Actually, I would put the fault on the complainer here....
Yeah, it sucks when languages and APIs change, but it happens and if one is going to be upgrading one should take such things as a given. This is why, when you have an environment where consistency is important, language and library upgrades are big deals that are scheduled with time allocated them.. otherwise freeze your versions unless there is a compelling reason with significant measurable benefit to upgrading... crow, I still keep VMs around in case I need to go back and work with earlier checkouts with known dependencies/versions.
I am guessing you have never tried to get Flash working on an embedded platform....
Flash wasn't work going after in OSX because OSX is a desktop/laptop OS with gobs of memory, swap, and CPU. Running the flash VM in a restricted environment, even with Adobe 'helping', is a nightmare and generally results in poor user experience.. which the user then blames the manufacturer for since 'the website runs fine on my desktop'
No conspiracy theories needed here.. Flash was just a bad idea to support that, when other attempts have been made, results in more pissed off customers if you do support it then if you remove it completely.
Well, 'better' is relative. The question is often 'is it better enough to justify the decreased portability and increased cost of supporting multiple platforms?' Sometimes the answer is yes, sometimes the answer is no.. sounds like the answered wrong in this case.
Has appeal in theory (and sometimes practice); looking great on paper, but it is easy to get swept up in enthusiasm for the concept and not really think though how applicable it is to any given environment.... and even when it does work it is pretty rare for something to truly 'work anywhere' in the real world.
It is a question we will have to work through at some point. At this stage, AI is more a question of economics then fundamental technology. We have successfully built systems that are as autonomous and self learning as lower order animals.. yes they are still initial programmed, but children are initially grown and given an initial neural layout, so it is not quite as simple as 'someone built it'. At some point both cases start off essentially blank and have complexity/structure added to them, one via an electronic process and one via a chemical one, both following data templates.
However I agree we need to deal with legal questions about how the world is tonight, not what might be developed tomorrow. While there is some utility in being proactive rather then reactive, this is something best handled at some later date. If nothing else, you can't have responsibility without self ownership, and right now there are no computers that can own themselves, so at the end some human (or group of humans) is going to be legally responsible for them. Well, I guess you can since slaves could be punished for their actions...
More importantly, a computer can not suffer legal consequences. This is what bothers me about framing this in terms of the computer's right to free speech. At the end of the day, the consequences will be applied to people (either as a legal entity like a corporation or as individuals) thus what really matters is does it infringe their 1st amendment rights... so the real question is, how responsible are the designers/backers/underwriters for speech generated by non-human things that they develop.
The thing is, this is the problem with subtle sexism. One doesn't need to encourage/discourage or even explicitly go over it, but parent's attitudes/assumptions about gender get picked up by kids when they are developing their own roles. The scenario you describe is a pretty common one.. parent is encouraging of their kids but has the 'men and women are different' attitude and magically their children's choices end up matching up with that.
The bulk of the cases where I have seen kids break out of those roles, it was the parent's attitude of 'men and women are essentially the same' that seemed to play a role, the kids picked up on the idea that their role was not assumed or natural and ended up doing things outside the construct.
This is what makes women in STEM such an insidious problem. Industry and Education arguing back and forth is pointless since both are already too late in the process... it is also what makes it so contentious since many of the people that prime the pump (as it were) honestly mean well and are trying to do right by their kids, so they (rightfully) do not like the implication that they are somehow forcing their kids into roles they would not naturally take, which is often how it is (wrongly) presented when people argue about it.
There is a large range of other governments out there that 'counter' us. The UK, EU, and NATO are all common examples of foreign power blocks that have at one time or another acted as a counter to unilateral US behavior. Historically even Russia had utility in this regard since they could provide consequences for US actions, though they have started to fill that role again.
As for clueless.. it is called actual history of foreign relations and is part of many state modeling systems used by both our government and others. So if you want to call the CIA clueless... *shrug*
Hobbyists are more then enough to justify it. If they get a kick out ouf playing with AmigaOS then good for them. Some people play games, some people read, some people waterski, and some people enjoy playing with old tech. Not sure why people get so butthurt over what other people do with their free time.
Well, partly people single out the US because it is so powerful. When weaker nations do stuff the impact is limited, when the US does something it can be kinda scary because no one can really stop them... and that makes everyone a bit nervous.
This includes people in the US. While there has been a lot of rhetoric about not needing a 'balance of power' in the world, in the end, such balance ends up being good for citizens. In a way, as citizens, out greatest ally is people on the outside who counter our government because we generally do not have the leverage to do so.
Though I agree, there is a serious disconnect between the reality of what every country does and the cleaned up mythology that people tend to view government actions through, so when stories like this come up people are shocked because political speeches and press reports rarely give a good idea of what actual international politics is like. This is bad all around.
Eh, I see it now and then. Some Mac users can be pretty obnoxious, though often it is part of a back and forth where both sides claim the are 'just responding in kind' to the other side. The problem with the arguments is they start with the fanboys insulting each other, but they tend to speak in universals so they quickly draw in other people who take exception to being stereotyped.
Ah, back when there was consumer choice... but apparently free markets where people have choice and thus can effect company behavior by taking their business elsewhere are now considered communism.
More likely smartphones and tablets filled much (but not all) of the consumer demand that netbooks were intended to address, so the market for them shrunk rapidly. It is also possible manufacturers were overly enthusiastic and flooded a market that didn't have the capacity for them in the first place.
If it was simply 'we stopped making them because laptops are more profitable and netbooks were doing too well' then whichever manufacturer continued to supply netbooks would have made a killing. Companies stop making things when there isn't enough demand to justify the cost (though, of course, marketing miscalculations and group-think can scramble things).
It shows group affiliation, which means people who agree with the original poster will be more likely to see the summary favorably and comment.
Nothing says 'I am part of the group' then demonstrating 'see, I hate the same things all the other cool kids hate! Lets go push some nerds in the mud!'
Yeah, looking at the guy's interview he really comes across as not being all that in-touch with the internet. He might know the letter of the law but he is really out of his depth putting any of it into context and seems to lack even basic mechanical knowledge of what he is dealing with.
Which kinda makes sense, from what I gather he usually represents 'businessmen' who are trying to get IP, so outsiders trying to push their way in to a community that is rubbed the wrong way by them... I doubt he has actually done any cases between knowledgeable parties.
Thing is.. this is the internet. Constructive criticism exists of course, but one does not have to look far to see just how much uninformed bile there is, esp if you happen to randomly be noticed and swept away. So this is kinda a variation of the 'if you are innocent you have nothing to hide', even a professional who is doing a good job but isn't accustomed to being in a PR heavy field can panic if they find out their performance is being broadcast to the world.
Not saying banning the girl's camera was a good move or that something productive could not come from scrutiny, just saying I could see why they would be worried even if they had done nothing wrong/bad/poor.
Yeah, but often the wrong people get in trouble. As the saying goes, praise travels up, blame travels down. I could see cooks (or their immediate superiors) getting public ire for things that are not really under their control.
It was probably less about the actual content being shared, and more about the lack of editorial control they had over it. For better or worse, knowing everything you do is going to be posted for the public to see has a bit of a 'looking over your shoulder' effect on people since you never know what might go wrong, what could be taken out of context, or what could haunt you if people are unsympathetic to the tradeoffs involved in whatever it is you do.
The US has an extradition treaty with the UK too, so I wonder why they are taking such an indirect route.
My best guess is that they feel they will have an easier time getting Sweeden to extradite him on hazier charges (since the DoJ has yet to find anything to actually charge him with) and the UK is a bit more obsessed with proper use of law (a rather old and neurotic British trait).
If I understand the case correctly, the issue was that the extradition was handled improperly and requested by someone who might not have the authority to do so. Sometimes the US and people bowing to US pressure get sloopy and forget to handle things above the board since they often assume their legal actions will simply be rubber stamped by foreign judges, which is not always the case.
Setting aside his innocence or guilt, US allies often go along with unofficial requests from the US to deal with people unless there is a domestic reason not to (such as countries that do not allow the death penalty making a ruckus about extradition, or Polanski's popularity).
In this case Assange is pretty hated by both governments and corporations around the world, so other governments are not exactly interested in fighting US pressure on the issue.
Given how many colleges are constantly strapped for cash and we don't exactly have people getting super wealthy being educators, I doubt this is a case of 'charge as much as you can'. The cost of running schools has increased significantly, all those extra students, all that extra capacity.. it isn't like a manufacturing plant where you just add another building or assembly line.
It is not a 'sacred ox', but it is part of the same mythology that has been bashing and devaluing education for decades in this country.. pulling otherwise reasonable people in to a larger culture war that wants to see 'liberal hotbeds' weakened, since education has been very bad for certain groups.
If it does well I imagine they will port it to multiple systems. For their first foray into console gaming through it makes sense to limit it to a single platform.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I would put the fault on the complainer here....
Yeah, it sucks when languages and APIs change, but it happens and if one is going to be upgrading one should take such things as a given. This is why, when you have an environment where consistency is important, language and library upgrades are big deals that are scheduled with time allocated them.. otherwise freeze your versions unless there is a compelling reason with significant measurable benefit to upgrading... crow, I still keep VMs around in case I need to go back and work with earlier checkouts with known dependencies/versions.
I am guessing you have never tried to get Flash working on an embedded platform....
Flash wasn't work going after in OSX because OSX is a desktop/laptop OS with gobs of memory, swap, and CPU. Running the flash VM in a restricted environment, even with Adobe 'helping', is a nightmare and generally results in poor user experience.. which the user then blames the manufacturer for since 'the website runs fine on my desktop'
No conspiracy theories needed here.. Flash was just a bad idea to support that, when other attempts have been made, results in more pissed off customers if you do support it then if you remove it completely.
Well, 'better' is relative. The question is often 'is it better enough to justify the decreased portability and increased cost of supporting multiple platforms?' Sometimes the answer is yes, sometimes the answer is no.. sounds like the answered wrong in this case.
Has appeal in theory (and sometimes practice); looking great on paper, but it is easy to get swept up in enthusiasm for the concept and not really think though how applicable it is to any given environment.... and even when it does work it is pretty rare for something to truly 'work anywhere' in the real world.
It is a question we will have to work through at some point. At this stage, AI is more a question of economics then fundamental technology. We have successfully built systems that are as autonomous and self learning as lower order animals.. yes they are still initial programmed, but children are initially grown and given an initial neural layout, so it is not quite as simple as 'someone built it'. At some point both cases start off essentially blank and have complexity/structure added to them, one via an electronic process and one via a chemical one, both following data templates.
However I agree we need to deal with legal questions about how the world is tonight, not what might be developed tomorrow. While there is some utility in being proactive rather then reactive, this is something best handled at some later date. If nothing else, you can't have responsibility without self ownership, and right now there are no computers that can own themselves, so at the end some human (or group of humans) is going to be legally responsible for them. Well, I guess you can since slaves could be punished for their actions...
More importantly, a computer can not suffer legal consequences. This is what bothers me about framing this in terms of the computer's right to free speech. At the end of the day, the consequences will be applied to people (either as a legal entity like a corporation or as individuals) thus what really matters is does it infringe their 1st amendment rights... so the real question is, how responsible are the designers/backers/underwriters for speech generated by non-human things that they develop.
The thing is, this is the problem with subtle sexism. One doesn't need to encourage/discourage or even explicitly go over it, but parent's attitudes/assumptions about gender get picked up by kids when they are developing their own roles. The scenario you describe is a pretty common one.. parent is encouraging of their kids but has the 'men and women are different' attitude and magically their children's choices end up matching up with that.
The bulk of the cases where I have seen kids break out of those roles, it was the parent's attitude of 'men and women are essentially the same' that seemed to play a role, the kids picked up on the idea that their role was not assumed or natural and ended up doing things outside the construct.
This is what makes women in STEM such an insidious problem. Industry and Education arguing back and forth is pointless since both are already too late in the process... it is also what makes it so contentious since many of the people that prime the pump (as it were) honestly mean well and are trying to do right by their kids, so they (rightfully) do not like the implication that they are somehow forcing their kids into roles they would not naturally take, which is often how it is (wrongly) presented when people argue about it.
So essentially what we have is yet another rehash of 'how much moderation is appropriate' with two (relatively) extreme examples?
*yawn* wake me up when we go through this again next time, I think I will sit this round out.
You are not looking in the right place. Try the mirror.
There is a large range of other governments out there that 'counter' us. The UK, EU, and NATO are all common examples of foreign power blocks that have at one time or another acted as a counter to unilateral US behavior. Historically even Russia had utility in this regard since they could provide consequences for US actions, though they have started to fill that role again.
As for clueless.. it is called actual history of foreign relations and is part of many state modeling systems used by both our government and others. So if you want to call the CIA clueless... *shrug*
Hobbyists are more then enough to justify it. If they get a kick out ouf playing with AmigaOS then good for them. Some people play games, some people read, some people waterski, and some people enjoy playing with old tech. Not sure why people get so butthurt over what other people do with their free time.
Well, partly people single out the US because it is so powerful. When weaker nations do stuff the impact is limited, when the US does something it can be kinda scary because no one can really stop them... and that makes everyone a bit nervous.
This includes people in the US. While there has been a lot of rhetoric about not needing a 'balance of power' in the world, in the end, such balance ends up being good for citizens. In a way, as citizens, out greatest ally is people on the outside who counter our government because we generally do not have the leverage to do so.
Though I agree, there is a serious disconnect between the reality of what every country does and the cleaned up mythology that people tend to view government actions through, so when stories like this come up people are shocked because political speeches and press reports rarely give a good idea of what actual international politics is like. This is bad all around.
Eh, I see it now and then. Some Mac users can be pretty obnoxious, though often it is part of a back and forth where both sides claim the are 'just responding in kind' to the other side. The problem with the arguments is they start with the fanboys insulting each other, but they tend to speak in universals so they quickly draw in other people who take exception to being stereotyped.
Ah, back when there was consumer choice... but apparently free markets where people have choice and thus can effect company behavior by taking their business elsewhere are now considered communism.
More likely smartphones and tablets filled much (but not all) of the consumer demand that netbooks were intended to address, so the market for them shrunk rapidly. It is also possible manufacturers were overly enthusiastic and flooded a market that didn't have the capacity for them in the first place.
If it was simply 'we stopped making them because laptops are more profitable and netbooks were doing too well' then whichever manufacturer continued to supply netbooks would have made a killing. Companies stop making things when there isn't enough demand to justify the cost (though, of course, marketing miscalculations and group-think can scramble things).
It shows group affiliation, which means people who agree with the original poster will be more likely to see the summary favorably and comment.
Nothing says 'I am part of the group' then demonstrating 'see, I hate the same things all the other cool kids hate! Lets go push some nerds in the mud!'
Yeah, looking at the guy's interview he really comes across as not being all that in-touch with the internet. He might know the letter of the law but he is really out of his depth putting any of it into context and seems to lack even basic mechanical knowledge of what he is dealing with.
Which kinda makes sense, from what I gather he usually represents 'businessmen' who are trying to get IP, so outsiders trying to push their way in to a community that is rubbed the wrong way by them... I doubt he has actually done any cases between knowledgeable parties.
Thing is.. this is the internet. Constructive criticism exists of course, but one does not have to look far to see just how much uninformed bile there is, esp if you happen to randomly be noticed and swept away. So this is kinda a variation of the 'if you are innocent you have nothing to hide', even a professional who is doing a good job but isn't accustomed to being in a PR heavy field can panic if they find out their performance is being broadcast to the world.
Not saying banning the girl's camera was a good move or that something productive could not come from scrutiny, just saying I could see why they would be worried even if they had done nothing wrong/bad/poor.
Yeah, but often the wrong people get in trouble. As the saying goes, praise travels up, blame travels down. I could see cooks (or their immediate superiors) getting public ire for things that are not really under their control.
It was probably less about the actual content being shared, and more about the lack of editorial control they had over it. For better or worse, knowing everything you do is going to be posted for the public to see has a bit of a 'looking over your shoulder' effect on people since you never know what might go wrong, what could be taken out of context, or what could haunt you if people are unsympathetic to the tradeoffs involved in whatever it is you do.
The US has an extradition treaty with the UK too, so I wonder why they are taking such an indirect route.
My best guess is that they feel they will have an easier time getting Sweeden to extradite him on hazier charges (since the DoJ has yet to find anything to actually charge him with) and the UK is a bit more obsessed with proper use of law (a rather old and neurotic British trait).
If I understand the case correctly, the issue was that the extradition was handled improperly and requested by someone who might not have the authority to do so. Sometimes the US and people bowing to US pressure get sloopy and forget to handle things above the board since they often assume their legal actions will simply be rubber stamped by foreign judges, which is not always the case.
Control no, influence yes.
Setting aside his innocence or guilt, US allies often go along with unofficial requests from the US to deal with people unless there is a domestic reason not to (such as countries that do not allow the death penalty making a ruckus about extradition, or Polanski's popularity).
In this case Assange is pretty hated by both governments and corporations around the world, so other governments are not exactly interested in fighting US pressure on the issue.
Given how many colleges are constantly strapped for cash and we don't exactly have people getting super wealthy being educators, I doubt this is a case of 'charge as much as you can'. The cost of running schools has increased significantly, all those extra students, all that extra capacity.. it isn't like a manufacturing plant where you just add another building or assembly line.
It is not a 'sacred ox', but it is part of the same mythology that has been bashing and devaluing education for decades in this country.. pulling otherwise reasonable people in to a larger culture war that wants to see 'liberal hotbeds' weakened, since education has been very bad for certain groups.
If it does well I imagine they will port it to multiple systems. For their first foray into console gaming through it makes sense to limit it to a single platform.