Perhaps today you cannot cite wikipedia in an academic setting, but do not laugh at the thought that one day wikipedia, google scholar, slashdot, and all of the similar endevours in their vein will bring about a complete shift in what information is trusted.
People are used to having experts filter inaccuracies and out and out lies from the information they read. With sources like Wikipedia, it's unclear to people how to separate the lies from the truth. (And in a climate of "truthiness", that distinction gets even cloudier...). SOME people will get better at filtering for themselves. The question is whether or not enough people will learn that skill to make the Wikipedias of the world the "goto" sources of the future. The problem is that anytime a new technology asks MORE of us as people, it fights an uphill battle.
But I do think that there is some hope for learning these new filtering skills. People who read both Slashdot and Digg have probably experienced this self-filtering already. Any sensational sounding Digg headline (even one that makes the front page (or perhaps especially one that makes the front page)) referencing an article is immediately suspect. But if the same news or article makes it onto Slashdot, the suspect-o-meter doesn't register quite so high. Slashdot doesn't perfectly filter out meaningless articles either - but the frequency for Slashdot is certainly lower than it is for Digg. Whether you prefer the Digg method to the Slashdot method has a healthy dependence on how much time you have to wade through the noise and filter it out for yourself.
As would I. For instance - does the existence of these tools open up design to people who can't draw freehand very well, but who do have an aptitude for design?
Put differently - are there more people who can't draw going into design now, skewing the measure of overall drawing skills? Tools that open up a particular area like design to people who wouldn't otherwise have been able to participate seems like a positive development...
Dogmatic belief seems to run rampant where ID is discussed, measured by the indignation with which "reasonable, evolution supporting" persons lash out at it. It appears to be the fashion to make poorly thought out comments about ID (flamebait) and then to run away tittering as your buddies slap you on the back saying "Good one, Dexter". The propoganda and the misinformation surrounding ID is often misleading if not patently unfair, and people who ought to know better are buying into the bad info without understanding ID at all.
The ID that is the basis of current research deals with statistical and logical anomalies that we can't explain by random chance. Which means some non-random influence appears to be involved. Dismissing ID in ignorance is just as bad as coercing it as proof that "God exists" or that "evolution is wrong". It's this dogmatic adherence to belief in Evolution or Creationism that prevents a reasonable discussion aimed and understanding something new.
Do you think Zonk realized that if he posted this we'd pretty much forget about how bees fly and get off on this tangent about ID (again)? I agree with the earlier posting that called this entire thread flamebait.
While I think some of your comparisons and comments are valid, they just don't add up to "things are ok in China".
China is rising in economic importance and influence (and middle class affluence), whereas the US has perhaps peaked. Americans (US Citizens) are in danger of becoming the next France - expecting everyone to continue catering to our language and culture, while China finally spends the pent up potential they've guarded as a comparatively closed economy for - well - centuries. It's practically inevitable as long as the Chinese Government doesn't screw it up.
However, China has a long ways to go before their government can be considered a "fair and reasonable" one by any current standard of human rights. You are correct that people tend to learn to live with the Devil they know - but I think you are guilty of trying to couch this as a competition between Chinese and American attitudes towards human rights. Even though US abuses don't affect most of us personally, many/.-ers are critical of it. And they are allowed to live in the US and post opinions to that effect right here on slashdot. Is slashdot even accessible in China or are you reading this from somewhere else?
I notice your posting makes no negative comments at all about the Chinese Government. Comes off a little dogmatic and unbalanced if you ask me. Is that because you still have family living there that could be affected negatively if you were to express your true feelings? Not that I blame you - but it's just a bit disingenious to allege that the human rights behavior of the Chinese Government is up to even the poor standards set by our current US administration.
The good news for China is that they may be headed in the right direction. Not as optimistic about the US. We'll see what happens after this Presidential term expires.
Check back in a hundred years or so, though, and we'll see who has the better record. Our grandkids and greatgrandkids may all be studying the latest philosophy on human rights in Mandarin Chinese...
The creationist/ID policy is to avoid facing unknowns by passing the buck onto a designer. In the current example, just because something appears elegant and simple to some person, it does'nt mean that it could not have naturally occured.
I don't think that's quite correct. My understanding is that ID examines a result using statistical or logical tools to see if it could have occurred by chance. It's not a subjective test. A statistical abberration indicates some outside influence. A collection of pre-existing conditions that all must be met at once (and not a step at a time) indicates some outside influence.
Glib oversimplified statements about ID will only come back to haunt you someday when we realize those ID guys were onto something - even if they don't quite have it all figured out yet.
I think it boils down to why you provide the internet access in the first place. Is it a draw to get more customers for your core business (coffee and sandwiches) or are you installing it as a source of additional revenue?
I live in a college town where freely provided WiFi in coffee shops, bars and some restaurants is becoming ubiquitous. We have both a Panera and a Borders (with their silly $10/day, $30/month tmobile internet access). You can guess where the locals and the students go to hang out and get their cafeine and internet fix.
I've noticed while travelling that Starbucks and most Airports with wireless are the same as the Borders. You pay for your wireless. But I'd argue that this is a different situation. Their theory is that you didn't "choose" that airport or to go to Starbucks just so you could access the internet. You were destined to go their anyway. So they charge extra for the service and make some additional revenue.
Can't say I like it - but it makes business sense.
So if I supply people with products based upon freely available open source code, and these people pay me for these products, they should expect the products to work properly without damaging their equipment or data? Some people sure have a lot of nerve...
I personally like recipes that allow you to make your own trade offs between goodness and ease of preparation, based on what you have available (ingredients, utensils, time, patience...):
This probably sounds too easy to be good, but trust me - it genuinely makes a tasty sauce.
Better than Ragu Spaghetti sauce:
1 can stewed tomatoes (12-16 oz)
1 can tomato paste (6-8 oz)
Open cans and dump into a pot, stir and put on the stove at medium heat setting (~10 minutes). Or dump them in a bowl and stick them in the microwave (3-5 minutes). Put it on some pasta.
It's fine just like that, but there are a number of variations you can make. I try have plenty of cans of tomatoes, paste and mushrooms on hand at all times.
Variations:
Stewed tomatoes come with spices already added. Try them all (even the mexican spiced ones).
Throw it all into a blender and pulverize the tomatoes before heating.
Or don't heat it at all.
Throw in some mushrooms.
Add a can of red or black beans (even coders need protein once in a while).
Crumble up that leftover hamburger patty and throw it in. (another possible source of protein, depending on where you get your hamburger)
In case you need help making pasta (I know people who do:/):
Put about 4-5 cups of water in a big pot. Put a little oil in there (about a tablespoon, or a shot if that's easier to visualize). Put on the stove and set the burner to high to get it boiling. Once it starts to boil, put in the pasta and turn down the heat so it doesn't boil over (I set my dial to about 3/4). It'll likely take around 20 minutes, but set the timer for 10 minutes so you remember to stir it at least once. Then set it for 10 more and it'll be done. Drain off the water.
Combine with that sauce and you have a decent spaghetti dinner. Presented properly, you might even impress a guest with it...
TuneShark
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps today you cannot cite wikipedia in an academic setting, but do not laugh at the thought that one day wikipedia, google scholar, slashdot, and all of the similar endevours in their vein will bring about a complete shift in what information is trusted.
People are used to having experts filter inaccuracies and out and out lies from the information they read. With sources like Wikipedia, it's unclear to people how to separate the lies from the truth. (And in a climate of "truthiness", that distinction gets even cloudier...). SOME people will get better at filtering for themselves. The question is whether or not enough people will learn that skill to make the Wikipedias of the world the "goto" sources of the future. The problem is that anytime a new technology asks MORE of us as people, it fights an uphill battle.
But I do think that there is some hope for learning these new filtering skills. People who read both Slashdot and Digg have probably experienced this self-filtering already. Any sensational sounding Digg headline (even one that makes the front page (or perhaps especially one that makes the front page)) referencing an article is immediately suspect. But if the same news or article makes it onto Slashdot, the suspect-o-meter doesn't register quite so high. Slashdot doesn't perfectly filter out meaningless articles either - but the frequency for Slashdot is certainly lower than it is for Digg. Whether you prefer the Digg method to the Slashdot method has a healthy dependence on how much time you have to wade through the noise and filter it out for yourself.
I'd like to see the study itself.
As would I. For instance - does the existence of these tools open up design to people who can't draw freehand very well, but who do have an aptitude for design?
Put differently - are there more people who can't draw going into design now, skewing the measure of overall drawing skills? Tools that open up a particular area like design to people who wouldn't otherwise have been able to participate seems like a positive development...
Dogmatic belief seems to run rampant where ID is discussed, measured by the indignation with which "reasonable, evolution supporting" persons lash out at it. It appears to be the fashion to make poorly thought out comments about ID (flamebait) and then to run away tittering as your buddies slap you on the back saying "Good one, Dexter". The propoganda and the misinformation surrounding ID is often misleading if not patently unfair, and people who ought to know better are buying into the bad info without understanding ID at all.
The ID that is the basis of current research deals with statistical and logical anomalies that we can't explain by random chance. Which means some non-random influence appears to be involved. Dismissing ID in ignorance is just as bad as coercing it as proof that "God exists" or that "evolution is wrong". It's this dogmatic adherence to belief in Evolution or Creationism that prevents a reasonable discussion aimed and understanding something new.
Do you think Zonk realized that if he posted this we'd pretty much forget about how bees fly and get off on this tangent about ID (again)? I agree with the earlier posting that called this entire thread flamebait.
While I think some of your comparisons and comments are valid, they just don't add up to "things are ok in China".
/.-ers are critical of it. And they are allowed to live in the US and post opinions to that effect right here on slashdot. Is slashdot even accessible in China or are you reading this from somewhere else?
China is rising in economic importance and influence (and middle class affluence), whereas the US has perhaps peaked. Americans (US Citizens) are in danger of becoming the next France - expecting everyone to continue catering to our language and culture, while China finally spends the pent up potential they've guarded as a comparatively closed economy for - well - centuries. It's practically inevitable as long as the Chinese Government doesn't screw it up.
However, China has a long ways to go before their government can be considered a "fair and reasonable" one by any current standard of human rights. You are correct that people tend to learn to live with the Devil they know - but I think you are guilty of trying to couch this as a competition between Chinese and American attitudes towards human rights. Even though US abuses don't affect most of us personally, many
I notice your posting makes no negative comments at all about the Chinese Government. Comes off a little dogmatic and unbalanced if you ask me. Is that because you still have family living there that could be affected negatively if you were to express your true feelings? Not that I blame you - but it's just a bit disingenious to allege that the human rights behavior of the Chinese Government is up to even the poor standards set by our current US administration.
The good news for China is that they may be headed in the right direction. Not as optimistic about the US. We'll see what happens after this Presidential term expires.
Check back in a hundred years or so, though, and we'll see who has the better record. Our grandkids and greatgrandkids may all be studying the latest philosophy on human rights in Mandarin Chinese...
I went here for using firefox, followed a few links, and was allowed to download and install the patch:
n /ms06-001.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulleti
The creationist/ID policy is to avoid facing unknowns by passing the buck onto a designer. In the current example, just because something appears elegant and simple to some person, it does'nt mean that it could not have naturally occured.
I don't think that's quite correct. My understanding is that ID examines a result using statistical or logical tools to see if it could have occurred by chance. It's not a subjective test. A statistical abberration indicates some outside influence. A collection of pre-existing conditions that all must be met at once (and not a step at a time) indicates some outside influence.
Glib oversimplified statements about ID will only come back to haunt you someday when we realize those ID guys were onto something - even if they don't quite have it all figured out yet.
Perhaps a late entry - but here's an interesting discussion of keeping science and theology out of each other's playgrounds:
n ceh.htm
http://www.str.org/free/commentaries/science/scie
I think it boils down to why you provide the internet access in the first place. Is it a draw to get more customers for your core business (coffee and sandwiches) or are you installing it as a source of additional revenue?
I live in a college town where freely provided WiFi in coffee shops, bars and some restaurants is becoming ubiquitous. We have both a Panera and a Borders (with their silly $10/day, $30/month tmobile internet access). You can guess where the locals and the students go to hang out and get their cafeine and internet fix.
I've noticed while travelling that Starbucks and most Airports with wireless are the same as the Borders. You pay for your wireless. But I'd argue that this is a different situation. Their theory is that you didn't "choose" that airport or to go to Starbucks just so you could access the internet. You were destined to go their anyway. So they charge extra for the service and make some additional revenue.
Can't say I like it - but it makes business sense.
So if I supply people with products based upon freely available open source code, and these people pay me for these products, they should expect the products to work properly without damaging their equipment or data? Some people sure have a lot of nerve...
I personally like recipes that allow you to make your own trade offs between goodness and ease of preparation, based on what you have available (ingredients, utensils, time, patience...): This probably sounds too easy to be good, but trust me - it genuinely makes a tasty sauce. Better than Ragu Spaghetti sauce: 1 can stewed tomatoes (12-16 oz) 1 can tomato paste (6-8 oz) Open cans and dump into a pot, stir and put on the stove at medium heat setting (~10 minutes). Or dump them in a bowl and stick them in the microwave (3-5 minutes). Put it on some pasta. It's fine just like that, but there are a number of variations you can make. I try have plenty of cans of tomatoes, paste and mushrooms on hand at all times. Variations: Stewed tomatoes come with spices already added. Try them all (even the mexican spiced ones). Throw it all into a blender and pulverize the tomatoes before heating. Or don't heat it at all. Throw in some mushrooms. Add a can of red or black beans (even coders need protein once in a while). Crumble up that leftover hamburger patty and throw it in. (another possible source of protein, depending on where you get your hamburger) In case you need help making pasta (I know people who do :/):
Put about 4-5 cups of water in a big pot. Put a little oil in there (about a tablespoon, or a shot if that's easier to visualize). Put on the stove and set the burner to high to get it boiling. Once it starts to boil, put in the pasta and turn down the heat so it doesn't boil over (I set my dial to about 3/4). It'll likely take around 20 minutes, but set the timer for 10 minutes so you remember to stir it at least once. Then set it for 10 more and it'll be done. Drain off the water.
Combine with that sauce and you have a decent spaghetti dinner. Presented properly, you might even impress a guest with it...
TuneShark