I cede the point. I was unaware of just how complex these plagiarism detectors have become. I had in mind something more like a TA looking over the printed source code of multiple students. I guess it all boils down to this : what plagiarism detection methods are employed in YOUR computer science department?
This idea definitely wouldn't fly at the college I went to; the course syllabus always contained a table with the assignments and the grade percentage that each was worth. The course syllabus was basically seen as a contract between the professor and his class and it couldn't be changed willy nilly. I suppose it would work if this system were incorporated into the syllabus . .
Another problem I have with this is it makes the cheater the enemy of the rest of the class. What exactly is this supposed to accomplish? Getting the cheater beaten up at the bar next Saturday? There's an official system to deal with cheaters. It is there for a reason. Use it.
... and it would be more work to re-engineer somebody else's code to avoid detection than to just write it from scratch.
This has been mentioned a few times already, and I completely disagree. Yes, if someone is given an algorithm to implement, it may be easier to do it themselves than to obfuscate someone else's code. BUT an important part of many computer science assignments is to first figure out the algorithm you are trying to implement. If a student understands the very basic code syntax and structure, but sucks (or blows) at problem solving, then it may actually be easier to change someone's code.
Since problem solving and algorithm development are arguably the more important aspects of most CS assignments, the cheater places himself at an even greater disadvantage.
Wow, after reading all this George Carlin nonsense, you just reminded me that this discussion is supposed to be about some super strength metallic foam! Can we talk a little more about that for a while?
On your point about the Iran point...I think there is still the issue of intermediate servers sending "domain doesn't exist" messages to Libyan requests before the packet even reaches the intended destination.
I found the end of your link to be the most interesting piece of the whole document:
"In brief, the fact that all the foreign relations power is vested in the National Government and that no formal restriction is imposed on the treaty-making power in the international context352 leaves little room for the notion of a limited treaty-making power with regard to the reserved rights of the States or in regard to the choice of matters concerning which the Federal Government may treat with other nations; protected individual rights appear to be sheltered by specific constitutional guarantees from the domestic effects of treaties, and the separation of powers at the federal level may require legislative action to give municipal effect to international agreements."
I read that as "the executive can agree to whatever it wants in a treaty, but it can't enforce any part of it that violates the constitution"
I'm actually a lot more interested in the vertical stripes than the horizontal ones. It looks like at certain times, every country in the world sends a packet . .
How the heck is this similar to the Onstar system? This uses a directed EMP to disrupt electronic engine control, Onstar uses a built-in remote kill switch. That's like saying shooting a lightbulb is the same as turning off the switch.
And you would be correct if your intent is to make the room dark. This system is like onstar in that both stop a vehicle remotely.
The government has the authority to do many things in a legal manner. No one is arguing that. No one is even arguing against searches and seizures at the border. The argument is against the illegal searches and seizures (no probable cause, etc) that is occurring.
Obviously, if you leave one country, but haven't entered the next country, you are in the Borderlands. We should all enter the Borderlands and set up a government there. You know, that 100 sq ft area considered "not past customs". But wait . . if we try to do something like that, the other governments would say that it is their land, and they have jurisdiction there ... so that land really is part of that government . . . so the constitution should apply . . .
all I'm saying is that in the real world, your ideals and values mean NOTHING. when some gov official is raping your rights, you have NOTHING you can do about it.
nothing.
this is the powerless that we all feel as being part of the modern world.
nothing you can do about it, either. nothing.
sorry to break it to you but MANY things in this world are really really wrong and nothing you can do about it. your youthful ideals won't help you. just accept it. life has MANY things like this that you cannot fight or win.
do I like this? HELL NO. but I live in the real world.
Maybe we could, I don't know, sue the border agents and the executive branch of our government, so that MAYBE the judicial branch will strike down these acts, or at least limit them, as unconstitutional and give us some case law on the matter. You know, kinda exactly like what the ACLU is trying to do here.
Nah, that's just too hard! We should all just resign ourselves to accept the inalienable and indisputable fact that the federal government is in absolute control and there is nothing we can ever do. That definitely sounds better./sarcasm
Yeah. Choice sucks. We should have LinWinMacs for operating systems and Chrome Fire Explorers for web browsers. . . Are you trying to be funny or satirical? Because if not, then what the hell are you thinking?
GP was making one point, not two independent ones. You didn't just misspell Lois, you misspelled it by making it into a man's name, "Louis." Instead of what you meant to say, what you actually said was that a man left superman, implying he is gay.
Many people would agree that there should be some sort of error or reliability checking in the FBI's database, or that they shouldn't have that database to begin with. But that is another argument entirely. Scientists aren't asking for access to the database in order to systematically verify the data. They would probably use the data with the assumption that it is correct.
I disagree. ACTA is being pushed through while Obama is POTUS. Let's pretend I voted for Bush. Would he have put a stop to it? Unlikely. Ok, now you pick any one of the major or even minor presidential candidates and tell me which one would have shut this down. Now here's they key: let's also pretend that I am NOT an apathetic voter, I knew all about the issues, and I voted for your guy. Would your guy have been elected? Nope. So my vote did nothing. There's no "I voted for this guy because..." box. Now let's say that your guy did win. He'd be fighting so hard to get ANYTHING passed through congress that little issues like this one would be given up in some kind of compromise.
That is somewhat true. Parts of congress are involved in health care, and those parts are only partly involved. How many times in the last few years have we hears about massive bills (1000's of pages) being pushed through with no time for anyone to actually read them? Pick any random congressperson. How much of their house's health care plan do you think that congressperson actually understands?
To add to the problems you mention above: many libraries do not even allow some of the things you mentioned to happen on their computers. No social networking sites or instant messaging (which is how I communicate with most of my family), no streaming of anything, and no forums or chat rooms.
Yes, they are willing to die on their own terms. They are not necessarily willing to get caught, stuck in a prison for years and years, and then maybe executed. They would more likely try to plead innocence so they would be let go and then try another attempt.
You've got no argument from me. The only point I was making was that when the ships were lost, value was lost as well. The post I replied to was arguing that if you enjoy the ship building process, then the value has already been returned. I argued that the end result had value in and of itself, so value was lost. Whether or not this loss of value should have been expected or accounted for is a separate issue.
I agree; that is a good example. The difference is that in my example, it is someone else's fault. In your example, it is your fault. That is the same discussion going on in other parts of this thread (the lost ships were who's fault?), but not the point I was making. I was only making the point that, either way, value WAS lost.
I've never heard of "fiches" and the online dictionaries all seem to allude to microfiche. Context gives the impression you are referring to the little round plastic/clay pieces that casinos exchange for money. We call them "chips" or "poker chips." Is that what you are talking about?
Slashdot Mirror
Never fear! Netflix has it streaming http://www.netflix.com/WiSearch?oq=real+gen&v1=Real+Genius&search_submit=
I cede the point. I was unaware of just how complex these plagiarism detectors have become. I had in mind something more like a TA looking over the printed source code of multiple students. I guess it all boils down to this : what plagiarism detection methods are employed in YOUR computer science department?
Another problem I have with this is it makes the cheater the enemy of the rest of the class. What exactly is this supposed to accomplish? Getting the cheater beaten up at the bar next Saturday? There's an official system to deal with cheaters. It is there for a reason. Use it.
... and it would be more work to re-engineer somebody else's code to avoid detection than to just write it from scratch.
This has been mentioned a few times already, and I completely disagree. Yes, if someone is given an algorithm to implement, it may be easier to do it themselves than to obfuscate someone else's code. BUT an important part of many computer science assignments is to first figure out the algorithm you are trying to implement. If a student understands the very basic code syntax and structure, but sucks (or blows) at problem solving, then it may actually be easier to change someone's code.
Since problem solving and algorithm development are arguably the more important aspects of most CS assignments, the cheater places himself at an even greater disadvantage.
Wow, after reading all this George Carlin nonsense, you just reminded me that this discussion is supposed to be about some super strength metallic foam! Can we talk a little more about that for a while?
On your point about the Iran point...I think there is still the issue of intermediate servers sending "domain doesn't exist" messages to Libyan requests before the packet even reaches the intended destination.
I think each Class B share with 10 votes, is broken up into 10 Class A shares with 1 vote each.
Mod parent up to infinity. Fettuccine Alfredo?? Really??
I found the end of your link to be the most interesting piece of the whole document:
"In brief, the fact that all the foreign relations power is vested in the National Government and that no formal restriction is imposed on the treaty-making power in the international context352 leaves little room for the notion of a limited treaty-making power with regard to the reserved rights of the States or in regard to the choice of matters concerning which the Federal Government may treat with other nations; protected individual rights appear to be sheltered by specific constitutional guarantees from the domestic effects of treaties, and the separation of powers at the federal level may require legislative action to give municipal effect to international agreements."
I read that as "the executive can agree to whatever it wants in a treaty, but it can't enforce any part of it that violates the constitution"
I'm actually a lot more interested in the vertical stripes than the horizontal ones. It looks like at certain times, every country in the world sends a packet . .
How the heck is this similar to the Onstar system? This uses a directed EMP to disrupt electronic engine control, Onstar uses a built-in remote kill switch. That's like saying shooting a lightbulb is the same as turning off the switch.
And you would be correct if your intent is to make the room dark. This system is like onstar in that both stop a vehicle remotely.
The government has the authority to do many things in a legal manner. No one is arguing that. No one is even arguing against searches and seizures at the border. The argument is against the illegal searches and seizures (no probable cause, etc) that is occurring.
Obviously, if you leave one country, but haven't entered the next country, you are in the Borderlands. We should all enter the Borderlands and set up a government there. You know, that 100 sq ft area considered "not past customs". But wait . . if we try to do something like that, the other governments would say that it is their land, and they have jurisdiction there . .. so that land really is part of that government . . . so the constitution should apply . . .
(what's all that BS about?)
all I'm saying is that in the real world, your ideals and values mean NOTHING. when some gov official is raping your rights, you have NOTHING you can do about it.
nothing.
this is the powerless that we all feel as being part of the modern world.
nothing you can do about it, either. nothing.
sorry to break it to you but MANY things in this world are really really wrong and nothing you can do about it. your youthful ideals won't help you. just accept it. life has MANY things like this that you cannot fight or win.
do I like this? HELL NO. but I live in the real world.
Maybe we could, I don't know, sue the border agents and the executive branch of our government, so that MAYBE the judicial branch will strike down these acts, or at least limit them, as unconstitutional and give us some case law on the matter. You know, kinda exactly like what the ACLU is trying to do here.
/sarcasm
Nah, that's just too hard! We should all just resign ourselves to accept the inalienable and indisputable fact that the federal government is in absolute control and there is nothing we can ever do. That definitely sounds better.
Yeah. Choice sucks. We should have LinWinMacs for operating systems and Chrome Fire Explorers for web browsers. . . Are you trying to be funny or satirical? Because if not, then what the hell are you thinking?
GP was making one point, not two independent ones. You didn't just misspell Lois, you misspelled it by making it into a man's name, "Louis." Instead of what you meant to say, what you actually said was that a man left superman, implying he is gay.
Many people would agree that there should be some sort of error or reliability checking in the FBI's database, or that they shouldn't have that database to begin with. But that is another argument entirely. Scientists aren't asking for access to the database in order to systematically verify the data. They would probably use the data with the assumption that it is correct.
I disagree. ACTA is being pushed through while Obama is POTUS. Let's pretend I voted for Bush. Would he have put a stop to it? Unlikely. Ok, now you pick any one of the major or even minor presidential candidates and tell me which one would have shut this down. Now here's they key: let's also pretend that I am NOT an apathetic voter, I knew all about the issues, and I voted for your guy. Would your guy have been elected? Nope. So my vote did nothing. There's no "I voted for this guy because..." box. Now let's say that your guy did win. He'd be fighting so hard to get ANYTHING passed through congress that little issues like this one would be given up in some kind of compromise.
That is somewhat true. Parts of congress are involved in health care, and those parts are only partly involved. How many times in the last few years have we hears about massive bills (1000's of pages) being pushed through with no time for anyone to actually read them? Pick any random congressperson. How much of their house's health care plan do you think that congressperson actually understands?
To add to the problems you mention above: many libraries do not even allow some of the things you mentioned to happen on their computers. No social networking sites or instant messaging (which is how I communicate with most of my family), no streaming of anything, and no forums or chat rooms.
All lawyers are cockroaches. Not all cockroaches are lawyers. There are at least a few good cockroaches out there!
Yes, they are willing to die on their own terms. They are not necessarily willing to get caught, stuck in a prison for years and years, and then maybe executed. They would more likely try to plead innocence so they would be let go and then try another attempt.
You've got no argument from me. The only point I was making was that when the ships were lost, value was lost as well. The post I replied to was arguing that if you enjoy the ship building process, then the value has already been returned. I argued that the end result had value in and of itself, so value was lost. Whether or not this loss of value should have been expected or accounted for is a separate issue.
I agree; that is a good example. The difference is that in my example, it is someone else's fault. In your example, it is your fault. That is the same discussion going on in other parts of this thread (the lost ships were who's fault?), but not the point I was making. I was only making the point that, either way, value WAS lost.
I've never heard of "fiches" and the online dictionaries all seem to allude to microfiche. Context gives the impression you are referring to the little round plastic/clay pieces that casinos exchange for money. We call them "chips" or "poker chips." Is that what you are talking about?