If you look at the record in terms of what information was missed by whom, when, and why, it's pretty evident that little or NONE of it had anything to do with a LACK of information. Most of it was plain old incompetence, or a failure to allocate necessary resource. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that no information "TIA" system is going to do anything to solve that problem.
''All the noise and optimism of the early adopters doesn't in any way guarantee Linux will cross into the mainstream,'' says Peter Houston, Microsoft's Windows server products director.
What this tells me is that M$ is in a state of denial. So be it. All it means is that some day, perhaps a few years from now, a sea of change may sweep over the IT sector, and M$ will be fighting for its life.
If I were Billy, I'd be lobbying Congress to enact laws that would ensure my existence - how a law that mandates that the government fork over the cost of one XXXP license (or whatever it's called by then) for each citizen on an annual basis? What better way to insulate against unauthorized copying? And, what better way to waste taxpayer money? It's all there - a perfectly American plan.
Everyone's talking about how effective Mozilla is at countering popup ads, but I think a fairly obvious question has been overlooked - what is it about this practice that required a "task force" to understand that people don't like popup ads? Is it corporate brain death, an example of the typical Harvard MBA, or something else?
Have you ever considered the possibility that the notion of "taking it up the rear" might just be a common metaphor? A bit cliche? Perhaps. But the idea of getting raped is no less repugnant, and this is exactly what I was attempting to convey.
Welfare recipients? Hmmm... like the airline, tobacco, shipbuilding, and auto industries? I don't like welfare, but there's PLENTY of it to go around. Where there's money to be had (earned or not), it WILL be had. Just ask the pork mongers in our White House, and all the corporate interests that benefit from their special treatment.
Although the government requires companies to agree to a "fair pricing clause," the NCI has no clear standards to enforce. 15 The cost of manufacturing Taxol, according to Love, is about $500 per patient for an eighteen-month treatment regimen. Bristol-Myers Squibb charges more than twenty times that amount, thus earning between $4 million and $5 million a day on Taxol. 16 In 1999, the drug generated an estimated $1.7 billion in sales for the company.
Ever wonder about that mysterious lower back pain, tightness of the sphincter muscle, and chronic hemorrhoidal condition? Those are the symptoms of being repeatedly screwed, even raped, by the government and private industry - private industry supported by government welfare no less. Bend over...there's a lot more coming.
Re:How to take care of the situation you describe
on
Copyright as Cudgel
·
· Score: 2
I have no problem with reasonable, responsible government - a government that is truly by the people and for the people. It corrupt government that I can't stand, and there's plenty of corruption to go around in the U.S. - from so-called bribed disguised as "campaign contributions" to loan guarantees, in which the only real guarantee is that the taxpayers will be left holding the bag, while monied scum makes off with a bag of loot.
The recent passage of the corporate responsibility act is a good thing, but it's only the beginning. It's time to start cleaning house by getting rid of congressional "representatives" that show nothing but contempt toward the notion of fiscal responsibility.
Rediculous. When a government bureaucrat needs to verify that what I'm saying (or expressing) is "legitimate" before I can diseminate it to others, it would seem to raise some serious constitutional issues.
This will be only partially successful - it's like trying to stop the flow of water after dam break. I say fix the dam, but obstructing the flow of water further upstream. That "water" is what you and I know as our hard-earned dollars - currently going into the pockets of these IP owners. No money, no revenue, game over - or at least the groundwork has been laid for a different, more reasonable set of rules.
I DO NOT CONDONE STEALING of intellectual property, but I do think the constant, ever-tightening, legal stranglehold that the entertainment industry has on its IP, and worse, how this ownership is being used to control peripheral issues that have nothing to do with the IP, is getting quite absurd. If there were more people willing to pick up their marbles and just stop playing this sick game, some common sense may actually work its way into the process.
First, let's presume that at least one strength of the internet lies in its ability to bring together groups of like-minded individuals in the form of online communities. Second, let's presume that because of its ability to facilitate the exchange of information and ideas, it is also a forum for discussing these ideas - whether in support of, or in opposition to, a particular idea. Third, let's draw an analogy between meeting up with someone in real life - say, a couple of friends at a local coffeehouse. You sit down, and a debate about something controversial ensues. For all intents and purposes, your words will not go beyond this little discussion group. The strength here is that you get to walk away with, and think about what has been said to you, just as your friends can consider what you have said. That's where it ends.
Now - picture trying something like this on the net. If you say anything that has your name attached to it, more often that not, it can be easily recalled through a search engine. I suspect that the notion of posting under one's real name will come to a screeching halt. The irony is almost amusing, as there are those who advocate a transparent society, but there is simply too much risk associated with exposing one's identity.
I've personally was a regular participant in a handfull of newsgroups several years ago, LONG before anyone had even an inkling that these posts might be retained - and searchable no less. I believe they're still available for anyone to see. Let's say I go and apply for a job, my prospective employer does a little checking, and sees that the opinions I've expressed AT THAT TIME do not coincide with their personal beliefs. My application gets round-filed, I'm not given the opportunity to defend myself, and I have no idea that this just happened.
I see this leading to a schizophrenic, even paranoid society. It provides ample opportunity for anyone to seek that little tidbit of information about someone (accurate or not), that could be used to wreak havoc - even covertly.
While some may say that it moves us back to the time when everyone in the village knew who you were, I think an important distinction is in order. I have the option to leave a village. With the internet, however, no matter where I move, the information is still there. Anyone can know me based on what they find on the net, whether or not it is accurate. Is this really a good thing?
Slashdot does not have a consensus on the value of the ACLU, "basic principles", the quality of various operating systems or programming languages, the best drugs to take while coding, or just about anything else.
Isn't there a statistic that says that 50% of all software projects fail? One wonders...
Is this really an economic issue, or a social one? I can't help but wonder if the fact that OSS is the underdog right now, that is behind participation, more than anything related to economics. Once OSS enters the main stream, there's every reason to believe that it could be come tainted (and hence, much less appealing) - like everything else touched by the contrived, superficial derivative we call popular culture. Maybe all of the analysis is a bit premature - maybe what we've seen up to this point is merely a transitional period, where the end is much less desirable than the transition itself.
I'm not so sure it will go down - I think instead, the conglomerates that control the pipes (say Qwest, for example), won't lower the price, but instead, include other services as part of a package deal. I guess the effect is a lower cost per service-unit, but if all you're really interested in is the bandwidth, there's no real benefit.
Are any free software companies BSA members? Why would the BSA account for software created by non-members?
Excellent question - if the BSA is nothing more than a paid lobbying group for the commercial software industry, this would put it on similar footing with the RIAA and MPAA.
Re: Parent ought to be modded up
on
.NET for Apache
·
· Score: 2
This is an EXCELLENT article, and states in absolutely clear terms what those who develop for and advocate Linux as an alternative need to accomplish in order to gain market share. Free or not, the evolution of the Linux Desktop will depend on how well it addresses a set of principles that essentially describe the economic cost/benefit to the user. To ignore them or downplay them is to write your own prescription for failure.
than sufficient. It won't work in all cases, but I wanted to know if any other Mac users thought that the "Find in this page" dialog ought to be modeless...sure enough- there were at least two reports already. The search terms: "mac find". A little common sense here will go a long way toward helping the development team. I realize that this simplicity won't work in all cases, but it probably will work more than people realize.
Re:CIA sponsored software - prior to 9/11...
on
Triangle Boy Lives
·
· Score: 2
This is interesting...how will they prove something in court that would seem to have no audit trail?
When a company reaches the point where it no longer has to care about how good the service it provides is, and merely tries to maximize it's profit without needing any concern for the trade-off, then it is wrong.
Sure it is...and there's one sure-fire solution. If enough people in the market are willing to get off their lazy asses and do something about it, they'll take their business elsewhere. A monopoly creates opportunities for abuse, but its the money that allows the abuse to continue. If consumers would rid themselves of their indifference, it seems like it could really turn things around.
I LIKE the fact that the Dow Jones is tanking. It's unfortunate that people are experiencing serious loss, but sometimes you've got to take a few steps back before moving forward. The message I see here on the part of investors is, "play by the rules, or don't play at all." Bush and his cronies would do well to climb out of their ivory towers and take note.
Part of this chaos is admittedly emotional, but the other part, I'm assuming, deals with the very real issue of investor confidence. There may well indeed be some good stock buys in the market right now, but without any reassurance that corporate fraud will be vigorously prosecuted, where's the sense in subjecting your money to any further risk that it will be stolen by corporate thieves?
To sum it up- if the practices of a given monopoly or corporate conglomerate are out of line, complain. If that doesn't work, LEAVE, and by all means, take your wallet with you.
The first $100K, if I understand correctly, is going to the investment company that put up a substantial amount of capital to fund Blender's development. Without it, the only other option was to start writing a eulogy for Blender's untimely demise.
I am sure the damned machines work fine. I think the company that makes the machines is being unneccessarily cagey about how the ballot machines function - it's not like this stuff is rocket science. I can't see their intellectual property being all that valuable - but hey, it's theirs to protect.
I don't know if I blame the company, or the morons in the government who agreed to such an arrangement. Public voting HAS to be auditable. It's not an option.
Not to discourage you, but I don't think many college students are interested in the ideology behind free software. If they can't play their favorite game, it's not an option. But then again, in many cases (but not all), college is the one place where it's socially acceptable to regress about 15 years before actually growing up.
Slashdot Mirror
If you look at the record in terms of what information was missed by whom, when, and why, it's pretty evident that little or NONE of it had anything to do with a LACK of information. Most of it was plain old incompetence, or a failure to allocate necessary resource. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that no information "TIA" system is going to do anything to solve that problem.
Just a little later on, it states:
''All the noise and optimism of the early adopters doesn't in any way guarantee Linux will cross into the mainstream,'' says Peter Houston, Microsoft's Windows server products director.
What this tells me is that M$ is in a state of denial. So be it. All it means is that some day, perhaps a few years from now, a sea of change may sweep over the IT sector, and M$ will be fighting for its life.
If I were Billy, I'd be lobbying Congress to enact laws that would ensure my existence - how a law that mandates that the government fork over the cost of one XXXP license (or whatever it's called by then) for each citizen on an annual basis? What better way to insulate against unauthorized copying? And, what better way to waste taxpayer money? It's all there - a perfectly American plan.
No fair. I don't know French. :)
Everyone's talking about how effective Mozilla is at countering popup ads, but I think a fairly obvious question has been overlooked - what is it about this practice that required a "task force" to understand that people don't like popup ads? Is it corporate brain death, an example of the typical Harvard MBA, or something else?
Have you ever considered the possibility that the notion of "taking it up the rear" might just be a common metaphor? A bit cliche? Perhaps. But the idea of getting raped is no less repugnant, and this is exactly what I was attempting to convey.
Welfare recipients? Hmmm ... like the airline, tobacco, shipbuilding, and auto industries? I don't like welfare, but there's PLENTY of it to go around. Where there's money to be had (earned or not), it WILL be had. Just ask the pork mongers in our White House, and all the corporate interests that benefit from their special treatment.
Although the government requires companies to agree to a "fair pricing clause," the NCI has no clear standards to enforce. 15 The cost of manufacturing Taxol, according to Love, is about $500 per patient for an eighteen-month treatment regimen. Bristol-Myers Squibb charges more than twenty times that amount, thus earning between $4 million and $5 million a day on Taxol. 16 In 1999, the drug generated an estimated $1.7 billion in sales for the company.
Ever wonder about that mysterious lower back pain, tightness of the sphincter muscle, and chronic hemorrhoidal condition? Those are the symptoms of being repeatedly screwed, even raped, by the government and private industry - private industry supported by government welfare no less. Bend over...there's a lot more coming.
I have no problem with reasonable, responsible government - a government that is truly by the people and for the people. It corrupt government that I can't stand, and there's plenty of corruption to go around in the U.S. - from so-called bribed disguised as "campaign contributions" to loan guarantees, in which the only real guarantee is that the taxpayers will be left holding the bag, while monied scum makes off with a bag of loot.
The recent passage of the corporate responsibility act is a good thing, but it's only the beginning. It's time to start cleaning house by getting rid of congressional "representatives" that show nothing but contempt toward the notion of fiscal responsibility.
Rediculous. When a government bureaucrat needs to verify that what I'm saying (or expressing) is "legitimate" before I can diseminate it to others, it would seem to raise some serious constitutional issues.
This will be only partially successful - it's like trying to stop the flow of water after dam break. I say fix the dam, but obstructing the flow of water further upstream. That "water" is what you and I know as our hard-earned dollars - currently going into the pockets of these IP owners. No money, no revenue, game over - or at least the groundwork has been laid for a different, more reasonable set of rules.
I DO NOT CONDONE STEALING of intellectual property, but I do think the constant, ever-tightening, legal stranglehold that the entertainment industry has on its IP, and worse, how this ownership is being used to control peripheral issues that have nothing to do with the IP, is getting quite absurd. If there were more people willing to pick up their marbles and just stop playing this sick game, some common sense may actually work its way into the process.
First, let's presume that at least one strength of the internet lies in its ability to bring together groups of like-minded individuals in the form of online communities. Second, let's presume that because of its ability to facilitate the exchange of information and ideas, it is also a forum for discussing these ideas - whether in support of, or in opposition to, a particular idea. Third, let's draw an analogy between meeting up with someone in real life - say, a couple of friends at a local coffeehouse. You sit down, and a debate about something controversial ensues. For all intents and purposes, your words will not go beyond this little discussion group. The strength here is that you get to walk away with, and think about what has been said to you, just as your friends can consider what you have said. That's where it ends.
Now - picture trying something like this on the net. If you say anything that has your name attached to it, more often that not, it can be easily recalled through a search engine. I suspect that the notion of posting under one's real name will come to a screeching halt. The irony is almost amusing, as there are those who advocate a transparent society, but there is simply too much risk associated with exposing one's identity.
I've personally was a regular participant in a handfull of newsgroups several years ago, LONG before anyone had even an inkling that these posts might be retained - and searchable no less. I believe they're still available for anyone to see. Let's say I go and apply for a job, my prospective employer does a little checking, and sees that the opinions I've expressed AT THAT TIME do not coincide with their personal beliefs. My application gets round-filed, I'm not given the opportunity to defend myself, and I have no idea that this just happened.
I see this leading to a schizophrenic, even paranoid society. It provides ample opportunity for anyone to seek that little tidbit of information about someone (accurate or not), that could be used to wreak havoc - even covertly.
While some may say that it moves us back to the time when everyone in the village knew who you were, I think an important distinction is in order. I have the option to leave a village. With the internet, however, no matter where I move, the information is still there. Anyone can know me based on what they find on the net, whether or not it is accurate. Is this really a good thing?
Slashdot does not have a consensus on the value of the ACLU, "basic principles", the quality of various operating systems or programming languages, the best drugs to take while coding, or just about anything else.
Isn't there a statistic that says that 50% of all software projects fail? One wonders...
Is this really an economic issue, or a social one? I can't help but wonder if the fact that OSS is the underdog right now, that is behind participation, more than anything related to economics. Once OSS enters the main stream, there's every reason to believe that it could be come tainted (and hence, much less appealing) - like everything else touched by the contrived, superficial derivative we call popular culture. Maybe all of the analysis is a bit premature - maybe what we've seen up to this point is merely a transitional period, where the end is much less desirable than the transition itself.
I'm not so sure it will go down - I think instead, the conglomerates that control the pipes (say Qwest, for example), won't lower the price, but instead, include other services as part of a package deal. I guess the effect is a lower cost per service-unit, but if all you're really interested in is the bandwidth, there's no real benefit.
Are any free software companies BSA members? Why would the BSA account for software created by non-members?
Excellent question - if the BSA is nothing more than a paid lobbying group for the commercial software industry, this would put it on similar footing with the RIAA and MPAA.
This is an EXCELLENT article, and states in absolutely clear terms what those who develop for and advocate Linux as an alternative need to accomplish in order to gain market share. Free or not, the evolution of the Linux Desktop will depend on how well it addresses a set of principles that essentially describe the economic cost/benefit to the user. To ignore them or downplay them is to write your own prescription for failure.
than sufficient. It won't work in all cases, but I wanted to know if any other Mac users thought that the "Find in this page" dialog ought to be modeless...sure enough- there were at least two reports already. The search terms: "mac find". A little common sense here will go a long way toward helping the development team. I realize that this simplicity won't work in all cases, but it probably will work more than people realize.
This is interesting...how will they prove something in court that would seem to have no audit trail?
When a company reaches the point where it no longer has to care about how good the service it provides is, and merely tries to maximize it's profit without needing any concern for the trade-off, then it is wrong.
Sure it is...and there's one sure-fire solution. If enough people in the market are willing to get off their lazy asses and do something about it, they'll take their business elsewhere. A monopoly creates opportunities for abuse, but its the money that allows the abuse to continue. If consumers would rid themselves of their indifference, it seems like it could really turn things around.
I LIKE the fact that the Dow Jones is tanking. It's unfortunate that people are experiencing serious loss, but sometimes you've got to take a few steps back before moving forward. The message I see here on the part of investors is, "play by the rules, or don't play at all." Bush and his cronies would do well to climb out of their ivory towers and take note.
Part of this chaos is admittedly emotional, but the other part, I'm assuming, deals with the very real issue of investor confidence. There may well indeed be some good stock buys in the market right now, but without any reassurance that corporate fraud will be vigorously prosecuted, where's the sense in subjecting your money to any further risk that it will be stolen by corporate thieves?
To sum it up- if the practices of a given monopoly or corporate conglomerate are out of line, complain. If that doesn't work, LEAVE, and by all means, take your wallet with you.
The first $100K, if I understand correctly, is going to the investment company that put up a substantial amount of capital to fund Blender's development. Without it, the only other option was to start writing a eulogy for Blender's untimely demise.
I doubt it, because I doubt that this is NaN's money- the money belongs to a non-profit foundation.
Votes with dollars sometimes count just as much as votes with voices or ballots when it comes to the economy.
Votes with dollars can move mountains. Have you seen the Dow Jones lately? I hope Bush isn't choking on his arrogance too badly.
Not if the secret involves how much over cost each of these units was actually sold for! : )
You are correct. I thought the objective was to improve to voting process, not conceal it. This is a just scandal waiting to happen.
I am sure the damned machines work fine. I think the company that makes the machines is being unneccessarily cagey about how the ballot machines function - it's not like this stuff is rocket science. I can't see their intellectual property being all that valuable - but hey, it's theirs to protect.
I don't know if I blame the company, or the morons in the government who agreed to such an arrangement. Public voting HAS to be auditable. It's not an option.
Not to discourage you, but I don't think many college students are interested in the ideology behind free software. If they can't play their favorite game, it's not an option. But then again, in many cases (but not all), college is the one place where it's socially acceptable to regress about 15 years before actually growing up.