The constitution certainly does matter, and the fifth amendment is more than just "cute." Of course, in my version of the world, the constitution protects individual rights, not corporate rights, but I guess that means I am out of touch with US policy.
Quit whining and start taking responsibility for your actions
This man didn't post anything. He is a Tor developer.
To put this another way, I am a cryptography researcher. Must I now be careful about what specific research I do? Should I be worried that I might be detained at an airport because of my work?
I really don't understand why it's even necessary to be sure any but math students understand the underlying math anymore
The underlying math still matters. Consider long division as an example; you might think there is no value in knowing long division, but as it turns out, the long division algorithm is a very important theorem in number theory, and many other results depend on it. Not only that, but in ring theory, the long division algorithm and many of the related results are generalized and a number of important ring theory results depend on that.
The basics should not be done away with simply because a machine is available to do the work for you, unless your only goal is job training.
In all seriousness, I am going to assume that your legal name carries less weight in China than the number they print on your government assigned ID card.
I have yet to see a "smart whiteboard" that I can both draw on using a cheap dry erase marker and that I can request calculations from. Really, the amount of time required to do some basic arithmetic on the whiteboard is a fraction of the time needed to even enter the numbers into a computer or calculator. Likewise with the cash register: the time needed to do some addition when someone randomly hands a cashier some extra change should be small if that cashier is actually capable of adding, smaller than the time needed to enter more information into the register itself.
As for hunting and navigation...well, I see nothing wrong with people knowing at least some basic techniques, even if they never actually have to use them.
Do you think that the rules of arithmetic come out of nowhere? Everything from basic add-and-carry techniques to square root algorithms can be derived in abstract math. Some of those techniques are actually very important -- the long division algorithm, for example, is used to prove significant results in number theory, and algorithms based on it (like the Euclidean algorithm) are generalized and studied in depth in ring theory.
Once people can be shown to understand what arithmetic means, its kinda silly to require them to not use tools.
Unfortunately, a number of high school students do not understand arithmetic and cannot do it -- their calculators become more of a crutch than a convenience.
You are obviously unfamiliar with the problems that face the American education system. Integration by parts? Substitution problems? People are graduating high school without ever having seen calculus. A system of 5 linear equations is tedious to work out, sure...but where I grew up (New York City), less than 40% of the students at many high schools were able to pass a test on basic linear equations (one at a time, not systems), where "passing" was defined as "at least 55% of the answers correct."
This may shock you, but most of what you described is considered "college level material" in the USA.
But why put the effort into making a piece of hardware better when the manufacturer clearly doesn't want you doing that?
Because we do not care what the manufacturer wants us to do with our hardware? We bought it, we'll use it however we want to, regardless of what the manufacturer says.
The important parts of math are abstract, not computational. It's a good thing to get rid of the tedious computation that you mastered back in 3rd grade. Removing calculators would be an artificial barrier to learning, like making students scan through paper volumes of trig tables.
Except that students are unable to do basic arithmetic these days. It is fine for an engineering undergrad to use a calculator to save some time, but when people are graduating high school and cannot multiply two numbers, there is a very serious problem. Yes, math is abstract, but the ability to compute a result still matters -- when I was a teenager working in an ice cream store, people would sometimes give me some change after I had entered everything into the cash register, and so I was forced to quickly do some arithmetic...and many of the kids working with me could not even handle that. Now I am in grad school, and I still find myself having to do basic arithmetic -- the research I am doing is almost entirely abstract math (cryptography), but when I am standing next to a whiteboard trying to explain something, I sometimes have a need to do some multiplication.
Considering that a high school in the neighborhood where I grew up had the dubious honor of less than 40% of its students being able to pass a basic one-variable algebra exam, there is no excuse for giving the students less practice working out problems without calculators. It would be better if they were able to at least understand the most basic math and not run to a calculator than if they were unable to do any math and need a calculator just to subtract some numbers.
I was not thinking of engineers, to be honest. I was thinking of high school students, since high school is where I saw the overwhelming majority of graphing calculators being used.
If "getting caught up in the algebra" is a problem, then you need all the practice you can get. There is nothing wrong with being required to work out the algebra in a math course, and in high school physics and chemistry courses, it is rare for the algebra to go beyond basic quadratic equations or systems of linear equations, neither of which takes a terribly long time to work out.
The teacher's only solution would be to purchase additional TI calculators
Or they might wake up and realize that graphing calculators do not solve any educational goals. Then TI would be screwed, as teachers began requiring their students to actually understand math instead of just understanding how to push buttons.
As it turns out, and this was mentioned the last time there was a TI article on/., a common strategy schools use is to press the reset button on the calculator, which clears out BASIC programs and whatnot. It seems, however, that the reset button does not touch the firmware -- which is why TI is probably worried about this situation.
I am vehemently opposed to DRM, but I would not go as far as to claim that the companies pushing DRM want to control their users just for the sake of control. These people are not twirling their mustachios and laughing to each other about their evil plots -- they have a reason for wanting to control their users, and it almost always boils down to making money. TI is worried about losing the only remaining market for graphing calculators, so they will go to any length, including undermining user freedoms, to try to maintain that market.
the answers to common and uncommon questions are a quick search away
If you are asking the same question year after year, then sure, that is a problem. The solution is as clear as day: ask different questions on each exam. If a student looks up the answers to previous exams on Google, and from that is able to answer new questions...then what is the problem, exactly? The student learned how to solve the problems they are expected to be able to solve, which seems like a victory for education.
As for calculators, they should not be allowed on exams at all, or in classrooms. Math is not about pushing buttons, and if every math problem (even in physics and chemistry) a student encountered required them to find a solution without the assistance of a calculator, we would not have to water down math exams just to ensure that more than 50% of the students pass (maybe I am being a bit optimistic about the extra practice...).
The point is the fight, not whether or not a particular device has been cracked. TI (and to be fair, plenty of other companies) are engaged in a constant struggle to prevent users from exercising their right to run whatever software they want on their computers. You might construe it as, "Well you can still run the software, you just don't know how" but realistically speaking, the devices are being designed to thwart the user's attempt to install software without thwarting the manufacturer. That is a strike against us and our rights, regardless of how you phrase it.
The last time this came up on/., I said that it is probably about standardized tests. A number of people pointed out that when they were in school, calculators were reset to the factory defaults before they were allowed to use them on an exam. What I have to wonder about, though, is what it means to be reset to "factory defaults" -- I doubt that there is a second copy of the original firmware that will be forced to load when the reset button is pressed. More likely, "factory defaults" only means clearing anything the user created, but leaving the firmware intact.
Thus, if users can just install their own firmware, TI risks having the current illusion that teachers are under -- that the calculators are "less of a computer" than any other computer -- being undermined.
You cannot bring a laptop into a standardized test, that's why TI cares. The only real business TI has with its graphing calculators is high school (and to some extent, middle school) students, and only because the teachers are under the illusion that the calculators cannot do everything that a laptop can do.
I think the problem there is the use of Excel; I'm just going to quickly peruse the data with grep to see how many instances of my name are in there. It will take a while because of the size of the data set, sure, but I can just leave it running in the background while I do something else (since the work is done on a line-by-line basis and won't load the entire file into memory).
I would not be terribly surprised if the organizations that were listed had instructed their employees to download this torrent. IBM, for example, is interested in data mining, and this is a nice data set for testing algorithms on. Scientology probably wants to track current and former members, and is just grabbing anything that will help them in that effort.
Of course, as others pointed out, there is no indication that this is not just routine; it would be nice to know if other popular torrents were also being downloaded by computers in those IP ranges.
The public expectations of software are not particularly rigorous -- it shouldn't crash too often, it should look moderately pretty, and it should get them on the web. Done, done, and done. Can we go back to arguing and tribalism now?
Well to be fair, the media constantly bombards us with the message that working an ordinary job makes you a failure of some kind, and that if your life is anything less than glamorous, something is wrong with you. As you note, though, those jobs have to be filled -- the problem is that we keep telling people that they should be avoiding them.
Slashdot Mirror
The constitution certainly does matter, and the fifth amendment is more than just "cute." Of course, in my version of the world, the constitution protects individual rights, not corporate rights, but I guess that means I am out of touch with US policy.
Quit whining and start taking responsibility for your actions
This man didn't post anything. He is a Tor developer.
To put this another way, I am a cryptography researcher. Must I now be careful about what specific research I do? Should I be worried that I might be detained at an airport because of my work?
I really don't understand why it's even necessary to be sure any but math students understand the underlying math anymore
The underlying math still matters. Consider long division as an example; you might think there is no value in knowing long division, but as it turns out, the long division algorithm is a very important theorem in number theory, and many other results depend on it. Not only that, but in ring theory, the long division algorithm and many of the related results are generalized and a number of important ring theory results depend on that.
The basics should not be done away with simply because a machine is available to do the work for you, unless your only goal is job training.
In all seriousness, I am going to assume that your legal name carries less weight in China than the number they print on your government assigned ID card.
Because the US government never does anything the Chinese government does.
I have yet to see a "smart whiteboard" that I can both draw on using a cheap dry erase marker and that I can request calculations from. Really, the amount of time required to do some basic arithmetic on the whiteboard is a fraction of the time needed to even enter the numbers into a computer or calculator. Likewise with the cash register: the time needed to do some addition when someone randomly hands a cashier some extra change should be small if that cashier is actually capable of adding, smaller than the time needed to enter more information into the register itself.
As for hunting and navigation...well, I see nothing wrong with people knowing at least some basic techniques, even if they never actually have to use them.
Once people can be shown to understand what arithmetic means, its kinda silly to require them to not use tools.
Unfortunately, a number of high school students do not understand arithmetic and cannot do it -- their calculators become more of a crutch than a convenience.
You are obviously unfamiliar with the problems that face the American education system. Integration by parts? Substitution problems? People are graduating high school without ever having seen calculus. A system of 5 linear equations is tedious to work out, sure...but where I grew up (New York City), less than 40% of the students at many high schools were able to pass a test on basic linear equations (one at a time, not systems), where "passing" was defined as "at least 55% of the answers correct."
This may shock you, but most of what you described is considered "college level material" in the USA.
But why put the effort into making a piece of hardware better when the manufacturer clearly doesn't want you doing that?
Because we do not care what the manufacturer wants us to do with our hardware? We bought it, we'll use it however we want to, regardless of what the manufacturer says.
The important parts of math are abstract, not computational. It's a good thing to get rid of the tedious computation that you mastered back in 3rd grade. Removing calculators would be an artificial barrier to learning, like making students scan through paper volumes of trig tables.
Except that students are unable to do basic arithmetic these days. It is fine for an engineering undergrad to use a calculator to save some time, but when people are graduating high school and cannot multiply two numbers, there is a very serious problem. Yes, math is abstract, but the ability to compute a result still matters -- when I was a teenager working in an ice cream store, people would sometimes give me some change after I had entered everything into the cash register, and so I was forced to quickly do some arithmetic...and many of the kids working with me could not even handle that. Now I am in grad school, and I still find myself having to do basic arithmetic -- the research I am doing is almost entirely abstract math (cryptography), but when I am standing next to a whiteboard trying to explain something, I sometimes have a need to do some multiplication.
Considering that a high school in the neighborhood where I grew up had the dubious honor of less than 40% of its students being able to pass a basic one-variable algebra exam, there is no excuse for giving the students less practice working out problems without calculators. It would be better if they were able to at least understand the most basic math and not run to a calculator than if they were unable to do any math and need a calculator just to subtract some numbers.
I was not thinking of engineers, to be honest. I was thinking of high school students, since high school is where I saw the overwhelming majority of graphing calculators being used.
If "getting caught up in the algebra" is a problem, then you need all the practice you can get. There is nothing wrong with being required to work out the algebra in a math course, and in high school physics and chemistry courses, it is rare for the algebra to go beyond basic quadratic equations or systems of linear equations, neither of which takes a terribly long time to work out.
The teacher's only solution would be to purchase additional TI calculators
Or they might wake up and realize that graphing calculators do not solve any educational goals. Then TI would be screwed, as teachers began requiring their students to actually understand math instead of just understanding how to push buttons.
As it turns out, and this was mentioned the last time there was a TI article on /., a common strategy schools use is to press the reset button on the calculator, which clears out BASIC programs and whatnot. It seems, however, that the reset button does not touch the firmware -- which is why TI is probably worried about this situation.
I am vehemently opposed to DRM, but I would not go as far as to claim that the companies pushing DRM want to control their users just for the sake of control. These people are not twirling their mustachios and laughing to each other about their evil plots -- they have a reason for wanting to control their users, and it almost always boils down to making money. TI is worried about losing the only remaining market for graphing calculators, so they will go to any length, including undermining user freedoms, to try to maintain that market.
the answers to common and uncommon questions are a quick search away
If you are asking the same question year after year, then sure, that is a problem. The solution is as clear as day: ask different questions on each exam. If a student looks up the answers to previous exams on Google, and from that is able to answer new questions...then what is the problem, exactly? The student learned how to solve the problems they are expected to be able to solve, which seems like a victory for education.
As for calculators, they should not be allowed on exams at all, or in classrooms. Math is not about pushing buttons, and if every math problem (even in physics and chemistry) a student encountered required them to find a solution without the assistance of a calculator, we would not have to water down math exams just to ensure that more than 50% of the students pass (maybe I am being a bit optimistic about the extra practice...).
The point is the fight, not whether or not a particular device has been cracked. TI (and to be fair, plenty of other companies) are engaged in a constant struggle to prevent users from exercising their right to run whatever software they want on their computers. You might construe it as, "Well you can still run the software, you just don't know how" but realistically speaking, the devices are being designed to thwart the user's attempt to install software without thwarting the manufacturer. That is a strike against us and our rights, regardless of how you phrase it.
The last time this came up on /., I said that it is probably about standardized tests. A number of people pointed out that when they were in school, calculators were reset to the factory defaults before they were allowed to use them on an exam. What I have to wonder about, though, is what it means to be reset to "factory defaults" -- I doubt that there is a second copy of the original firmware that will be forced to load when the reset button is pressed. More likely, "factory defaults" only means clearing anything the user created, but leaving the firmware intact.
Thus, if users can just install their own firmware, TI risks having the current illusion that teachers are under -- that the calculators are "less of a computer" than any other computer -- being undermined.
You cannot bring a laptop into a standardized test, that's why TI cares. The only real business TI has with its graphing calculators is high school (and to some extent, middle school) students, and only because the teachers are under the illusion that the calculators cannot do everything that a laptop can do.
I think the problem there is the use of Excel; I'm just going to quickly peruse the data with grep to see how many instances of my name are in there. It will take a while because of the size of the data set, sure, but I can just leave it running in the background while I do something else (since the work is done on a line-by-line basis and won't load the entire file into memory).
I would not be terribly surprised if the organizations that were listed had instructed their employees to download this torrent. IBM, for example, is interested in data mining, and this is a nice data set for testing algorithms on. Scientology probably wants to track current and former members, and is just grabbing anything that will help them in that effort.
Of course, as others pointed out, there is no indication that this is not just routine; it would be nice to know if other popular torrents were also being downloaded by computers in those IP ranges.
Why not look at a language like, say, AWK? Really basic, great for creating useful filter programs, and fairly widespread.
Also, a lot of people disagree with paying for apps as that goes against the purpose and concept of free software
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html
Do no evil*
* Unless there is a significant financial interest to be evil.
The public expectations of software are not particularly rigorous -- it shouldn't crash too often, it should look moderately pretty, and it should get them on the web. Done, done, and done. Can we go back to arguing and tribalism now?
Well to be fair, the media constantly bombards us with the message that working an ordinary job makes you a failure of some kind, and that if your life is anything less than glamorous, something is wrong with you. As you note, though, those jobs have to be filled -- the problem is that we keep telling people that they should be avoiding them.