The problem is no where in your original post did you mention that article. The closest you came was mentioning "rights to privacy and free speech" but the very next sentence you stated "I can't even count how many times I've heard people say 'If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to worry about'.". Here you specifically were not talking about what you read in the article, but about what people have said personally to you since 9/11. I've heard these same things said, mostly about airport security so I used that as an example.
"In civilized society, saying 'that we cannot kill someone means we aren't free' is indeed retarded. The freedom you speak of is referred to as Anarchy, and society evolved past that long ago. If someone now says the earth is flat, I would call that argument retarded since we've moved past that thinking. In the same way I consider the 'no kill=no freedom' thought equally retarded".
Careful what you say here, because many Americans consider the "right" to kill unborn children as a freedom we all deserve. Or the right to kill criminals a state-wide freedom. The U.S. is not near as civilized as some would like to believe.
"Freedom of Speech....again you are mistaking freedoms and Anarchy. Of course you can't threaten people (that goes for any person, not just the President btw). Of course you can't lie. Of course you can't spread false accusations. In Anarchy, these actions would have the likely consequences of earning the person a beating (or worse). Since we don't want vigilante's running all over the place, we put in laws to protect against these liers"
But you can lie. Just not in certain government-decided circumstances, such as in court. And read the first admendment again, it doesn't state these "restrictions" on free speech, nor do I think they were implied.
"Our Freedoms aren't in place to allow people to go out and do/say anything they want. Our Freedoms are in place to allow people the ability to pursue a decent life"
I believe this is the same reason given by those who want to restrict free speech and privacy...
How can I base my argument on something you intended to write, but never did? You never specifically stated what privacy people are willing to give up. Random searches at airports is an example of taking away privacy rights. Do you deny this? Also, notice I said "and other such restrictions" to take into account any other rights you did not mention but intended to.
Saying we cannot legally kill someone means we aren't totally free is not "retarted", it's a perfectly fine example. The fact that you stated that it is "retarted" only strengthens my original point: we (generally) didn't complain about our lack of freedom before 9/11 because society has driven into our heads that all our restrictive laws are not actually taking away our freedom, but instead they are just common sense. Of course I don't believe someone should have the right to kill someone else, but the fact that we don't have that right is a freedom taken away from us. If you still deny this then please state reasons this time, not just say it's "retarded" without backing up your accusation.
FYI, we have never had "freedom of speech". That is another myth society has brought people up to believe. Try threatening the president and see how what "freedom of speech" does for you. Try to lie in court and see if you are protected by "freedom of speech". Try to spread false accusations about someone and watch the courts grant them the $5 million dollar suit they file against you.
Freedom of speech is actually "freedom to say anything you want... except this... and that too, oh, and don't forget about this", etc.
Don't get me wrong, I love the country I live in and I think the laws are just fine. I just laugh at people who think we have "freedom" just because it's the only freedom they've known, and then complain about this or that new law suddenly takes away our supposed "freedom".
How have they destroyed American life as we've known it exactly? How has random searches at airports and other such "restrictions" destroyed American life?
Americans have never been free. We aren't free to not pay taxes, we aren't free to murder people, we aren't free drive a car at any age or as fast as we want to, etc, etc, etc. There are literally millions of things we aren't free to do yet people don't complain about these because these restrictions have been in place our whole lives, thus it's "normal". Then a new restriction comes into play and all of the sudden it's, "Whoa, we aren't free anymore".
We never were and never will be "free". Deal with it.
I keep seeing replies of "ask them logic problems" or "ask them to come up with an algorithm to do this or that". Sure, these questions could be important for a particular job, but that has nothing to do with how well a person can program.
Questions I'd ask? This of course depends heavily on the language in question, but I'll assume C++:
1) What progamming books do you own? - This would tell me if this person truley LOVES to program and tries to learn as much as possible on his/her own, or whether it's just a job for him/her. I'd also look for well known and respected books such as Code Complete, Design Patterns, Effective C++, Modern C++ Design, Exceptional C++, etc.
2) Name some design patterns and their uses. - This would tell me not whether they know syntax (who doesn't), but whether they know how to properly architect and design large complex applications using reusable and maintainable code.
3) Ask them to explain what use STL, functors, policies, typelists, smart pointers, etc, are. - This would give me an idea on how well they know/use generic programming and code reuse.
4) Ask to see any source code he/she owns. - This has already been mentioned numerous times, but it would allow me to see whether this person can write readable code, whether they comment their code, whether they've implemented any of the items mentioned above.
5) Talk to them on a personal level. Joke around, BS. - This would allow me to actually see their personality, how well they communicate, sense of humor, whether they are easy going, etc. All important aspects for programmers and team players.
I've yet to see a company ask even two of those five questions, but I think an employer could betetr judge programmer using these than asking them "how would you reverse a linked list" or other such questions.
I live in Sylvania, Ohio, a suburb of Toledo and use that same ISP. According to the article they served 6 search warrents in Sylvania.
Geez, I sure am glad *I* decided not to uncap my modem. Wow.
Oh, and on a completely seperate note I noticed yesterday that I was downloading a file at 125 kb/s. I've never gotten above 110 kb/s before on that ISP...
I guess those few bandwidth hogs really do affect other users.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is no where in your original post did you mention that article. The closest you came was mentioning "rights to privacy and free speech" but the very next sentence you stated "I can't even count how many times I've heard people say 'If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to worry about'.". Here you specifically were not talking about what you read in the article, but about what people have said personally to you since 9/11. I've heard these same things said, mostly about airport security so I used that as an example.
"In civilized society, saying 'that we cannot kill someone means we aren't free' is indeed retarded. The freedom you speak of is referred to as Anarchy, and society evolved past that long ago. If someone now says the earth is flat, I would call that argument retarded since we've moved past that thinking. In the same way I consider the 'no kill=no freedom' thought equally retarded".
Careful what you say here, because many Americans consider the "right" to kill unborn children as a freedom we all deserve. Or the right to kill criminals a state-wide freedom. The U.S. is not near as civilized as some would like to believe.
"Freedom of Speech....again you are mistaking freedoms and Anarchy. Of course you can't threaten people (that goes for any person, not just the President btw). Of course you can't lie. Of course you can't spread false accusations. In Anarchy, these actions would have the likely consequences of earning the person a beating (or worse). Since we don't want vigilante's running all over the place, we put in laws to protect against these liers"
But you can lie. Just not in certain government-decided circumstances, such as in court. And read the first admendment again, it doesn't state these "restrictions" on free speech, nor do I think they were implied.
"Our Freedoms aren't in place to allow people to go out and do/say anything they want. Our Freedoms are in place to allow people the ability to pursue a decent life"
I believe this is the same reason given by those who want to restrict free speech and privacy...
How can I base my argument on something you intended to write, but never did? You never specifically stated what privacy people are willing to give up. Random searches at airports is an example of taking away privacy rights. Do you deny this? Also, notice I said "and other such restrictions" to take into account any other rights you did not mention but intended to.
Saying we cannot legally kill someone means we aren't totally free is not "retarted", it's a perfectly fine example. The fact that you stated that it is "retarted" only strengthens my original point: we (generally) didn't complain about our lack of freedom before 9/11 because society has driven into our heads that all our restrictive laws are not actually taking away our freedom, but instead they are just common sense. Of course I don't believe someone should have the right to kill someone else, but the fact that we don't have that right is a freedom taken away from us. If you still deny this then please state reasons this time, not just say it's "retarded" without backing up your accusation.
FYI, we have never had "freedom of speech". That is another myth society has brought people up to believe. Try threatening the president and see how what "freedom of speech" does for you. Try to lie in court and see if you are protected by "freedom of speech". Try to spread false accusations about someone and watch the courts grant them the $5 million dollar suit they file against you.
Freedom of speech is actually "freedom to say anything you want... except this... and that too, oh, and don't forget about this", etc.
Don't get me wrong, I love the country I live in and I think the laws are just fine. I just laugh at people who think we have "freedom" just because it's the only freedom they've known, and then complain about this or that new law suddenly takes away our supposed "freedom".
How have they destroyed American life as we've known it exactly? How has random searches at airports and other such "restrictions" destroyed American life? Americans have never been free. We aren't free to not pay taxes, we aren't free to murder people, we aren't free drive a car at any age or as fast as we want to, etc, etc, etc. There are literally millions of things we aren't free to do yet people don't complain about these because these restrictions have been in place our whole lives, thus it's "normal". Then a new restriction comes into play and all of the sudden it's, "Whoa, we aren't free anymore". We never were and never will be "free". Deal with it.
I keep seeing replies of "ask them logic problems" or "ask them to come up with an algorithm to do this or that". Sure, these questions could be important for a particular job, but that has nothing to do with how well a person can program.
Questions I'd ask? This of course depends heavily on the language in question, but I'll assume C++:
1) What progamming books do you own? - This would tell me if this person truley LOVES to program and tries to learn as much as possible on his/her own, or whether it's just a job for him/her. I'd also look for well known and respected books such as Code Complete, Design Patterns, Effective C++, Modern C++ Design, Exceptional C++, etc.
2) Name some design patterns and their uses. - This would tell me not whether they know syntax (who doesn't), but whether they know how to properly architect and design large complex applications using reusable and maintainable code.
3) Ask them to explain what use STL, functors, policies, typelists, smart pointers, etc, are. - This would give me an idea on how well they know/use generic programming and code reuse.
4) Ask to see any source code he/she owns. - This has already been mentioned numerous times, but it would allow me to see whether this person can write readable code, whether they comment their code, whether they've implemented any of the items mentioned above.
5) Talk to them on a personal level. Joke around, BS. - This would allow me to actually see their personality, how well they communicate, sense of humor, whether they are easy going, etc. All important aspects for programmers and team players.
I've yet to see a company ask even two of those five questions, but I think an employer could betetr judge programmer using these than asking them "how would you reverse a linked list" or other such questions.
- Houdini
I live in Sylvania, Ohio, a suburb of Toledo and use that same ISP. According to the article they served 6 search warrents in Sylvania.
Geez, I sure am glad *I* decided not to uncap my modem. Wow.
Oh, and on a completely seperate note I noticed yesterday that I was downloading a file at 125 kb/s. I've never gotten above 110 kb/s before on that ISP...
I guess those few bandwidth hogs really do affect other users.