It's ludicrous to say that you own a particular configuration of 1s and 0s
That's the stupidest fucking argument on the topic I've ever heard. If everything comes down to just a bunch of 1s and 0s, then why don't you just create them as you need them? Oh, what's that? Creating what you want is non-trivial and the only way to create that is to do it the way it's currently done, which costs money? By the way, not believing in private property is communism. It's like, someone painstakingly creates something and then some wanker like you comes up and goes "this is now property of the people, thank you".
(Please bear in mind that I didn't read the grandpappy post, just the bit you quoted and your response.)
The FOSS movement does not equate the two concepts "a particular configuration of 1s and 0s" and "creat[ing that sequence of 1s and 0s] as you need them" as you have. The problem is in the notion of doing something cool once and then making money off of it for the rest of your life when there is zero cost to mass produce (i.e., make digital copies). This is where the FOSS movement and I part ways a bit, because FOSS says that it's "unethical" to do this. I'm not quite sure what that means, but I know if the cost of mass producing something is negligible, it's certainly impractical at the very least.
From the standpoint of a healthy capitalist society, I regard software more as a service (and don't confused SaaS here, I'm talking about box software like Windows) than a product. Capitalism is supposed to reward people for doing useful work. Patents and copyrights were originally conceived to do this, but over time they've become more and more about allowing one to rest on one's laurels and live a life of luxury for having done that one cool thing. I'm not exactly sure where this expectation of entitlement comes from...what other line of work doesn't require you to show up everyday to get a paycheck?
The "service" part of software comes in the form of extension and support. If I make something cool and release it for free, I may be paid to support it (ongoing labor), or even extend it (short-term labor at a particular customer's behest). Even in the case of being paid to do an extension I otherwise would not have done, I as the developer and strongly incented to release it for free to all because it presumably makes my original software more valuable and will drive further business.
Not coincidentally, this is actually how most commercial software companies actually work. I used to work for a well-known company that made marketing software, and they would routinely cut their prices 50%, even up to 90% to make a big sale. That sounds crazy until you understand the logic of it, which was to lock up the far more valuable support contract. In other words, what the market was saying is that the software itself wasn't valuable to customers—the support and ability to get feature requests answered, on the other hand, was. And so the pricing structure reflected that...give (or nearly give) the software away, and charge the real bucks for what the buyer is actually willing to pay for.
This happened on nearly every deal at that company, and it led me to wonder why they even bothered with charging at all...why not just give it away for free download on the website? Sure, a lot of small fish that otherwise wouldn't be able to afford it would start using it without ever paying a dime into the system...but so what? We weren't going to make money off of them anyway, and by removing the barrier to entry we open the door to at least small or one-time support fees, get better feedback for laying out our roadmap, and potentially deprive a competitor of a sale, increasing our own marketshare.
Yea, commie, I have to agree with longnick. Blocking ads is like going to Vegas and taking advantage of the cheap buffets without gambling. Not immoral (ahem, "amoral", not so sure), but if everyone did it, the buffets would cease to exist.
What you did is more like seeing a bike that wasn't properly locked to the bike rack, so you figure, OH YEA BABY. FREE BIKE.
Except it's not a free bike. The owner made a mistake, but that doesn't mean you're not a thief. Accidentally leaving one's door unlocked is not an tantamount to intentionally giving your stuff away.
This problem of the dirty shower head is easily solved by my approach. Instead of hooking up to a city water tap, I just had a giant tank of bactine installed that I use instead. Best part: no soap required, just a wire brush and a brillo pad and you're in and out as fast as you can say, Where'd all my skin go?
Great, now I have to hear my doctor say, Um, it seems you completed the full course of antibiotics...but it turns out it only attacked the inert state of your disease. The virulent, flesh-eating superposition continues unchecked.
And I'd argue that not everyone has the same chance of dying in a car crash. For instance, this morning I had to go around someone that will almost certainly perish in the next week or so if he keeps driving in the fashion I witnessed (if not from a crash, because someone will just take him out...but probably because of a crash). I, on the other hand, am omniscient and omnipotent behind the wheel, invincible save for the malice of others.
Not like a space shuttle. They're all pretty much in the same boat, regardless of skill.
I actually hope Leader Technologies wins this, because I happen to hold the patent on "associating data with a single category," and every time they get royalties, so do I.
Not to brag, but I also hold the patents on associating data with:
zero categories,
a negative number of categories,
any number of categories that can be expressed on the complex plane excluding the point-cut from the origin along the positive real line,
any number that can only be expressed using quaternions.
Unfortunately, none of these others have yielded any proceeds yet except the first one, which I've profited from quite handsomely. Patenting data associated with no categories turned out to be my master stroke!
Hmm. How do you know the kids are bright, happy, interesting, accomplished, etc, if there's no room for comparison? You have to compare people...that's what life is all about when you're passionate about something—pushing the limits, which is hard to do when you don't know where you stand. It's also hard to create any kind of brain trust (or passion trust, maybe) of like-minded individuals around a topic of shared interest without some kind of way of compare/contrast.
I'm not saying standardized testing is best. All I'm suggesting is that maybe the problem with it is with the means and method, not something more fundamental about the notion itself.
Unschooling could only be successful if the unstudent is surrounded by Really Smart People. We normally code information in the form of texts because, the first few goes in class, no one really understands it, but they can all go back to the source later and figure it out when need be. Without that kind of structure, a lot of knowledge gets lost because its transmission and existence depends on the unteacher to be able to convey it when the unstudent is most receptive. That's not easy.
So between this and Montessori, it's probably still Montessori ftw.
I'm gonna be a big jerk right now. I'm pre-announcing it so you know I aware.
What they've discovered is a material where under certain conditions you can model the behavior as though there were monopoles present, but it's an imaginary construction, not an actual particle
...as though there were monopoles present... - great! perfect! who cares about real monopoles anyway? what difference does that make?
...but it's an imaginary construction... - so, an imaginary construction like...our scientific model of any particle, quasi- or otherwise?
...the resulting defect looks like a monopole... - and if we had a real monopole, it too would look just like...what? a monopole!
(All of the above snark is not aimed at the poster, but rather provided for entertainment purposes only. Like mind readers and strippers. Not to be taken seriously.)
Who cares if you can't take it to the next computer? It's a cache.
Hard drives are super slow but portable. As long as we have large enough and fast enough caching layers in between, the big, portable, slow HD will behave as though it's SSD. That's what we want, the behavior. That's what we care about...the capabilities of the individual device do not interest me.
Stupid FA is about a bunch of stupid people making stupid use of our legal system to settle something stupid. Does anyone take a duck tour because that particular quacking sound is the best one? These bunch of stupids should all be rounded up and send to stupid camp where they can sit in a stupid circle around a campfire clapping their stupid hands and hopefully find a new and creative way to burn themselves alive.
The idea is that parts of the compound under high stress solidify, transmitting the energy of the drop into other parts of the goo, diffusing it over a wide surface area (actually, what makes it so effective is that it's transmitted through the entire volume, *not* just along the surface).
This stuff is comprised of macromolecules, same as if you mix a little corn starch and water. The molecules are big and have trouble navigating past one another, so under stress they tend to get tangled up and not slip by each other. The more stress -> the more friction -> the more energy absorbed.
So...the Gaming Antihero. He intentionally allocates 2MB of memory needlessly at the beginning of the project so that when they're overbudget on memory he can delete it and save the day. But, in the story in TFA, if he'd never have done that in the first place, everything would've happened the same except they would've reached their memory budget without him having to delete an empty memory buffer. In other words: sooner. And if he'd been hit by a bus and replaced in the meantime...
Then there's the fake deadline guy that bargains for extra time and lies to his team, telling them they have to deliver against the original, totally unrealistic deadline. So they're taking all sorts of shortcuts to make the deadline (as those described in the article) and working like slaves so they can deliver ahead of schedule...making compromises they don't need to make. Brilliant.
These people are stupid. How about making honest estimates and doing business correctly?
Man, people are stupid. If your strongest pr0n kung fu is to bury a bookmark deep in a list of nested folders, yoar doin it rong. egads man. that's like hiding your playboys under a glass coffee table...at least put a scientific american on top of the stack!
And I don't understand the viewpoint that nukes are evil. They're simply an update of the rocks we used to throw at each other.
I'm being a bit over-the-top by saying that, but it pains me to see an argument that begins with such specious logic. Especially when I would like to see the best argument out there...I like driving my car into the city because it is more convenient, but I haven't been able to figure out the pro-car side of this discussion because all I see are comments like yours.
On one side, we have the people trying to break the dependence on foreign oil, the unaccounted-for damage to the environment due to the extreme inefficiency of driving in congested areas, the opportunity cost of huge urban parking structures, etc. On the other, we have: Cars are just like horses lol! Then it's followed up by a comment about e-voting machines, which, besides having nothing to do with this debate (and belies your general stance against new-fangled technology...welcome to/. by the way), by all measures I've seen generate a more accurate vote count than paper ballots. The big drawback of e-voting machines, as far as I can tell, is that their inaccuracies are discoverable and more transparent than paper...which I thought was a good thing.
The big problem with the US is that our cities have never put a priority on good public transportation. Example: I live near the San Francisco airport. If my wife & I decide to go see a movie in SF, we have to walk ~1mi and then pay $5, then about 1/2 mi to the big theater downtown. So that's $5/person/direction = $20. And we can only go to the areas that are walking distance around the theater (unless we want to pay at least another $3.50/person—and that's assuming the second stop is on the way home...if we have to take a taxi to'n'fro, or round-trip some other public tranny back to the theater area, it's at least another $7-8/person easy).
The upshot of all this is that by the time we're done traveling around the city on a standard night out, we may have spent $40-50 on public transportation and cab fare (compare to our standard parking bill of $12-18). We've added at least 45 minutes of waiting time over what we get with the car (more if it's not a simple trip out / trip back). And, oh yea, we have to turn in at 1am on Fri & Sat night—the BART doesn't run after that. At the end of our night, we're faced with that 1mi trek back to our home, my wife in heels.
So just to tally it up: we pay at least double for a less convenient, more time-consuming & dangerous trip that takes away our ability to deviate from the plan, and we have to call it a night fairly early when most things in the city are just getting started. No thanks.
You want to fix parking problems? The local governments should figure out a way to run efficient public transit and subsidize it with parking fees, so every time you drive in, you pay most of the cost of a couple of people riding in (lowering the cost to take public tranny dramatically, encouraging more people to do it). Also, since businesses in the city are benefiting from easy access, direct some of the commercial property taxes at public tranny too—why shouldn't they subsidize easier access for their customers? Then, make sure people get everywhere they want to go, don't have to waste an inordinate amount of time waiting, and unify all the different modes of transport into a single system.
Lastly, despite the anti-privatization streak in this particular article, do NOT let the governments run this system. Open it up to several businesses to coordinate and run it, but make sure they compete unlike the Chicago disaster.
The f1r5t p0st is right. Just b/c we haven't found one yet doesn't mean there isn't one. However, the fact that Johann Lambert proved it in 1768...does.
This is ridiculous...just b/c people use languages on weekends doesn't mean they're "more fun" and it certainly doesn't justify using them at work. It only means that people are using their weekends experimenting around with something new. Perhaps it's because personal projects aren't that large so they don't need the robustness of an enterprise language. There's tons of reasons TFA is flawed...
zOMG guys! If this research is right, then that means someone could probably make money by writing a software app that does nothing but entertain people by exploiting this brain response! Like, instead of an app that is an electronic spreadsheet, an app that lets you shoot people in the face and beat up hookers. Even though there's no useful output, I bet people would totally BUY IT!!!
Slashdot Mirror
Awwwwwww SNAP! You go, crazyeti!!!
Gawd we're nerds...
All the things you say are necessary for justice, I'm trying to think of a word that would do just as well. I think I've got it: injustice.
(Please bear in mind that I didn't read the grandpappy post, just the bit you quoted and your response.)
The FOSS movement does not equate the two concepts "a particular configuration of 1s and 0s" and "creat[ing that sequence of 1s and 0s] as you need them" as you have. The problem is in the notion of doing something cool once and then making money off of it for the rest of your life when there is zero cost to mass produce (i.e., make digital copies). This is where the FOSS movement and I part ways a bit, because FOSS says that it's "unethical" to do this. I'm not quite sure what that means, but I know if the cost of mass producing something is negligible, it's certainly impractical at the very least.
From the standpoint of a healthy capitalist society, I regard software more as a service (and don't confused SaaS here, I'm talking about box software like Windows) than a product. Capitalism is supposed to reward people for doing useful work. Patents and copyrights were originally conceived to do this, but over time they've become more and more about allowing one to rest on one's laurels and live a life of luxury for having done that one cool thing. I'm not exactly sure where this expectation of entitlement comes from...what other line of work doesn't require you to show up everyday to get a paycheck?
The "service" part of software comes in the form of extension and support. If I make something cool and release it for free, I may be paid to support it (ongoing labor), or even extend it (short-term labor at a particular customer's behest). Even in the case of being paid to do an extension I otherwise would not have done, I as the developer and strongly incented to release it for free to all because it presumably makes my original software more valuable and will drive further business.
Not coincidentally, this is actually how most commercial software companies actually work. I used to work for a well-known company that made marketing software, and they would routinely cut their prices 50%, even up to 90% to make a big sale. That sounds crazy until you understand the logic of it, which was to lock up the far more valuable support contract. In other words, what the market was saying is that the software itself wasn't valuable to customers—the support and ability to get feature requests answered, on the other hand, was. And so the pricing structure reflected that...give (or nearly give) the software away, and charge the real bucks for what the buyer is actually willing to pay for.
This happened on nearly every deal at that company, and it led me to wonder why they even bothered with charging at all...why not just give it away for free download on the website? Sure, a lot of small fish that otherwise wouldn't be able to afford it would start using it without ever paying a dime into the system...but so what? We weren't going to make money off of them anyway, and by removing the barrier to entry we open the door to at least small or one-time support fees, get better feedback for laying out our roadmap, and potentially deprive a competitor of a sale, increasing our own marketshare.
This number itself has a lot of notable properties, besides generating another prime when plugged into the ol' 2-to-the-n-plus-1 thing...
...racks of gas masks, you say? Was that intentional?
Yea, commie, I have to agree with longnick. Blocking ads is like going to Vegas and taking advantage of the cheap buffets without gambling. Not immoral (ahem, "amoral", not so sure), but if everyone did it, the buffets would cease to exist.
What you did is more like seeing a bike that wasn't properly locked to the bike rack, so you figure, OH YEA BABY. FREE BIKE.
Except it's not a free bike. The owner made a mistake, but that doesn't mean you're not a thief. Accidentally leaving one's door unlocked is not an tantamount to intentionally giving your stuff away.
This problem of the dirty shower head is easily solved by my approach. Instead of hooking up to a city water tap, I just had a giant tank of bactine installed that I use instead. Best part: no soap required, just a wire brush and a brillo pad and you're in and out as fast as you can say, Where'd all my skin go?
Great, now I have to hear my doctor say, Um, it seems you completed the full course of antibiotics...but it turns out it only attacked the inert state of your disease. The virulent, flesh-eating superposition continues unchecked.
And I'd argue that not everyone has the same chance of dying in a car crash. For instance, this morning I had to go around someone that will almost certainly perish in the next week or so if he keeps driving in the fashion I witnessed (if not from a crash, because someone will just take him out...but probably because of a crash). I, on the other hand, am omniscient and omnipotent behind the wheel, invincible save for the malice of others.
Not like a space shuttle. They're all pretty much in the same boat, regardless of skill.
I actually hope Leader Technologies wins this, because I happen to hold the patent on "associating data with a single category," and every time they get royalties, so do I.
Not to brag, but I also hold the patents on associating data with:
Unfortunately, none of these others have yielded any proceeds yet except the first one, which I've profited from quite handsomely. Patenting data associated with no categories turned out to be my master stroke!
Hmm. How do you know the kids are bright, happy, interesting, accomplished, etc, if there's no room for comparison? You have to compare people...that's what life is all about when you're passionate about something—pushing the limits, which is hard to do when you don't know where you stand. It's also hard to create any kind of brain trust (or passion trust, maybe) of like-minded individuals around a topic of shared interest without some kind of way of compare/contrast.
I'm not saying standardized testing is best. All I'm suggesting is that maybe the problem with it is with the means and method, not something more fundamental about the notion itself.
Unschooling could only be successful if the unstudent is surrounded by Really Smart People. We normally code information in the form of texts because, the first few goes in class, no one really understands it, but they can all go back to the source later and figure it out when need be. Without that kind of structure, a lot of knowledge gets lost because its transmission and existence depends on the unteacher to be able to convey it when the unstudent is most receptive. That's not easy.
So between this and Montessori, it's probably still Montessori ftw.
I'm gonna be a big jerk right now. I'm pre-announcing it so you know I aware.
(All of the above snark is not aimed at the poster, but rather provided for entertainment purposes only. Like mind readers and strippers. Not to be taken seriously.)
Who cares if you can't take it to the next computer? It's a cache.
Hard drives are super slow but portable. As long as we have large enough and fast enough caching layers in between, the big, portable, slow HD will behave as though it's SSD. That's what we want, the behavior. That's what we care about...the capabilities of the individual device do not interest me.
Stupid FA is about a bunch of stupid people making stupid use of our legal system to settle something stupid. Does anyone take a duck tour because that particular quacking sound is the best one? These bunch of stupids should all be rounded up and send to stupid camp where they can sit in a stupid circle around a campfire clapping their stupid hands and hopefully find a new and creative way to burn themselves alive.
The idea is that parts of the compound under high stress solidify, transmitting the energy of the drop into other parts of the goo, diffusing it over a wide surface area (actually, what makes it so effective is that it's transmitted through the entire volume, *not* just along the surface).
This stuff is comprised of macromolecules, same as if you mix a little corn starch and water. The molecules are big and have trouble navigating past one another, so under stress they tend to get tangled up and not slip by each other. The more stress -> the more friction -> the more energy absorbed.
I've heard of politicians being fearful of technology, but this is ridiculous...
So...the Gaming Antihero. He intentionally allocates 2MB of memory needlessly at the beginning of the project so that when they're overbudget on memory he can delete it and save the day. But, in the story in TFA, if he'd never have done that in the first place, everything would've happened the same except they would've reached their memory budget without him having to delete an empty memory buffer. In other words: sooner. And if he'd been hit by a bus and replaced in the meantime...
Then there's the fake deadline guy that bargains for extra time and lies to his team, telling them they have to deliver against the original, totally unrealistic deadline. So they're taking all sorts of shortcuts to make the deadline (as those described in the article) and working like slaves so they can deliver ahead of schedule...making compromises they don't need to make. Brilliant.
These people are stupid. How about making honest estimates and doing business correctly?
Man, people are stupid. If your strongest pr0n kung fu is to bury a bookmark deep in a list of nested folders, yoar doin it rong. egads man. that's like hiding your playboys under a glass coffee table...at least put a scientific american on top of the stack!
And I don't understand the viewpoint that nukes are evil. They're simply an update of the rocks we used to throw at each other.
I'm being a bit over-the-top by saying that, but it pains me to see an argument that begins with such specious logic. Especially when I would like to see the best argument out there...I like driving my car into the city because it is more convenient, but I haven't been able to figure out the pro-car side of this discussion because all I see are comments like yours.
On one side, we have the people trying to break the dependence on foreign oil, the unaccounted-for damage to the environment due to the extreme inefficiency of driving in congested areas, the opportunity cost of huge urban parking structures, etc. On the other, we have: Cars are just like horses lol! Then it's followed up by a comment about e-voting machines, which, besides having nothing to do with this debate (and belies your general stance against new-fangled technology...welcome to /. by the way), by all measures I've seen generate a more accurate vote count than paper ballots. The big drawback of e-voting machines, as far as I can tell, is that their inaccuracies are discoverable and more transparent than paper...which I thought was a good thing.
The big problem with the US is that our cities have never put a priority on good public transportation. Example: I live near the San Francisco airport. If my wife & I decide to go see a movie in SF, we have to walk ~1mi and then pay $5, then about 1/2 mi to the big theater downtown. So that's $5/person/direction = $20. And we can only go to the areas that are walking distance around the theater (unless we want to pay at least another $3.50/person—and that's assuming the second stop is on the way home...if we have to take a taxi to'n'fro, or round-trip some other public tranny back to the theater area, it's at least another $7-8/person easy).
The upshot of all this is that by the time we're done traveling around the city on a standard night out, we may have spent $40-50 on public transportation and cab fare (compare to our standard parking bill of $12-18). We've added at least 45 minutes of waiting time over what we get with the car (more if it's not a simple trip out / trip back). And, oh yea, we have to turn in at 1am on Fri & Sat night—the BART doesn't run after that. At the end of our night, we're faced with that 1mi trek back to our home, my wife in heels.
So just to tally it up: we pay at least double for a less convenient, more time-consuming & dangerous trip that takes away our ability to deviate from the plan, and we have to call it a night fairly early when most things in the city are just getting started. No thanks.
You want to fix parking problems? The local governments should figure out a way to run efficient public transit and subsidize it with parking fees, so every time you drive in, you pay most of the cost of a couple of people riding in (lowering the cost to take public tranny dramatically, encouraging more people to do it). Also, since businesses in the city are benefiting from easy access, direct some of the commercial property taxes at public tranny too—why shouldn't they subsidize easier access for their customers? Then, make sure people get everywhere they want to go, don't have to waste an inordinate amount of time waiting, and unify all the different modes of transport into a single system.
Lastly, despite the anti-privatization streak in this particular article, do NOT let the governments run this system. Open it up to several businesses to coordinate and run it, but make sure they compete unlike the Chicago disaster.
Did anyone notice that it's all based on vacuum tubes?
The f1r5t p0st is right. Just b/c we haven't found one yet doesn't mean there isn't one. However, the fact that Johann Lambert proved it in 1768...does.
I think they are out of ideas if this is a way they're studying the flow of drugs.
This is ridiculous...just b/c people use languages on weekends doesn't mean they're "more fun" and it certainly doesn't justify using them at work. It only means that people are using their weekends experimenting around with something new. Perhaps it's because personal projects aren't that large so they don't need the robustness of an enterprise language. There's tons of reasons TFA is flawed...
zOMG guys! If this research is right, then that means someone could probably make money by writing a software app that does nothing but entertain people by exploiting this brain response! Like, instead of an app that is an electronic spreadsheet, an app that lets you shoot people in the face and beat up hookers. Even though there's no useful output, I bet people would totally BUY IT!!!