Microsoft didn't always seek support in Washington. For years, the software giant prided itself on steering clear of national politics and lobbying. But when their legal troubles started, that attitude quickly changed.
"Microsoft, before their anti-trust case, had almost no presence in Washington," Arizona Sen. John McCain told The Chronicle editorial board earlier this year. "Now, I almost don't know a lobbyist who's not on their payroll."
That was in 2001. After a decade of increasing corporate influence in Washington I doubt we'll ever see antitrust action against Microsoft again.
You've obviously never managed a large implementation - cost overruns always happen. Vendors oversell the capabilities of the project and companies underestimate their needs.
Well fucking hold them accountable when that happens. If they sign a contract, hold them to it. If what's in the contract turns out to be insufficient for your needs, don't just bend the contract. Negotiate a new one.
it's impossible to spec everything out at the beginning
That's no reason you shouldn't get what you specced for the price it was promised.
Your immune system IS the cure all. Your baby is already swarming with pathogens he is developing immunity to. A vaccine is just a drop in the bucket.
If you're really worried, keep your baby in a sterile room and make sure it never puts anything in its mouth. A decade later, you'll have one hell of a sickly kid.
The changes in DNA are due to methylation of the DNA, not changes in sequence. This can lead to more or less of a given gene being expressed, but won't lead to any actual changes in the genes.
This sounds great, except that our society is set up fundamentally around the idea of nearly everyone (or at least someone in every family group) having a job. In a future where there's only jobs for 10% of people, but without any changes to how we view work, 90% of everybody won't have any money with which to participate in all the amazing awesomeness of an automated future
This is excellent. It will force a fundamental reorganization of society. "From each according to ability, to each according to need" will become a workable proposition. I wish it would come in our lifetimes.
Re:There is Always More Work to Do
on
The Real Job Threat
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Absolutely. More efficiency is always good. If the benefits of that increased efficiency are not distributed equally, that's a problem with the economic system, not the automation.
You don't have to be a doctor to read and understand the literature. In fact, it helps. By and large med students don't care about anything not on the test, and doctors get most of their continuing education from pharmaceutical companies. Anyone with college level chemistry and biology, and an actual interest in science, is better prepared to interpret the literature than most doctors are.
What would actually improve the post a lot is a link to a peer reviewed article.
Viruses attack cells by binding to specific proteins expressed on the cell's membranes. Different populations of cells express different proteins in differing amounts, so it's not unlikely that one tissue would be more susceptible than others.
One good example of this is HIV actually. The cells it likes to infect are found in high numbers in foreskin, and circumcision leads to a 50% decrease in infection risk. Of course condoms lead to a >90% reduction in infection risk so do that instead.
I've been using Linux for over 13 years and I've never had a Linux install fail to recognize ethernet hardware. Happens all the time on Windows, where the only solution is to find a computer with a network connection and download the driver. Linux contains all the ethernet drivers in the kernel, so you're never going to be left without a network connection.
That's pretty much why I don't own any current gen hardware yet. There's not that much. Going from PSX to PS2 was a significant leap, you couldn't have done GTA3 on the PSX. I don't know what game you could say that about on a current gen console.
That's not unfortunate, that's economical. I benefit by being able to play more games on my older hardware, saving me money. The producers get to spend less on artwork, and increase the distribution of their games, making them more money. It's a win-win scenario.
Graphics are good enough now that graphics alone can't justify an upgrade. Only novel game mechanics could induce me to buy a new system. What game mechanic is going to use a gig of RAM?
Yes, but what are they actually going to do with more RAM besides make prettier graphics? What gameplay mechanics would be possible on a new system that aren't on todays consoles?
More polygons means more work for artists which means higher budgets and more risk. What's the incentive for a new console when current gen consoles can do anything one could actually want to do?
The question is, what sort of game are people going to want to play that will require new hardware? If you're just throwing a new coat of paint on the same old game designs, what's the point?
Slashdot Mirror
As for 3), well that's the crux of the issue isn't it? It's clear RMS doesn't get how the rest of the world works.
Apparently he does. This list of conditions hasn't prevented him from making a living by speaking.
So RMS is off the rails because he expects a journalist to do journalism?
Not going to happen. Microsoft lobbies heavily now.
That was in 2001. After a decade of increasing corporate influence in Washington I doubt we'll ever see antitrust action against Microsoft again.
Then open the iPod software, so people can add support for the formats they prefer.
The real big criminals own the banks.
Adam Smith saw it, and came up with a revolutionary theory that worked.
Except for the cases when it doesn't.
This is the most convincing case to buy Apple products I've ever seen.
You've obviously never managed a large implementation - cost overruns always happen. Vendors oversell the capabilities of the project and companies underestimate their needs.
Well fucking hold them accountable when that happens. If they sign a contract, hold them to it. If what's in the contract turns out to be insufficient for your needs, don't just bend the contract. Negotiate a new one.
it's impossible to spec everything out at the beginning
That's no reason you shouldn't get what you specced for the price it was promised.
Anyone who has used XP can tell you that the abbreviation is also an emoticon.
Your immune system IS the cure all. Your baby is already swarming with pathogens he is developing immunity to. A vaccine is just a drop in the bucket.
If you're really worried, keep your baby in a sterile room and make sure it never puts anything in its mouth. A decade later, you'll have one hell of a sickly kid.
The changes in DNA are due to methylation of the DNA, not changes in sequence. This can lead to more or less of a given gene being expressed, but won't lead to any actual changes in the genes.
This sounds great, except that our society is set up fundamentally around the idea of nearly everyone (or at least someone in every family group) having a job. In a future where there's only jobs for 10% of people, but without any changes to how we view work, 90% of everybody won't have any money with which to participate in all the amazing awesomeness of an automated future
This is excellent. It will force a fundamental reorganization of society. "From each according to ability, to each according to need" will become a workable proposition. I wish it would come in our lifetimes.
Absolutely. More efficiency is always good. If the benefits of that increased efficiency are not distributed equally, that's a problem with the economic system, not the automation.
Of course not. Colbert is funny.
You don't have to be a doctor to read and understand the literature. In fact, it helps. By and large med students don't care about anything not on the test, and doctors get most of their continuing education from pharmaceutical companies. Anyone with college level chemistry and biology, and an actual interest in science, is better prepared to interpret the literature than most doctors are.
What would actually improve the post a lot is a link to a peer reviewed article.
Viruses attack cells by binding to specific proteins expressed on the cell's membranes. Different populations of cells express different proteins in differing amounts, so it's not unlikely that one tissue would be more susceptible than others.
One good example of this is HIV actually. The cells it likes to infect are found in high numbers in foreskin, and circumcision leads to a 50% decrease in infection risk. Of course condoms lead to a >90% reduction in infection risk so do that instead.
Math exists regardless of whether or not it can be used to describe physics.
Did you run memtest? Always run memtest.
I've been using Linux for over 13 years and I've never had a Linux install fail to recognize ethernet hardware. Happens all the time on Windows, where the only solution is to find a computer with a network connection and download the driver. Linux contains all the ethernet drivers in the kernel, so you're never going to be left without a network connection.
No sir. I played it on my Nintendo 64 game console.
Indeed I do. I played OoT for the first time this year. Too many great classics to be terribly worried about new games.
That's pretty much why I don't own any current gen hardware yet. There's not that much. Going from PSX to PS2 was a significant leap, you couldn't have done GTA3 on the PSX. I don't know what game you could say that about on a current gen console.
That's not unfortunate, that's economical. I benefit by being able to play more games on my older hardware, saving me money. The producers get to spend less on artwork, and increase the distribution of their games, making them more money. It's a win-win scenario.
Graphics are good enough now that graphics alone can't justify an upgrade. Only novel game mechanics could induce me to buy a new system. What game mechanic is going to use a gig of RAM?
Yes, but what are they actually going to do with more RAM besides make prettier graphics? What gameplay mechanics would be possible on a new system that aren't on todays consoles?
More polygons means more work for artists which means higher budgets and more risk. What's the incentive for a new console when current gen consoles can do anything one could actually want to do?
The question is, what sort of game are people going to want to play that will require new hardware? If you're just throwing a new coat of paint on the same old game designs, what's the point?