GW: Hello Jiang, this is George... yes George Bush, President of the United States.
GW: Listen Jiang, would you mind terribly, turning down the music a little..
GW: Thanks... there.. that's better..
GW: How are you Jiang...
GW: Fine... Yes I'm fine too...
GW: So you're fine and I'm fine...
GW: Yes I agree... it's great to be fine..
GW: Now Jiang.. the reason for my call...
GW:...well.. you seen one of our pilots, he was flying a plane near your border, and well... he got into a little scuffle with one of your fighter pilots.. just a little... scuffle..
GW:.. and you see our plane hit your plane, and your pilot seems to have crashed into the ocean, and our plane landed on your Island...
GW:... now wait Jiang... hear me out now...
GW:... listen Jiang... this isn't the time to be getting hysterical about a thing like this..
GW:.. Look, I'm just calling to tell you something terrible has happened and...
GW:.. well of course I like to say hello.
GW:.. not just now, but anytime Jiang.. it's just that now something terrible has happend and...
GW:.. well you see, we want to give your air defense the flight path of our plane, so we can help you find the plane on that island of yours..
GW: Ok so who do we have to call.... yes.. the People's Central Air Defence Headquarters...
GW: Yes and where are they? In Shanghai.. ok
GW:.. well yes I know they're our boys..
GW: Listen Jiang, you'll call them first will you.
GW:.. Yes, well I'm sorry...
Gw:.. of course I'm sorry...
GW:... well, how do you think I feel about this...
GW: Of course I'm sorry..
GW: Well, don't say that you're more sorry, cause I'm capable of being just as sorry as you are..
I bet you I can get you the most points... Just take a little cruise out of the Golden Gate until I can't see land anymore, take one picture of a blue ocean, then follow up with some photoshop work on the gps receiver.. lot's and lots of ocean! Earth's pretty dull people! Now, if only we could see what the bottom of the ocean looks like.... well, suppose we'll have to consult the RIAA lawyers.:)
I understand that Yahoo! uses FreeBSD also. I wonder if they're doing anything to contribute back to the OS which has allowed them to become so successful.
Did anyone else notice that there was not a single mention of Linux in the Sun press release? This falls in line with Cobalt's decision earlier this year to distance themselves from Linux in their Marketing and PR efforts.
I've always enjoyed observing how San Francisco differs from Silicon Valley, not just in the kinds of people who live or work in either place, but also in how the offices look.
San Francisco typically has open offices, where everyone can see everyone.
In Silicon Valley, cubeville is common-place.
In SV we often see CEOs work in the same types of cubes which their employees work in. (Hey even John Chambers is rumored to fly economy and encourages his employees to do the same.) So, there's a form of equality which flows through SV, and to a certain degree SF which you might not see on the East Coast. SF definitely has the 'Trendy' thing going for it, while SV is populated by 'Geeks' who are more likely to want secluded work areas.
Usually, programmers tell me they prefer offices, even non-window ones, to cubes. Marketing types often like open spaces. These are generalizations, of course.
What I don't understand is why companies can't be modular? Why can't some work-areas be small offices, some be common areas, and some be cubes? I find the Chiat-Day experiment interesting, not because it failed, or because if its 'forward-thinking' approach, but because it is exactly the same thinking which has brought us cubes and open spaces in today's office designs.
'CONTROL!'
Upper management wants to control the environment. Leaving the worker bees to live in artificial habitats not of their own choosing.
Think about why we like the idea of our own house so much? We like it because we can shape it to however we like to live. Funny thing is, though, we spend about 40 hrs a week living at work, while we typically spend 54 hrs living at home. The rest of the time we're either sleeping, commuting, exercising, or shopping out of either of these environments. 40 hrs is a huge amount of time to live someplace you don't like.
What I would advocate is for work-places to be a lot more dynamic, where people can choose (perhaps, but not necessarily, by seniority where they'd like to work).
The goal would be to allow the work-place to be dynamic.
FAQ:
Q: Nice idea nwonknu, but what about people that are different who work in the same department.
A: I think that the Computer networks and the telephone have already allowed us to be liberated from these sorts of restraints. The only thing which working in the same area as your team helps to accomplish is having people, usually managers, interrupt your work unexpectedly. Part of what a dynamic environment would accomplish is to allow dynamic groups to form if they are required.
Personally, I like to equate today's work-environment to a hard disk. When you don't have enough free disk space (open office spaces, as in unused cubes) you start to have all sorts of other problems, that are the result of a over-crowded environment.
Q: nwonknu, you're idealistic.
A: yes.
Q: Your idea itself tries to force something on others. You're not much different than the other 'control' freaks.
A: Compare this idea to Open Source, why? because I said so.:) Open Source forces you to think of things a certain way, but it frees you. Non-Open Source forces you to think of things a certain way, but it constrains you. The 'Open Environment,' if you'll forgive the buzzword, frees you to think of the work environment as a dynamic place.
If this thing can only go in a straight line, wouldn't the earth's curvature result in this thing shooting out of the ocean and becoming an uncontrollable ICBM?
San Francisco, CA - In response to nVidia's announcement of a 3D card that will allow a game player to see-thru walls, 3Dfx has revealed that they are only weeks away from releasing a 3D graphics card that can see-thru clothing.
The technology coined "strip-o-way" allows the owner of a 3Dfx "ClearSpeed3D" card to analyze any graphic layer by layer. Similar to the upcoming movie "Hollow Man," a splashy special-effects remake of the popular movie "The Invisible Man," 3Dfx's technology will allow the user to see through-images.
In an late-afternoon press conference, 3Dfx Chairman, President and CEO Thisis Ajoke announced that, "Our technology is meant not just for the games people anymore. We have expanded our product line into a much larger market." Mr. Ajoke refused to comment what he meant by that comment, but, a source close the development effort said: "Think about it! What would you do if you could strip away, layer-by-layer, the clothes off any image of Gillian Anderson you find on the.. err.. I mean, you could possibly find out who shot Kennedy."
3Dfx is expected to release their new product before the Christmas buying season, but industry analysts already expect 3Dfx's stock to "go through the frik'in roof."
Some computer owners might have to upgrade their systems as the new video graphics technology is expected to take up 4 PCI and 1 AGP port, and require a minimum of 5 external power supplies to drive enough juice into the cards.
3Dfx is seperately negotiating with Intel to increase the mega-wattage it pumps through the system bus to make "all those dangly wires and power-strips" unnecessary.
Pricing has not been announced for the new product, but in light of Microsoft's recent announcement of becoming an Application Service Provider, 3Dfx is considering folling the software innovator's lead with their own ".accell" model. 3Dfx's engineers were unavailable for comment, as they were beating the crap out of their Marketing department at the time we called them up.
Speaking of Michael Schumacher, I believe he does, in fact, use a cell phone while he's driving around the F1 track.. Well, ok it's not a cell phone, but he's in radio communication with his pit-crew, and his earplug is attached to him so he's not holding the phone in one hand. It's hard to up- and down-shift, let alone steer an F1 car while holding a phone, which brings up the interesting question if the holding of the phone contributes more to the chance of accident than the potential distraction of talking or listening.
Plenty of people listen to the radio while they drive, and tons of people eat while they drive. Women often apply makeup while driving and guys adjust their balls while driving, parents play with their toddlers while driving. All in all I'm surprised there aren't more accidents!
Btw: if Patricia is a troll, my hat off to her, wow! Same goes for if she's real, putting up with all this crap from all these insensitive asshole geek guys.. wew!
Survivor is really not about survival, DUH! It's a sitcom, surprise! Compare that to Eco Challenge, the international competition which the Discovery Channel sponsors. E.C. is clearly about using a combination of physical strength, endurance AND intellect to survive the course. You routinely see physically strong men fall down and cry like babies, while wilderness 'geeks' who look like they're weak win the challenge. Why, because if you use your intellect and experience you can traverse the course with the least amount of effort and expended energy, thus survive! Ultimately, the show makes it clear that if you don't have the intellect to plan your route over the snow-covered mountains or conserve your energy effectively you'll get eaten by bears.:)
The Silicon Valley Webguild will be hosting: Marion Lewenstein professor of communications at Stanford for a talk on: "How do people read on the Web?" on July 12th at Cypress Semiconductor in North San Jose, CA, USA, which will directly address the The Stanford/Poynter Eyetrack2000 Project.
The meeting is free and anyone is welcome to attend. Check the www.webguild.org website for more information.
Like the leased life... Dammit!
on
The Leased Life?
·
· Score: 1
I like the fact that I can lease some server space and exercise a certain level of free speech, and I don't have to buy the server, which I might otherwise not be able to afford.
Yes, owning it would be better, but perhaps I've got better things to do with my money.
I'm not sure that putting a clause in the GPL that affects public web sites is such a good idea. Here's my reasoning:
GPL is about the freedom to control the behavior of your computer. If you use a GPLed program on your computer you should have the right to modify the program to function differently. It's your choice.
To protect this choice, the GPL states that when software is distributed to another party, it must be accompanied by the source code so that the choice is equally parted onto the next person.
That's my interpretation of the GPL. I do not interpret the GPL as the tool for the overthrow of proprietary software.;) It's about choice and freedom to control the behavior of ONES OWN computer. (sorta ironic that it's about the freedom to CONTROL your computer, huh?)
Now, if we believe in freedom to control ones own behavior, then isn't it counter-productive to want to control the behavior of someone else? (I read Chris DiBona's comment below about Lawyers getting involved... aren't they the masters at control?)
In fact, the rule that states that you must distribute the source code with your GPL work is really the only point of contention that a lot of people have with the GPL. What we're saying there is: "Freedom is our number one value, but in order to protect freedom we must restrict freedom in this ONE case." Some people feel that it's not worth it and choose other licenses for their work.
My personal impression is that this ONE exception is placed in the GPL very carefully, because you can avoid this restriction if you do not redistribute your changes to a GPLed program.
Basically, the restriction to have to release your source is not on your decision to change the code, or to EVEN use the code. It is when you redistribute the code for use on OTHER computers by OTHER users. (maybe I'm missing some key info here, but that's my interpretation.)
Therefore you can make changes and alter the USE of a GPLed program and not have to release the source code.
The question that plagues us now is: "What if the GPLed program interacts with OTHER users?" This is the case with all software that is used over a network. Other computers are asking YOUR computer to execute a program and return a result. Is the other user, since they are 'using' a GPLed program, entitled to now see the source code.
I say NOT!
Because, the program is being executed on YOUR computer and not the user's computer.
Now, you may disagree with me on drawing the line here, but I think we should because if we draw it anywhere else, the house of cards that is the GPL will come tumbling down like nothing you've seen before.
On the other hand, I truly empathize with the user of GPLed software to have the freedom to change the behavior of the program, even if the program is running on another system. Of course, we can't give the user the right to modify the way the software behaves on the other system. The best we could do is to have the user download the GPLed source code and set it up on their own systems.
And so a reasonable GPL modification might be: "If you use GPL software that has the ability to be used by anyone but you, you must release the source code." After all, you did decide to use GPL software that was built by others, and now that you've decided to let other users use the program you must release the source code and give other people the freedom also. This seems to be perfectly in line with GPL philosphy, the way I understand it.
However, I think the burden that is now placed on the developers is too great. If they create a GPLed program, or modify it, which in any way communicates with other users or computers, which most programs now-a-days do, then they would be required to release the source.
It is now impossible to make any personal modifications to your own setup of GPLed software without releasing the code. Think Sendmail, POP clients, etc.
OK, I must admit, that I've now confused myself, because I now understand the pro-ASP licensing arguments at lot better. And I don't know if I can muster the right arguments against it. But, my gut is still telling me we should be insanely careful before we add additional freedom-robbing exceptions to the GPL. I feel the burden of proof should be on the side of those who want to mofify the GPL.
The question of course is, whose freedom are we talking about: the user or the developer?
Maybe someone else can complete my thoughts on this.:)
I just noticed that www.lnux.com (ie: VA Linux System's stock ticker) is a web site dedicated to the Be operating system, or some books about it anyway.. I think that's pretty funny.
Just for the record: (my/. posting skills seem to have eclipsed my english writing ability.) What I meant to say is that fewer women were enrolling and graduating. I'm not sure about whether or not more are dropping out, but I know the article said there are fewer graduates.
There was a very interesting article in December's Delta Sky Magazine (but their web site didn't archive it.) mentioning that graduation rates (and I'm talking actual numbers, not percentages) of women in computer related fields is actually dropping. This seems pretty disturbing, given that this industry is so prosperous. I wonder if anyone has any actual figures on this.
Slashdot Mirror
I think we should bombard Adobe with Emails, Amnesty International Style. Does anyone have the Email address for the CXOs?
I had an Apple Powerbook 5300cs (code name: Hindenbook) that already had this self-distruct technology years ago.
Ring... Ring...
...well.. you seen one of our pilots, he was flying a plane near your border, and well... he got into a little scuffle with one of your fighter pilots.. just a little ... scuffle..
.. and you see our plane hit your plane, and your pilot seems to have crashed into the ocean, and our plane landed on your Island...
... now wait Jiang... hear me out now...
... listen Jiang... this isn't the time to be getting hysterical about a thing like this..
.. Look, I'm just calling to tell you something terrible has happened and ...
.. well of course I like to say hello.
.. not just now, but anytime Jiang.. it's just that now something terrible has happend and...
.. well you see, we want to give your air defense the flight path of our plane, so we can help you find the plane on that island of yours..
.. well yes I know they're our boys..
.. Yes, well I'm sorry...
.. of course I'm sorry...
... well, how do you think I feel about this...
... So you're sorry and I'm sorry... ok...
... we're both sorry...
GW: Hello Jiang, this is George... yes George Bush, President of the United States.
GW: Listen Jiang, would you mind terribly, turning down the music a little..
GW: Thanks... there.. that's better..
GW: How are you Jiang...
GW: Fine... Yes I'm fine too...
GW: So you're fine and I'm fine...
GW: Yes I agree... it's great to be fine..
GW: Now Jiang.. the reason for my call...
GW:
GW:
GW:
GW:
GW:
GW:
GW:
GW:
GW: Ok so who do we have to call.... yes.. the People's Central Air Defence Headquarters...
GW: Yes and where are they? In Shanghai.. ok
GW:
GW: Listen Jiang, you'll call them first will you.
GW:
Gw:
GW:
GW: Of course I'm sorry..
GW: Well, don't say that you're more sorry, cause I'm capable of being just as sorry as you are..
GW:
GW:
I bet you I can get you the most points... Just take a little cruise out of the Golden Gate until I can't see land anymore, take one picture of a blue ocean, then follow up with some photoshop work on the gps receiver.. lot's and lots of ocean! Earth's pretty dull people! Now, if only we could see what the bottom of the ocean looks like.... well, suppose we'll have to consult the RIAA lawyers. :)
I understand that Yahoo! uses FreeBSD also. I wonder if they're doing anything to contribute back to the OS which has allowed them to become so successful.
Why use Intel chips anyway? We all know Transmeta is 5 years ahead of them.
Did anyone else notice that there was not a single mention of Linux in the Sun press release? This falls in line with Cobalt's decision earlier this year to distance themselves from Linux in their Marketing and PR efforts.
I've always enjoyed observing how San Francisco differs from Silicon Valley, not just in the kinds of people who live or work in either place, but also in how the offices look.
:) Open Source forces you to think of things a certain way, but it frees you. Non-Open Source forces you to think of things a certain way, but it constrains you. The 'Open Environment,' if you'll forgive the buzzword, frees you to think of the work environment as a dynamic place.
San Francisco typically has open offices, where everyone can see everyone.
In Silicon Valley, cubeville is common-place.
In SV we often see CEOs work in the same types of cubes which their employees work in. (Hey even John Chambers is rumored to fly economy and encourages his employees to do the same.) So, there's a form of equality which flows through SV, and to a certain degree SF which you might not see on the East Coast. SF definitely has the 'Trendy' thing going for it, while SV is populated by 'Geeks' who are more likely to want secluded work areas.
Usually, programmers tell me they prefer offices, even non-window ones, to cubes. Marketing types often like open spaces. These are generalizations, of course.
What I don't understand is why companies can't be modular? Why can't some work-areas be small offices, some be common areas, and some be cubes? I find the Chiat-Day experiment interesting, not because it failed, or because if its 'forward-thinking' approach, but because it is exactly the same thinking which has brought us cubes and open spaces in today's office designs.
'CONTROL!'
Upper management wants to control the environment. Leaving the worker bees to live in artificial habitats not of their own choosing.
Think about why we like the idea of our own house so much? We like it because we can shape it to however we like to live. Funny thing is, though, we spend about 40 hrs a week living at work, while we typically spend 54 hrs living at home. The rest of the time we're either sleeping, commuting, exercising, or shopping out of either of these environments. 40 hrs is a huge amount of time to live someplace you don't like.
What I would advocate is for work-places to be a lot more dynamic, where people can choose (perhaps, but not necessarily, by seniority where they'd like to work).
The goal would be to allow the work-place to be dynamic.
FAQ:
Q: Nice idea nwonknu, but what about people that are different who work in the same department.
A: I think that the Computer networks and the telephone have already allowed us to be liberated from these sorts of restraints. The only thing which working in the same area as your team helps to accomplish is having people, usually managers, interrupt your work unexpectedly. Part of what a dynamic environment would accomplish is to allow dynamic groups to form if they are required.
Personally, I like to equate today's work-environment to a hard disk. When you don't have enough free disk space (open office spaces, as in unused cubes) you start to have all sorts of other problems, that are the result of a over-crowded environment.
Q: nwonknu, you're idealistic.
A: yes.
Q: Your idea itself tries to force something on others. You're not much different than the other 'control' freaks.
A: Compare this idea to Open Source, why? because I said so.
If this thing can only go in a straight line, wouldn't the earth's curvature result in this thing shooting out of the ocean and becoming an uncontrollable ICBM?
San Francisco, CA - In response to nVidia's announcement of a 3D card that will allow a game player to see-thru walls, 3Dfx has revealed that they are only weeks away from releasing a 3D graphics card that can see-thru clothing.
The technology coined "strip-o-way" allows the owner of a 3Dfx "ClearSpeed3D" card to analyze any graphic layer by layer. Similar to the upcoming movie "Hollow Man," a splashy special-effects remake of the popular movie "The Invisible Man," 3Dfx's technology will allow the user to see through-images.
In an late-afternoon press conference, 3Dfx Chairman, President and CEO Thisis Ajoke announced that, "Our technology is meant not just for the games people anymore. We have expanded our product line into a much larger market." Mr. Ajoke refused to comment what he meant by that comment, but, a source close the development effort said: "Think about it! What would you do if you could strip away, layer-by-layer, the clothes off any image of Gillian Anderson you find on the.. err.. I mean, you could possibly find out who shot Kennedy."
3Dfx is expected to release their new product before the Christmas buying season, but industry analysts already expect 3Dfx's stock to "go through the frik'in roof."
Some computer owners might have to upgrade their systems as the new video graphics technology is expected to take up 4 PCI and 1 AGP port, and require a minimum of 5 external power supplies to drive enough juice into the cards.
3Dfx is seperately negotiating with Intel to increase the mega-wattage it pumps through the system bus to make "all those dangly wires and power-strips" unnecessary.
Pricing has not been announced for the new product, but in light of Microsoft's recent announcement of becoming an Application Service Provider, 3Dfx is considering folling the software innovator's lead with their own ".accell" model. 3Dfx's engineers were unavailable for comment, as they were beating the crap out of their Marketing department at the time we called them up.
- Some hungry gremlins contributed to this story.
Speaking of Michael Schumacher, I believe he does, in fact, use a cell phone while he's driving around the F1 track.. Well, ok it's not a cell phone, but he's in radio communication with his pit-crew, and his earplug is attached to him so he's not holding the phone in one hand. It's hard to up- and down-shift, let alone steer an F1 car while holding a phone, which brings up the interesting question if the holding of the phone contributes more to the chance of accident than the potential distraction of talking or listening.
Plenty of people listen to the radio while they drive, and tons of people eat while they drive. Women often apply makeup while driving and guys adjust their balls while driving, parents play with their toddlers while driving. All in all I'm surprised there aren't more accidents!
Btw: if Patricia is a troll, my hat off to her, wow! Same goes for if she's real, putting up with all this crap from all these insensitive asshole geek guys.. wew!
Survivor is really not about survival, DUH! It's a sitcom, surprise! Compare that to Eco Challenge, the international competition which the Discovery Channel sponsors. E.C. is clearly about using a combination of physical strength, endurance AND intellect to survive the course. You routinely see physically strong men fall down and cry like babies, while wilderness 'geeks' who look like they're weak win the challenge. Why, because if you use your intellect and experience you can traverse the course with the least amount of effort and expended energy, thus survive! Ultimately, the show makes it clear that if you don't have the intellect to plan your route over the snow-covered mountains or conserve your energy effectively you'll get eaten by bears.
The meeting is free and anyone is welcome to attend. Check the www.webguild.org website for more information.
I like the fact that I can lease some server space and exercise a certain level of free speech, and I don't have to buy the server, which I might otherwise not be able to afford.
Yes, owning it would be better, but perhaps I've got better things to do with my money.
just my 2 cents.
I'm not sure that putting a clause in the GPL that affects public web sites is such a good idea. Here's my reasoning:
;) It's about choice and freedom to control the behavior of ONES OWN computer. (sorta ironic that it's about the freedom to CONTROL your computer, huh?)
:)
GPL is about the freedom to control the behavior of your computer. If you use a GPLed program on your computer you should have the right to modify the program to function differently. It's your choice.
To protect this choice, the GPL states that when software is distributed to another party, it must be accompanied by the source code so that the choice is equally parted onto the next person.
That's my interpretation of the GPL. I do not interpret the GPL as the tool for the overthrow of proprietary software.
Now, if we believe in freedom to control ones own behavior, then isn't it counter-productive to want to control the behavior of someone else? (I read Chris DiBona's comment below about Lawyers getting involved... aren't they the masters at control?)
In fact, the rule that states that you must distribute the source code with your GPL work is really the only point of contention that a lot of people have with the GPL. What we're saying there is: "Freedom is our number one value, but in order to protect freedom we must restrict freedom in this ONE case." Some people feel that it's not worth it and choose other licenses for their work.
My personal impression is that this ONE exception is placed in the GPL very carefully, because you can avoid this restriction if you do not redistribute your changes to a GPLed program.
Basically, the restriction to have to release your source is not on your decision to change the code, or to EVEN use the code. It is when you redistribute the code for use on OTHER computers by OTHER users. (maybe I'm missing some key info here, but that's my interpretation.)
Therefore you can make changes and alter the USE of a GPLed program and not have to release the source code.
The question that plagues us now is: "What if the GPLed program interacts with OTHER users?" This is the case with all software that is used over a network. Other computers are asking YOUR computer to execute a program and return a result. Is the other user, since they are 'using' a GPLed program, entitled to now see the source code.
I say NOT!
Because, the program is being executed on YOUR computer and not the user's computer.
Now, you may disagree with me on drawing the line here, but I think we should because if we draw it anywhere else, the house of cards that is the GPL will come tumbling down like nothing you've seen before.
On the other hand, I truly empathize with the user of GPLed software to have the freedom to change the behavior of the program, even if the program is running on another system. Of course, we can't give the user the right to modify the way the software behaves on the other system. The best we could do is to have the user download the GPLed source code and set it up on their own systems.
And so a reasonable GPL modification might be: "If you use GPL software that has the ability to be used by anyone but you, you must release the source code." After all, you did decide to use GPL software that was built by others, and now that you've decided to let other users use the program you must release the source code and give other people the freedom also. This seems to be perfectly in line with GPL philosphy, the way I understand it.
However, I think the burden that is now placed on the developers is too great. If they create a GPLed program, or modify it, which in any way communicates with other users or computers, which most programs now-a-days do, then they would be required to release the source.
It is now impossible to make any personal modifications to your own setup of GPLed software without releasing the code. Think Sendmail, POP clients, etc.
OK, I must admit, that I've now confused myself, because I now understand the pro-ASP licensing arguments at lot better. And I don't know if I can muster the right arguments against it. But, my gut is still telling me we should be insanely careful before we add additional freedom-robbing exceptions to the GPL. I feel the burden of proof should be on the side of those who want to mofify the GPL.
The question of course is, whose freedom are we talking about: the user or the developer?
Maybe someone else can complete my thoughts on this.
Hans Cathcart
hans@cathcart.org
I just noticed that www.lnux.com (ie: VA Linux System's stock ticker) is a web site dedicated to the Be operating system, or some books about it anyway.. I think that's pretty funny.
Just for the record: (my /. posting skills seem to have eclipsed my english writing ability.)
What I meant to say is that fewer women were enrolling and graduating. I'm not sure about whether or not more are dropping out, but I know the article said there are fewer graduates.
The term computers was actually used to describe the women who 'computed' for the US Government if I'm not mistaken.
There was a very interesting article in December's Delta Sky Magazine (but their web site didn't archive it.) mentioning that graduation rates (and I'm talking actual numbers, not percentages) of women in computer related fields is actually dropping. This seems pretty disturbing, given that this industry is so prosperous. I wonder if anyone has any actual figures on this.