"Much of what is funny about Dilbert cartoons is the disgust that technical workers have for managers who do not have intimate knowledge of the content of their work."
That doesn't match my experience. The best managers, those who can clear the way for/get out of the way of their technical staff, don't earn disgust, but respect, despite not having "intimate knowledge of the content" of the techies' work.
Generalizing to all managers who don't understand the technical content misses the point.
The DRM technologies that scare me are the ones that Intel wants to build in, not so much what MS wants. Without the hardware level support, things like "Palladium" will go nowhere.
I have not seen any implementation of XForms from any vendor, so I don't know how much of a condemnation it is that MS does not support it now.
There is no problem "decoding" the XML file formats used in the new Word, Excel, etc.
I did not say that MS is open. I said that MS is moving toward openness, possibly as a result of market experience in the changed (i.e., not 1985) market. I still believe that.
Whether the changes will be beneficial for the market as a whole or not remains to be seen. But MS is not stagnant, and they remain a powerful force in the market where I regularly seek gainful employ. Any MSCE who isn't learning the rudiments of Linux is playing with fire, and anyone who chooses to ignore MS's actions is doing the same.
I'm not an apologist for MS, but they will do what they think they have to do to win in the market they believe they're in.
The Office 11 beta is supposed to show a much stronger commitment to "openness" in the use of XML file formats than anything to come from MS before now. Working with standards bodies such as ECMA and ISO shows some level of commitment on the part of MS to cooperate with the other vendors and the customers in the market today. The recent drop off in "Linux is cancer" remarks show that MS has learned that policy won't fly.
These are interesting times. Don't count MS out just becasue you don't like some of their past products or practices.
I run Linux and OS/2 at home, but I like being able to afford feeding my kids and my cats, so I'm not going to ignore what one of the market's largest vendors does.
Vendors (and open source developers) call something "gold" when they're ready to release it, i.e., they've completed the beta testing and fixes to their satisfaction for an initial release.
Does Safari offer PDF? I don't use it (yet) but the posts I see here refer to saving HTML. I have the networking and the XML CD libraries, and they're both HTML.
I would definitely pay more when I buy the paper copy to have that edition permanently in a Safari bookshelf online, not counting against any Safari subscription that I pay for. The savings on my spine from hauling 3-4 books to differnt work sites would make it worthwhile for me.
Of course, these stories never mention the people that try this, and end up broke back living with their parents, etc.
You only end up back with your parents if you stop trying once you forced back. Like a lot of posters have said, life ain't always easy and most of us have to work for what we want.
There are a lot of important discoveries that have come out of China in recent years. Take a look at the info (and cool pics) on this page for more info.
Yet according to the Cert list referenced in the article, MS Windows systems are not affected, and most Linux distros are listed as "unknown".
Take time to be sure
on
DOD vs. 802.11b
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The article says that DOD only wants a delay in the consideration, blah, blah...
"The Pentagon wants regulators to delay consideration of opening an additional swath of radio frequencies..."
It seems prudent to at least explore the possibility that wireless could degrade the use of radar (for military and civilian purposes) before jumping on this issue. The key to being responsible about it is to move quickly on the necessary research.
OS/2 used preemptive multitasking when windows was still using cooperative multitasking.
OS/2 included things like REXX and a couple useful editors, when Windows included solitaire. (Yeah, OS/2 had a solitaire game, too.)
OS/2 included the Internet Access Kit (or some such), including the WebExplorer browser, a news reader, a mail reader, etc. when MS still considered the Web a dying fad.
Later, OS/2 included the IBM Voice recognition software in the box. Windows NT included the BSOD.
The list goes on and on. Like the previous poster said, search the web. The OS/2 Fido groups on old fashioned bulletine board systems were great technical resources, unlike the AOL polluted usenet of today.
From the description it sounds like this is one of the major Debian archives. Not a Debian user, or Dutch speaker, so I'm guessing from the original post.
I'm not a big fan of Jesse Helms, but it appears that he is doing exactly what he should do as a senator for North Carolina. He's representing the interests of the state's residents in the Senate, vs. representing the interests of an out of state campaign donor.
How many states stand to gain under the webcasting rates as approved in the House? Will there be a lot of new jobs pursuing small webcasters who haven't paid up? Will there be a lot of new technical skills dispersed through the population by reducing the number of webcasters through expensive licensing and/or royalies fees? Will there be a boom in artisic expression thanks to reduced chances for artists to gain exposure?
Helms is right on this one. I wish more legislators were looking out for their own constituencies on matters like this, DMCA, etc.
Microsoft can't afford to have the media companies not make their content available on Microsoft platforms, and they will do what they can to accommodate them.
Whether MS actually needs the content companies at this point is debatable. If it came to that, Gates could buy a couple;> in a pinch.
But if MS wants content available on their platform, why not open that platform up to let the consumers of content make sure they can access their favorites on Windows? There are a lot of people who use MS products by choice (not me, but there are such people) who would build their own open source solutions if MS would give them the slightest encouragement.
It's going to be interesting to see if/how the US Govt steps in to support WorldCom customers if this finally takes WC down. They do carry a lot of internet traffic.
If insurance companies refused to insure your multi million-dollar venture for your refusal to clean up your litter, you'd think twice about the next scrap you'd leave behind to destroy someone else's multi-million dollar investment.
Countries don't leave mines floating in the open sea during peace time. They shouldn't leave the orbital equivalents in orbit. There are precedents for the necessary agreement(s) in international law.
It's scarier than that. In an interview after it was published, Herbert explained that all of the equipment and materials that John (the protaganist microbiologist) used were freely available via mail order. In 1982.
What might be possible today, when we learn that no one knows exactly who received anthrax stock over the years?
And it is a great book, up there with his original Dune. I've read and re-read it many times since the first excerpt appeared in Omni. Good fiction entertains; great works inform.
Nowhere in the article do they discuss plans/methods to avoid making the problem worse. Shouldn't there be an international standard, at least among the ISS participants, for getting new space junk out of the way? A French satellite collided with remains of a French Arianne booster. Wouldn't it make sense now to define a standard procedure for ensuring that junk is sent on a destructive re-entry? If they use a verifiable method of ensuring destruction, it could help in assigning responsibility. And insurance companies could use that in assigning premiums (or littering fines;>) on satellites, etc.
It'd be nice to have some more detail on their results. The chart on the page shows Snort detected all the attacks listed in the chart except the SYN flood. And the footnote on that entry says Snort was down because of "configuration error."
I can't get to the article while the site is slashdotted, but I can see why there might be concern about "lost information." We're not in a paperless world by any means, but I bet there's a lot of raw data which exists only in electronic copy. Many studies probably have the source data on hard drives of a couple servers, with a few tape back ups. Both of these media are relatively short lived.
It's an information management problem (if you elevate the raw data to the level of information. We need some way to archive important data, easily and inexpensively, to preserve the basis for a lot of our new found (post "pc revolution") information, particularly in applied science fields. I can't read my essays written 20 years ago on an Apple IIe, but no one cares. If cancer researchers can't review results of large studies, they may not be able to reliably incorporate new data into their research. For that, people will care.
Slashdot Mirror
The schema documents themselves are UTF-16.
From the article, [Mike] Caffrey said "People are paying for my skills and expertise, and get the studio as part of the package."
Just having access to the hardware and software isn't going to do it. How many new "van Goghs" do we have since the advent of Photoshop?
According to the article,
"Much of what is funny about Dilbert cartoons is the disgust that technical workers have for managers who do not have intimate knowledge of the content of their work."
That doesn't match my experience. The best managers, those who can clear the way for/get out of the way of their technical staff, don't earn disgust, but respect, despite not having "intimate knowledge of the content" of the techies' work.
Generalizing to all managers who don't understand the technical content misses the point.
The DRM technologies that scare me are the ones that Intel wants to build in, not so much what MS wants. Without the hardware level support, things like "Palladium" will go nowhere.
I have not seen any implementation of XForms from any vendor, so I don't know how much of a condemnation it is that MS does not support it now.
There is no problem "decoding" the XML file formats used in the new Word, Excel, etc.
I did not say that MS is open. I said that MS is moving toward openness, possibly as a result of market experience in the changed (i.e., not 1985) market. I still believe that.
Whether the changes will be beneficial for the market as a whole or not remains to be seen. But MS is not stagnant, and they remain a powerful force in the market where I regularly seek gainful employ. Any MSCE who isn't learning the rudiments of Linux is playing with fire, and anyone who chooses to ignore MS's actions is doing the same.
IMHO, of course.
I'm not an apologist for MS, but they will do what they think they have to do to win in the market they believe they're in.
The Office 11 beta is supposed to show a much stronger commitment to "openness" in the use of XML file formats than anything to come from MS before now. Working with standards bodies such as ECMA and ISO shows some level of commitment on the part of MS to cooperate with the other vendors and the customers in the market today. The recent drop off in "Linux is cancer" remarks show that MS has learned that policy won't fly.
These are interesting times. Don't count MS out just becasue you don't like some of their past products or practices.
I run Linux and OS/2 at home, but I like being able to afford feeding my kids and my cats, so I'm not going to ignore what one of the market's largest vendors does.
Vendors (and open source developers) call something "gold" when they're ready to release it, i.e., they've completed the beta testing and fixes to their satisfaction for an initial release.
Does Safari offer PDF? I don't use it (yet) but the
posts I see here refer to saving HTML. I have the networking
and the XML CD libraries, and they're both HTML.
I would definitely pay more when I buy the paper copy
to have that edition permanently in a Safari bookshelf
online, not counting against any Safari subscription
that I pay for. The savings on my spine from hauling
3-4 books to differnt work sites would make it worthwhile
for me.
You only end up back with your parents if you stop trying once you forced back. Like a lot of posters have said, life ain't always easy and most of us have to work for what we want.
There are a lot of important discoveries that have come out of China in recent years. Take a look at the info (and cool pics) on this page for more info.
Yet according to the Cert list referenced in the article, MS Windows systems are not affected, and most Linux distros are listed as "unknown".
The article says that DOD only wants a delay in the consideration, blah, blah...
"The Pentagon wants regulators to delay consideration of opening an additional swath of radio frequencies..."
It seems prudent to at least explore the possibility that wireless could degrade the use of radar (for military and civilian purposes) before jumping on this issue. The key to being responsible about it is to move quickly on the necessary research.
OS/2 used preemptive multitasking when windows was still using cooperative multitasking.
OS/2 included things like REXX and a couple useful editors, when Windows included solitaire. (Yeah, OS/2 had a solitaire game, too.)
OS/2 included the Internet Access Kit (or some such), including the WebExplorer browser, a news reader, a mail reader, etc. when MS still considered the Web a dying fad.
Later, OS/2 included the IBM Voice recognition software in the box. Windows NT included the BSOD.
The list goes on and on. Like the previous poster said, search the web. The OS/2 Fido groups on old fashioned bulletine board systems were great technical resources, unlike the AOL polluted usenet of today.
From the description it sounds like this is one of the major Debian archives. Not a Debian user, or Dutch speaker, so I'm guessing from the original post.
The article states that
"The technology turns atomic particles into light with enough radiation to damage an object it encounters."
That sounds more like a matter-antimatter reaction than anything else. IANAP, but turning particles
into light sounds like matter to energy to me.
Is there a physicist in the house?
I'm not a big fan of Jesse Helms, but it appears
that he is doing exactly what he should do as a
senator for North Carolina. He's representing the
interests of the state's residents in the Senate,
vs. representing the interests of an out of state
campaign donor.
How many states stand to gain under the webcasting
rates as approved in the House? Will there be a lot
of new jobs pursuing small webcasters who haven't
paid up? Will there be a lot of new technical skills
dispersed through the population by reducing the
number of webcasters through expensive licensing
and/or royalies fees? Will there be a boom in artisic
expression thanks to reduced chances for artists to
gain exposure?
Helms is right on this one. I wish more legislators
were looking out for their own constituencies on
matters like this, DMCA, etc.
Whether MS actually needs the content companies at this point is debatable. If it came to that, Gates could buy a couple
But if MS wants content available on their platform, why not open that platform up to let the consumers of content make sure they can access their favorites on Windows? There are a lot of people who use MS products by choice (not me, but there are such people) who would build their own open source solutions if MS would give them the slightest encouragement.
Or maybe not. What the hell do I know?
It's going to be interesting to see if/how the US Govt steps in to support WorldCom customers if this finally takes WC down. They do carry a lot of internet traffic.
perhaps on a site hosted in some country that protects its citizens' right to free inquiry, and expression.
The one whose answer is 42.
If insurance companies refused to insure your multi million-dollar venture for your refusal to clean up your litter, you'd think twice about the next scrap you'd leave behind to destroy someone else's multi-million dollar investment.
Countries don't leave mines floating in the open sea during peace time. They shouldn't leave the orbital equivalents in orbit. There are precedents for the necessary agreement(s) in international law.
It's scarier than that. In an interview after it was published, Herbert explained that all of the equipment and materials that John (the protaganist microbiologist) used were freely available via mail order. In 1982.
What might be possible today, when we learn that no one knows exactly who received anthrax stock over the years?
And it is a great book, up there with his original Dune. I've read and re-read it many times since the first excerpt appeared in Omni. Good fiction entertains; great works inform.
Nowhere in the article do they discuss plans/methods to avoid making the problem worse. Shouldn't there be an international standard, at least among the ISS participants, for getting new space junk out of the way? A French satellite collided with remains of a French Arianne booster. Wouldn't it make sense now to define a standard procedure for ensuring that junk is sent on a destructive re-entry? If they use a verifiable method of ensuring destruction, it could help in assigning responsibility. And insurance companies could use that in assigning premiums (or littering fines ;>) on satellites, etc.
It'd be nice to have some more detail on their results. The chart on the page shows Snort detected all the attacks listed in the chart except the SYN flood. And the footnote on that entry says Snort was down because of "configuration error."
Gee, whose fault is that?
I'll split the $40 with you to get him a business B2 visa. OK?
I can't get to the article while the site is slashdotted, but I can see why there might be concern about "lost information." We're not in a paperless world by any means, but I bet there's a lot of raw data which exists only in electronic copy. Many studies probably have the source data on hard drives of a couple servers, with a few tape back ups. Both of these media are relatively short lived.
It's an information management problem (if you elevate the raw data to the level of information. We need some way to archive important data, easily and inexpensively, to preserve the basis for a lot of our new found (post "pc revolution") information, particularly in applied science fields. I can't read my essays written 20 years ago on an Apple IIe, but no one cares. If cancer researchers can't review results of large studies, they may not be able to reliably incorporate new data into their research. For that, people will care.