developers still don't know how to properly use the hardware.
Indeed!
This really is the problem. I think this looks like a very interesting and powerful piece of technology.. but if it only ever gets used to make a bunch of wii style "minigames", what's the point!
There will probably be a whole collection of Kinect minigames which though fun will not provide any real substance, and a handful of "real" games with Kinect support thrown in (but not required) for a little novelty. I'm not holding my breath for any serious titles appearing which really use Kinect to provide fundamental unique gameplay.
That may be true if you're the only one working on it. However some of the benefits of TDD include arriving at an early consensus on design details and allowing different roles to work in parallel. Once you've defined the tests, everyone knows exactly how it needs to work and you can have your developers go ahead at the same time as your qe at the sae time as your doc at the same time as your consumers. You've flattened out the pipeline.
By your reasoning without TDD, yes, your stage in the pipeline is quicker, but the pipeline is much longer and more serial.
I totally agree that nailing down interfaces between seperate components is always a priority, however there are lots of alternatives to TDD for this. it can be done procedurally through some kind of documentation... or even at the code level (Java interfaces are awesome for this.. define your interfaces first, then everyone can go into their silo).
I guess what I have an aversion to is locking the design down so tightly that developers can't breath. No matter how much up front design you do, programmers are always going to think of better ways to write code while they are actually writing the code. Stuff that works great on paper can suck in code form.
If unit tests are used more as general test automation.. that is testing inputs and outputs vice testing classes.. it's not so bad. When you start writing test cases that test every function of every class to increase some code/branch/path coverage metric, you end up with massive dead weight and a lot of "yeah that makes sense, but you'll have to re-write 56 use cases to make that slight design tweak".
I always hated the pay per GB model. Even if it does make sense, as a consumer I like to not have to watch my bandwidth. Even if I would end up paying more money, I think I would still prefer an unlimited plan.
Electricity is different, people generally use about the same. Infact, my bill is actually averaged based on last year to balance the winter usage with the summer usage.
I don't think this would be the case with internet usage, and I'd rather not have to consider the financial impact of watching a youtube video.
Also for the "regular folk", there is always the surprise $6500 bill, because you know much like cell companies, ISPs are going to do nothing to prevent users from racking up obscene charges.
Just so we're clear, what you're doing is blatantly generalizing.
Guilty as charged:(
Maybe it's more popular up here in Canada than "down there".
Whether or not people are getting cut off though, I believe (keyword "believe", as stated in origional post I'm no expert) the core problem is still the same. ISPs here did the "big magic number" thing for years.. one would offer 5, then another 7, then 10, then 15, etc.. with no actual belief that anyone would every use that bandwidth on a regular basis. Now people are using it, and they either have to limit it, charge way more money for it, or eliminate the things users are using it for).
..the problem is that ISPs have been selling us the "bandwidth" to do this kind of activity for years. Bandwidth is in quotes because "back in the day" if you actually used the bandwidth you were paying for, they suspended your account as the likely reason for a residential user to draw any serious transfer was piracy.
Now there are lots of legitimate "every day" uses that draw the massive bandwidth that ISPs have been using as a big magic number when selling service, and the ISPs can't (or can't for long) handle it.
There are a few solutions I see:
- implement rediculously low caps. You get 15mbps.. but can only download 60GB a month - upgrade infrastructure, and have consumers pay for the product they are actually getting (that is, if you paid for 15mbps, you can use 15mbps 24/7 if you want). - take the media industry approach of lobbying and suing everything that moves
Bits and pieces of agile are good. I think if you take the spirit of agile.. that is doing things because it's a good idea, not because you have a compulsive need to fill binders with documentation.. it can work well.
I like unit tests for regression testing (that is, verifying that the software still does what it used to).. but I think test driven development is more hassle and riskier than it's worth (now instead of just changing code when the requirements do a 180, you have to change code _and_ unit tests, ($cost + $time) * 2).
I like eliminating "because we need documentation" documentation.. but I think there is great value in documenting stuff that is complicated or weird. Having a binder full of "the UserAccount class represents a user account. It is comprised of a username representing.." is useless. The same goes with diagrams.
The worst is when agile is implemented as a buzzword. "We are agile! We have a binder full of documentation describing the rigid agile process we follow!" (not saying agile or processes in general shouldn't be documented, but in my opinion the whole point of agile is to be flexible).
Actually when I was in school, I never found the seats to be a problem.
What I _did_ find to be an annoyance was being stuck in them for hours at a time. This was particularily bad in the earlier grades where you tended to stay in the same room.
Even today I have no problem working in the most uncomfortable chair as long as I can get up every half hour or so and stretch my legs.. even if it is just a quick walk around the building.
I think this should some how be adopted in schools. I don't know how the logistics would work as I remember just getting everyone back after recess was a chore.. but I think getting away from the desk, even temporarily, is going to do way more than some new fangled "node chair".
As a side thought: most uncomfortable chairs I find are the ones who either don't have a locking back, or have a back that can't quite be adjusted to the right angle (that is, you have a choice of 90 degree perfect right angle, or fully reclined).
Unfortunately they would almost have to be discarded (the votes, not the candidates), however the numbers could be published..
Right now we just tend to assume the massive percentage of people who don't vote are lazy.. if numbers showed that a high percentage wen't lazy, but felt that no candidate was qualified.. it might get a discussion going and _maybe_ something might actually change
Then again, people might just look at the numbers, sadly nod, then change the channel.
I'm Canadian, so maybe the political situation is completely different "down there", but I think you are reading a little too much into people not showing up to vote.
Sure some people are making a statement by not voting, but I think most who do not vote are either lazy (probably the majority) or don't feel they have enough understanding to make a serious choice.
And personally, I would actually rather have a relatively small turn out of voters making a choice based on their beliefs, than a huge crowd of people just randomly picking a candidate because everyone is telling them they must vote. Voting isn't the important part.. keeping yourself aware of the politics of your country is!
I do like the idea of specifically counting people who say "I don't think any of these are good" and maybe even a "I don't feel confident to make a choice". Would be an interesting number to see.
users will begin a mass exodus once more and more articles about the dangers of Facebook are written and IT Professionals and techies begin informing everyone that using Facebook is dangerous especially on a Winblows PC.
Oh you can't seriously believe that!
People have been screaming at the top of their lungs about how insecure facebook is and what they do with your information for years. Your average user just doesn't care as long as they can keep playing farmville!
The point of my post wasn't that the technological workarounds that have held off ipv4 exhaustion directly translate into resource depletion.
Although it really does apply. As a resource becomes more scarce (water, gas, ipv4 address space) there becomes more incentive to find workarounds.
In other words.. recycling might become the NAT of earths resources. But no one is even going to think about it until we actually start running out of something (even if you've got a pile of evidence saying we _will_ run out soon).
.. and we've run out of ipv4 addresses "in about a year" for the last decade or so..
and people will probably pay about as much heed to this warning as they do to ipv4 exhaustion.
AND just like ipv4 exhaustion, nothing serious is going to be done about this until stuff actually starts falling apart. And by falling apart I don't mean charts and graphs, I mean "The Day After Tomorrow" falling apart. And even then...
I do understand this argument, but I tend not to mind this kind of thinking either. I know I'm gonna get modded troll for this, but it's really not my intention.
In theory, I'm ok with the whole "accumulated market data used to determine insurance rates / mortgage / credit / etc..". The idea being if an insurance company jacks someone's rate up because they are more likely to get into an accident based on whatever arbitrary data they are looking at (and I imagine they are probably quite good at this), then my rate is hopefully going to be lower (unless I am also high risk).
Ultimately I imagine (again, we are still in my theoretical sunshine and lollipop land here) if the mass of data people leave behind them was really used to determine these sort of things, most people would come out about even. Pay a little more on your car insurance for reason x, pay a little less on your mortgage for reason y.
In practice it's all moot, as they are going to jack the rates up regardless, and pocket the savings rather then pass them on.
This type of stuff really trips my “who cares” switch. Aside from slippery slope arguments and general “right to privacy” statements I find it hard to think of a scenario where I would really care if “the man” or “the corporation” knew what I was eating.
Hell, even if they attached my name to it and sold it to every market research company in the world, I can’t think how this negatively impacts me. Even less so what I ate as a kid.
I know I sound like a shill here.. but I’m a consumer. I buy and consume stuff. Corporations profit by selling me stuff. I generally don’t mind corporations trying to figure out how to better provide (or dupe me into buying) stuff. They profit, I (usually) benefit.. etc.
Most of the arguments against these “invasions of privacy” revolve around delusional dystopian worlds where the government uses market data to hunt down people counter to their objectives and drag them from their homes to be put to work in the acid mines.
We live in reality here people! And your buying habits are not that interesting! There is so much data out there and such a diversity of people, you have to be into some really weird stuff for anyone to take notice. Chances are you are just “person with sexual fetish for office supplies #21342” in aggregate set 143.
I think this is one of those things that sounds a lot cooler and more practical than it is in actual implementation.
I'd rather a dishwasher wash my dishes then some humanoid robot.. for the plain fact that a purpose built machine is going to be a lot better at it.
I think there's lots of room for automated or semi-automated machines which I guess you could call robots.. but a "robotic butler" I don't see happening.
Personally I'm waiting for an automated lawn mower that doesn't suck!
But my first somewhat obvious thought would be to build a very detailed list of what has to happen in the room, then use that to drive your design.
Positioning of people I would also imagine is quite important.. which groups of users need to communicate with each other.. who will be using the video wall.. who is going to be making the most noise (is someone going to be on the phone every 10 minutes.. if so a separate sound proof cage might be in order)
Things like white boards might also be a good idea. For all the high tech collaboration solutions out there, I've found nothing beats a whiteboard for figuring something out or just tracking status of a short term issue.
I'd also watch the cool factor stuff. A lot of the stuff that looks really neat on TV actually sucks in real life. Moody blue lighting for instance is depressing and hard on the eyes. Maybe you could have some kind of "holywood mode" switch or something for when people are being toured through.. though that is a little extreme.
Finally I'd say good quality monitors and the most comfortable chairs that the budget allows.
controlling access to mobile internet applications such as e-mail, social networking and on-line banking.
First one kinda iffy.. second one makes sense.. third one, no way in hell!
It's the old convenience vs. security argument. Personally for things like my money, I'm willing to go the extra mile and enter a password (or some kind of one time code if only my bank offered it).
Not saying a small business (especially if not IT based) needs an "enterprise" level server.. but running web and email off one of these things sounds very dubious.
Probably better off with a hosted solution.. most ISPs won't let you run a server on a standard plan.. and though you tend to get away with it.. I wouldn't have "hope my ISP ignores this" in my business plan. As soon as you start paying for a business ISP account you may as well pay the excess and get all the redundancy and proper data center perks.
Well.. it doesn't have to be one big exam at the end of the year I guess, it could be several smaller ones. I do understand your point though, and like I said, I totally accept that English and several other subjects are hard to grade in an on the spot "you have to do it right now" kinda way.
I would argue however that the solution to exam anxiety isn't to devalue exams. I know I'm once again drifting into idealism, but the same people who have anxiety before an exam are probably also going to have anxiety in a job interview. Being able to keep it together under stress is a pretty damn important skill in the real world, and I think the more practice the better.
I've long said that the whole self esteem "every child is special" nurturing learning environment movement is doing a lot more bad than good.
I'm waiting for the "cold hard reality of life" movement to come into play. I like to think I've found success and happiness in life because I set realistic expectations based on realistic feedback about my capabilities and had to fight with the usual stresses and social situations of being a fairly hard core geek.
Geeks in school today come out on a self esteem high thinking they'll be running the next google, quickly realize that every school has it's programming prodigy, and end up working a phone in a call center (no offence intended to call center workers).
I'd guess English is probably the harder of the subjects to achieve this. I was really thinking more technical/engineering where you can grade students by making them do.. technical stuff and engineering stuff.
However my thought would be to make assignments mostly worthless from a marking perspective.. and put most of the emphasis on exams where the subject is not known before hand.
In this kind of structure.. the assignments are more a means for students to learn and for teachers to evaluate progress. A student could buy all his papers throughout the year.. only to completely fail the exams (and thus the course). Previously passed in assignments could even be compared against the exam answers as a way of showing that the student clearly didn't write them (and in an ideal world, this would get the teacher off the hook when explaining why a student who passed every assignment throughout the year just completely failed the class).
I don't think I'd call a strip club or porn shop unethical. By some standards immoral for sure.. but what is the ethical violation of a strip club or porn shop?
The ethical implications of this are pretty direct though. You help someone get credentials which they are not qualified for, they become a civil engineer and end up building a bridge that falls on your head, cause someone wrote the paper on "building bridges that don't fall on people" for them.
Obviously that's a much oversimplified and unlikely scenario. And ethical concerns aside, I think this is hillarious. This guy has some stones!
While I'm on my soapbox, I'd like to say I think it's pretty sad that this kind of service is useful. If education was done properly, or specifically if students were evaluated in a meaningful and practical way, this service would be useful to maybe a handful of smart but lazy students.
This is exactly what's going to happen. Lets not kid ourselves here.. most people don't care about any of this. The few people who have any interest in this.. even enough to never pay for media again.. are just a tiny little insignificant blip.
Don't get me wrong.. this is really bad because they probably have a good chance of succeeding. As absurd as this is, essentially making it illegal to give the stuff you produce away for free, the media industry has a metric ass tonne of money and influence, and most importantly your average guy on the street is not going to understand or care.
I am just happy to finally see what I would describe as inevitable happen. And I totally don't blame the media industry. It a logical approach:
problem: something is costing us money solutions: make it illegal
Should be interesting to see how this all unfolds.
Slashdot Mirror
developers still don't know how to properly use the hardware.
Indeed!
This really is the problem. I think this looks like a very interesting and powerful piece of technology.. but if it only ever gets used to make a bunch of wii style "minigames", what's the point!
There will probably be a whole collection of Kinect minigames which though fun will not provide any real substance, and a handful of "real" games with Kinect support thrown in (but not required) for a little novelty. I'm not holding my breath for any serious titles appearing which really use Kinect to provide fundamental unique gameplay.
That may be true if you're the only one working on it. However some of the benefits of TDD include arriving at an early consensus on design details and allowing different roles to work in parallel. Once you've defined the tests, everyone knows exactly how it needs to work and you can have your developers go ahead at the same time as your qe at the sae time as your doc at the same time as your consumers. You've flattened out the pipeline.
By your reasoning without TDD, yes, your stage in the pipeline is quicker, but the pipeline is much longer and more serial.
I totally agree that nailing down interfaces between seperate components is always a priority, however there are lots of alternatives to TDD for this. it can be done procedurally through some kind of documentation... or even at the code level (Java interfaces are awesome for this.. define your interfaces first, then everyone can go into their silo).
I guess what I have an aversion to is locking the design down so tightly that developers can't breath. No matter how much up front design you do, programmers are always going to think of better ways to write code while they are actually writing the code. Stuff that works great on paper can suck in code form.
If unit tests are used more as general test automation.. that is testing inputs and outputs vice testing classes.. it's not so bad. When you start writing test cases that test every function of every class to increase some code/branch/path coverage metric, you end up with massive dead weight and a lot of "yeah that makes sense, but you'll have to re-write 56 use cases to make that slight design tweak".
I always hated the pay per GB model. Even if it does make sense, as a consumer I like to not have to watch my bandwidth. Even if I would end up paying more money, I think I would still prefer an unlimited plan.
Electricity is different, people generally use about the same. Infact, my bill is actually averaged based on last year to balance the winter usage with the summer usage.
I don't think this would be the case with internet usage, and I'd rather not have to consider the financial impact of watching a youtube video.
Also for the "regular folk", there is always the surprise $6500 bill, because you know much like cell companies, ISPs are going to do nothing to prevent users from racking up obscene charges.
Just so we're clear, what you're doing is blatantly generalizing.
Guilty as charged :(
Maybe it's more popular up here in Canada than "down there".
Whether or not people are getting cut off though, I believe (keyword "believe", as stated in origional post I'm no expert) the core problem is still the same. ISPs here did the "big magic number" thing for years.. one would offer 5, then another 7, then 10, then 15, etc.. with no actual belief that anyone would every use that bandwidth on a regular basis. Now people are using it, and they either have to limit it, charge way more money for it, or eliminate the things users are using it for).
..the problem is that ISPs have been selling us the "bandwidth" to do this kind of activity for years. Bandwidth is in quotes because "back in the day" if you actually used the bandwidth you were paying for, they suspended your account as the likely reason for a residential user to draw any serious transfer was piracy.
Now there are lots of legitimate "every day" uses that draw the massive bandwidth that ISPs have been using as a big magic number when selling service, and the ISPs can't (or can't for long) handle it.
There are a few solutions I see:
- implement rediculously low caps. You get 15mbps .. but can only download 60GB a month
- upgrade infrastructure, and have consumers pay for the product they are actually getting (that is, if you paid for 15mbps, you can use 15mbps 24/7 if you want).
- take the media industry approach of lobbying and suing everything that moves
And I think we know which two are most likely :(
Bits and pieces of agile are good. I think if you take the spirit of agile.. that is doing things because it's a good idea, not because you have a compulsive need to fill binders with documentation.. it can work well.
I like unit tests for regression testing (that is, verifying that the software still does what it used to).. but I think test driven development is more hassle and riskier than it's worth (now instead of just changing code when the requirements do a 180, you have to change code _and_ unit tests, ($cost + $time) * 2).
I like eliminating "because we need documentation" documentation.. but I think there is great value in documenting stuff that is complicated or weird. Having a binder full of "the UserAccount class represents a user account. It is comprised of a username representing.." is useless. The same goes with diagrams.
The worst is when agile is implemented as a buzzword. "We are agile! We have a binder full of documentation describing the rigid agile process we follow!" (not saying agile or processes in general shouldn't be documented, but in my opinion the whole point of agile is to be flexible).
Actually when I was in school, I never found the seats to be a problem.
What I _did_ find to be an annoyance was being stuck in them for hours at a time. This was particularily bad in the earlier grades where you tended to stay in the same room.
Even today I have no problem working in the most uncomfortable chair as long as I can get up every half hour or so and stretch my legs.. even if it is just a quick walk around the building.
I think this should some how be adopted in schools. I don't know how the logistics would work as I remember just getting everyone back after recess was a chore.. but I think getting away from the desk, even temporarily, is going to do way more than some new fangled "node chair".
As a side thought: most uncomfortable chairs I find are the ones who either don't have a locking back, or have a back that can't quite be adjusted to the right angle (that is, you have a choice of 90 degree perfect right angle, or fully reclined).
Unfortunately they would almost have to be discarded (the votes, not the candidates), however the numbers could be published..
Right now we just tend to assume the massive percentage of people who don't vote are lazy.. if numbers showed that a high percentage wen't lazy, but felt that no candidate was qualified.. it might get a discussion going and _maybe_ something might actually change
Then again, people might just look at the numbers, sadly nod, then change the channel.
I'm Canadian, so maybe the political situation is completely different "down there", but I think you are reading a little too much into people not showing up to vote.
Sure some people are making a statement by not voting, but I think most who do not vote are either lazy (probably the majority) or don't feel they have enough understanding to make a serious choice.
And personally, I would actually rather have a relatively small turn out of voters making a choice based on their beliefs, than a huge crowd of people just randomly picking a candidate because everyone is telling them they must vote. Voting isn't the important part.. keeping yourself aware of the politics of your country is!
I do like the idea of specifically counting people who say "I don't think any of these are good" and maybe even a "I don't feel confident to make a choice". Would be an interesting number to see.
users will begin a mass exodus once more and more articles about the dangers of Facebook are written and IT Professionals and techies begin informing everyone that using Facebook is dangerous especially on a Winblows PC.
Oh you can't seriously believe that!
People have been screaming at the top of their lungs about how insecure facebook is and what they do with your information for years. Your average user just doesn't care as long as they can keep playing farmville!
If it gets people to recycle.. sure!
The point of my post wasn't that the technological workarounds that have held off ipv4 exhaustion directly translate into resource depletion.
Although it really does apply. As a resource becomes more scarce (water, gas, ipv4 address space) there becomes more incentive to find workarounds.
In other words.. recycling might become the NAT of earths resources. But no one is even going to think about it until we actually start running out of something (even if you've got a pile of evidence saying we _will_ run out soon).
.. and we've run out of ipv4 addresses "in about a year" for the last decade or so..
and people will probably pay about as much heed to this warning as they do to ipv4 exhaustion.
AND just like ipv4 exhaustion, nothing serious is going to be done about this until stuff actually starts falling apart. And by falling apart I don't mean charts and graphs, I mean "The Day After Tomorrow" falling apart. And even then...
I do understand this argument, but I tend not to mind this kind of thinking either. I know I'm gonna get modded troll for this, but it's really not my intention.
In theory, I'm ok with the whole "accumulated market data used to determine insurance rates / mortgage / credit / etc..". The idea being if an insurance company jacks someone's rate up because they are more likely to get into an accident based on whatever arbitrary data they are looking at (and I imagine they are probably quite good at this), then my rate is hopefully going to be lower (unless I am also high risk).
Ultimately I imagine (again, we are still in my theoretical sunshine and lollipop land here) if the mass of data people leave behind them was really used to determine these sort of things, most people would come out about even. Pay a little more on your car insurance for reason x, pay a little less on your mortgage for reason y.
In practice it's all moot, as they are going to jack the rates up regardless, and pocket the savings rather then pass them on.
This type of stuff really trips my “who cares” switch. Aside from slippery slope arguments and general “right to privacy” statements I find it hard to think of a scenario where I would really care if “the man” or “the corporation” knew what I was eating.
Hell, even if they attached my name to it and sold it to every market research company in the world, I can’t think how this negatively impacts me. Even less so what I ate as a kid.
I know I sound like a shill here.. but I’m a consumer. I buy and consume stuff. Corporations profit by selling me stuff. I generally don’t mind corporations trying to figure out how to better provide (or dupe me into buying) stuff. They profit, I (usually) benefit.. etc.
Most of the arguments against these “invasions of privacy” revolve around delusional dystopian worlds where the government uses market data to hunt down people counter to their objectives and drag them from their homes to be put to work in the acid mines.
We live in reality here people! And your buying habits are not that interesting! There is so much data out there and such a diversity of people, you have to be into some really weird stuff for anyone to take notice. Chances are you are just “person with sexual fetish for office supplies #21342” in aggregate set 143.
I think this is one of those things that sounds a lot cooler and more practical than it is in actual implementation.
I'd rather a dishwasher wash my dishes then some humanoid robot.. for the plain fact that a purpose built machine is going to be a lot better at it.
I think there's lots of room for automated or semi-automated machines which I guess you could call robots.. but a "robotic butler" I don't see happening.
Personally I'm waiting for an automated lawn mower that doesn't suck!
But my first somewhat obvious thought would be to build a very detailed list of what has to happen in the room, then use that to drive your design.
Positioning of people I would also imagine is quite important.. which groups of users need to communicate with each other.. who will be using the video wall.. who is going to be making the most noise (is someone going to be on the phone every 10 minutes.. if so a separate sound proof cage might be in order)
Things like white boards might also be a good idea. For all the high tech collaboration solutions out there, I've found nothing beats a whiteboard for figuring something out or just tracking status of a short term issue.
I'd also watch the cool factor stuff. A lot of the stuff that looks really neat on TV actually sucks in real life. Moody blue lighting for instance is depressing and hard on the eyes. Maybe you could have some kind of "holywood mode" switch or something for when people are being toured through.. though that is a little extreme.
Finally I'd say good quality monitors and the most comfortable chairs that the budget allows.
controlling access to mobile internet applications such as e-mail, social networking and on-line banking.
First one kinda iffy.. second one makes sense.. third one, no way in hell!
It's the old convenience vs. security argument. Personally for things like my money, I'm willing to go the extra mile and enter a password (or some kind of one time code if only my bank offered it).
Totally agree..
Not saying a small business (especially if not IT based) needs an "enterprise" level server.. but running web and email off one of these things sounds very dubious.
Probably better off with a hosted solution.. most ISPs won't let you run a server on a standard plan .. and though you tend to get away with it.. I wouldn't have "hope my ISP ignores this" in my business plan. As soon as you start paying for a business ISP account you may as well pay the excess and get all the redundancy and proper data center perks.
.. either that or he's the only programmer in the company and can thus effectively call himself whatever he wants.
Well.. it doesn't have to be one big exam at the end of the year I guess, it could be several smaller ones. I do understand your point though, and like I said, I totally accept that English and several other subjects are hard to grade in an on the spot "you have to do it right now" kinda way.
I would argue however that the solution to exam anxiety isn't to devalue exams. I know I'm once again drifting into idealism, but the same people who have anxiety before an exam are probably also going to have anxiety in a job interview. Being able to keep it together under stress is a pretty damn important skill in the real world, and I think the more practice the better.
I've long said that the whole self esteem "every child is special" nurturing learning environment movement is doing a lot more bad than good.
I'm waiting for the "cold hard reality of life" movement to come into play. I like to think I've found success and happiness in life because I set realistic expectations based on realistic feedback about my capabilities and had to fight with the usual stresses and social situations of being a fairly hard core geek.
Geeks in school today come out on a self esteem high thinking they'll be running the next google, quickly realize that every school has it's programming prodigy, and end up working a phone in a call center (no offence intended to call center workers).
Wow.. that got way off track..
I'd guess English is probably the harder of the subjects to achieve this. I was really thinking more technical/engineering where you can grade students by making them do.. technical stuff and engineering stuff.
However my thought would be to make assignments mostly worthless from a marking perspective.. and put most of the emphasis on exams where the subject is not known before hand.
In this kind of structure.. the assignments are more a means for students to learn and for teachers to evaluate progress. A student could buy all his papers throughout the year.. only to completely fail the exams (and thus the course). Previously passed in assignments could even be compared against the exam answers as a way of showing that the student clearly didn't write them (and in an ideal world, this would get the teacher off the hook when explaining why a student who passed every assignment throughout the year just completely failed the class).
I don't think I'd call a strip club or porn shop unethical. By some standards immoral for sure.. but what is the ethical violation of a strip club or porn shop?
The ethical implications of this are pretty direct though. You help someone get credentials which they are not qualified for, they become a civil engineer and end up building a bridge that falls on your head, cause someone wrote the paper on "building bridges that don't fall on people" for them.
Obviously that's a much oversimplified and unlikely scenario. And ethical concerns aside, I think this is hillarious. This guy has some stones!
While I'm on my soapbox, I'd like to say I think it's pretty sad that this kind of service is useful. If education was done properly, or specifically if students were evaluated in a meaningful and practical way, this service would be useful to maybe a handful of smart but lazy students.
or allow themselves to to be screwed
This is exactly what's going to happen. Lets not kid ourselves here.. most people don't care about any of this. The few people who have any interest in this.. even enough to never pay for media again.. are just a tiny little insignificant blip.
Don't get me wrong.. this is really bad because they probably have a good chance of succeeding. As absurd as this is, essentially making it illegal to give the stuff you produce away for free, the media industry has a metric ass tonne of money and influence, and most importantly your average guy on the street is not going to understand or care.
I am just happy to finally see what I would describe as inevitable happen. And I totally don't blame the media industry. It a logical approach:
problem: something is costing us money
solutions: make it illegal
Should be interesting to see how this all unfolds.