Why prostate cells? I can think of a whole range of human cell types that are MUCH easier to access than Prostate cells. What are they working towards - Electronic Viagra?
Why do we need to genetically engineer prostate cells? Built in vibrators? Pushbutton orgasms?
BTW, Where's the 'Do Not Try This At Home' message?
Yes, I know 2 to 4 times longer IS a big deal, but can they bring it in at 4 to 8 times the cost of the current batteries?
We would be in agreement on an 'economic equivalent' formula?
I really hope they can make them affordable. I have no idea what fuel cell technology costs to manufacture, and I'm anxiously waiting for some product of this approximate size and quantity to come out so we can get some economic 'bechmarks'.
I noticed that the lithium batteries for their current product are listed as providing 4 to 6 hours runtime. So at 12 to 24 hours runtime, you are only talking about lasting 2 to 4 times as long. Yes, I know 2 to 4 times longer IS a big deal, but can they bring it in at 2 to 4 times the cost of the current batteries? And the lithiums are easily rechargeable with a plug-in adapter. How will they distribute Hydrogen? Home electrolysis units? And, IIRC, the Space Shuttle fuel cells have a useful life of 2400 hours. How will these compare? The lithiums are supposed to be rechargeable 500 times.
I really do hope they answer all the questions we've raised. I'm not convinced that their application sounds like a hit in the marketplace, but, as others have mentioned, there are plenty of other applications for fuel cells of all shapes and sizes.
Somebody forgot to clear the bit. How would you like to be the one responsible for that little piece of code? (Actually, I'd love to work on something like that!)
Kind of adds new meaning to the term 'System Crash', eh?
The original 'computer for the rest of us'. Codename: Popcorn. The unbelievable hype from IBM for the PCjr was the start of Modern Techno Marketing as we know and love it today. And the way the Mass Media bought into the IBM PR Machine was even more unbelievable. Did anyone actually ever BUY a PCjr ???
The Tom's Hardware Guide article is a must read. I don't agree with all the points he tries to make, but there is a wealth of insight into all the things AMD and Intel have done right and wrong to get us to this point.
And this CPU demo seems to fit right in with what he was saying.
ANOTHER attempt to waste our bandwidth for things that already have adequate distribution means. Between regular old AM/FM and all the channels available on DBS satellite and who knows what else, why waste our 2-way bandwidth for a one-way medium??? Use the Net for requesting songs or whatever, but leave the actual content distribution for OTHER mediums designed for one-way distribution!!!
What's next - DoS attacks with "The Carpenters' Christmas Album"????
I don't really mind, but a little credit would be nice. (sigh)
They did expand a lot on what I said. I'm not sure I agree with them about controlling who can PUBLISH DVD content. And I DEFINATELY don't agree with them about intending to intimidate ISPs. Intimidating ISPs was only a feeble legal maneuver the MPAA came up with AFTER DeCSS was in the Public Domain, which I still believe the MPAA never thought would happen.
And they are just plain WRONG about DVDs being only slightly better than VHS tape. Get a new television!! Obviously, they've never seen a DVD played on a full-blown HDTV system.
I am a little 'bothered' by the 'sensationalist' tone of the article. Yes it's an important topic that's worth getting excited about. But I think if you get enough facts wrong, and stretch things a little past credibility, you will turn a 'neutral' reader off.
I also have spent many years working for a company that provides shrink-wrap business productivity apps for Dos/Win and all major Unix OSs. I realize that business apps are a different market than games, but some of the issues that were discussed by my company while contemplating a Linux port of our software might be enlightening to the Linux community.
The issues raised are not necessarily MY issues but the issues raised within the company, and I pass this along to (hopefully) provide insight.
First, on the topic of e-mail requests for ports. We learned (the hard way) to deal with requests in one of two ways. Mail that included a request to be notified if we did a port to OS 'X' were saved as legitimate (read:potential paying customer) requests. And if the request offered a contact name/number for further info, that was even better. (yes, some companies actually DO ask their customers what they want instead of telling them what they need!) However, if there was no request for notification, the request was discarded as a Hardware and/or OS 'evangelist' request. It was assumed these people were more intested in selling THEIR products than in buying ours; as in "Look! You can get XYZ software for our systems! Buy MY Hardware/OS!". And yes, the 'tone' of the requests made a difference. Like it or not, Cranky Requests==Cranky Customers==Cranky Tech Support calls. We actually identified (or rather, they identified themselves) certain 'business types' that it was not cost-effective to sell to, because they absolutely refused to RTFM, among other things. Doing business with them was just NOT a pleasant experience and their money wasn't worth the hassle. We purposely avoided these types in our marketing.
A development issue that was unique to Linux was Future Product Development. We could go to HP or SUN or whoever and ask them what their plan was for future OS changes/enhancements 1 or 3 or 5 years down the road. While the quality of the answers we got varied, at least we had some idea what they were thinking and where they were going. To get 'equivalent' information on Linux would have required an additional investment in manpower on my company's part to stay on top of where Linux was going. This was not a slam on Linux; just an acknowledgement that Linux was a slightly different kind of animal, and our development/maintenance costs would therefor be slightly higher than for a 'commercial' Unix variant.
Another concern was whether people who had paid 'nothing' for their OS would be willing to pay $XXX dollars for an app, or would they just hack it and rip us off. For better or worse, the decision was (and still is) to take a 'wait and see' attitude to see how other Commercial software vendors fare in the Linux market. [I know of other app vendors that are taking the same position. It boils down to 'Will the Linux community respect OTHER peoples' licenses and property rights as fervently as they expect theirs to be respected?'. It's almost as if their is an expectation of LESS software cracking and stealing on Linux than on any other platform before Commercial app vendors will 'trust' the Linux community.]
Documentation of the OS was another issue. It's hard to tell someone to RTFM if their is no FM. This may not be fair, but it was decided that we had to build in extra revenue in our pricing structure to cover our extra Tech Support costs for cases where the OS documentation was unclear/incomplete/obsolete, relative to other Unix variants.
Ironically, we have Linux on a few of our internal systems, even though we don't currently support our products on it. It's one thing for US to recognize a good thing for our own use; it's quite another to have enough OTHER people able to see the same thing to create a viable Commercial app market.
the original. I speak, of course, of PinBall. The Real Ones, not the feeble computer simulations. No waiting for the Nth generation of a console to get a version that looks half-way realistic. It's speed is limited only by the Laws of Physics. No trying to differentiate this 4-pixel blob from that 5-pixel blob. Resolution limited only by the quality of your eyesight. No looking for illogical programmer's traps to keep the game interesting. Game variations are limited only by your imagination. And best of all, no outrageous upfront cash layout. Fifty cents, and you are playing. No obsolesence. No guilt about 'investing all that money and it sits in the closet' if you decide not to play for six months.
Invent a better PinBall, and the world will beat a path to your door.
It's the same as if you got a court order to turn over documents that you happen to keep in a safe, in a room that is normally locked. It is implied that you must unlock the door and open the safe and/or give the authorities a key to the door and the combination to the safe in order to be in compliance with the order.
As far as self-incrimination, IF you can make a successful argument against turning over information because of self-incrimination, it doesn't matter if they are encrypted or not. One has nothing to do with the other.
AFAIK, you are correct. It's the same as if you were ordered to turn over documents that you happened to keep in a wall safe. It is implied that you must open the safe and/or provide the combination to the safe so that the documents can be retrieved.
Yes, the CONTRACT forbade striking. but the CONTRACT is not LAW. If it was JUST a contract violation, then this would be breach of contract, not a criminal offense for which wire-tap and search and seizure laws could be brought to bear.
My understanding is that the Judge had previously issued a Court Order forbidding the Union from engaging in work stoppages, and it is the Criminal Offense of Violating a Court Order that is the basis for using wire-taps and search and seizure.
Off topic p.s.: I don't fly them as often as you, but they are at the bottom of my list also. I'm waiting for the announcement any day now that they have discovered the mummified remains of 176 passengers and crew in a plane in a far corner of the Detroit airport that was parked there 3 years ago in a snowstorm. (SUE ME, NW!)
This is absolutely, positively, wire-tapping, pure and simple. It uses the phone system, and the only difference between this and a voice conversation is that this conversation is represented in text mode instead of analog audio. And that this form sometimes keeps copies. Note that there is absolutely no requirement to keep back-ups, and no guilt could be inferred if the back-ups didn't exist (unless, of course, they were deleted AFTER the search warrants were issued). Period. I refuse to believe that this judge will not get his hands slapped for issuing the order in the first place.
Can anyone honestly tell me that a judge would have authorized audio phone taps on these same people under the same circumstances? For that matter, why didn't he authorize audio phone taps IN ADDITION to the search warrants? Because He can't. The Law won't allow it.
And the precedents for handling this type of 'labor dispute' are many, and they don't include seizing personal property. Fireman and Policeman are prohibited by law from striking or staging sickouts (at least in my state). If an employer (even governmental bodies) suspect an 'illegal' sick-out, the Union gets hauled to court, and if they can't provide sufficient documentation (Doctor's notes, etc.) that the employees were really sick, then THE UNION is penalized for the illegal action. How the Union handles their own individuals is up to them, as long as it's legal. The Union can not selectively decide to be their members' legal representative for labor and contract issues only when it's convenient for them. In for a dime, in for a dollar. How many times have you seen a Union leader jailed when the Union members were on an illegal strike? Too many to count.
The slippery slope this judge's actions lead us down are terrifying. To justify seizing private e-mails from privately-owned property when He couldn't get an audio wire-tap or audio bugs solely because e-mails SOMETIMES have copies leads quickly to other justifications. It's a short step to authorizing full-time audio wire-taps on all of a company's employees JUST IN CASE THEY PLAN SOMETHING in violation of a court order, so that they'll have records of the conversations in case they need them.
And if it's illegal to 'air your gripes' on a computer bulletin board, what's next? The company gets to record all conversations between any two or more employess, no matter if they are on company time or property? Two employees chat in the hardware store, they must provide written transcripts of everything said to the company? And what if two employees are married? They must provide tapes of everything said during sex, with a copy for each of their bosses? The list goes on.
I hope somebody (the ACLU)? jumps on this, even if it is withdrawn, to have the original order declared ILLEGAL!!>BR>
I find myself more afraid of not knowing what's going to happen than I am of any of the potential outcomes I can imagine.
The worst case scenario that I can think of: VALinux exerts some level of 'editorial control' of SlashDot content, but it is done so well and so subtley that we don't catch on for months or years.
A Suggestion (apologies if this has already been covered): Employees of VALinux, except for our leaders, are forbidden from posting on SlashDot. This would help. But an absolute: Employees of VALinux must NEVER be given moderator points, even if they do not identify themselves as employees of VALinux. Just like employees of companies sponsoring a contest are not allowed to enter the contest. And employees of OTHER distributors DO get to post and get moderator points. This is the price of 'owning' SlashDot. And part of the price of maintaining some integrity.
A Hope: If the worst happens, and this place 'goes commercial', a new site will spring up somewhere else. A Fear: If the worst happens, hundreds of new sites will spring up, some of whom will be more 'product-biased' than any commercial site would ever dream of being, and others will devise a way so that only their private 'inner circle' ever get moderated up.
I am reminded of the pronouncements of the soothsayers and prognosticaters when this 'open source thing' was still in it's infancy. 'They' said things like: --'anything designed by committee is inherently inferior', --'it'll never amount to anything', --'the best they could ever hope for is some simplistic OS whose only real-world application would be as a teaching tool for beginners', --'they'll be lucky to get all the source to compile at one time, much less do something usefull'. 'They' were wrong once before. What do WE need to do to make 'Them' wrong again??
What DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) says The DMCA allows copyrighted-content providers to encrypt their content to protect their property from unauthorized duplication. Notice that the law does NOT set any standards for the quality of the encryption, nor does it require it to be hardware or software. The DMCA makes it ILLEGAL to create anything that breaks this encryption for the purposes of copying. Again, no distinction is made between hardware or software.
My opinion on what MPAA's game plan was It seems they had a four-pronged approach: 1.Some level of encryption to meet DMCA's definiton of encryption, and use of region codes to control DVD distribution. 2.Licensing of the decrypt-codes and region codes necessary to decode and play DVDs to DVD player makers. 3.Put the decrypt-codes and region codes on a specific track of authorized DVDs. 4.Getting all blank DVD makers to write all zeros to the track on the blank DVDs that would normally hold the decrypt-codes and region codes on authorized DVDs.
We all seem to be amazed at how relatively easy it was to crack the CSS. My opinion is that MPAA didn't care and probably expected it to be cracked eventually; their only concern is that it meet the definition of encryption in the DCMA. The use of region codes was just plain greed on the part of MPAA, and since it appears to be in violation of multiple international trade agreements, I expect they will go away at some point.
MPAA's MAJOR SCREW-UP As we all know, you don't even need to decrypt the DVD to copy it, which is why MPAA didn't put much effort into the encryption scheme, IMHO. You can copy DVDs without decrypting them now, but since the decrypt-keys track is pre-written to zeros on all blank media, you can't play it on a DVD player. BUT, if you wrote the decrypt-code track to some pre-determined ALTERNATE track that wasn't written with zeros, and it was LEGAL to make players that looked for it on the alternate track, the whole scheme of pre-writing zeros on blank media would fail, without any violation of the DMCA, since the COPYING drive is not decrypting the source, and the PLAYING drive is not circumventing the encryption for the purposes of copying!! How did they plan to get around this? By licensing the DVD players, and as part of their license, prevent the DVD player makers from making players that look for the decrypt-codes on alternate tracks. And this is where MPAA's MAJOR SCREWUP comes in. They ASSUMED that anybody who would crack the CSS code would be motivated by profit, and would copyright their code and try to license it to player makers. Then, MPAA would go after the CSS crackers and stop them from licensing the cracked CSS code with the DMCA decryption laws. IT NEVER OCCURRED TO THEM THAT SOMEBODY WOULD CRACK CSS AND PUT THE CODE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN. With DeCSS in the public domain, there is nothing stopping DVD player makers from using the DeCSS code, and without the MPAA license, nothing to stop them from looking for the decrypt codes on an alternate track!! And nobody to stop from distributing the code.
So, in spite of MPAA's legal mumbo-jumbo, their real fear is that they will lose control of licensing DVD players, and therefor the ability to restrict DVD players from looking for de-crypt codes on an alternate track. So MPAA may have already lost the war. And this is why MPAA is now trying to put the Fear of God into anybody who has ever HEARD of DeCSS. The cat is out of the bag, they know it, and they are fighting for their very existence. If Jon had GPL'd the code, or any license that prevented commercial use (i.e.: DVD player makers), the only thing MPAA would probably be going after him for would be an agreement to NEVER sell or license the code or allow it's use in DVD players. I don't think the MPAA would scream much if Jon licensed his code, as long as it had the same provisions as the MPAA license. In fact, if Jon could still copyright his code, that might be his best bet for bringing this whole thing to an end.
you will ever get are happy customers. You can spend BIG BUCKS on advertising/marketing, and never achieve what you can get with even a half-dozen customers who are willing to sing your praises. And one of the best ways to get happy customers is to overwhelm them with SERVICE. And take notes on what questions your customers have and what problems they run into. These will form the basis of your first update to your documentation.
And you will run into the customer that is just a complete asshole (as opposed to a partial asshole) that wants something for nothing. This guy will NEVER sing your praises, no matter what you do. Chances are most other people he deals with know him as an asshole, also. He probably has a litany of 'horror stories' he dumps on anybody who will listen. Make sure you are not one of his horror stories. Do your best to make him a 'neutral' customer. Do the right thing, even though he will never thank you directly. That way, if he does talk about you as a 'horror story', a sane person listening to him can think "Gee, this guy's an asshole, but this company still did the right thing by him. Imagine what they will do for Me if I treat them fairly?!?" Voila. Your next customer.
Lots of good info posted. I would have expected the normal high level of drivel that accompanies every other article on every other topic. But I am amazed at the quality of the vast majority of replies I've read. It feels GOOD to be a part of this group again.
You didn't state what your intentions are for your company, as far as your personal income expectations. Do you intend to self-fund on a shoestring, and invest with sweat equity? Do you intend to draw a salary, and live off of someone else's dime until the company becomes profitable (Venture Capital)? Do you intend to do an IPO in five years or less? Do you intend to sell out to Bill G. in 3 years and retire? This is the first decision you must make, since all other decisions will flow from it. That doesn't mean you can't change your mind down the road and go a different direction - you will need to be flexible no matter which way you go. You can't tell what your next step is if you don't know where you want to end up.
And this brings me to the point I wanted to make. It's one thing to want to make a living working with friends. But that can include all the options I listed above. It won't work if you and your friends all have different expectations of where the company should end up. Discuss it NOW. Think about it for a while. Discuss it AGAIN. Repeat.
You also need to decide what will be more important - the succes of the company, or maintaining a friendship. No matter which direction you go, you will most likely be faced with making this decision at some point, and your decision will determine your action. There is no 'right' answer to this one, but you must be consistent. Waffling will get you nowhere. If your friends decide the company is more important, and you decide the friendship is more important, you will disagree on business decisions often.
And if you are doing a shoestring startup, be aware of your partners ability to hang in there financially. A shoestring startup often means that at some point, you may want or need to forego some personal income to reinvest in the company, or because of a 'slow month'. If you have few monthly payments to make, you can get by. But if one of your partners (or you) is engaged, and his girlfriend is talking about 3 kids, be aware that his ability to 'take a hit' in personal income is going to be much less than yours. He will need to provide for his family, and you can't blame him for that. But it will force hard decisions and probably hard feelings.
Also, if you are a shoestring startup, be aware of each person's strengths and weaknesses. Chances are, you are a Geek (Wear It Proud!) and so are your partners. But somebody's got to be the boss. And somebody's got to be in charge of emptying wastebaskets and recycling the cans. So pick a CEO, a Purchasing Manager, a Housekeeping Manager, etc.; and then change jobs every 60 days. You will learn a lot about you and your partners' strengths and weaknesses in the process, and get an idea what's involved in each of the jobs and an appreciation for each of them. You will be much better qualified to decide when to hire someone for a position and who to pick. And you will most likely find that someone in your group 'makes a job look easy'. But if you never try the job, you may think 'he doesn't work as hard as I do'. Been there, Done that.
You may think that all this advice is free. It's not. By asking the question, you obligated yourself to come back here in a year and tell us how it went. And share what you learned. Pass It On.
Finally, someone who understands what I MEANT to say! (you wouldn't happen to be an unattached Penthouse centerfold who just won the Lotto, would ya??)
I was attempting to refer to the uppermost stage. [brainfade]
I just tried it with Win95/Netscape 4.7, and it promptly crashed Netscape as soon as I clicked on 'contest'. I'm not going to bitch to loudly - I hope they spend their time getting the mission right before they 'fix' the website.
Read The Fxxxxxx Article! This IS privately funded (as much as Russia can privately fund). This looks like an interesting experiment. I hope they don't get beat up to bad if it doesn't work flawlessly on the first pass. The ability to return/reuse spent first stages, instead of burning them up in the atmosphere, seems like one of the most interesting aspects. Might also remove any future excuses for adding to our pile of orbiting 'space junk'. I know NASA didn't have anything to do with this, but I have to believe the successfull use of airbags on Mars Lander 'inspired' this crew to go ahead with their experiment. THANK GOD NOBODY PATENTED THE CONCEPT (I hope). The most interesting part of the project, IMHO, is that they are allowing on-line 'pilots' to attempt to pilot a simulator in real-time with the flight test, and the first 100 to successfully land get a free 'wing commander' souvenir that was in space on the actual test vehicle! Count me in! Talk about the ultimate in Space Geek collectibles!
ROTFLMAO!!!! Wish I had heard that back then! I attempted to teach an "Into to Micros" class at the local Community College, which (at that time) used PETs exclusively. These were the original 4k chiclet keyboard green screen models. We were supposed to have 1 PET for every 2 students, and class size was from 14-18 people. I never was able to get more than 2 machines to boot on any given night, from a universe of 12 machines. Granted, these were not the best maintained machines, and I didn't have more than a few minutes to spend om each one to get it to boot, but I was extremely unimpressed by the machines. About the same time, I went thru 3 Apple ][s of my own, none of which experienced this kind of problem. My first one was serial number 00353, which is still operational, which I traded in at a Computer store for a newer model. The second one was fried when a Maintenance Man hooked up a Welder to my electrical circuits at work while I was out to lunch. The third one was still operational last I checked, about 5 years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
so THAT'S what those voices in my head are!!
Why prostate cells? I can think of a whole range of human cell types that are MUCH easier to access than Prostate cells. What are they working towards - Electronic Viagra?
Why do we need to genetically engineer prostate cells? Built in vibrators? Pushbutton orgasms?
BTW, Where's the 'Do Not Try This At Home' message?
So, if I re-phrase my question to read:
Yes, I know 2 to 4 times longer IS a big deal, but can they bring it in at 4 to 8 times the cost of the current batteries?
We would be in agreement on an 'economic equivalent' formula?
I really hope they can make them affordable. I have no idea what fuel cell technology costs to manufacture, and I'm anxiously waiting for some product of this approximate size and quantity to come out so we can get some economic 'bechmarks'.
I noticed that the lithium batteries for their current product are listed as providing 4 to 6 hours runtime. So at 12 to 24 hours runtime, you are only talking about lasting 2 to 4 times as long. Yes, I know 2 to 4 times longer IS a big deal, but can they bring it in at 2 to 4 times the cost of the current batteries? And the lithiums are easily rechargeable with a plug-in adapter. How will they distribute Hydrogen? Home electrolysis units? And, IIRC, the Space Shuttle fuel cells have a useful life of 2400 hours. How will these compare? The lithiums are supposed to be rechargeable 500 times.
I really do hope they answer all the questions we've raised. I'm not convinced that their application sounds like a hit in the marketplace, but, as others have mentioned, there are plenty of other applications for fuel cells of all shapes and sizes.
Somebody forgot to clear the bit. How would you like to be the one responsible for that little piece of code? (Actually, I'd love to work on something like that!)
Kind of adds new meaning to the term 'System Crash', eh?
Just knowing that our cruise missiles are now targeted even more accurately. Take That, Saddam!!
The original 'computer for the rest of us'. Codename: Popcorn. The unbelievable hype from IBM for the PCjr was the start of Modern Techno Marketing as we know and love it today. And the way the Mass Media bought into the IBM PR Machine was even more unbelievable. Did anyone actually ever BUY a PCjr ???
The Tom's Hardware Guide article is a must read. I don't agree with all the points he tries to make, but there is a wealth of insight into all the things AMD and Intel have done right and wrong to get us to this point.
And this CPU demo seems to fit right in with what he was saying.
ANOTHER attempt to waste our bandwidth for things that already have adequate distribution means. Between regular old AM/FM and all the channels available on DBS satellite and who knows what else, why waste our 2-way bandwidth for a one-way medium??? Use the Net for requesting songs or whatever, but leave the actual content distribution for OTHER mediums designed for one-way distribution!!!
What's next - DoS attacks with "The Carpenters' Christmas Album"????
This is what I said a week ago.
I don't really mind, but a little credit would be nice. (sigh)
They did expand a lot on what I said. I'm not sure I agree with them about controlling who can PUBLISH DVD content. And I DEFINATELY don't agree with them about intending to intimidate ISPs. Intimidating ISPs was only a feeble legal maneuver the MPAA came up with AFTER DeCSS was in the Public Domain, which I still believe the MPAA never thought would happen.
And they are just plain WRONG about DVDs being only slightly better than VHS tape. Get a new television!! Obviously, they've never seen a DVD played on a full-blown HDTV system.
I am a little 'bothered' by the 'sensationalist' tone of the article. Yes it's an important topic that's worth getting excited about. But I think if you get enough facts wrong, and stretch things a little past credibility, you will turn a 'neutral' reader off.
I also have spent many years working for a company that provides shrink-wrap business productivity apps for Dos/Win and all major Unix OSs. I realize that business apps are a different market than games, but some of the issues that were discussed by my company while contemplating a Linux port of our software might be enlightening to the Linux community.
The issues raised are not necessarily MY issues but the issues raised within the company, and I pass this along to (hopefully) provide insight.
First, on the topic of e-mail requests for ports. We learned (the hard way) to deal with requests in one of two ways. Mail that included a request to be notified if we did a port to OS 'X' were saved as legitimate (read:potential paying customer) requests. And if the request offered a contact name/number for further info, that was even better. (yes, some companies actually DO ask their customers what they want instead of telling them what they need!) However, if there was no request for notification, the request was discarded as a Hardware and/or OS 'evangelist' request. It was assumed these people were more intested in selling THEIR products than in buying ours; as in "Look! You can get XYZ software for our systems! Buy MY Hardware/OS!". And yes, the 'tone' of the requests made a difference. Like it or not, Cranky Requests==Cranky Customers==Cranky Tech Support calls. We actually identified (or rather, they identified themselves) certain 'business types' that it was not cost-effective to sell to, because they absolutely refused to RTFM, among other things. Doing business with them was just NOT a pleasant experience and their money wasn't worth the hassle. We purposely avoided these types in our marketing.
A development issue that was unique to Linux was Future Product Development. We could go to HP or SUN or whoever and ask them what their plan was for future OS changes/enhancements 1 or 3 or 5 years down the road. While the quality of the answers we got varied, at least we had some idea what they were thinking and where they were going. To get 'equivalent' information on Linux would have required an additional investment in manpower on my company's part to stay on top of where Linux was going. This was not a slam on Linux; just an acknowledgement that Linux was a slightly different kind of animal, and our development/maintenance costs would therefor be slightly higher than for a 'commercial' Unix variant.
Another concern was whether people who had paid 'nothing' for their OS would be willing to pay $XXX dollars for an app, or would they just hack it and rip us off. For better or worse, the decision was (and still is) to take a 'wait and see' attitude to see how other Commercial software vendors fare in the Linux market. [I know of other app vendors that are taking the same position. It boils down to 'Will the Linux community respect OTHER peoples' licenses and property rights as fervently as they expect theirs to be respected?'. It's almost as if their is an expectation of LESS software cracking and stealing on Linux than on any other platform before Commercial app vendors will 'trust' the Linux community.]
Documentation of the OS was another issue. It's hard to tell someone to RTFM if their is no FM. This may not be fair, but it was decided that we had to build in extra revenue in our pricing structure to cover our extra Tech Support costs for cases where the OS documentation was unclear/incomplete/obsolete, relative to other Unix variants.
Ironically, we have Linux on a few of our internal systems, even though we don't currently support our products on it. It's one thing for US to recognize a good thing for our own use; it's quite another to have enough OTHER people able to see the same thing to create a viable Commercial app market.
the original. I speak, of course, of PinBall. The Real Ones, not the feeble computer simulations. No waiting for the Nth generation of a console to get a version that looks half-way realistic. It's speed is limited only by the Laws of Physics. No trying to differentiate this 4-pixel blob from that 5-pixel blob. Resolution limited only by the quality of your eyesight. No looking for illogical programmer's traps to keep the game interesting. Game variations are limited only by your imagination. And best of all, no outrageous upfront cash layout. Fifty cents, and you are playing. No obsolesence. No guilt about 'investing all that money and it sits in the closet' if you decide not to play for six months.
Invent a better PinBall, and the world will beat a path to your door.
It's the same as if you got a court order to turn over documents that you happen to keep in a safe, in a room that is normally locked. It is implied that you must unlock the door and open the safe and/or give the authorities a key to the door and the combination to the safe in order to be in compliance with the order.
As far as self-incrimination, IF you can make a successful argument against turning over information because of self-incrimination, it doesn't matter if they are encrypted or not. One has nothing to do with the other.
AFAIK, you are correct. It's the same as if you were ordered to turn over documents that you happened to keep in a wall safe. It is implied that you must open the safe and/or provide the combination to the safe so that the documents can be retrieved.
If I read the article correctly...
Yes, the CONTRACT forbade striking. but the CONTRACT is not LAW. If it was JUST a contract violation, then this would be breach of contract, not a criminal offense for which wire-tap and search and seizure laws could be brought to bear.
My understanding is that the Judge had previously issued a Court Order forbidding the Union from engaging in work stoppages, and it is the Criminal Offense of Violating a Court Order that is the basis for using wire-taps and search and seizure.
Off topic p.s.: I don't fly them as often as you, but they are at the bottom of my list also. I'm waiting for the announcement any day now that they have discovered the mummified remains of 176 passengers and crew in a plane in a far corner of the Detroit airport that was parked there 3 years ago in a snowstorm. (SUE ME, NW!)
This is the scariest thing I've seen in a while.
This is absolutely, positively, wire-tapping, pure and simple. It uses the phone system, and the only difference between this and a voice conversation is that this conversation is represented in text mode instead of analog audio. And that this form sometimes keeps copies. Note that there is absolutely no requirement to keep back-ups, and no guilt could be inferred if the back-ups didn't exist (unless, of course, they were deleted AFTER the search warrants were issued). Period. I refuse to believe that this judge will not get his hands slapped for issuing the order in the first place.
Can anyone honestly tell me that a judge would have authorized audio phone taps on these same people under the same circumstances? For that matter, why didn't he authorize audio phone taps IN ADDITION to the search warrants? Because He can't. The Law won't allow it.
And the precedents for handling this type of 'labor dispute' are many, and they don't include seizing personal property. Fireman and Policeman are prohibited by law from striking or staging sickouts (at least in my state). If an employer (even governmental bodies) suspect an 'illegal' sick-out, the Union gets hauled to court, and if they can't provide sufficient documentation (Doctor's notes, etc.) that the employees were really sick, then THE UNION is penalized for the illegal action. How the Union handles their own individuals is up to them, as long as it's legal. The Union can not selectively decide to be their members' legal representative for labor and contract issues only when it's convenient for them. In for a dime, in for a dollar. How many times have you seen a Union leader jailed when the Union members were on an illegal strike? Too many to count.
The slippery slope this judge's actions lead us down are terrifying. To justify seizing private e-mails from privately-owned property when He couldn't get an audio wire-tap or audio bugs solely because e-mails SOMETIMES have copies leads quickly to other justifications. It's a short step to authorizing full-time audio wire-taps on all of a company's employees JUST IN CASE THEY PLAN SOMETHING in violation of a court order, so that they'll have records of the conversations in case they need them.
And if it's illegal to 'air your gripes' on a computer bulletin board, what's next? The company gets to record all conversations between any two or more employess, no matter if they are on company time or property? Two employees chat in the hardware store, they must provide written transcripts of everything said to the company? And what if two employees are married? They must provide tapes of everything said during sex, with a copy for each of their bosses? The list goes on.
I hope somebody (the ACLU)? jumps on this, even if it is withdrawn, to have the original order declared ILLEGAL!!>BR>
Nothing lasts forever. Sometimes it gets better.
I find myself more afraid of not knowing what's going to happen than I am of any of the potential outcomes I can imagine.
The worst case scenario that I can think of: VALinux exerts some level of 'editorial control' of SlashDot content, but it is done so well and so subtley that we don't catch on for months or years.
A Suggestion (apologies if this has already been covered): Employees of VALinux, except for our leaders, are forbidden from posting on SlashDot. This would help. But an absolute: Employees of VALinux must NEVER be given moderator points, even if they do not identify themselves as employees of VALinux. Just like employees of companies sponsoring a contest are not allowed to enter the contest. And employees of OTHER distributors DO get to post and get moderator points. This is the price of 'owning' SlashDot. And part of the price of maintaining some integrity.
A Hope: If the worst happens, and this place 'goes commercial', a new site will spring up somewhere else.
A Fear: If the worst happens, hundreds of new sites will spring up, some of whom will be more 'product-biased' than any commercial site would ever dream of being, and others will devise a way so that only their private 'inner circle' ever get moderated up.
I am reminded of the pronouncements of the soothsayers and prognosticaters when this 'open source thing' was still in it's infancy. 'They' said things like:
--'anything designed by committee is inherently inferior',
--'it'll never amount to anything',
--'the best they could ever hope for is some simplistic OS whose only real-world application would be as a teaching tool for beginners',
--'they'll be lucky to get all the source to compile at one time, much less do something usefull'.
'They' were wrong once before. What do WE need to do to make 'Them' wrong again??
the latest rumor: the russians will launch the module on June 18,2000. See NasaWatch article.
What DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) says
The DMCA allows copyrighted-content providers to encrypt their content to protect their property from unauthorized duplication. Notice that the law does NOT set any standards for the quality of the encryption, nor does it require it to be hardware or software. The DMCA makes it ILLEGAL to create anything that breaks this encryption for the purposes of copying. Again, no distinction is made between hardware or software.
My opinion on what MPAA's game plan was
It seems they had a four-pronged approach:
1.Some level of encryption to meet DMCA's definiton of encryption, and use of region codes to control DVD distribution.
2.Licensing of the decrypt-codes and region codes necessary to decode and play DVDs to DVD player makers.
3.Put the decrypt-codes and region codes on a specific track of authorized DVDs.
4.Getting all blank DVD makers to write all zeros to the track on the blank DVDs that would normally hold the decrypt-codes and region codes on authorized DVDs.
We all seem to be amazed at how relatively easy it was to crack the CSS. My opinion is that MPAA didn't care and probably expected it to be cracked eventually; their only concern is that it meet the definition of encryption in the DCMA. The use of region codes was just plain greed on the part of MPAA, and since it appears to be in violation of multiple international trade agreements, I expect they will go away at some point.
MPAA's MAJOR SCREW-UP
As we all know, you don't even need to decrypt the DVD to copy it, which is why MPAA didn't put much effort into the encryption scheme, IMHO. You can copy DVDs without decrypting them now, but since the decrypt-keys track is pre-written to zeros on all blank media, you can't play it on a DVD player. BUT, if you wrote the decrypt-code track to some pre-determined ALTERNATE track that wasn't written with zeros, and it was LEGAL to make players that looked for it on the alternate track, the whole scheme of pre-writing zeros on blank media would fail, without any violation of the DMCA, since the COPYING drive is not decrypting the source, and the PLAYING drive is not circumventing the encryption for the purposes of copying!! How did they plan to get around this? By licensing the DVD players, and as part of their license, prevent the DVD player makers from making players that look for the decrypt-codes on alternate tracks. And this is where MPAA's MAJOR SCREWUP comes in. They ASSUMED that anybody who would crack the CSS code would be motivated by profit, and would copyright their code and try to license it to player makers. Then, MPAA would go after the CSS crackers and stop them from licensing the cracked CSS code with the DMCA decryption laws. IT NEVER OCCURRED TO THEM THAT SOMEBODY WOULD CRACK CSS AND PUT THE CODE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN. With DeCSS in the public domain, there is nothing stopping DVD player makers from using the DeCSS code, and without the MPAA license, nothing to stop them from looking for the decrypt codes on an alternate track!! And nobody to stop from distributing the code.
So, in spite of MPAA's legal mumbo-jumbo, their real fear is that they will lose control of licensing DVD players, and therefor the ability to restrict DVD players from looking for de-crypt codes on an alternate track. So MPAA may have already lost the war. And this is why MPAA is now trying to put the Fear of God into anybody who has ever HEARD of DeCSS. The cat is out of the bag, they know it, and they are fighting for their very existence. If Jon had GPL'd the code, or any license that prevented commercial use (i.e.: DVD player makers), the only thing MPAA would probably be going after him for would be an agreement to NEVER sell or license the code or allow it's use in DVD players. I don't think the MPAA would scream much if Jon licensed his code, as long as it had the same provisions as the MPAA license. In fact, if Jon could still copyright his code, that might be his best bet for bringing this whole thing to an end.
Am I right?
you will ever get are happy customers. You can spend BIG BUCKS on advertising/marketing, and never achieve what you can get with even a half-dozen customers who are willing to sing your praises. And one of the best ways to get happy customers is to overwhelm them with SERVICE. And take notes on what questions your customers have and what problems they run into. These will form the basis of your first update to your documentation.
And you will run into the customer that is just a complete asshole (as opposed to a partial asshole) that wants something for nothing. This guy will NEVER sing your praises, no matter what you do. Chances are most other people he deals with know him as an asshole, also. He probably has a litany of 'horror stories' he dumps on anybody who will listen. Make sure you are not one of his horror stories. Do your best to make him a 'neutral' customer. Do the right thing, even though he will never thank you directly. That way, if he does talk about you as a 'horror story', a sane person listening to him can think "Gee, this guy's an asshole, but this company still did the right thing by him. Imagine what they will do for Me if I treat them fairly?!?" Voila. Your next customer.
Lots of good info posted. I would have expected the normal high level of drivel that accompanies every other article on every other topic. But I am amazed at the quality of the vast majority of replies I've read. It feels GOOD to be a part of this group again.
You didn't state what your intentions are for your company, as far as your personal income expectations. Do you intend to self-fund on a shoestring, and invest with sweat equity? Do you intend to draw a salary, and live off of someone else's dime until the company becomes profitable (Venture Capital)? Do you intend to do an IPO in five years or less? Do you intend to sell out to Bill G. in 3 years and retire? This is the first decision you must make, since all other decisions will flow from it. That doesn't mean you can't change your mind down the road and go a different direction - you will need to be flexible no matter which way you go. You can't tell what your next step is if you don't know where you want to end up.
And this brings me to the point I wanted to make. It's one thing to want to make a living working with friends. But that can include all the options I listed above. It won't work if you and your friends all have different expectations of where the company should end up. Discuss it NOW. Think about it for a while. Discuss it AGAIN. Repeat.
You also need to decide what will be more important - the succes of the company, or maintaining a friendship. No matter which direction you go, you will most likely be faced with making this decision at some point, and your decision will determine your action. There is no 'right' answer to this one, but you must be consistent. Waffling will get you nowhere. If your friends decide the company is more important, and you decide the friendship is more important, you will disagree on business decisions often.
And if you are doing a shoestring startup, be aware of your partners ability to hang in there financially. A shoestring startup often means that at some point, you may want or need to forego some personal income to reinvest in the company, or because of a 'slow month'. If you have few monthly payments to make, you can get by. But if one of your partners (or you) is engaged, and his girlfriend is talking about 3 kids, be aware that his ability to 'take a hit' in personal income is going to be much less than yours. He will need to provide for his family, and you can't blame him for that. But it will force hard decisions and probably hard feelings.
Also, if you are a shoestring startup, be aware of each person's strengths and weaknesses. Chances are, you are a Geek (Wear It Proud!) and so are your partners. But somebody's got to be the boss. And somebody's got to be in charge of emptying wastebaskets and recycling the cans. So pick a CEO, a Purchasing Manager, a Housekeeping Manager, etc.; and then change jobs every 60 days. You will learn a lot about you and your partners' strengths and weaknesses in the process, and get an idea what's involved in each of the jobs and an appreciation for each of them. You will be much better qualified to decide when to hire someone for a position and who to pick. And you will most likely find that someone in your group 'makes a job look easy'. But if you never try the job, you may think 'he doesn't work as hard as I do'. Been there, Done that.
You may think that all this advice is free. It's not. By asking the question, you obligated yourself to come back here in a year and tell us how it went. And share what you learned. Pass It On.
Good Luck.
Finally, someone who understands what I MEANT to say! (you wouldn't happen to be an unattached Penthouse centerfold who just won the Lotto, would ya??)
I was attempting to refer to the uppermost stage. [brainfade]
I just tried it with Win95/Netscape 4.7, and it promptly crashed Netscape as soon as I clicked on 'contest'.
I'm not going to bitch to loudly - I hope they spend their time getting the mission right before they 'fix' the website.
Read The Fxxxxxx Article! This IS privately funded (as much as Russia can privately fund).
This looks like an interesting experiment. I hope they don't get beat up to bad if it doesn't work flawlessly on the first pass. The ability to return/reuse spent first stages, instead of burning them up in the atmosphere, seems like one of the most interesting aspects. Might also remove any future excuses for adding to our pile of orbiting 'space junk'.
I know NASA didn't have anything to do with this, but I have to believe the successfull use of airbags on Mars Lander 'inspired' this crew to go ahead with their experiment. THANK GOD NOBODY PATENTED THE CONCEPT (I hope).
The most interesting part of the project, IMHO, is that they are allowing on-line 'pilots' to attempt to pilot a simulator in real-time with the flight test, and the first 100 to successfully land get a free 'wing commander' souvenir that was in space on the actual test vehicle! Count me in! Talk about the ultimate in Space Geek collectibles!
ROTFLMAO!!!!
Wish I had heard that back then!
I attempted to teach an "Into to Micros" class at the local Community College, which (at that time) used PETs exclusively. These were the original 4k chiclet keyboard green screen models. We were supposed to have 1 PET for every 2 students, and class size was from 14-18 people. I never was able to get more than 2 machines to boot on any given night, from a universe of 12 machines. Granted, these were not the best maintained machines, and I didn't have more than a few minutes to spend om each one to get it to boot, but I was extremely unimpressed by the machines.
About the same time, I went thru 3 Apple ][s of my own, none of which experienced this kind of problem. My first one was serial number 00353, which is still operational, which I traded in at a Computer store for a newer model. The second one was fried when a Maintenance Man hooked up a Welder to my electrical circuits at work while I was out to lunch. The third one was still operational last I checked, about 5 years ago.