An odd example I've seen is the explosion in anime interest. Yes it has something of a faddish air, but there also seems to be a lot of neophilia - people love something NEW.
Given a chance at something different, I think a surprising amount of people will jump on it.
On the plus side, I find this very fascinating. It's an interesting idea and I'm bang alongside any attempt to increase people's ability to communicate.
And where is it going? I haven't a clue - and frankly analyzing the impact of this requires a proper timeframe.
How long will it take to get off the ground? What kind of content will be produced and what kind of content production tolls will evolve in the next few years? Will there be an overwhelming amount of crap - and if so, will there then be a die-off-pull-back effect that leaves better content, or what?
My wife is a ad designer who does video editing as a hobby and as a professional. She's watched the tools for broadcast and video editing change radically in the seven years she's done it, watched companies rise and fall. Communication is an odd, tricky, unpredictable business, and this initaitive will be just as hard to assess.
Let me try and get this straight. We'd save 10,000 barrels a day. We use 20 million.
This is a savings of 1/20th of a percent. And I'm not able to make out if that savings ONLY exists for those 2 months or the year round. Not particuarly impressive either way.
Here's an idea. Let's start passing legislation and using incentives to promote recycling, efficiency, and alternate sources of energy. You know, going to the heart of the problem as opposed to screwing around with something that presents piddly savings and smells more like a publicity stunt.
As for the coding repercussions . . . I can't say for sure.
Gods know getting a chance to play a beloved character with a strong history and dedicated fandom is the last thing any actor wants.
I've not seen the leaked episode, but I've heard rave reviews. It seems this gentleman really fit the role, and it's a shame he's not continuing - unless this is an early and bad April Fool's joke
In your experience, can managers with little technical knowledge successfully run a technically-oriented company?
The question isn't the important one.
Management may not quite "get" the nuts and bolts of a company, but can delegate and watch the bottom line. So I think any really good manager can run a company they know nothing about without running it into the ground.
The real question is In your experience, can managers with little technical knowledge successfully run a technically-oriented company as well as managers with technical knowledge but otherwise equivalent skills.
And that, to me, is a resounding "no."
Knowing your industry is a prerequisite for exemplary performance. Understanding how things work gives you an edge that, simply, you can't get anywhere else. For technology (or medicine, or finance) there's often subtleties that you not only need to know, but will let you ask the right questions and understand the answers. Asking the right questions is how you manage the bottom line, make plans, and delegate responsibilities.
Secondly, a technical manager MUST be a good manager period. Just being technical isn't going to cut it today. Products rarely sell themselves, deals and alliances are needed, etc.
Legal and software issues intertwined? That's putting it mildly. It's more a cat's cradle or some bizarre Gordinian knot.
The legal issues, the patent insanity, are just making it harder and harder to make progress. At what point is it just not worth DOING something becasue of all the legal hassles involved.
Today it's media formats. What more could go wrong and what could grind to a halt?
That's a good question. Five years ago I'd have had my doubts. However, having seen Linux make good progress, I can buy the idea of an Open Source BIOS doing the same thing.
It's not so much can it be done - it's will it be done, will people push for it, support it, evangelize it, etc.
Sure, the tornado warnings make sense, but those can actually wreck stuff
Having seen the works of viruses and trojans first hand, trust me - they wreck stuff.
You have a point though - I think people are already insensitive to alerts. I just don't think that's a reason to not use an alert system for important things.
We can't help the truly, deliberarelty dumb. But there's enough people out there with a clue, who pay attendion, and a good system may get them to pay attention.
After dealing with so much viral/spyware crap over the years, I'll take my chances that this could somewhat improve things.
Snarky comments and Microsoft jokes aside (not that I don't like either), this makes perfect sense, at least on an abstract level.
Weather alerts, pollution alerts, traffic alerts, tornado warnings - all those are ways to reduce damage, save lives, and make life run smoother in the face of of problems. In the internet age, viruses and such fall into a similar category, so this makes perfect sense to me.
Also, this just increases people's awareness of inernet issues. A few years of watching virus alerts fly all over the place may make people more careful, more picky - and more demanding on certain software vendors.
Now where I WILL bet a bit cynical is if this is A) done right and B) can be done right elsewhere. I'm sure it can be done right, but the "if" is anoter question.
Overall, I find this interesting despite some questions (interoperability, etc.). It looks convenient, it looks planned, and I've done hidden-frames work rather effectively.
The article just doesn't SAY much. I want more links, more code, more examples. Yes, it looks pretty, but don't just show me the product, let me under the hood, let me test drive it.
That being said, I'd also like to know if this framework can integrate into others. If you could merge this into Mono, into STRUTS, etc. . . . then we've got something REALLY interesting.
So what, in your world only Nobel Laurates and PhD's are allowed to have opinions, and to attempt to back them with argumentation?
Hush! You're spoiling my plans for a future ruled by SCIENCE!
Seriously, anyone can have an opinion. Opinions aren't special, how they're formed and backed up is. I'm going to give special attention to people with the education and knowledge and listen to them if they seem trustworthy. Same reason I listen to my doctor on my health, my auto mechanic on my car, and why I expect people I work with to listen to me on issues of coding, data flow, and application development.
Disclaimer: my science background is in neuroscience, biology, and psychology. Have a grain of salt to go with my response.
Accuracy in predicting systems depends in many cases on what you're predicting and the size of the system and the timeframe of the system being analyzed.
It also depends on what you have at your disposal to do so. A scientist with access to a lot of data and computing power is probably going to make better predictions than Danny Doppler over at a local news station.
Though saying "absolutely nail" is a term I don't think should be used in science unless you REALLY totally 100% mean it. And even then.
As an Ameircan, I feel our culture has gotten more anti-intellectual and anti-scientific as of late (or pseudo-scientific). Intellectual analysis and science often come to unpleasant conclusions, especially those butting heads with cherished beliefs.
Also, frankly, people will throw money at a problem before dealing with the discoveries surrounding it. Thus many people don't take care of themselves, and end up paying higher medical bills, for instance.
I'm sure once again we'll see more pointless deabate as opposed to thinking over the issues involved.
Me? I look at it this way. There's a lot of good information out there and a lot of experienced people have made very sober arguments about the issues of global warming. So, I give them credit, and figure that the efforts to reduce global warming, even if they do nothing, are unlikely to have a significant negative impact.
I'd say global warming appears to be one of those things like evolution . . . but I'd be right in more ways than one.
I do find it amusing to see people argue that a large number of experienced, intelligent, educated people are somehow irrelevant because some pundit shoots off his mouth. I'd like to start a talk show, then begin discussing how only egghead crackpots believe seatbelts save lives and that eating fried lard is unhealthy. I wonder how many people I could decieve into terribly unhealthy habits just by shooting my mouth off long enough.
I think you hit the nail on the head - no passion here. It's all product, and it's just not going to work without it - because when you get to Trek at its best, even when goofy or weird, there was something there. It's the same with anything good.
What is the legal mess the fan pages are going through? I haven't heard lately.
Since it sounds like JMS isn't interested, I wonder more and more if Trek needs a 5-10 year TV hiatus. They've got novels, games, etc., they can still rake in the $$$.
But after Enterprise (which I think didn't get a fair shake), what can they do? I can't think of anything. The well's dry.
Give SF a few years without a Trek. See what else pops up - fresh ideas, new takes, old concepts revived. Then perhaps something else can be tried.
I also wonder - and dare to ask - if the unspeakable could be done. From what I've seen the new Battlestar Galactica is quite good - could someone imagine a reboot of Trek TOS?
As goofy as this may seem, these methods are some of the best ways to: 1) Demonstrate micro-level computing to people. 2) Stretch one's imagination as a programmer.
I recall many fun hours spent building contraptions with legos, lincoln logs, erector sets, and more. Nothing of this complexity, but the understanding of interactions on a physical level really did help me relate to things on a code level.
Is there any online museum or page summarizing such contraptions?
I'm glad to see this. Going into computing from a psycology/neuroscience background, I always found biology to be an excellent source of ideas (or if nothing else, metaphors), for my work.
Nature has already solved many a problem (with some flaws like any solution). It's bad enough to reinvent the wheel. It's worse to reinvent something even more complex.
The sad part is wondering what else is out there that isn't being studied because we didn't think of it yet.
OK, kudos for an interesting idea. But I don't see a lot of practacal application of it.
I'm all for modifying the desktop, but I don't think this model is going to really solve any problems. Cool stuff is all fun and good, but in the end for something like this you have to address and solve a problem. Fulfill a need.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like they're trying to be the cafepress.com of online video distribution. Should be interested.
And wouldn't this last article mean they'll have some competition?
Curiouser and curiouser. Is video delivery the next big thing on the internet?
An odd example I've seen is the explosion in anime interest. Yes it has something of a faddish air, but there also seems to be a lot of neophilia - people love something NEW.
Given a chance at something different, I think a surprising amount of people will jump on it.
On the plus side, I find this very fascinating. It's an interesting idea and I'm bang alongside any attempt to increase people's ability to communicate.
And where is it going? I haven't a clue - and frankly analyzing the impact of this requires a proper timeframe.
How long will it take to get off the ground? What kind of content will be produced and what kind of content production tolls will evolve in the next few years? Will there be an overwhelming amount of crap - and if so, will there then be a die-off-pull-back effect that leaves better content, or what?
My wife is a ad designer who does video editing as a hobby and as a professional. She's watched the tools for broadcast and video editing change radically in the seven years she's done it, watched companies rise and fall. Communication is an odd, tricky, unpredictable business, and this initaitive will be just as hard to assess.
But it also SOUNDS damn cool.
Let me try and get this straight. We'd save 10,000 barrels a day. We use 20 million.
This is a savings of 1/20th of a percent. And I'm not able to make out if that savings ONLY exists for those 2 months or the year round. Not particuarly impressive either way.
Here's an idea. Let's start passing legislation and using incentives to promote recycling, efficiency, and alternate sources of energy. You know, going to the heart of the problem as opposed to screwing around with something that presents piddly savings and smells more like a publicity stunt.
As for the coding repercussions . . . I can't say for sure.
Gods know getting a chance to play a beloved character with a strong history and dedicated fandom is the last thing any actor wants.
I've not seen the leaked episode, but I've heard rave reviews. It seems this gentleman really fit the role, and it's a shame he's not continuing - unless this is an early and bad April Fool's joke
In your experience, can managers with little technical knowledge successfully run a technically-oriented company?
The question isn't the important one.
Management may not quite "get" the nuts and bolts of a company, but can delegate and watch the bottom line. So I think any really good manager can run a company they know nothing about without running it into the ground.
The real question is
In your experience, can managers with little technical knowledge successfully run a technically-oriented company as well as managers with technical knowledge but otherwise equivalent skills.
And that, to me, is a resounding "no."
Knowing your industry is a prerequisite for exemplary performance. Understanding how things work gives you an edge that, simply, you can't get anywhere else. For technology (or medicine, or finance) there's often subtleties that you not only need to know, but will let you ask the right questions and understand the answers. Asking the right questions is how you manage the bottom line, make plans, and delegate responsibilities.
Secondly, a technical manager MUST be a good manager period. Just being technical isn't going to cut it today. Products rarely sell themselves, deals and alliances are needed, etc.
Legal and software issues intertwined? That's putting it mildly. It's more a cat's cradle or some bizarre Gordinian knot.
The legal issues, the patent insanity, are just making it harder and harder to make progress. At what point is it just not worth DOING something becasue of all the legal hassles involved.
Today it's media formats. What more could go wrong and what could grind to a halt?
That's a good question. Five years ago I'd have had my doubts. However, having seen Linux make good progress, I can buy the idea of an Open Source BIOS doing the same thing.
It's not so much can it be done - it's will it be done, will people push for it, support it, evangelize it, etc.
You won't find me arguing, but the alert system also has the advantage of informing people.
And after the twentieth alert on IE from an "official" source people may start thinking outside of the Redmond Box.
Sure, the tornado warnings make sense, but those can actually wreck stuff
Having seen the works of viruses and trojans first hand, trust me - they wreck stuff.
You have a point though - I think people are already insensitive to alerts. I just don't think that's a reason to not use an alert system for important things.
We can't help the truly, deliberarelty dumb. But there's enough people out there with a clue, who pay attendion, and a good system may get them to pay attention.
After dealing with so much viral/spyware crap over the years, I'll take my chances that this could somewhat improve things.
Snarky comments and Microsoft jokes aside (not that I don't like either), this makes perfect sense, at least on an abstract level.
Weather alerts, pollution alerts, traffic alerts, tornado warnings - all those are ways to reduce damage, save lives, and make life run smoother in the face of of problems. In the internet age, viruses and such fall into a similar category, so this makes perfect sense to me.
Also, this just increases people's awareness of inernet issues. A few years of watching virus alerts fly all over the place may make people more careful, more picky - and more demanding on certain software vendors.
Now where I WILL bet a bit cynical is if this is A) done right and B) can be done right elsewhere. I'm sure it can be done right, but the "if" is anoter question.
Still, hey, go for it UK Government.
Overall, I find this interesting despite some questions (interoperability, etc.). It looks convenient, it looks planned, and I've done hidden-frames work rather effectively.
The article just doesn't SAY much. I want more links, more code, more examples. Yes, it looks pretty, but don't just show me the product, let me under the hood, let me test drive it.
That being said, I'd also like to know if this framework can integrate into others. If you could merge this into Mono, into STRUTS, etc. . . . then we've got something REALLY interesting.
Which, if you read my post, I noted trustworthiness.
A very good point indeed, I was keeping it general so I really didn't mention scale or level.
So what, in your world only Nobel Laurates and PhD's are allowed to have opinions, and to attempt to back them with argumentation?
Hush! You're spoiling my plans for a future ruled by SCIENCE!
Seriously, anyone can have an opinion. Opinions aren't special, how they're formed and backed up is. I'm going to give special attention to people with the education and knowledge and listen to them if they seem trustworthy. Same reason I listen to my doctor on my health, my auto mechanic on my car, and why I expect people I work with to listen to me on issues of coding, data flow, and application development.
Disclaimer: my science background is in neuroscience, biology, and psychology. Have a grain of salt to go with my response.
Accuracy in predicting systems depends in many cases on what you're predicting and the size of the system and the timeframe of the system being analyzed.
It also depends on what you have at your disposal to do so. A scientist with access to a lot of data and computing power is probably going to make better predictions than Danny Doppler over at a local news station.
Though saying "absolutely nail" is a term I don't think should be used in science unless you REALLY totally 100% mean it. And even then.
Though the link is appreciated, I'm not inclined to trust a man who wrote a novel where Environmentalists use weather-alteration technology to commit ecoterrorism as a person I can trust for an objective analysis of the situation.
As an Ameircan, I feel our culture has gotten more anti-intellectual and anti-scientific as of late (or pseudo-scientific). Intellectual analysis and science often come to unpleasant conclusions, especially those butting heads with cherished beliefs.
Also, frankly, people will throw money at a problem before dealing with the discoveries surrounding it. Thus many people don't take care of themselves, and end up paying higher medical bills, for instance.
I'm sure once again we'll see more pointless deabate as opposed to thinking over the issues involved.
Me? I look at it this way. There's a lot of good information out there and a lot of experienced people have made very sober arguments about the issues of global warming. So, I give them credit, and figure that the efforts to reduce global warming, even if they do nothing, are unlikely to have a significant negative impact.
I'd say global warming appears to be one of those things like evolution . . . but I'd be right in more ways than one.
I do find it amusing to see people argue that a large number of experienced, intelligent, educated people are somehow irrelevant because some pundit shoots off his mouth. I'd like to start a talk show, then begin discussing how only egghead crackpots believe seatbelts save lives and that eating fried lard is unhealthy. I wonder how many people I could decieve into terribly unhealthy habits just by shooting my mouth off long enough.
I think you hit the nail on the head - no passion here. It's all product, and it's just not going to work without it - because when you get to Trek at its best, even when goofy or weird, there was something there. It's the same with anything good.
What is the legal mess the fan pages are going through? I haven't heard lately.
Since it sounds like JMS isn't interested, I wonder more and more if Trek needs a 5-10 year TV hiatus. They've got novels, games, etc., they can still rake in the $$$.
But after Enterprise (which I think didn't get a fair shake), what can they do? I can't think of anything. The well's dry.
Give SF a few years without a Trek. See what else pops up - fresh ideas, new takes, old concepts revived. Then perhaps something else can be tried.
I also wonder - and dare to ask - if the unspeakable could be done. From what I've seen the new Battlestar Galactica is quite good - could someone imagine a reboot of Trek TOS?
As goofy as this may seem, these methods are some of the best ways to:
1) Demonstrate micro-level computing to people.
2) Stretch one's imagination as a programmer.
I recall many fun hours spent building contraptions with legos, lincoln logs, erector sets, and more. Nothing of this complexity, but the understanding of interactions on a physical level really did help me relate to things on a code level.
Is there any online museum or page summarizing such contraptions?
I'm glad to see this. Going into computing from a psycology/neuroscience background, I always found biology to be an excellent source of ideas (or if nothing else, metaphors), for my work.
Nature has already solved many a problem (with some flaws like any solution). It's bad enough to reinvent the wheel. It's worse to reinvent something even more complex.
The sad part is wondering what else is out there that isn't being studied because we didn't think of it yet.
OK, kudos for an interesting idea. But I don't see a lot of practacal application of it.
I'm all for modifying the desktop, but I don't think this model is going to really solve any problems. Cool stuff is all fun and good, but in the end for something like this you have to address and solve a problem. Fulfill a need.
Nah, they'll catch on. So you go to people you CAN'T fire and ask these questions ;)