He doesn't use the phrase, but this is basically talking about taboo trade-offs and value conflicts - and what really strikes me is that this isn't problem, rather, these technologies make it so we can no longer ignore the questions that value conflicts pose.
That is, we've already recognized the question of "would you kill one to kill ten?", we haven't yet needed an explicit answer or decision process.
(Well, that's not quite true. The Triage system for medical care during disasters, for instance, but that's not everyday everywhere like driving is)
...but, AFAIK, a Koan tries to thwart understanding in order to communicate an otherwise impossible to describe concept. By preventing understanding yet asking for investigation, a koan communicates its actual content through your investigation, rather than the successful translation of the words into your thoughts.
+1, but I think you want to keep the column width shorter. Took me a bit to figure out why browsing was harder than on Slashdot, but I think that's what it is.
Sticking my foot out - Panopticons are not a bad thing. They're actually a really good thing, because they, theoretically, let you get a lot more security without losing a lot of liberty (instead, you lose privacy).
The problem people have - universally in my limited experience - is with the people and institutions behind the cameras, not the cameras themselves. If CCTV is Big Brother, isn't neighborhood watch something like Little Brother?
(Jumping ship from the other link to the same story)
Success metric fail.
Then again - What is the success metric for education? Attendance is (IMHO) pretty terrible, and standardized testing hasn't worked out the best - so what is it?
A classic answer (but still, probably not all that great of one) is jobs upon graduation - but that doesn't help in elementary school.
So, how would you go about turning such long-term metrics as "employment in ten years" into short term metrics, to figure out what to do next week?
What I'm saying is that using attendance as the metric to determine funding sucks and we should find a better way.
Success metrics are how you determine whether a change has worked, and they are how you determine where to put more resources. So if your success metric is attendance, you're going to maximize attendance, not quality of education.
Then again - What is the success metric for education? Attendance is (IMHO) pretty terrible, and standardized testing hasn't worked out the best - so what is it?
A classic answer (but still, probably not all that great of one) is jobs upon graduation - but that doesn't help in elementary school.
So, how would you go about turning such long-term metrics as "employment in ten years" into short term metrics, to figure out what to do next week?
Do you remember EA Spouse? Although it looks defunct now, the spouse, Erin Hoffman, went on to found GameWatch[.org], which aimed to address these issues. AFAIK, they at least curbed the worst offenses, like those that led to the scandal, but...
If you could get enough studios to realize the important of a good QA department, there'd at least be a niche to form a company dedicated to it, where skilled QA could get what they deserve.
I'm going to be honest - It's never occurred to me to /practice/ programming, particularly in the way that you might practice, say, juggling. I've always worked to learn some new technique or technology, instead.
So - What are the other methods that people use to "practice" programming?
Sounds like a baby out with the bathwater kind of case, to me. if comments are the problem, why aren't they playing with alternatives to the standard thread format?
Well, but then your problem is religion, not coding standards. And then it'll be over this or that design pattern, coding paradigm, version control commit logs....
If you name the problem "coding standards" and it's "religion", you'll solve the wrong problem and of course it won't work.
Seems to me that what you need more than the standards are the reasons behind the standards - because yeah, the person coding that particular problem knows more than you about that problem, and should /teach you what they know/, particularly when it's easy.
The post may be about programming over politics, but the post is essentially recommended exploring the consequences of extremes, and that operation is valuable in (heh - taking it to the extreme!) all places. For example: 1984 - extremes of medication, Player Piano - extremes of automation.
You can also notice this technique in a debate, someone takes the emotional stakes to an extreme - while it's usually used as an attempt to convince you, it's actually a useful practice because it can magnify otherwise overlooked elements of the positions, opinions, and principles.
That is, we've already recognized the question of "would you kill one to kill ten?", we haven't yet needed an explicit answer or decision process.
(Well, that's not quite true. The Triage system for medical care during disasters, for instance, but that's not everyday everywhere like driving is)