierra [3], who managed snare a ringside seat at the internal Amazon developers conference featuring Paul Graham [4]. This the only reference to this talk I have found. It goes something like this.... dignity is deadly...
`... When you evolve out of start-up
mode and start worrying about being
professional and dignified, you only
lose capabilities. You don't add
anything... you only take away. Dignity
is deadly....` [5]
"... You are claiming that internet use and open source organization on the net wouldn't have happened without Internet Explorer?!..."
No but is a pretty good trojan to expand onto the desktop wouldn't you say.
Before Mozilla and WWW in '94 you have to remember the state of MS Windows, V3.x Most Windows based user machines would have an OS without:
*networking (unless you had 3.1) *tcp/ip stack (unless you used trumpet created by a little tasmanian sw company of same name) *browser (unless you used mozilla, tulip etc)
I personally see it the other way around (MS gaining more than it gave ~ zero sum gain) with MS gaining a huge technical jolt up the rear.
I still remember with fondness bill.gates trying to run his own little internet - probably called bbb internally, big bad billy or something equally as silly:)
"... the entire OSS community would learn to never ever rely on proprietary tech again,... (continues)... with gnome dead everyone would standardize on KDE..."
'... Oh, and tapes remember where you
stopped listening, and resume where you
left off - even if it was years ago and
you've listen to a thousand tapes
since....'
Data storage: I remember tapes. I loaded my first programs off tape into my Sinclair ZX. Still use them. Currently listening to a TDK D60). Before disk drives (think Woz with Apple 2e who made a diskdrive without ever seeing them), tapes ruled for storing data on PC`s.
Music: I even have a retro SONY sports Walkman (WM-BF58) that I use to play recordings from the 1990. I just started it up and it works fine, radio and player. Compare this to the Creative PA-20 that is sitting on my desk. I need a USB enabled PC, with Win32. (Must do a search for *nix software).
'... I have great respect for the technology
companies involved in forging tape
standards and tape players. They are
cheap, durable and just work....'
Simple, durable and cheap: The thing I like the best is the simplicity. Tapes are simple. Rewind them with pencils, after kiddies work out theres some shiny brown stuff inside them. The sound is acceptable. Sure there are downsides but I`m sure the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.
After reading this about VC`s fishing for talent to build their ideas. I couldn`t put the thought out of my mind that `these guys are doomed`. Someone may bite at the money. Would you?
I don't see any interesting problems. Just lots of little nasty ones.
Thoughtful listening: One of the biggest shifts I`ve seen this year is audio. Audio scales. [2] It brings the ideas forward with more immediacy than the written word. I don`t have to be at the conference to hear these speakers. IT conversations [3] has a whole heap of talks suitable for those interested in start-ups. For example....
* Paul Graham on Great hackers [4]
* Clayton Christensen about Capturing the Upside [5]
* Tim O`Reilly on The paradigm shift [6]
* Ben, Mena Trot on Six Apart [7]
But don't think Pod cast. This is more radio than Pod and the ideas are lasting ones.
Nasty little problems make you stupid.
Good hackers avoid it like models avoid
cheese burgers. [8]
Great Hackers: The Paul Graham talk, Great Hackers, is humerous and insightful and all about the types of problems hackers find interesting. Graham poses lots of good questions on hacker motivation, what kind of projects hackers find worthy of solving, their tools and optimal environments.
Innovators Solution: The Clayton Christensen talk has to be listened to carefully. His talk is about the answers, to the questions posed in his book Innovators Dilemma.[9] The core idea is that creating a start-up is less hit and miss than first appears. Christensen has devised a model that can be used as a guide to turning an idea to an enterprise.
The Paradigm shift: Tim O`Reilly has written about, The paradigm shift in his article on the same name. His idea is that software like hardware is being comoditised. Therefore, the opportunities are not in hardware or software but the three c`s... accommodation's, collaboration & customisation. Listen to the talk or read the article [10] to find out.
SixApart: What is it like to run a start-up? Ben and Mena Trot have ridden the Blog Wave with their company Six Apart. The Trots talk about what may appear as trivial, day to day things about their business. None of the pie in the sky ideas, just how they solve problems like, What are the consequences of changing business focus from a software development company to a software service company. Reference
[0] `Paul Graham`, Great Hackers, talk, runtime... 30m 50s, 10Mb, recorded on 2004JUL27:
`... Today, I wish blogs would fall.
This comes from two days of intensive
googling while I learned how to netboot
an original ibook (no boot from USB, no
firewire at all) because of a dead
cdrom. I was all over the place: open
firmware, tftp, bootp, dhcpd, yaboot,
and endless useless tangents. I can't
tell you how many pages would come in
google where my search terms appeared,
but were in completely unrelated parts
of some knucklehead's blog....`
This post is rings loud and clear with me. But maybe you are searching for information from the wrong end. I`ll give you a personal example.
Ages ago I wanted to resurrect a old `486 to build an OpenBSDfirewall. Anyone familiar with old hardware will tell you that, `Its the little things (like *&!!@#$ BIOS) that matter` when installing operating systems. So I read all the manuals, man pages, catalogued the hardware (down to the serial numbers), read every Google, Yahoonewsgroup I could find and formulated a post detailing what I found. Most give up around the Google part.
... gather what you know into a
meaningful format, then dump it onto a
knowledgeable group and write up your
results...
The key insight I can give you, is to gather what you know into a meaningful format, then dump it onto a knowledgeable group and write up your results. In my case it was misc@openbsd.org. Having given a detailed account of what I wanted to know, I drew out those who had a clue of what was going on. The result was I got that firewall installed, but not without a lot of effort and some very helpful advise. You can read about it here [0], here [1], and here [2].
As for the lame blogs with useless
information, I agree.
So the answer is out there, but inside someones head in terms of experience and knowledge. It is up to you to learn as much as possible about what you do and dont know and approach the right domain of knowledge. If you post your knowledge (and verify it) to a list, write it up, then blog about it, the chances of someone else finding the write-up via Google may have better luck.
So if you want to distil this into a repeatable process
define your problem
read the esr faq on how to ask questions the smart way [3]
write up what you know/dont know carefully
find your expert knowledge domain
post your question carefully to a newsgroup, forum etc.
write up the results with meaningful heading, summary.
Why after 30 years of Artificial Intelligence, millions of dollars and lots of basic science cant we create intelligent computers?
`... And the Blue Brain Project just
might culminate in a new breed of
supersmart computers that will make
even BlueGene/L seem like a piker....`
[0]
I was expecting an interesting read with new insights of how the mind process works and how it solves lots of different bits of incomplete data and still come to reasonable conclusions. But reading the above line I lost a bit of that interest.
The failure of non thinking computer decision making has its roots in the Aristotelian approach [1] rounding off data to true or false. This kind of thinking extends right down to the fundamentals of science and ultimately the decision making algorythms. What happens when we want to process non-linear data? How do we compute equations to solve them? Traditional Western Scientific approaches (True or Not True) ignore the vagueness of answers and try to fit the results neatly into boxes. In dealing with real world data, the Eastern Confusion approach (True and Not True) can more accurately accommodate such data.
One approach to improve the intelligence of computed decision is to try using the Fuzzy Approximation Theorem or FAT. [2] The idea is that you can make decisions on non-linear data by covering the data curve with fuzzy linguistic rules (rule patches). It is then possible to map the language to the measured data and get a meaningful result.
For example, I`m working on a simple problem right now that grabs my local weather forecast for the day (date + time + 4 sets of min., max. temp, textual forecast description). The intention is to use the weather data numbers to determine how COLD, COOL, JUST RIGHT, WARM, HOT it is then based on this work out which clothes I need to wear using fuzzy rules such as
IF temp is COLD THEN trouserlength = LONG
IF temp is JUSTRIGHT THEN trouserlength = MEDIUM
IF temp is HOT THEN trouserlength = SHORT
Using this approach I can determines the answer to 3 particular questions.
What do I wear today?
If I have the washing on the line, do I bring it in? If I have washing to hang out do I hang it out?
Do I bother going on a picnic in the afternoon based on today`s weather forecast?
But the catch is, I don`t really need to guess the solution equation. The fuzzy system does it for me. Using FAT I should be able to get reasonable answers without equations. Sounds counter intuitive doesn?t it?
Well Man has been doing this kind of problem solving for thousands of years yet it seems its being ignored yet again. If you want to read more about this try reading Fuzzy Thinking [3] by Bart Kosko. [4]
Reference
[0] Otis Port , Blue Brain: Illuminating the Mind, Business Week Online, 2005 JUN 06:
And this is why Edward de Bono makes for interesting reading. I wont bother detailing his bio but point you to his website. de Bono spent the early part of his life working on the structure and self organisation of the brain.
He has spent considerable more time trying to get people to think better. For example in a thinking exercise he tries to explain why people (not just smart ones) argue incorrect results to problems through a simple example:
'... Most people cannot distinguish between: 6+2 = 8 8 = 6+2 The difference can be rather important. The addition of 6 and 2 cannot produce any answer other than 8. But 8 can be made up of combinations other than 6 and 2 (5+3, 4+4, 7+1). Why is this important? Because people start to believe that if you have a 'right' answer there is no need to think further because you can never be more than right. Having the right answer means you do not have to listen to other answers because they can never be 'more than right'. The result is a severe limitation on thinking. The point will be followed up in my next message. [Weekly Message (Week 20), Edward de Bono 8th May 2004]...'
Good ideas flow from good thinking. Good thinking is (mostly) about changing perception not logic or argument.
Slashdot Mirror
"The laws are pretty clear that your online activity can only be recorded if the police specifically ask your ISP."
@Zouden since the legislation was signed yesterday have you personally looked at it?
I haven't but I've scanned through the discussion paper [0], "The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security has commenced an inquiry into potential reforms of national security legislation." from the 'Joint Parliamentary Committee on Intelligence and Security'. [1] This legislation is simply a rubber stamp to update the Telecommunications act 79, 97, the ASIO act 97 and the Intelligence services act 2001. The outcome of the specific changes are not clear at the moment but the big picture is clear. Lets make it easier to collect and gather intelligence and share it between stakeholders - a nasty word that means intelligence, law enforcement and revenue collection at state & federal level.
''There is a big risk that we will in the future not be able to undertake even basic investigations...
from our perspective data retention is a must. We seriously would not be able to do the majority
of investigations without it' AFP, High Tech Crime Centre, Neil Gaughan. [2]
Future changes to the legislation make the ideas in the discussion paper and potentially the legislation (which I have yet to read) passed dangerous because an objective of the report is to identify & store information of online of all Australian individuals.
Reference
[0] http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House_of_Representatives_Committees?url=pjcis/nsl2012/additional/discussion%20paper.pdf
[1] http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House_of_Representatives_Committees?url=pjcis/nsl2012/index.htm
[2] http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/data-trail-easy-to-follow-for-big-brother-20120720-22ffm.html#ixzz24N57ILoN
"... What's amazing to me isn't that /. has carried on this long, but rather that the comment quality on here hasn't gone the way of most social new sites. ..."
I am surprised /. has survived. The place pretty much as it was back when it started in '97.
This is my first post for a couple of years. But there was a time when I lived here. I remember when /. was sold & CmdrTaco said all he wanted to do was run it I'm sure I for one didn't believe he'd still be at it now. The sig/noise is still bad if you trawl below the +2 level. But at +5 it's readable. I think the combination of moderation, ability to filter comments (text, best comments at top), culture and relationships have helped shape the site into something *still* readable. HackerNews [0], where I sort of trawl now exhibits all of the same sorts of growing pains /. had to go through.
[0] HN is to Startups what /. is (was) to Linux.
> Not sure if Yahoo was in the wrong here
Yes, because the images they extracted from the wii flickr feed was not filtered for images tagged with CC licenses restricting commercial use. It's been corrected without fuss but is stirring up the natives a bit
> Now check this out from Yahoo:
NQR. Check this post where wii.yahoo.com had to pull images from flickr where they ignored the licensing ~ http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/378171483/
'... microsoft doesnt make PC's FYI, so how could they compete with making PC's? ...'
xbox perhaps? Read here for more why.
(sousveillance) '... watchful vigilance from underneath ...' [0] and (shootback) turn camera back on them
Steve Mann [1] has a lot of intelligent things to say on surveillance [2], sousveillance [3] and the intersection of technology & privacy. The earliest I can find is in a 1995 paper [4]. In an article predating the Austrians, Mann advocates shooting back (with your own camera) [5].
More links can be found here. [6]
Reference
[0] Steve Mann, 'definition from Sousveillance as an alternative balance':
http://wearcam.org/sousveillance.htm
[Accessed Tuesday, 3 January 2006]
[1] Steve Mann, 'Cyberman':
http://wearcam.org/steve.html
[Accessed Tuesday, 3 January 2006]
[2] Steve Mann, 'Identity Trail - Stream 3 - technologies that identify, anonymize and authenticate':
http://idtrail.org/content/view/47/43/
[Accessed Tuesday, 3 January 2006]
[3] Steve Mann, 'Sousveillance: A Gathering of the Tribes':
http://sousveillance.org/tribesissue/
[Accessed Tuesday, 3 January 2006]
[4] Steve Mann, 'PRIVACY ISSUES OF WEARABLE CAMERAS VERSUS SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS, Feb. 24, 1995':
http://wearcam.org/netcam_privacy_issues.html
[Accessed Tuesday, 3 January 2006]
[5] Steve Mann, 'Shooting back article & pictures':
http://wearcam.org/shootingback.html
[Accessed Tuesday, 3 January 2006]
[6] Delicious 'my delicious links on steve.mann':
http://del.icio.us/goon/steve.mann
[Accessed Tuesday, 3 January 2006]
`... Python get some better
documentation tools as well so that
it'd be easy to generate documentation
on par with the Java and
documentation.
I make this same mistake everytime I program in python. If you dont read the docs [1] & other peoples code you can write functional code, but with a third to a half bloat penalty. That is of course unless you read lots of example code or the docs...
So check again. Because PyDoc [2] is a tool that displays the documentation, from the source. It is pretty much on par with Java and
Reference
[1] google on `PyDoc the module`, `look for Ka-Ping Yee and PyDoc`:
http://www.google.com/search?q=pydoc
[Accessed Friday, 23 December 2005]
[2] PyDoc, `The python documentation module by Ka-Ping Yee and PyDoc`:
http://del.icio.us/goon/pydoc
[Accessed Friday, 23 December 2005]
`... I tried to add that some people believed that Bomis is in fact not "glamour photography" but "pornography", and found myself accused of vandalism and given the boot. ...`[1]
3 04794
c tion=history
I saw this doing a quick check on the history of Bomis. Here is the reference to the changes [2].
There are real problems in the way wikipedia allow rewrites on articles. Wikipedia itself doesn`t take any responsibility for inaccuracies, when there are technical measures that could be implemented to do this. Wikipedia does not identify who makes the changes. Making it difficult to verify if a change was malicious or valid.
It would not be difficult for users to gain XP [3] through group validated approvals to information, like in perlmonks. [4]
Btw if you think your having problems, check wikipedia-watch.org. [5]
Reference
[1] slashdot, `William Randolph Hearst - not forgotten`:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=171739&cid=14
[Accessed Wednesday, 21 December 2005]
[2] wikipedia, `bomis edit history`:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bomis&a
[Accessed Wednesday, 21 December 2005]
[3] XP or experience points are gained by group validation of posts. They are rewarded for good or acceptable behaviour and removed for the converse.
[4] perlmonks, `Perlmonks is a place where you can discuss Perl intelligently. Users start off as novices and work their way to Master gaining experience points gained through intelligent posts, articles etc.`:
http://www.perlmonks.org/
[Accessed Wednesday, 21 December 2005]
[5] wikipedia watch, `We are interested in them because they have a massive, unearned influence on what passes for reliable information.`:
http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/
[Accessed Wednesday, 21 December 2005]
Improve apon betterdesktop. The site is a collection of usability data with a focus on Linux apps. The front page gives more detail
Looks like D's already on Make. Read about the geeky lad here & check out those pics.
I hang my head in shame when I read some of the posts here. Isn't the journey of hacking together some technology from design to completion what
Did anyone comment on the firmware? or even look at it & wonder how the watch works at code level? To me the biggest leap D made was a) making the firmware hackable & b) taking the trouble of getting a 3D designer to redisgn the cosmetics & rebuild the guts to fit into the case. Masterpiece.
I've added the url to Make blog where they really do get off on making things from scratch. Instead of worring about trivial things like fashion trends & consumer item aesthetics
Yeah I tend to not get hot under the collar reading stuff like this. Remember
The only statements Linus make that I listen to or really care about is ones concerning the kernel.[1] Everything else I temper with the knowledge that Linus like all of us have personal preferences. His prefereces are not mine. So while I might read about them I certainly don?t waste sleep over them. But thats not to say we shouldn?t question them. The Gnome Vs KDE debate has raged ever since KDE has used Qt. And for good reason. If we frame the debate slightly differently say wrt to freedom. You can see there is always going to be a clash between software having the latest functionality, usability and niceness with restrictions and the freedom of doing anything you want without restrictions. The error of choice Linus makes (his own to make) is that he wants the pragmatic solution to a problem. This is his strength in developing the kernel. It is also his weakness. If taken at a personal level there is nothing wrong with it. When you get the followers picking up their thongs and shouting in agreement and aping their leader this a problem. So say after me kiddies, You are all different! Make your own choose when it comes to desktops. Dont listen to Linus, Choose your own.
Reference
[0] Wikiquote, `Monty Python Life of Brian quotes:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Monty_Python%27s_Lif
[Accessed Wednesday, 14 December 2005]
[1] The Linux Kernel Archives, `Kernel HQ the origin of everything wrt the Linux Kernel. Where it is dicussed, disseminated to death. Where Linus really is the the Messiah sometimes & a naughty boy most of the times.`:
http://www.kernel.org
[Accessed Wednesday, 14 December 2005]
[2] Wikiquote, Life of Brian, Ibid.
[Accessed Wednesday, 14 December 2005]
[3] Wikiquote, Life of Brian, Ibid.
[Accessed Wednesday, 14 December 2005]
[4] Wikiquote, Life of Brian, Ibid.
[Accessed Wednesday, 14 December 2005]
Wrong. Dead wrong.
...'
...'
. aspx?id=2220537&table=HANSARDS
m
The Senator you are refering to is (ex) Senator Brian Harridine [0]. You can read here an interview on ABC Radio, AM (22 June, 2005) [1] on his Senate retirement. Harridine was a independent hardliner from Tasmania. The Senator you refer to is Richard Alston, Liberal Party Hack & now gracing the powers of London as Australia's High Comissioner in the UK.
'... Thankfully Alston lost his powerseat during following elections
No it has to do with fixed terms in the senate. You can read this in reference 1.
'... Alston was exposed as the luddite nutjob he trully was and the sun once again shone.
No (unfortunately). He was among other things appointed 'Adjunct Professor in the Faculty of Information Technology at Bond University in Queensland'.
Reference
[0] Australian Parliament Hansard, 'Validictory, Senate Hansard, 21 June, 2005':
http://parlinfoweb.aph.gov.au/piweb/view_document
[1] ABC AM, 'Brian Harradine bids farewell to the Senate':
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2005/s1397805.ht
[2] Department of Foreign Affairs & Trade, 'Richard Alston
Australian High Commissioner to the United Kingdom':
http://www.dfat.gov.au/homs/uk.html
No need. You can get emu in the supermarket along with Kangaroo, Crocs, Buffallo, Camel etc. I'd be a lot more impressed with hunting Taipan, Hoop snakes & Dropbears in season.
Full marks for citing the authors but this is not Journalism and should not be paraded as such.
This article is spin. Avoid the hard questions. Tell your story, repeat the lines you want the market to hear. Repeat it often.
The way it works in real journalism is balance. Test the assertions made by Schmidt with critical questions. Get them to answer the hard questions like cookie privacy and copyright. Where is the Journalist asking the hard questions to the CEO & paid consultant?
You wont get this with the self serving fluff you are reading. I wouldn`t bat an eyelid if this article was on the google blog page.
Appearing on Newsweek requires a different set of standards.
`Packem in`, but not too tight. No mention of google`s corporate niceness is complete without mentioning googlewatch.org [1]. I wouldn`t necessarily be so cynical but look at the *cough* authors.
This alone should send out a warning sign to readers of the article. The `Data drive decisions` line is a crock. No amount of data will allow accurate future decision making and is illustrated clearly by Clayton Christiansen`s talk on ITConversation, Capturing the Upside [2].
One of the things that has always puzzled me is why google has to communicate the `dont be evil line` everytime they get a chance. My interpretation of this is spin. Google has to enforce the perception they are not some intelligence gathering tool for the state. [3] The data they collect from you (if you allow them) wont be sold as a backoffice feed for advertisers. This is conjecture. But this is fact. The golden rule for PR is repeat a short message, loud and often. Repeat it so often, perception becomes reality.
By the way Googles current market cap is US$118. [4]
Reference
[1] google-watch.org, `Who watches the watchers?`:
http://www.google-watch.org
[2] delicious, `Clayton Christainsen, Capturing the Upside talk on ITConversations, 2004MAR17, Runtime: 1Hr 48m, 37.3Mb`:
http://del.icio.us/goon/clayton.christiansen
[3] google-watch.org, `Spooks on board, article about Google hiring exNSA staff.`:
http://www.google-watch.org/jobad.html
[4] www.scroogle.org, ` self-updating, market-cap watcher`:
http://www.scroogle.org/bubble.html
"... Help-desk staff were named as the worst ..." [1]
... Short ...` [2]
...
...` [5]
9 09640.html?oneclick=true
s ers/2005/09/dignity_is_dead.html
offenders, followed by those working in
technology start-ups, many of whom had
continued to wear T-shirts to work as a
consequence of the casual web culture
of the '90s.
`... More than 150 tech professionals
attended a corporate fashion show in
Sydney last night as organisers
officially dubbed the industry "the
worst dressed" in Australia.
sleeved shirts, man-made fibres and the
wrong coloured socks were some of the
most common fashion faux-pas cited by
corporate stylist, Melanie Moss, who
hosted the event.
I reflect on this dressed in running shorts, Oxford blue shirt, vendorware tee shirt & black socks at my terminal. It`s a constant bone of contention to my better half who says I should dress a bit smarter. But I digress. I read an article a couple of months ago that confirmed my choice of dress.
It was by Kathy Sierra [3], who managed snare a ringside seat at the internal Amazon developers conference featuring Paul Graham [4]. This the only reference to this talk I have found. It goes something like this.... dignity is deadly
`... When you evolve out of start-up
mode and start worrying about being
professional and dignified, you only
lose capabilities. You don't add
anything... you only take away. Dignity
is deadly.
Reference:
[1], [2] Louisa Horn, `IT workers dubbed ``worst dressed``:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2005/11/17/1132016
[Accessed Friday, 18 November 2005]
[3] Dignity is deadly, `Kathy Sierra comments on Paul Graham talk to Amazon developers why worring about clothes, dress & unessentials detracts from startup based companies.`:
http://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_u
[Accessed Friday, 18 November 2005]
[4] Paul Graham, `Paul Grahams website`:
http://www.paulgraham.com/bio.html
[Accessed Friday, 18 November 2005]
[5] Dignity is deadly, Kathy Sierras take on Paul Grahams comments. Ibid.
"... You are claiming that internet use and open source organization on the net wouldn't have happened without Internet Explorer?! ..."
:)
No but is a pretty good trojan to expand onto the desktop wouldn't you say.
Before Mozilla and WWW in '94 you have to remember the state of MS Windows, V3.x Most Windows based user machines would have an OS without:
*networking (unless you had 3.1)
*tcp/ip stack (unless you used trumpet created by a little tasmanian sw company of same name)
*browser (unless you used mozilla, tulip etc)
I personally see it the other way around (MS gaining more than it gave ~ zero sum gain) with MS gaining a huge technical jolt up the rear.
I still remember with fondness bill.gates trying to run his own little internet - probably called bbb internally, big bad billy or something equally as silly
"... the entire OSS community would learn to never ever rely on proprietary tech again, ... (continues) ... with gnome dead everyone would standardize on KDE ..."
*sigh*
Data storage: I remember tapes. I loaded my first programs off tape into my Sinclair ZX. Still use them. Currently listening to a TDK D60). Before disk drives (think Woz with Apple 2e who made a diskdrive without ever seeing them), tapes ruled for storing data on PC`s.
Music: I even have a retro SONY sports Walkman (WM-BF58) that I use to play recordings from the 1990. I just started it up and it works fine, radio and player. Compare this to the Creative PA-20 that is sitting on my desk. I need a USB enabled PC, with Win32. (Must do a search for *nix software).
'... I have great respect for the technology companies involved in forging tape standards and tape players. They are cheap, durable and just work.Simple, durable and cheap: The thing I like the best is the simplicity. Tapes are simple. Rewind them with pencils, after kiddies work out theres some shiny brown stuff inside them. The sound is acceptable. Sure there are downsides but I`m sure the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.
AS400 ... hackers despise it. [1]
... 1Hr 48m, 37.3Mb, recorded 2004MAR17:
... 37Min 45s, 8.6Mb, recorded 2003SEP18:
After reading this about VC`s fishing for talent to build their ideas. I couldn`t put the thought out of my mind that `these guys are doomed`. Someone may bite at the money. Would you?
I don't see any interesting problems. Just lots of little nasty ones.
Thoughtful listening:
One of the biggest shifts I`ve seen this year is audio. Audio scales. [2] It brings the ideas forward with more immediacy than the written word. I don`t have to be at the conference to hear these speakers. IT conversations [3] has a whole heap of talks suitable for those interested in start-ups. For example....
* Paul Graham on Great hackers [4]
* Clayton Christensen about Capturing the Upside [5]
* Tim O`Reilly on The paradigm shift [6]
* Ben, Mena Trot on Six Apart [7]
But don't think Pod cast. This is more radio than Pod and the ideas are lasting ones.
Nasty little problems make you stupid.
Good hackers avoid it like models avoid
cheese burgers. [8]
Great Hackers:
The Paul Graham talk, Great Hackers, is humerous and insightful and all about the types of problems hackers find interesting. Graham poses lots of good questions on hacker motivation, what kind of projects hackers find worthy of solving, their tools and optimal environments.
Innovators Solution:
The Clayton Christensen talk has to be listened to carefully. His talk is about the answers, to the questions posed in his book Innovators Dilemma.[9] The core idea is that creating a start-up is less hit and miss than first appears. Christensen has devised a model that can be used as a guide to turning an idea to an enterprise.
The Paradigm shift:
Tim O`Reilly has written about, The paradigm shift in his article on the same name. His idea is that software like hardware is being comoditised. Therefore, the opportunities are not in hardware or software but the three c`s... accommodation's, collaboration & customisation. Listen to the talk or read the article [10] to find out.
SixApart:
What is it like to run a start-up? Ben and Mena Trot have ridden the Blog Wave with their company Six Apart. The Trots talk about what may appear as trivial, day to day things about their business. None of the pie in the sky ideas, just how they solve problems like, What are the consequences of changing business focus from a software development company to a software service company.
Reference
[0] `Paul Graham`, Great Hackers, talk, runtime... 30m 50s, 10Mb, recorded on 2004JUL27:
http://www.itconversations.com/shows/detail188.htm l
[Accessed August 28, 2005]
[1] `Ideas For Your Next Tech Startup`, Slashdot.org comments on VC ideas they want to fund:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/27/022320 5&threshold=3&tid=187&tid=1
[Accessed August 28, 2005]
[2] Audio recordings scale (just like Linus does not). You can get the ideas from the source speakers with more immediacy that reading the words.
[3] `ITConversations`, A bottom up, audio based geek community:
http://www.itconversations.com/
[Accessed August 28, 2005]
[4] `Paul Graham`, Ibid.
[5] `Clayton Christensen`, Capturing the Upside, talk, runtime
http://www.itconversations.com/shows/detail135.htm l
[Accessed August 28, 2005]
[6] `Tim O`Reilly`, The Software Paradigm Shift, runtime
This post is rings loud and clear with me. But maybe you are searching for information from the wrong end. I`ll give you a personal example.
Ages ago I wanted to resurrect a old `486 to build an OpenBSD firewall. Anyone familiar with old hardware will tell you that, `Its the little things (like *&!!@#$ BIOS) that matter` when installing operating systems. So I read all the manuals, man pages, catalogued the hardware (down to the serial numbers), read every Google, Yahoo newsgroup I could find and formulated a post detailing what I found. Most give up around the Google part.
The key insight I can give you, is to gather what you know into a meaningful format, then dump it onto a knowledgeable group and write up your results. In my case it was misc@openbsd.org. Having given a detailed account of what I wanted to know, I drew out those who had a clue of what was going on. The result was I got that firewall installed, but not without a lot of effort and some very helpful advise. You can read about it here [0], here [1], and here [2].
So the answer is out there, but inside someones head in terms of experience and knowledge. It is up to you to learn as much as possible about what you do and dont know and approach the right domain of knowledge. If you post your knowledge (and verify it) to a list, write it up, then blog about it, the chances of someone else finding the write-up via Google may have better luck.
So if you want to distil this into a repeatable process
- define your problem
- read the esr faq on how to ask questions the smart way [3]
- write up what you know/dont know carefully
- find your expert knowledge domain
- post your question carefully to a newsgroup, forum etc.
- write up the results with meaningful heading, summary.
reference[0] Peter Renshaw, openbsd on old i386: http://goonmail.customer.netspace.net.au/2003OCT19 1842.html
[1] Peter Renshaw, i386 install cont ...:
http://goonmail.customer.netspace.net.au/2003OCT20 1637.html
[2] Peter Renshaw, i386 obsd install problem : http://goonmail.customer.netspace.net.au/2003OCT23 0736.html
[3] Eric S. Raymond, How To Ask Questions The Smart Way http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Why after 30 years of Artificial Intelligence, millions of dollars and lots of basic science cant we create intelligent computers?
I was expecting an interesting read with new insights of how the mind process works and how it solves lots of different bits of incomplete data and still come to reasonable conclusions. But reading the above line I lost a bit of that interest.
The failure of non thinking computer decision making has its roots in the Aristotelian approach [1] rounding off data to true or false. This kind of thinking extends right down to the fundamentals of science and ultimately the decision making algorythms. What happens when we want to process non-linear data? How do we compute equations to solve them? Traditional Western Scientific approaches (True or Not True) ignore the vagueness of answers and try to fit the results neatly into boxes. In dealing with real world data, the Eastern Confusion approach (True and Not True) can more accurately accommodate such data.
One approach to improve the intelligence of computed decision is to try using the Fuzzy Approximation Theorem or FAT. [2] The idea is that you can make decisions on non-linear data by covering the data curve with fuzzy linguistic rules (rule patches). It is then possible to map the language to the measured data and get a meaningful result.
For example, I`m working on a simple problem right now that grabs my local weather forecast for the day (date + time + 4 sets of min., max. temp, textual forecast description). The intention is to use the weather data numbers to determine how COLD, COOL, JUST RIGHT, WARM, HOT it is then based on this work out which clothes I need to wear using fuzzy rules such as
Using this approach I can determines the answer to 3 particular questions.
But the catch is, I don`t really need to guess the solution equation. The fuzzy system does it for me. Using FAT I should be able to get reasonable answers without equations. Sounds counter intuitive doesn?t it?
Well Man has been doing this kind of problem solving for thousands of years yet it seems its being ignored yet again. If you want to read more about this try reading Fuzzy Thinking [3] by Bart Kosko. [4]
Reference
[0] Otis Port , Blue Brain: Illuminating the Mind, Business Week Online, 2005 JUN 06:
http://www.businessweek.com/print/technology/conte nt/jun2005/tc2005066_6414_tc024.htm?chan=tc
[1] Aristotelian Logic, or syllogistic logic is a particular type of logic that dominates Western Scientific thinking:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotelian_logic
[1] Fuzzy Approximation Theory, FAT:
http://www.google.com/search?num=20&hl=en&lr=&q=+F AT+fuzzy+approximation+theory&btnG=Search
And this is why Edward de Bono makes for interesting reading. I wont bother detailing his bio but point you to his website. de Bono spent the early part of his life working on the structure and self organisation of the brain.
He has spent considerable more time trying to get people to think better. For example in a thinking exercise he tries to explain why people (not just smart ones) argue incorrect results to problems through a simple example:
Good ideas flow from good thinking. Good thinking is (mostly) about changing perception not logic or argument.