On the plus side, it will take many years before SJW incompetence will have destroyed the Linux kernel, and we may just see a serious fork that still values technological merits over everything else.
Indeed. Typical clueless technology fanatic. Also, as to diagnostic superiority, look at the failed medical diagnostics by IBM Watson published recently, that ended up killing people. Technology is not there even for the relatively clean and clear field of diagnostics. It is not clear whether it ever will get there enough to replace human experts. It may take some of their work, but if MDs have 10% less work, that will not matter much. Medicine may in fact be the single largest area pretty safe from "robots".
Ah, yes, all the nativity of those that have no clue what they are talking about and think security is easy. Have a look into the relevant literature and then come back. Here is a starting point: The public x.509 certificate system is badly broken, and you can even get EV certificates for a fake or wrong identity with minimal effort.
That has all been tied before. The only hardware in existence that offers a reasonable protection and could do the functionality you describe is a full HSM (Hardware Security Module) at something like $50'000 and upwards. All other approaches have been hacked successfully, and I have a nagging suspicion that HSMs have not only because they are to expensive for hackers to get their hands on as you would probably have to burn 3-4 for a successful hack. They are also not sold to the general public.
And what gives them power? Laws criminalizing things. There is no way in this universe they can stop this. But they can profit from it and they are certainly trying to.
This are people that chose to be offended. Any demented thing will do. It is essentially a power-move, where they try to force their will on others, in the most public fashion they can manage. It does serve no other purpose. It is dishonorable, insulting and low and should be resisted decisively.
There actually is no alternative that is any better. A Master/slave relationship is a technological dependency where one component forces the behavior of the other. The only appropriate terms hence must be offensive (to deranged snowflakes), because the technical situation itself is. At the same time, terminology describing technology must be as clear as possible. Technology is already difficult enough without fuzzy language that makes it even harder to understand what is going on.
This whole thing is an expression of terminal stupidity and should be resisted decisively.
Lets call them "gentle_suggestor" and "potential_suggestion_taker"!
On other news, weakening the descriptiveness of technical terms has found to cause a lot of problems and solve none. This had gone to a level way beyond stupid.
Well, on high-school level there is also a pedagogic problem with students being able to bypass requirements in this way: It teaches them that they just need the right kind of problem or "victim" status an they can get away with not trying hard. This way we get incomplete and problematic adults.
Indeed. Being able and willing where needed to speak publicly is a huge enabler. That does not mean you have to like it, but the benefits that come with is are sure something most people will like.
You are missing a lot. Role-playing is not useless and focusing on the channel (speaker to audience) not the content is a good exercise for some things. Even presenting meaningless things is a good exercise for some things, for example on how to handle a disinterested audience. Sure, the school-setting is not the full deal. But you have to start somewhere or you will never get to the more advanced settings.
Indeed. Nobody said anything about public speaking all the time. It is a requirement that you can do it competently. If you use that skill rarely that is not an issue. Also, being able to speak before an audience competently has other benefits, for example being able to explain things coherently, like, for example, you would do in an interview.
While I never took any of these, I experimented with caffeine and sugar in the first year or so at University. Even these relatively benign stimulants hurt more than they help.
“Nobody should be forced to do something that makes them uncomfortable,”
Yes indeed. Like taking an exam, learning a subject they are not good at or learning about what happens when they screw up in their job.... If you cannot do things that you feel uncomfortable with, then you are disabled. I am all for supporting genuinely disabled persons, but they (with some exceptions) cannot be engineers or scientists. Sorry about that, the degree is not an award, but a certification of competence.
When you have somebody truly gifted, allowances can be made. This will be 0.1% or less of all cases though and hence is not really relevant to the discussion. For example, I recently had a student with a cognitive disability (and a doctor's note to that effect, verified by the academic institution) that makes him somewhat slower in reading comprehension, but not in actual ability to solve things. He got exactly the same examination, just some additional time and a bit of an extended possibility to ask questions regarding comprehension. But the actual requirement was not reduced one bit.
So I am all for making the public specking part a bit easier if there is a real, medically verified, problem but dropping it is out of the question.
We had that recently for a semester-project as well. 3 students, one contributed nothing to the presentation. When questioned, he was clueless. Fortunately, he admitted he had not actually done anything and was just dropped from the course retroactively.
People caught in something like that and fighting it should be expelled though. It is hugely dishonorable behavior and damages the credibility of the academic field they try to be a part of.
Slashdot Mirror
On the plus side, it will take many years before SJW incompetence will have destroyed the Linux kernel, and we may just see a serious fork that still values technological merits over everything else.
Sounds like a variant of totalitarianism to me. "You are either with us or against us." No, thanks.
The good news is that every project compromised by these people will eventually go down the drains.
Quick, make a copy of the kernel sources, we are going to see all kinds of SJW BS in the mainline now!
Indeed. Typical clueless technology fanatic. Also, as to diagnostic superiority, look at the failed medical diagnostics by IBM Watson published recently, that ended up killing people. Technology is not there even for the relatively clean and clear field of diagnostics. It is not clear whether it ever will get there enough to replace human experts. It may take some of their work, but if MDs have 10% less work, that will not matter much. Medicine may in fact be the single largest area pretty safe from "robots".
Bla, bla, bla. Seriously?
Ah, yes, all the nativity of those that have no clue what they are talking about and think security is easy. Have a look into the relevant literature and then come back. Here is a starting point: The public x.509 certificate system is badly broken, and you can even get EV certificates for a fake or wrong identity with minimal effort.
That has all been tied before. The only hardware in existence that offers a reasonable protection and could do the functionality you describe is a full HSM (Hardware Security Module) at something like $50'000 and upwards. All other approaches have been hacked successfully, and I have a nagging suspicion that HSMs have not only because they are to expensive for hackers to get their hands on as you would probably have to burn 3-4 for a successful hack. They are also not sold to the general public.
Trusted third parties are expensive and usually unworkable. Cameras signing things will not provide any security at all, as they are easily hacked.
We will just have to learn to deal with this. There really is no other way.
And what gives them power? Laws criminalizing things. There is no way in this universe they can stop this. But they can profit from it and they are certainly trying to.
Yeah, that is what basically every competent IT security person says and has been saying for years. This is just some people trying to grab attention.
This are people that chose to be offended. Any demented thing will do. It is essentially a power-move, where they try to force their will on others, in the most public fashion they can manage. It does serve no other purpose. It is dishonorable, insulting and low and should be resisted decisively.
Oh, yes. Context is _everything_!
It dose not describe what is going on and therefore is unsuitable.
There actually is no alternative that is any better. A Master/slave relationship is a technological dependency where one component forces the behavior of the other. The only appropriate terms hence must be offensive (to deranged snowflakes), because the technical situation itself is. At the same time, terminology describing technology must be as clear as possible. Technology is already difficult enough without fuzzy language that makes it even harder to understand what is going on.
This whole thing is an expression of terminal stupidity and should be resisted decisively.
Lets call them "gentle_suggestor" and "potential_suggestion_taker"!
On other news, weakening the descriptiveness of technical terms has found to cause a lot of problems and solve none. This had gone to a level way beyond stupid.
And if I were talking about that, you would have a point. But I am not.
Urgh. That sounds about as horrible as I expected. Not good at all. Probably also driven by MDs getting kickbacks...
Well, on high-school level there is also a pedagogic problem with students being able to bypass requirements in this way: It teaches them that they just need the right kind of problem or "victim" status an they can get away with not trying hard. This way we get incomplete and problematic adults.
Indeed. Being able and willing where needed to speak publicly is a huge enabler. That does not mean you have to like it, but the benefits that come with is are sure something most people will like.
You are missing a lot. Role-playing is not useless and focusing on the channel (speaker to audience) not the content is a good exercise for some things. Even presenting meaningless things is a good exercise for some things, for example on how to handle a disinterested audience. Sure, the school-setting is not the full deal. But you have to start somewhere or you will never get to the more advanced settings.
Indeed. Nobody said anything about public speaking all the time. It is a requirement that you can do it competently. If you use that skill rarely that is not an issue. Also, being able to speak before an audience competently has other benefits, for example being able to explain things coherently, like, for example, you would do in an interview.
While I never took any of these, I experimented with caffeine and sugar in the first year or so at University. Even these relatively benign stimulants hurt more than they help.
“Nobody should be forced to do something that makes them uncomfortable,”
Yes indeed. Like taking an exam, learning a subject they are not good at or learning about what happens when they screw up in their job....
If you cannot do things that you feel uncomfortable with, then you are disabled. I am all for supporting genuinely disabled persons, but they (with some exceptions) cannot be engineers or scientists. Sorry about that, the degree is not an award, but a certification of competence.
When you have somebody truly gifted, allowances can be made. This will be 0.1% or less of all cases though and hence is not really relevant to the discussion. For example, I recently had a student with a cognitive disability (and a doctor's note to that effect, verified by the academic institution) that makes him somewhat slower in reading comprehension, but not in actual ability to solve things. He got exactly the same examination, just some additional time and a bit of an extended possibility to ask questions regarding comprehension. But the actual requirement was not reduced one bit.
So I am all for making the public specking part a bit easier if there is a real, medically verified, problem but dropping it is out of the question.
We had that recently for a semester-project as well. 3 students, one contributed nothing to the presentation. When questioned, he was clueless. Fortunately, he admitted he had not actually done anything and was just dropped from the course retroactively.
People caught in something like that and fighting it should be expelled though. It is hugely dishonorable behavior and damages the credibility of the academic field they try to be a part of.