Point taken. On an individual level it does create a short-term bias.
One important differentiation from what most people might deem as "cheating," however: This form of modification isn't a "free pass" in the same sense as say, cheating on a university exam. Effort is still expended and knowledge is still obtained, just in a more efficient manner. And the knowledge and enhanced skills stay with the individual, and the field as a whole benefits, unlike what happens when someone cheats their way to a degree or a job.
Of course then we all gain from the overall advance. It's all a matter of whether that one sacrifice offsets the overall advantage.
These drugs aren't making Rhodes Scholars out of an imbeciles, they're simply being used to enhance existing skills. And as the parent poster mentioned, we're all benefiting in some form or another by this.
It is also possible that the sciences are a more attractive field for people who truly do need to take these types of medications, so the disproportionately high percentage of users in that area may actually be closer to reality than the article would have you believe.
As a learning tool this is a near perfect example of a truly victimless "crime."
Good the The House Democrats. Like many other U.S. citizens I've had it up to my chin with Bush's arrogant, irresponsible, and unintelligent deconstruction of our country. I hope they give him the fight of a lifetime on this that keeps him awake at night.
To argue that Bush has done anything whatsoever to fend off terrorism is a joke. I couldn't care less about the immigration system, but his blatant failings to secure our southern borders stands in direct conflict with the GOP's assertions that we are better off today than we were a few years ago is fodder for comedians. If the terrorists decide they want to get us, they'll find a away. The only thing (thank God) that is keeping the U.S. safe today was the worldwide embrace of the U.S. after 9/11, which hurt the terrorists from an ideological point of view.
The obsession that U.S. Citizens have with The First Amendment is ridiculous. Quit being so fucking paranoid, everyone.
If you *feel* the *need* to post anonymously to an internet blog you should stop and ask yourself why you don't feel comfortable attributing your real identity with your assertions. Are you ashamed of your position? Is it counter to your public image? Are you posting something impulsively that you may later regret? If you answered yes to any of these questions then perhaps you shouldn't be posting.
I agree that such a law would be impractical to enforce, but there are latent advantages...
There are people who have postulated that the Vista clusterfuck is the inevitable result of Microsoft's massive success. The truth is that Vista is the result of Ballmer taking more control over Microsoft's direction. The company's recovery plan should be evidence enough that Microsoft has lost the ability to recognize its own shortcomings (in either their products or their processes). Everyone knows the clinical definition of insanity...
Love him or hate him, Bill Gates' relatively recent distractions have severely damaged MS.
Most car bombs that do a lot of damage don't even need someone in them. Riding up on a check point wont bag a lot of casualties. They are set up with that in mind, and the first time said truck with mannequin is stopped, the gig is up.
Maybe I'm a little slow here...who will be driving the cars? The mannequins?
This can be solved by giving the parents the root password and letting the girl keep a secret password. That makes it so that she gets the feeling of privacy and, for the most part, the reality of privacy while still allowing the parents to do and see whatever they want on the computer.
That's a slippery slope. A seven-year-old child should be entitled to the kind of privacy necessary to protect their dignity (in other words, the same privacy to which any human is entitled) and keep them safe. Sending the message that it's acceptable to do things on a computer that the parents won't know about (whether or not that is true) is extending far too much discretion to someone who lacks the maturity to make wise decisions.
A computer is a (potential) gateway into the worlds of people who would knowingly do harm to a child for their own gratification, and children often times lack the experience to know when they are being manipulated into compromising positions.
It's still short-sighted on CNN's part. As the author of the article noted, a warning or ultimatum would have cast responsibility back on him, at which point he would have been forced to accept the repercussions of his (in)actions. Either way, the goal would have been achieved: This man would no longer be a CNN producer who blogged.
As it stands, CNN created a needlessly confrontational situation in which they come across as the aggressor.
Think about it this way: CNN obviously has a tremendous amount of respect for the blog as an effective and efficient news outlet with the potential to influence the opinions of many. Why would they want to risk ostracizing an employee with an all-ready established readership?
I agree; to a certain extent pedophiles are victims of their disorder, and are deserving of sympathy.
You're framing the "issue" incorrectly, however. Children are (largely) innocent and are incapable of exerting the control necessary to fend off this problem. We bring them into this world with the promise and understanding that we will defend and represent them until they reach the point where they are capable of doing so themselves. As a member of the adult community (whether or not one is a parent) there exists an implicit obligation to protect children.
If a "cure" to this situation exists, I hope it is discovered. I even support the idea of public funding for research and treatment (within reason, of course). Save for that, if a pedophile simply cannot control him or herself, they have an obligation to permanently remove themselves from society.
Microsoft and Yahoo are the 2nd and 3rd place players in this game...MS buying Yahoo doesn't weaken google's already 60%+ position.
That's Microsoft's biggest folly: They refuse to admit when an approach is failing. If they had any real ability to compete in this area, they would simply save their $$$ and drive Yahoo! out of business.
Microsoft will never vanish, but with the gradual migration towards SaaS and open source roots growing stronger every day, I can easily imagine a future whereby they become highly marginalized. Fortunately, when they're no longer large enough to be a threat to most other tech companies, their obnoxious business practices will be curtailed by the community.
From all accounts it seems as though Yahoo! is afraid of Microsoft, as they should be.
Right now they've got Steve Ballmer in a corner. This is a man who is driven to win at all costs. Despite the flury of lawyers and PR folks advising against a hostile take over, I can't see him backing down. His identity and authority is too closely linked to his gratification.
Yahoo has no choice but to try to work out some sort of partnership with Google, if only for its own survival. Fortunately, I do not see a way that Microsoft can ever "beat" Google. Google has more raw talent.
Yes, but he's one upping the system. Rather than placing a label on his claim, he's (effectively) challenging the brightest minds to explain its behavior. A wise way to defeat the free energy stigma.
1. The applications simply aren't available yet. A lot of the basics are there, such as office suites, but until all the frills are available there won't be a massive conversion. By this I mean those cute little annoyances Walmart packages on every photo CD, etc.
2. Internet connectivity utilities. The larger ISPs include Windows/Mac utilities to configure a DSL router or Cable bridge via the desktop. How does one design a universal utility for Linux that includes the presets (pppoe is less complicated) for things like nameservers. Maybe it could poll a home server to auto-populate this information for the most common providers...
3. Despite the fact that open source software is all over the data rooms in schools, you still don't see a decent installation base in the classrooms. Expose kids to it there and a change of mindset in the home is inevitable, followed by a change of mindset at the parent's employer...
The answer is simple; implementing the solution is more involved.
Please forgive me if this reply is a bit off-topic.
Firstly, I don't believe GNU/Linux development will be seriously hindered. It's long since reached a tipping point past which any major disruptions are unlikely.
This might be a good time, however, for people to begin looking at some of the BSDs. Yes, I realize Yahoo! is a major BSD customer, and should this deal go through I can't see Microsoft permitting the existence of anything else on their servers. Still, the BSDs are also widely deployed, reliable, and many would argue that the BSD license is less encumbering. Also, it has a formal foundation and governance which effectively ensures it's survival.
I've been an open source user/administrator now for over 12 years (12 w/ Linux, 11 w/ BSD) and am surprised at the relatively low uptake for this family of operating systems. In short, Linux ain't the only game in town.
These folks are pros; within 15 minutes of speaking with you they'll know whether or nor you run running legitimately-purchased software or not. If you're out of compliance you're up a creek and you had better believe that they won't even think of letting go.
If you are in compliance, be cooperative and let them look over your inventory. The moment they start demanding payment politely escort them off your property, and remind them if they continue to push the matter you'll have every consumer advocate group imaginable breathing down their neck.
These folks RELY on your blind adherence; don't be foolish and succumb to their demands. Drag them out into the light for public scrutiny and they'll scatter like cockroaches.
Remember, the first thing they do is size you up morally. If you're a thief, you're dinner. If you're honest, they KNOW they'll come across as self-serving bullies and won't want the trouble.
But it is also interesting to note that this isn't the first time Microsoft has been accused of inserting backdoors for the CIA or the NSA. Of course, Microsoft vehemently denies such allegations, but I would assume that they would.
So if Microsoft denies an allegation against them, it's inherently true? Sounds just a weeeee bit suspect.
My feelings toward Microsoft are not incredibly warm, but this is silly. I read the linked blog post and the author himself goes out of the way numerous times to point out that he had no way of knowing whether such backdoors existed or not.
The best way to "dethrone" Microsoft (if that's what you happen to live for) is to focus on the positive aspects of its competitors products, not obsess over imagined shortfalls in their's.
Exactly. The fact that an organization the size of the RIAA, with its nearly unlimited resources, would effectively throw up their hands and walk away should speak volumes to other victims and consumers in general, and I'm certain the brightest legal minds in the US are reviewing this case with a fine-toothed comb to discover exactly what the perceived weaknesses were.
This is, by far, the funniest Slashdot post I've ever read.
An individual runs out and buys the latest toy the day after it's released, not realizing it wasn't supported on his particular hardware architecture. Then, not being able to see the error in his ways, he or she whines to the world about it via Slashdot.
It certainly doesn't appear as though Apple is going out of their way to mislead consumers. Perhaps a bit of research on the part of this
person would have prevented the situation.
Slashdot Mirror
Point taken. On an individual level it does create a short-term bias.
One important differentiation from what most people might deem as "cheating," however: This form of modification isn't a "free pass" in the same sense as say, cheating on a university exam. Effort is still expended and knowledge is still obtained, just in a more efficient manner. And the knowledge and enhanced skills stay with the individual, and the field as a whole benefits, unlike what happens when someone cheats their way to a degree or a job.
Of course then we all gain from the overall advance. It's all a matter of whether that one sacrifice offsets the overall advantage.
These drugs aren't making Rhodes Scholars out of an imbeciles, they're simply being used to enhance existing skills. And as the parent poster mentioned, we're all benefiting in some form or another by this.
It is also possible that the sciences are a more attractive field for people who truly do need to take these types of medications, so the disproportionately high percentage of users in that area may actually be closer to reality than the article would have you believe.
As a learning tool this is a near perfect example of a truly victimless "crime."
What's the point in signing a petition? Wouldn't it be easier to just not watch his movies?
Good the The House Democrats. Like many other U.S. citizens I've had it up to my chin with Bush's arrogant, irresponsible, and unintelligent deconstruction of our country. I hope they give him the fight of a lifetime on this that keeps him awake at night.
To argue that Bush has done anything whatsoever to fend off terrorism is a joke. I couldn't care less about the immigration system, but his blatant failings to secure our southern borders stands in direct conflict with the GOP's assertions that we are better off today than we were a few years ago is fodder for comedians. If the terrorists decide they want to get us, they'll find a away. The only thing (thank God) that is keeping the U.S. safe today was the worldwide embrace of the U.S. after 9/11, which hurt the terrorists from an ideological point of view.
You don't own remastered versions of any Beatles material that isn't available to the general public. Quit embarrassing yourself.
The obsession that U.S. Citizens have with The First Amendment is ridiculous. Quit being so fucking paranoid, everyone.
If you *feel* the *need* to post anonymously to an internet blog you should stop and ask yourself why you don't feel comfortable attributing your real identity with your assertions. Are you ashamed of your position? Is it counter to your public image? Are you posting something impulsively that you may later regret? If you answered yes to any of these questions then perhaps you shouldn't be posting.
I agree that such a law would be impractical to enforce, but there are latent advantages...
I can't be the only one who caught the following quote in the page linked to in the updated section:
In other words, I can't say definitively that Linux is faster than FreeBSD.
There are people who have postulated that the Vista clusterfuck is the inevitable result of Microsoft's massive success. The truth is that Vista is the result of Ballmer taking more control over Microsoft's direction. The company's recovery plan should be evidence enough that Microsoft has lost the ability to recognize its own shortcomings (in either their products or their processes). Everyone knows the clinical definition of insanity...
Love him or hate him, Bill Gates' relatively recent distractions have severely damaged MS.
Most car bombs that do a lot of damage don't even need someone in them. Riding up on a check point wont bag a lot of casualties. They are set up with that in mind, and the first time said truck with mannequin is stopped, the gig is up.
Maybe I'm a little slow here...who will be driving the cars? The mannequins?
robotic innocent civilians can be manufactured to replace the humans blown up by military bots and suicide bomber bots, then no one has to die.
Even better--mentally ill robots.
That was my first thought. Odd that it took so long for someone to suggest it.
This can be solved by giving the parents the root password and letting the girl keep a secret password. That makes it so that she gets the feeling of privacy and, for the most part, the reality of privacy while still allowing the parents to do and see whatever they want on the computer.
That's a slippery slope. A seven-year-old child should be entitled to the kind of privacy necessary to protect their dignity (in other words, the same privacy to which any human is entitled) and keep them safe. Sending the message that it's acceptable to do things on a computer that the parents won't know about (whether or not that is true) is extending far too much discretion to someone who lacks the maturity to make wise decisions.
A computer is a (potential) gateway into the worlds of people who would knowingly do harm to a child for their own gratification, and children often times lack the experience to know when they are being manipulated into compromising positions.
Remember yahoo is freeBSD based, MSFT will first attempt to replace all the servers with windows ones.
You probably are correct, but there's a lot of BSD knowledge at Yahoo! and I would be amazed if Microsoft didn't want a piece of that.
It's still short-sighted on CNN's part. As the author of the article noted, a warning or ultimatum would have cast responsibility back on him, at which point he would have been forced to accept the repercussions of his (in)actions. Either way, the goal would have been achieved: This man would no longer be a CNN producer who blogged.
As it stands, CNN created a needlessly confrontational situation in which they come across as the aggressor.
Think about it this way: CNN obviously has a tremendous amount of respect for the blog as an effective and efficient news outlet with the potential to influence the opinions of many. Why would they want to risk ostracizing an employee with an all-ready established readership?
I agree; to a certain extent pedophiles are victims of their disorder, and are deserving of sympathy.
You're framing the "issue" incorrectly, however. Children are (largely) innocent and are incapable of exerting the control necessary to fend off this problem. We bring them into this world with the promise and understanding that we will defend and represent them until they reach the point where they are capable of doing so themselves. As a member of the adult community (whether or not one is a parent) there exists an implicit obligation to protect children.
If a "cure" to this situation exists, I hope it is discovered. I even support the idea of public funding for research and treatment (within reason, of course). Save for that, if a pedophile simply cannot control him or herself, they have an obligation to permanently remove themselves from society.
Microsoft and Yahoo are the 2nd and 3rd place players in this game...MS buying Yahoo doesn't weaken google's already 60%+ position.
That's Microsoft's biggest folly: They refuse to admit when an approach is failing. If they had any real ability to compete in this area, they would simply save their $$$ and drive Yahoo! out of business.
Microsoft will never vanish, but with the gradual migration towards SaaS and open source roots growing stronger every day, I can easily imagine a future whereby they become highly marginalized. Fortunately, when they're no longer large enough to be a threat to most other tech companies, their obnoxious business practices will be curtailed by the community.
From all accounts it seems as though Yahoo! is afraid of Microsoft, as they should be.
Right now they've got Steve Ballmer in a corner. This is a man who is driven to win at all costs. Despite the flury of lawyers and PR folks advising against a hostile take over, I can't see him backing down. His identity and authority is too closely linked to his gratification.
Yahoo has no choice but to try to work out some sort of partnership with Google, if only for its own survival. Fortunately, I do not see a way that Microsoft can ever "beat" Google. Google has more raw talent.
Yes, but he's one upping the system. Rather than placing a label on his claim, he's (effectively) challenging the brightest minds to explain its behavior. A wise way to defeat the free energy stigma.
1. The applications simply aren't available yet. A lot of the basics are there, such as office suites, but until all the frills are available there won't be a massive conversion. By this I mean those cute little annoyances Walmart packages on every photo CD, etc. 2. Internet connectivity utilities. The larger ISPs include Windows/Mac utilities to configure a DSL router or Cable bridge via the desktop. How does one design a universal utility for Linux that includes the presets (pppoe is less complicated) for things like nameservers. Maybe it could poll a home server to auto-populate this information for the most common providers... 3. Despite the fact that open source software is all over the data rooms in schools, you still don't see a decent installation base in the classrooms. Expose kids to it there and a change of mindset in the home is inevitable, followed by a change of mindset at the parent's employer...
The answer is simple; implementing the solution is more involved.
Please forgive me if this reply is a bit off-topic.
Firstly, I don't believe GNU/Linux development will be seriously hindered. It's long since reached a tipping point past which any major disruptions are unlikely.
This might be a good time, however, for people to begin looking at some of the BSDs. Yes, I realize Yahoo! is a major BSD customer, and should this deal go through I can't see Microsoft permitting the existence of anything else on their servers. Still, the BSDs are also widely deployed, reliable, and many would argue that the BSD license is less encumbering. Also, it has a formal foundation and governance which effectively ensures it's survival.
I've been an open source user/administrator now for over 12 years (12 w/ Linux, 11 w/ BSD) and am surprised at the relatively low uptake for this family of operating systems. In short, Linux ain't the only game in town.
These folks are pros; within 15 minutes of speaking with you they'll know whether or nor you run running legitimately-purchased software or not. If you're out of compliance you're up a creek and you had better believe that they won't even think of letting go.
If you are in compliance, be cooperative and let them look over your inventory. The moment they start demanding payment politely escort them off your property, and remind them if they continue to push the matter you'll have every consumer advocate group imaginable breathing down their neck.
These folks RELY on your blind adherence; don't be foolish and succumb to their demands. Drag them out into the light for public scrutiny and they'll scatter like cockroaches.
Remember, the first thing they do is size you up morally. If you're a thief, you're dinner. If you're honest, they KNOW they'll come across as self-serving bullies and won't want the trouble.
But it is also interesting to note that this isn't the first time Microsoft has been accused of inserting backdoors for the CIA or the NSA. Of course, Microsoft vehemently denies such allegations, but I would assume that they would.
So if Microsoft denies an allegation against them, it's inherently true? Sounds just a weeeee bit suspect.
My feelings toward Microsoft are not incredibly warm, but this is silly. I read the linked blog post and the author himself goes out of the way numerous times to point out that he had no way of knowing whether such backdoors existed or not.
The best way to "dethrone" Microsoft (if that's what you happen to live for) is to focus on the positive aspects of its competitors products, not obsess over imagined shortfalls in their's.
Exactly. The fact that an organization the size of the RIAA, with its nearly unlimited resources, would effectively throw up their hands and walk away should speak volumes to other victims and consumers in general, and I'm certain the brightest legal minds in the US are reviewing this case with a fine-toothed comb to discover exactly what the perceived weaknesses were.
By default DNS will fall back to TCP for requests if it receives no response via UDP.
This is, by far, the funniest Slashdot post I've ever read.
An individual runs out and buys the latest toy the day after it's released, not realizing it wasn't supported on his particular hardware architecture. Then, not being able to see the error in his ways, he or she whines to the world about it via Slashdot.
It certainly doesn't appear as though Apple is going out of their way to mislead consumers. Perhaps a bit of research on the part of this person would have prevented the situation.