Slashdot Mirror


Decentralization

jamesgregory writes "'Geeks make new stuff primarily because it's fun, because it's useful, and because they can. Suits make new stuff primarily because they hope to earn a profit. Yes, that is an oversimplification, and there's overlap between the two types -- there are plenty of profit-seeking geeks and geeky business folks. Still, the distinction is real.'"

280 comments

  1. I know by neo8750 · · Score: 0

    I know thats why i like to fiddle with stuff to see what Iu can make. usally it works out for the best.

    1. Re:I know by oO0OoO0Oo · · Score: 1

      It seems to me that you only read the post, not the article. . . but perhaps you're better off. The post suggests an interesting (possibly Ask Slashdot type) discussion about the products of geek ingenuity. But that discussion will be overshadowed here for obvious reasons by a much less interesting string of 1.[Insert verb here.] 2. ??? 3. Profit jokes.

      At the risk of being "offtopic" I'd like to suggest just that discussion: Products and experiences of raw geek ingenuity and creativity.

      What say you?

      --
      We Are Familiar With Elephants By Virtue Of Their Size.
    2. Re:I know by idontgno · · Score: 1
      Here's all the discussion about geek ingenuity I need to know, courtesy of Scott Adams:

      Marketing manager: "So, Dilbert, I understand this is the prototype you have been working on for the last six months."
      Dilbert: "Yes, Sir. - This little baby can convert worthless pocket lint into a valuable parsley substitute!"
      Marketing manager: "Well, this looks absolutely brilliant and completely unmarketable."
      Dilbert: "Thanks. I'm technology driven"

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  2. Copy & Paste by rmohr02 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why just copy and paste the first paragraph when you could copy and paste the whole article?

    1. Re:Copy & Paste by vectra14 · · Score: 1

      reason #1:
      we need to conserve the article so we can post different sections of it for repeated posts (of the same thing)

    2. Re:Copy & Paste by dildatron · · Score: 2

      because if we pasted the whole article, we couldn't slashot the site, now could we?

      plus it would probably be about trains if we did...

      --


      If you had nuts on your chin, would they be chin nuts?
    3. Re:Copy & Paste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Becuase they're convinced that they, unlike Google, should take the high moral path & not provide mirrors of the sites they overload?

    4. Re:Copy & Paste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I liked the train article. There needs to be more non story submissions from readers.

  3. This is a summary? by Amata · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is it just me or did the "summary" give no idea whatsoever of what the article is actually about?

    1. Re:This is a summary? by Osty · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Remember, this is Slashdot. It's not the editors' jobs to make sure that the story summaries actually summarize the story. Really, why should we know what the story is about, when we could click on the link to find out and generate revenue for the target site (assuming that site hasn't already been slashdotted, in which case it's impossible to have any idea what the story is about)? Really, come on! Editors doing editorial duties? What are you going ask for next, that they use a spell checker? Or that they actually read their own site to make sure they don't duplicate stories?


      Remember, Slashdot is just Rob's personal site that happens to enjoy a large audience. Or so the line goes when someone has a gripe with the way it's run. To parrot the trolls, if you don't like it, leave. (I don't subscribe to that view, as it's a downward spiral leaving slashdot with nothing but first posters and trolls, but hey, if that's what they want ...)


      And now for the karma whoring -- That wooshing noise is the sound of a thousand moderators clicking "troll" and/or "flamebait" (guaranteed to get me modded up to at least +4).

    2. Re:This is a summary? by rmohr02 · · Score: 2

      Remember, Slashdot is just Rob's personal site that happens to enjoy a large audience. Then what's cmdrtaco.net for?

    3. Re:This is a summary? by LostCluster · · Score: 3

      Still, can we expect the editors to RTFA like we insist anybody who posts a comment is supposed to do? They don't have to read everything, just the links within the stories they're about to post. And can we ask the editors to at least read the story summaries that have been posted by the other editors since last they worked. Just a simple scan to make sure they know what's been posted the last couple days. That won't totally eliminate dupes, but at least make a noticable cutback in them. I don't think this is too much to ask...

    4. Re:This is a summary? by Hubert_Shrump · · Score: 2

      Shh!

      I couldn't say anything up in the subject line, because, well -- they might be watching.

      We in the underground of the One Good Site support you. When the rising up of the Quality Posts is upon Us, you will be asked to make a Sacrifice.

      Until then, keep the Faith.

      --
      Keep your packets off my GNU/Girlfriend!
    5. Re:This is a summary? by Osty · · Score: 1

      When the rising up of the Quality Posts is upon Us

      I shall post as required, but I am unable to cause posts to rise, for the Powers That Be deem me unsuitable for moderation points. The bastards.

    6. Re:This is a summary? by SN74S181 · · Score: 3, Funny

      cmdrtaco.net is Rob's personal site that happens to enjoy a very small audience.

      *rim-shot*

    7. Re:This is a summary? by baezju · · Score: 1

      I am a new member to the site and I would like to say that I really enjoy the site's content and choice of articles. I was looking for a site like this for a while and I'm very pleased that I found it. Keep up the good work guys.

      JB

  4. Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by SteweyGriffin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Geeks make new stuff primarily because it's fun, because it's useful, and because they can. Suits make new stuff primarily because they hope to earn a profit.

    You know what? That's a load of crap, and you know it. I don't even care that you tried to cover your blatant generalization up in the next sentence of the write-up. If someone tells a racist joke, are they not a racist regardless of if they were "just joking"?

    I'm sick of these "it's either this way, or that way" people. The computing field is full of a ton of smart people who have more than one ability. I can code with the best of 'em but still am confident that, if necessary and so desired, I could run a group of a dozen or two programmers, system administrators, etc.

    The reason I get so upset sometimes is that people pigeonhole themselves into a specific career (major in computer engineering OR major in management OR major in English, etc.) before thinking "Hey, ya know, maybe I'm gifted enough to do both coding and project management and testing, and hey, maybe even a few interviews."

    I love to see other fellow men and women reach their highest potential, but that can't happen when you segregate folks into one specific area.

    1. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by hng_rval · · Score: 2, Informative

      I love to see other fellow men and women reach their highest potential

      This happens to be Microsofts current vision statement or mission statement or motto, or whatever it is that appears on their commercials.

      I do agree with you though. There's absolutely no reason to pigeonhole ourselves into a specific career. At the University of Michigan business school the highest percentage of students (27%) have an undergraduate degree in engineering.

      Plenty of geeks are out there getting MBAs or Law degrees.

      --
      Thank you Mario! But our princess is in another castle!
    2. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I disagree. Programmers with altruistic movies are truly rare. Virtually all of them program because it's fun to them - they get the same feelings of sucess and power that an athlete does when they sucede at reaching a target. They're able to find programming fun usually because they possess a neurological makeup which makes other things less stimulating than they are for a normal person.
      How many programmers dedicate their programming time to caring intentions such as making software to help people? They do exist, but I think the generalisation that programmers do programming for fun is more or less true. Or else there'd be far more sites like arachnoid.com on the internet.

    3. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, PHing yourself is not necessarily a good idea. But I can say hands down that someone who only specializes in 1 field will kick your ass skillwise with no problems if you are a "jack of all trades" Remember the ending to that saying because it's tried and true. That's the reason people SPECIALIZE in things in the first place.

    4. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Programmers with altruistic movies are truly rare.
      Programmers with the motives to not make typos are truly rare too ;)
    5. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by quantaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh come on, this is a major overreaction.
      I'm sick of these "it's either this way, or that way" people.
      Well the poster wasn't one of those people, perhaps I should include the next sentence which you mentioned and yet completely ignored.
      Yes, that is an oversimplification, and there's overlap between the two types -- there are plenty of profit-seeking geeks and geeky business folks. Still, the distinction is real.'"

      And he's right, can you honestly tell me there isn't a bit of truth to that statement. The fact is that he made a statement that in general that held true. Of course it isn't this way or that way. He wasn't thinking that when he wrote it I didn't think that when I read it and I'm sure that you were perceptive enough to realize it. This has nothing to do with any form of discrimination. It really irritates me when people make that mistake. The truth is that some groups are more prone to crime and to be less productive. Why? It has nothing to do with culture or ethnic backgrough. It's simply the fact that they have been placed in socio-economic circumstances that make it very hard to succeed. Too often because of political correctness people ignore these problems and nothing gets done. Meanwhile people who hold discriminatory views continue to hold them because they don't know better since no one who knows better is willing to discuss the situation. Of course I don't know if you fall into any of these categories but I will mention a couple things in closing. One if you don't make generalizations it's very difficult to have any sort of higher level conversations and two, if you are criticising the generalizations the poster made I will point out that you made more generalizations about him than he did about "suits" and "geeks".

      --
      I stole this Sig
    6. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Maybe alot of us WANT to be pigeonholed, I don't want to end up in management, I don't want to become a lawer, I want to code / program /develop and that's it.

      Who are you to say that to "reach [my] highest potential", I must also do 3 other things. If you want to, go ahead, but to do so and say you "can code with the best of 'em" just tells me you probably think you're the best at everything you do.

      If you want to tell a joke about an american, a newfy and a european, I won't call you a racist. If you want them to sit respectively in different sections of the bus, I will.

    7. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by zabieru · · Score: 1

      I agree that this sort of thing is bullshit. But if you squint a little, you can make it better... Think of it this way: Each of us has a part of us that likes to make stuff for geeky reasons. And each of us has a part that likes the benjamins. You might call those in whom one drive or the other is dominant a "geek" or a "suit." Certainly almost all of us want to do both of those things, as well as many others. Any description of this sort can only hope to describe aspects of each of us.

    8. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by Sanity · · Score: 2
      Programmers with altruistic movies are truly rare. Virtually all of them program because it's fun to them
      That is a nuts distinction. I get a feeling of pleasure from donating to charity, does the fact that it makes me feel good mean that it isn't altruistic?
    9. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by dildatron · · Score: 2

      This AC has a good point. I manily want to say that there are many different needs for many different people. Jack of all trades geeks fit the bill for many positions, while specialized geeks in one field fit the bill for many other positions. We shouldnt be so black and white.

      --


      If you had nuts on your chin, would they be chin nuts?
    10. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by Mattsson · · Score: 1

      We all have our prejudices...
      For some it is that all the suits thinks about is making money and swindle their employees.
      For some it is that geeks don't want to make money.

      On this particular subject, my prejudice is this:
      Anyone working in the field of computers, electronics or something related and who actually wear a suit or a tie at work are incompetent.

      This is probably not true, but so far it has been correct regarding the people I came across during the five years I was working in that field...

      --
      /.Mattsson - My native language is not English, so please don't whine over linguistic errors. (That's lame anyway...)
    11. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by RockyJSquirel · · Score: 2

      That's a load of crap, and you know it. [blah blah blah] blatant generalization [blah blah blah] racist joke [bizarre analogy to racism] [blah blah blah] I'm sick of these "it's either this way, or that way" people [hissy fit] [blah blah blah]

      And I'm sick of knee-jerks who go into spasms of rightous indignation every time they see a generalization.

      The reality is that what the guy said is true a lot of the time, so what'cha bitchin about?

      You could have made the simple point that some people are polymaths without the overheated accusations and spitting frenzy.

      "Don't have a cow, man"

      Rocky J. Squirrel

    12. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      You're saying that someone can learn C AND Java??? No way!

      Actually, the specialization is mostly brought in by businesses (who do you want to get to admin your Oracle database? Obviously not someone who knows Sybase administration - else you're paying for extra skills you're not using) This type of thinking makes people learn and target niche markets.

      In fact, knowing more than what is required is sometimes seen as bad. Management wants a person they can control and manipulate. Not someone who can spot problems, and realize the manager is an idiot, etc. This is more of the case for middle-management. (a semi-sorta-friend of mine who's at one of these positions once said that he'll never "ok" for hire someone whom he thinks is smarter than he is).

      Most IT schools (the non-accredited few months ones, 18moth programs, etc.) do just that - they create 'specialists' in one area. If you're in a 6-18 month program to learn VB (a nice degree title "VB Professinal" or something just as grand), then that's all you'll learn. Most learning in such places is based on memorization and not understanding. If you ask that person what is an array or how to resolve a problem that they haven't been explicitly shown how to solve, they're lost.

      I call it the if-while problem: You show a person how an if statement works, they understand it. You how that same person how a while statement works, they understand it. You give them a problem that requires them to use both (one inside the other), and they'll *never* be able to solve it.

      How do you get that type of a person out of the specialization pigeonhole if that's what they explicitly got into?

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    13. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by aggieben · · Score: 1

      Jeez. Get a grip. I'm not so convinced that people that are so afraid to specialize or be "pigeonholed" aren't just afraid of committing to something and committing to be good at it. Maybe it's a fear of being unsuccessful. I don't know. Anyway, I think most things can be broken down into right/wrong, this way/that way, etc. Of course, there are complicated exceptions, but if you know what you believe and why, I don't think it's too hard to make those kind of deductions.

      --
      Don't become a regular here, you will become retarded. -- Yoda the Retard
    14. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by MntlChaos · · Score: 1

      ummm that's because you have almost mutually exclusive mindsets: self-centered and challenge-centered. In a few cases these desires coincide. However in most cases, these do not have anything in common, leading to the distinction between suits and geeks.

    15. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by drob · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I'm sick of these "it's either this way, or that way" people. The computing field is full of a ton of smart people who have more than one ability. I can code with the best of 'em but still am confident that, if necessary and so desired, I could run a group of a dozen or two programmers, system administrators, etc.

      Hey you're young, smart and multi-talented right and you can do anything right? Perhaps, but you are in a distinct minority. VERY few people will actually be happy writing code OR managing coders. I've worked with a LARGE number of people over 18 years in this business and I've met virtually no one who is both a good engineer and a good manager. The personalities that do well in these two different roles are VERY different (for one, engineers tend to be introverted and managers extroverted).

      I'm with the original post - it is a fairly accurate generalization. There are those who make and there are those who shuffle papers, go to meetings and play politics. Believe it.

    16. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      "If someone tells a racist joke, are they not a racist regardless of if they were "just joking"?".

      I'm going offtopic here (and modding myself down as well...), but I do feel I have to reply to this. My answer to this (rethorical) question is No. It is possible to not be a racist, believe in equality of all men, and yet laugh at racist jokes precisely because the reinforced stereotypes are so damn funny I remember some racist jokes being swapped at my previous workplace, with everyone laughing along heartily, including the boss... who is from Suriname and as black as they come. Come to think of it, he told most of them.

      It used to be so that telling racist or antisemitic jokes was regarded the same as joking about blondes or men/women. Sad thing is, these days, at least here in the Netherlands, you can actually be hauled in front of court for telling a racist joke. Welcome to 1984.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    17. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by AlecC · · Score: 2

      But I think the point was right about no "either this way ot that". I think you can plot a scatter graph with two axes - geekiness one way and suitness the other if you want. People with neither are out of the business. People with both probably choose suit because it pays better (and gets you laid more?). But there is no reason, in my experience, to believe there is any clustering at any given point in the graph. Just as there are tall people and short people, but a lot more ordinary-sized people, there are total geeks and total (pointy haired) managers, but most people are somewhere in the middle. So that the "overlap between the two types" is actually the majority. Picking ends of the spectrum as archetypes is like the picture of the sumo wrestler with the geisha - interesting as an example of extremes bu not informative about the generality.

      --
      Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    18. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by arakon · · Score: 1

      You know what? Everyone has some level of geekiness, because no one is "Normal" when you get to know them. Its part of that evolution thing, we're all a little different so that (supposably) only the most desirable of us reproduce and have offspring with a few of our qualities, now I think we've shot the evolution thing in the foot lately but thats a whole another can of ethical/social worms that can never be debated in text without people getting the wrong idea or misquotation.

      Now I do believe that some of us may seem a bit more "geeky" than others because instead of completey conforming to our society we let a few more of our "unique" traits shine a bit more.

      Just a thought.

      --
      "If I were bound by all laws everywhere I'm sure I would have committed a capital crime somewhere."
    19. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by arakon · · Score: 1

      PS> Its really early here and I just got up, sorry if I'm a bit incoherant.

      --
      "If I were bound by all laws everywhere I'm sure I would have committed a capital crime somewhere."
    20. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by SN74S181 · · Score: 1

      So, it wasn't that clear from what you typed there, but with codewords like 'altruistic' and what-not, are you following along in the spirit of the article and implying that profits are eeeeevile?

      That's what I get from the initial thesis.

      I would say that geeks make stuff for fun and profit. Suits make things justs for profit. And political zealots just sit around ranting about evile 'profit' and prepending 'Big' (i.e. Big Oil, Big Business, Big Labor .... oops, scratch that one) onto things they don't like.

    21. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by Tim+Browse · · Score: 2
      I get a feeling of pleasure from donating to charity, does the fact that it makes me feel good mean that it isn't altruistic?

      Hey, that's the plot of an episode of Friends! :-)

      No, really - one of them claimed that there are 'no unselfish acts' - and used a similar argument - helping a charity makes you feel better.

      I liked the the conclusion - Phoebe gave money to a charity that had pissed her off, so it gave her no pleasure to do so. Don't think about that one too much, or you'll go mad :-)

      Tim

    22. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by blue+trane · · Score: 1

      Each of us has a part of us that likes to make stuff for geeky reasons. And each of us has a part that likes the benjamins.

      Making stuff for geeky reasons is a trait that will hopefully survive for a while; liking the benjamins need only remain with us as long as we choose...

    23. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by m_cuffa · · Score: 1

      Leonardo Da Vinci was a jack of all trades AND could kick anyone's ass at any one of those trades. Now if only narrow minded people could follow his example, this might be a better world.

    24. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pwned!

    25. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by MrResistor · · Score: 2

      I was about to agree with you, but then it occured to me that the statement you're complaining about defines the difference between a suit and a geek. It has nothing to do with training or pigeonholing, but rather with base motivations.

      A geek creates for primarily for personal enjoyment, profit is at best a secondary motivation. A geek in a suit is still a geek.

      A suit creates primarily for profit. A suit in a ratty t-shirt is still a suit.

      It has nothing to do with people reaching their full potential, it's just defining terms.

      If someone tells a racist joke, are they not a racist regardless of if they were "just joking"?

      My sister tells a lot of blonde jokes. Does that mean she hates blondes? I certainly hope not, since she is one. She also has a BS in Combined Sciences (medical focus), and is gaining some practical field experience, and paying off some debt, as a paramedic before she goes on to medical school. She thinks the blonde stereotype is funny, so she collects blonde jokes.

      Similarly, most of the racist jokes I've heard have been told to me by people of the race the joke ridicules. Again, stereotypes are funny. Realizing that does not make me a racist.

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
    26. Re:Listen up, this is the last time I'll say this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Hey, that's the plot of an episode of Friends! :-)

      Seinfeld at best. This is not friends material, but great for Seinfeld to babble on for hours and hours/

  5. Ok, I'll dumb it down for you. by DarthWing · · Score: 1

    1. Make new stuff.
    2. ???
    3. Profit!

    1. Re:Ok, I'll dumb it down for you. by whereiswaldo · · Score: 2

      Let me fill that in for you:

      1. Make new stuff.
      2. Karma whore.
      3. Profit!

  6. Um... by PRickard · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is this news? Must be a slow weekend at both /. and Salon.

    --

    == Paul Rickard, Editor of The Microsoft Boycott Campaign ====

    1. Re:Um... by rmohr02 · · Score: 2

      Well, Mozilla 1.3a is out, but /. rejected my article--apparently this decentralization thing is news and Mozilla milestones aren't.

  7. I'd have to agree... by LucidityZero · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'd have to agree. Look at how many seemingly useless sites there are out there. Look at Slashdot itself!
    I know my website (www.sometimes.org (which is currently down for a redo, will return January 1st, 2003)) is much along the same lines. It's mostly an open forum for people to discuss and display their "art" (for which I have a very loose definition [there is a programming section, for example]). I am going to be spending tons of money on this venture in the next few months in particular, and although I have very vague plans in the back of my head to eventually turn a profit from this, I figure I'll figure that out when I get there.

    In the mean time, I'm doing it for fun.

    --
    Sig.i>
    1. Re:I'd have to agree... by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 2, Informative

      And that, IMO, is the best reason to do something. For fun. I'm trying to run my own business (http://jan-jr-ent.homelinux.org. ATM it's not much more then a web page and a few screen shots, but I'm hoping by Mid-2003 it'll be a site that'll draw in the business as well as any other. Until I turn a profit, I do web design for fun. Why? Because I can.

      I also like to write poetry, short stories and novels. Why? I find it fun and relaxing.

      With any venture, you have to do it for the hell of it in the beginning. Worry about making money once you got all the details sorted out. Until then, have fun!

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
    2. Re:I'd have to agree... by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      Hah! Now there's a way to save on bandwidth bills. Take your site "down for a redo" before you post it on Slashdot.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    3. Re:I'd have to agree... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, nothing spells "KLASS" like a flaming logo.

      "Urge to kill rising...."

    4. Re:I'd have to agree... by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

      Yeah, nothing spells "KLASS" like a flaming logo.

      "A picture is worth a thousand words..."

      That particular logo happens to say: "We're so hot, we're on fire!"

      At least, I hope that'st he message conveyed. :-)

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
  8. what about the sharks and the jets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    the geeks need to make something that'll filter these stupid topics

  9. What's the difference? by PhysicsGenius · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Geeks make new stuff primarily because it's fun, because it's useful, and because they can. Suits make new stuff primarily because they hope to earn a profit.

    As if that was somehow a lesser goal. They are isomorphic, in that they both consist of informational efficiency gains. Here's what I mean.

    Geeks see a need for a device/program. They function as a evolutionary force to fill an "ecological" niche. The niche is the need, the device is the thing that exploits the niche. "Suits" do the same thing. They see a financial or economic inefficiency and they create a "device" (a financial instrument or business, say) to exploit it. They are money hackers. Profit is just another way of saying efficiency which everyone here knows is related to elegance.

    Sure, suits don't care about the elegance of YOUR crap--but you don't care about yours, so why should they. And they are rightly in charge, since their feet are on the ground. Now if only those damn liberals in Congress would understand that people like Ken Lay should be praised for increasing efficiency instead of castigated.

    1. Re:What's the difference? by NineNine · · Score: 2

      I'd put it differently. Geeks create for the sake of creating. Period. Whether or not what the create does anything useful is irrelevant.

      "Suits" on the other hand create to fill a niche. They fill needs. Big fat obvious example: Gates (also a geek) filled a need: Software to make PC's accessable to the masses. Linux is created just to be created. It doesn't fill any needs that aren't already met. Most people don't have any compelling reason to use it. It's there because it's there. MS is there because people *wanted* it there.

    2. Re:What's the difference? by Bendebecker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Geeks see a need for a device/program

      Not always true, the orginal personal computers could do basically nothing and, as many pointed out at the time, no one really needed one. Many of the orginal programmers and engineers built them anyway though, not because they needed them but because they thought they would be fun to play around with. They had no interest in 'exploiting' the technology, they just wanted to have fun with it.

      Sure, suits don't care about the elegance of YOUR crap--but you don't care about yours, so why should they

      I do care about the elegance of my programs. If my programs were inefficent (or just plain crap) I would be ashamed to say I wrote them. I take pride in what I write as every programmer should. Our programs are a reflection of our abilities. We care about the quality of what we produce, suits should care about the quality of what they are trying to sell. If your selling crap, then maybe you should reflect on the ethics of what your doing.

      You also seem to be trying to rationalize your drive to make money(aka greed) by fooling yourself into believing that everyone else is only interested in the same thing. Making a good program that ppl can use is not the same as designing a means to exploits others' needs (which is what you seem to be doing.)
      We program becuase it is fun. We create things to help people, not exploit them. You sell our programs becuase you seem to just want to make more money. You exploit others needs for your own personal gain. If people don't need something, you try to trick them into thinking they do. You help no one but yourself. That's the difference.

      --
      There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
      most of us won't be able to afford it.
      -- Lemmy
    3. Re:What's the difference? by God!+Awful+2 · · Score: 1

      Your otherwise intelligent comment comes to an end when you defend Ken Lay. Is breaking the law now considered "hacking" (finding an innovative solution to a problem)? Is tax evasion just "increasing efficiency"? That's BS.

      -a

    4. Re:What's the difference? by Newcastle22 · · Score: 1
      Linux is created just to be created. It doesn't fill any needs that aren't already met. Most people don't have any compelling reason to use it.

      Linux's success is just plain dumb luck then? Wow, maybe God does exist afterall.

      Dan

    5. Re:What's the difference? by pogen · · Score: 2
      "Suits" do the same thing. They see a financial or economic inefficiency and they create a "device" (a financial instrument or business, say) to exploit it. They are money hackers. Profit is just another way of saying efficiency which everyone here knows is related to elegance.

      Please explain to me how Big Mouth Billy Bass makes the world more efficient and/or elegant.

    6. Re:What's the difference? by MntlChaos · · Score: 1

      one difference. what happens after the device gets created?

      the geek shares, the suit hogs. simple as that

    7. Re:What's the difference? by jpmorgan · · Score: 1
      Ken Lay should be praised for increasing efficiency Increasing efficiency? What kind of crack are you smoking? He wasted billions of dollars trying to line his, and his cronies pockets.

      The problem with you extremist conservatives is you don't realise there's a difference between a free market and capitalism. Capitalism requires a certain amount of governance to keep operating; rules about disclosure of information to investors, or about monopoly positions in a market. Without rules you have a free market anarchy, and everybody loses.

      The problem with Ken Lay is the Republicans in Congress spent 8 years dismantling and weakening the rules that kept men like him in check and kept the economy booming. And now we're paying the price for it.

    8. Re:What's the difference? by Surak · · Score: 2



      Not always true, the orginal personal computers could do basically nothing and, as many pointed out at the time, no one really needed one. Many of the orginal programmers and engineers built them anyway though, not because they needed them but because they thought they would be fun to play around with. They had no interest in 'exploiting' the technology, they just wanted to have fun with it.


      Yes and no. When I got my first "personal computer" way back in '78 or something, I needed to organize my books so I wrote a program to catalogue and categorize them and store the database in comma-delimited format on a floppy disk.

      I wrote it because A) to see if I could do it, B) to have a program to play with and C) because I needed it. (I didn't care if others needed it or not -- I wrote it for me.)

    9. Re:What's the difference? by blue+trane · · Score: 1

      Geeks see a need for a device/program. They function as a evolutionary force to fill an "ecological" niche. The niche is the need, the device is the thing that exploits the niche. "Suits" do the same thing. They see a financial or economic inefficiency and they create a "device" (a financial instrument or business, say) to exploit it. They are money hackers. Profit is just another way of saying efficiency which everyone here knows is related to elegance.

      I think the difference is that when coding, being truthful (with yourself, when debugging) contributes to efficiency; but when "hacking money", lying is often the most efficient path.

    10. Re:What's the difference? by blue+trane · · Score: 1

      MS is there because people *wanted* it there.

      Or because they were sold on it. Without being presented with all the options. So a lot of people made an uninformed choice.

  10. Geeks and nerds and being bored. by DAS1 · · Score: 1

    I know the reason i built a wireless network that actively serves about 20 or 30 people. I was bored and it sounded cool. I was just wondering what some of the projects that other geeks have been doing in their just for fun time.

    1. Re:Geeks and nerds and being bored. by Caez · · Score: 0

      I made a debian/mosix cluster with the leftovers from my attic.

      --
      http://www.mistersampo.com
  11. Am I the only one... by Erik+Hollensbe · · Score: 5, Funny

    That thought this was an opening for a Jon Katz article?

    1. Re:Am I the only one... by brarrr · · Score: 1

      nope, i thought it was too. come to think of it, i havn't seen any katz articles in a long time. i wonder if i turned off katz stories, or if he just stopped posting them. whatever the case, i don't care, as /. has improved for me immensly because of it.

      --
      to email me: take my /. handle and append .net preceded by charter.
    2. Re:Am I the only one... by dgenr8 · · Score: 2

      Wish I could help you there. I filtered him out a year ago. It has made Slashdot ever so much more enjoyable.

    3. Re:Am I the only one... by anshil · · Score: 1

      Me not! I am blocking all John Kaz article already for a long time ...

      --

      --
      Karma 50, and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt.
  12. The rest of the artile by zephc · · Score: 5, Funny

    Something about grass being green and water being wet...

    --
    "I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
    1. Re:The rest of the artile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Miagi: Remember, Sun is shining and Grass is green...

      Geek: Sun? Grass? What are thos and will they help prevent RSI? Do they has 802.11b Wireless?

  13. Merkac Dot - Google Links, Slashdot Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Merkac Dot - The Slashdot Summariser: something to ease your slashdot browsing.
    All story links point to the google cache. See Merkac Dot for the full slashdot summary & perl source

    "'Geeks make new stuff primarily because it's fun, because it's useful, and because they can [G]. Suits make new stuff primarily because they hope to earn a profit. Yes, that is an oversimplification, and there's overlap between the two types -- there are plenty of profit-seeking geeks and geeky business folks. Still, the distinction is real.'"

    Mirrored here (for posterity, not karma): because they can

    By Scott Rosenberg

    Dec. 13, 2002 | The technology industry has long been shaped by the creative tension between technologists and businesspeople, otherwise known as geeks and suits. Geeks make new stuff primarily because it's fun, because it's useful, and because they can. Suits make new stuff primarily because they hope to earn a profit. Yes, that is an oversimplification, and there's overlap between the two types -- there are plenty of profit-seeking geeks and geeky business folks. Still, the distinction is real.

    You'd think that, today, with the tech industry in its worst downturn in memory, jobs scarce and funding scarcer, bottom-line thinking would dominate. Instead, the recent cratering of so many companies seems to have chastened the suits -- and the very absence of get-rich-quick opportunities has cleared a space for geek enthusiasms to flourish.

    That was certainly the feeling I got from this week's Supernova conference on decentralization -- a gathering in Palo Alto, Calif., for which the ber-geeks of Silicon Valley and beyond (to use the label suggested by one of the software-industry legends in attendance) turned out in full force.

    There was Bob Frankston, who'd coded VisiCalc, the personal computer's first "killer app," and a row behind him sat Mitch Kapor, whose Lotus 1-2-3 replaced VisiCalc as the spreadsheet of choice in the early '80s. There were Marc Canter (creator of Director and other multimedia tools) and Dave Winer (creator of Radio and other blogging and outlining tools), double-teaming a Microsoft exec on the issue of patents.

    When I think about you... I TOUCH MY ELF! - ebaynham.com

    Prominent bloggers swarmed the place, keeping up a keyboard-click chorus as they logged speakers' comments in real time. (Mitch Ratcliffe offers a good list here.) The blogging was so thorough that, though my Salon duties kept me in the office on the conference's second day, I could keep up with the event pretty well. Thank you, decentralization!

    Conference organizer Kevin Werbach admitted that his "decentralization" label was "ugly," but suggested that its very awkwardness was a sign that we were dealing with an underlying trend rather than a "marketing-concocted theme." And he was right: The phenomena this event focused on, a grab bag of new technologies that have bubbled up from the humbled high-tech world in the post-crash era, are mostly geek driven and grassroots spread: Wi-Fi (802.11b), the wireless high-speed Net access method; blogs; and "Web services," a fuzzy term to describe new methods of directly and quickly connecting software applications and data across the Net.

    These disparate boomlets share an "end to end" design: They rely on the power of individual users' computers -- there's no big, centrally operated piece of software or hardware mediating. The users connect across an open, "stupid" network -- the Internet itself, today -- that simply moves information without worrying about what it is. The resulting software is ad hoc, impromptu, flexible, "lightweight." Empowered individuals at the ends of the network try out new ideas and build myriad new services. It's geek heaven.

    Next page | But, but, but ... where's the business model?1, 2

    The Free Software Project Read Andrew Leonard's book-in-progress on Linux and open source -- and post your comments.

    Salon Search Directory -->About Salon Table Talk Advertise in Salon Investor Relations

    Arts & Entertainment | Books | Comics | Life | News | PeoplePolitics | Sex | Tech & Business and The Free Software Project | AudioLetters | Columnists | Salon Plus | Salon Gear

    Reproduction of material from any Salon pages without written permission is strictly prohibitedCopyright 2002 Salon.com Salon, 22 4th Street, 16th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103Telephone 415 645-9200 | Fax 415 645-9204E-mail | Salon.com Privacy Policy | Terms of Service

    1. Re:Merkac Dot - Google Links, Slashdot Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I think about you... I TOUCH MY ELF! - ebaynham.com

      Hey, thanks for leaving that ad in there...heheheh.

      ebay-n-ham anyone?? heh

  14. Because they can... by bcliftondotcom · · Score: 3, Funny

    Geeks make new stuff primarily because it's fun, because it's useful, and because they can.

    Because they can is essential for making anything at all. I've personally never made anything that I can't make.

    1. Re:Because they can... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      But how much have you NOT made, even though you could make it?

      And, how much have you made because you had the ability to, not because you really needed the thing?

    2. Re:Because they can... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh oh there, goes your career in designing copy-protection schemes!

    3. Re:Because they can... by karlm · · Score: 2
      I dunno... I do lots of things b/c I can't. I couldn't write anything in Ocaml and I couldn't write any http basic auth apps, so I went and got rfc 2617 and went to ocaml.org.

      I take great joy in doing things I can't do. (Okay, if you want to pick nits, it's stuff I couldn't do and learned in the process of doing, but it sounds better to phrase it the other way.)

      I've been thinking about writing an app to quiz me on Koine Greek (very similar to Attic Greek spoken in the Helenistic erra). I'm leaning towards writing it as a Zope Python script, but PHP is also a strong option.

      Do things b/c you can't, not b/c you can.

      --
      Copyright Violation:"theft, piracy"::Anti-Trust Violation:"thermonuclear price terrorism"<-Overly dramatic language.
  15. Poop by poopdik · · Score: 0

    Yes, everyone is interested in doing something for free. Until they find out that they can get paid for it. Then your geek puts on a suit, and goes to the bank!

  16. you don't care about *theirs* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    en tea

  17. The truth by EggplantMan · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Yes, it's true that most geeks like yourself like to explore and tinker, and that's suitable when you're a small child or when you're in an academic environment.

    When it comes to putting bread on the table - something that geeks are intrinsicly poor at - I'd rather be a suit. What the geek culture fails to recognise is that there is a time and a place for this sort of thing, and this behavior is useless in the work environment. That's why the entire dot-com bubble burst, remember?

    --

    ?-|||-----x<*))))><
    1. Re:The truth by ryochiji · · Score: 4, Insightful
      > When it comes to putting bread on the table [...] I'd rather be a suit.

      Maybe I shouldn't be speaking since I'm a college student and only have myself to feed, but I sure hope I don't ever say "I'd rather be a suit." Maybe it sounds immature and naive when I say this, but to me, it sounds an aweful lot like admitting defeat and submitting to the norm.

      Personally, I'd like to give my software away for free and still put bread on the table. I don't know if it's possible, but I like to think it is. And I'll be damned if I don't at least try.

    2. Re:The truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ...admitting defeat and submitting to the norm.

      and being a "geek" is not submitting to a norm?!
      50% of everything is bullshiting yourself into believing your right.

    3. Re:The truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Personally, I'd like to give my software away for free and still put bread on the table. I don't know if it's possible, but I like to think it is. And I'll be damned if I don't at least try.

      Sounds like you understand capitalism more than most suits. Keep trying my man, it just might be possible. It'll be much harder than going the easy route though.

      Oh yeah, and don't forget, "putting food on the table" usually means "putting a new computer on the desk each year, paying cable and cell phone bills, buying lots of DVDs and CDs and gadgets, and eating out every week". If you try and trim that down a little your goal will be easier and you just might be a better person because of it.

    4. Re:The truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ahh but the dot-com bubble burst precisely because people went looking for "Business models" when they shouldn't have bothered. i.e., it was the suit's faults.

      And don't think that the "work environment" is something great. The industrial revolution is over and it's okay to think a little differently.

    5. Re:The truth by ryochiji · · Score: 2
      >If you try and trim that down a little your goal will be easier

      I lost 60lb since leaving home 5 years ago. If I trim down any more, I'm afraid I might start floating!

    6. Re:The truth by NineNine · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe it sounds immature and naive when I say this, but to me, it sounds an aweful lot like admitting defeat and submitting to the norm.

      Actually, it does.

      Personally, I'd like to give my software away for free and still put bread on the table.

      I run a store. I'd like to give away my products *and* pay my mortgage. It ain't gonna happen. Not on this planet.

      - A suit

    7. Re:The truth by ryochiji · · Score: 3, Insightful
      >I run a store. I'd like to give away my products *and* pay my mortgage. It ain't gonna happen.

      Oh, it happens (on this planet too). Phone companies give away cell phones and cell service. Gilette gives away disposable razors and sells replacement blades. Radio stations give away music and sell air time for commercials. It's actually a well known business model. The tough part, at least for me, is to apply the same for my software.

    8. Re:The truth by NineNine · · Score: 2

      The truth is hard, kiddo. The sooner you deal with it, the better off you'll be. Only Peter Pan can line in Neverland forever (well, him and Michael Jackson).

    9. Re:The truth by capitalsucks · · Score: 1

      A-Fucking-Men. Do the points count?

      --
      "I feel it is my duty to look at the porn that kids download before I delete it, to be sure what it is."--School Admin
    10. Re:The truth by Bendebecker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So your trying to blame the .com burst on geek culture? lol! What about all those suits who just poured money into the most useless e-commerce crap, not really caring about the business, only about a quick profit and then taking the money and running. The .com burst didn't happen because people suddenly realized that jsut toying around and tinkering was not very profitable. The .com burst happened because people poured money into dumb shit solely for the purposes of making money fast which caused teh market to become overvalued. People suddenly realized, "Hey, maybe amazon.com stock isn't worth $200 bucks a share" and that is when the crash began.

      --
      There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
      most of us won't be able to afford it.
      -- Lemmy
    11. Re:The truth by Guppy06 · · Score: 2

      "Maybe I shouldn't be speaking since I'm a college student and only have myself to feed, but I sure hope I don't ever say "I'd rather be a suit.""

      So, how are you paying for college?

      "Putting food on the table with money I think I might have next week/month/year" doesn't quite cut it.

    12. Re:The truth by ReaperOfSouls · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Add to your list, companies like Redhat, Yahoo, AOL, MSN, oh yeah and Slashdot too.

      For Software, the model of giving something away to make a profit is the halmark of the 90's and early 00's. The reason is thoretically when support is factored in software can have an infinate cost to the company that produces it. For most propietary software, where the software support cost is bundled with the cost of purchasing the product, the actual support cost is unknown. For some products after the second or third call, the income from the sale of the software has already been eaten up. Many companies have moved to giving the software away for free and selling the content, the service, support or all three.

      A good example is Redhat. They give away, their brand of linux every day. Thousands of people download their product off their website for free. Yes free. What they sell is service and support subscriptions. Also beyond the scope of actual products, Redhat gives away a lot of code and integration time, back to the community. Things like gcc development, kernel code etc.

      Yahoo, AOL and MSN all give a way product every day. Yahoo has tons of games, content, free e-mail, all for the minimal price of looking at some advertising. They also have a number of upsells to improve the quality of the free product, but the key is they give it away first. AOL and MSN do simmilar things.

      Slashdot, while albiet questionable, provides content that get thousands of comments a day. All for the price of watching the pretty banner add at the top of the screen.

      --
      Shameless self promotion : The Misadvetures of the in
    13. Re:The truth by trotski · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      - A suit Yeah, some suit. YOu run a goddam prono site. People like you are the lowest of the low. I've seen you post before, you arsehole. You seem to think of your self as a big busness man. Instead your a loser exploiting people's inability to get laid. A pornographer calling themselves a suit is like a drug dealer calling himself a benefit to society. YOu sir are full of shite.

      --

      "Entropy is the bad-guy, and he is everywhere"
    14. Re:The truth by Doomdark · · Score: 5, Insightful
      No. Dot-com burst wasn't due to geeks, it was... guess who? The suits. They thought there were lots of golden "business opportunities" out there. This is obvious and I feel silly even pointing that out, but geeks would have been happy just putting up a simple web site and be done (or more likely, keep on tinkering). But suits not; they needed to get 100+ employee sweat shop creating web site that gives stuff out for free, and then selling these brilliant ideas to other suits and unfortunate investors.

      And you say geeks are intrinsically bad at earning living, but suits not? And then point at dotcom bubble as an example. Oh boy.

      Of course it's worth pointing out that it was epidemic of "green suits", not seasoned pointy-haired ones, that kept trainwreck going... at least initially; towards the end even normally level-headed people joined the party. And then it all imploded.

      --
      I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
    15. Re:The truth by pi_rules · · Score: 2


      Personally, I'd like to give my software away for free and still put bread on the table. I don't know if it's possible, but I like to think it is. And I'll be damned if I don't at least try.


      oh... you can do this; but in limited areas. If you're talented enough or lucky enough to end up in an R&D lab of a big coporation (ie: AT&T) that lets you share your achivements with the community you're in. Or perhaps if you're a professor at a university that promotes research you're good to go.

      Fact of the matter is though, if you work in the private sector the only way that you'll do this is by coding "dipshit" stuff at your day job to get the job done then going home to have fun with your code and experiment with stuff. I only say "dipshit" above because you'll often see yourself forced into writing sub-par solutions in an attempt to meet near impossible deadlines.. all to do it over again because you never had the time on the previous project that was 80% similar to what you're doing this time around to do it right the first time and make it extensible. It happens.. and it's the reason IT is often blamed for writing crap -- becuase we have to. Yes... I'm bitter.

    16. Re:The truth by ryochiji · · Score: 2
      >So, how are you paying for college?

      I work. But I spend most of my time working on my own project because it only takes me 10% of the alloted time to do what they tell me to do.

    17. Re:The truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You can give away products and still put food on the table - you just need to sell services.

      You can give away services and still put food on the table - you just need to sell products.

      Unless you can farm, fabricate and generate electricity, you're not going to lead a very fufilling life without doing something for money.

    18. Re:The truth by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2
      Personally, I'd like to give my software away for free and still put bread on the table. I don't know if it's possible, but I like to think it is. And I'll be damned if I don't at least try.

      Rock on my friend. I'm 18, gap year student, I get paid to write non free software. I'd rather work on Linux. I have some ideas on how we can make money, and write free software, in a way that scales to everybody. Email me about it if you're interested.

    19. Re:The truth by NineNine · · Score: 1

      I have another business, asshole. Brick & mortar.

    20. Re:The truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      curious... has anyone ever bought a shirt or coffee mug?

    21. Re:The truth by blue+trane · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Unless you can farm, fabricate and generate electricity, you're not going to lead a very fufilling life without doing something for money.

      Humans existed for 15? thousand years without doing anything for money...so it is possible.

      What we need to do is invest heavily in technology so that food and energy become basically free to produce. Then we can each pursue our happiness without having to do something to make a living.

    22. Re:The truth by blue+trane · · Score: 1

      I could be wrong, but I think the Fed's pushing up interest rates also had a major effect on the stock market crash. The Fed basically (and arbitrarily) called "Time!" on the ideas behind the dot-com boom...

    23. Re:The truth by Trolling4Dollars · · Score: 1

      I don't know... I have a pretty fulfilling life without needing to own a brand new car every year, or buy the latest tech gadgets. In fact, I can usually make my own tech gadget. The time I spend doing that is pretty fulfilling. I'm sorry, but if you feel that you need to make a lot of money to have a fulfilling life, then how "fulfilled" are you really? I am fulfillied by increasing my knowledge, and therefore my power and mastery of the environment around me. Worth much more than money...

  18. Seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Yeah, seriously, geeks have way too much time on their hands.

    Why build a GingerbreadPC or PumpkinPC?

    Like the article says, because they can.

  19. Okay then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's the point here folks? As far as I know, geeks are pimply-faced losers who live in their parents basement and have no social skills. Not exactly anything a person wants to be.

    As well, and this is my cause, they give those of us who are extremely competant technically a bad name. Stop lumping us together, please!

    Geek = Loser
    Technically Inclined != Geek

    1. Re:Okay then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "extremely competant"

      Too... easy... Must... not comment...

    2. Re:Okay then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you know, this is just an example of greenrd's law. Can't be bothered to find a link - it's on Kuro5hin.org.

  20. Geeks v. Suits by MacAndrew · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hmm, am I going too far afield here if I imagine we're supposed to pick good guys and bad guys here?

    The geeks here sounds like creative types who still live with their parents and maybe have a nice car; the suits genderless soulless drones with 401(k)'s and more likely have a nice car.

    If anything this article illustrates the uselessness of stereotypes. As soon as the writer concedes the existence of hybird strains, the binary distinction loses value. Better to talk about these different qualities and identify people who have interesting mixes. Someone else here mentions race; I wouldn't be so melodramatic, but yes it's analogous. Geek and suit are superimposed social abstractions that, as individuals, we should reject.

    Now I feel like I'm working a little hard to make something interesting of a humdrum article that reads like something written on a deadline and a hangover. How come they never take my submissions? ;-)

    1. Re:Geeks v. Suits by rnd() · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Anyone who uses the word suits to describe people whose responsibilities are focused on the bottom line is way out of touch. Both stragegy/managerial and technical positions require intelligence, problem solving, and creativity. Anyone who thinks otherwise should try to run a company by him/herself.

      --

      Amazing magic tricks

    2. Re:Geeks v. Suits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Suit" to me refers to the folks that mill about in the soulless bureaucracies. They exist only to server their unseen masters and even then they don't do any more than their job requires. Whenever they have to think for themselves, they never venture from the path of maximum shareholder value.

      A businessman running a small business, worrying about the bottom line as well as keeping employees and customers happy, is usually NOT a "suit".

    3. Re:Geeks v. Suits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Geeks vs. Suits: The eternal struggle of good against evil!

    4. Re:Geeks v. Suits by dpt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Both stragegy/managerial and technical positions require intelligence, problem solving, and creativity

      As soon as someone displays these three qualities, they cease being a "suit" in my opinion. It's just that there are so many climbers who don't actually produce *anything*, have *never* done anything, have no skills at all, and in fact continually make utterly stupid decisions that cause costly damage. The good thing about a recession, of course, is that the middle managers are weeded out pretty rapidly.

      Anyone who thinks otherwise should try to run a company by him/herself

      See, there's your problem right there. Most managerial positions *aren't* running the company! What exactly they are doing, no-one seems to know. I try to only work in organizations with relatively "flat" structures, and where everyone works to produce things that can be seen and have actual value, not "synergy", or "pro-active visions for win/win scenarios", or corporate theme songs, or dolls of the CEO, or whatever else they spoon feed people in MBA "school".

    5. Re:Geeks v. Suits by RockyJSquirel · · Score: 2

      Anyone who uses the word suits to describe people whose responsibilities are focused on the bottom line is way out of touch.

      Well, "Suits" do have the problem that they are human beings.

      When I thing about the "suits" I've had big problems with they fall into two catagories (me having a big problem is my definition of evil of course):

      1. idiots who're faking their way through their jobs, and making a big mess

      2. intelligent, capable people who are insecure and neurotic (read - "great big, egotistical assholes")

      Since most people aren't brilliant and since pushy neurotic people are the ones who push themselves to the top while the sane people send out their resumes to get away from the carnage, these problems are common as water.

      So there's enough bad blood between "suits" and everyone else based on the fact that we're all unfortunately human to justify the use of all sorts of epethets.

      Rocky J. Squirrel

  21. well by SweetAndSourJesus · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Why are you reading it, then?

    What could we possibly gain by knowing that you don't find this item newsworthy? Why bother with commentary like that?

    If you don't like a story, just move along.

    --

    --
    the strongest word is still the word "free"
    1. Re:well by Coke+in+a+Can · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Myself, I'm reading it because it's sunday night and I have nothing else to do. Everything is slow today.

  22. Good distinction... by shylock0 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This is an interesting hypothesis, and in some ways it's probably correct. Consider this:

    "Suits" -- i.e., Microsoft, Sun, Apple -- create operating systems and software which appeal to wide swaths of people. They have to; they have something to sell and money to make.

    "Geeks" -- i.e., most of the GPL community -- write software for the purpose of writing software. The end result is pure art in a way.

    A good analogy would be the world of photography. Professional photographers take pictures for magazines and newspapers, or at weddings, etc. They need to be product-driven, they have something to sell, and it shows in their work.

    Artistic photographers, on the other hand, are driven by purity. They strive for an artistic goal, which is very different from the commerical one.

    The same thing could go for music -- say the wide world of "artistic music" and artists (okay, okay, that's a sensitive one here on /.) and studio bands.

    Questions and comments welcome. Flames ignored. Post resonsibly

    --
    Statistically speaking, there's a 99.998% chance that my IQ is higher than yours. Get over it.
    1. Re:Good distinction... by LostCluster · · Score: 2

      I think this problem shows up in a good number of open source projects. They're programed by programmers for programmers, users sometime become an afterthought.

      It's not true that anyone can look at and edit the code of a GPL product. It's anyone who knows how to program in the language in which the producted was written in who can work with the code. "If a feature you want isn't there, add it yourself" is not a model that can go very far.

      Those who try to commecialize GPL products, such as Red Hat and Lindows, act as a bridge between the common user and the programmer's universe. If it weren't for the people who are motivated by money do dumb things down to the lowest common denominator, would anybody who can't program in C be able to use Linux?

    2. Re:Good distinction... by gwernol · · Score: 2

      "Suits" -- i.e., Microsoft, Sun, Apple -- create operating systems and software which appeal to wide swaths of people. They have to; they have something to sell and money to make.

      "Geeks" -- i.e., most of the GPL community -- write software for the purpose of writing software. The end result is pure art in a way.


      Well apart from being slightly offensive to commercial programmers this is both historically and currently incorrect. I know from personal experience that a large number of the people working at and running Apple very much do it for the love of programming - particularly creating exciting products. Apple was founded by geeks and dreamers.

      From people I know who work at Sun the same spirit of geekdom and innovation exist there.

      There certainly are many people in any large organization whose motives are more oriented towards profit and business. The strength of these companies is they combine both approaches to produce excellent products that people actually want.

      Creating software for its own end is ultimately a waste of time and talent. The true test of good software is that it solves real problems and real people want to use it.

      --
      Sailing over the event horizon
    3. Re:Good distinction... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same thing could go for music -- say the wide world of "artistic music" and artists (okay, okay, that's a sensitive one here on /.) and studio bands.

      At best, the "artist"/"professional" distinction is a 20th-century distinction. I can't think of any(*) pre-1900 musicians who were rich enough to do music for any reason other than to put food on the table. They usually lived commission-to-commission.

      (*) Ok, maybe Mendelssohn. He was born to money.

    4. Re:Good distinction... by CommieOverlord · · Score: 1

      Plenty of pre-20th century musicians only wrote music for the sake of writing music. Look at Russia's Mighty Five, eg Mussorgsky was a civil servant in his day job.

      However, contrary to the original poster's comment. It is often the "full-time" employee musicians who made their mark. ie Bach, Haydn, Mozart whose day-to-day job was to provide entertainment for their employer, or later professional composers who do more freelance.

    5. Re:Good distinction... by Tsuzuki · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You can always have elements of both in each of those analogies, but you'd only know that if you'd experienced it. ;) By your analogies, all true geeks, photographers and musicians are gainfully unemployed. (Well, that's how I'm interpreting it anyway.)

      There are plenty of "true artists" working in commercial realms out there. You tend to end up bringing your methodologies to your workplace, and learning things from the workplace to use in your pursuit of "pure art" in your spare time.

      If you're rich or live with your parents/on welfare you can stick to "pure art" alone, but some people feel better working, paying taxes and eating something other than instant noodles...

    6. Re:Good distinction... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But your analogies make the exact same distinctions as the original article by lumping every photographer and musician in the world into one of the 2 categories that represent the 2 extremes

      As far as I can see the same problem exists

      There are studio bands and there are musicians who "are driven by purity" But I doubt there isn't a musician out there that IS talented, DOES make 'artistic' music and also WANT commercial success at the same time

    7. Re:Good distinction... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the stupidest shit I've ever heard. Have you ever been to Microsoft, Apple, or Sun? Have you ever met a Microsoft, Apple, or Sun dev? They're geeks, usually more talented than the OSS crowd (since they were able to convince a company to hire them) and realize that they want to do what they love for a living, not just a hobby on the side.

      I interviewed at Microsoft last weekend. The only suits worn around there were those by interview candidates who weren't aware of Microsoft's laid back dress code.

    8. Re:Good distinction... by shylock0 · · Score: 1
      I wasn't talking about developers at Microsoft, Apple, or Sun. "Suits" are a generic term for management, the people who set broad policy. It is lunacy to dispute the fact that Microsoft, Sun, and Apple are market-driven. Maybe Microsoft less so in recent years, because its monopoly in certain areas has allowed it to ignore the market, but on the whole its true.

      The analogy still holds. Oftentimes, professional photographers are more technically talented than thier "artistic" counterparts. Both of them do what they love for a living (like many devs in the OSS community), its just that one of them does it commercially.

      Developers are all geeks, whether they do OSS or commercial dev., we can't dispute that. But anybody who's worked at a major software company will most likely support me in saying that oftentimes its not the "geeks," the developers, who decide the course of the project. It's the management -- who may have been geeks once-upon-a-time, but now have a broader responsibility to shareholders.

      --
      Statistically speaking, there's a 99.998% chance that my IQ is higher than yours. Get over it.
  23. Why do geeks do stuff? by dagg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Geeks make new stuff primarily because it's fun, because it's useful, and because others cannot. That's why most geeks become geeks. The best geeks are those who can do what nobody else can.

    --
    Sex - Find It
    1. Re:Why do geeks do stuff? by carpe_noctem · · Score: 2

      That's not true at all. Everyone knows that the *real* reason geeks do stuff is to impress the ladies!

      --
      "Quoting famous computer scientists out of context is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming." - K
  24. What about.. by Adam9 · · Score: 2

    applications that directly compete with Microsoft etc. E.g. OpenOffice, KDE (I mean they even have a Windows style desktop that comes in the package). Ever think that these copuld be created with the submitter's intentions in mind and also to take profit away from "the suits?"

  25. I agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A libertarian like Nader would have given Enron just a slap on the wrist for lying and let them go about their business. Damn, I wish he and Celia Ward had won in 2000.

    1. Re:I agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      A libertarian like Nader

      Say what? Is that kind of like "a humanitarian like Hitler?"

    2. Re:I agree by Lord+Omlette · · Score: 2

      Nader's a Green, not a Libertarian... right?

      --
      [o]_O
    3. Re:I agree by stephanruby · · Score: 2
      A libertarian like Nader would have given Enron just a slap on the wrist for lying and let them go about their business. Damn, I wish he and Celia Ward had won in 2000.

      I think he meant to say "A liberal like Nader..." and since Nader seems to want a strong benevolent paternal government, I can only assume that the anonymous poster was making an attempt at sarcasm.

    4. Re:I agree by jstott · · Score: 1
      A libertarian like Nader would have given Enron just a slap on the wrist for lying and let them go about their business.

      Libertarian? Nader? And this got mod'ed insightful?!?

      -JS

      --
      Vanity of vanities, all is vanity...
  26. Profits? who needs it! by ademko · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think for things like software and web servers, profit will be secondary. Yes, I've witnessed the .com crash, but here me out:

    Free software applications have to replace all common off the shelf softwate (except for stuff like games, which is more "content" than application). Simply put, time is on free software's side. Maybe not now, maybe not soon, but eventually, someone will have written a free replacement for every commercial off-the-shelf application.

    Similarly, many web sites and web services seem to be too simple (from an application complexity point of view) to demand any kind of real subscription fees to users. People won't pay them, for the most part, so sites have to slim down and make due with ad revenues.

    (shameless plug, check out the site on my sig for an example of such a web service)

    1. Re:Profits? who needs it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But software we pay for will increase in complexity at the same time. Using KDE still feels like I'm using Windows 98.

  27. There's no reason why geekism's a problem. by tgrotvedt · · Score: 5, Interesting
    At the risk of sounding like a naive geek or fanatical OSS advocate, I don't see why volunteer geeks can't exist in harmony with bussinessmen and bussiness.

    A geek writes some software/builds some hardware that takes off, and starts to become recognised as good/cool via word-of-mouth. Geeks everywhere start to chip in and help him, because that's by nature what geeks do. A bussinessman sees an oppourtunity to provide a service of some sort that will enhance the geeks' new toy. The bussinessman makes money, the geek gets recognition (and job offers), the consumers/users win.

    While this is very simplistic, I can't see why this process can't be applied to most good, cool, or useful things. No matter what anyone says, if something is useful or entertaining, it is profitable, directly or otherwise.

    So all technologists with or without dayjobs, make time to help/start geek projects. After all if you're a real geek, this sort of work doubles as play.

    --
    What makes a man want to be a mouse? (Python's Flying Circus)
    1. Re:There's no reason why geekism's a problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because in the REAL WORLD that doesn't happen. In the real world, you write some good software, and some geek you know who also happens to be a sneaky businessman buys it out from you and then turns it evil ala Bill Gates.

    2. Re:There's no reason why geekism's a problem. by tgrotvedt · · Score: 2
      I totally understand what you mean, and it is a problem. But, anyone who has made something technological and good/profitable must be smart, and there is very little social engineering could do to convince them otherwise. Now, one way to ensure your geek software project stays pure is to GPL it, or put it under a similar open liscence.

      Also, often a geek will allow themselves to be "bought out" by a Bill G entrepreneur type because they think that it will be best for that particular project. On the other hand, the Bill G type could mislead the geek, or change their approach to the product/service later on, but that's life. You sell something to someone, they are going to be able to screw it up. That's life.

      --
      What makes a man want to be a mouse? (Python's Flying Circus)
    3. Re:There's no reason why geekism's a problem. by HiThere · · Score: 2

      After you've been taken advantage of a few times, you start being a bit more protective. That's why the GPL garners more supporters than the BSD. BSD *sounds* better, but it's wide open to expropriations. (If that's what you want, then that's your correct choice.)

      This doesn't necessarily mean that the businesspeople and the geeks can't work together. But it does mean that the experienced geeks are quite rightly a bit ... defensive.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  28. $ave your $oul... by fluxmix · · Score: 0, Troll

    Money will be responsible for the destruction of our society. Art will save it.

    1. Re:$ave your $oul... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BWAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!

      newsflash, welfare bum, art has never 'saved' shit.
      There's a reason they're called 'starving' artists...

      move out of your parent's basement

  29. In Soviet Russia by MoreDruid · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Let _me_ get this one this time...
    If I see another post with "in Soviet Russia" again, I will push this shiny red buttonthingy right here on my desk and nuke the US... Always telling jokes over other pples backs. BUAHAHAHAA *BOOOOM* the joke's on _YOU_ now
    Oops... do I sound like some terrorist hippy on speed? Ummm.. never mind... scroll along

    --
    The best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy, but the best weapon of a democracy should be the weapon of openness.
  30. Not suprising by mao+che+minh · · Score: 5, Interesting
    This sentiment can be compared to many open source initiatives, especially Linux.

    I haven't worked in many companies (I'm only 23), but, there is an example here that I can draw from my tiny experience: web related technologies and their associated databases, and how that relates to Linux and open source.

    In a large company like mine, database clients, the OSs to run them, and the databases that they serve are, together, big business indeed. To serve about 700 people of all manner of trade using one unified client system is tough. You have people that need to make hundreds of transactions a day, and people that need to use this data to connect to yet other clients to arrange services from yet other clients. You need increased IT staff that must manage it and use it themselves, and automation people that must keep it running and add needed and unforseen features. For such a solution, both my previous company and the one I work for now chooses PeopleSoft.

    Companies like PeopleSoft and their associated vendors love Microsoft and other proprietary vendors. They push Win2k for the desktops, .NET for the developers, and SQL for the database. This is because with this combination, they can force you into a static model (predictable and simple for them) that is easy for them to control. The assured future upgrades of more Microsoft technologies will keep them involved, because their solution only works with it, and will "evolve" with it (I.E. they make their new products more efficient with future Microsoft technologies). They can also sell you these MS products and the consultation needed to implement them because they are vendors of them themselves. No need to go to the Microsoft salesman for "the latest and greatest" when PeopleSoft can just "throw it all in together".

    My previous company was ready to spend 1.5 million on PeopleSoft, 500k for Microsoft technologies needed to run it, and hire three programmers and admins to keep it all going for the next 3 years. I saved them about 500k by showing them how I could replace the PeopleSoft "solutions" to run on Linux terminals and simple PHP/mySQL clients that could be used from a web browser. Many Win2k licenses were avoided, many PeopleSoft licenses were avoided, many SQL licenses were avoided, and any 1rst year CS student could tailor my code in the future (I.E. out source a programmer for a week at a time).

    The reason why I only saved them 500k and not the full 2 million (plus new staff)? Because the PeopleSoft salespeople have very slippery tongues, and talked the suits into using it at about a 60-65% distribution model (compared to the old 100% model). The local PeopleSoft guy still hates me for showing my old bosses that, with just a little know how and open source, you could replace their crap with highly efficient and simple tools at a fraction of the cost. In this case, nothing, since I didn't recieve any extra money for my time - only my usual salary.

    Such is life.

    1. Re:Not suprising by shut_up_man · · Score: 1

      When you say "a 60-65% distribution model", do you mean that their plan had only 60-65% of the people in the organization actually getting the system?

    2. Re:Not suprising by MeanMF · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My previous company was ready to spend 1.5 million on PeopleSoft, 500k for Microsoft technologies needed to run it, and hire three programmers and admins to keep it all going for the next 3 years. I saved them about 500k by showing them how I could replace the PeopleSoft "solutions" to run on Linux terminals and simple PHP/mySQL clients that could be used from a web browser

      This has absolutely nothing to do with open source vs. commercial software. It is the age-old buy vs. build debate. You could just as easily built the same system with Active Server Pages/SQL Server or JSP/Oracle instead of PHP and mySQL and still saved your company a boatload of money.

      There are a lot of cases where building your own software is less expensive in the short run than buying a commercial package. The real test will be over the next 5 or 10 years when the total cost of your solution becomes apparent. What happens when somebody comes out with something better and PHP becomes a "legacy" system? Will a 1st year student still be able to fix your code? What happens if mySQL isn't widely supported any more? Will you still be able to outsource development? Sure the same thing might happen to Microsoft's technology and Peoplesoft's applications, but I think the odds are a little more in their favor.

      The Peoplesoft people may hate you now, but there's also the risk that your bosses will hate you down the road for locking them into supporting custom software when a widely-used commercial solution was available.

    3. Re:Not suprising by Billly+Gates · · Score: 3, Informative
      I happen to disagree.

      There is no way you can kill opensource software. Many companies who have bought into os/2, paradox, borland, lotus, and other things that were hot 15 years ago got burned. What if Microsoft decides to directly compete with peoplesoft and they go under because of it?

      Its this reasoning why CIO's buy all or mostly microsoft products. They buy out of fear. Microsoft is already entering the crm market and will likely prevail because they are Microsoft.

      Opensource software can not be bought out, file for chapter 11 bankrupty, or be cancelled due to lack of demand or a new direction by a CEO.

      The only argument agaisnt opensource software is the fact that pallidium might kill it since only visual c++ can sign "trusted code" and I would not be supprised to see a eula forbidding to compile gnu licensed code therefore killing anything non proprietary on %99 of the world's computers. Scary shit.

      I am a strong believer in custom software because its best suited for your needs and more flexible. Everything becomes obsolete eventually and upgrading it makes more sense then buying later and later versions and hoping it still works for your needs. Needs change and sometimes your software does not have the ability to adapt to your change. With something in-house created you know it fits your needs and will always do so best and is cheaper in the long run.

      Nothing commercial can ever come close.

    4. Re:Not suprising by puto · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Great handle by the way.

      You make a valid point. I am constantly dealing with employees of companies that hire me as a conusltant(GASP).

      This week I was called into an orginization that has genius programmer. Mr. PHP, KING Database, the kid has skills I would give a testicle for(really). But he cant see the big picture. He can see the OSS pic, but not around it.

      His answer always is to build instead of buy. We are always locking horns because he never realizes.
      1. Although you might be out of more cash intitally, you get a product that functions out of the box, has been tested, and has support.
      2.You build, you have to go through alpha, beta, testing, and then it works. SO you extend the time frame by a factor of 20 just so he could roll his own.

      He hates me because they usually end up outsourcing projects to me.

      Two examples.

      1. Company sells a product that they have had on the market for 50 years. They sell a lot of said product. They want eccommerce because people are asking for it. Their in house IT kiddie tells them he can write a store ground up in six months and cost them nothing but a 5 grand as a bonus to him.

      They call me for an opinion. They ask me me if they offered me the same money what would i do and in what kinda time frame. I said 5 grand? 3 weeks complete eccommerce. Turnkey. I send them a contract. They sign.

      They get hosting that comes with a miva merchant. I build a complete site with 300 products in the three weeks time. I make it pretty, you dont even know its miva. And in three months they have netted 20 grand off the website. 5 grand solution, three weeks time. The client loves it. The IT guy hates it.

      2. Second problem. Customers want knowledgebase. Inhouse it says he can develop in three months. Guess he knew they would call me. They want forums where customers can ask questions and company members can respond. How much and how soon. 1500 dollars and two days I say. The IT guy tells me impossible and I will not make them happy. I tell the company I will do it free and they do not have to pay me if they dont like it. They say go for it.

      I buy Vbulletin. 165 bucks. Customize the look, put their logo. Create forums. 1 day.

      The customers and the owners love it. Instant forums, instant knowledgebase.

      The great thing is all the products i used were inexpensive, plenty of info for them all over the net. And if for some reason they get mad at me. It wont be hard to find someone to tinker with them.

      I sell the solution that will not lock the customer into a corner. Namely me. And I keep customers because I sell proven things.

      Puto

      --
      The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
    5. Re:Not suprising by stephanruby · · Score: 2
      The real test will be over the next 5 or 10 years when the total cost of your solution becomes apparent. What happens when somebody comes out with something better and PHP becomes a "legacy" system?

      Proprietary languages have a much better chance of becoming "legacy" systems that noone will support. For instance, Microsoft has already said they will stop supporting its pre-DotNET technology and they will force their customers to upgrade and rewrite everything from scratch.

    6. Re:Not suprising by MeanMF · · Score: 1

      There is no way you can kill opensource software. Many companies who have bought into os/2, paradox, borland, lotus, and other things that were hot 15 years ago got burned

      You're taking a risk no matter what software you use. You just need to minimize that risk. I didn't mean to imply that the open source software would be gone, just that it might not be widely used any more and the support costs might go through the roof.

    7. Re:Not suprising by MeanMF · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has already said they will stop supporting its pre-DotNET technology and they will force their customers to upgrade and rewrite everything from scratch.

      There is always going to be the risk that a piece of software that you're using is no longer supported. You just need to make sure that you plan for that possibility and try to build it into your cost assessment. For example, Microsoft provides tools for migrating Visual Basic applications to .NET making the transition cost a lot less than if you actually had to "rewrite everything from scratch."

    8. Re:Not suprising by Kallahar · · Score: 2

      Just to clarify, SQL is an open standard. MSSQL is microsoft's implementation of an SQL compliant server.

      However, microsoft has pulled their typical bullshit by calling it "SQL Server" which is totally generic, just like "Office", "Windows", "Word", etc. This just servers to confuse people now to the software, which is very unfortunate (but effective for MS)

      Travis

    9. Re:Not suprising by stephanruby · · Score: 2
      For example, Microsoft provides tools for migrating Visual Basic applications to .NET making the transition cost a lot less than if you actually had to "rewrite everything from scratch."

      The migration tool you speak of is just a "search and replace" script. It leaves the most difficult part of the migration to the programmer and unfortunately -- most VB programmers I know are incapable of doing the rest of the migration correctly. Most traditional VB programmers are not able to make the conceptual leap to VB.NET. This last observation is not an isolated opinion.

      Even William Vaughn, an authority on the subject, agrees with that observation. In his book, ADO.NET and ADO, page 402, he wrote: "Unfortunately, as I see it, more than a few BASIC and Visual Basic developers really expect continued support for...a forgiving language and an IDE that supports default properties, unstructured code, automatic instantiation, morphing datatypes, wizards, designers, drag-and-drop binding,...more importantly...[an] 'edit and continue' development [environment], which permitted developers to change their code after a breakpoint and cointinue...this was a radical departure from other development language interfaces...Microsoft expectes'professional' Visual Basic developers (whoever they are) to whole heartly embrace Microsofts' new languages...Some of these developers will be skilled enough and motivated enough to adapt to a new language...some will have the formal training that permits them to easily step from language-to-language--many(I would venture the majority) do not....Microsoft continues to complicate the situation by insisting that VB.NET is really just another version of Visual Basic 6 and that ADO.NET is just another version of COM-based ADO. They clearly aren't the same--not even close."

    10. Re:Not suprising by MeanMF · · Score: 1

      The migration tool you speak of is just a "search and replace" script. It leaves the most difficult part of the migration to the programmer and unfortunately -- most VB programmers I know are incapable of doing the rest of the migration correctly. Most traditional VB programmers are not able to make the conceptual leap to VB.NET. This last observation is not an isolated opinion.

      I know what you mean, I've used it. So far I haven't moved any of our company's VB applications to .NET, mostly because the related third-party components and other tools haven't caught up yet.

      There are certain things the upgrade tool won't do, but the effort required to port the applications over is definitely nowhere near what a rewrite would entail. Fortunately, we have until 1/31/2008 before Microsoft drops official support for VB6.

      Trying to get somewhat back on topic, my point was that when you decide to go out and write an application rather than purchasing one, you have to take a lot of things into account besides the inital purchase price of the software. Saving $500,000 now does you no good if you end up spending twice that in support costs over the next five to ten years making sure your system stays current and compatible. A couple of the factors to consider are the support that is behind the products that you're using and how large an installed base there is for the products you're using. How this applies to open source software vs. commercial software is an exercise left to the reader :)

  31. sucking it up by ack154 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I keep reading all these articles on the job market and the direction some businesses are going. Where do they leave me? Clueless. As I get ready to graduate PSU next summer, I leave with one question... wtf am I ever going to do for a job? Decentralization. Great, so does that mean I should try to start some business away from a business? Or is it that when I get into a business, I won't have 50 bosses? Does anyone have a plain english definition?

    When I think centralized companies, I think back to my Managing Quality prof from this semester saying how a lot of companies are flattening out their structures from having tall hierarchies to wide bases with a few upper people. Meaning, less people telling you what to do, but more people around you trying to work with you on everything...

    Are the two totally related? Probably not. But when you're soon to be entering the job market, its food for thought, and leaves me more confused than ever... What do I want to do, and who do I want to do it for?

    1. Re:sucking it up by EZmagz · · Score: 1
      As I get ready to graduate PSU next summer, I leave with one question... wtf am I ever going to do for a job?

      Good question, my friend. I was in your same shoes a year ago and my outlook looked good. That is, until 9/11 "happened". Then companies went on hiring freezes, there were more cuts in budgets than on Jack the Ripper's victims, and getting a tech job became WAY harder.

      I've been unemployed for 13 months so far, and it hasn't gotten any easier. I'm going about my job hunt the right way (cranking out resumes left and right, informational interviewing, networking, and any other way I can whore myself out to recruiters and HR fucks), but haven't gotten more than a couple interviews. It's gotten to the point where I'm almost about to give up and just shoot myself. Last time I posted that story on /. I got flamed by the masses saying in typical pseudo-intellect speak that's so common on /. that "you're doing something wrong" or "you're just an idiot". The truth is, the market sucks. Maybe it's my pessimestic attitude, but I don't see it getting much better in the near future.

      I'd still suggest jumping through the hoops and utilizing any kind of campus career center that you (most likely) have. Just have a definite Plan B just in case. Keep an open mind about what kind of job you apply for...maybe be a suit for a year and shift over to the IT world. Remember, just because you have a certain major doesn't mean you have to work in that area. Also, a good way to buy time (literally) is grad school. I'd be there right now if I didn't already owe about $45k in loans and had a higher gpa. Such is life.

      --

      "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for SEGA. ..."

    2. Re:sucking it up by protohiro1 · · Score: 1

      Well, I would not count on anything. The job market, in a word, sucks for recent graduates. I graduated in 2001 and I know four people total that I graduated with "real" jobs. I took my sixteen months to find a job. But I did do some good work in the hospitality industry first..

      --
      Sig removed because it was obnoxious
    3. Re:sucking it up by ack154 · · Score: 1

      Ya, I remember when 9/11 happened, our HUGE fall career fair was the next day. When I say huge, we fill up our arena and it lasts a week. Well, its normally huge, but when that happened, so many companies pulled out, or were just there because they didn't know what else to do, that it was useless. Although, given it was one of those times when things should be brought to a stop to think about things.

      And I remember my freshman year, going to the same career fair. I was internship shopping (fall of 99) and I might have been going at it wrong, but I thought the idea of an internship would be to get some experience in a company you're interested, help them out, while you narrow down what you want to do. But they treated me as if I was applying for some full time job with a specific position...

      "What position are you applying for?"

      "Um, intern?"

      Oh well though. I think my plan "b" is to live at home, work somewhere local, maybe at some computer repair place or something... Who knows, I have no clue where I'll be in a year...

  32. You got it wrong by NixterAg · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    make new stuff primarily because it's fun, because it's useful, and because they can. ...and to impress a bunch of nameless 15-year-olds on IRC.

    About 10% of geeks are in it to challenge and entertain themselves. The other 90% are in it for the pissing contest.

  33. Re:must be a very slow news day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this story gets accepted, while my ask slashdot about getting wing commander privateer working in windows has been pending for almost 3 days....at least mine would be interesting in the fact that I COULD PLAY THE FREAKING GAME FOR THE FIRST TIME IN ABOUT A YEAR!!!

    how can this be offtopic? THERE IS NO TOPIC! this whole story is lame and worthless mod me down I know it'll happen almost instantly I don't care my point is there are way better stories that could be submited that arn't instead they post this garbage that barely makes sense

  34. Am i the only one... by Cyno01 · · Score: 1

    whos really sick of the phrase/word/buzzword 'killer-app'. It seems like everythings being touted as it, without anyone really understanding what the hell it means. Or maybe i dont really understnad what it means. I dunno, buzzwords just irk me.

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  35. As for the bit at the end of the article... by ironfroggy · · Score: 1

    How much tax money are our rights worth?

  36. Lol, at least the "damn liberals" aren't racist. by BoomerSooner · · Score: 2, Insightful

    BTW notice the "damn liberals" dont have the majority in either the house or senate and the "racists" have the presidency as well.

    I guess there will be no excuses (terrorism, or terraism/tourism as the president would say) when everything is still shitty in 2 years. Oh well, I guess they cut my taxes.

    No one wants anything from the govt (society) until they are in need (ie medical healthcare), then every pathetic "racist" that lost their ass in the great stock market crash of 2000-2002 comes whining that they cannot afford to pay for health care. Fuck'em is what I say.

    Since when did the "religious/racist" party give a shit about being hypocrites. Going to church every sunday and talking about how good you are and how you help so much (by giving to your "church/cult") for another activity center. When the fucking public school across the street doesn't have textbooks newer than 1983 and the building is falling apart. I fucking hate "conservatives/cocksuckers"

    Notice my state of utterly moronic people. We voted all conservatives on the national level but all liberal on the local level. How the fuck does that happen? Welcome to DipShit USA. If I hear one more person say "I voted for him based on his character and I liked him better." I'm going to puke. All that means is "His commercial was more appealing than the other guy." Unbelievable.

    Can't wait for my Flamebait.... so mod away assholes.

  37. Article ignores most obvious example by MisterFancypants · · Score: 5, Interesting
    This article ignores the most obvious example of convergence between geekdom and businessman, not surprising since it was written by Scott Rosenberg who seems to be anti-Microsoft. And yes, I'm talking about Bill Gates. Everyone knows he is a billionaire many times over thanks to his business skills (you may not like HOW he made the billions, but you can't argue with the fact that he did make them, and therefore is a successful businessman).

    Many people these days tend to forget that Gates IS also a geek. Whether you want to admit it or not he was hacking some pretty good assembler code back when a large portion of the Slashdot readship was still wearing diapers.

    1. Re:Article ignores most obvious example by MeanMF · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Many people these days tend to forget that Gates IS also a geek

      Don't forget about the rest of the company. Three of the smartest, most technical people I have worked with are now employed by Microsoft. Outside the vast wastelands of the marketing and legal departments, I'd bet a large percentage of Microsoft employees fit the flimsy "geek" definition in this article a lot closer than the one for "suits".

    2. Re:Article ignores most obvious example by trotski · · Score: 2

      No, Gates never hacked anything. Some people argue that Gates can't even program.

      Paul Alan was hacking code. Gates was the promoter. He may have done some minor stuff here and there. But I assure you that Gates was a suit all the way.

      --

      "Entropy is the bad-guy, and he is everywhere"
    3. Re:Article ignores most obvious example by SN74S181 · · Score: 2

      Please stop spreading lies.

      Bill Gates wrote code. You're thinking of Steve Jobs and the Woz. Now there is the story of a huckster who locks a hacker in the back room.

      One of Gates' last coding projects was the Word Processor for the TRS-80 Model 100. I've seen Paul Allen state that Gates coded it.

  38. Re:In Soviet Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IN SOVIET RUSSIA red buttonthings press Y-

    BOOOOOM!

  39. if you don't want to read slashdot anymore... by SweetAndSourJesus · · Score: 0, Redundant

    there are lots of things to do

    • Maybe look at some boobies
    • Go for a drive
    • Call your mom
    • Smoke a bowl
    • Make a really amazing sandwich and photograph it
    • Make a website for your sandwich pictures
    • Take a nice hot bath
    • Dread the inevitable monday
    --

    --
    the strongest word is still the word "free"
  40. Re:In Soviet Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We don't tolerate people perpetuating the "In Soviet Russia" shit

  41. "Decentralization" or Unrestriction by Ashetos · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I thing that the "Geek" and "Suit" generalization is utterly limited.

    It is probably a mistake to try to relate this "balance" to the future of Silicon Valley or our economy for the following reason: There must be tangible financial benefits for there "home-brewed" or "geek-driven" applications to really be exploited and capitalized on.

    That was the case for the internet's early days (before the web) and still is the case for P2P; it isn't the first person who manages to come up with something new that benefits from it, it is the first person who figures out how to make a profit from it... and has incentive to market, etc...

    1. Re:"Decentralization" or Unrestriction by NineNine · · Score: 2

      1. Geeks create Linux.

      2. IBM markets.

      3. IBM profits. Geeks still live in parents' basement.

    2. Re:"Decentralization" or Unrestriction by Ashetos · · Score: 1

      Conversely: Napster... Geek has idea, implements... suits come on board... hilarity ensues.
      IBM hasn't caused a serious industry-wide trend, it will eventually happen, but it shows to me that they haven't developed a model that is compelling enough for others to emulate... yet.
      I wonder how the top-down (non-geek driven) cell-phone sweep that is changing the landscape compares to these observations...
      Perhaps it is a social-driven phenomenon, and while computing culture is converging with mainstream society (at least in the US), the two will be more difficult to identify.
      I think P2P is going to be a reocurring technoilogy that will surface and fade untill a "magic" implementation sweeps the market; becomes widely accepted; and ingrained in our maiunstream society... much like videotaping TV shows (timeshifting) did in the 80s.

  42. eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What's the deal here, can't people just make something for the sake of making it and solving problems without having to go sniffing for a business model and a killer app and all that other bullshit?

    wtf?

    sometimes things just happen because somebody thinks of it. that's all. somebody ELSE can think of a way to make money off of it, but that's not directly relevant to the inventing itself.

    It's just a technological democratization. was anybody looking for business models when the constitution was drafted?

    maybe there is no business model.

  43. ham is good by hankaholic · · Score: 1

    Get in on the latest ./ fad, started by none other than michael -- posting articles with no obvious relationship to their subject line!

    --
    Somebody get that guy an ambulance!
  44. im thinking about this by hfastedge · · Score: 1

    Being a participant in the open source world really makes you think about these issues.

    By chance, I was pondering on this a week ago.

    Basically, I think that a lot of people are dumb-scared of the word 'profit'. On the other hand, I acknowledge some of the fears that go into the collective knee-jerk condemnation of profit:

    http://slashdot.org/~hfastedge/journal/18516

    --

    -- -- --

    Help my mini cause: My journal

  45. "Why? Because we can..." by TWX_the_Linux_Zealot · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Geeks make new stuff primarily because it's fun, because it's useful, and because they can."

    yes, much the the annoyance of receiving a $120 electric bill for a 810 sq. ft. apartment, where the air conditioning has to be run in the winter time to keep all of the equipment cool enough...

    --

    IBM had PL/1, with syntax worse than JOSS,
    And everywhere the language went, it was a total loss...
  46. The reasons geeks make less money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because you all overanalyze this kind of stuff instead of learning the skills that really pay off.

  47. Re:Good distinction... more than you know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Art and GPLed software also share something else in common, there are very very few gems, and the vast majority of it is pure shit from people who don't know what the fuck they are doing.

  48. Geeks and Suits have a lot of in common by $0.02 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Geeks's model

    1. Make cool thing
    2. ???
    3. Profit

    Suit's model

    1. ???
    2. Market, Advertise, Sell
    3. Profit

    Yeah, they have a lot of in common. It's step 3.

    --
    If enithin kan gow rong it whil. (Murfey)
    1. Re:Geeks and Suits have a lot of in common by AlephNot · · Score: 2

      You make it sound as if geeks and suits have something to gain from each other. Oh, the horrors!

      --
      "Feel a glory in so rolling / on the human heart a stone" --E. A. Poe, "The Bells"
    2. Re:Geeks and Suits have a lot of in common by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Geeks's model

      1. Make cool thing
      2. ???
      3. Profit

      Suit's model

      1. ???
      2. Market, Advertise, Sell
      3. Profit"

      So what do you suggest goes in 2 for the geek, 1 for the suit?

      The way I see it, it could be:

      A) The Crossover

      GeekStep1. Make cool thing

      GeekStep2. Geek sells to suit / SuitStep1. Buys product

      SuitStep2. Market, Advertise, Sell

      GeekStep3/SuitStep3. PROFIT

      ***************

      OR, they could be:

      B) Identical

      Step 2 for the geek could be Market, Advertise, Sell, and step 1 for the suit could be Make cool thing.

      I'm guessing it's The Crossover in most cases...

    3. Re:Geeks and Suits have a lot of in common by RPoet · · Score: 2

      Crapspackle. You assume that monetary rewards are what motivates geeks into doing stuff they do. It has long since been established that the presence of such rewards can actually have demotivating effects. Stuff are just simply more fun to do when you do it out of your own free will and for it's own sake, than for external rewarding systems such as money. I think if there's any one defining difference between geeks and suits, it's what reward system that motivates them.

      Did Linus write his operating system in the hope of getting rich from it? Did eight-year-old Mozart write sweet symphonies for sweet legal tender? I think not. :-)

      --
      "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
    4. Re:Geeks and Suits have a lot of in common by archen · · Score: 1

      Well putting them together explains the entire dot com deflation. Normally to make a buisness you need a geek AND a suit. In this model you get:

      1) Make cool thing
      2) Market, Advertize, sell
      3) profit

      Obviously this business can succeed. During the dot com era you got the other mix:

      1) ???
      2) ???
      3) profit(?)

      for some reason this doesn't work =P

    5. Re:Geeks and Suits have a lot of in common by anshil · · Score: 2

      Look in example to famous companies that were sucessful in their age. I can think of one famous example. Hewlett and Packard, a suite and a geek that managed to work together.

      --

      --
      Karma 50, and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt.
    6. Re:Geeks and Suits have a lot of in common by HiThere · · Score: 2

      They have an immense amount to gain from each other. Unfortunately, the suits have written rules that allow them to cheat with impunity. So the geeks are often reluctant to play with them. And when they must, they try to take precautions. (E.g., the GPL -- which exists soley because the BSD was too open to cheating.)

      A fair deal presumes a level playing field. An honest contract presumes that both sides benefit approximately equally. Occasionally you may see these rare beasts.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  49. The hell? by Phleg · · Score: 1

    I went to read the comments for this, and was greeted by an advertisement for Microsoft .NET. Isn't that a bit like trying to sell publicity to Mark Hamill?

    --
    No comment.
    1. Re:The hell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Thanks for asking though.

  50. Which is all well and good, for *you* by kfg · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The downside is that you have to abrogate your ability to take care of yourself to another party. That *is* what you are doing when you take a specialized job ( payed or volunteer) whether you look at it that way or not. Someone has to provide you with money to buy food/shelter/clothing or provide you with the food/clothing/shelter itself if *all* you do is code.

    The American "job system" is really just a form of fuedalism in disguise. YOU do not provide for yourself and your family, your "Lord" does, although he wraps it in a pretty package to artfully disguise the true relationship.

    This is no particular surprise. The system evoloved directly out of the British Fuedal system which merely replaced the agricultural Lord with a mine manager. The "workers" were, and are, serfs in everything but name anyway. The only added "freedom" is the right to change allegience to another "Lord," or starve.

    Or make one's own way.

    There are coders who are perfectly comfortable at the workstation AND in the board room. I can think of a particular example off the top of my head who is world famous for being a coder *and* a positively *rapacious* businessman. You may have heard of him. His name is Bill something or other.

    And if you work for him you are *his,* and *he* makes the money in your paycheck.

    There are even a few odd coders here and there who are good enough at business that they've managed to put a good many dollars in their pocket producing "free" code. The two are *not* incompatible.

    Me, I think specialization is for insects, but that's me. Your milage may vary.

    You may, as far as *I* am concerned, manage to find a living in any lawful ( and perhaps even a few select *unlawful*) means available to you that works for you.

    This does not invalidate the point of the parent poster that the differentiation between "coders" and "businessmen" is bullshit. This is true even when the differentiation is between the production of "free" vs. propriatary software.

    *People* ( as opposed to *you*) are more diverse than that.

    KFG

    1. Re:Which is all well and good, for *you* by gilroy · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Blockquoth the poster:

      Me, I think specialization is for insects, but that's me. Your milage may vary.

      Wow. I'm impressed that you have time to code at all -- much less post to slashdot -- what with all the farming and milling and weaving and such that you must be doing.


      Oh, wait. You mean you buy food from a market and clothes from a store, rather than growing or making your own? Gasp! It sounds like you've specialized a tad ... you've given up direct exercise of some skills and now "depend" on someone else to provide some of your needs. In return, one imagines, you've become more efficient at the skills you do directly exercise, and so has the other. And so the system operates at a higher level than would be otherwise.


      The usual and current rant against "specialization" is just as much a load of crap now as it was when Thoreau screeched "Simplify, simplify, simplify" while using a printing press (a pretty complicated piece of machinery).

    2. Re:Which is all well and good, for *you* by nihilogos · · Score: 5, Funny

      Me, I think specialization is for insects, but that's me. Your milage may vary.

      Rubbish. Specialization is for specific cases in a templated function.

      --
      :wq
    3. Re:Which is all well and good, for *you* by RockyJSquirel · · Score: 1

      Rubbish. Specialization is for specific cases in a templated function.

      Giggle.

      Don't bother, I modded myself down
      (No Score +1 Bonus)

      Rocky J. Squirrel

  51. FUCK SUITS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Suits represent the brainwashed corporate clone type. The person who doesn't mind being subservient. The person who supports hierachy, therefore, supporting domination.
    SUIT WEARERS == FASCIST

    fuck suits.

    1. Re:FUCK SUITS by trotski · · Score: 2

      YOU == Wanabe marxist 15 year old.

      C'mon, I'm right arent I?

      --

      "Entropy is the bad-guy, and he is everywhere"
    2. Re:FUCK SUITS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      way off the mark dude. Marxism is fascism with a different mask. Marxist beaurocrates still wear suits, just like corporate technocrates. All the same shit arranged slightly differently.

    3. Re:FUCK SUITS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      crikey. I didn't realize your nic was trotski. for fucks sake, get over it dude.

      http://www.infoshop.org/

  52. Amen!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you want to tell a joke about an american, a newfy and a european, I won't call you a racist. If you want them to sit respectively in different sections of the bus, I will.

    He makes the same mistake with his "racist" joke statment that he is *trying* to argue against. IMO, he was just trolling and had no clear thought formed, nor does he have any real feelings on this issue either which way.

  53. Re:Lol, at least the "damn liberals" aren't racist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mod up parent please.

    Racistiplicans suck.

  54. Re:Lol, at least the "damn liberals" aren't racist by bucky0 · · Score: 1

    Note that one person made a racist comment. Even though all of his colleagues renounced his statement, they all get thrown into the same 'racist' pot. That's kinda sad, don't you think?

    Sigh, there so much misunderstanding here.

    BTW notice the "damn liberals" dont have the majority in either the house or senate and the "racists" have the presidency as well.

    If your comment was in reply to the parent's comment about leaving buisnesmen alone or whatever, that was an extreemly moot point. the republicans don't control the senate yet, and they've only controlled the house for 8-9 years? How would they be able to turn around 30-something odd years of liberal agenda in 8 years anyway?
    But, I digress...

    No one wants anything from the govt (society) until they are in need (ie medical healthcare)

    Well, I can only speak for myself, but I personally dont have a problem with government-supported healthcare for the ones that truely need it, but there are far, far, far too many: people that abuse the system, corruption within the system and waste within the system. The problem that most(read: most) conservatives have with a lot of programs is that there is too much fat on it.

    then every pathetic "racist" that lost their ass in the great stock market crash of 2000-2002 comes whining that they cannot afford to pay for health care. Fuck'em is what I say

    fine. they were stupid for putting all of their money into the stock market

    Since when did the "religious/racist" party give a shit about being hypocrites.

    You're getting funny now, just because one person out of a group makes a racist statement, the whole group is tainted even though a vast majority of the group condemns that one person's action? Please.

    Going to church every sunday and talking about how good you are and how you help so much (by giving to your "church/cult") for another activity center

    I think you have a skewed view of what churches are. Without having a long, drawn-out explanation, if people were following the Bible, they wouldn't claim to be holy(er). Just remember that because people screw up an ideology doesn't mean the ideology is wrong. Also, spending for things like activity centers etc... are a vast minority of the entire budget. For instance, my church funds 2 homeless shelters, a clothing/hygene product program where they give clothes and hygene products to whoever needs and wants it, etc... Those are the things that the church does to help.

    When the fucking public school across the street doesn't have textbooks newer than 1983 and the building is falling apart.

    Being in a public school, I can say firsthand that that's a complete mis-management of the funds given to the school. Teachers complain about pay, a 27 inch TV was installed in each classroom. Students complain about the school' s condition, a several-millilon-dollar study is done on the effects of pre-kindergarten reading programs. The problem with a lot of public schools isnt the funding. For instance, my school system has had it's funding doubled in the past 6 years, it's just that there are a bunch of morons running theshow.

    Notice my state of utterly moronic people. We voted all conservatives on the national level but all liberal on the local level. How the fuck does that happen? Welcome to DipShit USA. If I hear one more person say "I voted for him based on his character and I liked him better." I'm going to puke. All that means is "His commercial was more appealing than the other guy." Unbelievable.

    I'll agree with you on that one. I watch and read about politcs all the time and people think I'm some sort of circus freak. The complete and utter lack of political-aptitude(whatver you want to call it) in this country is ridiculus, but I really dont know how it could be changed..

    --

    -Bucky
  55. "Manufacturer", not "Geek" by Animats · · Score: 3, Interesting
    This is the classical distinction between the manufacturer and the financier. The manufacturer wants to make huge volumes of stuff, and the financier wants to make huge volumes of money.

    In the first half of the 20th century, when mass production really got going, this was a clear distinction. Understand, throughout all of history up to then, making stuff took a lot of work on each item. Even simple items were expensive. Suddenly, in one lifetime, that all changed. Machines were developed for stamping, moulding, glassblowing, punching, rolling, and the other operations of manufacturing. Those machines got faster and more powerful. For the first time ever, the world was awash in manufactured goods.

    The relationship between manufacturers, who put the machines and plants together to make stuff, and the financiers, who put deals together, was much like the "geek" and "suit" distinction today.

  56. Re:oh great by capitalsucks · · Score: 1

    You say leftwing like its a bad thing.

    --
    "I feel it is my duty to look at the porn that kids download before I delete it, to be sure what it is."--School Admin
  57. I guess I'm a geek by morksmail · · Score: 1

    Geeks make new stuff primarily because it's fun, because it's useful, and because they can. Suits make new stuff primarily because they hope to earn a profit.

    I just spent my freetime (not much of that around) this week making a site that is free. Why? Because I can, it is useful and because I didn't want to pay $36 to use a similar site. I though about a way to make money off of it and not charge too much, but I get so much for for free I thought I'd give something back. Here it is ClassmatesFree Don't push and shove, I bet it can't take a /. hit, enjoy.

    1. Re:I guess I'm a geek by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your site is trivial. The only real value of this service is the data in the database (of which you have none). Polish your screen scraping Perl skills. You're going to have to do some serious (and quasi-legal) data mining of the opposition in order to produce a worthwhile service.

    2. Re:I guess I'm a geek by morksmail · · Score: 1

      Polish your screen scraping Perl skills.

      You must have spent a long time on the site to notice that it is PHP.
      No data? What a surprise for a 2 day old site. Slashdot was empty for how long before it picked up?
      Which is worth more, a database of 30 schools for free or one with 33 million names that you have to pay for?

  58. umm so? by SquierStrat · · Score: 2

    What's the point? This is a known. It's also part of the "everyone has a place in society" thing. Some people make the stuff, some people design it, some people sell it. Then some people scoop fries and some flip burgers and some make change. Then the overlap, some design, make and sell stuff (I can think of some law enforcement devices off hand...) and then some people not only scoop fries, but flip burgers and make change as well - depends on which grease joint they work at. In a free market economy such as that in the U.S. they are kind of dependant upon one another

    --
    Derek Greene
  59. I manufacture my own transportation as well by kfg · · Score: 1

    Although I rely on the afore- mentioned miners to produce the materials for me.

    And I produce code for them. Other things as well. You'll find no rant against trade in my writting, nor will you find any in Throreau who was a sucessful inventor and businessman as well as an author.

    In fact, he managed to lecture and write Walden, all while living primarily off his own self produced food. Hoeing peas and cogitating are compatible, not incompatible. Coding while weaving and sewing make both endeavors more enjoyable.

    If *you* do not find it so then I heartily advise you not to do it.

    KFG

  60. Killer app? by Ratso+Baggins · · Score: 1
    VisiCalc & 123 were killer apps. They were quite innovative for their time. To compare these to blogs as a killer app is down right dissrespectful. I mean whats so innovative or interesting or marketable about blogs. Technically they are simple SQL & Perl (or whatever), hardly an innovative achievement beyond a web-guestbook. I guess banner adds count for marketability now-days, but it's not a seriously relevant business model - ie: enough to call it marketable.

    --

    --
    "we live in a post-ideological world..." - Billy Bragg.

  61. zerg by Lord+Omlette · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    This Christmas... jamesgregory IS Jon Katz!

    --
    [o]_O
  62. Who made you an expert? What is your category? by Conspire · · Score: 1, Redundant
    Hello Poster, you draw some very clear lines in a subject that is impossible to draw clear lines within. Of the 6,233,821,945 (July 2002 est.) people on this planet, you are saying all those involved with the development of technology are either geeks or capitalists exclusively. I would argue that most (if not all) geeks are in fact capitalists or living in capitalist societies by the capitalist ways, while many capitalists are not geeks but do try to grasp and utilize technology to thier advantage (either capitalist or personal).

    There are also many many semi-geek capitalists, people like myself, whose primary function in society is capitalist by description, but whose primary personal interests lie in technology, science, and "geek" things. Yes, I love to play with tech and "create" things just for fun, not only for profit. If the opportunity arises to profit from one of those creations, of course I, being a human living in a capitalist society, would of course look to profit from said creation. Where do you categorize that?

    I fail to see your point, or the validity of your points, and any historical societal evidence behind those points. Are you saying that geeks are ANTI-capitalist in nature? Or, are you saying that real capitalists cannot be geeks? The logic is interesting, but I arge that there is no real "distinction" in the classes you draw.

    --
    Real men don't need signitures!!!
  63. i agree by too_bad · · Score: 1

    Even though its sort of a over-simplification I agree that
    this is basically the most fundamental difference.

    I grew up in an environment where we were taught that money
    comes much after many other things in life. We were also
    taught that companies (and people) who use money to bend laws
    around them were evil.

    And slowly I realised that in our soceity money _is_ played out to
    be a very very important factor and that almost all the time
    most laws are biased by those who lobby and those who have money
    (yes thats an understatement).

    Oh yeah, I forgot to mention, I am a geek and I love doing thing
    just because I can. Well, thats not entirely true, because there
    is no kicks in doing things I know for sure I can do. Its doing
    things just to see if I can do them, and doing these things
    just gives me the kicks that somehow I dont get when I am in
    a suity environment, racking my brains to do things that fetch
    money (oh yeah since I do get hungry and have to eat food
    I have a job too ... pity).

    --
    DO NOT PANIC
  64. Re:I disagree by Newcastle22 · · Score: 1

    I think you are thinking of Pat Buchanan of the Libertarian party. Ralph Nader is, er was, the Greenparty presidential candidate last election, and is generally anti-naughty corporations. Hell, he even wanted to do away with lobbyists and cap campaign contributions. So, uh, did you vote for Buchanan on accident by any chance? Dan

  65. Success. by blair1q · · Score: 2


    Geeks tend to be successful because they know they will be.

    Businesses tend to look successful because they have been successful.

    1-p is as valid a metric as p.

  66. Re:I disagree by proj_2501 · · Score: 2

    Pat Buchanan ran with the Reform party in 2000. The Libertarian Candidate was Harry Browne.

  67. Two kinds of business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There are two kinds of businesses: 1) means to an end; 2) end in itself.

    You can make goods, or provide services, because you can make money doing it. Or you can do it because it's what you like to do, and making money doing it is just the best way to pay the bills while you keep doing it.

    Whatever the business is, computers, sailboats, farming, medicine -- if you're doing it because you love it, then you're a geek; if you're doing it to make money, you're a suit.

    Clearly the two (geeks & suits) can exist in a symbiotic relationship. The suit can use the geek's love of building widgets to make money; the geek can use the suit's ability to manage finances in order to keep his operation funded.

    Public corporations are primarily suit-driven. Sole proprietorships and family businesses are probably mostly geek-driven.

  68. do it yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    geeks = diy anarchist
    suits = consuming capitalists

  69. Re:Agreed! by VoidEngineer · · Score: 2

    Well said! One of the most fundamentally important lessons that I ever learned was that not everything can be broken down into terms of 'yes/no', 'true/false', 'good/bad', right/wrong', 'right/left', 'win/loose', and 'this/that'.

    I am also sick of the mentality of "it's either this way, or that way". I'm also very, very sick of the 'win/loose' people. Frankly, there are a lot of problems in society which simply cannot be solved with such a narrow minded, simplistic viewpoint as that. I agree completely with your comments!

    Right on regarding pigeonholing and careers!

    Damn. SteweyGriffin, I'm a fan.

  70. What color is your suit? by chakalaka · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is just another manifestation of the fact that the domains of art and practicality lie, at times, seperate from each other. Yes, there are those out there who are mainly interested in creating things in order to increase sales. Yes, there are those out there who are only interested in creating things that enact change or communicate with others. Or perhaps things that just amuse themselves.

    The truth is, both types are firmly entrenched in our humanity. Half a century of various failed or struggling communist social models bear out that there will always be those motivated by greed. Half the art hanging in MOMA bears out that there will always be those who couldn't care less about the vote of the common Joe's greenback.

    Most of us have a little "suit" in us, even if we pretend not to. Developing GPL software, for example, is often just a form of apprenticeship, or self-teaching. Most people who develop GPL software would not be satisfied with working the stamp at a steel factory forever to support their hobby. Those who would are rare (but, notably, valuable to the world; while artists often only end up living a hard, poverty stricken life, they populate the cutting edge of human thought.) On a similar vein, one likely would do the world much more good by devoting their life to a project such as world hunger, as opposed to taking classes in electronic engineering and wiring up the l33test battle bot this side of TNN. Only with world hunger, you get to meet mankind, not Mankind.

    The base problem here (if you call it that) is human greed and self-interest. Remove that and the ocasional division between art and usefullness is no longer relavent. Unfortunately, remove that and most of humanity dies of starvation and dolphins take over the world. Which is mostly like it is now, except with more dolphins.

    1. Re:What color is your suit? by blue+trane · · Score: 1

      Half a century of various failed or struggling communist social models bear out that there will always be those motivated by greed.

      Well, hunter-gatherers survived for several thousand years with a lifestyle not motivated primarily by greed. So it is possible.

      Imagine living like a hunter-gatherer (lots of leisure time), but with the convenience of technology...greed need not remain with us forever.

  71. Crisis... in decent articles maybe by Offwhite98 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This somehow related weblogs, web services and decentralization together. It does not make any sense. And saying Web Services has no business model or that is just a silly idea just lacks any amount of research to justify an article which bashes it.

    In an economic slowdown would you expect innovation to also be stifled? That would be the best time to innovate since a truly good idea would be successful when others would die as they should. The whole dotcom era let every silly idea live for a while, with venture capital, and now the good ideas from the dotcom era are being sorted out to the top (XML, Java) and the 2nd generation will be the result.

    From what I see it is a good thing. Head over to Apache.org and you will see lots of very useful projects which leverage lots of good ideas. This article is just crap.

    --
    Brennan Stehling - http://brennan.offwhite.net/blog/
  72. the distinction is NOT real... by TheMonkeyDepartment · · Score: 4, Insightful

    as a geeky business owner, I hate to tell you that the distinction is NOT real, it is an artificial border that you have decided to draw. It is more than an "oversimplification", it is a total fabrication.

    There are many hardcore geeks who are also trying to make a profit -- so many that it creates an infinitely blurred line. You are trying to invent a definition of "geeks" and "suits." In real life there are billions of different people, all with infinitely differing shades of motives and values. I hope you get some more experience with real life very soon.

  73. yes, but.... by djupedal · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Gate's bought DOS...he didn't write it. That makes him a suit in my book....not a geek.

    If he was as good (a geek) as you claim, he wouldn't have gone to all the trouble to buy it.

    1. Re:yes, but.... by jpmorgan · · Score: 2
      Gate's bought DOS

      That was the first good business decision. He bought it for 50 grand, hired the guy who wrote it originally, then licensed it out to IBM who were looking for an OS for their new 'PC' thing.

      But, it was his BASIC implementation that got IBM talking to him in the first place. He was one of the original authors of that.

      Geekery got him in the game. Business sense got him the rest of the way.

    2. Re:yes, but.... by hankaholic · · Score: 1

      Go write a BASIC interpreter that executes in 4k of memory.

      Then you have the right to argue.

      --
      Somebody get that guy an ambulance!
    3. Re:yes, but.... by stephanruby · · Score: 2
      "Geekery got him in the game. Business sense got him the rest of the way. "

      Geekery may have gotten him into the game, but his father got him the rest of the way. At the time, Bill's dad was already a top-notch lawyer in New York. Without his dad, at his age, he would have been screwed just like most of us have been screwed at his age.

      No, I am not bitter. And yes, I am assuming that most of us, at his age, have been screwed businesswise.

    4. Re:yes, but.... by anshil · · Score: 1

      Wrong, what I know of, as it is often buisness, personal relationships got IBM started to talk with him, bill gates mother was a close friend of the co-CEO of IBM that times. Now guess what?

      --

      --
      Karma 50, and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt.
    5. Re:yes, but.... by Future+Shock · · Score: 1

      Gates was well-known for years before he sold IBM DOS, primarily for writing the first BASIC interpreters in ROM for MITS, Altair, and Ohio Scientific computers. I actually still OWN the last one (a C1P model w/ a 1Mhz 6502 CPU), and the copywrite date on the ROMS is 1977, by MicroSoft, Inc. As BASICs go, it was very full featured, had some neat character mapped graphics capability, and was very small. And at that time, writing an interpreter was not yet just an undergrad course that everyone did as part of getting a CS degree...it was considered HARD. Gates wrote it all in assembler, pretty much by himself...his geek creds are pretty secure, even if a bit dated. What were YOU doing in 1977???

  74. I disagree by version5 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    > Sure, suits don't care about the elegance of YOUR crap--but you don't care about [theirs].

    Characterizing it like that is a blatant attempt to make the suit-geek dichotomy go away, and its not working. For one thing, everyone understands money, geeks included. When a suit is concerned with the bottom-line, we can at least understand where he's coming from. The converse is (often) not even remotely true. In the extreme, suits understand money, and money alone. Geeks, on the other hand, hold the position that while money is important, in some circumstances, elegance trumps money. So while geeks understand both the ephemeral "elegance" AND the more obvious bottom line, suits usually only understand money.

    Therein lies the problem. If anything, the Geek is more dedicated to the bottom line than the Suit, because a more elegant solution is a part of or even the foundation of a sound business model, especially in the long run. However, a Suit who typically has little or no understanding of the domain, or the humility to take the advice of those who do often cuts technological corners (like hiring MSCEs) with deleterious effects on the bottom line. A geek suggesting the use of free open-source software will get modded down in the board room because "Everyone uses Microsoft." The reason for the stereotype of the Pointy Haired Boss is because it is unfortunately common. Not the pointy hair part, the inept technological aptitude part.

    --

    "It's Dot Com!"

    1. Re:I disagree by AlphaMaker · · Score: 1

      Therein lies the problem. If anything, the Geek is more dedicated to the bottom line than the Suit, because a more elegant solution is a part of or even the foundation of a sound business model, especially in the long run.

      That's nice in theory but companies like DEC proved that excellent engineering doesn't necessarily translate into profit. There was a company started by a geek and run by geek culture. They could have done with a little more business culture.

  75. Re:Agreed! by VoidEngineer · · Score: 2

    Yep. I'm working on a portfolio project right now, which happens to be web based, so I'm at my computer all the time. I figure that Slashdot has got another two or three weeks of 'VoidEngineer' posts all over the place before I find my next project which will require me to be away from my computer.

    Yeah, I wish I had something better going on in my life that I didn't have so much time to procrastinate by posting to slashdot. Ah well. The glass is always half full, right? I'm improving by web authoring skills... (yeah, right...)

  76. Re:Who made you an expert? What is your category? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hello Poster

    Hello person who obviously did not read the article, since then you would have realized that the post was actually just a direct quote from the article itself, rather than an original though from the poster.

  77. most curious by certron · · Score: 1

    why do i feel like this is part of some strange experiment? One paragraph, and a link that I ignored THREE TIMES until I realized 'oh, it goes to a story.' Yes, people are different. Why are we not going into the motvations of professional athletes, or high school athletes who have applied what they were motivated by to their non-athletic life? Should we focus on attention-starved people who drift in and out of relationships because they are insecure and / or easily bored? While I do understand that there is a bit of a spectrum between the individual happy-coloured geek and the monotonic monolithic faceless corporate buzzdrone suit, they (generally) are people too. They have favourite foods, songs. They probably dislike being poked in the eye with a stick. They still have to buy toilet paper.

    (I'm worried that this is turning into an insightful post...)

    What exactly does 'decentralization' have to do with it, other than that geeks are spread across vast geographic areas? (Some take up vast physical areas, too, but personally, I'm working on reducing my aerial footprint.)

    Well, I suppose the least I can do is peer out of the laboratory bell jar and wave.

    Hi!

    --

    fair.org counterpunch.com truthout.com indymedia.org salon.com
    eff.org guerrilla.net debian.org gentoo.org
  78. YOU FAIL IT! by Regul8or · · Score: 1

    Perhaps you were beaten to the first post by the "IN SOVIET RUSSIA" line? Perhaps you're a pathetic FAILURE? Survey says YES to all of the above.

    YOU FAIL IT!

    1. Re:YOU FAIL IT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod me as "off topic" or "troll" if you must, but... What is the meaning of "You fail it"? I'm being serious here. I've seen it. I like the way it sounds, but I have no real idea what it means or where it originated. Does it mean:
      1. You have failed
      2. You are a failure (at everything)
      3. You have failed in the world of I.T.
      I figure since this is a site for more technical people, It probably means the latter, but that would be giving the trolls too much credit. Which leads me to another point. How many of you trolls out there are professionally employed in I.T? I am a part time troll (although I am posting seriously this time), an I work as a professional in the I.T. world managing thousands of machines and users.

    2. Re:YOU FAIL IT! by Regul8or · · Score: 1

      I think it just sounds good. It's one of those things that would sound good yelled at someone's face while they squabble at the mercy of their own stupidity. Most of us know it's not proper english and I think that's the point. It wouldn't be as funny if "YOU FAIL IT!" was all the sudden "YOU HAVE FAILED!". But to answer your original question, I think it's #2.

  79. two different things bubba :) by djupedal · · Score: 2

    buying something takes money....writing code takes brains...

    bg has loads of one and shards of the other.

    Live at home? No, I moved in with your daughter....ooops...I promised not to tell. She says hi!

  80. What are you talking about? by autopr0n · · Score: 3, Informative

    Linux was created so that there could be a truly free OS to play around with. Minix cost money, back in the day, and modifications had to be distributed in the form of patches, which got to be extreemly annoying, even for people who already had licenses. That was the reason Linus created Linux.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  81. Black & White by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Imagine a piano with only 2 keys... that's how you people play music...

  82. different strokes by djupedal · · Score: 2

    And only history (and the lackluster sales of his books on the future) will tell if his business sense will live beyond the image of him that many of us hold today.

    Too bad no one around him gets any of the credit....must be something in the coolaid.

    Ok, lest I didn't make myself clear...you guys are defending/idolizing a criminal. I don't admire him for anything...zero. You're free to laddle on the adoration, but I don't have to get in the same reception line. Talk to the hand.

    1. Re:different strokes by SN74S181 · · Score: 1

      .you guys are defending/idolizing a criminal.

      Perhaps for some definitions of 'criminal.'

      I can name many of the successful 'robber baron' capitalists of the 19th century. I can even name the innovations they brought to the marketplace. You think anybody can remember the names of the paunchy bueraucrats and sniveling lawyers who 'persecuted' them in the courtroom??

      The same is and will be true with Bill Gates. A lot of people hated Andrew Carnegie back when he was alive. That doesn't change the fact that the Carnegie money did a lot of good spreading libraries and literacy throughout the land. The Gates Foundation seeks (we will see how it comes out in the end) to do the same thing.

      If you want an archetypical evil fuck capitalist who stomps on others, look up one of Gates' opponents. A guy named Larry Ellision.

  83. oh yes....very impressive by djupedal · · Score: 2

    Basic: A toy language that has ruined more good programmers than sleepless nights. It should never have lived more than 6 months...thank gates for keeping it around, so it could stink things up, like a dead woodchuck, laying lifeless under the back porch in the hot noonday sun.

    "BASIC /bay'-sic/ n.
    A programming language, originally designed for Dartmouth's experimental timesharing system in the early 1960s, which for many years was the leading cause of brain damage in proto-hackers. Edsger W. Dijkstra observed in "Selected Writings on Computing: A Personal Perspective" that "It is practically impossible to teach good programming style to students that have had prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration." This is another case (like Pascal) of the cascading lossage that happens when a language deliberately designed as an educational toy gets taken too seriously. A novice can write short BASIC programs (on the order of 10-20 lines) very easily; writing anything longer (a) is very painful, and (b) encourages bad habits that will make it harder to use more powerful languages well. This wouldn't be so bad if historical accidents hadn't made BASIC so common on low-end micros in the 1980s. As it is, it probably ruined tens of thousands of potential wizards. "

    1. Re:oh yes....very impressive by hankaholic · · Score: 1

      What's this? Cut and paste random crap day?

      Sheesh... maybe I should search for myself on Google and cut and paste something I've said before... then at least it would be relevent in the context of _one_ of the stories on the homepage...

      --
      Somebody get that guy an ambulance!
  84. puke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jesus Christ what a limp dick show.

  85. Re:yes, but.... REal History of Dos Fools by puto · · Score: 3, Funny

    Found this gem on the NANET Comedy Conference. If you know anything about
    DOS vs Windows vs OS/2 vs... then READ IT.

    How It Came To Pass...

    Long ago, in the days when all disks flopped in the breeze and the
    writing of words was on a star, the Blue Giant dug for the people the
    Pea Sea. But he needed a creature who could sail the waters, and would
    need for support but few rams.

    So the Gatekeeper, who was said to be both micro and soft, fashioned a
    Dosfish, who was small and spry, and could swim the narrow sixteen-bit
    channel. But the Dosfish was not bright, and could be taught few new
    tricks. His alphabet had no A's, B's, or Q's, but a mere 640 K's, and
    the size of his file cabinet was limited by his own fat.

    At first the people loved the Dosfish, for he was the only one who
    could swim the Pea Sea. But the people soon grew tired of commanding
    his line, and complained that he could be neither dragged nor dropped.
    "Forsooth," they cried. "the Dosfish can only do one job at a time, and
    of names, he knows only eight and three." And many of them left the
    Pea Sea for good, and went off in search of the Magic Apple.

    Although many went, far more stayed, because admittance to the Pea Sea
    was cheap. So the Gateskeeper studied the Magic Apple, and rested
    awhile in the Parc of Xer-Ox, and he made a Window that could ride on
    the Dosfish and do its thinking for it. But the Window was slow, and
    it would break when the Dosfish got confused. So most people contented
    themselves with the Dosfish.

    Now it came to pass that the Blue Giant came upon the Gateskeeper, and
    spoke thus: "Come, let us make of ourselves something greater than the
    Dosfish." The Blue Giant seemed like a humbug, so they called the new
    creature OZ II.

    Now Oz II was smarter than the Dosfish, as most things are. It could
    drag and drop, and could keep files without becoming fat. But the
    people cared for it not. So the Blue Giant and the Gateskeeper
    promised another OZ II, to be called Oz II Too, that could swim the
    fast new 32-bit wide Pea Sea.

    Then lo, a strange miracle occurred. Although the Window that rode on
    the Dosfish was slow, it was pretty, and the third Window was the
    prettiest of all. And the people began to like the third Window, and
    to use it. So the Gateskeeper turned to the Blue Giant and said, "Fie
    on thee, for I need thee not. Keep thy OZ II Too, and I shall make of
    my Window an Entity that will not need the Dosfish, and will swim in
    the 32-bit Pea Sea."

    Years passed, and the workshops of the Gateskeeper and the Blue Giant
    were overrun by insects. And the people went on using their Dosfish
    with a Window; even though the Dosfish would from time to time become
    confused and die, it could always be revived with three fingers.

    Then there came a day when the Blue Giant let forth his OZ II Too onto
    the world. The Oz II Too was indeed mighty, and awesome, and required
    a great ram, and the world was changed not a whit. For the people said,
    "It is indeed great, but we see little application for it." And they
    were doubtful, because the Blue Giant had met with the Magic Apple, and
    together they were fashioning a Taligent, and the Taligent was made of
    objects, and was most pink.

    Now the Gateskeeper had grown ambitious, and as he had been ambitious
    before he grew, he was now more ambitious still. So he protected his
    Window Entity with great security, and made its net work both in
    serving and with peers. And the Entity would swim, not only in the Pea
    Sea, but in the Oceans of Great Risk. "Yea," the Gateskeeper declared,
    "though my entity will require a greater ram than Oz II Too, it will be
    more powerful than a world of Eunuchs.

    And so the Gateskeeper prepared to unleash his Entity to the world, in
    all but two cities. For he promised that a greater Window, a greater
    Entity, and even a greater Dosfish would appear one day in Chicago and
    Cairo, and it too would be built of objects.

    Now the Eunuchs who lived in the Oceans of Great Risk, and who scorned
    the Pea Sea, began to look upon their world with fear. For the Pea Sea
    had grown, and great ships were sailing in it, the Entity was about to
    invade their oceans, and it was rumored that files would be named in
    letters greater than eight. And the Eunuchs looked upon the Pea Sea,
    and many of them thought to immigrate.

    Within the Oceans of Great Risk were many Sun Worshippers, and they
    wanted to excel, and make their words perfect, and do their jobs as
    easy as one-two-three. And what's more, many of them no longer wanted
    to pay for the Risk. So the Sun Lord went to the Pea Sea, and got
    himself eighty-sixed.

    And taking the next step was He of the NextStep, who had given up
    building his boxes of black. And he proclaimed loudly that he could
    help anyone make wondrous soft wares, then admitted meekly that only
    those who know him could use those wares, and he was made of objects,
    and required the biggest ram of all.

    And the people looked out upon the Pea Sea, and they were sore amazed.
    And sore confused. And sore sore. And that is why, to this day, Ozes,
    Entities, and Eunuchs battle on the shores of the Pea Sea, but the
    people still travel on the simple Dosfish.

    --
    The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
  86. But Profit == Useful (to someone) by plgs · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hang on a minute. The article distinguishes (and criticises) the "turning a profit" motive from the "being useful" motive. But the only reason something turns a profit is because it's useful enough to someone for them to decide to pay for it. That's the whole market economy driver, and (I'm sorry) but it's responsible for the vast majority of your present quality of life.

    1. Re:But Profit == Useful (to someone) by blue+trane · · Score: 1

      But the only reason something turns a profit is because it's useful enough to someone for them to decide to pay for it.

      Or because someone sells it well enough to you that you think you need it, or you think it will be better than something else. The seller often lies...

    2. Re:But Profit == Useful (to someone) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not for long. Such lies are always short lived and once the liar is found out he is no longer an economic force. In fact that very thing has happened so many times in the tech sector recently I'd think that the lesson would be crystal clear to all readers here.

    3. Re:But Profit == Useful (to someone) by blue+trane · · Score: 1

      The individual liar who is found out may no longer be an economic force; but how many spring up to replace him (her)?

      Lying is a fundamental technique of salesmanship, and is often viewed as the quickest most efficient way to profit.

      It's sort of like drug dealers/hustlers in the completely unrestricted free market of the street drug trade. There are always those who lie to you while selling you bunk. They may not last, but others inevitably take their place...

  87. Two groups by mlush · · Score: 1

    There are two sorts of people, thoes who divide people into two groups.

  88. Speaking about making things because it's fun... by mattis_f · · Score: 3, Insightful
    This reminds me of the Japanese art of Chindogu. This is the art of making inventions because it can be done and because it is fun, and has nothing to do with usefulness. In fact, to be a true Chindogu ("weird tool") it's not allowed to be useful!

    In general, a good chindogu solves a real problem but creates a new one at the same time.

    Like one of my favorites: The solar powered flashlight.

  89. 2 easy by djupedal · · Score: 2

    Ok, I'll take that as acknowledgement of defeat on your part :)

    laugh...it's funnnnnnny....

    1. Re:2 easy by hankaholic · · Score: 1

      Acknowledgement of what? All I said (or implied) was that writing BASIC in 4k was impressive. You can go off (or cut and paste) all you want about how much you don't like BASIC, but you miss the point entirely, because I never endorsed the BASIC language, I only said that a 4k BASIC interpreter impressed me.

      --
      Somebody get that guy an ambulance!
  90. Business and e2e by Anthony+Bailey · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The article is a report from the "Supernova conference" on decentralization - a currently perceived shift in the nature of the Net, back from few publishers and many readers, to something more end-to-end.

    The two-page Salon report wonders what the business models for e2e are, and what the consequences of greater commercial interest in e2e technologies might be. The quoted introduction (and high-rated comments) are not very representative of the story. It doesn't say anything very surprising, but there's more there than the dubious geek/suit dichotomy.

    --Anthony.

  91. Heh heh... no. by ArcSecond · · Score: 2

    I was looking for the 3-page rant, for sure.

    --

    I've got a bad attitude and karma to burn. Go ahead. Mod me down.

  92. keeping the lights on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nothing wrong with making a few bucks for your efforts. IT's when a handful of felonious FraUDs, call ALL the shots, & collect MoSt of the proceeds, that IT gets a little treacherous.

    'course now with almost everything being gnu, there's infinite opportunities available to those who are willing/able to think outside of the (billy)box.

    as we like to think, all you need, is a dialup, a dream, & some investigation of the brand gnu cooperation. not a billyunheir in the bunch, & proud of IT.

  93. Stereotypes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps its me, but doesn't the whole "geek vs suit" subject strike anyone else as being a bit juvenile?

    I'm only in my early thirties, but I haven't heard talk like this since my late teens (at least in my peer group.) People are much more complicated than that.

    I think anyone with a shred of intelligence will see how utterly silly statements like these are.

    By the way, are the people developing DRM geeks?

  94. I was ranting but here is my point about my state. by BoomerSooner · · Score: 2

    (BTW I live in Norman, Oklahoma hence my name BoomerSooner)

    #1
    The republican party is racist. There is no doubt. The only reason they "act" inclusionist is because if they get 8% of stupid blacks/latinos to vote for them it is usually enough to beat the democrats. Remember it was the republican party that sponsored segregation and fought very hard to keep it in place. Mind you this was only 50 years ago (Strom Thurmond ring a bell?).

    Why did JC "Uncle Tom" Watts (from my town) step down as the 3rd highest republican? They were asking him to essentially get the coffee for them. Notice the jackass Inhoffe trying to move to #1 by calling for a "vote" on Lott. Hell I hope Lott stays the leader and the democrats get some fucking balls and attack the assholes. What the fuck happened to the will of the democratic party? If they are pussy whipped because of Clinton they need to fucking retire. I'll take a president that gets a BJ (does anyone remember JFK?) in the oval office to a moron that cannot even say terrorist (terraist or tourist is what I hear). The republican party is a bunch of pandering assholes. If you don't believe it watch this:

    The repubs will have the house, senate, presidency and supreme court. I will bet the first person with balls $1000 that there is No Anti-Abortion Law which based on their platform should pass with flying colors. Do you want to know why it wont? They would die a quick death in the next election. They just pander to the religious dumb fucks that can only focus on abortion as their "how I vote issue". Mark it down in 2004 there will still be legal abortion. Pussies.

    #2
    Every church in my town (of around 85-100k depending on if school is in or not) has expanded/remodeled their original building, bought neighboring houses and turned them into parking lots (this has royally pissed of some people on campus, frats/sororities have done the same), and build mutil-million dollar centers of worthlessness.

    In a time where our schools are lacking funding (partially due to bad management but mostly due to fast growth of population and lack of funds) people bitch and moan about a new bond issue for the schools (note the funds only go to schools not general funds within the area) but will gladly give another $100 to their church every weekend because that is their new "high school".

    Have you ever noticed 90% of the hypocrites that go to church are more interested in the gossip than the gospel? Being a child of an Italian family the Catholic church is a birth requirement. However, in my personal search for religion I have attended almost every available denomination and religion in my area (yes, muslum/islamic, buddhism, non secular, native american (kiowa, choctaw)). All I see is hypocracy in the Christian religions. It's not about being a good person it's about how much you "give". So all I can say is fuck'em.

    The only exception is the mormons I know. I hold them in the highest esteem because even though I don't agree with their beliefs they respect me, so in turn I respect them. Also they are the nicest people I've met (in relation to attending services). They too have their tithing (10% or you burn in hell). At least mormons aren't hypocrites.

    I have no problem with religion, I have a major problem with people who lie to themselves to feel better than others simply because they piss their money away on giving 1st Baptist more money so the PowerPoint presentations can be professionally designed.

  95. Specialization and Insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aren't you going to give proper attribution for your clever little quotation? Well? Go ahead...

  96. Re:oh great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "You say leftwing like its a bad thing."

    [mouth hanging open...blinks slowly...shakes head]

    [pulls out handgun,blows commie away]

    BLAMMMMM!!

  97. You bastards!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I should have KNOWN it!!!

    A freakn crap salon article...the lack of info in the header shaould have been a dead giveaway...DAMN!!

    You assclowns just made me give them some hits...FUCK!!!

    I feel dirty now...no slashdot for a week...

  98. We are all geeks and suits... by ACowDOA · · Score: 1

    Thank you ACow. No /. for a week? Promise!!

    To summarize... geeks good, suits bad? Specailization good, well-rounded education bad? Geek martyrdom good, money bad?

    We are all thrust into situations in which ethical decisions must be made. The decision made will most often do one thing. Serve ourselves. I just designed a teleportation device... Some defense contractor suit wants to give me $100 million dollars for it. Do I take it? Or do I say no because I am a pacifist "geek" and I like living in a box? Money blurs a lot of borders. Did I invent this to make a profit? No. Will I take a profit from it. Damn straight. Does that make me a suit? Depends on who you ask. Do I care? No because I have just bought a small island full of nothing but beutiful women and beer.

    While I'm at it, specialization does not exist. It is a misnomer for being one-dimensional in the work force. I prefer to be multi-dimensional. I read philosophy, sing, play volleyball, watch cartoons and paint. All of these things make me a better problem solver and better at my career, these hobbies also make me a geek by most standards. If specialization were real, and furthermore important, Einstein would have stayed a patent clerk, DaVinci an artist and ACow a cube monkey (instead a really insightful and brilliant poster).

    We are all geeks and suits in our own twisted ways.

    What labels are attached to us is not up to us.

  99. Any Slashdot reader who doesn't know. . . by kfg · · Score: 1

    that's Robert Heilein hasn't been paying attention.

    I may have been unbearably rude to elements of my audience, but I didn't treat them like idiots.

    KFG

  100. Actually. . . by kfg · · Score: 1

    I agree with you. In my defense I can only say I was responding in context to someone who said he *only* wants to code.

    I'd guess there's a 'template' or two more than that in his bag of tricks.

    KFG

  101. Re:oh great by capitalsucks · · Score: 1

    Hmm..
    [Is shocked by this blatant right wing capitalist pig,decides carefully..]
    {Descision Made}
    Hangs pig by his piggy feet and feeds him to the masses of impovershed children suffering at his hands.

    --
    "I feel it is my duty to look at the porn that kids download before I delete it, to be sure what it is."--School Admin
  102. Re:Who made you an expert? What is your category? by Conspire · · Score: 2

    You are correct, I did not read the article because it seemed like such froth that it would be a waste of time reading it. Total balogna marginalizing our intelligence (or lack thereof).

    --
    Real men don't need signitures!!!
  103. Last Post! by alpg · · Score: 1

    I just uploaded xtoolplaces-1.6. It fixes all bugs but one: It still
    coredumps instead of doing something useful. The upstream author's
    e-mail address bounces, Redhat doesn't provide it and I never used it.
    -- Sven Rudolph

    - this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...