Well... yes and no. Back when i was a kid i used to read a lot. In my life i probably read hundreds of books of any kind, from technical books to narrative to horrors to whatever i could put my hands on so i perfectly understand what you mean. But it is also true that in today's world (and more so in 20 years or so) the more you know about computers the better your chances will be.
We are going through a turning point in human history. Many of today's jobs will probably be a thing of the past in the next 20-30 years. Taxi-drivers, truck-drivers, plane pilots but also many other jobs who require low skills and education are going to be replaced by robots and computers and whoever can't adapt will probably be left to die in poverty.
In the future there will probably be an high request of software developers and computer-users... so teaching these skills to your kid _today_ is going to really make a difference in his/her future.
Reading books is very important.. but so are computers, that we like it or not they are going to dominate our future.
I am sorry but i don't agree. Internet is actually _very_ distracting. I belong to the pre-internet generation. Back when i was 12 the only computers that were around were MSXes, Commodores, Ataris, TRSes, Apples and some very expensive IBM compatibles which were way too expensive for most of us anyways. While my resources were VERY limited i learned a lot spending hours over hours on my MSX, reading and re-reading the few books i had but most of all "exploring" by trial and error. Internet was unknown to me, and so did BBSes too (the only thing i really miss and i only wish i could have experienced).
For every other kind of information that was not related to computers i could rely on the local public library, on the books at my school, on a couple of encyclopedias that i had access to, on my parents, on my friends (adult and not) and on teachers.
Sometimes i look at the kids i know today... and i see them wasting their time on facebook, youtube, 4chan... and sometimes i wonder... what if i had Internet access back in my youth? I would have probably wasted my time too. Because, lets be honest... Internet is a hell fun. Forums are fun, youtube is fun, the kitties on the internet are cute and kawaii, facebook is... ok... facebook is just scary... so instead than studying, exploring, experimenting i would have probably learned nothing beside how to waste time with perfectly unknown strangers who spend their lives trolling online and today i would probably know 1/4 of what i do and what i need in my job (i am a software developer).
Please note that i am not saying that Internet is bad for children. It isn't. It is actually very useful... what i am saying is that it is extremely distracting and that most activities online are not educative at all and also that there are lots of other resources "out there" (yes, outside of the bedroom) and that kids probably are better off playing, experimenting with their peers, riding their bikes before they become too old to find that fun and the outside world amusing or left alone with an internet-less computer with a couple of good books about programming and maybe a couple of informative DVD-Roms.
So no, i don't agree that "give them a computer and it's like giving a starving man a tin of beans - but no tin opener", it was not true for me back in the 80es/90es, it is not true for a child today. Internet is a nice addition and if not abused it can become a great educative and fun tool... but is not vital for learning.
Also... a computer without internet access is still better than no computer at all.
1kbps should be good enough to exchange secret keys for "real world" cryptography. This should be used in place of Asymmetric-key cryptography.
Once you know that the secret key has not been eavesdropped then you can use regular symmetric-key cryptography over faster but unsafe communication channels.
The goal of secure quantum networks is to substitute asymmetric-key cryptography, non in place of symmetric-key cryptography.
The length of a symmetric-key for AES-256 is... 256 bits... so 1kbps for that is good enough.
Why don't you chop off your whole penis then? If by just removing the foreskin you reduce the risk of HIV, following your reasoning, it would be good to remove the whole penis which should lower the chances of getting HIV almost to zero.
I find this kind of argument pretty much hilarious and so it would be if there wasn't people who would take it seriously and damage in a non-repairable way the penises of their sons. This kind of choice is one you just cannot revert and you are simply depriving THEIR choice to have their WHOLE body just as "god" or nature made it imposing your choices to them for their whole life.
I think that if my parents did something like that to me i would simply take them to court, but i understand that a foreskin-less man simply does not know what he is missing just like a blind man can't know what sight is and this is the only reason why there are not so many sons who take their parents in front of their responsibilities for useless choices that cannot be reverted for fear of "god", "hiv", "the toothfairy" and so on.
Just use Tor and get rid of this idiocity all at once. It is really sick, first they try to convince us that sex = violence and now that drawings = violence. Idiots.
I'm OT i know... just wanted to know if you have any good book to suggest me about game programming... i am not really interested in something in particular, anything is good... it is for my personal knowledge only.
While i agree that the sentence is absolutely too severe for anything this man can have said online i would really like to know how, in your opinion, a picture does "more damage to the society and the individuals involved".
Do you realize that even the picture of a naked 15 y/o who willingly took a picture of himself and put it on the WEB is what is commonly said "child porn"? What damage is there? There is no damage at all.
A 15 y/o is everything but a child and for sure he is big enough to decide about his body.
Even a picture taken on the beach with a naked kid having fun in water is "child porn"... again... no damage at all.
The real problem is the irrational fear of sex that is spreading in the society and is eroding our rights. There is a big difference between someone who DOES violence against someone else and someone that just collects free pictures from the net for his own private pleasure. Just like there is a big difference between someone who steals a car and someone who downloads a bunch of MP3s that he would have never bought anyways.
Take Italy as an example, here you can actually have legal sex with a 14/15 y/o boy/girl (16 if you are his/her teacher/parent/tutor), but you cannot keep a picture of him/her naked! This is simply insane and clearly shows that there is a phobic feeling towards the sex where, the sex, is NOT seen anymore as a nice experience between two individuals who love and care for each other, but is actually seen as an act of violence.
If you then consider the fact that most of the so said "pedophiles" are actually very young persons (usually less than 30 y/o [in 50% of the cases], some even younger than 20) who feel an absolutely *normal* physical attraction towards boys and girls who are very close to their age... then you see that all this pedophile-fear is absolutely baseless and is NOT there to protect children as they want you to believe, but it is there to allow them use your own fear for their advantage, such as limiting your rights, limiting your freedom and sending to jail thousands of persons who, in their whole life, wouldn't ever touch a kid with a finger.
This sentence, where a man goes to jail simply for what he said, is SCARY, or so it should be to someone who is not affected by irrational fears. This is clearly against the right of everyone of us to SAY what we think, to communicate our ideas without fearing to be jailed for them, this is the beginning of a new regime... very similar to the one the Nazis had but with a different name: "democracy". Unfortunately the TV and press have brainwashed us so much that we easily believe the LIE that this is to protect us and our children while, instead, it is just an easy way to do what Nazis did all the time... destroy whoever thinks different.
And remember... at the time of Nazis no one knew to live at the time of Nazis.
...what kind of brainless idiot can charge a 18y/o boy for a felony for such a stupid thing.
Probably someone that knows *nothing* about technology but just wants his/her name on the newspapers.
So if a child steals from a store that they go to without a parent, it should be OK because the minor can't afford to purchase the item?
I find it very interesting when, from time to time, someone writes a post where he, intentionally or not, mistakes theft with copyright infringement. Copyright infringement has NOTHING to do with theft... they have even two different names, see? Do you think that if it was actually theft they would bother naming it in a different way? So why do you keep mixing the two things togheter? Maybe to make the people think that copying an MP3 is like stealing a CD? Saying lies to people won't help their cause.
Besides... i always hear the RIAA talk about theft... but i never see anyone talk about the HUGE theft that RIAA and friends did to our society. The THEFT of culture! Did you know that copyright, until just a bunch of years ago, was limited to no more than 28 years or so? Did you know that if an author did not renew its copyright after 14 years his work would go into public domain?
28 years was MORE THAN ENOUGH for an author to make a living from his works, actually... 14 years was MORE than enough, but he had the option to renew the copyright and keep making money from it for 14 years more. But this... to RIAA and friends, was not enough, because they want to STEAL money from the work of others. This is the ONLY reason why now the copyright lasts so much. If it was for them Copyright would never expire. They would keep making money forever from the work of long dead authors if they just had a chance. THIS IS THEFT, not a 13 years old who downloads even 10 thousands of MP3s since he would NOT have bought them anyways.
I can only base my opinion on what i read here, and from what i read here there is NO reason for what it has been done. Now, of course, if you go to that school you know better than me, but if the facts are just as they have been told to me then i keep my mind unchanged about this matter.
Lately the schools have become jails, metal-detectors, videocameras, survillance with police... the SCHOOL is NOT A JAIL. It is CLEAR that when a school becomes a jail the students rebel to it and its rules.
I still strongly believe that charging with computer felony a student because he wanted to LEARN and EXPERIMENT is IDIOTIC.
...to meet the underdeveloped idiot who thinks that it is a good idea to charge these kids with computer felony. When will these imbeciles understand that the school is a place where kids LEARN (and this is *exactly* what these kids did) and not jails? These stupids should understand that if they do not like kids or school they should simply change job. It is clear that an idiot who wants to charge a kid with computer felony can't even be considered a human being... and for sure not someone that should work in a school.
It is not about "dumping one supplier of software simply to save money". It is more like a matter of "stop wasting money on products where there are serious, free, instructive, alternatives to them".
The money saved (by stopping their waste) can be used/invested by the school in more helpful/instructive ways/projects for the kids.
Does it make more sense to you now?
Bye,
Luca
This depends on the country.
For example, if i am correct (and i usually am), in Italy you can download music as long as it is for personal use, exactly as you can record TV movies for personal use. In few words: sharing copyrighted material is illegal, downloading isn't... so, if you download a song with viruses included, you do not risk jail, but who put the virus inside your computer does.
Bye,
Luca
Slashdot Mirror
Well... yes and no.
Back when i was a kid i used to read a lot. In my life i probably read hundreds of books of any kind, from technical books to narrative to horrors to whatever i could put my hands on so i perfectly understand what you mean.
But it is also true that in today's world (and more so in 20 years or so) the more you know about computers the better your chances will be.
We are going through a turning point in human history. Many of today's jobs will probably be a thing of the past in the next 20-30 years.
Taxi-drivers, truck-drivers, plane pilots but also many other jobs who require low skills and education are going to be replaced by robots and computers and whoever can't adapt will probably be left to die in poverty.
In the future there will probably be an high request of software developers and computer-users... so teaching these skills to your kid _today_ is going to really make a difference in his/her future.
Reading books is very important.. but so are computers, that we like it or not they are going to dominate our future.
I am sorry but i don't agree.
Internet is actually _very_ distracting. I belong to the pre-internet generation. Back when i was 12 the only computers that were around were MSXes, Commodores, Ataris, TRSes, Apples and some very expensive IBM compatibles which were way too expensive for most of us anyways.
While my resources were VERY limited i learned a lot spending hours over hours on my MSX, reading and re-reading the few books i had but most of all "exploring" by trial and error. Internet was unknown to me, and so did BBSes too (the only thing i really miss and i only wish i could have experienced).
For every other kind of information that was not related to computers i could rely on the local public library, on the books at my school, on a couple of encyclopedias that i had access to, on my parents, on my friends (adult and not) and on teachers.
Sometimes i look at the kids i know today... and i see them wasting their time on facebook, youtube, 4chan... and sometimes i wonder... what if i had Internet access back in my youth? I would have probably wasted my time too. Because, lets be honest... Internet is a hell fun. Forums are fun, youtube is fun, the kitties on the internet are cute and kawaii, facebook is... ok... facebook is just scary... so instead than studying, exploring, experimenting i would have probably learned nothing beside how to waste time with perfectly unknown strangers who spend their lives trolling online and today i would probably know 1/4 of what i do and what i need in my job (i am a software developer).
Please note that i am not saying that Internet is bad for children. It isn't. It is actually very useful... what i am saying is that it is extremely distracting and that most activities online are not educative at all and also that there are lots of other resources "out there" (yes, outside of the bedroom) and that kids probably are better off playing, experimenting with their peers, riding their bikes before they become too old to find that fun and the outside world amusing or left alone with an internet-less computer with a couple of good books about programming and maybe a couple of informative DVD-Roms.
So no, i don't agree that "give them a computer and it's like giving a starving man a tin of beans - but no tin opener", it was not true for me back in the 80es/90es, it is not true for a child today. Internet is a nice addition and if not abused it can become a great educative and fun tool... but is not vital for learning.
Also... a computer without internet access is still better than no computer at all.
My robot won't be happy...
I wonder why should one consider a colonisation of the whole Galaxy?
You don't know about the evil plans of the RIAA, do you?
1kbps should be good enough to exchange secret keys for "real world" cryptography.
This should be used in place of Asymmetric-key cryptography.
Once you know that the secret key has not been eavesdropped then you can use regular symmetric-key cryptography over faster but unsafe communication channels.
The goal of secure quantum networks is to substitute asymmetric-key cryptography, non in place of symmetric-key cryptography.
The length of a symmetric-key for AES-256 is... 256 bits... so 1kbps for that is good enough.
Why don't you chop off your whole penis then? If by just removing the foreskin you reduce the risk of HIV, following your reasoning, it would be good to remove the whole penis which should lower the chances of getting HIV almost to zero.
I find this kind of argument pretty much hilarious and so it would be if there wasn't people who would take it seriously and damage in a non-repairable way the penises of their sons. This kind of choice is one you just cannot revert and you are simply depriving THEIR choice to have their WHOLE body just as "god" or nature made it imposing your choices to them for their whole life.
I think that if my parents did something like that to me i would simply take them to court, but i understand that a foreskin-less man simply does not know what he is missing just like a blind man can't know what sight is and this is the only reason why there are not so many sons who take their parents in front of their responsibilities for useless choices that cannot be reverted for fear of "god", "hiv", "the toothfairy" and so on.
Wow! Lets just start the x-files theme http://youtube.com/watch?v=t5KJJ83MQUg :D
So the BBC is hiring trolls?
It is a small step for a troll, but a giant leap for trollkind!
No one understands what the hell it is...
Just use Tor and get rid of this idiocity all at once.
It is really sick, first they try to convince us that sex = violence and now that drawings = violence.
Idiots.
http://tor.eff.org/
I find it reputable enough... what's _your_ problem with it?
I'm OT i know... just wanted to know if you have any good book to suggest me about game programming... i am not really interested in something in particular, anything is good... it is for my personal knowledge only.
Thank you.
Trasferiamo Punto Informatico qui? ^_^
LOL, i am a genius and i didn't even know it ^_^
Aren't we lucky?
They are so good with us.
Don't you feel loved?
While i agree that the sentence is absolutely too severe for anything this man can have said online i would really like to know how, in your opinion, a picture does "more damage to the society and the individuals involved".
Do you realize that even the picture of a naked 15 y/o who willingly took a picture of himself and put it on the WEB is what is commonly said "child porn"? What damage is there? There is no damage at all. A 15 y/o is everything but a child and for sure he is big enough to decide about his body. Even a picture taken on the beach with a naked kid having fun in water is "child porn"... again... no damage at all.
The real problem is the irrational fear of sex that is spreading in the society and is eroding our rights. There is a big difference between someone who DOES violence against someone else and someone that just collects free pictures from the net for his own private pleasure. Just like there is a big difference between someone who steals a car and someone who downloads a bunch of MP3s that he would have never bought anyways.
Take Italy as an example, here you can actually have legal sex with a 14/15 y/o boy/girl (16 if you are his/her teacher/parent/tutor), but you cannot keep a picture of him/her naked! This is simply insane and clearly shows that there is a phobic feeling towards the sex where, the sex, is NOT seen anymore as a nice experience between two individuals who love and care for each other, but is actually seen as an act of violence.
If you then consider the fact that most of the so said "pedophiles" are actually very young persons (usually less than 30 y/o [in 50% of the cases], some even younger than 20) who feel an absolutely *normal* physical attraction towards boys and girls who are very close to their age... then you see that all this pedophile-fear is absolutely baseless and is NOT there to protect children as they want you to believe, but it is there to allow them use your own fear for their advantage, such as limiting your rights, limiting your freedom and sending to jail thousands of persons who, in their whole life, wouldn't ever touch a kid with a finger.
This sentence, where a man goes to jail simply for what he said, is SCARY, or so it should be to someone who is not affected by irrational fears. This is clearly against the right of everyone of us to SAY what we think, to communicate our ideas without fearing to be jailed for them, this is the beginning of a new regime... very similar to the one the Nazis had but with a different name: "democracy". Unfortunately the TV and press have brainwashed us so much that we easily believe the LIE that this is to protect us and our children while, instead, it is just an easy way to do what Nazis did all the time... destroy whoever thinks different.
And remember... at the time of Nazis no one knew to live at the time of Nazis.
P.S.: Sorry for my bad English.
...what kind of brainless idiot can charge a 18y/o boy for a felony for such a stupid thing. Probably someone that knows *nothing* about technology but just wants his/her name on the newspapers.
I find it very interesting when, from time to time, someone writes a post where he, intentionally or not, mistakes theft with copyright infringement. Copyright infringement has NOTHING to do with theft... they have even two different names, see? Do you think that if it was actually theft they would bother naming it in a different way? So why do you keep mixing the two things togheter? Maybe to make the people think that copying an MP3 is like stealing a CD? Saying lies to people won't help their cause.
Besides... i always hear the RIAA talk about theft... but i never see anyone talk about the HUGE theft that RIAA and friends did to our society. The THEFT of culture! Did you know that copyright, until just a bunch of years ago, was limited to no more than 28 years or so? Did you know that if an author did not renew its copyright after 14 years his work would go into public domain?
28 years was MORE THAN ENOUGH for an author to make a living from his works, actually... 14 years was MORE than enough, but he had the option to renew the copyright and keep making money from it for 14 years more. But this... to RIAA and friends, was not enough, because they want to STEAL money from the work of others. This is the ONLY reason why now the copyright lasts so much. If it was for them Copyright would never expire. They would keep making money forever from the work of long dead authors if they just had a chance. THIS IS THEFT, not a 13 years old who downloads even 10 thousands of MP3s since he would NOT have bought them anyways.
If you want to know more about the THEFT that RIAA and friends did to our society then read this book, it is free: http://www.free-culture.cc/freecontent/
After you read it, come back here and say "sorry" to this kid for have calling him/her a thief.
Ok... this is my question... i've always been curious about it:
"Where the hell did you find Ballmer????"
I can only base my opinion on what i read here, and from what i read here there is NO reason for what it has been done. Now, of course, if you go to that school you know better than me, but if the facts are just as they have been told to me then i keep my mind unchanged about this matter. Lately the schools have become jails, metal-detectors, videocameras, survillance with police... the SCHOOL is NOT A JAIL. It is CLEAR that when a school becomes a jail the students rebel to it and its rules. I still strongly believe that charging with computer felony a student because he wanted to LEARN and EXPERIMENT is IDIOTIC.
...to meet the underdeveloped idiot who thinks that it is a good idea to charge these kids with computer felony. When will these imbeciles understand that the school is a place where kids LEARN (and this is *exactly* what these kids did) and not jails?
These stupids should understand that if they do not like kids or school they should simply change job. It is clear that an idiot who wants to charge a kid with computer felony can't even be considered a human being... and for sure not someone that should work in a school.
It is not about "dumping one supplier of software simply to save money". It is more like a matter of "stop wasting money on products where there are serious, free, instructive, alternatives to them". The money saved (by stopping their waste) can be used/invested by the school in more helpful/instructive ways/projects for the kids. Does it make more sense to you now? Bye, Luca
Hmmm... this would actually prove that the real medicine is ineffective... imo...
The fact that you do not understand something doesn't mean that you can say that it is useless or unworthy. Bye, Luca
This depends on the country. For example, if i am correct (and i usually am), in Italy you can download music as long as it is for personal use, exactly as you can record TV movies for personal use. In few words: sharing copyrighted material is illegal, downloading isn't... so, if you download a song with viruses included, you do not risk jail, but who put the virus inside your computer does. Bye, Luca