The last time I went looking for a laptop, I was seriously disappointed by the time one can run those things on battery. I travel a lot and often I simply wouldn't be able to plug my laptop to an outlet for days.
Now if I remember correctly, the screen is the largest consumer of power, but the processor comes next. Now I don't need a 500 MHz P-III that not only is ridiculously fast for someone who wants to run Linux, emacs and gcc in text mode while on a trip, but is also uncomfortably warm in my lap. I can think of better things that are also warm, comforting and sitting on my lap.;-)
I wonder why the Patent Office doesn't use the peer review process similar to that of the scientific community?
They should send the pending patents to established institutions/experts for peer review, and just act as the "editorial office" either granting or denying the patent based on the referees' comments.
If you've got a university CS degree you should expect to be given more responsibility and to manage projects! Sometimes it takes more time sometimes less. My first job was a pure coding job and it just sucked: coding according to someone else's design. At my second job I got at last to design the software and to manage a team of four coders.
I like to code. I like designing even better, but I also like to manage. Not because I get my kicks out of being "the boss", but because I am good at managing projects. Most of all I enjoy producing quality software and management is inevitable part of it -- just as desigining, coding and testing.
Re:I have to disagree with those statistics
on
Disconnected
·
· Score: 1
escape the banter of coworkers (and decrease productivity at the same time
I personally avoid all banter with my coworkers. Firstly, I hate it. Secondly, it decreases productivity.
When you buy a Windows license, you pay with your soul.
If you believe in the black-and-white world of Linus the God and Bill the Devil.
I don't. I won't give a shit about open source ideology if the numbers tell me that I will lose more money by sending my staff away for re-education than buying an MS license.
Was I talking about the meatworld? No. I was talking about the net. What's the difference? The problem of scarcity... the corporate "mine, mine, mine!" model may (I'm still not convinced of the blessings of the "normal" capitalist mode) work in the meatworld but most definitely does not work in the electronic world.
You really mean that secretaries and tech writers should learn to use Linux and StarOffice? When all they know about Windows MS Office, and computers in general was learned during a four week re-education course?
Boy, I hope I'll never end up in a company or a project run by you.
These people aren't in the tech industry. They may only be working in the tech industry. Teaching them to use yet another word processor is simply not cost-effective -- even if the software is free. The lost hours spent either interviewing for a secretary who knows Linux or teaching them to use it cost more than paying for a Windows license.
I really liked the bit about how nobody could link to his stuff even if they wanted.
The corporate influence is slowly but surely eating away the open nature of the net and replacing it with barbed wire fencing to protect their property. They are claiming "land", dumping property on it and putting up "no trespassing" signs without ever stopping to think whether it would be better to keep their property somewhere else.
The net is in a danger of becoming a desolate, sterilized wasteland decorated by islands of corporate information protected behind the walls of greed.
It is less expensive to buy a Windows and Office license for your entire company than getting your secretaries and tech writers to use Linux and StarOffice efficiently in a reasonable time.
In ten years Gnutella, Freenet and similar subversive software will most likely lead into a situation where all the equipment required for a net connection will be licensed, traceable tamper proof black boxes. Protocols will enable transparent interception by the authorities and provide unique identification of the source, destination and even general content of each packet. Penalties for disrupting or circumventing the system will be severe and the legislation international.
Governments and media just will not give up their accumulated power.
The first option is that if the European Commision has some guts and decides to defy the US in that the DMCA (as proposed to them by the WTO) is not compatible with European laws, all trade-war hell will break lose.
The second option is that the EU, facing a devastating trade-war with USA, decides to give in and implements a law similar to the DMCA.
Now, to me the second option sounds far more plausible than the first one...
I've got an HP LaserJet 2100TN with PostScript and ethernet at home and it works perfectly with my Linux boxen. Setting up the JetDirect was a breeze. I just telnetted to the printer, set the JetDirect up there before finally configuring my printcap to send raw and text stuff to the correct IP addresses.
You either don't have the great idea/implementation or you lack the necessary ruthlessness.
There are people who are willing to do (almost) anything to make sure that their idea wins. Is a monopoly to be their reward? If you believe that free market is literally a free market, the inevitable result is a one huge monopoly.
1. Great business idea.
2. Great implementation.
3. Make money.
4. Buy/crush the weakest rival. Get more clients.
5. Make more money.
6. Buy/crush the next rival. Get more clients.
7. Make more money.
...
n-1. Buy/crush the last rival. Get the all clients.
n. Monopoly.
The point is: if you can come up with an overwhelmingly great business idea, is it right to dominate the whole market?
Just where have you been for the last two decades?
Corporations are not exactly the best model for capitalism. More like mom and pop types of things. The whole idea of capitalism was for *anyone* to start selling *now*
Now, who's being an idealist?
If corporations are not the best models for capitalism, then why is it that capitalism inevitably seems to give birth to huge, multinational and uncontrollable corporations? Mom and pop types? Yeah, right. They're so cute that they can exist unless they become too successful and either get bought out or trashed by the corporations whose interests are at stake.
Ah, yes. Once a doctor, engineer or a physicist graduates he has all the knowledge he'll ever need and he should also know everything by heart.
Bollocks.
Anyone, at least the individuals not trying delude themselves, soon realize that once they pass all the exams and get to the real life they a) need to learn much, much more and b) they only remember things that they practise often. The rest is not forgotten, but needs to be "refreshed" and reading an old, familiar course book is not a bad choice.
Slashdot Mirror
The last time I went looking for a laptop, I was seriously disappointed by the time one can run those things on battery. I travel a lot and often I simply wouldn't be able to plug my laptop to an outlet for days.
Now if I remember correctly, the screen is the largest consumer of power, but the processor comes next. Now I don't need a 500 MHz P-III that not only is ridiculously fast for someone who wants to run Linux, emacs and gcc in text mode while on a trip, but is also uncomfortably warm in my lap. I can think of better things that are also warm, comforting and sitting on my lap. ;-)
They should send the pending patents to established institutions/experts for peer review, and just act as the "editorial office" either granting or denying the patent based on the referees' comments.
Pro-Pain "Switchblade Knife"
Hold your breath.
Run like hell.
Hope no-one will notice.
Like the corporate world couldn't come up with funding and brains to achieve the same?
Is this technology restricted?
I like to code. I like designing even better, but I also like to manage. Not because I get my kicks out of being "the boss", but because I am good at managing projects. Most of all I enjoy producing quality software and management is inevitable part of it -- just as desigining, coding and testing.
I personally avoid all banter with my coworkers. Firstly, I hate it. Secondly, it decreases productivity.
If you believe in the black-and-white world of Linus the God and Bill the Devil.
I don't. I won't give a shit about open source ideology if the numbers tell me that I will lose more money by sending my staff away for re-education than buying an MS license.
Was I talking about the meatworld? No. I was talking about the net. What's the difference? The problem of scarcity... the corporate "mine, mine, mine!" model may (I'm still not convinced of the blessings of the "normal" capitalist mode) work in the meatworld but most definitely does not work in the electronic world.
Boy, I hope I'll never end up in a company or a project run by you.
These people aren't in the tech industry. They may only be working in the tech industry. Teaching them to use yet another word processor is simply not cost-effective -- even if the software is free. The lost hours spent either interviewing for a secretary who knows Linux or teaching them to use it cost more than paying for a Windows license.
The corporate influence is slowly but surely eating away the open nature of the net and replacing it with barbed wire fencing to protect their property. They are claiming "land", dumping property on it and putting up "no trespassing" signs without ever stopping to think whether it would be better to keep their property somewhere else.
The net is in a danger of becoming a desolate, sterilized wasteland decorated by islands of corporate information protected behind the walls of greed.
Have you ever tried to write equations with HTML?
It is less expensive to buy a Windows and Office license for your entire company than getting your secretaries and tech writers to use Linux and StarOffice efficiently in a reasonable time.
Governments and media just will not give up their accumulated power.
The first option is that if the European Commision has some guts and decides to defy the US in that the DMCA (as proposed to them by the WTO) is not compatible with European laws, all trade-war hell will break lose.
The second option is that the EU, facing a devastating trade-war with USA, decides to give in and implements a law similar to the DMCA.
Now, to me the second option sounds far more plausible than the first one...
I've got an HP LaserJet 2100TN with PostScript and ethernet at home and it works perfectly with my Linux boxen. Setting up the JetDirect was a breeze. I just telnetted to the printer, set the JetDirect up there before finally configuring my printcap to send raw and text stuff to the correct IP addresses.
Perhaps you're right, but not for long.
WTO will take care of the rest of the world.
In the face of cutthroat corporatism as protected by DMCA and UCITA, the answer to the first question is "no" and to the second "yes".
You either don't have the great idea/implementation or you lack the necessary ruthlessness.
There are people who are willing to do (almost) anything to make sure that their idea wins. Is a monopoly to be their reward? If you believe that free market is literally a free market, the inevitable result is a one huge monopoly.
Losing CPU time in the scheduler instead of the process?
1. Great business idea.
2. Great implementation.
3. Make money.
4. Buy/crush the weakest rival. Get more clients.
5. Make more money.
6. Buy/crush the next rival. Get more clients.
7. Make more money.
...
n-1. Buy/crush the last rival. Get the all clients.
n. Monopoly.
The point is: if you can come up with an overwhelmingly great business idea, is it right to dominate the whole market?
Just where have you been for the last two decades?
Corporations are not exactly the best model for capitalism. More like mom and pop types of things. The whole idea of capitalism was for *anyone* to start selling *now*
Now, who's being an idealist?
If corporations are not the best models for capitalism, then why is it that capitalism inevitably seems to give birth to huge, multinational and uncontrollable corporations? Mom and pop types? Yeah, right. They're so cute that they can exist unless they become too successful and either get bought out or trashed by the corporations whose interests are at stake.
So? A completely free and unregulated market inevitably turns into a single, huge monopoly. It's not pessimistic at all.
Bollocks.
Anyone, at least the individuals not trying delude themselves, soon realize that once they pass all the exams and get to the real life they a) need to learn much, much more and b) they only remember things that they practise often. The rest is not forgotten, but needs to be "refreshed" and reading an old, familiar course book is not a bad choice.