You've never heard of context? AOL doesn't own the trademark on "gaol" (yes, it is a word!) just because it has the letters "aol" in it. It's the same thing with Microsoft Windows..... if they had complete control over the word "Windows" then I'm sure there would be a lot of glass shops and window-hangers out of business. AFAIK, The infringing use of a trademark must be that it will cause confusion or clearly use the trademark in a method similar to that of the trademark owner's use. AOL does have a case if it's just about trademark... but anything else is pure crap.
Yes, if people want your reflected photons they damn well better be prepared to accept ALL of them, artificial or not. Speaking of that, you could theoretically transmit the terms of a license over the laser beam to REMOVE these people's rights to your image. Of course, you cannot do this with actual people, but such is life.
I have seen some of those on the American stations we get here in Canada. Are they funded by the government or are they funded by a public interest group? If they are funded by the government, can you say "nineteen eighty-four"? That would be too double-speak for me.
Only a species on holiday can say 'unapplied education is worth something'. It is not, IMHO.
I agree that strictly unapplied knowledge isn't worth much in a global sense. This doesn't say much about real life though. There are many places one can apply their knowledge. This could be by voting, public debate (sort of like this), or making rational decisions for example. Just getting jobs for students should not be the focus of university. I am not saying that the knowledge should or cannot be applied. I am saying that a university education should be at a different level than this. Getting prepared for life is not the same as getting prepared to work. If a university teaches in a field where there is very little work for their graduates, it is not a failure of the university. Marketable skills change over time and what might have been a very promising career could be worth peanuts tomorrow. Market trends should not dictate human knowledge. We should not abandon seemingly useless subjects so that students can learn what is best for the economic viability of their nation. That is not what being educated is really about.
A job should really be an independant bi-product of a university education, not a result, if it were in the right field. That is why here, in Canada, universities and colleges are treated differently. A university is about higher education and research. College is about preparing people for a career. It would be a failure for a college to not provide skills for a useful job, but not a university.
This would be true if universities succeeded in their purpose.
Well, I think there purpose is exactly what we're trying to find out. We aren't arguing the same thing now. I contend that arts majors getting shitty jobs is irrelevant since they are still educated people... that being the reason they go to university.
Setting exams that are easy to cheat is just one example of failure.
I think that is the symptom of our problem. Universities are overrun by people who go their to get good jobs afterward. Maybe that changes the definition of a university, maybe it doesn't. The conceptual model of a university has existed before the industrial revolution. Long before that, people didn't go to university to get a job afterward. I think this still holds true, even though that model is taking a beating. Now, a higher education is very important because of our competativeness with knowledge. But the fact that people cheat, and they do, shows that those people don't go for the education, but for the peice of paper that comes after. This peice of paper, as they see it, entitles them to a job. If people were going there to be educated, then they wouldn't cheat because there really wouldn't be any reason to. There still are other people that go university to get an education in something interesting. Maybe it's just me being a geek, but that's what it should be.
This really comes down to (excuse the pun) "new-school versus old-school". This problem has been beaten to death many times in many different forms and I don't think that we could every solve it through/. comments.
As for CS being applied math, cooking is not applied math. I think the word "applied" is ambigous, however. Cooking utilizes math in its use, but it is not mathematical in nature. Exactly the same thing in general science. Studying our world through science can utilize math and create mathematical models of real life, eg f=ma. But, computing "science" is something completely different. It is itself a form of mathematics. It is just the subset of mathematics that can be performed on calculating machines. Algorithms, complexity, problem solving etc, is not utilized, it is its nature. The reason it is called applied mathematics is because it is not exaclty pure mathematics. Pure math has no direct application by definition.
Very few people can make a career from Computing Science. I suspect you are a programmer with a CS education, though. The point of a university education, in general, is not to prepare people for jobs. The purpose of it is to educate people, to teach them to think for themselves, and advance the human race. Even though most people that go into university never go onto graduate work / research or make any significant contribution, having informed and intelligent people in the world is a good thing.
Take a look at it this way: if the sole purpose of university was to get you a good job afterward, arts majors would get good jobs too. The truth is that arts majors go to work at McDicks when they graduate. Computing Science is one of those rare fields that most of the theory is directly applicable to creating marketable products. That is not to say that CS isn't actually something that is worth being in a university rather than a college (colleges & universities are different here in Canada). Computing Science has a lot more to it than programming. Too bad you wasted your education.
Yes. I am pretty sure that if a person experiences 100 m/s^2 of acceleration for an extended period of time they will pass out from that. I think this is above the figures I saw on the television program that put regular people in an accelerating device of NASA's or something like that. You don't see people passing out from jump-sitting on a chair too often, so I imagine duration has an important affect on the brain.
I've since graduated HS, but my school was nowhere near as anal about things. For fucks sake, students carry around knives on beltloops in plain sight.. and I carried around a knife as well with a 10cm blade in my backpack. If they didn't want you to bring something to school they would tell you not to bring it; no suspensions were given out for things like that. You could get up in the middle of class and walk out for no reason and the teacher wouldn't even give it a second thought. The administration wouldn't care if you came and went without a doctor's note or such crap. I think maybe a couple of fieldtrips were cancelled for a few weeks after 9/11 because of government policy, not the school's. This is not a school in Nunavut either, it was a suburb of Vancouver. My school had about 1500+ students, so it was about medium sized.
I'm glad that I went to a school like mine, not some overly retarded fear-mongering anti-terrorist frenzy school. The initial attack on 9/11 ignited the fear, the people where what spread it and made it something it wasn't.
"Its like the right of a pc maker to alter windows with custom programs and menus before sending it out on the street on a computer, the windows is licensed, just different."
So it is exactly the same, but completely different? The problem here is that movies are an artform, while an operating system is sold as a functional device. They are not the same, and equating them would be like equating apples and oranges. Making changes to one is unlike making changes to the other and are in no way related.
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: ...
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other means of communication.
Well, on the point about viruses, I certainly think it would be illegal to restrict people from collecting or creating them. The logic contained within in a virus definitely falls under expression / communication points in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Should the possesion of information without the intent to use it illegally (by current standards, that is) be illegal? I say no! This isn't the same thing as preaching "hate speech" (afaik, is illegal in Canada). There is no "balancing of rights" involved. All programs are a form of discrete mathematics, and mathematics is in my books an artform. The freedom and creativity involved in writing a program is infinite and the people who right viruses can be very crafty.
A tool that can be used for evil but at the same time expressing protected speech is drastically two sided and most people don't understand the "other" side. It shoud be illegal to distribute viruses with the intent to cause harm. Making it illegal to knowingly store a virus is fucking nutz.
I sure hope that there is a court challenge soon in Canada (even in the US or the EU would have a great effect here) that finally sets the record straight and establishes programming as a protected form of speech. Too bad politicians are more concerned with enroaching on our rights for the sake of fighting terrorism to actually keep up with the times (instead of fighting things they don't understand).
Maybe except for Gandhi / Mother Theresa or Hitler / Barney the Dinosaur (pure evil!), nothing is ever an absolute. Some days one thing may be a strong shade of gray, the next it will be a light shade of gray. It will never be 0x000000 or 0xffffff.
This brings an idea though. Someone (read "I'm too lazy") should create a karma system for companies! It would be a website that would have people rate companies actions on a day by day basis on important events that occur that involve that specific company and assign an ever changing value correlating to what we consider good or bad.
This would be kinda like a BBB / e-pinions combination. Has someone alread seen/created this before? Just a thought
It is if you think you wont be caught. There are valid reasons to break the law publicly like mounting a case against an unfair law in order to strike it down.
This is not trying to be a troll, but it seems there is always one more "clincher" in the movement away from MS products. IE / Office / Outlook / Photoshop you name it, but now it is Exchange. OSS always makes a replacement, but it is only 98% there in terms of functionality in most cases. As soon as we get Exchange out of the way, there will still be something else left to take its place to prevent adoption.
What I don't understand is why they even came to the US if they were wanted? They must have been very very desperate to need a job that badly to risk so much. They should have guessed that it was too good to be true.
No, there is more to the story. I don't go to UBC, but I live in Vancouver and am going to SFU (another local university) next fall from HS. Anyway, a year or so back UBC didn't meet their quota for selling and Coke was threatening to pull out unless they started to really change the status quo. Well, I am not sure what really happened after that, but they didn't apparently pull out.
It is not paranoia, it is quite rational thinking.
Yes, that is a good question. Though taking out scenes from a movie, and replacing swear words with obviously faked dubs just to put it on tv isn't really considered derivative work. But, what about things like the Phantom Edit? It basically changes the whole movie. Where does it begin and where does it end?
I personally think the artistic integrity of the director (yes, I do consider a small percentage of films today art) is very important whether it is derivative or not. Also, I dislike censorship. I live in Canada, and they show movies unedited with swearing and nudity (for example, The People Versus Larry Flynt (funny movie, but I do not consider it art)). I don't think that any movie should be censored at all. If you want to show something on tv, either show it from beginning to end unedited or show nothing at all. It is quite pathetic to watch channels like TBS (from the US) that have the runtimes reduced by 20 minutes on movies because of cut scenes.
google v. [common] To search the Web using the Google search engine,
`www.google.com'. Google is highly esteemed among hackers for its
significance ranking system, which is so uncannily effective that many
users consider it to have rendered other search engines effectively
irrelevant. The name `google' has additional flavor for hackers because
most know that it was copied from a mathematical term for ten to the
hundredth power, famously first uttered by a mathematician's infant
child.
---------
googol
n : a cardinal number represented as 1 followed by 100 zeros
(ten raised to the power of a hundred)
Slashdot Mirror
You've never heard of context? AOL doesn't own the trademark on "gaol" (yes, it is a word!) just because it has the letters "aol" in it. It's the same thing with Microsoft Windows..... if they had complete control over the word "Windows" then I'm sure there would be a lot of glass shops and window-hangers out of business. AFAIK, The infringing use of a trademark must be that it will cause confusion or clearly use the trademark in a method similar to that of the trademark owner's use. AOL does have a case if it's just about trademark... but anything else is pure crap.
Yes, if people want your reflected photons they damn well better be prepared to accept ALL of them, artificial or not. Speaking of that, you could theoretically transmit the terms of a license over the laser beam to REMOVE these people's rights to your image. Of course, you cannot do this with actual people, but such is life.
I have seen some of those on the American stations we get here in Canada. Are they funded by the government or are they funded by a public interest group? If they are funded by the government, can you say "nineteen eighty-four"? That would be too double-speak for me.
Only a species on holiday can say 'unapplied education is worth something'. It is not, IMHO.
I agree that strictly unapplied knowledge isn't worth much in a global sense. This doesn't say much about real life though. There are many places one can apply their knowledge. This could be by voting, public debate (sort of like this), or making rational decisions for example. Just getting jobs for students should not be the focus of university. I am not saying that the knowledge should or cannot be applied. I am saying that a university education should be at a different level than this. Getting prepared for life is not the same as getting prepared to work. If a university teaches in a field where there is very little work for their graduates, it is not a failure of the university. Marketable skills change over time and what might have been a very promising career could be worth peanuts tomorrow. Market trends should not dictate human knowledge. We should not abandon seemingly useless subjects so that students can learn what is best for the economic viability of their nation. That is not what being educated is really about.
A job should really be an independant bi-product of a university education, not a result, if it were in the right field. That is why here, in Canada, universities and colleges are treated differently. A university is about higher education and research. College is about preparing people for a career. It would be a failure for a college to not provide skills for a useful job, but not a university.
This would be true if universities succeeded in their purpose.
/. comments.
Well, I think there purpose is exactly what we're trying to find out. We aren't arguing the same thing now. I contend that arts majors getting shitty jobs is irrelevant since they are still educated people... that being the reason they go to university.
Setting exams that are easy to cheat is just one example of failure.
I think that is the symptom of our problem. Universities are overrun by people who go their to get good jobs afterward. Maybe that changes the definition of a university, maybe it doesn't. The conceptual model of a university has existed before the industrial revolution. Long before that, people didn't go to university to get a job afterward. I think this still holds true, even though that model is taking a beating. Now, a higher education is very important because of our competativeness with knowledge. But the fact that people cheat, and they do, shows that those people don't go for the education, but for the peice of paper that comes after. This peice of paper, as they see it, entitles them to a job. If people were going there to be educated, then they wouldn't cheat because there really wouldn't be any reason to. There still are other people that go university to get an education in something interesting. Maybe it's just me being a geek, but that's what it should be.
This really comes down to (excuse the pun) "new-school versus old-school". This problem has been beaten to death many times in many different forms and I don't think that we could every solve it through
As for CS being applied math, cooking is not applied math. I think the word "applied" is ambigous, however. Cooking utilizes math in its use, but it is not mathematical in nature. Exactly the same thing in general science. Studying our world through science can utilize math and create mathematical models of real life, eg f=ma. But, computing "science" is something completely different. It is itself a form of mathematics. It is just the subset of mathematics that can be performed on calculating machines. Algorithms, complexity, problem solving etc, is not utilized, it is its nature. The reason it is called applied mathematics is because it is not exaclty pure mathematics. Pure math has no direct application by definition.
Computing Science is applied math.
Very few people can make a career from Computing Science. I suspect you are a programmer with a CS education, though. The point of a university education, in general, is not to prepare people for jobs. The purpose of it is to educate people, to teach them to think for themselves, and advance the human race. Even though most people that go into university never go onto graduate work / research or make any significant contribution, having informed and intelligent people in the world is a good thing.
Take a look at it this way: if the sole purpose of university was to get you a good job afterward, arts majors would get good jobs too. The truth is that arts majors go to work at McDicks when they graduate. Computing Science is one of those rare fields that most of the theory is directly applicable to creating marketable products. That is not to say that CS isn't actually something that is worth being in a university rather than a college (colleges & universities are different here in Canada). Computing Science has a lot more to it than programming. Too bad you wasted your education.
What if Celine's latest album is crap?
That kind of question is a priori.
Statistical error? you mean they didn't count all of the votes?
Or is that just how the numbers are turned into a percentage and interpreted that way?
Yes. I am pretty sure that if a person experiences 100 m/s^2 of acceleration for an extended period of time they will pass out from that. I think this is above the figures I saw on the television program that put regular people in an accelerating device of NASA's or something like that. You don't see people passing out from jump-sitting on a chair too often, so I imagine duration has an important affect on the brain.
Ummmm... Adam West was Batman!
Pow! Zap! Bif!
I'm Canadian as well.
I've since graduated HS, but my school was nowhere near as anal about things. For fucks sake, students carry around knives on beltloops in plain sight.. and I carried around a knife as well with a 10cm blade in my backpack. If they didn't want you to bring something to school they would tell you not to bring it; no suspensions were given out for things like that. You could get up in the middle of class and walk out for no reason and the teacher wouldn't even give it a second thought. The administration wouldn't care if you came and went without a doctor's note or such crap. I think maybe a couple of fieldtrips were cancelled for a few weeks after 9/11 because of government policy, not the school's. This is not a school in Nunavut either, it was a suburb of Vancouver. My school had about 1500+ students, so it was about medium sized.
I'm glad that I went to a school like mine, not some overly retarded fear-mongering anti-terrorist frenzy school. The initial attack on 9/11 ignited the fear, the people where what spread it and made it something it wasn't.
Though I like seeing Canadian issues get a lot of coverage, isn't this a double post
"Its like the right of a pc maker to alter windows with custom programs and menus before sending it out on the street on a computer, the windows is licensed, just different."
So it is exactly the same, but completely different? The problem here is that movies are an artform, while an operating system is sold as a functional device. They are not the same, and equating them would be like equating apples and oranges. Making changes to one is unlike making changes to the other and are in no way related.
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
...
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other means of communication.
Well, on the point about viruses, I certainly think it would be illegal to restrict people from collecting or creating them. The logic contained within in a virus definitely falls under expression / communication points in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Should the possesion of information without the intent to use it illegally (by current standards, that is) be illegal? I say no! This isn't the same thing as preaching "hate speech" (afaik, is illegal in Canada). There is no "balancing of rights" involved. All programs are a form of discrete mathematics, and mathematics is in my books an artform. The freedom and creativity involved in writing a program is infinite and the people who right viruses can be very crafty.
A tool that can be used for evil but at the same time expressing protected speech is drastically two sided and most people don't understand the "other" side. It shoud be illegal to distribute viruses with the intent to cause harm. Making it illegal to knowingly store a virus is fucking nutz.
I sure hope that there is a court challenge soon in Canada (even in the US or the EU would have a great effect here) that finally sets the record straight and establishes programming as a protected form of speech. Too bad politicians are more concerned with enroaching on our rights for the sake of fighting terrorism to actually keep up with the times (instead of fighting things they don't understand).
Maybe except for Gandhi / Mother Theresa or Hitler / Barney the Dinosaur (pure evil!), nothing is ever an absolute. Some days one thing may be a strong shade of gray, the next it will be a light shade of gray. It will never be 0x000000 or 0xffffff.
This brings an idea though. Someone (read "I'm too lazy") should create a karma system for companies! It would be a website that would have people rate companies actions on a day by day basis on important events that occur that involve that specific company and assign an ever changing value correlating to what we consider good or bad.
This would be kinda like a BBB / e-pinions combination. Has someone alread seen/created this before? Just a thought
When can I get a Geordie LaForge Visor so I can tell when people are lying by their body temperature?
This is not trying to be a troll, but it seems there is always one more "clincher" in the movement away from MS products. IE / Office / Outlook / Photoshop you name it, but now it is Exchange. OSS always makes a replacement, but it is only 98% there in terms of functionality in most cases. As soon as we get Exchange out of the way, there will still be something else left to take its place to prevent adoption.
yah, we could use base 36 (digits + 26 letters) and try to get "racecar" out of it.
What I don't understand is why they even came to the US if they were wanted? They must have been very very desperate to need a job that badly to risk so much. They should have guessed that it was too good to be true.
No, there is more to the story. I don't go to UBC, but I live in Vancouver and am going to SFU (another local university) next fall from HS. Anyway, a year or so back UBC didn't meet their quota for selling and Coke was threatening to pull out unless they started to really change the status quo. Well, I am not sure what really happened after that, but they didn't apparently pull out. It is not paranoia, it is quite rational thinking.
Unthaw and thaw are exactly the same word. They both mean "to turn to liquid from solid"
You are forgetting the nicest, most magical four letter acronym of them all: CRTC.
Yes, that is a good question. Though taking out scenes from a movie, and replacing swear words with obviously faked dubs just to put it on tv isn't really considered derivative work. But, what about things like the Phantom Edit? It basically changes the whole movie. Where does it begin and where does it end?
I personally think the artistic integrity of the director (yes, I do consider a small percentage of films today art) is very important whether it is derivative or not. Also, I dislike censorship. I live in Canada, and they show movies unedited with swearing and nudity (for example, The People Versus Larry Flynt (funny movie, but I do not consider it art)). I don't think that any movie should be censored at all. If you want to show something on tv, either show it from beginning to end unedited or show nothing at all. It is quite pathetic to watch channels like TBS (from the US) that have the runtimes reduced by 20 minutes on movies because of cut scenes.
google v. [common] To search the Web using the Google search engine,
`www.google.com'. Google is highly esteemed among hackers for its
significance ranking system, which is so uncannily effective that many
users consider it to have rendered other search engines effectively
irrelevant. The name `google' has additional flavor for hackers because
most know that it was copied from a mathematical term for ten to the
hundredth power, famously first uttered by a mathematician's infant
child.
---------
googol
n : a cardinal number represented as 1 followed by 100 zeros
(ten raised to the power of a hundred)
There is a HUGE difference between the two.