Last, but not least, Mill-Owner Robert Owen (founder of Owen's College, now the University of Manchester, England) proved conclusively that an able, educated, well-nourished, well-treated work-force with adequate breaks and adequate housing will ALWAYS out-produce a crippled, uneducated, malnourished, abused one, with no breaks and poor housing, by MORE than the difference in cost between them.
Really.
I'm having a little trouble believing this, especially since most modern assembly-line production methods proceed at a fixed rate. I'm also having trouble believing that his proof is so extensive that it covers all economic and technology levels, past and future.
You going to give us a source on this, a paper, a book, a link, or should we just assume you're repeating someone's propaganda?
Where there's always at least a hundred different valid, feasible, workable answers to any question - and everyone tends to forward thier answer as the best. It is, after all, the answer they are most familiar with.
And when you have to choose between answers? Of course it is *always* easier to attack the man instead of the solution he offers, when trying to sell your answer. They're (too young/too old/too female/too dark-skinned/too undereducated/a foolish ivory tower intellecual/a microsoft drone/a linux fanatic/a sloppy-coding perl whiz/a wheel-reinventing c hack/a slow-coding heirarchy-building object fiend). Learning a new solution takes months. Learning the flaws in a person takes a couple hours of contemplation. Didn't Slashdot have an article about old programmers not getting any respect because your tech foundations are stale at 35?
The important thing, really, is not which answer is best, or which answer is most efficient, or which answer is the most politicially correct, when a great many answers would do. What's most important is, which solution is the team best equipped to implement? If you know the new mojo and everyone else uses the old mojo, face it, the old mojo is best for that team at that time. So learn it and be part of the team or prepare your resume, and keep all of the "if we were using X we would just Y" comments to yourself.
If I had a buisness that was once a leader in it's field, and suddenly I was faced with the prospect of going out of buisness, I would be sorely tempted to beat people about the head with IP to keep from putting all my employees on the street.
However, it seems like there's lots of prior art. (See :
A History of Search Engines) So this is probably just a corporate form of rigor mortis. Besides, doesn't everyone use Google these days?
However, applying OCR is something of a
tedious process. Timewise, it takes a while to do, takes a level of experitise, and can be prone to error. Compare to a CD ripper, which is a piece of cake to use and takes about a minute.
Book publishing and audio publishing are not in the same boat.
Look at all the HORRIBLE things I can do with books, and yet I dont see people claiming that modern copy machines are hurting book sales.
You, sir, are an idiot.
A modern book can have 300 pages and cost 5 dollars. That means you are paying about 1.6 cents a page. Without owning your own copy machine (few do), you can't make a copy for less than 3 or 5 cents (often 10) these days. Thus, it is more expensive to copy a book then to buy a book. Of course nobody pirates the things!
Compare this to a MP3, which I can download a couple thousand dollars worth of over a 20 dollar a month connection to the net.
And the people who ranked this tripe as insightful? Shame on you! Don't you use your head? Call FedEX - your clue isn't in yet, maybe it's on backorder.
If they'll change the ending. The ending was very anti-climatic. Clarke made the anticlimax work well, but there's danger of it not carrying over well in movie form. Will they change it?
Maybe this was what was with Dana Barrett's apartment building. It used to be a satellite tracking facility, and that explains all the strange beamwork.
To quote the movie:
"Guess they just don't make 'em like they used to, huh?"
In Canada, you wouldn't have that (assuming we had useful anti-monopoly laws), Canadians would hear that and laugh (like we do now, anyways). Of course government should protect us from Microsoft, we would say. Government is Doing Their Job. I don't remember ever hearing the words Big Brother applied to the Canadian government.
What would you need anti-trust laws for? You already have drive-buisnesses-away-before-they-get-that-big taxes...
A: An absolute right. Let there be no doubt: The primary reason for the right to bear arms is not defense against crime, not hunting, but defense against the State. If the people as a whole do not possess the means to overthrow the State, the State may rule without fear. What good does 'democracy' do, when there is no means to make the rulers obey the result of the vote?
2 : Well, it's our view that if you give a right to a federal government, you will never, ever get it back if it turned out to be a bad idea.
4 : I know way too many people who are against improving public education because it would lower the pay rate gotten for being a well educated individual. ack! It borders on the vile, really.
5 : I have to agree. Sorry about that. I gather the Cold War started because America protected Standard Oil's oil fields in Russia. I've even heard the rumor that fellows in Bagdad asked fellows in Washington if they could grab Kuwait, and the Washington chaps said yes so they could bomb the hell out of them when they did it, for election points. There's a line somewhere, a line between defending your interests and using military force to create interests for you to have. I know not where this line lay - I just know which side of it the USA is on. I think I do.
Why *in the world* would genetic evolution lead us to live *longer*? The longer you live, the slower your reproductive cycles, the slower you evolve compared to shorter-lived beings!
As they say in evolutionary biology, "What you do after you reproduce, from an evolutionary perspective, doesn't fucking matter."
I think it's justified to not trust a government that is disarming the populace and simultaneously arming it's police officers with guns for the first time.
I use micq, Matt's icq clone, because I like having a terminal shell icq client. Here's a project for you. I'd like to be able to fix mispellings in outgoing messages with the s/foo/bar/ notation, which would change foo to bar.
Surely environmentalists will require us to simultaneously send a ship in the opposite direction so that we don't disrupt the sun.
Laugh if you want. I'm sure that the guy who made the first combustion engine and smelled the exhaust said, "Wow, that stuff is really icky. But I can't see the stuff gunking up the atmosphere, it's not *that* much exhaust."
Climate change from messing up the atmosphere is bad enough - do we really want climate change from moving the sun?
Well, I assumed we were looking at the word "instruction" in a new light. Algorithms are lists of instructions. Under a quantum computer, we might have new instructions, such as "pick highest from list" which would be O(n) on an unsorted list in a non-quantum computer, but might be O(1) (doable in one step) on a quantum computer. That's what I'm getting at, I guess.
Slashdot Mirror
Last, but not least, Mill-Owner Robert Owen (founder of Owen's College, now the University of Manchester, England) proved conclusively that an able, educated, well-nourished, well-treated work-force with adequate breaks and adequate housing will ALWAYS out-produce a crippled, uneducated, malnourished, abused one, with no breaks and poor housing, by MORE than the difference in cost between them.
Really.
I'm having a little trouble believing this, especially since most modern assembly-line production methods proceed at a fixed rate. I'm also having trouble believing that his proof is so extensive that it covers all economic and technology levels, past and future.
You going to give us a source on this, a paper, a book, a link, or should we just assume you're repeating someone's propaganda?
Proof that slashdot needs a new type of moderation: "witty". Witty and funny are not the same things.
what if this wasn't newsworthy?
wait, it isn't.
Instead of having it imprisoned in your browser, right click on the wheelman movie link in this page: Wheelman Movie Link
Where there's always at least a hundred different valid, feasible, workable answers to any question - and everyone tends to forward thier answer as the best. It is, after all, the answer they are most familiar with.
And when you have to choose between answers? Of course it is *always* easier to attack the man instead of the solution he offers, when trying to sell your answer. They're (too young/too old/too female/too dark-skinned/too undereducated/a foolish ivory tower intellecual/a microsoft drone/a linux fanatic/a sloppy-coding perl whiz/a wheel-reinventing c hack/a slow-coding heirarchy-building object fiend). Learning a new solution takes months. Learning the flaws in a person takes a couple hours of contemplation. Didn't Slashdot have an article about old programmers not getting any respect because your tech foundations are stale at 35?
The important thing, really, is not which answer is best, or which answer is most efficient, or which answer is the most politicially correct, when a great many answers would do. What's most important is, which solution is the team best equipped to implement? If you know the new mojo and everyone else uses the old mojo, face it, the old mojo is best for that team at that time. So learn it and be part of the team or prepare your resume, and keep all of the "if we were using X we would just Y" comments to yourself.
Where'd you get the stuff in bold? I'm curious to read the rest of it. Always get all of the sides of the story...
So we can move the Earth to make it cooler.
Can we move Venus to make it habitable?
Alltheweb. That's a new one to me - never heard of it. I guess I'll try it for a while.
If I had a buisness that was once a leader in it's field, and suddenly I was faced with the prospect of going out of buisness, I would be sorely tempted to beat people about the head with IP to keep from putting all my employees on the street.
However, it seems like there's lots of prior art. (See : A History of Search Engines) So this is probably just a corporate form of rigor mortis. Besides, doesn't everyone use Google these days?
Hmmm.
Maybe they have contacts to get the digital form inside the publisher? That digital copy has to pass through a lot of hands.
You win.
Excellent point.
However, applying OCR is something of a tedious process. Timewise, it takes a while to do, takes a level of experitise, and can be prone to error. Compare to a CD ripper, which is a piece of cake to use and takes about a minute.
Book publishing and audio publishing are not in the same boat.
Look at all the HORRIBLE things I can do with books, and yet I dont see people claiming that modern copy machines are hurting book sales.
You, sir, are an idiot.
A modern book can have 300 pages and cost 5 dollars. That means you are paying about 1.6 cents a page. Without owning your own copy machine (few do), you can't make a copy for less than 3 or 5 cents (often 10) these days. Thus, it is more expensive to copy a book then to buy a book. Of course nobody pirates the things!
Compare this to a MP3, which I can download a couple thousand dollars worth of over a 20 dollar a month connection to the net.
And the people who ranked this tripe as insightful? Shame on you! Don't you use your head? Call FedEX - your clue isn't in yet, maybe it's on backorder.
If they'll change the ending. The ending was very anti-climatic. Clarke made the anticlimax work well, but there's danger of it not carrying over well in movie form. Will they change it?
Maybe it's time to start building support for a constitutional ammendment that specifically forbids prosecution for consensual crimes.
Maybe this was what was with Dana Barrett's apartment building. It used to be a satellite tracking facility, and that explains all the strange beamwork.
To quote the movie:
"Guess they just don't make 'em like they used to, huh?"
"No, no! Nobody ever made them like this!"
In Canada, you wouldn't have that (assuming we had useful anti-monopoly laws), Canadians would hear that and laugh (like we do now, anyways). Of course government should protect us from Microsoft, we would say. Government is Doing Their Job. I don't remember ever hearing the words Big Brother applied to the Canadian government.
What would you need anti-trust laws for? You already have drive-buisnesses-away-before-they-get-that-big taxes...
I'll just quote a favorite of mine, Lizard:
Q: What about the right to bear arms?
A: An absolute right. Let there be no doubt: The primary reason for the right to bear arms is not defense against crime, not hunting, but defense against the State. If the people as a whole do not possess the means to overthrow the State, the State may rule without fear. What good does 'democracy' do, when there is no means to make the rulers obey the result of the vote?
With regards to:
Cobol?
COBOL?
Will we never be rid of that damn language?
Why *in the world* would genetic evolution lead us to live *longer*? The longer you live, the slower your reproductive cycles, the slower you evolve compared to shorter-lived beings!
As they say in evolutionary biology, "What you do after you reproduce, from an evolutionary perspective, doesn't fucking matter."
wince
Put the pun on the ground and raise your hands in the air! Back away from the pun! This is your final warning!
I think it's justified to not trust a government that is disarming the populace and simultaneously arming it's police officers with guns for the first time.
I use micq, Matt's icq clone, because I like having a terminal shell icq client. Here's a project for you. I'd like to be able to fix mispellings in outgoing messages with the s/foo/bar/ notation, which would change foo to bar.
Surely environmentalists will require us to simultaneously send a ship in the opposite direction so that we don't disrupt the sun.
Laugh if you want. I'm sure that the guy who made the first combustion engine and smelled the exhaust said, "Wow, that stuff is really icky. But I can't see the stuff gunking up the atmosphere, it's not *that* much exhaust."
Climate change from messing up the atmosphere is bad enough - do we really want climate change from moving the sun?
Well, I assumed we were looking at the word "instruction" in a new light. Algorithms are lists of instructions. Under a quantum computer, we might have new instructions, such as "pick highest from list" which would be O(n) on an unsorted list in a non-quantum computer, but might be O(1) (doable in one step) on a quantum computer. That's what I'm getting at, I guess.