How can you honestly think in terms of fairness to say "My ideas are right" when it may be ethical to you but not to others. Sure I despise racism, sites but I will say this, they are entitled to their own opinions and the same right to express it, as I can express my opinions, etc.
Not to nitpick, but that's egregiously illogical. Discourse is served best when the different sides believe that their ideas are right and are willing to defend them. Saying that everyone should just accept other people's opinions... what if my opinion is that other people's opinions don't count? Would accept that one, also? Or are you closed-minded to that idea?
I don't think anyone needed statistical data to make that choice. I'm pretty sure even the brain-dead marketing people could figure out that breakfast cereal ads would work better with Saturday morning cartoons.
From your complaint, it seems that they do respect your ability to do your job. If you have built and implemented an application at work at their request, the very fact that they made the request and used your app means that they respect your ability.
But you can't expect them to respect your opinion on other things just because you can write some code. Your boss probably won't ask your opinion about solving marital problems, etc. and probably wouldn't respect your opinion on it anyway. And that's perfectly normal and reasonable.
The same goes for other business related things... a person who has experience in business probably won't care about the opinion of someone who doesn't when it comes to how to run their business. Sometimes that even seems to cross areas, meaning that their choice of system, or encryption, etc. might have more to do with business concerns than IT concerns. There is often a lot more to those decisions than whether "X" is the "best"....
My advice: Be satisfied that they actually respect your ability to do your job.
Content-Protection Racket Corporation Rep: "Questions?"
Pissed-Off Journalist: "How do you answer the allegations that consumers won't even be able to copy =songs/movies/etc= that they have made themselves......?"
See how easy it is? And the other journalists suddenly see another story brewing and jump on the bandwagon... after all, it's all about other peoples' misery, and seeing a consumer scandle with a big corporation is always good for news programs....
TE was only a part of the problem, but a big one. It wasn't about merchandising. In fact, they were actually set to make money and had been making a profit lately. But the buildup of it all and the aggressive pushing by TE caused an overnight stumble that they couldn't possibly recover from. If TE had laid off, they would have moved forward and began a very profitable season with the redesign of both of their major systems which were starting to really sell well just before "the fall".
The same exact problem exists with radio broadcasts. People tape things off the radio all the time. Are the radio stations responsible for that infringement? No. Neither should an Internet broadcast be responsible. A book store knows that people can copy the books they buy. Are they responsible for that copying?
And don't hand me that "digital format" crap. MP3's don't sound as good as a CD. Period. And photocopies don't look as good as the bound book. But we can't go around banning or overcharging either bookstores, copy machine makers, etc. just because someone might possibly in some way infringe on someone else's copyright. Attack the actual pirates.
Well... let's take a look at history to see what that's all about:
When the tax on everything you made over 200k was 98%, what happened?
Well, say an actor, (wink, wink) made 200k on a movie one year. And then, they wanted him to do another.
Why would he? Yet, if he doesn't make that blockbuster, the lighting guys have no job, the camermen have no job, etc. etc. It doesn't just affect that one rich actor. In fact, it makes no difference to that one guy because he already has a lot of money. But that choice that the government has encouraged him into affects the people that it's trying to help!!
The reason is that these deals are each worked out individually. But, it's not the playing of the music, per se, that is subject to royalties. It is only because the station is a commercial venture and is rebroadcasting the music specifically for public consumption.
I.e., it is not illegal for you to go down to the corner with a guitar and play and sing some song that someone else wrote. Even though we may think of that as "public performance", it doesn't fall under that category.
OTOH, if you recorded yourself playing that song and starting selling tapes of it, that would be subject to royalties. (to the composer, not the artist).
A gray area is performing for free in public without charging, yet using amplification equipment. In general, no one pursues royalties for such a thing. So, unless someone knows of a case, it's never really been decided if something like that is illegal.
From my own experience.
I had a boss with a CS degree. SA, including an HP-UX, was a self-described Unix guru.
I went to 2 years of college for music.
Why is it he kept asking me how to use simple unix commands? Didn't know what sed was for? Had problems making even the simplest (10 lines) shell scripts? Supposedly took a class on C, compiler theory, etc. but couldn't program his way out of a wet paper bag? In one instance, he couldn't come up with a simple script for knocking a certain group of users off the system at a given time....
What did college do for this man? How did he even graduate without what I would consider basic information needed to perform in an IT position?
I don't want this to come out all "Linux R00lz" or anything but....
Linux in the OS dept. is like women in the workplace. They have to be better than the competition. If they are as good as the competition or even only a little bit better, that's not good enough. (which is the current situation IMO). Unfortunately, being a little bit better than Windows doesn't cut it. Linux must be spectacularly better in every way. Linux already has faster and smoother installation, nicer looking widgets, and much better "back-end" stuff. But it's not good enough, because if Linux is going to be recognized as a leader in the OS space, then it *must* be ~astoundingly~ better in every area, including in ease of use. Being just as good or even only a small amount better than the rival is not good enough.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to nitpick, but that's egregiously illogical. Discourse is served best when the different sides believe that their ideas are right and are willing to defend them. Saying that everyone should just accept other people's opinions... what if my opinion is that other people's opinions don't count? Would accept that one, also? Or are you closed-minded to that idea?
I don't think anyone needed statistical data to make that choice. I'm pretty sure even the brain-dead marketing people could figure out that breakfast cereal ads would work better with Saturday morning cartoons.
From your complaint, it seems that they do respect your ability to do your job. If you have built and implemented an application at work at their request, the very fact that they made the request and used your app means that they respect your ability.
But you can't expect them to respect your opinion on other things just because you can write some code. Your boss probably won't ask your opinion about solving marital problems, etc. and probably wouldn't respect your opinion on it anyway. And that's perfectly normal and reasonable.
The same goes for other business related things... a person who has experience in business probably won't care about the opinion of someone who doesn't when it comes to how to run their business. Sometimes that even seems to cross areas, meaning that their choice of system, or encryption, etc. might have more to do with business concerns than IT concerns. There is often a lot more to those decisions than whether "X" is the "best"....
My advice: Be satisfied that they actually respect your ability to do your job.
Content-Protection Racket Corporation Rep: "Questions?"
Pissed-Off Journalist: "How do you answer the allegations that consumers won't even be able to copy =songs/movies/etc= that they have made themselves......?"
See how easy it is? And the other journalists suddenly see another story brewing and jump on the bandwagon... after all, it's all about other peoples' misery, and seeing a consumer scandle with a big corporation is always good for news programs....
I'm getting the feeling that these "Black Holes" are just vaporware...
TE was only a part of the problem, but a big one. It wasn't about merchandising. In fact, they were actually set to make money and had been making a profit lately. But the buildup of it all and the aggressive pushing by TE caused an overnight stumble that they couldn't possibly recover from. If TE had laid off, they would have moved forward and began a very profitable season with the redesign of both of their major systems which were starting to really sell well just before "the fall".
Ah, the good 'ol days.
The same exact problem exists with radio broadcasts. People tape things off the radio all the time. Are the radio stations responsible for that infringement? No. Neither should an Internet broadcast be responsible. A book store knows that people can copy the books they buy. Are they responsible for that copying?
And don't hand me that "digital format" crap. MP3's don't sound as good as a CD. Period. And photocopies don't look as good as the bound book. But we can't go around banning or overcharging either bookstores, copy machine makers, etc. just because someone might possibly in some way infringe on someone else's copyright. Attack the actual pirates.
Well... let's take a look at history to see what that's all about:
When the tax on everything you made over 200k was 98%, what happened?
Well, say an actor, (wink, wink) made 200k on a movie one year. And then, they wanted him to do another.
Why would he? Yet, if he doesn't make that blockbuster, the lighting guys have no job, the camermen have no job, etc. etc. It doesn't just affect that one rich actor. In fact, it makes no difference to that one guy because he already has a lot of money. But that choice that the government has encouraged him into affects the people that it's trying to help!!
The reason is that these deals are each worked out individually. But, it's not the playing of the music, per se, that is subject to royalties. It is only because the station is a commercial venture and is rebroadcasting the music specifically for public consumption.
I.e., it is not illegal for you to go down to the corner with a guitar and play and sing some song that someone else wrote. Even though we may think of that as "public performance", it doesn't fall under that category.
OTOH, if you recorded yourself playing that song and starting selling tapes of it, that would be subject to royalties. (to the composer, not the artist).
A gray area is performing for free in public without charging, yet using amplification equipment. In general, no one pursues royalties for such a thing. So, unless someone knows of a case, it's never really been decided if something like that is illegal.
From my own experience.
I had a boss with a CS degree. SA, including an HP-UX, was a self-described Unix guru.
I went to 2 years of college for music.
Why is it he kept asking me how to use simple unix commands? Didn't know what sed was for? Had problems making even the simplest (10 lines) shell scripts? Supposedly took a class on C, compiler theory, etc. but couldn't program his way out of a wet paper bag? In one instance, he couldn't come up with a simple script for knocking a certain group of users off the system at a given time....
What did college do for this man? How did he even graduate without what I would consider basic information needed to perform in an IT position?
I don't want this to come out all "Linux R00lz" or anything but....
Linux in the OS dept. is like women in the workplace. They have to be better than the competition. If they are as good as the competition or even only a little bit better, that's not good enough. (which is the current situation IMO). Unfortunately, being a little bit better than Windows doesn't cut it. Linux must be spectacularly better in every way. Linux already has faster and smoother installation, nicer looking widgets, and much better "back-end" stuff. But it's not good enough, because if Linux is going to be recognized as a leader in the OS space, then it *must* be ~astoundingly~ better in every area, including in ease of use. Being just as good or even only a small amount better than the rival is not good enough.
my US$0.02
Imagine a beowulf cluster of these!!
sigh... the burden has to fall on someone, I guess.
Of course. Adam and Eve got "kicked" out of the garden. Probablly due to a flag on the play, using their hands on the apple.