heh... criminals are okay, and negligence that destroys your email, well, you could live with it. the government being able to read my conveniently indexed mails is what scares me more.
don't worry -- the average slashdotter will have as much success with robots as he has with women. it's all safe here, from women, robot-women and alien women.
typo in my ole physics book. that makes the max distance 0.068 l.y., still well within the margin of error even accounting for the large beta expansion and the wobbling due to galactic core protuberances.
the sun travels around the galactic center at about 20km/s. even assuming than sun and orion nebula travel away from each other at this speed, for 6 months they'd have moved away at about 6 billion km. this is about 0.00068 light years. since the distance is estimated at 1250+ l.y. give or take 50-60, the error due to the relative movement of the two objects seems accounted for.
The trend for simplification is positively there, and the math is right -- the more complex and often-used it is, the bigger the pressure to simplify.
Just look at them damned Chinese characters and the reform they underwent last century -- compare the characters used in Taiwan or Hong Kong, those in Japan (that were adopted after the Chinese simplified them once) and those that are used in China now (which were simplified gradually even more). The more them characters evolve, the more they look the same.
Probably in the end it'll all end up where Korea is -- they have more or less given up on characters and switched to alphabet. Which is where English was back then;)
while i was mostly kidding, DBIx::Class is a neat ORM framework. you may want to take a look at how it is integrated into the Catalyst framework -- it is quite a pleasure to use the combination.
i tried 1.6 some time ago -- mostly because i needed something access-like on Linux. the database app on the surface looks a lot better than the horror the ooo thingy, except that it didn't work with pre-existing sql databases. one has to create a database from scratch, and there wasn't an easy (UI) way to even hookup an existing database after one creates a custom one. since my needs were really simple, i gave up, and instead used knoda (http://www.knoda.org/) which is similar, and works nicely for the kind of thing I needed.
the rest of the office implemenation seemed to almost work. of course, it wasn't completely compatible with OO, but i liked the interface better and would have used it if it had a useful PDF output. However the PDF i got out of it was really jagged (the letters jumping up and down around the line), and the opinion on the mailing list was at the time 'it isn't our problem', so I switched back to OO in the end.
what i am saying is that tfa implies working for the government is morally wrong, or at least it read so to me. working for the government is not always morally wrong, and in some areas -- e.g. fundamental research -- it may not be immediately obvious if the research is used for good or bad.
in a democratic society the burden is on the general public to oversee what the government is doing via whatever political tools are available. the individual researchers can complement that function, but not be a substitute of it. besides, individual moral stances differ. some are wider:)
I know -- I meant public as in open to the public. If it is classified, all bets are off, and it works like any other spy stuff -- all one can really do is either not have a spy agency, or trust an oversight process.
damned bleeding heart pirate and crime promoters, these telcos, how dare they muddy the waters of evidence-gathering against all those copyright-thieving artist-income-depriving file-sharing child-porn distributing criminals?
The article itself read like Mel Gibson wrote it like running away from Jean Luc Picard on a tricycle. FTA: "vaguagely haigiographic ", "mathmatics", "not a univeral reality"... Obviously no preview button on that Wiki site.
There is no doubt the NSA and the other spying agencies are using talented researchers, and obviously they would have appeal to many people-- after all it is likely their grants are good, they are researching hard and interesting problems, and there is also the patriotic factor (your gubbermint is not your friend, but the foreign gubbermints are even less your friends). So, it is not a surprise that people go for those grants.
It'd be hard to draw universal moral rules governing such participation. I'd say there is no moral issue if the research is public (as seems to be the case with most of the grants mentioned on the Wikileak). There might be a moral issue if the research is obviously done with the purpose to actively harm people, but it is unlikely such research will be publicized, except by a whistle blower.
All in all, except for clear-cut Dr. Mengele-like cases, I'd say the blame (if any) should be put on the government (which hires NSA and decides their agenda), and the issue should not be the grants, but, rather, the level and quality of oversight the general public has over such organizations, because it is oversight that will contribute more to keeping spy agencies in check, rather than the attitude of the individual researchers.
#Echelon noise: company president, Baghdad thief, nuclear family, water bomb
... and you must be under 14, since you express yourself so eloquently, and your statements are so mature and supported by so many arguments. btw, where have you seen or heard me doing all the stuff you alledge above, anon shill?
well, in a few years, when the one laptop per child project succeeds, and the world has successfully moved to ipv6 and most computers have real IP addresses, there may be some really interesting pictures in the developing world as well. in fact, since by that time the West will probably be saturated with networked devices, the only maps that are interesting visually may be those in the poorer countries.
the media industries were not attempting to get people to purchase content repeatedly until unauthorized copying became common place
really? which media industry would at the time let me exchange my tape for a CD at the cost of the media? why would i need to pay the licensing fee again, if i had a tape with the same music? not one? i wonder why that would be.
can i swap any movie DVD i now have for a hi-def media without repaying the license again? i am not against a small markup for the work the studio has done to improve the fidelity of the original work, but the _whole_ license again?
Okay, you're not blind. You dislike the drive for extension of copyright terms and DRM, and believe those are primarily there to protect copyrights, not limit consumer choice and eat consumer surplus. Fine. Now, two questions. Why has the drive to extend copyrights started long before there was even tcp/ip, not to mention file sharing? Why has the music/movie industry consistently opposed limited, fair-use sharing "even [though] when it first became easy it was no threat to copyright holders"? Why would they sue the makers of VCRs at the time, when copyright abuse wasn't a threat?
If what you say was true, any of these would be very difficult to explain, don't you think?
... It was not until unauthorized copying and distribution became mainstream that companies felt they needed to add copy protection to their products. You must be blind or a shill if you don't see where the real push of the music industry is targeted (so i guess i am wasting my time anyway). It is going one way only: perpetual copyrights, criminalization of the public domain (and thus potential competition), and developing technological solutions that make you pay incrementally for every time you listen to music. You know why? Because that is the most painless way to guarantee what the music industry has now -- monopoly profits, and multiply them many times over, by what economists call discriminatory pricing. incidentally, it means total control over the supply market as well.
And why is it happening now, and not 20 years ago? Well, only one reason -- now they have the technology to do it (and due to the massive profits from the 80s and 90s -- the cash to finance the bribery of the various parliaments all over the world).
The fight against downloaded music is an aside -- the music industry types, being the myopic idiots they are, simply had not expected the general public to adopt the same tools they use. They thought they were way too smart.
in a free economy, where there is a choice, cheaters would be weeded out. you know as in "fool me once... you can't fool me again". in a real economy, that's why we have these product liability laws (which, strangely, don't seem to apply to software).
Where would we be now if, instead of 50 years of engineering going into [...] and safety
indeed, where would we be without all that effort gone into safety, i.e. protecting the users from themselves... you make my point for me.
your analogy would be true if the people had at their disposal equipment for dealing with computers similar to the one they have to take care of disease and so on in their bodies. as it happens, it is the body that takes care of all these, and the person doesn't participate in the process. the various over-the-counter medicines mostly make the process less painful. why is that so? because the body (or the person) has other things to do.
so, to extend _your_ analogy, just as the genes -- the ultimate designers of the body -- take care of their 'product' in the case of sickness, so should the software designers and vendors take care of their product -- the software when it is sick. the user has other, better things to learn.
Slashdot Mirror
heh ... criminals are okay, and negligence that destroys your email, well, you could live with it. the government being able to read my conveniently indexed mails is what scares me more.
don't worry -- the average slashdotter will have as much success with robots as he has with women.
it's all safe here, from women, robot-women and alien women.
typo in my ole physics book. that makes the max distance 0.068 l.y., still well within the margin of error even accounting for the large beta expansion and the wobbling due to galactic core protuberances.
the sun travels around the galactic center at about 20km/s. even assuming than sun and orion nebula travel away from each other at this speed, for 6 months they'd have moved away at about 6 billion km. this is about 0.00068 light years. since the distance is estimated at 1250+ l.y. give or take 50-60, the error due to the relative movement of the two objects seems accounted for.
oops -- thanks for correcting the point, it was a hasty submission.
don't read too much into it.
The trend for simplification is positively there, and the math is right -- the more complex and often-used it is, the bigger the pressure to simplify.
;)
Just look at them damned Chinese characters and the reform they underwent last century -- compare the characters used in Taiwan or Hong Kong, those in Japan (that were adopted after the Chinese simplified them once) and those that are used in China now (which were simplified gradually even more). The more them characters evolve, the more they look the same.
Probably in the end it'll all end up where Korea is -- they have more or less given up on characters and switched to alphabet. Which is where English was back then
while i was mostly kidding, DBIx::Class is a neat ORM framework. you may want to take a look at how it is integrated into the Catalyst framework -- it is quite a pleasure to use the combination.
yay perl. if it has DBIx::Class support (or one can be rigged easily) i'm sold. i'll look it over the weekend, thanks for the plug :-D
i tried 1.6 some time ago -- mostly because i needed something access-like on Linux. the database app on the surface looks a lot better than the horror the ooo thingy, except that it didn't work with pre-existing sql databases. one has to create a database from scratch, and there wasn't an easy (UI) way to even hookup an existing database after one creates a custom one. since my needs were really simple, i gave up, and instead used knoda (http://www.knoda.org/) which is similar, and works nicely for the kind of thing I needed.
:)
the rest of the office implemenation seemed to almost work. of course, it wasn't completely compatible with OO, but i liked the interface better and would have used it if it had a useful PDF output. However the PDF i got out of it was really jagged (the letters jumping up and down around the line), and the opinion on the mailing list was at the time 'it isn't our problem', so I switched back to OO in the end.
I hope 2.0 delivers. I'll give it a try anyway
don't worry, they'll sue each of those companies you list in turn ... and win.
win like you know who.
what i am saying is that tfa implies working for the government is morally wrong, or at least it read so to me. working for the government is not always morally wrong, and in some areas -- e.g. fundamental research -- it may not be immediately obvious if the research is used for good or bad.
:)
in a democratic society the burden is on the general public to oversee what the government is doing via whatever political tools are available. the individual researchers can complement that function, but not be a substitute of it. besides, individual moral stances differ. some are wider
I know -- I meant public as in open to the public. If it is classified, all bets are off, and it works like any other spy stuff -- all one can really do is either not have a spy agency, or trust an oversight process.
damned bleeding heart pirate and crime promoters, these telcos, how dare they muddy the waters of evidence-gathering against all those copyright-thieving artist-income-depriving file-sharing child-porn distributing criminals?
Grr... My comment itself reads like Slashdot has no preview buttons...
The article itself read like Mel Gibson wrote it like running away from Jean Luc Picard on a tricycle. FTA: "vaguagely haigiographic ", "mathmatics", "not a univeral reality"... Obviously no preview button on that Wiki site.
There is no doubt the NSA and the other spying agencies are using talented researchers, and obviously they would have appeal to many people-- after all it is likely their grants are good, they are researching hard and interesting problems, and there is also the patriotic factor (your gubbermint is not your friend, but the foreign gubbermints are even less your friends). So, it is not a surprise that people go for those grants.
It'd be hard to draw universal moral rules governing such participation. I'd say there is no moral issue if the research is public (as seems to be the case with most of the grants mentioned on the Wikileak). There might be a moral issue if the research is obviously done with the purpose to actively harm people, but it is unlikely such research will be publicized, except by a whistle blower.
All in all, except for clear-cut Dr. Mengele-like cases, I'd say the blame (if any) should be put on the government (which hires NSA and decides their agenda), and the issue should not be the grants, but, rather, the level and quality of oversight the general public has over such organizations, because it is oversight that will contribute more to keeping spy agencies in check, rather than the attitude of the individual researchers.
#Echelon noise: company president, Baghdad thief, nuclear family, water bomb
... and you must be under 14, since you express yourself so eloquently, and your statements are so mature and supported by so many arguments. btw, where have you seen or heard me doing all the stuff you alledge above, anon shill?
well, in a few years, when the one laptop per child project succeeds, and the world has successfully moved to ipv6 and most computers have real IP addresses, there may be some really interesting pictures in the developing world as well. in fact, since by that time the West will probably be saturated with networked devices, the only maps that are interesting visually may be those in the poorer countries.
i just want to know steel at what temperature.
really? which media industry would at the time let me exchange my tape for a CD at the cost of the media? why would i need to pay the licensing fee again, if i had a tape with the same music? not one? i wonder why that would be.
can i swap any movie DVD i now have for a hi-def media without repaying the license again? i am not against a small markup for the work the studio has done to improve the fidelity of the original work, but the _whole_ license again?
Okay, you're not blind. You dislike the drive for extension of copyright terms and DRM, and believe those are primarily there to protect copyrights, not limit consumer choice and eat consumer surplus. Fine. Now, two questions.
Why has the drive to extend copyrights started long before there was even tcp/ip, not to mention file sharing?
Why has the music/movie industry consistently opposed limited, fair-use sharing "even [though] when it first became easy it was no threat to copyright holders"? Why would they sue the makers of VCRs at the time, when copyright abuse wasn't a threat?
If what you say was true, any of these would be very difficult to explain, don't you think?
sounds like a bad case of misconfiguration to me.
... It was not until unauthorized copying and distribution became mainstream that companies felt they needed to add copy protection to their products. You must be blind or a shill if you don't see where the real push of the music industry is targeted (so i guess i am wasting my time anyway). It is going one way only: perpetual copyrights, criminalization of the public domain (and thus potential competition), and developing technological solutions that make you pay incrementally for every time you listen to music. You know why? Because that is the most painless way to guarantee what the music industry has now -- monopoly profits, and multiply them many times over, by what economists call discriminatory pricing. incidentally, it means total control over the supply market as well. And why is it happening now, and not 20 years ago? Well, only one reason -- now they have the technology to do it (and due to the massive profits from the 80s and 90s -- the cash to finance the bribery of the various parliaments all over the world). The fight against downloaded music is an aside -- the music industry types, being the myopic idiots they are, simply had not expected the general public to adopt the same tools they use. They thought they were way too smart.in a free economy, where there is a choice, cheaters would be weeded out. you know as in "fool me once ... you can't fool me again".
in a real economy, that's why we have these product liability laws (which, strangely, don't seem to apply to software).
Where would we be now if, instead of 50 years of engineering going into [...] and safety indeed, where would we be without all that effort gone into safety, i.e. protecting the users from themselves ... you make my point for me.
your analogy would be true if the people had at their disposal equipment for dealing with computers similar to the one they have to take care of disease and so on in their bodies. as it happens, it is the body that takes care of all these, and the person doesn't participate in the process. the various over-the-counter medicines mostly make the process less painful. why is that so? because the body (or the person) has other things to do.
;)
so, to extend _your_ analogy, just as the genes -- the ultimate designers of the body -- take care of their 'product' in the case of sickness, so should the software designers and vendors take care of their product -- the software when it is sick. the user has other, better things to learn.
anyhow, out of here