I hope that you're right about this model failing, but I'm still worried. Even if the system changes tomorrow, we'll still have all sorts of critical technology lawyered out of existence for the next twenty years.
As a Phoenix resident, I am entirely in favor of the NFL blacking out Cardinals home games. By not showing the Cardinals get pounded, they can show an interesting game that's worth watching.
If only they would black out away games as well...
It's not just the excitement - my experience has been that the best in-game rewards come from the hardest paths. The best power-ups are going to be at then end of the laser corridor, not sitting in the window.
I think that we agree on the major points here. Life is risky, and there are no guarantees.
My point is, though, that the risks might come to exceed the rewards if the trend of outsourcing skilled jobs continues. Consider a risk-reward calculation. The expected value of an investment is the chance of success times the reward for success minus the chance of failure minus the losses incurred by failure. As the chances for success decrease, the expected value of education starts to fall. If it should fall below zero, then not pursuing higher education will become the better bet. Some people will succeed, just as some people make money at roulette even though it is still a losing wager.
Of course, there is much more involved than random chance. Your skills, talents, and drive will affect your personal risk factor more than anything else, but I am looking at the situation averaged across the US population. On that population, I see the potential for a drop in the value of education for the average person, and I think that is a bad thing.
There is no guarantee of a good job, but there should be a reasonable expectation of one if a college education is to be considered valuable to our society.
The price of a college education, including the opportunity costs of not working full time, are very high. These costs were traditionally offset by the greater potential earnings that a job requiring that education provides.
Unless a grad has a reasonable expectation of earning enough to pay for that education (and survive at the same time), college becomes (financially speaking) just money down the drain.
Higher education is important enough for our country that this should not happen. College should not just be for the independently wealthy.
Team sports (and integrating well into sports teams) involve a lot of social skills, especially with regard to spotting, understanding, and dealing with power relationships. An individual sport, like tennis, would be an easier place to start for someone needing lower level social skills.
For some people, the backwards compatability losses are much more important than the security gains. These people are complaining, possibly because this will involve a lot of work for them.
For others, the security gains are more important than backwards compatability losses. These people are cheering.
From what I've read so far (at +3, YMMV), opinions seem to be fairly evenly split.
People realizing the possibility of spaceflight brought us space opera novels.
People realizing the possibility of nuclear annihilation brought us post-apocalyptic wasteland novels.
People realizing the potential for computer networks to revolutionize the way we live brought us cyberpunk novels.
When the someone realizes the potential of some new development, we get a new batch of fresh science fiction novels. Sooner or later, something will be made or discovered that creates thousands of interesting possibilities. When that happens, science fiction writers will write about those possibilities in exciting new works. Until then, we're stuck with book 18 of a 93 book series.
I think the presence of cameras will restrain those likely to cause disturbances in class, and will be a tremendous aid in dealing with those who don't belong in a traditional classroom setting.
While I understand your point here, I worry a great deal about a technology used specifically to create a chilling effect on speech. To keep students from throwing spitballs and passing notes is a worthy goal, but it carries the strong risk of suppressing unpopular opinions. The independent thought alarm from "Lisa the Vegetarian" could become the new reality for both students and teachers.
I make the general classification of device size as follows:
* Fits in my pocket or on my belt, etc.
* Fits in my backpack, etc.
* Fits in my car.
* Too big for the car.
A device that is one or more size ranks smaller than the standard kind is probably worth significantly more than the standard (e.g. a laptop is worth more to me than its equivalent desktop). Movement within a rank is not especially meaningful - my desk can fit a two foot tall case or a four foot case with equal ease.
Thus, for me, a change in case form factor would probably not be worth the extra money.
Its important to note here that there are two different standards for libel.
If the plaintiff is a public figure (and it is probably fair to say that a publicly traded corporation is), then that plaintiff must prove that the defendant acted with actual malice, that is, that the defendant was aware at the time of publication that the statement was false.
If the defendant is not a public figure (and some mid-level manager is probably not one), then the plaintiff must only show defamation by the defendant.
Of course, who is a public figure and who is not is a tricky point that is not well defined.
This is going to be a tough spot for Slashdot - the main defense sees to be saying there will be bad PR for Microsoft if they press on.
I sincerely doubt that this will be effective, because most of the bad PR will be directed at people on Slashdot that never liked Microsoft anyway. The rest of the world will probably hear carefully spun news about stopping piracy, etc. Microsoft has very few customers to lose in this situation, so there is really no financial reason for them to not sue 'till its done.
I can only hope Slashdot treads carefully in this.
Slashdot Mirror
I hope that you're right about this model failing, but I'm still worried. Even if the system changes tomorrow, we'll still have all sorts of critical technology lawyered out of existence for the next twenty years.
As a Phoenix resident, I am entirely in favor of the NFL blacking out Cardinals home games. By not showing the Cardinals get pounded, they can show an interesting game that's worth watching.
If only they would black out away games as well...
It's not just the excitement - my experience has been that the best in-game rewards come from the hardest paths. The best power-ups are going to be at then end of the laser corridor, not sitting in the window.
I think that we agree on the major points here. Life is risky, and there are no guarantees.
My point is, though, that the risks might come to exceed the rewards if the trend of outsourcing skilled jobs continues. Consider a risk-reward calculation. The expected value of an investment is the chance of success times the reward for success minus the chance of failure minus the losses incurred by failure. As the chances for success decrease, the expected value of education starts to fall. If it should fall below zero, then not pursuing higher education will become the better bet. Some people will succeed, just as some people make money at roulette even though it is still a losing wager.
Of course, there is much more involved than random chance. Your skills, talents, and drive will affect your personal risk factor more than anything else, but I am looking at the situation averaged across the US population. On that population, I see the potential for a drop in the value of education for the average person, and I think that is a bad thing.
There is no guarantee of a good job, but there should be a reasonable expectation of one if a college education is to be considered valuable to our society.
The price of a college education, including the opportunity costs of not working full time, are very high. These costs were traditionally offset by the greater potential earnings that a job requiring that education provides.
Unless a grad has a reasonable expectation of earning enough to pay for that education (and survive at the same time), college becomes (financially speaking) just money down the drain.
Higher education is important enough for our country that this should not happen. College should not just be for the independently wealthy.
Team sports (and integrating well into sports teams) involve a lot of social skills, especially with regard to spotting, understanding, and dealing with power relationships. An individual sport, like tennis, would be an easier place to start for someone needing lower level social skills.
Slashdot does not speak with one voice.
For some people, the backwards compatability losses are much more important than the security gains. These people are complaining, possibly because this will involve a lot of work for them.
For others, the security gains are more important than backwards compatability losses. These people are cheering.
From what I've read so far (at +3, YMMV), opinions seem to be fairly evenly split.
People realizing the possibility of spaceflight brought us space opera novels.
People realizing the possibility of nuclear annihilation brought us post-apocalyptic wasteland novels.
People realizing the potential for computer networks to revolutionize the way we live brought us cyberpunk novels.
When the someone realizes the potential of some new development, we get a new batch of fresh science fiction novels. Sooner or later, something will be made or discovered that creates thousands of interesting possibilities. When that happens, science fiction writers will write about those possibilities in exciting new works. Until then, we're stuck with book 18 of a 93 book series.
I think the presence of cameras will restrain those likely to cause disturbances in class, and will be a tremendous aid in dealing with those who don't belong in a traditional classroom setting.
While I understand your point here, I worry a great deal about a technology used specifically to create a chilling effect on speech. To keep students from throwing spitballs and passing notes is a worthy goal, but it carries the strong risk of suppressing unpopular opinions. The independent thought alarm from "Lisa the Vegetarian" could become the new reality for both students and teachers.
More to the point, he turns a blind eye to the laws that he doesn't like, and cries about how the public does the same thing.
> he obviously turns the blind eye to laws that he doesn't like, and wants the public to do the same until they're eroded into nothingness.
I make the general classification of device size as follows:
* Fits in my pocket or on my belt, etc.
* Fits in my backpack, etc.
* Fits in my car.
* Too big for the car.
A device that is one or more size ranks smaller than the standard kind is probably worth significantly more than the standard (e.g. a laptop is worth more to me than its equivalent desktop). Movement within a rank is not especially meaningful - my desk can fit a two foot tall case or a four foot case with equal ease.
Thus, for me, a change in case form factor would probably not be worth the extra money.
Its important to note here that there are two different standards for libel.
If the plaintiff is a public figure (and it is probably fair to say that a publicly traded corporation is), then that plaintiff must prove that the defendant acted with actual malice, that is, that the defendant was aware at the time of publication that the statement was false.
If the defendant is not a public figure (and some mid-level manager is probably not one), then the plaintiff must only show defamation by the defendant.
Of course, who is a public figure and who is not is a tricky point that is not well defined.
This is going to be a tough spot for Slashdot - the main defense sees to be saying there will be bad PR for Microsoft if they press on.
I sincerely doubt that this will be effective, because most of the bad PR will be directed at people on Slashdot that never liked Microsoft anyway. The rest of the world will probably hear carefully spun news about stopping piracy, etc. Microsoft has very few customers to lose in this situation, so there is really no financial reason for them to not sue 'till its done.
I can only hope Slashdot treads carefully in this.