We are so close to a Web-based operating system I can taste it.
One of the things I like to say is, "In the long run, all file formats become programming languages". When somebody says they need a simple format for a config file or something, inevitably scope creep causes them to ask for something like a conditional (can you have a config setup so that if we're running offline it does this; but if the network is available it does that?). For the developer of the file format, *any* file format, it's a good idea to have a language developer's perspective.
Now, once you look at programming languages you start to get drawn into operating systems. C was developed in conjunction with Unix. Forth tends to become an operating system. Lisp, although it runs in userspace is used as a shell via Emacs and some have compared that to an OS. They talked about building Java chips at one point, and a Java OS certainly would have been written to go with it--it's only natural.
Thus I feel compelled to revise my little one-liner. "In the long run, all file formats become operating systems".
The next time the boss says he needs a flat-text config file, think about what kind of scheduling algorithm you want to use.
Also, individual investors have to pay taxes on dividends. I'm not sure if corporations have to establish a cost basis for potential sale when they acquire their own shares. Not my problem. If the stock pays no dividends but goes up in price, I don't pay tax on the capital gains until I sell. If I never sell, I can leave the shares to my heirs who will get a new tax basis.
The blades in the racks will get smaller and smaller, and cooler and cooler until... a bunch of hippie hackers decide to build a server farm on their kitchen table. The "dumb terminal" will sit right there on the kitchen table too. It'll be the same "cloud" architecture, but small and private. The PC (Personal Cloud) revolution will begin.
If you haven't actually heard Carlin deliver this bit, it's merely interesting. I've heard him deliver it, and at least half the value is in his intonation. Dig up a link if you can find it. Left as an exercise to the reader.
Plural of anecdote, and semantic of what I consider a small job vs. what you consider a small job. Plenty of people have bathrooms and addtions, and I'm sure it gets tricky. I'm talking about development from the ground up (acquire land, design custom house, build, etc.).
Anyway, the mere existence of proprietary software doesn't prevent people from helping themselves. Proprietary software doesn't eliminate Free or Open Source software; but crusaders who believe proprietary software is immoral and are part of the broader sweep of leftist ideology would force us all to work under copyleft if they had their way. That would be an absolute disaster that would deprive many people of the ability to have things they can't produce themselves, and to help themselves with tools that only exist because of the profit motive.
he will be housed for the rest of his life in a correctional facility that is humanely operated to the maximum extent consistent with ensuring public safety.
If he doesn't get the death penalty, he'll most likely be housed in a Supermax prison which is controversial. Some say it's unconstitutionally cruel and unusual punishment. The wheels of justice haven't ground it down yet though. Note, California's overcrowded state prisons were ruled unconstitutional, with a result of state prisoners being sent to county jails or released, so it is possible to win a suit to improve prison conditions in the US.
Anyway, if supermax is as bad as they say it is, those who say that the death penalty is too merciful may get their wish.
This proprietary program is an instrument of unjust power over the user.
No it isn't. You're free to stop using the device or to develop free apps and free hardware designs. People are doing that every thing, even as we type. Said before, and said again, I have no problem with that. I have no problem with Muslims who don't want to eat pork, or Hindus who don't want to eat beef. I have a problem with people starting a riot in the street because I want to have a bar-b-q and they don't like the smell of it. There's room in this world for both models. Accusations of "immorality" are the first step on the road to theocracy. Ultimately that's what this all boils down to--a religious debate, which is why I did a lot of arguing about it 10 years ago and then finally calmed down and stepped away from it... most of the time.
Like most analogies it isn't perfect. When it comes to minor renovations it breaks the other way. Almost everybody has worked with a contractor for *minor* renovations; and it's usually not too expensive.
Hiring a developer to develop software is no different to hiring an architect and builder to build your house
Right. Which is why most people buy houses in tracts, or pre-existing houses. Very few people who buy a house ever go through the whole development process on their own. It's either too expensive or too difficult and time consuming; just like developing your own software or hiring somebody to develop software.
Note that while "Free Software" purists believe it's immoral to trade in proprietary software, I don't believe it's immoral to trade in "free" or "open source" software. I believe we should all have a choice.
Now go back to that housing analogy and it's like they're saying that inexpensive tract homes and apartments are immoral and that all housing should be custom designed for the occupant (or in the case of an apartment, the community with lots of hands-on interaction from future occupants as opposed to building on spec). In other words, they're making a moral judgement on the processes that deliver products to consumers. They're making that judgement in favor of a process that works well for some people, but not for everybody.
The core BSD code "speaks" to the developer and says, "here's a foundation". Apple speaks and says, "here's what I built on this foundation". If what Apple built on the foundation is trivial, then your effort to duplicate it should be trivial. If what they built is non-trivial, then I have a hard time finding any sympathy with those who claim a right to somebody else's non-trivial work. That work is Apple's. They have a right to their own time and money.
Other developers can chose to clone Apple's work. Some people might think that's a waste; but I think it's good to have more than one approach.
FWIW, I agree that patents would probably end getting in the way and that's where I find common ground with the Free Software folks--software patents shouldn't exist. In fact, when I mentioned this to somebody who asked me why I thought software was special in this regard. I thought about it and realized it wasn't. My mind was changed; but not in the direction he thought. I concluded that there were many other classes of patents that ought to be abolished. Of course, that's another topic...
This line of reasoning also brings us down another familiar path--the cognitive dissonance among Free Software folks concerning "theft". When you discuss "piracy" they are all on board with the idea that "IP can't be stolen because it isn't property, and you still have the first copy", but when you mention permissive licensing they immediately complain that it allows companies to steal code.
I thought somebody might bring that up. They brought it up 10 years ago too. Typical users don't hire developers. Businesses hire developers.
At the consumer level it's just not happening. Joe Sixpack doesn't have apps because he looked at his phone and said, "I need to hire somebody to write an app". Joe Sixpack is a price-taker in the open market, even with the GPL.
The "free software" side's key interest is the freedom of users to modify their hardware and software,
Wow, 10-year flashback from Slashdot of old, arguing about how this freedom is about as important as my right to appear pro se in a court of law. Anyone who is a user and does this with hardware or software has a fool for an engineer. If they are not a fool, they are a developer and then the developer freedoms espoused by permissive licenses become more important.
Thanks a lot Slashdot. Now I have a sudden urge to know precisely how many married couples with the husbands between the ages of 30 and 32 inclusive have children in Queensland, and what the genders of and ages of the children are.
Passenger trains, even subways, have drivers ("engineers"); and if you've never sat on an unmoving train for an hour you haven't done a lot of train travel. Trains crash, too,
You just reminded me of the story of a Washington DC Metro train that crashed. The operator who died was begging dispatch for manual control as it sped towards a stopped train in a snow storm. I hope they put override in the cars after that.
OK, I had to track down the link for that. It's the first one--the Blizzard of '96 crash. I remember that the Washington Post published a poem with the lines, "when an operator asks for manual control, he's only asking for his life" or something like that. I couldn't find the poem.
Apparently, the system does now give operators manual control of the emergency brake.
Huh? I downloaded Chrome because it has the fastest and most reliable scripting engine (or did at the time). Even though my broker claims to work with IE, some of their tables won't render reliably with IE. They render reliably and quickly with Chrome, so it became my default browser. So. There's one more anecdote...
I treat political parties like phone providers. If they don't connect with me I switch.
I'll register as whatever the dominant party is in a district so that my vote in the primary counts, because sometimes your vote is worthless in the general election. This happens most frequently with the Democratic Party in cities.
That doesn't mean "I'm a Democrat". It means that I'm using the provider that works best, and strategically using the system just like they do.
Party loyalty? For most people it makes no sense. With few exceptions, you are an idiot to claim loyalty to a party, or to think of it as virtuous. The exceptions? Influence peddlers and politicians. Lawyers also tend to be creatures of party, even if they don't get very far in the hierarchy. It's ugly though. I know a very intelligent Republican who fits into the lawyer category, and hearing him argue that Palin was a good choice was just hilarious. Now the party to which he is so loyal is disagreeing with him over immigration so they can get teh votez. Loyalty? Principal? Parties have no such thing. Loyalty to a party? Maybe it's silly for everybody, not just the common man.
No. At least the US wouldn't react that way. Why? Because NORAD tracks all kinds of things and the profile of a meteor looks nothing like a missile. The missile comes in a parabolic arc at less than escape velocity. The meteor comes in much faster, on a straight line. When you extrapolate back the trajectory you get space, not Russia.
I assume the Russians and Chinese have similar tracking capability. We also know from experience that even if the Russian systems send a false positive, their commanders have the guts to say nyet. That happened during the Cold War.
Rogue nations like North Korea? That's a different story; but they don't have enough bombs to end civilization.
The "definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result" quote is only applicable if you "did the same thing" more than once and got poor results.
Windows 7 was working. People would have upgraded eventually. It wouldn't have been a blowout, but this is a mature industry now. You can't expect blowouts unless you really innovate. In other words, Microsoft was getting good results, "did something different" and got poor results. The saner course of action is to go back to what they were doing, namely working on making their desktop robust, working to make it more secure, maintaining as much backward compatability as possible, and maintaining their Office suite and other products that have solid traction at corporations.
If they wanted to get into mobile the "sane" way, they should have parallel tracked it like the X-box. When they introduced the X-box, they didn't turn the desktop experience into a console experience. That was their fundamental error--deciding that a mobile UI with lots of eye candy was the future, and imposing that on the rest of us.
As for going OSS/FS, it's like telling Apple to release their OS separately. The response to that is "Apple is a hardware company", likewise, "Microsoft is a software company". Of course neither company is "pure" hardware or software; but they both get their "bread and butter" from one or the other.
Definition of insanity? Doing something different just for the sake of it, especially when that something is contrary to your historicly successful business model and you are sitting on more than enough cash to help you make much better plans.
(Disclaimer, IANAL). OK, let's dig deeper. The IRS link is an interpretation. Here's a copy of the law
I don't see anything in the actual law that says you have to be remote. The phrase "convenience" isn't defined there. Perhaps it's defined elsewhere. Perhaps it will eventually be ruled out as unconstitutionally vague.
Here's an interesting case involving this section and lodging. Discuss.
IANAL; but the IRS is at least sane enough to allow coffee, snacks and donuts under de minimis. After having looked over this a bit further after my earlier comment, I see the dispute coming from this paragraph:
Meals you furnish to promote goodwill, boost morale, or attract prospective employees are not considered furnished for your convenience. However, you may be able to exclude their value as discussed under De Minimis Meals , earlier.
OTOH, the definition of "for your convenience" includes some scenarios that are likely to occur at Google facilities, such as sysadmins on call for server outages. That's probably not 50% of the employees there though, so you need to find a way to claim that at least half the people sitting at the tables are doing so under the definition of "for your convenience". That phrase is where the vagueness is coming from, and the lawyers are going to make their pay on that I bet.
I'm assuming that "for your convenience" and "goodwill" are not mutually exclusive. If goodwill taints all the meals, then they're screwed.
FWIW, I think these companies should keep giving away the meals even if they have to tax them. The IRS shouldn't be doing quiet backroom deals either. This rule should be clarified under the current law, and if we don't like the answer we should change the law.
Slashdot Mirror
We are so close to a Web-based operating system I can taste it.
One of the things I like to say is, "In the long run, all file formats become programming languages". When somebody says they need a simple format for a config file or something, inevitably scope creep causes them to ask for something like a conditional (can you have a config setup so that if we're running offline it does this; but if the network is available it does that?). For the developer of the file format, *any* file format, it's a good idea to have a language developer's perspective.
Now, once you look at programming languages you start to get drawn into operating systems. C was developed in conjunction with Unix. Forth tends to become an operating system. Lisp, although it runs in userspace is used as a shell via Emacs and some have compared that to an OS. They talked about building Java chips at one point, and a Java OS certainly would have been written to go with it--it's only natural.
Thus I feel compelled to revise my little one-liner. "In the long run, all file formats become operating systems".
The next time the boss says he needs a flat-text config file, think about what kind of scheduling algorithm you want to use.
Also, individual investors have to pay taxes on dividends. I'm not sure if corporations have to establish a cost basis for potential sale when they acquire their own shares. Not my problem. If the stock pays no dividends but goes up in price, I don't pay tax on the capital gains until I sell. If I never sell, I can leave the shares to my heirs who will get a new tax basis.
Disclaimer: IANAfinancial/tax advisor...
I want my USB controlled and powered Easy Bake oven.
The blades in the racks will get smaller and smaller, and cooler and cooler until... a bunch of hippie hackers decide to build a server farm on their kitchen table. The "dumb terminal" will sit right there on the kitchen table too. It'll be the same "cloud" architecture, but small and private. The PC (Personal Cloud) revolution will begin.
If you haven't actually heard Carlin deliver this bit, it's merely interesting. I've heard him deliver it, and at least half the value is in his intonation. Dig up a link if you can find it. Left as an exercise to the reader.
Plural of anecdote, and semantic of what I consider a small job vs. what you consider a small job. Plenty of people have bathrooms and addtions, and I'm sure it gets tricky. I'm talking about development from the ground up (acquire land, design custom house, build, etc.).
Anyway, the mere existence of proprietary software doesn't prevent people from helping themselves. Proprietary software doesn't eliminate Free or Open Source software; but crusaders who believe proprietary software is immoral and are part of the broader sweep of leftist ideology would force us all to work under copyleft if they had their way. That would be an absolute disaster that would deprive many people of the ability to have things they can't produce themselves, and to help themselves with tools that only exist because of the profit motive.
he will be housed for the rest of his life in a correctional facility that is humanely operated to the maximum extent consistent with ensuring public safety.
If he doesn't get the death penalty, he'll most likely be housed in a Supermax prison which is controversial. Some say it's unconstitutionally cruel and unusual punishment. The wheels of justice haven't ground it down yet though. Note, California's overcrowded state prisons were ruled unconstitutional, with a result of state prisoners being sent to county jails or released, so it is possible to win a suit to improve prison conditions in the US.
Anyway, if supermax is as bad as they say it is, those who say that the death penalty is too merciful may get their wish.
On the one hand, we must maintain the due process of law that makes this country great. On the other hand, threads like this help us vent.
Therefore, I suggest that we throw him in a food processor, and blow him out a vent.
This proprietary program is an instrument of unjust power over the user.
No it isn't. You're free to stop using the device or to develop free apps and free hardware designs. People are doing that every thing, even as we type. Said before, and said again, I have no problem with that. I have no problem with Muslims who don't want to eat pork, or Hindus who don't want to eat beef. I have a problem with people starting a riot in the street because I want to have a bar-b-q and they don't like the smell of it. There's room in this world for both models. Accusations of "immorality" are the first step on the road to theocracy. Ultimately that's what this all boils down to--a religious debate, which is why I did a lot of arguing about it 10 years ago and then finally calmed down and stepped away from it... most of the time.
Like most analogies it isn't perfect. When it comes to minor renovations it breaks the other way. Almost everybody has worked with a contractor for *minor* renovations; and it's usually not too expensive.
Hiring a developer to develop software is no different to hiring an architect and builder to build your house
Right. Which is why most people buy houses in tracts, or pre-existing houses. Very few people who buy a house ever go through the whole development process on their own. It's either too expensive or too difficult and time consuming; just like developing your own software or hiring somebody to develop software.
Note that while "Free Software" purists believe it's immoral to trade in proprietary software, I don't believe it's immoral to trade in "free" or "open source" software. I believe we should all have a choice.
Now go back to that housing analogy and it's like they're saying that inexpensive tract homes and apartments are immoral and that all housing should be custom designed for the occupant (or in the case of an apartment, the community with lots of hands-on interaction from future occupants as opposed to building on spec). In other words, they're making a moral judgement on the processes that deliver products to consumers. They're making that judgement in favor of a process that works well for some people, but not for everybody.
The core BSD code "speaks" to the developer and says, "here's a foundation". Apple speaks and says, "here's what I built on this foundation". If what Apple built on the foundation is trivial, then your effort to duplicate it should be trivial. If what they built is non-trivial, then I have a hard time finding any sympathy with those who claim a right to somebody else's non-trivial work. That work is Apple's. They have a right to their own time and money.
Other developers can chose to clone Apple's work. Some people might think that's a waste; but I think it's good to have more than one approach.
FWIW, I agree that patents would probably end getting in the way and that's where I find common ground with the Free Software folks--software patents shouldn't exist. In fact, when I mentioned this to somebody who asked me why I thought software was special in this regard. I thought about it and realized it wasn't. My mind was changed; but not in the direction he thought. I concluded that there were many other classes of patents that ought to be abolished. Of course, that's another topic...
This line of reasoning also brings us down another familiar path--the cognitive dissonance among Free Software folks concerning "theft". When you discuss "piracy" they are all on board with the idea that "IP can't be stolen because it isn't property, and you still have the first copy", but when you mention permissive licensing they immediately complain that it allows companies to steal code.
I thought somebody might bring that up. They brought it up 10 years ago too. Typical users don't hire developers. Businesses hire developers.
At the consumer level it's just not happening. Joe Sixpack doesn't have apps because he looked at his phone and said, "I need to hire somebody to write an app". Joe Sixpack is a price-taker in the open market, even with the GPL.
The "free software" side's key interest is the freedom of users to modify their hardware and software,
Wow, 10-year flashback from Slashdot of old, arguing about how this freedom is about as important as my right to appear pro se in a court of law. Anyone who is a user and does this with hardware or software has a fool for an engineer. If they are not a fool, they are a developer and then the developer freedoms espoused by permissive licenses become more important.
Looking at a map is interesting. You're wrong about Oregon. The social divides on this issue aren't as clear-cut as they would be on other issues..
Thanks a lot Slashdot. Now I have a sudden urge to know precisely how many married couples with the husbands between the ages of 30 and 32 inclusive have children in Queensland, and what the genders of and ages of the children are.
Passenger trains, even subways, have drivers ("engineers"); and if you've never sat on an unmoving train for an hour you haven't done a lot of train travel. Trains crash, too,
You just reminded me of the story of a Washington DC Metro train that crashed. The operator who died was begging dispatch for manual control as it sped towards a stopped train in a snow storm. I hope they put override in the cars after that.
OK, I had to track down the link for that. It's the first one--the Blizzard of '96 crash. I remember that the Washington Post published a poem with the lines, "when an operator asks for manual control, he's only asking for his life" or something like that. I couldn't find the poem.
Apparently, the system does now give operators manual control of the emergency brake.
Huh? I downloaded Chrome because it has the fastest and most reliable scripting engine (or did at the time). Even though my broker claims to work with IE, some of their tables won't render reliably with IE. They render reliably and quickly with Chrome, so it became my default browser. So. There's one more anecdote...
I treat political parties like phone providers. If they don't connect with me I switch.
I'll register as whatever the dominant party is in a district so that my vote in the primary counts, because sometimes your vote is worthless in the general election. This happens most frequently with the Democratic Party in cities.
That doesn't mean "I'm a Democrat". It means that I'm using the provider that works best, and strategically using the system just like they do.
Party loyalty? For most people it makes no sense. With few exceptions, you are an idiot to claim loyalty to a party, or to think of it as virtuous. The exceptions? Influence peddlers and politicians. Lawyers also tend to be creatures of party, even if they don't get very far in the hierarchy. It's ugly though. I know a very intelligent Republican who fits into the lawyer category, and hearing him argue that Palin was a good choice was just hilarious. Now the party to which he is so loyal is disagreeing with him over immigration so they can get teh votez. Loyalty? Principal? Parties have no such thing. Loyalty to a party? Maybe it's silly for everybody, not just the common man.
No. At least the US wouldn't react that way. Why? Because NORAD tracks all kinds of things and the profile of a meteor looks nothing like a missile. The missile comes in a parabolic arc at less than escape velocity. The meteor comes in much faster, on a straight line. When you extrapolate back the trajectory you get space, not Russia.
I assume the Russians and Chinese have similar tracking capability. We also know from experience that even if the Russian systems send a false positive, their commanders have the guts to say nyet. That happened during the Cold War.
Rogue nations like North Korea? That's a different story; but they don't have enough bombs to end civilization.
The "definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result" quote is only applicable if you "did the same thing" more than once and got poor results.
Windows 7 was working. People would have upgraded eventually. It wouldn't have been a blowout, but this is a mature industry now. You can't expect blowouts unless you really innovate. In other words, Microsoft was getting good results, "did something different" and got poor results. The saner course of action is to go back to what they were doing, namely working on making their desktop robust, working to make it more secure, maintaining as much backward compatability as possible, and maintaining their Office suite and other products that have solid traction at corporations.
If they wanted to get into mobile the "sane" way, they should have parallel tracked it like the X-box. When they introduced the X-box, they didn't turn the desktop experience into a console experience. That was their fundamental error--deciding that a mobile UI with lots of eye candy was the future, and imposing that on the rest of us.
As for going OSS/FS, it's like telling Apple to release their OS separately. The response to that is "Apple is a hardware company", likewise, "Microsoft is a software company". Of course neither company is "pure" hardware or software; but they both get their "bread and butter" from one or the other.
Definition of insanity? Doing something different just for the sake of it, especially when that something is contrary to your historicly successful business model and you are sitting on more than enough cash to help you make much better plans.
Pumpity-dumpity from the Great Wall.
Pumpity-dumpity had a great fall.
All the geek women and all the geek men
Need to configure the routers again.
(Disclaimer, IANAL). OK, let's dig deeper. The IRS link is an interpretation. Here's a copy of the law
I don't see anything in the actual law that says you have to be remote. The phrase "convenience" isn't defined there. Perhaps it's defined elsewhere. Perhaps it will eventually be ruled out as unconstitutionally vague.
Here's an interesting case involving this section and lodging. Discuss.
IANAL; but the IRS is at least sane enough to allow coffee, snacks and donuts under de minimis. After having looked over this a bit further after my earlier comment, I see the dispute coming from this paragraph:
Meals you furnish to promote goodwill, boost morale, or attract prospective employees are not considered furnished for your convenience. However, you may be able to exclude their value as discussed under De Minimis Meals , earlier.
OTOH, the definition of "for your convenience" includes some scenarios that are likely to occur at Google facilities, such as sysadmins on call for server outages. That's probably not 50% of the employees there though, so you need to find a way to claim that at least half the people sitting at the tables are doing so under the definition of "for your convenience". That phrase is where the vagueness is coming from, and the lawyers are going to make their pay on that I bet.
I'm assuming that "for your convenience" and "goodwill" are not mutually exclusive. If goodwill taints all the meals, then they're screwed.
FWIW, I think these companies should keep giving away the meals even if they have to tax them. The IRS shouldn't be doing quiet backroom deals either. This rule should be clarified under the current law, and if we don't like the answer we should change the law.