If your accountant is entering invoices in your system fine but the entry is always done by a clerk and the accountant verifies the enties.
You make a very good point there. I guess it really depends on your industry, the size of your company, and your expectation for growth. A lot of the time it's going to make sense to just outsource your accounting completely. Other times may call for other circumstances. I can't think of a situation where it makes sense to pick the software first and the accountant second, though.
I'm not a fan of micromanagement. If I have a certain set of requirements for reports, I'd rather discuss that with the accountant and get his/her suggestions. Unless this is an extremely small business (say less than $100,000/year revenue), you're going to want a dedicated person working at least part-time on managing your finances. Accountants, like programmers, want to at least perceive that they are in control of their own work. Giving them latitude in their accounting environment will pay off in loyalty and productivity in the long run.
Even if you insist on having the final say on the software package, the question of what is out there and how good it is is much better researched by the person doing the work than by some random people on slashdot.
If you were starting your own business and standardized on Linux as a platform, what accounting package would you use and why?
Whatever the accountant/CFO/treasurer was most familiar with. The cost of the manpower is going to greatly exceed the cost of the software, in this instance.
In fact, if you read the article, it actually refutes your claims, and provides comprehensive evidence that Autism and Asperger's syndrome are genetically based.
Even if Autism and Asperger's syndrome are genetically based, upbringing is still going to increase the diagnosis of Autism and Asperger's.
Geeks tend to be wealthy, and therefore are more able to afford psychiatric evaluation for their young children. They also tend to have good mental health plans. Also, bad parenting can mild to medium case much more pronounced, and may contribute to misdiagnosis. Also, geeks tend to want answers for things. Where a non-geek might just think his/her child is a bit anti-social, and punish the child (that's basically what my non-geek parents did), a geek is more likely to look it up on the internet, recognize the symptoms, and take the kid to a psychiatrist.
please explain how this story is 'news for nerds, stuff that matters'
If you don't want movie reviews, turn off the movies category. If you don't think satire about pop-culture is "news for nerds", explain to me why so many computers are named after Simpson's characters.
The whole point of the movie is to make fun of pop culture. I think that qualifies it as "News for Nerds".
As for "Stuff that Matters", if you don't think movies matter, it's really quite simple to go into your preferences and turn off the "movies" category.
The commodity is traffic. VPN traffic and other traffic costs them the exact same amount of money to produce/distribute/etc. In fact, they have zero way to distinguish VPN traffic from non-VPN traffic. The only reason they do so is because telecommuters have a more inelastic demand curve, and therefore are willing to pay higher prices.
What subscription is about is when a corporation forces me to upgrade.
Forces you how? I don't see anyone putting a gun to anyone else's head, and any language in the EULA is completely unenforcible. You bought the software, you have the right to use it, forever.
In any case, my point is that in order for the open source movement to suceed, subscription services are essentially the only solution. Redhat is only one example. A better one would probably be Tivo.
BUT... the contract itself does seem to be legal. He is giving up something (money) for a service (internet connection). As part of that arrangement, certain restrictions on the usage have been set, in the contract. When he signed the contract (or agreed via a website or by placing an order), he has agreed to all terms of the contract.
The contract itself is legal, in that there is consideration for both sides, but that doesn't mean that every single part of it is enforcible. It is quite common for contracts to include terminology giving up rights which are not enforcible. This is why most contracts include language that if one part is deemed unenforcible that the rest of the contract still holds.
There's no monopoly there - there are alternatives to this service. Maybe not as attractive, but there are alternatives.
The same could be said of Microsoft's monopoly In fact, the same was said, and a judge decided that this was not the case. I think it's clear that many cable companies have monopolies on high speed internet access in certain areas.
As for restraint of trade - huh? I'm not seeing this here. VPN is generally (key word there) used by businesses, or by individuals wanting to telecommute. These tend to use higher amounts of bandwidth during peak periods.
This is what the cable companies would like you to believe, but I seriously doubt this is the truth. Peak bandwidth on a cable-modem system does not occur during business hours. The costs associated with cable companies provision of bandwidth comes mainly from the peak bandwidth necessary, not the total bandwidth used.
The exception to the Robinson-Patman act that I assume you're thinking of reads "Provided, That nothing herein contained shall prevent differentials which make only due allowance for differences in the cost of manufacture, sale, or delivery resulting from the differing methods or quantities in which such commodities are to such purchasers sold or delivered". I don't think using a VPN qualifies.
I understand that, but that's not what he signed. Yes, the TOS he signed says they disallow what he's doing.
I can sign something saying that I will kill myself. Doesn't make it legally binding. BTW, I highly doubt he signed anything, not that that's a requirement for it to be binding.
So they're going to shut off a paying customer who isn't harming anyone?
Although I agree with you that this is damn silly, yes. They legally can and could/will pull his plug should they want to crack down on this stuff.
Legally can is debatable. They are a monopoly in restraint of free trade. But I don't really want to get into that argument, cause I could see a court going either way.
My point (and I believe the point of the original commenter), is that they likely won't permanently cut off service to someone who is paying them a nice monthly fee and isn't harming anyone, especially if that person refuses to upgrade to a business level service. The clause is there as an excuse to shut people off who are bothering them in some way, not to be taken literally.
Remember when Netscape had a 30 day trial, then you were supposed to pay for it? Did they have a legal right to take it from you or sue you after 30 days? Yes (well, actually, maybe, but that's another legal question). Did they sue any consumers? Of course not. They actually encouraged consumers to break the "contract". Because it wasn't in their best interests to enforce it.
god, i forget what the term is, but there's an economics word for this. old people and students get discounts in the real world, non-workers get discounts in the virtual one. annoying, but fair.
The "economics word" is "price discrimination". And under the Robinson-Patman act, it is sometimes illegal.
A seller charging competing buyers different prices for the same "commodity" or discriminating in the provision of "allowances" -- compensation for advertising and other services -- may be violating the Robinson-Patman Act. This kind of price discrimination may hurt competition by giving favored customers an edge in the market that has nothing to do with the superior efficiency of those customers. However, price discriminations generally are lawful, particularly if they reflect the different costs of dealing with different buyers or result from a seller?s attempts to meet a competitor?s prices or services.
The funny thing is, a subscription model is pretty much the only way to make money off open-source software. All you FAIC freaks better start getting used to the idea, if you expect open-source to be the wave of the future.
I agree with you for the most part, but there are two major differences:
Using encryption is a passive activity. No one else is affected by it. Breaking into someone's computer and installing a keylogger is not a passive activity. This is why I find one morally neutral, and the other one morally wrong.
Outlawing the use of these systems may be somewhat futile in that they will still be used by the FBI, but it is not completely futile because this information will not be able to be used as evidence in a court of law.
If I sue the government for breaking into my computer, I get a large amount of money. If the government sues someone for using encryption, society gets to pay for one more person's room and board in jail.
Last I checked, "posession of stolen property" was still a crime.
Cite that. I highly doubt the law covers possession of copyrighted material. The copyrighted material is, however, evidence that you committed a crime, namely "copying copyrighted material without permission".
Then again, if you store the mp3s on tape, or other AHRA medium, you're protected under the Audio Home Recording Act. If not you have to rely on fair use, which will probably only work if you've legally paid for a copy.
I wasn't aware that Mozilla had an "open" feature. I've certainly never used it. How would that "open" feature work, anyway? How would mozilla know what application to launch, for instance?
All I know is when I click on a pdf, my only option is "save". I assumed (presumably wrongly) that all mime types would behave similarly.
Ethics 101: We are the lawyers. We make the laws. We judge the laws. We prosectute the laws. We defend from the laws. About the only place in law we don't have a monopoly is in juries, but we're working on repealing your right to a jury as we speak.
Anyone giving free advice without going to our way overpriced schools will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
I was browsing around for emulators and roms, and I got kicked to a porn site and a million pop-ups.
Hehe, "browsing around for emulators and roms". I'll have to use that one when my girlfriend asks me about the porn sites in the history.
But seriously...
I thought it was interesting that it had gotten on my computer without my knowledge...I don't open files I don't trust and maybe it was another exploit of IE, I don't know.
I would assume that A) the virus was already there, B) you clicked something accidently, C) it was a different exploit, or D) IHBT. IHL. HAND.
Do you happen to know what site you were browsing at the time? I'd definately be interested in checking it out for myself. Check your history if it's something that happened recently.
Slashdot Mirror
mozilla.org is working towards having all the code in the tree licensed under a MPL/LGPL/GPL tri-license
working towards != is
(And, it is truly Free!)
NPL != Free
If your accountant is entering invoices in your system fine but the entry is always done by a clerk and the accountant verifies the enties.
You make a very good point there. I guess it really depends on your industry, the size of your company, and your expectation for growth. A lot of the time it's going to make sense to just outsource your accounting completely. Other times may call for other circumstances. I can't think of a situation where it makes sense to pick the software first and the accountant second, though.
If you know one accounting app you know them all.
I'm not a fan of micromanagement. If I have a certain set of requirements for reports, I'd rather discuss that with the accountant and get his/her suggestions. Unless this is an extremely small business (say less than $100,000/year revenue), you're going to want a dedicated person working at least part-time on managing your finances. Accountants, like programmers, want to at least perceive that they are in control of their own work. Giving them latitude in their accounting environment will pay off in loyalty and productivity in the long run.
Even if you insist on having the final say on the software package, the question of what is out there and how good it is is much better researched by the person doing the work than by some random people on slashdot.
If you were starting your own business and standardized on Linux as a platform, what accounting package would you use and why?
Whatever the accountant/CFO/treasurer was most familiar with. The cost of the manpower is going to greatly exceed the cost of the software, in this instance.
In fact, if you read the article, it actually refutes your claims, and provides comprehensive evidence that Autism and Asperger's syndrome are genetically based.
Even if Autism and Asperger's syndrome are genetically based, upbringing is still going to increase the diagnosis of Autism and Asperger's.
Geeks tend to be wealthy, and therefore are more able to afford psychiatric evaluation for their young children. They also tend to have good mental health plans. Also, bad parenting can mild to medium case much more pronounced, and may contribute to misdiagnosis. Also, geeks tend to want answers for things. Where a non-geek might just think his/her child is a bit anti-social, and punish the child (that's basically what my non-geek parents did), a geek is more likely to look it up on the internet, recognize the symptoms, and take the kid to a psychiatrist.
http://www.mydomain.com (next time try google, not slashdot).
After reading other reviews and the IMDB demographic of votes, I guess I mispoke. I was giving JK the benefit of the doubt. Silly me.
please explain how this story is 'news for nerds, stuff that matters'
If you don't want movie reviews, turn off the movies category. If you don't think satire about pop-culture is "news for nerds", explain to me why so many computers are named after Simpson's characters.
I assumed he actually meant "self-referential". As in, the movie makes fun of itself.
The whole point of the movie is to make fun of pop culture. I think that qualifies it as "News for Nerds".
As for "Stuff that Matters", if you don't think movies matter, it's really quite simple to go into your preferences and turn off the "movies" category.
The commodity is traffic. VPN traffic and other traffic costs them the exact same amount of money to produce/distribute/etc. In fact, they have zero way to distinguish VPN traffic from non-VPN traffic. The only reason they do so is because telecommuters have a more inelastic demand curve, and therefore are willing to pay higher prices.
What subscription is about is when a corporation forces me to upgrade.
Forces you how? I don't see anyone putting a gun to anyone else's head, and any language in the EULA is completely unenforcible. You bought the software, you have the right to use it, forever.
In any case, my point is that in order for the open source movement to suceed, subscription services are essentially the only solution. Redhat is only one example. A better one would probably be Tivo.
Usual preface - IANAL.
IANALE.
BUT ... the contract itself does seem to be legal. He is giving up something (money) for a service (internet connection). As part of that arrangement, certain restrictions on the usage have been set, in the contract. When he signed the contract (or agreed via a website or by placing an order), he has agreed to all terms of the contract.
The contract itself is legal, in that there is consideration for both sides, but that doesn't mean that every single part of it is enforcible. It is quite common for contracts to include terminology giving up rights which are not enforcible. This is why most contracts include language that if one part is deemed unenforcible that the rest of the contract still holds.
There's no monopoly there - there are alternatives to this service. Maybe not as attractive, but there are alternatives.
The same could be said of Microsoft's monopoly In fact, the same was said, and a judge decided that this was not the case. I think it's clear that many cable companies have monopolies on high speed internet access in certain areas.
As for restraint of trade - huh? I'm not seeing this here. VPN is generally (key word there) used by businesses, or by individuals wanting to telecommute. These tend to use higher amounts of bandwidth during peak periods.
This is what the cable companies would like you to believe, but I seriously doubt this is the truth. Peak bandwidth on a cable-modem system does not occur during business hours. The costs associated with cable companies provision of bandwidth comes mainly from the peak bandwidth necessary, not the total bandwidth used.
The exception to the Robinson-Patman act that I assume you're thinking of reads "Provided, That nothing herein contained shall prevent differentials which make only due allowance for differences in the cost of manufacture, sale, or delivery resulting from the differing methods or quantities in which such commodities are to such purchasers sold or delivered". I don't think using a VPN qualifies.
I can sign something saying that I will kill myself. Doesn't make it legally binding. BTW, I highly doubt he signed anything, not that that's a requirement for it to be binding.
Legally can is debatable. They are a monopoly in restraint of free trade. But I don't really want to get into that argument, cause I could see a court going either way.
My point (and I believe the point of the original commenter), is that they likely won't permanently cut off service to someone who is paying them a nice monthly fee and isn't harming anyone, especially if that person refuses to upgrade to a business level service. The clause is there as an excuse to shut people off who are bothering them in some way, not to be taken literally.
Remember when Netscape had a 30 day trial, then you were supposed to pay for it? Did they have a legal right to take it from you or sue you after 30 days? Yes (well, actually, maybe, but that's another legal question). Did they sue any consumers? Of course not. They actually encouraged consumers to break the "contract". Because it wasn't in their best interests to enforce it.
The same way redhat does it. Additonally, by tying the product to a service, a la Tivo or MSN Companion.
god, i forget what the term is, but there's an economics word for this. old people and students get discounts in the real world, non-workers get discounts in the virtual one. annoying, but fair.
The "economics word" is "price discrimination". And under the Robinson-Patman act, it is sometimes illegal.
So they're going to shut off a paying customer who isn't harming anyone? NO, they're not going to do that. That's kind of the point of his comment.
The funny thing is, a subscription model is pretty much the only way to make money off open-source software. All you FAIC freaks better start getting used to the idea, if you expect open-source to be the wave of the future.
I agree with you for the most part, but there are two major differences:
Last I checked, "posession of stolen property" was still a crime.
Cite that. I highly doubt the law covers possession of copyrighted material. The copyrighted material is, however, evidence that you committed a crime, namely "copying copyrighted material without permission".
Then again, if you store the mp3s on tape, or other AHRA medium, you're protected under the Audio Home Recording Act. If not you have to rely on fair use, which will probably only work if you've legally paid for a copy.
I wasn't aware that Mozilla had an "open" feature. I've certainly never used it. How would that "open" feature work, anyway? How would mozilla know what application to launch, for instance?
All I know is when I click on a pdf, my only option is "save". I assumed (presumably wrongly) that all mime types would behave similarly.
Ethics 101: We are the lawyers. We make the laws. We judge the laws. We prosectute the laws. We defend from the laws. About the only place in law we don't have a monopoly is in juries, but we're working on repealing your right to a jury as we speak.
Anyone giving free advice without going to our way overpriced schools will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
I was browsing around for emulators and roms, and I got kicked to a porn site and a million pop-ups.
Hehe, "browsing around for emulators and roms". I'll have to use that one when my girlfriend asks me about the porn sites in the history.
But seriously...
I thought it was interesting that it had gotten on my computer without my knowledge...I don't open files I don't trust and maybe it was another exploit of IE, I don't know.
I would assume that A) the virus was already there, B) you clicked something accidently, C) it was a different exploit, or D) IHBT. IHL. HAND.
Do you happen to know what site you were browsing at the time? I'd definately be interested in checking it out for myself. Check your history if it's something that happened recently.