While some have raised concerns that law-abiding citizens will be tempted to try the new lanes and get into life-threatening situations, DOT officials claim they will be self- enforcing, self-regulating, and, with proper drainage and fluid grooves, self-cleaning. Nevertheless, steps are being taken to prevent their use by non-reckless drivers.
How does global climate change fit into this? I don't seem to see much coverage of dissenting views in main stream media but I see a lot of people in the news virtually every day predicting nasty stuff in the future. Is it the left or the right that is behind this seemingly one-sided message?
What's worse is disagreeing with someone and spouting, "just read these 14 URLs comprising 347,958 words and you'll find out how stupid you really are" rather than putting effort into making some clear statements and taking the time to put coherent thought into words.
There's not much worse than copypaste advocacy but it's all the rage with those who tend to refer others to talking points and narratives.
FoxNews is considered to be conservative/Republican (from what I gather, I don't watch it). What are the political leanings of the other news outlets? Are they all neutral in their outlook and presentation of news?
Before one can engage in social engineering, one must have reliable information about the society that is to be engineered, and one must have effective tools to carry out the engineering. Both of these only became available relatively recently - roughly within the past one hundred years. The development of social science made it possible to gather and analyze information about social attitudes and trends, which is necessary in order to judge the initial state of society before an engineering attempt and the success or failure of that attempt after it has been implemented. At the same time, the development of modern communications technology and the media provided the tools through which social engineering could be carried out.
While social engineering can be carried out by any organization - whether large or small, public or private - the most comprehensive (and often the most effective) campaigns of social engineering are those initiated by powerful central governments.
Extremely intensive social engineering campaigns occurred in countries with authoritarian governments. In the 1920s, the government of the Soviet Union embarked on a campaign to fundamentally alter the behavior and ideals of Soviet citizens, to replace the old social frameworks of Tsarist Russia with a new Soviet culture, to create the New Soviet man. The Soviets used newspapers, books, film, mass relocations, and even architectural design tactics to serve as "social condenser" and change personal values and private relationships. Similar examples are the Chinese "Great Leap Forward" and "Cultural Revolution" program and the Khmer Rouge's plan of deurbanization of Cambodia.
Non-authoritarian regimes tend to rely on more sustained social engineering campaigns that create more gradual, but ultimately as far-reaching, change. Examples include the "War on Drugs" in the United States, the increasing reach of intellectual property rights and copyright, and the promotion of elections as a political tool. The campaign for promoting elections, which is by far the most successful of the three examples, has been in place for over two centuries. In Singapore, the government's housing policies attempt to promote a mix of all races within each subsidized housing district in order to foster social cohesion and national loyalty while providing the citizens with affordable housing.
Social theorists of the Frankfurt School in Weimar Germany like Theodor Adorno had also observed the new phenomenon of mass culture and commented on its new manipulative power, when the rise of the Nazis drove them out of the country around 1930 (many of them became connected with the Institute for Social Research in the United States). The Nazis themselves were no strangers to the idea of influencing political attitudes and re-defining personal relationships. The Nazi propaganda machine under Joseph Goebbels was a synchronized, sophisticated and effective tool for creating public opinion.
In a similar vein the Greek military junta of 1967-1974 attempted to steer Greek public opinion not only by propaganda but also by inventing new words and slogans such as: palaiokommatismos (translated as old-partyism), Ellas Ellinon Christianon translated as: Greece of Christian Greeks, Ethnosotirios Epanastasis translated as Nation-saving Revolution meaning coup d'état etc.
Social engineering can be used as a means to achieve a wide variety of different results, as illustrated by the different governments and other organizations that have employed it. The discussion of the possibilities for such manipulation became especially active following World War II, with the advent of television, and continuing discussion of techniques of social engineering - particularly in advertising - is still quite pertinent in the western model of consumer capitalism.
Interesting. Recently I had some trouble logging in to my bank account using Firefox, so I called the help hotline. The help person assumed I was using IE; I explained that I was using FF and had tried re-setting the password to no avail.
Then he mentions, out of the blue, that Safari is recommended for Mac users. I've used both my Mac and my PC to access this account, how did he know I have a Mac?
The legal term is P.Eng in Canada, PE in the US. I'm not sure what "Certified Engineer" actually means. Is it computer-related or a title given as a job description?
Product activation, DRM, dongles and a dozen other ways the proprietary model has shot themselves in the foot. If you need capacity on an open source platform, just stand it up. Fast and uncomplicated.
I like the sound of that. I bought and sometimes use a fairly expensive visualization program (for 3D "zooming" through facilities) that needs to phone home for activation. I have a laptop and a desktop that I'd like to run it on, but can't because it marries itself to only one hard disk.
Your rant somewhat relates to one of my other posts in this topic. Some people like tinkering with the machine more than they like actually accomplishing things with the technology. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but when futzing around with gizmos interferes with real work...
Paid software implies a contractual obligation on the part of the software provider. I.E., if something screws-up, the manager that chose that software (even if s/he made a bad decision) can blame the software company. With free/OSS you can't do that credibly and managers are well-known for risk-aversion. What's that quote about not getting fired for buying IBM?
I hope this happens for CAD, since the current state of that world is in a bit of chaos due to competing and incompatible file formats (not to mention profit-driven upgrade cycles, dubious UI changes and poor documentation).
The more time needed to be spent on figuring-out the latest upgrade equals less time available for learning/understanding the fundamentals of engineering. Some CAD software "enhancements" seem to be designed to make things easier for those that like to tinker with program settings or to more efficiently perform automated tasks rather than help people that actually design things.
Get off my lawn, but in the board days we didn't have the current fractured market where knowledge of specific software decided your opportunities. I'm hoping that open source CAD might at least force some standardization back into the field but I'm not holding my breath for this to happen.
Sounds like a money sink-hole once the beaurocrats get a hold of it. In the old days we used to be able to do this sort of stuff with pencils and a really large napkin.
You see... that is the problem. The term "Engineer" has been so deluded that most people will fall into that category anymore. Write software? Engineer. Use a cheap CAD program to draw your house addition? Engineer. Drive a train? Engineer.
Outside of bars and pubs where smoking is banned you'll now find homeless moochers and drug dealer types mingling with the legitimate patrons bumming cigarettes and "fitting into the crowd".
Perhaps I'm mistaken, but isn't this *worse* for walkers-by in the sense that they now have to stroll through an outdoor cloud AND be subject to "undesireables" pretending to be bar customers just temporarily outside for a smoke?
I think the term was used to emphasize the fact that, to some people, there is never enough "safety". And many people (usually NGO, political and government types) earn a living from being "safety people" and realize that once "enough" safety has been achieved their jobs are at risk.
Think of those who state, "if measure X saves just one innocent child it will all have been worth the effort". There's a certain type of personality that gravitates to that type of thinking and they are usually those who have an interest in monitoring and controlling.
One example is smoking laws. Hate smokers or not, the laws are getting more and more restrictive and to the point of being ridiculous. That's creeping intolerance from a certain segment of the population.
First, smokers were banned from puffing away inside buildings because of the dangers of second-hand smoke (link to scanned Skeptic Magazine article - PDF). Then they were banned from smoking within 50' of a doorway. Now, proposals are to make that distance quadrupled or more while it is possible to create proper building ventilation systems to accommodate tobacco smoke.
This example is about intolerance and the right to not be offended, not a safety issue.
I hope I've made a rational point here and won't be modded into oblivion.
Scientology was clandestinely created by psychiatrists so as to make their field of study less looney-looking and to redirect criticism away from the profession.
If that were the case, McDonald's and a bunch of other businesses that turn out what are essentially low-quality, cheap or just plain mediocre products would be out of business.
I think that phenomenon might have more to do with providing people with what they expect (as you mention). Which makes it strange that MS effs around with the interface that people are already familiar with. Software should always have a fallback UI (enable the old interface - does Vista have this?) otherwise there tends to be too much effort learning new ways to perform the same tasks.
Slashdot Mirror
What, no Monstercable to bump the cost up to $25K?
some studies show that red light cameras increase the total number of collisions because rear-end collisions go up.
And if one car rear-ends another, it's always the car behind that's at fault, legally, no?
DOT Creates New Lane For Reckless Drivers
While some have raised concerns that law-abiding citizens will be tempted to try the new lanes and get into life-threatening situations, DOT officials claim they will be self- enforcing, self-regulating, and, with proper drainage and fluid grooves, self-cleaning. Nevertheless, steps are being taken to prevent their use by non-reckless drivers.
How does global climate change fit into this? I don't seem to see much coverage of dissenting views in main stream media but I see a lot of people in the news virtually every day predicting nasty stuff in the future. Is it the left or the right that is behind this seemingly one-sided message?
At least he spelled it right.
What's worse is disagreeing with someone and spouting, "just read these 14 URLs comprising 347,958 words and you'll find out how stupid you really are" rather than putting effort into making some clear statements and taking the time to put coherent thought into words.
There's not much worse than copypaste advocacy but it's all the rage with those who tend to refer others to talking points and narratives.
FoxNews is considered to be conservative/Republican (from what I gather, I don't watch it). What are the political leanings of the other news outlets? Are they all neutral in their outlook and presentation of news?
The term 'Social Engineering' has been co-opted so as to now commonly mean something other than it's original definition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_engineering_(political_science)
Social engineering through history
Before one can engage in social engineering, one must have reliable information about the society that is to be engineered, and one must have effective tools to carry out the engineering. Both of these only became available relatively recently - roughly within the past one hundred years. The development of social science made it possible to gather and analyze information about social attitudes and trends, which is necessary in order to judge the initial state of society before an engineering attempt and the success or failure of that attempt after it has been implemented. At the same time, the development of modern communications technology and the media provided the tools through which social engineering could be carried out.
While social engineering can be carried out by any organization - whether large or small, public or private - the most comprehensive (and often the most effective) campaigns of social engineering are those initiated by powerful central governments.
Extremely intensive social engineering campaigns occurred in countries with authoritarian governments. In the 1920s, the government of the Soviet Union embarked on a campaign to fundamentally alter the behavior and ideals of Soviet citizens, to replace the old social frameworks of Tsarist Russia with a new Soviet culture, to create the New Soviet man. The Soviets used newspapers, books, film, mass relocations, and even architectural design tactics to serve as "social condenser" and change personal values and private relationships. Similar examples are the Chinese "Great Leap Forward" and "Cultural Revolution" program and the Khmer Rouge's plan of deurbanization of Cambodia.
Non-authoritarian regimes tend to rely on more sustained social engineering campaigns that create more gradual, but ultimately as far-reaching, change. Examples include the "War on Drugs" in the United States, the increasing reach of intellectual property rights and copyright, and the promotion of elections as a political tool. The campaign for promoting elections, which is by far the most successful of the three examples, has been in place for over two centuries. In Singapore, the government's housing policies attempt to promote a mix of all races within each subsidized housing district in order to foster social cohesion and national loyalty while providing the citizens with affordable housing.
Social theorists of the Frankfurt School in Weimar Germany like Theodor Adorno had also observed the new phenomenon of mass culture and commented on its new manipulative power, when the rise of the Nazis drove them out of the country around 1930 (many of them became connected with the Institute for Social Research in the United States). The Nazis themselves were no strangers to the idea of influencing political attitudes and re-defining personal relationships. The Nazi propaganda machine under Joseph Goebbels was a synchronized, sophisticated and effective tool for creating public opinion.
In a similar vein the Greek military junta of 1967-1974 attempted to steer Greek public opinion not only by propaganda but also by inventing new words and slogans such as: palaiokommatismos (translated as old-partyism), Ellas Ellinon Christianon translated as: Greece of Christian Greeks, Ethnosotirios Epanastasis translated as Nation-saving Revolution meaning coup d'état etc.
Social engineering can be used as a means to achieve a wide variety of different results, as illustrated by the different governments and other organizations that have employed it. The discussion of the possibilities for such manipulation became especially active following World War II, with the advent of television, and continuing discussion of techniques of social engineering - particularly in advertising - is still quite pertinent in the western model of consumer capitalism.
Yeah. "could of" is not a simple mispelling, it's fundamental ignorance of the language.
http://grammartips.homestead.com/couldof.html
I think you mean that *some* people don't have common courtesy.
Interesting. Recently I had some trouble logging in to my bank account using Firefox, so I called the help hotline. The help person assumed I was using IE; I explained that I was using FF and had tried re-setting the password to no avail.
Then he mentions, out of the blue, that Safari is recommended for Mac users. I've used both my Mac and my PC to access this account, how did he know I have a Mac?
The legal term is P.Eng in Canada, PE in the US. I'm not sure what "Certified Engineer" actually means. Is it computer-related or a title given as a job description?
Product activation, DRM, dongles and a dozen other ways the proprietary model has shot themselves in the foot. If you need capacity on an open source platform, just stand it up. Fast and uncomplicated.
I like the sound of that. I bought and sometimes use a fairly expensive visualization program (for 3D "zooming" through facilities) that needs to phone home for activation. I have a laptop and a desktop that I'd like to run it on, but can't because it marries itself to only one hard disk.
Your rant somewhat relates to one of my other posts in this topic. Some people like tinkering with the machine more than they like actually accomplishing things with the technology. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but when futzing around with gizmos interferes with real work...
Paid software implies a contractual obligation on the part of the software provider. I.E., if something screws-up, the manager that chose that software (even if s/he made a bad decision) can blame the software company. With free/OSS you can't do that credibly and managers are well-known for risk-aversion. What's that quote about not getting fired for buying IBM?
I hope this happens for CAD, since the current state of that world is in a bit of chaos due to competing and incompatible file formats (not to mention profit-driven upgrade cycles, dubious UI changes and poor documentation).
The more time needed to be spent on figuring-out the latest upgrade equals less time available for learning/understanding the fundamentals of engineering. Some CAD software "enhancements" seem to be designed to make things easier for those that like to tinker with program settings or to more efficiently perform automated tasks rather than help people that actually design things.
Get off my lawn, but in the board days we didn't have the current fractured market where knowledge of specific software decided your opportunities. I'm hoping that open source CAD might at least force some standardization back into the field but I'm not holding my breath for this to happen.
Sounds like a money sink-hole once the beaurocrats get a hold of it. In the old days we used to be able to do this sort of stuff with pencils and a really large napkin.
You see... that is the problem. The term "Engineer" has been so deluded that most people will fall into that category anymore. Write software? Engineer. Use a cheap CAD program to draw your house addition? Engineer. Drive a train? Engineer.
Then why have none of my Slashdot story submissions been accepted since I became a subscriber?
And now they have to move even father away
Outside of bars and pubs where smoking is banned you'll now find homeless moochers and drug dealer types mingling with the legitimate patrons bumming cigarettes and "fitting into the crowd".
Perhaps I'm mistaken, but isn't this *worse* for walkers-by in the sense that they now have to stroll through an outdoor cloud AND be subject to "undesireables" pretending to be bar customers just temporarily outside for a smoke?
Law of unintended consequences, I guess.
Don't you think the minimum (perceived) required age is a bit old, though? 40?
OTOH, the requirement might be flattering for vain people.
MikeRT is correct.
I think the term was used to emphasize the fact that, to some people, there is never enough "safety". And many people (usually NGO, political and government types) earn a living from being "safety people" and realize that once "enough" safety has been achieved their jobs are at risk.
Think of those who state, "if measure X saves just one innocent child it will all have been worth the effort". There's a certain type of personality that gravitates to that type of thinking and they are usually those who have an interest in monitoring and controlling.
One example is smoking laws. Hate smokers or not, the laws are getting more and more restrictive and to the point of being ridiculous. That's creeping intolerance from a certain segment of the population.
First, smokers were banned from puffing away inside buildings because of the dangers of second-hand smoke (link to scanned Skeptic Magazine article - PDF). Then they were banned from smoking within 50' of a doorway. Now, proposals are to make that distance quadrupled or more while it is possible to create proper building ventilation systems to accommodate tobacco smoke.
This example is about intolerance and the right to not be offended, not a safety issue.
I hope I've made a rational point here and won't be modded into oblivion.
Neither do I, it causes beeping sounds.
Here's a nutty conspiracy theory for you:
Scientology was clandestinely created by psychiatrists so as to make their field of study less looney-looking and to redirect criticism away from the profession.
If that were the case, McDonald's and a bunch of other businesses that turn out what are essentially low-quality, cheap or just plain mediocre products would be out of business.
I think that phenomenon might have more to do with providing people with what they expect (as you mention). Which makes it strange that MS effs around with the interface that people are already familiar with. Software should always have a fallback UI (enable the old interface - does Vista have this?) otherwise there tends to be too much effort learning new ways to perform the same tasks.