Related, but not exactly, is the plight of software development in general. While there is a professed need by industry for engineers, there's also little incentive for the silver back to stay around.
For example, Java has available to the public since 1994. I happen to be a Java developer. I work with a person who has been developing for much longer than I have (in another language). We both started with Java at the same time. So, after 5 years, we both have 5 years of experience with the language (which seems to be an adequate amount of time to comfortably state "I know what I'm doing").
What's the biggest difference between us? Even if you say we do nearly exactly the same level of work in Java, he's getting paid nearly twice as much because he's been with the company for 20 years.
How can it ever be in a company's interest to pay someone so much money for the same level/quality of work as someone that makes half as much? Why not hire two of "me?"
I know the parent post is about the gaming industry and people leaving because they figured out they aren't getting compensated properly. On the flip-side, what benefit is it to a game company to keep those people around longer? Are games (the ones that make it to market) no longer selling multi-millions of copies because quality is too low? Are game companies that develop games that don't make it to market better off from having paid more money on an abandoned project?
The problem isn't that skilled people are leaving. The problem is that there are very rare circumstances where such vast experience is worth paying for. And that makes me sad because I enjoy development, but I need to make a career switch before I outgrow my financial usefulness.
If I was Chase, or PayPal, I'd budget a couple of programmers to build a distributed phisher thwarting screen saver. Build a list of phishing emails, share the sites, and use some nasty screen scraping algorithm to fill their databases with junk. It could run in the background like a vigilante SETI.
At first blush it might seem like a good idea. But consider that such a tool could just as easily be turned against legitimate businesses/sites. Like a gun, it can't be made smart enough to just target bad people. 8/
[sarcasm] I can't wait until the military figures out a way to distribute this in an aerosol for the purposes of DE-constructing nerves/brains/sight. [/sarcasm]
One can only hope that the amount of effort it takes to make these (even if for benevolent reasons) is expensive/difficult enough to keep all but the most altruistic applications out of the mix.
But then again, when did "expensive" and "altruistic" ever cross paths? 8/
If these things are quiet AND efficient they might really have something there, although 2 GHz for a router seems excessive.
Exactly correct: 2G is excessive for a router. However, if it can be passively cooled at 2G (well, the article states passively cooled at 1.2G), then it should be very cool when it is underclocked to run at a speed adequate to handle router-specific tasks. Just because the power is there doesn't mean you need to utilize it all; underclocking* is great in situations where cooling is an issue.
* - When available. Depends on if there are frequency locks on the MB and/or processor.
I know it is just a nit-pick, but using the example of video conferencing with friends that are so far away made me think about game broadcast blackout areas. I mean, how can I watch a football game with friends across the country if they're not "allowed" to watch the game anyway?
Or, more to the point... will the NFL/MPAA/[insert anti-digital copying lobby] go after this device since, to get around said blackout, I could point it at my TV and share the experience with said friends?
While generally this may be true, the Star Trek movies bucked this trend; almost all the "even" ones rocked, while the "odd" ones were... questionable. 8)
I can't think of a way to be ethical without being moral, though. In any case, the easiest way I can put it is that morals are subjective to a person, ethics are subjective to a group of persons.
You meant to say "being moral without being ethical."
IANAL, but an example would be if a lawyer breaks client-attorney privilege by reporting a confession the client had made in private to the police or state's attorney. While this information might not be admissible in court and the lawyer would potentially face losing his license, it would be a demonstration of motivation based on moral (and not ethical) reasons.
I think the idea behind such a device is to get it closer to recording *all* tv, so you can go back and watch stuff you didn't even know you were missing. While in the US this is not very likely to happen (too many channels... too much to record), in some places (like the UK), the choices are limited enough that one *can* record all broadcast channels. I think it might be 8 channels in the UK, but that's just some (probably wrong) factoid I have floating around in the back of my head.
I suppose in the US, you could have 1 (or 2) streams dedicated to whatever channel you happen to be watching (pause live tv) and have the other 9 or 10 set to channels you frequently watch content on to record everything (like in the scenario just presented).
Still... I agree with you on it not necessarily being useful. With the advent of "On Demand" TV from the cable companies, why roll your own solutions when, theoretically, the cable company is already working on storing/serving up all your shows on demand? Not here yet... but definitely on the way.
Honestly, do people think the President would do something like this "just because?"
What could the President (or anyone of the people close to him) benefit from doing this? C'mon people; I'm no Dubbya fan, but I have a hard time believing there's a sinister motivation to get around the rights of the American people "just because he can." At the most innocent, it was a process oversight. At worst, it could be an abuse of power for personal gain. But ask yourself... what is there to gain or, more importantly, what has been gained? Have they been bringing high-ranking Democrats to Guantanamo? Anti-BigOil groups? Wouldn't someone who's rights were stepped on unjustly have squawked by now?
Do the people think that the first thing on any President's mind after something like the 9/11 attacks would be, "hmmm... how can I screw the American system for personal advancement in this time of crisis?"
It just doesn't make sense to me that that would be the case.
...it has the potential to become a very bad precedent, and ruin mod-chipping for everyone.
Well, you're absolutely correct on this one. It can go one of two ways. But if it gets the "legs" we all fear, one more right goes down the toilet and possibly gives steam to the anti-analog recording device trouble that's been brewing lately.
I have my 1.5 version set to delete all history/caches automatically (it is an internal feature). I don't recall if it happened at startup or shutdown of the app (I'm assuming startup). Would that be a viable workaround (especially for those who don't care about/want history)?
What if a person commits a crime and uses this surgery to escape identification and/or conviction.
The muscle and bone structure underneath the skin make up most of the identifying features of a person's face. While it won't be exact, with replacement skin you should look more like your "old self" than like the person who's donating the skin (save for color and blemishes).
Nice summary.
However, you missed touching on your last (and perhaps most important to the "lack of shopping this year") point:
...You need money to spend there.
There was a massive spike in US bankruptcy claims the 4th quarter of this year. This was mostly spurred on by the changes in laws around bankruptcy making it more difficult to do. So large was this spike that many credit card companies profits for 4th quarter are projected to be wiped out completely. With so many people declaring, their spending will be curbed, to say the least. Add to that that there hasn't been a rousing economic recovery, and I'd say we're looking at a fairly red Christmas season.
On the rest of your comment about the non-need to rush, I suspect marketers/businesses are pushing especially hard this year because they know it will be hard to get into the black.
It is easy to put out hype. It is hard to convince Joe Six-pack to spend his dollars at BestBuy instead of food when the money is scarce.
Not to take away from the guys accomplishments but will a time come when we all but do away with the need to press the flesh?
No. And that's mostly because it proves he's a real person. How would one tell a very skilled player from a corporate-sponsored bot? Think along the lines of the movie S1m0ne. I suppose that'll be the next big thing... don't beat Deep Blue at chess, frag it at Quake4!;)
Perhaps HBO should consider, instead of interdiction, simply giving the first few episodes away to induce subscription, that is, of course and ironically, if the show isn't too cheesy.
Isn't that, basically, what the SciFi channel did for Battlestar Galactica (but, to increase viewership, not subscriptions, obviously)? I think that was considered a success.
If the FBI can't spy on every single US resident 24/7, how can they be sure we're not all terrorists?
Well, this is generally the extreme view on the whole privacy issue, which (unfortunately) makes your point impotent.
If given the option would the FBI monitor all calls made by everyone in the US? That's absurd. There isn't enough man-power to do that. Even if you have computers monitoring calls, there'd still be enough data from that digested version to drown-out any effort.
People's reaction to this sort of thing is often knee-jerk. What is the FBI really trying to accomplish? If they suspect someone is a "baddie," they want to be able to get evidence against that "baddie."
With that access, can abuses occur?
Yup.
So instead of just wailing that "all access is bad access," wouldn't it be better to be focused on rules around "when and how that access can be obtained?" I'm all for allowing access to encrypted communications IF there are enough regulations around how that access can be granted. I want someone out there trying hard to stop people looking to destroy my way of life.
If one doesn't have enough trust in the system that grants that access, then why stop there in your paranoia? What stops the FBI from doing it without asking for permission?
Or, better still, why allow any sort of government regulation of law? Anarchy vs Police State. Given that people are inherently greedy about their own rights, I'd rather take my chances with a Police State... at least there I can hope that politicians won't give up their rights to privacy that I want to maintain for myself.
Although, RoboRalley is quite excellent, if one wants to "learn programming" through a game experience, why not try one of those virtual battle grounds like Red Code?
Slashdot Mirror
Related, but not exactly, is the plight of software development in general. While there is a professed need by industry for engineers, there's also little incentive for the silver back to stay around.
For example, Java has available to the public since 1994. I happen to be a Java developer. I work with a person who has been developing for much longer than I have (in another language). We both started with Java at the same time. So, after 5 years, we both have 5 years of experience with the language (which seems to be an adequate amount of time to comfortably state "I know what I'm doing").
What's the biggest difference between us? Even if you say we do nearly exactly the same level of work in Java, he's getting paid nearly twice as much because he's been with the company for 20 years.
How can it ever be in a company's interest to pay someone so much money for the same level/quality of work as someone that makes half as much? Why not hire two of "me?"
I know the parent post is about the gaming industry and people leaving because they figured out they aren't getting compensated properly. On the flip-side, what benefit is it to a game company to keep those people around longer? Are games (the ones that make it to market) no longer selling multi-millions of copies because quality is too low? Are game companies that develop games that don't make it to market better off from having paid more money on an abandoned project?
The problem isn't that skilled people are leaving. The problem is that there are very rare circumstances where such vast experience is worth paying for. And that makes me sad because I enjoy development, but I need to make a career switch before I outgrow my financial usefulness.
it is a monkey...isnt that all they do anyways?
/. poster.
No, they masturbate too.
I suppose in that way they're not so different from your average
Oh... doh!
If I was Chase, or PayPal, I'd budget a couple of programmers to build a distributed phisher thwarting screen saver. Build a list of phishing emails, share the sites, and use some nasty screen scraping algorithm to fill their databases with junk. It could run in the background like a vigilante SETI.
At first blush it might seem like a good idea. But consider that such a tool could just as easily be turned against legitimate businesses/sites. Like a gun, it can't be made smart enough to just target bad people. 8/
[sarcasm] I can't wait until the military figures out a way to distribute this in an aerosol for the purposes of DE-constructing nerves/brains/sight. [/sarcasm]
One can only hope that the amount of effort it takes to make these (even if for benevolent reasons) is expensive/difficult enough to keep all but the most altruistic applications out of the mix.
But then again, when did "expensive" and "altruistic" ever cross paths? 8/
If these things are quiet AND efficient they might really have something there, although 2 GHz for a router seems excessive.
Exactly correct: 2G is excessive for a router. However, if it can be passively cooled at 2G (well, the article states passively cooled at 1.2G), then it should be very cool when it is underclocked to run at a speed adequate to handle router-specific tasks. Just because the power is there doesn't mean you need to utilize it all; underclocking* is great in situations where cooling is an issue.
* - When available. Depends on if there are frequency locks on the MB and/or processor.
I know it is just a nit-pick, but using the example of video conferencing with friends that are so far away made me think about game broadcast blackout areas. I mean, how can I watch a football game with friends across the country if they're not "allowed" to watch the game anyway?
Or, more to the point... will the NFL/MPAA/[insert anti-digital copying lobby] go after this device since, to get around said blackout, I could point it at my TV and share the experience with said friends?
So if you have not RTFA then don't worry your[sic] not missing anything!
/. crowd that they don't have to RTFA? You must be new here! 8D
You're advising the
Being an even number it may be awful...
While generally this may be true, the Star Trek movies bucked this trend; almost all the "even" ones rocked, while the "odd" ones were... questionable. 8)
I can't think of a way to be ethical without being moral, though. In any case, the easiest way I can put it is that morals are subjective to a person, ethics are subjective to a group of persons.
You meant to say "being moral without being ethical."
IANAL, but an example would be if a lawyer breaks client-attorney privilege by reporting a confession the client had made in private to the police or state's attorney. While this information might not be admissible in court and the lawyer would potentially face losing his license, it would be a demonstration of motivation based on moral (and not ethical) reasons.
I think the idea behind such a device is to get it closer to recording *all* tv, so you can go back and watch stuff you didn't even know you were missing. While in the US this is not very likely to happen (too many channels... too much to record), in some places (like the UK), the choices are limited enough that one *can* record all broadcast channels. I think it might be 8 channels in the UK, but that's just some (probably wrong) factoid I have floating around in the back of my head.
I suppose in the US, you could have 1 (or 2) streams dedicated to whatever channel you happen to be watching (pause live tv) and have the other 9 or 10 set to channels you frequently watch content on to record everything (like in the scenario just presented).
Still... I agree with you on it not necessarily being useful. With the advent of "On Demand" TV from the cable companies, why roll your own solutions when, theoretically, the cable company is already working on storing/serving up all your shows on demand? Not here yet... but definitely on the way.
No, you want the bad guys to have id's... ;)
the trick is properly labeling them with the "bad guy" identifier.
Where's the governmental action for setting (and enforcing) the "evil bit" on packets?!?
I seriously believe this is treason.
Honestly, do people think the President would do something like this "just because?"
What could the President (or anyone of the people close to him) benefit from doing this? C'mon people; I'm no Dubbya fan, but I have a hard time believing there's a sinister motivation to get around the rights of the American people "just because he can."
At the most innocent, it was a process oversight. At worst, it could be an abuse of power for personal gain. But ask yourself... what is there to gain or, more importantly, what has been gained? Have they been bringing high-ranking Democrats to Guantanamo? Anti-BigOil groups? Wouldn't someone who's rights were stepped on unjustly have squawked by now?
Do the people think that the first thing on any President's mind after something like the 9/11 attacks would be, "hmmm... how can I screw the American system for personal advancement in this time of crisis?"
It just doesn't make sense to me that that would be the case.
...it has the potential to become a very bad precedent, and ruin mod-chipping for everyone.
Well, you're absolutely correct on this one. It can go one of two ways. But if it gets the "legs" we all fear, one more right goes down the toilet and possibly gives steam to the anti-analog recording device trouble that's been brewing lately.
I have my 1.5 version set to delete all history/caches automatically (it is an internal feature). I don't recall if it happened at startup or shutdown of the app (I'm assuming startup).
Would that be a viable workaround (especially for those who don't care about/want history)?
Two guys sitting in adjacent bathroom stalls.
I piece of used toilet paper accidentally drops on the floor.
Man 1: "Hey! You got poop on my RSS feeds!"
Man 2: "Hey! You got RSS feeds on my poop!"
And a new era of online entertainment is born...
What if a person commits a crime and uses this surgery to escape identification and/or conviction.
The muscle and bone structure underneath the skin make up most of the identifying features of a person's face. While it won't be exact, with replacement skin you should look more like your "old self" than like the person who's donating the skin (save for color and blemishes).
It is easy to settle; we'll see how 4th quarter/year 2005 results turn out in a couple of months.
Honestly, I hope you're the one that's right.
Nice summary.
...You need money to spend there.
However, you missed touching on your last (and perhaps most important to the "lack of shopping this year") point:
There was a massive spike in US bankruptcy claims the 4th quarter of this year. This was mostly spurred on by the changes in laws around bankruptcy making it more difficult to do. So large was this spike that many credit card companies profits for 4th quarter are projected to be wiped out completely. With so many people declaring, their spending will be curbed, to say the least.
Add to that that there hasn't been a rousing economic recovery, and I'd say we're looking at a fairly red Christmas season.
On the rest of your comment about the non-need to rush, I suspect marketers/businesses are pushing especially hard this year because they know it will be hard to get into the black.
It is easy to put out hype. It is hard to convince Joe Six-pack to spend his dollars at BestBuy instead of food when the money is scarce.
...I got coffee too.
Was that "hot coffee?" 8)
Not to take away from the guys accomplishments but will a time come when we all but do away with the need to press the flesh?
;)
No. And that's mostly because it proves he's a real person. How would one tell a very skilled player from a corporate-sponsored bot? Think along the lines of the movie S1m0ne.
I suppose that'll be the next big thing... don't beat Deep Blue at chess, frag it at Quake4!
Perhaps HBO should consider, instead of interdiction, simply giving the first few episodes away to induce subscription, that is, of course and ironically, if the show isn't too cheesy.
Isn't that, basically, what the SciFi channel did for Battlestar Galactica (but, to increase viewership, not subscriptions, obviously)? I think that was considered a success.
"We should make a gun that only kills bad people."
Yeah... let's automate/simplify remote execution of code under the guise that it'll only be "used for good" and "by the right people." 8P
If the FBI can't spy on every single US resident 24/7, how can they be sure we're not all terrorists?
Well, this is generally the extreme view on the whole privacy issue, which (unfortunately) makes your point impotent.
If given the option would the FBI monitor all calls made by everyone in the US? That's absurd. There isn't enough man-power to do that. Even if you have computers monitoring calls, there'd still be enough data from that digested version to drown-out any effort.
People's reaction to this sort of thing is often knee-jerk. What is the FBI really trying to accomplish? If they suspect someone is a "baddie," they want to be able to get evidence against that "baddie."
With that access, can abuses occur?
Yup.
So instead of just wailing that "all access is bad access," wouldn't it be better to be focused on rules around "when and how that access can be obtained?" I'm all for allowing access to encrypted communications IF there are enough regulations around how that access can be granted. I want someone out there trying hard to stop people looking to destroy my way of life.
If one doesn't have enough trust in the system that grants that access, then why stop there in your paranoia? What stops the FBI from doing it without asking for permission?
Or, better still, why allow any sort of government regulation of law? Anarchy vs Police State. Given that people are inherently greedy about their own rights, I'd rather take my chances with a Police State... at least there I can hope that politicians won't give up their rights to privacy that I want to maintain for myself.
Although, RoboRalley is quite excellent, if one wants to "learn programming" through a game experience, why not try one of those virtual battle grounds like Red Code?
/. the article about MIT Video Game programming?
Or, I suppose, more recently on
Any honest answer to that question will be modded -1 flamebate.
... you've obviously answered both questions in a single go without risking the "-1" mods! ;)
That's flamebait