The sad fact of the current political state of the United States is simply that politicians are relying on voters to vote based on emotion, not logic.
Which, when you think about it, is a brilliant way to manipulate people into getting them to vote against their own best interests. Rove understood this and whatever you say about the man, if he fools you once and fools you twice and keeps on fooling you, it's not his fault. I refer to some of those issues as Sucker Bait and you can certainly see how quickly people polarize on them. The trick is figuring which issues are going to get you the numbers you need and then you can go and do whatever you want. Which they have. Perhaps it will be a good thing when low-lying parts of the US capitol are among the first to flood if sea levels do rise 40 or more feet.
In this day and age, if I'm running for office, which am I going to do:
Say and Do the right things for the integrity of office and country?
OR
Say and Do the right things to get elected/re-elected and bring home the bacon?
I think it's fair to say, we can see how we got where we are. Fixing it by electing good, intelligent and wise candidates
means finding them and grooming them so the voter, who cares more about Paris Hilton getting a DUI, keeping gays from marrying, teaching Creationism/Intelligent Design vs. Evolution than whether there's
about to be a rise in sea levels, mass extinction and famine is a truly gargantuan undertaking. First they have to
get the average clod on the street to understand how clean science will impact their lives. Considering the head start stupidity has
and the powerful allies of ignorance, it's daunting.
If "quality is free" at all, it's only free in the long term, and rarely is your boss interested in the long term. Despite the "grass-roots" rhetoric to these movements, management determines how much "quality" they're willing to pay for, not engineers and programmers.
As if to underscore this, in the first rounds of job cuts they sacked Q/A. When the people who do that work leave, the writing is on the wall.
And yet a lot of code isn't quality, and computers crash and people die. Maybe we need fewer "shortcuts", and more "quality".
And yet a lot of big companies who have legions of MBAs are regularly reported in the news, leaking user data, having recalls, denying their product had anything to do with a tragedy, big accounting firm taking money and giving their nod of approval to crooks. Yeah.
The shortcuts I mean aren't quick and dirty, they're just the most direct path among the parties who need to know, without lots of fun meetings where you explain things to people who will forget all the key points and then force preposterous schemes upon IT because it gives them something to do. Ever hear of people whose jobs it is to go to meetings? TQM created a need for these people.
i wish they would give up or just legalize it. online gambling really isn't a problem, just like online sales of goods isn't a problem to walmart or best buy.
Several states have deals where they get a cut of Indian Casinos and the other privately run casinos. Even Las Vegas is feeling the pinch from the competition of the spread of brick and mortar (albeit well lit bricks and glittery mortar) casinos throughout the USA and thus great giveaways aren't what they used to be as Vegas repositions itself as a destination for the family (what a sordid thought that is, but they really are!) along with conventions.
If I could be anywhere in the world and bet on 888.com or any other site, who gets a cut? There's multiple special interests at work and the online community isn't quite as strongly represented, to say nothing of the people's own personal wishes. I dare Washington to make it a Fall referendum.
I've re-written the same applications dozens of times, sometimes because my code is unreadable, sometimes just for fun to find a new way to do it, and occasionally because it's so easy that it's actually faster than spending 2 minutes finding the previous version. Gotta keep my mind fresh, I'm over 30 you know.
Typically when I've re-written an app it is because it has been modified so much from its origninal form it is unable to accomodate a new option and/or has become fragile. There are chunks of code you can reuse and if you've worked in the same job long enough you know where to find them.
The concept of Code Portfolios is rather humourous in that you could easily, as you say, spend a lot of time documenting it only to replace it the next time. We kept a compendium at one of my past employers, but it fell out of date rapidly unless it was some tiny piece of code which was highly specialised and rarely changed. (Typically these were the routines which required extreme care when changing as they were widely used.)
The best solutions to specific problems are going to be custom made, at least for a while.
Yeah, but sometimes you have to gird yourself for those days when the sheep come home from being fleeced at the latest management fad sheering.
I vividly remember the epic battles that took place when managers returned from TQM (Total Quality Management) training. The all had these purposeful looks of the new acolyte and a Franklin Planner under their arm. They cooked up Vision and Mission statements and tried to get everyone on the bandwagon. It was a trying time because most of the way we already did things were obviously the most efficient. Work under the gun a lot and you tend to find the shortcuts yourself. If anything we became less efficient until the whole clamour died away and most of us returned to getting it done the proper way.
Why would you ever assemble wisdom and business savvy when it's simpler and easier to assemble random quotes & concepts from popular seminars and "Best Seller" managerial books.
You have to keep in mind, there's an industry which keeps inself employed by selling seminars and books. If everyone got all the right answers the first time, what would these people do?
Gartner urges managers to consider better process control and governance, managing 'application portfolios' much as they do stock portfolios. Part of this discipline is 'killing development projects early and often.'"
Whatever they're smoking, it's worse than paraquat.
While about 1/3 apps I program are sort of cookie-cutter, a routine from here, a routine from there and a little glue, most are completely from scratch and have never been done before. The nature of things is change and change dictates writing new apps which handed data differently and produces information in a different light each time.
Microsoft has released two successive patches aimed at disabling the tool. The first worked--but the hacker, known only by the pseudonym "Viodentia," quickly found a way around the update, the company alleges. Now the company says this was because the hacker had apparently gained access to copyrighted source code unavailable to previous generations of would-be crackers.
Tenuous grounds -- Microsoft is in effect claiming nobody could have reverse engineered their code, or cracked it, so fast, therefore they must have cheated by having
access to Microsoft's original sources. Sounds like a logical assumption, but it's a bit like claiming a driver went from Point A to Point B, 100 miles apart, in one hour must have been speeding, though there was no witness to the driver actually speeding.
I expect what Microsoft really wants is to find if they have an inside man leaking code. Have to get Viodentia to reveal that by poring over his/her drive, which may yield absolutely nothing and be fairly claimed as
harrassment.
"FairUse4WM has been my own creation, and has never involved Microsoft source code," the developer wrote. "I link with Microsoft's static libraries provided with the compiler and various platform SDK (software development kit) files."
Sounds almost as if those at Microsoft pursuing this case do not even know what their own library routines may be capapble of.
The Fat Cats want the consumer to have as much excess money as possible to buy more of his product. The Nanny State wants the consumer to have the minimal amount of money possible to not revolt.
Ideally, you want to maximise your return on as little product as possible, that way you don't run out of your money making stock. Doubled the price, gasoline still sold in large quantities. I work in California and am shocked how many people won't pay $180 for annual school bus fare, but will happily join the morning grid-lock to transport their kids and burn through a few $ of fuel per day.
Let me get this straight... the fat cats are worried other fat cats will get a shot at the saucer of milk, even though it'll still all be paid for by the consumer?
"A new study has come out that purports to show a link between file-sharing and decreased CD purchases. Covering the period of 1995-2003, the study looked for a link between owning a computer and decreased CD purchases.
This could also explain teh drop in 8-track and LP sales, too!
<Homer>Ooooohhh, no more 8 tracks? Darn you computer makers!</Homer>
the study goes on to link reselling used CD's with cooties
The game hasn't changed since Mesopotamian times, and probably earlier.
Actually it rather has. Where wars were fought over resources, now governments look out for the interests of business using alliances and instruments such things as treaties and the WTO.
One thing I don't believe any other government, or people, have done throughout history is to insist other governments should be more like their own and encouraging change with a very large military.
What!? No other nation in the history of the world has used its military to make others like them?
One of these days I'd like to believe slashdot readers actually understand something before replying, without siezing upon a misunderstanding or a tangential point. What part of to insist other governments should be more like their own was a mystery to you? Too many posts are interpreting the whole sentence as 'the US have never attacked or invaded another country', which isn't anywhere near what I wrote. The US a habit of installing and/or propping up governments which are friendly to its interests, more recently the US is into Nation Building, that is doing a makeover on the governance to be more like that in the US, democratic. Democratic of not, the US has a tendency to befriend or alienate governments which appears to have no bering upon how leaders are selected and what powers they have. It's business as usual.
Are you for real? 100 years ago was the end of colonial power?
What part of "The Beginning of the End" wasn't clear to you?
British Empire? A shadow of itself. Netherlands? Likewise. French? Not much of it left. Spain? Can't say much of the New World pays them tribute anymore.
The US is currently dominant in the world, but anyone can see that this is untenable.
The US is not an colonial power! The US has territories, like Puerto Rico and Guam, but not, say and enclave in China or an administered territory in Africa.
The dominant world power is more of a diplomatic and business force than military. Sure, the US knocked over the Taliban and Sadam, but neither were really any real opposition, say, like invading Brazil or Australia would be, besides that the USA would find a world very strongly aligning against it for such a move. Iraq has bust the USA's credibility and it's debt is increasingly funded by China. Expect change to come from that quarter.
I've gotta disagree with you there. Those who have the stongest economies* will have the less uncomfortable time of it. People can point fingers and complain all they want, but in the end, the quality of life will remain highest for those who have the best economies
I take it you weren't alive in 1973.
Those with the furthest to fall, will fall and it will not be a pleasant experience for anyone. With the astounding energy dependence of the USA I can't see it going very comfortably. Perhaps this is why the current administration is in such a state of denial, doctoring studies, saying all the facts aren't in yet, etc.
You don't believe in the British Empire? (And by 'be more like their own' I mean run by the British for the betterment of the Bristish, to the exclusion of all others.)
Outposts of the Empire were largely administered in whatever way was deemed fit, often very, very brutally, simply to keep things in check and to advance interests of British interests, the notorious East India Company as an example. Not much of an Empire anymore, but many of the treasures obtained during the age of empire still remain in british hands (and I don't just mean museum pieces.)
Multinationals now do with trade agreements what once was achieved at point of arms.
Has it been that long since world war II? Certainly it's been a while. But Europe has a much longer lineage of threating the world than the US does...
100 years ago is effectively The Beginning of the End for colonial powers.
The USA, a late entry into the game tried to grab as much as it could, which lead to increased heat of competition and pressure upon peoples who eventually began to push back.
If you haven't seen An Inconvenient Truth, yet, do try.
Like Al Gore, it's a bit clunky, but there's a lot of truth in there and shouldn't be discounted just because
you may not like the presenter.
My belief is, we'll keep right on going in this direction until we feel sufficient pain* to stop. Famine and flooding will
certainly increase the likelihood of conflict. Darfur as depicted in the film was an eye opener, the severe drought
which may
be caused by warming now appears more likely the root of conflict as people scrabble for remaining water and land.
It may become the view that USA and Europe, have had it good long enough and they should cut down on emissions first.
It will come to a head when cities like Shanghai are under water and each country is blaming the other for the fine mess things are in. Those who have
dipped deepest and longest into the carbon fuels trough the will have an uncomfortable time of it.
Please get off your soap box for a moment. Not that I support everything the USA government does on behalf of corporate interest, but let's not pretend the US is the sole practitioner of such tactics. The imperialists of Europe have been using their military might to enrich monetary interests since way before there even was a USA.
The exception to this argument being that Europe isn't doing anything with it's militaries anymore. Oh, a little intervention in West Africa by France, but mostly to keep the peace. The world has changed since 100 years ago, when it was still viewed as acceptable to colonise savage lands and subvert southeastern asian nations. Ask someone recently from China what the Big Insult was, they'll tell you. Could anyone, even the USA do that today? Not a chance. Now most of it is all done through diplomacy, multinational corporations and a few should lived marauders.
Slashdot Mirror
The sad fact of the current political state of the United States is simply that politicians are relying on voters to vote based on emotion, not logic.
Which, when you think about it, is a brilliant way to manipulate people into getting them to vote against their own best interests. Rove understood this and whatever you say about the man, if he fools you once and fools you twice and keeps on fooling you, it's not his fault. I refer to some of those issues as Sucker Bait and you can certainly see how quickly people polarize on them. The trick is figuring which issues are going to get you the numbers you need and then you can go and do whatever you want. Which they have. Perhaps it will be a good thing when low-lying parts of the US capitol are among the first to flood if sea levels do rise 40 or more feet.
In this day and age, if I'm running for office, which am I going to do:
- Say and Do the right things for the integrity of office and country?
ORI think it's fair to say, we can see how we got where we are. Fixing it by electing good, intelligent and wise candidates means finding them and grooming them so the voter, who cares more about Paris Hilton getting a DUI, keeping gays from marrying, teaching Creationism/Intelligent Design vs. Evolution than whether there's about to be a rise in sea levels, mass extinction and famine is a truly gargantuan undertaking. First they have to get the average clod on the street to understand how clean science will impact their lives. Considering the head start stupidity has and the powerful allies of ignorance, it's daunting.
If "quality is free" at all, it's only free in the long term, and rarely is your boss interested in the long term. Despite the "grass-roots" rhetoric to these movements, management determines how much "quality" they're willing to pay for, not engineers and programmers.
As if to underscore this, in the first rounds of job cuts they sacked Q/A. When the people who do that work leave, the writing is on the wall.
And yet a lot of code isn't quality, and computers crash and people die. Maybe we need fewer "shortcuts", and more "quality".
And yet a lot of big companies who have legions of MBAs are regularly reported in the news, leaking user data, having recalls, denying their product had anything to do with a tragedy, big accounting firm taking money and giving their nod of approval to crooks. Yeah.
The shortcuts I mean aren't quick and dirty, they're just the most direct path among the parties who need to know, without lots of fun meetings where you explain things to people who will forget all the key points and then force preposterous schemes upon IT because it gives them something to do. Ever hear of people whose jobs it is to go to meetings? TQM created a need for these people.
i wish they would give up or just legalize it. online gambling really isn't a problem, just like online sales of goods isn't a problem to walmart or best buy.
Several states have deals where they get a cut of Indian Casinos and the other privately run casinos. Even Las Vegas is feeling the pinch from the competition of the spread of brick and mortar (albeit well lit bricks and glittery mortar) casinos throughout the USA and thus great giveaways aren't what they used to be as Vegas repositions itself as a destination for the family (what a sordid thought that is, but they really are!) along with conventions.
If I could be anywhere in the world and bet on 888.com or any other site, who gets a cut? There's multiple special interests at work and the online community isn't quite as strongly represented, to say nothing of the people's own personal wishes. I dare Washington to make it a Fall referendum.
If you read the article you would know that they do know this, and more. Apparently you don't know not to trust slashdot summaries though.
And slashdot gets so worked up about doctored photos....
I've re-written the same applications dozens of times, sometimes because my code is unreadable, sometimes just for fun to find a new way to do it, and occasionally because it's so easy that it's actually faster than spending 2 minutes finding the previous version. Gotta keep my mind fresh, I'm over 30 you know.
Typically when I've re-written an app it is because it has been modified so much from its origninal form it is unable to accomodate a new option and/or has become fragile. There are chunks of code you can reuse and if you've worked in the same job long enough you know where to find them.
The concept of Code Portfolios is rather humourous in that you could easily, as you say, spend a lot of time documenting it only to replace it the next time. We kept a compendium at one of my past employers, but it fell out of date rapidly unless it was some tiny piece of code which was highly specialised and rarely changed. (Typically these were the routines which required extreme care when changing as they were widely used.)
The best solutions to specific problems are going to be custom made, at least for a while.
Yeah, but sometimes you have to gird yourself for those days when the sheep come home from being fleeced at the latest management fad sheering.
I vividly remember the epic battles that took place when managers returned from TQM (Total Quality Management) training. The all had these purposeful looks of the new acolyte and a Franklin Planner under their arm. They cooked up Vision and Mission statements and tried to get everyone on the bandwagon. It was a trying time because most of the way we already did things were obviously the most efficient. Work under the gun a lot and you tend to find the shortcuts yourself. If anything we became less efficient until the whole clamour died away and most of us returned to getting it done the proper way.
Why would you ever assemble wisdom and business savvy when it's simpler and easier to assemble random quotes & concepts from popular seminars and "Best Seller" managerial books.
You have to keep in mind, there's an industry which keeps inself employed by selling seminars and books. If everyone got all the right answers the first time, what would these people do?
Going out of business sale, nostrums 50% off!
Gartner urges managers to consider better process control and governance, managing 'application portfolios' much as they do stock portfolios. Part of this discipline is 'killing development projects early and often.'"
Whatever they're smoking, it's worse than paraquat.
While about 1/3 apps I program are sort of cookie-cutter, a routine from here, a routine from there and a little glue, most are completely from scratch and have never been done before. The nature of things is change and change dictates writing new apps which handed data differently and produces information in a different light each time.
These people are analysts and don't know this???
Microsoft has released two successive patches aimed at disabling the tool. The first worked--but the hacker, known only by the pseudonym "Viodentia," quickly found a way around the update, the company alleges. Now the company says this was because the hacker had apparently gained access to copyrighted source code unavailable to previous generations of would-be crackers.
Tenuous grounds -- Microsoft is in effect claiming nobody could have reverse engineered their code, or cracked it, so fast, therefore they must have cheated by having access to Microsoft's original sources. Sounds like a logical assumption, but it's a bit like claiming a driver went from Point A to Point B, 100 miles apart, in one hour must have been speeding, though there was no witness to the driver actually speeding.
I expect what Microsoft really wants is to find if they have an inside man leaking code. Have to get Viodentia to reveal that by poring over his/her drive, which may yield absolutely nothing and be fairly claimed as harrassment.
"FairUse4WM has been my own creation, and has never involved Microsoft source code," the developer wrote. "I link with Microsoft's static libraries provided with the compiler and various platform SDK (software development kit) files."
Sounds almost as if those at Microsoft pursuing this case do not even know what their own library routines may be capapble of.
ARCHON!
<Homer>Aaaaahhhh, forbidden Archon, aaaaaagggghhhh</Homer>
Some ideas were just dead right when they came out and the rest of the gaming world is still trying to re-achieve that pinnacle.
Still no MMP M.U.L.E.
The Fat Cats want the consumer to have as much excess money as possible to buy more of his product. The Nanny State wants the consumer to have the minimal amount of money possible to not revolt.
Ideally, you want to maximise your return on as little product as possible, that way you don't run out of your money making stock. Doubled the price, gasoline still sold in large quantities. I work in California and am shocked how many people won't pay $180 for annual school bus fare, but will happily join the morning grid-lock to transport their kids and burn through a few $ of fuel per day.
Let me get this straight... the fat cats are worried other fat cats will get a shot at the saucer of milk, even though it'll still all be paid for by the consumer?
5 volts harkens back to the days of 7400 series TTL.
Time to give it a rest if it's not a necessary voltage.
"A new study has come out that purports to show a link between file-sharing and decreased CD purchases. Covering the period of 1995-2003, the study looked for a link between owning a computer and decreased CD purchases.
This could also explain teh drop in 8-track and LP sales, too!
<Homer>Ooooohhh, no more 8 tracks? Darn you computer makers!</Homer>
the study goes on to link reselling used CD's with cooties
The game hasn't changed since Mesopotamian times, and probably earlier.
Actually it rather has. Where wars were fought over resources, now governments look out for the interests of business using alliances and instruments such things as treaties and the WTO.
What!? No other nation in the history of the world has used its military to make others like them?
One of these days I'd like to believe slashdot readers actually understand something before replying, without siezing upon a misunderstanding or a tangential point. What part of to insist other governments should be more like their own was a mystery to you? Too many posts are interpreting the whole sentence as 'the US have never attacked or invaded another country', which isn't anywhere near what I wrote. The US a habit of installing and/or propping up governments which are friendly to its interests, more recently the US is into Nation Building, that is doing a makeover on the governance to be more like that in the US, democratic. Democratic of not, the US has a tendency to befriend or alienate governments which appears to have no bering upon how leaders are selected and what powers they have. It's business as usual.
Are you for real? 100 years ago was the end of colonial power?
What part of "The Beginning of the End" wasn't clear to you?
British Empire? A shadow of itself. Netherlands? Likewise. French? Not much of it left. Spain? Can't say much of the New World pays them tribute anymore.
The US is currently dominant in the world, but anyone can see that this is untenable.
The US is not an colonial power! The US has territories, like Puerto Rico and Guam, but not, say and enclave in China or an administered territory in Africa.
The dominant world power is more of a diplomatic and business force than military. Sure, the US knocked over the Taliban and Sadam, but neither were really any real opposition, say, like invading Brazil or Australia would be, besides that the USA would find a world very strongly aligning against it for such a move. Iraq has bust the USA's credibility and it's debt is increasingly funded by China. Expect change to come from that quarter.
I've gotta disagree with you there. Those who have the stongest economies* will have the less uncomfortable time of it. People can point fingers and complain all they want, but in the end, the quality of life will remain highest for those who have the best economies
I take it you weren't alive in 1973.
Those with the furthest to fall, will fall and it will not be a pleasant experience for anyone. With the astounding energy dependence of the USA I can't see it going very comfortably. Perhaps this is why the current administration is in such a state of denial, doctoring studies, saying all the facts aren't in yet, etc.
You don't believe in the British Empire? (And by 'be more like their own' I mean run by the British for the betterment of the Bristish, to the exclusion of all others.)
Outposts of the Empire were largely administered in whatever way was deemed fit, often very, very brutally, simply to keep things in check and to advance interests of British interests, the notorious East India Company as an example. Not much of an Empire anymore, but many of the treasures obtained during the age of empire still remain in british hands (and I don't just mean museum pieces.)
Multinationals now do with trade agreements what once was achieved at point of arms.
Has it been that long since world war II? Certainly it's been a while. But Europe has a much longer lineage of threating the world than the US does...
100 years ago is effectively The Beginning of the End for colonial powers.
The USA, a late entry into the game tried to grab as much as it could, which lead to increased heat of competition and pressure upon peoples who eventually began to push back.
If you haven't seen An Inconvenient Truth, yet, do try. Like Al Gore, it's a bit clunky, but there's a lot of truth in there and shouldn't be discounted just because you may not like the presenter.
My belief is, we'll keep right on going in this direction until we feel sufficient pain* to stop. Famine and flooding will certainly increase the likelihood of conflict. Darfur as depicted in the film was an eye opener, the severe drought which may be caused by warming now appears more likely the root of conflict as people scrabble for remaining water and land.
It may become the view that USA and Europe, have had it good long enough and they should cut down on emissions first. It will come to a head when cities like Shanghai are under water and each country is blaming the other for the fine mess things are in. Those who have dipped deepest and longest into the carbon fuels trough the will have an uncomfortable time of it.
Please get off your soap box for a moment. Not that I support everything the USA government does on behalf of corporate interest, but let's not pretend the US is the sole practitioner of such tactics. The imperialists of Europe have been using their military might to enrich monetary interests since way before there even was a USA.
The exception to this argument being that Europe isn't doing anything with it's militaries anymore. Oh, a little intervention in West Africa by France, but mostly to keep the peace. The world has changed since 100 years ago, when it was still viewed as acceptable to colonise savage lands and subvert southeastern asian nations. Ask someone recently from China what the Big Insult was, they'll tell you. Could anyone, even the USA do that today? Not a chance. Now most of it is all done through diplomacy, multinational corporations and a few should lived marauders.