The value of information is inversely proportional to the amount of people knowing it. If they want money for their information, they 1. have to keep it a secret 2. have to have information that nobody else has 3. ask for money on first release (to X people) and STFU as soon as it’s out. Because then it’s too late. They just split control with X people.
If they fail at one single of those points, they can not expect any money. They might get it though... like the change you give someone who makes music in the streets. Or like a donation. Out of respect. But they can not expect it. Let alone demand it.
Those are the laws of bitspace. And like the laws of physics (on which they are based), they won’t go away, if you don’t believe in them.:)
You are falling for the broken window fallacy. Every dollar that you throw at that single human life (which is not special), is then missing for other human life.
So if you, by your suggestion, throw infinite dollars at that one life, then what you think happens to the other life? Hunger, disease and death.
It’s not the dollar that is worth more than human life. The dollar is only a piece of paper. It’s the other human life that we value more at some point, that the dollar can buy.
Of course you are free to choose whichever life you value the most, and give it all for the person who is about to die, because that person gave you so much in the past. Nothing wrong about that. But is there really no other life that at some point could use the money in a better way to survive, than that person?
If I’m about to die, I rather have my daughter or son improve their own chance of survival, than mine. After all one could say that if my strain survives, then so do I. I’m not dying. Most of me lives on right there. Children are humanity’s way of immortality.:)
In what dream world do you live? Yes, we should care for our people. But every minute of health care and every resource still costs. Which is never ever free. But always a loss for the community as a whole. Resources are limited. So at some point it will cause so much bad, that you won’t be able to keep someone else alive.
So would you really throw so much resources at one person, that you risk the survival of another one? Or the health of another 100 people? Where do you draw the line?
Since you are suggesting to never draw the line, you would essentially at some point kill others. Now in what way is that fair??
The reason we care for our community, is because of the huge benefits of having one. And because they will do the same for us. Together we are strong! Also: Stop your arrogance. Our galaxy is not special! Our solar system is not special! Earth is not special! Humans are not special! Human life is not special! Your race is not special! (See where I’m going?) You are not special! We all aren’t!
When I’m old enough that life stops being fun, I’ll cut all ties to everyone (so they can’t get to them for liability questions), take the largest loan I can get, book a parachute drop, and jump without an actual parachute. I plan to land head-first on the biggest asshole on the planet. Be it some dictator or something alike. Oh, and if I can manage, I’ll strap something to me that will guarantee his death.
Human missile FTW! What better way to go, than to do something good, like making a “god king” bleed (or rather burst into gibs). ^^
There is a sneaky error in your logic. Since in reality it’s impossible to find that there is no correlation in general for everything. You can only find that there is no correlation in the subset of reality that you actually test for.
Your argument is like creating a firewall that by default lets everything trough, and has a huge set of filters of what to block. You know someone will find yet another way around one of your rules. Which is why no firewall or real security system is designed that way around. They always block first, then open only what’s necessary.
(Don’t mix this up: I’m not making an argument for or against there being a correlation. I’m making an argument, that your argument is a bad argument. ^^ [Btw: I don’t think there is a correlation. Because I know enough of physics.])
I don’t trust anyone who claims to have “no bias” (aka is “neutral”). Because I know that in physical reality, there is no such thing.
Every human’s senses do massive filtering and processing. And our brain can by definition only store information by its difference from everything. And so, our very thought processes only work trough bias. Plus, the vast majority of our information input (e.g. everything on the Internet) is already processed by many brains and machines executing the instructions given by brains. So it’s by definition already extremely biased.
What we call “neutral” is nothing else than what we think “fits the reality of a certain group”. But every group, and in fact every person has different views on at least some topics (which is why Wikipedia’s “one truth(iness)” is doomed to fail). And which group that is, also differs. Plus, what we think fits, does not have to.
So someone who is ignorant of those basic physics, can’t be taken serious in my book. Because the better you know someone’s bias, the better you can adjust your corrective lenses. And those who claim to be “neutral” are hiding their obviously existing bias the best. Which makes it hardest, to know what is bullshit, and what not.
By the way: I’m selling infallible anti-cellphone-radiation healing crystals for only $5000 a piece! Remember: Infallible! Or money back!
(The best strategy to deal with idiots, is to make money (or power) off of them. It’s called natural selection. Bill Gates understands this. Steve Jobs does. Every politician understands it. Etc, etc, etc.;)
Oh oh. Thank you. I made that mistake down there in another of my comments.:( If I knew that anyone else besides you had read TFA, I would feel stupid now. But luckily, this is Slashdot.;)
Hey, I found a way to kill Knuth: Create “Clippy’s ’Microsoft Visual PHP’, Clickwheel Tablet Edition”! (A browser game^Wapplication of course.), He will die from a heart attack, and then spin in his grave... round and round and round... wheeee.
Man, you complain well. But you don’t seem to do anything against it. It’s like my last boss. (Ever!)
You know what the first thing is, that I do in a new environment? Code me a generic CRUD generator (database/persistency, logic, gui). E.g. a tool that renders me a whole application out of the SQL database definition. Or in other words: The difference between SQL and tools like MS Access.;) Then I can push out generic software faster than I can write up the data models. Add the little bit that usually is the business logic, and tadaa!
In my last job, we were at the limits of our capacity. Too much work for too few people. And I offered my boss, to cut our work load by 90% (realistically!), when he would give me two to five days of free time. He denied with “We don’t have time for that.” And why not? Hm? Because you don’t take the time for this! It was one of those typical PHB moments. Needless to say: I quit.
Now I’m on to what is basically a completely new OS (Linux kernel, new shell (cli and gui), and legacy interface to GNU) that goes a huge step further, by generalizing it as much as physically possible. (Actually, I can prove that it can’t be generalized more, without becoming less efficient again.)
I absolutely hate frameworks. They are the same as libraries. But without the ability to plug them into anything. They want to be the core of your application, and not play with anything else. They are a very “enterprisey” concept.
Please, all, stop doing frameworks, cut them into their aspects, and start doing libraries again! Nobody wants you elaborate all-encompassing framework that is its own inner platform and yet unfortunately lacks the very function you need the most.
He seems to bitch about not being able to write something fundamentally new... but ignores that you have to think of actually inventing something new beforehand. Maybe he is more of an engineer, and less of an inventor/scientist. (Two types that complement and need each other.)
I don't do much library gluing, since I chose to concentrate on inventing new things. Revolutionary things. It’s just a choice. Nothing is stopping him from doing the same. But I don’t even consider the gluing bad. Actually it only shows how far we have come, when we have nearly perfect standard libraries for everything and its dog. Generalizing algorithms and making things reusable are corner stones of programming. And they are great ones!
If you want to code something new, you need to come up with something revolutionary.
So: Mr Knuth: How about we team up: I deliver new ideas that nobody came up with yet, and you get something to code that nobody ever coded before. How about that? I bet we would make a great team! ^^
That should keep the CPU usage down, and your system secure from that type of attack. You can’t do much more than that.
You could run a script to find the owner of all those IPs... maybe do a bit of statistics to see what you can find out... But in the end it will be someone that you can not sue or contact in any way anyway.
How dumb do you think people in these poor countries are?? Sounds pretty arrogant to me, considering you got Alabama and Utah in your backyard, and politicians saying on live TV that you should appeal to the “supernatural powers”.;)
Insightful) I can raise you level of outside the box thinking: Lifelong marriage is an invention of churches anyway, and not the basic human thing that we all think it is. In nature it’s rather unusual for humans to stay together their whole life. Usually you stay together a couple of years/decades. Since humans were small communities where everybody was there for everybody else, your children usually were raised by the whole tribe. Look at those tribes who still live like that. It’s our natural way of living.:)
Funny) Wait, I thought the copyfight was the struggle of our generation... (Btw: Is being gay copyrightable? I’m sure, by mafiaa rules, it is.;)
Troll) Sorry, this option is not available for this comment.;)
Just answer with a “UNDEFINED_TERM_ERROR: In this context, this term is not defined.” ^^ And follow up with a “INVALID_ARGUMENTS_ERROR: Your arguments are invalid, because they contain undefined terms.”
It has nothing to do with lawn-related age.;)
Some people use perfectly cromulent words to elevate themselves above you. So they can act as if they were wiser and exclude you from the discussion. Or in short: So that it’s harder to tell them that they are talking stupid bullshit.;)
Medicine is well-known for this. Especially classical psychology, since they actually don’t know what they are talking about. (Still mostly not based on neurology, and hence on physics.;) Also management buzzwords like “synergistic vertical chunnels” fall into this category. Really the area doesn’t matter, and i’m sure we “IT” people have those types too.
Yes. It was the first product from Apple, that was so crappy, that not even the fanbois liked it. Let alone people who did’t have money to throw out of the window.;)
I realized that the way Apple marketing works, is very similar to trolling: The more you fight it, the more you mention it... and hence the more publicity/hype it will get. Especially since fanbois are so drowning everything else out right after it. You may hate it. But you have to admire its elegance.
Slashdot Mirror
The value of information is inversely proportional to the amount of people knowing it.
If they want money for their information, they
1. have to keep it a secret
2. have to have information that nobody else has
3. ask for money on first release (to X people)
and STFU as soon as it’s out. Because then it’s too late. They just split control with X people.
If they fail at one single of those points, they can not expect any money.
They might get it though... like the change you give someone who makes music in the streets. Or like a donation. Out of respect.
But they can not expect it. Let alone demand it.
Those are the laws of bitspace. And like the laws of physics (on which they are based), they won’t go away, if you don’t believe in them. :)
but it's not remotely slashdot material.
To be fair: So is kdawson. ;)
You are falling for the broken window fallacy.
Every dollar that you throw at that single human life (which is not special), is then missing for other human life.
So if you, by your suggestion, throw infinite dollars at that one life, then what you think happens to the other life?
Hunger, disease and death.
It’s not the dollar that is worth more than human life. The dollar is only a piece of paper. It’s the other human life that we value more at some point, that the dollar can buy.
Of course you are free to choose whichever life you value the most, and give it all for the person who is about to die, because that person gave you so much in the past. Nothing wrong about that.
But is there really no other life that at some point could use the money in a better way to survive, than that person?
If I’m about to die, I rather have my daughter or son improve their own chance of survival, than mine. :)
After all one could say that if my strain survives, then so do I. I’m not dying. Most of me lives on right there.
Children are humanity’s way of immortality.
In what dream world do you live?
Yes, we should care for our people.
But every minute of health care and every resource still costs. Which is never ever free. But always a loss for the community as a whole.
Resources are limited. So at some point it will cause so much bad, that you won’t be able to keep someone else alive.
So would you really throw so much resources at one person, that you risk the survival of another one?
Or the health of another 100 people?
Where do you draw the line?
Since you are suggesting to never draw the line, you would essentially at some point kill others.
Now in what way is that fair??
The reason we care for our community, is because of the huge benefits of having one. And because they will do the same for us. Together we are strong!
Also: Stop your arrogance. Our galaxy is not special! Our solar system is not special! Earth is not special! Humans are not special! Human life is not special! Your race is not special! (See where I’m going?) You are not special! We all aren’t!
When I’m old enough that life stops being fun, I’ll cut all ties to everyone (so they can’t get to them for liability questions), take the largest loan I can get, book a parachute drop, and jump without an actual parachute.
I plan to land head-first on the biggest asshole on the planet. Be it some dictator or something alike. Oh, and if I can manage, I’ll strap something to me that will guarantee his death.
Human missile FTW! What better way to go, than to do something good, like making a “god king” bleed (or rather burst into gibs). ^^
There is a sneaky error in your logic. Since in reality it’s impossible to find that there is no correlation in general for everything.
You can only find that there is no correlation in the subset of reality that you actually test for.
Your argument is like creating a firewall that by default lets everything trough, and has a huge set of filters of what to block. You know someone will find yet another way around one of your rules. Which is why no firewall or real security system is designed that way around. They always block first, then open only what’s necessary.
(Don’t mix this up: I’m not making an argument for or against there being a correlation. I’m making an argument, that your argument is a bad argument. ^^ [Btw: I don’t think there is a correlation. Because I know enough of physics.])
I don’t trust anyone who claims to have “no bias” (aka is “neutral”). Because I know that in physical reality, there is no such thing.
Every human’s senses do massive filtering and processing. And our brain can by definition only store information by its difference from everything. And so, our very thought processes only work trough bias.
Plus, the vast majority of our information input (e.g. everything on the Internet) is already processed by many brains and machines executing the instructions given by brains. So it’s by definition already extremely biased.
What we call “neutral” is nothing else than what we think “fits the reality of a certain group”. But every group, and in fact every person has different views on at least some topics (which is why Wikipedia’s “one truth(iness)” is doomed to fail). And which group that is, also differs. Plus, what we think fits, does not have to.
So someone who is ignorant of those basic physics, can’t be taken serious in my book.
Because the better you know someone’s bias, the better you can adjust your corrective lenses. And those who claim to be “neutral” are hiding their obviously existing bias the best. Which makes it hardest, to know what is bullshit, and what not.
By the way: I’m selling infallible anti-cellphone-radiation healing crystals for only $5000 a piece!
Remember: Infallible! Or money back!
(The best strategy to deal with idiots, is to make money (or power) off of them. It’s called natural selection. Bill Gates understands this. Steve Jobs does. Every politician understands it. Etc, etc, etc. ;)
You know what radiation is a hundreds of thousands of times stronger than cellphone microwaves, and incredibly brighter?
THE SUN!
If you are in fear of getting sick from microwaves, you MUST have hundreds of thousands of times more fear of sunlight. It’s simple physics.
So? Your choice?
Oh oh. Thank you. I made that mistake down there in another of my comments. :( ;)
If I knew that anyone else besides you had read TFA, I would feel stupid now. But luckily, this is Slashdot.
Hey, I found a way to kill Knuth: Create “Clippy’s ’Microsoft Visual PHP’, Clickwheel Tablet Edition”! (A browser game^Wapplication of course.),
He will die from a heart attack, and then spin in his grave... round and round and round... wheeee.
Man, you complain well. But you don’t seem to do anything against it.
It’s like my last boss. (Ever!)
You know what the first thing is, that I do in a new environment? ;)
Code me a generic CRUD generator (database/persistency, logic, gui). E.g. a tool that renders me a whole application out of the SQL database definition. Or in other words: The difference between SQL and tools like MS Access.
Then I can push out generic software faster than I can write up the data models. Add the little bit that usually is the business logic, and tadaa!
In my last job, we were at the limits of our capacity. Too much work for too few people. And I offered my boss, to cut our work load by 90% (realistically!), when he would give me two to five days of free time. He denied with “We don’t have time for that.”
And why not? Hm? Because you don’t take the time for this!
It was one of those typical PHB moments.
Needless to say: I quit.
Now I’m on to what is basically a completely new OS (Linux kernel, new shell (cli and gui), and legacy interface to GNU) that goes a huge step further, by generalizing it as much as physically possible. (Actually, I can prove that it can’t be generalized more, without becoming less efficient again.)
I absolutely hate frameworks. They are the same as libraries. But without the ability to plug them into anything. They want to be the core of your application, and not play with anything else.
They are a very “enterprisey” concept.
Please, all, stop doing frameworks, cut them into their aspects, and start doing libraries again! Nobody wants you elaborate all-encompassing framework that is its own inner platform and yet unfortunately lacks the very function you need the most.
He seems to bitch about not being able to write something fundamentally new... but ignores that you have to think of actually inventing something new beforehand. Maybe he is more of an engineer, and less of an inventor/scientist. (Two types that complement and need each other.)
I don't do much library gluing, since I chose to concentrate on inventing new things. Revolutionary things.
It’s just a choice. Nothing is stopping him from doing the same.
But I don’t even consider the gluing bad. Actually it only shows how far we have come, when we have nearly perfect standard libraries for everything and its dog. Generalizing algorithms and making things reusable are corner stones of programming. And they are great ones!
If you want to code something new, you need to come up with something revolutionary.
So: Mr Knuth: How about we team up: I deliver new ideas that nobody came up with yet, and you get something to code that nobody ever coded before. How about that? I bet we would make a great team! ^^
That should keep the CPU usage down, and your system secure from that type of attack. You can’t do much more than that.
You could run a script to find the owner of all those IPs... maybe do a bit of statistics to see what you can find out... But in the end it will be someone that you can not sue or contact in any way anyway.
See it like this: At least you will have milk when the world comes to an end. ;)
Or in short: Humanity is a society of trust-relationships. News at 11. ;)
How dumb do you think people in these poor countries are?? Sounds pretty arrogant to me, considering you got Alabama and Utah in your backyard, and politicians saying on live TV that you should appeal to the “supernatural powers”. ;)
While I somehow believe you, your comment is also circular reasoning. ^^
So in conclusion, since you didn’t mention competency, they would be... politicians? ;)
You know... inspiring, experienced, but not exactly what you had in mind. ;)
Choose your mood:
Insightful) I can raise you level of outside the box thinking: Lifelong marriage is an invention of churches anyway, and not the basic human thing that we all think it is. In nature it’s rather unusual for humans to stay together their whole life. Usually you stay together a couple of years/decades. Since humans were small communities where everybody was there for everybody else, your children usually were raised by the whole tribe. Look at those tribes who still live like that. It’s our natural way of living. :)
Funny) Wait, I thought the copyfight was the struggle of our generation... (Btw: Is being gay copyrightable? I’m sure, by mafiaa rules, it is. ;)
Troll) Sorry, this option is not available for this comment. ;)
I’ll claim to be a black Mexican lesbian far-right jew, including the appropriate profile photo.
Yeah, but they would get free money (aka “bailouts”) instead.
Just answer with a “UNDEFINED_TERM_ERROR: In this context, this term is not defined.” ^^
And follow up with a “INVALID_ARGUMENTS_ERROR: Your arguments are invalid, because they contain undefined terms.”
It has nothing to do with lawn-related age. ;)
Some people use perfectly cromulent words to elevate themselves above you. So they can act as if they were wiser and exclude you from the discussion. Or in short: So that it’s harder to tell them that they are talking stupid bullshit. ;)
Medicine is well-known for this. Especially classical psychology, since they actually don’t know what they are talking about. (Still mostly not based on neurology, and hence on physics. ;) Also management buzzwords like “synergistic vertical chunnels” fall into this category. Really the area doesn’t matter, and i’m sure we “IT” people have those types too.
Yes. It was the first product from Apple, that was so crappy, that not even the fanbois liked it. Let alone people who did’t have money to throw out of the window. ;)
I realized that the way Apple marketing works, is very similar to trolling: The more you fight it, the more you mention it... and hence the more publicity/hype it will get. Especially since fanbois are so drowning everything else out right after it.
You may hate it. But you have to admire its elegance.