I'm not even sure what the 'Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement' has to do with copyright enforcement.
If the items breaking copyright come from outside the US, the ICE in its "Customs Enforcement" role has a job to keep it out. Now, whether or not there was proper evidence (or even a bit of checking) before this raid occurred is certainly an issue, but the ICE does have the right (and perhaps the responsibility) to do this.
I believe the field should be called "Algorithm Development".
It's not only algorithms. It's also the design of data structures that can be efficiently processed by the algorithms and control structures that allow efficient use of the algorithms upon the available computing substrate. And, of course, the processes used to extract needs from customers, build code in an efficient and maintainable manner, and test so that one has some level of assurance that the computational device being constructed functions normally. This is all much more than "Algorithm Development". You can call it "Software Engineering" or "Informatics and Algorithmics" or "Blub". Right now I call it "work". So why am I posting on Slashdot? Answer that, and the question as to what the field should be called will probably fall out.
Even back home going to the bookstore means driving half way across town.
Hell, if I had to drive halfway across town for a book or wait five days to get it from Amazon, it would mean I'm living in the wrong place. You should move.
This site would be better off returning to its roots.
Don't let the door hit you on the ass on your way out!
Seriously. Slashdot's pageviews are growing, not shrinking. They must be doing something right. You are obviously not in the majority with your viewpoint. More importantly, for all of your stupid posturing, I don't think you'll quit reading. So, if you really hate this, stop posting stupid whining, vote with your feet, and leave.
Now, given that it doesn't, how do you get the message across? We'd all love to live in a purely rational world where we were all Spocks and used logic to determine truth and falsity (although, once you consider that most people disagree on axioms, even that breaks down). However, we do not. Hyperbole and entertainment are useful in the real world. They do not detract from the message and, in fact, make it more palatable and digestible. That is, unless you're actively looking for something to use to disregard the message in the first place. If you can see so clearly, it must be hell for you to live in world full of colors where the only thing you want to see are black-and-white, unadulterated facts. Although, I have a sneaking suspicion that you disregard your own internal filters and save your carping for those whose messages you disdain. Which, sadly (at least to you) makes you human. But the good news is that Spock would find joy in it...
As provisioning cable is a natural monopoly due to most people's desire not to have ten or twenty cables strung past their house, you'll never have more than one or two providers, ensuring that the level of competition will be low. And this means that there is no profit in the carrier providing more than the minimal service necessary to avoid major complaints (note that this is unless the provider also sees benefits in providing other "value added" services on the network for which he can charge - Hello, Comcast! - leading to network neutrality issues). The corollary is that, if the government wants increased broadband to our country's home, it is going to have to do one of two things: it's either going to have to (a) do it itself or (b) mandate same for the carriers with proper incentives for them to "do the right thing". Sorry Libertarians.
... every reporter is just a softball Larry King type these days.
It started when reporters stopped worrying about what was factually true and started worrying about balance. News reporters are no longer allowed to question veracity. The most they can do is to find "someone with an opposing view" to interview. That they've given equal time to a liar makes no difference. That there may be more nuance than a dialectic interview can present doesn't matter. So the Rolodex parade keeps on going. Add to that the consolidation of major media and the (now) highly paid reporters who, if they lost their "access", would suffer greatly and you get the kind of bland, stupid reporting we get today.
Want good reporting? Start paying reporters less and let them call their subjects liars. Things would get better pretty quickly.
Let it not be said that Slashdot cares not for the Queen's English.
Really, do you have to call him a queen just because he wears makeup? You really don't know anything about his sexual orientation just from what he's wearing...
1. It is now much harder for musicians to land recording contracts. Because music industry will only record big sellers as the other types would spread via file sharing.
No, the major recording industry (as opposed to the music industry) is still signing smaller acts. Yes, the number of small acts signed is smaller than in the past, but that's the same as the situation with major book publishers - are the book publishers suffering from major "book piracy"? No.
In reality, the situation is as follows: It takes hundreds of thousands of dollars just to get one single promoted to radio stations, let alone the millions in associated costs to advertise the CD from which the single was taken, support the touring of the band/artist and, in general, catch the ear of the public in an ever more fragmented media environment. Marketing now costs so much that resources must be concentrated on a small number of artists that are almost certainly guaranteed to turn a major profit - and damn few of them at that. You will hear about those. The rest of the folks signed by the majors get a pittance in promotion and make up a very small pool of the major's revenues - you don't hear about them because there's no promotional budget left to promote their deals, concerts, and records. The exact same thing is happening in books, as publishers need to pay via deep discounts to get on to shelves of limited bookstores and spend big bucks to promote their winners. And I don't think that book "piracy" is a big deal.
Plus, you just have to check out the torrent sites to see that "the other types" are not spreading as widely through sharing. You can get the latest from the large-selling artists within about a millisecond of the latest release. It can take months for a minor artist to show up in torrents and often those aren't around a long time.
Yup. As an old tech writer friend told me once: "If I can't easily explain it to a user, the design is wrong."
Words to live by. The only other thing to remember is that sometimes designs that are "simple to explain" are still pains in the butt to use because the model doesn't match real world uses and makes doing what it needs to do laborious. But that you can figure out by adding a set of common usage scenarios to the user document, as well.
Are you saying that it isn't possible to keep explosive materials safely?
No. But look at the Federal, State, and local rules involved. Some subset of those are probably necessary for safe storage. And I'm pretty sure that NONE of them were being followed here. So most of your argument is bullshit.
I've read the chemistry blogs. Some of the stuff that they've found in this house should never be made in more than gram batches before it's added to stabilizers and plasticizers. They've found pounds of raw compounds that go "Really BIG boom (TM)" when just jostled a bit harshly. Excuse me for not crying tears when they decide that, rather than having some poor schlub try to carry this out, they get rid of it in a relatively safe manner.
What we actually have here is a situation in which the tenant created something that the government isn't willing to spend the time and money to dispose of safely, so instead of doing it the right way, they're just burning down the house. That's a choice by the government, not an imperative.
What we have here is some asshat internet Libertarian deciding that "The government is always wrong (TM)". In reality, they're spending enough to build pretty damn thick buffer walls around the place before they burn it. That doesn't come cheaply. If they could have simply carried the crap out and disposed of it in an incinerator, it would have cost a lot less - in fact, the buffer wall is going to cost more than the house is worth. But, since you're so concerned, how about they give you $10/hour and you carry the stuff out? OK?
And don't forget to rate down the other asshats running for the role while you're there. Though to be fair, I did give Lady Gaga and Hamid Karzai each a 75 rating, too, because their contribution to the cultural environment and cool hats could not be denied (though which for which could be debated).
Calculus? That's some form of kidney stone, right?
Nah, it has something to do with teeth - tell the patient to go see a dentist. Oh, yeah... make sure you use the ICD9 for an exam so you get reimbursed by the insurance company.
How about A-? As far as I know, just a few years ago you still couldn't get close to the doors of a med school with less than a 4.9 GPA and a fabulously great score on the MCAT. And this wasn't always the case. My father made it into med school just fine with a B+ average in the mid-1950's and none of his patients complained. At least not the ones that survived - yes, that was a joke.
Over FaceBook, he has been putting a great deal of effort into informing people about government conspiracies that are crushing alternative fuel concepts because all politicians are making profits from oil in one way or another.... and he moved on to talk about "Howard Johnson's power amplifier"...
So he's getting started on his real career - getting money from people who don't know better. It's a winning career move and, if he's honest about what he's achieved so far and he really believes, it's not a scam and not illegal. Why are you so worried about human stupidity (i.e., that which will be the real driving factor of his success)? Is there some odd character flaw that prevents you from seeing the "A fool and his money is soon parted," is not only morally neutral, but an evolutionary good? Somehow, I think that the thing that you're really worried about is that he might succeed in living his life of leisure while you slave away for a pittance. Such jealousy is unbecoming.
There is a reason the rich are rich. They are smarter then the poor people.
Not necessarily. However, they need to be smart enough to understand that money buys power and use that power ruthlessly to ensure that they will never ever lose that money - oddly enough, this seems to be doable with a minimal level of intelligence (see "Commodore" Cornelius Vanderbilt and his spawn, for a historical example). The fact that "little people" get hurt along the way is either ignored or simply gravy, depending upon how awful the rich person is.
Oh, you wacky evolutionists! Everyone knows that God doesn't mention this lifeform in Genesis, so it must be either (a) an analytical error, (b) a test of faith, or (c) a trick by Satan meant to deceive us. No proof of evolution here - move along...
Themes for research in EECS tend to have about 25-35 year cycles while being updated with the technology du jour at each peak. I think it has something to do with the dying out/retiring of academic advisers and industrial lab directors who think a field is "mined out". Bubble memory is about that old. Mercury delay lines twice that. On the other hand, I get the distinct impression that most of the performance findings will show the same pros and cons of any cyclical memory system. It really points out the need for a really in-depth history of computation course for EECS curricula.
Next up: A rebirth of symbolic AI in five... four... three...
Slashdot Mirror
Bootleg copies of Kanye West?
Yeah. I know they should protect us from all copies, but the bootleg imports were all they had jurisdiction over.
I'm not even sure what the 'Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement' has to do with copyright enforcement.
If the items breaking copyright come from outside the US, the ICE in its "Customs Enforcement" role has a job to keep it out. Now, whether or not there was proper evidence (or even a bit of checking) before this raid occurred is certainly an issue, but the ICE does have the right (and perhaps the responsibility) to do this.
I believe the field should be called "Algorithm Development".
It's not only algorithms. It's also the design of data structures that can be efficiently processed by the algorithms and control structures that allow efficient use of the algorithms upon the available computing substrate. And, of course, the processes used to extract needs from customers, build code in an efficient and maintainable manner, and test so that one has some level of assurance that the computational device being constructed functions normally. This is all much more than "Algorithm Development". You can call it "Software Engineering" or "Informatics and Algorithmics" or "Blub". Right now I call it "work". So why am I posting on Slashdot? Answer that, and the question as to what the field should be called will probably fall out.
Even back home going to the bookstore means driving half way across town.
Hell, if I had to drive halfway across town for a book or wait five days to get it from Amazon, it would mean I'm living in the wrong place. You should move.
This site would be better off returning to its roots.
Don't let the door hit you on the ass on your way out!
Seriously. Slashdot's pageviews are growing, not shrinking. They must be doing something right. You are obviously not in the majority with your viewpoint. More importantly, for all of your stupid posturing, I don't think you'll quit reading. So, if you really hate this, stop posting stupid whining, vote with your feet, and leave.
The message should speak for itself.
Yes, your right... it should.
Now, given that it doesn't, how do you get the message across? We'd all love to live in a purely rational world where we were all Spocks and used logic to determine truth and falsity (although, once you consider that most people disagree on axioms, even that breaks down). However, we do not. Hyperbole and entertainment are useful in the real world. They do not detract from the message and, in fact, make it more palatable and digestible. That is, unless you're actively looking for something to use to disregard the message in the first place. If you can see so clearly, it must be hell for you to live in world full of colors where the only thing you want to see are black-and-white, unadulterated facts. Although, I have a sneaking suspicion that you disregard your own internal filters and save your carping for those whose messages you disdain. Which, sadly (at least to you) makes you human. But the good news is that Spock would find joy in it...
Sorry, kid. You're 20 years too late.
According to Newton Minnow, FCC director under JFK, you're 49 years too late.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means... At least since around 1995.
It looks like you're searching for something!
Would you like help?
[ ] Don't show this tip again.
I'll bet their paperclip has even more Googly eyes than the original!
As provisioning cable is a natural monopoly due to most people's desire not to have ten or twenty cables strung past their house, you'll never have more than one or two providers, ensuring that the level of competition will be low. And this means that there is no profit in the carrier providing more than the minimal service necessary to avoid major complaints (note that this is unless the provider also sees benefits in providing other "value added" services on the network for which he can charge - Hello, Comcast! - leading to network neutrality issues). The corollary is that, if the government wants increased broadband to our country's home, it is going to have to do one of two things: it's either going to have to (a) do it itself or (b) mandate same for the carriers with proper incentives for them to "do the right thing". Sorry Libertarians.
Is it some genetic diversity argument?
No, it's just that people are scared of clones.
They run accross the monkey first...
With what? A Honda?
... every reporter is just a softball Larry King type these days.
It started when reporters stopped worrying about what was factually true and started worrying about balance. News reporters are no longer allowed to question veracity. The most they can do is to find "someone with an opposing view" to interview. That they've given equal time to a liar makes no difference. That there may be more nuance than a dialectic interview can present doesn't matter. So the Rolodex parade keeps on going. Add to that the consolidation of major media and the (now) highly paid reporters who, if they lost their "access", would suffer greatly and you get the kind of bland, stupid reporting we get today.
Want good reporting? Start paying reporters less and let them call their subjects liars. Things would get better pretty quickly.
... the cloud should sail wide of our planet.
Damn! There goes my chance for super powers.
Let it not be said that Slashdot cares not for the Queen's English.
Really, do you have to call him a queen just because he wears makeup? You really don't know anything about his sexual orientation just from what he's wearing...
1. It is now much harder for musicians to land recording contracts. Because music industry will only record big sellers as the other types would spread via file sharing.
No, the major recording industry (as opposed to the music industry) is still signing smaller acts. Yes, the number of small acts signed is smaller than in the past, but that's the same as the situation with major book publishers - are the book publishers suffering from major "book piracy"? No.
In reality, the situation is as follows: It takes hundreds of thousands of dollars just to get one single promoted to radio stations, let alone the millions in associated costs to advertise the CD from which the single was taken, support the touring of the band/artist and, in general, catch the ear of the public in an ever more fragmented media environment. Marketing now costs so much that resources must be concentrated on a small number of artists that are almost certainly guaranteed to turn a major profit - and damn few of them at that. You will hear about those. The rest of the folks signed by the majors get a pittance in promotion and make up a very small pool of the major's revenues - you don't hear about them because there's no promotional budget left to promote their deals, concerts, and records. The exact same thing is happening in books, as publishers need to pay via deep discounts to get on to shelves of limited bookstores and spend big bucks to promote their winners. And I don't think that book "piracy" is a big deal.
Plus, you just have to check out the torrent sites to see that "the other types" are not spreading as widely through sharing. You can get the latest from the large-selling artists within about a millisecond of the latest release. It can take months for a minor artist to show up in torrents and often those aren't around a long time.
Yup. As an old tech writer friend told me once: "If I can't easily explain it to a user, the design is wrong."
Words to live by. The only other thing to remember is that sometimes designs that are "simple to explain" are still pains in the butt to use because the model doesn't match real world uses and makes doing what it needs to do laborious. But that you can figure out by adding a set of common usage scenarios to the user document, as well.
Are you saying that it isn't possible to keep explosive materials safely?
No. But look at the Federal, State, and local rules involved. Some subset of those are probably necessary for safe storage. And I'm pretty sure that NONE of them were being followed here. So most of your argument is bullshit.
I've read the chemistry blogs. Some of the stuff that they've found in this house should never be made in more than gram batches before it's added to stabilizers and plasticizers. They've found pounds of raw compounds that go "Really BIG boom (TM)" when just jostled a bit harshly. Excuse me for not crying tears when they decide that, rather than having some poor schlub try to carry this out, they get rid of it in a relatively safe manner.
What we actually have here is a situation in which the tenant created something that the government isn't willing to spend the time and money to dispose of safely, so instead of doing it the right way, they're just burning down the house. That's a choice by the government, not an imperative.
What we have here is some asshat internet Libertarian deciding that "The government is always wrong (TM)". In reality, they're spending enough to build pretty damn thick buffer walls around the place before they burn it. That doesn't come cheaply. If they could have simply carried the crap out and disposed of it in an incinerator, it would have cost a lot less - in fact, the buffer wall is going to cost more than the house is worth. But, since you're so concerned, how about they give you $10/hour and you carry the stuff out? OK?
And don't forget to rate down the other asshats running for the role while you're there. Though to be fair, I did give Lady Gaga and Hamid Karzai each a 75 rating, too, because their contribution to the cultural environment and cool hats could not be denied (though which for which could be debated).
Calculus? That's some form of kidney stone, right?
Nah, it has something to do with teeth - tell the patient to go see a dentist. Oh, yeah... make sure you use the ICD9 for an exam so you get reimbursed by the insurance company.
Maybe take people with B-/C+ averages.
How about A-? As far as I know, just a few years ago you still couldn't get close to the doors of a med school with less than a 4.9 GPA and a fabulously great score on the MCAT. And this wasn't always the case. My father made it into med school just fine with a B+ average in the mid-1950's and none of his patients complained. At least not the ones that survived - yes, that was a joke.
Over FaceBook, he has been putting a great deal of effort into informing people about government conspiracies that are crushing alternative fuel concepts because all politicians are making profits from oil in one way or another.... and he moved on to talk about "Howard Johnson's power amplifier"...
So he's getting started on his real career - getting money from people who don't know better. It's a winning career move and, if he's honest about what he's achieved so far and he really believes, it's not a scam and not illegal. Why are you so worried about human stupidity (i.e., that which will be the real driving factor of his success)? Is there some odd character flaw that prevents you from seeing the "A fool and his money is soon parted," is not only morally neutral, but an evolutionary good? Somehow, I think that the thing that you're really worried about is that he might succeed in living his life of leisure while you slave away for a pittance. Such jealousy is unbecoming.
There is a reason the rich are rich. They are smarter then the poor people.
Not necessarily. However, they need to be smart enough to understand that money buys power and use that power ruthlessly to ensure that they will never ever lose that money - oddly enough, this seems to be doable with a minimal level of intelligence (see "Commodore" Cornelius Vanderbilt and his spawn, for a historical example). The fact that "little people" get hurt along the way is either ignored or simply gravy, depending upon how awful the rich person is.
Same tree of life.
Oh, you wacky evolutionists! Everyone knows that God doesn't mention this lifeform in Genesis, so it must be either (a) an analytical error, (b) a test of faith, or (c) a trick by Satan meant to deceive us. No proof of evolution here - move along...
Themes for research in EECS tend to have about 25-35 year cycles while being updated with the technology du jour at each peak. I think it has something to do with the dying out/retiring of academic advisers and industrial lab directors who think a field is "mined out". Bubble memory is about that old. Mercury delay lines twice that. On the other hand, I get the distinct impression that most of the performance findings will show the same pros and cons of any cyclical memory system. It really points out the need for a really in-depth history of computation course for EECS curricula.
Next up: A rebirth of symbolic AI in five... four... three...