An important part of this discussion is John Horgan's The End of Science. His basic theme is "all the cool stuff has been done". So discussions of "novel" start to get pretty hard for new aspiring scientists.
I'd rather have a paper with decent data but no conclusions because then someone else can do the stats on top of it. Call it "Open Source Science". Contrast that with the dubious studies we have seen where the conclusions are highly dubious followed by a trumpeted headline.
You do know that Barter is against the US tax code, right? Up until now (!) the govt had better things to do than track chickens, but conceptually it's in the category of unreported revenue.
There was that Asteroids Game a while back that let you fire bullets and blow up fragments of a page that you didn't like. I'd like a turbo version of that, maybe as a browser add-on, that lets you automatically delete the first thread on Slashdot.
Okay, just for 38 special seconds, assume they're not dense. This is that "security through crowd-cover" on the search engines. So what do they gain by co-opting one of the top-five acronyms?
Actually, I had it as one series back - both Pets.com and "golden age files" is 1.0 I see "info sharing" a la forums and Facebook as the 2.0 that's cresting now. We're just starting to see ominous abuses of privacy and rights, which makes for a long, dark, 3.0.
So somehow, probably like Digital-Sixties, we'll get really really tired of living Brave New World, 1984, Animal Farm, and Fahrenheit 451, and we'll mashup distibuted stuff, anonymous credit cards, and some new legislation in 2014 as a rebellion.
Where you don't "actually" believe something, but instead you say it because you correctly predicted the next 5 responses. Very very hard to do properly, but if you get it right you get a major victory of some kind.
My best example so far is Apple vs. RIAA and DRM. Apple played it darn near perfectly to shut down random WMA-type DRM.
Politics is Professional Deal Making, where the name of the game is getting your cut of the proceedings. Actual "fairness" is only used lately when it seems like a useful strategy, oherwise Big Money wins 1-0.
People get freaked about poitics because it's fuzzy judgement zone where the best sneak wins.
I'm having fun with the version numbers based on Buzzword Bingo, but I do think there's the overarching narrative effect. Since I'm not that original, I'm pretty sure someone out there has a Citation.
Maybe, but Google is one of the 5 companies I think is smart enough to play the Long-Script game.
Of course they could have played Corporation Games and squashed it, but instead maybe they're using a carefully chosen test-case to get certain predictable events "over with".
Right after the early Dot-Com crash I (among many to be sure) I noticed the Gaping Abyss concept: once the original "This Time Will Be Different" sales-mood of Dot Com 1.0 crashed, I felt that medium-soon we'll just be staring at a bunch of years of "small-village boredom" ahead of us. When small villages become bored, the members get into each other's business with a hyper-sensitive event amplifier. "Oh my gawd, Catcher in the Rye has Bad Words in it!"
Okay, if Web 1.0 was Sales, 2.0 was Sharing, one candidate for 3.0 is Walled Garden & Censorship, and I speculate that 4.0 will be a Privacy Revolt.
Right, you're describing the "Big H" approach - I respect it, I just don't have the finesse to really glue it together. But it's also real slippery whether those ops = $40,000 per year. How good ARE those contacts?
The rest of the time, Uni is about studying hard. I was middle of the pack B+ territory. We need jobs too.
But I was just barely bright enough to recognize that in 1994 computers really weren't "locked in" yet, so I went BS Business, which proved more durable as a content base. Say about 3 years from now when I get on the black ink side of the personal finance ledger, I want to revisit the idea of a Master's - a brand new Master's from 2014 will be worth far more than a "power track" Masters from 1998, just becaue the world context is so different.
Kudos sir, for using the same phrase I was thinking in other contexts.
If the whole "1.0" and "2.0" equates to "moods" of the internet, I think we're just on the verge of seeing a key part of one aspect of Net 3.11 = external forces "declaring" huge swaths of the net to be "legally" dangerous. Not "virus-dangerous" because the tech crowd knows how to stop that stuff... but if some external authority "declares" stuff to be dangerous then it goes right along with the Fear Mongering that's now in vogue.
Although my visual design skills are awful, I made my glacially evolving experimental site "whitesourced" so that all the pieces are accounted for as Not-CopyVio (and incidentally not-porn).
They can't quite block all porn, but they can make it an ugly enough game of NetRoulette to cower the masses into a nice controllable herd.
Slashdot Mirror
We will hold a meeting regarding Patents of Mass Stupidity
--CIA
I'd say we're dejected and despairing rather than happy about all this.
An important part of this discussion is John Horgan's The End of Science. His basic theme is "all the cool stuff has been done". So discussions of "novel" start to get pretty hard for new aspiring scientists.
I'd rather have a paper with decent data but no conclusions because then someone else can do the stats on top of it. Call it "Open Source Science". Contrast that with the dubious studies we have seen where the conclusions are highly dubious followed by a trumpeted headline.
You do know that Barter is against the US tax code, right?
Up until now (!) the govt had better things to do than track chickens, but conceptually it's in the category of unreported revenue.
There was that Asteroids Game a while back that let you fire bullets and blow up fragments of a page that you didn't like. I'd like a turbo version of that, maybe as a browser add-on, that lets you automatically delete the first thread on Slashdot.
"Warning?"
That's an instructional video!
Okay, just for 38 special seconds, assume they're not dense. This is that "security through crowd-cover" on the search engines. So what do they gain by co-opting one of the top-five acronyms?
Here's your first assignment!
http://www2.b3ta.com/namethatbeard/
+1 Harrison Bergeron.
Really though, precisely how loud is NY City without auto noise? It might just be a rustle of footsteps, but fairly quiet and peaceful.
Maybe it would stop crime because you can hear someone holler when a purse gets snatched.
Mu.
Actually, I had it as one series back -
both Pets.com and "golden age files" is 1.0
I see "info sharing" a la forums and Facebook as the 2.0 that's cresting now.
We're just starting to see ominous abuses of privacy and rights, which makes for a long, dark, 3.0.
So somehow, probably like Digital-Sixties, we'll get really really tired of living Brave New World, 1984, Animal Farm, and Fahrenheit 451, and we'll mashup distibuted stuff, anonymous credit cards, and some new legislation in 2014 as a rebellion.
Where you don't "actually" believe something, but instead you say it because you correctly predicted the next 5 responses. Very very hard to do properly, but if you get it right you get a major victory of some kind.
My best example so far is Apple vs. RIAA and DRM. Apple played it darn near perfectly to shut down random WMA-type DRM.
Politics is Professional Deal Making, where the name of the game is getting your cut of the proceedings. Actual "fairness" is only used lately when it seems like a useful strategy, oherwise Big Money wins 1-0.
People get freaked about poitics because it's fuzzy judgement zone where the best sneak wins.
AC is right, yet he's modded flamebait.
I'm having fun with the version numbers based on Buzzword Bingo, but I do think there's the overarching narrative effect. Since I'm not that original, I'm pretty sure someone out there has a Citation.
Thanks AC. .. er... Typing in high school.
I didn't take "Computer Science"
Maybe, but Google is one of the 5 companies I think is smart enough to play the Long-Script game.
Of course they could have played Corporation Games and squashed it, but instead maybe they're using a carefully chosen test-case to get certain predictable events "over with".
Right after the early Dot-Com crash I (among many to be sure) I noticed the Gaping Abyss concept: once the original "This Time Will Be Different" sales-mood of Dot Com 1.0 crashed, I felt that medium-soon we'll just be staring at a bunch of years of "small-village boredom" ahead of us. When small villages become bored, the members get into each other's business with a hyper-sensitive event amplifier. "Oh my gawd, Catcher in the Rye has Bad Words in it!"
Okay, if Web 1.0 was Sales, 2.0 was Sharing, one candidate for 3.0 is Walled Garden & Censorship, and I speculate that 4.0 will be a Privacy Revolt.
Yep.
Govs & Pols & Biz are re-reading classic old dystopian SF with Moral-Reversal glasses on.
Right, you're describing the "Big H" approach - I respect it, I just don't have the finesse to really glue it together. But it's also real slippery whether those ops = $40,000 per year. How good ARE those contacts?
The rest of the time, Uni is about studying hard. I was middle of the pack B+ territory. We need jobs too.
But I was just barely bright enough to recognize that in 1994 computers really weren't "locked in" yet, so I went BS Business, which proved more durable as a content base. Say about 3 years from now when I get on the black ink side of the personal finance ledger, I want to revisit the idea of a Master's - a brand new Master's from 2014 will be worth far more than a "power track" Masters from 1998, just becaue the world context is so different.
Sorry man.
You can have my algorithm for instant +1's if you want it.
Ancient Rome sent a message via a spirit medium. They want their Mount Pompeii Pr0n back.
Is it really spyware/malformed PDF?
I was bored so I looked at it, but MS Sec Essentials didn't flag it.
Kudos sir, for using the same phrase I was thinking in other contexts.
If the whole "1.0" and "2.0" equates to "moods" of the internet, I think we're just on the verge of seeing a key part of one aspect of Net 3.11 = external forces "declaring" huge swaths of the net to be "legally" dangerous. Not "virus-dangerous" because the tech crowd knows how to stop that stuff... but if some external authority "declares" stuff to be dangerous then it goes right along with the Fear Mongering that's now in vogue.
Although my visual design skills are awful, I made my glacially evolving experimental site "whitesourced" so that all the pieces are accounted for as Not-CopyVio (and incidentally not-porn).
They can't quite block all porn, but they can make it an ugly enough game of NetRoulette to cower the masses into a nice controllable herd.
Right - haven't we learned we're in the InfoLeak Age?
This is National Blackmail against anyone who ever desires to become a public figure.