Make something idiot proof, and they'll invent a better idiot.
Idiot proofing is just a pipe dream. A noble goal, to be sure, but a pipe dream none the less. No matter how well intentioned something is, humans will always find a way to screw it up. We've had how long to perfect the use of fire and yet we still manage to burn down how many buildings/forests/cities?
Personally, I am very glad to be living in Washington with our state wide smoking ban. I guess it stems from my belief that so long as your activities harm no others, then feel free to partake in them.
Of course, what I never understood was why anyone would willingly put themselves at such a huge risk. Do you think smoking make you look cool? Was it peer pressure that got you started on it? Are you that weak willed as to do what everyone else is doing? Every smoker I have ever known has always had what I consider to be an underlying weakness of character. Without fail, they have been prone to self destructive behaviors and ALWAYS have some sort of way to justify what they are doing to themselves and those around them. After seeing multiple family members go down due to smoking, it has only solidified my anti-smoking stance. Emphysema and brain tumors look bad enough from the outside; I can't imagine having to deal with it from the inside. I'll not even go into the messed up voice and premature aging it does to a persons looks.
Again, If it harms none, so shall it be.
Self destruction falls under that statement, but if you really want to destroy your body like that, have at it. Just don't do it near where I have to live and breathe.
I think what bothers me the most about the bill that is in the Senate right now is this line:
`(4) UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT- The term `unlawful enemy combatant' means an individual engaged in hostilities against the United States who is not a lawful enemy combatant.
found in Senate bill S.3930, Subchapter I, Sec. 948a. Definitions.
Nowhere in there do i see the definition of "hostilities". For all that says, speaking out against the US is considered hostile, and boom, you have just become an Unlawful Enemey Combatant.
I shudder to think what would happen if that loose of a definition is allowed to pass muster and goes into regular usage.
Just when i thought i didn't like PDFs, up comes this neat little "Feature" to try and make me like them all the more...
Wait, this isn't a good thing, is it... And i'm willing to bet Adobe is not really all that happy about it either...
Maybe this will prod them into getting back to their roots of a simpler system that did not take 30+ seconds to start up and did not bring a browser to its knees when it decided to act up... Or maybe i could just be dreaming.
That sounds an awful lot like the original plot to the original Ocean's 11... Except it was Sammy Davis Jr driving the garbage truck, and it was the Casino's money, not the personal information of millions of customers...
I think what you are talking about is at the core of american medicine these days. Fix the symptoms, and if they go away, it must be better. Thus, we see all these skyrocketing costs of surgeries and a booming drug trade... erm, I mean, pharmaceuticals industry.
I wish the medical world would realize that they can't actually "heal" anything. All they are there for is to put our bodies into a state where it can heal itself. I am not saying that medical science has no place in the healing of the body, quite the contrary, doctors can do amazing things that do allow the body to heal itself. It just seems like they are more focused on the 'quick fix' rather than fixing the root of the problem.
Did any of you happen to read the Executive summary of M2Z's proposal? Their goals are:
"(1)provide nationwide boadband service with no recurring costs to all users that pruchase and register an M2Z certified device; (2)construct its network so that at least 95% of the U.S. population - in urban centers and rural communities across America - can avail themselves of the service within 10 years of license grant and commencement of operations; (3)block access to indecent content for all free access service users;(emphasis added) (4)provide public safety officials with access to an interoperable secondary data network, with appropriate consultation with such officials as to their needs; and (5)submit a voluntary payment to the U.S. Treasurey of 5% of gross revenues generated from the subscription services that it will offer in addition to the free National Broadband Radio Service."
I'm not too sure if i'm okay with giving this agency the power to decide what is "indecent" or not. China's government has assumed that 'right' and look at what they consider "indecent". While this is America, the pandering tone of this application makes me think that the currently Bush stacked F'nCC will jump all over that "indecent Content" bit and have a field day with it...
I think this whole discussion of who wrote the code first is moot. The IEEE had an article a few months back in their magazine Spectrum that discussed the validity of patenting software in the first place.
Since all software can be broken down at its lowest level to be just a series of mathematical equations, and you can not patent mathematical equations, you should not be able to patent software. You SHOULD be able to copyright it, but not patent it.
Slashdot Mirror
Make something idiot proof, and they'll invent a better idiot.
Idiot proofing is just a pipe dream. A noble goal, to be sure, but a pipe dream none the less. No matter how well intentioned something is, humans will always find a way to screw it up. We've had how long to perfect the use of fire and yet we still manage to burn down how many buildings/forests/cities?
I suppose the people voting for Joe Pebkac should ask for the ID-10-T ballot?
Personally, I am very glad to be living in Washington with our state wide smoking ban. I guess it stems from my belief that so long as your activities harm no others, then feel free to partake in them.
Of course, what I never understood was why anyone would willingly put themselves at such a huge risk.
Do you think smoking make you look cool? Was it peer pressure that got you started on it? Are you that weak willed as to do what everyone else is doing?
Every smoker I have ever known has always had what I consider to be an underlying weakness of character. Without fail, they have been prone to self destructive behaviors and ALWAYS have some sort of way to justify what they are doing to themselves and those around them. After seeing multiple family members go down due to smoking, it has only solidified my anti-smoking stance. Emphysema and brain tumors look bad enough from the outside; I can't imagine having to deal with it from the inside. I'll not even go into the messed up voice and premature aging it does to a persons looks.
Again, If it harms none, so shall it be.
Self destruction falls under that statement, but if you really want to destroy your body like that, have at it. Just don't do it near where I have to live and breathe.
I think what bothers me the most about the bill that is in the Senate right now is this line:
:
`(4) UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT- The term `unlawful enemy combatant' means an individual engaged in hostilities against the United States who is not a lawful enemy combatant.
found in Senate bill S.3930, Subchapter I, Sec. 948a. Definitions.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.3930
Nowhere in there do i see the definition of "hostilities". For all that says, speaking out against the US is considered hostile, and boom, you have just become an Unlawful Enemey Combatant.
I shudder to think what would happen if that loose of a definition is allowed to pass muster and goes into regular usage.
Just when i thought i didn't like PDFs, up comes this neat little "Feature" to try and make me like them all the more...
Wait, this isn't a good thing, is it... And i'm willing to bet Adobe is not really all that happy about it either...
Maybe this will prod them into getting back to their roots of a simpler system that did not take 30+ seconds to start up and did not bring a browser to its knees when it decided to act up... Or maybe i could just be dreaming.
That sounds an awful lot like the original plot to the original Ocean's 11... Except it was Sammy Davis Jr driving the garbage truck, and it was the Casino's money, not the personal information of millions of customers...
"I think so Brain, but with me and Pippy Longstockings, what would the kids look like?"
We don't have to get RealPlayer or any of Reals other crap crammed down our collective throats with our FireFox downloads, i don't care what they do.
I think what you are talking about is at the core of american medicine these days. Fix the symptoms, and if they go away, it must be better. Thus, we see all these skyrocketing costs of surgeries and a booming drug trade... erm, I mean, pharmaceuticals industry.
I wish the medical world would realize that they can't actually "heal" anything. All they are there for is to put our bodies into a state where it can heal itself. I am not saying that medical science has no place in the healing of the body, quite the contrary, doctors can do amazing things that do allow the body to heal itself. It just seems like they are more focused on the 'quick fix' rather than fixing the root of the problem.
Did any of you happen to read the Executive summary of M2Z's proposal? Their goals are: "(1)provide nationwide boadband service with no recurring costs to all users that pruchase and register an M2Z certified device; (2)construct its network so that at least 95% of the U.S. population - in urban centers and rural communities across America - can avail themselves of the service within 10 years of license grant and commencement of operations; (3)block access to indecent content for all free access service users;(emphasis added) (4)provide public safety officials with access to an interoperable secondary data network, with appropriate consultation with such officials as to their needs; and (5)submit a voluntary payment to the U.S. Treasurey of 5% of gross revenues generated from the subscription services that it will offer in addition to the free National Broadband Radio Service."
Quoted from http://www.m2znetworks.com/pdf/Application.pdf/
I'm not too sure if i'm okay with giving this agency the power to decide what is "indecent" or not. China's government has assumed that 'right' and look at what they consider "indecent". While this is America, the pandering tone of this application makes me think that the currently Bush stacked F'nCC will jump all over that "indecent Content" bit and have a field day with it...
I think this whole discussion of who wrote the code first is moot. The IEEE had an article a few months back in their magazine Spectrum that discussed the validity of patenting software in the first place.
Since all software can be broken down at its lowest level to be just a series of mathematical equations, and you can not patent mathematical equations, you should not be able to patent software. You SHOULD be able to copyright it, but not patent it.