Re:yea, this is clear, but what about....
on
Plagiarism Inc.
·
· Score: 1
That -is- the theory, now isn't it? But in practice...?
yea, this is clear, but what about....
on
Plagiarism Inc.
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
ok, so this is unethical,
but lets look at this with more grainularity:
at what point have I reached unethical in the following situations
1. I hire a typist to type my thesis (this is before computers)
2. I hire a graphic artist to draw my figures
3. I hire a presentation firm to do my powerpoint slides (beamer for me please)
4. I 'hire' (read: give the honor of doing my research) master's students to run my experiments / write code.
5. I 'hire' (read: give the honor of doing my research) phd students to draw conclusions on those experiments
Is the difference between buying an essay and being a research professor that thin? jeesh
This applies to VLSI cad as well, you need wide screens and lots of resolution - of course you could get by with a 320x200 display - zooming in and out, but your productivity and quailty would suffer.
Tufte talks about this:
It is reasonable to suggest that there are other issues in presenting evidence than high resolution. Any other view would be astonishing.
But the overwhelming truth is that much of the history of progress in science and in communication can be written in terms of improvements in resolution. That is the big idea here, and it should not be compromised away by shortrun situational considerations.
-- Edward Tufte, July 29, 2001
Humans can't just stare at blue sky and unmoving gauges for hours on end - we're not wired for it. Simply threatening to fire people doesn't work. You need to give their brains something to do.
we've been doing this for years... no big deal... my jet had beds in the crew area... certain organizations don't mind you napping at all.
yea, they give us stuff to do: position reports, equal time point monitoring, divert field status, fuel plan validation, winds PIREPs (pilot reports), and if you have it, you dial up the HF radio and try to listen to canadian/european stations.
not as easy as it may seem, for instance
I flew across the atlantic and halfway there I had the shut down one my engines.... yea... definitely not bored then.
1) no, those guys overflew hawaii cause they were lousy pilots.
2) big planes (I got thousands of hours in them) absolutely have to use autopilot, and it is required when crossing the "pond" on the north atlantic tracks.
3) auto pilot makes air refueling easier on the reciever (he is stuck with manal however)
Autoland came about in the 60's, (along with auto-flare and auto-throttles, i believe) - the 747 had auto brakes and spoilers upon WOW (weight on wheels) - I am pretty sure no one taxis on autopilot, maybe the global hawk. The next step is Cat III C ils. I am pretty sure there are systems that simply takeoff as well - I know certain autothrottle systems are made to operate before takeoff roll
Well, I agree, why not have three legs, or one leg and really good balance, or legs with spheres as the feet, or well - I can think of many many variants, but if I wanted something that could get across almost any terrain, it would have four legs for sure (or the ability to hover) instead of just focusing on making a humanoid.
j
As a student of war, I cannot agree more: even as a participant of these recent hostilities, I recognize, and have been taught, that the purpose of war IS NOT revenge (or retaliation). War occurs in many forms, but the one's involving "killing people and breaking things" tend to get folks all (rightfully so) upset.
War is a way to get somebody (a leader/and its people) to do something they refuse to do otherwise.
ps: let's please stop getting all sniffy about war hurting civilians, it hurts pretty much everybody.
I totally agree, let me quote myself:
'There are way more important things in life than, well, "things". '
ideas, theories, science, politics are all worthwhile (among many others), although it is presumptive of me to decide for anyone else what is important. I will step out on the limb and say that, unless you are a museum curator, art dealer, or collector of rare, storied, artifacts, "things" are a bit less meaningful to devote your life to.
having said that, has anyone seen my stapler?
-sent from my cray-
I actually took the time to read the final fbi report This guy was mentally unstable well before the attacks, he was obsessed with some sorrority, with female co-workers, and was quite openly discussing his mental illness with co-workers. (why he was still in charge of antrax - astonishes me)
The most interesting part is the new science that came out of the investigation (some kind of new dna sequencing method)
either way, this guy was nuts before the fbi got involved (imho)
The first sign of trouble is when you said/thought, at least I am not as bad as X. oh goodness. The second sign: an intervention by way of watching a tv show devoted to your disease. Take it from a former hoarder: just throw everything away (donate, trash, etc). There are way more important things in life than, well, "things". Once you start spending as much time, energy, and care for the people in and around your life, I doubt you will ever hoard again.
clausevitz, jomini, study them. To even ask the question of explaining morality in war suggests you might have thought there should be morality in war. I am sorry you got that impression. A short essay on my thoughts and others: War is an extension of politics - clausevitz. In the quest to get some power/people/entity to stop doing something (invading, destabilizing, living in some land you want) you must find a way (a policy) that convinces them (harasses them) such that continued pursuit of the policy you abhor (invading, destabilizing, living in some land you want) is NOT in their best interests. Since kings/presidents/governments tend to listen to their people _before_ they listen to some other king/president/government - your task as a war strategist: convince the king/president/government to stop the behavior you abhor (invading, destabilizing, living in some land you want) by causing chaos and fear amongst his population (the people who pay for the invading, destabilizing, living in some land you want activities). This could be peaceful (voice of america), cruel (trade emabargoes, sanctions), or violent (killing them / breaking their stuff until they see your way)
Jomeni advocated bombing the city centers (al queda have you been studying jomeni?) to cause chaos. This method of warfare dominated US strategy during WW2 (nagasaki, hiroshima, fire bombings: germany, japan) and briefly during linebacker 2 of the vietnam war. This is also the method of warfare of "terrorists" since beirut. Using largely ineffective, but spectactular effects to scare people. (cars/heart attacks/cancer kill way many more people than terrorists)
Recent glamorization of war (going back as far as the chivalry movement of the knights to cut down on the sheer barbarism of war) since WW2 has led to this thought of "civilians" - people who have nothing to do with war - and thus don't deserve to be targeted: it is merely a myth to calm the palettes of doves to convince them that war isn't really all that bad. Which of course is not true.
Once we stop the idea of "civilian" - I think people will realize that we all are responsible for the people we put in office, and it is our responsibility to stop them from expressing anything other than our intent when it comes to war. we are all in this fight, whether it be school teachers educating the next marines, or even the grocery store, our taxes fund the war machine and are a collective message to the rest of the world on our approval of the current war we are in.
in short: war was never meant to be moral - it is simply getting a country to do something they do not want to do, by means of strategic maneuvering (bombs, trade, money, isolation, invasion, eradication)
Why isn't JAVA (or some JAVA-like byte code embedded language) being used to address this- wasn't that the point of JAVA? I am not a CS guy, so maybe somebody can clue me in.
its actually worse than that, the US could arbitrarily, in the event of a national emergency, turn OFF gps. And thus before 9/11, the EU wasn't worried about that scenario, after 9/11, they saw that we could and might turn off the GPS system if/when we needed to. -that could wreak havoc in a lot of places...
well, there actually has been a mid air collision of two planes off the coast of africa, a C-141 and another cargo plane , the accuracies of the flight control systems put them on exact paths and... well, the big sky theory was proven wrong once again... there are fundamental flaws in the current design of the airspace system, and the fact that we use walkie talkies to communicate in this digital age is rediciulous... I know there are some messaging systems out there (I have used them)... but in general.. we use 1950's tech to do our most critical communication (tower/approach, etc) - I don't even wanna think of the other safety concerns such an old system has such as hacking, or jamming of those comm systems during a critical phase of flight.
a similar incident happened over hawaii as well: <URL:http://blogs.abcnews.com/rapidreport/2008/02/sleeping-pilots.html>
TCAS: Traffic Collision and Avoidance System each plane has an active TACAN and they peer -to- peer negotiate away from each other..... been available for a while now... when coupled to an autopilot it even lets you sleep through your daily commute up the Hudson... ok not really...
John 3000+ hours Commercial Multi Engine Instructor Pilot
Ok, don't get confused, here is a summary: there are autonomous uav's (they have the intelligence to takeoff land, fly a mission ( waypoints, altitudes, orbit, drop bombs, return ), then there are standard UAV's: controlled totally by a human remotely. A third class of a uav - in development: an autonomous UAV that would - in theory - start to make decisions about its mission profile: pick targets, decide when to take off, respond to ground troop requests, etc.
there is no real technical difficulty in landing or takeoff - planes have had auto-land ability for decades- the problem is that the UAV: 1) doesn't have a 3d stereoscopic visual collision avoidance system like humans do 2) doesn't have a voice recognition system to hear other humans verbal avoidance commands: doesn't understand "dude! look out!" and 3) doesn't have the AI to deal with all the weird things that come up in flying big / small aircraft. (deciphering weather forecasts, deciding whether a target is legal/ethical, balancing mission profile with needs of ground troops, when to sacrifice itself to save others, etc , how to limp back to base under system failure (gracefully degrade), picking out an emergency landing field, etc etc
Billie Jean (1983) This is the video that changed history - the first video by a black artist to be aired on MTV. When the network refused to play the video the president of Jackson's record label threatened to go public with their stance on black musicians. MTV caved and Billie Jean was added to heavy rotation.
Due to the anti-ghosting features (or maybe multipath rejection) the current standard is unusable in a car/fast moving vehicle. There is an update to the standard to aleviate this oversight, but for now, all of those RV drivers/van drivers, and boaters who used broadcast TV will be SOL.
I think to date there are no (or very very few) ATSC capable portable tv's... hopefully someone corrects me, but that spells bad news for folks in hurricane prone areas who could lose power for weeks at a time....
the aim-120 is the best dog fighter out there.... ok, in fairness, there are many missiles (fire and forget class) that are nearly in-defendable, air OR surface launched dog fighting uav's have been around FOREVER (relatively)...
we in the Air Force are less concerned about Migs and more concerned about the missile threat.
control systems != AI ok, that could be a debate, but in general, the global hawk has a fancy autopilot that can of course: cruise, fly to waypoints and land (like any other somewhat sophisticated airplane from the 70's on) - but it can also takeoff, and I think has limited taxi abilities. You give this guy a flight plan (taxi/takeoff, waypoint, mission profile, and approach and landing location) and voila! an "autonomous" airplane.
what it can't do: see and avoid (google it) that would require some nice ai, or human supervision. (the latter is employed right now)
it also has trouble choosing targets and playing chess.... that's another story
It is illegal to conduct official business on other-than-official comm devices in the federal govt (without permission / best interests, etc)... not sure about alaska...
remember all of those laptops getting lost with SSN's and people bringing sensitive (Privacy Act of 1974) - style information home from work... So if I brought some work home with me and put it on my own mac, I would be breaking the law... I have actually had a administrator at work, about a year ago, lecture us about this (using gmail/yahoo/etc), it is expressly forbidden on the federal level. Those email sites are often blocked by many govt firewall's.
So by using yahoo SHE may have broken the law. interesting....
>Much like the difference between AC and DC current in copper (AC is significantly more > effective because it essentially vibrates electrons back and forth rather then sending them > all the way along the conductive medium from source to target)
Simply not true.... go take a circuits 2 class at an accredited engineering college at a good university.... or reference a good text/website on it. Not your fault, you have simply been misled. sites: http://www.physclips.unsw.edu.au/jw/AC.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternating_current
(use caution on the physics websites, they think current flows in the opposite direction that us ElecEngs believe>
Slashdot Mirror
That -is- the theory, now isn't it? But in practice...?
ok, so this is unethical,
but lets look at this with more grainularity:
at what point have I reached unethical in the following situations
1. I hire a typist to type my thesis (this is before computers)
2. I hire a graphic artist to draw my figures
3. I hire a presentation firm to do my powerpoint slides (beamer for me please)
4. I 'hire' (read: give the honor of doing my research) master's students to run my experiments / write code.
5. I 'hire' (read: give the honor of doing my research) phd students to draw conclusions on those experiments
Is the difference between buying an essay and being a research professor that thin? jeesh
Tufte talks about this:
It is reasonable to suggest that there are other issues in presenting evidence than high resolution. Any other view would be astonishing. But the overwhelming truth is that much of the history of progress in science and in communication can be written in terms of improvements in resolution. That is the big idea here, and it should not be compromised away by shortrun situational considerations. -- Edward Tufte, July 29, 2001
see: http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/index
Humans can't just stare at blue sky and unmoving gauges for hours on end - we're not wired for it. Simply threatening to fire people doesn't work. You need to give their brains something to do.
we've been doing this for years... no big deal... my jet had beds in the crew area... certain organizations don't mind you napping at all.
yea, they give us stuff to do: position reports, equal time point monitoring, divert field status, fuel plan validation, winds PIREPs (pilot reports), and if you have it, you dial up the HF radio and try to listen to canadian/european stations. ... definitely not bored then.
not as easy as it may seem, for instance
I flew across the atlantic and halfway there I had the shut down one my engines.... yea
1) no, those guys overflew hawaii cause they were lousy pilots.
2) big planes (I got thousands of hours in them) absolutely have to use autopilot, and it is required when crossing the "pond" on the north atlantic tracks.
3) auto pilot makes air refueling easier on the reciever (he is stuck with manal however)
Autoland came about in the 60's, (along with auto-flare and auto-throttles, i believe) - the 747 had auto brakes and spoilers upon WOW (weight on wheels) - I am pretty sure no one taxis on autopilot, maybe the global hawk. The next step is Cat III C ils.
I am pretty sure there are systems that simply takeoff as well - I know certain autothrottle systems are made to operate before takeoff roll
Well, I agree, why not have three legs, or one leg and really good balance, or legs with spheres as the feet, or well - I can think of many many variants, but if I wanted something that could get across almost any terrain, it would have four legs for sure (or the ability to hover) instead of just focusing on making a humanoid. j
As a student of war, I cannot agree more: even as a participant of these recent hostilities, I recognize, and have been taught, that the purpose of war IS NOT revenge (or retaliation). War occurs in many forms, but the one's involving "killing people and breaking things" tend to get folks all (rightfully so) upset.
War is a way to get somebody (a leader/and its people) to do something they refuse to do otherwise.
ps: let's please stop getting all sniffy about war hurting civilians, it hurts pretty much everybody.
I totally agree, let me quote myself:
'There are way more important things in life than, well, "things". '
ideas, theories, science, politics are all worthwhile (among many others), although it is presumptive of me to decide for anyone else what is important.
I will step out on the limb and say that, unless you are a museum curator, art dealer, or collector of rare, storied, artifacts, "things" are a bit less meaningful to devote your life to. having said that, has anyone seen my stapler? -sent from my cray-
I actually took the time to read the final fbi report This guy was mentally unstable well before the attacks, he was obsessed with some sorrority, with female co-workers, and was quite openly discussing his mental illness with co-workers. (why he was still in charge of antrax - astonishes me) The most interesting part is the new science that came out of the investigation (some kind of new dna sequencing method) either way, this guy was nuts before the fbi got involved (imho)
The first sign of trouble is when you said/thought, at least I am not as bad as X. oh goodness.
The second sign: an intervention by way of watching a tv show devoted to your disease.
Take it from a former hoarder: just throw everything away (donate, trash, etc). There are way
more important things in life than, well, "things". Once you start spending as much time, energy,
and care for the people in and around your life, I doubt you will ever hoard again.
-sent from my cray-
where is the outcry against "cowardly" IED's and homicide-bombers?
read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fog_of_war . it will enlighten you.
also: there are civilians, and there are noncombatants... there is a difference.
unless you have been to war, you really know nothing about it.
cheers
J
clausevitz, jomini, study them. To even ask the question of explaining morality in war suggests you might have thought there should be morality in war. I am sorry you got that impression. A short essay on my thoughts and others:
War is an extension of politics - clausevitz. In the quest to get some power/people/entity to stop doing something (invading, destabilizing, living in some land you want) you must find a way (a policy) that convinces them (harasses them) such that continued pursuit of the policy you abhor (invading, destabilizing, living in some land you want) is NOT in their best interests. Since kings/presidents/governments tend to listen to their people _before_ they listen to some other king/president/government - your task as a war strategist: convince the king/president/government to stop the behavior you abhor (invading, destabilizing, living in some land you want) by causing chaos and fear amongst his population (the people who pay for the invading, destabilizing, living in some land you want activities). This could be peaceful (voice of america), cruel (trade emabargoes, sanctions), or violent (killing them / breaking their stuff until they see your way)
Jomeni advocated bombing the city centers (al queda have you been studying jomeni?) to cause chaos.
This method of warfare dominated US strategy during WW2 (nagasaki, hiroshima, fire bombings: germany, japan) and briefly during linebacker 2 of the vietnam war.
This is also the method of warfare of "terrorists" since beirut. Using largely ineffective, but spectactular effects to scare people. (cars/heart attacks/cancer kill way many more people than terrorists)
Recent glamorization of war (going back as far as the chivalry movement of the knights to cut down on the sheer barbarism of war) since WW2 has led to this thought of "civilians" - people who have nothing to do with war - and thus don't deserve to be targeted: it is merely a myth to calm the palettes of doves to convince them that war isn't really all that bad. Which of course is not true.
Once we stop the idea of "civilian" - I think people will realize that we all are responsible for the people we put in office, and it is our responsibility to stop them from expressing anything other than our intent when it comes to war. we are all in this fight, whether it be school teachers educating the next marines, or even the grocery store, our taxes fund the war machine and are a collective message to the rest of the world on our approval of the current war we are in.
in short: war was never meant to be moral - it is simply getting a country to do something they do not want to do, by means of strategic maneuvering (bombs, trade, money, isolation, invasion, eradication)
Why isn't JAVA (or some JAVA-like byte code embedded language) being used to address this- wasn't that the point of JAVA? I am not a CS guy, so maybe somebody can clue me in.
JP
its actually worse than that, the US could arbitrarily, in the event of a national emergency, turn OFF gps. And thus before 9/11, the EU wasn't worried about that scenario, after 9/11, they saw that we could and might turn off the GPS system if/when we needed to. -that could wreak havoc in a lot of places...
J
well, there actually has been a mid air collision of two planes off the coast of africa, a C-141 and another cargo plane , the accuracies of the flight control systems put them on exact paths and... well, the big sky theory was proven wrong once again... there are fundamental flaws in the current design of the airspace system, and the fact that we use walkie talkies to communicate in this digital age is rediciulous... I know there are some messaging systems out there (I have used them)... but in general.. we use 1950's tech to do our most critical communication (tower/approach, etc) - I don't even wanna think of the other safety concerns such an old system has such as hacking, or jamming of those comm systems during a critical phase of flight.
a similar incident happened over hawaii as well: <URL:http://blogs.abcnews.com/rapidreport/2008/02/sleeping-pilots.html>
JP
Commercial Multi Engine Pilot
TCAS: Traffic Collision and Avoidance System
each plane has an active TACAN and they peer -to- peer negotiate away from each other..... been available for a while now...
when coupled to an autopilot it even lets you sleep through your daily commute up the Hudson... ok not really...
John
3000+ hours Commercial Multi Engine Instructor Pilot
Ok, don't get confused, here is a summary: there are autonomous uav's (they have the intelligence to takeoff land, fly a mission ( waypoints, altitudes, orbit, drop bombs, return ), then there are standard UAV's: controlled totally by a human remotely. A third class of a uav - in development: an autonomous UAV that would - in theory - start to make decisions about its mission profile: pick targets, decide when to take off, respond to ground troop requests, etc.
there is no real technical difficulty in landing or takeoff - planes have had auto-land ability for decades- the problem is that the UAV: 1) doesn't have a 3d stereoscopic visual collision avoidance system like humans do 2) doesn't have a voice recognition system to hear other humans verbal avoidance commands: doesn't understand "dude! look out!" and 3) doesn't have the AI to deal with all the weird things that come up in flying big / small aircraft. (deciphering weather forecasts, deciding whether a target is legal/ethical, balancing mission profile with needs of ground troops, when to sacrifice itself to save others, etc , how to limp back to base under system failure (gracefully degrade), picking out an emergency landing field, etc etc
JP
Billie Jean (1983)
This is the video that changed history - the first video by a black artist to be aired on MTV. When the network refused to play the video the president of Jackson's record label threatened to go public with their stance on black musicians. MTV caved and Billie Jean was added to heavy rotation.
Due to the anti-ghosting features (or maybe multipath rejection) the current standard is unusable in a car/fast moving vehicle. There is an update to the standard to aleviate this oversight, but for now, all of those RV drivers /van drivers, and boaters who used broadcast TV will be SOL.
I think to date there are no (or very very few) ATSC capable portable tv's... hopefully someone corrects me, but that spells bad news for folks in hurricane prone areas who could lose power for weeks at a time....
JP
the aim-120 is the best dog fighter out there....
ok, in fairness, there are many missiles (fire and forget class) that are nearly in-defendable, air OR surface launched
dog fighting uav's have been around FOREVER (relatively)...
we in the Air Force are less concerned about Migs and more concerned about the missile threat.
JP
control systems != AI
ok, that could be a debate, but in general, the global hawk has a fancy autopilot that can of course: cruise, fly to waypoints and land (like any other somewhat sophisticated airplane from the 70's on) - but it can also takeoff, and I think has limited taxi abilities. You give this guy a flight plan (taxi/takeoff, waypoint, mission profile, and approach and landing location) and voila! an "autonomous" airplane.
what it can't do: see and avoid (google it) that would require some nice ai, or human supervision. (the latter is employed right now)
it also has trouble choosing targets and playing chess.... that's another story
JP
It is illegal to conduct official business on other-than-official comm devices in the federal govt (without permission / best interests, etc) ... not sure about alaska...
remember all of those laptops getting lost with SSN's and people bringing sensitive (Privacy Act of 1974) - style information home from work... So if I brought some work home with me and put it on my own mac, I would be breaking the law... I have actually had a administrator at work, about a year ago, lecture us about this (using gmail/yahoo/etc), it is expressly forbidden on the federal level. Those email sites are often blocked by many govt firewall's.
So by using yahoo SHE may have broken the law. interesting....
>Much like the difference between AC and DC current in copper (AC is significantly more
> effective because it essentially vibrates electrons back and forth rather then sending them
> all the way along the conductive medium from source to target)
Simply not true.... go take a circuits 2 class at an accredited engineering college at a good university.... or reference a good text/website on it.
Not your fault, you have simply been misled.
sites:
http://www.physclips.unsw.edu.au/jw/AC.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternating_current
(use caution on the physics websites, they think current flows in the opposite direction that us ElecEngs believe>
JP