Actually, I "got into computers" because they're so trivial in comparison to general relativity and particle mechanics. Dropped out of school with 12 credits to go on my physics bs, grad school lurking around the corner, and I'd just burned out.
Interesting parallel to my experience - I was a dual CS/physics major until my brain started to melt and pour out my ears near the end of my junior year. Found operating systems and compiler classes more enjoyable than theoretical EM, so I stuck with the CS and dropped the physics. No regrets - I went on to get my master's and am doing reasonablly well. Maybe I'll even finish that physics degree someday, but if I do it'll be for the fun of learning.
Actually, I wouldn't say that computer science is easier than physics - but there is a different type of thinking involved. I find the logic of code and algorithms more pleasant to deal with than cranking through ugly diff eq's.
I have to agree that classifying geeks into narrow categories is not a good idea; but, I do fit the category of J. Random Hacker pretty well.
I know that I was bagged at high school for being geeky, but who cares? Do other people opinions _really_ make that much difference to how you think about yourself? I certinaly didn't give myself an ulcer over it.
There's more involved than simply being unpopular. As a kid, I was bullied and beat up; I can remember being literally spit on by other boys. My family was often a target of minor vandalism. There were times I was afraid to leave the house because I might get into a fight. (I'm doing much better now; besides being a reasonably successful hacker (in the Jargon File sense), I hold a nidan (second degree black belt) in karate. Nobody bothers me B->; and I teach a lot of kids, some of whom have a bit of the geek in them.)
The Voice article just doesn't get it. We're not talking about being unpopular, about not getting a date for the dance; we're talking about being physically and mentally abused.
So what if these geeks are mostly white suburbaners? I'm reminded of Repo Man:
Duke: The lights are growing dim. I know a life of crime led me to this sorry fate. And yet I...I blame society. Society made me what I am.
Otto: That's bullshit. You're a white suburban punk just like me.
Duke: But it still...hurts....
Yes, they're not turning firehoses on us, or burying us in mass graves. But do you tell a white kid who's just been beat up because he was too smart for his peer's liking, "Your pain's not real?"
Geeks may not be experiencing the level of oppression undergone by various racial and religious groups.
Why would the work naturally go to the lowest bidder? Are the decision makers incapable of considering long-term costs? Issues of quality, maintenance, and support still apply. Intelligent companies don't just hire the employees or contractors who will work for the lowest salary; they look for skills and experience as well. Best value, not just lowest price.
Certainly if I were bidding on a project, I would include support and maintenance in my proposal. If the sponsors chose to go with someone who worked cheaper but didn't guarantee support - well, then they'll end up hiring someone else to fix their problems down the road.
I think this is a truth of programming regardless of open source issues.
The sponsor could lend hardware for the duration of the project.
My last job was a contract for a company outside my commuting range. I worked at home and they lent me 4 HP workstations and a Linux box for the duration - had 'em networked together in my bedroom. Way cool.
Of course, part of the compensation could be getting to keep the hardware afterwards.
I haven't encountered that. Of course, if a website is designed in such a brain-dead fashion, I doubt that its content is worth reading anyway.
After all, if the designer cared about the content, she would create a page that could be viewed with any browser. If the designer doesn't care about the content, why would I?
This is always going to be a significant problem. Not just for specific projects, but for things like documention and quality control / testing. People may want to code it, but do they want to take the extra steps to make it maintainable?
Sadly, those steps are rarely taken in commerical, proprietary code...
Cosource mentions docmentation as one of its potential type of projects. I don't see why testing, code reviews, et cetera can't be contracted out just like development.
Ugh. Why would you want to? Truetype fonts are uniformly ugly.
Trying to have identical fonts on screen and on paper is a dumb idea (except when you're previewing a print job). I find it much easier to read page on my home Netscape (on Linux) than the one at work (Win95) because of the fonts.
Hmm. I find the fonts no worse than those used in Win95 software. (It helps to set your zoom to 150% or so.)
Personally, if I'm creating large docs, I create the text with emacs (with an easy to read and edit monospaced font (I like -b&h-lucidatypewriter-bold-r-normal-sans-14-140-*) in pleasant colors (midnightblue on antiquewhite), then import it into whatever word proc I'm being forced to use for formatting. Much easier on the eyes, IMHO.
'Course, I grew up reading monochrome amber, green, or blue screens, so my tastes my be skewed. (We have a green screen Wyse 50 hooked up to a telephone switch at work...makes me nostalgic.)
I spent 3 years working on a B3-targeted operating system base, a project that required a stack of documentation that I think ended up being taller than I am. We used LaTeX, xfig, and xidraw.
For serious documents, markup languages are the way to go.
Yeah, I'm actually using WP mostly for its spreadsheet capabilties - less bloated and more stable than StarOffice's spreadsheet. (Your mileage may vary.)
I also use it when folks send me M$ Word docs, and to neaten up the hard copy version of my resume (the definitive version is the HTML one on my web site, but a few minutes of importing and formatting with WP gives a nicer look than just printing from Netscape).
For most everything else, I use lyx or straight LaTeX.
NameSecure.com will enter into an accreditation agreement as soon as possible with ICANN and expects to begin acting as a.com,.net, and.org registrar immediately upon the conclusion of a 60-day "testbed phase" currently scheduled to end on July 9, 1999.
Vinge's True Names was years before Gibson. I also recall a story by Ben Bova (I think) called The Duelling Machine that (I think) was even earlier, which involved VR but in a different context. Gibson does get credit for "cyberspace", though.
Re:Giving credit to Stallman
on
GNU Inside?
·
· Score: 1
Everyone who knows anything about Linux knows that the GNU bit is implied - it is the very foundation of Linux
I'm not sure that's true. I would venture to say that if you asked most users, "To what part of your computer system does `Linux' refer?", a small minority would understand that it is the kernel.
Stallman has a good point, that what we are running are GNU systems with Linux kernels. But in all but the most technical contexts, no one is going to say "GNU system with Linux kernels" instead of "Linux". A "GNU inside" logo sounds like a great way to help people understand the make-up of the systems they are running.
It's questionable as to how accutate hypnotic recall is. People have been induced to have precise and detailed recollection of events that never really happened. The most visable of these cases would be "alien abduction" stories and many (not all) "repressed memories" of childhood sexual abuse, especially those about ritual Satanic abuse.
The fact the neurons have differmatter a hell of a lot. The shape of a nerve cell determines how its inputs are weighted and the strength and timing of its output.
That's the "meme" idea, comparing ideas to genes - look for Dawkin's essay "Selfish Genes and Selfing Memes" (or something like that). It's in Dennett and Hofstader's collection The Mind's I, recommended reading.
If I was an evil genius who could hack together a device that would spoof the ATMs, no, I wouldn't waste my time trying to get fifty bucks out of one. I'd sell them on the black market to gansters, drug kingpins, and other criminals with street-level organizations, and let them worry about the actual thefts.
socialist, perhaps, but not communist
on
BSD vs GPL
·
· Score: 1
I think the one thing we haven't explored here is the tie to communism. Now you can disagree with it or not, but the fact that a central organization (GNU/FSF) infects all aspects of it's control (GPL'd products) DOES indicate a communistic model.
The FSF does not "control" GPL'd products. The decision of whether to GPL code rests solely with the author.
That aside, the infection metaphor is an interesting one. We think of infection as negative, but consider: a few billion years ago, a cell got infected by a little bugger of a bacterium called mitochondria. When the infected cell split, both offspring were still infected with mitochondria. That cells decendants have done pretty well. - every plant, animal, fungus, and protist cell (and maybe some bacterial ones too, I'm a hacker, not a biologist) around today is "infected".
Capitalism: It's mine cause I earned it, and no one else can have it.
In capitalism most everything belongs to a relatively small group of people - those who hold the capital. My creations belong to my boss. If I am lucky, and am not expoited too much by my boss, I might get to be my own boss someday. This is much more likely for software developers than for many other workers, since we are highly skilled and need little capital.
Socialism: It's all of ours, and we rule it all ourselves.
There's several types of socialism. They all agree that capital (the "means of production") should be jointly controlled, but differ on who controls the rest. The idea that basic system software should be open could be considered socialist.
Feudalism: It's all mine, but cause you helped you can have some of it.
Huh? In feudalism, it's all the king's. (It's good to be the king!)
Communism: It's all of ours, the people's, with the government controlling the disbursment.
Actually, according to Marx, the state would eventually wither away. You might notice that that didn't happen...
So it's ok if I demand that you pay me $100,000 to use that code, but not ok if I demand that you adopt my license? Free market, chum; if you don't like my terms (either one), find someone else with code that'll do what you need, or write it yourself.
If you use my code and are unwilling to change your license to GPL, then you are restricting my freedom to control my software. That's the issue.
If you'd rather have your code be under a BSD style licence, great! It's your creation, do as you will with it. But understand that others will choose to do differently with their software.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I wouldn't say that computer science is easier than physics - but there is a different type of thinking involved. I find the logic of code and algorithms more pleasant to deal with than cranking through ugly diff eq's.
I have to agree that classifying geeks into narrow categories is not a good idea; but, I do fit the category of J. Random Hacker pretty well.
There's more involved than simply being unpopular. As a kid, I was bullied and beat up; I can remember being literally spit on by other boys. My family was often a target of minor vandalism. There were times I was afraid to leave the house because I might get into a fight. (I'm doing much better now; besides being a reasonably successful hacker (in the Jargon File sense), I hold a nidan (second degree black belt) in karate. Nobody bothers me B->; and I teach a lot of kids, some of whom have a bit of the geek in them.)
The Voice article just doesn't get it. We're not talking about being unpopular, about not getting a date for the dance; we're talking about being physically and mentally abused.
So what if these geeks are mostly white suburbaners? I'm reminded of Repo Man:
Yes, they're not turning firehoses on us, or burying us in mass graves. But do you tell a white kid who's just been beat up because he was too smart for his peer's liking, "Your pain's not real?"Geeks may not be experiencing the level of oppression undergone by various racial and religious groups.
But it still hurts.
I think this is a truth of programming regardless of open source issues.
My last job was a contract for a company outside my commuting range. I worked at home and they lent me 4 HP workstations and a Linux box for the duration - had 'em networked together in my bedroom. Way cool.
Of course, part of the compensation could be getting to keep the hardware afterwards.
And I got my first modem in 1986, and it was 2400 baud - they were common by the late 80's.
After all, if the designer cared about the content, she would create a page that could be viewed with any browser. If the designer doesn't care about the content, why would I?
Sadly, those steps are rarely taken in commerical, proprietary code...
Cosource mentions docmentation as one of its potential type of projects. I don't see why testing, code reviews, et cetera can't be contracted out just like development.
Trying to have identical fonts on screen and on paper is a dumb idea (except when you're previewing a print job). I find it much easier to read page on my home Netscape (on Linux) than the one at work (Win95) because of the fonts.
Personally, if I'm creating large docs, I create the text with emacs (with an easy to read and edit monospaced font (I like -b&h-lucidatypewriter-bold-r-normal-sans-14-140-*) in pleasant colors (midnightblue on antiquewhite), then import it into whatever word proc I'm being forced to use for formatting. Much easier on the eyes, IMHO.
'Course, I grew up reading monochrome amber, green, or blue screens, so my tastes my be skewed. (We have a green screen Wyse 50 hooked up to a telephone switch at work...makes me nostalgic.)
For serious documents, markup languages are the way to go.
I also use it when folks send me M$ Word docs, and to neaten up the hard copy version of my resume (the definitive version is the HTML one on my web site, but a few minutes of importing and formatting with WP gives a nicer look than just printing from Netscape).
For most everything else, I use lyx or straight LaTeX.
From http://www.namesecure.com/newsrel ease/042199.cfm
(My only tie to NameSecure is as a customer.)Vinge's True Names was years before Gibson. I also recall a story by Ben Bova (I think) called The Duelling Machine that (I think) was even earlier, which involved VR but in a different context. Gibson does get credit for "cyberspace", though.
Sure, but do I call my car "AC/Delco"?
Stallman has a good point, that what we are running are GNU systems with Linux kernels. But in all but the most technical contexts, no one is going to say "GNU system with Linux kernels" instead of "Linux". A "GNU inside" logo sounds like a great way to help people understand the make-up of the systems they are running.
It's questionable as to how accutate hypnotic recall is. People have been induced to have precise and detailed recollection of events that never really happened. The most visable of these cases would be "alien abduction" stories and many (not all) "repressed memories" of childhood sexual abuse, especially those about ritual Satanic abuse.
The fact the neurons have differmatter a hell of a lot. The shape of a nerve cell determines how its inputs are weighted and the strength and timing of its output.
That's the "meme" idea, comparing ideas to genes - look for Dawkin's essay "Selfish Genes and Selfing Memes" (or something like that). It's in Dennett and Hofstader's collection The Mind's I, recommended reading.
If I was an evil genius who could hack together a device that would spoof the ATMs, no, I wouldn't waste my time trying to get fifty bucks out of one. I'd sell them on the black market to gansters, drug kingpins, and other criminals with street-level organizations, and let them worry about the actual thefts.
The FSF does not "control" GPL'd products. The decision of whether to GPL code rests solely with the author.
That aside, the infection metaphor is an interesting one. We think of infection as negative, but consider: a few billion years ago, a cell got infected by a little bugger of a bacterium called mitochondria. When the infected cell split, both offspring were still infected with mitochondria. That cells decendants have done pretty well. - every plant, animal, fungus, and protist cell (and maybe some bacterial ones too, I'm a hacker, not a biologist) around today is "infected".
In capitalism most everything belongs to a relatively small group of people - those who hold the capital. My creations belong to my boss. If I am lucky, and am not expoited too much by my boss, I might get to be my own boss someday. This is much more likely for software developers than for many other workers, since we are highly skilled and need little capital. There's several types of socialism. They all agree that capital (the "means of production") should be jointly controlled, but differ on who controls the rest. The idea that basic system software should be open could be considered socialist. Huh? In feudalism, it's all the king's. (It's good to be the king!) Actually, according to Marx, the state would eventually wither away. You might notice that that didn't happen...So it's ok if I demand that you pay me $100,000 to use that code, but not ok if I demand that you adopt my license? Free market, chum; if you don't like my terms (either one), find someone else with code that'll do what you need, or write it yourself.
If you use my code and are unwilling to change your license to GPL, then you are restricting my freedom to control my software. That's the issue.
If you'd rather have your code be under a BSD style licence, great! It's your creation, do as you will with it. But understand that others will choose to do differently with their software.