Dear ACM and Computer Science Teachers Association, both of which I am a professional member,
STOP.
Please.
I know constitutional matters fairly well. I've got degrees in computer science and K-12 education. I see things from a younger yet informed, educated standpoint (I am in the first generation to be tested under the PA tests which satisfy No Child Left Behind).
Stop campaigning the federal government for educational things. The federal government has NOT been granted the right to deal with education in any way. Its current educational meddling in state-run schools should serve as evidence of this, and should be unconstitutional. Continued federal campaigning will only increase the amount of influence the federal government thinks it has and tries to have on public schools, an influence which is detrimental to the individual needs of students and the societal needs of their communities.
Instead, my dear ACM, please spend your time and money asking state departments of education, which move far, far quicker than the federal department of education, to include CS in curriculum. The federal department of education moves as a brontosaurus would, but the state department of education moves like a triceratops--still slow, but certainly quicker and more aware of its surroundings than a brontosaurus would be.
More effectively would be a grassroots campaign among ACM members to try to convince local school districts that CS needs to be included more in curriculum, especially in city and suburban districts where programming jobs are more available.
Asking the federal government to intervene is asking for something which will simply worsen the situation, and something which cannot be undone.
This is another example of the broken patent system. No government should be able to patent something--that technology was funded by the taxpayer and should thus be owned by the taxpayer, meaning that it is public and thus not patentable.
If you don't know much about Watergate, I suggest hitting up Watergate on Wikipedia, then considering acquiring a copy of Woodward and Bernstein's All the President's Men. Those two reporters were the ones two interacted with Deep Throat, named for a 70s porn.
The 1976 Redford/Hoffman movie version of the book All the President's Men is the definitive story in video format.
Emery's Watergate is another arguably excellent book on the matter.
Avoid the new "Frost/Nixon" film--it's history ambiguous and largely inaccurate; it's a Hollywood version of the story with excellent acting. Instead, watch the original interviews.
Remember, physical access is total access. Most of the kids won't go outside the rules. However, as soon as the geeky kid figures out how to get past all your artificial security measures and tells another kid, you have lost all of your security.
The punishment could be to take away the laptop, but then the kid couldn't get work done because you've essentially taken away his books and notepad. Most kids are indifferent about detention and suspension these days.
I guess you could implement some way to force the OS to connect to the school via VPN and use the school's internet connection all of the time, but then the school has to have the necessary bandwidth for several hundred laptops connecting every night and weekend.
Honestly, the best policies are social policies. "If we catch you looking at porn or playing games, we tell everyone in the school and probably give you some kind of irrelevant punishment." Guilty consciences, laughing mouths, and pointing fingers are far more deterrent than NetNanny.
I know if I was given a school laptop, the first thing I would do is run out and buy a huge, quick Flash drive and install a persistent Linux distro on it. I'd never even touch the installed OS unless I was at school.
What do they do when they tear up or lose a book? What do they do when they tear up or lose a gym uniform? What do they do when they destroy other things required for school?
Pay for it.
If someone else screws it up, they pay for it if it can be proved they did. One way to see this is as a great teacher of a responsibility for things which one possesses but does not own.
I assume see it from your point of view, too: you wouldn't want your kid carrying it because he or she might lose/damage it or someone else might damage it, and you'd be stuck with the bill. If you're not willing to take that risk, then spend the money ahead of time to get your kid an equivalent or better machine which he or she can use at home.
Eventually, all textbooks will be on these school-provided portable computers. With the ever-rising cost of modern textbooks, a cheaper netbook loaded with site-licensed PDF textbooks costs less than a locker full of paper books!
Know this: checking in on your developers via a bug tracking system is probably advisable instead of constantly walking in and saying, "What's happening." Note period instead of a question mark.
It seems to me that it would be tied to a single phone. It would be illegal to blanket jam, if I'm recalling FCC regulations correctly. A jamming signal might impair the communications of a passing vehicle.
To my knowledge, this is international roaming, folks. When this story first broke approximately a week ago, I called T-Mobile to ensure that all phone and data roaming in the US was covered and they said it was.
However, this might be just for my plan (MyFaves 600 and unlimited G1 data).
Of course so is the U.S. law that mandates drinking age be 21 and forced many states to change their age of consent from 18 to 21.
You may be unaware that the law which dictates that is actually not a law. There is not an actual federal law which says that folks under cannot purchase or consume alcohol.
There is, however, legislation which provides additional highway funding to states which set the age limit at 21. It's up to the states to actually enact and enforce their own laws since the federal government doesn't have the authority to do that in regards to intrastate alcohol dealings.
It's still an arbitrary age and there's significant proof either way that it works or doesn't work.
It's also a dirty hack on the part of the federal government.
21 states have rejected it because it would be too expensive, too invasive, and/or pretty much unconstitutional.
Pennsylvania's Dept. of Transportation effected many of the points of Real ID without an edict from the PA legislature, and there are many legislators not pleased with this. One point required a multimillion dollar contract with a security firm whose technology was cracked reliably just a few months later (I wish I could find evidence on the 'net of this, but I trust the person who told me, as he's been following Real ID religiously since it was introduced).
You're advocating a national ID card, essentially. That's one stop shopping for identity thieves--just like social security numbers are now--and it won't do a thing to stop "terrorists" and other malfeasant souls. It's also terribly close to the "papers, please" seen in many places throughout time.
Real ID should make any sensible person cringe. Take five minutes and read how the federal government has mandated a variety of criteria for states' drivers licenses, the cost of which to the states is in the millions and is entirely unfunded (not to mention unconstitutional!) and poorly executed in states where it has been effected.
Take a moment today to call your state legislators and see where they stand on your states' Real ID compliance. If they oppose it, congratulate them and consider donating to their campaign. If they support it, swear on your mother's grave to see them unseated and replaced with a responsible legislator.
The federal government has not been granted to the right to tell the citizenry what they can or cannot put into their own body. I see it as a Constitutional issue at the federal level.
However, at the state and local level, it's a moral and ethical issue. The arguments I would make have already been made in the ~5 5-modded posts made prior to this one.
To summarize, though: no one has a right to tell me what I can or cannot put in my body. They may advise me; they are within their right to deny me government jobs and programs, but it is an abrogation of my personal liberty to throw me in jail for my putting something into my body.
How would I go about reserving an IPv6 block for myself? Is there a central agency controlling that yet? Is a reservation free, or is there a periodic payment?
I've been using it all day (Ubuntu 8.10, gcc4/qt4) and I've not encountered any major setbacks or bad renderings. There's some graphical distortions on the tab bar, but I have a feeling that's a purely cosmetic, chrome issue which could be resolved with a quick flick of the wrist.
Really, I think Opera is slowly becoming my browser of choice for day-to-day activities. It's just faster than Firefox or Safari or Chrome. I'd like to see it get the process separation abilities of Chrome and the extensibility of Firefox, and it would be awesome. I still use Firefox for development, though, because its market share is much, much higher and the tools are there (Firebug and Web Developer, plus Venkman, etc.).
However, the mail client and feed reader are still lackluster. Thunderbird does a better job of the former, Google Reader handles the latter better. If Opera could act as a frontend to Google Reader, I'd be a very, very happy man, and so would thousands of others who like desktop applications with web-based backends.
This is still a travesty of justice. Disorderly conduct and neutering her of her source of income is terrible for something of which she had no control.
I just bought a new Nissan, fully loaded, except the iPod connection package. The dealer was curious as to why I specifically didn't want it, especially he knows I'm into all kinds of technology and gadgets. My reply: "I would never use a device that locks down what I put on it."
Slashdot Mirror
Dear ACM and Computer Science Teachers Association, both of which I am a professional member,
STOP.
Please.
I know constitutional matters fairly well. I've got degrees in computer science and K-12 education. I see things from a younger yet informed, educated standpoint (I am in the first generation to be tested under the PA tests which satisfy No Child Left Behind).
Stop campaigning the federal government for educational things. The federal government has NOT been granted the right to deal with education in any way. Its current educational meddling in state-run schools should serve as evidence of this, and should be unconstitutional. Continued federal campaigning will only increase the amount of influence the federal government thinks it has and tries to have on public schools, an influence which is detrimental to the individual needs of students and the societal needs of their communities.
Instead, my dear ACM, please spend your time and money asking state departments of education, which move far, far quicker than the federal department of education, to include CS in curriculum. The federal department of education moves as a brontosaurus would, but the state department of education moves like a triceratops--still slow, but certainly quicker and more aware of its surroundings than a brontosaurus would be.
More effectively would be a grassroots campaign among ACM members to try to convince local school districts that CS needs to be included more in curriculum, especially in city and suburban districts where programming jobs are more available.
Asking the federal government to intervene is asking for something which will simply worsen the situation, and something which cannot be undone.
Hello Android is the only one of these which isn't out yet. Hell, if you order one tomorrow, one-day shipping will get it there before Christmas!
This is another example of the broken patent system. No government should be able to patent something--that technology was funded by the taxpayer and should thus be owned by the taxpayer, meaning that it is public and thus not patentable.
If you don't know much about Watergate, I suggest hitting up Watergate on Wikipedia, then considering acquiring a copy of Woodward and Bernstein's All the President's Men. Those two reporters were the ones two interacted with Deep Throat, named for a 70s porn.
The 1976 Redford/Hoffman movie version of the book All the President's Men is the definitive story in video format.
Emery's Watergate is another arguably excellent book on the matter.
Avoid the new "Frost/Nixon" film--it's history ambiguous and largely inaccurate; it's a Hollywood version of the story with excellent acting. Instead, watch the original interviews.
I couldn't find any books by either this Ron Ace (the inventor of this "idea") or Kenneth Caldeira. However I did find some books in which Caldeira is quoted.
Remember, physical access is total access. Most of the kids won't go outside the rules. However, as soon as the geeky kid figures out how to get past all your artificial security measures and tells another kid, you have lost all of your security.
The punishment could be to take away the laptop, but then the kid couldn't get work done because you've essentially taken away his books and notepad. Most kids are indifferent about detention and suspension these days.
I guess you could implement some way to force the OS to connect to the school via VPN and use the school's internet connection all of the time, but then the school has to have the necessary bandwidth for several hundred laptops connecting every night and weekend.
Honestly, the best policies are social policies. "If we catch you looking at porn or playing games, we tell everyone in the school and probably give you some kind of irrelevant punishment." Guilty consciences, laughing mouths, and pointing fingers are far more deterrent than NetNanny.
Further proof that the IRS is outdated and needs to be dissolved...
I know if I was given a school laptop, the first thing I would do is run out and buy a huge, quick Flash drive and install a persistent Linux distro on it. I'd never even touch the installed OS unless I was at school.
What do they do when they tear up or lose a book? What do they do when they tear up or lose a gym uniform? What do they do when they destroy other things required for school?
Pay for it.
If someone else screws it up, they pay for it if it can be proved they did. One way to see this is as a great teacher of a responsibility for things which one possesses but does not own.
I assume see it from your point of view, too: you wouldn't want your kid carrying it because he or she might lose/damage it or someone else might damage it, and you'd be stuck with the bill. If you're not willing to take that risk, then spend the money ahead of time to get your kid an equivalent or better machine which he or she can use at home.
Eventually, all textbooks will be on these school-provided portable computers. With the ever-rising cost of modern textbooks, a cheaper netbook loaded with site-licensed PDF textbooks costs less than a locker full of paper books!
Read Hackers and Painters and Mythical Man Month, especially the latter.
Know this: checking in on your developers via a bug tracking system is probably advisable instead of constantly walking in and saying, "What's happening." Note period instead of a question mark.
It seems to me that it would be tied to a single phone. It would be illegal to blanket jam, if I'm recalling FCC regulations correctly. A jamming signal might impair the communications of a passing vehicle.
To my knowledge, this is international roaming, folks. When this story first broke approximately a week ago, I called T-Mobile to ensure that all phone and data roaming in the US was covered and they said it was.
However, this might be just for my plan (MyFaves 600 and unlimited G1 data).
You may be unaware that the law which dictates that is actually not a law. There is not an actual federal law which says that folks under cannot purchase or consume alcohol.
There is, however, legislation which provides additional highway funding to states which set the age limit at 21. It's up to the states to actually enact and enforce their own laws since the federal government doesn't have the authority to do that in regards to intrastate alcohol dealings.
It's still an arbitrary age and there's significant proof either way that it works or doesn't work.
It's also a dirty hack on the part of the federal government.
21 states have rejected it because it would be too expensive, too invasive, and/or pretty much unconstitutional.
Pennsylvania's Dept. of Transportation effected many of the points of Real ID without an edict from the PA legislature, and there are many legislators not pleased with this. One point required a multimillion dollar contract with a security firm whose technology was cracked reliably just a few months later (I wish I could find evidence on the 'net of this, but I trust the person who told me, as he's been following Real ID religiously since it was introduced).
You're advocating a national ID card, essentially. That's one stop shopping for identity thieves--just like social security numbers are now--and it won't do a thing to stop "terrorists" and other malfeasant souls. It's also terribly close to the "papers, please" seen in many places throughout time.
Real ID should make any sensible person cringe. Take five minutes and read how the federal government has mandated a variety of criteria for states' drivers licenses, the cost of which to the states is in the millions and is entirely unfunded (not to mention unconstitutional!) and poorly executed in states where it has been effected.
Take a moment today to call your state legislators and see where they stand on your states' Real ID compliance. If they oppose it, congratulate them and consider donating to their campaign. If they support it, swear on your mother's grave to see them unseated and replaced with a responsible legislator.
The federal government has not been granted to the right to tell the citizenry what they can or cannot put into their own body. I see it as a Constitutional issue at the federal level.
However, at the state and local level, it's a moral and ethical issue. The arguments I would make have already been made in the ~5 5-modded posts made prior to this one.
To summarize, though: no one has a right to tell me what I can or cannot put in my body. They may advise me; they are within their right to deny me government jobs and programs, but it is an abrogation of my personal liberty to throw me in jail for my putting something into my body.
(have I (feeling ((become popular Scheme) again)))
How would I go about reserving an IPv6 block for myself? Is there a central agency controlling that yet? Is a reservation free, or is there a periodic payment?
I'll allow it only if I can sign up as an indie artists and get some of the money, too.
(read: this is ludicrous and will never happen)
I've been using it all day (Ubuntu 8.10, gcc4/qt4) and I've not encountered any major setbacks or bad renderings. There's some graphical distortions on the tab bar, but I have a feeling that's a purely cosmetic, chrome issue which could be resolved with a quick flick of the wrist.
Really, I think Opera is slowly becoming my browser of choice for day-to-day activities. It's just faster than Firefox or Safari or Chrome. I'd like to see it get the process separation abilities of Chrome and the extensibility of Firefox, and it would be awesome. I still use Firefox for development, though, because its market share is much, much higher and the tools are there (Firebug and Web Developer, plus Venkman, etc.).
However, the mail client and feed reader are still lackluster. Thunderbird does a better job of the former, Google Reader handles the latter better. If Opera could act as a frontend to Google Reader, I'd be a very, very happy man, and so would thousands of others who like desktop applications with web-based backends.
u = e?
better filesystem?
I was being facetious, but I may actually be correct.
This is still a travesty of justice. Disorderly conduct and neutering her of her source of income is terrible for something of which she had no control.
Coming soon, ISPs which sell their service as "unfiltered".
I just bought a new Nissan, fully loaded, except the iPod connection package. The dealer was curious as to why I specifically didn't want it, especially he knows I'm into all kinds of technology and gadgets. My reply: "I would never use a device that locks down what I put on it."