Ahem i don't know. Maybe "sth" has an especially good length(word)/length(abbrev) ratio. Never thought about it. on the other hand, English in not my mother tongue, so thanks for pointing it out. Thinking about it, it seems weird....
I think the problem is that children compare themselves to their peers. In my generation programming/electronics/technical knowledge was considered nerdy, but gained you some respect. I am not sure thats the same nowadays.
Did you read the document you cite?
Its says: "We focus on benign-but-buggy extensions"; this seems to not the case here.
Comprehension and hunger to achieve sth
on
The Creativity Crisis
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I grew up in a surrounding which i pretty much could understand (lets exclude politics here) at age 10. I was presented with toys which you can use to build sth yourself (lego bricks, later lego technics, electronics experimental kits). I was not allowed to watch television unsupervised and in average maybe watched 30 minutes per day. I helped renovate the parents house and played outside in the forest. When i started to play computer games i knew how they were programmed. Which means that for me the fun and the possibilities to do sth depended on and grew with comprehending the world and finding creative ways to use this understanding.
To me it seems that kids today are raised under a different paradigm: give them an extreme amount of toys which are completely incomprehensible - and no level on comprehension which the kid could achieve will enable it to reshape this toy. An DVD player will never do anything else. Even computer are castrated nowadays (Hello, who of us did not start programming with typing something on the C128 for curiosity) to be game-consoles only. Electronics kit can never come close - even qualitatively - to the millions of gadgets surrounding us, I dont even want to talk about the sense of security which would forbid that children modify their bikes. Nothing which you paint, write, do, will compare to the best amateur thing you find on the internet.
So let me formulate that way: we have raised the level of intelligence and knowledge required before creativity pays of visibly to a level not achievable for most of the kids.
Me (to secretary): I can access the webpage without getting a warning about the certificate Secretary: I cant access it without problems I (sitting besides her) see that she takes 0.1 sec to click the warning away: Ahem, you just got the warning! Secretary: yes, its always there.
(And this was an company-internal application where the fix was to download the certificate exactly from the same untrusted website - that educates the users well)
Maybe the permission for "reads password data" should not exist.
how about a sandbox? How about stealing some Ideas from java? I think one can introduce a "Wants to read password" exception" or a "wants to transfer data outside" exception.
And at least firefox points out to me that installing extensions requires thrusting the author
a) Forbid *unmanaged* of documents. If the question: "where is the most up-to-date version of this document stored?" is systematically and easily answered then people can delete the crap from their laptops.
b) Forbid in-company attachments to mails. If the last version can be easily found, including the revision history, a link to this revision is worth *more* than the current state of the document. Most space in my inbox are totally useless attached documents.
c) Forbid the use of formats unsuitable for storing a certain kind of information. (Where i work, they use powerpoint/word files for electronics forms)
d) Provide a good archiving and backup service. Besides the quality improvement by using a service, also the 100th copy done in some unsystematic way of some data is prevented (forbid this explicitely)
e) Thin clients. store the data on a server. Deduplicate.
f) i would expect that most of the documents in a company can (and should) be stored in a database.
Yes. Nokia has some problem competing with the iphone. Is this bad? maybe. But what Nokia need to focus on is the markets where they are strong and where Apple cant compete. Look at Indonesia, China or other places where you can not sell iphones costing $500-$1000. What Nokia need to do is keep their dominance in these markets stable, and when processing power become cheap enough (you just have to wait) to push a major revision into new models sold in 100s of millions per year, then they can make the change. Anything up to then serve either a very specific market (people who used Nokia for the last 10 Years) or are plainly test devices for Nokia.
What is a "page" on an electronic device? I enjoy free resizing (with reflowing) and positioning of the text i want to read. And actually the one button i want tactile feedback *outside* the display area may be the next page button. i have an ebook reader and enjoy that you can hold it (an turn the page) when holding with only one hand. i am sure they did not choose the activation force of the buttons randomly. Needless to say that i also enjoy the next page to appears as fast as possible (to flip quickly trough the book).
Needless to say that i prefer a slow (but nearly zero energy) e-paper display over something suitable for animations.
Oh, only 220 Africans are i the danger of dying a slow, painful death; thats so much different from 250 million.
Let me spell it out clearly:
a) the IPCC report is not a peer reviewed journal; if you want to have it more valid, introduce peer review. In the scientific part that took place, however the biggest problems are in the part where the consequences are described not by scientists, but collected by social and political sciences.
b) the IPCC report is meant to be a basis for politics. There are few things on which politics is based which are really quantified. As a scientist this pisses me off, but i consider the IPCC report a minor sin in that respect. You really believe that political decisions can be made down to a level where the fact if 220 million people may die of thirst or 250 milion people may die of thirst would make a difference? Will they now start to prepare emergency measures? will they now plans for building wells and larger caverns differently to provide them a mean to survive? Or will we in the end just count the deaths there, congratulate ourself that the civilized world helped to save 1 Million people there? Politics is full of symbolic decisions, compromises between lobby groups etc.? Pensions, school systems, military actions; all these are field where you can watch politician making uninformed, intentionally uninformed, or even intentional decisions not based on valid science, but plainly on the feeling they want to induce in Joe the plumbers stomach or the opinions of the lobbyists paying for their advertisements.
c) so let me condense the message to the level needed by politics: 1) the best scientific estimates say we will get a changed climate; we may be lucky and the change may be significant, but minor; or we may be unlucky and the change will be mayor, if we continue like the last 100 years. 2) Its a good idea to limit our effect on the climate and stop burning the carbon sequestred in million of years in a century. 3) We have to develop technologies and scociety structure to deal with this. 4) we could develop technologies to do large-scale geoengineering, but carefully.
d) Last but not least - also as a scientist i have to criticize the role of the media. It is cynical that every time that some strong, but still withing statistical deviation, storm hits the USA, Europe, or Canada they will have some (self-declared) "climate expert" without formal qualification (sometimes from man environmental organization) who will tell them that this storm is due to the climate change. Usually this person will be introduced with a sentence like "Mr. x will tell us about how these storms are affected by climate change" instead of "we will talk to Mr. x. who is working for Organization y. He will tell us what he figured from secondary literature which he carefully selected to fit the sensationalist viewpoint required to get some airtime. He/she has nof fucking idea about even elementary physics, which is why he took this badly paid job as a NGO spokesperson" It is cynical that the same media two weeks later will have an "expert" who tells to the people that everything is not so bad; the Himalaya glaciers will not come down next year and no big wave will hit New York (which is right), so everybody just go on consuming fuel. Parts of the IPCC report where then taken from the Media, which influenced the non-scientific part. I can only say: Dear Jornalists, how fucking cynical do you have to be to Ignore possibly tens of millions of people dying just for the more sensationalist picture of a city hit by a hurricane, explaining how *this* Hurrican was made by Humans (which is a funny claim, similar to Astrology)
I am not exactly sure *how* you imagine the editorial process of scientific journals works (and to answer your possible question: no scientist considers the IPCC report in its total length to be a high-class peer review journal - for the simple reason because it was *not* peer reviewed). In scientific journals it is not the majority vote of the panel which decides if a paper gets published.
I stopped using MS word whenever i could when correctly printing a Word document containing equations requiring having loaded the equation editor before printing (otherwise just garbage). Moreover i would imagine that word documents, which contain DDE-Objects (hmm Excuse-me: OLE-Objects) may have some issues when loading them on another Platform.
*And before you ask: yes, i may have some Floppy images with Documents from 1995 on my HD, not touched sinces then; and yes, my Latex documents from back then still compile*
Well. The point is simpler, no matter who you are and for what purpose you buy:
Either you have a contract which include the option to buy identical replacement parts with your supplier or not. Either you have a support contract for a certain feature guaranteeing this feature to you for some time or not. Either your feature is important enough for you supplier to make it a problem for his reputation or not (And honestly: in my view this does not damage Sony reputation significantly. In the main-stream all Linux articles together still would be outnumbered by every singe iFart Steve Jobs releases). Either your supplier expects a significant earning from keeping this feature - or not.
Moreover if they did it right it should be no problem to upgrade the Nodes to IBM QS20, probably anyway the better form factor. And IBM will no start selling these soon i guess.
should this reflect the availability of people who can evaluate the exam? In that case Pascal should have been removed and C should have been kept.
Or should it reflect the useful languages for CS students? in that case C# and C should have been kept.
Or should it be the languages the students are proficient in (to give them a good start)? then PHP should have been kept, and Pascal definitely removed.
I am not working in a SW company, but observe people who try to pretend a certain personality probably fail at that. Whats worst, they will probably fail completely at "exhibiting the right personality" in a stressful situation. If my co-worker/collaborator wants to mock on my work, i prefer him doing so *not* just before the deadline while swallowing his thoughts before.
The rest of the personality problems has to be solved by your attitude to the job. A usual and reasonable attitude as a beginner is: a) You are new and don't know how it works there. b) If you have good ideas, they are probably welcome at some team meeting or the coffee break, but not at a discussion about some specific problem. c) If you have a different opinion from the rest of the team or your boss, remember: you don't get money for following your own opinion. If you feel you opinion is constantly undervalued, then leave.
I have seen many people buying one "soft skills"-book after the other and learning how to shake hands correctly etc, but after five minutes of talking you found them the same self-centered insecure pricks they always were.
But the real point is that i would also not like to see such equipment in a hospital, in a emergency dispatch center or in a control room of a power plant (nuclear or not), a refinery or a chemical plant. There are a lot of jobs which are only safe as long as you have all information continuously available.
And always you should try to design systems in a way that minimizes the danger of dying.
Yes. I am not the average user. However i appreciated for example that my Dell Mini 9, preinstalled Ubuntu, contained, for example, a DVD player, which worked out of the box (it not like i would not find CSS ridiculous). So, if a netbook sold with windows contains licenses for essential codes, then i also appreciate it if the same model contains these codes when sold with Linux.
are, you with you obviously limited intellectual grasp, able to do anything but listing prejudices? I think not:
Well. You know what the funny thing is. The "moronic science bigots" who "believe" in science have actually set up a system to keep checks and balances on each other. I should remind you that it was scientists figuring out that Newtons science was "incorrect" (as you call it). BTW to call Newtons theories "incorrect" is a gross misconception. Newtons theory works excellent for observations accessible to Newton. And some uneducated hypocrite person may be surprised, but Newtons theory is still in widespread use, without any harm done (no mechanical part of a car is relativistic, no airplane requires relativistic movement of air in the aerodynamic simulations). And i must inform you that many scientists do not "believe" in string theory. Actually most of my friends have the same viewpoint as i have: We don't understand it enough to comment on it, but we would prefer it if they make testable predictions (There is an excellent book "The Trouble with physics" (Lee Smolin) on that). Actually i don't know what string theory is exactly about because its beyond my horizon - and very, very very likely beyond yours. Moreover i don't have many dusty books. I mainly have a computer and read the rss feeds of the preprint archives every day. Books are usually 10-20 years outdated. And its funny that you assume that scientists automatically have no faith. Does faith somehow contradict a rational perception of the world? Thats an interesting Hypothesis. I personally know several religious scientists. Ahh, one more point: I don't know many scientists who are interested in politics. Most of them prefer the lab. It is always sad if politics enters a scientific field, because it kills the scientific process. Because suddenly people otherwise incapable of solving the two-body problem, incapable of replicating 4000year old mathematics, incapable of understanding the simplest chemical reactions suddenly are experts on complicated, advanced fields of science and tell scientists what to do.
Well about AGW i can only say: If you are driving on a curvy road in the night and you don't know what exactly in front of you, its a good idea not to step on the gas. So even if you say we don't have reliable data (which is an uninformed opinion at best), one thing we know for sure: The absorption of light in the atmosphere changes significantly. So yes, we are manipulating a more or less global parameter of the system and hoping it's irrelevant. Good luck with that.
Slashdot Mirror
Ahem i don't know. Maybe "sth" has an especially good length(word)/length(abbrev) ratio. Never thought about it. on the other hand, English in not my mother tongue, so thanks for pointing it out. Thinking about it, it seems weird....
Meccano... i always wanted to have it....
I think the problem is that children compare themselves to their peers. In my generation programming/electronics/technical knowledge was considered nerdy, but gained you some respect. I am not sure thats the same nowadays.
Did you read the document you cite? Its says: "We focus on benign-but-buggy extensions"; this seems to not the case here.
I grew up in a surrounding which i pretty much could understand (lets exclude politics here) at age 10. I was presented with toys which you can use to build sth yourself (lego bricks, later lego technics, electronics experimental kits). I was not allowed to watch television unsupervised and in average maybe watched 30 minutes per day. I helped renovate the parents house and played outside in the forest. When i started to play computer games i knew how they were programmed. Which means that for me the fun and the possibilities to do sth depended on and grew with comprehending the world and finding creative ways to use this understanding. To me it seems that kids today are raised under a different paradigm: give them an extreme amount of toys which are completely incomprehensible - and no level on comprehension which the kid could achieve will enable it to reshape this toy. An DVD player will never do anything else. Even computer are castrated nowadays (Hello, who of us did not start programming with typing something on the C128 for curiosity) to be game-consoles only. Electronics kit can never come close - even qualitatively - to the millions of gadgets surrounding us, I dont even want to talk about the sense of security which would forbid that children modify their bikes. Nothing which you paint, write, do, will compare to the best amateur thing you find on the internet. So let me formulate that way: we have raised the level of intelligence and knowledge required before creativity pays of visibly to a level not achievable for most of the kids.
Yes, i think its an nonstory.
However:
Me (to secretary): I can access the webpage without getting a warning about the certificate
Secretary: I cant access it without problems
I (sitting besides her) see that she takes 0.1 sec to click the warning away: Ahem, you just got the warning!
Secretary: yes, its always there.
(And this was an company-internal application where the fix was to download the certificate exactly from the same untrusted website - that educates the users well)
Maybe the permission for "reads password data" should not exist.
I may point out that the style of the article implied it fails at this.
how about a sandbox? How about stealing some Ideas from java? I think one can introduce a "Wants to read password" exception" or a "wants to transfer data outside" exception. And at least firefox points out to me that installing extensions requires thrusting the author
For this i already have a device.
a) Forbid *unmanaged* of documents. If the question: "where is the most up-to-date version of this document stored?" is systematically and easily answered then people can delete the crap from their laptops.
b) Forbid in-company attachments to mails. If the last version can be easily found, including the revision history, a link to this revision is worth *more* than the current state of the document. Most space in my inbox are totally useless attached documents.
c) Forbid the use of formats unsuitable for storing a certain kind of information. (Where i work, they use powerpoint/word files for electronics forms)
d) Provide a good archiving and backup service. Besides the quality improvement by using a service, also the 100th copy done in some unsystematic way of some data is prevented (forbid this explicitely)
e) Thin clients. store the data on a server. Deduplicate.
f) i would expect that most of the documents in a company can (and should) be stored in a database.
Yes. Nokia has some problem competing with the iphone. Is this bad? maybe. But what Nokia need to focus on is the markets where they are strong and where Apple cant compete. Look at Indonesia, China or other places where you can not sell iphones costing $500-$1000. What Nokia need to do is keep their dominance in these markets stable, and when processing power become cheap enough (you just have to wait) to push a major revision into new models sold in 100s of millions per year, then they can make the change. Anything up to then serve either a very specific market (people who used Nokia for the last 10 Years) or are plainly test devices for Nokia.
What is a "page" on an electronic device? I enjoy free resizing (with reflowing) and positioning of the text i want to read. And actually the one button i want tactile feedback *outside* the display area may be the next page button. i have an ebook reader and enjoy that you can hold it (an turn the page) when holding with only one hand. i am sure they did not choose the activation force of the buttons randomly. Needless to say that i also enjoy the next page to appears as fast as possible (to flip quickly trough the book).
Needless to say that i prefer a slow (but nearly zero energy) e-paper display over something suitable for animations.
Oh, only 220 Africans are i the danger of dying a slow, painful death; thats so much different from 250 million.
Let me spell it out clearly:
a) the IPCC report is not a peer reviewed journal; if you want to have it more valid, introduce peer review. In the scientific part that took place, however the biggest problems are in the part where the consequences are described not by scientists, but collected by social and political sciences.
b) the IPCC report is meant to be a basis for politics. There are few things on which politics is based which are really quantified. As a scientist this pisses me off, but i consider the IPCC report a minor sin in that respect. You really believe that political decisions can be made down to a level where the fact if 220 million people may die of thirst or 250 milion people may die of thirst would make a difference? Will they now start to prepare emergency measures? will they now plans for building wells and larger caverns differently to provide them a mean to survive? Or will we in the end just count the deaths there, congratulate ourself that the civilized world helped to save 1 Million people there? Politics is full of symbolic decisions, compromises between lobby groups etc.? Pensions, school systems, military actions; all these are field where you can watch politician making uninformed, intentionally uninformed, or even intentional decisions not based on valid science, but plainly on the feeling they want to induce in Joe the plumbers stomach or the opinions of the lobbyists paying for their advertisements.
c) so let me condense the message to the level needed by politics: 1) the best scientific estimates say we will get a changed climate; we may be lucky and the change may be significant, but minor; or we may be unlucky and the change will be mayor, if we continue like the last 100 years. 2) Its a good idea to limit our effect on the climate and stop burning the carbon sequestred in million of years in a century. 3) We have to develop technologies and scociety structure to deal with this. 4) we could develop technologies to do large-scale geoengineering, but carefully.
d) Last but not least - also as a scientist i have to criticize the role of the media. It is cynical that every time that some strong, but still withing statistical deviation, storm hits the USA, Europe, or Canada they will have some (self-declared) "climate expert" without formal qualification (sometimes from man environmental organization) who will tell them that this storm is due to the climate change. Usually this person will be introduced with a sentence like "Mr. x will tell us about how these storms are affected by climate change" instead of "we will talk to Mr. x. who is working for Organization y. He will tell us what he figured from secondary literature which he carefully selected to fit the sensationalist viewpoint required to get some airtime. He/she has nof fucking idea about even elementary physics, which is why he took this badly paid job as a NGO spokesperson" It is cynical that the same media two weeks later will have an "expert" who tells to the people that everything is not so bad; the Himalaya glaciers will not come down next year and no big wave will hit New York (which is right), so everybody just go on consuming fuel. Parts of the IPCC report where then taken from the Media, which influenced the non-scientific part. I can only say: Dear Jornalists, how fucking cynical do you have to be to Ignore possibly tens of millions of people dying just for the more sensationalist picture of a city hit by a hurricane, explaining how *this* Hurrican was made by Humans (which is a funny claim, similar to Astrology)
I am not exactly sure *how* you imagine the editorial process of scientific journals works (and to answer your possible question: no scientist considers the IPCC report in its total length to be a high-class peer review journal - for the simple reason because it was *not* peer reviewed). In scientific journals it is not the majority vote of the panel which decides if a paper gets published.
I stopped using MS word whenever i could when correctly printing a Word document containing equations requiring having loaded the equation editor before printing (otherwise just garbage). Moreover i would imagine that word documents, which contain DDE-Objects (hmm Excuse-me: OLE-Objects) may have some issues when loading them on another Platform.
*And before you ask: yes, i may have some Floppy images with Documents from 1995 on my HD, not touched sinces then; and yes, my Latex documents from back then still compile*
Well. The point is simpler, no matter who you are and for what purpose you buy:
Either you have a contract which include the option to buy identical replacement parts with your supplier or not. Either you have a support contract for a certain feature guaranteeing this feature to you for some time or not. Either your feature is important enough for you supplier to make it a problem for his reputation or not (And honestly: in my view this does not damage Sony reputation significantly. In the main-stream all Linux articles together still would be outnumbered by every singe iFart Steve Jobs releases). Either your supplier expects a significant earning from keeping this feature - or not.
Moreover if they did it right it should be no problem to upgrade the Nodes to IBM QS20, probably anyway the better form factor. And IBM will no start selling these soon i guess.
should this reflect the availability of people who can evaluate the exam? In that case Pascal should have been removed and C should have been kept.
Or should it reflect the useful languages for CS students? in that case C# and C should have been kept.
Or should it be the languages the students are proficient in (to give them a good start)? then PHP should have been kept, and Pascal definitely removed.
I am not working in a SW company, but observe people who try to pretend a certain personality probably fail at that. Whats worst, they will probably fail completely at "exhibiting the right personality" in a stressful situation. If my co-worker/collaborator wants to mock on my work, i prefer him doing so *not* just before the deadline while swallowing his thoughts before.
The rest of the personality problems has to be solved by your attitude to the job. A usual and reasonable attitude as a beginner is: a) You are new and don't know how it works there. b) If you have good ideas, they are probably welcome at some team meeting or the coffee break, but not at a discussion about some specific problem. c) If you have a different opinion from the rest of the team or your boss, remember: you don't get money for following your own opinion. If you feel you opinion is constantly undervalued, then leave.
I have seen many people buying one "soft skills"-book after the other and learning how to shake hands correctly etc, but after five minutes of talking you found them the same self-centered insecure pricks they always were.
i guess its not.
But the real point is that i would also not like to see such equipment in a hospital, in a emergency dispatch center or in a control room of a power plant (nuclear or not), a refinery or a chemical plant. There are a lot of jobs which are only safe as long as you have all information continuously available.
And always you should try to design systems in a way that minimizes the danger of dying.
For sure you are paid by the government that you give such an good sounding explanation!
I mean.. they *have* the logs, i hope. I mean they *have* some software anyway which does data-mining to analyze for unusual things....
Yes. I am not the average user. However i appreciated for example that my Dell Mini 9, preinstalled Ubuntu, contained, for example, a DVD player, which worked out of the box (it not like i would not find CSS ridiculous). So, if a netbook sold with windows contains licenses for essential codes, then i also appreciate it if the same model contains these codes when sold with Linux.
Don't make the software available. An independent check is better.
just put a rfid tag clipped to their ear, like cattle.
The funny thing is that the real processor load happens at unexpected places.....
Dear Anonymous Coward,
are, you with you obviously limited intellectual grasp, able to do anything but listing prejudices? I think not:
Well. You know what the funny thing is. The "moronic science bigots" who "believe" in science have actually set up a system to keep checks and balances on each other. I should remind you that it was scientists figuring out that Newtons science was "incorrect" (as you call it). BTW to call Newtons theories "incorrect" is a gross misconception. Newtons theory works excellent for observations accessible to Newton. And some uneducated hypocrite person may be surprised, but Newtons theory is still in widespread use, without any harm done (no mechanical part of a car is relativistic, no airplane requires relativistic movement of air in the aerodynamic simulations). And i must inform you that many scientists do not "believe" in string theory. Actually most of my friends have the same viewpoint as i have: We don't understand it enough to comment on it, but we would prefer it if they make testable predictions (There is an excellent book "The Trouble with physics" (Lee Smolin) on that). Actually i don't know what string theory is exactly about because its beyond my horizon - and very, very very likely beyond yours. Moreover i don't have many dusty books. I mainly have a computer and read the rss feeds of the preprint archives every day. Books are usually 10-20 years outdated. And its funny that you assume that scientists automatically have no faith. Does faith somehow contradict a rational perception of the world? Thats an interesting Hypothesis. I personally know several religious scientists. Ahh, one more point: I don't know many scientists who are interested in politics. Most of them prefer the lab. It is always sad if politics enters a scientific field, because it kills the scientific process. Because suddenly people otherwise incapable of solving the two-body problem, incapable of replicating 4000year old mathematics, incapable of understanding the simplest chemical reactions suddenly are experts on complicated, advanced fields of science and tell scientists what to do.
Well about AGW i can only say: If you are driving on a curvy road in the night and you don't know what exactly in front of you, its a good idea not to step on the gas. So even if you say we don't have reliable data (which is an uninformed opinion at best), one thing we know for sure: The absorption of light in the atmosphere changes significantly. So yes, we are manipulating a more or less global parameter of the system and hoping it's irrelevant. Good luck with that.