true or false, that statement disproves *nothing* I've said...
there's no law saying that every failing company in Finland must hire ignorant Machiavellian former Microsofties who will slash and burn a century old company...you're way off!
so...no shit Sherlock, when a company is failing (as Nokia was pre-Elop) you can *always* say of that company, "X has no plan...X has no future"
if it was otherwise, the **company wouldn't be failing**
a flagging company is an everyday occurance in the business world...companies go through cycles...but they maintain a minimum of existence and weather storms!
just because a company is 'failing' does not mean they need to hire an unethical *corporate raider* who will suck your company dry then sell it out to a bigger company he used to work for...
I agree with your superficial point...who would have thunk it indeed
However, I think it is still a distinction without a difference, one that only causes more confusion.
You and I know what 'documentation' in the computing sense means, but it's not a logical concept for a non-techie.
'documentation' in computing can be as simple as the coder showing his/her work and making a formal log of changes and bug reports/fixes
however, and here is where the problem happens...what constitutes 'sufficient documentation' for a coder is *not* sufficient for a user!
the problem is, that to bridge the gap, most programmers (who are not at all schooled in education theory & by nature tend anti-social) must create some sort of 'document' beyond the 'documentation' for the end user
sometimes this takes the form a 'tutorial'
a 'tutorial' is not full instructions...it is a real-time step-by step *demonstration* which may have supplimentary material that is actually instructions
ex: I can make a video with the steps to start a car, put it in gear and how the brake and throttle work...a person, with *nothing* else but that video and factory plans of the car *could* learn to use it...but calling a basic video and factory plans 'instrucitons' is insulting!
'documentation' can be helpful
'tutorials' can be helpful
'help' menus can be helpful
even so, its not a full user manual that an end user in other industries would expect
the computing industry has decades of work in this area I fear...so many have gotten used to doing it a bad way
documentation should be used to teach, not to dump excessive amounts of unstructured information onto a user
That's it in a thesis statement.
What does 'documentation' or a 'user manual' that **teaches** not dumps random data actually look like???
Complexity is the problem, and it causes blurred lines in areas that in a simpler technical area (with less uncertainty), say auto repair, would not be uncertain.
Computer programs, languages, API's, etc are insanely complex compared to a radio or engine. The parameters and variables are way off the scale in comparison.
Another way to say it is, even on the 'strict' end, in computing there are too many ways to do everything.
A second problem is time. Specifically time in relation to the development cycle.
A manual for a '68 Mustang will always be accurate and usable as long as '68 Mustangs exist.
A complete guide to HTML, CSS, and Dreamweaver...well that can become obsolete in 2 years b/c of changes in the industry. What good is a tome on CSS 2 when CSS 3 becomes standard? It filters down through the whole development stack.
1. Complexity 2. Time
These things cause making a proper 'user manual' that teaches the user like the best user manuals or instructions for other things we've seen.
That's the thing, us tech-minded people know what a good 'user manual' or 'FAQ' or 'help page' looks like when we see it.
The challenge for developers is to integrate educational concepts to mitigate the challenges of the complexity and speed of the industry provide.
We need teachers who can code...we need *women* who can code...
To get that, we need to learn to admit when we *don't know* exactly what we are doing and fess up to the fact that much of computer developmenet these days is done by trial and error!
I don't like it, but we have to accept it to change a whole industry.
With Juniper and Microsoft he was prospecting for clients, and found gold with Microsoft.
it's so obvious now, looking at GP's info on Elop's resume...
so it's all just a bunch of insider trading...
I see alot of commenters gaming out who did what and when and why Nokia failed and Microsoft wasn't 'evil' but made a mistake and on and on...
This is not about sharp, highly technical yet well rounded businesspeople on a board of a company or in a product development team trying to make the best widget for their users...
This is about rich people gaming a system of commerce for their own personal short term gain...it's not 'business' it's Machiavellian bullshit.
Sure, b/c this predatory capitalism makes profits and therefore makes headlines many equate their profit with success...but it is not so...
It's robbery...legal? most likely yes...but in the end it is a failing way to do business and proceed through life
Jolla aims to create something fresh compared to iOS and Android.
Waste of time. Android is there. I know Meego exists and theoretically someone here on/. will make a case that it's better but that's in theory land. In the business world, Android is the only viable competitor to iOS.
It'll do more than waste time...it will drain R&D and kill the project.
Jolla, and any other company wanting to do "mobile" should make apps, work on *one* device that fills a gap in the market perfectly and sustainably, and go from there.
making your own OS isn't some kind of badge or right of passage for a 'mobile' company...its just about what is best for your users at that time!
My idea for a device is an iPhone 5 clone that can run iOS or Android, run on any carrier, has a USB and removable memory, and can receive over-the-air radio and TV!
IMHO the 'smartphone' market is about fully 'plateaued' now...it's like the TV market...it's so advanced the product differentiation is small...perfect time for a startup to enter!
I read a thinly-veiled defense of M$ in your tl;dr post...let's address this:
Second of all Nokia WAS ALREADY TOAST by the time the board called in Elop
they weren't doing *well* but that doesn't mean they were going to crash and burn...it's practically Finland's official technology provider...in business for almost 150 years...lots of deep business relationships in Europe
only a dumb, short-sighted (typical) American businessman would look at Nokia and think "ah they're toast"...
Nokia could have switched to Android instead of Widoze.
Sure, they'd have taken a loss to switch to Android, but it was a loss no matter which OS they migrated to!!! Nokia's userbase would have weathered the change as they have for decades of new tech.
M$ jobbed Nokia and the entire country of Finland. The end.
It's kind of like hearing a neighbor couple argue...you can't help but listen but you don't approve of it in any way...that's how I view M$'s raping and pillaging of Nokia. I don't agree with it, I think it is wrong, but AFAIK it wasn't *technically* illegal...so lesson learned I guess?
That's it...that's the lesson: STAY AWAY FROM MICROSOFT or anyone who does business in their manner.
another damned collectivist who thinks that they should have the right to control another aspect of my life
You say 'collectivist' like its a term as familiar and concrete as say 'nazi'...
Only people who already agree with you share the same heavy emotional and psychological satisfaction from scapegoating 'collectivists'
So, let's hear it...what is a 'collectivist'?
Troll answers will get ignored...let's see a real, consistently applicable definition...one that has some grounding in the actual meaning of the word and use in academia would help immensely...
I call bullshit on you and everyone mocking these people.
They don't know what they are looking at for sure until they capture it...or what this article calls 'detaining'...it is obvious the news writers are mocking them and trying to use reverse propaganda.
Just reading the *two* articles I presented, that is evidence enough to any reasonable person that this is not dumb or paranoid just good sense.
Sure, these guys don't have our education! But they know implicitly where things are headed...
The Army admits to having very lifelike bird-drones...that's it
We elected a terrorist for president, we revolted against him and the military backed us up, we have a civil government (so far).
partisans in America are too dumb to see this...critics in America look at Egypt and wonder, "How can we make this Obama's fault"
Egyptians, Syrians, Libyans, etc **all** know exactly what they are fighting FOR and who they are fighting AGAINST 4 American's are being duped by a media too dumb to know when the military/illuminati complex is leading them around by the nose...
Egypt and Syria now are just like Iran in 1979...
Democratic uprising to topple an Aristocrat dictator who was installed by foreign Oligarch's to mine the countries resources....oligarch's find a way to pit one part of the democratic revolution against the other (liberals vs conservatives) and the status quo is maintained.
They're running the *same playbook* in Syria and the American media is too dumb to see it
advised one undercover agent posing as the brother of a violent Mexican drug trafficker to withhold details during a polygraph for a Customs and Border Protection job, prosecutors said.
Which is a crime.
allegedly!
seriously though, point taken...I did read that section but I interpreted it in the context of the narrative the endigtment tries to weave. there is another side to the story for sure...
the intention to use what he taught to commit a crime.
not quite...it was a sting operation the FBI set up...they posed as people who were guilty admittedly who were looking for 'help passing' the polygraph.
see, there is no way to teach someone to 'pass' the polygraph because it's impossible to pass OR fail an innacurate, non-scientific test.
essentially this guy has a polygraph, and hooks you up to it and lets you see it work...
they can teach you to control your reactions and how to notice 'control questions' but that still isn't 'passing' or 'failing' as everything is still up to *the interpretation of the polygrapher*
polygraph results are never shown, because they are useless data and showing it in court would expose that
polygrapher interpretation is the last element in the equation...and that takes something that *was* pseudoscience at best and puts it entirely in the fiction section...
if It was my daughter...and they caught a guy who they think raped her, and he was dumb enough to get tricked by the polygraph to admit his guilt...i'd say give it to him...
I say the polygraph should be used in extreme interrogation situations only...situations where investigators have a good reason to believe the suspect is dumb enough to get fooled by the polygraph
he documents he leaked show that the NSA flat out lied to Congress
show me
show me at least an article that has quotations from the leaked documents and the NSA testimony
I am not defending the NSA...but i see 'the NSA lied' all over but very little discussion of the actual evidence
The NSA probably just was evasive...don't link me to an NSA official dodging a question and call it a 'lie'...the NSA could have good reason not to ansewr an intel question in open congress....they have the right to some stuff questioned by the congressmen only
but I'm willing to look...so show me this proof of the NSA lying to congress that will justify Snowden's behavior.
It states specifically that **ALL CALLS ARE PROCESSED** not just calls to certain groups or overseas as you stated.
It was reproted nationally in 2006 and before...we knew before...
Ron Wyden, Senator from Oregon was making noise about it in the Senate before Snowden's revealations.
The contention that 'we knew but we didn't **know** until Snowden' is factually wrong.
WE KNEW ALL WE NEEDED SINCE THE PATRIOT ACT...and several disclosures since then...getting headlines is nothing more than a decision by a news editor
I'm not saying the NSA or CIA is good or doing right...far from it! I'm saying none of this story is as it seems, yet so many see it in black and white.
Snowden is either being manipulated or a full-on spy.
America is an advanced system of government. It demands an educated, informed public. We need to be able to see past a flurry of headlines to the facts.
Snowden is a chess piece. Whoever is working him is doing well...no one is talking about it and why...we instead argue over and over about things that we have all known and been pissed about **since the Patriot Act**
If Snowden just wanted Americans to know the operational details, this would have gone down much differently.
Why are we to believe anything that the NSA Directorate says, since time after time their statements to the public have been demonstrated to be fabrications, misdirection, and lies. What makes this proclamation from these folks any different from the rest?
why does any of my points necessetate that conclusion???
it doesn't...you can see the truth of the Snowden fiasco, see past the intrigue and illuminati crap, reach the logical conclusion I presented, and still agree with everything you said above.
you are making a false dichotomy...these thing are not mutually exclusive
the NSA/CIA/etc are only as good as WE KEEP THEM ACCOUNTABLE
us...we Americans
every system, even an anarchic system has heuristics that govern resource allocation...our American system allows alot of freedom for us....
since the Patriot Act's passage, we have abdicated that power...
Patriot Act this shit has been going on since then and WE ALL HAVE KNOWN
Snowden didn't need to wreck his life to push the discussion forward
those are the people who decide what articles get assigned and what don't, which journalist does what story, how long the story will be, the budget (if it has one), and *they write the headline* except at a few papers
you said this:
The evidence that Snowden's leak was valuable is on the front pages every day. Before Snowden, the NSA was in the news once or twice a year, buried in newspapers. After Snowden, the NSA is in the news almost every day.
So because there were headlines, that means what he did is justified?
If that's true, then news editors (which have been laid off in numbers) and the bosses of the editors (publishers, owners, advertisers) are the defining operational factor in what is 'right' and 'wrong' for you...which isn't a tenable position.
Just because news people are more tech-savvy, or their editors want news to report that makes Obama look bad, or because there are more privacy advoates in the newsroom....**whatever**
That does not justify what Snowden did at all.
In America, if the Patriot Act gets passed...it is up to The People to protest until it is gone...
The people were informed about the Patriot Act....ever since then people have been screaming their fool heads off about privacy!
Ever since the Patriot Act the American people have been under this...to make Snowden's actions somehow necessary to have a 'national conversation' about privacy is incorrect
you have no evidence that Snowden had to steal documents, leak them publicly, run all over the world in order for news editors to put stories about privacy at the top of hte headlines
We can see why in this quotation from TFA which you mentioned:
This is why you don't hire brilliant people for jobs like this. You hire smart people. Brilliant people get you in trouble.
This is irrational and IMHO just plain ignorant.
How could you reach such a non-sensical conclusion? It requires a misunderstanding of both the technical difficulty of the tasks Snowden accomplished *and* an Asperger-level understanding of what motivates humans to perform.
The error: Interpreting Snowden's behavior as something 'difficult'...
What Snowden did was, on a technical level, something most people at or above his paygrade in IT could do. It is something **some** of us here on/. could do with little effort.
Snowden isn't some code-cracking wizard. Most people on/. could spoof users (or just steal login info) with some work.
Hopping a fence to get to a private pool is not 'innovative' or 'brilliant' thinking...that's all Snowden did.
It's not like he's DVD John....
Second, Snowden's info was *not new information*
We all knew since the PATRIOT ACT that the govt could do this...Bush renewed a domestic spying order to the NSA every 45 days after 9/11.
"NSA has massive database of American's phone calls"is the headline
So, Snowden is either *a full on spy for Russia/global Oligarchs* or *being duped into releasing info by the same*
He's not a hero, he's not a whistleblower, he's a misguided dupe that got taken advantage of, at best...
I've written this before, with links just like now...if you want to disagree, if you want to claim Snowden *did* release valuable information and not just technical details for things we already knew existed...you have to show evidence.
Snowden's info was of no use...and we didn't need any of this to have a "national conversation about privacy"
hundreds of thousands of Americans vehemently do activism to guard our privacy...these are every day people...we've been active since 9/11 and the Patriot Act and before...
when coupled with their AI (like this one which can take exams), can become, if the Japanese wish to, a formidable force of war bots
I've written code. I haven't worked directly on an AI project, but I've been around them in academia.
The coding (and 'AI' I guess you could say) and software for taking some kind of entrance exam and differentiating targets and choosing which to kill on a battlefield are two separate things.
You're in LA LA land...as in L.A....Los Angeles...Hollywood to be exact...you're theory is not very plausible
Sure, governments do weapons research and call it toy research or whathave you...maybe you're onto something with the Aibo robot dog...
I think the whole 'let's fear AI' thing is misplaced (there are legit issues...keeping humans in the loop for kill shots on drones for example)...it's the humans who are in control of the technology we need to keep accountable.
we have everyone and their grandmother trying to emulate the once great king of consumer tech (long live the king!) with dramatic unveiling ceremonies that remind one more of a pop concert than a product release
reminds me of how the Jobs film in theaters now starts off...it's this triumphant scene, just as you describe, where Jobs' introduces an 'industry changer'...it's the iPod
NO! NO you idiots! I want to scream...
the iTunes' store did indeed change the industry...the iPod was just big shiny.mp3 player...it was Jobs's ability to *convince the RIAA* to license the music for digital sale!!!
that was an innovation of **MARKETING**
see? I agree with you...
but you're still missing something I think...
The real legacy of Steve Jobs was to engender feelings of inadequacy in a whole generation of tech bosses
IMHO that is on the tech bosses...Jobs was the real deal...people **HATE** how unusable products like Windows are...they hate it! Jobs was a *marketer* with tech background who had the egoism and hard-headedness to demand the user be the top of the design equation
the speeches matter **in the right moment**....like I said, I hate TED talks...a mile wide and an inch deep...
however, hype may win the battle but not the war...every Jobs needs a Woz...or is it the reverse?
People that are good at appearances rule in the business community
I agree, but something just seems off...they rule *now* but their tactics assure their eventual failure (re: microsoft)
maybe:
People that are good at appearances ruin the business community
i've seen the cycle over and over...the predatory, almost colonial capitalist playbook...like how the major labels glommed onto Seattle music scene in the 90s
there is no structural reason why the, say, shoe industry has to be dominated by Nike...there's no technical barrier to competing with Nike...it's all externalities...global supply chain, multi-year licensing deals with institutions, investors...none of which has anything to do with physically making a better shoe
all Nike's shoes could be made in the US from recycled material and the company would still profit...technologically we are there...we could do it
I guess it's about perspective, I *expect* businesses to make the smart decision, the long-term, sustainable choice...
when a business does as you say, become a mishmash of flash buzzwords, & bullshit...i don't see an invitable cycle...I see a preventable tragedy
Slashdot Mirror
so what?
true or false, that statement disproves *nothing* I've said...
there's no law saying that every failing company in Finland must hire ignorant Machiavellian former Microsofties who will slash and burn a century old company...you're way off!
so...no shit Sherlock, when a company is failing (as Nokia was pre-Elop) you can *always* say of that company, "X has no plan...X has no future"
if it was otherwise, the **company wouldn't be failing**
a flagging company is an everyday occurance in the business world...companies go through cycles...but they maintain a minimum of existence and weather storms!
just because a company is 'failing' does not mean they need to hire an unethical *corporate raider* who will suck your company dry then sell it out to a bigger company he used to work for...
then he goes to work for that company
no way man
I agree with your superficial point...who would have thunk it indeed
However, I think it is still a distinction without a difference, one that only causes more confusion.
You and I know what 'documentation' in the computing sense means, but it's not a logical concept for a non-techie.
'documentation' in computing can be as simple as the coder showing his/her work and making a formal log of changes and bug reports/fixes
however, and here is where the problem happens...what constitutes 'sufficient documentation' for a coder is *not* sufficient for a user!
the problem is, that to bridge the gap, most programmers (who are not at all schooled in education theory & by nature tend anti-social) must create some sort of 'document' beyond the 'documentation' for the end user
sometimes this takes the form a 'tutorial'
a 'tutorial' is not full instructions...it is a real-time step-by step *demonstration* which may have supplimentary material that is actually instructions
ex: I can make a video with the steps to start a car, put it in gear and how the brake and throttle work...a person, with *nothing* else but that video and factory plans of the car *could* learn to use it...but calling a basic video and factory plans 'instrucitons' is insulting!
'documentation' can be helpful
'tutorials' can be helpful
'help' menus can be helpful
even so, its not a full user manual that an end user in other industries would expect
the computing industry has decades of work in this area I fear...so many have gotten used to doing it a bad way
I like seeing this alot:
That's it in a thesis statement.
What does 'documentation' or a 'user manual' that **teaches** not dumps random data actually look like???
Complexity is the problem, and it causes blurred lines in areas that in a simpler technical area (with less uncertainty), say auto repair, would not be uncertain.
Computer programs, languages, API's, etc are insanely complex compared to a radio or engine. The parameters and variables are way off the scale in comparison.
Another way to say it is, even on the 'strict' end, in computing there are too many ways to do everything.
A second problem is time. Specifically time in relation to the development cycle.
A manual for a '68 Mustang will always be accurate and usable as long as '68 Mustangs exist.
A complete guide to HTML, CSS, and Dreamweaver...well that can become obsolete in 2 years b/c of changes in the industry. What good is a tome on CSS 2 when CSS 3 becomes standard? It filters down through the whole development stack.
1. Complexity
2. Time
These things cause making a proper 'user manual' that teaches the user like the best user manuals or instructions for other things we've seen.
That's the thing, us tech-minded people know what a good 'user manual' or 'FAQ' or 'help page' looks like when we see it.
The challenge for developers is to integrate educational concepts to mitigate the challenges of the complexity and speed of the industry provide.
We need teachers who can code...we need *women* who can code...
To get that, we need to learn to admit when we *don't know* exactly what we are doing and fess up to the fact that much of computer developmenet these days is done by trial and error!
I don't like it, but we have to accept it to change a whole industry.
it's so obvious now, looking at GP's info on Elop's resume...
so it's all just a bunch of insider trading...
I see alot of commenters gaming out who did what and when and why Nokia failed and Microsoft wasn't 'evil' but made a mistake and on and on...
This is not about sharp, highly technical yet well rounded businesspeople on a board of a company or in a product development team trying to make the best widget for their users...
This is about rich people gaming a system of commerce for their own personal short term gain...it's not 'business' it's Machiavellian bullshit.
Sure, b/c this predatory capitalism makes profits and therefore makes headlines many equate their profit with success...but it is not so...
It's robbery...legal? most likely yes...but in the end it is a failing way to do business and proceed through life
seriously, I genuinely wish them well, but I don't see Jolla competing in Nokia's territory.
here's an interview with one of their founders: http://www.ossimantylahti.com/2012/07/interview-of-jussi-hurmola-jolla-mobiles-managing-director/
From that interview:
Waste of time. Android is there. I know Meego exists and theoretically someone here on /. will make a case that it's better but that's in theory land. In the business world, Android is the only viable competitor to iOS.
It'll do more than waste time...it will drain R&D and kill the project.
Jolla, and any other company wanting to do "mobile" should make apps, work on *one* device that fills a gap in the market perfectly and sustainably, and go from there.
making your own OS isn't some kind of badge or right of passage for a 'mobile' company...its just about what is best for your users at that time!
My idea for a device is an iPhone 5 clone that can run iOS or Android, run on any carrier, has a USB and removable memory, and can receive over-the-air radio and TV!
IMHO the 'smartphone' market is about fully 'plateaued' now...it's like the TV market...it's so advanced the product differentiation is small...perfect time for a startup to enter!
I read a thinly-veiled defense of M$ in your tl;dr post...let's address this:
they weren't doing *well* but that doesn't mean they were going to crash and burn...it's practically Finland's official technology provider...in business for almost 150 years...lots of deep business relationships in Europe
only a dumb, short-sighted (typical) American businessman would look at Nokia and think "ah they're toast"...
Nokia could have switched to Android instead of Widoze.
Sure, they'd have taken a loss to switch to Android, but it was a loss no matter which OS they migrated to!!! Nokia's userbase would have weathered the change as they have for decades of new tech.
M$ jobbed Nokia and the entire country of Finland. The end.
It's kind of like hearing a neighbor couple argue...you can't help but listen but you don't approve of it in any way...that's how I view M$'s raping and pillaging of Nokia. I don't agree with it, I think it is wrong, but AFAIK it wasn't *technically* illegal...so lesson learned I guess?
That's it...that's the lesson: STAY AWAY FROM MICROSOFT or anyone who does business in their manner.
You say 'collectivist' like its a term as familiar and concrete as say 'nazi'...
Only people who already agree with you share the same heavy emotional and psychological satisfaction from scapegoating 'collectivists'
So, let's hear it...what is a 'collectivist'?
Troll answers will get ignored...let's see a real, consistently applicable definition...one that has some grounding in the actual meaning of the word and use in academia would help immensely...
So how do you define 'collectivist'?
man...you're way off...
"Army's new robot so realistic it gets attacked by hawks"
see for yourself: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/6/armys-new-robotic-bird-drone-so-realistic-it-gets-/
I call bullshit on you and everyone mocking these people.
They don't know what they are looking at for sure until they capture it...or what this article calls 'detaining'...it is obvious the news writers are mocking them and trying to use reverse propaganda.
Just reading the *two* articles I presented, that is evidence enough to any reasonable person that this is not dumb or paranoid just good sense.
Sure, these guys don't have our education! But they know implicitly where things are headed...
The Army admits to having very lifelike bird-drones...that's it
I hate these articles...the headlines are insulting and are subtly racist IMHO...
Headline should read: "Haha look at these Egyptian rubes! These camel jockeys don't understand technology and that is humorous."
But it is absolutely within the realm of possibility for someone to use a live bird for surveillance, especially when you look at what the Israelis are developing right in the open.
The technical ability and implicit demand are there for a live bird/spy drone.
I think anyone who laughs at these Egyptians is the true idiot.
These Egyptians may not have the technical schooling we do, but they appear to understand what their enemy is moving towards.
I hate that we mock them for this!
thank you
partisans in America are too dumb to see this...critics in America look at Egypt and wonder, "How can we make this Obama's fault"
Egyptians, Syrians, Libyans, etc **all** know exactly what they are fighting FOR and who they are fighting AGAINST
4
American's are being duped by a media too dumb to know when the military/illuminati complex is leading them around by the nose...
Egypt and Syria now are just like Iran in 1979...
Democratic uprising to topple an Aristocrat dictator who was installed by foreign Oligarch's to mine the countries resources....oligarch's find a way to pit one part of the democratic revolution against the other (liberals vs conservatives) and the status quo is maintained.
They're running the *same playbook* in Syria and the American media is too dumb to see it
haha "not quite"
allegedly!
seriously though, point taken...I did read that section but I interpreted it in the context of the narrative the endigtment tries to weave. there is another side to the story for sure...
not quite...it was a sting operation the FBI set up...they posed as people who were guilty admittedly who were looking for 'help passing' the polygraph.
see, there is no way to teach someone to 'pass' the polygraph because it's impossible to pass OR fail an innacurate, non-scientific test.
essentially this guy has a polygraph, and hooks you up to it and lets you see it work...
they can teach you to control your reactions and how to notice 'control questions' but that still isn't 'passing' or 'failing' as everything is still up to *the interpretation of the polygrapher*
polygraph results are never shown, because they are useless data and showing it in court would expose that
polygrapher interpretation is the last element in the equation...and that takes something that *was* pseudoscience at best and puts it entirely in the fiction section...
if It was my daughter...and they caught a guy who they think raped her, and he was dumb enough to get tricked by the polygraph to admit his guilt...i'd say give it to him...
I say the polygraph should be used in extreme interrogation situations only...situations where investigators have a good reason to believe the suspect is dumb enough to get fooled by the polygraph
they are out there but not many...
Absolutely it does. He is the Chief Executive of the Executive Branch.
The Attorney General, the Fed's top prosecutor, is chosen by and answers to Obama.
It is not like an Inspector General of say, the State Dept...they are more independent.
This policy is a directive that is **within prosecutorial discretion**
Prosecutorial discretion.
Shame on you and the mods who voted you up...you know better....bad stoner!
show me
show me at least an article that has quotations from the leaked documents and the NSA testimony
I am not defending the NSA...but i see 'the NSA lied' all over but very little discussion of the actual evidence
The NSA probably just was evasive...don't link me to an NSA official dodging a question and call it a 'lie'...the NSA could have good reason not to ansewr an intel question in open congress....they have the right to some stuff questioned by the congressmen only
but I'm willing to look...so show me this proof of the NSA lying to congress that will justify Snowden's behavior.
lets see it
you must not be an American
see, over here, since Obama got elected the minority party (Republicans) have acted in unison to block *everthing Obama does*...
American has three branches of government and they all check and balance each other's power.
Obama needs Congressional approval to do as you say, and they have consistently voted *even against their own laws* in order to oppose Obama
In America, this level of partisanship is not common.
Obama could not, IN ANY WAY...just make a law for this to go away.
thanks for your friendly tone, but you are factually wrong...it's understandable you missed this in my orignal post, b/c I didn't tag it properly
this is from 2006
"NSA has massive database on American's phone calls"
http://yahoo.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm
It states specifically that **ALL CALLS ARE PROCESSED** not just calls to certain groups or overseas as you stated.
It was reproted nationally in 2006 and before...we knew before...
Ron Wyden, Senator from Oregon was making noise about it in the Senate before Snowden's revealations.
The contention that 'we knew but we didn't **know** until Snowden' is factually wrong.
WE KNEW ALL WE NEEDED SINCE THE PATRIOT ACT...and several disclosures since then...getting headlines is nothing more than a decision by a news editor
I'm not saying the NSA or CIA is good or doing right...far from it! I'm saying none of this story is as it seems, yet so many see it in black and white.
Snowden is either being manipulated or a full-on spy.
America is an advanced system of government. It demands an educated, informed public. We need to be able to see past a flurry of headlines to the facts.
Snowden is a chess piece. Whoever is working him is doing well...no one is talking about it and why...we instead argue over and over about things that we have all known and been pissed about **since the Patriot Act**
If Snowden just wanted Americans to know the operational details, this would have gone down much differently.
why does any of my points necessetate that conclusion???
it doesn't...you can see the truth of the Snowden fiasco, see past the intrigue and illuminati crap, reach the logical conclusion I presented, and still agree with everything you said above.
you are making a false dichotomy...these thing are not mutually exclusive
the NSA/CIA/etc are only as good as WE KEEP THEM ACCOUNTABLE
us...we Americans
every system, even an anarchic system has heuristics that govern resource allocation...our American system allows alot of freedom for us....
since the Patriot Act's passage, we have abdicated that power...
Patriot Act this shit has been going on since then and WE ALL HAVE KNOWN
Snowden didn't need to wreck his life to push the discussion forward
then release the documents anonymously!
an anonymous leak, like the Pentagon Papers, would have allowed him to keep his awesome job and hot Russian girlfriend
no no, he had to have his face on it...maybe Glenn Greenwald pressured him to release his name, who knows...
what is certain is the US has a very well defined way to release info through the press under the 1st Amendment that would keep him legal
the journalist can be jailed for a time, but not charged criminally
it doesn't add up...what he released and how he did it...this is more than it appears and he is not a hero
he's a self-deluded victim at best
so for you it is all about newspaper editors???
those are the people who decide what articles get assigned and what don't, which journalist does what story, how long the story will be, the budget (if it has one), and *they write the headline* except at a few papers
you said this:
So because there were headlines, that means what he did is justified?
If that's true, then news editors (which have been laid off in numbers) and the bosses of the editors (publishers, owners, advertisers) are the defining operational factor in what is 'right' and 'wrong' for you...which isn't a tenable position.
Just because news people are more tech-savvy, or their editors want news to report that makes Obama look bad, or because there are more privacy advoates in the newsroom....**whatever**
That does not justify what Snowden did at all.
In America, if the Patriot Act gets passed...it is up to The People to protest until it is gone...
The people were informed about the Patriot Act....ever since then people have been screaming their fool heads off about privacy!
Ever since the Patriot Act the American people have been under this...to make Snowden's actions somehow necessary to have a 'national conversation' about privacy is incorrect
you have no evidence that Snowden had to steal documents, leak them publicly, run all over the world in order for news editors to put stories about privacy at the top of hte headlines
you are justifying after the fact
http://yahoo.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm
that's it
sorry again...gah I need to go back to typing school
Here's the link missing from my comment above
"NSA has massive database of American's phone calls"
even though most of us on /. could do what Snowden did, apparently I can't close a tag....my bad
So much wrong with all of this...
We can see why in this quotation from TFA which you mentioned:
This is irrational and IMHO just plain ignorant.
How could you reach such a non-sensical conclusion? It requires a misunderstanding of both the technical difficulty of the tasks Snowden accomplished *and* an Asperger-level understanding of what motivates humans to perform.
The error: Interpreting Snowden's behavior as something 'difficult'...
What Snowden did was, on a technical level, something most people at or above his paygrade in IT could do. It is something **some** of us here on /. could do with little effort.
Snowden isn't some code-cracking wizard. Most people on /. could spoof users (or just steal login info) with some work.
Hopping a fence to get to a private pool is not 'innovative' or 'brilliant' thinking...that's all Snowden did.
It's not like he's DVD John....
Second, Snowden's info was *not new information*
We all knew since the PATRIOT ACT that the govt could do this...Bush renewed a domestic spying order to the NSA every 45 days after 9/11.
"NSA has massive database of American's phone calls"is the headline
So, Snowden is either *a full on spy for Russia/global Oligarchs* or *being duped into releasing info by the same*
He's not a hero, he's not a whistleblower, he's a misguided dupe that got taken advantage of, at best...
I've written this before, with links just like now...if you want to disagree, if you want to claim Snowden *did* release valuable information and not just technical details for things we already knew existed...you have to show evidence.
Snowden's info was of no use...and we didn't need any of this to have a "national conversation about privacy"
hundreds of thousands of Americans vehemently do activism to guard our privacy...these are every day people...we've been active since 9/11 and the Patriot Act and before...
I've written code. I haven't worked directly on an AI project, but I've been around them in academia.
The coding (and 'AI' I guess you could say) and software for taking some kind of entrance exam and differentiating targets and choosing which to kill on a battlefield are two separate things.
You're in LA LA land...as in L.A....Los Angeles...Hollywood to be exact...you're theory is not very plausible
Sure, governments do weapons research and call it toy research or whathave you...maybe you're onto something with the Aibo robot dog...
But the Israelis and others just develop this shit right in the open...probably with an eye towards selling it
I think the whole 'let's fear AI' thing is misplaced (there are legit issues...keeping humans in the loop for kill shots on drones for example)...it's the humans who are in control of the technology we need to keep accountable.
I hate TED talks...just wanted to say that...
reminds me of how the Jobs film in theaters now starts off...it's this triumphant scene, just as you describe, where Jobs' introduces an 'industry changer'...it's the iPod
NO! NO you idiots! I want to scream...
the iTunes' store did indeed change the industry...the iPod was just big shiny .mp3 player...it was Jobs's ability to *convince the RIAA* to license the music for digital sale!!!
that was an innovation of **MARKETING**
see? I agree with you...
but you're still missing something I think...
IMHO that is on the tech bosses...Jobs was the real deal...people **HATE** how unusable products like Windows are...they hate it! Jobs was a *marketer* with tech background who had the egoism and hard-headedness to demand the user be the top of the design equation
the speeches matter **in the right moment**....like I said, I hate TED talks...a mile wide and an inch deep...
however, hype may win the battle but not the war...every Jobs needs a Woz...or is it the reverse?
People that are good at appearances rule in the business community
I agree, but something just seems off...they rule *now* but their tactics assure their eventual failure (re: microsoft)
maybe:
People that are good at appearances ruin the business community
i've seen the cycle over and over...the predatory, almost colonial capitalist playbook...like how the major labels glommed onto Seattle music scene in the 90s
there is no structural reason why the, say, shoe industry has to be dominated by Nike...there's no technical barrier to competing with Nike...it's all externalities...global supply chain, multi-year licensing deals with institutions, investors...none of which has anything to do with physically making a better shoe
all Nike's shoes could be made in the US from recycled material and the company would still profit...technologically we are there...we could do it
I guess it's about perspective, I *expect* businesses to make the smart decision, the long-term, sustainable choice...
when a business does as you say, become a mishmash of flash buzzwords, & bullshit...i don't see an invitable cycle...I see a preventable tragedy