While I have no wish to demean their efforts, this approach still seems somewhat brutal to me. I'm no neurologist, but isn't this still a rather macro-level view of things, with the cutting process still causing damage to the fine structures they want to study?

It seems likely to me that future scientists will look back at this in not too long with stifled laugher and perhaps a little shock at the approach.

I read that and my inner monologue immediately thought, "Now I'm on a horse."

Or possibly, that they are smart enough to recognize that having "something" to show possible investors (and more importantly, current investors) is worth a great deal more than a framework that can't be demonstrated.

Don't get me wrong -- I really, *really* hope that the security model gets implemented well in Diaspora, and they don't get destracted by "ooh, shiny!" syndrome. But expecting them to go to folks who have given them money -- people who likely know even less about security than these college students -- and say, "This mystery code will work, it's really better, we just can't demonstrate it," is unreasonable.

Prototype first, then refine. Bugs happen, just fix them and move on. It looks like they're on their way to me. If you (or others) think you can fix these bugs or fundamental flaws in their security model, talk to them. You might just find yourself a job at a potentially big startup.

I'd have modded you up, had you not posted AC. That was a perfectly applicable reference! For those not familiar, here is a quick explanation:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concepts_in_the_Ender's_Game_series#Fantasy_Game

Easy -- just put two peltiers together, hot sides facing each other. Problem solved! ;-)

Yes, you're absolutely right. But I thought it was important to note the effort to document the "bad" art, however small.

Negative examples are powerful, whether they be in art, history, programming, or any other branch of human endeavor or record keeping. If we "forget it and remember the stuff worth remembering", then we are doomed to repeat it.

Actually, we do.

And it does indeed "give context to the goodness." By seeing negative examples, we can better appreciate what it is about "good" art that we enjoy. Plus, it gives one the chance to wince, laugh and point at an art exhibit, without feeling like you're breaking social rules. It's quite refreshing, and the art truly is terrible.*

* Not as terrible as Boxbot though. (Inside joke for fans of Gunnerkrigg Court)

Same here, except my coffee pot just broke (seriously) -- so now I have a deranged voice saying COFFEE over and over in my head, and I have no way to appease it!! This is not cool.

My hat's off to you, sir. A first post that was relevant and funny -- very well done!

At the risk of sounding sentimental, what keeps me coming back to slashdot is the people. Granted, lots of new folks keep showing up here, but they tend to leave for more popular sites like Digg and Reddit. I'm fine with that; the Eternal September can just roll on by.

I'm not in as much of a hurry as I once was, and a day or two isn't going to kill me. Plus, time does wonders for weeding out the interesting from the merely sensational. This story might not be the best example of that, but even when it's not "stuff that matters," if it is somehow related to nerds and we've had a few days to hear and think about it, then the discussion here is likely to be more insightful.

Or not. :-)

Either way, it's nice to come by here and see some long-standing friends whom I've never met personally. Whether the discussion of the day is logical disourse, blatant fanboyism, heated rhetoric, well-earned snarkery, complaining about editors, or just lighthearted BS about whatever rabbit trail we've found ourselves on, I know I am in for an enjoyable time.

So sit back, read, laugh, be challenged, challenge someone else, troll if you must, meme if you can, respect your elders, respect your youngsters, relax and have a good time.

Wait, something like this could work to everyone's advantage:

1.) Set up a company hosting all music and movies to be shared. Encode said files with an identical MD5 checksum, to be used later.
        For irony, perhaps use 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0.
        The checksum will be used as evidence because checksums are very hard to fake.
2.) Everybody grab whatever they want.
3.) The RIAA/MPAA sues the company for $1.5 trillion, or whatever large number they'd like to come up with.
4.) Said company is found guilty (checksums prove it, and besides, they admit it) but they can't pay, and fold.
5.) The RIAA/MPAA can't come after you, since they've already been awarded damages covering the infringement.
6.) PROFIT!

(If you haven't figured it out yet, this is meant to be funny and I am not a lawyer. Laugh already!)

And I personally know cops and other law enforcement that work hard to help keep our society safe, regardless of the risk to themselves. What's your point?

I did not elect the police either, but I am very glad they are around. If my 4-year old son is lost or in danger, he knows he can ask a police officer for help. If I am driving too fast, I deserve to get a ticket -- and if I flip my car, it is likely there will be a trooper, cop or sheriff there in minutes, calling in aid and trying to rescue me.

You make a valid point about many investigations and reports ending up without activity, but this is a comment more on the nature of our society and the inability of the police to follow every lead than anything else. In order to "solve every crime", which is obviously impossible, the police force would have to be huge -- and I imagine you would have some serious complaints about that! I would as well. But your point about the police not being there to protect you, or that they never think about the crimes they see once they've filed their reports, is ridiculous.

Do you like the media calling all tech-savvy people "hackers", and then misdefining that as "super-genius young male loner-types who break into systems for fun or money"? Is that you? Then why do you proceed to take the same approach to law-enforcement, painting them all with a negative brush that applies to a very few?

We rightly hold law enforcement officers to high standards because of the authorities that they have been given, and because of this I think we should be allowed to record them whenever they are performing their public duties. If nothing else, this is ought to fall under the heading of public accountability used elsewhere. There's nothing special about video recording; it is simply the best method for auditing a primarily physical job.

As has been pointed out, you might find people will respect your opinions more when you voice them with less vitriol and hyperbole and more reason. There is a difference between being heard and being listened to.

I paused for a second, waiting for the flash of lightning and crack of thunder, but it didn't come...

Thanks for the laugh, though! :-D

I did a double-take when I read that -- how many hitpoints do you need to enter the highway? :-)

You make some good points, though I doubt you'll be modded insightful given the current (and fairly earned) dislike for Zucker and his ethics.

I can't speak for everyone, but I keep an eye on my personal information because I resent its use by strangers. When I share something with friends, it is not intended to be available to people who I do not know. It should not be for sale to marketers. It should not be used for decisions of worthiness of credit or employment. It most certainly should not be avalailable to identity thieves.

Unfortunately, that's not the current trend. Businesses are out to make money, and to many people the idea of being asked to keep a confidence is an antiquated imposition.

But what to do? Staying off of social networks is not a perfect solution, since a partial online identity will likely be created for you by proxy -- created from an amalgam of pictures and posts by friends and acquaintances, and pages made by other people who share your name. I think it is better to maintain a simple web presence with accurate public information and minimal private information. Consider what you say and post before doing so, and try not to embarrass your future self. If nothing else, showing responsible use is a better testimony to your character than either immature wild abandon or paranoid avoidance.