I assumed every self respecting techie was boycotting Netfix because they are one of the driving companies behind adding DRM (EME) to HTML5. I'm surprised anyone on this board noticed.:-/
Generally, regulations HELP big corporations. I'm also suspect that Google and other big corps are lobbying hard on this front too. I trust neither AT&T, Google, nor the U. S. government. That is why, in general, not regulating things helps small businesses and the individual consumers.
I'm also wondering why the rush on this. The pro net neutrality guy at work says that there was once one such example but, according to slashdot, even that would not have fell within the new rules.
More and more, folks are feeling entitled. Medical insurance is now considered a "basic right" by many whereas 100 years ago it was not.
More and more, corporations want longer and longer copyrights with copyright term going from 14 + 14 years to 95 or 120 years.
These two forces are on a collision course.
The law makers assume they have the final say. But they don't.
Laws such as the Micky Mouse Copyright law or the DMC that are not respected are weak. Enforcement of laws is mostly by self regulation. I choose to not run the red light on a deserted street at midnight out of respect of the law -- not fear of the consequences. Once the law has no respect, the self regulation disappears and the net result is a step closer to anarchy.
Instead of DRM, DMC, and EME, the law makers might take note of the public unrest and revise downward the lifetime of copyrights to the original and sensible 14 + 14 years. The publishers would very likely see a drop in copyright infringement and a slight uptick in profits.
Unfortunately, USA is not the only country that is doing this type of activity. And copyright law is just one area where law makers and society all across the world are progressing further and further astray from each other.
Is it time for a new standards organization that listens to the people rather than the corporations?
Why not have a true free web standards committee and browsers and various entities would try to comply with it rather than W3C.
Remember, W3C is the place that gave us XML and XHTML (two rather hideous abortions) and they sat on their hands with HTML 5 until other groups (WhatWG.org in particular) came along and started to make progress. Then W3C jealously took it back over. Why? It baffled me at the time. Who cares about W3C? They are obvious a compromised organization.
Why would the guy be so freaked out about others finding out his real identity and the fact that he created the video?
I wonder how much of this "update" is fake news... I just don't get it. If you make a video and then talk about it to the extent that it can be linked back to you... why would you then become ashamed of the video? This is his chance to become the next dildo that travels the talk show circuit grating everyone the wrong way. e.g. Milo Vweriuwoeifuwoeifuwoeiuoweiufwoiuwoeufowieufoweoewhatever.
An old system from IBM called CMVC (which is still in use by the way) was not just an SCM but a bug reporting system as well as a build system. A defect is opened. Code changes are tied to that defect. When that happens test records are opened and sent to the person who opened the defect. There is also a verify record created. The build group can not build that defect until the test records are complete. Then they build it. Now you have a defect that is linked to the code changes and linked to a specific build (or builds if you have multiple branches of development).
It does not prevent the problems mentioned above but it does clearly define who should do what when. Much like sbaker pointed out above. And then you manage the people involved to get them to do their part at the proper time.
When the complaint comes from a customer the support person takes on the role of the customer and is responsible for the testing. This usually causes support to be broken into pieces. One is solely facing the customer and the other(s) take larger roles in the testing including sometimes setting up tests for the developers to use.
This may be marked as a troll question. I hope not.
It seems to me that this law now makes it clear that such things as browsing history have value. Does that start to raise the question of who owns the copyright of the history in the first place?
If I take a photograph and display it publicly, I still own the copyright. Why isn't the list of web sites I visit copyright by the original author (the person doing the browsing) the instant that it is created?
If my browsing history has value and I own the copyright, then congress does not have the authority to give that copyright to another entity.
Put yourself on a jury and the defense points out the law and argues that everything the prosecution says is false. Prosecution can't readily prove it.
And if the prosecution supports its evidence with lies, it could be simpler to disprove them or cast doubt upon them than if they were true.
I'd be inclined to acquit in any and all cases. Not sure about U. K. but America is "beyond reasonable doubt" and with foreknowledge that the prosecution can lie, I would never acquit. They could never prove to me beyond reasonable doubt that the whole thing was made up. Am I missing something here?
> We forget that we are the United States of America
That's the problem. Things started to go downhill when we stopped being these United States of America.
According to scopes http://www.snopes.com/2016/11/... the electoral college is there so that smaller states do not get swamped out by the bigger states. We forget that we are the United States of America... not the Bickering Citizens of America.
The stories behind the creation of the Constitution are very fascinating and educational. The wisdom demonstrated is amazing. And most of it still applies today.
Seriously, go look at the final maps. Almost the entire middle of the country is Republican. You have the extremely populated east and west coasts that are Democrat. Should they really dictate what the entire country does? The founding fathers believed not.
So far, no one has put forth and passed an amendment to change it. So shut the fuck up.
Also, you are talking about less than 0.5% of the vote difference. As far as popular vote, I'd pretty much call that a tie. It seems very wise to me in that case that an alternative means of picking the winner.
By the way, I did not vote for Trump. I don't understand being upset when someone who you don't really agree with in the first place loses. Next time, try voting for someone instead of against someone else. The external results won't change but your internal peace might..
Is it my fault the other viable choice was a criminal who very likely would not have followed the plans she claims to have wanted?
Is it my fault, she literally stole the Democratic nomination from a very intelligent practical leader?
Is it my fault that the DNC itself uses "Super Delegates" to make sure that these types of events will occur with predictable frequency?
I voted for Johnson. The only candidate who is against war, understandable on immigration and free trade. Is it my fault, 95% of the country is locked into the Democrat and Republican mind control?
Frequently I rage that our problems are due to ourselves. In this case, I'm excluding myself. While I would much prefer Trump instead of the One World Order continuation I by no means liked him -- ever. Until more people think instead of react, nothing is going to get better no matter who or what is at the steering wheel.
Anyone who voted for Trump or Hillary is part of the problem.
What has been lost and forgotten is the value of a well trained, talented, competent, productive employee. This is due to the failure of accounting to provide useful, meaningful, insightful reports to management. And, probably, it is due to management being incompetent to understand the reports.
I do support at Big Corp whose customers are also Big Corps. What we've seen over the past ten years is the IT being outsourced to the point that the people managing the systems are utterly clueless what they are doing. I'm not saying they are stupid and incompetent. I'm saying it is hundreds of times worse than you can possibly imagine.
Yet, things continue to get outsourced. It really is amazing.
There are conference calls involving tens of people that last multiple days, even weeks just to solve very simple issues that a competent sys admin and network person could resolve in a few hours assuming that they did not prevent the situation in the first place simply by practicing a few normal obvious practices in the first place.
The Big Corps are digging further and further into the hole. Its almost amusing to watch.
Reading just the Slash Dot part (not the original article), it seems that India has a shortage of water so now they want to take it from the air. Well... fine. But that will dry out the air and if done to excess, will change the weather and ultimately, less rain fall will come down in other areas (or perhaps even the same area) of the water extraction plants. It just seems like a classic robbing Peter to pay Paul scenario.
So, you believe that an unlimited number of cell phones could transmit and receive simultaneously at full bandwidth for an unlimited amount of time from the same spot on earth?
I agree mostly but Pascal offers an interesting exception. It was designed as a teaching language but, unfortunately, became rather wide spread. Perhaps that argues more for your point than against. I'm not sure.
I have a lot of various concerns. First, there is no shortage of programmers today. Their pay has remained relatively flat since 1995 or so when out source became the solution to all of U. S. industries woes. Sure, most of the employees are coming from other countries or being out sourced but having cheaper programming labor home grown may or may not help. If there is a glut, those people will be susceptible to abuses, low wages, and long hours.
"writing a programming" is not the same as computer science or even "programming" as a skill. I'm frustrated where I work. I have a BS and MS in CS. Some of the people I work with don't even have a high school diploma, some have trade school backgrounds, a few have a random college degree. Yes, they can "write a program" but they create more problems than they solve because they don't have enough depth. Good quality maintainable code isn't written by someone who writes a program. Its done by someone who really cares about the craft. I'm not arguing that a degree makes the difference but it is a first indicator of the depth of a person's interest. Creating a new set of low trained people who can write a program or two but are not actually interested in the art and craft of programming isn't what the world needs.
To that end, what the world of programming needs is a method of judging and grading the skill of a person who writes programs -- a management technique that works. Currently, the guy who talks the most gets the most promotions and usually they are the least talented. Tragically, this is also true for managers themselves.
As far as which language, it doesn't make any difference at all. I started with TI programmable calculators. What is needed is a magic spark to create an interest in a person. Most people believe that that magic spark is "fun" but I'm very dubious about that belief as well. "fun" lasts for a weekend (ala Pokemon Go). The person needs to find it "interesting" -- somehow, someway. Making it "useful" to them is even better. I don't think a given language will spark a higher percentage of people than any other given language. A few will find GUI bullshit useful, some will find it fun. But some students actually are curious what three dimensional conic sections look like and don't care the least about GUI clicky things.
What I'm finding a shortage of is basic diagnostic abilities... debugging methodologies. People today simply do not know how to narrow down and find where a problem is. They can not differentiate between problems and symptoms. They don't know to change only one thing at a time, keep careful notes, and methodically eliminate various sources of an issue until the real root cause of the issue is found. I'm not talking just about programming but basic life things like when a car or a smart phone acts up.
Indeed, I would say that the current push for more people who can write a program is a perfect example of treating a symptom rather than fully understanding what the problem is. What exactly is the problem that will be solved when everyone can write a program or two?
When I was in school, around 8th grade or so, everyone took an art class. Did that make us all artists? I would say not. Did that even create a basis where all of us can appreciate good art? I would say no to that as well.
Never saw the appeal to Python. Linux guys use it but I never understood why. How is any different, really, than Perl 5? And the biggest hit against Python is the two versions that still are prevalent today that don't work with each other. I can't remember: Python 2 and Python 3? Or is it 3 and 4. In any case, when I toyed with it, half the scripts worked with A and half worked with B. It was fairly frustrating for me and I'm a CS language nut.
Slashdot Mirror
Its gonna hit the fan anyway, You really think the federal government is your friend? You really think you can regulate your way to a better life?
I assumed every self respecting techie was boycotting Netfix because they are one of the driving companies behind adding DRM (EME) to HTML5. I'm surprised anyone on this board noticed. :-/
Generally, regulations HELP big corporations. I'm also suspect that Google and other big corps are lobbying hard on this front too. I trust neither AT&T, Google, nor the U. S. government. That is why, in general, not regulating things helps small businesses and the individual consumers.
I'm also wondering why the rush on this. The pro net neutrality guy at work says that there was once one such example but, according to slashdot, even that would not have fell within the new rules.
I found this interesting: FCC Chairman Ajit Pai: Why He's Rejecting Net Neutrality
Defective By Design
and
Copyrights Must Expire
and
Copyright Timeline
Just to give you a start...
More and more, folks are feeling entitled. Medical insurance is now considered a "basic right" by many whereas 100 years ago it was not.
More and more, corporations want longer and longer copyrights with copyright term going from 14 + 14 years to 95 or 120 years.
These two forces are on a collision course.
The law makers assume they have the final say. But they don't.
Laws such as the Micky Mouse Copyright law or the DMC that are not respected are weak. Enforcement of laws is mostly by self regulation. I choose to not run the red light on a deserted street at midnight out of respect of the law -- not fear of the consequences. Once the law has no respect, the self regulation disappears and the net result is a step closer to anarchy.
Instead of DRM, DMC, and EME, the law makers might take note of the public unrest and revise downward the lifetime of copyrights to the original and sensible 14 + 14 years. The publishers would very likely see a drop in copyright infringement and a slight uptick in profits.
Unfortunately, USA is not the only country that is doing this type of activity. And copyright law is just one area where law makers and society all across the world are progressing further and further astray from each other.
Is it time for a new standards organization that listens to the people rather than the corporations?
Why not have a true free web standards committee and browsers and various entities would try to comply with it rather than W3C.
Remember, W3C is the place that gave us XML and XHTML (two rather hideous abortions) and they sat on their hands with HTML 5 until other groups (WhatWG.org in particular) came along and started to make progress. Then W3C jealously took it back over. Why? It baffled me at the time. Who cares about W3C? They are obvious a compromised organization.
Why would the guy be so freaked out about others finding out his real identity and the fact that he created the video? I wonder how much of this "update" is fake news... I just don't get it. If you make a video and then talk about it to the extent that it can be linked back to you... why would you then become ashamed of the video? This is his chance to become the next dildo that travels the talk show circuit grating everyone the wrong way. e.g. Milo Vweriuwoeifuwoeifuwoeiuoweiufwoiuwoeufowieufoweoewhatever.
But wait... we need to waterboard the data until it tells us what we know must have really happened!!!
Depends what your definition of IS is?
An old system from IBM called CMVC (which is still in use by the way) was not just an SCM but a bug reporting system as well as a build system. A defect is opened. Code changes are tied to that defect. When that happens test records are opened and sent to the person who opened the defect. There is also a verify record created. The build group can not build that defect until the test records are complete. Then they build it. Now you have a defect that is linked to the code changes and linked to a specific build (or builds if you have multiple branches of development).
It does not prevent the problems mentioned above but it does clearly define who should do what when. Much like sbaker pointed out above. And then you manage the people involved to get them to do their part at the proper time.
When the complaint comes from a customer the support person takes on the role of the customer and is responsible for the testing. This usually causes support to be broken into pieces. One is solely facing the customer and the other(s) take larger roles in the testing including sometimes setting up tests for the developers to use.
This may be marked as a troll question. I hope not.
It seems to me that this law now makes it clear that such things as browsing history have value. Does that start to raise the question of who owns the copyright of the history in the first place?
If I take a photograph and display it publicly, I still own the copyright. Why isn't the list of web sites I visit copyright by the original author (the person doing the browsing) the instant that it is created?
If my browsing history has value and I own the copyright, then congress does not have the authority to give that copyright to another entity.
Put yourself on a jury and the defense points out the law and argues that everything the prosecution says is false. Prosecution can't readily prove it. And if the prosecution supports its evidence with lies, it could be simpler to disprove them or cast doubt upon them than if they were true. I'd be inclined to acquit in any and all cases. Not sure about U. K. but America is "beyond reasonable doubt" and with foreknowledge that the prosecution can lie, I would never acquit. They could never prove to me beyond reasonable doubt that the whole thing was made up. Am I missing something here?
A good book on the Constitution is here: https://www.amazon.com/America...
I think (but not sure) it was a joke. It was a gold mine that is having problems.
> We forget that we are the United States of America That's the problem. Things started to go downhill when we stopped being these United States of America.
Excellent point!
The stories behind the creation of the Constitution are very fascinating and educational. The wisdom demonstrated is amazing. And most of it still applies today.
Seriously, go look at the final maps. Almost the entire middle of the country is Republican. You have the extremely populated east and west coasts that are Democrat. Should they really dictate what the entire country does? The founding fathers believed not.
So far, no one has put forth and passed an amendment to change it. So shut the fuck up.
Also, you are talking about less than 0.5% of the vote difference. As far as popular vote, I'd pretty much call that a tie. It seems very wise to me in that case that an alternative means of picking the winner.
By the way, I did not vote for Trump. I don't understand being upset when someone who you don't really agree with in the first place loses. Next time, try voting for someone instead of against someone else. The external results won't change but your internal peace might..
Is it my fault, she literally stole the Democratic nomination from a very intelligent practical leader?
Is it my fault that the DNC itself uses "Super Delegates" to make sure that these types of events will occur with predictable frequency?
I voted for Johnson. The only candidate who is against war, understandable on immigration and free trade. Is it my fault, 95% of the country is locked into the Democrat and Republican mind control?
Frequently I rage that our problems are due to ourselves. In this case, I'm excluding myself. While I would much prefer Trump instead of the One World Order continuation I by no means liked him -- ever. Until more people think instead of react, nothing is going to get better no matter who or what is at the steering wheel.
Anyone who voted for Trump or Hillary is part of the problem.
What has been lost and forgotten is the value of a well trained, talented, competent, productive employee. This is due to the failure of accounting to provide useful, meaningful, insightful reports to management. And, probably, it is due to management being incompetent to understand the reports.
I do support at Big Corp whose customers are also Big Corps. What we've seen over the past ten years is the IT being outsourced to the point that the people managing the systems are utterly clueless what they are doing. I'm not saying they are stupid and incompetent. I'm saying it is hundreds of times worse than you can possibly imagine.
Yet, things continue to get outsourced. It really is amazing.
There are conference calls involving tens of people that last multiple days, even weeks just to solve very simple issues that a competent sys admin and network person could resolve in a few hours assuming that they did not prevent the situation in the first place simply by practicing a few normal obvious practices in the first place.
The Big Corps are digging further and further into the hole. Its almost amusing to watch.
Reading just the Slash Dot part (not the original article), it seems that India has a shortage of water so now they want to take it from the air. Well... fine. But that will dry out the air and if done to excess, will change the weather and ultimately, less rain fall will come down in other areas (or perhaps even the same area) of the water extraction plants. It just seems like a classic robbing Peter to pay Paul scenario.
So, you believe that an unlimited number of cell phones could transmit and receive simultaneously at full bandwidth for an unlimited amount of time from the same spot on earth?
I agree mostly but Pascal offers an interesting exception. It was designed as a teaching language but, unfortunately, became rather wide spread. Perhaps that argues more for your point than against. I'm not sure.
I have a lot of various concerns. First, there is no shortage of programmers today. Their pay has remained relatively flat since 1995 or so when out source became the solution to all of U. S. industries woes. Sure, most of the employees are coming from other countries or being out sourced but having cheaper programming labor home grown may or may not help. If there is a glut, those people will be susceptible to abuses, low wages, and long hours.
"writing a programming" is not the same as computer science or even "programming" as a skill. I'm frustrated where I work. I have a BS and MS in CS. Some of the people I work with don't even have a high school diploma, some have trade school backgrounds, a few have a random college degree. Yes, they can "write a program" but they create more problems than they solve because they don't have enough depth. Good quality maintainable code isn't written by someone who writes a program. Its done by someone who really cares about the craft. I'm not arguing that a degree makes the difference but it is a first indicator of the depth of a person's interest. Creating a new set of low trained people who can write a program or two but are not actually interested in the art and craft of programming isn't what the world needs.
To that end, what the world of programming needs is a method of judging and grading the skill of a person who writes programs -- a management technique that works. Currently, the guy who talks the most gets the most promotions and usually they are the least talented. Tragically, this is also true for managers themselves.
As far as which language, it doesn't make any difference at all. I started with TI programmable calculators. What is needed is a magic spark to create an interest in a person. Most people believe that that magic spark is "fun" but I'm very dubious about that belief as well. "fun" lasts for a weekend (ala Pokemon Go). The person needs to find it "interesting" -- somehow, someway. Making it "useful" to them is even better. I don't think a given language will spark a higher percentage of people than any other given language. A few will find GUI bullshit useful, some will find it fun. But some students actually are curious what three dimensional conic sections look like and don't care the least about GUI clicky things.
What I'm finding a shortage of is basic diagnostic abilities... debugging methodologies. People today simply do not know how to narrow down and find where a problem is. They can not differentiate between problems and symptoms. They don't know to change only one thing at a time, keep careful notes, and methodically eliminate various sources of an issue until the real root cause of the issue is found. I'm not talking just about programming but basic life things like when a car or a smart phone acts up.
Indeed, I would say that the current push for more people who can write a program is a perfect example of treating a symptom rather than fully understanding what the problem is. What exactly is the problem that will be solved when everyone can write a program or two?
When I was in school, around 8th grade or so, everyone took an art class. Did that make us all artists? I would say not. Did that even create a basis where all of us can appreciate good art? I would say no to that as well.
Never saw the appeal to Python. Linux guys use it but I never understood why. How is any different, really, than Perl 5? And the biggest hit against Python is the two versions that still are prevalent today that don't work with each other. I can't remember: Python 2 and Python 3? Or is it 3 and 4. In any case, when I toyed with it, half the scripts worked with A and half worked with B. It was fairly frustrating for me and I'm a CS language nut.
The government that governs least governs best. The citizenry that cares the least gets governed worst.
I don't care. I just want an iPhone with the bigger GBs.
http://images.protopage.com/im...