Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users
Google

Web Adequacy.org
Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an unofficial archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page or the footnote if you have questions.
 Keep them ignorant

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Mar 06, 2002
 Comments:
I make money due to a huge amount of ignorance on behalf of the general public. I like it that way. All of these communist values of "education" and "independence" are wrong. Sick and wrong. I believe the real reason we've hit a recession is due to the recent increase in gifted amatuers taking money away from people like me. I discourage this kind of DIY behavior. Remember kids, computers are magical boxes that blow up if you open them. Windows can reach you through the keyboard with tiny little finger demons if you're not me.
diaries

More diaries by corpanarchy
A world ruled by Posh
Free speech, but only if you like babies
Eugenics? Feminism? Ain't much difference
People deserve to be screwed by telephone sidekicks
IBM is the best computer manufacturer
I hope I get phone jacked
Sweat Shops



You're more right than you know. (none / 0) (#1)
by elenchos on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 11:26:17 AM PST
Dangerous knowledge should be not be given away to just anybody.


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill


Hah! (none / 0) (#2)
by budlite on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 11:33:10 AM PST
I did wonder how long it'd be before you dragged that one up again.


You think my beliefs are some fickle game? (5.00 / 1) (#4)
by elenchos on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 11:54:35 AM PST
I shall keep "dragging up" my core ideas again and again. Why? Because they are true, and because they are what the world needs to hear right now. Some of us are sheep (i.e. you) and some are leaders of men, the public intellectuals whose ideas shape the future (that's me).

Yes, I may be a voice crying out in the wilderness now, but some day my service to Truth will be recognized for what it is.


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill


Yes, and ineffective one. (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by The Mad Scientist on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 01:30:55 PM PST
I shall keep "dragging up" my core ideas again and again. Why? Because they are true, and because they are what the world needs to hear right now. Some of us are sheep (i.e. you) and some are leaders of men, the public intellectuals whose ideas shape the future (that's me).

And some are punks who don't give a light curse about the sheep nor the self-appointed leaders and their petty "rules" and like to do things on their own. Like me.

Yes, I may be a voice crying out in the wilderness now, but some day my service to Truth will be recognized for what it is.

Knowledge blackmarket, anyone?

I see a dark street: "Hey! Wanna something? Mary Jane, cocaine, gcc? Or a new debugger?"

And knowledge and tools will be as available as before. Who will want it, will get it.


Yeah... (3.66 / 3) (#6)
by hauntedattics on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 01:43:40 PM PST
you're a real rebel there, Paco.

Now don't you have a computer to fix, or something?



Better a rebel... (2.00 / 3) (#7)
by The Mad Scientist on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 01:50:48 PM PST
...than a sheep.


Baa. (none / 0) (#22)
by hauntedattics on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 11:30:40 AM PST
You just keep believing that if you want to, and maybe someday, Ayn Rand 2.0 will write a book about you.



 
Better a rebel... (none / 0) (#17)
by The Mad Scientist on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 12:25:57 AM PST
..than a sheep.


 
Yeah (none / 0) (#20)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 09:36:45 AM PST
I can just see all the geeks haning out in the 'hood, buying compilers from the same guy who sell rock cocaine.

You'd get pistol whipped for your bankroll so fast you wouldn't be able to scream.


 
whoa (1.00 / 1) (#9)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 05:32:32 PM PST
Some of us are sheep (i.e. you) and some are leaders of men, the public intellectuals whose ideas shape the future (that's me).

I have been reading your dribble for quite sometime. It's rather amusing how this supposed campaign is going nowhere. Your utter lack of technical expertise far from makes you qualified to pass judgements on tools and utilities and the free exchange of ideas. I have seen absolutely no change. Rather I have seen an increase in these freedoms and tools you loath so much.

What amazes me is that you seem to love the principle and ideals on which the United States was founded yet constantly bewilder us with hypocritical statements. It's seems that rather than believe in the very foundations of the United States of America you would prefer a country in which self proclaimed intellectuals have freedoms and the rest do not. It is almost as if I and no one else has the freedom to disagree. That is the foundation of America.

Don't like it? Fine. Take all that supposed millions/billions that you editors claim to have and buy your own damn country. I seriously doubt anyone would have much of an objection.


Contradiction? Where? (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by elenchos on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 05:50:45 PM PST
If you think that anything I have ever posted is contradictory, by all means, point out the location of this supposed contradiction. I would gladly examine your evidence.

As far as your ignorance of the progress of our campaign to end hacking, perhaps you need to stop writing viruses and stealing IP Tokens for once and go inform yourself a little. Don't blame me for your own lack of knowledge.

It is true that your perceived freedom, and that of other terrorists, is increasing. I would argue that terrorism is actually winning right now. Perhaps it is too late, and banning programming and ending hacking will not be enough to prevent the fall of civilization.

The irony, of course, is that when fundamentalist Islam takes over, there will not only be no hacking, there will be no Internet and no computers. Then you will wish you had listened to me, eh?


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill


you point (1.00 / 2) (#13)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 08:39:48 PM PST
If you think that anything I have ever posted is contradictory, by all means, point out the location of this supposed contradiction. I would gladly examine your evidence.
It's not necessary to point out sepcific sentences. I have read extremely long post that you fail to even acknowledge any portion of it. You simple revert to pretending to be a psychologist. I think possibly you need to go out into the real world and spend a little less time sitting out home watching Fraiser. You article and many of your post are in regards to eliminating all the basic freedoms of even legal activities simply because you take no part in them. I'm sorry but not everyone in the world wishes to be a pompous jackass clones of elenchos.
As far as your ignorance of the progress of our campaign to end hacking, perhaps you need to stop writing viruses and stealing IP Tokens for once and go inform yourself a little. Don't blame me for your own lack of knowledge.
You think for someone with a bio that states "He is a computer scientist" you would have a better understanding of the subject you are referring to. First of all, no where did I meantion that I was a software engineer. I wouldn't know how to write a virus if someone were to tell me. Your pitiful assumptions are amuzing. Secondly, if you were a computer scientist or someone with basic understandings of networking (such as a pathetic MCSE) you would no that there are no such things as IP tokens. I would seriously love to know what this technology supposedly is. It's seems odd that a token is nothing more than a a method for communication on a network referred to as token passing.

A communications network access method that uses a continuously repeating frame (the token) that is transmitted onto the network by the controlling computer. When a terminal or computer wants to send a message, it waits for an empty token. When it finds one, it fills it with the address of the destination station and some or all of its message.

Every node on the network constantly monitors the passing tokens to determine if it is a recipient of a message, in which case it "grabs" the message and resets the token status to empty. Token passing uses bus and ring topologies.


It seems rather odd that you have yet to present any sort of evidence that would suggest that your campaign has been successful. Well, at least not your campaign. Surely you have mention anti-copying methods used on compact discs to prevent them from being burn onto, for example, a mixed CD for your own listening pleasure. You have failed to mention that these methods are so utterly full of bugs that the retail copy (not the one burned yourself) will not even play properly on standard CD players.

Maybe you a referring to Microsoft threatening to pull Windows from the market completely. Yet this has nothing to do with the removal of various programs and application you claim are nothing more than "hacker tools "(although you have never mention how thigs such as the command prompt are such).

But wait, that has more to do with Microsoft's misinterpretation of the guidelines proposed by the states still suing Microsoft. Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer (Bill Gate's right hand man) even gave a deposition making the entire company look like a pack of idiots and liars. MS has asked for time to, as one author put it, it's going to take time for the Beastly spinmeisters to figure out how to mis-characterize the now-clarified position of their opponents.
It is true that your perceived freedom, and that of other terrorists, is increasing.
I do not hold the same ideals as those of any terrorist. I was referring to the freedoms put forth by the Constituion. Perhaps you should read it sometime as you see to have a rather imaginative understanding of what's in it.
I would argue that terrorism is actually winning right now.
TRANSLATION: No one with a bit of intelligence is buying into our bullshit.
Perhaps it is too late, and banning programming and ending hacking will not be enough to prevent the fall of civilization.
The only way you could do this is to remove technology from the hands of normal people. Drugs are illegal yet they are still bought, sold, and used.
The irony, of course, is that when fundamentalist Islam takes over, there will not only be no hacking, there will be no Internet and no computers.
So now we have gone from communists to Islmaic radicals? It seems that the enemy of the day is whoever, is the bad guy in the news that month. Who's next? The Isrealis or the Palestinians? Possibly Pat Robertson and the Kristian KKKoalition?
Then you will wish you had listened to me, eh?
Sure. Just let me know when you say something intelligent.


Back to Micro-Soft again. (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by elenchos on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 09:12:40 PM PST
I should have guessed you would bring that company up. Do you have any idea how difficult it is for healthy people to understand how some software company could become the single most important thing in anyone's inner life? All I can say is I'm glad I don't work there. I'd be afraid some Lunix lunatic would try to shoot me to impress Jodi Foster.

But do you know who is really to blame? Of course you don't. Ronald Reagan is to blame. Yes! Ronald Reagan, who had his own problems with obsessive loners like yourself. Reagan decided to cut of Federal funding for keeping the mentally ill institutionalized, and the result was a mass exodus from the American madhouses. Those of us who were there remember the sudden increase in aggessive and even violent homeless people.

And in a few short years, what happened? Free Software. Lunix. Then high school massacres by teenage Lunix hackers and international terrorists depending on hacker know-how to carry out their plots. All because the Republicans were too cheap to keep the mental cases of the world locked up for their own protection and ours.

Such a shame.

As far as your obvious attempt to trick me into giving out my knowledge of IP Tokens for every J. Random Hacker Terrorist to use against us, nice try! Nice try, my Bill Gates-obsessed weirdo. Nice try, lone wanker who thinks Steve Ballmer is his Darth Vader father. Nice try, but not today.

Now run along.


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill


saw that one coming (none / 0) (#19)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 02:47:05 AM PST
I should have guessed you would bring that company up. Do you have any idea how difficult it is for healthy people to understand how some software company could become the single most important thing in anyone's inner life?
Go back and read your article. I really think it would aid you in forming a better response. The reason people mention Microsoft when you bring up your campaign is because the article makes references to Microsoft. Either tahy include the tools to make through because of pressure. This is rather odd as Microsoft doesn't have to bow to consumers. In fact MS is know for mandating what consumer want. Your article and post also seem to suggest that Ms will rally beyond your campaign. What have they done lately? Nothing.

Another reason is that you and others like you seem to believe that Microsoft got where it is today through innovation. This couldn'y be farther from the truth. It's funny how you believe that the philosphy of Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish could be regarded as innovation.
All I can say is I'm glad I don't work there. I'd be afraid some Lunix lunatic would try to shoot me to impress Jodi Foster.
What would you do there anyway? Obviously you lack any technical expertise. So maybe you'd be...a janitor?
But do you know who is really to blame? Of course you don't.
I know exactly who is too blame. The Republicans, but not for the reason you listed. The US government withdrawal from defense of open standards.

So why the withdrawal by the government in the first place? The retreat of federal involvement has been based on a combination of ideological opposition, private industry desires, and the disappearance of a stable government bureaucracy able to assume the role of regulator. This has left Internet development increasingly in the hands of self-interested companies seeking commercial advantage rather than maximum innovation and compatibility for consumers.

The ideological assault on federal involvement in further developments of the Internet is strongly related to the end of the Cold War and the withdrawal of the "national security" basis for much of the federal government's economic involvement since World War II. It was probably not a coincidence that ARPA director Craig Fields, criticized for ARPA's involvement in trying to direct the development of high technology, was fired by the Bush Administration in 1989--the same year as the fall of the Berlin Wall. While the Clinton administration made some gestures in asserting a public interest in the development of what they called the National Information Infrastructure, privatization proceeded apace. What limited funds the Clinton Administration allocated for encouraging community and local government development of the Internet was vociferously opposed by conservatives in Congress and, with the Republican takeover of the Congress in 1994, those funds were initially zeroed out and in the end sharply limited, even as local need for the funds exploded with the expansion of the Net.

As for Internet standards, criticism had already been leveled against the University of Illinois and NCSA for attempting to manage the expansion of the World Wide Web and, in the context of Newt Gingrich's anti-government message, there was probably even less support for government regulation of standards.
As far as your obvious attempt to trick me into giving out my knowledge of IP Tokens for every J. Random Hacker Terrorist to use against us, nice try! Nice try, my Bill Gates-obsessed weirdo. Nice try, lone wanker who thinks Steve Ballmer is his Darth Vader father. Nice try, but not today.
Amazing how someone with such an idiotic grasp of the basic concepts of networking would hold this information a secret. It's not as if I care as it's a simple imaginary concept devised solely to make arguments against open source software development. As one aurthor put it:

By moving Bill Gates to the role of chief software architect (although he hasn't done anything since the development of BASIC), Microsoft probably hopes to cast him in the light of futurist-guru-visionary. On the other hand, Steve Ballmer as CEO plays the role of company cheerleader (one need only watch his infamous "Developers" speech to see proof).

Don't forget to patch the token ring into the ethernet switch in order to enhance the collision rate on the bitmap decoder algorithm! This will greatly improve memory index of your firewall, limiting access the html stored in you Windows Temporary Internet Files folder. This in turn will eliminate a hacker's ability to to decrease the contrast of you video card and crack the binaries of the CMOS then plant spyware such as the infamous Bonzi Buddy in your monitor's RAM drive.

I can make up funny shit too.


Why would a Computer Scientist work at Micro-Soft? (none / 0) (#23)
by elenchos on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 03:28:06 PM PST
Well, actually, your kind of confusion is rather common. When you think of "computers" you think of the computers you know and use every day, and so naturally you think Computer Science must have something to do with the computer applications you use every day, such as Micro-Soft Outlook or .NET.

But these things, useful and even indispensable as they are, have as much to do with Computer Science as changing a tire has to do with being CEO of General Motors. Yes, we Computer Scientists have a passing familiarity with how the Internet works and the tools that are used to make your PC applications, but we don't use them ourselves!

Can you imagine? How much scientific research would I get done if I were to try to write "C+ code" or waste my time learning the difference between TCP and IP? It would be like dissassembling the plumbing in my house just to learn what I needed to take a piss!

I have enormous respect for those who shoulder the burden of writing computer code or building "networks" or "de-bugging" -- I find their colorful jargon terribly droll and even envy the quite warm and earnest primitiveness of their blue-collor lifestyle.

But really. I am a Computer Scientist. What would happen to the social order if I forgot my place? Speaking of which, haven't you lost track of yours? Mmmm?


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill


huh? (none / 0) (#33)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 11:15:37 PM PST
When you think of "computers" you think of the computers you know and use every day, and so naturally you think Computer Science must have something to do with the computer applications you use every day, such as Micro-Soft Outlook or .NET.
Let's see, Computer Science gee what else could that mean? The study of plants?
Yes, we Computer Scientists have a passing familiarity with how the Internet works and the tools that are used to make your PC applications, but we don't use them ourselves!
Wrong. A computer scientist is someone with an understanding of how things work in order to develop and innovate. This would obviously mean that would use them at some point or another. You claiming now to be a computer scientist is rather funny. In previous posts I read you had written "never did I claim to be a computer scientist". The argument you set forth would mean I could claim to be a biologist simply because I know I am alive.
But really. I am a Computer Scientist.
Computer Scientist
The field of computer hardware and software. It includes systems analysis & design, application and system software design and programming and datacenter operations. For young students, the emphasis in typically on learning a programming language or running a personal computer with little attention to information science, the study of information and its uses.

I would like to refer to the second half regarding young students. When one seeks training they are often taught to run a personal. This is achieve familiarity with the PC. However, it is ually limited to a single OS and only a handful of application. While this is sometimes referred to as computer science it is really just basic Pc training. It does not however, make you a computer scientist. If you study these same things when taking business courses it doesn't mean you then have the ability to slap computer scientist on you r�sum�.

Sure in the past various public schools have tried to impress dopey parents by calling it something that simply sounds more impressive. Rather it is a set of courses to better prepare you for course in computer science.


Cat got your link? (none / 0) (#34)
by elenchos on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 11:34:59 PM PST
Your memory is a bit sloppy. I have said I am not a programmer, nor am I a Network "Engineer" (droll, that "engineer" title, eh?), nor am I any other kind of maintenance technician or production line worker. Would that I were! I would love to enjoy the union benefits that they get.

Not that I'm complaining. Being in a leadership position has it's advantages too.

Anyway, who are you fooling? Does putting your made-up beliefs in some kind of citation quote format give them any more authority? Am I to believe that the field I have been distinguishing myself in all these years is in reality some manual trade, and somehow no one told me?

This is silly beyond belief. Hardware! Frankly, I and most of my colleagues would probably electrocute ourselves if we so much as attempted to touch a piece of hardware!

The very idea... really. Rest assured, I have people around do that sort of work.


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill


here's some (none / 0) (#35)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Mar 8th, 2002 at 11:15:31 AM PST
To me, Science means the open-minded pursuit of new knowledge. You observe your environment, imagine what it means, and formulate the means to test if you have created a truth. It is about exploration, not about accumulating a bunch of facts that someone else discovered or created. Pirsig in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance makes this point well (prior to the racist epilogue, but nevermind that...). Someone who approaches the repair of their motorcycle with an empty, unprejudiced mind and simply plays with it, experiments, and in a disciplined and honest way records what they learn (not what someone else knows -- what THEY learn) is a Motorcycle Scientist.

And this is what has given me my success as a Computer Scientist. Not because I meet some pedestrian definition of a "real computer scientist" because I happen to have memorized mere facts a, b, and c. Nor because I pretend to be a "programmer", professionally certified or otherwise. And certainly not a Net-Work "Engineer".


Sounds more like your just an average user who happened to look up so facts from time to time. However, you seem to have a real problem when it comes time to recall them. Did you really write this or was it one of the other hippy flower children you smoke pot with?

And how does this connect with this accusation of posing as a "questionable" Computer Scientist? The only pose I ever struck was one in the mode of exactly what I am: a quite legitimate Computer Scientist. Nothing "questionable" there, rest assured.

Legitimate? Now who definition is that? Professional or you pot smoking hippy child of children of the 60s one above?

You are, surprisingly, correct in saying I have not proven that I am a Computer Scientist. Those in the field whose points of view matter are already aware of who I am and what my credentials are. Those outside the field have no need to know such things. How would they even recognize my credentials if they saw them?

Now you are claiming that a real computer scientist (in the professional sense) would regard you has being someone that fits the definition of a computer scientist (again professional, not your own).

I am going to be just like you elenchos. I guess I should rewrite my resume. That may be the real reason (if you're not completely full of shit) that you still have a job. I will revise my resume. According to you if I know a few fun facts and have a passing knowledge and am always willing to learn more I can consider myself a scientist. I wonder if that works for other things too.

I know a few things about living things. So I should put biologist. I did demolition and am an explosive expert. I know what chemicals make things go BOOM! I am able to apply various mathematical formulas to predict the outcome of the explosion. I know that if it's thrown at a certain speed it will travel a certain distant, etc, etc. I guess I should add physicist.

Hopefully your employer never bothers to actual do his/her job and perform a background check.

Joseph Kilmwell
MOUS, MCSE, MCP, MCSD


Resumes are for nobodies. (none / 0) (#36)
by elenchos on Fri Mar 8th, 2002 at 11:36:29 AM PST
The reason I don't need to produce evidence to prove who and what I am is that it is not neccessary. I simply tell them my name and that sufficies. Anyone who hasn't heard of me would not be doing Computer Science work anyway and I would never be interested in working with them. With them not for them, mind you. I'm not some hireling, some employee, although of course I have nothing but respect for those who earn their daily bread by the sweat of their brows.

I take this as a retraction of your accusation that I "never claimed to be a Computer Scientist". The best you could find was me saying I have no need to prove it, which is altogether a different thing.

Still, we have nothing to support you vicious accusation that I contradicted myself, nor anything to support any of your wild claims. And you call me a hippy? Sticks and stones.


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill


proof gone (none / 0) (#37)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Mar 8th, 2002 at 12:48:31 PM PST
No it seems rather odd though. I seem to recall as well you getting into a heated debate with eith one of the many anonymous readers (or was it NAWL). You had written "I never claimed to be a computer scientist". I wish that all like these other people had the time to pour through your posts. However, since you are an editor it would be just as easy to delete any of these posts now wouldn't it? I seem to recall this particular thread disappearing for a little while. It magicly popped up shortly afterwards with a response you had written.

And it seems rather odd that someone with your limited knowledge would only need to speak his name. There are only a few people who could do such a thing. I can assure you that you are not one of them.

You stated that you have no need to learn how to program or to learn the difference between TCP and IP. TCP/IP stack for example is not hardware, it's software. It's computer science. More precisely under the sub category Data Communications. It seems rather odd that someone with an utter lack of knowledge would be so high regarded in such a field.

If you don't wish to prove that you are a computer scientist then for once prove that you have any knowledge that would make anyone in that industry have even an ounce of repect for you. That is if you can tear yourself away from righting opinion based dribble and linux/hacker bashing.

>>>This is silly beyond belief. Hardware! Frankly, I and most of my colleagues would probably electrocute ourselves if we so much as attempted to touch a piece of hardware!

Obviously you are no Douglas Englebart (the innovator of one of the first graphic interfaces and "father" of the computer mouse) or Tim Berners-Lee (Enquire Within Upon Everything).

You seem to believe that someone has been making any sort of references to hardware and hardware alone. As I mentioned before TCP and IP are software. No one has been trying to make a software hardware field debate. Seeing as how you are obviously not a computer scientist it's apparent that you can't tell the difference. Any real computer scientist would also be able to tell you that the lines between the study of hardware and software are very blurry. Being able to do a google search doesn't make you one either. Today you will find very few "server monkeys" that don't know the principle behind such things as the TCP/IP suite. There is no such thing hadware and software. It's not black and white.


You might want to try... (none / 0) (#38)
by elenchos on Fri Mar 8th, 2002 at 05:21:13 PM PST
...something like this. Looks like your words, not mine. Unfalsifiable claims about deleted comments just make you seem all the more like a dangerous net.kook who would still be locked away to this day had Jimmy Carter and not the evil Ronald R. Reagan been inagurated President in 1981 as he rightfully deserved.

Nothing pleases me more than to have nothing at all in common with a reputed hacker like Douglas Englebart or the notorious Tim Berners-Lee. I do legitimate Computer Science, not anti-social and illegal computer crime.

I never even heard of these shadowy men until I began my hobby of investigating the dark underbelly of the computing world and discovered it lousy with wicked, wicked, wicked hackers.

Oh, and Computer Scientists have nothing to do with "software" either. Didn't I scoff at the idea of a Computer Scientist working at Micro-Soft, a major software company? Software is the implementaion of the fruits of our Scientific research. It's an interesting trade, and I'm sure many family men support their wives and children laboring at it, but what does it have to do with Science?


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill


are you ignorant or what? (none / 0) (#39)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Mar 8th, 2002 at 10:07:46 PM PST
Nothing pleases me more than to have nothing at all in common with a reputed hacker like Douglas Engelbart or the notorious Tim Berners-Lee. I do legitimate Computer Science, not anti-social and illegal computer crime.

I never even heard of these shadowy men until I began my hobby of investigating the dark underbelly of the computing world and discovered it lousy with wicked, wicked, wicked hackers.
Maybe you should go back and read the article Celebrating 2000 Years of British Achievement, even though it contains error such as crediting TBL with the invention of the Internet rather than the web. I'm sure the author, iat would have something to say about the comment you made about Time Berners-Lee.

As for Douglas Engelbart
One of the most radical innovations was the SKETCHPAD program by Ivan Sutherland which allowed the first graphic manipulation of computer images, thereby allowing users to resize and manipulate pictures on the computer screen. Ivan Sutherland would go on to run ARPA (now DARPA) and would hire a NASA engineer named Bob Taylor to run the IPTO office after Licklider. Both would use their positions to further promote the creation of breakthrough computing and encourage collaboration across the country.

A key part of this was funding for the Augmentation Research Center (ARC) at the Stanford Research Institute. ARC was run by an researcher Doug Engelbart whose ideas on use of the computer as an aid to individual creativity largely paralleled Licklider's. Taylor pushed through a multi million-dollar grant for computers and staff for ARC's proposed "augmentation laboratory." Out of ARC's lab would come an array of researchers who would go on to become leaders of their own research teams at universities and commercial R&D divisions across the country.

Engelbart worked from Sutherland's precedent to concentrate on using the computer to manipulate text and ideas on the screen. Working with seventeen colleagues and going through three rapid cycles of hardware revolution, by 1968 he was ready to publicly demonstrate the results at an engineering conference called the ACM/IEEE Joint Computer Conference in San Francisco. And the results stunned the audience.
Oh, and Computer Scientists have nothing to do with "software" either.
The study of computers, including both hardware and software design. Computer science is composed of many broad disciplines, including artificial intelligence and software engineering.

A computer scientist is someone who has a deep understanding of these concepts and implements them. A computer scientist is not a scientist with knowing the science behind what they are doing. Just because you know a thing or to doesn't make you a computer scientist. I know how to type on a keyboard. Does that make a computer scientist simply because I can implement that? No.

I seriously suggest you take a look at the IEEE Computing Society.

How about this. If you, Tim Berners-Lee, Linus Torvalds, and Douglas Engelbart were to walk into a corporation which was looking for innovation (not publicity), which 3 people would they most like to work with and which one would be running out crying? I'll give a hint...YOU


 
You're wrong, of course (5.00 / 3) (#15)
by jvance on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 09:30:05 PM PST
The irony, of course, is that when fundamentalist Islam takes over, there will not only be no hacking, there will be no Internet and no computers. Then you will wish you had listened to me, eh?

Oh, there'll be plenty of hacking when Islam takes over. There won't be much typing afterwards, though.

Bloody IP thieves.
--
Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

 
My time... (none / 0) (#3)
by jvance on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 11:54:14 AM PST
...is worth considerably more than yours. I can't be bothered with trifles such as keeping the IP Token Ring Ethernet Router on my CPU humming along at peak efficiency, just as I can't be bothered with the mechanical details of servicing my Bentley.

That's where common tradesmen such as yourself come in. Now kindly get back to work. My foot-pedal is acting up again.
--
Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

comical (1.00 / 3) (#8)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 05:18:13 PM PST
I can't be bothered with trifles such as keeping the IP Token Ring Ethernet Router on my CPU humming along at peak efficiency
Oh goodie, this again. As if the IP Token wasn't funny enough let's combine Ethernet and Token Ring (two different network topologies), add a router, and the mysterious some how unknown to the entire industry IP Token (that was supposedly invented by Microsoft according to osm). To think that businesses have these machines called routers when they could just use their CPUs. Somebody call Intel, Cisco, Belkin, Linksys, and anyone else you can think of. This guy just found out something Intel, AMD and all the other CPU manufacturers obviously didn't know about.

That is unless you're one of those idiots that thinks CPU refers to the entire unit rather than a chip which fits onto the motherboard. Man to think I read all the texts from respected organisations (and Microsoft too) and none have ever mentioned the wonderful technology of IP Token Ring Ethernet Routers on CPUs. I guess my engineering degree is worthless.


I think.. (3.00 / 1) (#10)
by JoePain on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 05:44:20 PM PST
That this show of ignorance was part of the effect he was trying to create with his post.


 
Not comical (none / 0) (#12)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 06:08:36 PM PST
It's just that some of us have REAL JOBS to perform, because we're not janitors!

A glass pane on the LCD projector broke in Room 315, d00d. Go clean it up!


But funny. (5.00 / 1) (#25)
by The Mad Scientist on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 05:13:46 PM PST
It's just that some of us have REAL JOBS to perform, because we're not janitors!

Janitors?

When a suit spills his coffee over his precious memos, he usually can wipe it himself.

But even so simple thing like putting a magenta plug to magenta hole and green plug to green hole is apparently too intellectually challenging for many of them. What a sight, a Fortune 500 CEO helplessly waiting for someone to plug his phone in or switch on his printer!

Why so many users switch their brain off at the moment they switch their computer on?

There should be mandatory technosurvival crash courses. I can easy put up with people being unable to read tcpdump outputs. I think rather about the "it will work better when switched on" sort of literacy.

A glass pane on the LCD projector broke in Room 315, d00d. Go clean it up!

The marketroids dropped it again?


 
Re: (none / 0) (#16)
by tkatchev on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 10:25:36 PM PST
Your brain is worthless, d00d. Time to insert a fresh one and reformat, or something.

P.S. Where do idiots like you come from?


--
Peace and much love...




 
Ah niche market (none / 0) (#18)
by corpanarchy on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 02:35:25 AM PST
Token ring? Token ring? Do your clients use Microsoft Stone Tablet v 3.11 for Word processing as well? (Extra cost for Microsoft peripheral chisel)

You can keep your obscure knowledge and strange sense of superiority. I prefer to exist in these modern times....



Missed point (none / 0) (#21)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 09:51:39 AM PST
I think you missed the point entirely.

When those of us who say things like, "I need to be in New York in a half an hour", say things like that, we mean them. We are going there to put the finishing touches on deals that are worth billions and affect the lives of hundreds of thousands of commoners. I simply identify a need (getting to New York in a half an hour) and task one of my many underlings with securing the method by which it will happen.

If I dash off a memo to another Fortune 500 CEO, I care very little about the electronic trickery involved in getting it there. I don't care a bit about lasers or wires or fibers, beyond the numbers that appear on the spreadsheet read to me by a member of the accounting department so that I may give the go ahead for the Communications Improvement Project. Come to think of it, I don't even care about that. Maybe I will hire someone to handle those details.

It matters not whether my computer contains Microsoft Tablet, Bank Street Writer, or Lenix Emacs, just like it matters not whether I get to New York by Lear jet, autogyro, or heliotrope. All that matters is that my wishes are brought to fruition.


Subtle note (none / 0) (#24)
by The Mad Scientist on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 05:01:32 PM PST
I don't care a bit about lasers or wires or fibers, beyond the numbers that appear on the spreadsheet read to me by a member of the accounting department so that I may give the go ahead for the Communications Improvement Project.

...Until the whole corp will go to its knees because a failure that could've prevented or recovered if you wouldn't year and half ago refuse to sign that "overly expensive" security audit, that "unnecessary" disk array, and that "nothing will happen anyway" offsite backup facility.


That's why... (none / 0) (#26)
by hauntedattics on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 06:16:22 PM PST
excellent CEOs hire excellent CIOs. It's a basic principle of management.



He's a product of the Soviet education system. (5.00 / 1) (#27)
by elenchos on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 06:46:24 PM PST
And there's no helping that.

Subconsciously, his beliefs are dominated by the idea that some day the proletariat will rise up and take their rightful place in the order of things. His inverted ordering that places those who know how to twiddle wires above the "suits" is the tip of an iceberg that is easily recognized, could we but look below the surface, as the "dictatorship of the proletariat."

What a dream to have! But then underneath it all, it seems nearly everyone stars as Cinderella in their own private drama, awaiting Prince Charming to come along and establish the Thousand Year Reich or the Kingdom of Heaven or what have you.


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill


 
I'm sorry, (none / 0) (#28)
by jvance on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 08:05:22 PM PST
but there's such a thing as an "excellent CIO"? If they were truly excellent they'd be CEOs, no? Every one to a man that I've encountered babbled on about "continuous improvement" and other such balderdash. If you want peak productivity, bring on the whip!
--
Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

 
I'm sorry, (none / 0) (#29)
by jvance on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 08:07:15 PM PST
but there's such a thing as an "excellent CIO"? If they were truly excellent they'd be CEOs, no? Every one to a man that I've encountered babbled on about "continuous improvement" and other such balderdash. If you want peak productivity, bring on the whip!
--
Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

Crap. Please delete duplicate parent and this. (none / 0) (#30)
by jvance on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 08:10:14 PM PST

--
Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

Oh NOW you want your shit deleted? (5.00 / 1) (#31)
by elenchos on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 08:20:26 PM PST
Sure, sure Joe. I delete for you real good. You hungry? I cook for you too. Anything you want, you got it.

Adequacy.org best service anywhere!


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill


It's still there. (none / 0) (#32)
by jvance on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 08:26:52 PM PST
Hurry up chop chop!
--
Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

 

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.