Does this work the same way in the US? Is older music no longer copyrighted? I assume this is NOT the case, or else P2P networks would have alot more legitimacy. Will US music ever go into the public domain?
Well, x86 continues to live because of the absolutely enormous amount of software written for it. Could you even begin to fathom starting at zero again? Itanium failed for this very reason. Sure, one of the holy grails as programmers we are supposed to chase after is full portability, but technical and time constraints often make that a dream. It is unfortunate, but the only way I can forsee a momentous move to a completely new architecture is if Microsoft really monopolizes the entire software industry, and then gets in bed w/ CPU makers and agrees to port all of the apps to this new architecture, and then everyone will make a ton of money selling new hardware and software that is legacy free. I will place my bet that in 10-15 years we will still be having this discussion.
the embedded market is not prone to marketing armies and such like the mass market CPU market is. The embedded market is ruled by geeks who make informed decisions based on specs and their products needs. In fact, I would say that the only market where consumer confidence would matter is the CPU market. I guess it is nice to brandish the fact to EE dorks that they are the masters of CPU technology, but power consumption and things of that nature are much bigger issues when youre dealing with other products.
Well, under the unlikely scenario that AMD completely drops out, what will probably happen is that Intel will drive prices up, and start making killer profits again (which is probably what AMD was drooling over five or however many years ago when they jumped in the CPU market), and then AMD will jump back in. AMD has been at this game awhile time now, and for a really long time was in a FAR worse position than it is now. In the K6-2 days, AMD was pretty much a joke, and was at best fighting for the low end- low profit segment of the market. Now, geeks see AMD on an equal footing, AMD has (well maybe had) high end- high profit competitive products, mobo producer support (this used to be a really big problem), and much, much more sway in the industry. I do not know what their bottom line is in the CPU business, but I bet they are alot happier now than in the K6 days.
I dont know why this needs to be continually restated but... AMD (Advanced Micro Devices, not Advanced Micro Processors) makes more than just PC processors! PC processor's are the tip of the iceberg when you consider embedded processors. TV's, VCR's, phones, dishwashers, etc. are all using embedded processor's now, and the # of products that use them in the future will continue to grow. Absolute worst case scenario, AMD will bow out of the CPU market. AMD is a huge company. One, two, three, or even four flopped products are not going to phase AMD. Look at AMD's website. PC processors are the most mainstream product they make, and thus the highest profile, but processors are just a cog in the AMD wheel. (And the same thing goes for Intel).
You could always try your hand at making a useful software product. Note that I said useful. If you can increase productivity with your software then you have a much larger chance of a business buying it, and they tend to be much more scrupulous than the general populous. To make it less risky and intrusive into your life, make it something you will use at work, or your co-workers will use (that way, your life is made easier, and you also get brownie points at work). Obviously, you need to be reasonable in your expectations, I would not expect to earn more than a thousand bucks for each application you release. A variation on this is to use the Microsoft model and create knockoffs of current very popular software- especially software that has gotten ridiculously bloated over time (*coughcough* Word). IE, Implement wordpad with a table of contents feature, page numbering, slightly more advanced formatting, etc. and keep the size small. Market it as a cheaper version of whatever software. There are alot of people looking for legit copies of cheap productivity software that gives them the best features of huge programs w/out the bloat. Most likely, you will make very little money, but mebbe enough to buy a new TV. But, you also have that one chance in hell that your software will catch on, and you could make a considerable amount of money. And programming in the comfort of your home is alot better than working at Best Buy on the weekends.
I dont know exactly what you or your company does, so maybe you guys need more support than the average company, but it does not appear that you guys should be stretched 'to the breaking point.' You guys should be MAKING time to make your processes more efficient, and clamping down the machines a bit tighter so that users can not screw them up so often. Also, do not be afraid to say no to fixing a pesky problem if there are larger issues at hand ( like spending time automating things). If you guys are spending your whole day putting out fires, then there is a larger problem. I also dont know what the culture or general intelligence is like at your company, but if it is anything like the places where I have worked where all the training is to be paid for by money out of my pocket and on my own out of work time, then propogate that attitude down to the users. Make them figure out how to install the printer drivers, or fix a paper jam, or put up a sign sign explaining what 'PC Load Letter' means next to the fax machine. I am sure someone knows how to do these things, and they can use the 'ask a neighbor' system to take care of these tedious things.
Well I think it is also important to realize that Computer Programming methodologies and architecture are still changing, and one day they may actually settle into "best ways" of doing things. IE, Mainframes gave way to PCs, which changed our programming styles from Mainframe/dumb display terminal to standalone apps, which then gave way to networks and client/server, to today's fashionable multi-tier Web applications. Each of these requires a completely different architecture. Also, keep in mind that most students go to school for "computer science," which is a very different thing from "software engineering." To compare to the bridge building scenario, imagine if a bunch of a bunch of material scientists had to go and build bridges for a living. There are not that many types of bridges, so it is much easier for a student to learn to build a truss bridge or a suspension bridge and focus on that, whereas CS types often come up with a new architecture each time. Additionally, bridges generally have ONE goal, to get things from A to B. Imagine now if that bridge also had to provide a habitat to the fish over the body of water it crosses, send daily status reports of all of its parts back to a central command center, alert cars that go over the bridge if their tire pressure is low, integrate or be built on top or use the parts of another rusting bridge that no one has any idea as to how it was built twenty years ago, predict how many cars and what types of cars are gong to be on it twenty years from now, and design around that prediction, have less upkeep and maintenance costs than the previous bridge, have the terrain over which the bridge is going to built change several times in the middle of the project, have what the bridge is supposed to carry change several times over the course of a project, etc, I think you see the point here before I ramble any more. I think a really key point is the fact that bridges do one thing in their life. 5 years after a bridge is built, no one goes to some engineer who is just out of school and says, you know that George Washington Bridge? We want boats to be able to cross over the top deck now, and have that done next week. Nor do they ask them to be able to handle triple the traffic their specs were maxed out to by only adding a few bolts. Could you imagine building a bridge over a river of water that suddenly turned into lava? In the case of the bridge, the engineers laugh at even the thought of doing any of these things. A programmer says yes sir, right away sir and does his best. The sad thing is, is that most of these problems are avoidable. I think over the next century, computing power and will far exceed most systems needs, and instead of solving the problems we can solve right now, we will be able to focus on building systems that are done, and dont need to be replaced every 10 years because of a drastic change in how computing is done. I am sure at some point in history, someone said "why the heck cant we build a bridge that doesnt wash away each time the rain rises."
Can you quantify that with any real data? Anectodally, I know many people w/ dell's, gateway's, etc... but not that many with home brew. No large or even small companies that I have seen buy their computers from small companies. I think what you are saying could be true, but I wont believe it until some evidence tells me otherwise.
He should run the software for the environment he wants to work in- and in most large corporate environments windows is entrenched, and is not likely to go anywhere. Sure its great to know linux, and mebbe you could convince a switch once you have the job, but if you have linux all over your resume and you go to Morgan Stanley ( or wherever) and they say they are a Windows shop, you will never even get the opportunity. I did not intend for the post to start a holy war. I dont really think that is lying, you have the skills, you put them on your resume, you just dont have to mention that you did not necessarily obtain them while getting paid.
This is interesting. Even in the largest of companies, I have never seen a real distinction between system administrators and network administrators. I supppose that you would be lower on the totem pole though. In any case, my suggestion to you is, scrounge a few older PC's that are greater than 100 mhz (should be easy nowadays) scrounge/buy a router/firewall. I will make an assumption that you are using a windows based network. Yes, I am going to advocate this, steal win2k advanced server, exchange, etc. Install w2kAS, buy a book on it, read the book (I recommend mastering windows 2000 server, I think its a sybex book). Install Active Directory, get IIS working to serve webpages, leave your ftp on anonymous login by mistake and have it taken over as a DIVX server (cleaning up the mess will remind you to never do it again). If you can scrounge up a 300mhz+ machine, put 512MB of ram in it, and put exchange on (youre looking for functionality, not speed). create a small lan out of the scrounged PC's put whatever OS's on that you want, and configure them all to talk to each other. Buy a domain - you can get them for $10. Take one of the machines, throw two nics in it, *nix, and make it a firewall. I think you see the point- simulate the environment you want to learn about, its no longer prohibitively expensive to do so. MS would probably encourage this activity. One caveat- you will be best off if you can find a decent ISP - one that will provide you with a static IP and wont block ports. That may be impossible or very expensive. A solution to that would be a second router, in between the "play" lan and the cable/DSL modem. Attach a machine on this second router to simulate a machine out on the internet. If you are looking to get experience on cisco stuff, well... then... youre going to have to spend a significant amount of money no matter what. after you have done all this, fudge your resume.
Well I agree that putting a laptop on every desk and then hooking them all up to the internet is a huge waste of money and counterproductive. Its an additional tool to the arsenal, but it sounds that project got caught up in the thinking "when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail" type thinking. The only time that students should be sitting in front of a computer is when they are learning to use the computer, or are engaged in an activity that can only be done on the computer. It would be interesting to see if students at a young age who used e-textbooks would actually prefer them. I have tried to read some books online, and man is it a pain. That might just be me being slow to adjust though.
I do not believe that the goal of having computers in classrooms is to have brighter children. Rather, it is to make them comfortable using computers and to increase their skills in using them so that when they go out into the real world they are more competitive. The internet can also be used as a valuable resource. There were several times when my college professor's notes did not help me get an understanding of a topic, so I would go and search the web for alternate material. It almost always helped. If more money and energy was provided, the government could help transform education. As an example of what could be using today's technology, lets say all classrooms were wired. A teacher who is going to be absent for a day and needs a sub could potentially pick a lesson from a large internet repository and have the children watch the lesson that is piped over the internet as opposed to being given busy work by a clueless sub (as is all too often the case). Or I could envision homework assignments on a computer that report back to the teacher and give statistical analysis of where the students as a whole are having trouble understanding a concept, or even better, homework assignments that reinforce concepts to the children as they get things wrong, and then make them do problems until they get it down. Could you imagine the improvement that could be seen if software could pick out weaknesses and help someone understand something better, and then reinforce the concept? I do not think it is really possible to have a piece of software be the equivalent of a real live teacher next to you helping you, but, I do think it could help quite a bit.
On a side note, I made a bit of an attempt to create a piece of software to do just this over at Sourceforge, and while it appeared to be feasible to me and I did some proof of concept type stuff, my job has been killing me with hours and I have not had time to get anywhere with it. Its the eduonline project. If you have an interest in doing something like this, check it out on sourceforge and let me know.
My favorite software is on Windows. I have not yet seen anything beat AIM, Outlook, or IE. Open Office is pretty nice, but I still like MS office better. Every piece of hardware I have works in windows. Out of the box. I know windows. For me, the cost of windows and its affiliated software is the same price as open source software. Windows 2000 is stable. I have never had it just crash on me. Sometimes individual software packages do, and destabilize the system to the point where I feel more comfortable rebooting, but I have never been just typing away and have something crash on me. For what I do on my machine, I dont need a command line as full featured as bash. Linux, as a server, not running X is stable. A default install of Redhat 7.2 (the last distro I tried) is not as stable as windows, imho. Configuring things is a pain in linux. I dont have to refer to a man page in windows to recall how to sort by date. I dont have to run find / -name to find a file I misplaced. I am not incapable of doing these things, but in windows it is easy. Yes, linux is more powerful. You can configure more things. I am waiting for OSS to eclipse the quality and userfriendliness of windows software. When the day comes that I feel linux has truly surpassed windows and is more ENJOYABLE to use, I will use it. But as for right now, I am quite content with not having to memorize commands, and I believe that windows is now a stable platform, and yes I really believe that it is more stable than a distro running X and KDE.
Well the EULA to some extent. I expect the same things that keep closed source software from being released publicly, the fact that it is morally wrong or illegal to do so. I like to believe that we still live in a society where the only reason people do not do things is because they believe they will get caught. I was not asking "why cant we sell open source in a manner that will perfectly prevent abuse," I meant why cant we sell Open Source Software like we do other software that is not under the GPL. Like I said, I am not familiar w/ the details of the GPL, just the general spirit. I guess when I said "open" I really meant something more along the lines of "viewable," but that does bring up issues of changing/improving the source, and whether those changes could be made public or whatever, things which could be worked out (ONE method could be having the company control all changes to the source tree somewhat similar to the way the linux kernel runs). Maybe in that sense the GPL will restrict you too much.
You should not make assumptions about my views on EULA's. I feel EULA's, like all contracts are fine until they overstep their bounds. Using a EULA to prevent people from taking your program or source and reselling/redistributing it is fine. Using a EULA to give a company permission to see what kind of porn you happen to like and selling this to companies is overstepping their bounds. Using the fact that most people are apathetic to what is in a EULA and using that to a company's advantage is overstepping its bounds. It just seems plausible to me that the source code could stay in an open state while a company can still make money off it.
Just because a program is open source, does that necessarily mean it has to be free (as in beer)? Why cant a company sell its source code along with its executables? I am only casually familiar with the GPL, would selling the source code violate the license? I think this could be a valid business model that wouldnt make the zealots angry. Perhaps even distributing the binary and source without a makefile so you can run it fine and also see how the code works, although recompiling and making changes is going to be quite difficult.
I see the holes in my argument, but there are many people who think that the whole cost or 95% of owning a piece of software is the purchase price, and dont take into account the fact that admins cost a measurable amount of money. I was aiming the post more towards those type of people who just see the initial cost as the only cost of a piece of software and then cheerlead for OSS.
Open source has alternatives for more than just Office and windows. Lets say we download a piece of software that converts html to pdf or something like that. I would say the cost of a piece of closed source software would be about $50 for that. Now lets say you go to sourceforge, and get the same thing. ok, you saved $50. Oh but wait there is only a source version, I have to compile it. Doh. There is a dependency issue. I have to go find some library on the net. Ok found it. Doh. It wont work/compile with XP/Gcc Version whatever. Doh. The guys who wrote the software are not supporting it anymore and have moved on to other projects. Doh. John in sales has no idea to change the source code so that he can put a watermark on each page. He sends it to Mark on IT who then spends a few hours looking at and changing the code. Oh wait. weve spent alot of tine looking at this thing. Mark in IT's time alone was equivalent to more than $50.
This is obviously dramatized a bit, but still. The argument that open source is open and can be changed is very misleading. Any programmer time is exremely expensive. If you fix that bug yourself, it will almost definitely cost you more than that program off the shelf.
I went on some tangents, but it is clear that open source CAN cost more than off the shelf software, and has similar pitfalls to off the shelf software.
I know this may not be a very popular opinion, but I really think the best way to teach them to program is to use an IDE with a language like java that makes things point and click, to create graphical programs, at least to begin with. Why? Teaching Hello World that prints out to the console command line using Emacs is not going to excite middle school students about computer programming, it is most likely going to discourage them. However, if they can make programs that look like real programs they use every day from day 1, they will be alot more likely to want to play with things and see what "tricks" they can do with their programs. Starting out by creating a window and printing hello world in that, and then moving onto buttons, basic if logic, loops, while loops, etc. Middle school students really need this coddling. Then work out something w/ the high school where they force emacs and C on them.
An alternative to teaching students to "program" is to teach them Html, and then move onto improving their pages using javascript or php. This will not really teach them solid concepts about programming though, although it may work out better in getting them interested in programming.
Why Mac Cases?
on
Mac Case Mods
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I understand the basis from which PC case modding arose... people wanted something more than a beige square box with no personality. But Mac cases are already quite attractive. I guess case moding has now reached a hacker/artistic level where people do it just to push the envelope and find new ways to express themselves.
It would have been interesting if they accepted the donation, and then just sold the copies of Office XP on ebay or something. They could have really outsmarted MS, if even just out of spite, rather than an intention of making a decent profit.
I know you dont directly claim this in your post, but how is taking a derivative or being able to write hello world going to allow you to make decisions on/become informed about issues like digital rights management and the DMCA? I mean it takes something pretty close to a full CS degree to *really* understand the complexities of making an electronic voting system. I do not feel that if everyone had a background in CS/math/physics/whatever, that we would necessarily be better off. I spent most of my time in classes learning theory, and programming. Issues like DRM were never discussed. If I was a strictly by the books student, I would be just as clueless as my grandmother about the DMCA. Point being, is that Kernhigan's class hits the nail right on the head. It puts the issues in terms someone not familiar with concepts like hard drive firmware can understand, and even better, he actually goes a bit into the technical side of the problem. What more could you ask for? He should be giving required lectures to congress, judges, lawyers, soccer moms, anyone and everyone who will or will not listen. He should stand on the top of the empire state building with a giant megaphone and start lecturing or pirating major broadcast stations to achieve the same result. Yeah it would be wonderful if everyone could understand at the blink of an eye why preventing only german users from seeing certain sites is a fundamentally difficult and pretty much futile endeavor without putting up another great firewall of china. But, for now, this is the exact medicine we need for the problem. This type of class should be mandatory for students, even if it has to replace CSI101 in our schools.
I think you are confusing electric with hybrids... Hybrids have batteries that are recharged by the engine and brakes. They do not need to be plugged in. Most of the MPG savings come from having the engine shut off while sitting in traffic, only coming on periodically to recharge the battery. Ars Technica has a really good review of the 2003 honda civic hybrid: http://arstechnica.com/reviews/02q3/civic -hybrid/2 003-civic-hy-1.html
Im not sure where you come from, but I dont pay a water tax. But... I do pay a water bill. As my physics teachers used to state it... the price of water per gallon out of the tap is than the price of any bottled water. Even the store brand bottled water costs about 79 cents a gallon, whereas a gallon of tap water at my house costs a fraction of a cent.
Senators pay attention to money. When the EFF or an organization that exists to take a stance against crippled cd's and the issues surrounding it contribute more campaign money than the RIAA and its associated companies, senators will take notice. Until then... dont hold your breath. I feel it is very unlikely that copyright's will ever become a hotbutton issue like gun control or abortion that will really sway politicians due to voter beliefs (and I think the NRA is the only reason gun's are not completely restricted). However, politicians are good at remembering who bought them their position of power.
Slashdot Mirror
Does this work the same way in the US? Is older music no longer copyrighted? I assume this is NOT the case, or else P2P networks would have alot more legitimacy. Will US music ever go into the public domain?
Well, x86 continues to live because of the absolutely enormous amount of software written for it. Could you even begin to fathom starting at zero again? Itanium failed for this very reason. Sure, one of the holy grails as programmers we are supposed to chase after is full portability, but technical and time constraints often make that a dream. It is unfortunate, but the only way I can forsee a momentous move to a completely new architecture is if Microsoft really monopolizes the entire software industry, and then gets in bed w/ CPU makers and agrees to port all of the apps to this new architecture, and then everyone will make a ton of money selling new hardware and software that is legacy free. I will place my bet that in 10-15 years we will still be having this discussion.
the embedded market is not prone to marketing armies and such like the mass market CPU market is. The embedded market is ruled by geeks who make informed decisions based on specs and their products needs. In fact, I would say that the only market where consumer confidence would matter is the CPU market. I guess it is nice to brandish the fact to EE dorks that they are the masters of CPU technology, but power consumption and things of that nature are much bigger issues when youre dealing with other products.
Well, under the unlikely scenario that AMD completely drops out, what will probably happen is that Intel will drive prices up, and start making killer profits again (which is probably what AMD was drooling over five or however many years ago when they jumped in the CPU market), and then AMD will jump back in. AMD has been at this game awhile time now, and for a really long time was in a FAR worse position than it is now. In the K6-2 days, AMD was pretty much a joke, and was at best fighting for the low end- low profit segment of the market. Now, geeks see AMD on an equal footing, AMD has (well maybe had) high end- high profit competitive products, mobo producer support (this used to be a really big problem), and much, much more sway in the industry. I do not know what their bottom line is in the CPU business, but I bet they are alot happier now than in the K6 days.
I dont know why this needs to be continually restated but... AMD (Advanced Micro Devices, not Advanced Micro Processors) makes more than just PC processors! PC processor's are the tip of the iceberg when you consider embedded processors. TV's, VCR's, phones, dishwashers, etc. are all using embedded processor's now, and the # of products that use them in the future will continue to grow. Absolute worst case scenario, AMD will bow out of the CPU market. AMD is a huge company. One, two, three, or even four flopped products are not going to phase AMD. Look at AMD's website. PC processors are the most mainstream product they make, and thus the highest profile, but processors are just a cog in the AMD wheel. (And the same thing goes for Intel).
You could always try your hand at making a useful software product. Note that I said useful. If you can increase productivity with your software then you have a much larger chance of a business buying it, and they tend to be much more scrupulous than the general populous. To make it less risky and intrusive into your life, make it something you will use at work, or your co-workers will use (that way, your life is made easier, and you also get brownie points at work). Obviously, you need to be reasonable in your expectations, I would not expect to earn more than a thousand bucks for each application you release. A variation on this is to use the Microsoft model and create knockoffs of current very popular software- especially software that has gotten ridiculously bloated over time (*coughcough* Word). IE, Implement wordpad with a table of contents feature, page numbering, slightly more advanced formatting, etc. and keep the size small. Market it as a cheaper version of whatever software. There are alot of people looking for legit copies of cheap productivity software that gives them the best features of huge programs w/out the bloat. Most likely, you will make very little money, but mebbe enough to buy a new TV. But, you also have that one chance in hell that your software will catch on, and you could make a considerable amount of money. And programming in the comfort of your home is alot better than working at Best Buy on the weekends.
I dont know exactly what you or your company does, so maybe you guys need more support than the average company, but it does not appear that you guys should be stretched 'to the breaking point.' You guys should be MAKING time to make your processes more efficient, and clamping down the machines a bit tighter so that users can not screw them up so often. Also, do not be afraid to say no to fixing a pesky problem if there are larger issues at hand ( like spending time automating things). If you guys are spending your whole day putting out fires, then there is a larger problem. I also dont know what the culture or general intelligence is like at your company, but if it is anything like the places where I have worked where all the training is to be paid for by money out of my pocket and on my own out of work time, then propogate that attitude down to the users. Make them figure out how to install the printer drivers, or fix a paper jam, or put up a sign sign explaining what 'PC Load Letter' means next to the fax machine. I am sure someone knows how to do these things, and they can use the 'ask a neighbor' system to take care of these tedious things.
Well I think it is also important to realize that Computer Programming methodologies and architecture are still changing, and one day they may actually settle into "best ways" of doing things. IE, Mainframes gave way to PCs, which changed our programming styles from Mainframe/dumb display terminal to standalone apps, which then gave way to networks and client/server, to today's fashionable multi-tier Web applications. Each of these requires a completely different architecture. Also, keep in mind that most students go to school for "computer science," which is a very different thing from "software engineering." To compare to the bridge building scenario, imagine if a bunch of a bunch of material scientists had to go and build bridges for a living. There are not that many types of bridges, so it is much easier for a student to learn to build a truss bridge or a suspension bridge and focus on that, whereas CS types often come up with a new architecture each time. Additionally, bridges generally have ONE goal, to get things from A to B. Imagine now if that bridge also had to provide a habitat to the fish over the body of water it crosses, send daily status reports of all of its parts back to a central command center, alert cars that go over the bridge if their tire pressure is low, integrate or be built on top or use the parts of another rusting bridge that no one has any idea as to how it was built twenty years ago, predict how many cars and what types of cars are gong to be on it twenty years from now, and design around that prediction, have less upkeep and maintenance costs than the previous bridge, have the terrain over which the bridge is going to built change several times in the middle of the project, have what the bridge is supposed to carry change several times over the course of a project, etc, I think you see the point here before I ramble any more. I think a really key point is the fact that bridges do one thing in their life. 5 years after a bridge is built, no one goes to some engineer who is just out of school and says, you know that George Washington Bridge? We want boats to be able to cross over the top deck now, and have that done next week. Nor do they ask them to be able to handle triple the traffic their specs were maxed out to by only adding a few bolts. Could you imagine building a bridge over a river of water that suddenly turned into lava? In the case of the bridge, the engineers laugh at even the thought of doing any of these things. A programmer says yes sir, right away sir and does his best. The sad thing is, is that most of these problems are avoidable. I think over the next century, computing power and will far exceed most systems needs, and instead of solving the problems we can solve right now, we will be able to focus on building systems that are done, and dont need to be replaced every 10 years because of a drastic change in how computing is done. I am sure at some point in history, someone said "why the heck cant we build a bridge that doesnt wash away each time the rain rises."
Can you quantify that with any real data? Anectodally, I know many people w/ dell's, gateway's, etc... but not that many with home brew. No large or even small companies that I have seen buy their computers from small companies. I think what you are saying could be true, but I wont believe it until some evidence tells me otherwise.
He should run the software for the environment he wants to work in- and in most large corporate environments windows is entrenched, and is not likely to go anywhere. Sure its great to know linux, and mebbe you could convince a switch once you have the job, but if you have linux all over your resume and you go to Morgan Stanley ( or wherever) and they say they are a Windows shop, you will never even get the opportunity. I did not intend for the post to start a holy war. I dont really think that is lying, you have the skills, you put them on your resume, you just dont have to mention that you did not necessarily obtain them while getting paid.
This is interesting. Even in the largest of companies, I have never seen a real distinction between system administrators and network administrators. I supppose that you would be lower on the totem pole though. In any case, my suggestion to you is, scrounge a few older PC's that are greater than 100 mhz (should be easy nowadays) scrounge/buy a router/firewall. I will make an assumption that you are using a windows based network. Yes, I am going to advocate this, steal win2k advanced server, exchange, etc. Install w2kAS, buy a book on it, read the book (I recommend mastering windows 2000 server, I think its a sybex book). Install Active Directory, get IIS working to serve webpages, leave your ftp on anonymous login by mistake and have it taken over as a DIVX server (cleaning up the mess will remind you to never do it again). If you can scrounge up a 300mhz+ machine, put 512MB of ram in it, and put exchange on (youre looking for functionality, not speed). create a small lan out of the scrounged PC's put whatever OS's on that you want, and configure them all to talk to each other. Buy a domain - you can get them for $10. Take one of the machines, throw two nics in it, *nix, and make it a firewall. I think you see the point- simulate the environment you want to learn about, its no longer prohibitively expensive to do so. MS would probably encourage this activity. One caveat- you will be best off if you can find a decent ISP - one that will provide you with a static IP and wont block ports. That may be impossible or very expensive. A solution to that would be a second router, in between the "play" lan and the cable/DSL modem. Attach a machine on this second router to simulate a machine out on the internet. If you are looking to get experience on cisco stuff, well... then... youre going to have to spend a significant amount of money no matter what. after you have done all this, fudge your resume.
Well I agree that putting a laptop on every desk and then hooking them all up to the internet is a huge waste of money and counterproductive. Its an additional tool to the arsenal, but it sounds that project got caught up in the thinking "when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail" type thinking. The only time that students should be sitting in front of a computer is when they are learning to use the computer, or are engaged in an activity that can only be done on the computer. It would be interesting to see if students at a young age who used e-textbooks would actually prefer them. I have tried to read some books online, and man is it a pain. That might just be me being slow to adjust though.
I do not believe that the goal of having computers in classrooms is to have brighter children. Rather, it is to make them comfortable using computers and to increase their skills in using them so that when they go out into the real world they are more competitive. The internet can also be used as a valuable resource. There were several times when my college professor's notes did not help me get an understanding of a topic, so I would go and search the web for alternate material. It almost always helped. If more money and energy was provided, the government could help transform education. As an example of what could be using today's technology, lets say all classrooms were wired. A teacher who is going to be absent for a day and needs a sub could potentially pick a lesson from a large internet repository and have the children watch the lesson that is piped over the internet as opposed to being given busy work by a clueless sub (as is all too often the case). Or I could envision homework assignments on a computer that report back to the teacher and give statistical analysis of where the students as a whole are having trouble understanding a concept, or even better, homework assignments that reinforce concepts to the children as they get things wrong, and then make them do problems until they get it down. Could you imagine the improvement that could be seen if software could pick out weaknesses and help someone understand something better, and then reinforce the concept? I do not think it is really possible to have a piece of software be the equivalent of a real live teacher next to you helping you, but, I do think it could help quite a bit.
On a side note, I made a bit of an attempt to create a piece of software to do just this over at Sourceforge, and while it appeared to be feasible to me and I did some proof of concept type stuff, my job has been killing me with hours and I have not had time to get anywhere with it. Its the eduonline project. If you have an interest in doing something like this, check it out on sourceforge and let me know.
My favorite software is on Windows. I have not yet seen anything beat AIM, Outlook, or IE. Open Office is pretty nice, but I still like MS office better. Every piece of hardware I have works in windows. Out of the box. I know windows. For me, the cost of windows and its affiliated software is the same price as open source software. Windows 2000 is stable. I have never had it just crash on me. Sometimes individual software packages do, and destabilize the system to the point where I feel more comfortable rebooting, but I have never been just typing away and have something crash on me. For what I do on my machine, I dont need a command line as full featured as bash. Linux, as a server, not running X is stable. A default install of Redhat 7.2 (the last distro I tried) is not as stable as windows, imho. Configuring things is a pain in linux. I dont have to refer to a man page in windows to recall how to sort by date. I dont have to run find / -name to find a file I misplaced. I am not incapable of doing these things, but in windows it is easy. Yes, linux is more powerful. You can configure more things. I am waiting for OSS to eclipse the quality and userfriendliness of windows software. When the day comes that I feel linux has truly surpassed windows and is more ENJOYABLE to use, I will use it. But as for right now, I am quite content with not having to memorize commands, and I believe that windows is now a stable platform, and yes I really believe that it is more stable than a distro running X and KDE.
Well the EULA to some extent. I expect the same things that keep closed source software from being released publicly, the fact that it is morally wrong or illegal to do so. I like to believe that we still live in a society where the only reason people do not do things is because they believe they will get caught. I was not asking "why cant we sell open source in a manner that will perfectly prevent abuse," I meant why cant we sell Open Source Software like we do other software that is not under the GPL. Like I said, I am not familiar w/ the details of the GPL, just the general spirit. I guess when I said "open" I really meant something more along the lines of "viewable," but that does bring up issues of changing/improving the source, and whether those changes could be made public or whatever, things which could be worked out (ONE method could be having the company control all changes to the source tree somewhat similar to the way the linux kernel runs). Maybe in that sense the GPL will restrict you too much.
You should not make assumptions about my views on EULA's. I feel EULA's, like all contracts are fine until they overstep their bounds. Using a EULA to prevent people from taking your program or source and reselling/redistributing it is fine. Using a EULA to give a company permission to see what kind of porn you happen to like and selling this to companies is overstepping their bounds. Using the fact that most people are apathetic to what is in a EULA and using that to a company's advantage is overstepping its bounds. It just seems plausible to me that the source code could stay in an open state while a company can still make money off it.
Just because a program is open source, does that necessarily mean it has to be free (as in beer)? Why cant a company sell its source code along with its executables? I am only casually familiar with the GPL, would selling the source code violate the license? I think this could be a valid business model that wouldnt make the zealots angry. Perhaps even distributing the binary and source without a makefile so you can run it fine and also see how the code works, although recompiling and making changes is going to be quite difficult.
I see the holes in my argument, but there are many people who think that the whole cost or 95% of owning a piece of software is the purchase price, and dont take into account the fact that admins cost a measurable amount of money. I was aiming the post more towards those type of people who just see the initial cost as the only cost of a piece of software and then cheerlead for OSS.
Open source has alternatives for more than just Office and windows. Lets say we download a piece of software that converts html to pdf or something like that. I would say the cost of a piece of closed source software would be about $50 for that. Now lets say you go to sourceforge, and get the same thing. ok, you saved $50. Oh but wait there is only a source version, I have to compile it. Doh. There is a dependency issue. I have to go find some library on the net. Ok found it. Doh. It wont work/compile with XP/Gcc Version whatever. Doh. The guys who wrote the software are not supporting it anymore and have moved on to other projects. Doh. John in sales has no idea to change the source code so that he can put a watermark on each page. He sends it to Mark on IT who then spends a few hours looking at and changing the code. Oh wait. weve spent alot of tine looking at this thing. Mark in IT's time alone was equivalent to more than $50.
This is obviously dramatized a bit, but still. The argument that open source is open and can be changed is very misleading. Any programmer time is exremely expensive. If you fix that bug yourself, it will almost definitely cost you more than that program off the shelf.
I went on some tangents, but it is clear that open source CAN cost more than off the shelf software, and has similar pitfalls to off the shelf software.
I know this may not be a very popular opinion, but I really think the best way to teach them to program is to use an IDE with a language like java that makes things point and click, to create graphical programs, at least to begin with. Why? Teaching Hello World that prints out to the console command line using Emacs is not going to excite middle school students about computer programming, it is most likely going to discourage them. However, if they can make programs that look like real programs they use every day from day 1, they will be alot more likely to want to play with things and see what "tricks" they can do with their programs. Starting out by creating a window and printing hello world in that, and then moving onto buttons, basic if logic, loops, while loops, etc. Middle school students really need this coddling. Then work out something w/ the high school where they force emacs and C on them.
An alternative to teaching students to "program" is to teach them Html, and then move onto improving their pages using javascript or php. This will not really teach them solid concepts about programming though, although it may work out better in getting them interested in programming.
I understand the basis from which PC case modding arose... people wanted something more than a beige square box with no personality. But Mac cases are already quite attractive. I guess case moding has now reached a hacker/artistic level where people do it just to push the envelope and find new ways to express themselves.
It would have been interesting if they accepted the donation, and then just sold the copies of Office XP on ebay or something. They could have really outsmarted MS, if even just out of spite, rather than an intention of making a decent profit.
I know you dont directly claim this in your post, but how is taking a derivative or being able to write hello world going to allow you to make decisions on/become informed about issues like digital rights management and the DMCA? I mean it takes something pretty close to a full CS degree to *really* understand the complexities of making an electronic voting system. I do not feel that if everyone had a background in CS/math/physics/whatever, that we would necessarily be better off. I spent most of my time in classes learning theory, and programming. Issues like DRM were never discussed. If I was a strictly by the books student, I would be just as clueless as my grandmother about the DMCA. Point being, is that Kernhigan's class hits the nail right on the head. It puts the issues in terms someone not familiar with concepts like hard drive firmware can understand, and even better, he actually goes a bit into the technical side of the problem. What more could you ask for? He should be giving required lectures to congress, judges, lawyers, soccer moms, anyone and everyone who will or will not listen. He should stand on the top of the empire state building with a giant megaphone and start lecturing or pirating major broadcast stations to achieve the same result. Yeah it would be wonderful if everyone could understand at the blink of an eye why preventing only german users from seeing certain sites is a fundamentally difficult and pretty much futile endeavor without putting up another great firewall of china. But, for now, this is the exact medicine we need for the problem. This type of class should be mandatory for students, even if it has to replace CSI101 in our schools.
I think you are confusing electric with hybrids... Hybrids have batteries that are recharged by the engine and brakes. They do not need to be plugged in. Most of the MPG savings come from having the engine shut off while sitting in traffic, only coming on periodically to recharge the battery. Ars Technica has a really good review of the 2003 honda civic hybrid:c -hybrid/2 003-civic-hy-1.html
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/02q3/civi
Im not sure where you come from, but I dont pay a water tax. But... I do pay a water bill. As my physics teachers used to state it... the price of water per gallon out of the tap is than the price of any bottled water. Even the store brand bottled water costs about 79 cents a gallon, whereas a gallon of tap water at my house costs a fraction of a cent.
Senators pay attention to money. When the EFF or an organization that exists to take a stance against crippled cd's and the issues surrounding it contribute more campaign money than the RIAA and its associated companies, senators will take notice. Until then... dont hold your breath. I feel it is very unlikely that copyright's will ever become a hotbutton issue like gun control or abortion that will really sway politicians due to voter beliefs (and I think the NRA is the only reason gun's are not completely restricted). However, politicians are good at remembering who bought them their position of power.