"One of the most common responses of those unconcerned about government surveillance or privacy invasions is 'I've got nothing to hide.' "
Change that to "One of the most common strawmen set up by those concerned about government surveillance or privacy invasions is 'I've got nothing to hide' and I'll agree with you.
You can have a long, thought out, and well written opinion (note: its late so this post will not be one of them). There is nothing out there that requires opinion pieces to be short sound bites. The problem is that in our society we are getting so used to the short blogs that I worry we are losing the attention span needed to take in the longer pieces. If all we can process are the sound bites, we are all going to start sounding like Congressmen pretty soon.
"Are you really implying that your CS is useless. "
Are you really implying that the lawyer who doesn't know accounting is useless? Or if you refuse to accept that analogy, what about a lawyer who primarily knows constitutional law when you are looking for a divorce attorney. Are they useless because their education focused on subject different from the one you are currently looking for?
Yes, the user interface is an important part of most software systems. But software systems have many parts, and the user interface is usually a very small one, despite its importance. You ask about my particular work, no, I do not develop our product's UI. That is done by other developers who I work closely with and (hopefully) have more training in the subject. However at my previous position they had me developing the web tier (it should be noted that the actual designs were developed by dedicated usability experts, we merely implemented them), and that was the main reason I started looking for something different.
You are also right in that software applications often have problems in the UI. But that is not because CS students are learning mathematics. Its because employers fail to recognize that developing a UI is different from developing back end software and put the wrong person on the job (as which happened in my previous job). Its a problem with management, not education.
Do you know why frameworks like Struts became popular in the first place? Its because they separated the view out of the model and the control of the application (hence the term MVC). The reason for this is not some pure academic pursuit of software purity, the goal is to have a different person, someone who specializes in human computer interaction, develop the application's view.
"I am the original author and I do have a math degree from U of Waterloo and do know math very well."
I'm sorry but if you think memorizing formulas is what mathematics is about, I don't care what degree you have you don't know mathematics.
"The algorithmic problems of computer science are minuscule compared to the human interface design problems and a CS education that spends more time on algorithmic complexity than psychology produces graduates who make poor CS researchers, let alone practitioners."
Have you spent even an hour on an university campus in the past decade? There are dedicated programs all over the world dedicated to human computer interaction. In fact they are often very popular with students, who enjoy working with something that at least appears to be physical. The fact that you (and many employers) are ignorant of such programs does not mean there is a problem in our education system, it means there is a problem with you and those employers.
But again, the UI is not the extent of software. I am aware that many people who have a poor understanding of software do not understand that since the UI is all that they see, but if you have half the qualifications you claim you should know that is not the case.
Ironically when I looked it up on wikipedia to make sure I had the correct terminology they automatically redirected me to "rogue wave". This is why you never trust the wikipedia.
"mathematics as a base for CS was great in the 50's and 60's, but the real problems in computer software are people problems, not algorithmic ones. Once you program a calculation correctly, it generally stays that way."
You, like the author of this article, are missing the point of an education in mathematics. It isn't to simply teach you algorithms, its a way of thinking through abstraction which is crucial to computer science.
"But determining the optimal layout of a form to benefit the users of the system requires observing people and their needs."
That work should be done by a web designer, not a CS grad. Yes, many projects fail to adequately separate out the view from the rest of the app or force the same developers who wrote the backend to also write the user interface. But complaining that the problem is that those developers are learning math instead of human/computer interaction is like making your lawyer do your taxes and then complaining that their education was too focused on constitutional law and not the tax code. If you make someone do the wrong job, they often won't have the right education to do it.
In general, no, waves are not that big of a factor in deep water (as oil platforms demonstrate). However rare rouge waves could potentially cause problems to floating structures. But I'm willing to bet the guys who designed these have already taken them into account (its not like they are an obscure phenomenon that only geeks on/. have heard of), so they won't be a problem either.
"Okay, I get that computer scientists have to take math classes and they don't like it."
No, most CS students actually like math (as much as you can like a required class) since they understand the point of mathematics is learn how to think in terms of abstraction, which is necessary in their chosen field. In fact I ended up majoring in it. The ones who hate it are the ones who should be Business Information Technology majors, whose most technically demanding job will end up being setting up a Ruby on Rails web application.
The Communications of the ACM is not a paid journal, so do your homework before crying a river over having to spend a dime of your precious money.
And in case you hadn't heard of it, there is this place called a public library where you can read magazines, journals, and books for free. Yeah, you have to be quiet and deal with lots of old people, but you probably should try visiting one at least once in your life.
"The article makes a good point saying that the obsession with mathematics at the exclusion of all else in computational theory is not necessarily a good thing for the IT field"
Well first of all, thats not happening. Computer science education programs are not obsessed with mathematics at the exclusion of other subjects, in fact modern programs are often designed to incorporate many other subjects from biology to art to business fundamentals.
Second, no, you don't use every theorem you learned your college math classes. But thats not the point. Professional mathematicians don't use them all either. Studying mathematics is not like studying history where the goal is to memorize as many facts as you can about a particular subject. Its about learning a way of thinking which is critical to the study of computer science, namely abstraction. For more information on the subject, check out the article "Is Abstraction the Key to Computing" from the April 07 issue of the Communications of the ACM. Everything is computer science is abstract, and if you are unable to think in those terms you will be unable to deal with complex problems in computer science.
Now are there other issues that should be covered in modern CS curricula like concurrency? Of course. The curricula needs to constantly evolve as the profession evolves. However, concurrency is another place where if you don't understand abstraction, you are going to be entirely unable to figure out what is happening.
And yes, I do think all programmers (at least those on production systems) should have a CS education. There are many things such as data structures and algorithms that we take for granted, but the average joe might not be familiar of. Yes, they may be able to throw together a basic PHP site, but that is far different from building a production system. I had to maintain some code that had been written someone whose subject had been graphic design and who had picked up some Java and JavaScript on the side. It wasn't exactly pretty. And what would you really expect? Would you allow yourself to be treated by a doctor who hadn't really studied medicine, but had merely visited a website and took a few online tutorials on the subject?
"So if someone steals your SSN and fraudulently obtains a credit card, it's the institution's fault?"
Well, yeah. SSNs were never intended to be secret numbers that only the owner would know, so in theory it shouldn't matter if the whole world knew your SSN. If the institution issues a credit card without doing a sufficient job to verify your identity (which unfortunately is usually the case), it damn well is their fault.
Child abuse sounds like you smacked the kid when you caught him stealing a cookie from the cookie jar. Not that that should be considered acceptable (thats a debate for a different day), but child pornography is a bit more serious.
Umm, this is/., analogies that have to do with having racy pictures of your girlfriend will go over the heads of many people here. Thats especially true of those who think this is a gray area, as I'm guessing for them stealing pictures of someone's wife or girlfriend from their computer is probably the closest they will ever get to having a significant other.
This is also why you generally don't want to let the Geek Squad (or any other tech support company) kids into your house...
You may have thought it is a bad thing to have the software and device tied together, but much of the public didn't. They bought into the idea that traditional mp3 players with drag and drop interfaces were too hard to use, and liked having everything integrated.
Well, no, there were plenty of mp3 players around before the iPod hit the stage. Their 'innovation' was they sold it closely linked with their iTunes store, and that they blanketed the airwaves with annoying commercials featuring dancing silhouettes.
Though with the smartphone market, there are plenty of well known names in existence already. BlackBerry, Palm, and Motorola are all much more well known than iRiver or Rio.
Well I was sort of thinking that maybe they would learn their lesson. I mean it shouldn't really surprise people that batteries need to be changed every once in a while, why the f*ck would you want to solder one in place?
I just hope that either these batteries last longer than the iPod batteries or I never have to get a hold of someone using a year old iPhone...
I suspect they had a lot of trouble deciding that. Should they make a campy fun movie for people in their 20s who are nostalgic for the days when they played with the plastic toys? Or should they make a kids movie for people who may be fans of the toy line today? From what I've heard (though I haven't actually seen it), they tried and failed at both. Its rated too high for kids today (ok, I know theaters don't always honor ratings that strictly, but if you target audience is 10 year old kids, you need to make it rated PG), and they took it too seriously (and made too many changes) for those wanting a campy throwback to the 80s. I groaned when I heard they made Megatron turn into a jet instead of a gun because they thought it would be unrealistic if he changed size during his transformation. Come on, its a bunch of transforming robot aliens blowing each other up, whats so hard about that? Once again Michael Bay gets a potentially great project, but blows it because he misses the entire point.
Ah screw it. Hopefully Transformers 2 will get an actually decent director, and I'm crossing my fingers that will cover digging up JetFire (he kicked ass).
Actually, they don't. In fact, they weren't even the first company to trademark the word, Apple Corps began in 1968 and the two have been going at it in lawsuits ever since then whenever Apple Inc (the computer company) starts selling something related to music.
"Well, to be plain, what I actually said was that he shouldn't be claiming these things without evidence."
So you expect him to provide evidence of his skill in a/. post? I think you are taking this forum a bit too seriously. He isn't applying for a job, he is voicing his opinion on a controversial issue. In reality, whether or not his claims apply to him himself are really quite irrelevant, as its a critique of the idea that Indian programmers will replace all American programmers simply because they can work for less.
"You may choose to argue that if you wish, and unfortunately I expect you probably will, but this was an opinion, and your opinion of my opinion isn't actually interesting."
Seems you think it is, since you are responding to it. Although I'm not stating an opinion, I'm stating a fact. You do not have the information needed to make the claims you are making.
"You need to go down to Sylvan and enroll in a workshop to improve your reading comprehension skills. "Read into what was said" doesn't mean the same thing as "read what was said.""
Actually it does. "Reading into" someone's post and interpreting more than just what they literally are saying is an important part of reading comprehension. Although you do take it a step too far when you try to gauge the original poster's programming skills based on his comments, and when you claim he is just making up the number of programmers he is better than based on how much more his salary. That does make the fact that you are complaining about people "reading into" a post a bit ironic.
"On the side, you should probably look up the word 'audacious.' You either accused me of being brave, recklessly brave, contemptuous of law, or original and unique. No, none of those apply to the thing you misread, whether or not considering the correct interpretation of what was actually said."
audacious
-adjective
1. extremely bold or daring; recklessly brave; fearless: an audacious explorer.
2. extremely original; without restriction to prior ideas; highly inventive: an audacious vision of the city's bright future.
3. recklessly bold in defiance of convention, propriety, law, or the like; insolent; brazen.
4. lively; unrestrained; uninhibited: an audacious interpretation of her role.
As a rule, complaining about the use of words you don't actually know is also a great way to make yourself look stupid.
"I know. I have several of them. I didn't say those people didn't exist, only that the original speaker wasn't one such person."
And you are familiar with this particular individual's skill level how?
"I never said it did. I've actually read TMM quite a few times, and Fred is a personal friend. Thanks kindly. Nothing I said is in contrast with his book in any way."
From your last post: "And when you start costing 30x as much, suddenly you'll be able to out-do 35 of them, right?"
Sure sounds like you are thinking productivity scales linearly.
"That's about lowest bidder, not about India. You'll get the same problem if you look for the lowest bidder in Chicago."
Yes, thats pretty much exactly what I said when I wrote that such people exist domestically.
"Please don't read things into what I said then argue with those things. That's really ugly."
Don't argue with things you say that I read? Thats a bit of an audacious demand, don't you think?
Yes, after one has gotten their foundation from formal education, or even in conjunction with formal education, real world experience is a benefit. No one is saying you should stay in school and never leave for the real world. However, that is different from saying things like "experience is the best teacher". This is important because (especially in computer programming) there are many out there who have no formal background in what they are doing and try to learn as they go, much like the original poster said. However, they fail to learn the fundamentals (things like performance, data structures, security, etc.) and end up just learning bad practices on the job. And then there is no way to convince them to change, because they are convinced what they are doing is the correct way.
"The only real difference between school learning and experience based learning is that there are real things at stake when learning by experience. And that can be a great motivator."
It motivates you to go for the quick and easy solution instead of the right solution. And as the gp said, in the end that will cause you to go with the "test first, lesson afterwards (if at all)" approach.
Even in our young industry there is a wealth of knowledge out there on how to best do things. To throw it out in the guise of "I'll experience it all myself" is just plain wasteful.
"In the case with hard drives, the hard drives are not floating in water themselves, they are surrounded by a sealed packet of liquid."
No, they actually are in the liquid themselves (well, technically they have a waterproof shell, but that is in the liquid solution). This is a patent for a system in which the hard drive is suspended in liquid (and no, its not simply filling a baggie with water and dropping the device in it, its a bit more complicated that that). Yes, the/. summary did not exactly make that clear, but if you think about it, simply using a liquid filled cushion wouldn't be even remotely patentable (there is plenty of prior art out there for that).
Except that would involve the hard drive outside of the bag, which isn't what they are describing. In fact that technology has existed for some time (check out Panasonic's Toughbook line), so it wouldn't be patentable.
Slashdot Mirror
"One of the most common responses of those unconcerned about government surveillance or privacy invasions is 'I've got nothing to hide.' "
Change that to "One of the most common strawmen set up by those concerned about government surveillance or privacy invasions is 'I've got nothing to hide' and I'll agree with you.
You can have a long, thought out, and well written opinion (note: its late so this post will not be one of them). There is nothing out there that requires opinion pieces to be short sound bites. The problem is that in our society we are getting so used to the short blogs that I worry we are losing the attention span needed to take in the longer pieces. If all we can process are the sound bites, we are all going to start sounding like Congressmen pretty soon.
"Are you really implying that your CS is useless. "
Are you really implying that the lawyer who doesn't know accounting is useless? Or if you refuse to accept that analogy, what about a lawyer who primarily knows constitutional law when you are looking for a divorce attorney. Are they useless because their education focused on subject different from the one you are currently looking for?
Yes, the user interface is an important part of most software systems. But software systems have many parts, and the user interface is usually a very small one, despite its importance. You ask about my particular work, no, I do not develop our product's UI. That is done by other developers who I work closely with and (hopefully) have more training in the subject. However at my previous position they had me developing the web tier (it should be noted that the actual designs were developed by dedicated usability experts, we merely implemented them), and that was the main reason I started looking for something different.
You are also right in that software applications often have problems in the UI. But that is not because CS students are learning mathematics. Its because employers fail to recognize that developing a UI is different from developing back end software and put the wrong person on the job (as which happened in my previous job). Its a problem with management, not education.
Do you know why frameworks like Struts became popular in the first place? Its because they separated the view out of the model and the control of the application (hence the term MVC). The reason for this is not some pure academic pursuit of software purity, the goal is to have a different person, someone who specializes in human computer interaction, develop the application's view.
"I am the original author and I do have a math degree from U of Waterloo and do know math very well."
I'm sorry but if you think memorizing formulas is what mathematics is about, I don't care what degree you have you don't know mathematics.
"The algorithmic problems of computer science are minuscule compared to the human interface design problems and a CS education that spends more time on algorithmic complexity than psychology produces graduates who make poor CS researchers, let alone practitioners."
Have you spent even an hour on an university campus in the past decade? There are dedicated programs all over the world dedicated to human computer interaction. In fact they are often very popular with students, who enjoy working with something that at least appears to be physical. The fact that you (and many employers) are ignorant of such programs does not mean there is a problem in our education system, it means there is a problem with you and those employers.
But again, the UI is not the extent of software. I am aware that many people who have a poor understanding of software do not understand that since the UI is all that they see, but if you have half the qualifications you claim you should know that is not the case.
Ironically when I looked it up on wikipedia to make sure I had the correct terminology they automatically redirected me to "rogue wave". This is why you never trust the wikipedia.
"mathematics as a base for CS was great in the 50's and 60's, but the real problems in computer software are people problems, not algorithmic ones. Once you program a calculation correctly, it generally stays that way."
You, like the author of this article, are missing the point of an education in mathematics. It isn't to simply teach you algorithms, its a way of thinking through abstraction which is crucial to computer science.
"But determining the optimal layout of a form to benefit the users of the system requires observing people and their needs."
That work should be done by a web designer, not a CS grad. Yes, many projects fail to adequately separate out the view from the rest of the app or force the same developers who wrote the backend to also write the user interface. But complaining that the problem is that those developers are learning math instead of human/computer interaction is like making your lawyer do your taxes and then complaining that their education was too focused on constitutional law and not the tax code. If you make someone do the wrong job, they often won't have the right education to do it.
In general, no, waves are not that big of a factor in deep water (as oil platforms demonstrate). However rare rouge waves could potentially cause problems to floating structures. But I'm willing to bet the guys who designed these have already taken them into account (its not like they are an obscure phenomenon that only geeks on /. have heard of), so they won't be a problem either.
"Okay, I get that computer scientists have to take math classes and they don't like it."
No, most CS students actually like math (as much as you can like a required class) since they understand the point of mathematics is learn how to think in terms of abstraction, which is necessary in their chosen field. In fact I ended up majoring in it. The ones who hate it are the ones who should be Business Information Technology majors, whose most technically demanding job will end up being setting up a Ruby on Rails web application.
The Communications of the ACM is not a paid journal, so do your homework before crying a river over having to spend a dime of your precious money.
And in case you hadn't heard of it, there is this place called a public library where you can read magazines, journals, and books for free. Yeah, you have to be quiet and deal with lots of old people, but you probably should try visiting one at least once in your life.
"The article makes a good point saying that the obsession with mathematics at the exclusion of all else in computational theory is not necessarily a good thing for the IT field"
Well first of all, thats not happening. Computer science education programs are not obsessed with mathematics at the exclusion of other subjects, in fact modern programs are often designed to incorporate many other subjects from biology to art to business fundamentals.
Second, no, you don't use every theorem you learned your college math classes. But thats not the point. Professional mathematicians don't use them all either. Studying mathematics is not like studying history where the goal is to memorize as many facts as you can about a particular subject. Its about learning a way of thinking which is critical to the study of computer science, namely abstraction. For more information on the subject, check out the article "Is Abstraction the Key to Computing" from the April 07 issue of the Communications of the ACM. Everything is computer science is abstract, and if you are unable to think in those terms you will be unable to deal with complex problems in computer science.
Now are there other issues that should be covered in modern CS curricula like concurrency? Of course. The curricula needs to constantly evolve as the profession evolves. However, concurrency is another place where if you don't understand abstraction, you are going to be entirely unable to figure out what is happening.
And yes, I do think all programmers (at least those on production systems) should have a CS education. There are many things such as data structures and algorithms that we take for granted, but the average joe might not be familiar of. Yes, they may be able to throw together a basic PHP site, but that is far different from building a production system. I had to maintain some code that had been written someone whose subject had been graphic design and who had picked up some Java and JavaScript on the side. It wasn't exactly pretty. And what would you really expect? Would you allow yourself to be treated by a doctor who hadn't really studied medicine, but had merely visited a website and took a few online tutorials on the subject?
"So if someone steals your SSN and fraudulently obtains a credit card, it's the institution's fault?"
Well, yeah. SSNs were never intended to be secret numbers that only the owner would know, so in theory it shouldn't matter if the whole world knew your SSN. If the institution issues a credit card without doing a sufficient job to verify your identity (which unfortunately is usually the case), it damn well is their fault.
Child abuse sounds like you smacked the kid when you caught him stealing a cookie from the cookie jar. Not that that should be considered acceptable (thats a debate for a different day), but child pornography is a bit more serious.
Umm, this is /., analogies that have to do with having racy pictures of your girlfriend will go over the heads of many people here. Thats especially true of those who think this is a gray area, as I'm guessing for them stealing pictures of someone's wife or girlfriend from their computer is probably the closest they will ever get to having a significant other.
This is also why you generally don't want to let the Geek Squad (or any other tech support company) kids into your house...
" I just try to remember if there has been any year where this exact prediction has not been made ? "
Sure, 1990. Oh wait...
You may have thought it is a bad thing to have the software and device tied together, but much of the public didn't. They bought into the idea that traditional mp3 players with drag and drop interfaces were too hard to use, and liked having everything integrated.
Well, no, there were plenty of mp3 players around before the iPod hit the stage. Their 'innovation' was they sold it closely linked with their iTunes store, and that they blanketed the airwaves with annoying commercials featuring dancing silhouettes.
Though with the smartphone market, there are plenty of well known names in existence already. BlackBerry, Palm, and Motorola are all much more well known than iRiver or Rio.
Well I was sort of thinking that maybe they would learn their lesson. I mean it shouldn't really surprise people that batteries need to be changed every once in a while, why the f*ck would you want to solder one in place?
I just hope that either these batteries last longer than the iPod batteries or I never have to get a hold of someone using a year old iPhone...
I suspect they had a lot of trouble deciding that. Should they make a campy fun movie for people in their 20s who are nostalgic for the days when they played with the plastic toys? Or should they make a kids movie for people who may be fans of the toy line today? From what I've heard (though I haven't actually seen it), they tried and failed at both. Its rated too high for kids today (ok, I know theaters don't always honor ratings that strictly, but if you target audience is 10 year old kids, you need to make it rated PG), and they took it too seriously (and made too many changes) for those wanting a campy throwback to the 80s. I groaned when I heard they made Megatron turn into a jet instead of a gun because they thought it would be unrealistic if he changed size during his transformation. Come on, its a bunch of transforming robot aliens blowing each other up, whats so hard about that? Once again Michael Bay gets a potentially great project, but blows it because he misses the entire point.
Ah screw it. Hopefully Transformers 2 will get an actually decent director, and I'm crossing my fingers that will cover digging up JetFire (he kicked ass).
Actually, they don't. In fact, they weren't even the first company to trademark the word, Apple Corps began in 1968 and the two have been going at it in lawsuits ever since then whenever Apple Inc (the computer company) starts selling something related to music.
Actually G-mail/Gmail is 5 letters, not one. Thats what was trademarked, not the letter it began with.
"Well, to be plain, what I actually said was that he shouldn't be claiming these things without evidence."
So you expect him to provide evidence of his skill in a /. post? I think you are taking this forum a bit too seriously. He isn't applying for a job, he is voicing his opinion on a controversial issue. In reality, whether or not his claims apply to him himself are really quite irrelevant, as its a critique of the idea that Indian programmers will replace all American programmers simply because they can work for less.
"You may choose to argue that if you wish, and unfortunately I expect you probably will, but this was an opinion, and your opinion of my opinion isn't actually interesting."
Seems you think it is, since you are responding to it. Although I'm not stating an opinion, I'm stating a fact. You do not have the information needed to make the claims you are making.
"You need to go down to Sylvan and enroll in a workshop to improve your reading comprehension skills. "Read into what was said" doesn't mean the same thing as "read what was said.""
Actually it does. "Reading into" someone's post and interpreting more than just what they literally are saying is an important part of reading comprehension. Although you do take it a step too far when you try to gauge the original poster's programming skills based on his comments, and when you claim he is just making up the number of programmers he is better than based on how much more his salary. That does make the fact that you are complaining about people "reading into" a post a bit ironic.
"On the side, you should probably look up the word 'audacious.' You either accused me of being brave, recklessly brave, contemptuous of law, or original and unique. No, none of those apply to the thing you misread, whether or not considering the correct interpretation of what was actually said."
audacious
-adjective
1. extremely bold or daring; recklessly brave; fearless: an audacious explorer.
2. extremely original; without restriction to prior ideas; highly inventive: an audacious vision of the city's bright future.
3. recklessly bold in defiance of convention, propriety, law, or the like; insolent; brazen.
4. lively; unrestrained; uninhibited: an audacious interpretation of her role.
As a rule, complaining about the use of words you don't actually know is also a great way to make yourself look stupid.
"I know. I have several of them. I didn't say those people didn't exist, only that the original speaker wasn't one such person."
And you are familiar with this particular individual's skill level how?
"I never said it did. I've actually read TMM quite a few times, and Fred is a personal friend. Thanks kindly. Nothing I said is in contrast with his book in any way."
From your last post: "And when you start costing 30x as much, suddenly you'll be able to out-do 35 of them, right?"
Sure sounds like you are thinking productivity scales linearly.
"That's about lowest bidder, not about India. You'll get the same problem if you look for the lowest bidder in Chicago."
Yes, thats pretty much exactly what I said when I wrote that such people exist domestically.
"Please don't read things into what I said then argue with those things. That's really ugly."
Don't argue with things you say that I read? Thats a bit of an audacious demand, don't you think?
Yes, after one has gotten their foundation from formal education, or even in conjunction with formal education, real world experience is a benefit. No one is saying you should stay in school and never leave for the real world. However, that is different from saying things like "experience is the best teacher". This is important because (especially in computer programming) there are many out there who have no formal background in what they are doing and try to learn as they go, much like the original poster said. However, they fail to learn the fundamentals (things like performance, data structures, security, etc.) and end up just learning bad practices on the job. And then there is no way to convince them to change, because they are convinced what they are doing is the correct way.
"The only real difference between school learning and experience based learning is that there are real things at stake when learning by experience. And that can be a great motivator."
It motivates you to go for the quick and easy solution instead of the right solution. And as the gp said, in the end that will cause you to go with the "test first, lesson afterwards (if at all)" approach.
Even in our young industry there is a wealth of knowledge out there on how to best do things. To throw it out in the guise of "I'll experience it all myself" is just plain wasteful.
"In the case with hard drives, the hard drives are not floating in water themselves, they are surrounded by a sealed packet of liquid."
No, they actually are in the liquid themselves (well, technically they have a waterproof shell, but that is in the liquid solution). This is a patent for a system in which the hard drive is suspended in liquid (and no, its not simply filling a baggie with water and dropping the device in it, its a bit more complicated that that). Yes, the /. summary did not exactly make that clear, but if you think about it, simply using a liquid filled cushion wouldn't be even remotely patentable (there is plenty of prior art out there for that).
Except that would involve the hard drive outside of the bag, which isn't what they are describing. In fact that technology has existed for some time (check out Panasonic's Toughbook line), so it wouldn't be patentable.