Legislating morality is a dangerous game that leads down the path the theocracy, but that doesn't mean that ALL PEOPLE don't have a moral responsibility. Athletes, musicians, and game developers are not exceptions to that rule. Each of us has an inherent moral and biological obligation to be a good person, do right, obey the law, respect others, and serve as an example.
The question should therefore not be "do they *HAVE* a moral responsibility" but rather "How should that moral responsibility influence their actions?" Violence and sex have become a crutch upon which developers have leaned when they are too lazy or uncreative to come up with a compelling story. Perhaps redirecting efforts away from realistic blood spatters towards strong narrative is one way that a moral responsibility can influence a developer. I would suggest that the game rating system used by the ESRB is a good start. Parents are ultimately the ones responsible for the moral development of their children, and need a concise way to know what they are getting.
The consequences of shrugging off this moral responsibility are severe. Chuck D would argue that the Black Community in America is in the position that it is in because of the lack of moral responsibility of those in the media spotlight. The individuals that -visibly- got ahead financially did so by being sleazy. This has been glamorized by popular culture and compunded by the fact that you CAN in fact make a lot of money if you are a bad person.
Potato chips, like everything else have changed dramatically over the years, and the CEOs of Utz and Intel do *about* the same thing. CEOs are not innovators, they are managers.
They communicate between owners (shareholders) and staff. They work to set financial goals and analyze why they did or did not meet them. They network with other CEOs, bankers, politicians, etc. They talk to the tech people and ask what they need and then try to get it for them.
Besides, Monosodium glutamate, high-fructose corn syrup and yellow #5 weren't even available in 1905.
A modern CEO of a computer company does not need to know how to operate a computer, they need to know how to operate a business. It doesn't matter if you are selling computer chips or potato chips, all businesses are run *about* the same way. The skills that a non-tech CEO would need are an open mind willing to listen to input from all levels, and the ability to surround themselves with good people that know the tech part.
The United Nations isn't quite what some people think it is. It's not the "world government" that evil geniuses demand $1,000,000 dollars from before they use their doomsday weapons. It is a forum of ambassadors that get together and talk about things. They don't make laws. The only power they have is the ability to pass resolutions that essentially have no legal standing in any country in the world. International treaties are sometimes facilitated by the UN, but they are still agreements between sovereign nations. The ITU is the same thing, a forum where industries get together to set standards.
Putting ICANN under the UN is a VERY bad idea, as they would have no ability to resolve disputes with any legal validity. A unilaterally authority is better than none.
I'm no government apologist, but how long do you think it would take you to integrate pieces of 100's of agencies (DHS) with thousands of custom and COTS applications on every platform imaginable into a brand new superagency? They can't even get office space together, how can they be expected to have their infosec together? When mission continuity is your only priority, and your budget is earmarked for more important things, you lose a lot of your options.
The entire point of GTA is that you get to be a predator without regards to the lives of the relatively peaceful citizens around you. So now you go from predator amongst sheep to predator amongst predators, and the dynamic changes entirely. You'll have snipers on every rooftop, a couple air-wars, one guy with a tank and streets that resemble the LA riots with serious military hardware. It'll be REALLY fun for about 10 minutes.
Perhaps a bit off-topic, but if software CAN'T be patented, then couldn't one LEGALLY take that unpatented open source code and make a commercial product out of it, thus negating the GPL? (IANAL, and it shows)
You make a great point. I am often accused of being a Microsoft lover, but in reality I couldn't care less what OS I use so long as my applications run well.
The issue arises when some zealotous penguinite starts yapping their mouth off making unsupported claims about how great open source is and how we should ditch everything MS. I often end up having to knock these people off their milk-crates with a bucket of cold, hard reality. Again, not anti-open source, just realistic.
This is a serious behavioral problem that the OS community needs to address. Open Source has gone as far as it can as a novelty act, and if it wants to make any REAL headway, the immature zealotry has be substituted for thoughtful realistic competitiveness.
Something needs to be done with the names too. They sound like toys. Just as an example, if you were to rename firefox to something sounding corporate, professional and "boring" you would probably double the rate of acceptance and bring some OEMs on board.
That's like saying that one cell-tower can cover a whole downtown area. While technically true, potential concurrent users in any major metro area would demand significant and overlapping and redundant coverage. To cover 90% of the US population you are talking about only urban areas, magnifying the problem.
This figure also doesn't include spectrum licensing. Any telecom could swing 3 Bil if that were the true costs.
Read more and tell me what you think I'm not an expert in this field, but these experiments look quite dangerous to me in the long term, especially if they become widespread.
I think you're an alarmist that has no concept of how science, agriculture, or genetics works. Go protest something hippy!
To mix this with the strategy of using one strong enemy against another is brilliance!
Why didn't I think of pitting my level 19 HIV against a mere level 16 cancer? I mean it has a level 7 interferon that gets +3 against malignant tumors and everything! Now if only I could get my tuberculosis to do battle with that cowardly gonnorhhea...
Ok, so by some metric we determine that linux is 2x as secure as windows. Well windows systems are down more than half the time, and thus less vulnerable to compromise.
Humor aside, counting patches is about as good of a way to determine security as counting car crashes to determine what is the safest car.
that technology will not solve ALL our problems. Nobody doubts that technological advances like penicillin and electric power have made our lives better and solved many problems for us, but at a base level, our global social problems are political and ideological, not technical. (Nobody starves because there is too little food)
In the same vein, weapons wielded in defense now serve as tools of oppression the world over. This is the overarching point that I get from BG.
As for water, where do you propose getting that hydrogen from, flying through a star's photosphere? I suppose if they can take a nuke or two the ship could probably handle it, but it seems like a lot of effort when you can just go and dig it up.
The windows GUI requires *minimal* resources, and it's a huge selling point for them. A windows server can be (and often is) administered by people with no real experience with windows beyond the desktop. Simple administration is part of what keeps MS's TCO "low" (heavy sarcasm, but you get my drift)
Restricting Sci-fi to the intellectual depth of a four-year-old has been detrimental to the genre for years. Space-dogfights and fleet battles are sometimes fun to watch, but are more suited to a 2-hour movie than a series. It gets old real quick.
Rarely in a sci-fi context does anybody delve deeply into major questions of life, but what good is technology if it can't help us answer any of the fundamental questions of humanity? BG is a great example of how tecchnology is not going to provide some deus-ex-machina solution to our problems.
Lets not pretend that religion is a new topic in Sci-Fi. Take for example Heinlein's classic "Stranger in a Strange Land" and Herbert's "Dune"
Every time I see a new Microsoft product, I say to myself, "Wow, good luck topping this" but sure enough the next year there is always a new version with over 500 improvements and a cleaner, more streamlined interface. How does Microsoft continuously make their already great products better and better?
What do you see as being "wrong" with linux on the desktop? Are the problems inherent to the licensing regime or is it a technical issue? Is it something like the fragmented environment? (kde v. gnome) Is it poor applications? Is it an underdeveloped user experience? Lack of commercial software development? I have a feeling that your insight on this topic would be very interesting to many in this community.
You have to go about this in a multi-layered system.
Tier 1: Family - should always be free, you decide who is family
Tier 1.5: Hot Girls - If you have a legitimate chance of scoring, then see tier 1. If no score opportunity exists then see tier 2
Tier 2: Close friends/extended family/less hot girls - Barter for services/beer/sex/whatever, and you keep old hardware if upgrading
Tier 3: Acquaintances/friend of friend - Charge by type of car they drive, $10/hr per $10k value of their car NEW, rounded down. (i.e. VW touraeg @ $42k = $40/hr)
Tier 4: Random Donkeys - If you want the money, charge Tier 3 rate x1.5
why do they call US for help. When peoples cars break, they -generally- take them to a licensed mechanic and pay out the rear to get them fixed.
So why do they call us, a ragtag group of neighbors, friends, and relatives to fix their computers instead of having them professionally serviced by computer repairmen? Computers just aren't important enough to people to justify spending the time or money to do right.
They don't care
Sounds like too easy of an answer, but for non-tech savvy people, a computer is just a tool for email, web, etc. If computers were a vital part of people's lives, they might care. Corporations can pay administrators to keep their computers clean, but joe twelvepack doesn't use his computer for anything that he can't do without. QED.
Chinese delagate: (in chinese) "China says we are happy to contribute to world development"
Taiwanese interpreter: (in english) "we unholy communist dogs will kill you all"
The reason that interpreters are so highly paid is because they are vetted professionals that will not lose anything in translation. Their livelihood is dependant on their integrity.
if you THINK too hard...you'll never guess
Perhaps it's thought controlled?
Even if it's not reading your mind, it could be bioreactive. Like the IBM blueeyes, combined with a head tracker, microphone, and pule sensor in the controller and electro-shock pads on your body for feedback.
Is the track record of custom built software really that bad?"
Custom software projects fail constantly because the developers are morons or lazy scam-artists, the requirements aren't specific, and the company doesn't realize that a COTS solution exists. Millions of employees could be replaced with good custom software, saving businesses BILLIONS, but only if they build it smart, which doesn't often happen.
The federal government works on amazingly diverse and exciting software development projects, and they are looking for people EXACTLY like you. You can make a lot more than normal GS-payscale people, and get to work on incredibly interesting and unique projects. I'm sure that Military and intelligence agencies do some REALLY neat stuff, and you could be a part of it. You also get a real feeling of serving your country. The benefits are REALLY good, and if you plan right, you can make out quite well in retirement.
Slashdot Mirror
The question should therefore not be "do they *HAVE* a moral responsibility" but rather "How should that moral responsibility influence their actions?" Violence and sex have become a crutch upon which developers have leaned when they are too lazy or uncreative to come up with a compelling story. Perhaps redirecting efforts away from realistic blood spatters towards strong narrative is one way that a moral responsibility can influence a developer. I would suggest that the game rating system used by the ESRB is a good start. Parents are ultimately the ones responsible for the moral development of their children, and need a concise way to know what they are getting.
The consequences of shrugging off this moral responsibility are severe. Chuck D would argue that the Black Community in America is in the position that it is in because of the lack of moral responsibility of those in the media spotlight. The individuals that -visibly- got ahead financially did so by being sleazy. This has been glamorized by popular culture and compunded by the fact that you CAN in fact make a lot of money if you are a bad person.
They communicate between owners (shareholders) and staff. They work to set financial goals and analyze why they did or did not meet them. They network with other CEOs, bankers, politicians, etc. They talk to the tech people and ask what they need and then try to get it for them.
Besides, Monosodium glutamate, high-fructose corn syrup and yellow #5 weren't even available in 1905.
A modern CEO of a computer company does not need to know how to operate a computer, they need to know how to operate a business. It doesn't matter if you are selling computer chips or potato chips, all businesses are run *about* the same way. The skills that a non-tech CEO would need are an open mind willing to listen to input from all levels, and the ability to surround themselves with good people that know the tech part.
Putting ICANN under the UN is a VERY bad idea, as they would have no ability to resolve disputes with any legal validity. A unilaterally authority is better than none.
Stick to analog.
I'm no government apologist, but how long do you think it would take you to integrate pieces of 100's of agencies (DHS) with thousands of custom and COTS applications on every platform imaginable into a brand new superagency? They can't even get office space together, how can they be expected to have their infosec together? When mission continuity is your only priority, and your budget is earmarked for more important things, you lose a lot of your options.
The entire point of GTA is that you get to be a predator without regards to the lives of the relatively peaceful citizens around you. So now you go from predator amongst sheep to predator amongst predators, and the dynamic changes entirely. You'll have snipers on every rooftop, a couple air-wars, one guy with a tank and streets that resemble the LA riots with serious military hardware. It'll be REALLY fun for about 10 minutes.
Perhaps a bit off-topic, but if software CAN'T be patented, then couldn't one LEGALLY take that unpatented open source code and make a commercial product out of it, thus negating the GPL? (IANAL, and it shows)
The issue arises when some zealotous penguinite starts yapping their mouth off making unsupported claims about how great open source is and how we should ditch everything MS. I often end up having to knock these people off their milk-crates with a bucket of cold, hard reality. Again, not anti-open source, just realistic.
This is a serious behavioral problem that the OS community needs to address. Open Source has gone as far as it can as a novelty act, and if it wants to make any REAL headway, the immature zealotry has be substituted for thoughtful realistic competitiveness.
Something needs to be done with the names too. They sound like toys.
Just as an example, if you were to rename firefox to something sounding corporate, professional and "boring" you would probably double the rate of acceptance and bring some OEMs on board.
This figure also doesn't include spectrum licensing. Any telecom could swing 3 Bil if that were the true costs.
I'm not an expert in this field, but these experiments look quite dangerous to me in the long term, especially if they become widespread.
I think you're an alarmist that has no concept of how science, agriculture, or genetics works. Go protest something hippy!
Why didn't I think of pitting my level 19 HIV against a mere level 16 cancer? I mean it has a level 7 interferon that gets +3 against malignant tumors and everything! Now if only I could get my tuberculosis to do battle with that cowardly gonnorhhea...
Humor aside, counting patches is about as good of a way to determine security as counting car crashes to determine what is the safest car.
In the same vein, weapons wielded in defense now serve as tools of oppression the world over. This is the overarching point that I get from BG.
As for water, where do you propose getting that hydrogen from, flying through a star's photosphere? I suppose if they can take a nuke or two the ship could probably handle it, but it seems like a lot of effort when you can just go and dig it up.
The windows GUI requires *minimal* resources, and it's a huge selling point for them. A windows server can be (and often is) administered by people with no real experience with windows beyond the desktop. Simple administration is part of what keeps MS's TCO "low" (heavy sarcasm, but you get my drift)
Rarely in a sci-fi context does anybody delve deeply into major questions of life, but what good is technology if it can't help us answer any of the fundamental questions of humanity? BG is a great example of how tecchnology is not going to provide some deus-ex-machina solution to our problems.
Lets not pretend that religion is a new topic in Sci-Fi. Take for example Heinlein's classic "Stranger in a Strange Land" and Herbert's "Dune"
Mike Rosoft
Windows Times
What do you see as being "wrong" with linux on the desktop? Are the problems inherent to the licensing regime or is it a technical issue? Is it something like the fragmented environment? (kde v. gnome) Is it poor applications? Is it an underdeveloped user experience? Lack of commercial software development? I have a feeling that your insight on this topic would be very interesting to many in this community.
Tier 1: Family - should always be free, you decide who is family
Tier 1.5: Hot Girls - If you have a legitimate chance of scoring, then see tier 1. If no score opportunity exists then see tier 2
Tier 2: Close friends/extended family/less hot girls - Barter for services/beer/sex/whatever, and you keep old hardware if upgrading
Tier 3: Acquaintances/friend of friend - Charge by type of car they drive, $10/hr per $10k value of their car NEW, rounded down. (i.e. VW touraeg @ $42k = $40/hr)
Tier 4: Random Donkeys - If you want the money, charge Tier 3 rate x1.5
So why do they call us, a ragtag group of neighbors, friends, and relatives to fix their computers instead of having them professionally serviced by computer repairmen?
Computers just aren't important enough to people to justify spending the time or money to do right.
They don't care
Sounds like too easy of an answer, but for non-tech savvy people, a computer is just a tool for email, web, etc. If computers were a vital part of people's lives, they might care. Corporations can pay administrators to keep their computers clean, but joe twelvepack doesn't use his computer for anything that he can't do without. QED.
Taiwanese interpreter: (in english) "we unholy communist dogs will kill you all"
The reason that interpreters are so highly paid is because they are vetted professionals that will not lose anything in translation. Their livelihood is dependant on their integrity.
if you THINK too hard...you'll never guess Perhaps it's thought controlled? Even if it's not reading your mind, it could be bioreactive. Like the IBM blueeyes, combined with a head tracker, microphone, and pule sensor in the controller and electro-shock pads on your body for feedback.
Custom software projects fail constantly because the developers are morons or lazy scam-artists, the requirements aren't specific, and the company doesn't realize that a COTS solution exists. Millions of employees could be replaced with good custom software, saving businesses BILLIONS, but only if they build it smart, which doesn't often happen.
The federal government works on amazingly diverse and exciting software development projects, and they are looking for people EXACTLY like you. You can make a lot more than normal GS-payscale people, and get to work on incredibly interesting and unique projects. I'm sure that Military and intelligence agencies do some REALLY neat stuff, and you could be a part of it. You also get a real feeling of serving your country. The benefits are REALLY good, and if you plan right, you can make out quite well in retirement.