I tend to listen to the Daily Source Code each day. If only Adam would stop talking about Podcasting and actually put on some more interesting content.
I'm really looking forward to some good stuff out of this. Remember, if you don't like what you're hearing, there's nothing stopping you from producing something yourself!
The first time that I read The Guide, I was in a tenth grade math class with a graphing calculator on my desk. It happened that I'd programmed a rather large file onto it while had the sum of all my Science notes on it. This was because you could bring anything you could put on your calculator into the tests.
So there I was, working with a small device with a keypad, which contained a listing of a fair amount of knowledge.
Basically, I think of The Guide to look like a graphing calculator, perhaps with a larger and more readable screen, a backlight, that sort of thing.
It talks about Jeffrey Lee Parson. Also the/. story says he's 18. The USATODAY one says 19, though he would have been 18 at the time he released the worm (guessing based on article, I don't know when his birthday is).
Please check the facts before you submit a Slashdot story.
Your interpretation to an art isn't always a correct one
Perhaps I need to revise. What I'm trying to say is that there isn't necesarily the one 'right' interpetation. Certainly, there are wrong interpetations. Certainly things can be 'misunderstood' to get pretty much any result you want. The point I was trying to make is that good interpetation of anything involves thinking about it yourself, interpeting it against you own ideas and experiences, and making sure you ground that in reality.
Can one truly ever be a non-conformist?
Hell no.
I'm just going to point out a quote from the original essay to show that I do agree with you here.
You in the back. The one who's only reading this because it's an attack on the current system. Go stand in line again.
My intention was to show how strongly I'm against indoctrination, how I think that you should evaluate the information that comes to you, and how you should be responsable for thinking for yourself. A lot of my examples are used simply to point out that most of the time you don't think for yourself. All information that comes in must come in and be processed, not repeated back at will.
Yes, my ideas do resemble a lot of other ideas. They've been influenced by every idea I've ever come in contact with. I only consider them 'my ideas' after I've thought about them and decided where I want to stand on them.
This essay was meant to express my fear as well. My fear that everyone believes there must be one right answer, and because of that we all have to have the same ideas. My fear that it's more acceptable to repeat verbosely someone elses ideas without thinking about them than it is to try to decide if another idea can have merit.
Don't get me wrong. This essay isn't about saying that I'm smarter than everyone else, or that I'm the guy who isn't like that. It was written confrontationally because at least then people have to come up with a counter argument.
Two more things I want to use up some bandwidth on. You ask exactly what it is that seperates me from the 'sheep'. I don't know, but I tried for my last 6 months of High School (got out in half a year) to just keep my mouth shut and put down the answers that they wanted to hear.
I couldn't. After a month of giving back the exact right answers, I started to write down my interpetations. A lot of them were right, those that were flawed were pointed out, and I re-evaluated. Peer review is essential.
So I don't know what makes me different. Maybe it's that I thought to think. After you do that, you can't turn back and just let others do it for you. I'd love it if everyone conformed to the idea that they should think about their ideas. Ironic, isn't it.
The last point. I'm not all non-conformist. There are simply some things that are right, and there are some that are wrong. 2+2 will always equal four in base 10. Depriving someone for your gain is always wrong (ethical opinion, but essential when I think about it). I just need people to realize that the world isn't binary, that black and white are merely shades of grey, and that exploring another idea isn't a crime.
I stand corrected.
(This humility is only happening because I know if I don't, at least 10 slashdotters will repeat the same fact as this guy.)
I just had scenario 4 pop into my head, where some kids with a laptop grabs the code for Joe's 'service denied, pay me at the counter' screen, and starts replacing all requests with it.
It could cause quite a bit of confusion, as Joe would think it was an issue with his server.
This could actually be a fairly annoying tool in the hands of advertisers. It also has some pretty good uses I can think of.
Three scenarios to point this out.
You're at Joes Internet Cafe, munching on your slightly overpriced muffin and glad for the free Wi-Fi access since you're out of town, and don't get to check your email much on the road. You hit the link to a message you want to read on webmail, when all of a sudden, an ad comes up. Nothing too bad, but it seems that Joe has decided that instead of charging people directly for 'net access, he'll rig up an old desktop with wireless to transmit the ad source for every 100th HTTP request that comes through his system.
This is a potentially annoying way of using the technology, but it also sounds like it could be a good way for Joe to help recoup his costs on the internet. Not a place I'd mind going.
Scenario Two
You're at Joes Internet Cafe, munching on your slightly overpriced bagel, glad for the...well, you know. This time the 'net access isn't free, but Joe's giving it out for $1 an hour, more than reasonable. 58 minutes in, you make an HTTP request, and a small javascript window pops up informing you that you've just got a couple minutes left, more time can be bought at the counter. After 60 minutes, instead of locking you out, all your requests simply get a screen advising you that if you want to keep going, Joe's going to need a dollar at the counter.
Seems useful to me.
Scenario Three
You're in Joes Internet Cafe, sipping some slightly overpriced coffee and you try to get online. After you've payed your dollar to the friendly man at the counter.
You keep gettings ads. You click out, thinking that it's a popup window, and no, you really don't need to enlarge that, it's fine how it is.
All browser windows closed. You try again.
No, I don't really need those drugs...
Or those pieces of software
Or...
You get the idea. Turns out, that guy in the corner is making some quick cash by spamming everyone in the place. The only sites that are coming through are from those ads. He leaves after about 15 minutes, because it can't be long until someone figures it out, but you've just lost 15 minutes of your time.
I realize it's an extreme example, but you think someone won't try it?
Joe, if you're out there, we need to talk. I've got some ideas for you.
I wrote the following essay several months ago. It's fairly broken apart, and it needs to be more fluid, but it gets all my points about stuff like this across. The names are fictional. The rest is true.
Free Speech On The Approved Reading List
I once read that a story is a way to slip past your emotional immune system. It's like a virus that makes you feel something you wouldn't always feel. If that's true, then it's no wonder that certain stories are banned, that we won't let our children read some of them. Do we dare allow them to feel something that we don't think they should?
I was told by my teachers that school was to help prepare me for life. It was to give me vital skills that I would need in order to achieve something in this world. I don't believe that's the case. What I think our schooling is for is to prevent us from thinking the thoughts we'd think otherwise. Maybe we've even convinced ourselves that general schooling for everyone beyond a certain point does us good, but I think we're deluding ourselves.
One of the most ironic situations I've been in was having my history teacher telling our class that indoctrination was absolutely wrong and that it should never have been done. If you don't get the irony, please put this paper down and walk back to your place in line.
It's because of the severe irony of this all that I'm sitting in the back of Mr. Johnson's English class writing this, instead of having him tell me just how I'm supposed to interpret the story we're currently dissecting. I stopped listening to his opinions when he told me once that my interpretation of a story was completely wrong with no basis. I spent half the class describing exactly why my opinion on this was what it was.
He agreed that just maybe my interpretation could be valid. Unfortunately, it wasn't the 'right' interpretation, so we couldn't be bothered to look into it. Once again, if you believe there can only ever be one correct interpretation to a story, please shuffle back into your line.
Lisa's interpretation of the story we're looking at right now didn't agree with what's sitting on that paper in front of him. What scares me is that she isn't even saying why she thinks she's right. Lisa just sat down again, because she knows she is wrong and this isn't the way she should think.
In another severe dose of irony, I just recalled a cartoon from the forties that a friend showed me once. It's a Disney cartoon showing just how evil Hitler's indoctrination of the German children was. It talks all about how Hans is taught to believe that mercy is wrong. The cartoon, targeted at small children, tells us that telling small children what to think is absolutely wrong.
In our school systems, we teach children that they must be accepting of everyone, though there is only one way to read this story. Is it any wonder that we have kids who are unsure of what their place in the world is? They've got no idea what's supposed to be happening at this time in their life. The haven't had it defined for it yet. You in the back. The one who's only reading this because it's an attack on the current system. Go stand in line again.
I have a friend who is rather talkative, especially in group conversations. Except that all he says is taking the last opinion, then not even bothering to reword it. He's an excellent parrot. It scares me that no one else seems to notice this about him.
Mr. Johnson is wondering what I'm writing down. He never dictated any notes for us to take on this story. Why am I writing? God forbid I might be learning on my own.
Conforming to what they say I'm supposed to be would be so much easier if they just gave me a list of the thoughts I'm allowed to think. It couldn't be more than a couple of pages long.
Exactly, a well put together workplace is far more valuable than any perks they may offer you. Yeah, free food is a huge plus, but somewhere that you can actually work on good projects with a sane environment is worth far more.
I'm a young coder (not employed at present, I have the luxury of being 18 and still living at home so I have no expenses that I don't want.) and my right now I'm hunting for my ideal job. I'm going to university in the fall to make sure I can get some good jobs in the future, but for now all I want is somewhere that I can code and concentrate on it.
The ideal workplace for me is a desk in a room, no windows, no distractions. A bookshelp, a whiteboard, a couple tables (I plan on paper a lot), a good computer, and enough time given to actually get the work done.
There's a reason why a lot of hackers (trad. usage) work in the middle of the night. There's nothing to distract. No phone calls, no meetings, no people from sales who think that because you're just staring at the code you can't possibly be busy.
I'm convinced that many hackers aren't naturally night owls, we just associate those hours with our best productivity/enjoyment, and we change our schedules for that.
It's not what free stuff they give you, it's how they let you work.
If I want to have something on a system, then I will put it on the system myself. I trust me, as I tend to work in my own best interests.
If the virus pops up a box that says 'Protect yourself by clicking...", I still don't want it. If I wanted to use security software, I would make the choice to download it. How do I know this won't interfere with something running on my system?
Or worse. Suppose it patches without permission. I can just see someone writing one with the best of intentions, and causing some side effect. What if an important port was closed? Or if the port is in legitimate use?
In short, if I want to protect my system, I want to be the one who decides that. Without that choice, I lose control over how my machine is protected, and risk possible conflict with any security I have in place already.
Whoops. I'm a Mac user. I guess I'm covered either way.
(Awaits the inevitable comeback from a hundred people telling me that just because nobody writes viruses for Macs doesn't mean they can't be!)
-Rob
He mentions that he hasn't talked to his friend at Google yet, and I have to wonder if his friend actually holds a position that could make something useful out of this, or if he just happens to have access to internal Google info that might clarify the 102% thing (though I think everyone here solved that one anyhow).
Regardless, it's been Slashdotted, and I'm sure there has to be at least one guy at Google who reads Slashdot. Possibly as many as four.
When I was working in a print shop doing graphics, one of the guys who had been doing it for quite a bit longer told me:
First go, and make it really weird, way weirder than you actually want it. Then when it goes for proof, the client will send it back asking to tone it down. When they do that, you put in your original design, and it looks really sane now.
Y'know, laws like this make me proud to be Canadian. That, and Canada's really big. Yeah, mostly proud 'cause Canada's really big.
I think I'll stick to Google on this one. Yeah, it's fairly cool looking, but over my dial up connection, Google actually gives me what I want quickly. This gives me some good stuff, perhaps in a better way that Google does, but it takes a second or two longer. I know I should have patience, but I use Google because it's fast and it's not cluttered. I can't say the same for Blinkx.
With any luck, this will offer another major engine though. The less people who are using one search engine, the harder it is to build a page just so it will come up quickly in search results.
Technically, by the logic of the United States, no, I'm not an adult. Nor am I a five year old. I really am sorry that I spoke way too fast, it's something I normally remember to work on, but I was more concerned with trying to come up with questions that don't revolve around "How do you feel about Markoff" (sp on name?) or anything else that's commonly asked. I'm working on the transcript now by the way. Just got back home after another 4000 km drive, so I've actually got a spare moment now.
What would you have asked him?
Sorry about the quality folks, I'll put up a transcript after I get it typed. I've got a train ride back to New Jersey tonight, so I'll throw it up.
Also, sorry about the Canadian accent and the quick talking. Getting a few minutes with Kevin Mitnick is not easy at HOPE, and I was trying to get through the material.
Fine, I admit it, I'm posting on an iBook. Same situation.
Not to troll or anything, but since the article is talking about your TV being the monitor, I sincerely hope you can turn it off independantly.
I grew up using Macs (still use them, but I do have to use a few PC's for work) and it honestly never occured to me that you might have to switch off the monitor when you shut down the computer. Then I started to use PC's in high school and suddenly I had to learn the whole new habit.
I think the older Macs had it right. You can turn off the monitor and let the computer keep working, but they won't waste power by keeping an active monitor on a powered down Mac.
This is a saterical news show. And every politician who shows up on it knows it. I'm a big fan of satire myself, and if you ask me, this is the way to do it. If you're willing to make fun of yourself, all the better. If not, I won't miss you.
Personally, I don't know how you can take someone seriously if they can't make fun of themselves. But I also think that they should be given the opportunity to poke fun at themselves, not be humiliated without notice, like this guy was.
Slashdot Mirror
"You can't take the sky from me"
-Rob
I'm really looking forward to some good stuff out of this. Remember, if you don't like what you're hearing, there's nothing stopping you from producing something yourself!
So there I was, working with a small device with a keypad, which contained a listing of a fair amount of knowledge.
Basically, I think of The Guide to look like a graphing calculator, perhaps with a larger and more readable screen, a backlight, that sort of thing.
-Rob
"Up your shaft."
I'm only a couple of episodes into listening to it, but that sounds an awful lot like the Listeners License in Tales From The Afternow.
It talks about Jeffrey Lee Parson. Also the /. story says he's 18. The USATODAY one says 19, though he would have been 18 at the time he released the worm (guessing based on article, I don't know when his birthday is).
Please check the facts before you submit a Slashdot story.
Your interpretation to an art isn't always a correct one
Perhaps I need to revise. What I'm trying to say is that there isn't necesarily the one 'right' interpetation. Certainly, there are wrong interpetations. Certainly things can be 'misunderstood' to get pretty much any result you want. The point I was trying to make is that good interpetation of anything involves thinking about it yourself, interpeting it against you own ideas and experiences, and making sure you ground that in reality.
Can one truly ever be a non-conformist?
Hell no.
I'm just going to point out a quote from the original essay to show that I do agree with you here.
You in the back. The one who's only reading this because it's an attack on the current system. Go stand in line again.
My intention was to show how strongly I'm against indoctrination, how I think that you should evaluate the information that comes to you, and how you should be responsable for thinking for yourself. A lot of my examples are used simply to point out that most of the time you don't think for yourself. All information that comes in must come in and be processed, not repeated back at will.
Yes, my ideas do resemble a lot of other ideas. They've been influenced by every idea I've ever come in contact with. I only consider them 'my ideas' after I've thought about them and decided where I want to stand on them.
This essay was meant to express my fear as well. My fear that everyone believes there must be one right answer, and because of that we all have to have the same ideas. My fear that it's more acceptable to repeat verbosely someone elses ideas without thinking about them than it is to try to decide if another idea can have merit.
Don't get me wrong. This essay isn't about saying that I'm smarter than everyone else, or that I'm the guy who isn't like that. It was written confrontationally because at least then people have to come up with a counter argument.
Two more things I want to use up some bandwidth on. You ask exactly what it is that seperates me from the 'sheep'. I don't know, but I tried for my last 6 months of High School (got out in half a year) to just keep my mouth shut and put down the answers that they wanted to hear.
I couldn't. After a month of giving back the exact right answers, I started to write down my interpetations. A lot of them were right, those that were flawed were pointed out, and I re-evaluated. Peer review is essential.
So I don't know what makes me different. Maybe it's that I thought to think. After you do that, you can't turn back and just let others do it for you. I'd love it if everyone conformed to the idea that they should think about their ideas. Ironic, isn't it.
The last point. I'm not all non-conformist. There are simply some things that are right, and there are some that are wrong. 2+2 will always equal four in base 10. Depriving someone for your gain is always wrong (ethical opinion, but essential when I think about it). I just need people to realize that the world isn't binary, that black and white are merely shades of grey, and that exploring another idea isn't a crime.
Sorry, that was longer than I meant it to be.
I stand corrected. (This humility is only happening because I know if I don't, at least 10 slashdotters will repeat the same fact as this guy.) I just had scenario 4 pop into my head, where some kids with a laptop grabs the code for Joe's 'service denied, pay me at the counter' screen, and starts replacing all requests with it. It could cause quite a bit of confusion, as Joe would think it was an issue with his server.
Three scenarios to point this out.
You're at Joes Internet Cafe, munching on your slightly overpriced muffin and glad for the free Wi-Fi access since you're out of town, and don't get to check your email much on the road. You hit the link to a message you want to read on webmail, when all of a sudden, an ad comes up. Nothing too bad, but it seems that Joe has decided that instead of charging people directly for 'net access, he'll rig up an old desktop with wireless to transmit the ad source for every 100th HTTP request that comes through his system.
This is a potentially annoying way of using the technology, but it also sounds like it could be a good way for Joe to help recoup his costs on the internet. Not a place I'd mind going.
Scenario Two
You're at Joes Internet Cafe, munching on your slightly overpriced bagel, glad for the...well, you know. This time the 'net access isn't free, but Joe's giving it out for $1 an hour, more than reasonable. 58 minutes in, you make an HTTP request, and a small javascript window pops up informing you that you've just got a couple minutes left, more time can be bought at the counter. After 60 minutes, instead of locking you out, all your requests simply get a screen advising you that if you want to keep going, Joe's going to need a dollar at the counter.
Seems useful to me.
Scenario Three
You're in Joes Internet Cafe, sipping some slightly overpriced coffee and you try to get online. After you've payed your dollar to the friendly man at the counter.
You keep gettings ads. You click out, thinking that it's a popup window, and no, you really don't need to enlarge that, it's fine how it is.
All browser windows closed. You try again.
No, I don't really need those drugs...
Or those pieces of software
Or...
You get the idea. Turns out, that guy in the corner is making some quick cash by spamming everyone in the place. The only sites that are coming through are from those ads. He leaves after about 15 minutes, because it can't be long until someone figures it out, but you've just lost 15 minutes of your time.
I realize it's an extreme example, but you think someone won't try it?
Joe, if you're out there, we need to talk. I've got some ideas for you.
Free Speech On The Approved Reading List
I once read that a story is a way to slip past your emotional immune system. It's like a virus that makes you feel something you wouldn't always feel. If that's true, then it's no wonder that certain stories are banned, that we won't let our children read some of them. Do we dare allow them to feel something that we don't think they should?
I was told by my teachers that school was to help prepare me for life. It was to give me vital skills that I would need in order to achieve something in this world. I don't believe that's the case. What I think our schooling is for is to prevent us from thinking the thoughts we'd think otherwise. Maybe we've even convinced ourselves that general schooling for everyone beyond a certain point does us good, but I think we're deluding ourselves.
One of the most ironic situations I've been in was having my history teacher telling our class that indoctrination was absolutely wrong and that it should never have been done. If you don't get the irony, please put this paper down and walk back to your place in line.
It's because of the severe irony of this all that I'm sitting in the back of Mr. Johnson's English class writing this, instead of having him tell me just how I'm supposed to interpret the story we're currently dissecting. I stopped listening to his opinions when he told me once that my interpretation of a story was completely wrong with no basis. I spent half the class describing exactly why my opinion on this was what it was.
He agreed that just maybe my interpretation could be valid. Unfortunately, it wasn't the 'right' interpretation, so we couldn't be bothered to look into it. Once again, if you believe there can only ever be one correct interpretation to a story, please shuffle back into your line.
Lisa's interpretation of the story we're looking at right now didn't agree with what's sitting on that paper in front of him. What scares me is that she isn't even saying why she thinks she's right. Lisa just sat down again, because she knows she is wrong and this isn't the way she should think.
In another severe dose of irony, I just recalled a cartoon from the forties that a friend showed me once. It's a Disney cartoon showing just how evil Hitler's indoctrination of the German children was. It talks all about how Hans is taught to believe that mercy is wrong. The cartoon, targeted at small children, tells us that telling small children what to think is absolutely wrong.
In our school systems, we teach children that they must be accepting of everyone, though there is only one way to read this story. Is it any wonder that we have kids who are unsure of what their place in the world is? They've got no idea what's supposed to be happening at this time in their life. The haven't had it defined for it yet. You in the back. The one who's only reading this because it's an attack on the current system. Go stand in line again.
I have a friend who is rather talkative, especially in group conversations. Except that all he says is taking the last opinion, then not even bothering to reword it. He's an excellent parrot. It scares me that no one else seems to notice this about him.
Mr. Johnson is wondering what I'm writing down. He never dictated any notes for us to take on this story. Why am I writing? God forbid I might be learning on my own.
Conforming to what they say I'm supposed to be would be so much easier if they just gave me a list of the thoughts I'm allowed to think. It couldn't be more than a couple of pages long.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have a religion class.
I'm a young coder (not employed at present, I have the luxury of being 18 and still living at home so I have no expenses that I don't want.) and my right now I'm hunting for my ideal job. I'm going to university in the fall to make sure I can get some good jobs in the future, but for now all I want is somewhere that I can code and concentrate on it.
The ideal workplace for me is a desk in a room, no windows, no distractions. A bookshelp, a whiteboard, a couple tables (I plan on paper a lot), a good computer, and enough time given to actually get the work done.
There's a reason why a lot of hackers (trad. usage) work in the middle of the night. There's nothing to distract. No phone calls, no meetings, no people from sales who think that because you're just staring at the code you can't possibly be busy.
I'm convinced that many hackers aren't naturally night owls, we just associate those hours with our best productivity/enjoyment, and we change our schedules for that.
It's not what free stuff they give you, it's how they let you work.
Do we really have the kids a computer with a touchscreen? I have a hard enough time getting co-workers and family to stop poking my screen as it is.
If I want to have something on a system, then I will put it on the system myself. I trust me, as I tend to work in my own best interests. If the virus pops up a box that says 'Protect yourself by clicking...", I still don't want it. If I wanted to use security software, I would make the choice to download it. How do I know this won't interfere with something running on my system? Or worse. Suppose it patches without permission. I can just see someone writing one with the best of intentions, and causing some side effect. What if an important port was closed? Or if the port is in legitimate use? In short, if I want to protect my system, I want to be the one who decides that. Without that choice, I lose control over how my machine is protected, and risk possible conflict with any security I have in place already. Whoops. I'm a Mac user. I guess I'm covered either way. (Awaits the inevitable comeback from a hundred people telling me that just because nobody writes viruses for Macs doesn't mean they can't be!) -Rob
Regardless, it's been Slashdotted, and I'm sure there has to be at least one guy at Google who reads Slashdot. Possibly as many as four.
-Rob
1) This could be a great breakthrough for spammers. Instead of just showing you the product, now they can make you want the product.
2) Does this mean Bond is just another form of Spyware?
3) Whoa. If you need to think to use a computer, tech support would die out completely.
Thank you, I'll be here all week ;)
First go, and make it really weird, way weirder than you actually want it. Then when it goes for proof, the client will send it back asking to tone it down. When they do that, you put in your original design, and it looks really sane now.
Y'know, laws like this make me proud to be Canadian. That, and Canada's really big. Yeah, mostly proud 'cause Canada's really big.
With any luck, this will offer another major engine though. The less people who are using one search engine, the harder it is to build a page just so it will come up quickly in search results.
Technically, by the logic of the United States, no, I'm not an adult. Nor am I a five year old. I really am sorry that I spoke way too fast, it's something I normally remember to work on, but I was more concerned with trying to come up with questions that don't revolve around "How do you feel about Markoff" (sp on name?) or anything else that's commonly asked. I'm working on the transcript now by the way. Just got back home after another 4000 km drive, so I've actually got a spare moment now. What would you have asked him?
Sorry about the quality folks, I'll put up a transcript after I get it typed. I've got a train ride back to New Jersey tonight, so I'll throw it up. Also, sorry about the Canadian accent and the quick talking. Getting a few minutes with Kevin Mitnick is not easy at HOPE, and I was trying to get through the material.
Freedom Downtime is now available in DVD. I've got a copy in my iBook right now.
Fine, I admit it, I'm posting on an iBook. Same situation.
Not to troll or anything, but since the article is talking about your TV being the monitor, I sincerely hope you can turn it off independantly.
I grew up using Macs (still use them, but I do have to use a few PC's for work) and it honestly never occured to me that you might have to switch off the monitor when you shut down the computer. Then I started to use PC's in high school and suddenly I had to learn the whole new habit.
I think the older Macs had it right. You can turn off the monitor and let the computer keep working, but they won't waste power by keeping an active monitor on a powered down Mac.
No! Turning off your monitor and turning off your computer are the same thing. Anyone who's ever worked phone tech support can tell you that.
Plus, if you use the switch on your monitor, you can get some awesome boot times!
Up here in Canada, we have a show called This Hour Has 22 Minutes.
This is a saterical news show. And every politician who shows up on it knows it. I'm a big fan of satire myself, and if you ask me, this is the way to do it. If you're willing to make fun of yourself, all the better. If not, I won't miss you.
Personally, I don't know how you can take someone seriously if they can't make fun of themselves. But I also think that they should be given the opportunity to poke fun at themselves, not be humiliated without notice, like this guy was.