GEtting PCI compliance certification is not cheap, and you need it if you want integrated payment. So far, not a lot of open source POS systems are lining up to pay for certification...
Oh I get it. You run a POS software on a POS operating system on a POS hardware? And that's why the system stinks!!
Really? The beauty of Flash websites, here on Slashdot of all places?
Indeed. While reading the sumary, I thought they had a database mistake and republished a review from when authoring websites in flash was thought to be a good idea (about ten years ago? I've not seen one of those for a while now.)
The benefits system is not there to provide a lifestyle, it is there to TEMPORARILY provide the bare essentials until you find another job. People should have to work if they want any kind of luxury items.
And if they don't find work, what then? Do you let them starve?
The amount of people on long term benefits, who have all manner of luxury goods is absolutely sickening.
This number is actually very small, and it constitutes the rare exception, not the rule.
What is there to stop the Bitcoin exchange to start functioning like the goldsmiths you mentioned above?
Nothing, of course. You would have pre-central bank banking.
What if they start issuing "scripts" to facilitate trading, finance, debt ?
People participating in that scheme would be setting themselves up for some "interesting" (read: horrible) economic phenomena that have become very rare since the invention of central banking. There is a reason for this, of course, and maybe some gold bugs will be enlightend. Most of them, being a little dense, will just suffer and start again.
all cryptocurrencies have no actual reason to have a value outside of the gullibility of their users. They're modern art.
Really you can say the same thing about any fiat currency.
Uh, no, not realy. When it comes to fiat currency, it matters a great deal who declares it to be a currency. And this is in fact a practical matter. It makes a huge difference wether your currency is backed by the government of the US or that of Zimbabwe, say.
I'm an atheist, but it's completely possible to believe in God and evolution. Not everyone who is a christian believes the bible is literal.
Sure. But what the hell do they actually believe in and why are they not embarrassed?
I was speaking to my great uncle, who happens to be a practicing Catholic priest and somehow the creation story came up. He flatly said it is simply a story and in no way actually happened.
Ok. But so WTF does he actually believe in? Evolution + personal god? That's a contradiction, you know? The seven day creationists are at least consistent (whacky to the bone).
Of course it probably helped that I am both a christian and believe in evolution.
How do you pull that off? I mean, evolution on one hand and a personal god on the other are really incompatible ideas. Sounds to me as if you are just deluding yourself.
There are a couple of things I found quite disturbing about this story.
One was how easily he got off from prosecution. To mention just one episode,
"It was an out-and-out hijacking," LeFevre told me. "They counterfeited our product, they pirated our Web site, and they basically directed all of their customer service to us."
So how come this Jesse guy not in jail? Isn't that fraud, piracy, etc?
Another disturbing thing in this article is that it turns out people actually click on shady adds for colon cleansers, buy these things, and then use them!!!. What?!?
leaving both individuals and corporations uncertain of whether their phone calls, online activity or even data stored in the cloud will ultimately be shielded by U.S. laws protecting property, privacy or search and seizure by law-enforcement agencies.
If after all that has happened someone is still uncertain about this, then i'm quite certain that something is wrong with his/her cognitive abilities.
Otherwise if you spend $10 million developing something, and anyone can steal it in an hour - no-one is going to spend $10 million to develop something again.
If you spent $10 million to develop something that can be stolen within an hour by anyone - would that not mean that you are breathtakingly inept and incompetent?
For example, suppose someone (let's call it duncecorp) invested $10 million in developing the progress bar. Why should that idea be protected? To encourage stupidity and ineptitude?
System administrators rely on command line utilities, on all platforms. That isn't a Unix-specific thing. Windows administrators do the same thing.
Sure. The problem is teaching people to be admins. If they refuse to use the CLI, then it doesn't matter if they are smart or not - they will not learn. This was the focus of the original article: teaching students used to GUIs.
I sincerely hope that I will be able to use Enlightenment at some point in the future. I like the idea of a desktop full of eye-candy exhuberance, but every time I tried to use E, I ended up annoyed by the bugs.
It seems I'll try again after christmas, and I hope it is better this time.
While it is a nice idea, it doesn't run my programs.
I use MS Word and Excel on a regular basis, Adobe Acrobat (the real version) is my friend. Quickbooks is a part of my life.
What this means is that you are not the intended audience of this laptop.
I get that there is more than the price, snooping software is another concern, but frankly, I'm not a single issue voter when it comes to tech choices.
I fear that you are the typical single neuron voter.
One thing you miss even in a good recording is the directional quality of sound from the different instruments and sections.
You also miss out on the experience. On having been there. You miss out on the champagne and everybody dressed up. The feeling of belonging to the exclusive club that will be there at this time, an experience which will never repeat.
What I mean is that music really is way, way more than airwaves. It makes a difference if it's "just a synth" prgrammed by Nameless, or if it's mister Weirdface who used to be an alcoholic and now is spreading the message that set him free. Even if it were completely pointless from an audio processing point of view, people would still want to hear the human playing, bacause at the end of the day this is all about humans listening to each other.
You know, while I find that funny too (on first, and second readings), once you look at it with an open mind you realize that she might be onto something.
For starters, there is a lot of evidence that OOP reflects how people think the world should be organized, and not how it actually is organized. No idea if this is what is meant with "reifies normative subject object theory", but it sounds as if that might be the idea. (There are lots of critiques of OOP out there on the net to get you started, and see if that idea is so far fetched).
Another interesting issue would be to try to understand why some very bad languages (like C++ and Perl), which cater to the heroic macho programmer, are so popular despite their obvious technical shortcomings. Yeah, actually, that's a good word for it: shortcomings.
Tenure is the worst idea ever. It is essentially saying that it doesn't matter you are unproductive and a waste of space, you did something really good in the past so you are now in the Club now.
This is only partially true. At the very least, most people who make it to professor are crazy by then, and just continue in there never-ending fight like ever before.
Additionally, tenured professors will be bullied by the administration if they underperform. That can get very nasty.
If you're staff, you're not even a potential member of the club. It doesn't matter how much of an expert you in are in your field, if you're not faculty, your opinion doesn't matter.
Of course it doesn't. Think about it: it really can't. While everybody talks science, they are really in the rat race. Whatever you, as non-rat-racer, tell them, is irrelevant because it misses the point by definition.
Let me try to explain with a car analogy. Suppose you are in a kart competition. A long winded, gruesome affair spanning uncountable races over many continents. And suddenly, in the midst of it, one of the tire salesmen appears with a formula one car. It obviously makes no sense. Get it?
In sum, be thankful for not being in the rat race.
Another thing they downplay in the reward side of academia is the time flexibility.
For many people, time flexibility de facto means working essentially around the clock. Also, in many places this time flexibility is just an illusion. When there is a problem then it turns out that by constantly arriving late you weren't fulfilling your duties, no matter that you stayed until 2:00 AM.
In this world, organisations almost exclusively focus on attracting "young talent". Yet they fail to understand that older workers are far more experienced. Amongst misunderstandings is the notion that older workers would be (a) untrainable (b) too expensive (c) not creative, and (d) not flexible enough to adapt. This is all ruled out by research, but you know how it works with research. That's just "theory" and management wants "practice".
I hear that theory quite often, but I've been wondering why The Market does not correct that at least to some extent. Now, I'm far from being a free market taliban, but markets kind of work, sort of. One way of rephrasing what you are saying is that companies are leaving money on the table by hiring people without the experience required. We live in a world where people use whatever crazy idea they can to have an edge, but hiring older workers is an obvious trick that somehow no one does. How can that be?
The american national research labs pay well, as do many european institutions. KAUST is reported to pay a shipload of money. They all include sick leave, health plans, vacations, etc. which the standard US postdoc does not provide.
The standard US postdoc position is a pretty horrible job.
I didn't mean to speculate about or disparage Mathematica, I meant to use it as an example of a commercial software package where the person running the calculation doesn't control the code or compiling process.
The fact is that people rarely control that to the level that is necessary to definitively ensure the kind full reproducibility you are asking for. You still use compilers and libraries, and their behavior may vary.
That said, processors that do not follow the IEEE standard are very rare nowadays, and I don't see why they would be more frequent in the future. Perhaps GPUs, but there you already trade some degree of reliability for speed and low cost.
Given that, your most likely priority is making sure the same software environment can be reproduced.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh I get it. You run a POS software on a POS operating system on a POS hardware? And that's why the system stinks!!
Indeed. While reading the sumary, I thought they had a database mistake and republished a review from when authoring websites in flash was thought to be a good idea (about ten years ago? I've not seen one of those for a while now.)
Indeed. And it wasn't the free market that did it. Go figure.
And if they don't find work, what then? Do you let them starve?
This number is actually very small, and it constitutes the rare exception, not the rule.
Nothing, of course. You would have pre-central bank banking.
People participating in that scheme would be setting themselves up for some "interesting" (read: horrible) economic phenomena that have become very rare since the invention of central banking. There is a reason for this, of course, and maybe some gold bugs will be enlightend. Most of them, being a little dense, will just suffer and start again.
Really you can say the same thing about any fiat currency.
Uh, no, not realy. When it comes to fiat currency, it matters a great deal who declares it to be a currency. And this is in fact a practical matter. It makes a huge difference wether your currency is backed by the government of the US or that of Zimbabwe, say.
From all I can tell, there actually is almost nobody who takes it literally.
Sure. But what the hell do they actually believe in and why are they not embarrassed?
Ok. But so WTF does he actually believe in? Evolution + personal god? That's a contradiction, you know? The seven day creationists are at least consistent (whacky to the bone).
How do you pull that off? I mean, evolution on one hand and a personal god on the other are really incompatible ideas. Sounds to me as if you are just deluding yourself.
There are a couple of things I found quite disturbing about this story.
One was how easily he got off from prosecution. To mention just one episode,
So how come this Jesse guy not in jail? Isn't that fraud, piracy, etc?
Another disturbing thing in this article is that it turns out people actually click on shady adds for colon cleansers, buy these things, and then use them!!!. What?!?
If after all that has happened someone is still uncertain about this, then i'm quite certain that something is wrong with his/her cognitive abilities.
If you spent $10 million to develop something that can be stolen within an hour by anyone - would that not mean that you are breathtakingly inept and incompetent?
For example, suppose someone (let's call it duncecorp) invested $10 million in developing the progress bar. Why should that idea be protected? To encourage stupidity and ineptitude?
Alternatively, your mind is just too rigid to dig the style and too inflexible to get what the dialog is about.
Sure. The problem is teaching people to be admins. If they refuse to use the CLI, then it doesn't matter if they are smart or not - they will not learn. This was the focus of the original article: teaching students used to GUIs.
I sincerely hope that I will be able to use Enlightenment at some point in the future. I like the idea of a desktop full of eye-candy exhuberance, but every time I tried to use E, I ended up annoyed by the bugs.
It seems I'll try again after christmas, and I hope it is better this time.
What this means is that you are not the intended audience of this laptop.
I fear that you are the typical single neuron voter.
They are searching for an enzime that reigns in bad bacterial behavior. Would that be a naughtyase?
You also miss out on the experience. On having been there. You miss out on the champagne and everybody dressed up. The feeling of belonging to the exclusive club that will be there at this time, an experience which will never repeat.
What I mean is that music really is way, way more than airwaves. It makes a difference if it's "just a synth" prgrammed by Nameless, or if it's mister Weirdface who used to be an alcoholic and now is spreading the message that set him free. Even if it were completely pointless from an audio processing point of view, people would still want to hear the human playing, bacause at the end of the day this is all about humans listening to each other.
You know, while I find that funny too (on first, and second readings), once you look at it with an open mind you realize that she might be onto something.
For starters, there is a lot of evidence that OOP reflects how people think the world should be organized, and not how it actually is organized. No idea if this is what is meant with "reifies normative subject object theory", but it sounds as if that might be the idea. (There are lots of critiques of OOP out there on the net to get you started, and see if that idea is so far fetched).
Another interesting issue would be to try to understand why some very bad languages (like C++ and Perl), which cater to the heroic macho programmer, are so popular despite their obvious technical shortcomings. Yeah, actually, that's a good word for it: shortcomings.
This is only partially true. At the very least, most people who make it to professor are crazy by then, and just continue in there never-ending fight like ever before.
Additionally, tenured professors will be bullied by the administration if they underperform. That can get very nasty.
Of course it doesn't. Think about it: it really can't. While everybody talks science, they are really in the rat race. Whatever you, as non-rat-racer, tell them, is irrelevant because it misses the point by definition.
Let me try to explain with a car analogy. Suppose you are in a kart competition. A long winded, gruesome affair spanning uncountable races over many continents. And suddenly, in the midst of it, one of the tire salesmen appears with a formula one car. It obviously makes no sense. Get it?
In sum, be thankful for not being in the rat race.
Disclosure: been there, done that.
For many people, time flexibility de facto means working essentially around the clock. Also, in many places this time flexibility is just an illusion. When there is a problem then it turns out that by constantly arriving late you weren't fulfilling your duties, no matter that you stayed until 2:00 AM.
I hear that theory quite often, but I've been wondering why The Market does not correct that at least to some extent. Now, I'm far from being a free market taliban, but markets kind of work, sort of. One way of rephrasing what you are saying is that companies are leaving money on the table by hiring people without the experience required. We live in a world where people use whatever crazy idea they can to have an edge, but hiring older workers is an obvious trick that somehow no one does. How can that be?
(Disclosure: I'm well beyond my twenties)
Indeed.
The american national research labs pay well, as do many european institutions. KAUST is reported to pay a shipload of money. They all include sick leave, health plans, vacations, etc. which the standard US postdoc does not provide.
The standard US postdoc position is a pretty horrible job.
The fact is that people rarely control that to the level that is necessary to definitively ensure the kind full reproducibility you are asking for. You still use compilers and libraries, and their behavior may vary.
That said, processors that do not follow the IEEE standard are very rare nowadays, and I don't see why they would be more frequent in the future. Perhaps GPUs, but there you already trade some degree of reliability for speed and low cost.
Given that, your most likely priority is making sure the same software environment can be reproduced.