Oh, and lets not forget the 2% of Americans in PRISON.
I'm not sure it's fair to blame that 2% on technological progress. Sure, some people would rather commit crime than become educated and work, and maybe that contributes to a higher crime rate, but I would like to see some studies to back that up.
I have read (can't remember where) that a significant fraction (maybe 1/4 - 1/2) of that 2% is in prison because of nonviolent drug charges (i.e., users arrested for possession). I vaguely recall that they cited justice dept and/or prison bureau stats to back up that claim, but it's been a while. So it could be that social policies mostly unrelated to technical progress are responsible for some/most of that 2%.
HOWEVER technology and human ingenuity are making traditional life as humans have known for the past few millenia pointless. Just when technology is allowing for people to spend their lives truly living, we are further turning our people into mindless drones to serve a bureucratic system rather then letting them explore the infinite possibilities of existence on their own.
Well, the 'traditional life' that humans have known for the past few millenia (up until a few hundred years ago) was pretty damn cruel and laborious. I think someone living in the third world today would gladly trade their life for one where they could go to school for 12 years for free, work at some (pointless?) job that would provide them with more food and shelter than they could ever use, and be able to live in relative comfort when they retire.
The current system does allow people to "explore the infinite possibilities of existence on their own" - so long as they are willing to take the risk of doing so. I know plenty of people that are too afraid to quit their stable jobs and go 'exploring.' Maybe we can blame that on the education system or society, but some people still manage to overcome these things and break out of the normal pattern.
Now is the time to give people their lives back. The educational/social services system must be abolished. The industrial economy at least produced things of value, often questionalable. The service economy is nothing more than modern slavery, which the schools gleefully train us to accept. Servitude is for slaves, it is not the foundation of a society or an economy.
While I might agree with you that the educational and social services systems have done a great deal of harm by pressuring people to conform to some idealized social norm, or encouraging/enabling them to be less productive than their potential might allow, I don't agree with your statement that (somebody) must "give" people their lives back. The human condition has almost always involved people having to claim the potential of their lives from the grip some external force, whether from the uncaring natural world, the chains of an enslaving nation, or suffocating social norms. Some might have a harder fight than others to claim their life for themselves, but it is up to the individual to make the effort. I am not opposed to helping people with a particularly difficult fight, but in the end nobody can make that individual effort for them.
Capitalism always has an element of "service economy" - if I produce a product or service, I am answerable to the customer to produce something that they want. It's not necessarily like slavery, unless one allows themselves to work in an environment that makes it feel that way.
As for the 3D printer, I can imagine that there will be many people that will provide "things of value" on a small scale for sale. Grandma can earn some extra money at home by making refrigerator magnets and selling them in a local craft store, for example. Somebody will have to provide the raw materials for the printer (again, "things of value"). A technology like this is no different than the example above of the Spinning Jenny - just a method to allow the operator of the technology to produce more things of value with less human effort. I just don't think our history gives much credence to the idea that advances in tools lead to a bunch of mind-numbed drones toiling away at 'make work' - such a thing is a human problem, not a technological problem.
Interesting to note that according to a statement on page 15 of the ORNL doc in the parent post, the home-made geiger counter has an accuracy of +/-25% (just like the watch) when built as specified, "even by untrained persons.":)
Re:so if two objects are traveling toward the same
on
E ~ mc^2
·
· Score: 1
As someone else remarked elsewhere, wtf? Maybe this is an example of Relativity Ass-Talking Syndrome (RATS), a close relative of Quantum Ass-Talking Syndrome (QATS)
I am not a physicist, but I have some minimal exposure to the concepts of relativity, and I think I can make the following statements:
1) You can't just add speeds of two objects traveling in opposite directions at c/2 and end up with a mutually relative speed of c. Another example: If you're riding on a vehicle traveling at 0.5c, and you throw a baseball at (from your perspective) 0.5c, a 'stationary' oberver (one who sees you fly past at 0.5c) will see the baseball traveling at 0.86c (I think) instead of c.
2) The only thing that can travel towards Earth *at* c would be light. IIRC Einstein discussed what an observer riding on a light wave would see, but that was just a thought experiment and I don't really recall much about it.
These things do not 'make sense' to our brains because we don't deal with relativistic speeds first-hand. Maybe things would be different if our ancestors had routinely traveled at a significant fraction of c.
You might want to go look up "Lorentz transformations" or get Einstein's works (the "Relativity" book on my shelf is ISBN 0-517-029618). If you're lucky enough to have access to it, there was a TV series called "The Mechanical Universe" that has some cool explanations of these things.
I'm glad somebody pointed out that the article leads off with the plight of a "product marketing director." What the hell is that? I had to scan waaay down before I ran across any mention of anyone remotely "techie." Reminds me of a similar recent article (also posted on/.) about whiney MCSE's bummed out because they were too proud to take a job at Starbucks making "only" $10 or $20/hour.
Where did this "I have a degree and/or a big salary history and therefore somebody owes me a nice job with a fat salary whether or not I can produce anything of value" attitude come from? Why are all these mis\H\H\Hdisplaced "IT workers" unable to get a job of any kind for 6+ months? Every pizza place I see needs delivery drivers - certainly even a geek can deliver pizzas. It's not IT, but damn, are you too proud to do something to get off unemployment? STOP WHINING!
Maybe I don't have a right to judge and complain about whiners. I am a self-taught programmer - no degree or certification of any kind - and I had two concurrent software jobs and a third one on the horizon. I fired one of my employers because they took me for granted. I found my second job because of my spare-time/hobbyist programming activities and a trip to SIGGRAPH 2000. I might have a third job on the way because of my reputation at my first job. I don't think I'm special or extraordinarily talented; I just don't depend on somebody else to look out for my future.
Maybe I'm just lucky, but I've never expected to find a decent job by sitting at home on my ass and mailing out resumes; I guess now I know why. If I could remember exactly how it goes or who said it, I'd post some eloquent quote about luck being the residue of hard work or something.
Continual learning is most beneficial if you're fortunate enough to work in a place where it is recognized. I quit my last job partly because the senior developers thought they didn't need to put forward much effort to learn new things - that created an environment where people said things like "no, no, no; you can't do X in Java because it can't read dBase files. Let's just continue to copy/paste/modify our existing obfuscated, badly written C."
So I left the somewhat stifled environment in search of new work. I had already found some part-time work, and there are new things on the horizon. But none of those opportunities would have been available to me had I adopted the mindset of the people for whom I worked.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=faith">Fa ith2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. This (IMNSHO) is the meaning that most people ascribe to faith when used in a sentence like the one in the parent post. That seems to make your statement somewhat contradictory.
Contradictions notwithstanding, what exactly do you mean by "any other method?" Witch doctors casting bones or reading entrails? New age mystics discussing vibrations and resonance with Art Bell?
I just left a software company that mostly used C++, and there were several guys there that had the "I don't need to learn anything new because I can already do it in obfuscated C/C++" mentality. Getting some of them to look at newer languages, tools, methodologies, etc., was like pulling teeth.
It's not that they only wanted to code in C/C++, it's that they habitually coded *badly* in C/C++. IMHO, that's where a lot of the crap code comes from - people that have no interest in ongoing learning.
Maybe get a bunch of coworkers together and set up a candlelight..errr, bobblelight...vigil outside his office.:P
I'm just stepping out into the independent thing myself. I started doing contract work on the side a year ago and just finally got tired of the broken promises and silly games. It's been worth the effort of working two jobs just so I could make the decision to quit.
...I gave my employer a Christmas bonus: my resignation letter. We were acquired by a large company, received no raise this year, and weren't going to receive a year-end bonus. So I figured they needed a bonus.:)
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure it's fair to blame that 2% on technological progress. Sure, some people would rather commit crime than become educated and work, and maybe that contributes to a higher crime rate, but I would like to see some studies to back that up.
I have read (can't remember where) that a significant fraction (maybe 1/4 - 1/2) of that 2% is in prison because of nonviolent drug charges (i.e., users arrested for possession). I vaguely recall that they cited justice dept and/or prison bureau stats to back up that claim, but it's been a while. So it could be that social policies mostly unrelated to technical progress are responsible for some/most of that 2%.
Well, the 'traditional life' that humans have known for the past few millenia (up until a few hundred years ago) was pretty damn cruel and laborious. I think someone living in the third world today would gladly trade their life for one where they could go to school for 12 years for free, work at some (pointless?) job that would provide them with more food and shelter than they could ever use, and be able to live in relative comfort when they retire.
The current system does allow people to "explore the infinite possibilities of existence on their own" - so long as they are willing to take the risk of doing so. I know plenty of people that are too afraid to quit their stable jobs and go 'exploring.' Maybe we can blame that on the education system or society, but some people still manage to overcome these things and break out of the normal pattern.
While I might agree with you that the educational and social services systems have done a great deal of harm by pressuring people to conform to some idealized social norm, or encouraging/enabling them to be less productive than their potential might allow, I don't agree with your statement that (somebody) must "give" people their lives back. The human condition has almost always involved people having to claim the potential of their lives from the grip some external force, whether from the uncaring natural world, the chains of an enslaving nation, or suffocating social norms. Some might have a harder fight than others to claim their life for themselves, but it is up to the individual to make the effort. I am not opposed to helping people with a particularly difficult fight, but in the end nobody can make that individual effort for them.
Capitalism always has an element of "service economy" - if I produce a product or service, I am answerable to the customer to produce something that they want. It's not necessarily like slavery, unless one allows themselves to work in an environment that makes it feel that way.
As for the 3D printer, I can imagine that there will be many people that will provide "things of value" on a small scale for sale. Grandma can earn some extra money at home by making refrigerator magnets and selling them in a local craft store, for example. Somebody will have to provide the raw materials for the printer (again, "things of value"). A technology like this is no different than the example above of the Spinning Jenny - just a method to allow the operator of the technology to produce more things of value with less human effort. I just don't think our history gives much credence to the idea that advances in tools lead to a bunch of mind-numbed drones toiling away at 'make work' - such a thing is a human problem, not a technological problem.
Interesting to note that according to a statement on page 15 of the ORNL doc in the parent post, the home-made geiger counter has an accuracy of +/-25% (just like the watch) when built as specified, "even by untrained persons." :)
As someone else remarked elsewhere, wtf? Maybe this is an example of Relativity Ass-Talking Syndrome (RATS), a close relative of Quantum Ass-Talking Syndrome (QATS)
I am not a physicist, but I have some minimal exposure to the concepts of relativity, and I think I can make the following statements:
These things do not 'make sense' to our brains because we don't deal with relativistic speeds first-hand. Maybe things would be different if our ancestors had routinely traveled at a significant fraction of c.
You might want to go look up "Lorentz transformations" or get Einstein's works (the "Relativity" book on my shelf is ISBN 0-517-029618). If you're lucky enough to have access to it, there was a TV series called "The Mechanical Universe" that has some cool explanations of these things.
I'm glad somebody pointed out that the article leads off with the plight of a "product marketing director." What the hell is that? I had to scan waaay down before I ran across any mention of anyone remotely "techie." Reminds me of a similar recent article (also posted on /.) about whiney MCSE's bummed out because they were too proud to take a job at Starbucks making "only" $10 or $20/hour.
Where did this "I have a degree and/or a big salary history and therefore somebody owes me a nice job with a fat salary whether or not I can produce anything of value" attitude come from? Why are all these mis\H\H\Hdisplaced "IT workers" unable to get a job of any kind for 6+ months? Every pizza place I see needs delivery drivers - certainly even a geek can deliver pizzas. It's not IT, but damn, are you too proud to do something to get off unemployment? STOP WHINING!
Maybe I don't have a right to judge and complain about whiners. I am a self-taught programmer - no degree or certification of any kind - and I had two concurrent software jobs and a third one on the horizon. I fired one of my employers because they took me for granted. I found my second job because of my spare-time/hobbyist programming activities and a trip to SIGGRAPH 2000. I might have a third job on the way because of my reputation at my first job. I don't think I'm special or extraordinarily talented; I just don't depend on somebody else to look out for my future.
Maybe I'm just lucky, but I've never expected to find a decent job by sitting at home on my ass and mailing out resumes; I guess now I know why. If I could remember exactly how it goes or who said it, I'd post some eloquent quote about luck being the residue of hard work or something.
Continual learning is most beneficial if you're fortunate enough to work in a place where it is recognized. I quit my last job partly because the senior developers thought they didn't need to put forward much effort to learn new things - that created an environment where people said things like "no, no, no; you can't do X in Java because it can't read dBase files. Let's just continue to copy/paste/modify our existing obfuscated, badly written C."
So I left the somewhat stifled environment in search of new work. I had already found some part-time work, and there are new things on the horizon. But none of those opportunities would have been available to me had I adopted the mindset of the people for whom I worked.
You speak as if that were a valid reason for it to not get posted on /. :)
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=faith">Fa ith 2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. This (IMNSHO) is the meaning that most people ascribe to faith when used in a sentence like the one in the parent post. That seems to make your statement somewhat contradictory.
Contradictions notwithstanding, what exactly do you mean by "any other method?" Witch doctors casting bones or reading entrails? New age mystics discussing vibrations and resonance with Art Bell?
I just left a software company that mostly used C++, and there were several guys there that had the "I don't need to learn anything new because I can already do it in obfuscated C/C++" mentality. Getting some of them to look at newer languages, tools, methodologies, etc., was like pulling teeth.
It's not that they only wanted to code in C/C++, it's that they habitually coded *badly* in C/C++. IMHO, that's where a lot of the crap code comes from - people that have no interest in ongoing learning.
Maybe get a bunch of coworkers together and set up a candlelight..errr, bobblelight...vigil outside his office. :P
I'm just stepping out into the independent thing myself. I started doing contract work on the side a year ago and just finally got tired of the broken promises and silly games. It's been worth the effort of working two jobs just so I could make the decision to quit.
...I gave my employer a Christmas bonus: my resignation letter. We were acquired by a large company, received no raise this year, and weren't going to receive a year-end bonus. So I figured they needed a bonus. :)