Japan has been leading the US in development in many areas for years. Get off your high horse. The US has become FAR less free than it ever has been. You don't care because as yet, the new state powers have not been overly abused.
Comparing to China is just stupid. There are far more countries out there than the US and China and the existence of worse countries like China does not rule out the existence of better countries in terms of freedoms. The US has already thumbed it's nose at other countries in other respects (world court, trade rules, etc). Do I trust the US not to abuse it's power over the domain names? Not for an instant.
Besides, there are already cases of censorship in the US. Take for instance the musicians who spoke up against the Iraq war. They got taken off the air. There was no public vote on it, no poll, nothing. No government is infalliable, this is why the UN exists, a democracy of governments in theory.
Do you not understand the idea of democracy? A few countries with weird ideas will easily be outvoted by the majority in the UN. Also, as a non-american I consider YOUR country to be oppressive (ip laws, attacking science (evolution), biased political views, etc). I don't want the US one day using the domain name registry to influence others.
Except that there is no way to know how many of the sneakers would pay to get in if they couldn't sneak in. Therefore the argument that prices are high because of the sneakers is bogus.
Prices are high because either the game is not popular enough, is priced at too high of a price point and therefore deters people from buying who otherwise would have, or perhaps the sellers are just greedy.
Now, this doesn't justify warezing games, but none the less, the price argument has and will always be stupid.
The speed limits are NOT there for safty. They were lowered during the gas crisis to save fuel. Sorry to tell you, but you are in the minority on this.
People WANT to speed. I want to speed. Most cars these days can easly go faster than the speed limits. Also, the cars are very safe at those speeds, and the roads easily support higher speeds.
In Canada, where I live, people basically ignore the speed limits completely on major highways. Average speed on the 401 is 130-140 kph. The speed limit is 100.
Bottom line: people don't like the low speed limits as is evidenced by the vast majority breaking the law. It's time the laws changed. It has nothing to do with testosterone or any such nonsense. It is simply that people want to get somewhere quicker, and everything but the law supports that.
This is why I run with cookies disabled by default. I only enable them for sites that absolutely don't work without them. And often, if there is a choice, I will just find a different site that does work without cookies.
The question is, do you really have a democracy? You currently get to effectivly choose between two parties. Despite their disagreements, both parties are very very similar. It's kind of like asking "Would you like milk chocolate or dark chocolate?"
The majority of laws are now lobbied by large corporations, for the benifit of those corporations. Very few laws are even proposed for the little guy anymore. Even our existing laws are barely enforced. Monopoly laws? At most companies get a slap on the wrist and nothing changes. Compare that to the break up of Bell or AT&T of old.
So, de we have democracy? Or the illusion of democracy?
In Canada it's even worse. The ruling party sucks, but the competition is far far worse. So much worse, that people like me vote again and again for the same party to prevent the opposition from getting power. Are there ways to improve this situation? YES! For instance, ranking candidates instead of just voting for one would go a long way towards fixing our systems.
Sorry, it sounds like we agree then. I just get annoyed when people make light of degrees in higher education. It seems to be a very popular thing to do in north america. I almost get the impression that some industry types *try* to belittle people with higher degrees.
I do agree with you about software engineering and experience. Experience is a must, but likely software engineering is a good background to have for someone doing architectural stuff. That said, my exposure to SE is somewhat slim, so I could easily be wrong.
And yeah, unfortunately most programming jobs don't require advanced algorithms or novel algorithms. Also, most programming jobs are dead boring.:(
First, a Master's degree is not regarded as that big of a deal. Second, computer science is more mathematics than it is programming. Being a good computer scientist does not mean you can code well in terms of style and such.
A person's ability to architect depends on the area they studied. If they have a phd in software engineering, they'd likely be good at architecting. Also, if they studied algorithms, they could easily out design seasoned programmers.
Also keep in mind that research is not at all the same as doing mundane implementation. While people here seem to enjoy dumping on grads, they always forget to mention that while a cs phd or master can enter the job market without difficulty, someone from the job market is wholly inadequate to do research at a university level.
People with phds should be looking for research jobs, because that is what they are trained for. Many bigger companies offer positions that generally *require* a phd or masters. If you asked a nuclear engineer to program, they would not necessarily be steller at it. Please stop comparing cs phd's with programmers.
Enslave? So your code is sentient then? Sorry, we do not apply the term freedom, as in political freedom, or freedom from jail, to non-living object like code.
The specific code you as a developer release under the BSD license will always be avaliable and free. Forever. Modifications that someone else makes, those may not be free to you.
Please stop twisting around the english language to try and suite your political agenda. You are advocating a license which gives you more control over what downstream developers do with the code. So don't try to be all high and mighty and talk about freedom. You want *control*.
Hm. You think you will be able to buy anything while making 1 cent an hour putting together shoes for Nike?
This is why most of the EU, Britian, Canada, USA, etc have labour laws. Essentially to prevent a form of slavery. Even so, it doesn't work very well, as you will notice if you look at the division of money in most countries.
Make no mistake, it is not YOUR quality of living that is going up by having these companies in your country. It's just that the higher ups make more money than they do now. You will still be poor, and very likely you will also work harder than you do now for that 1 cent an hour.
I actually agree with you completely on this. I suppose I was writing more of an 'imagine if' scenario to show that the GPL is not the solution for everything.
More than likely, commodity software will end up being open source, which is good, and more complex things will remain closed. Of course, I still feel that a more business friendly license (like LGPL or BSD) would be better than using the GPL. In my ideal world, foundation like software would be open source, and on that you could build anything you desire, closed or open.
Except that Ford payed his workers for their time, and consumers still needed to pay for the cars. Wait, so that means that current software companies are much like Ford's assembly lines.
I didn't say that I am losing any job. I'm not threatened at all actually.
Also, open source project rewrite the same thing over and over far more than closed source companies, ironically. Seriously, how many shitty audioplayers, xml editors, text editors, and the like are there in open source? Open source is terrible that way, despite having usable code already written, people scratching itches decide that 'oh, I don't like the way they did it, I'm going to do it AGAIN, my way'.
You are a prime example of someone who is unable to look ahead. First, there are a handfull of paid open source developers. This, in TWO DECADES. Wow. What growth. In the mean time, how many people do you think came into the software industry?
Also, this handfull is not paid for the software, but rather paid from money gathered for 'support'. The market for support may be large, but not nearly as large as the market for software.
Also, as a result of open source software, how many people do you think have LOST their jobs? Or will lose their jobs? Let's say Linux is successfull and causes windows and office to become irrelevant in the future. How many hundreds of people will suddenly be out of a job? Replaced by what, 40 paid redhat employees that code? Now repeat with other proprietary software companies.
I don't think you realize how many people these companies employ.
Sorry if this sounds too harsh for you, but you made a fine example of not gettting IT.
Seriously, there are many reasons FOR the GPL. I am sick of people who aren't political having an allergic reaction to it, while you might not value the reasons for the GPL there *ARE* perfectly legitimate and powerful reasons for believing in it.
I am sorry, but I do not see that our current software economy is at all sustainable with the GPL. I firmly believe that the GPL will and is putting programmers out of jobs everywhere.
If GPL software ever reaches a critical mass and destroys 'for pay' software, I predict that we will see our software industry completely stagnate. I'll be here to say 'I told you so' at that point, but by then it will be too late.
right.. just like linux 2.4 -> 2.6 is just a service pack. Sure thing. Hell, Windows 5.0 -> 5.1 is just a service pack too right? (5.0 = windows 2000, 5.1 = windows xp)
Slashdot Mirror
Japan has been leading the US in development in many areas for years. Get off your high horse. The US has become FAR less free than it ever has been. You don't care because as yet, the new state powers have not been overly abused.
Comparing to China is just stupid. There are far more countries out there than the US and China and the existence of worse countries like China does not rule out the existence of better countries in terms of freedoms. The US has already thumbed it's nose at other countries in other respects (world court, trade rules, etc). Do I trust the US not to abuse it's power over the domain names? Not for an instant.
Besides, there are already cases of censorship in the US. Take for instance the musicians who spoke up against the Iraq war. They got taken off the air. There was no public vote on it, no poll, nothing. No government is infalliable, this is why the UN exists, a democracy of governments in theory.
Do you not understand the idea of democracy? A few countries with weird ideas will easily be outvoted by the majority in the UN. Also, as a non-american I consider YOUR country to be oppressive (ip laws, attacking science (evolution), biased political views, etc). I don't want the US one day using the domain name registry to influence others.
Except that there is no way to know how many of the sneakers would pay to get in if they couldn't sneak in. Therefore the argument that prices are high because of the sneakers is bogus.
Prices are high because either the game is not popular enough, is priced at too high of a price point and therefore deters people from buying who otherwise would have, or perhaps the sellers are just greedy.
Now, this doesn't justify warezing games, but none the less, the price argument has and will always be stupid.
The speed limits are NOT there for safty. They were lowered during the gas crisis to save fuel. Sorry to tell you, but you are in the minority on this.
People WANT to speed. I want to speed. Most cars these days can easly go faster than the speed limits. Also, the cars are very safe at those speeds, and the roads easily support higher speeds.
In Canada, where I live, people basically ignore the speed limits completely on major highways. Average speed on the 401 is 130-140 kph. The speed limit is 100.
Bottom line: people don't like the low speed limits as is evidenced by the vast majority breaking the law. It's time the laws changed. It has nothing to do with testosterone or any such nonsense. It is simply that people want to get somewhere quicker, and everything but the law supports that.
Being at the top is about power and about manipulating people. Consider the effect of your post. How do you figure it gains you any power?
Do not let your insecurity speak for you.
This is why I run with cookies disabled by default. I only enable them for sites that absolutely don't work without them. And often, if there is a choice, I will just find a different site that does work without cookies.
Great. Now I can hear the bling bling of the ricers around me.
I'M. SO. THRILLED.
The question is, do you really have a democracy? You currently get to effectivly choose between two parties. Despite their disagreements, both parties are very very similar. It's kind of like asking "Would you like milk chocolate or dark chocolate?"
The majority of laws are now lobbied by large corporations, for the benifit of those corporations. Very few laws are even proposed for the little guy anymore. Even our existing laws are barely enforced. Monopoly laws? At most companies get a slap on the wrist and nothing changes. Compare that to the break up of Bell or AT&T of old.
So, de we have democracy? Or the illusion of democracy?
In Canada it's even worse. The ruling party sucks, but the competition is far far worse. So much worse, that people like me vote again and again for the same party to prevent the opposition from getting power. Are there ways to improve this situation? YES! For instance, ranking candidates instead of just voting for one would go a long way towards fixing our systems.
What does this mean for free services such as Skype, or even voice chat for games and such?
Bluetooth keyboards are encrypted, but that still doesn't stop software loggers, which are probably more common anyways.
Many people recommend gnuplot. However, gnuplot is not that easy to use. I'd recommend Octave, a matlab clone, as a frontend to gnuplot.
At least I find it far far far better.
I've never used it, but Ogre3d looks promising.
http://www.ogre3d.org/
Sorry, it sounds like we agree then. I just get annoyed when people make light of degrees in higher education. It seems to be a very popular thing to do in north america. I almost get the impression that some industry types *try* to belittle people with higher degrees.
:(
I do agree with you about software engineering and experience. Experience is a must, but likely software engineering is a good background to have for someone doing architectural stuff. That said, my exposure to SE is somewhat slim, so I could easily be wrong.
And yeah, unfortunately most programming jobs don't require advanced algorithms or novel algorithms. Also, most programming jobs are dead boring.
First, a Master's degree is not regarded as that big of a deal. Second, computer science is more mathematics than it is programming. Being a good computer scientist does not mean you can code well in terms of style and such.
A person's ability to architect depends on the area they studied. If they have a phd in software engineering, they'd likely be good at architecting. Also, if they studied algorithms, they could easily out design seasoned programmers.
Also keep in mind that research is not at all the same as doing mundane implementation. While people here seem to enjoy dumping on grads, they always forget to mention that while a cs phd or master can enter the job market without difficulty, someone from the job market is wholly inadequate to do research at a university level.
People with phds should be looking for research jobs, because that is what they are trained for. Many bigger companies offer positions that generally *require* a phd or masters. If you asked a nuclear engineer to program, they would not necessarily be steller at it. Please stop comparing cs phd's with programmers.
Enslave? So your code is sentient then? Sorry, we do not apply the term freedom, as in political freedom, or freedom from jail, to non-living object like code.
The specific code you as a developer release under the BSD license will always be avaliable and free. Forever. Modifications that someone else makes, those may not be free to you.
Please stop twisting around the english language to try and suite your political agenda. You are advocating a license which gives you more control over what downstream developers do with the code. So don't try to be all high and mighty and talk about freedom. You want *control*.
Hm. You think you will be able to buy anything while making 1 cent an hour putting together shoes for Nike?
This is why most of the EU, Britian, Canada, USA, etc have labour laws. Essentially to prevent a form of slavery. Even so, it doesn't work very well, as you will notice if you look at the division of money in most countries.
Make no mistake, it is not YOUR quality of living that is going up by having these companies in your country. It's just that the higher ups make more money than they do now. You will still be poor, and very likely you will also work harder than you do now for that 1 cent an hour.
I actually agree with you completely on this. I suppose I was writing more of an 'imagine if' scenario to show that the GPL is not the solution for everything.
More than likely, commodity software will end up being open source, which is good, and more complex things will remain closed. Of course, I still feel that a more business friendly license (like LGPL or BSD) would be better than using the GPL. In my ideal world, foundation like software would be open source, and on that you could build anything you desire, closed or open.
Except that Ford payed his workers for their time, and consumers still needed to pay for the cars. Wait, so that means that current software companies are much like Ford's assembly lines.
Your analogy is a terribly poor.
I haven't heard that statistic before. If that is true, then it truley lightens my heart.
Hmm... or maybe you've bought the open source FUD? See, I can throw around useless acronoms too!
I didn't say that I am losing any job. I'm not threatened at all actually.
Also, open source project rewrite the same thing over and over far more than closed source companies, ironically. Seriously, how many shitty audioplayers, xml editors, text editors, and the like are there in open source? Open source is terrible that way, despite having usable code already written, people scratching itches decide that 'oh, I don't like the way they did it, I'm going to do it AGAIN, my way'.
You are a prime example of someone who is unable to look ahead. First, there are a handfull of paid open source developers. This, in TWO DECADES. Wow. What growth. In the mean time, how many people do you think came into the software industry?
Also, this handfull is not paid for the software, but rather paid from money gathered for 'support'. The market for support may be large, but not nearly as large as the market for software.
Also, as a result of open source software, how many people do you think have LOST their jobs? Or will lose their jobs? Let's say Linux is successfull and causes windows and office to become irrelevant in the future. How many hundreds of people will suddenly be out of a job? Replaced by what, 40 paid redhat employees that code? Now repeat with other proprietary software companies.
I don't think you realize how many people these companies employ.
Sorry if this sounds too harsh for you, but you made a fine example of not gettting IT.
Seriously, there are many reasons FOR the GPL. I am sick of people who aren't political having an allergic reaction to it, while you might not value the reasons for the GPL there *ARE* perfectly legitimate and powerful reasons for believing in it.
I am sorry, but I do not see that our current software economy is at all sustainable with the GPL. I firmly believe that the GPL will and is putting programmers out of jobs everywhere.
If GPL software ever reaches a critical mass and destroys 'for pay' software, I predict that we will see our software industry completely stagnate. I'll be here to say 'I told you so' at that point, but by then it will be too late.
right.. just like linux 2.4 -> 2.6 is just a service pack. Sure thing. Hell, Windows 5.0 -> 5.1 is just a service pack too right? (5.0 = windows 2000, 5.1 = windows xp)
Indeed. At my university computer science is under the "Mathematics" department, as it should be.