Live data from Hacker News

All I learned in college was how to work for someone else

stefankendall.com

51–60 of 61 posts

Re: All I learned in college was how to work for someone else

#51
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most open source licensing requires 0 citation. If I copy your formula or recipe, I don't need to cite a thing - you don't own the copyright to your own formula. I could sell your work if I wanted to do so. Plagiarism, as it affected my grading, was copying without attribution. Attribution is rarely required for most licensing, except where it is. These sorts of distinctions are lost in the collegiate machine.

Which open source licenses are you talking about? The most common that I can think of is GPL, which does not allow you to remove the copyright notice, although you may add yours in addition to it. The next one that comes to mind is the BSD license, which states: "Redistribution and use in source and binary forms are permitted provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are duplicated in all such forms…

I'm almost always using binaries or javascript libraries, in which I need not do anything but copy and paste files and include them in my projects to be within the letter of those licenses.

Plenty of people copy code straight off of blogs, which due to the DMCA are given implied copyright. Stackoverflow, also, requires attribution under the CC license, but nobody attributes stackoverflow when applying fixes to their problems.

If I include an MIT licensed JS file, I can replace functions willy nilly, or rewrite parts of the code. If it's LGPL3 or GPL, I can't.

Licensing is more nuanced than you're describing, but pragmatically I never need to cite anything. The most I need to deal with licensing is handling proprietary code (unlicensed github code, for example), and GPL/LGPL.

Re: All I learned in college was how to work for someone else

#52
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most open source licensing requires 0 citation. If I copy your formula or recipe, I don't need to cite a thing - you don't own the copyright to your own formula. I could sell your work if I wanted to do so. Plagiarism, as it affected my grading, was copying without attribution. Attribution is rarely required for most licensing, except where it is. These sorts of distinctions are lost in the collegiate machine.

Which open source licenses are you talking about? The most common that I can think of is GPL, which does not allow you to remove the copyright notice, although you may add yours in addition to it. The next one that comes to mind is the BSD license, which states: "Redistribution and use in source and binary forms are permitted provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are duplicated in all such forms…

Here is the WTFPL, which is my favorite license as it works as well as public domain, but, being a license, deals with the concerns of people who believe public domain is a legal fiction in certain jurisdictions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTFPL

This is the only total freedom license I am aware of, and allows claiming others work as your own if you wish.

I agree the OP was confused about the word plagiarism, but from his follow up it seems clear he meant not giving acknowledgement, as opposed to falsely taking credit. Regarding non-acknowledgement and non-advertising clause licenses, the zlib is perhaps the most popular and is a really nice license. It has an anti-plagiarism clause that you can't falsely claim it is yours, but you are not required to acknowledge ownership in binary distributions. (It is appreciated but not required.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zlib_license

There is also the anti-copyright notice, which varies in form, but is an explicit public domain grant required by the Berne Convention. Typically they do not require acknowledgment either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-copyright_notice

Re: All I learned in college was how to work for someone else

#54
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"So, if you quit college for the sake of being an entrepreneur when you are 19 and then you fail, you lost the chance of getting 'more' ready through college." I hear this a lot (frequently even about passing on college for lucrative, if short-term, opportunities), but I don't get it. This isn't amateur athletics where you have to worry about losing your eligibility and wouldn't be able to get in without an athletic…

You can go to college any time, but it's damn nice to be the same age as everyone else there. I'd argue rather that unless you've got a really solid plan, given the choice you should go to college first. You can start a business any time, the only thing you'll miss out on by waiting 4 years is the "Check out this 19-year-old entrepreneur" techcrunch articles.

I fear that colleges condition students to be bad at entrepreneurship and teach actively harmful lessons.

Of course this isn't true of all schools, but I can't say for certain I know anyone who came out of college more prepared for the world and business than they went in. More prepared for a job, surely.

Re: All I learned in college was how to work for someone else

#55
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which open source licenses are you talking about? The most common that I can think of is GPL, which does not allow you to remove the copyright notice, although you may add yours in addition to it. The next one that comes to mind is the BSD license, which states: "Redistribution and use in source and binary forms are permitted provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are duplicated in all such forms…

I'm almost always using binaries or javascript libraries, in which I need not do anything but copy and paste files and include them in my projects to be within the letter of those licenses. Plenty of people copy code straight off of blogs, which due to the DMCA are given implied copyright. Stackoverflow, also, requires attribution under the CC license, but nobody attributes stackoverflow when applying fixes to their…

When you "include an MIT licensed JS file", as you mention doing, you leave its copyright/license notice intact in the source right? That's the acknowledgement required. You didn't change the copyright to have your own name on it and erase the original.

Re: All I learned in college was how to work for someone else

#56
post #10

1. Plagiarism is bad I'm assuming this meant in the sense of "why can't I just copy a binary tree implementation from the internet and turn it in", since every advanced course I took in college encouraged the use of libraries where appropriate (to the point of linking to open source libraries on the course website). The answer to the former question should be painfully obvious... you're learning to be a creator of th…

My school was ABET accredited, so I guess ABET is crap. I don't care at all about ethics - you can't teach that in a semester of college.

I care about the law, and what I can and can't sell without being able to win the lawsuit when I'm sued.

I've never had to build an operating system, and I never will. Performance problems likely mean you have product success, at which point you can figure out solutions to your problem.

You don't get facebook scale by planning it up front.

Re: All I learned in college was how to work for someone else

#57
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which open source licenses are you talking about? The most common that I can think of is GPL, which does not allow you to remove the copyright notice, although you may add yours in addition to it. The next one that comes to mind is the BSD license, which states: "Redistribution and use in source and binary forms are permitted provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are duplicated in all such forms…

Here is the WTFPL, which is my favorite license as it works as well as public domain, but, being a license, deals with the concerns of people who believe public domain is a legal fiction in certain jurisdictions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTFPL This is the only total freedom license I am aware of, and allows claiming others work as your own if you wish. I agree the OP was confused about the word plagiarism, but fr…

What I wonder is how far copyright protection goes, specifically when AI algorithms are involved. Suppose you "copy" a recipe + description (or a book for that matter) in the following way :

1) you create markov chains using a large number of cookbook texts

2) you create the markov chain for a specific recipe's description and go down alternate high-probability paths in an effort to creatively change the wording without changing the content (maybe this is comparable to the way a human would if he tried the recipe and then wrote down "how he did it")

3) you republish the result

Did you violate copyright or not ?

The reason I ask is that this is often used as an end-run around patents and copyrights. What most speech recognition programs do these days is preprocess the sound + feed into neural network + get output. (and while most "pattern recognition" algorithms for non-visual things seem to have a love affair with support-vector machines, temporal neural networks are certainly advancing there too).

Now if you analyse what those neural networks do there's 2 types of things 1) ~40% effectively is unrolled loops of (mostly) patented algorithms 2) 60% you effectively don't recognize (to be fair it takes hours of seeing the network operate before you realize anything it's doing)

Clearly this is legal, in cases human implementations of the exact same algorithms wouldn't be, nicely sidestepping the problem of patented algorithms. And as a bonus you don't really have to know the subject matter (e.g. you can write a pretty good voice recognizer without 8 years experience as a linguist. Or you can write them for languages you don't actually know). And as a bonus, academics are miles ahead of the private sector where it comes to machine learning algorithms, so extremely useful thing are effectively free-for-all.

Of course this is also what humans do. If you look at neural networks, they can only do what they've "seen" happen before, or they can combine various things they've seen before. But they are utterly incapable of coming up with original work. So I don't think humans are any different to machines when it comes to producing original work based on combinations of previous works. This doesn't mean the thing that was copied was itself copyrighted, you can write about your own life, for example, or about nature, or ... but we'd call that original, when (in a strict mathematical sense) it's not.

So clearly we've de-facto accepted in our society that machine-processed works at some point start constituting original work.

Do we have any data what point that is ?

Re: All I learned in college was how to work for someone else

#58
post #36

I started school when I was 23, mainly due to pressure from my parents. I was working full time as a VoIP tech however my mom kept pressuring me to get my degree. I'm 29 now, have worked full time until I was 26, and started my own web development firm at 27 (hired my first two full time employees in 2012). I'm a few months away from being done with school, and I can honestly say it has been the most worthless invest…

This seems like a learning style issue, and that will vary; however you and I are in the same boat.

Re: All I learned in college was how to work for someone else

#59
I don't have a CS degree nor did I attend a school that even offered a CS degree so my college experience was quite different.

I attended Emerson College where most of the degrees are in the arts and communications and everything there was focused on not becoming a corporate stooge but often an entrepreneur.

Most work was project based often with the idea that your work would help to build your portfolio. Most importantly, your work outside of the classroom working on films, recording bands, writing marketing campaigns with clubs or on your own was just as much of the curriculum, possibly more so. I learned that only a small percentage of knowledge was coming from my professor at the front of the room but from the people around me and the work I was doing on my own. If I didn't take that "work outside of the work" attitude from college I think I would have had are a hard time getting motivated to learn to program and do other ventures like doing freelance work or working on passion projects on my own.

Sorry but college is what you make it.

Re: All I learned in college was how to work for someone else

#60
post #10

1. Plagiarism is bad I'm assuming this meant in the sense of "why can't I just copy a binary tree implementation from the internet and turn it in", since every advanced course I took in college encouraged the use of libraries where appropriate (to the point of linking to open source libraries on the course website). The answer to the former question should be painfully obvious... you're learning to be a creator of th…

My school was ABET accredited, so I guess ABET is crap. I don't care at all about ethics - you can't teach that in a semester of college. I care about the law, and what I can and can't sell without being able to win the lawsuit when I'm sued. I've never had to build an operating system, and I never will. Performance problems likely mean you have product success, at which point you can figure out solutions to your pro…

The name of the class will vary, I just mentioned Ethics because that seems to be what a lot of schools call it. Mine was "Social Implications of Computing"... but again, it goes into (very specifically) the law regarding copyright and patents. Your college can be ABET accredited, but that doesn't mean your degree program was.

I've never had to build a priority queue. The language I've used has always had a library to provide that functionality for the purposes I needed. However, knowing what a priority queue is, how it works, and when it is appropriate to use (and those pesky big O performance implications) were all taught in an algorithms course (and are a quick CLRS reference away).

On performance problems, that is an incredibly hand wavy response. You seem to be assuming product success is a $50 million Series A round and enough buzz to make people want to work for you. And what are you going to do with that money? Probably hire someone who has an understanding of algorithms and operating systems.

Post reply on HN