Some non-compete clauses have been struck down in court since they can be written too broadly and leaving a job would mean entering a line of working totally unrelated to your skill set.
For example: Imagine working at MS then leaving for another programming job. There aren't many areas of software that MS does not compete in.
In this article , Michael Dell (of Dell Computers if you didn't know) says "We found the AMD environment to be much more fragile... than equivalent Intel systems."
This could be a Dell playing friends with Intel so he doesn't get short changed in chips when processor shortages come around, but none the less, his opinion will matter with big business about Intel being better than AMD.
He goes on in the article to say that the chipsets are what is lacking for AMD.
MHz is starting to become insignifacant compared to the overall system since the bus, hard drive, network, and RAM can't keep up. Once these technologies are sped up by an order of magnitude, we will see real dividends by these MHz increases.
Sure Crusoe has to be a better chip, even though we've only seen product demonstrations and hasn't been tested on the street by real consumers. While it has better technology behind it, it still is only a 1.0 version product which can can mean ruin if there are problems with it.
Even you've done studies of Win NT/2K, technological it is superior to any OS, it is unforunate that MS has not gotten the bugs out of it, which is why WinNT can suck at times.
I hope crusoe is not an MS in disguise. That could prove torture to lots of users.
I can hook a computer into my brain as an external source of information. This computer can log onto networks, look up information and then compile results. My directed thoughts to the computer will my mode of data entry. My monitor will be my eyes or imagination. There is a link between the sensors in your eyes and the brain, intercept the link and transmit a different signal. Until this is done, everything else is really just a hack.
Yes they have. But they needed special film and you had to send them away to a special place for processing. But the quality was so-so, but it was a nice idea and neat for the first few pictures but got annoying very quickly.
Being able to process the pictures on the computer looks like it has some nice potential, but not for your average joe.
How about we have the FSF(or appropriate) get the patent. Then if a company tries to obtain a patent from the derived technology, they will need to work out a licensing agreement with the FSF. The FSF could force a patent sharing agreement the company in question. So the patent will end up being shared with the FSF as if it were owner, keeping the patent open for everyone to freely use.
Of course this sounds too easy so I am either making the wrong assumptions or I have a flaw in my logic.
Virus's can still be written that destroy anything belonging to the currently logged in user. Also a strategy can be written for that virus to place itself strategically so it may eventually be run by someone with more privledges, and so on.
Of course, this all comes down to system configuration. If the system is properly configured, then viruses would be no problem. But who has the time, or the patience? The average user does not. And it is the average user who falls victim to viruses.
But now we see mobile 600MHz and 650MHz chips for the mobile market. The 500 MHz PIII chips that are in production now have all of the glitches out of the manufacturing process so they may create chips at a lower price.
A few times each year, Intel and AMD announce price cuts. This is typical marketing for both companies. They announce price cuts on all but their highest speed/most expensive processors. This is not news, just the typical PR we see every few months.
Here is a different article about the same subject. In that article, they say Geron's license prohibits the use of the technology to clone entire humans.
I interpret this as: we will license the technology to other companies so other companies can develop or enhance this tecnhology but our patent will hopefully prevent ethical arguments from blowing out of proportion.
2. To discourage futility. Computer experts who tackle problems that are simply insoluble need to stop wasting their time.
4. To make possible the otherwise impossible.
Computers are unable to interpret English to discover typos in words spelled correctly. Forget the unsolvable problems, I prefer insoluble ones more. They go so much better with tea.
They can't make the author appear smarter either. First I will state computers cannot solve a problem, then I will say I will use computers to solve problems which were once impossible.
The reason we have TV is because of advertising. No advertising, no TV. That being said, why are there so many advertisements? Because TV shows can be extremely expensive. It is not uncommon to see some stars get 1 million dollars per episode. At a minimum, to break even, the network needs to sell 1 million in advertising. (This is ignoring the inner workings of how bookkeeping is done with respect to syndication). Most likely, that show is a bread winner show which makes up for shows which have production costs more than advertising revenue.
With the advent of:
the remote control
5 billion channels
internet access
technology which can alert you when a commercial is over
we are not watching commercials and the marketing people know this. Why pay for commercial time that people won't watch? This is why we see split screens during the credits or ads embedded into the stadium or even some TV shows themselves.
Which may bring us back to why do companies advertise? To get the name out to the people and sell an image. People are busy and sometimes do not have the time to compare quality or price. During these times, who do you buy from? A name which is familiar. Why is AOL so popular? Because people know you can get on the internet with it easily. At least that is what they say.
Why buy any pain medication such as tylenol or advil when the generics work exactly the same and are cheaper? You may not, but millions do.
Running your business without any methodology means letting everyone do their own thing their own way. That maybe good sometimes, but not always.
Exactly! Letting everyone do their own thing works if everyone is competent and even compentency is not enough. See
here
I am a lowly programmer like everyone else but I have talked to CIO's and they know the best programmers can be 10 or 100 times or more productive than the worst programmer on staff. But the CIO does not care because if the gifted programmer creates a killer product if that product( I use product as internal program used by companies since most programs fall under this domain.) may only be maintained by that programmer, not the lowest common denominator. That killer product is actually worthless. Why? Because if only person who may be able to maintain the program is the creator and this person is such a great programmer, then their time should be spent developing on new projects, not maintenance. The CIO is most interested in everyone following a similar set of rules and standards with minimal diversion from the standard (but deviation can be ok but there is a limit which is left to discretion).
If everyone follows the same rules and standards, what are the rules? That is where CMM and the others come into play. Instead of creating another standard, follow the work someone has already done. More likely, the following will happen: Take the best pieces of each standard and water them down so the common folk can understand them. KISS is the key.
The 20/20 did have an interesting proposition that one of the script kiddies responsible got hired as a consultant instead of being turned in to the Feds. The reason... the victim did not want to feel the wrath of the script kiddie after he served his jailed time.
Looks like the potential makings of a new "high tech" mafia.
Why was a mission to the moon so important in the 60's? Because were in the midst of the arms race. The whole US vs USSR space race was just a race to see who can build a better rocket to put warheads on it. Of course, the same technology can carry humans too, so the general population can easily be duped into thinking science is the main concern. How many scientists landed on the moon? I believe only 1 did, on the very last mission.
Right now and into the far future, Mars will be very inhospitable to human life. For humans to make it there and back safely, we need to be able to have more reliable data about Mars.
To travel to Mars, they will be in space for a long time (over a year). Many things can happen in a year to a person which can ruin chances for success: illness, cancer, solar flares, etc. A first attempt to Mars would most likely be a suicide mission.
This is just the age old question: What language should I use? A compiled one, or an interpreted one?
Of course each language has its pros and cons. But for this argument, but we now have a network layer to deal with. Because of the network overhead in every request, the interpreted language has another pro. It'll be up to the reader to determine why.
Wearable computers will not be for personal usage, or at least at first. Someone will not do their term papers, business papers, spreadsheet analysis on these machines (unless they are "docked" I guess). The beauty of the wearable computer is a person has access to information for input/output. Wearable computers will start in niche markets: Surveyors/Civil engineers in the field, mechanics working on specialized machinery, and others. Voice recognition is coming along well. Between using a mouse or pointer like object and voice recognition technology, a lot of input or interaction can be achieved with a computer. Enough interaction to satisfy the needs in many niche markets.
1) Unix has said "You have mail" for a long time. Unix states "You have mail" or "You have new mail". AOL says "You got mail" if you have new mail. "You got mail" is a catch phrase recognized by millions with AOL. I have used UNIX for the past 4+ years and it took some time to remember that association. I have never used AOL in my life and instantly think of AOL when I here the phrase "You got mail".
2) AOL has never gone after the people who parody them on The Simpsons, etc. That is called freedon of speech. Simpsons are protected by the first amendment.
3) As usual in these cases (such as WB against their FANS), AOL is trying to sue someone for parody This is not a case of parody. This is not making fun of AOL. This is using AOL's brand name to be able to obtain easier recognition so more books can be sold. If no disclaimer is by the phrase "You got male", believe it or not, one can believe there is an association with the AOL brand name. AOL is a highly recognized brand name among the general population. (General population, not the techies folks)
To me this "small potatoes" bookwriter is not worth their time. It is if they are profiting off of a brand name. This is a book about internet dating. AOL is largest ISP in the World. Millions of people chat on AOL and people meet or discover new people using AOL.
Even though your head may get transplanted to a "healthy" body, your brain still continues dying as you get older. Granted this may make lifespans of 150 years possible, who would really want to live that long? Most elderly I've talked to and known would be happy to go at the ripe old age of 90. Another 60 years of only having a head with and no feeling in your body may be considered inhumane.
I disagree with the author's assertion that all feedback from programmers should be rejected; programmers are users too, and you're not going to get feedback on a C++ IDE's usability from your average secretary. All feedback should be counted and considered.
When was the last time your secretary was doing C++ programming? Create your GUI toward the target audience. The GUI of a programming IDE may be different from a spreadsheet application because the average user is a different type of person.
Slashdot Mirror
For example: Imagine working at MS then leaving for another programming job. There aren't many areas of software that MS does not compete in.
This could be a Dell playing friends with Intel so he doesn't get short changed in chips when processor shortages come around, but none the less, his opinion will matter with big business about Intel being better than AMD.
He goes on in the article to say that the chipsets are what is lacking for AMD.
MHz is starting to become insignifacant compared to the overall system since the bus, hard drive, network, and RAM can't keep up. Once these technologies are sped up by an order of magnitude, we will see real dividends by these MHz increases.
Even you've done studies of Win NT/2K, technological it is superior to any OS, it is unforunate that MS has not gotten the bugs out of it, which is why WinNT can suck at times.
I hope crusoe is not an MS in disguise. That could prove torture to lots of users.
I can hook a computer into my brain as an external source of information. This computer can log onto networks, look up information and then compile results. My directed thoughts to the computer will my mode of data entry. My monitor will be my eyes or imagination. There is a link between the sensors in your eyes and the brain, intercept the link and transmit a different signal. Until this is done, everything else is really just a hack.
Being able to process the pictures on the computer looks like it has some nice potential, but not for your average joe.
<IMG SRC="http://barneyonline.com/images/bab4.gif">
Of course this sounds too easy so I am either making the wrong assumptions or I have a flaw in my logic.
Of course, this all comes down to system configuration. If the system is properly configured, then viruses would be no problem. But who has the time, or the patience? The average user does not. And it is the average user who falls victim to viruses.
But now we see mobile 600MHz and 650MHz chips for the mobile market. The 500 MHz PIII chips that are in production now have all of the glitches out of the manufacturing process so they may create chips at a lower price.
A few times each year, Intel and AMD announce price cuts. This is typical marketing for both companies. They announce price cuts on all but their highest speed/most expensive processors. This is not news, just the typical PR we see every few months.
I interpret this as: we will license the technology to other companies so other companies can develop or enhance this tecnhology but our patent will hopefully prevent ethical arguments from blowing out of proportion.
2. To discourage futility. Computer experts who tackle problems that are simply insoluble need to stop wasting their time.
4. To make possible the otherwise impossible.
Computers are unable to interpret English to discover typos in words spelled correctly. Forget the unsolvable problems, I prefer insoluble ones more. They go so much better with tea.
They can't make the author appear smarter either. First I will state computers cannot solve a problem, then I will say I will use computers to solve problems which were once impossible.
With the advent of:
- the remote control
- 5 billion channels
- internet access
- technology which can alert you when a commercial is over
we are not watching commercials and the marketing people know this. Why pay for commercial time that people won't watch? This is why we see split screens during the credits or ads embedded into the stadium or even some TV shows themselves.Which may bring us back to why do companies advertise? To get the name out to the people and sell an image. People are busy and sometimes do not have the time to compare quality or price. During these times, who do you buy from? A name which is familiar. Why is AOL so popular? Because people know you can get on the internet with it easily. At least that is what they say.
Why buy any pain medication such as tylenol or advil when the generics work exactly the same and are cheaper? You may not, but millions do.
Exactly! Letting everyone do their own thing works if everyone is competent and even compentency is not enough. See here
I am a lowly programmer like everyone else but I have talked to CIO's and they know the best programmers can be 10 or 100 times or more productive than the worst programmer on staff. But the CIO does not care because if the gifted programmer creates a killer product if that product( I use product as internal program used by companies since most programs fall under this domain.) may only be maintained by that programmer, not the lowest common denominator. That killer product is actually worthless. Why? Because if only person who may be able to maintain the program is the creator and this person is such a great programmer, then their time should be spent developing on new projects, not maintenance. The CIO is most interested in everyone following a similar set of rules and standards with minimal diversion from the standard (but deviation can be ok but there is a limit which is left to discretion).
If everyone follows the same rules and standards, what are the rules? That is where CMM and the others come into play. Instead of creating another standard, follow the work someone has already done. More likely, the following will happen: Take the best pieces of each standard and water them down so the common folk can understand them. KISS is the key.
The 20/20 did have an interesting proposition that one of the script kiddies responsible got hired as a consultant instead of being turned in to the Feds. The reason... the victim did not want to feel the wrath of the script kiddie after he served his jailed time.
Looks like the potential makings of a new "high tech" mafia.
Why was a mission to the moon so important in the 60's? Because were in the midst of the arms race. The whole US vs USSR space race was just a race to see who can build a better rocket to put warheads on it. Of course, the same technology can carry humans too, so the general population can easily be duped into thinking science is the main concern. How many scientists landed on the moon? I believe only 1 did, on the very last mission.
Right now and into the far future, Mars will be very inhospitable to human life. For humans to make it there and back safely, we need to be able to have more reliable data about Mars.
To travel to Mars, they will be in space for a long time (over a year). Many things can happen in a year to a person which can ruin chances for success: illness, cancer, solar flares, etc. A first attempt to Mars would most likely be a suicide mission.
This is just the age old question:
What language should I use? A compiled one, or an interpreted one?
Of course each language has its pros and cons. But for this argument, but we now have a network layer to deal with. Because of the network overhead in every request, the interpreted language has another pro. It'll be up to the reader to determine why.
Oh no! Won't someone think of the children
Mrs. Rev Lovejoy
Wearable computers will not be for personal usage, or at least at first. Someone will not do their term papers, business papers, spreadsheet analysis on these machines (unless they are "docked" I guess). The beauty of the wearable computer is a person has access to information for input/output. Wearable computers will start in niche markets: Surveyors/Civil engineers in the field, mechanics working on specialized machinery, and others.
Voice recognition is coming along well. Between using a mouse or pointer like object and voice recognition technology, a lot of input or interaction can be achieved with a computer. Enough interaction to satisfy the needs in many niche markets.
Unix states "You have mail" or "You have new mail". AOL says "You got mail" if you have new mail. "You got mail" is a catch phrase recognized by millions with AOL. I have used UNIX for the past 4+ years and it took some time to remember that association. I have never used AOL in my life and instantly think of AOL when I here the phrase "You got mail".
2) AOL has never gone after the people who parody them on The Simpsons, etc.
That is called freedon of speech. Simpsons are protected by the first amendment.
3) As usual in these cases (such as WB against their FANS), AOL is trying to sue someone for parody
This is not a case of parody. This is not making fun of AOL. This is using AOL's brand name to be able to obtain easier recognition so more books can be sold. If no disclaimer is by the phrase "You got male", believe it or not, one can believe there is an association with the AOL brand name. AOL is a highly recognized brand name among the general population. (General population, not the techies folks)
To me this "small potatoes" bookwriter is not worth their time.
It is if they are profiting off of a brand name. This is a book about internet dating. AOL is largest ISP in the World. Millions of people chat on AOL and people meet or discover new people using AOL.
Sorry, the header should have read: Re:It still won't guarantee immortality
Even though your head may get transplanted to a "healthy" body, your brain still continues dying as you get older. Granted this may make lifespans of 150 years possible, who would really want to live that long? Most elderly I've talked to and known would be happy to go at the ripe old age of 90. Another 60 years of only having a head with and no feeling in your body may be considered inhumane.
When was the last time your secretary was doing C++ programming? Create your GUI toward the target audience. The GUI of a programming IDE may be different from a spreadsheet application because the average user is a different type of person.
Speed is great but it looks like you'll run out of memory and/or disk space before a real simulation gets finished running.