You have to remember that they use these systems to run their business and they've been tested for thousands or millions of hours so the system is extremely reliable. It is naive to suggest to switch to a newer platform or language. Those things are always changing. Also, once you are a seasoned software developer in multiple languages how long do you really think it will take you to learn cobol? Not much I can assure you. You'll probably be familiar with the basics in a couple of days, and maybe even enough to be dangerous. Switching to a platform just for the sake of switching is extremely dangerous and potentially quite costly. Especially when from the customers point of view it really makes no difference whether behind the scenes the business is using cobol, fortran, java, ruby or whatever new fad of the day. If the system is going to behave exactly the same whether you use java or cobol then what is the point of switching?
No is not. Thousands if not millions of people use their systems every year. Every person that uses it counts as time testing the system. Notice how quickly the hours add up if you look at it this way.
Ok, I was thinking in terms of the run-time of the software, not in terms of the time people spent using the system. But that's a valid way to look at it.
You were down to -1 points. Your phrase is awesome and try to live by it every day. The people that down voted you must be really screw up. I'm really curious as to why they would do that. What is it that bothers them so much about your phrase? They are probably old and bitter. Or maybe young and pessimistic. Who knows. If one of those persons that down voted this comment could shed some light as to why, it will be greatly appreciated.
Of course, more than likely those same people are now going to down vote me.
Your comment and the parent's lack empathy for someone's circumstances. Also, you should just make your point and not worry too much about votes and points. I say this because, presumably, the implicit goal of a conversation is to understand rather than score points.
I thought it was pretty clear I was trying to understand why they didn't like the comment. It wasn't about the points but about why somebody would not like that quote. You only have one life, once you are dead, you are dead. So why not enjoy it by doing what you like? (As long as you follow the law of course, i.e. if you like hurting people then that is a no-no) Why would somebody dislike a comment like that? That is what I was trying to understand.
The guy is indeed very inspiring. I wish him luck. These type of people are the type that move an entire economy and country forward. Always looking for ways to create more new wealth.
Yes, freeing ideas frees ourselves and our users in the process. I think that's a much more motivating justification for launching projects than any amount of wealth potentially being created. I can't wait to see what you're creating this time and wish you all the best.
Honestly, calling yourself an idiot is a huge turnoff. You automatically make me want to not cheer you on. It makes me feel like you deserve to fail. Bill gates, Steve Jobs, Paul Grahams and many other famous people have had failures before becoming successful but you have never heard them call themselves idiots (as far as I'm aware). If nothing else they would call those failures "early attempts at success". And the worst thing is that what you did cannot really be called a failure so what is wrong with you? Even if you think that you are no longer an idiot the title and article gives waves of no confidence. My advise, please never call yourself an idiot; your subconscious will start to believe you're an idiot and so will other people. Is difficult to describe but just remembering your article I feel repulsion. I wonder whether other people feel like this. Anybody else or do I just have issues?
Can't speak for anyone else, but I disagree. Title notwithstanding, the article is a nice piece of self-reflection. The author clearly looked at his semi-successful past, and managed to see both what he did right, and what he did wrong. Not many people are as able (or willing) to dig deep like that, much less share those thoughts with others. I'm happy he did so so that I have a chance to learn, and I also think it takes great confidence to admit what you did wrong.
Nothing wrong with learning from your failures. I do it all the time. I Think back about the times that I screw up and that if I'd had more experience things would have turned different. But hindsight is 20-20 so calling yourself an idiot just because you had no experience and were learning is unfair to yourself. What is the necessity of calling himself an idiot and then trying to convince us that he is an idiot. It smells a lot like low confidence and I'm not sure I want to be around him if he feels that way. The paper could have been written as lessons learned from his first startup. The way he portrays himself is just completely wrong. I noticed he has other articles and I just cannot force myself to read them. He did to good a job in his article convincing me that he was an idiot. How do I know he still is not one. He probably is not because of what he did (he made a good amount of money) but emotionally I still feel like he is an idiot. Weird huh?
I tend to wear my heart on my sleeve. From endless private conversations and all of the entrepreneurs I'm friends with, I'm somewhere in the middle confidence-wise, but others are better at projecting an image of greater confidence. I'm a humble and extremely introverted engineer and just don't project an image that's either above or below my station. I accept that this is a flaw in certain walks of life, particularly business.
He probably is not because of what he did (he made a good amount of money) but emotionally I still feel like he is an idiot. Weird huh?
Sure, I'm still an idiot in lots of things. There's always more to learn, always more wisdom to extract from situations, always better ways to deal with things.
I think I feel as much uncertainty or intimidation as anyone who tackles difficult work - I'm just not scared to admit my shortcomings. As I said before, I think this might just be a clash in our cultures and approaches to life.
Do you feel the same way about Derek Sivers? He recently wrote about assuming he's always "below average" in things. His thought process is similar to mine: http://sivers.org/below-average
I think I know the difference between fmora and me. I forgot the article's title (I'm an idiot) before reading the article, so everything I read came off as a lot of honest introspection. Just like with Derek Sivers' article.
On the other hand, it seems to me that others, who go into the article with the idea that it's going to be a lot of low-confidence self-pity type statements, approach it with a different attitude.
Obviously I can't speak for fmora or anyone else, but the impression I get from his statements make me think the title of the article is the main sticking point; taking it too literally colors the rest of the article in a much more negative light. On that note, Derek's article is titled in a "better" way, since saying "I'm below average" has nowhere near the negative undertones that saying "I'm an idiot" has.
fmora - Would you agree with what I'm saying? Or am I misinterpreting?
I think you got it. Calling yourself and idiot has huge negative undertones for me. I do understand that smart people tend to undervalue themselves. Trying to convince everybody you are an idiot (or that you were an idiot) just didn't sit well with me.
culturally speaking, are you primarily a business person or primarily an Engineer?
In Engineering that sort of self-deprecation is considered polite. False humility is /essential/ for Engineering types to get along without our massive egos causing unproductive fights. You quite often see "But I might be wrong" at the end or "Perhaps" at the beginning of very detailed, very correct mailing lists... it's just there to soften the "You are wrong" blow.
Of course, this is quite different from the business world, where people seem to select for massive egos.
It's interesting, really, how my world has changed as I've learned to fake confidence as well as I can fake humility.
(of course, in both cases, I think everyone knows you are faking it, and nobody cares. It's sort of like wearing culturally appropriate clothing. investment bankers don't show up in T shirts, and coders don't show up in suits.)
Really, this is one of the things I find most interesting about the hacker news crowd... so many are halfway between the worlds of Engineering and Business that you see these two diametrically opposed cultures mixing, sometimes producing something that is more useful than either one by itself.
You make some good points, but I think this is a clash of cultures than intentions. The word "idiot", to me, isn't as harsh as it seems to be to you, and I'm using it in a very subject specific sense. If you date the wrong girl for a few years and ignore her bad traits, you might later say you "were a fool" for loving her while not extending that assertion to your entire life. I'm saying I was an idiot at business, though not at the technology or dealing with the customers.
Further, though, I'm English, and this sort of self deprecating speech is characteristically European. Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_poppy_syndrome for more info. It's mostly not "the done thing" to boast about minor achievements. Derek Sivers (of CDBaby and now a multi millionaire) approached the overall topic well: http://sivers.org/below-average
Anyway, I totally get where you're coming from, but I also think you may have read too much into a little half-hearted humility.
No, don't worry about that. If seeing a surprising, alternative viewpoint I can learn from means reading some blunt language, it's worth it.
I don't think I'd write the post any differently despite learning something about your perspective, but.. who knows, it might make me think twice at some point in the future :-)
What I really want to know is how they got those IP addresses and how did they identify the persons involved? Besides, couldn't you argue as your defense that even if that was your IP that you did not downloaded those movies and that somebody probably hacked your wireless modem. Since they are the ones suing the burden of proof is on them right?
Coming up with a 'just-so' story is not defense. They have evidence that links you to the crime when the standard is merely 'preponderance of the evidence'. Unless you have evidence that rebuts theirs, you're 'maybe a hacker did it' will be up there with 'maybe my sister did it'.
If my car is seen leaving the scene of an accident, can I be sued for damages because the car is registered to me even though everyone in the family uses it?
It seems they need SOMETHING that ties it to me. What if it was my sister? Or my mother? They have evidence that links me to the crime but the same evidence links several other people to the same degree. Is that really a "preponderance of evidence"?
It seems at most they could use the IP to get a search warrant and look through the computers to try to find some actual evidence.
Besides, is it really a crime to download a movie when they don't know if any of it was actually saved? Just because the bits were sent down the pipe doesn't mean that I received them. It's as if someone reading a book to me makes me liable for copyright infringement on the presumption that I must have been writing down what was read.
"If my car is seen leaving the scene of an accident, can I be sued for damages because the car is registered to me even though everyone in the family uses it?"
Yes. You'd defend yourself by providing evidence as to who was actually driving it at the time. So, for instance, if your car is seen fleeing the scene of an accident, but you reported it stolen the day before, you would have a defense. Or if your sister admitted to driving your car, but then she'd be on the hook.
"It seems they need SOMETHING that ties it to me. What if it was my sister?"
There is: you're the account holder for the broadband account that was downloading the movie. That is something. And it doesn't link several other people 'to the same degree'. If you have logs on your router that how it was your sister's computer on the router that was uploading the movie, then so be it.
"It seems at most they could use the IP to get a search warrant and look through the computers to try to find some actual evidence."
This is what they will do if you don't settle.
"Besides, is it really a crime to download a movie when they don't know if any of it was actually saved?"
This is why people should not play lawyer: the charges (for every instance I'm aware of, and certainly the popular USCG cases) are for illegal distribution, not illegal download.
This is why people should not play lawyer: the charges (for every instance I'm aware of, and certainly the popular USCG cases) are for illegal distribution, not illegal download.
A-ha. So then downloading is fine, then? That certainly makes more sense to me.
You mean IP addresses of people downloading torrents? It's peer to peer man, if I start to DL the torrent I'll make a connection to you (assuming you set up your client to accept) and I'll see that you're sharing the data.
The "hacked wireless modem" (the term by the way makes me assume you're not hardcore) defence is good, but they don't care about that. By the time you hire a lawyer and get your shit together they'll have met their goal: stopping you from pirating their IP.
I doubt they'll take it to trial unless it was a particularly egregious violation. The idea with these is to settle out of court for a few thousand bucks, which is pure profit for these guys. They are like debt collectors. They threaten but have no teeth when it comes down to it. Lawyers cost money for them too.
Frankly I'm not so sure I would settle or even hire a lawyer if I were to face a situation like this. First, I have no assets. I guess they could garnish my wages. Isn't bankruptcy for this. I can get sued for a trillion dollars and it wouldn't matter. Am I being naive?
I think you're being naive, not that they can extract money from you, but that you value your time so little. Imagine the pain in the ass a lawsuit would be.
I know this is part of the strategy of "Big Media", but the real solution is for the content producers to self publish (since the middle man takes too much of a cut and isn't providing the value they used to (i.e. trucking your CD to the store))
However, this doesn't justify that the content producer doesn't get paid if you pirate shit. In the long run I expect prices to drip and content producers to increase profits, but that's still a few years away.
I used to think like this also. Then I was in a car accident. The lawsuit lasted 1.5 years. 99.999% of that time was just spent waiting. The actual work that I had to do during that time was like 2 hours. Mainly one for the deposition. If you go to the judge you expose your case to the judge, it takes about an hour. Of course, this is from the point of view that says you have nothing to loose. Although, I know what you mean. I rather avoid it if I can.
I applaud you for this. Frankly you'll end up being more desirable if the company notices that you don't really care about them that much. As you say, it will send strong signals that you will succeed regardless and they'll probably want to acquire you now on the cheap than wait till you become too expensive. Don't listen to the other people that want you to jump hoops for something that may not even pan out.
This is the type of attitude that got us into two huge wars and the reason why so many people hate us so much. You are probably one of those people that also believe in white supremacy and that would join the KKK in a heart beat. Stupid Moron.
The best way to deal with this is by the US blocking some of the chinese companies ability to do business here in the USA. Or something similar to that. But not by us getting involved in their political process. They have to solve their own problems.
There's nothing racist about his comment. He didn't say anything about the Chinese people. Going on about white supremacy and the Ku-Klux Klan is just ignorance on your part. Quite frankly I find your comment to be the racist one.
This is how it starts though. How do you think the British justified taken the lands from Native Americans? By saying that they were savages and a lot of other rationalizations. This is the first step towards that slippery slope. Once everybody is convinced that going into China and messing with their political affairs is OK then we will raise it up a notch. This is how its always done. His comment may seem innocuous to you but this type of comments are only the beginning of something more perverse.
I thought his comment was utterly stupid. I thought twice or more wethere he was joking or being for real. No one else has agreed with him. He hardly has offered any good follow up arguments and in the end he even seems to soften down his approach.
None of that was achieved by calling him a racist or anything else. He has a belief in some idea, that "dictatorships" are bad and we should do all we can to "liberate" the people of such dictatorships. That is his right.
Ideals are only half the story though. Pragmatism trumps most often. But there is no reason to insult the man rather than his thinking.
This comment I replied to has a fair point though. Shame it was tainted by the previous ones.
