I am a scientist. I like scepticism. However history shows:
a) Any comparatively new theory (climate models *are* new in terms of a scientific theory will always get an over-proportional share of skepticism for some time. This skepticism will take longer to rise and stay longer the further the skeptic is away from the subject. Quantum mechanics and Special/General RT are two good examples: The first skeptics where physicists, and after a few years that was settled. Then came some phase during which vague ans strange concepts where sold as paradoxes to moderatly interested people (e.g. physics teachers), who in turn stated that "these theories are not well understood". Nowadays sometimes social sciences/politicians/pure philosophers try to think about it and sometimes refers to or criticized the theory of relativity completely out of context.
b) The likeliness of normal people to believe "skepticism" depends strongly on how convenient it may be. For example people, who assured you ten seconds ago wholeheartedly that nuclear power plant are safe because "scientists proveed that hundred of times", even if scientists have a heavy debate ongoing (and no idea at all) where to go with the nuclear waste, will assure you in the next moment that in the case of global warming it is better to listen to a bunch of sceptics, mostly unqualified in CFD simulations or climate research in general and discard the results acquired with great care in favor of some book written by somebody holding no degreee in natural science at all. While in one case listening to scientists makes electricity cheaper, in the other case listening to skeptics makes driving a car cheaper.
c) Books/articles which reference mainly publications from the own institute are, in my experience not worth looking into.
d) Scientists who circumvent peer review, are arrogant at best and liars at worst. But no matter what their motivation is, a lot of pre-publishes mathematical (non)proofs caused embarrassment for the author who believed he does not get enough glory if he asks other mathematicians first. And cold fusion, once circumventing peer review completely, a second time on "fast track" online publication two times turned out to be a failure.
a lot of other reasons for waste of Bandwidth
1) The idea that no instead of a link URL we need usuall a javascript onclick event
2) The idea that a really good layouted requires nesting 15 levels of components.
3) The ideas that we first need to test if flash is installed.
4) The idea that even just figuring out the start date of a movie nowadays requires to load and skip a flash video.
5) The idea that things which would be perfectly fine without AJAX now require extra request after loading the website.
6) the idea that every wesite needs special menu bars on each end of the page instead of a unified, simple menu with one hierachy level more
Nevertheless i was going to the University for a few reasons:
a) The Monitors have been black and white (SUN), but 21 inch, which was expensive ten years ago. b) The Network is faster c) my files were safely stored on the university fileserver, with automated daily backups d) if the machines had problems (happened seldom) somebody fixed it for me e) different printers f) good scanners g) always people around to make a coffee-break h) 100meter besides the library, in case you need to look something up. i) close to lecture halls, in case you want to visit a lecture. j) when you go home, you go home. i am *sure* i would fail studies today because of this lack of separation. Mixing up your studies to much with your personal life is not good.
This all motivated me *NOT* to upgrade my own computer hardware during my whole studies. It was just more convenient and i could focus more on programming and studying by working in the computer pool. only problem was the sound in some of the rooms.
I was sysadmin for some time in a group where i suspected that not all members used properly licensed software. I did not install unlicensed SW. Licenses were not my business. When fixing network problems/client-server issues i usually used cmd, so i avoided to look at the start menu and made an extremely restrictive FW. Since checking for licensing issues was not in my contract, i did not bother. However i informed the boss that several things indicate that people use unlicensed SW. For example i knew how many licenses where bought centrally, it was outside my power to ask all colleagues to present me their office licenses, so strictly speaking i really did not know it. For circumstances i can not disclose, neither leaving directly nor trying to bring the issues to persecution was an viable option.
And yes i am such a dick if everybody falls for the myth of the BSA that you will receive death penalty on touching an unlicensed copy of some SW.
Can you read? The guy just joined. Nobody will be able to attach this to him. And unlike other posters here claim, not reporting a crime is usually not a crime.
Oh wow. If you want to get fired, at least do so withput commiting a crime. Really good people know that faking and eliminating all traces of what you did is so difficult that you *dont* want to be in the circle of closer suspects.
1) *Never states the existence of pirated software as a fact to outside you company*.!!!
2) Ask your Boss at a cup of tea outside his office
3) Depending on your bosses answer and your morality
a) Boss says: hunt down priated software -> you do that
b) Boss says: dont touch the issue and you are not too worried about the moral/legal issues: close your eyes
c) Boss says: dont touch the issue and you are worried about the moral/legal issues AND you are brave: state is explicictely in an e-mail to your boss with somebody else in the company in the CC
d) Boss says: dont touch the issue and you are worried about the moral/legal issues AND you are reasonable: leave.
Exactly. But normallly you would expect that you can return a compromised machine to an uncompromised state by wiping/exchanging the HD. If i get it rught this procesure does not work. I remember some time ago there existed Motherboards ith two copis of the original bios, one non-writable, which could be copied to the writable part by some means. Such a thing would circumvent that.
On the other hand I find it fascinating that editing publisìng a few images is regularly done by picasa in a time where enough webspace is often included within your internet access and a programs like f-spot are free.
If people would read the google agreements they sign of, they would be scared to hell.
About a lot of other thing he may be too fundamentalistic, but this danger is real. The average user is now more than ever dependent on a fragile link of software-service-supplier chain, locking him in totally
Given the track history of the carriers providing services for me about what I expect from a mobile phone, i am not sure this is a bad thing.
a) not so expensive to nail me to a super-expensive contract
b) standby battery life
c) speech quality
d) standard system where a lot of applications run on
only after that features like "not beeing dull" come to my mind. I am perfectly happy with my "dull" Nokia E61, as i was before with my "dull" Nokia 6310 and Nokia 6310i. Would Dell bring a cheap dull phone fulfilling conditions a-d, they could make me switch.
-mysql and DB2 would be owned by the same company -zfs and jfs would be ownded by the same company (yes i know jfs can also be licensed as GPL) -jsp could be defined by the owners of websphere -java technologies held by IBM and Sun could be merged
that Apple subnotebooks (alo applies to smartphones) seem to be the absolute standard, even on slashdot. IBM/Lenovo, Toshiba and Sony have/had always an broad range of small form-factors available (especially at $1999) which are beaten by the macbook Air only if you accept tho measure the "thickness" of a triangle
> I would wager 100 bucks it's not nearly as much as they think he is doing.
And i would not bet against that.
As a matter of fact, i once had the ungrateful task to supervise some Josh in something (writing a master thesis) which was not exactly on his line of talent (he was a brilliant engineer who decided life is too boring and studying another subject would be a remedy for that), and he grossly underperformed due to his unwillingness to accept a good advice before the shit hit the fan and his opinion that he is so brilliant that de does not have to learn something. Somehow when the shit finally hit the fan, he made it sound like it was not his fault not to listen to the advice (actually with an accusation in the undertone that I had not been insisting enough in convincing him to listen; Bystanders working in the same room usually had the impression that my attempts to steer him took a little bit too long); the usual sentence was "who could have known that?". When i think about it, he also made diminishing comments about the work of a female co-master student who was undoubtedly the best we ever had in the chair (measured by all scales available, grades, prices, publications and also personal opinion). It finally cumulated in him skipping me as his direct supervisor and talking directly to the professor whenever he did want to do some task actually was necessary for his thesis (I did not load him with anything additionally).
Slashdot Mirror
I am a scientist. I like scepticism. However history shows:
a) Any comparatively new theory (climate models *are* new in terms of a scientific theory will always get an over-proportional share of skepticism for some time. This skepticism will take longer to rise and stay longer the further the skeptic is away from the subject. Quantum mechanics and Special/General RT are two good examples: The first skeptics where physicists, and after a few years that was settled. Then came some phase during which vague ans strange concepts where sold as paradoxes to moderatly interested people (e.g. physics teachers), who in turn stated that "these theories are not well understood". Nowadays sometimes social sciences/politicians/pure philosophers try to think about it and sometimes refers to or criticized the theory of relativity completely out of context.
b) The likeliness of normal people to believe "skepticism" depends strongly on how convenient it may be. For example people, who assured you ten seconds ago wholeheartedly that nuclear power plant are safe because "scientists proveed that hundred of times", even if scientists have a heavy debate ongoing (and no idea at all) where to go with the nuclear waste, will assure you in the next moment that in the case of global warming it is better to listen to a bunch of sceptics, mostly unqualified in CFD simulations or climate research in general and discard the results acquired with great care in favor of some book written by somebody holding no degreee in natural science at all. While in one case listening to scientists makes electricity cheaper, in the other case listening to skeptics makes driving a car cheaper.
c) Books/articles which reference mainly publications from the own institute are, in my experience not worth looking into.
d) Scientists who circumvent peer review, are arrogant at best and liars at worst. But no matter what their motivation is, a lot of pre-publishes mathematical (non)proofs caused embarrassment for the author who believed he does not get enough glory if he asks other mathematicians first. And cold fusion, once circumventing peer review completely, a second time on "fast track" online publication two times turned out to be a failure.
My advice is: do what you really want to do. If you really like it, you will be above average. That is the average which asked: what looks best?
When i started to study (physics) the future for physicists looked very grim, according to everybody. Now i can't complain.
a lot of other reasons for waste of Bandwidth 1) The idea that no instead of a link URL we need usuall a javascript onclick event 2) The idea that a really good layouted requires nesting 15 levels of components. 3) The ideas that we first need to test if flash is installed. 4) The idea that even just figuring out the start date of a movie nowadays requires to load and skip a flash video. 5) The idea that things which would be perfectly fine without AJAX now require extra request after loading the website. 6) the idea that every wesite needs special menu bars on each end of the page instead of a unified, simple menu with one hierachy level more
Hmm sounds like me. I also don't do what i am told and i don't plan for the future.
Nevertheless i was going to the University for a few reasons:
a) The Monitors have been black and white (SUN), but 21 inch, which was expensive ten years ago.
b) The Network is faster
c) my files were safely stored on the university fileserver, with automated daily backups
d) if the machines had problems (happened seldom) somebody fixed it for me
e) different printers
f) good scanners
g) always people around to make a coffee-break
h) 100meter besides the library, in case you need to look something up.
i) close to lecture halls, in case you want to visit a lecture.
j) when you go home, you go home. i am *sure* i would fail studies today because of this lack of separation. Mixing up your studies to much with your personal life is not good.
This all motivated me *NOT* to upgrade my own computer hardware during my whole studies. It was just more convenient and i could focus more on programming and studying by working in the computer pool. only problem was the sound in some of the rooms.
for small things it is quite ok. The autorouting sucks an needs lots of manual tuning, but thts ok/
Exactly.
which fraction of the population are non-idiots, according to your definition?
selling music and getting rid of the "which is the right format for you?" question, which would end up in support costs.
I was sysadmin for some time in a group where i suspected that not all members used properly licensed software. I did not install unlicensed SW. Licenses were not my business. When fixing network problems/client-server issues i usually used cmd, so i avoided to look at the start menu and made an extremely restrictive FW. Since checking for licensing issues was not in my contract, i did not bother. However i informed the boss that several things indicate that people use unlicensed SW. For example i knew how many licenses where bought centrally, it was outside my power to ask all colleagues to present me their office licenses, so strictly speaking i really did not know it. For circumstances i can not disclose, neither leaving directly nor trying to bring the issues to persecution was an viable option. And yes i am such a dick if everybody falls for the myth of the BSA that you will receive death penalty on touching an unlicensed copy of some SW.
Can you read? The guy just joined. Nobody will be able to attach this to him. And unlike other posters here claim, not reporting a crime is usually not a crime.
Oh wow. If you want to get fired, at least do so withput commiting a crime. Really good people know that faking and eliminating all traces of what you did is so difficult that you *dont* want to be in the circle of closer suspects.
Fighting dragons usually gets you fried.
pleas try to interpret the first sentence of the original post. maybe the funniest shit starts to make sense then.
Rules for dealing with that
1) *Never states the existence of pirated software as a fact to outside you company*.!!!
2) Ask your Boss at a cup of tea outside his office
3) Depending on your bosses answer and your morality
a) Boss says: hunt down priated software -> you do that
b) Boss says: dont touch the issue and you are not too worried about the moral/legal issues: close your eyes
c) Boss says: dont touch the issue and you are worried about the moral/legal issues AND you are brave: state is explicictely in an e-mail to your boss with somebody else in the company in the CC
d) Boss says: dont touch the issue and you are worried about the moral/legal issues AND you are reasonable: leave.
Exactly. But normallly you would expect that you can return a compromised machine to an uncompromised state by wiping/exchanging the HD. If i get it rught this procesure does not work. I remember some time ago there existed Motherboards ith two copis of the original bios, one non-writable, which could be copied to the writable part by some means. Such a thing would circumvent that.
It would be wrong to make them a law.
On the other hand I find it fascinating that editing publisìng a few images is regularly done by picasa in a time where enough webspace is often included within your internet access and a programs like f-spot are free.
If people would read the google agreements they sign of, they would be scared to hell.
About a lot of other thing he may be too fundamentalistic, but this danger is real. The average user is now more than ever dependent on a fragile link of software-service-supplier chain, locking him in totally
Given the track history of the carriers providing services for me about what I expect from a mobile phone, i am not sure this is a bad thing.
a) not so expensive to nail me to a super-expensive contract
b) standby battery life
c) speech quality
d) standard system where a lot of applications run on
only after that features like "not beeing dull" come to my mind. I am perfectly happy with my "dull" Nokia E61, as i was before with my "dull" Nokia 6310 and Nokia 6310i. Would Dell bring a cheap dull phone fulfilling conditions a-d, they could make me switch.
I finally can install the PHD course for mantra singing and acting enlightened!
i would willingly let the doctors replace by body by mechanical part to avoid death.
in that case
-mysql and DB2 would be owned by the same company
-zfs and jfs would be ownded by the same company (yes i know jfs can also be licensed as GPL)
-jsp could be defined by the owners of websphere
-java technologies held by IBM and Sun could be merged
etc...
that Apple subnotebooks (alo applies to smartphones) seem to be the absolute standard, even on slashdot. IBM/Lenovo, Toshiba and Sony have/had always an broad range of small form-factors available (especially at $1999) which are beaten by the macbook Air only if you accept tho measure the "thickness" of a triangle
Thanks. I did not use latin for the last 18 years and even i thought something was wrong....
That is a "did *not* want to do some task" in the last line...
> I would wager 100 bucks it's not nearly as much as they think he is doing.
And i would not bet against that.
As a matter of fact, i once had the ungrateful task to supervise some Josh in something (writing a master thesis) which was not exactly on his line of talent (he was a brilliant engineer who decided life is too boring and studying another subject would be a remedy for that), and he grossly underperformed due to his unwillingness to accept a good advice before the shit hit the fan and his opinion that he is so brilliant that de does not have to learn something. Somehow when the shit finally hit the fan, he made it sound like it was not his fault not to listen to the advice (actually with an accusation in the undertone that I had not been insisting enough in convincing him to listen; Bystanders working in the same room usually had the impression that my attempts to steer him took a little bit too long); the usual sentence was "who could have known that?". When i think about it, he also made diminishing comments about the work of a female co-master student who was undoubtedly the best we ever had in the chair (measured by all scales available, grades, prices, publications and also personal opinion). It finally cumulated in him skipping me as his direct supervisor and talking directly to the professor whenever he did want to do some task actually was necessary for his thesis (I did not load him with anything additionally).