I have an even better idea... let the marketplace provide services for location of commercial websites: say maybe, have a list of words ("key words") that the internet browser could type in at a website, and then that website would facilitate finding the desired website, based on a huge database of known websites.
While I do agree with your post, I would like to point out that there's a difference between middle managers making some bad decisions, and systemic unethical business practices.
I don't know enough to say if I consider walmart's business practices unethical, but my intuition is that large institutions tend to support unethical behavior, as long as the cost of putting out propaganda to the contrary is less than the cost of acting ethically.
isn't this kinda like centrino?
on
Viiv Falls Flat
·
· Score: 1
It seems intel is getting big on pushing "platforms" instead of hardware.
Yes, that is the answer. Or more practically, maybe a large group (>= 10,000?) of people could decide to make a certain year a "we don't pay taxes" year. I'd probably join em. The nerve of our government! They want our money, but won't send out a nice bill indicating how much we owe. Sure, perhaps it's prohibitively expensive to figure out the complexities of each individual's taxes owed. But then again, it's largely their own damn fault for making the tax code such a mess. They don't even make the envelope to the IRS postage paid! Bottom line: I never agreed to all the services they provide. If I'm actually paying it's just because I'm too much of a coward to stand up to their threats of imprisonment.
can anyone tell me why LI batteries have taken over the world? It seems they are expensive and only seem to last about 5 years. NiMH batteries seem much more appropriate for devices such as cell phones that people compulsively recharge anyway.
I think your points highlight a possible key weakness of libertarianism. Unfortunately, engineering goverment strategies to maximize societal benefit seem dangerous. Where exactly do you draw the line between the benefit for individuals vs the benefit for society?
I am a Libertarian, but the reason I believe in Libertarianism is because I suppose it to be a good way to maximize societal benefits. And because seeing society benefit is my personal end-goal in government, I am superficially attracted to the idea of taking money from those for whom its relative value is low. Or taking from those who will not even invest money back into the economy.
However, I am not sure what sort of scientifically-justified system could draw the line between the rights of the individual and the benefits to society. Certainly there is a line that is drawn by each government, but I'm afraid that line is arbitrary, especially where democracies are concerned.
Did you say C# and constrained in the same sentence? It seems to me that C# is designed to break all that is sacred in the OO paradigm (I'm looking at you, keyword new).
unless you're going to be using polymorphism, I don't see any reason to use inheritance. If I want to use the functionality of one object in another, I just create an instance of it there.
Certainly if you use a language with generics, which I take Smalltalk to be from you example, you have inherent polymorphism. But that is a design descision built into the language. To make another example, you don't have to think about the modularity of your design when you make a java GUI. That is because the java GUI API already has its modularity defined. There is a given class heirarchy that you are using. And this certainly can be a joy.
Now, perhaps it's just me, but I've never found a place for OO in small programs. There it just gets in the way, IMHO. Unless you're going to be using polymorphism, I don't see how OO really adds anything to programming. And the trouble with polymorphism is that to really use it effectively you have to plan in advance how you're going to break your program into modular pieces. I'm not a very experienced programmer; I'm still in school in fact. But in my limited experience, however I plan to break a program up into conceptual parts, I eventually find in the course of my programming that my design did not incorporate the flexibility that I envisioned, and I have to redesign it.
I feel there's a fundamental difference when I'm programming with C rather than when I'm programming with Java, for instance. If I'm using C, I think only how I'm going to solve the problem. If I'm using Java, I think about how I'm going to design the problem solution, and then how I'm going to actually solve the problem. To be simpler, my distinction is that I spend a lot of time making design decisions rather than writing code. This is undesirable for smaller projects. Perhaps it's just a matter of inexperience.
I really do feel that OO is an organizational aid more than anything else. There's no reason that you can't write in an OO style with C, for instance.
C++ is way too complex. I suppose it'd be fine to teach a beginner a small subset of C++, but in that case, why not teach them a simpler language like C or Java? Plus, when the beginner goes online and looks up how to do in C++, who knows what kind of horrible hacks they'll find?
Anyway, this ask slashdot question needs to provide more background info. If it is a beginner who plans to have a career in programming, I think they should be taught the languages that best teach them paradigms without confusing them. Also, Java has an extensive native API and online reference that lets beginners quickly get a gui put together so that they can interact with their program and get visual feedback.
Personally, if I were to each a beginner a language, I'd go for haskell. Hopefully they'd learn thorough and elegant problem solving techniques this way. Or it would leave them irreparably scarred.
I'm going to have to weigh in on the side of the trackpoint. I suppose I've never been forced to use a touchpad for any long period of time, so perhaps I might come to like it as much.
I suppose using a trackpoint has a longer training period to get accustomed to using it. But I suspect that a trained touchpoint user is much more accurate than a touchpad user. I could play a FPS with a touchpoint if I had to, but I can't imagine doing it with a touchpad.
Oh, and I absolutely hate the tapping-is-clicking function of touchpads. I didn't want to click on anything, I just wanted to move the damn cursor!
You start off by stating that you hate the self-righteousness of the government of this country, and saying that they shouldn't expect companies to act morally or by american values, and then you end saying that congress should take a stand.
Frankly, I'm rather scared of congress getting involved in complex moral issues. I wish people would have exactly the attitude that you seem to really hate. Instead of wishing congress would fix everything for them, people should hold companies accountable. Congress is held accountable to large corporations, generally not the other way around, unless there is a huge public outcry.
Oh, and so far I still don't think I know enough about the chinese censorship issue to make a judgement on whether google is doing "good" or "evil". I think we'll have to wait and see the ramifications.
They are only improving the state of censorship in China...
Can you clarify this for me? I am unable to see why this is necessarily so.
Would you say that without google in china, china's citizens would be less censored? I think that chinese companies could probably make perfectly good search engines that would comply with chinese censorship laws as well.
Actually, that brings up an interesting idea. If you are a chinese company, and you follow the censorship laws of china, are you doing evil? I suppose you could say that chinese companies don't have a choice. But does that make it less evil (if it is, indeed evil)?
Slashdot Mirror
I have an even better idea... let the marketplace provide services for location of commercial websites: say maybe, have a list of words ("key words") that the internet browser could type in at a website, and then that website would facilitate finding the desired website, based on a huge database of known websites.
While I do agree with your post, I would like to point out that there's a difference between middle managers making some bad decisions, and systemic unethical business practices.
I don't know enough to say if I consider walmart's business practices unethical, but my intuition is that large institutions tend to support unethical behavior, as long as the cost of putting out propaganda to the contrary is less than the cost of acting ethically.
It seems intel is getting big on pushing "platforms" instead of hardware.
+1 informative. Hehehe....
noone's going to mod parent +1 informative?
http://70.86.201.113/imageserv2/temporary/PBF024AD Unicorn.jpg
The problem is not that the game is too fun or addicting, it's that RL isn't fun enough/meaningful enough/engaging enough.
MMOs provide an easy path, with clear rewards and punishments. RL doesn't usually provide any clear feedback on how you're doing in it.
Oh, and hallucinogens can be good for treating addiction.
Yes, that is the answer.
Or more practically, maybe a large group (>= 10,000?) of people could decide to make a certain year a "we don't pay taxes" year. I'd probably join em. The nerve of our government! They want our money, but won't send out a nice bill indicating how much we owe. Sure, perhaps it's prohibitively expensive to figure out the complexities of each individual's taxes owed. But then again, it's largely their own damn fault for making the tax code such a mess.
They don't even make the envelope to the IRS postage paid!
Bottom line:
I never agreed to all the services they provide.
If I'm actually paying it's just because I'm too much of a coward to stand up to their threats of imprisonment.
can anyone tell me why LI batteries have taken over the world? It seems they are expensive and only seem to last about 5 years. NiMH batteries seem much more appropriate for devices such as cell phones that people compulsively recharge anyway.
I think your points highlight a possible key weakness of libertarianism. Unfortunately, engineering goverment strategies to maximize societal benefit seem dangerous. Where exactly do you draw the line between the benefit for individuals vs the benefit for society?
I am a Libertarian, but the reason I believe in Libertarianism is because I suppose it to be a good way to maximize societal benefits. And because seeing society benefit is my personal end-goal in government, I am superficially attracted to the idea of taking money from those for whom its relative value is low. Or taking from those who will not even invest money back into the economy.
However, I am not sure what sort of scientifically-justified system could draw the line between the rights of the individual and the benefits to society. Certainly there is a line that is drawn by each government, but I'm afraid that line is arbitrary, especially where democracies are concerned.
In fact, I seem to remember a certain book review that may be of aid to you unenlightened masses.
Oh, come now... has noone read "The Areas of my Expertise"?
Ya'll are missing out.
Well, at least we agree on something.
And I dunno if I was clear, but I meant the new keyword in context of masking functions.
Did you say C# and constrained in the same sentence? It seems to me that C# is designed to break all that is sacred in the OO paradigm (I'm looking at you, keyword new).
unless you're going to be using polymorphism, I don't see any reason to use inheritance. If I want to use the functionality of one object in another, I just create an instance of it there.
Certainly if you use a language with generics, which I take Smalltalk to be from you example, you have inherent polymorphism. But that is a design descision built into the language. To make another example, you don't have to think about the modularity of your design when you make a java GUI. That is because the java GUI API already has its modularity defined. There is a given class heirarchy that you are using. And this certainly can be a joy.
Now, perhaps it's just me, but I've never found a place for OO in small programs. There it just gets in the way, IMHO. Unless you're going to be using polymorphism, I don't see how OO really adds anything to programming. And the trouble with polymorphism is that to really use it effectively you have to plan in advance how you're going to break your program into modular pieces. I'm not a very experienced programmer; I'm still in school in fact. But in my limited experience, however I plan to break a program up into conceptual parts, I eventually find in the course of my programming that my design did not incorporate the flexibility that I envisioned, and I have to redesign it.
I feel there's a fundamental difference when I'm programming with C rather than when I'm programming with Java, for instance. If I'm using C, I think only how I'm going to solve the problem. If I'm using Java, I think about how I'm going to design the problem solution, and then how I'm going to actually solve the problem. To be simpler, my distinction is that I spend a lot of time making design decisions rather than writing code. This is undesirable for smaller projects. Perhaps it's just a matter of inexperience.
I really do feel that OO is an organizational aid more than anything else. There's no reason that you can't write in an OO style with C, for instance.
C++ is way too complex. I suppose it'd be fine to teach a beginner a small subset of C++, but in that case, why not teach them a simpler language like C or Java? Plus, when the beginner goes online and looks up how to do in C++, who knows what kind of horrible hacks they'll find?
Anyway, this ask slashdot question needs to provide more background info. If it is a beginner who plans to have a career in programming, I think they should be taught the languages that best teach them paradigms without confusing them. Also, Java has an extensive native API and online reference that lets beginners quickly get a gui put together so that they can interact with their program and get visual feedback.
Personally, if I were to each a beginner a language, I'd go for haskell. Hopefully they'd learn thorough and elegant problem solving techniques this way. Or it would leave them irreparably scarred.
I'm going to have to weigh in on the side of the trackpoint. I suppose I've never been forced to use a touchpad for any long period of time, so perhaps I might come to like it as much.
I suppose using a trackpoint has a longer training period to get accustomed to using it. But I suspect that a trained touchpoint user is much more accurate than a touchpad user. I could play a FPS with a touchpoint if I had to, but I can't imagine doing it with a touchpad.
Oh, and I absolutely hate the tapping-is-clicking function of touchpads. I didn't want to click on anything, I just wanted to move the damn cursor!
Surely you mean lojban right?
There's no ironic mod, I'm sorry.
You sir. are the most intelligent autonomous being I have ever come across. Now tell me about your emotions.
I will be using it, unless you tell me otherwise.
Oh, and I definitely agree with your post.
You start off by stating that you hate the self-righteousness of the government of this country, and saying that they shouldn't expect companies to act morally or by american values, and then you end saying that congress should take a stand.
Take a stand and do what? Do this?
Frankly, I'm rather scared of congress getting involved in complex moral issues. I wish people would have exactly the attitude that you seem to really hate. Instead of wishing congress would fix everything for them, people should hold companies accountable. Congress is held accountable to large corporations, generally not the other way around, unless there is a huge public outcry.
Oh, and so far I still don't think I know enough about the chinese censorship issue to make a judgement on whether google is doing "good" or "evil". I think we'll have to wait and see the ramifications.
They are only improving the state of censorship in China...
Can you clarify this for me? I am unable to see why this is necessarily so.
Would you say that without google in china, china's citizens would be less censored? I think that chinese companies could probably make perfectly good search engines that would comply with chinese censorship laws as well.
Actually, that brings up an interesting idea. If you are a chinese company, and you follow the censorship laws of china, are you doing evil? I suppose you could say that chinese companies don't have a choice. But does that make it less evil (if it is, indeed evil)?
Additionally, your nick is perfect for setting up a negative bias against any post you make.