CLARKE: I think that you cannot try to
prevent technological progress. What you must do is take a step back, and say, "How can we
adapt to this new technology?"
I get so sick and tired of hearing this line again and again! Let's think about it. Technology is a human-driven enterprise. All biological metaphors are just that: metaphors. Except in the case of, oh, bacterial research, new and interesting inventions do not just pop into existence. Inventors think about what exists, and make new things to improve their lives. Or at least their pocketbooks.
We all have a responsibility to examine those inventions -- all technology, really -- to monitor its effects and decide whether it's really a Good Thing. I mean, what if (and this is hypothetical! don't flame me for this part!) freenet ended up being used for ONLY passing peoples' credit card numbers around, becoming a major tool of international fraud and nothing else ? Then yes, we'd be better off stopping it!
The attitude that "technology can't be stopped" is just irresponsible. If you start with that attitude, you back yourself into situations where a technology gets to the point that it can't be stopped. Self-fulfilling prophecy, that's all it is.
Ha! Actually, I love how they're shipping AOL samples in DVD cases now. I didn't know where to get spare ones; now I get a free one in the mail every couple of weeks.
New AIM client for Linux? Huh, guess I'll just connect to the internet here with my new installation of AOL for Linux, and try it out... oops, where did I install AOL again? If anyone remembers the default install directory for AOL for Linux, email me...
(Nice move, but they've a ways to go before they really support Linux)
You know, this is a good point. If it's well written (let's not even speculate), then it uses standard Linux networking stuff anyway, and should run on any Linux platform. Well, any well-implented one, anyway.
Of course, they're scared to death of releasing the source, so they'll only distribute the %#@& RPM with x86 binaries. So, if they even wanted to expand to other Linux hardware, they'd have to compile and distribute all those binaries themselves. Translation: don't hold your breath.
Well, the install file is only 540K, which is a lot smaller than the 2.0-2.4M for other platforms. Of course, this is a beta version, so it's likely low on features as well as bloat.
Why fiddle around with one chat protocol at a time? I'll take Everybuddy any day. Even over the new AOL client, btw, but I guess I might download it to check it out.
It is about the court costs.
Um... class action? Maybe you could start a spam-watch, where everyone "affected" by a certain peice of spam bands together and sues the pants off the offender.
That one was supposed to
be used to calculate nuclear explosions, this one will be used by the
National Science Foundation to work on biophysics, global climate
change, astrophysics and materials science...
Yes, exactly:
biophysics: what are the environmental impacts of a nuclear blast?
global climate change: How will the global temperature be affected by the tons of dust thrown into the atmosphere by a nuclear blast?
astrophysics: how can we more effectively deliver nuclear payloads?
Materials science: What's the best material to use in the construction of nuclear weapons?
Since no alien race has contacted us yet, they're probably all less advanced than we are.
What if bombarding us with tons of space dust every day is an alien culture's idea of "communication"? They're sending us messages in the patterns of dust which falls into our atmosphere every day!
And here we sit, ignoring it day in and day out. "Damn those earthlings, they don't understand our language at all!"
Sure, to "track hits." Towards what end? To say that
It's not technically a web bug, and
it tracks hits
is not to say it's harmless. I mean, I'm not accusing anyone of any wrongdoing. I was just saying that that particular answer didn't really address the concern that slashdot might be tracking users, too.
Well, rather than splitting semantic hairs, I think the point of bringing this up is to ask: what does Slashdot do with those invisible images? This has really nothing to do with whether or not they come from a foreign server. Let's not squabble about whether they're "technically" web bugs or not.
That said, it looks to me like it keeps track of which comments you've read, or what your comment preferences are, or something. If you don't want this tracked, don't accept cookies from slashdot! The site can be viewed perfectly without them, you just have to post as AC. Or, you can accept one lousy cookie when you log in and never ever accept another one.
Slashdot is not out to get you. Or if it, is, it's not trying very hard:)
You know, even with "old" Netscape 4.x, you can
just click on "refuse all cookies" or at least "warn me before accepting cookies." With mozilla, it's even better; it remembers your cookie preferences for each server.
Granted, this is not the easiest thing to use ever. I'd really like a list of servers I could manually update, whose cookies would always be rejected. *.doubleclick.net, *.adforce.com... you get the picture.
Point is, though, you do have recourse. You don't have to "blindly trust" all those baddies trying to set cookies on your harddrive.
Now I think the priority should be making this easier for newbies to pick up, and educating them about it.
Another interesting aspect of education would be to teach the kids patterns.
And I don't necessarily mean assigning Design Patterns and making them learn the things one by one:) But there is a movement out there towards making "Elementary Patterns," or "patterns at a level appropriate for students just learning to design and write programs." That quote is from Eugene Wallingford's Elementary Patterns Homepage, which you should check out.
Basically, elementary patterns are just like full fledged design patterns, but a lot simpler. Instead of a pattern for writing a text editor, for instance, you have one for writing a bounded loop. Or other fundamental programming constructs, such as case statements. Then, to make more complicated algorithms, like searches, you can combine a bunch of simpler patterns to get, for example, a Selection Sort pattern.
I don't know what this would do in terms of making the class more "fun," but it could make it a whole lot easier in terms of understanding one building block at a time, and then reusing those blocks to code some kick-ass apps.
Well... last year, I assistant taught an AP CS class at a high school in Michigan, and I agree: some of that material is pretty dry.
I tried to focus on OO programming rather than straight up proceedural, which is what the AP coursebook for some reason recommends. I mean, the language is C++, but they don't deal explicitly with OO. Hello?
But, to be more practical and (hopefully) more interesting, I kind of based the OO lectures around a central project, which was designing the backend to an online CD store. Of course, it was very simplified; we used static arrays for inventory, etc etc. But even then we got into sorting and other AP-approved topics:)
The thing is, I don't think they were THAT interested. In retrospect, building a store isn't all that engaging, unless you stand to make some serious profits from it. Anyway, what I really wish I'd done is used a platform where they could see their stuff run on-line. I think that's key: all useful apps are network apps now, pretty much, and just typing into codewarrior and then running a console session is not going to cut it much longer.
I'd like to see a kind of invisible CGI gateway, so that students could code their own apps and test/run/enter data over the internet... this could tie in nicely with a course unit on web design, which is also an important thing for the up n coming CS student to know. Of course you don't have to get too deep into it; they're still just high schoolers;)
Keith Packard's frame buffer code is now in XFree86 4.0.1: the text of a full function X server is a smidgen over 600Kbytes on the iPAQ. I'll be putting the screws on the X libraries in the next month or two, and save another 500Kbytes there. Keith and I believe we can get a basic X environment into something like a megabyte...
Which appeared in the text twice. So how come my version still takes about 10 times that much? I guess I should go download XFree86 version 4! I'm really impressed, actually, that this rewrite didn't require hobbling it in some way to customize for the small screen.
Wow, Jon, this article is almost as good as the New York Times article written by Michiko Kakutani a whole week ago on exactly the same subject, even referencing the same book by S. Borsook. (Sorry I can't link to it; it's in the archives now and I'd have to pay $2.50). Or the review of said book from 3 days before that.
So, here's JonKatz's recipe for success: take an article from the mainstream press, stir in personal emails and comments from slashdot, add a dash of half-baked analysis, and sprinkle with a few painful misspellings.
Wow... now that it is a very cool argument for freedom of expression! I must say that is clever indeed. C as a preferred means of expression.
Okay. I agree that Touretsky was pretty clever for equating binary code with C code with the Engligh description. But let's look at this from a different perspective.
I'm thinking of the analogy that it's legal to describe -- in exacting detail -- how to make a nuclear bomb, but it's illegal for a civilian to posess one of those in America. Right so far?
So, it seems to me that putting the DeCSS source code out there is ok, compiling it is even okay, but as soon as you run it, to watch or (god forbid!) copy a movie, you've infringed! I realize that this is contrary the DMCA (which wouldn't even allow you to generate the code), but it seems that using that speech to infringe on a copyright would still not be protected.
Keep in mind, I don't like the DMCA either, but this seems like a reasonable (legal) argument against dashing it all in favor of "free speech."
Slashdot Mirror
I get so sick and tired of hearing this line again and again! Let's think about it. Technology is a human-driven enterprise. All biological metaphors are just that: metaphors. Except in the case of, oh, bacterial research, new and interesting inventions do not just pop into existence. Inventors think about what exists, and make new things to improve their lives. Or at least their pocketbooks.
We all have a responsibility to examine those inventions -- all technology, really -- to monitor its effects and decide whether it's really a Good Thing. I mean, what if (and this is hypothetical! don't flame me for this part!) freenet ended up being used for ONLY passing peoples' credit card numbers around, becoming a major tool of international fraud and nothing else ? Then yes, we'd be better off stopping it!
The attitude that "technology can't be stopped" is just irresponsible. If you start with that attitude, you back yourself into situations where a technology gets to the point that it can't be stopped. Self-fulfilling prophecy, that's all it is.
Ha! Actually, I love how they're shipping AOL samples in DVD cases now. I didn't know where to get spare ones; now I get a free one in the mail every couple of weeks.
(Nice move, but they've a ways to go before they really support Linux)
Ha! His name is Liam, silly, ell - ai - aye - emm.
Of course, they're scared to death of releasing the source, so they'll only distribute the %#@& RPM with x86 binaries. So, if they even wanted to expand to other Linux hardware, they'd have to compile and distribute all those binaries themselves. Translation: don't hold your breath.
Thanks, AOL. That's the Linux spirit.
Well, the install file is only 540K, which is a lot smaller than the 2.0-2.4M for other platforms. Of course, this is a beta version, so it's likely low on features as well as bloat.
Why fiddle around with one chat protocol at a time? I'll take Everybuddy any day. Even over the new AOL client, btw, but I guess I might download it to check it out.
Oh yeah, and now that I replied, the moderation is undone. Sweet.
I didn't mean to mark that "funny," that was my mistake... I hope someone comes along soon and re-moderates it.
Only 87? Ha! I find it hard to believe that one in seven songs transferred on Napster is non-infringing...
And some of us think it's funny as hell :)
D'oh! Good point... Guess I should skim less and read more :)
Couldn't they just require that everyone USE the "X-priority: bulk" header? That would really solve a lot, if you have decent mail client...
More bang for your buck!
Yes, exactly:
What if bombarding us with tons of space dust every day is an alien culture's idea of "communication"? They're sending us messages in the patterns of dust which falls into our atmosphere every day!
And here we sit, ignoring it day in and day out. "Damn those earthlings, they don't understand our language at all!"
- It's not technically a web bug, and
- it tracks hits
is not to say it's harmless. I mean, I'm not accusing anyone of any wrongdoing. I was just saying that that particular answer didn't really address the concern that slashdot might be tracking users, too.That said, it looks to me like it keeps track of which comments you've read, or what your comment preferences are, or something. If you don't want this tracked, don't accept cookies from slashdot! The site can be viewed perfectly without them, you just have to post as AC. Or, you can accept one lousy cookie when you log in and never ever accept another one.
Slashdot is not out to get you. Or if it, is, it's not trying very hard :)
Granted, this is not the easiest thing to use ever. I'd really like a list of servers I could manually update, whose cookies would always be rejected. *.doubleclick.net, *.adforce.com ... you get the picture.
Point is, though, you do have recourse. You don't have to "blindly trust" all those baddies trying to set cookies on your harddrive. Now I think the priority should be making this easier for newbies to pick up, and educating them about it.
And I don't necessarily mean assigning Design Patterns and making them learn the things one by one :) But there is a movement out there towards making "Elementary Patterns," or "patterns at a level appropriate for students just learning to design and write programs." That quote is from Eugene Wallingford's Elementary Patterns Homepage, which you should check out.
Basically, elementary patterns are just like full fledged design patterns, but a lot simpler. Instead of a pattern for writing a text editor, for instance, you have one for writing a bounded loop. Or other fundamental programming constructs, such as case statements. Then, to make more complicated algorithms, like searches, you can combine a bunch of simpler patterns to get, for example, a Selection Sort pattern.
I don't know what this would do in terms of making the class more "fun," but it could make it a whole lot easier in terms of understanding one building block at a time, and then reusing those blocks to code some kick-ass apps.
http://www.collegeboard.com/ap/com puter-science/
I tried to focus on OO programming rather than straight up proceedural, which is what the AP coursebook for some reason recommends. I mean, the language is C++, but they don't deal explicitly with OO. Hello?
But, to be more practical and (hopefully) more interesting, I kind of based the OO lectures around a central project, which was designing the backend to an online CD store. Of course, it was very simplified; we used static arrays for inventory, etc etc. But even then we got into sorting and other AP-approved topics :)
The thing is, I don't think they were THAT interested. In retrospect, building a store isn't all that engaging, unless you stand to make some serious profits from it. Anyway, what I really wish I'd done is used a platform where they could see their stuff run on-line. I think that's key: all useful apps are network apps now, pretty much, and just typing into codewarrior and then running a console session is not going to cut it much longer.
I'd like to see a kind of invisible CGI gateway, so that students could code their own apps and test/run/enter data over the internet... this could tie in nicely with a course unit on web design, which is also an important thing for the up n coming CS student to know. Of course you don't have to get too deep into it; they're still just high schoolers ;)
Keith Packard's frame buffer code is now in XFree86 4.0.1: the text of a full function X server is a smidgen over 600Kbytes on the iPAQ. I'll be putting the screws on the X libraries in the next month or two, and save another 500Kbytes there. Keith and I believe we can get a basic X environment into something like a megabyte...
Which appeared in the text twice. So how come my version still takes about 10 times that much? I guess I should go download XFree86 version 4! I'm really impressed, actually, that this rewrite didn't require hobbling it in some way to customize for the small screen.
So, here's JonKatz's recipe for success: take an article from the mainstream press, stir in personal emails and comments from slashdot, add a dash of half-baked analysis, and sprinkle with a few painful misspellings.
Taco, how much are you paying this guy?
Okay. I agree that Touretsky was pretty clever for equating binary code with C code with the Engligh description. But let's look at this from a different perspective.
I'm thinking of the analogy that it's legal to describe -- in exacting detail -- how to make a nuclear bomb, but it's illegal for a civilian to posess one of those in America. Right so far?
So, it seems to me that putting the DeCSS source code out there is ok, compiling it is even okay, but as soon as you run it, to watch or (god forbid!) copy a movie, you've infringed! I realize that this is contrary the DMCA (which wouldn't even allow you to generate the code), but it seems that using that speech to infringe on a copyright would still not be protected.
Keep in mind, I don't like the DMCA either, but this seems like a reasonable (legal) argument against dashing it all in favor of "free speech."