Is this what "intelligent design" actually refers to? The idea that God set in motion and guided the Big Bang, formation of galaxies, planets, evolution, etc.?
Here we go again. Describe the detriment of others you're discussing.
You ask if it's fair that certain students who happen to know about a loophole in a third-party service can discover what their acceptance status is. Fair? Maybe not. Harmful? Assuredly not. You ask if it's fair that no one else knew the stock was going to tank and the CEO was the only one warned. Fair? Absolutely not. Harmful? You're damn skippy it is.
And as for issues of fairness, consider that anyone who was told how to manipulate a URL could discover their acceptance status. Had this been allowed to proceed, quite quickly everyone would have used it.
Let's break it down, then, to what this is really about: Harvard's petulance about losing control of its ability to hold a Sword of Damocles over applicants' heads, the blade of which is sharpened steel forged of acceptance status.
Victimless "crimes" like this are almost always about whining over loss of control. It's pitiful that an Ivy League school isn't above things like this, but there it is anyway. The information rightly belongs to the applicants, not to Harvard or the third-party application company.
"knew that it was wrong to do so, since any business leader knows that there are strict laws prohibiting insider-trading"
This is not why insider-trading is unethical. Why is there such a culture of "law makes right" on Slashdot?
Insider-trading is wrong because when everyone can't do it, it destabilizes the stock market and hurts everyone. (I have a theory about how you could allow insider trading without harming other traders, but I am not an economist and my theory probably has holes in it I am not aware of - but that's neither here nor there.)
"Perhaps the hack allowed you to see letters of provisional acceptance? Perhaps those letters were intended to be on a wait list? You do not really know what the intention was until you receive your letter from the school. Otherwise expectations would be unmet and you could not use that in a court of law to press your case. So imagine that you did read that you were accepted, but in reality your letter of acceptance was predicated upon somebody else ahead of you not accepting? You would start making decisions for an entire month to move, make preparations and get ready for business school at Harvard before receiving your letter of rejection because the person ahead of you chose to attend. This structure is in place in many places where people are placed on provisional acceptance lists."
The key portion of this scenario is "you would start making decisions." No one other than "you" has been harmed here. On the other hand, Harvard cannot be responsible for the consequences of your actions based on data that you were not intended to have at the time.
You still have yet to prove that anyone other than the applicant who views his own data is harmed here.
"If they can't wait a month to find out if they got in or not, how well do you think they'll stand up to the ethical quandary involved in an opportunity for insider trading?"
I fail to see how this statement follows logically.
What does insider trading have to do with sweaty-palmed fear about not getting into an Ivy League school? In the first circumstance, other people are harmed. In the second, they are not.
I was not an Ivy League student, and I get no satisfaction from this.
Many of these kids were probably under enormous pressure to get in. I don't blame them, and it doesn't seem like any harm was done. I think a written reprimand would have been fine.
It sounds like you're saying the only person you could harm is yourself.
How could I possibly blame Harvard for not accepting me when I looked at something that was not ready to be sent out yet?
And no, this is not equivalent to . In the movie theater case, there is a fixed number of registers, so everyone has to wait their turn. In the acceptance letter case, all the letters are sent out at once - or at least not in any particular order. Someone else's results are not a blocking condition on your results.
As far as I know, the fusion reactors produce far, far less energy than is required for modern warp drives, although supposedly "back in the day" fusion was used to energize warp coils, but it was much less efficient and couldn't be sustained for long. The creation of antimatter aboardship is a time-consuming, low-yield, low-efficiency process. According to what I remember from the TNG and TOSmovie technical manuals, "bulk" antimatter is created in large spaceborne arrays which use solar power to run some kind of quantum device which changes deuterium into antideuterium. A smaller version of this device is built into most starships, but only as a sort of emergency measure or a long-term cruise extender.
"The original poster was pointing out why the show grated on the sensibilities of viewers raised on TNG and DS9."
What?
Where?
He was doing no such thing. Nowhere did he mention TNG or DS9, I simply inferred that that was what he was talking about.
And justify your baseless statement that Enterprise did not change the previous conventions in interesting ways. Enterprise has an atmosphere that is more like a traditional navy than the other shows - I think the implications of this are interesting for a variety of reasons.
I'd be glad to talk about why, if you'll admit I wasn't trolling.
Actually, I wasn't trolling, I was being quite serious.
There was no "holy war." I discussed each point of his "dream" - which was more of a troll than anything else - and gave support for why it was inconsistent with the actual show.
He said "T'Pol scares me." Come the fuck on.
As for attacking the judgement of the moderators, it will not be the first time, nor the last, that someone does this with good reason.
Hell, I'd settle for 120W/m^2. Roof your house with these suckers and you'd have to draw a tiny fraction of the utility power you draw now. Not to mention the potential gains from mounting these on hybrid cars.
Absolutely not, and I would mod you up if I could.
I wonder if this is part of the "most Slashdotters are Trekkies" effect which presumes that all power in THE FUTURE is generated by antimatter reactors, and so if we haven't found a power source that can replace everything, it must not be any good.
Slashdot Mirror
Enterprise got much, much better in its last season.
Actually, she used to be a rather attractive girl before all of this happened to her.
I'm beginning to wish as well that they would give her body a lethal injection and have done with it.
Not very much heavier. Yours is 2.something lbs and the MP30 is about 3.
:)
I gotta say, though, I like Sharp's designs
How do you like it so far?
I've been thinking about getting the MM series' successor, the MP30.
of a reason why you wouldn't be able to use shielded cable with Ethernet, can you?
Spaceballs 3: The Search for 2
The topic is Mac OS X. Since Apple's OS and hardware are interlinked, this is clearly on-topic.
That said, I want a 12". Small, powerful, portable preconfigured UNIX with a reasonable price tag.
I wonder, however, whether Tiger will be faster or slower overall than 10.3 on the same hardware.
Is this what "intelligent design" actually refers to? The idea that God set in motion and guided the Big Bang, formation of galaxies, planets, evolution, etc.?
Here we go again. Describe the detriment of others you're discussing.
You ask if it's fair that certain students who happen to know about a loophole in a third-party service can discover what their acceptance status is. Fair? Maybe not. Harmful? Assuredly not.
You ask if it's fair that no one else knew the stock was going to tank and the CEO was the only one warned. Fair? Absolutely not. Harmful? You're damn skippy it is.
And as for issues of fairness, consider that anyone who was told how to manipulate a URL could discover their acceptance status. Had this been allowed to proceed, quite quickly everyone would have used it.
Let's break it down, then, to what this is really about: Harvard's petulance about losing control of its ability to hold a Sword of Damocles over applicants' heads, the blade of which is sharpened steel forged of acceptance status.
Victimless "crimes" like this are almost always about whining over loss of control. It's pitiful that an Ivy League school isn't above things like this, but there it is anyway. The information rightly belongs to the applicants, not to Harvard or the third-party application company.
... but ultimately, it signifies nothing.
Here is my arbitrary line. IF YOU CROSS IT, YOU ARE A BAD PERSON!
C'mon. Harm is the arbiter of ethics. It is what every ethical code (note that I distinguish between ethics and morality) boils down to.
"knew that it was wrong to do so, since any business leader knows that there are strict laws prohibiting insider-trading"
This is not why insider-trading is unethical. Why is there such a culture of "law makes right" on Slashdot?
Insider-trading is wrong because when everyone can't do it, it destabilizes the stock market and hurts everyone. (I have a theory about how you could allow insider trading without harming other traders, but I am not an economist and my theory probably has holes in it I am not aware of - but that's neither here nor there.)
Sorry to be a nazi nazi, but that would be "spelling nazi," not "grammar nazi."
(And, of course, it would be "cumming," not "cuming," which would be pronounced more like "cooming." Not sure what a cooming girl would be like.)
"Perhaps the hack allowed you to see letters of provisional acceptance? Perhaps those letters were intended to be on a wait list? You do not really know what the intention was until you receive your letter from the school. Otherwise expectations would be unmet and you could not use that in a court of law to press your case. So imagine that you did read that you were accepted, but in reality your letter of acceptance was predicated upon somebody else ahead of you not accepting? You would start making decisions for an entire month to move, make preparations and get ready for business school at Harvard before receiving your letter of rejection because the person ahead of you chose to attend. This structure is in place in many places where people are placed on provisional acceptance lists."
The key portion of this scenario is "you would start making decisions." No one other than "you" has been harmed here. On the other hand, Harvard cannot be responsible for the consequences of your actions based on data that you were not intended to have at the time.
You still have yet to prove that anyone other than the applicant who views his own data is harmed here.
I could see the student suing not Harvard, but the application processing company for making their application data insecure.
And you know what? They'd have a case.
A) It's not the school's computer.
B) They used a login hack to view their own data. Who was harmed here?
"If they can't wait a month to find out if they got in or not, how well do you think they'll stand up to the ethical quandary involved in an opportunity for insider trading?"
I fail to see how this statement follows logically.
What does insider trading have to do with sweaty-palmed fear about not getting into an Ivy League school? In the first circumstance, other people are harmed. In the second, they are not.
I was not an Ivy League student, and I get no satisfaction from this.
Many of these kids were probably under enormous pressure to get in. I don't blame them, and it doesn't seem like any harm was done. I think a written reprimand would have been fine.
It sounds like you're saying the only person you could harm is yourself.
How could I possibly blame Harvard for not accepting me when I looked at something that was not ready to be sent out yet?
And no, this is not equivalent to . In the movie theater case, there is a fixed number of registers, so everyone has to wait their turn. In the acceptance letter case, all the letters are sent out at once - or at least not in any particular order. Someone else's results are not a blocking condition on your results.
I still fail to see the moral harm here.
This is about the fact that kids can figure out a way to circumvent more or less any parental control put in front of them.
Not to say I agree with the legislation, mind you. But that's what it's (ostensibly) about, when you get down to brass tacks.
I don't think that's canon.
As far as I know, the fusion reactors produce far, far less energy than is required for modern warp drives, although supposedly "back in the day" fusion was used to energize warp coils, but it was much less efficient and couldn't be sustained for long. The creation of antimatter aboardship is a time-consuming, low-yield, low-efficiency process. According to what I remember from the TNG and TOSmovie technical manuals, "bulk" antimatter is created in large spaceborne arrays which use solar power to run some kind of quantum device which changes deuterium into antideuterium. A smaller version of this device is built into most starships, but only as a sort of emergency measure or a long-term cruise extender.
Now THIS was a troll.
Should I rather have said "sounds like a nigger?" Would that have made your Aryan blood pound proudly in your heart?
Give me a fucking break. I was being specific, not PC.
"The original poster was pointing out why the show grated on the sensibilities of viewers raised on TNG and DS9."
What?
Where?
He was doing no such thing. Nowhere did he mention TNG or DS9, I simply inferred that that was what he was talking about.
And justify your baseless statement that Enterprise did not change the previous conventions in interesting ways. Enterprise has an atmosphere that is more like a traditional navy than the other shows - I think the implications of this are interesting for a variety of reasons.
I'd be glad to talk about why, if you'll admit I wasn't trolling.
Actually, I wasn't trolling, I was being quite serious.
There was no "holy war." I discussed each point of his "dream" - which was more of a troll than anything else - and gave support for why it was inconsistent with the actual show.
He said "T'Pol scares me." Come the fuck on.
As for attacking the judgement of the moderators, it will not be the first time, nor the last, that someone does this with good reason.
Hell, I'd settle for 120W/m^2. Roof your house with these suckers and you'd have to draw a tiny fraction of the utility power you draw now. Not to mention the potential gains from mounting these on hybrid cars.
Absolutely not, and I would mod you up if I could.
I wonder if this is part of the "most Slashdotters are Trekkies" effect which presumes that all power in THE FUTURE is generated by antimatter reactors, and so if we haven't found a power source that can replace everything, it must not be any good.
Morons.