nuclear ( P ) Pronunciation Key (nkl-r, ny-) adj. Biology. Of, relating to, or forming a nucleus: a nuclear membrane. Physics. Of or relating to atomic nuclei: a nuclear chain reaction. Using or derived from the energy of atomic nuclei: nuclear power. Of, using, or possessing atomic or hydrogen bombs: nuclear war; nuclear nations.
I don't know about nuclear war, but internet and computers will be gone. The only ones left will be luddites (per Bill Gates) and Amish farmers.
I intend on passing down the story of the great meterorite to my children, and have them pass it on to their children and so on...as well as tails of the combustion engine, the electric generator, the light bulb and the silicon chip...hopefully my clan will be living on high ground far away from major bodies of water.
While the rest of us are living in the 21st Century, companies are regressing into the dark ages.
There is only one way out - become independently wealthy; have a job (such as writing novels) that does not require such BS (either that or win the Lotto - I haven't figured out which one I will pursue in earnest yet...)
If philanthropy was genuine, these companies would have been doing it from day one.
On the one hand, Microsloth is helping SCO in the frivilous lawsuit to scare business away from Linux, and on the other hand they are undercutting Linux in the non-profit sector. Sounds like they have everything tied up.
We can only hope they damage their company to such an extent that it is irrepairable. Of course, the perpetrators will have thier golden parachutes - or will keep the company by laying off thousands of workers.
It is disgusting.
It is all a big game, until someone gets their eye poked out...
I just happened to have dictionary.com up when I read your post - tenor has other meanings:
A continuous, unwavering course. See Synonyms at tendency. The word, phrase, or subject with which the vehicle of a metaphor is identified, as life in "Life's but a walking shadow" (Shakespeare).
The course of thought or argument running through something written or spoken. General sense; purport. Law. The exact meaning or actual wording of a document as distinct from its effect. An exact copy of a document. Music. The highest natural adult male voice. One who sings this part. An instrument that sounds within this range. Abbr. T A vocal or instrumental part written within this range.
I highlighted the ones I thought applied - take your pick. His use of tenor is correct.
With the cost of computers dropping and free operating systems available, hackers can hack to their heart's content without 'hacking' anyone off.
Because of the stigma attached to the word 'hacker', perhaps we need to reexamine the lexicon, and make up a new word for what we recognize as peaceful, non-intrusive exploration. Here is my go at it:
Phreaker - phone freak -
Cracker - W@rezd00dz
Hacker - mainstream meaning - person who breaks into computer systems illegally for malicious purposes (lets face it, the public perception will not go away)
Groker - take the verb 'grok', and turn it into a noun - implies the process of getting to the point where you grok something; eg. a hacker hacks until he groks what he is hacking groks ham radio; he transmits every night), or passive (he groks ham radio; but, he doesn't have an antenna up yet). Saying he is a groker would clear that up (he is a ham radio groker). Clearly 'groker' implies activity.
I think this (or something like it) would clear up the misconceptions people have.
El Stupido...
on
Hijacking .NET
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Seems like a bad thing to implement an interface to a non-documented API for mission essential code.
The problem with this is that Microsloth can easily change their non-public interface without telling anyone and your code will break. Other than the lack of security implied by accessing things that are supposed to be secure, this interoperability issue will come back to haunt anyone who implements these 'tricks' IMHO.
Don't put this in mission essential code, or you will recieve a phone call late one night by your operations staff for unknown reasons...you have been warned.
Microsoft is going to dig through the Unix code, and the Linux code side by side. They will find interoperability shortfalls to take advantage of, or failing that, will create them by extending APIs, or using undefined fields in APIs to their advantage (e.g. Java et al). If the majority of desktop systems can't interoperate with Linux, then their thinking is, "Linux is dead in the mainstream".
Look for Microsoft to try to manipulate Posix standards toward proprietary extensions. Also look at them to support SCO in the patent infringement case.
Urge your friends to boycott Microsoft products, buy systems without the 'Microsoft Tax' (without an OS - easiest way to do this is build a machine from parts), and reload Microsoft machines with Linux (my game box is going to be loaded with Linux exclusively in the next few days - directX is dead - long live OpenGL!)
More importantly, support Linux and open source products/projects. Lets get the breadth and depth of computer games now available on Windows for Linux by buying/supporting Linux games/developers, and following through on open source game development. Desktop productivity tools are there, now lets get the other arenas up to speed as well.
1. Patent and Copyright knee-jerk reactions by the media controllers will get out of hand.
2. People will react by boycotting the 'new' technology, and the media mega-corporations will crumble; unfortunately this means our internet backbone will die, and broadband access will be priced out of the reach of the average person. This will feed upon itself until the only Telcos left are the mobile phone companies - and the few entertainment (news) corporations left will be viewed via satelite providers.
3. An emergence of a home grown wireless network will quickly spread across the landscape (a recent article spoke of a group trying to get a coast to coast WIFI link up in the near future); a sub-culture of music, writing, art, and ideas will spread across the land.
4. Cleansed of the old media controllers, new technology will flourish. (This will start about 2036).
Unfortunately I will be an old fart by the time all of this works out, with the battle scars to prove it...
There is no Utopia - and there never will be; life will always be about struggling for what is right against greed and stupidity.
"From February 1995, computer systems have carried the UNIX brand if:
They guarantee to support the services specified in the Single UNIX Specification.
Customers can identify UNIX certified products by the Open Brand logo and the mandatory attribution declaring to which version of the specification the product complies:
UNIX 93 applies to UNIX system products which pre-date the Single UNIX Specification.
UNIX 95 applies to UNIX system products which conform to the Single UNIX Specification.
UNIX 98 applies to UNIX system products which conform to the Single UNIX Specification , Version 2.
The mark to be associated with the Single UNIX Specification, Version 3 is under development, see the platform pages for the latest information.
In licensing the UNIX brand a vendor warrants and represents that every certified product:
Conforms to the specification.
Meets The Open Group's test and certification requirements.
Will continue to conform to the specification.
Will be rectified within an agreed time should it be found to be non-conformant.
UNIX certification is widely recognized as the international symbol of assurance in open systems. By the end of 2001, the value of procurements of open systems referencing the brand had exceeded $25 billion. "
So, from a technical standpoint you can see that if it meets the standards (UNIX98, UNIX95, UNIX93, or a soon to be updated standard) LINUX, FREEBSD, or any other OS can be branded 'UNIX' legally.
However, in spoken discourse (and by spoken I mean not only verbal, but written words attributed to journal, informal, or fiction genres) I think it perfectly acceptable to say 'unix' when it would be more accurate to say 'Linux', or 'FreeBSD', as mentioned previously in the example of 'Kleenex' becoming a generic term for 'tissue'. The verbal lexicon will continue to change and reflect our understandings of the effective reality (Linux contains many of the standards contained in UNIX98 for example, and for all intents and purposes is indistenguishable from a branded UNIX to an end user)
Unix keepers of the flame should not find issue with this usage, since it really serves to pay homage to the roots of all Posix compliant operating systems - UNIX. Without the brainchild of AT&T Labs, we would not be here discussing this subject. Just as well, as the article cited at the head of this thread indicates, the tradition of brainstorming inovation across a free community will continue to drive changes which will find their way into the standard whether the UNIX purists like it or not. As Bruce Lee stressed: internalize what works - and the unix paradigm of open development works.
As long as I can touch type faster than I can write (which I can) I will never have a use for a tablet PC as my primary.
I see tablets/PDAs as adjuncts that allow you to download information from your desktop/laptop, and carry it around in a handy package for quick access, when lugging around the laptop is not an option (outdoors on a hiking trip for example). Of course, the laptop will probably be in the backpack for when we set up camp...
If any real work/writing needs to be done, then the laptop or desktop is where the action is.
Please don't compare the attrocities of the Germans during WWII to the war fighting that is going on in Iraq. There is no really 'fair' fighting in war. In order to survive you must call down artillery and air support when you make contact with large formations, and you must maneuver to fire from covered and concealed positions if possible. You must pursue your enemy and bring him down so that he can not live to fight another day. Most of the time the enemy does not see it coming. That is war. As Sherman said during the Civil War: "War is Hell". The way we fight is not in and of itself a war atrocity.
Now, if we wantonly kill civilians or execute prisoners, these are attrocities and punishible under the UCMJ (uniform code of military justice). Any soldier, sailor, airman or marine has a duty to disobey orders to perform such acts - and I would support thier decision whole-heartedly.
Don't confuse combat with attrocities. They are two different things.
You are among the same people who spit on the veterans coming home from Vietnam.
Shame on you!
Our soldiers (and the word 'soldier', btw, means a person in the Army), sailors, airmen and marines get paid squat, train and fight in life threatening environments, and put thier lives on the line so you don't have to be drafted and put your soft body in the line of fire.
Now, you may not agree with all of the policies of the current administration, and I can guarantee you that there are many military men and women who don't either; however, the moral imperative to start a rebellion because of it is not there. Given that, the airman's statement is true and a fair reflection of duty, and honor - qualities you seem to be lacking.
While I may believe that diplomacy should have been more adroitly managed to avoid this, now that the president has made the decision, my duty as a soldier would be to follow his orders; again, I don't see the war in Iraq as a moral delema requiring protest at this point. The key for the troops to come home safely is for them to be able to concentrate on thier missions without needless distractions from back home.
You should be praying for the safety of everyone deserving of it in that region - your brother included - instead of spouting your vitriolic comments about those who put everything on the line, so we don't have to.
Re:it's easier than that if you use free software.
on
Family Tech Support
·
· Score: 1
"...as much as I hate watching my mom buy a $500 break job."
Remember the 'cassette tape'? Music recordings have been shared from the begining of the advent of recording medium.
Now, my question is: why is the copying and sharing a a medium (CDs) that are cheaper to manufacture per unit than cassettes so much worse now than it was in the past?
Given statistical averages, the amount of copied recordings is the same as it was in the past.
I think the real issue here is that we are living in a time where technology allows the would-be 'information cops' to keep tabs on where those copies are going and to whom. Given DMCA and efforts for government to mandate the installation of copy control hardware on consumer electronics, we are fast approaching a digital dark age. If you 'opt out' and refuse to upgrade all new content will become inaccessible.
A kneejerk reaction against piracy is going to effect all of us (who don't pirate) in ways we can not even imagine atm.
"Surely that shoul[d] have been at the top of the list? Standards support should come before everything else. If we don't have standards, its bloody hard for software to tak to other bits of software, let alone to humans." - aallan
Consumers want open standards so they can share easily with other people.
Businesses want open standards so they can share easily with their partners.
Software Companies do not want open standards - so they can lock you into their proprietary standards (and thus a perpetual upgrade path). At least, that was the predominant model as of yesterday. Who knows about tomorrow? Perhaps they will get a clue if we all move to open source applications and operating systems?
Re:If you criticize, you'RE a TERRORIST:+1,Patriot
on
Analysis of SCO vs. IBM
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
The real problem comes when this is not a personal decision, but an institutional manifestation.
When the government (and any person representing the government is 'the government' for all intents and purposes) makes an outrageous statement, it certainly does not fall into the same class as a private citizen making the same statement. This is so because the government has access to private records and has an army (FBI, CIA, Local Law Enforcement, as well as the regular standing army) to suppress individual's rights (we have seen this done in the past; it will be done in the future).
The government branding someone a 'terrorist' serves to put desired 'punishment' behind a faceless agency, and thus allows personal vendettas to move forward under the veil of 'law enforcement'. This was seen during the McCarthy era, and the implications in Mr. Pearle's statements are shockingly similar, in words if not substance (replace 'terrorist' with 'communist' and you have a perfect example of past history).
Our country is built upon freedom of expression. It is a dark day, indeed, when that pillar of our system is suppressed by the very people who swear to uphold the Constitution (and thus freedom of expression). I could not abide hipocracy when I was a child, and I can not stand for it as an adult.
The main point I want to make is that regardless of what we call ourselves, we must recognize and teach what goes on in the real world, in addition to the purely theoretical and lofty concepts that reside in the ivory towers.
Maybe a definition would help matters -
To engineer: To plan, manage, and put through by skillful acts or contrivance.
Given that definition, I don't see a problem with calling ourselves 'Software Engineers'.
On the other hand my title has the word 'Developer'in it, and I find that a good choice as well.
In the sited article, the author makes his most critical point:
"The precision of traditional computer science has a drawback, however. The problems that are solved are those that are amenable to precise solutions. These problems are, by definition, tightly defined, with no mushy statements or an unacceptably high number of variables. In short, these problems are easier than real-world problems that aren't conveniently narrowed."
This says it all to me. In reality, systems design and the resultant programming implementation are truely a mixture of Art and Science.
Software is made for people to use - either directly, such as a productivity application on a personal computer - or indirectly, such as a program embedded in a microprocessor in a car. As people become more sophisticated in their use of software, they expect software to do things that come naturally to people. This makes programs more complex, and provides situations that sometimes can not be well defined in advance, or ever over the life of the application yet still needs to be adressed in the program!.
If we, as computer scientists, force the definitions of problems to fit neatly within acceptable scientific boundaries, we invariably produce a product that is unusable by human beings over the long run. I see this in the real world all of the time; development teams that insist that every aspect of the specification be written before coding is accomplished - and once coding starts, no changes are allowed (this is commonly referred to as the 'waterfall' lifecycle - i.e. - design, spec, build, maintain, deprecate - a one path solution).
As a developer/programmer, I have been advocating a more holistic view of software development. We, as programmers, are not here simply to satisfy our own egos; we are here to help people through our work. If there were no people there would be no need for software, as tautological as this sounds, it is indeed true, and something programmers should think about every day.
Along these lines I advocate an iterative lifecycle model (and you will see similar ideas called other things, such as the 'ready, shoot, aim' approach of software design as put forward in the 'Pragmatic Programmer' [don't have the author's names or the publisher...sorry]
There are other chemical fuels that do not use oil, and provide more energy over shorter durations (particularly if you are interested in racing at current speedway velocities) than electric setups. We have alot of experience with chemical powered motors, and thus it is easy and cost effective to design them - versus trying to invent new technology.
The U.S.A. is not a democracy, it is a republic. The people do not elect the leaders, the political parties decide who they will support (how many independents made it into Congress last year?) and those generally win the election. The executive branch is chosen by the electorial college - there are many instances when one candidate wins the popular vote, but does not pick up the electorial college votes needed to win.
Our forefathers, in their wisdom, set up our election system this way with the intention of making change more difficult - to put brakes on violent swings in leadership at the whim of the mob (us).
Unfortunately what this equates to is a good ol' boy system and pork barrel politics. The people have very little say in what goes on in government on a daily basis, and a 'Hobson's Choice' at the polls.
Slashdot Mirror
If you are in it for the money - then you are doing it for the wrong reasons.
I am sure the Government and Big Business beg to differ...
From Dictionary.com:
nuclear ( P ) Pronunciation Key (nkl-r, ny-)
adj.
Biology. Of, relating to, or forming a nucleus: a nuclear membrane.
Physics. Of or relating to atomic nuclei: a nuclear chain reaction.
Using or derived from the energy of atomic nuclei: nuclear power.
Of, using, or possessing atomic or hydrogen bombs: nuclear war; nuclear nations.
I don't know about nuclear war, but internet and computers will be gone. The only ones left will be luddites (per Bill Gates) and Amish farmers.
I intend on passing down the story of the great meterorite to my children, and have them pass it on to their children and so on...as well as tails of the combustion engine, the electric generator, the light bulb and the silicon chip...hopefully my clan will be living on high ground far away from major bodies of water.
I'll pay for my computing in Zorkmids, thank you very much!
While the rest of us are living in the 21st Century, companies are regressing into the dark ages.
There is only one way out - become independently wealthy; have a job (such as writing novels) that does not require such BS (either that or win the Lotto - I haven't figured out which one I will pursue in earnest yet...)
If philanthropy was genuine, these companies would have been doing it from day one.
On the one hand, Microsloth is helping SCO in the frivilous lawsuit to scare business away from Linux, and on the other hand they are undercutting Linux in the non-profit sector. Sounds like they have everything tied up.
We can only hope they damage their company to such an extent that it is irrepairable. Of course, the perpetrators will have thier golden parachutes - or will keep the company by laying off thousands of workers.
It is disgusting.
It is all a big game, until someone gets their eye poked out...
I just happened to have dictionary.com up when I read your post - tenor has other meanings:
A continuous, unwavering course. See Synonyms at tendency.
The word, phrase, or subject with which the vehicle of a metaphor is identified, as life in "Life's but a walking shadow" (Shakespeare).
The course of thought or argument running through something written or spoken.
General sense; purport.
Law.
The exact meaning or actual wording of a document as distinct from its effect.
An exact copy of a document.
Music.
The highest natural adult male voice.
One who sings this part.
An instrument that sounds within this range.
Abbr. T A vocal or instrumental part written within this range.
I highlighted the ones I thought applied - take your pick. His use of tenor is correct.
Hacking is a relative term.
With the cost of computers dropping and free operating systems available, hackers can hack to their heart's content without 'hacking' anyone off.
Because of the stigma attached to the word 'hacker', perhaps we need to reexamine the lexicon, and make up a new word for what we recognize as peaceful, non-intrusive exploration. Here is my go at it:
Phreaker - phone freak -
Cracker - W@rezd00dz
Hacker - mainstream meaning - person who breaks into computer systems illegally for malicious purposes (lets face it, the public perception will not go away)
Groker - take the verb 'grok', and turn it into a noun - implies the process of getting to the point where you grok something; eg. a hacker hacks until he groks what he is hacking groks ham radio; he transmits every night), or passive (he groks ham radio; but, he doesn't have an antenna up yet). Saying he is a groker would clear that up (he is a ham radio groker). Clearly 'groker' implies activity.
I think this (or something like it) would clear up the misconceptions people have.
Seems like a bad thing to implement an interface to a non-documented API for mission essential code.
The problem with this is that Microsloth can easily change their non-public interface without telling anyone and your code will break. Other than the lack of security implied by accessing things that are supposed to be secure, this interoperability issue will come back to haunt anyone who implements these 'tricks' IMHO.
Don't put this in mission essential code, or you will recieve a phone call late one night by your operations staff for unknown reasons...you have been warned.
We are "reaching for the stars" while we defecate all over our home planet, destroying the biodiversity in the process.
[sarcasm]YES, even a cretan can see we are qualitatively better than our cousins in the trees [/sarcasm]
Microsoft is going to dig through the Unix code, and the Linux code side by side. They will find interoperability shortfalls to take advantage of, or failing that, will create them by extending APIs, or using undefined fields in APIs to their advantage (e.g. Java et al). If the majority of desktop systems can't interoperate with Linux, then their thinking is, "Linux is dead in the mainstream".
Look for Microsoft to try to manipulate Posix standards toward proprietary extensions. Also look at them to support SCO in the patent infringement case.
Urge your friends to boycott Microsoft products, buy systems without the 'Microsoft Tax' (without an OS - easiest way to do this is build a machine from parts), and reload Microsoft machines with Linux (my game box is going to be loaded with Linux exclusively in the next few days - directX is dead - long live OpenGL!)
More importantly, support Linux and open source products/projects. Lets get the breadth and depth of computer games now available on Windows for Linux by buying/supporting Linux games/developers, and following through on open source game development. Desktop productivity tools are there, now lets get the other arenas up to speed as well.
Here is my idealized view of what will happen:
1. Patent and Copyright knee-jerk reactions by the media controllers will get out of hand.
2. People will react by boycotting the 'new' technology, and the media mega-corporations will crumble; unfortunately this means our internet backbone will die, and broadband access will be priced out of the reach of the average person. This will feed upon itself until the only Telcos left are the mobile phone companies - and the few entertainment (news) corporations left will be viewed via satelite providers.
3. An emergence of a home grown wireless network will quickly spread across the landscape (a recent article spoke of a group trying to get a coast to coast WIFI link up in the near future); a sub-culture of music, writing, art, and ideas will spread across the land.
4. Cleansed of the old media controllers, new technology will flourish. (This will start about 2036).
Unfortunately I will be an old fart by the time all of this works out, with the battle scars to prove it...
There is no Utopia - and there never will be; life will always be about struggling for what is right against greed and stupidity.
To quote from the Open Group:
"From February 1995, computer systems have carried the UNIX brand if:
They guarantee to support the services specified in the Single UNIX Specification.
Customers can identify UNIX certified products by the Open Brand logo and the mandatory attribution declaring to which version of the specification the product complies:
UNIX 93 applies to UNIX system products which pre-date the Single UNIX Specification.
UNIX 95 applies to UNIX system products which conform to the Single UNIX Specification.
UNIX 98 applies to UNIX system products which conform to the Single UNIX Specification , Version 2.
The mark to be associated with the Single UNIX Specification, Version 3 is under development, see the platform pages for the latest information.
In licensing the UNIX brand a vendor warrants and represents that every certified product:
Conforms to the specification.
Meets The Open Group's test and certification requirements.
Will continue to conform to the specification.
Will be rectified within an agreed time should it be found to be non-conformant.
UNIX certification is widely recognized as the international symbol of assurance in open systems. By the end of 2001, the value of procurements of open systems referencing the brand had exceeded $25 billion. "
So, from a technical standpoint you can see that if it meets the standards (UNIX98, UNIX95, UNIX93, or a soon to be updated standard) LINUX, FREEBSD, or any other OS can be branded 'UNIX' legally.
However, in spoken discourse (and by spoken I mean not only verbal, but written words attributed to journal, informal, or fiction genres) I think it perfectly acceptable to say 'unix' when it would be more accurate to say 'Linux', or 'FreeBSD', as mentioned previously in the example of 'Kleenex' becoming a generic term for 'tissue'. The verbal lexicon will continue to change and reflect our understandings of the effective reality (Linux contains many of the standards contained in UNIX98 for example, and for all intents and purposes is indistenguishable from a branded UNIX to an end user)
Unix keepers of the flame should not find issue with this usage, since it really serves to pay homage to the roots of all Posix compliant operating systems - UNIX. Without the brainchild of AT&T Labs, we would not be here discussing this subject. Just as well, as the article cited at the head of this thread indicates, the tradition of brainstorming inovation across a free community will continue to drive changes which will find their way into the standard whether the UNIX purists like it or not. As Bruce Lee stressed: internalize what works - and the unix paradigm of open development works.
As long as I can touch type faster than I can write (which I can) I will never have a use for a tablet PC as my primary.
I see tablets/PDAs as adjuncts that allow you to download information from your desktop/laptop, and carry it around in a handy package for quick access, when lugging around the laptop is not an option (outdoors on a hiking trip for example). Of course, the laptop will probably be in the backpack for when we set up camp...
If any real work/writing needs to be done, then the laptop or desktop is where the action is.
'I was just following orders.' "
Mind that this also applies to you. - mindriot
mindriot,
Please don't compare the attrocities of the Germans during WWII to the war fighting that is going on in Iraq. There is no really 'fair' fighting in war. In order to survive you must call down artillery and air support when you make contact with large formations, and you must maneuver to fire from covered and concealed positions if possible. You must pursue your enemy and bring him down so that he can not live to fight another day. Most of the time the enemy does not see it coming. That is war. As Sherman said during the Civil War: "War is Hell". The way we fight is not in and of itself a war atrocity.
Now, if we wantonly kill civilians or execute prisoners, these are attrocities and punishible under the UCMJ (uniform code of military justice). Any soldier, sailor, airman or marine has a duty to disobey orders to perform such acts - and I would support thier decision whole-heartedly.
Don't confuse combat with attrocities. They are two different things.
Ty,
You are among the same people who spit on the veterans coming home from Vietnam.
Shame on you!
Our soldiers (and the word 'soldier', btw, means a person in the Army), sailors, airmen and marines get paid squat, train and fight in life threatening environments, and put thier lives on the line so you don't have to be drafted and put your soft body in the line of fire.
Now, you may not agree with all of the policies of the current administration, and I can guarantee you that there are many military men and women who don't either; however, the moral imperative to start a rebellion because of it is not there. Given that, the airman's statement is true and a fair reflection of duty, and honor - qualities you seem to be lacking.
While I may believe that diplomacy should have been more adroitly managed to avoid this, now that the president has made the decision, my duty as a soldier would be to follow his orders; again, I don't see the war in Iraq as a moral delema requiring protest at this point. The key for the troops to come home safely is for them to be able to concentrate on thier missions without needless distractions from back home.
You should be praying for the safety of everyone deserving of it in that region - your brother included - instead of spouting your vitriolic comments about those who put everything on the line, so we don't have to.
"...as much as I hate watching my mom buy a $500 break job."
:)
Your mom must live in a tough neighborhood...
Back in the day...
Remember the 'cassette tape'? Music recordings have been shared from the begining of the advent of recording medium.
Now, my question is: why is the copying and sharing a a medium (CDs) that are cheaper to manufacture per unit than cassettes so much worse now than it was in the past?
Given statistical averages, the amount of copied recordings is the same as it was in the past.
I think the real issue here is that we are living in a time where technology allows the would-be 'information cops' to keep tabs on where those copies are going and to whom. Given DMCA and efforts for government to mandate the installation of copy control hardware on consumer electronics, we are fast approaching a digital dark age. If you 'opt out' and refuse to upgrade all new content will become inaccessible.
A kneejerk reaction against piracy is going to effect all of us (who don't pirate) in ways we can not even imagine atm.
"Surely that shoul[d] have been at the top of the list? Standards support should come before everything else. If we don't have standards, its bloody hard for software to tak to other bits of software, let alone to humans." - aallan
Consumers want open standards so they can share easily with other people.
Businesses want open standards so they can share easily with their partners.
Software Companies do not want open standards - so they can lock you into their proprietary standards (and thus a perpetual upgrade path). At least, that was the predominant model as of yesterday. Who knows about tomorrow? Perhaps they will get a clue if we all move to open source applications and operating systems?
The real problem comes when this is not a personal decision, but an institutional manifestation.
When the government (and any person representing the government is 'the government' for all intents and purposes) makes an outrageous statement, it certainly does not fall into the same class as a private citizen making the same statement. This is so because the government has access to private records and has an army (FBI, CIA, Local Law Enforcement, as well as the regular standing army) to suppress individual's rights (we have seen this done in the past; it will be done in the future).
The government branding someone a 'terrorist' serves to put desired 'punishment' behind a faceless agency, and thus allows personal vendettas to move forward under the veil of 'law enforcement'. This was seen during the McCarthy era, and the implications in Mr. Pearle's statements are shockingly similar, in words if not substance (replace 'terrorist' with 'communist' and you have a perfect example of past history).
Our country is built upon freedom of expression. It is a dark day, indeed, when that pillar of our system is suppressed by the very people who swear to uphold the Constitution (and thus freedom of expression). I could not abide hipocracy when I was a child, and I can not stand for it as an adult.
To continue my thoughts:
The main point I want to make is that regardless of what we call ourselves, we must recognize and teach what goes on in the real world, in addition to the purely theoretical and lofty concepts that reside in the ivory towers.
Maybe a definition would help matters -
To engineer: To plan, manage, and put through by skillful acts or contrivance.
Given that definition, I don't see a problem with calling ourselves 'Software Engineers'.
On the other hand my title has the word 'Developer'in it, and I find that a good choice as well.
In the sited article, the author makes his most critical point:
"The precision of traditional computer science has a drawback, however. The problems that are solved are those that are amenable to precise solutions. These problems are, by definition, tightly defined, with no mushy statements or an unacceptably high number of variables. In short, these problems are easier than real-world problems that aren't conveniently narrowed."
This says it all to me. In reality, systems design and the resultant programming implementation are truely a mixture of Art and Science.
Software is made for people to use - either directly, such as a productivity application on a personal computer - or indirectly, such as a program embedded in a microprocessor in a car. As people become more sophisticated in their use of software, they expect software to do things that come naturally to people. This makes programs more complex, and provides situations that sometimes can not be well defined in advance, or ever over the life of the application yet still needs to be adressed in the program!.
If we, as computer scientists, force the definitions of problems to fit neatly within acceptable scientific boundaries, we invariably produce a product that is unusable by human beings over the long run. I see this in the real world all of the time; development teams that insist that every aspect of the specification be written before coding is accomplished - and once coding starts, no changes are allowed (this is commonly referred to as the 'waterfall' lifecycle - i.e. - design, spec, build, maintain, deprecate - a one path solution).
As a developer/programmer, I have been advocating a more holistic view of software development. We, as programmers, are not here simply to satisfy our own egos; we are here to help people through our work. If there were no people there would be no need for software, as tautological as this sounds, it is indeed true, and something programmers should think about every day.
Along these lines I advocate an iterative lifecycle model (and you will see similar ideas called other things, such as the 'ready, shoot, aim' approach of software design as put forward in the 'Pragmatic Programmer' [don't have the author's names or the publisher...sorry]
There are other chemical fuels that do not use oil, and provide more energy over shorter durations (particularly if you are interested in racing at current speedway velocities) than electric setups. We have alot of experience with chemical powered motors, and thus it is easy and cost effective to design them - versus trying to invent new technology.
The U.S.A. is not a democracy, it is a republic. The people do not elect the leaders, the political parties decide who they will support (how many independents made it into Congress last year?) and those generally win the election. The executive branch is chosen by the electorial college - there are many instances when one candidate wins the popular vote, but does not pick up the electorial college votes needed to win.
Our forefathers, in their wisdom, set up our election system this way with the intention of making change more difficult - to put brakes on violent swings in leadership at the whim of the mob (us).
Unfortunately what this equates to is a good ol' boy system and pork barrel politics. The people have very little say in what goes on in government on a daily basis, and a 'Hobson's Choice' at the polls.