I hate it when supposedly sane people act like they are not in control of their own behavior.
It is called addiction. And there are ways to get help, the first step of which is to realize and admit that you have a problem.
The only advice that I can offer to the guy posting the question is that, since his job is not motivating enough to engage him, he should find stimulating hobbies that he must do outside the office and without a computer. Hiking, cooking, wild-life/urban photography are just a few that pop to mind. In other words he should find some stimulating activities that motivate him to finish his job early, so that he can get out of the office (and away from the computer) and perform them. If he wants to leave office early (I take for granted that he now stays late, but I think that this is almost a certainty, since he still has a job in spite of his procrastinating) he may be less tempted to look for lolcats on youtube.
I think that obtaining the info on the Xbox and the PS just served as a proof of his feat. He infiltrated the networks of two mega-corps that spend millions on security and employ hundreds of experts using his skills and knowledge. Maybe he didn't even care about the specs of the consoles. He just wanted the kind of information that would prove that he had actually gained access.
The one with the twisted perspective on the subject is you in this case. You completely ignore the black/gray/white-hat categorization and try to make us believe that this guy should be treated like a common criminal. Well, he should not. Depending on the way he gained access, MS and Sony should probably consider hiring him.
Let's take a website like amazon as an example. It would be great to be able to look at and rotate 3D models of any item for sale around, look at them from any possible angle, or even take a look from the inside! The problem is, it is still much too hard and time-consuming to generate such content. You can take multiple 2D photos of an object of any size from many different angles and upload them in a matter of minutes, whereas you need whole days to generate the same content as a 3D object that you can rotate, pan and zoom.
Just having a framework that adds the 3rd dimension is not enough, you need someone to program the content, since 3D scanners do have limitations (size, cost etc.). And in any case, 2D won't be going anywhere because it will always be good enough for most cases.
However, in Germany, PhD students are more often than not in the total mercy of arrogant professors with even sadistic tendencies and nobody to control them. Compared to doing research in a british, dutch or american university (based on people I know), being a PhD student in Germany is a very lousy deal. The doctorates get relatively good money with full benefits, but that doesn't really sweeten the pill.
Defense Minister Guttenberg resigned from his post for the exact same reason a while back. Getting a PhD in Germany is a hardship and I can well imagine that some people would like to "cut some corners" to reach their goal.
However, the fact that DOS didn't have all these things doesn't mean that the programming/assembly language didn't need/have them in order to write DOS. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that even the idea of a pointer was unknown back then, since all low level management was done in assembly. If you have to deal with the memory directly anyway, then a pointer doesn't make much sense, I guess.
It was not possible to write an OS in Fortran. You lacked pointers, memory management and pretty much everything useful except the ability to do math and some basic I/O. Although the modern Fortran versions have a lot more features, I think it is still impossible to write an OS in Fortran, but I am no OS expert.
If the item really is faulty, then you don't have bad feelings when throwing it away. You just discard it like the junk that it is. Same goes for source code: the work is justified when the old version is a pile of spaghetti code that is hard to maintain and expand. When you know that the stuff are going to be picked up, you also don't have bad feelings. Through its tone, the commercial suggests that the item is being treated in a cruel and "unfair" manner, thus implying that it can still fulfill its function. Indeed, the lamp only goes off at the end of the commercial, to show that it has "given up on life". The sentiments, of course, are only those of the human, who projects it on the personified lamp. This is a clear suggestion that the human feels remorse for doing something bad (and knowing it).
Thank you for sharing this. I will never buy anything from IKEA ever again. It is even more sad to learn that the advertisement was a "popular, critical, and financial success" and boosted IKEA's sales, according to Wikipedia.
How could a commercial about consumerism resonate with people? Let's all throw away all our stuff for no reason and buy new shit! This is what our IKEA-overlords want us to do! Never mind about the environment, your savings account, or the mere fact that someone may be in need of a lamp and cannot afford it. Not to mention that you can always make a buck by selling the lamp in a used goods store or in a garage sale. And I am sure you can even buy this lamp model brand new marketed as "retro design" or something like that.
Back on topic, maybe IKEA would suggest that we should trash Opportunity now that Curiosity is up and running. Yes objects are inanimate and have no feelings, but that doesn't mean that we should act as retarded sheep.
This story is absurd any way you look at it. First of all, the telecom's customers already paid them for the traffic. The telecom should shut up and deliver their product already (with the promised bandwidth). Second, Google should just ignore them. What will the telecom do? Block Google? Good luck with that. I would be surprised if they'd have any customers left by the end of the month. Third, if Google pays up, suddenly all telecoms around the globe will come asking for money. Nobody in their right mind would succumb to such an absurd demand from some telecom.
It is sad because the alternatives are mostly walled gardens that are worse than the Microsoft lock-in of the 90's. At least back then you owned your hardware...
My favorite science teacher in school told me this, "Life is lazy". Everything wants to do the least amount of work possible.
Then I suggest that you try to persuade a lady salmon to lay her eggs downstream, rather than upstream, and save herself a whole lot of trouble. Sometimes, you need to go out of your way to do what feels right. You misunderstood the GP in that "safety" was not meant as "software security", but rather as the overall feeling of safety generated by conforming to some given standards of convenience, social status etc. that you correctly mention. The point is, the shackle-free alternative takes away the shackles, but ties you on a wheelchair, controlled by the provider of the aforementioned (false) safety. I would rather walk around in shackles and go anywhere I like, than sit myself on a wheelchair and get pushed around.
Indeed. Plus, an officer on his own I guess is much more likely to wait for backup and choose not to take any unnecessary risks. It is probable that the "my partner's got my back" feeling causes recklessness.
OMG, are you really saying that both the teacher and the students are supposed to be creative and move beyond the exercise description in order to learn more and even have fun while doing it?
You, sir, disgust me. I am shocked, shocked I tell you!
Everyone knows that knowledge is based on intelligence and is a trained-only skill, whereas wisdom is an ability. Knowledge may increase every time you level-up whereas wisdom may only increase at levels that are multiples of four. Jeez, what a n00b...
Not to mention that damaging the LCD means repair costs comparable to buying a new camera. In a consumer-grade compact camera, damaging the display is totally fatal to the camera, since they lack a viewfinder.
And by the way, kudos to all film-photographers for knowing how to expose a shot and when to push the button. Non-professional photographers of the digital era are accustomed to shooting hundreds of exposures that will be later sorted to obtain 5-10% keepers. With film, this is just expensive and a major hassle. And there's no cheating in post-processing (unless you have a dark-room). With film, you have to make every button-press count.
Nevertheless, DSLRs offer the advantage of lower running costs (no film-developing necessary) and video-shooting capabilities.
You don't really need math to realize that the price difference of gasoline between Europe and USA cannot be due to the actual cost of producing gasoline. The price of gasoline is defined by how much people are willing to pay for it, not by how much it actually costs to produce.
Supply and demand was my thought, too. The OP said: "And we'll never run out of oil. We'll use less and less of it as the prices rises against the falling price of the alternatives." Why on earth should the price of oil rise while there is no shortage? Right now oil has no competition. When faced with competition (i.e. the alternatives) prices drop, don't rise.
We'll use less and less of it as the prices rises against the falling price of the alternatives.
The price of petroleum today is waaaay higher than its actual cost. If alternatives become energy-positive and cheap, the OPEC can just drop the prices to become more competitive. Why should the petroleum price rise against the falling price of the alternatives?
What?! Of course we do. The energy is already into a compact and transportable form usable in cars. It is called gasoline or diesel. It is liquid, easy to handle and relatively safe (diesel more so than gasoline). And, you know what? It is energy efficient, too, because you spend less energy taking it out of the ground and distilling it than you gain from burning it (plus, you can make wonderful things out of the plastic you get when you add some processing steps). The only problem? It will run eventually out, and our planet will be a gigantic dump when we are done with it.
So do you want to waste petrol fooling around converting its energy from one form to another, wasting its majority in the process, just because for some weird reason our cars shouldn't bur gasoline/diesel any more, or do you want to pull yourself together and focus the research on the technologies with an actual positive energy balance? Hint: you will know this technology if, when using the respective apparatus (solar panel, wind generator, bio-fuel processing plant etc) you will be able to generate enough energy to manufacture another of the same apparatus, plus have some energy remaining on top for your profit.
Slashdot Mirror
I think that your post is much too frightening to be moderated "Funny".
Keep trying tho...
I hate it when supposedly sane people act like they are not in control of their own behavior.
It is called addiction. And there are ways to get help, the first step of which is to realize and admit that you have a problem.
The only advice that I can offer to the guy posting the question is that, since his job is not motivating enough to engage him, he should find stimulating hobbies that he must do outside the office and without a computer. Hiking, cooking, wild-life/urban photography are just a few that pop to mind. In other words he should find some stimulating activities that motivate him to finish his job early, so that he can get out of the office (and away from the computer) and perform them. If he wants to leave office early (I take for granted that he now stays late, but I think that this is almost a certainty, since he still has a job in spite of his procrastinating) he may be less tempted to look for lolcats on youtube.
I thought Mr. Garrison invented this back in 2001. I guess I was wrong...
I think that obtaining the info on the Xbox and the PS just served as a proof of his feat. He infiltrated the networks of two mega-corps that spend millions on security and employ hundreds of experts using his skills and knowledge. Maybe he didn't even care about the specs of the consoles. He just wanted the kind of information that would prove that he had actually gained access.
The one with the twisted perspective on the subject is you in this case. You completely ignore the black/gray/white-hat categorization and try to make us believe that this guy should be treated like a common criminal. Well, he should not. Depending on the way he gained access, MS and Sony should probably consider hiring him.
Let's take a website like amazon as an example. It would be great to be able to look at and rotate 3D models of any item for sale around, look at them from any possible angle, or even take a look from the inside! The problem is, it is still much too hard and time-consuming to generate such content. You can take multiple 2D photos of an object of any size from many different angles and upload them in a matter of minutes, whereas you need whole days to generate the same content as a 3D object that you can rotate, pan and zoom.
Just having a framework that adds the 3rd dimension is not enough, you need someone to program the content, since 3D scanners do have limitations (size, cost etc.). And in any case, 2D won't be going anywhere because it will always be good enough for most cases.
Yeah! Fortran too!
I totally agree.
However, in Germany, PhD students are more often than not in the total mercy of arrogant professors with even sadistic tendencies and nobody to control them. Compared to doing research in a british, dutch or american university (based on people I know), being a PhD student in Germany is a very lousy deal. The doctorates get relatively good money with full benefits, but that doesn't really sweeten the pill.
Defense Minister Guttenberg resigned from his post for the exact same reason a while back. Getting a PhD in Germany is a hardship and I can well imagine that some people would like to "cut some corners" to reach their goal.
Heh, no, I had not realized that.
However, the fact that DOS didn't have all these things doesn't mean that the programming/assembly language didn't need/have them in order to write DOS. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that even the idea of a pointer was unknown back then, since all low level management was done in assembly. If you have to deal with the memory directly anyway, then a pointer doesn't make much sense, I guess.
It was not possible to write an OS in Fortran. You lacked pointers, memory management and pretty much everything useful except the ability to do math and some basic I/O. Although the modern Fortran versions have a lot more features, I think it is still impossible to write an OS in Fortran, but I am no OS expert.
If the item really is faulty, then you don't have bad feelings when throwing it away. You just discard it like the junk that it is. Same goes for source code: the work is justified when the old version is a pile of spaghetti code that is hard to maintain and expand. When you know that the stuff are going to be picked up, you also don't have bad feelings. Through its tone, the commercial suggests that the item is being treated in a cruel and "unfair" manner, thus implying that it can still fulfill its function. Indeed, the lamp only goes off at the end of the commercial, to show that it has "given up on life". The sentiments, of course, are only those of the human, who projects it on the personified lamp. This is a clear suggestion that the human feels remorse for doing something bad (and knowing it).
Maybe, while they're at it, they can give Spirit a nudge and get her rolling again.
Thank you for sharing this. I will never buy anything from IKEA ever again. It is even more sad to learn that the advertisement was a "popular, critical, and financial success" and boosted IKEA's sales, according to Wikipedia.
How could a commercial about consumerism resonate with people? Let's all throw away all our stuff for no reason and buy new shit! This is what our IKEA-overlords want us to do! Never mind about the environment, your savings account, or the mere fact that someone may be in need of a lamp and cannot afford it. Not to mention that you can always make a buck by selling the lamp in a used goods store or in a garage sale. And I am sure you can even buy this lamp model brand new marketed as "retro design" or something like that.
Back on topic, maybe IKEA would suggest that we should trash Opportunity now that Curiosity is up and running. Yes objects are inanimate and have no feelings, but that doesn't mean that we should act as retarded sheep.
You are married? Can you plz post some pseudocode on how to do that. thnx.
This story is absurd any way you look at it.
First of all, the telecom's customers already paid them for the traffic. The telecom should shut up and deliver their product already (with the promised bandwidth).
Second, Google should just ignore them. What will the telecom do? Block Google? Good luck with that. I would be surprised if they'd have any customers left by the end of the month.
Third, if Google pays up, suddenly all telecoms around the globe will come asking for money. Nobody in their right mind would succumb to such an absurd demand from some telecom.
It is sad because the alternatives are mostly walled gardens that are worse than the Microsoft lock-in of the 90's. At least back then you owned your hardware...
My favorite science teacher in school told me this, "Life is lazy". Everything wants to do the least amount of work possible.
Then I suggest that you try to persuade a lady salmon to lay her eggs downstream, rather than upstream, and save herself a whole lot of trouble. Sometimes, you need to go out of your way to do what feels right. You misunderstood the GP in that "safety" was not meant as "software security", but rather as the overall feeling of safety generated by conforming to some given standards of convenience, social status etc. that you correctly mention. The point is, the shackle-free alternative takes away the shackles, but ties you on a wheelchair, controlled by the provider of the aforementioned (false) safety. I would rather walk around in shackles and go anywhere I like, than sit myself on a wheelchair and get pushed around.
Indeed. Plus, an officer on his own I guess is much more likely to wait for backup and choose not to take any unnecessary risks. It is probable that the "my partner's got my back" feeling causes recklessness.
OMG, are you really saying that both the teacher and the students are supposed to be creative and move beyond the exercise description in order to learn more and even have fun while doing it?
You, sir, disgust me. I am shocked, shocked I tell you!
Everyone knows that knowledge is based on intelligence and is a trained-only skill, whereas wisdom is an ability. Knowledge may increase every time you level-up whereas wisdom may only increase at levels that are multiples of four. Jeez, what a n00b...
Oh, wait...
Very true.
Not to mention that damaging the LCD means repair costs comparable to buying a new camera. In a consumer-grade compact camera, damaging the display is totally fatal to the camera, since they lack a viewfinder.
And by the way, kudos to all film-photographers for knowing how to expose a shot and when to push the button. Non-professional photographers of the digital era are accustomed to shooting hundreds of exposures that will be later sorted to obtain 5-10% keepers. With film, this is just expensive and a major hassle. And there's no cheating in post-processing (unless you have a dark-room). With film, you have to make every button-press count.
Nevertheless, DSLRs offer the advantage of lower running costs (no film-developing necessary) and video-shooting capabilities.
You don't really need math to realize that the price difference of gasoline between Europe and USA cannot be due to the actual cost of producing gasoline. The price of gasoline is defined by how much people are willing to pay for it, not by how much it actually costs to produce.
Supply and demand was my thought, too. The OP said: "And we'll never run out of oil. We'll use less and less of it as the prices rises against the falling price of the alternatives." Why on earth should the price of oil rise while there is no shortage? Right now oil has no competition. When faced with competition (i.e. the alternatives) prices drop, don't rise.
We'll use less and less of it as the prices rises against the falling price of the alternatives.
The price of petroleum today is waaaay higher than its actual cost. If alternatives become energy-positive and cheap, the OPEC can just drop the prices to become more competitive. Why should the petroleum price rise against the falling price of the alternatives?
Now imagine the people in that world imagining
Yeah, man...
for most applications, we don't mind energy loss
What?! Of course we do. The energy is already into a compact and transportable form usable in cars. It is called gasoline or diesel. It is liquid, easy to handle and relatively safe (diesel more so than gasoline). And, you know what? It is energy efficient, too, because you spend less energy taking it out of the ground and distilling it than you gain from burning it (plus, you can make wonderful things out of the plastic you get when you add some processing steps). The only problem? It will run eventually out, and our planet will be a gigantic dump when we are done with it.
So do you want to waste petrol fooling around converting its energy from one form to another, wasting its majority in the process, just because for some weird reason our cars shouldn't bur gasoline/diesel any more, or do you want to pull yourself together and focus the research on the technologies with an actual positive energy balance? Hint: you will know this technology if, when using the respective apparatus (solar panel, wind generator, bio-fuel processing plant etc) you will be able to generate enough energy to manufacture another of the same apparatus, plus have some energy remaining on top for your profit.