Part of the hype is being generated by articles like this one, if not promoting java, then either questioning the promotion of java, promoting something else altogether.
Use what works best. Simple. I really don't care what THEY decide to use. This fickle, platform-du-jour nonsense reminds me of what I'd expect from a group of schoolgirls. There is no holy grail. Technology is what it is.
When it comes to working and contractual conditions, they are squeezed by the content industry. When it comes to piracy, they are being squeezed by illegal file sharing. Collectively, this squeeze has led to a lower standard of living for artists and lower profile workers in the content industry.
He doesn't seem to understand the reasons behind the alleged squeeze. Shoring up the content industry will do NOTHING to resolve the squeeze that artists most definitely feel from that side of the fence. On the other side, if the material being produced by the artist is good, I believe that people will want to buy it- they just don't want to shove more money into the pockets of *AA in order to do it. Doing so will perpetuate the same crap that has been going on for decades. In a sense, consumers are in a bit of a bind themselves. (Even so, this doesn't justify the willful violation of copyright with respect to material that belongs to *AA).
Traffic cameras in the US operate under odd circumstances - if you get caught speeding, or even running entering an intersection on red light, you'll get ticketed, but no points will be assessed against your license (at least where I live). What does this say about the motives behind these cameras? It says(at least in my mind) that they won't mind at all if you keep speeding or entering an intersection too close to the red light, because each infraction means an additional $100 or so that will be entering the city coffers. This seems like a sleazy way to run a government.
Remember those? Prevention is a lot easier than cleaning up the mess once it happens.
I liked google because the ads were there IF YOU NEEDED them, but didn't suck the life out of you if you weren't interested. Further, images by their very nature, are designed to attract and entice, thus moving Google from the informational realm, to the motivational realm.
Ad images are distracting, add to the visual clutter, and make the overall experience less desirable. There are some local TV stations with web sites that are so CRAMMED with junk (small ads along each side) I rarely visit them.
Every dollar saved is some money passed on to the consumer.
This *might* work purely on a PR level, but we all know that the first beneficiary of any money-saving activity is the CEO. After he gets done stroking his ego with an extra perk or bonus, any savings left over from that then, may be passed on as savings to the customer.
What with the push for storyline patents, you may at some point in the future, simply be restricted from speaking about the film, since it involves revealing elements, whose likeness, sequence, and context are "owned" by someone. Revealing anything would become tantamount to revealing trade secrets.
that male nudity equates with homosexuallity, and that homesexuality
I think you could have stopped right there and been spot on, since pedophilia is a characteristic that is equally present in both camps.
I remember watching a PBS documentary called "The Boy Code" (I hope that's right), which discussed the manner which boys are indoctrinated early on not only to reject, but outright destroy (literally or figuratively, depending on the circumstances) anything that threatens the notion of what is masculine. Boys are expected to give up any semblance of emotion, love sports (or anything rough and violent), etc., etc. For those that have a hard time fitting into this mold, they are ridiculed, teased, bullied, etc.
The irony is that we reap what we sow...we create these people as a society, and then wonder why men are so uh, "challenged" in some ways. It's all quite pathetic, in my opinion, because it doesn't *have* to be this way.
Voting works where opinions reign, but wikipedia is supposed to be a factual resource. Voting on factual information seems kind of risky, especially if the voting is open to anyone (who may or may not have the specialized knowledge required to make an informed choice).
Why did they stop producing CD singles? Could it be because it was eating in to the sale of full-length CDs, which were mostly overpriced collections of stuff that people didn't really want? Now comes iTunes, and other services that are offering the purchase of individual songs - the very same model. Maybe it's just high time that the music industry (RIAA, mind you), made a correction to its revenue model that incorporates the very likely probability that they really aren't as good as they thought they were.
The issue here is that what ends up becoming a phenomenon (like Google or E-bay), often start out as mere curiosities. I'm not sure that either of them set out at the very beginning to make something that would become wildly popular. What's more, I'm not sure you can buy this- it just sort of happens. It is my opinion that more often than not, the depth of one's pockets is irrelevent.
I don't think that's necessarily an accurate analysis. The government, in various forms, has wasted MILLIONS on various failed software-related projects, some of them spearheaded by large, well-known companies. This leads me to believe that it doesn't matter how much you blow on software, no amount of money will make up for piss-poor management, company politics, or just plain incompetence.
Having said that, let's remember what we're talking about here- a voting machine- not some enterprise-wide resource management app.
My bet is that he'll either take a position as a highly-paid lobbiest for some corporate interest, or he'll end up as an appointee for some politician currently in office, where he can then wield influence from the inside.
If your software is only designed to last a year before rewriting it, then go ahead, build it on "sand"
I'm not speaking of software per se, but the environment in which it exists - it is highly dynamic. Once a bridge is built, that's it. Once a software application is built, that's only the beginning, assuming it even gets there. How many failed bridges are you aware of? By contrast, how many failed software projects continue to make their way onto the mounting pile of bit-junk?
Is it because more developers are using.NET and LAMP, is because LAMP and.NET are necessarily better?
On a side note- funny thing about software and QA. People like to compare a software application (the enginneering aspect) to other fields of engineering, such as those involved in building a bridge. This is an inane comparison, because while software does entail an engineering component, the techscape is constantly changing. New languages, new frameworks, new methods, upgrades, updates- if a bridge can't survive a foundation laid on shifting sand, how can we expect anything different from software?
I was listening to a podcast last night (Slashdot Review), and as it was coming to an end, I noticed there was still quite a bit of play time left. My curiosity was greeted with what I think was a pretty cool idea- they featured a band from garageband.com. I got to hear 10 Story Relapse for the first time. When you factor in the number of podcasts, and the various tastes that people have, I think this is a great way for a fledgling band to gain exposure. Talking about killing several birds with one stone...
I use gnome, and I've also used KDE. However, my disappointment with gnome (FC4) comes when I try using nautilus to mount an SMB share (via the network neighborhood-type browser). The gnome-vfs-daemon will chew through any available memory, nothing will happen, and within a matter of minutes, your machine will be rendered unusable. After looking at bugzilla, it appears that this kind of bug has been reported before- in 2004, and still hasn't been fixed. Making things "just work" is a great objective, but with gnome, it's not quite a reality yet.
This might not be their biggest problem (TiVO). Networks seem to have tapped into this mentality that tries the patience of its viewers every step of the way. It's not just the commercials any more. Now it's having to endure visual clutter like the station ID logo, and these rediculous sliders that zip in and out at the bottom of the screen just after we've already been subject to four or more commercials.
I've found this so annoying in fact, that I've started to look at alternative forms of distraction. Podcasts have grown to fill that niche. They're great- they are personal, it's easy to connect with the producers, and they are/can be eductional and/or informative. Best of all, there are few if any commercials, and NO ANNOYING LOGOS OR SLIDERS. That's gets my vote hands down.
Just as governement agencies can request your telephone records if you call someone with a death threat (now, in complete secrecy, whether or not you've violated the law), it's hard to imagine them not being able to acquire the same kind of information from the service responsible for routing them.
Slashdot Mirror
Part of the hype is being generated by articles like this one, if not promoting java, then either questioning the promotion of java, promoting something else altogether.
Use what works best. Simple. I really don't care what THEY decide to use. This fickle, platform-du-jour nonsense reminds me of what I'd expect from a group of schoolgirls. There is no holy grail. Technology is what it is.
When it comes to working and contractual conditions, they are squeezed by the content industry. When it comes to piracy, they are being squeezed by illegal file sharing. Collectively, this squeeze has led to a lower standard of living for artists and lower profile workers in the content industry.
He doesn't seem to understand the reasons behind the alleged squeeze. Shoring up the content industry will do NOTHING to resolve the squeeze that artists most definitely feel from that side of the fence. On the other side, if the material being produced by the artist is good, I believe that people will want to buy it- they just don't want to shove more money into the pockets of *AA in order to do it. Doing so will perpetuate the same crap that has been going on for decades. In a sense, consumers are in a bit of a bind themselves. (Even so, this doesn't justify the willful violation of copyright with respect to material that belongs to *AA).
Traffic cameras in the US operate under odd circumstances - if you get caught speeding, or even running entering an intersection on red light, you'll get ticketed, but no points will be assessed against your license (at least where I live). What does this say about the motives behind these cameras? It says(at least in my mind) that they won't mind at all if you keep speeding or entering an intersection too close to the red light, because each infraction means an additional $100 or so that will be entering the city coffers. This seems like a sleazy way to run a government.
Remember those? Prevention is a lot easier than cleaning up the mess once it happens.
I liked google because the ads were there IF YOU NEEDED them, but didn't suck the life out of you if you weren't interested. Further, images by their very nature, are designed to attract and entice, thus moving Google from the informational realm, to the motivational realm.
Ad images are distracting, add to the visual clutter, and make the overall experience less desirable. There are some local TV stations with web sites that are so CRAMMED with junk (small ads along each side) I rarely visit them.
Every dollar saved is some money passed on to the consumer.
This *might* work purely on a PR level, but we all know that the first beneficiary of any money-saving activity is the CEO. After he gets done stroking his ego with an extra perk or bonus, any savings left over from that then, may be passed on as savings to the customer.
What with the push for storyline patents, you may at some point in the future, simply be restricted from speaking about the film, since it involves revealing elements, whose likeness, sequence, and context are "owned" by someone. Revealing anything would become tantamount to revealing trade secrets.
Welcome to the United States of Amerikorp.
That was quite enlightening! Thanks for sharing that. : )
that male nudity equates with homosexuallity, and that homesexuality
I think you could have stopped right there and been spot on, since pedophilia is a characteristic that is equally present in both camps.
I remember watching a PBS documentary called "The Boy Code" (I hope that's right), which discussed the manner which boys are indoctrinated early on not only to reject, but outright destroy (literally or figuratively, depending on the circumstances) anything that threatens the notion of what is masculine. Boys are expected to give up any semblance of emotion, love sports (or anything rough and violent), etc., etc. For those that have a hard time fitting into this mold, they are ridiculed, teased, bullied, etc.
The irony is that we reap what we sow...we create these people as a society, and then wonder why men are so uh, "challenged" in some ways. It's all quite pathetic, in my opinion, because it doesn't *have* to be this way.
Are we sure that 9/11 was not a setup for the Patriot Act?
No.
So in other words, they messed up what started out as a good thing, but instead of fixing it, they simply ceased to provide it altogether?
Voting works where opinions reign, but wikipedia is supposed to be a factual resource. Voting on factual information seems kind of risky, especially if the voting is open to anyone (who may or may not have the specialized knowledge required to make an informed choice).
Why did they stop producing CD singles? Could it be because it was eating in to the sale of full-length CDs, which were mostly overpriced collections of stuff that people didn't really want? Now comes iTunes, and other services that are offering the purchase of individual songs - the very same model. Maybe it's just high time that the music industry (RIAA, mind you), made a correction to its revenue model that incorporates the very likely probability that they really aren't as good as they thought they were.
Thanks : )
Curious...with respect to LinuxCare, what were you expecting that you weren't seeing? (I have no affiliation, I'm just curious).
The issue here is that what ends up becoming a phenomenon (like Google or E-bay), often start out as mere curiosities. I'm not sure that either of them set out at the very beginning to make something that would become wildly popular. What's more, I'm not sure you can buy this- it just sort of happens. It is my opinion that more often than not, the depth of one's pockets is irrelevent.
Hell, it worked for Bush.
I don't think that's necessarily an accurate analysis. The government, in various forms, has wasted MILLIONS on various failed software-related projects, some of them spearheaded by large, well-known companies. This leads me to believe that it doesn't matter how much you blow on software, no amount of money will make up for piss-poor management, company politics, or just plain incompetence.
Having said that, let's remember what we're talking about here- a voting machine- not some enterprise-wide resource management app.
My bet is that he'll either take a position as a highly-paid lobbiest for some corporate interest, or he'll end up as an appointee for some politician currently in office, where he can then wield influence from the inside.
If your software is only designed to last a year before rewriting it, then go ahead, build it on "sand"
I'm not speaking of software per se, but the environment in which it exists - it is highly dynamic. Once a bridge is built, that's it. Once a software application is built, that's only the beginning, assuming it even gets there. How many failed bridges are you aware of? By contrast, how many failed software projects continue to make their way onto the mounting pile of bit-junk?
Is it because more developers are using
On a side note- funny thing about software and QA. People like to compare a software application (the enginneering aspect) to other fields of engineering, such as those involved in building a bridge. This is an inane comparison, because while software does entail an engineering component, the techscape is constantly changing. New languages, new frameworks, new methods, upgrades, updates- if a bridge can't survive a foundation laid on shifting sand, how can we expect anything different from software?
I was listening to a podcast last night (Slashdot Review), and as it was coming to an end, I noticed there was still quite a bit of play time left. My curiosity was greeted with what I think was a pretty cool idea- they featured a band from garageband.com. I got to hear 10 Story Relapse for the first time. When you factor in the number of podcasts, and the various tastes that people have, I think this is a great way for a fledgling band to gain exposure. Talking about killing several birds with one stone...
I use gnome, and I've also used KDE. However, my disappointment with gnome (FC4) comes when I try using nautilus to mount an SMB share (via the network neighborhood-type browser). The gnome-vfs-daemon will chew through any available memory, nothing will happen, and within a matter of minutes, your machine will be rendered unusable. After looking at bugzilla, it appears that this kind of bug has been reported before- in 2004, and still hasn't been fixed. Making things "just work" is a great objective, but with gnome, it's not quite a reality yet.
This might not be their biggest problem (TiVO). Networks seem to have tapped into this mentality that tries the patience of its viewers every step of the way. It's not just the commercials any more. Now it's having to endure visual clutter like the station ID logo, and these rediculous sliders that zip in and out at the bottom of the screen just after we've already been subject to four or more commercials.
I've found this so annoying in fact, that I've started to look at alternative forms of distraction. Podcasts have grown to fill that niche. They're great- they are personal, it's easy to connect with the producers, and they are/can be eductional and/or informative. Best of all, there are few if any commercials, and NO ANNOYING LOGOS OR SLIDERS. That's gets my vote hands down.
You pose some very good questions. As for me, I'd rather be a little paranoid than sorry. : )
Just as governement agencies can request your telephone records if you call someone with a death threat (now, in complete secrecy, whether or not you've violated the law), it's hard to imagine them not being able to acquire the same kind of information from the service responsible for routing them.