I think the whole "budget crisis on infinite earth's" is all fiscal voodoo...however if this has to happen, we should turn it over "to the community"
NASA should open the project to screened volunteers who maintain the basic mission functions.
NASA could set up an API & a simple prototyping program & let people download it for free. Best ideas get kicked up the ladder...eventually to NASA staff who could approve it.
This should be happening now...it would cost virtually nothing (on NASA $ scales) and get thousands interested & involved in space.
bitcoin isn't the Napster of currency...that's part of the scam!
the **system** of generating "bitcoins" is novel for sure, but as implemented it looks like the whole thing was a scam...part of the scam, of course, is to get people to take it seriously...
that's why drug dealers have 'front' operations!
they were tapping into the 'l33t h@x0r' crowd
BTC is an 'alternative currency' in today's financial world, but really it's just an algorythm that allocates resources based on parameters
what makes BTC a currency is the act of trading it...it's comparable to trading a nug of weed for a beer
anything traded is 'currency'...BTC is an algorythm for allocating resources in a closed exchange community
Napster mediated file transfers anonymously...BTC is not the mediation, it is the thing being traded...MtGOX is the mediator
Don't blame Tim for the ignorance of so-called, "News Analysts"
I'm not.
I'm blaming Tim for not setting things straight in all those CNN, BBC, Fox, MSNBC, etc TV appearances (and thats just in the US)...
Those interviews where it's his talking head and the screen graphics say "Invented World Wide Web"
If he's anywhere near the scientist he pretends to be, he should have **explained that 'the internet' was around long before his work**
He should have been the ***FIRST*** person to give credit to the Stanford team that did 'invent the internet' as we know it as exemplified in the Mother of All Demos: http://www.wired.com/wiredente...
Instead TBL accepted a knighthood from the Queen of England & helped stifle development of web standards in support of DRM
fsck TBL & the horse he rode in on...he's a charlatan
heh...usually typos don't matter but in this case...
I don't see this as anything other than **routing** criminal proceedings.
routine...I meant to type "routine" not "routing"
afaik none of the MtGOX ppl are accused of any kind of crime & in general all currencies are used for "routing criminal" stuff...so you can't arrest BTC people just b/c its used in illegal transactions
well, an unnecessary abstraction layer in internetworked computing conjured out of thin air by Euro academics for essentially marketing purposes...that hasn't really done jack sh*t for me
now..."the internet"...that's pretty much changed every aspect of my life in some way or another...
it just so happens, right now in USA 2014, one group is working in virtual lockstep to deprive citizens of freedom in order to build their personal wealth/fame
absolutely nothing will change regardless of if anyone votes or not
yeah b/c Democrats & Republicans are **exactly the same** on issues like:
net neutrality abortion science teaching in schools foreign relations civil rights gay marriage taxation economic theory affirmative action criminal justice reform privatization of government services health care/"Obamacare" prescription drugs & marijuana **environmental issues**
I could go on and on...you're living in a fantasy that **allows you to sit on your ass and bitch** instead of **making the hard choices and working to improve**
all of the above issues have **policies** that Republicans & Democrats are at ANTIPATHY on
elections matter & you're an idiot to think otherwise
You seem to actually believe what you're saying & so you need to be shown why your whole line of thinking is going to **guarantee** you will be in error.
Productive discussion is not about hacking the other person's language in order to jam, edgewise, some possible universe where the language the other person **might** be taken in a way that would not make their point so strong
It seems you have bought into this in your personal internal dialogue when deciding for yourself how you feel about something.
Whether it is with me or in your own head, when one side makes a valid "point" it must be **weighted** and analyzed rationally with the other points. One point in favor of doing something **isnt the same as** the point 'against' just by the fact that they are next to each other.
You have to go beyond finding any possible nitpick & think about the concepts. You'll see that your counterpoints are, as I said, not the same just because it might be technically valid. They are ***NOT EQUIVALENT***
just b/c a stool has 3 legs doesn't mean it will be level...each leg must be the same length...in that way the points you structure your argument upon & the points you counter must be comparable
Otherwise...you commit the logical fallacy of: FALSE EQUIVALENCE
yeah, the thing you (attempted) to link to was **NOT WHAT YOU CLAIMED IT WAS**
it was a **false equivalence**
again...google searching to find a non-abusive law that a GOP'er co-sponsored does not, in any way, counter or disprove my point...for the same reason as above...
**false equivalence**
you're dead in the water...just accept that things are different than you thought & adapt...take pride of it...only if you refuse to change are you being prideful
2nd, You commit fatal false equivalence. These two things:
1. ALL REPUBLICANS in lockstep opposing ***any*** net neutrality policies
2. ONE legislator **writing a letter** that does nothing more than **ask** for **another agency** to consider regulating something
false equivalence all over...1 is way different than 2. 1 is a baseball bat to the head...the other is...
3rd, everyone who understands the issue agrees Net Neutrality is the right course....only corporations & their GOP sockpuppets oppose net neutrality. However, ***regulating Bitcoin is a debatable policy*** Many would want some kind of government resopnse. I'm not saying its a good idea, or that i agree with the letter.
1 is different than 2...your comparison is full of logical error, false equivalence, trolling, and willful ignorance
having high-power officials 20 years behind the times seems a bit outrageous.
it is completely outrageous...the people who make the laws about a thing not knowing the essential function of how a thing works...that's the definition of legislative incompetence!
the problem is there is so much impoetence & misunderstanding about Tech that the relative measure for 'competent' is frighteningly low...
here's who to blame:
1. Politicians themselves. They're idiots if they don't try to understand what they're making laws about plain and simple. But it doesn't end there....if we're trying to diagnose this problem we have to look deeper. Any cursory look at **policy** will show that **Republicans** are by far and away the worst offenders. They wear technological & scientific ignorance like a badge of honor They're always against Net Neutrality.
2. Tech industry. Your Google's, M$, and even facebook.com's...they all throw money around to accomplish their *corporate* goals. They flood the conversation with PR & drown out any dissenting voices. They make anti-user moves, including monopolies, then lobby congress to avoid any anti-trust accountability. This all causes intense confusion in the literature!
3. Us...tech people. We do a shit job of explaining ourselves. We give new products idiotic and abstract names that alienate non-techs. We have a culture of **snobbishness** and **superiority** that leads us to be condescending & either *over-explain* or more often **over-simplify**
if you are a US citizen, you can make a difference in ***ALL THREE CATEGORIES*** starting today...stop voting for Republicans...stop giving shit stupid confusing names...and stop acting like knowing something that is confusing & only comes with trial and error makes you inherently superior!
tech is confusing...we helped make it this way...we can fix it!
to go further, I what I meant by "end all confusion on this topic permanently" is that if RAM/ROM are used the universe of possible nodes of confusion is decreased
anything can cause confusion...by reducing abstraction & maintaining consistency we can make the "storage/memory" confusion go away forever.
not all confusion...but confusion over the usage of those terms in relation to the **actual function** they represent!
the question you was "how come I can write to 'read-only' memory?" isn't nullified, but it exists if you use "storage/memory" as well...you just get all the possible nodes of confusion with "storage/memory" added into the equation
No terminology is perfect, but using RAM/ROM would end all confusion on this topic permanently.
At the cost of introducing a different confusion. "How come I can write to read-only memory?"
right...it is theoretically possible to misunderstand....that's not a counterpoint.
**any** terminology can be misunderstood...that's not the test...the test is whether it is **intuitive** **logical** and most importantly **consistent**
It's no wonder your friend was confused...your "storage/memory" dichotomy is absolutely stupid.
For non-tech's, they expect the names of things to indicate their function somehow, and that will be somewhat analogous to non-computing usages of those terms. This is normal behavior.
To make "storage/memory" as the words for "Hard-drive" & "RAM" guarantees confusion.
1. We already have logical terms that roughly distinguish the two functions: RAM and ROM...there is **NO NEED** to add another layer of abstraction. New computer users have to learn the concept, so learning two new words is the same as learning to associate two old words with new meanings.
2. "storage/memory" are too broad and both words have the same connotation. There is no logical reason a non-tech could know which was which without someone telling them. "RAM" & "ROM" also require this, but their ackronyms have different meanings which denote the difference in function.
3. Some of "storage" is used as "memory"...some times HD's have a portion that is used to supplement regular RAM
I know 'RAM' and 'ROM' arent' perfect but that's a false bar for me to meet. No terminology is perfect, but using RAM/ROM would end all confusion on this topic permanently.
Really, it would....non-tech's can learn the difference between "BAKE" and "BROIL" then they can learn this.
Your friend is actually thinking more logically than you!
SXSW is a tradeshow & alot of the "keynote" speaking slots are for sale. It's a revenue stream for SXSW: keynotes get alot of press for their product therefore there is value to trade. Not that Snowden would have to pay to be a "keynote" speaker but it's possible.
To go another level, I don't trust anything about the Snowden Narrative from the ***very beginning*** It's fishy as hell, from the Russian poled-dancing girlfriend to his repeated wearing of the same two shirts...on the face of it the whole thing was backwards.
Typical sysadmin, thinking they know everything about how you should do your job, even if your job has nothing to do with administering systems.
Yes. This is a fact that alot of fanbois want to ignore. We all may be happy about the increased awareness of gov't spying, but that doesn't mean we turn off our brains entirely.
IMHO Snowden was/is being blackmailed. He may have had nothing but good intentions but it's obvious that he's getting worked.
A lot of CS degrees today contain a lot more software engineering and general programming than they do theory
Yes and this is a major improvement that took decades. Alot of talent was wasted b/c some CS majors didn't write code until the 3rd year.
It grows out of a misunderstanding of what 'computing' is as an academic discipline & non-tech academia's inherent inability to understand something new & adapt.
To me there are really three different areas: computer science, which is mostly math and theory; programming, which is translating algorithms into code; and software engineering, which encompasses the entire software lifecycle and managing it.
Now...are we saying **how things are** or **how things should be**
I'd agree you're close to 'how things are' but it's not how they should be.
CS, programming and 'software engineering' should all be **one major**
Everything in computing involves interacting with machines to give them instructions.
Humans giving machines instructions. That's computing. It's a simple description of a complex action, but it is accurate! Why fight it!
CS theory could be covered in 2 4hr class sections. Alot of CS programs expand the 'theory' aspect in order to "justify their existence" on the balance sheet. It's an administrative power play. All academic disciplines do it to some degree.
CS is no more than an Applied Math degree "in drag"
This. It may seem to conflict with other credible posts that indicate alot of programming skills were gained in a CS program. It's important to note that CS is kind of a mash-up of disciplines that was as much of a creation of the marketing department as academia. It seems like a logical major to have, but the discipline suffered b/c it became popular at a time when many academics couldn't even check email!!!
The key is what is your **a priori** knowledge. In other words, it's all about what you know going in.
If you want to do actual **computer research** as in working on new processor designs or something like that, then you will want a CS degree.
Slashdot Mirror
> anything traded is 'currency'..
No....In theory, anything at all can become a currency, but in reality only a few items become the currency of a given community...
Yes...that's **exactly what I said**...minus some linguistic nitpicks on your part
We agree...your definition and mine are not in conflict...and even if they were it is irrelevant to my point about BTC not being like Napster.
I think the whole "budget crisis on infinite earth's" is all fiscal voodoo...however if this has to happen, we should turn it over "to the community"
NASA should open the project to screened volunteers who maintain the basic mission functions.
NASA could set up an API & a simple prototyping program & let people download it for free. Best ideas get kicked up the ladder...eventually to NASA staff who could approve it.
This should be happening now...it would cost virtually nothing (on NASA $ scales) and get thousands interested & involved in space.
that's deceptive & plays into the scam
to virtually everyone except techies 'the internet' == 'world wide web'
which is the ***entire problem*** which TBL purposely evades correcting....
the 'world wide web' is a reductive, even childish abstraction that is completely unworthy of celebration
bitcoin isn't the Napster of currency...that's part of the scam!
the **system** of generating "bitcoins" is novel for sure, but as implemented it looks like the whole thing was a scam...part of the scam, of course, is to get people to take it seriously...
that's why drug dealers have 'front' operations!
they were tapping into the 'l33t h@x0r' crowd
BTC is an 'alternative currency' in today's financial world, but really it's just an algorythm that allocates resources based on parameters
what makes BTC a currency is the act of trading it...it's comparable to trading a nug of weed for a beer
anything traded is 'currency'...BTC is an algorythm for allocating resources in a closed exchange community
Napster mediated file transfers anonymously...BTC is not the mediation, it is the thing being traded...MtGOX is the mediator
so MtGox::Napster
I'm not.
I'm blaming Tim for not setting things straight in all those CNN, BBC, Fox, MSNBC, etc TV appearances (and thats just in the US)...
Those interviews where it's his talking head and the screen graphics say "Invented World Wide Web"
If he's anywhere near the scientist he pretends to be, he should have **explained that 'the internet' was around long before his work**
He should have been the ***FIRST*** person to give credit to the Stanford team that did 'invent the internet' as we know it as exemplified in the Mother of All Demos: http://www.wired.com/wiredente...
Instead TBL accepted a knighthood from the Queen of England & helped stifle development of web standards in support of DRM
fsck TBL & the horse he rode in on...he's a charlatan
heh...usually typos don't matter but in this case...
routine...I meant to type "routine" not "routing"
afaik none of the MtGOX ppl are accused of any kind of crime & in general all currencies are used for "routing criminal" stuff...so you can't arrest BTC people just b/c its used in illegal transactions
MtGox has had this coming. They need to provide answers.
I don't see this as anything other than routing criminal proceedings.
I got tired of him when mainstream news analysts started introducing him as "the man who invented the internet"
When the WHATWG had to be formed to get around the W3C's DRM capitulation...that basically confirmed my suspicions
Tim = corporate sockpuppet
well, an unnecessary abstraction layer in internetworked computing conjured out of thin air by Euro academics for essentially marketing purposes...that hasn't really done jack sh*t for me
now..."the internet"...that's pretty much changed every aspect of my life in some way or another...
December 9th 1968...**that's** the internet's birthday!
I hate **corrupt politicians**
it just so happens, right now in USA 2014, one group is working in virtual lockstep to deprive citizens of freedom in order to build their personal wealth/fame
I love Timothy's little editorial at the end:
Why do we assume the fact from TFA (70% of checks...) necessitates laying "blame" on someone.
The government ***manages resources*** in every single decision it makes. It ***allocates*** and decides where money should go.
70% to individuals as opposed to...? Checks to **corporations** that then, themselves, pay **individuals**?
Sounds like Uncle Same is just "cutting out the middle man" to get the best bang for the buck.
yeah b/c Democrats & Republicans are **exactly the same** on issues like:
net neutrality
abortion
science teaching in schools
foreign relations
civil rights
gay marriage
taxation
economic theory
affirmative action
criminal justice reform
privatization of government services
health care/"Obamacare"
prescription drugs & marijuana
**environmental issues**
I could go on and on...you're living in a fantasy that **allows you to sit on your ass and bitch** instead of **making the hard choices and working to improve**
all of the above issues have **policies** that Republicans & Democrats are at ANTIPATHY on
elections matter & you're an idiot to think otherwise
You seem to actually believe what you're saying & so you need to be shown why your whole line of thinking is going to **guarantee** you will be in error.
Productive discussion is not about hacking the other person's language in order to jam, edgewise, some possible universe where the language the other person **might** be taken in a way that would not make their point so strong
It seems you have bought into this in your personal internal dialogue when deciding for yourself how you feel about something.
Whether it is with me or in your own head, when one side makes a valid "point" it must be **weighted** and analyzed rationally with the other points. One point in favor of doing something **isnt the same as** the point 'against' just by the fact that they are next to each other.
You have to go beyond finding any possible nitpick & think about the concepts. You'll see that your counterpoints are, as I said, not the same just because it might be technically valid. They are ***NOT EQUIVALENT***
just b/c a stool has 3 legs doesn't mean it will be level...each leg must be the same length...in that way the points you structure your argument upon & the points you counter must be comparable
Otherwise...you commit the logical fallacy of: FALSE EQUIVALENCE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...
yeah, the thing you (attempted) to link to was **NOT WHAT YOU CLAIMED IT WAS**
it was a **false equivalence**
again...google searching to find a non-abusive law that a GOP'er co-sponsored does not, in any way, counter or disprove my point...for the same reason as above...
**false equivalence**
you're dead in the water...just accept that things are different than you thought & adapt...take pride of it...only if you refuse to change are you being prideful
first, you posted the wrong link...here's the proper link: http://www.networkworld.com/co...
2nd, You commit fatal false equivalence. These two things:
1. ALL REPUBLICANS in lockstep opposing ***any*** net neutrality policies
2. ONE legislator **writing a letter** that does nothing more than **ask** for **another agency** to consider regulating something
false equivalence all over...1 is way different than 2. 1 is a baseball bat to the head...the other is...
3rd, everyone who understands the issue agrees Net Neutrality is the right course....only corporations & their GOP sockpuppets oppose net neutrality. However, ***regulating Bitcoin is a debatable policy*** Many would want some kind of government resopnse. I'm not saying its a good idea, or that i agree with the letter.
1 is different than 2...your comparison is full of logical error, false equivalence, trolling, and willful ignorance
link to mainstream news article or it didn't happen...it's obvious from your multiple comments that you've got an agenda, harrkev.
'democrats want to ban bitcoin'...and that's just to start the conversation...if true that doesn't disprove any of my points
you have a long way to go before you've made constructive points to the discussion.
are you saying that Democrats aren't perfect?
are you saying that Republicans are in favor of Net Neutrality?
what are you saying exactly...because you're not directly clashing my points at all...you're just spouting parenthetical GOP talking points...
it is completely outrageous...the people who make the laws about a thing not knowing the essential function of how a thing works...that's the definition of legislative incompetence!
the problem is there is so much impoetence & misunderstanding about Tech that the relative measure for 'competent' is frighteningly low...
here's who to blame:
1. Politicians themselves. They're idiots if they don't try to understand what they're making laws about plain and simple. But it doesn't end there....if we're trying to diagnose this problem we have to look deeper. Any cursory look at **policy** will show that **Republicans** are by far and away the worst offenders. They wear technological & scientific ignorance like a badge of honor They're always against Net Neutrality.
2. Tech industry. Your Google's, M$, and even facebook.com's...they all throw money around to accomplish their *corporate* goals. They flood the conversation with PR & drown out any dissenting voices. They make anti-user moves, including monopolies, then lobby congress to avoid any anti-trust accountability. This all causes intense confusion in the literature!
3. Us...tech people. We do a shit job of explaining ourselves. We give new products idiotic and abstract names that alienate non-techs. We have a culture of **snobbishness** and **superiority** that leads us to be condescending & either *over-explain* or more often **over-simplify**
if you are a US citizen, you can make a difference in ***ALL THREE CATEGORIES*** starting today...stop voting for Republicans...stop giving shit stupid confusing names...and stop acting like knowing something that is confusing & only comes with trial and error makes you inherently superior!
tech is confusing...we helped make it this way...we can fix it!
to go further, I what I meant by "end all confusion on this topic permanently" is that if RAM/ROM are used the universe of possible nodes of confusion is decreased
anything can cause confusion...by reducing abstraction & maintaining consistency we can make the "storage/memory" confusion go away forever.
not all confusion...but confusion over the usage of those terms in relation to the **actual function** they represent!
the question you was "how come I can write to 'read-only' memory?" isn't nullified, but it exists if you use "storage/memory" as well...you just get all the possible nodes of confusion with "storage/memory" added into the equation
make sense?
No terminology is perfect, but using RAM/ROM would end all confusion on this topic permanently.
At the cost of introducing a different confusion. "How come I can write to read-only memory?"
right...it is theoretically possible to misunderstand....that's not a counterpoint.
**any** terminology can be misunderstood...that's not the test...the test is whether it is **intuitive** **logical** and most importantly **consistent**
It's no wonder your friend was confused...your "storage/memory" dichotomy is absolutely stupid.
For non-tech's, they expect the names of things to indicate their function somehow, and that will be somewhat analogous to non-computing usages of those terms. This is normal behavior.
To make "storage/memory" as the words for "Hard-drive" & "RAM" guarantees confusion.
1. We already have logical terms that roughly distinguish the two functions: RAM and ROM...there is **NO NEED** to add another layer of abstraction. New computer users have to learn the concept, so learning two new words is the same as learning to associate two old words with new meanings.
2. "storage/memory" are too broad and both words have the same connotation. There is no logical reason a non-tech could know which was which without someone telling them. "RAM" & "ROM" also require this, but their ackronyms have different meanings which denote the difference in function.
3. Some of "storage" is used as "memory"...some times HD's have a portion that is used to supplement regular RAM
I know 'RAM' and 'ROM' arent' perfect but that's a false bar for me to meet. No terminology is perfect, but using RAM/ROM would end all confusion on this topic permanently.
Really, it would....non-tech's can learn the difference between "BAKE" and "BROIL" then they can learn this.
Your friend is actually thinking more logically than you!
SXSW is a tradeshow & alot of the "keynote" speaking slots are for sale. It's a revenue stream for SXSW: keynotes get alot of press for their product therefore there is value to trade. Not that Snowden would have to pay to be a "keynote" speaker but it's possible.
To go another level, I don't trust anything about the Snowden Narrative from the ***very beginning*** It's fishy as hell, from the Russian poled-dancing girlfriend to his repeated wearing of the same two shirts...on the face of it the whole thing was backwards.
Yes. This is a fact that alot of fanbois want to ignore. We all may be happy about the increased awareness of gov't spying, but that doesn't mean we turn off our brains entirely.
IMHO Snowden was/is being blackmailed. He may have had nothing but good intentions but it's obvious that he's getting worked.
all "CS majors" are not created the same.
first, you tell me what is useful for designing processors. You tell me who makes them & what kind of degrees they have.
2nd, tell me how those things you listed, graph theory etc....tell me, in your words, how those concepts are useful in the 'real world'
if you can't engage at that level you're trolling...
Yes and this is a major improvement that took decades. Alot of talent was wasted b/c some CS majors didn't write code until the 3rd year.
It grows out of a misunderstanding of what 'computing' is as an academic discipline & non-tech academia's inherent inability to understand something new & adapt.
Now...are we saying **how things are** or **how things should be**
I'd agree you're close to 'how things are' but it's not how they should be.
CS, programming and 'software engineering' should all be **one major**
Everything in computing involves interacting with machines to give them instructions.
Humans giving machines instructions. That's computing. It's a simple description of a complex action, but it is accurate! Why fight it!
CS theory could be covered in 2 4hr class sections. Alot of CS programs expand the 'theory' aspect in order to "justify their existence" on the balance sheet. It's an administrative power play. All academic disciplines do it to some degree.
This. It may seem to conflict with other credible posts that indicate alot of programming skills were gained in a CS program. It's important to note that CS is kind of a mash-up of disciplines that was as much of a creation of the marketing department as academia. It seems like a logical major to have, but the discipline suffered b/c it became popular at a time when many academics couldn't even check email!!!
The key is what is your **a priori** knowledge. In other words, it's all about what you know going in.
If you want to do actual **computer research** as in working on new processor designs or something like that, then you will want a CS degree.
Otherwise, parent is the best advice.