The point is that the "magic number" would be different for each purpose (i.e. generated by you for this transaction with Sony).
The key here though is not the technological hurdles - it'd be relatively easy to come up with a better system. The problem is that its not cheaper for Visa et al to switch - and they have no incentive to do so. The system as designed puts the economic burden on the merchants (and then the consumers) leaving the "cardtels" unscathed.
Until that externality is addressed, we will continue to read about breaches in the news.
However: Why buy a server at all? Get a hosted vm image somewhere, throw the software on there, and just have everyone in the department use it. Putting a machine on the IT department's network is what causing the issue (legitimately for them, annoyingly for you) remove that part of the equation, and the problem is largely solved (only issue left would be whether keeping the schedule outside is a privacy, or policy violation).
"You get this bath, see? Imagine you've got this bath. And it's ebony. And it's conical."
"Conical?" said Arthur. "What sort of..."
"Shhh!" said Ford. "It's conical. So what you do is, you see, you fill it with fine white sand, all right? Or sugar. Fine white sand, and/or sugar. Anything. Doesn't matter. Sugar's fine. And when it's full, you pull the plug out... are you listening?"
"I'm listening."
"You pull the plug out, and it all just twirls away, twirls away you see, out of the plughole."
"I see."
"You don't see. You don't see at all. I haven't got to the clever bit yet. You want to hear the clever bit?"
"Tell me the clever bit."
"I'll tell you the clever bit."
Ford thought for a moment, trying to remember what the clever bit was.
"The clever bit," he said, "is this. You film it happening."
"Clever," agreed Arthur.
"You get a movie camera, and you film it happening."
"Clever."
"That's not the clever bit. This is the clever bit, I remember now that this is the clever bit. The clever bit is that you then thread the film in the projector... backward!"
"Backward?"
"Yes. Threading it backward is definitely the clever bit. So then, you just sit and watch it, and everything just appears to spiral upward out of the plughole and fill the bath. See?"
"And that's how the Universe began, is it?" said Arthur.
"No," said Ford, "but it's a marvelous way to relax."
The laser is nailed to the head, so that it won't fall off during high speed maneuvers and the fish* is taped to the airplane so that it can be dropped on commando raids deep behind enemy lines - granted, they just sorta flop around on the ground afterward, but anyone walking by is likely to get quite a sunburn.
*Yes, we've been *told* they are mammals, but I believe its all a conspiracy started by the "late"** Douglas Adams to ensure that they wouldn't be seen as cannibals during the pre-release marketing for his fourth book in the trilogy.
**I put late in quotes because we know that he's just gone home.***
Yes I know, this is/. and no one read the article, let alone the actual patent - however the article (and the/. excerpt) are very misleading about what was patented. Reading the actual patent, it appears that the patent was granted on a method for the user to create an account with the patent-holder and then use the patent-holders software to access any number of various for-pay and other wifi hotspots without having to manage the individual credentialing, network configuration and associated billing.
I am not a lawyer, or a patent attorney -- and I'm not a big fan of software patents in general -- but this doesn't sound anything like: "patenting wifi hotspot access". More like: "patenting an integrated, account-managed, token passing, billing system for accessing multiple diverse wifi-hotspot vendor systems". I.e. Much narrower and a based on a product built on basic wifi access.
In short: Boingo was granted a patent on their software that makes it easier to manage all those wifi accounts you have to set up if you travel a lot and use a bunch of different carriers. Not wifi access in general.
The editors should consider amending the front page summary because its very misleading.
Please don't mod my post up - I hate it when someone thinks I've said something funny when it was really informative or vice versawise not the other and it gets twisted into a comment on the fundamental nature of molecular... oh the hell with it, It's Friday, I'm going for a beer.
you can master any language withing a matter of weeks
Not really, but you can be *proficient* and a *productive contributor* in a matter of weeks.
Mastery of a language takes longer because it's more about mastering of all of the little quirks, warts, conventions and whatnot that only come with experience with a certain platform than it is about syntax and transliteration of general programming techniques to the new language.
Still, I agree with the overall sentiment: Focus on being a good programmer and learning new languages (and being a valuable contributor) takes care of itself.
>my motorcycle is highly important to me and a fundamental part of who >I am but I don't introduce myself as "I'm Steve the motorcyclist".
You might, if fundamental meant: "you had to ride that motorcycle" yet you were being told it made you unwelcome anyway and you were still trying to define your identity and your place in the world. Then, you might very well say, "Hi I'm Steve the motorcyclist, I won't be at the movie theater tonight because they don't allow motorcycles on their property", or: "I'm Steve, the motorcyclist, I can't visit that other state/country/province because they don't allow motorcycles on their roads." You'd be even more likely to say: "I'm Steve the motorcyclist" if you did go to the movies or that other state, because then you'd be protesting the injustice by going anyway and what's the point if everyone there thought you arrived in a car.
Besides, you're doing a disservice to those motorcyclists who've gone before you. At one time, wearing leathers and sporting a pony tail was enough to land you in jail all by itself. How is this any different? Maybe you wouldn't be riding your bike now if it wasn't for all those hippie freaks flying their flags 40 years ago. And maybe (if people like this girl "keep on keepin' on") homosexuals 40 years from now will be forgetting how controversial it was once to be one and will be chastising someone else for wearing their identity on their sleeve.
Writing good software is hard, anyone who tells you different is selling something.
Most programmers program, trading their time and knowledge for money. The ones who hype have an agenda beyond that -- to sell themselves for financial or egotistical gain. The former are consultants (selling themselves, not the tools and practices they purport to sell for a liviing), the latter are that guy who spends all his time on the mailing list, telling you how great x is, and how stupid you are for uisng y.
Not that there is anything inherently wrong in this -- in fact, I'd argue that both groups serve a valuable function in our industry -- so long as people understand that the motivation for this has a lot less to do with the languages, techniques and tools directly than for the person who's doing the hyping.
Come back when you've got a suggestion for improvement, rather than just a complaint.
As in complaints like yours? All you said was the idea is impossible. Why is it impossible? Just off the top of my head, here are four ideas:
1) If the field was level, if the investment capped, then each candidate would do his advertising and be done with it.
2) Let the gov't advertise. A simple website with all the information about every candidate, and then standard ads in all other media paid for by the gov't to encourage voters to go check it out.
3) With today's communication capabilities, why have one or two candidates at a national level? Instead allow candidates to run from anywhere, compete at the most local level (e.g. a single voting district), and then progressively play them off like a tournament.
4) Hide the candidates names and force them to campaign on issues.(it isn't names we are interested in, but positions and ideas, right?, oh no we care a lot more about someone's private past then we do about what they are likely to do publicly in the future )
There are a million ways to improve our election process. Its people like you who shout down every one who suggests a change (impossible! impossible!) that give people like Hatch the power they have.
And don't give me that voters wouldn't never do it crap, that disinterest is the same force that is at work in most of our schools -- its because most people aren't stupid -- they don't engage in activities that won't have any meaningful impact on their lives. If we change the rules, so that it will, people would engage.
As long as we have people like you to protect the status-quo though, the current robber barons, and corrupt, self-serving professional politications have nothing to worry about.
The most powerful weapon they (they being those who prefer any status-quo) have are the pessimists out there (like you) who label any improvement or change as idealist (and imply its therefore impossible). Maybe what the world needs is more idealists and fewer cynical pessimists then the inertia would swing toward improvement for a while.
I have no problem with warning labels and ID checking
Yes, these have really curbed the use of tobacco, alcohol and illegal drugs by children.
The problem I have with the whole "protect the children" argument is that it ignores the reality of childhood:
1) Of the physical assaults (i.e. fist fights) you have seen were most of them people over 18, or under?
2) If you have been subjected to organized vocal and sustained criticism, and verbal abuse (i.e. teasing) was it by people over 18 or under?
3) Where did you see the most cheating?
4) Who commits the most vandalism?
5) What is the average age of a gang member?
6) Who throws the most screaming temper tantrums?
As children we are not good, sweet and innocent -- we are violent, selfish and nasty. Society and culture is how we learn not to be. Now, lest you think this proves the video game ban argument:
1) from birth to age 5: Children spend the vast majority of their time with their (wait for it) Parents
2) from 5 - 7: if they aren't with their parents, they are with: other children and where are they? at school.
3) from 7 - 18: If they are in any of those other places, they are with their peers doing whatever they want (see the above list for details).
So, tell me, how could a video game compete with parents, teachers and schools full of other children? If a video game could really have that much influence, then why don't we just write a game that let's them explore utopia, and have them turn out perfect?
Who knows, maybe that will be the next great decision from the wizards of Washington.
/. cynicism proves its Romantic Demographic
on
David Brin On LOTR
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
Reading through the comments here, there are two themes: "I liked the LOTR, so back off" or "Brin's full of shit."
All of these comments have "proven" is that the/. crowd is made up of Romantics.
Guess what folks? Brin's absolutly right. Romanticism was Tolkien's worldview (by his own admission). Brin didn't create the terms, or this view of Tolkien. Its not even an insult. Its just a description of a perception. The problem is, it hits too close to home for many/.'rs.
From the article:
the Romantic elitism of many who share the same cause. Enlightenment's child -- suspicion of authority -- often comes paired with the quintessential romantic image: a smug loner who despises the masses. They get mixed together, even though they arise from different traditions. One way to tell them apart is to observe whether a character sneers only at power-abusers -- or at everybody: Is his or her ire aimed solely upward, toward some cruel elite, or downward too, despising fellow citizens and neighbors as clueless sheep?)
Sounds like the/. crowd to me. Hell, it sounds like me -- except I have been losing my snobbish elitism, but maybe I am just becoming a sheep.
But don't take my word for it, look around. How often do we see elitism, and disgust for the masses here? Lusers? RTFM? Everything on ESR's site?/.'rs think in terms of rank, which makes them Romantics.
So, its not surprising that the cynical comments should fly:
"Democracy was invented in ancient greece"
Yup, for male citizens of a certain age, and economic standing. Hardly egalitarian.
"Its just a fairy Tale"
All fairy tales are moral plays, this is a cop out.
"The world is going to hell in a hand cart"
Romantics always see the world this way, this is a tautology. The world has alway been improving, and always been getting worse. Its a matter of perspective.
I loved Brin's comments. And I love TLOTR. The two can be seen together, if you don't commit the classic Romanticist mistake of reserving your scathing critcism for everyone "out there" and instead turn that keen insight inward.
I have read all of Tolkien's works at one time or another, written papers, and taken classes on them, and can quote much of TLOTR from memory, so I am not really interested in how LOTR is not Romantic, it is, that's why I like it. Just because there are problems with that world view doesn't mean there isn't good in it too, or entertaining, but it is essentially fantastical, in a true feudal world, we wouldn't be lords, we would be serfs -- or at least you would be, I of course would be king.:-)
Flame Flame!
Re:The last of the V8 Interceptors
on
New Mad Max Film
·
· Score: 1
it was the most violet movie I had ever seen
Most children can't distinguish between violet and regular purple anyway, so it probably had no lasting effect on him.
Its been that way throughout human history (throughout life's history?) -- when things got too crowded, too violent, too oppressive, too competitive, too boring, etc. some (usually the very rich and the very poor) moved on to look for new places with better opportunities.
And in general, it seems to pay off -- intelligence, and skill don't make people successful, getting there first with lots of friends does. It just makes sense, the competition is less, so what's needed for success is less.
But just like bacteria in a pitri dish, when we run out of room, we will die off. Sure there's too many people, but who's gonna volunteer to fall on the sword first? You? Stop breeding? You? For everyone who says "yes" all you will have done is take yourself out of the running, life doesn't seem to favor the self-eliminating.
But nature has the answer: We call them War, Famine, Pestilence, and Natural Causes. We still fear them as much as we ever did. There's a reason we call them the four horsemen of the apocolypse: Because they are nature's answer to "surplus inventory." There's also a reason why "celibacy" and "suicide" aren't included -- they don't have what it takes for mass population control -- if they did, nature would have promoted them by now.
So while your advice might be the rational answer, it doesn't seem to be the instinctive one, and whether we want to admit it or not, instinct and habit drive us much more than reason.
"A person is smart, people are dumb, panicy dangerous animals, and you know it." -- MIB
We've known it ever since we became self-aware. And its the arrogance of our self-awareness that makes us think we can change any of it.
So, go ahead change it I mean the question is so simple: "How does one change life into something its not?" We already know the answer -- its what we spend our "lives" trying to avoid.;-)
Kent was not alone, but yes he was one of the earliest advocates of patterns -- He is also a good friend of Eric's (its not that big of a community).
As I mentioned here A good place to learn more about these topics (including Extreme Programming) is to go to the Portland Pattern Repository Which is also, incidently the first Wiki.
Refactoring to Patterns and other Resources
on
Design Patterns
·
· Score: 2, Informative
An alternative to designing software using patterns is to refactor code toward patterns.
This is considered one of the best ways to use patterns by many in the patterns community -- especially to avoid the "little boy with a pattern" syndrome described by many here.
For more on this idea, and on patterns in general check out the Portland Patterns Repository. There is also a conference every year about patterns called PLOP
Finally, the software patterns community owes its origins to the Architectural (think buildings not code) Patterns world. Christopher Alexander is considered the father of patterns. His books A Timeless Way of Building, and A Pattern Language are technical, dry and expensive, but considered fundamental to truly grokking patterns.
You can't create rules to stop rule breakers -- that's what makes them rule breakers. The only people (as always) who will be negatively impacted by such "disallowing" is the average person.
The two groups mentioned: "organized crime", and "terrorists", have almost as much money and power(in some cases, more) as the governments that would be "allowed" to use this technology.
How long before they circumvent the "rules?"
Oh and BTW, its not a function of criminality, its the nature of rules and power. This is the same dynamic that is at work with regard to taxes, investments, world banking, civil rights, the environment, pick your favorite rant.
People only follow rules when they have to, or or when they want to.
Who is more likely to have to?
Who is more likely to want to?
The powerless cannot pass rules to thwart the powerful, they can only make themselves less powerful.
>I used to have a boss who couldn't quite grasp the paperless office concept.
I did too. If he received an email he wanted us all to read, he would print it, give the printed copy to the department's administrative assistant, have her make copies, and distribute them to each of us.
That happend 2 - 3 times a week -- until they finally fired him (not for this, but you get the idea). His job, why IT manager of course!:-)
Another guy I worked for (boy I had some fun ones along the way) would do the same thing with web pages -- print them, and hand people the printed copies instead of sending a link.
But the absolute best was the boss at my first computer-related job. He would make a copy of everything before he let anyone fax it -- so we would have a copy too!
This post is dead on, but unfortunately too far down the post list to be seen by anyone.
OOP vs. Procedural there's an original question.
Let's see what else has been up on Ask Slashdot lately:
Satellite Command Security? -- Security through Obscurity, definitely a new one for/.
Handling Discrimination in the IT Workplace? -- This one was a guy claiming he was being discriminated for his age, and then explaining how this happens from everyone he meets, after a period of time on the job. Yeah its everyone but him.
MS Office for OSX? Why not for Unix as Well? -- Troll the unix crowd with M$ and Apple in the same sentence.
Is Assembler Still Relevant? -- I am sure that this was a stunner to most, but to the few in the dark, an NT sys admin was arguing that not knowing computer architecture didn't hinder his job. Really useful topic, could this be any more subjective?
Fast Track to a CS Degree? -- This one was good. A self taught programmer asking where he could pick up a degree in a year. That wasn't a troll honest.
Responsible Handling of Billing Information? -- This was my favorite, a guy picks up an independent cowboy hack job. In over his head, he turns to slashdot for advice on how to architect the application that some poor schmucks are too ignorant, or too cheap to realize how much it is really going to cost them.
Its a shame, because every once in a while there are questions that pertain to more than just the poster and the prima-donnas who feel the need to show off what they know in response to subjective and often religious topics.
Cliff, get a grip man, its starting to look like the National Enquirer or Jerry Springer around here.
(Mod me down. who cares. It won't improve the quality around here either way)
Judge Abramson said that students in schools are not using the computers for personal use "but as an integral part of the education curriculum." Thus the records of such official computer use must be deemed public, she asserted
Is that information the school's, or the children's??
Like you said, why should anyone be able to get a print-out of the entire book borrowing record from a public library?
I guess because its a government funded entity (some of them) your individual privacy goes out the window.
But I think it makes more sense to say that information is mine, not the library's. They just store it for me.
"part of the education curriculum" is the weak spot in the judge's comment IMO -- what about teacher's breaks? what about recess? Is she implying that the facilities are not available except for school education? Then what about when kids play basketball in a gym after school, or kiss in the hallways?
Is this level of invasivness really what we want for our citizenry?
People like the plaintiff treat children like property, not citizens. That's why the battle cry of these busybodies is "protect the children!"
Instead Protect property, and the country, but educate the citizens. And children are citizens too.
Slashdot Mirror
The point is that the "magic number" would be different for each purpose (i.e. generated by you for this transaction with Sony).
The key here though is not the technological hurdles - it'd be relatively easy to come up with a better system. The problem is that its not cheaper for Visa et al to switch - and they have no incentive to do so. The system as designed puts the economic burden on the merchants (and then the consumers) leaving the "cardtels" unscathed.
Until that externality is addressed, we will continue to read about breaches in the news.
Yup to the CAFC... where all patent cases go to die (look at this week's TIVO/Echostar "decision" in its *seventh* year of appeals).
My guess is that the Linux Kernel will be in version 12 before this concludes.
Plug it in at home, problem solved.
However: Why buy a server at all? Get a hosted vm image somewhere, throw the software on there, and just have everyone in the department use it. Putting a machine on the IT department's network is what causing the issue (legitimately for them, annoyingly for you) remove that part of the equation, and the problem is largely solved (only issue left would be whether keeping the schedule outside is a privacy, or policy violation).
...playing Angry Birds on his ipad and laughing at how expertly he trolled slashdot!
(obligatory Douglas Adams reference)
"You get this bath, see? Imagine you've got this bath. And it's ebony. And it's conical."
"Conical?" said Arthur. "What sort of ..."
"Shhh!" said Ford. "It's conical. So what you do is, you see, you fill it with fine white sand, all right? Or sugar. Fine white sand, and/or sugar. Anything. Doesn't matter. Sugar's fine. And when it's full, you pull the plug out ... are you listening?"
"I'm listening."
"You pull the plug out, and it all just twirls away, twirls away you see, out of the plughole."
"I see."
"You don't see. You don't see at all. I haven't got to the clever bit yet. You want to hear the clever bit?"
"Tell me the clever bit."
"I'll tell you the clever bit."
Ford thought for a moment, trying to remember what the clever bit was.
"The clever bit," he said, "is this. You film it happening."
"Clever," agreed Arthur.
"You get a movie camera, and you film it happening."
"Clever."
"That's not the clever bit. This is the clever bit, I remember now that this is the clever bit. The clever bit is that you then thread the film in the projector ... backward!"
"Backward?"
"Yes. Threading it backward is definitely the clever bit. So then, you just sit and watch it, and everything just appears to spiral upward out of the plughole and fill the bath. See?"
"And that's how the Universe began, is it?" said Arthur.
"No," said Ford, "but it's a marvelous way to relax."
Seriously, the bad guys already have it, so enlist the help of the security community to improve it.
The laser is nailed to the head, so that it won't fall off during high speed maneuvers and the fish* is taped to the airplane so that it can be dropped on commando raids deep behind enemy lines - granted, they just sorta flop around on the ground afterward, but anyone walking by is likely to get quite a sunburn.
*Yes, we've been *told* they are mammals, but I believe its all a conspiracy started by the "late"** Douglas Adams to ensure that they wouldn't be seen as cannibals during the pre-release marketing for his fourth book in the trilogy.
**I put late in quotes because we know that he's just gone home.***
***OK, I've got nothing... POPCORN!
Yes I know, this is /. and no one read the article, let alone the actual patent - however the article (and the /. excerpt) are very misleading about what was patented. Reading the actual patent, it appears that the patent was granted on a method for the user to create an account with the patent-holder and then use the patent-holders software to access any number of various for-pay and other wifi hotspots without having to manage the individual credentialing, network configuration and associated billing.
I am not a lawyer, or a patent attorney -- and I'm not a big fan of software patents in general -- but this doesn't sound anything like: "patenting wifi hotspot access". More like: "patenting an integrated, account-managed, token passing, billing system for accessing multiple diverse wifi-hotspot vendor systems". I.e. Much narrower and a based on a product built on basic wifi access.
In short: Boingo was granted a patent on their software that makes it easier to manage all those wifi accounts you have to set up if you travel a lot and use a bunch of different carriers. Not wifi access in general.
The editors should consider amending the front page summary because its very misleading.
Please don't mod my post up - I hate it when someone thinks I've said something funny when it was really informative or vice versawise not the other and it gets twisted into a comment on the fundamental nature of molecular... oh the hell with it, It's Friday, I'm going for a beer.
you can master any language withing a matter of weeks
Not really, but you can be *proficient* and a *productive contributor* in a matter of weeks.
Mastery of a language takes longer because it's more about mastering of all of the little quirks, warts, conventions and whatnot that only come with experience with a certain platform than it is about syntax and transliteration of general programming techniques to the new language.
Still, I agree with the overall sentiment: Focus on being a good programmer and learning new languages (and being a valuable contributor) takes care of itself.
>my motorcycle is highly important to me and a fundamental part of who
>I am but I don't introduce myself as "I'm Steve the motorcyclist".
You might, if fundamental meant: "you had to ride that motorcycle" yet you were being told it made you unwelcome anyway and you were still trying to define your identity and your place in the world. Then, you might very well say, "Hi I'm Steve the motorcyclist, I won't be at the movie theater tonight because they don't allow motorcycles on their property", or: "I'm Steve, the motorcyclist, I can't visit that other state/country/province because they don't allow motorcycles on their roads." You'd be even more likely to say: "I'm Steve the motorcyclist" if you did go to the movies or that other state, because then you'd be protesting the injustice by going anyway and what's the point if everyone there thought you arrived in a car.
Besides, you're doing a disservice to those motorcyclists who've gone before you. At one time, wearing leathers and sporting a pony tail was enough to land you in jail all by itself. How is this any different? Maybe you wouldn't be riding your bike now if it wasn't for all those hippie freaks flying their flags 40 years ago. And maybe (if people like this girl "keep on keepin' on") homosexuals 40 years from now will be forgetting how controversial it was once to be one and will be chastising someone else for wearing their identity on their sleeve.
Writing good software is hard, anyone who tells you different is selling something.
Most programmers program, trading their time and knowledge for money. The ones who hype have an agenda beyond that -- to sell themselves for financial or egotistical gain. The former are consultants (selling themselves, not the tools and practices they purport to sell for a liviing), the latter are that guy who spends all his time on the mailing list, telling you how great x is, and how stupid you are for uisng y.
Not that there is anything inherently wrong in this -- in fact, I'd argue that both groups serve a valuable function in our industry -- so long as people understand that the motivation for this has a lot less to do with the languages, techniques and tools directly than for the person who's doing the hyping.
Come back when you've got a suggestion for improvement, rather than just a complaint.
As in complaints like yours? All you said was the idea is impossible. Why is it impossible? Just off the top of my head, here are four ideas:
1) If the field was level, if the investment capped, then each candidate would do his advertising and be done with it.
2) Let the gov't advertise. A simple website with all the information about every candidate, and then standard ads in all other media paid for by the gov't to encourage voters to go check it out.
3) With today's communication capabilities, why have one or two candidates at a national level? Instead allow candidates to run from anywhere, compete at the most local level (e.g. a single voting district), and then progressively play them off like a tournament.
4) Hide the candidates names and force them to campaign on issues.(it isn't names we are interested in, but positions and ideas, right?, oh no we care a lot more about someone's private past then we do about what they are likely to do publicly in the future )
There are a million ways to improve our election process. Its people like you who shout down every one who suggests a change (impossible! impossible!) that give people like Hatch the power they have.
And don't give me that voters wouldn't never do it crap, that disinterest is the same force that is at work in most of our schools -- its because most people aren't stupid -- they don't engage in activities that won't have any meaningful impact on their lives. If we change the rules, so that it will, people would engage.
As long as we have people like you to protect the status-quo though, the current robber barons, and corrupt, self-serving professional politications have nothing to worry about.
The most powerful weapon they (they being those who prefer any status-quo) have are the pessimists out there (like you) who label any improvement or change as idealist (and imply its therefore impossible). Maybe what the world needs is more idealists and fewer cynical pessimists then the inertia would swing toward improvement for a while.
I have no problem with warning labels and ID checking
.
Yes, these have really curbed the use of tobacco, alcohol and illegal drugs by children.
The problem I have with the whole "protect the children" argument is that it ignores the reality of childhood:
1) Of the physical assaults (i.e. fist fights) you have seen were most of them people over 18, or under?
2) If you have been subjected to organized vocal and sustained criticism, and verbal abuse (i.e. teasing) was it by people over 18 or under?
3) Where did you see the most cheating?
4) Who commits the most vandalism?
5) What is the average age of a gang member?
6) Who throws the most screaming temper tantrums?
As children we are not good, sweet and innocent -- we are violent, selfish and nasty. Society and culture is how we learn not to be. Now, lest you think this proves the video game ban argument:
1) from birth to age 5: Children spend the vast majority of their time with their (wait for it) Parents
2) from 5 - 7: if they aren't with their parents, they are with: other children and where are they? at school
3) from 7 - 18: If they are in any of those other places, they are with their peers doing whatever they want (see the above list for details).
So, tell me, how could a video game compete with parents, teachers and schools full of other children? If a video game could really have that much influence, then why don't we just write a game that let's them explore utopia, and have them turn out perfect?
Who knows, maybe that will be the next great decision from the wizards of Washington.
Reading through the comments here, there are two themes: "I liked the LOTR, so back off" or "Brin's full of shit."
/. crowd is made up of Romantics.
/.'rs.
/. crowd to me. Hell, it sounds like me -- except I have been losing my snobbish elitism, but maybe I am just becoming a sheep.
/.'rs think in terms of rank, which makes them Romantics.
:-)
All of these comments have "proven" is that the
Guess what folks? Brin's absolutly right. Romanticism was Tolkien's worldview (by his own admission). Brin didn't create the terms, or this view of Tolkien. Its not even an insult. Its just a description of a perception. The problem is, it hits too close to home for many
From the article:
the Romantic elitism of many who share the same cause. Enlightenment's child -- suspicion of authority -- often comes paired with the quintessential romantic image: a smug loner who despises the masses. They get mixed together, even though they arise from different traditions. One way to tell them apart is to observe whether a character sneers only at power-abusers -- or at everybody: Is his or her ire aimed solely upward, toward some cruel elite, or downward too, despising fellow citizens and neighbors as clueless sheep?)
Sounds like the
But don't take my word for it, look around. How often do we see elitism, and disgust for the masses here? Lusers? RTFM? Everything on ESR's site?
So, its not surprising that the cynical comments should fly:
"Democracy was invented in ancient greece"
Yup, for male citizens of a certain age, and economic standing. Hardly egalitarian.
"Its just a fairy Tale"
All fairy tales are moral plays, this is a cop out.
"The world is going to hell in a hand cart"
Romantics always see the world this way, this is a tautology. The world has alway been improving, and always been getting worse. Its a matter of perspective.
I loved Brin's comments. And I love TLOTR. The two can be seen together, if you don't commit the classic Romanticist mistake of reserving your scathing critcism for everyone "out there" and instead turn that keen insight inward.
I have read all of Tolkien's works at one time or another, written papers, and taken classes on them, and can quote much of TLOTR from memory, so I am not really interested in how LOTR is not Romantic, it is, that's why I like it. Just because there are problems with that world view doesn't mean there isn't good in it too, or entertaining, but it is essentially fantastical, in a true feudal world, we wouldn't be lords, we would be serfs -- or at least you would be, I of course would be king.
Flame Flame!
it was the most violet movie I had ever seen
Most children can't distinguish between violet and regular purple anyway, so it probably had no lasting effect on him.
Two questions:
1) When did particle accelerators replace hammers on loading docs?
2) When we take the Anti-Fonz out of the crate does he say, "!yaaaA" and mess up his hair?
Because it seems to be just as natural.
;-)
Its been that way throughout human history (throughout life's history?) -- when things got too crowded, too violent, too oppressive, too competitive, too boring, etc. some (usually the very rich and the very poor) moved on to look for new places with better opportunities.
And in general, it seems to pay off -- intelligence, and skill don't make people successful, getting there first with lots of friends does. It just makes sense, the competition is less, so what's needed for success is less.
But just like bacteria in a pitri dish, when we run out of room, we will die off. Sure there's too many people, but who's gonna volunteer to fall on the sword first? You? Stop breeding? You? For everyone who says "yes" all you will have done is take yourself out of the running, life doesn't seem to favor the self-eliminating.
But nature has the answer: We call them War, Famine, Pestilence, and Natural Causes. We still fear them as much as we ever did. There's a reason we call them the four horsemen of the apocolypse: Because they are nature's answer to "surplus inventory." There's also a reason why "celibacy" and "suicide" aren't included -- they don't have what it takes for mass population control -- if they did, nature would have promoted them by now.
So while your advice might be the rational answer, it doesn't seem to be the instinctive one, and whether we want to admit it or not, instinct and habit drive us much more than reason.
"A person is smart, people are dumb, panicy dangerous animals, and you know it." -- MIB
We've known it ever since we became self-aware. And its the arrogance of our self-awareness that makes us think we can change any of it.
So, go ahead change it I mean the question is so simple: "How does one change life into something its not?" We already know the answer -- its what we spend our "lives" trying to avoid.
Kent was not alone, but yes he was one of the earliest advocates of patterns -- He is also a good friend of Eric's (its not that big of a community).
As I mentioned here A good place to learn more about these topics (including Extreme Programming) is to go to the Portland Pattern Repository Which is also, incidently the first Wiki.
An alternative to designing software using patterns is to refactor code toward patterns.
This is considered one of the best ways to use patterns by many in the patterns community -- especially to avoid the "little boy with a pattern" syndrome described by many here.
For more on this idea, and on patterns in general check out the Portland Patterns Repository. There is also a conference every year about patterns called PLOP
Finally, the software patterns community owes its origins to the Architectural (think buildings not code) Patterns world. Christopher Alexander is considered the father of patterns. His books A Timeless Way of Building, and A Pattern Language are technical, dry and expensive, but considered fundamental to truly grokking patterns.
>Whether they should be allowed??
Exactly.
You can't create rules to stop rule breakers -- that's what makes them rule breakers. The only people (as always) who will be negatively impacted by such "disallowing" is the average person.
The two groups mentioned: "organized crime", and "terrorists", have almost as much money and power(in some cases, more) as the governments that would be "allowed" to use this technology.
How long before they circumvent the "rules?"
Oh and BTW, its not a function of criminality, its the nature of rules and power. This is the same dynamic that is at work with regard to taxes, investments, world banking, civil rights, the environment, pick your favorite rant.
People only follow rules when they have to, or or when they want to.
Who is more likely to have to?
Who is more likely to want to?
The powerless cannot pass rules to thwart the powerful, they can only make themselves less powerful.
Dude, that was an ostrich!
>I used to have a boss who couldn't quite grasp the paperless office concept.
:-)
I did too. If he received an email he wanted us all to read, he would print it, give the printed copy to the department's administrative assistant, have her make copies, and distribute them to each of us.
That happend 2 - 3 times a week -- until they finally fired him (not for this, but you get the idea). His job, why IT manager of course!
Another guy I worked for (boy I had some fun ones along the way) would do the same thing with web pages -- print them, and hand people the printed copies instead of sending a link.
But the absolute best was the boss at my first computer-related job. He would make a copy of everything before he let anyone fax it -- so we would have a copy too!
This post is dead on, but unfortunately too far down the post list to be seen by anyone.
/.
OOP vs. Procedural there's an original question.
Let's see what else has been up on Ask Slashdot lately:
Satellite Command Security? -- Security through Obscurity, definitely a new one for
Handling Discrimination in the IT Workplace? -- This one was a guy claiming he was being discriminated for his age, and then explaining how this happens from everyone he meets, after a period of time on the job. Yeah its everyone but him.
MS Office for OSX? Why not for Unix as Well? -- Troll the unix crowd with M$ and Apple in the same sentence.
Is Assembler Still Relevant? -- I am sure that this was a stunner to most, but to the few in the dark, an NT sys admin was arguing that not knowing computer architecture didn't hinder his job. Really useful topic, could this be any more subjective?
Fast Track to a CS Degree? -- This one was good. A self taught programmer asking where he could pick up a degree in a year. That wasn't a troll honest.
Responsible Handling of Billing Information? -- This was my favorite, a guy picks up an independent cowboy hack job. In over his head, he turns to slashdot for advice on how to architect the application that some poor schmucks are too ignorant, or too cheap to realize how much it is really going to cost them.
Its a shame, because every once in a while there are questions that pertain to more than just the poster and the prima-donnas who feel the need to show off what they know in response to subjective and often religious topics.
Cliff, get a grip man, its starting to look like the National Enquirer or Jerry Springer around here.
(Mod me down. who cares. It won't improve the quality around here either way)
I agree, the big question in the decision was:
Judge Abramson said that students in schools are not using the computers for personal use "but as an integral part of the education curriculum." Thus the records of such official computer use must be deemed public, she asserted
Is that information the school's, or the children's??
Like you said, why should anyone be able to get a print-out of the entire book borrowing record from a public library?
I guess because its a government funded entity (some of them) your individual privacy goes out the window.
But I think it makes more sense to say that information is mine, not the library's. They just store it for me.
"part of the education curriculum" is the weak spot in the judge's comment IMO -- what about teacher's breaks? what about recess? Is she implying that the facilities are not available except for school education? Then what about when kids play basketball in a gym after school, or kiss in the hallways?
Is this level of invasivness really what we want for our citizenry?
People like the plaintiff treat children like property, not citizens. That's why the battle cry of these busybodies is "protect the children!"
Instead Protect property, and the country, but educate the citizens. And children are citizens too.