Agreed - and in this case "Hackers" == "Nation Sates"
No one is ever influenced by advertising, ask around. People say "no, I'd never buy something because it's on TV" but those infomercials stay in business for a reason.
So polling people and asking them if advertising is effective on them is a bit of a red herring. Like IQ tests - logically half the world has IQs less then 100. Oddly, I've never met any of them.
Now the question 'is social advertising effective' is certainly open for debate, but not because some survey says people believe it's not effective on themselves.
Sitting on a closed toilet seat in a college bathroom where someone decided to install the Cisco router I needed to do unnatural things to with a Perl script.
Agreed, as a DC attendee I'd give it a miss, and if there wasn't anything on that was more interesting in the slot use it to fulfill some of the 3-2-1 rule of attending Defcon. The talk is an interesting read, and there are other confs I've attended where it would be a fit, but DC isn't it.
I think the review committee made the right call on this one.
You kidding? They'd be terrible at tech support! They think the internet is made of tubes forchrissake!
If you're going to volunteer, go find an non profit that speaks to you and volunteer there. At least if you don't get a job lead out of it you'll feel good about the work you did instead of bitter over doing free labour for a company that didn't give you a job in the end.
In my personal case, I did volunteer work for an non-profit ISP just starting up way up north. 6 months later, I was being paid for the same work, and jump started my professional career.
There are options for lots of types of geeks, from the "we recycle used computers for disadvantaged people" to the "We send you to an impoverished country to bootstrap their technology base" ones.
I believe the ICRC is always looking for skilled technical people who can think outside the box too.
I enjoyed my time doing non profit work immensely and it still comes up 15 yrs later in job interviews, as some of my best war stories come from those jobs. There's something about the combination of the startup shoestring budget and the feeling that you're actually improving the world that comes together and energizes me. Your mileage may of course very.
Actually, unless I'm missing something in TFS, this isn't about rotating your certificate (although that's a good plan if you were vulnerable to Heartbleed, but do your own risk assessment there).
Heartbleed was a vulnerability against openssl, mitigate that and you won't be vulnerable to Heartbleed. You may want to swap out your SSL certs too in case someone grabbed them while you' were vulnerable, but certainly not wanting to pay for the cert rotation shouldn't stop you from updating openssl.
Understood, and agreed in so far as everything you wrote is concerned. My (unwritten) assertion, which is probably obvious to someone who understands that the research is about statistical medians, is that it would be dangerous to extrapolate from the study's conclusions that it would be appropriate to mandate a particular note taking style (e.g. "No laptops") because you would likely be doing a disservice to a portion of your student population who is not the 'average' student.
In point of fact I scored a 4.0 in English class, and technical writing. After that I spent 20 years in the school of working for a living. The first two taught me correct diction, grammar, and proofreading skills. The latter taught me that there was a time and place for perfection, and a time and place for writing quickly with enough accuracy to get a point across. No one pays me to write Slashdot comments, so it falls into the second category.
Yep, but I'm dysgraphic, so anything involving my fine motor system is a cognitive, rather then an associative task, as it probably is for you. E.g. writing requires cognitive processing for me as opposed to happening as an 'automatic' background task as it likely does for you.
Thus my point about the danger of making sweeping statements for 'students'. We all learn differently, so making decisions based on this sort of study is treacherous ground.
You know what worked better for me then longhand notes? No notes. Listening to the teacher instead of writing worked best for me. Turns out I recalled things better when I spent my attention listening to the teacher rather then trying to write legible notes so I could read then later.
Just goes to show that people learn differently and making blanket statements for all people gets you into trouble
The courses I was referring to were not the "History of Philosophy" classes. Rather, the formal logic (think Boolean logic) and argument, rhetoric and reason classes.
Teaching you to think and communicate, rather then teaching you what other people have thought before.
Having taken some comp sci and worked in IT for 20 years, I can state with some basis for argument, that comp sci has very little to do with IT. Probably about the most useful portion of the comp sci coursework to me now is computational efficiency (choose the o(n) solution not the o(n!) one).
But the poster who said psych and phil wasn't far wrong. I'd add technical writing in there as a class I don't regret taking. Philosophy to come up with the right argument and psychology to make it stick, then technical writing to put it on paper in a way that's understandable to my audience.
I have yet to solve a differential equation at work tho, (unless I'm playing with Kerbal Space Program on the side!)
I view kickstarter more as the patron system of artistic sponsorship from the middle ages. A wealth patron commissions a piece of art because they believe in the artists's artistic vision and want to see that vision brought to fruition. So they back the artist with their money.
Sometimes the patron's eye is good, and you get good art. Most of the time, not so much.
So I think the venture capitalism model, to your point isn't the correct one, and certainly isn't what I'm thinking when I donate on kickstarter. I hope that my money helps an artist's vision come to fruition, and I'll benefit from having that art available to (use/play/enjoy).
If it doesn't work out, like the patron of olde, I'm not spending money I can't afford to spend, and it'll make its way back into the economy, which will make the world go round. And there'll be fewer starved artists on the curb
Just to point out, the fact that a large number of people believe something does not necessarily impact the morality of it. At one point a large majority of people (at least non-African people) felt that the slave trade was right too. That does not make them any less wrong in the eyes of history. Being a part of a majority does not by definition make you right. Morality is moved forward by outliers, people with views outside the social norm, by definition. Eventually society moves towards the new moral norm and the majority now believes the position formerly occupied by outliers, and the cycle resets.
So you can't logically argue that since even the entire state of California believes something to be true that someone stating that they are morally offside is wrong, as history is replete with counter examples.