The way I look at it, I'm a comp.sci guy, so I can buy or build better equipment than college labs supply, therefore I don't need them for that. At the same time, the way I look at it, if you want to actually create technology, you don't want to be holed up in a college, you want to be out in the world trying out different ventures. Who cares if you reinvent the wheel? Maybe your wheel's a hot alloy job that'll make you some money. Besides, that's what a membership in ACM is for. We all read the same journals, after all...
In my view, the only people who should try for a graduate degree (among Americans at least) are people who wish to have an academic career. I respect these people, and I understand the allure of such a life. Who wouldn't want to work on a nice campus, with lab space for your research interests, surrounded by interesting students and all the activities that occur around a university setting? It's a nice setup.
But you don't need an advanced degree to do anything else. It's pretty much ONLY required to become an academic. So if that's your thing, that's great, but if it's not, the degree is pretty much irrelevant. It's much better to "go forth and conquer" than to stay in your lab and think about conquering, especially when most colleges make people sign I.P. agreements nowadays.
Just my opinion, you understand... But I think the whole "OMG we don't have enough Ph.Ds" thing is completely silly, like being terrified the cold-war-era Russians will have better gymnasts than we do. I see it as mostly propaganda designed to make us feel the need to do something the government wants us to do (like pour more money into the university system and get buried in student loans financed by the government's pet banks, for instance).
That's how I look at it at least.
Now that I think of it, here's a fun angle: usually when a politician does something, there's money involved. Either someone wants to make more money, or someone doesn't think they're making enough money, or whatever.
So, who's losing money if students don't stay in college for ten years? The private colleges lose tuition, but they aren't that powerful individually. Maybe an industry group can lobby for them, but I think a much more likely actor is the banking industry and student loan servicing companies. They stand to lose billions if graduate school goes out of favor. So, John the banker calls his old Yale buddy James the politician, and we have a furor!
Before you mod me down automatically, let me make the case that graduate degrees aren't really important anyway, at least in high tech, and that what's really going on is a difference in culture and lifestyle, NOT the horrifying end of our culture.
Let me begin by saying that my understanding of "the problem" is that Americans have lost interest in spending tens of thousands of dollars (possibly over a hundred thousand) to continue with their already expensive education, particularly when it is perfectly clear they're never, ever going to make that investment back in the workplace (if, that is, they get a job at all).
Furthermore, many American students may just find it extremely annoying that colleges expect them to pay a premium to be taught by someone whose broken english they can barely understand in the first place (this happens a LOT).
Add to this the fact that, at least when it comes to high tech, you can learn anything you want by buying the text online for under a hundred bucks, which is far cheaper than the hundreds of dollars per credit it takes to have a teaching assistant mumble at you for two hours a week while the professor fiddles with his research. Most students learn most of their knowledge from the textbooks ANYWAY.
On top of all that, the dirty truth of high tech is that anyone can do research anywhere, with inexpensive equipment bought on Ebay, and doing it in your apartment instead of in a college means that YOU OWN THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY and can start a business based on it.
Add all these things together, and I think you'll be able to see that the type of people who may once have stayed in school for the 8 - 12 years required for a Ph.D are probably now much more comfortable just graduating with their B.S, getting a job, and spending their free time trying to invent something that will one day make them rich (alternately, maybe they become consultants, or do something else). I believe they see this as a much better use of their time and money, and that they see the opportunity cost of attending graduate school to be far too high.
In contrast, in asian cultures there seems to be a much higher emphasis on the "piece of paper", with which one may impress ones parents and grandparents, and attract a much better wife when the parents go arranged-marriage shopping. Where we Americans don't give a rat's ass whether our parents approve of our girlfriends, and really couldn't care less about appearance and status, in some of the cultures being considered, approval, status and appearance are VERY important.
Perhaps what's really going on is simply a cultural difference. In some asian cultures, having official recognition of ones status is important and desireable, and in rough-and-tumble, individualist America, nobody gives a crap and they do their own thing.
Both approaches to life are just as valid. Both have advantages. There's no reason to run around with your hair on fire.
And in our own defense, we Americans haven't really had much use for those highfalutin' pieces of paper, anyway. I seem to remember that Thomas Alva Edison was completely self-taught, as are most hackers. And look how HE influenced society.
When I was a wee lad, I had a very interesting, somewhat cranky physics professor. I had bought a several-milliwatt helium-neon laser tube via catalog. Due to a typo, they had claimed its power as something like 4MW, which I interpereted to mean it literally was four megawatts. I was ecstatic and couldn't wait to share my great good fortune with my prof.
I showed the prof the ad, and told him that when the laser came in, maybe we could try it out.
He repeated "4 megawatts? What are you going to do, shoot planes down?"
I said, "Nah, I'm a pacifist. Maybe we can zap one'a them light poles around the quad. Besides, it says so right there. 4MW."
He said "Ah, so it does. And it takes a 9-volt battery?"
I said, "It's got a transformer."
He clenched his lips together extremely tightly, and screwed his eyes shut. He looked briefly like he was rumbling. Then, he gained control over it and said, "Well, you'll have to bring that baby in, kid. I'll be right back..."
Years later, looking back, I'm pleased I was able to give a man his age the belly laugh I'm sure he went out in the hall to enjoy. It's the little pleasures that make life worthwhile...
As to your objections, why couldn't a person set up a single, perfect install, then make sure a copy of the SID-altering utility is available on the computer, THEN image the thing using DD?
Then it wouldn't be fragmented, and everything would be smooth and beautiful.
Touche. However, it isn't even "most". It's "some". And although a Canadian company DOES sell hydroelectric power to the U.S. there are American companies generating at the falls, too. Observe the Wikipedia:
Wikipedia Citation 1, from the Niagara Falls article: The most powerful hydroelectric stations on the Niagara River nowadays are Sir Adam Beck 1 and 2 on the Canadian side, and the Robert Moses Niagara Power Plant and the Lewiston Pump Generating Plant on the American side. All together, Niagara's generating stations can produce about 4.4 GW of power.
Wikipedia Citation 2, about the American-side power plants:...the Robert Moses Hydro-Electric Dam (the source of the majority of New York City's electricity), also in Niagara Falls...
Citation 3, from the New York Power Authority, which owns/manages the power plants on the American side, WHICH FEED NEW YORK: " The Niagara project, located about 4 1/2 miles downstream from the Falls, consists of two main facilities: the Robert Moses Niagara Power Plant, with 13 turbines, and the Lewiston Pump-Generating Plant, with 12 pump-turbines. In between the two plants is a forebay capable of holding 164 billion gallons of water; behind the Lewiston plant, a 1,900-acre reservoir holds additional supplies of this liquid fuel" (http://www.nypa.gov/facilities/niagara.htm)
SO, you're completely off base. NO, we don't import most of the power for the Northeast from Canada. We generate it ourselves, using OUR OWN power plants on the Niagara river.
That's life, man. So there you have it.
Claiming that the Northeast gets most of its power from Canada is cute, and a fun spin on the truth, but it's not very accurate.
Indian Point nuclear power plant provides a significant amount of it, then there are many coal-fired plants, some natural gas plants, a small amount of wind power and methane power from landfills, and (what you're probably referring to) the generating facilities up in Niagara Falls. ConEd and Niagara Mohawk serve most of the power needs of the New York area.
SO, you hoser, Canada does NOT provide us all our power. Only a little chunk of it.
Other than that, though, yeah, Canada's pretty cool, eh?
A virus outbreak. We have a system here which is designed to seek out and handle these sorts of things, and just this afternoon we released its controls so it would be able to nip a huge outbreak in the bud.
So far, it seems to be working quite well. Skynet has managed to regain control of most of our systems... Pardon me, just a sec, one of my coworkers is on the other line...
(Yeah, Jim, I'm in the middle of an interview here... What? What do you mean you're locked out of your terminal. That can't be right...
What??? You've got missles airborne??? How many? ALL OF THEM???
What's new, I think, is the iterative aspect of Scrum and other agile methods. When you look at them in contrast to up-front methods like Waterfall, they look pretty good. But it's not all that new; RUP's been around for a while, and they use an iterative-incremental method.
Anyway, it's just a word. It's shorthand for a whole set of characteristics, so we can blab about it around the watercooler without taking ten minutes to finish our sentences, you know? There are probably people who turn it into a fetish and write up huge lists of buzzwords, but the developers are probably interpereting "we'll use Scrum" as "Iterative/incremental, plus more meetings, and a shorter develop and test cycle".
Unless you are actually ENGAGED IN RACKETEERING, you will not be charged with it. Wielding the equivalent of a Captain Midnight Secret Decoder Ring is still not illegal.
Here's some clarification of "racketeering" from Dictionary.com:
Main Entry: racketeering Pronunciation: "ra-k&-'tir-i[ng] Function: noun 1 : the extortion of money or advantage by threat or force 2 : a pattern of illegal activity (as extortion and murder) that is carried out in furtherance of an enterprise (as a criminal syndicate) which is owned or controlled by those engaged in such activity --see also Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act in the IMPORTANT LAWS section --compare ORGANIZED CRIME
Darknets have always been around, and always will.
on
Darknets Coming Soon?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Darknets are just the latest "OH MY GOD WE MUST ALL FEAR" line the computer industry is going to use to field a "solution" (probably some kind of sniffer for corporations, which tries to detect traffic which it cannot categorize and produces reports for suits).
Say it with me: darknets have always been here, and they will always be.
Hackers have IRC and other invite-only forums, and all the ways in which they've used them to secretly pass information around without the squares being in on it. P2P networks are darknets (for YOU, anyway) if you don't have software which uses the protocols and don't know anyone who knows about them. ANY new network protocol can be a darknet. You can roll your own anytime you want.
Darknets are the modern equivalent of the Captain Midnight Secret Decoder Ring. They are NOT the Beginning Of The Fall Of Civilization(tm).
Don't believe me? Fine. Be that way. Try this fun experiment:
Write yourself a Java suite that:
CLIENT SIDE:
1. Briefly touches a server, downloads the current list of IP addresses that have announced themselves to the server, announces ITSELF to the server, and then logs off. The server IP is probably best implemented as one of a list of possible server sites, so that if one is compromised (doesn't give the correct handshake or whatever) you just move on to the next one. All communication should be encrypted using the server's public key and YOUR public key (RSA between the two points, or whatever is fashionable in your circle of friends).
2. Lets you compose messages, or file transfers, or whatever, destined for whatever IP address you want to communicate with, again encrypted with both public keys. Maybe you even compress the data first, to reduce bandwidth usage.
3. Lets you "blackball" any IP address you think is compromised. You could implement this as "My PC Only" or as a common blackball pool, which everyone could vote on, or as a common blackball pool which people could consider provisional and accept or not accept.
SERVER SIDE:
1. Manage lists of IP addresses and their status.
2. Provide a handshake which is meant to test whether your software is authentic and you are in fact an approved node. If you're not, you get sucked into a honeypot and studied. You are NOT given an actual IP address list; rather you are given a fake list full of false leads.
3. Allow certain admins to control the system to some extent, ousting problematic members (bans) and so forth. This could alternately be implemented on the client side, with a voting scheme, or whatever.
Bam. Instant darknet. And it's a piece of cake for anyone who's passed the junior-level networking course at any public university. THINK about it -- why do you think anyone studies computer science these days? It sure ain't to find a job... People study computer science to build themselves cool, weird things that stiff, stick-up-their-ass types don't approve of.
Deal, people. The world is not all simple and sparkly, like an amusement park. We are all grown-ups, and we can do grown up things even if it frightens The Man(tm). And, really, computer science is the closest thing any of us gets to wielding supernatural power. Us geeks can do things NOBODY else can do. Why not do them? Why be a boring square if you don't have to? Build something freaky, get yourself one of those weird, off-kilter cover photos in Wired that makes you look like Dr. Evil. Why not? You weren't put on this earth to make Sheeple feel comfy and warm. Fuck 'em.
Pardon me, Mr. Grammar Nazi, sir, but I couldn't help but notice that your sentence:
"PEOPLE NEED TO LEARN TO FUCKING WRITE"
is missing a word. I believe what you meant to say was:
"SOME PEOPLE NEED TO LEARN HOW TO FUCKING WRITE"
Although I believe that, too, is a bit churlish. Perhaps you would be better served if you were to say:
"I say, old boy, I do believe that certain undesireables among us have demonstrated a need, I daresay a BURNING need, to learn how to better communicate with their Slashdot bretheren."
Thanks! I envision "Phil the Unarmed Guy" as being about 5'5 tall, with stooped shoulders, a bad combover, rumpled tweedy clothes, an overbite, and a lispy voice like Peter Lorre:
"Thhhay, that ithn't fair! Jutht becauth I'm the unarmed guy doethn't mean you all have to come to MY houth! Go away, all you crathy gun people! Leath me alone! THTOP! GITHE ME BACK MY PANTH!"
Thanks! It's really nice of you to pound the final ashen stake into the heart of your business model. Lord knows we open-source users have been trying to do it for years to no avail. Now that you're willing to do it FOR us, we anticipate a bright future for all involved.
Deciding to screw your customers not once, not twice, but ANNUALLY in PERPETUITY is a master stroke. We couldn't have thought of something that evil ourselves (OUR general way of doing things is to NOT charge the customer annually, in perpetuity) and if we had, most of the FOSS community would have told us we were conspiracy theorists.
So thank you, Bill, you have done the world a great service. I wish you the best of all possible retirements, spending your tractor-trailer trucks full of cash around the world as you see fit.
Cordially, The collective users of F/OSS software.
Your last paragraph really captures my sentiment exactly. From my perspective, I would absolutely love it if the government confiscated everyone's guns and started us all from a "total ban" starting point. But since everyone already HAS a gun, pretty much, and hardly anyone is going to be sophisticated enough to be the first to hand theirs over, at this point even if the governmet does get wise and try to ban them, the situation is a permanent mexican standoff.
I would love it if someone could figure a way out of it, but I really don't think anything can be done at this point except make sure your individual family is sufficiently tooled up "in case of".
Oh, I just thought of one more excellent example of "why at this point we're stuck with a need for at least a couple of guns". During the L.A. riots, when entire black communities went batshit over the Rodney King fiasco and started viciously attacking any whites or asians they came across, I remember seeing a story about a group of Korean store owners whose store was successfully protected from harm. Rioters didn't come any closer than about 20 feet from the store because all the men in the family were out front with high-caliber rifles and a "go ahead, give me an excuse" attitude. They came though the whole thing relatively unscathed. Everybody ELSE got either beaten nearly to death (like that poor truck driver) or their store smashed and looted.
(don't get me wrong, I understand why they were angry, but beating up some random white guy or looting a deli doesn't solve anything either).
Of course, I'm not saying most of us will ever live through something that bizarre and unique, but those Korean guys didn't think THEY were going to have to, either. Sometimes, life says "Surprise!" and throws a pie at you.:)
Anyway, I'm with you on the gun ban idea. I think it would be marvellous. But for it to work, it would have to be enforced with a house-to-house sweep, confiscating EVERYTHING. If they did THAT, I'd be a lot more comfortable handing anything I had over. It's one of those things where it's got to be all or nothing, or no one will participate. Nobody wants to be the one unarmed guy, you know? You'd feel like any criminals in the area would be saying "So what should we do now? Let's go to Phil's house, he's the Unarmed Guy!" Heh heh... Man, that could be a Simpson's episode, now that I think about it. That'd be pretty funny.
Oh, by the way, about serial killers: Many of the serial killers here in the U.S. used guns with relish. Son of Sam, for instance, used a magnum revolver. What you say is probably true in your country, but not in mine.
You make SOME good points; and I agree with you in general, and do actually wish there WERE no guns available in the U.S. (a common joke I've heard is that you never hear about a "drive-by knifing"). The point I was trying to make was that given the situation, as it currently exists, it's better to have a gun than not to *in many situations commonly experienced in America*. And I'm surprised you thought those two blurbs towards the end were potentially offensive. Do you think Canadians will be offended by the implication that they're "running around NOT shooting each other"? You didn't think that was at least cute, if not funny? Come ON, I worked hard on that one.;)
Well, not TOO hard. I did find your assertion that most Americans don't live near potentially dangerous wildlife amusing. What on earth do you base this on? When you vacation here, you're in a major city. You're nowhere NEAR "most Americans". Please don't assume (remember what Benny Hill said).
I'll grant you the things I listed (which do happen here) probably wouldn't give you much opportunity to go for your shotgun. But you DO underestimate the number of serious crimes that are prevented because someone returned fire or chased a criminal off. It happens all the time.
And although they might not qualify as "serial killers" there are a lot more murderers around than you would guess. I suspect the U.K. is a bit safer than the U.S. when it comes to that kind of thing. "Culture of violence" and all that. My understanding of it is, in the U.K. you get into a lot more fights, but you don't actually KILL each other. Here in the U.S. there are lots and lots of murders, but relatively fewer fistfights. Odd as that may seem. And people kill each other here for remarkably stupid reasons. You hear stories about stuff like one redneck wasting another because he wouldn't give him an easement onto his property, things like that. STUPID things. Life is weird here.
Let me tell you about an ACTUAL SURVEY that was done here in Albany.
Shootings on South Pearl (a neighborhood) were compared to those on North Pearl (another neighborhood) -- I work directly between the two neighborhoods (ugh). It was determined that although you were more likely to be shot on North Pearl, you were more likely to survive because the people on South Pearl were better shots (more actual deaths).
THIS is why we Americans are not exactly flush with the sensation of personal safety. Let me tell you another one (these are so much fun).
My friend Neil was driving through Troy one day when there, in the middle of the street, was a guy with a huge hole in his head. There was a cop standing over the body, shaking his head. Neil said hello to the cop, who told him "Man, this is weird. You don't see that every day; usually they shoot people in the neck around here." They never found the guy who shot the dead guy, by the way.
Again, it doesn't exactly inspire confidence that ones community is safe. My point is just that this is most definitely NOT the U.K. Things are different here. People here tend to keep guns "just in case". MOST people never have occasion to use them, but when occasions come up (and they do) the people in question are always very, very glad they had the gun on hand.
That's all I'm saying. By the way, I know Michael Moore likes to talk about how it's all fake, all a big media thing, but he's way off the mark. Remember how he went to South Central L.A. and nothing happened to him? He acted like that was proof it was safe there. How silly; what did he think would happen? In broad daylight, he was obviously shooting a documentary. Did he really think he was going to get mugged just like that, ON CAMERA??? With his friends right there? He knew he was safe, that's why he filmed it. It was propaganda making a false point.
Finally, let me say that my point "Americans have good reasons for wanting access to firearms" does NOT imply that I approve of assault weapons or pistols. I'm strictly talking about "norma
"Backward"? Not at all! Actually in my thinking your society is more civilized, and probably a whole lot safer. Guns are a real problem here.
If you watch the news, almost all of the really terrible things that happen are because some nut-job took a gun to some heavily populated place and started blasting away at people. And, most of the violent crimes that take place happen because an idiot mugger or burgular or something decided that it was less risky to just murder his mark than risk having the cops get a good description out of him.
I wish the government would go around and forcibly collect up ALL of our guns; then, none of us would need them anyway (except for the whole "wild animals" thing, but then, since they can't shoot back a good compound bow would probably work well enough). As an American, I hate the fact that everyone here has a weapon. It bugs me.
But, things as they are, I'm not going to be the neighborhood's unarmed guy!:)
Heh heh...
I totally agree with you on the "overthrow the government" thing. I think that the people who say things about overturning the government have never served in the armed services -- they just have no idea how powerful military weapons are. Even a regular serviceman's M-16A2 from the early nineties would blow huge holes straight through a car. The rounds were loaded with special powder that contained magnesium dust (or something like that), and fired steel shells at 3100fps. One burst shot and the target was toast, and bulletproof vests don't work with that muzzle velocity. It's almost quaint that gun nuts from the NRA actually think they can take on the Marine Corps... I mean, when you think about it, it's kind of comical, isn't it?
If the government ever goes nuts/totalitarian, revolts are going to be put down QUICKLY. It'll be brutal. I'm going to be hiding in my apartment, doing EXACTLY what Big Brother tells me to, and I'm not going to be giving him any lip, either! heh heh...
It's not so bad here. It sucks that our criminals are so goddamn psycho (this guy kidnapped a yuppie and his friend from the Nanuet Mall a few years ago, made them drive into the woods, shot the guy in the head and the other one non-fatally, and eventually got caught for example). But most of us live in relatively safe places.
It's true a lot of us keep long arms (shotguns, etc) tucked away in our closets, but we're not SLEEPING with them per se. The thing is, they're there on the off chance we ever need to go for them. If someone starts kicking in our front door or something, we grab our twelve guage and hide somewhere while we call the cops. It could buy us some time if the guy manages to get through our (very heavy) door.
What's wrong with this idea? Virtually ALL of OUR criminals are packing, either guns or knives. Why do non-Americans have so much trouble understanding the basic facts of our society? There's no gun control here, at least no REAL gun control. Every nut-bag with a bone to pick can bring his piece to your house any time he wants. The cops NEVER get there in time... So, it makes sense to keep something sensible around "in case of". With luck, you never need it, and it gathers dust in a closet for forty years. Most people have exactly that experience.
But, there are rotten people in the world; it makes sense to have something to greet them with if they ever decide to visit.
By the way, I know some of you are going to say that most people aren't going to have anything terrible happen to them at any time in their lives. This is probably true. And those people won't ever have any call to drag out their dusty old shotguns. BUT, those of us who DO have occasion to lock and cock are going to be mighty glad we had some irons on hand when the time comes.
Just a thought. "Better to have one and not need it, than to need it and not have it."
You don't live in the U.S. so you wouldn't know this, but violent murder, robbery, and rape are fairly common in many of our communities. Many of us who own weapons own them for the SPECIFIC PURPOSE of forcibly removing the head of anyone who decides to kick in our front door.
I could tell you about a friend of my mother's, who was viciously attacked by a handiman she had hired. The guy did some fairly vile things to her before cutting her throat. They caught him, but that didn't make her feel any better.
I could tell you about my ex girlfriend, who was nearly raped by a Mexican guy who broke into her apartment. She managed to fight her way out of it, but he nearly got her.
I could tell you about the time a girl I was about to start dating had forgotten to tell me about her insane boyfriend, who promptly told me he was coming over with a nine millimeter to "talk this out". I informed him I'd be waiting with my hunting rifle, and he never showed up. THIS sort of thing is way more common than you might think, by the way. People are such hotheads!
Here's one: a new form of criminal activity, called "Home Invasion" has been happening. It seems to have started in the Southwest, because the first I heard of it was in stories from Arizona and Texas. Basically, a set of criminals dress up in "FBI" or police T-Shirts (fake, of course), kick in your door armed to the teeth, and once they have control of the house, THEN they rob and kill everyone.
Then, of course, we have serial killers turning up all over the place, picking on people who live towards the outer edges of suburbs and so on.
And, here in New York, it isn't even just humans: we have black bears killing people from time to time. If a black bear wants to get into your house, your lock isn't going to keep him out; he just pushes in the door or a window and scrambles in. Down in New Jersey, a year or two ago, a black bear mauled a child to death; neighbors shot it about a block away. These things have been happening more often in the past ten years for some reason. It's probably related to suburban sprawl, but still, even if it isn't really the bear's fault, I'd still rather it was him than me.
What you have to remember is, we Americans don't have guns so we can carry them around, waving them in people's noses (usually). We keep them locked in the closet in a gun safe, "just in case". If we hear someone kicking the front door in, we hustle upstairs, lock and load while the wife calls the cops, and we wait for Mr. Criminal to saunter his stupid ass into the hallway. Warning shot #1 goes center of mass.
It's a necessity in this society. What do you think this is? Canada? With civilized people running around NOT shooting each other? Come ON. Unless you're going to let us emigrate to your nice, safe, civilized country, we're keeping our guns. And you shouldn't pull the ivory tower routine with us unless you know our situation.
People around here are getting crazier every year. This place is DANGEROUS.
No, that wasn't it... It might have been the same guy, but the book I saw was a 2,000 year old (or so) engineering textbook full of his notes for apprentices and such. Good stuff, though.
Re:Steam engine of Heron of Alexandria
on
Archimedes Death Ray
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I once read part of a book by an ancient Roman engineer in which he talked about how to set up a building site. The first thing he would do is locate water. He would lie down on the ground at the top of a hill before sunrise, and as the sun rose, he would gaze down the hill and notice where mist appeared.
That would be where the water table was close to the surface, and they would dig there to open a spring.
What I find funny is that Christians never accept the simple fact that JESUS WAS A JEW, so he would have naturally followed the principles of the Talmud. And, didn't he say "I am not the end of the law but the fulfillment of it"? He didn't want to change anything, he wanted to remind people to obey the commandments given to Moses.
I think the problem is that Paul the Gentile and his followers were the only apostles to survive the sacking of Jerusalem by the Romans somewhere around 100AD. Paul had some serious issues, I think. Look at how he pestered the Romans about their sexual practices. Jesus never bothered anyone about that sort of thing... He just wanted us to be nice to each other.
It's hard, because I'm technically a Presbyterian, but I think most Christian philosophy is totally full of shit and geared towards maintaining a state of self-loathing (why, oh why, did they EVER go this route? It's nuts).
I'd change religions, but I don't think any of the others are that much better. They all have their wonky points.
Slashdot Mirror
The way I look at it, I'm a comp.sci guy, so I can buy or build better equipment than college labs supply, therefore I don't need them for that. At the same time, the way I look at it, if you want to actually create technology, you don't want to be holed up in a college, you want to be out in the world trying out different ventures. Who cares if you reinvent the wheel? Maybe your wheel's a hot alloy job that'll make you some money. Besides, that's what a membership in ACM is for. We all read the same journals, after all...
;)
In my view, the only people who should try for a graduate degree (among Americans at least) are people who wish to have an academic career. I respect these people, and I understand the allure of such a life. Who wouldn't want to work on a nice campus, with lab space for your research interests, surrounded by interesting students and all the activities that occur around a university setting? It's a nice setup.
But you don't need an advanced degree to do anything else. It's pretty much ONLY required to become an academic. So if that's your thing, that's great, but if it's not, the degree is pretty much irrelevant. It's much better to "go forth and conquer" than to stay in your lab and think about conquering, especially when most colleges make people sign I.P. agreements nowadays.
Just my opinion, you understand... But I think the whole "OMG we don't have enough Ph.Ds" thing is completely silly, like being terrified the cold-war-era Russians will have better gymnasts than we do. I see it as mostly propaganda designed to make us feel the need to do something the government wants us to do (like pour more money into the university system and get buried in student loans financed by the government's pet banks, for instance).
That's how I look at it at least.
Now that I think of it, here's a fun angle: usually when a politician does something, there's money involved. Either someone wants to make more money, or someone doesn't think they're making enough money, or whatever.
So, who's losing money if students don't stay in college for ten years? The private colleges lose tuition, but they aren't that powerful individually. Maybe an industry group can lobby for them, but I think a much more likely actor is the banking industry and student loan servicing companies. They stand to lose billions if graduate school goes out of favor. So, John the banker calls his old Yale buddy James the politician, and we have a furor!
Just thinking aloud.
Before you mod me down automatically, let me make the case that graduate degrees aren't really important anyway, at least in high tech, and that what's really going on is a difference in culture and lifestyle, NOT the horrifying end of our culture.
Let me begin by saying that my understanding of "the problem" is that Americans have lost interest in spending tens of thousands of dollars (possibly over a hundred thousand) to continue with their already expensive education, particularly when it is perfectly clear they're never, ever going to make that investment back in the workplace (if, that is, they get a job at all).
Furthermore, many American students may just find it extremely annoying that colleges expect them to pay a premium to be taught by someone whose broken english they can barely understand in the first place (this happens a LOT).
Add to this the fact that, at least when it comes to high tech, you can learn anything you want by buying the text online for under a hundred bucks, which is far cheaper than the hundreds of dollars per credit it takes to have a teaching assistant mumble at you for two hours a week while the professor fiddles with his research. Most students learn most of their knowledge from the textbooks ANYWAY.
On top of all that, the dirty truth of high tech is that anyone can do research anywhere, with inexpensive equipment bought on Ebay, and doing it in your apartment instead of in a college means that YOU OWN THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY and can start a business based on it.
Add all these things together, and I think you'll be able to see that the type of people who may once have stayed in school for the 8 - 12 years required for a Ph.D are probably now much more comfortable just graduating with their B.S, getting a job, and spending their free time trying to invent something that will one day make them rich (alternately, maybe they become consultants, or do something else). I believe they see this as a much better use of their time and money, and that they see the opportunity cost of attending graduate school to be far too high.
In contrast, in asian cultures there seems to be a much higher emphasis on the "piece of paper", with which one may impress ones parents and grandparents, and attract a much better wife when the parents go arranged-marriage shopping. Where we Americans don't give a rat's ass whether our parents approve of our girlfriends, and really couldn't care less about appearance and status, in some of the cultures being considered, approval, status and appearance are VERY important.
Perhaps what's really going on is simply a cultural difference. In some asian cultures, having official recognition of ones status is important and desireable, and in rough-and-tumble, individualist America, nobody gives a crap and they do their own thing.
Both approaches to life are just as valid. Both have advantages. There's no reason to run around with your hair on fire.
And in our own defense, we Americans haven't really had much use for those highfalutin' pieces of paper, anyway. I seem to remember that Thomas Alva Edison was completely self-taught, as are most hackers. And look how HE influenced society.
When I was a wee lad, I had a very interesting, somewhat cranky physics professor. I had bought a several-milliwatt helium-neon laser tube via catalog. Due to a typo, they had claimed its power as something like 4MW, which I interpereted to mean it literally was four megawatts. I was ecstatic and couldn't wait to share my great good fortune with my prof.
I showed the prof the ad, and told him that when the laser came in, maybe we could try it out.
He repeated "4 megawatts? What are you going to do, shoot planes down?"
I said, "Nah, I'm a pacifist. Maybe we can zap one'a them light poles around the quad. Besides, it says so right there. 4MW."
He said "Ah, so it does. And it takes a 9-volt battery?"
I said, "It's got a transformer."
He clenched his lips together extremely tightly, and screwed his eyes shut. He looked briefly like he was rumbling. Then, he gained control over it and said, "Well, you'll have to bring that baby in, kid. I'll be right back..."
Years later, looking back, I'm pleased I was able to give a man his age the belly laugh I'm sure he went out in the hall to enjoy. It's the little pleasures that make life worthwhile...
Well, I like the DD idea from the OP.
As to your objections, why couldn't a person set up a single, perfect install, then make sure a copy of the SID-altering utility is available on the computer, THEN image the thing using DD?
Then it wouldn't be fragmented, and everything would be smooth and beautiful.
Touche. However, it isn't even "most". It's "some". And although a Canadian company DOES sell hydroelectric power to the U.S. there are American companies generating at the falls, too. Observe the Wikipedia:
...the Robert Moses Hydro-Electric Dam (the source of the majority of New York City's electricity), also in Niagara Falls...
Wikipedia Citation 1, from the Niagara Falls article:
The most powerful hydroelectric stations on the Niagara River nowadays are Sir Adam Beck 1 and 2 on the Canadian side, and the Robert Moses Niagara Power Plant and the Lewiston Pump Generating Plant on the American side. All together, Niagara's generating stations can produce about 4.4 GW of power.
Wikipedia Citation 2, about the American-side power plants:
Citation 3, from the New York Power Authority, which owns/manages the power plants on the American side, WHICH FEED NEW YORK:
" The Niagara project, located about 4 1/2 miles downstream from the Falls, consists of two main facilities: the Robert Moses Niagara Power Plant, with 13 turbines, and the Lewiston Pump-Generating Plant, with 12 pump-turbines. In between the two plants is a forebay capable of holding 164 billion gallons of water; behind the Lewiston plant, a 1,900-acre reservoir holds additional supplies of this liquid fuel"
(http://www.nypa.gov/facilities/niagara.htm)
SO, you're completely off base. NO, we don't import most of the power for the Northeast from Canada. We generate it ourselves, using OUR OWN power plants on the Niagara river.
That's life, man. So there you have it.
Claiming that the Northeast gets most of its power from Canada is cute, and a fun spin on the truth, but it's not very accurate.
Our power here in New York???
Indian Point nuclear power plant provides a significant amount of it, then there are many coal-fired plants, some natural gas plants, a small amount of wind power and methane power from landfills, and (what you're probably referring to) the generating facilities up in Niagara Falls. ConEd and Niagara Mohawk serve most of the power needs of the New York area.
SO, you hoser, Canada does NOT provide us all our power. Only a little chunk of it.
Other than that, though, yeah, Canada's pretty cool, eh?
A virus outbreak. We have a system here which is designed to seek out and handle these sorts of things, and just this afternoon we released its controls so it would be able to nip a huge outbreak in the bud.
So far, it seems to be working quite well. Skynet has managed to regain control of most of our systems... Pardon me, just a sec, one of my coworkers is on the other line...
(Yeah, Jim, I'm in the middle of an interview here... What? What do you mean you're locked out of your terminal. That can't be right...
What??? You've got missles airborne??? How many? ALL OF THEM???
Awwwwww.... Crap...)
What's new, I think, is the iterative aspect of Scrum and other agile methods. When you look at them in contrast to up-front methods like Waterfall, they look pretty good. But it's not all that new; RUP's been around for a while, and they use an iterative-incremental method.
Anyway, it's just a word. It's shorthand for a whole set of characteristics, so we can blab about it around the watercooler without taking ten minutes to finish our sentences, you know? There are probably people who turn it into a fetish and write up huge lists of buzzwords, but the developers are probably interpereting "we'll use Scrum" as "Iterative/incremental, plus more meetings, and a shorter develop and test cycle".
Umm... NO.
Unless you are actually ENGAGED IN RACKETEERING, you will not be charged with it. Wielding the equivalent of a Captain Midnight Secret Decoder Ring is still not illegal.
Here's some clarification of "racketeering" from Dictionary.com:
Main Entry: racketeering
Pronunciation: "ra-k&-'tir-i[ng]
Function: noun
1 : the extortion of money or advantage by threat or force
2 : a pattern of illegal activity (as extortion and murder) that is carried out in furtherance of an enterprise (as a criminal syndicate) which is owned or controlled by those engaged in such activity --see also Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act in the IMPORTANT LAWS section --compare ORGANIZED CRIME
Darknets are just the latest "OH MY GOD WE MUST ALL FEAR" line the computer industry is going to use to field a "solution" (probably some kind of sniffer for corporations, which tries to detect traffic which it cannot categorize and produces reports for suits).
Say it with me: darknets have always been here, and they will always be.
Hackers have IRC and other invite-only forums, and all the ways in which they've used them to secretly pass information around without the squares being in on it. P2P networks are darknets (for YOU, anyway) if you don't have software which uses the protocols and don't know anyone who knows about them. ANY new network protocol can be a darknet. You can roll your own anytime you want.
Darknets are the modern equivalent of the Captain Midnight Secret Decoder Ring. They are NOT the Beginning Of The Fall Of Civilization(tm).
Don't believe me? Fine. Be that way. Try this fun experiment:
Write yourself a Java suite that:
CLIENT SIDE:
1. Briefly touches a server, downloads the current list of IP addresses that have announced themselves to the server, announces ITSELF to the server, and then logs off. The server IP is probably best implemented as one of a list of possible server sites, so that if one is compromised (doesn't give the correct handshake or whatever) you just move on to the next one. All communication should be encrypted using the server's public key and YOUR public key (RSA between the two points, or whatever is fashionable in your circle of friends).
2. Lets you compose messages, or file transfers, or whatever, destined for whatever IP address you want to communicate with, again encrypted with both public keys. Maybe you even compress the data first, to reduce bandwidth usage.
3. Lets you "blackball" any IP address you think is compromised. You could implement this as "My PC Only" or as a common blackball pool, which everyone could vote on, or as a common blackball pool which people could consider provisional and accept or not accept.
SERVER SIDE:
1. Manage lists of IP addresses and their status.
2. Provide a handshake which is meant to test whether your software is authentic and you are in fact an approved node. If you're not, you get sucked into a honeypot and studied. You are NOT given an actual IP address list; rather you are given a fake list full of false leads.
3. Allow certain admins to control the system to some extent, ousting problematic members (bans) and so forth. This could alternately be implemented on the client side, with a voting scheme, or whatever.
Bam. Instant darknet. And it's a piece of cake for anyone who's passed the junior-level networking course at any public university. THINK about it -- why do you think anyone studies computer science these days? It sure ain't to find a job... People study computer science to build themselves cool, weird things that stiff, stick-up-their-ass types don't approve of.
Deal, people. The world is not all simple and sparkly, like an amusement park. We are all grown-ups, and we can do grown up things even if it frightens The Man(tm). And, really, computer science is the closest thing any of us gets to wielding supernatural power. Us geeks can do things NOBODY else can do. Why not do them? Why be a boring square if you don't have to? Build something freaky, get yourself one of those weird, off-kilter cover photos in Wired that makes you look like Dr. Evil. Why not? You weren't put on this earth to make Sheeple feel comfy and warm. Fuck 'em.
Pardon me, Mr. Grammar Nazi, sir, but I couldn't help but notice that your sentence:
"PEOPLE NEED TO LEARN TO FUCKING WRITE"
is missing a word. I believe what you meant to say was:
"SOME PEOPLE NEED TO LEARN HOW TO FUCKING WRITE"
Although I believe that, too, is a bit churlish. Perhaps you would be better served if you were to say:
"I say, old boy, I do believe that certain undesireables among us have demonstrated a need, I daresay a BURNING need, to learn how to better communicate with their Slashdot bretheren."
You're welcome!
Thanks! I envision "Phil the Unarmed Guy" as being about 5'5 tall, with stooped shoulders, a bad combover, rumpled tweedy clothes, an overbite, and a lispy voice like Peter Lorre:
:P
"Thhhay, that ithn't fair! Jutht becauth I'm the unarmed guy doethn't mean you all have to come to MY houth! Go away, all you crathy gun people! Leath me alone! THTOP! GITHE ME BACK MY PANTH!"
It's got its humor potential!
Dear Bill:
Thanks! It's really nice of you to pound the final ashen stake into the heart of your business model. Lord knows we open-source users have been trying to do it for years to no avail. Now that you're willing to do it FOR us, we anticipate a bright future for all involved.
Deciding to screw your customers not once, not twice, but ANNUALLY in PERPETUITY is a master stroke. We couldn't have thought of something that evil ourselves (OUR general way of doing things is to NOT charge the customer annually, in perpetuity) and if we had, most of the FOSS community would have told us we were conspiracy theorists.
So thank you, Bill, you have done the world a great service. I wish you the best of all possible retirements, spending your tractor-trailer trucks full of cash around the world as you see fit.
Cordially,
The collective users of F/OSS software.
Your last paragraph really captures my sentiment exactly. From my perspective, I would absolutely love it if the government confiscated everyone's guns and started us all from a "total ban" starting point. But since everyone already HAS a gun, pretty much, and hardly anyone is going to be sophisticated enough to be the first to hand theirs over, at this point even if the governmet does get wise and try to ban them, the situation is a permanent mexican standoff.
:)
I would love it if someone could figure a way out of it, but I really don't think anything can be done at this point except make sure your individual family is sufficiently tooled up "in case of".
Oh, I just thought of one more excellent example of "why at this point we're stuck with a need for at least a couple of guns". During the L.A. riots, when entire black communities went batshit over the Rodney King fiasco and started viciously attacking any whites or asians they came across, I remember seeing a story about a group of Korean store owners whose store was successfully protected from harm. Rioters didn't come any closer than about 20 feet from the store because all the men in the family were out front with high-caliber rifles and a "go ahead, give me an excuse" attitude. They came though the whole thing relatively unscathed. Everybody ELSE got either beaten nearly to death (like that poor truck driver) or their store smashed and looted.
(don't get me wrong, I understand why they were angry, but beating up some random white guy or looting a deli doesn't solve anything either).
Of course, I'm not saying most of us will ever live through something that bizarre and unique, but those Korean guys didn't think THEY were going to have to, either. Sometimes, life says "Surprise!" and throws a pie at you.
Anyway, I'm with you on the gun ban idea. I think it would be marvellous. But for it to work, it would have to be enforced with a house-to-house sweep, confiscating EVERYTHING. If they did THAT, I'd be a lot more comfortable handing anything I had over. It's one of those things where it's got to be all or nothing, or no one will participate. Nobody wants to be the one unarmed guy, you know? You'd feel like any criminals in the area would be saying "So what should we do now? Let's go to Phil's house, he's the Unarmed Guy!" Heh heh... Man, that could be a Simpson's episode, now that I think about it. That'd be pretty funny.
Cheers!
Oh, by the way, about serial killers: Many of the serial killers here in the U.S. used guns with relish. Son of Sam, for instance, used a magnum revolver. What you say is probably true in your country, but not in mine.
;)
Tsk.
You make SOME good points; and I agree with you in general, and do actually wish there WERE no guns available in the U.S. (a common joke I've heard is that you never hear about a "drive-by knifing"). The point I was trying to make was that given the situation, as it currently exists, it's better to have a gun than not to *in many situations commonly experienced in America*. And I'm surprised you thought those two blurbs towards the end were potentially offensive. Do you think Canadians will be offended by the implication that they're "running around NOT shooting each other"? You didn't think that was at least cute, if not funny? Come ON, I worked hard on that one. ;)
Well, not TOO hard. I did find your assertion that most Americans don't live near potentially dangerous wildlife amusing. What on earth do you base this on? When you vacation here, you're in a major city. You're nowhere NEAR "most Americans". Please don't assume (remember what Benny Hill said).
I'll grant you the things I listed (which do happen here) probably wouldn't give you much opportunity to go for your shotgun. But you DO underestimate the number of serious crimes that are prevented because someone returned fire or chased a criminal off. It happens all the time.
And although they might not qualify as "serial killers" there are a lot more murderers around than you would guess. I suspect the U.K. is a bit safer than the U.S. when it comes to that kind of thing. "Culture of violence" and all that. My understanding of it is, in the U.K. you get into a lot more fights, but you don't actually KILL each other. Here in the U.S. there are lots and lots of murders, but relatively fewer fistfights. Odd as that may seem. And people kill each other here for remarkably stupid reasons. You hear stories about stuff like one redneck wasting another because he wouldn't give him an easement onto his property, things like that. STUPID things. Life is weird here.
Let me tell you about an ACTUAL SURVEY that was done here in Albany.
Shootings on South Pearl (a neighborhood) were compared to those on North Pearl (another neighborhood) -- I work directly between the two neighborhoods (ugh). It was determined that although you were more likely to be shot on North Pearl, you were more likely to survive because the people on South Pearl were better shots (more actual deaths).
THIS is why we Americans are not exactly flush with the sensation of personal safety. Let me tell you another one (these are so much fun).
My friend Neil was driving through Troy one day when there, in the middle of the street, was a guy with a huge hole in his head. There was a cop standing over the body, shaking his head. Neil said hello to the cop, who told him "Man, this is weird. You don't see that every day; usually they shoot people in the neck around here." They never found the guy who shot the dead guy, by the way.
Again, it doesn't exactly inspire confidence that ones community is safe. My point is just that this is most definitely NOT the U.K. Things are different here. People here tend to keep guns "just in case". MOST people never have occasion to use them, but when occasions come up (and they do) the people in question are always very, very glad they had the gun on hand.
That's all I'm saying. By the way, I know Michael Moore likes to talk about how it's all fake, all a big media thing, but he's way off the mark. Remember how he went to South Central L.A. and nothing happened to him? He acted like that was proof it was safe there. How silly; what did he think would happen? In broad daylight, he was obviously shooting a documentary. Did he really think he was going to get mugged just like that, ON CAMERA??? With his friends right there? He knew he was safe, that's why he filmed it. It was propaganda making a false point.
Finally, let me say that my point "Americans have good reasons for wanting access to firearms" does NOT imply that I approve of assault weapons or pistols. I'm strictly talking about "norma
"Backward"? Not at all! Actually in my thinking your society is more civilized, and probably a whole lot safer. Guns are a real problem here.
:)
If you watch the news, almost all of the really terrible things that happen are because some nut-job took a gun to some heavily populated place and started blasting away at people. And, most of the violent crimes that take place happen because an idiot mugger or burgular or something decided that it was less risky to just murder his mark than risk having the cops get a good description out of him.
I wish the government would go around and forcibly collect up ALL of our guns; then, none of us would need them anyway (except for the whole "wild animals" thing, but then, since they can't shoot back a good compound bow would probably work well enough). As an American, I hate the fact that everyone here has a weapon. It bugs me.
But, things as they are, I'm not going to be the neighborhood's unarmed guy!
Heh heh...
I totally agree with you on the "overthrow the government" thing. I think that the people who say things about overturning the government have never served in the armed services -- they just have no idea how powerful military weapons are. Even a regular serviceman's M-16A2 from the early nineties would blow huge holes straight through a car. The rounds were loaded with special powder that contained magnesium dust (or something like that), and fired steel shells at 3100fps. One burst shot and the target was toast, and bulletproof vests don't work with that muzzle velocity. It's almost quaint that gun nuts from the NRA actually think they can take on the Marine Corps... I mean, when you think about it, it's kind of comical, isn't it?
If the government ever goes nuts/totalitarian, revolts are going to be put down QUICKLY. It'll be brutal. I'm going to be hiding in my apartment, doing EXACTLY what Big Brother tells me to, and I'm not going to be giving him any lip, either! heh heh...
It's not so bad here. It sucks that our criminals are so goddamn psycho (this guy kidnapped a yuppie and his friend from the Nanuet Mall a few years ago, made them drive into the woods, shot the guy in the head and the other one non-fatally, and eventually got caught for example). But most of us live in relatively safe places.
It's true a lot of us keep long arms (shotguns, etc) tucked away in our closets, but we're not SLEEPING with them per se. The thing is, they're there on the off chance we ever need to go for them. If someone starts kicking in our front door or something, we grab our twelve guage and hide somewhere while we call the cops. It could buy us some time if the guy manages to get through our (very heavy) door.
What's wrong with this idea? Virtually ALL of OUR criminals are packing, either guns or knives. Why do non-Americans have so much trouble understanding the basic facts of our society? There's no gun control here, at least no REAL gun control. Every nut-bag with a bone to pick can bring his piece to your house any time he wants. The cops NEVER get there in time... So, it makes sense to keep something sensible around "in case of". With luck, you never need it, and it gathers dust in a closet for forty years. Most people have exactly that experience.
But, there are rotten people in the world; it makes sense to have something to greet them with if they ever decide to visit.
By the way, I know some of you are going to say that most people aren't going to have anything terrible happen to them at any time in their lives. This is probably true. And those people won't ever have any call to drag out their dusty old shotguns. BUT, those of us who DO have occasion to lock and cock are going to be mighty glad we had some irons on hand when the time comes.
Just a thought. "Better to have one and not need it, than to need it and not have it."
You don't live in the U.S. so you wouldn't know this, but violent murder, robbery, and rape are fairly common in many of our communities. Many of us who own weapons own them for the SPECIFIC PURPOSE of forcibly removing the head of anyone who decides to kick in our front door.
I could tell you about a friend of my mother's, who was viciously attacked by a handiman she had hired. The guy did some fairly vile things to her before cutting her throat. They caught him, but that didn't make her feel any better.
I could tell you about my ex girlfriend, who was nearly raped by a Mexican guy who broke into her apartment. She managed to fight her way out of it, but he nearly got her.
I could tell you about the time a girl I was about to start dating had forgotten to tell me about her insane boyfriend, who promptly told me he was coming over with a nine millimeter to "talk this out". I informed him I'd be waiting with my hunting rifle, and he never showed up. THIS sort of thing is way more common than you might think, by the way. People are such hotheads!
Here's one: a new form of criminal activity, called "Home Invasion" has been happening. It seems to have started in the Southwest, because the first I heard of it was in stories from Arizona and Texas. Basically, a set of criminals dress up in "FBI" or police T-Shirts (fake, of course), kick in your door armed to the teeth, and once they have control of the house, THEN they rob and kill everyone.
Then, of course, we have serial killers turning up all over the place, picking on people who live towards the outer edges of suburbs and so on.
And, here in New York, it isn't even just humans: we have black bears killing people from time to time. If a black bear wants to get into your house, your lock isn't going to keep him out; he just pushes in the door or a window and scrambles in. Down in New Jersey, a year or two ago, a black bear mauled a child to death; neighbors shot it about a block away. These things have been happening more often in the past ten years for some reason. It's probably related to suburban sprawl, but still, even if it isn't really the bear's fault, I'd still rather it was him than me.
What you have to remember is, we Americans don't have guns so we can carry them around, waving them in people's noses (usually). We keep them locked in the closet in a gun safe, "just in case". If we hear someone kicking the front door in, we hustle upstairs, lock and load while the wife calls the cops, and we wait for Mr. Criminal to saunter his stupid ass into the hallway. Warning shot #1 goes center of mass.
It's a necessity in this society. What do you think this is? Canada? With civilized people running around NOT shooting each other? Come ON. Unless you're going to let us emigrate to your nice, safe, civilized country, we're keeping our guns. And you shouldn't pull the ivory tower routine with us unless you know our situation.
People around here are getting crazier every year. This place is DANGEROUS.
No, that wasn't it... It might have been the same guy, but the book I saw was a 2,000 year old (or so) engineering textbook full of his notes for apprentices and such. Good stuff, though.
I once read part of a book by an ancient Roman engineer in which he talked about how to set up a building site. The first thing he would do is locate water. He would lie down on the ground at the top of a hill before sunrise, and as the sun rose, he would gaze down the hill and notice where mist appeared.
That would be where the water table was close to the surface, and they would dig there to open a spring.
What I find funny is that Christians never accept the simple fact that JESUS WAS A JEW, so he would have naturally followed the principles of the Talmud. And, didn't he say "I am not the end of the law but the fulfillment of it"? He didn't want to change anything, he wanted to remind people to obey the commandments given to Moses.
I think the problem is that Paul the Gentile and his followers were the only apostles to survive the sacking of Jerusalem by the Romans somewhere around 100AD. Paul had some serious issues, I think. Look at how he pestered the Romans about their sexual practices. Jesus never bothered anyone about that sort of thing... He just wanted us to be nice to each other.
It's hard, because I'm technically a Presbyterian, but I think most Christian philosophy is totally full of shit and geared towards maintaining a state of self-loathing (why, oh why, did they EVER go this route? It's nuts).
I'd change religions, but I don't think any of the others are that much better. They all have their wonky points.
Sigh... Whatta world...
Scary stuff, man. I think I'm going to hide out here in Albany until the world goes back to normal.
I would love to hear how, exactly, the British cops explain this.
Question: "So, the suspect was dangerous?"
Cop: "No, guv, we had him pinned down, he wasn't going anywhere."
Q: "So... Did he have a weapon?"
Cop: "No, just a rail ticket."
Q: "And you had him pinned down?"
Cop: "Yep!"
Q: "At which point you shot him once in the shoulder and seven times in the head?"
Cop: "We wasn't taking any chances, Gov!"
Q: "What, exactly, did you think he might do? Use harsh language???"
Cop: "..."