It's not the gov't that maintains the record -- it's just the gov't that failed to provide privacy for U.S. residents with regard to other civil or criminal records maintained by all the other "institutions" we have to pass through. The individual schools each maintain records, which they are mandated (locally or state-wide, presumably) to maintain for varying amounts of time. The individual colleges/U's may or may not require "records" aside from a transcript (a list of academic grades). The heavy emphasis on conformity in the U.S. does come from the top (McCarthyism is by no means dead, and is in fact being revived yet again this election year with regard to "entertainment"), but the central gov't confidently leaves it to lower-level institutions to carry out the record-keeping that makes continual surveillance possible. Btw, there are now towns in the U.S. where one is continually monitored by "security" videocameras in every public space.
Did you imagine that the violent right-wing, anti-gov't extremists here just sprung up full-grown out of nothing? They are merely reacting (in their paranoid, inappropriate ways) to circumstances we all face.
After '93, I was practically disabled (in ADA terms): I can no longer take public transportation, within NYC); can't sit without support, and with support, not for more than 2-3 hours, without the onset of chronic pain; can't climb stairs (without onset of cp); have trouble walking uphill even.
I made several adjustments... First, I bought 2 kneeling chairs, one for home and one for work. That worked reasonably well for awhile, but long work hours were still a problem. Then I found a "laptop desk," which is designed like a 2-piece hospital tray, one piece of which inclines while the other remains flat for coffee mugs, dickettes, peripherals -- the unit included a flexible halogen light which was itself attached to a highly adjustable copy holder. This allows me to work "at home" lying down (which is one reason I hate bad keyboards -- it's not like I can easily look at the damned things when the keys are misplaced!); I started working partly off-site at home, and looking for part-time regular work.
The problem with these solutions, of course, is neither is very portable. (I did once wheel one of the kneeling chairs, strapped to a luggage rack, to a movie theatre. Getting home afterwards was the problem.) The ultimate solution, for me, I found at a computer show: It's called Nada Chair, which is a company that makes various marvellous, portable contraptions. The one they sold me originally was called the "Back-Up" and sold as "backup for your discs" (a little humor never hurts!).
When that one was stolen (long story), I didn't want to wait for mail order, so I bought the only device they make I could find in NYC: the "Sit-pack." It's not quite as good, but it goes with me literally everywhere. If you suffer from low-back pain, go check out Nada Chair's Web site (www.nadachair.com)... No chair can possibly fit you as well as these devices, which you can use in ANY chair!
I used to recommend Nada Chair to writers, too, who also often suffer from low-back pain for the same reason computer users do. Btw, use a decent WP/coding/editing package which does NOT force you to use a mouse -- and learn the short-cut keys. Mouse use if FAR more stressful to your wrists and hands than tapping on a keyboard.
Assuming you refer to Oklahoma -- and that Oklahoma is the state which recently banned teaching evolution and mandated teaching "creationism" -- your post reminded me of a delicious joke I heard some months back: It seems some folks were arguing about where to store dangerous radioactive waste. One scientist suggested they store it in Oklahoma, since "mutations don't happen there!"
Think a little deeper... I wasn't very good at playing politics, but I've always been pretty good at focusing on and then solving (or finding workarounds for) the actual problems facing a company. At times I certainly "failed" personally as an employee, usually because my bosses always seemed to be afraid I wanted their jobs (I didn't); why else would I put in those hours and do such good work? (Because I have an overdeveloped sense of responsibility...)
Fortunately, that's not the end of the story. I was able to analyze my problem, see that "office politics" would always be a problem for me because I kept focusing on the COMPANY's actual problem (instead of what the IMMEDIATE BOSS wanted to see happen). So, I became a consultant. In this way, my "boss" is free to take credit for being smart enough to hire me, and I can focus on getting the job(s) done.
Usually the company is very happy with my work; if its management types are all too short-sighted and insecure to look at their real problems, and just want a make-it-pretty solution (like Citibank and other past clients which shall remain nameless, since Citibank is the only one where I worked in 3-4 separate departments and found the same, apparently pervasive, corporate climate), well... there's plenty of potential clients out there!
All right, let's talk about what "people skills" are, and what they're for. Suppose you live in a culture which actively detests intelligence (as demonstrated in its films, books, and all other modes of popular culture). Suppose you yourself are smart enough to have studied history and realize that
at all times and in all social movements, including violent revolutions as well as "peaceful" social change, only 10% of the people were actively involved in the change, and
in a highly technological culture, failure to think things through and control where we allow our technology to take us is a death sentence -- firstly to liberty, and finally, very likely, to corporeal existence itself.
Wouldn't it be your responsibility to try to get others to think for themselves, before you simply try to take control and do their thinking for them (a la Gates and your other so-called "successful geeks")? The boy in high school who is smart enough and has enough integrity to fail to conform deliberately, with a funny and strikingly effective act of theatre that galvanizes such an unthinking response by authority, has a great chance of growing up to be one of our new "leaders."
If you studied what used to be called "leadership traits," you'd know that political "leaders" are actually those who intuit or otherwise know (through manipulation, sometimes) how the crowd feels -- they get out front and lead them in the direction they already want to go. This is sad but true.
But we can imagine a society differently organized, can't we: a society in which individuals are free to speak many-to-many, can use reason in their low-level political discourse, and perhaps arrive at high-level consensus based on the merits (for a particular issue) rather than based on the "popularity" of the leader, or her/his conformity to the lowest denominator of popular values. Since you are online, and visit/., I have to hope you know what I'm talking about.
"People skills" are those skills which allow us to understand how others (who are different from us) think and feel; and to speak, listen, and act with them in a non-violent manner. Depending on your own personality, you may believe good "people skills" are those which allow you to become coercive, to manipulate others and accomplish your personal will collectively. Some of us, however, believe good "people skills" are displayed exceptionally well by individuals like the 19-century Quaker who single-handedly decided slavery was wrong, and visited every Quaker slaveholder to persuade them of the same, without any coercion, individually. By the Civil War, no Quakers held slaves.
There are many times I would despair of humanity, except that I note that despite the barbarism and inhumanity of mass warfare and genocide in the 20th century, the last century also saw the birth of civil disobedience movements, and non-violent intentional social change. My hope is in young men and women, like this young man who lay down his crown, to continue this brand-new form of "people skills" as practised by Gandhi, MLK, and a few other pioneers.
No-one seems to have reported this in the discussion, so I figured I should point out that IBM quite often initiates an involvement with some hardware or software company (anyone remember "IBM partners?"), then drops the ball. Several of the partners involved suffered a great deal from this policy, having made extensive changes to suit their partner, then reaping no benefits as IBM pulled out at the last minute.
For example, a few years ago IBM was going to offer hosting. I decided not to put any client with them, because given their track record, the hosting component of the company was likely to disappear without warning. It did.
It's a bad idea to rely on IBM following through with anything, in my opinion. And, btw, they sometimes make really, really bad decisions -- around the early 80's, they created a new, expensive, fully automated plant to build... TYPEWRITERS! Even I knew that was pretty dumb, yet an IBMer friend of mine felt typewriters were still going to be in demand sufficiently to justify the huge cost of the project. Like all large companies, they typically underestimate the amount of time it will take for the market to adapt to new (IT) technology.
As an occasional player (I don't find it addictive at all!), I have to say the most important move is the first move, and that the second move always involves guesswork also. If the first move uncovers a "1," I try a second move on an adjacent square (which has a 7 in 8 chance of not blowing up). If I haven't uncovered a "1," I usually click on a second random square, hoping for a "1."
Sometimes after the second or third move the game becomes completely soluble by logic alone, but sometimes the configuration is such that yet another random move is necessary quite late in (more than halfway into) the game. That's why I don't believe Minesweeper is in principle soluble through logic.
On the other hand, I find Freecell fascinating, and keep trying to work out algorithms to solve each game first time through. There's a principle similar to the Hippocratic oath ("first, do no harm") which seems to work pretty well! It translates roughly into, "Can I see how to get back to the same number of free cells after this move?"
Wasn't there, in _Cryptonomicron_, a very careful and thorough explanation of the problem of (algorithmic) solubility/non-solubility? I found that explanation (which wasn't exactly exploring P/NP) very useful.
Older HTML spec's required you to use quotation marks around attribute values when the value consisted of anything other than numbers & letters. The new XHTML spec (v 1.0) requires all values for attributes be quoted -- in fact, there are no more blank attributes (without a value given).
In case you were wondering, that's why your attempt to provide us with a link didn't work. Btw, XHTML also requires that SMALL (not CAP) letters be used to specify tags and attributes; in XML,
It certainly is a step in the right direction to have off-the-shelf, high quality, end-user-ready applications for Linux. What would be better is a new killer-app (new application so powerful and obviously necessary that everyone wants it NOW) for Linux. Why not marry the convergence of these two trends: The move to Linux, and the move from desktop-to-laptop-to-wearable PC? Someone ought to be aiming at writing the ultimately integratable (sp?) software for wearables, now, for a Linux machine of the near future.
Hey, maybe that's why Transmeta hired Linus? (I never really believed it was just for PR, myself. Why would he have accepted the gig, if it were?)
There's a Web site (sorry, I forget its URL -- search for it) that let's you enter your (anonymous) decisions on all the major issues, then rates the candidates (ALL of them) regarding how they agree with your profile. I was amazed to find that Nader's policies fit 88% with my profile. Nader also has had the largest rallies in the election (he sold out Madison Square Garden last Friday -- you didn't read about it, of course, but it happened!), so it's not wasting your vote to vote for the Green Party.
If your politics don't fit the Green Party, of course, you may not have a preferred candidate. But why not check it out first? There's more to the ballot (in most states) that Bore and Gush.
Actually, the real problem is not "campaign financing," but the heavily consolidated grasp of (traditional) media. Nader has the largest rally of the election (he sold out Madison Square Garden in NYC), but _The New York Times_, et al don't report that story. Why not? It would give him credibility. He isn't permitted to debate. Why not? It might give his campaign credibility. No, if all the media together don't even mention him most days (I mean in "news" shows, not ads), and many states still won't allow him on the ballot, who would vote for him?
I'm amazed that techies would consider voting for Gore, champion of the "clipper" chip, the "v" chip. Champion of the horrific telecommunications (in)decency act (whose most egregiously censorious clauses were fortunately struck down by the courts). This is a man (and his wife) deeply into controlling what others can read, watch, listen to, or say. He can't stop the changes technology is introducing -- no-one ever has stopped technologically-driven social change -- but he will keep trying, and that would cause great pain, as well as deep alienation, in this society and throughout the world.
When one gratuitously SPEAKS falsely of another to third party(ies), that is "slander." When the false, published allegations are WRITTEN, it's called "libel."
I am an older (49), grey-haired, female who often works as documentation specialist (including Web design/coding, and tech writing). When the first laptop came out, I was using it; when the first decent (i.e,. meets my specs) wearable computer comes out (even if it costs thousands), I'll be wearing that, too.
Working as a consultant (when it's not just a tax dodge for the corporations involved!) means taking along one's own tools -- software, especially, and that implies specific hardware often. I want an integrated phone, too, to make staying in touch with clients/getting new clients easier while I'm working. I don't want to carry any PDA unless its keyboard works properly -- and that means full-size keys, preferably arranged vertically unless I'm seated (i.e., a hinged keyboard I can wear around my neck) -- so just put PDA-type software in the whole package, please. Finally, I want a scanning wand to make text [re]entry easier.
These things are not only practical, they'll be considered essential for all students/scholars, computer-using consultants (which category will grow to include architects & space-arrangers, educators, and most other professionals), family members, soldiers, etc. Long ago I predicted laptops would be the locus of most action in research/development; I was right about that, and I'm right about wearables now.
I don't think so... First, laptops (despite their appearance in _Star Trek_ spinoffs) are the past; the future is wearables. Second, wearables will be "always on" devices, since we will end up folding in the cellphone, PDA, and other extras (that replacement software already exists: Voice over IP, PIM's). Third, wearables are NOT devices typically used while we're plugged into external power sources/chargers.
Speaking as one of the earliest adopters of laptop technology (I consult, and used a Model 100 with the ancient Radio Shack Model I when working as tech-writer/documentation specialist!), as well as a current user, I predict laptops will die out over the next 5-10 years, maybe sooner. Instead, we'll see divergence into portable cube/brick type computers, plus wearables. So power consumption will count for a lot, though I admit externally-invisible, projected screens will help.
I liked that -- just spell "phenomenal" (etc.) right, okay? Although I love role-playing games, I've only twice had an opportunity to actually play one. Wish I lived in your neighborhood (geographically, that is) instead of boring (for RPG'ers) NYC.
Yeah -- when I used to code (APL especially), I always wrote the lines of documentation first which had to then be implemented as code. For example, I might say, create an n-dimensional kernel for the data (line 1), read the text (line 2) and put it in a vector (line 3), search for delimiters including space, comma, etc. (line 4), then create nested matrix (line 5).
Then "all" I had to do was implement the lines of documentation. Of course, this is a lot easier with a high-level language like APL; with a very low-level language like C it would be tougher.
Another approach is to go through your existing program at a fairly high level and make a simple list of what still has to be done (either non-existing routines, or bug fixes, or a high-level redesign to take out reusable modules). Once the list, at whatever level, is finished, you can tackle it. Printing it out and physically crossing out ANY little item you actually finish off will motivate you to keep going, until it's all done.
Btw, this approach works in many other areas than just programming blocks. (-8
The guy who calls himself Cringeley can't be all that anonymous, since he was shown on PBS trying to build a plane (or was it a boat? fiberglass kit, anyway), as I recall in 3 successive programs of over an hour each, a few years back.
He's also the guy who did PBS's show, called something like "Triumph of the Nerds." His PC history only goes back to Gates, et al, but he does have a grasp of that.
My point is, exactly, that those on death row are NOT guaranteed a chance to prove they have been wrongly convicted (by asking that new DNA evidence be taken). On the other hand, DNA testing IS used when "they" want to prove someone is guilty (in recent cases). Yes, hard as this is to believe, innocent persons are convicted, then denied a chance to prove their innocence with DNA testing, then executed. As I understand it, the U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that "new evidence" was NOT grounds for an appeal of a death sentence! Appeals must be based only on technical grounds (that is, legal technicalities). In general, the "criminal justice system" is set up to allow prosecution of anyone the authorities (esp. police) don't like; DNA residue (no matter how questionable, as in the money confiscation laws) would be just one more weapon in their growing arsenal.
A fellow by the name of John German (pronounced "germane") created a non-profit organization to do this (while helping older, unemployed IT specialists update their skills -- this was back before eveyone was in demand!). The group is called (I think) NonProfit Computing, but also has a career-oriented subgroup which meets every other Thursday (I think) at one of the Citicorp buildings (around Park Ave. & 51st). Meetings start at around noon and run 'til after 3pm, and are facilitated by one of 3-4 professional "headhunters."
John has won many awards and other recognition for his work. I don't know if he ever got his own Web site up, but some pages should be around on someone's site, so do a search. You can never tell what is needed, but this is a great place to try. (One of his earliest "placements" was getting an intern to China; I think this was a paying position. He also helps with the "getting computers wired in the schools" project, a big thing that happens here in NYC once a year.)
If you can't contact the group any other way, call Susan Werbin (head of Werbin Associates; very professional and ethical placement firm) at [212] 787-2468 (I think -- but that number's pretty unforgetable, don't you think? (-8 ).
Your comment is an excellent illustration of why Fling (or something like it) is both necessary and inevitable. No-one can stop the development of a bottom-up network of networks (like the Internet). Now that the tax-based network (i.e., developed with tax monies, primarily by U.S. Dept of Defense) has been taken over by the overblown commercial sector, and with processors and peripherals ever cheaper and more powerful, discontents will build a new network. For awhile (until the retailers finish dying off) the two systems will run in parallel, used by different persons or for different reasons. I.e., game-players,/.'ers, free speech enthusiasts, activists, and others (non-parents at home) will use the anonymous network; parents with children they don't trust, government approved or sponsored sites, and commercial sites will use the old Internet. How could you stop the spread of something like the old BBS networks from developing, and then interconnecting? You can't.
Something massive like the NSA could conceivably "crack" the proposed system (or something like it) by employing HUGE storage, taking a picture of the whole network every "instant" and tracking backwards. (I don't even want to think about how tiny an "instant" will be by then!). But it's unlikely they can keep up, as long as the new network keeps growing.
As to the philosophy, I was briefly intrigued by Ayn Rand-ism when I was 18, but rejected it. But I agree with the goals, if not the author's reasons: I agree that free speech is the safest way to guarantee good order in societies (in the long run -- and as someone who sat through a 4-hour Quaker business meeting yesterday, I agree it can take a very long time to reach consensus when everyone is free to speak!!!). I agree that truth is better than "political correctness." (After all, if it were "correct," the modifier would be unnecessary.) I agree that using the slow and awkward methods of preventing child (and other) sexual abuse, and other bad (really criminal) behavior, is preferable to enabling fast methods which inexorably tend to compromise the freedom of anyone "They" don't like.
Considering how many innocent persons have already been convicted and NEARLY executed by sloppy police/"justice" system work, do we really wanna sit back and say, "Oh, well..." This new attack on privacy -- not to mention all the dangers of contamination you mention -- is outrageous and MUST be FOUGHT!!! For U.S. readers: Did you know that if you carry cash in the U.S. it can be confiscated? A man who was heading to Las Vegas was taking about $10,000 with him and was stopped at the airport, searched, and the money taken for "drug tests." Since most new money in the U.S. is in fact contaminated with at least a trace of drugs (having passed through the hands of some dealer -- it's a huge, cash-only business, after all!), he realized he hadn't a hope of fighting it. I read this in a newspaper article several months back. So, if you ever plan to carry any cash around with you, make sure you carry along all the receipts, tax forms, invoices, and other papers to prove it didn't go through the drug trade while it was in your hands. (What do you mean, "innocent 'til proven guilty???")
You're right, and I'm glad you said it first! Sometimes I wonder if directors know anything... even in the theater, they ignore directions and production notes by playwrights; some directors ban playwrights from their own rehearsals. I think we have to blame Truffaut and the rest of the "auteur" school of criticism (not to mention those horrid "deconstructionists!")[signed: disgruntled writer] (-8
There are two basic approaches to what I call "3-D immersive imagery": photographic (with zooms as jump-cuts or with scanning/panning), and virtual reality. As everyone who's ever worked with it knows, the problem with VR is building the model -- in order to move around, for example, Philadelphia, some poor sap has to run around modeling the whole thing. Projections can't be screened until a huge database exists. This technique sounds as if it can help build (automatically) these databases. (Remember when the protagonist in Cryptonomicron ran around making measurements of... was it Manilla?)
Slashdot Mirror
It's not the gov't that maintains the record -- it's just the gov't that failed to provide privacy for U.S. residents with regard to other civil or criminal records maintained by all the other "institutions" we have to pass through. The individual schools each maintain records, which they are mandated (locally or state-wide, presumably) to maintain for varying amounts of time. The individual colleges/U's may or may not require "records" aside from a transcript (a list of academic grades). The heavy emphasis on conformity in the U.S. does come from the top (McCarthyism is by no means dead, and is in fact being revived yet again this election year with regard to "entertainment"), but the central gov't confidently leaves it to lower-level institutions to carry out the record-keeping that makes continual surveillance possible. Btw, there are now towns in the U.S. where one is continually monitored by "security" videocameras in every public space.
Did you imagine that the violent right-wing, anti-gov't extremists here just sprung up full-grown out of nothing? They are merely reacting (in their paranoid, inappropriate ways) to circumstances we all face.
After '93, I was practically disabled (in ADA terms): I can no longer take public transportation, within NYC); can't sit without support, and with support, not for more than 2-3 hours, without the onset of chronic pain; can't climb stairs (without onset of cp); have trouble walking uphill even.
I made several adjustments... First, I bought 2 kneeling chairs, one for home and one for work. That worked reasonably well for awhile, but long work hours were still a problem. Then I found a "laptop desk," which is designed like a 2-piece hospital tray, one piece of which inclines while the other remains flat for coffee mugs, dickettes, peripherals -- the unit included a flexible halogen light which was itself attached to a highly adjustable copy holder. This allows me to work "at home" lying down (which is one reason I hate bad keyboards -- it's not like I can easily look at the damned things when the keys are misplaced!); I started working partly off-site at home, and looking for part-time regular work.
The problem with these solutions, of course, is neither is very portable. (I did once wheel one of the kneeling chairs, strapped to a luggage rack, to a movie theatre. Getting home afterwards was the problem.) The ultimate solution, for me, I found at a computer show: It's called Nada Chair, which is a company that makes various marvellous, portable contraptions. The one they sold me originally was called the "Back-Up" and sold as "backup for your discs" (a little humor never hurts!).
When that one was stolen (long story), I didn't want to wait for mail order, so I bought the only device they make I could find in NYC: the "Sit-pack." It's not quite as good, but it goes with me literally everywhere. If you suffer from low-back pain, go check out Nada Chair's Web site (www.nadachair.com)... No chair can possibly fit you as well as these devices, which you can use in ANY chair!
I used to recommend Nada Chair to writers, too, who also often suffer from low-back pain for the same reason computer users do. Btw, use a decent WP/coding/editing package which does NOT force you to use a mouse -- and learn the short-cut keys. Mouse use if FAR more stressful to your wrists and hands than tapping on a keyboard.
Assuming you refer to Oklahoma -- and that Oklahoma is the state which recently banned teaching evolution and mandated teaching "creationism" -- your post reminded me of a delicious joke I heard some months back: It seems some folks were arguing about where to store dangerous radioactive waste. One scientist suggested they store it in Oklahoma, since "mutations don't happen there!"
Think a little deeper... I wasn't very good at playing politics, but I've always been pretty good at focusing on and then solving (or finding workarounds for) the actual problems facing a company. At times I certainly "failed" personally as an employee, usually because my bosses always seemed to be afraid I wanted their jobs (I didn't); why else would I put in those hours and do such good work? (Because I have an overdeveloped sense of responsibility...)
Fortunately, that's not the end of the story. I was able to analyze my problem, see that "office politics" would always be a problem for me because I kept focusing on the COMPANY's actual problem (instead of what the IMMEDIATE BOSS wanted to see happen). So, I became a consultant. In this way, my "boss" is free to take credit for being smart enough to hire me, and I can focus on getting the job(s) done.
Usually the company is very happy with my work; if its management types are all too short-sighted and insecure to look at their real problems, and just want a make-it-pretty solution (like Citibank and other past clients which shall remain nameless, since Citibank is the only one where I worked in 3-4 separate departments and found the same, apparently pervasive, corporate climate), well... there's plenty of potential clients out there!
All right, let's talk about what "people skills" are, and what they're for. Suppose you live in a culture which actively detests intelligence (as demonstrated in its films, books, and all other modes of popular culture). Suppose you yourself are smart enough to have studied history and realize that
Wouldn't it be your responsibility to try to get others to think for themselves, before you simply try to take control and do their thinking for them (a la Gates and your other so-called "successful geeks")? The boy in high school who is smart enough and has enough integrity to fail to conform deliberately, with a funny and strikingly effective act of theatre that galvanizes such an unthinking response by authority, has a great chance of growing up to be one of our new "leaders."
If you studied what used to be called "leadership traits," you'd know that political "leaders" are actually those who intuit or otherwise know (through manipulation, sometimes) how the crowd feels -- they get out front and lead them in the direction they already want to go. This is sad but true.
But we can imagine a society differently organized, can't we: a society in which individuals are free to speak many-to-many, can use reason in their low-level political discourse, and perhaps arrive at high-level consensus based on the merits (for a particular issue) rather than based on the "popularity" of the leader, or her/his conformity to the lowest denominator of popular values. Since you are online, and visit /., I have to hope you know what I'm talking about.
"People skills" are those skills which allow us to understand how others (who are different from us) think and feel; and to speak, listen, and act with them in a non-violent manner. Depending on your own personality, you may believe good "people skills" are those which allow you to become coercive, to manipulate others and accomplish your personal will collectively. Some of us, however, believe good "people skills" are displayed exceptionally well by individuals like the 19-century Quaker who single-handedly decided slavery was wrong, and visited every Quaker slaveholder to persuade them of the same, without any coercion, individually. By the Civil War, no Quakers held slaves.
There are many times I would despair of humanity, except that I note that despite the barbarism and inhumanity of mass warfare and genocide in the 20th century, the last century also saw the birth of civil disobedience movements, and non-violent intentional social change. My hope is in young men and women, like this young man who lay down his crown, to continue this brand-new form of "people skills" as practised by Gandhi, MLK, and a few other pioneers.
No-one seems to have reported this in the discussion, so I figured I should point out that IBM quite often initiates an involvement with some hardware or software company (anyone remember "IBM partners?"), then drops the ball. Several of the partners involved suffered a great deal from this policy, having made extensive changes to suit their partner, then reaping no benefits as IBM pulled out at the last minute.
For example, a few years ago IBM was going to offer hosting. I decided not to put any client with them, because given their track record, the hosting component of the company was likely to disappear without warning. It did.
It's a bad idea to rely on IBM following through with anything, in my opinion. And, btw, they sometimes make really, really bad decisions -- around the early 80's, they created a new, expensive, fully automated plant to build... TYPEWRITERS! Even I knew that was pretty dumb, yet an IBMer friend of mine felt typewriters were still going to be in demand sufficiently to justify the huge cost of the project. Like all large companies, they typically underestimate the amount of time it will take for the market to adapt to new (IT) technology.
As an occasional player (I don't find it addictive at all!), I have to say the most important move is the first move, and that the second move always involves guesswork also. If the first move uncovers a "1," I try a second move on an adjacent square (which has a 7 in 8 chance of not blowing up). If I haven't uncovered a "1," I usually click on a second random square, hoping for a "1."
Sometimes after the second or third move the game becomes completely soluble by logic alone, but sometimes the configuration is such that yet another random move is necessary quite late in (more than halfway into) the game. That's why I don't believe Minesweeper is in principle soluble through logic.
On the other hand, I find Freecell fascinating, and keep trying to work out algorithms to solve each game first time through. There's a principle similar to the Hippocratic oath ("first, do no harm") which seems to work pretty well! It translates roughly into, "Can I see how to get back to the same number of free cells after this move?"
Wasn't there, in _Cryptonomicron_, a very careful and thorough explanation of the problem of (algorithmic) solubility/non-solubility? I found that explanation (which wasn't exactly exploring P/NP) very useful.
I should have said
Older HTML spec's required you to use quotation marks around attribute values when the value consisted of anything other than numbers & letters. The new XHTML spec (v 1.0) requires all values for attributes be quoted -- in fact, there are no more blank attributes (without a value given).
In case you were wondering, that's why your attempt to provide us with a link didn't work. Btw, XHTML also requires that SMALL (not CAP) letters be used to specify tags and attributes; in XML,
(for example) doesn't mean the same thing as
(at least potentially).
It certainly is a step in the right direction to have off-the-shelf, high quality, end-user-ready applications for Linux. What would be better is a new killer-app (new application so powerful and obviously necessary that everyone wants it NOW) for Linux. Why not marry the convergence of these two trends: The move to Linux, and the move from desktop-to-laptop-to-wearable PC? Someone ought to be aiming at writing the ultimately integratable (sp?) software for wearables, now, for a Linux machine of the near future.
Hey, maybe that's why Transmeta hired Linus? (I never really believed it was just for PR, myself. Why would he have accepted the gig, if it were?)
I'm puzzled -- how did you end up being attributed when you intended to be "Anonymous Coward?" Did you forget you were logged on?
There's a Web site (sorry, I forget its URL -- search for it) that let's you enter your (anonymous) decisions on all the major issues, then rates the candidates (ALL of them) regarding how they agree with your profile. I was amazed to find that Nader's policies fit 88% with my profile. Nader also has had the largest rallies in the election (he sold out Madison Square Garden last Friday -- you didn't read about it, of course, but it happened!), so it's not wasting your vote to vote for the Green Party.
If your politics don't fit the Green Party, of course, you may not have a preferred candidate. But why not check it out first? There's more to the ballot (in most states) that Bore and Gush.
Actually, the real problem is not "campaign financing," but the heavily consolidated grasp of (traditional) media. Nader has the largest rally of the election (he sold out Madison Square Garden in NYC), but _The New York Times_, et al don't report that story. Why not? It would give him credibility. He isn't permitted to debate. Why not? It might give his campaign credibility. No, if all the media together don't even mention him most days (I mean in "news" shows, not ads), and many states still won't allow him on the ballot, who would vote for him?
I'm amazed that techies would consider voting for Gore, champion of the "clipper" chip, the "v" chip. Champion of the horrific telecommunications (in)decency act (whose most egregiously censorious clauses were fortunately struck down by the courts). This is a man (and his wife) deeply into controlling what others can read, watch, listen to, or say. He can't stop the changes technology is introducing -- no-one ever has stopped technologically-driven social change -- but he will keep trying, and that would cause great pain, as well as deep alienation, in this society and throughout the world.
When one gratuitously SPEAKS falsely of another to third party(ies), that is "slander." When the false, published allegations are WRITTEN, it's called "libel."
I am an older (49), grey-haired, female who often works as documentation specialist (including Web design/coding, and tech writing). When the first laptop came out, I was using it; when the first decent (i.e,. meets my specs) wearable computer comes out (even if it costs thousands), I'll be wearing that, too.
Working as a consultant (when it's not just a tax dodge for the corporations involved!) means taking along one's own tools -- software, especially, and that implies specific hardware often. I want an integrated phone, too, to make staying in touch with clients/getting new clients easier while I'm working. I don't want to carry any PDA unless its keyboard works properly -- and that means full-size keys, preferably arranged vertically unless I'm seated (i.e., a hinged keyboard I can wear around my neck) -- so just put PDA-type software in the whole package, please. Finally, I want a scanning wand to make text [re]entry easier.
These things are not only practical, they'll be considered essential for all students/scholars, computer-using consultants (which category will grow to include architects & space-arrangers, educators, and most other professionals), family members, soldiers, etc. Long ago I predicted laptops would be the locus of most action in research/development; I was right about that, and I'm right about wearables now.
I don't think so... First, laptops (despite their appearance in _Star Trek_ spinoffs) are the past; the future is wearables. Second, wearables will be "always on" devices, since we will end up folding in the cellphone, PDA, and other extras (that replacement software already exists: Voice over IP, PIM's). Third, wearables are NOT devices typically used while we're plugged into external power sources/chargers.
Speaking as one of the earliest adopters of laptop technology (I consult, and used a Model 100 with the ancient Radio Shack Model I when working as tech-writer/documentation specialist!), as well as a current user, I predict laptops will die out over the next 5-10 years, maybe sooner. Instead, we'll see divergence into portable cube/brick type computers, plus wearables. So power consumption will count for a lot, though I admit externally-invisible, projected screens will help.
I liked that -- just spell "phenomenal" (etc.) right, okay? Although I love role-playing games, I've only twice had an opportunity to actually play one. Wish I lived in your neighborhood (geographically, that is) instead of boring (for RPG'ers) NYC.
Yeah -- when I used to code (APL especially), I always wrote the lines of documentation first which had to then be implemented as code. For example, I might say, create an n-dimensional kernel for the data (line 1), read the text (line 2) and put it in a vector (line 3), search for delimiters including space, comma, etc. (line 4), then create nested matrix (line 5).
Then "all" I had to do was implement the lines of documentation. Of course, this is a lot easier with a high-level language like APL; with a very low-level language like C it would be tougher.
Another approach is to go through your existing program at a fairly high level and make a simple list of what still has to be done (either non-existing routines, or bug fixes, or a high-level redesign to take out reusable modules). Once the list, at whatever level, is finished, you can tackle it. Printing it out and physically crossing out ANY little item you actually finish off will motivate you to keep going, until it's all done.
Btw, this approach works in many other areas than just programming blocks. (-8
The guy who calls himself Cringeley can't be all that anonymous, since he was shown on PBS trying to build a plane (or was it a boat? fiberglass kit, anyway), as I recall in 3 successive programs of over an hour each, a few years back.
He's also the guy who did PBS's show, called something like "Triumph of the Nerds." His PC history only goes back to Gates, et al, but he does have a grasp of that.
My point is, exactly, that those on death row are NOT guaranteed a chance to prove they have been wrongly convicted (by asking that new DNA evidence be taken). On the other hand, DNA testing IS used when "they" want to prove someone is guilty (in recent cases). Yes, hard as this is to believe, innocent persons are convicted, then denied a chance to prove their innocence with DNA testing, then executed. As I understand it, the U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that "new evidence" was NOT grounds for an appeal of a death sentence! Appeals must be based only on technical grounds (that is, legal technicalities). In general, the "criminal justice system" is set up to allow prosecution of anyone the authorities (esp. police) don't like; DNA residue (no matter how questionable, as in the money confiscation laws) would be just one more weapon in their growing arsenal.
A fellow by the name of John German (pronounced "germane") created a non-profit organization to do this (while helping older, unemployed IT specialists update their skills -- this was back before eveyone was in demand!). The group is called (I think) NonProfit Computing, but also has a career-oriented subgroup which meets every other Thursday (I think) at one of the Citicorp buildings (around Park Ave. & 51st). Meetings start at around noon and run 'til after 3pm, and are facilitated by one of 3-4 professional "headhunters."
John has won many awards and other recognition for his work. I don't know if he ever got his own Web site up, but some pages should be around on someone's site, so do a search. You can never tell what is needed, but this is a great place to try. (One of his earliest "placements" was getting an intern to China; I think this was a paying position. He also helps with the "getting computers wired in the schools" project, a big thing that happens here in NYC once a year.)
If you can't contact the group any other way, call Susan Werbin (head of Werbin Associates; very professional and ethical placement firm) at [212] 787-2468 (I think -- but that number's pretty unforgetable, don't you think? (-8 ).
Your comment is an excellent illustration of why Fling (or something like it) is both necessary and inevitable. No-one can stop the development of a bottom-up network of networks (like the Internet). Now that the tax-based network (i.e., developed with tax monies, primarily by U.S. Dept of Defense) has been taken over by the overblown commercial sector, and with processors and peripherals ever cheaper and more powerful, discontents will build a new network. For awhile (until the retailers finish dying off) the two systems will run in parallel, used by different persons or for different reasons. I.e., game-players, /.'ers, free speech enthusiasts, activists, and others (non-parents at home) will use the anonymous network; parents with children they don't trust, government approved or sponsored sites, and commercial sites will use the old Internet. How could you stop the spread of something like the old BBS networks from developing, and then interconnecting? You can't.
Something massive like the NSA could conceivably "crack" the proposed system (or something like it) by employing HUGE storage, taking a picture of the whole network every "instant" and tracking backwards. (I don't even want to think about how tiny an "instant" will be by then!). But it's unlikely they can keep up, as long as the new network keeps growing.
As to the philosophy, I was briefly intrigued by Ayn Rand-ism when I was 18, but rejected it. But I agree with the goals, if not the author's reasons: I agree that free speech is the safest way to guarantee good order in societies (in the long run -- and as someone who sat through a 4-hour Quaker business meeting yesterday, I agree it can take a very long time to reach consensus when everyone is free to speak!!!). I agree that truth is better than "political correctness." (After all, if it were "correct," the modifier would be unnecessary.) I agree that using the slow and awkward methods of preventing child (and other) sexual abuse, and other bad (really criminal) behavior, is preferable to enabling fast methods which inexorably tend to compromise the freedom of anyone "They" don't like.
Considering how many innocent persons have already been convicted and NEARLY executed by sloppy police/"justice" system work, do we really wanna sit back and say, "Oh, well..." This new attack on privacy -- not to mention all the dangers of contamination you mention -- is outrageous and MUST be FOUGHT!!! For U.S. readers: Did you know that if you carry cash in the U.S. it can be confiscated? A man who was heading to Las Vegas was taking about $10,000 with him and was stopped at the airport, searched, and the money taken for "drug tests." Since most new money in the U.S. is in fact contaminated with at least a trace of drugs (having passed through the hands of some dealer -- it's a huge, cash-only business, after all!), he realized he hadn't a hope of fighting it. I read this in a newspaper article several months back. So, if you ever plan to carry any cash around with you, make sure you carry along all the receipts, tax forms, invoices, and other papers to prove it didn't go through the drug trade while it was in your hands. (What do you mean, "innocent 'til proven guilty???")
You're right, and I'm glad you said it first! Sometimes I wonder if directors know anything... even in the theater, they ignore directions and production notes by playwrights; some directors ban playwrights from their own rehearsals. I think we have to blame Truffaut and the rest of the "auteur" school of criticism (not to mention those horrid "deconstructionists!")[signed: disgruntled writer] (-8
There are two basic approaches to what I call "3-D immersive imagery": photographic (with zooms as jump-cuts or with scanning/panning), and virtual reality. As everyone who's ever worked with it knows, the problem with VR is building the model -- in order to move around, for example, Philadelphia, some poor sap has to run around modeling the whole thing. Projections can't be screened until a huge database exists. This technique sounds as if it can help build (automatically) these databases. (Remember when the protagonist in Cryptonomicron ran around making measurements of... was it Manilla?)