Server crashed. No explanation. After an hour of everyone's best effort, it becomes clear that we don't know what we're doing. (This is why its smart to hire admins, as opposed to not having an admin)
So, we've got one production server. It handles everything. Database, email, people's files, ftp server, web site.
A lot of things are going to need to be backed up, and for people to come in monday and work, a lot of things are going to need to be configured.
Bottom line, I knew what these tasks were, what and how to back up, and how to configure everything so that it would at least be parity to our pre-crash situation (which, of course, wasn't great, but people could get work done)
You can't really cut back features if management is asking for MORE features and less time.
In short, I'm a "classic clueless newbie" so what do I know about scheduling?
And scheduling software is very, very tough. I couldn't explain "the best way" that "would always work."
There's just a lot of approaches to it.
But at the risk of being labeled an ignorant and naive kid, I know its less-than-practical to just add features, cut back on time, and not test.
Its called "shoot from the hip" programming. You won't find any books on that methodology because there is yet to be an expert in the field that ships a working product to the outside world that an end-user would call "good".
You're absolutely right. I don't know of a single large company that *doesn't* use cubes. It makes me question the writer's knowledge of...anything.
Have you ever heard of Microsoft? Here's a little tidbit there: Every developer gets an office. Not having heard of them, this make me question your knowledge of...everything.
didn't even bother to listen to alumni dispensing career advice because it was "all very, very dry." Attendance to the seminars were mandatory. 90% of the time, it was related to our major (Robotics club, Engineering Student Council, IEEE.) The time an alumni did speak, it was so boring the professors left early.
His sole qualification is a Bachelors in CS from a middle tier school, and he acts like he should be given the golden boy treatment in his first job.
Sorry, B.S. in Computer Engineering, and I interned every summer, and before that I completed a minor in CS at a small private college.
As to my thoughts on my management, it comes to down to this: There are managers out there that are competant with no technical experienance. Because they focus on managing their team, not telling them how to program. Its a different skillset then coding.
Just like developing software is a different skillset to testing software.
As to the reason for my lay off -- you very well might be right. I'm not so arrogant that I would flat out deny that this is my side of the story.
I think its unlikely that I'm suffering depression, unless I was born depressed and a lifelong sufferer of it, undiagnosed by any of the medical professionals I'm come into contact with throughout the course of my life.
And there's quite a gap between "the constant shrill noise of a phone breaks my concentration" and "man, i'm so depressed, i think i'm gonna pull a Kurt Cobain."
More to the point: I know its possible to burn out on your first job out of school (*cough*, EA games, *cough*) but I doubt I'm a burn out. I feel like I haven't even hit my stride as a software developer, and from what I can tell, that's perfectly normal, considering the breadth and depth in the field.
Remember, the premise for the cublicle speech is if I was to ever speak at my school. Yes, I've only been out now about 18 months. There probably are "successful" companies out there with cubes. "Successful and fun to work at"...well I'm not so sure.
And I know, work is not supposed to be fun. But if you're passionate about it, there should be some fun to it. At the very least, you should enjoy the team you're working with. I know most of the older crowd has things in their life that are more important then a cubicle/office debate. They have kids, they have a house. They have hobbies. I'm sure work seems like less of an issue. But for a "new blood", to someone just out, things like that either feel right or wrong. In my defense, it doesn't take 18 months to figure out whether or not you like cubicles. Although I won't deny that things like being allowed to listen to music might minimize the cubicle issue. Where i worked, you could hear your co-workers gossip amongst themselves and about each other as you tried to meet (impossible) deadlines.
And yes, if you plan on leaving, be smart like a monkey: have a firm grasp on the next tree branch before letting go of the current one. I didn't have that luxury.
One of the comments on my blog before it got/.'d was from a worker whose company was bought out by Very Big Software Corp -- I can't speak for him, but I think he was implying IBM. He's a friend of mine, and I believe him when he says he's happier that he left early while they started shuffling employees to cubes.
1) The applications we developed were web-interface/database backend. Mainly for aiding in paperwork.
This makes sense, as a highly regulated industry (nuclear power) is going to be heavy on the paperwork.
2) With 1) in mind, a corporation might adopt a standard of ASP.NET for their enterprise applications. If this is case, you have to a) live with it, or b) move on.
I tried a) until I got the boot. Now I don't develop in.NET.
And while I don't think of.NET as "totally useless", I certainly enjoy work more now that I'm sans VB.
No, a degree doesn't 'entitle' you to anything.
Here is what I'm trying to say: A cubicle is a sign of a bankrupt corporate culture, one not likely to value you. And odds are, you won't find yourself doing interesting projects at your workplace. Unless your definition of interesting is an online profit-loss worksheet for accounts receiveable.
JoelOnSoftware.com has an article titled "Five Worlds" in the archive. I would definitely suggest you check it out.
Good points. The manager I worked under had a cube right behind mine. Like I said in the article, I was just out of school. I was trying to pad schedules by a factor of 25% -- time I referred to as "test time."
It always got cut. I'm a lot happier working at a place with testers.
If you want to take a test drive on a Mac, and you've got decent credit, order one and try it for 30 days. If you don't like it, return it and get your money back.
Or there's the apple store....
but you won't get G4 performance out of any Intel Procs. Or AMD. Because they're not G4s. They both process data, but they both do it differently. And I doubt stuff like Quartz Extreme is handled by an emulator. So you won't be getting the Mac experience.
Everyone here at/. thinks its expensive to get a Mac....you guys ever hear of a little website called ebay?
Apple's Quicktime player is free, with no ad-support. All that Apple needs to do is fix a bug that would prevent them from playing divx files. Time to start flooding their forums!
Yeah, because the 18 year olds of this generation our helpless. I'm about to graduate from college this year, and I've got everyone I know younger then me calling about how to get rid of Blaster. Hopefully Ten year olds of this generation know to keep virus defs. up to date, if they're running windows.
PC's are not mono culture. PC's are extremely diverse. Just because many PC's run Windows does not mean that is all a PC can do.
You're right. A PC can do something other then run windows: It can be used as a doorstop. You can use it to break windows by throwing it through them. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean it should be.
The point I'm trying to make here is against the IT-environment myth: Mono-cultures solve problems. Mono-cultures are easier to administer. Since all PCs can pretty much do the same. So why not just buy all one PC? Just because you can tool out a PC to be flexible, doesn't mean the IT eejit will. Most networks take the "Personal" out of "Personal Computing".
I used to run a Mac Notebook. Gave it away. Why? Because it was too limited. With my PC I can run; Linux, Windows, FreeBsd, Solaris, etc. On top of each OS I can run X*X*X applications.
Um....Macs can run X*X*X applications. With Fink, most open source packages can be recompiled and run on a Mac just as if it were linux. You forget that OS X is BSD based, and its compatibility is increasing with every update. Techically, if UNIX is UNIX is UNIX and LINUX is LINUX is LINUX, you weren't limited, except in thinking how to accomplish things. Why not check out OSXguide.com and learn how to handle all the ticky installs. I mean, it shouldn't be much harder the installing a complex software package on Solaris, Unix, Linux, BSD, etc, right?
My Mac essentially has two choices OSX or Linux from Yellow Dog. Software apps is even worse. I once asked a company selling Linux software to do a simple recompile for OSX. No-go.... While Open Source is great not all packages will configure and build for a PPC chip.
But the majority will. And OS is nothing but a tool to run software applications. And with the ability to run X apps, as well as Mac apps, Mac users have more software choice then EVER. And more then just a typical *nix user.
It is just oo frustrating...
Nope, it is the Mac world is that mono-culture...
The FBI to this day still gives its field agents PowerBooks. You want to knoow why? Because they're the most flexible laptops in the world. They've had X windows clients/servers (X is not a *nix feature, its a protocol, it can and does run on nearly every platform. people forget this.) It can run Windows (virtual PC), and its had Applications like Tenons Mach Ten (sort of a propritary version of Cygwin) to run Unix apps before OS X had a BSD underbelly. There's nothing that a mac couldn't do that a PC running *nix or windows couldn't.
Isn't it highly funny that a "public" radio station has choosen an exclusive, proprietary solution?
There are open source streaming servers (shoutcast, Quicktime streaming server) and plenty of other, commercial servers that rely on open-standards (just like real radio) so that choice of client is irrelevant and up to the user.
Here's another one. Don't break the law. The courts don't give a damn what you think about music or the RIAA. You can think music should be free all you want. That isn't going to change the fact that someone else has the copyright to it, not you. And despite the wailing and gnashing of teeth here, last time I checked, there was no right to copyright infringement of any kind.
Just because it's cheap, and easy, and it's music doesn't get you an exemption in the eyes of the law. And don't scream fair use at me either. Distributing a song to 100,000 of your closest friends on KaZaa isn't fair use.
Actually, distribution of that kind is legal. Ever been to an online rom site? "If you do not own an original ROM of this game, do not download it." or the ever classic "These ROMs are available for evaluation purposes only, if you decide not to buy the game, you must delete the ROM in 24 hours."
If that's legal, why can a click-thru license on Kazaa simply state that everyone agrees to something like that? That they already own a license to the content or the files will be deleted. A lot of ROM sites stay up and running -- they're not shut down all the time like file-swappers would be.
And the poor guy sharing "as many" (and not "as few") as 8 songs online could simply show up in court with a (legally purchased) CD containing the tracks he downloaded. Hell, he could even claim he was forced to download the MP3s because the CD he bought contained copy-protected files which he could not rip with his own technical ability.
With all hope, some sort of loophole will prevent them from getting many settlements, while the cost of all the legal fees will really make them take a hit.
It's like they say: You can't legislate profitability.
I'm trying to figure out what the big deal is. Apple makes a freely available "QuickTime Streaming Server". Download it, install it. And stream your music through it. Its not that hard. Anyone with quicktime can then connect and listen to the music stream. Its not like apple really "forced fed anyone shit." They just made it slightly harder for the RIAA to hold them accountable.
As long as I've got a normal CD player then I've got a way to "rip" cd tracks. All I'll have to do is plug the tape out from my receiver into the line-level input of my sound card and "rip" the CD track to a wav file. The people at these radio stations should be able to do something equivalent. When CD's first started being used in radio 15+ years ago, the people at the station generally copied them over to the high-fidelity analog tapes they used for broadcast at the time. I don't know what they're using nowadays, but I'd tend to believe that the engineers there could transfer the CD tracks into the needed format in their sleep regardless of anything the RIAA does to the CD.
Depending on the budget of the station, it may not have an engineer. One thing that made Clear Channel so effiecent was they automated everything, and just had an engineer rotate from station to station. As it stands, I bet the people "ripping" tracks were nothing more then trained moneys who hold down the fort while the engineer's away.
As the human species progress over the course of time, without destroying itself, it will inherently gain many qualities. One of which is, since we've developed many ways to aid in our progress, to make machines that will aid in our progress. To think otherwise is insane - do you know anyone that would have taken Pi to the extent pc's have? I thought not. As computers become more common place humans will evolve further.
Computers have yet to exist long enough for them to effect evolution. And before you get all high and mighty about your precious status as human, top of the food chain, remember that dinosaurs ruled with earth with thick skin, big teeth, and cold blood for 40 million years. Our evolutionary experiment of "reason" (brainpower and tool building as opposed to strength) has only lasted 7,000 years. Not very long in compairison, when you think about it. With oil spills, nuclear fallout, and all the other potential "civilization killers" or "environmental destroyers". It looks like man's greatest enemy in evolving further is man.
We will no longer have to invest in hard core brain power, and perhaps will concentrate on a different role.
Actually, we're not going to "evolve" anything differently. The more complex an organism, the harder it is to change. Thinking/Self-Managing Technology is not going to supplant thought anymore then the calculator was going to destory mathematics. Technology, often thought of today as man's savior (both in medecine and in war) will not give you answers. Such Optimism in the technology field is dangerous. Do you think AI is going to be used in educating your children, or in designing smartbombs? If you believe the former instead of the latter, stop by CMU's SEI (Software Engineering Institute -- making the guidance systems of a lifetime:) )
If you disagree with darwinism please disregard this post entirely, I don't want to say anything but my opinion. As computers start to do some things for us we will learn how to do other things we couldn't imagine of doing right now. The question is - will we get there without losing sight of what is really important?
Maybe the inner cynic in me wants me to yell "haven't we already?" -- but in general, I see all men as blind -- even those whose faith lies in the prominence of scientific reasoning, such as myself. We're cane tapping our way to the future. All our past discoveries are merely a recorded number of taps from one location to another. My hope for the next century is the men learn to see, instead of continue to cane tap. That's when things will get exciting.
If I lost you, I apologize in advance - mod this down all you want:)
The arguments seem to boil down to "trust" and "possible misuse".
Fair enough, but I really think people are getting a little paranoid here.
But in a free society, shouldn't people have the right to be paranoid? The right to free speech includes anonymous speech, and the right NOT to speak out. Life is not so "black and white" or "right and wrong" with respect to privacy. Say I'm a licensed, professional engineering. My company is committing illegal actions violating environmental standards, and endangering the welfare of the local population. If my free speech were truly protected, then blowing the whistle would be consequence free. But anyone knows that companies have something to hide, and that employees who violate that "corporate wall of silence" find it harder to get a job with another employer. Thus, anonymous speech could be used, if I wanted to protect my career. What if the company I worked for had influence politically -- and with our current law and mind frame....i could be considered a terrorist.
Every employee that forms part of "The Government" is a person just like you or me; they go home at night to their families; and have a private life - just like anybody else.
That argument alone isn't enough for me. Kennith Lay was a person "just like me" -- he went home every night to his home and family. But the big difference is Kennith Lay got rich off putting 42,000 american familes out of work. Misuse isn't a "hypothetical situation" its a standard operating procedure. Wouldn't you misuse it? What if the "security benifits" outweighed the "costs". Besides, no one's going to find out about it. And after they realized we prevented Sept. 11th 2: The Sequel, they wouldn't question our methods. The ends will justify the means for the public.
It is in their interest to protect their private life just as much (if not more so!) as you or me.
Or divert the watchful eye's attention on to someone else's. Remember, in 1984 all the party members could turn off their telescreens.
Even the (President | Prime Minister) if they were to leave office would be as subject to any government surveillance as anybody else.
If everyone were equal under the law, George W. Bush would have to take the bus and would never have come to power. His "youthful indiscretions" were D.U.Is at age 29. Police Officers found him driving on the shoulder of the road! Now he gets to send other families' kids off to die, having never fought in a war himself (He dodged the draft by joining the national guard back during Nam.)
If the NSA employee could discover something about you in the future and use it against you; well that's a bummer; but there is just as much chance of something being found and used against that NSA employee.
Again, more motivation to find dirt on other people. Get results, and they won't be looking for fault on the inside. There are plenty of patsy's in the american public.
I think I trust my Government. They're elected after all;
Not in my country, buddy. Stupid Florida.
the big caveat being that the majority of what is the "Government" is the civil service; which of course does not change with elections. I'm sure "Yes Prime Minister" has been seen outside the UK.
Even Civil Servants fall in love, and have cats and dogs as pets.
Plenty of people who've done horrible, horrible things were animal lovers or some such drek. Hitler was a strict vegetarian. G.W. Bush Jr reads scripture every day in the morning, even when he was executing retarded people as the Governor of Texas.
We've also had the secret police in western countries for years; and probably still have departments that are "even more secret than the secret ones that we know about"; but so what.
So why should I just sit there and let a soulless organization be funded with my money to work against me and deny me the very freedoms I'm supposedly paying them to "protect"? Are YOU being served?
I think people need to chill out a bit.
I think you need to graduate High School, go to college, maybe stop watching "Yes Prime Minister" and look at how dreadfully dangerous your government IS. Not "will be" or "can be", but IS.
Slashdot Mirror
To clarify the situation:
Server crashed. No explanation. After an hour of everyone's best effort, it becomes clear that we don't know what we're doing. (This is why its smart to hire admins, as opposed to not having an admin)
So, we've got one production server. It handles everything. Database, email, people's files, ftp server, web site.
A lot of things are going to need to be backed up, and for people to come in monday and work, a lot of things are going to need to be configured.
Bottom line, I knew what these tasks were, what and how to back up, and how to configure everything so that it would at least be parity to our pre-crash situation (which, of course, wasn't great, but people could get work done)
What really happened? Two words: Office Politics.
Good concise advice. I'm definitely trying to guard against the same situation in the future. :)
By posting on slashdot all day
You can't really cut back features if management is asking for MORE features and less time.
In short, I'm a "classic clueless newbie" so what do I know about scheduling?
And scheduling software is very, very tough. I couldn't explain "the best way" that "would always work."
There's just a lot of approaches to it.
But at the risk of being labeled an ignorant and naive kid, I know its less-than-practical to just add features, cut back on time, and not test.
Its called "shoot from the hip" programming. You won't find any books on that methodology because there is yet to be an expert in the field that ships a working product to the outside world that an end-user would call "good".
You're absolutely right. I don't know of a single large company that *doesn't* use cubes. It makes me question the writer's knowledge of...anything.
Have you ever heard of Microsoft? Here's a little tidbit there: Every developer gets an office.
Not having heard of them, this make me question your knowledge of...everything.
didn't even bother to listen to alumni dispensing career advice because it was "all very, very dry."
Attendance to the seminars were mandatory. 90% of the time, it was related to our major (Robotics club, Engineering Student Council, IEEE.) The time an alumni did speak, it was so boring the professors left early.
His sole qualification is a Bachelors in CS from a middle tier school, and he acts like he should be given the golden boy treatment in his first job.
Sorry, B.S. in Computer Engineering, and I interned every summer, and before that I completed a minor in CS at a small private college.
As to my thoughts on my management, it comes to down to this: There are managers out there that are competant with no technical experienance. Because they focus on managing their team, not telling them how to program. Its a different skillset then coding.
Just like developing software is a different skillset to testing software.
As to the reason for my lay off -- you very well might be right. I'm not so arrogant that I would flat out deny that this is my side of the story.
I think its unlikely that I'm suffering depression, unless I was born depressed and a lifelong sufferer of it, undiagnosed by any of the medical professionals I'm come into contact with throughout the course of my life.
:)
And there's quite a gap between "the constant shrill noise of a phone breaks my concentration" and "man, i'm so depressed, i think i'm gonna pull a Kurt Cobain."
More to the point: I know its possible to burn out on your first job out of school (*cough*, EA games, *cough*) but I doubt I'm a burn out. I feel like I haven't even hit my stride as a software developer, and from what I can tell, that's perfectly normal, considering the breadth and depth in the field.
Lastly, what's a sick day?
Yeah, I'd agree with that.
Remember, the premise for the cublicle speech is if I was to ever speak at my school. Yes, I've only been out now about 18 months. There probably are "successful" companies out there with cubes. "Successful and fun to work at"...well I'm not so sure.
And I know, work is not supposed to be fun. But if you're passionate about it, there should be some fun to it. At the very least, you should enjoy the team you're working with. I know most of the older crowd has things in their life that are more important then a cubicle/office debate. They have kids, they have a house. They have hobbies. I'm sure work seems like less of an issue. But for a "new blood", to someone just out, things like that either feel right or wrong. In my defense, it doesn't take 18 months to figure out whether or not you like cubicles. Although I won't deny that things like being allowed to listen to music might minimize the cubicle issue. Where i worked, you could hear your co-workers gossip amongst themselves and about each other as you tried to meet (impossible) deadlines.
And yes, if you plan on leaving, be smart like a monkey: have a firm grasp on the next tree branch before letting go of the current one. I didn't have that luxury.
One of the comments on my blog before it got /.'d was from a worker whose company was bought out by Very Big Software Corp -- I can't speak for him, but I think he was implying IBM. He's a friend of mine, and I believe him when he says he's happier that he left early while they started shuffling employees to cubes.
With respect to my former employer
.NET.
.NET as "totally useless", I certainly enjoy work more now that I'm sans VB.
1) The applications we developed were web-interface/database backend. Mainly for aiding in paperwork.
This makes sense, as a highly regulated industry (nuclear power) is going to be heavy on the paperwork.
2) With 1) in mind, a corporation might adopt a standard of ASP.NET for their enterprise applications. If this is case, you have to a) live with it, or b) move on.
I tried a) until I got the boot. Now I don't develop in
And while I don't think of
No, a degree doesn't 'entitle' you to anything. Here is what I'm trying to say: A cubicle is a sign of a bankrupt corporate culture, one not likely to value you. And odds are, you won't find yourself doing interesting projects at your workplace. Unless your definition of interesting is an online profit-loss worksheet for accounts receiveable. JoelOnSoftware.com has an article titled "Five Worlds" in the archive. I would definitely suggest you check it out.
I know as the author of the article, I shouldn't really reply to any of these comments, as I'll probably get flagged as flamebait, but here it goes:
Most grad students have their schooling paid for them by their professor. (RAship) And they get a stipend. So it does compare.
It also does compare to slave labor, from what my friends have told me.
Tacocat,
Good points. The manager I worked under had a cube right behind mine. Like I said in the article, I was just out of school. I was trying to pad schedules by a factor of 25% -- time I referred to as "test time."
It always got cut. I'm a lot happier working at a place with testers.
If you want to take a test drive on a Mac, and you've got decent credit, order one and try it for 30 days. If you don't like it, return it and get your money back.
/. thinks its expensive to get a Mac....you guys ever hear of a little website called ebay?
Or there's the apple store....
but you won't get G4 performance out of any Intel Procs. Or AMD. Because they're not G4s. They both process data, but they both do it differently. And I doubt stuff like Quartz Extreme is handled by an emulator. So you won't be getting the Mac experience.
Everyone here at
Safarti keeps screwing this up (Knew I shouldn't have ditched Firefox)
2 &item =2918
But if you feel the need to take action, then take it:
http://action.eff.org/action/index.asp?step=
This will allow you to email your senators (calling would be even better -- but this is the least you can do)
And if you're not an EFF member already, you should be.
You read /. but don't know how to use Google to shop for a computer? And you WANT a tablet PC?
For shame, poor child, for shame....
A really good buy/sell secondhand site is www.secondspin.com
( I know, shameless plug. )
Apple's Quicktime player is free, with no ad-support. All that Apple needs to do is fix a bug that would prevent them from playing divx files. Time to start flooding their forums!
Yeah, because the 18 year olds of this generation our helpless. I'm about to graduate from college this year, and I've got everyone I know younger then me calling about how to get rid of Blaster. Hopefully Ten year olds of this generation know to keep virus defs. up to date, if they're running windows.
PC's are not mono culture. PC's are extremely diverse. Just because many PC's run Windows does not mean that is all a PC can do.
You're right. A PC can do something other then run windows: It can be used as a doorstop. You can use it to break windows by throwing it through them. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean it should be.
The point I'm trying to make here is against the IT-environment myth: Mono-cultures solve problems. Mono-cultures are easier to administer. Since all PCs can pretty much do the same. So why not just buy all one PC? Just because you can tool out a PC to be flexible, doesn't mean the IT eejit will. Most networks take the "Personal" out of "Personal Computing".
I used to run a Mac Notebook. Gave it away. Why? Because it was too limited. With my PC I can run; Linux, Windows, FreeBsd, Solaris, etc. On top of each OS I can run X*X*X applications.
Um....Macs can run X*X*X applications. With Fink, most open source packages can be recompiled and run on a Mac just as if it were linux. You forget that OS X is BSD based, and its compatibility is increasing with every update. Techically, if UNIX is UNIX is UNIX and LINUX is LINUX is LINUX, you weren't limited, except in thinking how to accomplish things. Why not check out OSXguide.com and learn how to handle all the ticky installs. I mean, it shouldn't be much harder the installing a complex software package on Solaris, Unix, Linux, BSD, etc, right?
My Mac essentially has two choices OSX or Linux from Yellow Dog. Software apps is even worse. I once asked a company selling Linux software to do a simple recompile for OSX. No-go.... While Open Source is great not all packages will configure and build for a PPC chip.
But the majority will. And OS is nothing but a tool to run software applications. And with the ability to run X apps, as well as Mac apps, Mac users have more software choice then EVER. And more then just a typical *nix user.
It is just oo frustrating...
Nope, it is the Mac world is that mono-culture...
The FBI to this day still gives its field agents PowerBooks. You want to knoow why? Because they're the most flexible laptops in the world. They've had X windows clients/servers (X is not a *nix feature, its a protocol, it can and does run on nearly every platform. people forget this.) It can run Windows (virtual PC), and its had Applications like Tenons Mach Ten (sort of a propritary version of Cygwin) to run Unix apps before OS X had a BSD underbelly. There's nothing that a mac couldn't do that a PC running *nix or windows couldn't.
Isn't it highly funny that a "public" radio station has choosen an exclusive, proprietary solution?
/.'d
There are open source streaming servers (shoutcast, Quicktime streaming server) and plenty of other, commercial servers that rely on open-standards (just like real radio) so that choice of client is irrelevant and up to the user.
My other sig was
The Apple Legal Store : All your alltime favorite copyright lawyer consultations for just $.99/consult.
Hey...it could happen.
Here's another one. Don't break the law. The courts don't give a damn what you think about music or the RIAA. You can think music should be free all you want. That isn't going to change the fact that someone else has the copyright to it, not you. And despite the wailing and gnashing of teeth here, last time I checked, there was no right to copyright infringement of any kind.
Just because it's cheap, and easy, and it's music doesn't get you an exemption in the eyes of the law. And don't scream fair use at me either. Distributing a song to 100,000 of your closest friends on KaZaa isn't fair use.
Actually, distribution of that kind is legal. Ever been to an online rom site? "If you do not own an original ROM of this game, do not download it." or the ever classic "These ROMs are available for evaluation purposes only, if you decide not to buy the game, you must delete the ROM in 24 hours."
If that's legal, why can a click-thru license on Kazaa simply state that everyone agrees to something like that? That they already own a license to the content or the files will be deleted. A lot of ROM sites stay up and running -- they're not shut down all the time like file-swappers would be.
And the poor guy sharing "as many" (and not "as few") as 8 songs online could simply show up in court with a (legally purchased) CD containing the tracks he downloaded. Hell, he could even claim he was forced to download the MP3s because the CD he bought contained copy-protected files which he could not rip with his own technical ability.
With all hope, some sort of loophole will prevent them from getting many settlements, while the cost of all the legal fees will really make them take a hit.
It's like they say: You can't legislate profitability.
I'm trying to figure out what the big deal is.
Apple makes a freely available "QuickTime Streaming Server". Download it, install it. And stream your music through it. Its not that hard. Anyone with quicktime can then connect and listen to the music stream. Its not like apple really "forced fed anyone shit."
They just made it slightly harder for the RIAA to hold them accountable.
As long as I've got a normal CD player then I've got a way to "rip" cd tracks. All I'll have to do is plug the tape out from my receiver into the line-level input of my sound card and "rip" the CD track to a wav file. The people at these radio stations should be able to do something equivalent. When CD's first started being used in radio 15+ years ago, the people at the station generally copied them over to the high-fidelity analog tapes they used for broadcast at the time. I don't know what they're using nowadays, but I'd tend to believe that the engineers there could transfer the CD tracks into the needed format in their sleep regardless of anything the RIAA does to the CD.
Depending on the budget of the station, it may not have an engineer. One thing that made Clear Channel so effiecent was they automated everything, and just had an engineer rotate from station to station. As it stands, I bet the people "ripping" tracks were nothing more then trained moneys who hold down the fort while the engineer's away.
As the human species progress over the course of time, without destroying itself, it will inherently gain many qualities. One of which is, since we've developed many ways to aid in our progress, to make machines that will aid in our progress. To think otherwise is insane - do you know anyone that would have taken Pi to the extent pc's have? I thought not.
:) )
:)
As computers become more common place humans will evolve further.
Computers have yet to exist long enough for them to effect evolution. And before you get all high and mighty about your precious status as human, top of the food chain, remember that dinosaurs ruled with earth with thick skin, big teeth, and cold blood for 40 million years. Our evolutionary experiment of "reason" (brainpower and tool building as opposed to strength) has only lasted 7,000 years. Not very long in compairison, when you think about it. With oil spills, nuclear fallout, and all the other potential "civilization killers" or "environmental destroyers". It looks like man's greatest enemy in evolving further is man.
We will no longer have to invest in hard core brain power, and perhaps will concentrate on a different role.
Actually, we're not going to "evolve" anything differently. The more complex an organism, the harder it is to change. Thinking/Self-Managing Technology is not going to supplant thought anymore then the calculator was going to destory mathematics. Technology, often thought of today as man's savior (both in medecine and in war) will not give you answers. Such Optimism in the technology field is dangerous. Do you think AI is going to be used in educating your children, or in designing smartbombs? If you believe the former instead of the latter, stop by CMU's SEI (Software Engineering Institute -- making the guidance systems of a lifetime
If you disagree with darwinism please disregard this post entirely, I don't want to say anything but my opinion. As computers start to do some things for us we will learn how to do other things we couldn't imagine of doing right now. The question is - will we get there without losing sight of what is really important?
Maybe the inner cynic in me wants me to yell "haven't we already?" -- but in general, I see all men as blind -- even those whose faith lies in the prominence of scientific reasoning, such as myself. We're cane tapping our way to the future. All our past discoveries are merely a recorded number of taps from one location to another.
My hope for the next century is the men learn to see, instead of continue to cane tap. That's when things will get exciting.
If I lost you, I apologize in advance - mod this down all you want
The arguments seem to boil down to "trust" and "possible misuse".
Fair enough, but I really think people are getting a little paranoid here.
But in a free society, shouldn't people have the right to be paranoid? The right to free speech includes anonymous speech, and the right NOT to speak out.
Life is not so "black and white" or "right and wrong" with respect to privacy. Say I'm a licensed, professional engineering. My company is committing illegal actions violating environmental standards, and endangering the welfare of the local population. If my free speech were truly protected, then blowing the whistle would be consequence free. But anyone knows that companies have something to hide, and that employees who violate that "corporate wall of silence" find it harder to get a job with another employer. Thus, anonymous speech could be used, if I wanted to protect my career. What if the company I worked for had influence politically -- and with our current law and mind frame....i could be considered a terrorist.
Every employee that forms part of "The Government" is a person just like you or me; they go home at night to their families; and have a private life - just like anybody else.
That argument alone isn't enough for me. Kennith Lay was a person "just like me" -- he went home every night to his home and family. But the big difference is Kennith Lay got rich off putting 42,000 american familes out of work. Misuse isn't a "hypothetical situation" its a standard operating procedure. Wouldn't you misuse it? What if the "security benifits" outweighed the "costs". Besides, no one's going to find out about it. And after they realized we prevented Sept. 11th 2: The Sequel, they wouldn't question our methods. The ends will justify the means for the public.
It is in their interest to protect their private life just as much (if not more so!) as you or me.
Or divert the watchful eye's attention on to someone else's. Remember, in 1984 all the party members could turn off their telescreens.
Even the (President | Prime Minister) if they were to leave office would be as subject to any government surveillance as anybody else.
If everyone were equal under the law, George W. Bush would have to take the bus and would never have come to power. His "youthful indiscretions" were D.U.Is at age 29. Police Officers found him driving on the shoulder of the road! Now he gets to send other families' kids off to die, having never fought in a war himself (He dodged the draft by joining the national guard back during Nam.)
If the NSA employee could discover something about you in the future and use it against you; well that's a bummer; but there is just as much chance of something being found and used against that NSA employee.
Again, more motivation to find dirt on other people. Get results, and they won't be looking for fault on the inside. There are plenty of patsy's in the american public.
I think I trust my Government. They're elected after all;
Not in my country, buddy. Stupid Florida.
the big caveat being that the majority of what is the "Government" is the civil service; which of course does not change with elections. I'm sure "Yes Prime Minister" has been seen outside the UK.
Even Civil Servants fall in love, and have cats and dogs as pets.
Plenty of people who've done horrible, horrible things were animal lovers or some such drek. Hitler was a strict vegetarian. G.W. Bush Jr reads scripture every day in the morning, even when he was executing retarded people as the Governor of Texas.
We've also had the secret police in western countries for years; and probably still have departments that are "even more secret than the secret ones that we know about"; but so what.
So why should I just sit there and let a soulless organization be funded with my money to work against me and deny me the very freedoms I'm supposedly paying them to "protect"? Are YOU being served?
I think people need to chill out a bit.
I think you need to graduate High School, go to college, maybe stop watching "Yes Prime Minister" and look at how dreadfully dangerous your government IS. Not "will be" or "can be", but IS.