It's quite easy really, you print two pages side by side on both sides of the paper, then take the whole pile to the local binding shop, have them slice and bind, presto you have a printed version of a free book.
Like CDs and DVDs though it is much cooler to have the original if it is available.
much of the work revolves around problem-solving techniques, which cannot be learned second-hand.
Yes they can, most definitely. Problem solving techniques are part of what you are meant to learn. Should be taught at school, but usually isn't.
you can't learn how to code by reading someone else's code, or even discussing a coding solution.
Of course you can. Discussing how someone codes or why they decided to code in a specific way is an excellent way to teach and learn. You learn how to code by looking at how others did it.
You can't learn how to develop algorithms by looking over someone else's algorithm.
No, but you can learn by having them explain the thinking that led to the algorithm.
By working with other people (which usually means some people guiding the others through things) you miss out on learning how to problem-solve.
Absolute rubbish, you learn how to solve problems. How to solve problems is a learned skill and one that can be taught, in fact should be taught. It is completely ludicrous to claim otherwise.
but the general skills and concepts by which you can learn things on your own.
Which should be the point of any university course whether it is in the arts or a technical field.
So basically CS can't be approached like other disciplines - I can learn history from another history student, and I can learn approaches to a particular CS problem from another CS student, but I can only acquire problem solving skills by working by myself.
So you contradict yourself; learning approaches is studying and learning problem solving, a skill that is far more easily learned with others than on your own. Learning it on your own is a supreme waste of time and a complete waste of the knowledge of others. Problem solving is an acquired skill, one that can be taught.
Computer Science is just like any other science or technical field. Just as in the physics, astrophysics, chemistry, electrical engineering, applied maths and maths courses I did, our lecturers quite rightly encouraged collaboration and the exchange of knowledge, including the techniques and thinking needed to successfully solve problems. This is never cheating or copying, except in the minds of deranged bureaucrats who have zero knowledge of humans or how they learn.
It's entirely fair, if they've shown the good sense to learn from others while you've spent your time re-inventing the wheel. I'd test your skills obviously, but sounds to me like they'd be my first choice for an offer.
The head of the electrical engineering department I attended always said that he didn't care how you got through the degree because ultimately you'll have to learn the stuff and besides you learn more while working - if you grasp enough to make it through the degree, then you're capable of making it in employment. I can attest to that - I learned far more in my first 6 months of employment that I had learned in 4 years of university training.
Collaboration and mutual assistance is the great human strength and how we learn; any institution that tries to destroy this should have any government assistance terminated immediately - I do not want my tax money funding these monsters.
"We catch people who cheat. We have a very good program that catches people at cheating. Cheating is working with anyone else regarding the assignment, other than a TA or a professor. If you cheat, you fail. We've failed people before. If you cheat, we'll catch you and we'll fail you."
Only if they aren't smart enough to cheat intelligently. I guarantee that they catch at most 1 in 10 and that's being generous.
Of course working with another student is not in any way cheating and it is very disturbing to me that universities and technical colleges are more and more taking the attitude that it is cheating. I don't care what the dumb rules of the particular institution are or whether they are spelled out in advance - working with others is NOT cheating. It is called learning. So much for institutions of learning and collaboration. Universities really have gone downhill in the last few years.
I would never send my child to one of these institutions, but I pity the professor or dumb bureaucrat who tries to screw my child through these kind of rules; they'll certainly rue the day.
Why is advertising aimed at children even still legal? Yeah, it has been there for decades, but it has definitely become more insidious and just because it has gone on for a long time doesn't make it right. So much for so called family values and the desire to protect them from negative influences (encouraging them for instance to eat fast food is clearly a negative influence and very dangerous to their health).
Capitalism only works when it is properly controlled and there are checks.
It's more along the lines of here's yet another way that Western corporates, and that's not just the US - Shell helped fund a war so they could steal oil, are doing everything possible to screw Africa, and in fact any third world area, out of their natural resources. And that's everything from the oil companies who fund wars to pharmaceutical giants trying to steal local plants from tribes who have used them for centuries.
Fortunately this trend is changing - the San in South Africa recently won a victory against a pharmaceutical company that tried to screw them out of their right to a percentage of the profits from a slimming drug found in a plant that they discovered.
who think that it's perfectly ok to go hunt after music online because they can't find in a store here in Finland
It certainly is, especially with the huge cost of importing a disc, along with the possibility that you may not like it in the end and the store will insist that you pay for it regardless.
Most people who download huge amounts of music hardly listen to it and they would never have bought anything in the first place so no revenue has been lost.
There have been numerous articles around on the actual rendering and general performance of the PS2 vs X-Box; overall the X-Box is a more powerful system and added to that it is far easier to get at that power - it is notoriously difficult to develop for the PS2. There are also numerous compromises in the design of the PS2 that will undermine its performance as time goes on.
Ah, it would be so funny if they went after a company actually controlled by the mafia; I'm sorry sir your lawyer seems to have fallen on a knife, five times; don't hurt yourself on the way out, oh and you might as well send us a million dollars too.
I don't know, to listen to some religious nuts you'd think porn was the greatest threat there is, worse than being stretched on the rack or fed to the lions.
But of course you know what will happen if sales/subscriptions go down, they'll blame it on piracy. It happens here in South Africa, they'll hike CD prices by R50 (now understand that relative to income that is like raising the price about $20 and CDs already cost R150, nearly double that if they're two discs) - then these clowns claim the drop in sales is due to massive piracy.
Now if you'll excuse me we have to raise the jolly roger and set sail.
Even the simplest books engage your intellect. TV is in general an entirely passive medium. Books require eye tracking, TV does not. Books can make you think, they take time to read giving you time to process the information. TV rarely does the former and never does the latter.
People who read invariably have a better vocabulary and are more prone to thinking. The latter is something corporations and politicians positively hate - there's nothing worse than customers or constituents who think.
And the rest of the world will be even further behind.
Of course they'll just get laws passed making importation illegal. Then we'll have stories of intrepid TV card smugglers being gunned down at the border with their evil wares.
Whatever happened to the free market? Oh, we sold it to the entertainment industry.
While no doubt a good legal tactic it would be cruel and totally uncalled for in this case. The first thing parents do when something like this happens to their child is blame themselves. There is nothing more painful than losing a child - I have not personally experienced this, but I know what it is like to lose friends, other family and partners - those who have lost children tell me it is even worse than any of those and it hurts forever.
I do think his mother is misguided, but I couldn't condone corporate cruelty, especially not from a company like Sony that has recently been a major corporate bully.
Mothers overreact; we all want someone to blame when somebody dies; when a friend or worse a child kills themselves we're prone to blame ourselves.
On the matter of not divulging his private data I fully agree with Sony - I wouldn't want my mother poking around in my private stuff, even if I am dead - frankly it would be for her own good.
Online interactive games are very addictive, but there is no special design involved really, they're compelling in themselves. Single player games are too. How about this, when I get into a good book I let everything else slide.
Addiction - you die, quit or go insane. Really? Not true, certainly not when it comes to a physical addiction. Even psychological addiction, there are degrees, it is never all or nothing. And unfortunately the small minority go off the deep end one way or another; we can never save them, although it is always worth trying.
I have a problem with considering interacting over a network to be non-social. Funny how hardly anyone makes that claim about the telephone, but I recall such gripes arose when it was the new thing. You know many people suffer a great deal in direct face to face socialising, many even when using the telephone, and before the internet they would not interact with other people at all - if you haven't been there you cannot comment on what it is like. Socialising via a safer medium is far better than no socialising at all, but typically psychologists and social workers have a narrow view of the world, what is right, what is not, what is normal and what is abnormal. Most often they have no concept of their patient's world because they have never been there.
And frankly I've yet to meet a drug counsellor who was qualified to comment on anything. I'm still waiting for the day when I meet one who actually has the remotest clue about addiction.
The soldiers of Al-Qaeda may be misguided, they may even be insane (as anyone fanatically patriotic generally is), but on Sept 11 they carried out a military operation against valid military targets - White House and Pentagon are obvious, but the WTC housed significant communications equipment among other things and was therefore also a military target - there was of course collateral damage as the US call it, i.e. the unnecessary death of ordinary civilians. No-one screams and whines when these are Arabs in Israel or Afghanistan of course.
The US likes to act high and mighty, but it carries out more than its fair share of slaughter around the world so don't act all lilly white innocent with me.
The Israelis actively target civilians and they always have, but the US supports this particular terrorist government. Just like the South African army of old their soldiers are trained and encouraged to shoot civilians; you also do not go after a single Palestinian dissident with helicopter gunships unless it is your express intention to kill everyone in the area. The Palestinians are fighting a vastly better equipped enemy and they therefore carry out whatever military operations they can against their enemy's supporters.
The WTC, Pentagon and White House were all legitimate military targets. The US and Nato would call the civilian casualties collateral damage if it was their military operation.
Your statements regarding going after the country, its citizens and the family of someone you label as a terrorist merely shows your callous disregard for human life. By your logic Al-Qaida's operation against the US was completely justified. By the same logic the Palestinians are only doing what's right if they attack anyone and everyone associated with the Israelis or their government. Or is this yet another case of it's OK to kill people as long as they aren't Americans or Jews? As the Israelis say, they're only Arabs they're killing.
The IRA could perhaps be called terrorists, but their behaviour was little different from the UK government that happily tortured and murdered Irish civilians.
While I disagree with the wanton murder of civilians, when you're in the position of the Palestinians, the black people of South Africa or any of numerous other groups fighting against oppression, you know that they will in all likelihood murder you, your family and friends anyway so you fight back any way you can. Unfortunately innocent people end up dying. I know, some of my friends died in ANC bomb attacks in the 80s in South Africa. Our old government like the Israeli government was composed of murderous scum who had to be stopped and it can be hard to tell who is and isn't on their side when you're desperately fighting for your life.
And lets not forget that the US covertly supported the old SA government because they were anti-communist. By their own definition the US government sponsors terrorism and oppression.
Nothing is ever as simple as some would have us believe.
Slashdot Mirror
It's quite easy really, you print two pages side by side on both sides of the paper, then take the whole pile to the local binding shop, have them slice and bind, presto you have a printed version of a free book.
Like CDs and DVDs though it is much cooler to have the original if it is available.
Yes, yes, yes. Humans learn by example, they learn from others how to do things and that includes how to think.
Good to see that at least one person actually understands teaching and learning.
much of the work revolves around problem-solving techniques, which cannot be learned second-hand.
Yes they can, most definitely. Problem solving techniques are part of what you are meant to learn. Should be taught at school, but usually isn't.
you can't learn how to code by reading someone else's code, or even discussing a coding solution.
Of course you can. Discussing how someone codes or why they decided to code in a specific way is an excellent way to teach and learn. You learn how to code by looking at how others did it.
You can't learn how to develop algorithms by looking over someone else's algorithm.
No, but you can learn by having them explain the thinking that led to the algorithm.
By working with other people (which usually means some people guiding the others through things) you miss out on learning how to problem-solve.
Absolute rubbish, you learn how to solve problems. How to solve problems is a learned skill and one that can be taught, in fact should be taught. It is completely ludicrous to claim otherwise.
but the general skills and concepts by which you can learn things on your own.
Which should be the point of any university course whether it is in the arts or a technical field.
So basically CS can't be approached like other disciplines - I can learn history from another history student, and I can learn approaches to a particular CS problem from another CS student, but I can only acquire problem solving skills by working by myself.
So you contradict yourself; learning approaches is studying and learning problem solving, a skill that is far more easily learned with others than on your own. Learning it on your own is a supreme waste of time and a complete waste of the knowledge of others. Problem solving is an acquired skill, one that can be taught.
Computer Science is just like any other science or technical field. Just as in the physics, astrophysics, chemistry, electrical engineering, applied maths and maths courses I did, our lecturers quite rightly encouraged collaboration and the exchange of knowledge, including the techniques and thinking needed to successfully solve problems. This is never cheating or copying, except in the minds of deranged bureaucrats who have zero knowledge of humans or how they learn.
It's entirely fair, if they've shown the good sense to learn from others while you've spent your time re-inventing the wheel. I'd test your skills obviously, but sounds to me like they'd be my first choice for an offer.
The head of the electrical engineering department I attended always said that he didn't care how you got through the degree because ultimately you'll have to learn the stuff and besides you learn more while working - if you grasp enough to make it through the degree, then you're capable of making it in employment. I can attest to that - I learned far more in my first 6 months of employment that I had learned in 4 years of university training.
Collaboration and mutual assistance is the great human strength and how we learn; any institution that tries to destroy this should have any government assistance terminated immediately - I do not want my tax money funding these monsters.
"We catch people who cheat. We have a very good program that catches people at cheating. Cheating is working with anyone else regarding the assignment, other than a TA or a professor. If you cheat, you fail. We've failed people before. If you cheat, we'll catch you and we'll fail you."
Only if they aren't smart enough to cheat intelligently. I guarantee that they catch at most 1 in 10 and that's being generous.
Of course working with another student is not in any way cheating and it is very disturbing to me that universities and technical colleges are more and more taking the attitude that it is cheating. I don't care what the dumb rules of the particular institution are or whether they are spelled out in advance - working with others is NOT cheating. It is called learning. So much for institutions of learning and collaboration. Universities really have gone downhill in the last few years.
I would never send my child to one of these institutions, but I pity the professor or dumb bureaucrat who tries to screw my child through these kind of rules; they'll certainly rue the day.
Why is advertising aimed at children even still legal? Yeah, it has been there for decades, but it has definitely become more insidious and just because it has gone on for a long time doesn't make it right. So much for so called family values and the desire to protect them from negative influences (encouraging them for instance to eat fast food is clearly a negative influence and very dangerous to their health).
Capitalism only works when it is properly controlled and there are checks.
It's more along the lines of here's yet another way that Western corporates, and that's not just the US - Shell helped fund a war so they could steal oil, are doing everything possible to screw Africa, and in fact any third world area, out of their natural resources. And that's everything from the oil companies who fund wars to pharmaceutical giants trying to steal local plants from tribes who have used them for centuries.
Fortunately this trend is changing - the San in South Africa recently won a victory against a pharmaceutical company that tried to screw them out of their right to a percentage of the profits from a slimming drug found in a plant that they discovered.
Isn't it about time that patent office employees were required to have at least graduated kindergarten?
An IQ over 10 might be nice too.
It certainly is, especially with the huge cost of importing a disc, along with the possibility that you may not like it in the end and the store will insist that you pay for it regardless.
Most people who download huge amounts of music hardly listen to it and they would never have bought anything in the first place so no revenue has been lost.
There have been numerous articles around on the actual rendering and general performance of the PS2 vs X-Box; overall the X-Box is a more powerful system and added to that it is far easier to get at that power - it is notoriously difficult to develop for the PS2. There are also numerous compromises in the design of the PS2 that will undermine its performance as time goes on.
Ah, it would be so funny if they went after a company actually controlled by the mafia; I'm sorry sir your lawyer seems to have fallen on a knife, five times; don't hurt yourself on the way out, oh and you might as well send us a million dollars too.
There are nice, easy, sanctioned ways to steal.
But the Mafia still know how to deal with this kind of extortion - cut off their balls and shoot them in the back of the head.
I don't know, to listen to some religious nuts you'd think porn was the greatest threat there is, worse than being stretched on the rack or fed to the lions.
I have already informed Blizzard that neither I nor anyone I associate with will buy their games. It may not be much, but it is something.
But of course you know what will happen if sales/subscriptions go down, they'll blame it on piracy. It happens here in South Africa, they'll hike CD prices by R50 (now understand that relative to income that is like raising the price about $20 and CDs already cost R150, nearly double that if they're two discs) - then these clowns claim the drop in sales is due to massive piracy.
Now if you'll excuse me we have to raise the jolly roger and set sail.
Even the simplest books engage your intellect. TV is in general an entirely passive medium. Books require eye tracking, TV does not. Books can make you think, they take time to read giving you time to process the information. TV rarely does the former and never does the latter.
People who read invariably have a better vocabulary and are more prone to thinking. The latter is something corporations and politicians positively hate - there's nothing worse than customers or constituents who think.
They know where the little bastard lives and he didn't even suffer an unfortunate accident? That's sad.
And the rest of the world will be even further behind.
Of course they'll just get laws passed making importation illegal. Then we'll have stories of intrepid TV card smugglers being gunned down at the border with their evil wares.
Whatever happened to the free market? Oh, we sold it to the entertainment industry.
While no doubt a good legal tactic it would be cruel and totally uncalled for in this case. The first thing parents do when something like this happens to their child is blame themselves. There is nothing more painful than losing a child - I have not personally experienced this, but I know what it is like to lose friends, other family and partners - those who have lost children tell me it is even worse than any of those and it hurts forever.
I do think his mother is misguided, but I couldn't condone corporate cruelty, especially not from a company like Sony that has recently been a major corporate bully.
Mothers overreact; we all want someone to blame when somebody dies; when a friend or worse a child kills themselves we're prone to blame ourselves.
On the matter of not divulging his private data I fully agree with Sony - I wouldn't want my mother poking around in my private stuff, even if I am dead - frankly it would be for her own good.
Online interactive games are very addictive, but there is no special design involved really, they're compelling in themselves. Single player games are too. How about this, when I get into a good book I let everything else slide.
Addiction - you die, quit or go insane. Really? Not true, certainly not when it comes to a physical addiction. Even psychological addiction, there are degrees, it is never all or nothing. And unfortunately the small minority go off the deep end one way or another; we can never save them, although it is always worth trying.
I have a problem with considering interacting over a network to be non-social. Funny how hardly anyone makes that claim about the telephone, but I recall such gripes arose when it was the new thing. You know many people suffer a great deal in direct face to face socialising, many even when using the telephone, and before the internet they would not interact with other people at all - if you haven't been there you cannot comment on what it is like. Socialising via a safer medium is far better than no socialising at all, but typically psychologists and social workers have a narrow view of the world, what is right, what is not, what is normal and what is abnormal. Most often they have no concept of their patient's world because they have never been there.
And frankly I've yet to meet a drug counsellor who was qualified to comment on anything. I'm still waiting for the day when I meet one who actually has the remotest clue about addiction.
If I found spyware on my PC, put there by my partner I would throw her out immediately.
And what's this nonsense of guys always being the one who has to go elsewhere. To hell with that, she can move out and find a new home.
The soldiers of Al-Qaeda may be misguided, they may even be insane (as anyone fanatically patriotic generally is), but on Sept 11 they carried out a military operation against valid military targets - White House and Pentagon are obvious, but the WTC housed significant communications equipment among other things and was therefore also a military target - there was of course collateral damage as the US call it, i.e. the unnecessary death of ordinary civilians. No-one screams and whines when these are Arabs in Israel or Afghanistan of course.
The US likes to act high and mighty, but it carries out more than its fair share of slaughter around the world so don't act all lilly white innocent with me.
I agree it was exactly like the terrorism carried out in Afghanistan by the US government and in Palestine by the Israeli government.
Oh hang on I forgot, those were just Arab children which hardly counts.
The Israelis actively target civilians and they always have, but the US supports this particular terrorist government. Just like the South African army of old their soldiers are trained and encouraged to shoot civilians; you also do not go after a single Palestinian dissident with helicopter gunships unless it is your express intention to kill everyone in the area. The Palestinians are fighting a vastly better equipped enemy and they therefore carry out whatever military operations they can against their enemy's supporters.
The WTC, Pentagon and White House were all legitimate military targets. The US and Nato would call the civilian casualties collateral damage if it was their military operation.
Your statements regarding going after the country, its citizens and the family of someone you label as a terrorist merely shows your callous disregard for human life. By your logic Al-Qaida's operation against the US was completely justified. By the same logic the Palestinians are only doing what's right if they attack anyone and everyone associated with the Israelis or their government. Or is this yet another case of it's OK to kill people as long as they aren't Americans or Jews? As the Israelis say, they're only Arabs they're killing.
The IRA could perhaps be called terrorists, but their behaviour was little different from the UK government that happily tortured and murdered Irish civilians.
While I disagree with the wanton murder of civilians, when you're in the position of the Palestinians, the black people of South Africa or any of numerous other groups fighting against oppression, you know that they will in all likelihood murder you, your family and friends anyway so you fight back any way you can. Unfortunately innocent people end up dying. I know, some of my friends died in ANC bomb attacks in the 80s in South Africa. Our old government like the Israeli government was composed of murderous scum who had to be stopped and it can be hard to tell who is and isn't on their side when you're desperately fighting for your life.
And lets not forget that the US covertly supported the old SA government because they were anti-communist. By their own definition the US government sponsors terrorism and oppression.
Nothing is ever as simple as some would have us believe.