I'm 100% in favor of strict NSA accountability, but it's wrong to blame the NSA as if they aren't at least partially working for the right reasons.
Blame hackers, oligarchs, and wannabe international gangsters first and foremost. The NSA must be held accountable with hardcore oversight, but we need law enforcement and defense.
Also, the tone of this article is weird, it seems to put China as some kind of arbiter of global trade ethics:
Cisco, Apple, Intel, and McAfee -- among others -- have been dropped from the Chinese government's list of authorized brands,
China's government is a totalitarian, freedom depriving monolith. The people of China are victims.
I see the angle, when we put spyware in tech like this there are consequences and it's probably overreach by the NSA, but TFA is criticizing from the wrong angle.
China is not a threat to us. That's the core misunderstanding. How many books, blog posts, articles by Thomas Friedman have there been about the "China Rising" nonsense? We don't owe China like a bank...they ***invested in the US*** by buying our bonds...you don't invest in something you are trying to destroy.
China's financial sovlency depends on the US's ability to honor our bonds. They hitched their wagons to our economy.
Also, China is a pollution wasteland. Human and chemical. Their disasterous one child policy has ruined the population balance of a generation and they have to run their city marathons in smog so thick it's visible at ground level.
I want the US to be a good influence on China. I want our policies to promote them making the right decisions for their people.
I also did a research study on the effectiveness of a "Abstinence Only" sex-ed message in high schools in Indiana for the Indiana Department of Health.
I wrote the study and devised the research design.
Guess what the results were???
The info was presented to the IN Dept of Health who replicated the survey in schools all over the state. I used it as my Master's thesis. Published only in conference proceedings, but we presented it several times for rooms full of doctors and public health experts.
Not as good as Hawking, eh?
I think we should be able to criticize theories and that criticism can be based on logic more than courtroom-style evidence.
I reject the "Appeal to Authority" fallacy at the core of many criticisms, including yours.
my main contribution, in my wildest dreams, is to put out a new theory of Cybernetics which reconciles both 1st Order (Weiner) and 2nd Order Cybernetics
3rd order Cybernetics
Cybernetics is typically defined as 'the study of control in biological life and machines" and a new theory could revitalize Computer Science (which is bogged down by the Church-Turing model of computation) and also has applications in virtually all areas of design.
Cybernetics also involves Information Theory, especially Claude Shannon's contributions.
I'd really like to get a clear statement of Cybernetic theory that can apply consistently across all the disciplines that Cybernetics touches. From interaction design to information theory cosmology.
I think it would be a breath of fresh air and provide a point of departure to try many new theories.
you're using a double standard (i have to link to a peer reviewed research journal to support every sentence I type, where you give Hawking a pass completely) and also committing the 'appeal to authority' logical fallacy
my comment was about science and the misuse thereof...Hawking can be a 'genius' and still have incorrect notions of both computers and human behavior
Stephen Hawking needs to stick to cosmology...he doesn't know *shit* about computing and human behavior.
"aggression" is such a ridiculously ill-defined term, it means virtually nothing scientifically
just like all traits of human behavior, evolutionary biologists (esp. psych) drastically oversimplify the most complex behavior we observe in the known universe
the **real problem** is listening to people like Hawking....they pontificate to feel important and get all the research dollars chasing their tails
this is just like Hawking warning of 'ai'....neither 'ai' nor 'aggression' are a threat to humanity....people listening to Hawking on this is the only threat
After reading KS Robinson's Mars Trilogy (Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars) I just don't know if anything except the real thing will be worth reading
The appendices of Mars Trilogy have actual fictional research papers...it's pretty detailed.
The science hasn't changed that much, and he explores all different kinds of colonization approaches and technical solutions.
From a practical standpoint, i guess a technical description of actual robots we could make and use with existing technology would be an interesting read, but it's still just science fiction unless...you know....you're actually going to do it
GRRM should have hired a co-writer as soon as HBO picked up Game of Thrones for its second season.
At that point, there's no way he could have not known that the show would overtake him.
He let his fans down.
He's a hack writer who did a good job world-building but has no talent to finish it as a story.
I'm happy for him in the sense that he was a working writer who got rich...good for him as it goes...but we have to stop pretending he's a good writer if his behavior is to be understood.
But imho, he's more than just a hack who made good...he should have known better than to let his fans down like this...he should have hired some help.
these systems could be effective, but it comes down to ontology or more broadly research design
i'm not saying *any* company can benefit from "big data", but most can
the core problem is a misunderstanding of what is happening...from a to z alot of biz people are just clueless...the techies they hire to do the big data are partially responsible for this
data analysis is great...everyone does it to some level...highly complex data analysis in a biz situation must have well thought out research questions and research design, specifically tailored for the situation
business is too complex to have a one-size-fits-all data categorization ontology
I don't claim to have all the answers, and I acknowledge that things with crappy names can get very popular.
That said, i wanted to post about the name choice and in general soapbox a bit about how name choices matter and in tech they need to be better.
My goal is to get/.'ers, (hopefully still) the kind of people who choose software names, to understand that it's important.
It's not the most salient factor...but it's important.
It is funny you mention GIMP...i know it sounds crazy but it's true fact that people have chosen not to use GIMP in a classroom setting b/c the word is also a slur for handicapped people.
I'm not really ranting that much...maybe my first post was but it was modded down...i'm making rational, coherent points which the tech industry should think over
in the end the only thing that matters is that it is unique, and that your competition can't take it away from you.
that's where we disagree
ask your non-tech friends...ask them if 'Firefox' is a good name for a computer program you use to view web pages
choosing a good name matters...it's **one factor** in many, and yes, badly named things can become very popular, but **that doesn't mean it's not important to do right**
i was making the point that, just like the name 'Bluetooth', it may have an actual story behind the name that has some quirky relationship to the tech, but it still doesn't matter
i'm not saying go with a over-focused-grouped name, or generic name, w/e...just a bit more tech related
it really matters to people (assuming you want people to use your software of course;)
you seriously don't know who Vivaldi was, and you think everybody else is as proudly ignorant as you are.
even if you know who Vivaldi is, it's still a Dumb Name, that's my point...***most users will not get the reference***...just because it has an actual meaning, it doesn't mean it's a good name
'Bluetooth' is a Dumb Name
i sell handmade electronics in my spare time, which use 'bluetooth'...i have to explain *over and over* how 'bluetooth' is similar to wifi to my customers
the bottom line is, even if people know Vivaldi wrote a a well known piece of music with 4 suites like the program (get it), just like Bluetooth has it's own quirky/unique name origin story, **they both just confuse end users**
are you trying to make your program *actual* abstract art? like a Jackson Pollack painting?
unless that's your actual goal, you need to make a **little more** effort to name the thing something less esoteric...i'm not saying dumb it down, i'm seriously against dumbing things down....this is different
i hope that Vivaldi is a great success and i'm sure the developers are great, but this is what i'm commenting about...abstract wacky quirky names need to go...i'm not saying take it to the other extreme, but go with something a bit closer to describing what the function is
Slashdot Mirror
I'm 100% in favor of strict NSA accountability, but it's wrong to blame the NSA as if they aren't at least partially working for the right reasons.
Blame hackers, oligarchs, and wannabe international gangsters first and foremost. The NSA must be held accountable with hardcore oversight, but we need law enforcement and defense.
Also, the tone of this article is weird, it seems to put China as some kind of arbiter of global trade ethics:
Cisco, Apple, Intel, and McAfee -- among others -- have been dropped from the Chinese government's list of authorized brands,
China's government is a totalitarian, freedom depriving monolith. The people of China are victims.
I see the angle, when we put spyware in tech like this there are consequences and it's probably overreach by the NSA, but TFA is criticizing from the wrong angle.
China is not a threat to us. That's the core misunderstanding. How many books, blog posts, articles by Thomas Friedman have there been about the "China Rising" nonsense? We don't owe China like a bank...they ***invested in the US*** by buying our bonds...you don't invest in something you are trying to destroy.
China's financial sovlency depends on the US's ability to honor our bonds. They hitched their wagons to our economy.
Also, China is a pollution wasteland. Human and chemical. Their disasterous one child policy has ruined the population balance of a generation and they have to run their city marathons in smog so thick it's visible at ground level.
I want the US to be a good influence on China. I want our policies to promote them making the right decisions for their people.
I also did a research study on the effectiveness of a "Abstinence Only" sex-ed message in high schools in Indiana for the Indiana Department of Health.
I wrote the study and devised the research design.
Guess what the results were???
The info was presented to the IN Dept of Health who replicated the survey in schools all over the state. I used it as my Master's thesis. Published only in conference proceedings, but we presented it several times for rooms full of doctors and public health experts.
Not as good as Hawking, eh?
I think we should be able to criticize theories and that criticism can be based on logic more than courtroom-style evidence.
I reject the "Appeal to Authority" fallacy at the core of many criticisms, including yours.
my main contribution, in my wildest dreams, is to put out a new theory of Cybernetics which reconciles both 1st Order (Weiner) and 2nd Order Cybernetics
3rd order Cybernetics
Cybernetics is typically defined as 'the study of control in biological life and machines" and a new theory could revitalize Computer Science (which is bogged down by the Church-Turing model of computation) and also has applications in virtually all areas of design.
Cybernetics also involves Information Theory, especially Claude Shannon's contributions.
I'd really like to get a clear statement of Cybernetic theory that can apply consistently across all the disciplines that Cybernetics touches. From interaction design to information theory cosmology.
I think it would be a breath of fresh air and provide a point of departure to try many new theories.
i totally didn't mean it that way!
especially the media, blow everything he says (even casually) out of proportion
yeah i feel he was treated unfairly for his "I don't understand women" comment a few years back
i agree the media are idiots in general and especially when reporting about science
we can't all put our resumes atop every comment
you're using a double standard (i have to link to a peer reviewed research journal to support every sentence I type, where you give Hawking a pass completely) and also committing the 'appeal to authority' logical fallacy
my comment was about science and the misuse thereof...Hawking can be a 'genius' and still have incorrect notions of both computers and human behavior
Stephen Hawking needs to stick to cosmology...he doesn't know *shit* about computing and human behavior.
"aggression" is such a ridiculously ill-defined term, it means virtually nothing scientifically
just like all traits of human behavior, evolutionary biologists (esp. psych) drastically oversimplify the most complex behavior we observe in the known universe
the **real problem** is listening to people like Hawking....they pontificate to feel important and get all the research dollars chasing their tails
this is just like Hawking warning of 'ai'....neither 'ai' nor 'aggression' are a threat to humanity....people listening to Hawking on this is the only threat
You could tie their closest points together with a rope and that rope will never stretch or slacken.
it would be cool to actually do this
imho, it wouldn't "never stretch or slacken"....
relatively speaking, yes
but if you actually did this, you'd need at least...idk...1000 km of slack...just a guess
the IAU should grant Pluto a once-in-the-universe exception to the definition of 'planet'
it's perfect for kids...
why?
because Pluto technically isn't a planet even though historically it is known as one of the planets
why isn't it a planet?
see...it's just a big excuse to talk about astronomy
put an asterisk by it in the textbooks
the IAU could bolster its reputation by doing this as well
Mars colonization in book form.
After reading KS Robinson's Mars Trilogy (Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars) I just don't know if anything except the real thing will be worth reading
The appendices of Mars Trilogy have actual fictional research papers...it's pretty detailed.
The science hasn't changed that much, and he explores all different kinds of colonization approaches and technical solutions.
From a practical standpoint, i guess a technical description of actual robots we could make and use with existing technology would be an interesting read, but it's still just science fiction unless...you know....you're actually going to do it
Youtube is a great example of how the tech industry really works.
Sure, they had their ideas for how their site would be used, but it was a **free site** where users could **post video**
free video posting
and it actually worked 99% of the time
Goodbye old friend.
Man, me too...
I *love* Radio Shack.
I love going in and rummaging through the parts to see what kind of stuff I could make.
Well...now it's different. When I was a kid it was with my dad for fun, now I'm making hand-crafted electronics and it's more immediate.
I just can't help but think that with the right merchandising Radio Shack can be a hit.
A deal with Apple makes total sense...b/c Radio Shack is so many places where Apple stores are not.
Ah well...
I hope the current locations can stay open where I live at least when the Sprint changeover comes.
what's harsh and unrealistic about GRRM hiring a co-writer because he got in over his head?
GRRM is out of his league...his only option was to hire help.
It doesn't matter at all to this discussion whether yo *think* he owes you anything or not.
I'm not talking about the question "Does GRRM owe Maxo-Texas anything?"
i'm talking the question of "What could GRRM have done to salvage his books after he wrote himself into a corner?"
His taking a long time between books is utterly irrelevant to whether his writing is good or not.
you said this, not me
i did not say GRRM's writing was "not good"....I said he is a hack.
alot of people have good imaginations and GRRM does that no doubt, but to be an actual storyteller is a different kind of talent
GRRM is a ****hack storyteller**** who uses shopworn storytelling devices and trite interpersonal conflicts and moves the goalposts as he writes
that's why his writing is bad...
GRRM should have hired a co-writer as soon as HBO picked up Game of Thrones for its second season.
At that point, there's no way he could have not known that the show would overtake him.
He let his fans down.
He's a hack writer who did a good job world-building but has no talent to finish it as a story.
I'm happy for him in the sense that he was a working writer who got rich...good for him as it goes...but we have to stop pretending he's a good writer if his behavior is to be understood.
But imho, he's more than just a hack who made good...he should have known better than to let his fans down like this...he should have hired some help.
these systems could be effective, but it comes down to ontology or more broadly research design
i'm not saying *any* company can benefit from "big data", but most can
the core problem is a misunderstanding of what is happening...from a to z alot of biz people are just clueless...the techies they hire to do the big data are partially responsible for this
data analysis is great...everyone does it to some level...highly complex data analysis in a biz situation must have well thought out research questions and research design, specifically tailored for the situation
business is too complex to have a one-size-fits-all data categorization ontology
none of which disproves TFA's thesis...
TFA is about the **hype**...everything described in your post is value-added...not hype
I used the example of WiMax in a comment below.
I don't claim to have all the answers, and I acknowledge that things with crappy names can get very popular.
That said, i wanted to post about the name choice and in general soapbox a bit about how name choices matter and in tech they need to be better.
My goal is to get /.'ers, (hopefully still) the kind of people who choose software names, to understand that it's important.
It's not the most salient factor...but it's important.
It is funny you mention GIMP...i know it sounds crazy but it's true fact that people have chosen not to use GIMP in a classroom setting b/c the word is also a slur for handicapped people.
I'm not really ranting that much...maybe my first post was but it was modded down...i'm making rational, coherent points which the tech industry should think over
not if you don't have guaranteed government contracts it doesn't!
unless you have already become rich and have market penetration, the name **obviously** matters
that makes sense...
the name makes sense, but that's not the test if it is a 'good name' or not imho
in the end the only thing that matters is that it is unique, and that your competition can't take it away from you.
that's where we disagree
ask your non-tech friends...ask them if 'Firefox' is a good name for a computer program you use to view web pages
choosing a good name matters...it's **one factor** in many, and yes, badly named things can become very popular, but **that doesn't mean it's not important to do right**
What name do you propose for Bluetooth?
i don't have all the answers, but let's look at a reverse case...let's look at a *good name choice*
WiMax is a mostly-defunct next generation wireless protocol. If you did network engineering you prob have heard of it...
It is similar to Bluetooth in that way.
WiFi was, to users, something familiar...they chose to name the **next generation** wireless tech "WiMax"
it's not perfect either, but it has the word "max" in it, which is marketable as WiMax was to be a 1Gbit protocol
also, it ***connects to user's a priori knowledge***....
it's LOGICAL, MARKETABLE, AND CONNECTS WITH USERS CURRENT KNOWLEDGE
Bluetooth is just a random word to people! Even longtime network engineers I know had no idea where the name came from.
That's the difference.
Windows was the Federal Government's desktop OS of choice...for millions of desks...all over the world
That level of automatic penetration of the market is absolutely invaluable.
It's very easy to see how M$ leveraged their huge US contracts...it's much easier to have your home OS be the same as your work OS.
That and bundling deals with major PC makers...if you were using computers in that era you should remember all this
i was making the point that, just like the name 'Bluetooth', it may have an actual story behind the name that has some quirky relationship to the tech, but it still doesn't matter
i'm not saying go with a over-focused-grouped name, or generic name, w/e...just a bit more tech related
it really matters to people (assuming you want people to use your software of course ;)
you seriously don't know who Vivaldi was, and you think everybody else is as proudly ignorant as you are.
even if you know who Vivaldi is, it's still a Dumb Name, that's my point...***most users will not get the reference***...just because it has an actual meaning, it doesn't mean it's a good name
'Bluetooth' is a Dumb Name
i sell handmade electronics in my spare time, which use 'bluetooth'...i have to explain *over and over* how 'bluetooth' is similar to wifi to my customers
the bottom line is, even if people know Vivaldi wrote a a well known piece of music with 4 suites like the program (get it), just like Bluetooth has it's own quirky/unique name origin story, **they both just confuse end users**
are you trying to make your program *actual* abstract art? like a Jackson Pollack painting?
unless that's your actual goal, you need to make a **little more** effort to name the thing something less esoteric...i'm not saying dumb it down, i'm seriously against dumbing things down....this is different
i hope that Vivaldi is a great success and i'm sure the developers are great, but this is what i'm commenting about...abstract wacky quirky names need to go...i'm not saying take it to the other extreme, but go with something a bit closer to describing what the function is