"....to astroturf even. And I wonder if they are - they appear to have an unreasonable amount of support on sites like this...."
They get "an unreasonable amount of support" because they use the GPL, there is no conspiracy, take away the GPL and they all look pretty much the same. In fact that is the whole point, they can't legally take away the GPL for code that has already been released. Rightly or wronly many "intellectuals" associate open source with freedom and indepenence.
Money motivates and astroturf happens, but "on sites like this", the GPL stamp is what drives the genuine enthusiasim amongst people who do know their stuff. If you don't "do software" for a living the GPL may seem obscure, but trust me, the GPL is important not only to geeks, but also an ever growing number of corporations and governments.
When I worked for IBM in the 90's, the then CEO, Lou Gerstner said: "All software has been written, it just needs to be managed". None of us geeks had a fucking clue what he was talking about and simply laughed at his seemingly bizzare pronouncments. Ironically I now make a good living by stiching software components together, many of them open source.
"SO I appreciate that there is a vocal minority who would trash anything, however, this isn't a minority of people questioning Diebold. Virtually everyone with a technical and business background is questioning these systems. And Diebold is noticably silent."
Well put, I have been doing "computer stuff" for a long time, I and many of my old-fart co-workers can smell Diebolds design all the way from Australia. The key to fair elections is not found in technology, satisfying the majority of election observers is the best defence against fraud. Judging from the simple google search Diebold is doing the opposite by not providing an audit trail. The fact that I didn't even mention Diebold in the search only enforces the notion that the paperless design is not trusted by anyone who has a clue.
Disclaimer: I have been an independent contractor for ~15yrs. The law is an ass and IANAL.
Let's start with a bad analogy, what you are saying is like an oil refinery manager saying "I did before I resigned, it's not my problem your refinery exploded". ( Apologies to BadAnalogyGuy if you are reading, it's not quite down to your standard:))
Iff the product of his work was embodied by the files on the laptop and he did this deliberately, it would be a clear case of sabotage regardless of when it happened. If he made secret notes or back-ups it would be industrial/commercial espionage. Much more likely that a lazy or stupid manager hired a greedy and stupid cotractor. His appearance here on/. means he definitely did not have the cunning to do either and get away with it like the big boys do, perhaps it was just spite or even something as trivial as porn.
On the surface, it seems he was intent on rubbing out every trace of the data, so he must have known it was sensitive and unique. The company must also have known sensitive data was stored on the laptop or else how would they know it was missing?
I think his manager(s) should be slapped around the head for not ensuring the data was periodically transfered to company repositories. The moron with the laptop should be "red-flaged" to agencies by being banned from starting a company for a few years, hopefully he will be forced out of contracting. The company lost it's data because of lax data security, hopefully the lesson was worth the cost.
Many people would think that a site taking your credit card would imply the product is legal, but I don't know the guy or the circumstances so I won't comment on him.
I was also once good friends with a guy for over a decade, I gradually found out he was an incestious pervert who had molested his three kids for at least 15yrs. In the time I knew him he appeared to be the exact opposite, always ready to rant on the evils of porn, prostitutes, strippers, gays, perverts, anything to do with sexuality in public, most of all he was keen to point suspision at others.
When I came to learn the full extent of his deeds I wanted to confront him but he was already dying of cancer and drugged up on morphine in a hospital bed. He was my father-in-law, after several breakdowns my ex-wife of 20yrs now says she has forgiven him. Personaly I still feel it was "natural justice" that he died a painful and early death.
The point is you should not feel bad about having been friends with an alleged pervert, anybody can be a rock spider, you cannot "see it in their eyes", often the worst perpetrators are the ones who denounce anything sexual in public.
I seem to recall the same story, maybe they were the first to get caught? Most bar tenders who want to boost thier paypack simply give drunks the wrong change.
It's summertime in Melbourne Australia, if I leave my car unprotected overnight the hot north winds cover it in a talcum-fine red/yellow dust. Particularly noticable when accompanied by a very light rain.
Pfft, observation/Finite Element Anaylisis/comparison. What is there not to understand, similar techniques are used in engineering every day? Point out some contrary facts/maths/studies rather than vague philosophical notions of what is and is not predictable. You may want to start your reasearch on climate models by checking out a small fraction of the scientic effort behind them. I doubt if you will, my guess is you don't understand much past the "unpredictability" talking point currently being fed to you.
OTOH: Public discussion is about risk assesment not absolute certainty, until very recently ALL of the planets "leaders" have grossly underestimated the risks a changing climate presents. Many people such as yourself are still unaware that the greatest risk is not a rise in ocean levels, it is a direct and currently visable threat to our food chain.
"Climate, in contrast, is non-linear - and as with any non-linear system, tiny inaccuracies in the starting values can drasticly, disproportionately, and often unpredictably (due to the complexity and / or iterations of the calculations) alter the outcome. So the tiniest inaccuracies in the data make the difference between global warming and a new ice age - at least, if the model is honest and accurate (and that's a whole separate debate)."
This is an argument we hear time and again.
First: Swing a pendulum on a string and you have a "non-linear" system, so "non-linear" does not equate to unpredictable.
Second: Weather is the "chaotic" part, climate is the statistics of weather and follows cyclical patterns.
Science is warning you something is wrong, if anything the most rigorous investigations over the last decade have underestimated the speed of change (eg: IPCC), you either lack the most basic research skills, or you simply don't want to hear it .
"The actual study is meaningless in terms of the global warming debate....blah,blah,fud-link,blah,blah....rather than bearing any relevance to the issue of global climate change and its implications."
Nature has the headline "Antarctica is shrinking" with the sub-heading "Gravity survey shows overall loss in ice". Your link does not give reference to the fact that the paper was published in "Science", rather it takes issue with an article about the paper in "ScienceExpress". Off course they have no trouble picking out and twisting a different "Science" paper to suit their agenda.
"It's unscientific conclusions like that which give non-climatologists a bad name when it comes to these kinds of FUD political tactics."
So why assist them by proffering links to their FUD?
"In fact, I believe the attacks actually missed, as the camps had already been evacuated (just going by memory here)."
Depends on your definition of "missed", reports from the time list the number of dead as ~30 and a similar number of wounded. Naturally women and kids were amoungst them.
Will the "net" bring us together or tear us apart.
By "net" I don't mean the internet and blogs in particular. What I mean by "net" is the trend that started with telephones, radios and TVs, and is now rapidly heading towards world wide, instant "person to person" or "person to public" communications for everyone.
Suplementry:
What affect do you think blogs or any of these new forms of communication have already, or could in the future, have on the magnitude and frequency of "violent knee-jerk reactions". I do not wish to single out any particular reaction, suffice to say they are enacted by powerfull states and angry mobs from across the political and religious spectrum.
"When I go to Wikipedia, I go there for one thing. Information puked at me at a very fast rate."
If thats what you want then perhaps typing random words into google would better suit your needs. A stream of factoids without a coherent style is like a database without a schema. OTOH: I find most multi screen articles (except the highly contraversial ones), well written and easy to navigate.
Incomprehensible drivel, if your teachers cannot teach you the concepts of autocracy, democracy, communisim and market forces then perhaps you should do some reading of your own. So far all I have heard from you and the OP can be summed up as "Smart people know what's best for the group".
You have no idea about the formation of Isreal. Just compare that map to a modern map and it's plain to see it follows the same pattern of "Indian treaties" found in US history and elsewhere. It is not a simplistic good vs evil situation, war never is. The civilians on both sides are, as always, the victims.
"It's almost as if there are some Muslim's who think that they are "too good" to share a piece of real estate with Jews."
It is Isreal's policy that Isreal will not "share" land with the Palestinians since this would dillute the jewish demographic and the jewish state would be in "danger" of losing it's mandated religion. This is known as "the right of return" in treaty negotiations.
"..the only thing hindering peace in the Middle East is the Palestinean refusal to acknowledge Israel's right to exist."
This is the position taken by Hamas, for decades Fatah (Arrafat) has controlled "Palestine" and they have repeatedly acknowlaged Isreal's right to exist. Personally I find it regrettable that Hamas won the recent election and the west has run off to consult dictators in Egypt and Pakistan in an attempt to control them.
"...the world also does not owe anyone an education..."
No it certainly does not, but in the terms of real life even a caveman will get one or die trying.
Since Victorian times it has been generally regarded, (in the west), as in "the best interests" of society that everyone gets some minimum education, traditionally refered to as the three "R's" (obviously spelling is not one of them).
"So the self interest of each INDIVIDUAL member of a majority of the members of the group PREVENTS achieving the 'best interests' of the group."
Think about that statement for a minute, you are in fact arguing in favour of the anti-thesis to democratic rule. ie: You are saying that there exists a "best" solution that an arbritary minority should be imposing on the majority because "they know what's best". (ie: born to rule, thus my comment on intellectual snobbery). Science does produce the best possible explanation for natural phenomena but to use that as justification for rule by technocrat ignores the human condition and is definitely not in the "best interests" of society.
Nirvana is a myth and most people at one point or another in their lives will find themselves chanting the NIMBY chant. Democracy is far from perfect because in practice there are no perfect solutions to social problems, and unless we are assimlated by the "Borg", there never will be. Denying a minimum education to a portion of the population will only create more ignorant fools to vote for people who promise Nirvana for "us" at the expense of "them".
"I agree that a basic education is a MINIMUM, but you seem to be advocating it as a MAXIMUM."
Not my intention, see my reply to another post in this thread (above). The reply voids alot of your objections.
"You are glad that the majority selfishly put their own interests ahead of the best interests of the group? I find that an interesting attitude."
So how do you define "best interests of the group", if it is not the self interest of the majority? Are you suggesting it's a small group of very smart people unselfishly hogging all the resources? What about smart, lazy people, do we give them an extra leg-up so they can sit on the couch all day? Do we introduce dictatorship-101 for smart meglomaniacs?
There are many aspects to adult life that have little to do with intelligence or education, (observe, GWB or Pamela Anderson). Or to be more blunt, the world does not owe you a living simply because someone thinks your smart.
"I would rather my children had the BEST teachers, no the oldest, and I am sorry for your children because you want your children to have the OLDEST (Union)teachers, even if they are not the best."
Ok, now you are putting words in my mouth. Let's just say that experience is something that ALL young people lack, some will simply accept this fact on face value, others will not see it until they gain some experience themselves.
Simply stated: My basic objection to the OP is that kicking out "dumb kids" in order to give more resources to "smart kids" is not only "intellectual snobbery" but also a dangerously stupid thing to do for society as a whole.
Slashdot Mirror
"....to astroturf even. And I wonder if they are - they appear to have an unreasonable amount of support on sites like this...."
They get "an unreasonable amount of support" because they use the GPL, there is no conspiracy, take away the GPL and they all look pretty much the same. In fact that is the whole point, they can't legally take away the GPL for code that has already been released. Rightly or wronly many "intellectuals" associate open source with freedom and indepenence.
Money motivates and astroturf happens, but "on sites like this", the GPL stamp is what drives the genuine enthusiasim amongst people who do know their stuff. If you don't "do software" for a living the GPL may seem obscure, but trust me, the GPL is important not only to geeks, but also an ever growing number of corporations and governments.
When I worked for IBM in the 90's, the then CEO, Lou Gerstner said: "All software has been written, it just needs to be managed". None of us geeks had a fucking clue what he was talking about and simply laughed at his seemingly bizzare pronouncments. Ironically I now make a good living by stiching software components together, many of them open source.
"So maybe it is an urban legend." - Probably, could have been FUD started by the card companies to deter scammers.
"SO I appreciate that there is a vocal minority who would trash anything, however, this isn't a minority of people questioning Diebold. Virtually everyone with a technical and business background is questioning these systems. And Diebold is noticably silent."
Well put, I have been doing "computer stuff" for a long time, I and many of my old-fart co-workers can smell Diebolds design all the way from Australia. The key to fair elections is not found in technology, satisfying the majority of election observers is the best defence against fraud. Judging from the simple google search Diebold is doing the opposite by not providing an audit trail. The fact that I didn't even mention Diebold in the search only enforces the notion that the paperless design is not trusted by anyone who has a clue.
Disclaimer: I have been an independent contractor for ~15yrs. The law is an ass and IANAL.
:))
/. means he definitely did not have the cunning to do either and get away with it like the big boys do, perhaps it was just spite or even something as trivial as porn.
Let's start with a bad analogy, what you are saying is like an oil refinery manager saying "I did before I resigned, it's not my problem your refinery exploded". ( Apologies to BadAnalogyGuy if you are reading, it's not quite down to your standard
Iff the product of his work was embodied by the files on the laptop and he did this deliberately, it would be a clear case of sabotage regardless of when it happened. If he made secret notes or back-ups it would be industrial/commercial espionage. Much more likely that a lazy or stupid manager hired a greedy and stupid cotractor. His appearance here on
On the surface, it seems he was intent on rubbing out every trace of the data, so he must have known it was sensitive and unique. The company must also have known sensitive data was stored on the laptop or else how would they know it was missing?
I think his manager(s) should be slapped around the head for not ensuring the data was periodically transfered to company repositories. The moron with the laptop should be "red-flaged" to agencies by being banned from starting a company for a few years, hopefully he will be forced out of contracting. The company lost it's data because of lax data security, hopefully the lesson was worth the cost.
Many people would think that a site taking your credit card would imply the product is legal, but I don't know the guy or the circumstances so I won't comment on him.
I was also once good friends with a guy for over a decade, I gradually found out he was an incestious pervert who had molested his three kids for at least 15yrs. In the time I knew him he appeared to be the exact opposite, always ready to rant on the evils of porn, prostitutes, strippers, gays, perverts, anything to do with sexuality in public, most of all he was keen to point suspision at others.
When I came to learn the full extent of his deeds I wanted to confront him but he was already dying of cancer and drugged up on morphine in a hospital bed. He was my father-in-law, after several breakdowns my ex-wife of 20yrs now says she has forgiven him. Personaly I still feel it was "natural justice" that he died a painful and early death.
The point is you should not feel bad about having been friends with an alleged pervert, anybody can be a rock spider, you cannot "see it in their eyes", often the worst perpetrators are the ones who denounce anything sexual in public.
I seem to recall the same story, maybe they were the first to get caught? Most bar tenders who want to boost thier paypack simply give drunks the wrong change.
"What pisses me off about the american public is that everyone seems to want something for free."
Do you piss yourself off when ranting about being taxed too much? Do you want a government for free?
It's summertime in Melbourne Australia, if I leave my car unprotected overnight the hot north winds cover it in a talcum-fine red/yellow dust. Particularly noticable when accompanied by a very light rain.
Get a grip mate, oh, and stay away from bell towers.
Pfft, observation/Finite Element Anaylisis/comparison. What is there not to understand, similar techniques are used in engineering every day? Point out some contrary facts/maths/studies rather than vague philosophical notions of what is and is not predictable. You may want to start your reasearch on climate models by checking out a small fraction of the scientic effort behind them. I doubt if you will, my guess is you don't understand much past the "unpredictability" talking point currently being fed to you.
OTOH: Public discussion is about risk assesment not absolute certainty, until very recently ALL of the planets "leaders" have grossly underestimated the risks a changing climate presents. Many people such as yourself are still unaware that the greatest risk is not a rise in ocean levels, it is a direct and currently visable threat to our food chain.
"Climate, in contrast, is non-linear - and as with any non-linear system, tiny inaccuracies in the starting values can drasticly, disproportionately, and often unpredictably (due to the complexity and / or iterations of the calculations) alter the outcome. So the tiniest inaccuracies in the data make the difference between global warming and a new ice age - at least, if the model is honest and accurate (and that's a whole separate debate)."
This is an argument we hear time and again.
First: Swing a pendulum on a string and you have a "non-linear" system, so "non-linear" does not equate to unpredictable.
Second: Weather is the "chaotic" part, climate is the statistics of weather and follows cyclical patterns.
Science is warning you something is wrong, if anything the most rigorous investigations over the last decade have underestimated the speed of change (eg: IPCC), you either lack the most basic research skills, or you simply don't want to hear it .
"Volcanoes put out far more greenhouse gasses than anything humans do."
flamebait/troll/overrated - take your pick.
"So solidly demonstrating that the argument is not based in fact"
When has anyone demonstrated that???
Nature
opps
"The actual study is meaningless in terms of the global warming debate....blah,blah,fud-link,blah,blah....rather than bearing any relevance to the issue of global climate change and its implications."
Nature has the headline "Antarctica is shrinking" with the sub-heading "Gravity survey shows overall loss in ice". Your link does not give reference to the fact that the paper was published in "Science", rather it takes issue with an article about the paper in "ScienceExpress". Off course they have no trouble picking out and twisting a different "Science" paper to suit their agenda.
"It's unscientific conclusions like that which give non-climatologists a bad name when it comes to these kinds of FUD political tactics."
So why assist them by proffering links to their FUD?
Thank-you for your thoughts Mr Burns.
"In fact, I believe the attacks actually missed, as the camps had already been evacuated (just going by memory here)."
Depends on your definition of "missed", reports from the time list the number of dead as ~30 and a similar number of wounded. Naturally women and kids were amoungst them.
Will the "net" bring us together or tear us apart.
By "net" I don't mean the internet and blogs in particular. What I mean by "net" is the trend that started with telephones, radios and TVs, and is now rapidly heading towards world wide, instant "person to person" or "person to public" communications for everyone.
Suplementry:
What affect do you think blogs or any of these new forms of communication have already, or could in the future, have on the magnitude and frequency of "violent knee-jerk reactions". I do not wish to single out any particular reaction, suffice to say they are enacted by powerfull states and angry mobs from across the political and religious spectrum.
"When I go to Wikipedia, I go there for one thing. Information puked at me at a very fast rate."
If thats what you want then perhaps typing random words into google would better suit your needs. A stream of factoids without a coherent style is like a database without a schema. OTOH: I find most multi screen articles (except the highly contraversial ones), well written and easy to navigate.
Incomprehensible drivel, if your teachers cannot teach you the concepts of autocracy, democracy, communisim and market forces then perhaps you should do some reading of your own. So far all I have heard from you and the OP can be summed up as "Smart people know what's best for the group".
Try the AP search function , but I agree there is nothing new or wrong with people repackaging stories provided they give credit where credit is due.
You have no idea about the formation of Isreal. Just compare that map to a modern map and it's plain to see it follows the same pattern of "Indian treaties" found in US history and elsewhere. It is not a simplistic good vs evil situation, war never is. The civilians on both sides are, as always, the victims.
"It's almost as if there are some Muslim's who think that they are "too good" to share a piece of real estate with Jews."
It is Isreal's policy that Isreal will not "share" land with the Palestinians since this would dillute the jewish demographic and the jewish state would be in "danger" of losing it's mandated religion. This is known as "the right of return" in treaty negotiations.
"..the only thing hindering peace in the Middle East is the Palestinean refusal to acknowledge Israel's right to exist."
This is the position taken by Hamas, for decades Fatah (Arrafat) has controlled "Palestine" and they have repeatedly acknowlaged Isreal's right to exist. Personally I find it regrettable that Hamas won the recent election and the west has run off to consult dictators in Egypt and Pakistan in an attempt to control them.
"...the world also does not owe anyone an education..."
No it certainly does not, but in the terms of real life even a caveman will get one or die trying.
Since Victorian times it has been generally regarded, (in the west), as in "the best interests" of society that everyone gets some minimum education, traditionally refered to as the three "R's" (obviously spelling is not one of them).
"So the self interest of each INDIVIDUAL member of a majority of the members of the group PREVENTS achieving the 'best interests' of the group."
Think about that statement for a minute, you are in fact arguing in favour of the anti-thesis to democratic rule. ie: You are saying that there exists a "best" solution that an arbritary minority should be imposing on the majority because "they know what's best". (ie: born to rule, thus my comment on intellectual snobbery). Science does produce the best possible explanation for natural phenomena but to use that as justification for rule by technocrat ignores the human condition and is definitely not in the "best interests" of society.
Nirvana is a myth and most people at one point or another in their lives will find themselves chanting the NIMBY chant. Democracy is far from perfect because in practice there are no perfect solutions to social problems, and unless we are assimlated by the "Borg", there never will be. Denying a minimum education to a portion of the population will only create more ignorant fools to vote for people who promise Nirvana for "us" at the expense of "them".
"I agree that a basic education is a MINIMUM, but you seem to be advocating it as a MAXIMUM."
Not my intention, see my reply to another post in this thread (above). The reply voids alot of your objections.
"You are glad that the majority selfishly put their own interests ahead of the best interests of the group? I find that an interesting attitude."
So how do you define "best interests of the group", if it is not the self interest of the majority? Are you suggesting it's a small group of very smart people unselfishly hogging all the resources? What about smart, lazy people, do we give them an extra leg-up so they can sit on the couch all day? Do we introduce dictatorship-101 for smart meglomaniacs?
There are many aspects to adult life that have little to do with intelligence or education, (observe, GWB or Pamela Anderson). Or to be more blunt, the world does not owe you a living simply because someone thinks your smart.
"I would rather my children had the BEST teachers, no the oldest, and I am sorry for your children because you want your children to have the OLDEST (Union)teachers, even if they are not the best."
Ok, now you are putting words in my mouth. Let's just say that experience is something that ALL young people lack, some will simply accept this fact on face value, others will not see it until they gain some experience themselves.
Simply stated: My basic objection to the OP is that kicking out "dumb kids" in order to give more resources to "smart kids" is not only "intellectual snobbery" but also a dangerously stupid thing to do for society as a whole.