电脑找不到网络许可管理器

I recently got back from London where I was presenting at QCon. Typically I enjoy single-track events more than multi-track events, but QCon did an impressive job of curating the talks.

我最近从伦敦参加QCon演讲回来。 通常，我比单轨活动更喜欢单轨活动，但是QCon在策划演讲方面做得非常出色。

Each track is curated by the track hosts and speakers are all given the opportunity to take advantage of mentoring. They even had a process in place so that speakers could give a preview of their talk to other speakers and conference staff for feedback in the weeks before the event. It’s a level of care in the talk process that you don’t typically expect from larger events.

每个曲目均由曲目主持人策划，演讲者都有机会利用辅导的机会。 他们甚至制定了流程，以便演讲者可以在活动开始前的几周内向其他演讲者和会议工作人员预览演讲内容，以征询反馈意见。 在谈话过程中，这是您通常不会从大型活动中获得的关注程度。

I had the privilege of closing QCon’s first ever ethics track. The whole day was full of fantastically passionate talks around the ethics of technology. Even more encouraging was that while the room was small, every single talk was packed.

我荣幸地关闭了QCon的第一个道德轨道。 整天都围绕着技术伦理进行了充满激情的演讲。 更令人鼓舞的是，尽管房间很小，但每个谈话都挤满了人。

Towards the end of the day all the speakers, the track hosts, and a couple of guests got on stage for a panel discussion. The discussion was lively and spirited. I was struck by how much we all agreed on the big picture, but how much less we agreed on the specific steps that we would need to start making notable improvements in our field. That makes complete sense to me. We’re at a critical junction in technology where (sadly, very late) we’re coming to grips with the broader impact of what we build. I know a lot of people, like those of us on the panel, want to fix it—the how is the tricky part.

当天快结束时，所有演讲者，主持人和几位嘉宾都上台进行了小组讨论。 讨论充满活力。 我们对总体情况达成了多少共识而感到震惊，但是对于开始在我们的领域进行显着改进所需采取的具体步骤，我们达成的共识却少了多少。 这对我来说完全有意义。 我们正处在技术的关键交汇点上(很遗憾，很晚了)，我们正在努力应对构建的更广泛影响。 我知道很多人都喜欢修复面板上的问题，就像面板上的我们这些人一样。

One of the topics that we were a little divided on was the idea of regulations and licenses. Doctors must be licensed, electricians must be licensed—why not web developers. The conversation got a little cut-off due to time, but I’ve been unable to shake it since then.

我们有点分歧的主题之一是法规和许可证的概念。 医生必须具有执照，电工必须具有执照-为什么没有Web开发人员。 由于时间的限制，对话中断了，但是从那以后我一直无法动摇。

Then I stumbled on a post I had missed from Mike Monteiro arguing for the same thing—some sort of licensing around design:

然后，我偶然发现了我从Mike Monteiro漏掉的关于同一件事的帖子 -有关设计的某种许可：

As professionals in the design field, a field becoming more complex by the day, it’s time that we aim for a professional level of accountability. In the end, a profession doesn’t decide to license itself. It happens when a regulatory body decides we’ve been reckless and unable to regulate ourselves. This isn’t for our sake. It’s for the sake of the people whose lives we come in contact with. We moved too fast and broke too many things.

作为设计领域的专业人员，这个领域每天都在变得越来越复杂，现在是我们瞄准专业责任级别的时候了。 最后，一个职业并没有决定许可自己。 当监管机构认为我们鲁re并且无法自我监管时，就会发生这种情况。 这不是我们的缘故。 这是为了我们所生活的人们。 我们动作太快，弄坏了很多东西。

First, let me say that I’m coming at this topic from the perspective of the web specifically. Technology is a much broader topic, of course, though I think a lot of the general concerns are similar.

首先，让我说我是专门从Web的角度来讨论这个主题的。 当然，技术是一个更广泛的话题，尽管我认为许多普遍关注的问题是相似的。

I firmly agree with Mike’s statement about moving too fast and breaking too many things. In fact, there is so much in his article that I agree with. Just as was the case on the panel, we absolutely agree on the goal and the problem. The solution—in this case, licensing—is what I’m not as sold on.

我坚决同意麦克关于过快移动和破坏太多事情的说法。 实际上，他的文章中有很多我同意的观点。 就像小组中的情况一样，我们绝对同意目标和问题。 解决方案(在这种情况下为许可)是我所不能买到的。

My worry is that in attempting to put some sort of restriction on who gets to build for the web, we’ll end up excluding important voices in the process.

我担心的是，在试图限制谁为Web构建应用程序时，我们最终会在此过程中排除重要的声音。

It’s not just access to consume that makes the web so great, but also access to create. So many people I know in this industry would quite likely not be here if they hadn’t been able to view source, to pop open notepad and hack together some HTML for some embarassingly bad site they wanted to make. I probably wouldn’t.

这不只是访问消耗 ，使网络如此之大，同时也获得了创造 。 我认识的这个行业的这么多人，如果他们无法查看源代码，弹出打开的记事本，并为他们想制作的一些令人尴尬的不良网站合并一些HTML，他们很可能不在这里。 我可能不会。

I love that feature of the web.

我喜欢网络的功能。

I love that I can sit down with my kids and teach them a little bit of markup and they can start building sites of their own, like my 9-year old building a site listing out all of her favorite books.

我喜欢我可以和孩子们一起坐下来，教他们一些标记，他们可以开始建立自己的网站，例如我9岁的孩子建立了一个列出她所有喜欢的书的网站。

I love that people like Elvis Chidera, without any access to an actual computer, can build a text messaging app with some PHP, HTML and CSS on a J2ME feature phone!

我喜欢像Elvis Chidera这样的人，无需访问实际计算机，就可以在J2ME功能手机上使用一些PHP，HTML和CSS构建文本消息传递应用程序 ！

Now maybe we wouldn’t lose this. Maybe we could find a way to enforce a license only for so-called “professional” work (though how we would define that in a way that enables the Elvis Chidera’s of the world to accomplish what he did is beyond me). But it’s an important consideration that makes me a little hesitant whenever the topic of licensing is brought up.

现在也许我们不会失去这一点。 也许我们可以找到一种仅对所谓的“专业”工作强制执行许可的方法(尽管我们如何以一种使Elvis Chidera的世界能够完成他所做的工作的方式来定义它，这超出了我的范围)。 但这是一个重要的考虑因素，每当提出许可主题时，我都会有些犹豫。

Mike also mentioned our role as gatekeepers:

迈克还提到了我们作为网守的角色：

We are gatekeepers, and we vote on what makes it through the gate with our labor and our counsel. We are responsible for what makes it through that gate, and out into the world. What passes through carries our seal of approval. It carries our name. We are the defense against monsters.

我们是守门员，我们会与我们的工作人员和顾问一起投票表决通过大门的事情。 我们要对通过门户进入世界的一切负责。 通过的内容带有我们的认可印章。 它带有我们的名字。 我们是对抗怪物的防御。

It’s a good point, but it’s also worth recognizing that gatekeeping isn’t always a good thing. The expensive licenses and educational requirements some other professions have help to weed out the riff-raff a bit, sure. They also make those professions prohibitively costly to many. We have to be careful with gatekeeping through licensing because it’s just as likely to weed-out the good as it is the bad. It’s a situation that, were we to go down this route, we would need to be careful to avoid.

这是一个好点，但值得一提的是，把关并非总是一件好事。 当然，其他专业的昂贵执照和教育要求也帮助清除了即兴演奏。 它们也使许多人付出高昂的代价。 我们必须谨慎对待通过许可进行的关守，因为它既有可能淘汰优缺点，也有可能淘汰它。 在这种情况下，如果我们走这条路，我们将需要小心避免。

Generally, I also wonder how realistic it is to expect licensing to help solve the issues we’re facing (and for the record, Mike never claims licensing will solve them). You don’t have to look far to find folks in all sorts of professions—cops, accountants, doctors—who are fully licensed and yet wreck terrible havoc. Licensing can help ensure a level of proficiency, but that’s not our problem. Our challenge is a matter of ethics, a matter of responsible consideration of the consequences of what we build. Skill does not equate to better ethics.

通常，我还想知道期望许可来帮助解决我们面临的问题有多现实(并且记录下来，Mike从未声称许可可以解决这些问题)。 您无需走远，就可以找到各种职业的人(警察，会计师，医生)，这些人已获得充分的执照，但却造成了严重的破坏。 许可可以帮助确保一定水平的熟练程度，但这不是我们的问题。 我们的挑战是道德问题，是对我们建设成果的负责任考虑。 技能并不等于道德更高。

So all that said, what do I think the answer is? I’ll be honest: I have no idea.

因此，我认为答案是什么？ 老实说：我不知道。

A hippocractic oath is an interesting idea, though like the one used in the medical profession, it’s unlikely to be enforceable.

尽管象医学界所使用的那样， 河马誓言是一个有趣的想法 ，但它不太可能被强制执行。

I do think a good start is to break down this idea of a “tech industry”, something Sara argued against in her book:

我确实认为一个好的开始是打破这种“技术产业”的观念，这在萨拉在她的书中提出了反对：

Ten years ago, tech was still, in many ways, a discrete industry—easy to count and quantify. Today, it’s more accurate to call it a core underpinning of every industry. As tech entrepreneur and activist Anil Dash writes, “Every industry and every sector of society is powered by technology today, and being transformed by the choices made by technologists.”

十年前，技术在许多方面仍然是一个离散的行业，易于计数和量化。 如今，将其称为每个行业的核心基础更为准确。 正如科技企业家和激进主义者Anil Dash所写的那样：“当今，每个行业和社会的每个部门都受到技术的推动，并被技术专家的选择所改变。”

A lot of the issues we see can be traced back to this artificial separation we have put between people who build technology and the industries that technology is used in. The end result is this enthusiasm for “disruption”. This belief that the same rules don’t apply.

我们看到的许多问题都可以追溯到我们在技术开发人员和技术使用行业之间进行的人为隔离。最终结果是这种对“破坏”的热情。 这种认为相同规则不适用的信念。

It would be a start, though I’d be naive to think it’s enough to fix the problem. The challenge is that this is a mess and there are no easy answers. It’s unlikely any one solution will solve all our woes. It will take a combination of things that leads to significant change.

这将是一个开始，尽管我天真地认为足以解决问题。 挑战在于，这是一团糟，没有简单的答案。 任何一种解决方案都不可能解决我们所有的麻烦。 需要结合多种因素才能带来重大变化。

I take hope from Ursula Franklin’s earthworm theory.

我从厄休拉·富兰克林的earth理论中获得了希望。

Social change will not come to us like an avalanche down the mountain. It will come through seeds growing in well prepared soil—and it is we, like the earthworms, who prepare the soil. We also seed thoughts and knowledge and concern. We realize there are no guarantees as to what will come up. Yet we do know that without the seeds and prepared soil nothing will grow at all…we need more earthworming.

社会变革不会像雪崩般降临到我们身边。 它将通过在充分准备好的土壤中生长的种子来实现，而正是我们像the一样在土壤中进行准备。 我们还播种思想，知识和关切。 我们意识到无法保证会发生什么。 但是我们确实知道，没有种子和没有准备好的土壤，根本就不会生长……我们需要更多的earth。

Change doesn’t happen all at once nor does it come from the top-down. It comes from the accumulation of little changes, from baby steps taken by everyday people who want to make things a little better.

更改不会一次全部发生，也不会从上至下进行。 它源于微小变化的积累，是日常生活中想要使事情变得更好的人们所采取的婴儿步骤。

I agree with Mike (and so many others): we have skirted by too long without taking responsibility for what we build. As Mike said, “We moved too fast and broke too many things.” Something needs to change and I’m grateful that we’re finally having that conversation on a broader level.

我同意Mike(以及其他许多人)的观点：我们已经走了很久，对我们的建设不承担任何责任。 正如Mike所说：“我们行动太快，弄坏了很多东西。” 有些事情需要改变，我很高兴我们终于在更广泛的层面上进行了对话。

And maybe I’m wrong. Maybe some sort of licensing can work. Smarter folks than I have argued for it. I have my doubts, though it’s certainly a discussion I want us to continue to have.

也许我错了。 也许某种许可可以起作用。 比我所主张的聪明的人。 我有疑问，尽管这肯定是我希望我们继续进行的讨论。

But I hope in our attempt to fix what is broken about technology and the web, we don’t break what isn’t. The openness of the web is one of its most important features and it’s something I hope we’re careful about defending.

但是我希望在尝试解决技术和网络方面的问题时，我们不要破坏未解决的问题。 网络的开放性是其最重要的功能之一，我希望我们对此有所注意。

翻译自: https://timkadlec.com/remembers/2018-03-16-licensed-to-web/

电脑找不到网络许可管理器