Hey, maybe I'm just a religion n00b, but I was under the impression that all the text of the Bible was, uh, in the Bible.
I think that this might qualify as the most naive thing I have heard on Slashdot. The Catholic church tells you exactly what they want you to hear. The Bible is the most interpreted/misinterpred book ever written. People over time have always translated it to say what they wanted it to say. I would love for them to put all of the "good stuff" from their archive online, but it won't happen. It will be selected texts that make them look good. Otherwise, if people found out all the info behind the Catholic church, it would probably fold.
In the end it's never been about benchmarks or raw speed. It's about how productive you can be writing these applications, time to "market" and total cost.
....."You won't see a heck of a lot of difference in Word, but software like [Adobe Systems'] Photoshop or video-rendering software will benefit considerably," he said.
How can Word appear any faster at 3GHz? I would think that after 1.5GHz, improvement in performance would be hard to notice. Granted, it will be good for people who are still running those 200MHz clunkers but what's the incentive if you're already running in the GHz range?
How can you quote something from the article and not even read it? It says you won't see much difference in Word, and you turn around and say "How will Word be faster?". Don't you even read what you cut and paste?
Strange days when people bitch about technology getting better.
In general, no. In particular, it can. If you want people to treat you like a grownup, it's a bright idea not to wear clothing that makes you look like the fat kid's little brother in hand-me-downs.
I find it odd that there is no middle ground for you between suits, and torn-up, dirty clothes.
When you are making a first impression, remember that appearance is the ONLY thing that people can SEE. Before they hear your voice, before they find out what you know, they see what you look like. If you are the janitor, no-one will care if your teeshirt is smudged. If you aren't the janitor, do you want strangers to think you are? Will it increase their confidence in you? Wear clothing which is appropriate to the time and place.
You know how many strangers I meet at work? Zero. What first impression are you talking about? Read what I wrote - if you interface with customers, or the public, there should be some kind of dress code. In most software companies, that is not the engineering department. Again, I find it odd that to you there is no middle ground between business casual and dirty, stained clothes.
Someone else pointed out that people at the top and bottom get to wear whatever they like. The ones at the top set the dress code, the ones at the bottom no-one cares about. The ones in the middle must follow the dress code. Ross Perot (owner of EDS, I think) could wear what the janitor wears, if he thought it was more comfortable than his suit. He doesn't, and that should tell you something about comfort.
Ross Perot - now there is someone to look up to.
Folks here keep saying that suits are uncomfortable. Mine aren't, and I've gotten most of them from the second hand stores, so we can't give the tailor any credit. You can buy them cheaper than you can buy denim, and the suits are generally in better condition than the jeans.
I have a couple of suits that are very comfortable. One cost $900. If I wear a suit, I wear a suit. So you want to look "professional" in your second-hand suit? What happened to that all-important first impression you are raving about? Do you want to look like a bum, or some 80 year old man? Wait a minute, in your first paragraph, hand-me-downs were bad. I am confused.
You will be comfortable in whatever you are accustomed to. If you have chosen to be accustomed to clothing that makes you look rebellious, unreliable and immature, you haven't chosen wisely. Unless, of course, you are rebellious, unreliable and immature, in which case you are wiser than you knew, and the rest of us can continue to rely on appearances.
If you rely on appearances, you are a fool. And for the third time, you assume that casual clothing means rebellious, unreliable, and immature. Ask me about some of the best software people I have ever worked with, and I'll tell you what they know, not what they wear. What about Open Source Software? I wonder what Linus wears. Or Alan Cox. I'll bet they look all unreliable and rebellious, so they must be. You sound like the classic middle management type. Good thing you are expendable, cause someone else will come along who thinks EXACTLY like you to replace you. Maybe they will dress a little nicer, therefore they must be better than you.
(god forbid they should check to see if you're running on 2K/XP which doesn't need to be rebooted to renew DHCP)
Dude, Win98 doesn't even need to be rebooted to renew DHCP. Winipcfg resides in the c:\windows directory, and you can release and renew your IP using it.
I have Earthlink DSL, and I got the self install kit. Once I used their software to connect and activate my account, I had my Linux firewall up in about a day and haven't used their software since.
People laugh at me when they find out I have Win98, but it is stable enough for me to boot it up and play games on, which is all that machine gets used for nowadays. If you upgraded to Win2k or WinXP, why am I the idiot?
Re:Wow! Communicating with others?!
on
Suit Up Or Ship Out?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Boy, what an outrage.
Of all the nerve, to expect computer guys to communicate with other people in the business, to work with them, to adopt the same dress code, and generally become good corporate citizens instead of that grumpy guy sitting over in the corner who won't talk to anyone.
I for one am outraged. I should be able to not be a team player, to dress slovenly, and be totally grumpy and non-communicative with my co-workers, just because my skills are with computers, instead of, say, accounting or HR.
Here is a question for you, and answer it seriously in your own mind: If you work with someone, does their fashion make a difference in your *professional* opinion of them? If you say yes, then you are probably in some type of managment/sales/marketing role. Those people work off of image, technical people work off of knowledge. That is the way it works. If you are telling me that I have to dress up to make the marketing folks happy, then you are full of crap and need to think about your priorities. Now if you are saying that I need to dress up because I will be working with customers directly, then you may have a point. And I find it pretty naive of you to think that all technical people are slovenly, grumpy, and non-communicative. Hey, I know, let's make them dress uncomfortably, that will improve their demeanor! Maybe we need another mission statement, or Hawaiian shirt day!
Quick, someone think of a catchy acronym that outlines our business paridigm initiative.
These are precisely why technical people snicker at the business folks.
Canada has very few gun related deaths compared to gun wielding Americans running scared from a evil sniper armed with a gun you can't even buy in Canada. Can you see the differences here?
Funny, I just got back from seeing Michael Moore's movie "Bowling for Columbine". You should see it, it addresses this point quite well. Canada has 7 million guns, which is no small nnumber. So why does the U.S. have so many more gun related deaths??? I would recommend that everyone see this movie. One of the best I have seen in a very very long time.
Well, I suppose you are right (except for the dipshit part). I meant that I don't buy into that crap where you ramble about the details of your life for the world to see. I comment on "news" stories here, so that may be some form of blog. I think the real bloggy part of/. is the ability for people to have friends lists, write journal entries, etc. I don't partake in that stuff, I think it is stupid.
So blog off you bloggity blogznatch.
(did I use that term correctly?)
Hey read my online journal and see what I bought at the grocery store yesterday! Whee.
Blog = weblog
on
Blogger Hacked
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
FYI, the term blog comes from the term weblog. It got morphed into "we blog", and the term got overused quite a bit. So a blog is basically a journal.
I have never used one, or intend to. For some unknown reason, it bacame popular to just ramble out your thoughts into an online journal. Whatever. I don't see why this made the news though...
I submitted this story but it got rejected. It details more about the Disney/MSN deal, and the service they are offering. (Disney themed IE - wheeee). This is a total deal with the devil, except nobody can figure out who is who. A couple of choice quotes:
"It's a real coup," Gates said, sharing a stage in the autumn-tinged park with Eisner and a pair of extras in Mickey and Minnie Mouse suits.
"We're going to gain a lot of share here," Gates said. "We're going to make a lot of consumers happy."
Somehow the first parts of that overshadow the last sentence.
And this one pretty much tells it all...
Microsoft intends its new software to cater to parents, who can receive a weekly e-mail detailing their children's online activity, including Web sites they visited or tried to visit and the e-mail addresses and MSN Messenger accounts of people with whom they corresponded.
Is there any cheaper method to get screen time and articles in newspapers than getting sued over nonsensical issues?
Or monopolistic practices? Or railed on by the U.S. Department of Justice, or a group of U.S. States? When you have some of the deepest pockets around, I guess you don't really care. It would be the same as someone suing me for pocket lint.
They want open-source to get them rich, right? Less initial cost by the company, etc etc. What are the odds they'll profit-share with people they're getting rich off of? (well, ok, attempting)
Dude, why are you bitching? I am sure they will make the source available so you can install it on your own 65,000 processor machine.
WAKE UP! IT IS. TCPA is perverted US capitalism at it's finest.
I know. Except I believe that it is wrong and should be stopped. That is what I was saying. You are saying "let it happen, it is only the U.S."
Re:Hear (being half of "hear hear")
on
Cool Work Shirts?
·
· Score: 2
Look, really, you have two options. You can be a geek and attempt to impress based purely on your technical skills, or you can be a professional (and still a geek) and dress appropriately. There are plenty who will kick and scream and yell that all that matters is that they know their job. And they will never rise very far, because they are in an imaginary world which bears less and less resemblance to the real world. According to the Gartner Group studies on this topic, we're on a timeline where technical skills have gone from a relevance level of 65% down to 35%. Project management skills, interpersonal relationship skills, and other such management skills have become more and more esteemed and important.
Ahem. Bullshit.
The only reason there is to put on airs, aka dress up, for work is if it is required. If you deal with customers that expect it, then do it. If you are a lawyer, then do it. If you are someone who works in tech, and you never see your customers, then why the hell should you have to dress up? Of the skills that you list that are becoming more and more important, I didn't see fashion in there. (unless you are in the fashion industry). When our GM comes to town, we have to dress business casual, which I really think is stupid because it is simply putting on an image for the big cheese. Other than that, we can wear jeans and casual clothes. They only let us wear shorts on Fridays during the summer. We all work together, and rarely see the customer because we are in software development. Let the marketing and sales people "dress to impress". I would rather think "man, this person knows their stuff" instead of "that is a nice tie, they must be smart".
To me, it is all BS, with the caveat that unless it is required, it is not necessary. You say that people who don't agree with this will never rise very far. That is probably because you consider management positions higher than technical positions. The best managers are the ones who surround themselves with good technical people, and know how to keep their technical people happy. *REAL* technical people believe this, and know that genuine respect comes from what you know. You can bullshit all you want about what you know, but if you can't deliver then it doesn't matter. So play the game, but only if there is one that has to be played. Don't dress to impress - just impress. OMFG - a previous poster said you should wear a suit on the first day, no matter what. That is the stupidest thing I have heard. Dress for the environment you are working in!
But to the real point of the original poster - go to cafepress.com, you can create your own shirts with whatever you want on them.
So keep ass-kissing, and conforming simply for the sake of conforming, and you'll realize one day that you don't have an original thought in your head, and you have been a sheep all these years. Or maybe not, and you'll simply fade into obscurity without realizing it. Well, at least you'll have a career you can be proud of...
...The US is a big player in the global economy.
We import and export a lot of things to the rest of the world, and if that stops, the rest of the world will notice.
Are we still talking about TCPA? Sounds like you're beating your chest over hypothetical events not related to the topic. Why don't you just say:
"The world cannot go on without a properous American economy!" or
"w3 o\/\/n j000000!!"
You're just proving my point on the American EGO. Many other countries currently follow a different path than the US and this will continue.
Pardon my frankness, but stop acting like a dumbass. Yes, I was being hypothetical, that is all TCPA is right now. I am envisioning a worst-case scenario, where TCPA allows great harm to come to the US economy. Yes, the world will go on if something awful were to happen to the US economy, but my point is that we all work together, and the effects would be felt. If I had said something as utterly stupid as you did (putting words in my mouth) then that would be ego. I am trying to make a point about how TCPA is BAD for everyone. Just because it starts with us, doesn't mean that it wouldn't be tried elsewhere. If some other country that produced the processors and operating systems that most of the world used was trying to implement this, I would be just as concerned.
Canada's senate is reviewing a bill to legalize pot while US police are still jailing kids for possession. Canada has very few gun related deaths compared to gun wielding Americans running scared from a evil sniper armed with a gun you can't even buy in Canada. Can you see the differences here?
To quote you: Are we still talking about the TCPA? Who's beating their chest now?
Canada will never see the day of TCPA and a large volume of non-TCPA hardware will always be available for countries not honoring the TCPA. Why? Because if there is a demand, someone will supply that need. The only case in which TCPA products would replace or modify all current PC hardware/software is when every single country in the world fully enforces the TCPAs directives. It's a joke that anyone would assume they have such absolute influence on the rest of the world. Didn't you hear about the Chinese buring DVDs and CDs in International Waters to avoid copyrights? Do you really think it's impossible to envison a country that would harbour non-TCPA hardware manufacturers?
Dude, it has to start somewhere! Are you seriously saying that TCPA doesn't concern you? If they get in bed with the processor manufacturers, and Microsoft, that is a pretty friggin good start.
Oh, every other country must be free of greedy corporations and corrupt politicians
No, but you're assuming these entities will follow a business path that aligns with US legislation. Wrong. The same capitalist needs that fuel the TPCA would create an industry of non-TCPA hardware; and trust me, the earnings would be lucrative.
Of course - but how can you deny the buying power of the U.S.? Come on, that is what we do. It would be more difficult for companies to support two different devices (TCPA and non-TCPA), so they would have to make a choice. We are a nation of consumers, and they might just make the jump to producing only TCPA. And if they see our corporations gaining control over our computer users, and making tons of cash, why woulnd't they do it as well? Greed is an evil thing, and I just don't think that we are the only ones who are capable of it. You seem to paint the world outside the U.S. as somehow radically different in that respect. Jebus, I don't want it to be like that, but I think that is how it is. Maybe I am naive.
Excuse me, I'm off to smoke a Cuban cigar.
That sounds good. I have a humidor full of them, maybe I'll have one too.;-)
Now, is SCSI better for your average Joe? Maybe not significantly. Neither is 7200 vs 5400, 2MB vs 8MB buffers, or 8.9 vs 9.1 ms access times.
However, if they could use one cable to connect 15 devices in their tower, they'd be alot happier than having the 8 cables they'd need to do it with current IDE tech (let alone IDE's relative inability to be used externally).
The average Joe will simply ship the whole computer back to Dell. Ask average Joe if he has an IDE drive or a SCSI drive in his computer, and see what kind of reaction you get. You'll either get Mr. Self-taught computer Joe, who will tell you he has a 30 Gee Bee and a 256 Em Bee, or someone who doesn't know and doesn't care.
People can say SCSI is better (or equivalent) to SATA, but the bottom line is it doesn't matter. The market, or more accurately the people driving the market, will decide. In the end, we are going to have technology that keeps getting better and better. Maybe SCSI missed the boat because of price. I know I wouldn't buy a SCSI drive for home, they are just too damn expensive. Servers - sure. But SATA is a way of sparking interest. If SCSI drives were cheaper, people would buy them, and if there was more interest in them, they would be cheaper. So SATA comes along, will garner interest because it is new, and it will probably take off. I don't think SCSI will go away any time soon, because of legacy support, but if it does, then are we really missing out on anything if SATA can pick up the slack?
I find it absolutely comical how self centered _some_ Americans are, to the point that they think the TCPA and related AMERICAN technologies (Palladium, etc.) will be the end of free computing in a global sense.
Do they really think asian/european PC hardware manufacturers are going to radically redesign their products to serve the needs of American capitalism? Not a chance.
Do you really think that if Intel and AMD implemented Palladium, that they would have much of a choice? Where else are they going to go? Sure, there may be other processors out there, but do you think that people will change? "Trusted Computing" sounds great to people who don't really know what it is. And somehow people outside the US have a clearer picture of all of this? Uh-huh.
The TCPA may be the end of free computing in America (though I doubt it), but the rest of the world will continue on its merry way.
Get over yourselves!
Sorry, but if the American economy tanks, I think it will have an impact on the world. The US is a big player in the global economy. I know better than to think that we control everything, and our way is best. I do know that if "trusted computing" takes hold, even if it is only in the US, that it could have dire consequences for everyone. If the American stock markets tank, the world will feel it. We import and export a lot of things to the rest of the world, and if that stops, the rest of the world will notice. I am not suggesting that Palladium will cause those things to happen, it is definitely a worse case scenario. But it is possible.
The point is, we are all in this together. Trusted computing is BAD, and it is bad for everyone. Maybe other countries wouldn't feel it as immediately, but you would feel it. I suggest you get over yourself, and stop thinking about things in such a nationalistic way. Why do you think that the rest of the world is somehow above having these restrictions imposed on them? So exactly WHY is the rest of the world so impervious to things like this? Oh, every other country must be free of greedy corporations and corrupt politicians, which would let something like this happen.
What is the role of the government in all of this and why is there a need to regulate these prices?
If I am an independent musician, can't I just make a deal with a local webcaster at a rate that we negotiate?
Does anybody know?
Shut up boy, you'll do what you are told, when you are told. You are nothing without a record deal from a company that is controlled by the RIAA. You are not a recording artist until we say you are a recording artist.
Sincerely,
Hilary Rosen
Sarcastic as it seems, it rings pretty true to life.
On a personal note...
I just ordered my first CD in over a year. Rise Above which is 23 Blag Flag songs to benefit the West Memphis Three . It looks like it will be awesome, from the song list.
I agree as long as the above is for personal use. If you open your MP3 server to the world and allow people to download files, then you are supporting piracy.
You'll get no argument from me on personal use. I believe once you buy one cd you should be able to make a 1000 copies or more, but only for personal use.
But the RIAA and the purchased politicians are trying to make personal use illegal at worst, and "only if we approve it" at best. I don't support piracy either, but I also realize that they aren't just going after piracy.
Not completely true. I can name an artist that owns his own music for every artist you name that signed his rights away.
And I bet I will have never heard of them.:-)
Normally, the people who aren't afraid to speak out against the music industry are those whose indentured servitude has expired.
You're using examples that are more than 80 years old and as such are easier to argue that they should be part of public domain.
And they are trying to extend the copyright laws to keep them out of the public domain. Check out this article . Yes, they are old examples, and yes, corporations are fighting to extend the copyright for them. If it were up to them, copyright would be infinite. I don't know what should be fair, but I know that "life + 70 years" for personal work and "95 years" for corporate created work is atrocious!
They are buying politicians to enact laws to do whatever they want. It is disgusting.
So, your point (simplified) is:
1) entertainment (music, movies, software, literature, etc) is too expensive and should be less costly
No. Movies cost a LOT to make. I don't think people should be able to download them for free. DVDs are cheaper than CDs in many cases, and the costs behind movies are much more than that of CDs. (did you ever wonder why CDs still cost the same to buy as they did 10 years ago?) The MPAA is bad, but the RIAA is so much worse. Yes, it is well known that by charging what they do for CDs, they are just lining their pockets (and not paying the artist what they deserve). This is all very well documented. Which is all fine, they can charge whatever they want - I won't buy it. BUT.... Then they start wanting to pass laws that infringe on my fair use of CDs that I have purchased. If I want to have an MP3 server in my house, I can. If I want to burn copies of the CDs I have purchased to protect against losing or damaging my only copy, I can. If I want to make a compilation CD, I can. The RIAA wants to make these activities illegal. It isn't that they are losing money, they see "piracy" as money owed to them. Which isn't really true at all, but they are twisting those "facts" to pass laws to make them more money, and to make sure that they have complete control over the music industry. What I am saying is that there is a business model out there that they could fill if they weren't blinded by their own collective ego and greed.
2) entertainment should be easier to attain (i.e. watch a new release movie in the comfort of your own home), and
The technology isn't quite there yet for movies (well, there is PPV) but for music it is there and has been for a few years now. Imagine walking into a record store, or even online, and being able to compile a CD of MP3 files of any song from 1920 to 1999. And pay for it. That technology is possible, and a lot of people would love it! The possibilies are fantastic, but it won't happen because the companies in the RIAA own all that music, and they will do with it as they see fit. (which is only in their interests)
What they don't see is that they could provide this and still make money at it. The fact is, music IS easier to attain. It is just illegal because the people who "own" the music haven't accepted that fact and provided a legal alternative. Why not? It has been proven technically feasable.
3) entertainment should be owned by the people and not by the artists or corporations?
First, take artists out of there. Artists don't own squat! They sign it away to get that record deal.
After a reasonable amount of time, yes, things should be public domain. Do the heirs of Robert Frost still deserve royalty checks for his poems, or should they be released into the public domain? Should the silent movies be released to the public domain, or should some company own them and just sit on them because they can? There are many people out there who can argue this point better than I can, and have. Do a search on google to find more info. The problem is that companies are lobbying for laws to extend the copyright laws to some ridiculous amount of time after the author's death. It is all about control, and stifles creativity because no matter what you do, you may be infringing on someone else's copyright. Don't release a CD with 4 minutes of silence on it, someone has that copyrighted. Don't use a term that is similar to Mickey Mouse, or you'll hear from Disney's lawyers.
Slashdot Mirror
Damn lawyer-speak.
I think that this might qualify as the most naive thing I have heard on Slashdot. The Catholic church tells you exactly what they want you to hear. The Bible is the most interpreted/misinterpred book ever written. People over time have always translated it to say what they wanted it to say. I would love for them to put all of the "good stuff" from their archive online, but it won't happen. It will be selected texts that make them look good. Otherwise, if people found out all the info behind the Catholic church, it would probably fold.
And freedom, don't forget freedom.
Oh, wait. It has never been about that.
One is a rich dork in real life and his alter ego is the cool superhero.
The other one is a cool superhero naturally, but his alter ego is a dork.
Yeah, tough to see which one the Slashdot crowd would pick.
How can Word appear any faster at 3GHz? I would think that after 1.5GHz, improvement in performance would be hard to notice. Granted, it will be good for people who are still running those 200MHz clunkers but what's the incentive if you're already running in the GHz range?
How can you quote something from the article and not even read it? It says you won't see much difference in Word, and you turn around and say "How will Word be faster?". Don't you even read what you cut and paste?
Strange days when people bitch about technology getting better.
I find it odd that there is no middle ground for you between suits, and torn-up, dirty clothes.
When you are making a first impression, remember that appearance is the ONLY thing that people can SEE. Before they hear your voice, before they find out what you know, they see what you look like. If you are the janitor, no-one will care if your teeshirt is smudged. If you aren't the janitor, do you want strangers to think you are? Will it increase their confidence in you? Wear clothing which is appropriate to the time and place.
You know how many strangers I meet at work? Zero. What first impression are you talking about? Read what I wrote - if you interface with customers, or the public, there should be some kind of dress code. In most software companies, that is not the engineering department. Again, I find it odd that to you there is no middle ground between business casual and dirty, stained clothes.
Someone else pointed out that people at the top and bottom get to wear whatever they like. The ones at the top set the dress code, the ones at the bottom no-one cares about. The ones in the middle must follow the dress code. Ross Perot (owner of EDS, I think) could wear what the janitor wears, if he thought it was more comfortable than his suit. He doesn't, and that should tell you something about comfort.
Ross Perot - now there is someone to look up to.
Folks here keep saying that suits are uncomfortable. Mine aren't, and I've gotten most of them from the second hand stores, so we can't give the tailor any credit. You can buy them cheaper than you can buy denim, and the suits are generally in better condition than the jeans.
I have a couple of suits that are very comfortable. One cost $900. If I wear a suit, I wear a suit. So you want to look "professional" in your second-hand suit? What happened to that all-important first impression you are raving about? Do you want to look like a bum, or some 80 year old man? Wait a minute, in your first paragraph, hand-me-downs were bad. I am confused.
You will be comfortable in whatever you are accustomed to. If you have chosen to be accustomed to clothing that makes you look rebellious, unreliable and immature, you haven't chosen wisely. Unless, of course, you are rebellious, unreliable and immature, in which case you are wiser than you knew, and the rest of us can continue to rely on appearances.
If you rely on appearances, you are a fool. And for the third time, you assume that casual clothing means rebellious, unreliable, and immature. Ask me about some of the best software people I have ever worked with, and I'll tell you what they know, not what they wear. What about Open Source Software? I wonder what Linus wears. Or Alan Cox. I'll bet they look all unreliable and rebellious, so they must be. You sound like the classic middle management type. Good thing you are expendable, cause someone else will come along who thinks EXACTLY like you to replace you. Maybe they will dress a little nicer, therefore they must be better than you.
Dude, Win98 doesn't even need to be rebooted to renew DHCP. Winipcfg resides in the c:\windows directory, and you can release and renew your IP using it.
I have Earthlink DSL, and I got the self install kit. Once I used their software to connect and activate my account, I had my Linux firewall up in about a day and haven't used their software since.
People laugh at me when they find out I have Win98, but it is stable enough for me to boot it up and play games on, which is all that machine gets used for nowadays. If you upgraded to Win2k or WinXP, why am I the idiot?
Here is a question for you, and answer it seriously in your own mind: If you work with someone, does their fashion make a difference in your *professional* opinion of them? If you say yes, then you are probably in some type of managment/sales/marketing role. Those people work off of image, technical people work off of knowledge. That is the way it works. If you are telling me that I have to dress up to make the marketing folks happy, then you are full of crap and need to think about your priorities. Now if you are saying that I need to dress up because I will be working with customers directly, then you may have a point. And I find it pretty naive of you to think that all technical people are slovenly, grumpy, and non-communicative. Hey, I know, let's make them dress uncomfortably, that will improve their demeanor! Maybe we need another mission statement, or Hawaiian shirt day! Quick, someone think of a catchy acronym that outlines our business paridigm initiative.
These are precisely why technical people snicker at the business folks.
Funny, I just got back from seeing Michael Moore's movie "Bowling for Columbine". You should see it, it addresses this point quite well. Canada has 7 million guns, which is no small nnumber. So why does the U.S. have so many more gun related deaths??? I would recommend that everyone see this movie. One of the best I have seen in a very very long time.
Well, I suppose you are right (except for the dipshit part). I meant that I don't buy into that crap where you ramble about the details of your life for the world to see. I comment on "news" stories here, so that may be some form of blog. I think the real bloggy part of /. is the ability for people to have friends lists, write journal entries, etc. I don't partake in that stuff, I think it is stupid.
So blog off you bloggity blogznatch.
(did I use that term correctly?)
Hey read my online journal and see what I bought at the grocery store yesterday! Whee.
I have never used one, or intend to. For some unknown reason, it bacame popular to just ramble out your thoughts into an online journal. Whatever. I don't see why this made the news though...
"It's a real coup," Gates said, sharing a stage in the autumn-tinged park with Eisner and a pair of extras in Mickey and Minnie Mouse suits.
"We're going to gain a lot of share here," Gates said. "We're going to make a lot of consumers happy."
Somehow the first parts of that overshadow the last sentence.
And this one pretty much tells it all...
Microsoft intends its new software to cater to parents, who can receive a weekly e-mail detailing their children's online activity, including Web sites they visited or tried to visit and the e-mail addresses and MSN Messenger accounts of people with whom they corresponded.
Or monopolistic practices? Or railed on by the U.S. Department of Justice, or a group of U.S. States? When you have some of the deepest pockets around, I guess you don't really care. It would be the same as someone suing me for pocket lint.
Dude, why are you bitching? I am sure they will make the source available so you can install it on your own 65,000 processor machine.
I know. Except I believe that it is wrong and should be stopped. That is what I was saying. You are saying "let it happen, it is only the U.S."
Ahem. Bullshit.
The only reason there is to put on airs, aka dress up, for work is if it is required. If you deal with customers that expect it, then do it. If you are a lawyer, then do it. If you are someone who works in tech, and you never see your customers, then why the hell should you have to dress up? Of the skills that you list that are becoming more and more important, I didn't see fashion in there. (unless you are in the fashion industry). When our GM comes to town, we have to dress business casual, which I really think is stupid because it is simply putting on an image for the big cheese. Other than that, we can wear jeans and casual clothes. They only let us wear shorts on Fridays during the summer. We all work together, and rarely see the customer because we are in software development. Let the marketing and sales people "dress to impress". I would rather think "man, this person knows their stuff" instead of "that is a nice tie, they must be smart".
To me, it is all BS, with the caveat that unless it is required, it is not necessary. You say that people who don't agree with this will never rise very far. That is probably because you consider management positions higher than technical positions. The best managers are the ones who surround themselves with good technical people, and know how to keep their technical people happy. *REAL* technical people believe this, and know that genuine respect comes from what you know. You can bullshit all you want about what you know, but if you can't deliver then it doesn't matter. So play the game, but only if there is one that has to be played. Don't dress to impress - just impress. OMFG - a previous poster said you should wear a suit on the first day, no matter what. That is the stupidest thing I have heard. Dress for the environment you are working in!
But to the real point of the original poster - go to cafepress.com, you can create your own shirts with whatever you want on them.
So keep ass-kissing, and conforming simply for the sake of conforming, and you'll realize one day that you don't have an original thought in your head, and you have been a sheep all these years. Or maybe not, and you'll simply fade into obscurity without realizing it. Well, at least you'll have a career you can be proud of...
Are we still talking about TCPA? Sounds like you're beating your chest over hypothetical events not related to the topic. Why don't you just say: "The world cannot go on without a properous American economy!" or "w3 o\/\/n j000000!!" You're just proving my point on the American EGO. Many other countries currently follow a different path than the US and this will continue.
Pardon my frankness, but stop acting like a dumbass. Yes, I was being hypothetical, that is all TCPA is right now. I am envisioning a worst-case scenario, where TCPA allows great harm to come to the US economy. Yes, the world will go on if something awful were to happen to the US economy, but my point is that we all work together, and the effects would be felt. If I had said something as utterly stupid as you did (putting words in my mouth) then that would be ego. I am trying to make a point about how TCPA is BAD for everyone. Just because it starts with us, doesn't mean that it wouldn't be tried elsewhere. If some other country that produced the processors and operating systems that most of the world used was trying to implement this, I would be just as concerned.
Canada's senate is reviewing a bill to legalize pot while US police are still jailing kids for possession. Canada has very few gun related deaths compared to gun wielding Americans running scared from a evil sniper armed with a gun you can't even buy in Canada. Can you see the differences here?
To quote you: Are we still talking about the TCPA? Who's beating their chest now?
Canada will never see the day of TCPA and a large volume of non-TCPA hardware will always be available for countries not honoring the TCPA. Why? Because if there is a demand, someone will supply that need. The only case in which TCPA products would replace or modify all current PC hardware/software is when every single country in the world fully enforces the TCPAs directives. It's a joke that anyone would assume they have such absolute influence on the rest of the world. Didn't you hear about the Chinese buring DVDs and CDs in International Waters to avoid copyrights? Do you really think it's impossible to envison a country that would harbour non-TCPA hardware manufacturers?
Dude, it has to start somewhere! Are you seriously saying that TCPA doesn't concern you? If they get in bed with the processor manufacturers, and Microsoft, that is a pretty friggin good start.
Oh, every other country must be free of greedy corporations and corrupt politicians No, but you're assuming these entities will follow a business path that aligns with US legislation. Wrong. The same capitalist needs that fuel the TPCA would create an industry of non-TCPA hardware; and trust me, the earnings would be lucrative.
Of course - but how can you deny the buying power of the U.S.? Come on, that is what we do. It would be more difficult for companies to support two different devices (TCPA and non-TCPA), so they would have to make a choice. We are a nation of consumers, and they might just make the jump to producing only TCPA. And if they see our corporations gaining control over our computer users, and making tons of cash, why woulnd't they do it as well? Greed is an evil thing, and I just don't think that we are the only ones who are capable of it. You seem to paint the world outside the U.S. as somehow radically different in that respect. Jebus, I don't want it to be like that, but I think that is how it is. Maybe I am naive.
Excuse me, I'm off to smoke a Cuban cigar.
That sounds good. I have a humidor full of them, maybe I'll have one too. ;-)
I have SlashVo. It only records re-runs.
The average Joe will simply ship the whole computer back to Dell. Ask average Joe if he has an IDE drive or a SCSI drive in his computer, and see what kind of reaction you get. You'll either get Mr. Self-taught computer Joe, who will tell you he has a 30 Gee Bee and a 256 Em Bee, or someone who doesn't know and doesn't care.
People can say SCSI is better (or equivalent) to SATA, but the bottom line is it doesn't matter. The market, or more accurately the people driving the market, will decide. In the end, we are going to have technology that keeps getting better and better. Maybe SCSI missed the boat because of price. I know I wouldn't buy a SCSI drive for home, they are just too damn expensive. Servers - sure. But SATA is a way of sparking interest. If SCSI drives were cheaper, people would buy them, and if there was more interest in them, they would be cheaper. So SATA comes along, will garner interest because it is new, and it will probably take off. I don't think SCSI will go away any time soon, because of legacy support, but if it does, then are we really missing out on anything if SATA can pick up the slack?
Do you really think that if Intel and AMD implemented Palladium, that they would have much of a choice? Where else are they going to go? Sure, there may be other processors out there, but do you think that people will change? "Trusted Computing" sounds great to people who don't really know what it is. And somehow people outside the US have a clearer picture of all of this? Uh-huh.
The TCPA may be the end of free computing in America (though I doubt it), but the rest of the world will continue on its merry way. Get over yourselves!
Sorry, but if the American economy tanks, I think it will have an impact on the world. The US is a big player in the global economy. I know better than to think that we control everything, and our way is best. I do know that if "trusted computing" takes hold, even if it is only in the US, that it could have dire consequences for everyone. If the American stock markets tank, the world will feel it. We import and export a lot of things to the rest of the world, and if that stops, the rest of the world will notice. I am not suggesting that Palladium will cause those things to happen, it is definitely a worse case scenario. But it is possible.
The point is, we are all in this together. Trusted computing is BAD, and it is bad for everyone. Maybe other countries wouldn't feel it as immediately, but you would feel it. I suggest you get over yourself, and stop thinking about things in such a nationalistic way. Why do you think that the rest of the world is somehow above having these restrictions imposed on them? So exactly WHY is the rest of the world so impervious to things like this? Oh, every other country must be free of greedy corporations and corrupt politicians, which would let something like this happen.
Shut up boy, you'll do what you are told, when you are told. You are nothing without a record deal from a company that is controlled by the RIAA. You are not a recording artist until we say you are a recording artist.
Sincerely,
Hilary Rosen
Sarcastic as it seems, it rings pretty true to life.
On a personal note...
I just ordered my first CD in over a year. Rise Above which is 23 Blag Flag songs to benefit the West Memphis Three . It looks like it will be awesome, from the song list.
When I first read this, I thought it said "testicle samples". Which was funny, but then made the next line even funnier...
More importantly when we go on dates? :)
But the RIAA and the purchased politicians are trying to make personal use illegal at worst, and "only if we approve it" at best. I don't support piracy either, but I also realize that they aren't just going after piracy.
Not completely true. I can name an artist that owns his own music for every artist you name that signed his rights away.
And I bet I will have never heard of them. :-)
Normally, the people who aren't afraid to speak out against the music industry are those whose indentured servitude has expired.
You're using examples that are more than 80 years old and as such are easier to argue that they should be part of public domain.
And they are trying to extend the copyright laws to keep them out of the public domain. Check out this article . Yes, they are old examples, and yes, corporations are fighting to extend the copyright for them. If it were up to them, copyright would be infinite. I don't know what should be fair, but I know that "life + 70 years" for personal work and "95 years" for corporate created work is atrocious! They are buying politicians to enact laws to do whatever they want. It is disgusting.
No. Movies cost a LOT to make. I don't think people should be able to download them for free. DVDs are cheaper than CDs in many cases, and the costs behind movies are much more than that of CDs. (did you ever wonder why CDs still cost the same to buy as they did 10 years ago?) The MPAA is bad, but the RIAA is so much worse. Yes, it is well known that by charging what they do for CDs, they are just lining their pockets (and not paying the artist what they deserve). This is all very well documented. Which is all fine, they can charge whatever they want - I won't buy it. BUT.... Then they start wanting to pass laws that infringe on my fair use of CDs that I have purchased. If I want to have an MP3 server in my house, I can. If I want to burn copies of the CDs I have purchased to protect against losing or damaging my only copy, I can. If I want to make a compilation CD, I can. The RIAA wants to make these activities illegal. It isn't that they are losing money, they see "piracy" as money owed to them. Which isn't really true at all, but they are twisting those "facts" to pass laws to make them more money, and to make sure that they have complete control over the music industry. What I am saying is that there is a business model out there that they could fill if they weren't blinded by their own collective ego and greed.
2) entertainment should be easier to attain (i.e. watch a new release movie in the comfort of your own home), and
The technology isn't quite there yet for movies (well, there is PPV) but for music it is there and has been for a few years now. Imagine walking into a record store, or even online, and being able to compile a CD of MP3 files of any song from 1920 to 1999. And pay for it. That technology is possible, and a lot of people would love it! The possibilies are fantastic, but it won't happen because the companies in the RIAA own all that music, and they will do with it as they see fit. (which is only in their interests) What they don't see is that they could provide this and still make money at it. The fact is, music IS easier to attain. It is just illegal because the people who "own" the music haven't accepted that fact and provided a legal alternative. Why not? It has been proven technically feasable.
3) entertainment should be owned by the people and not by the artists or corporations?
First, take artists out of there. Artists don't own squat! They sign it away to get that record deal.
After a reasonable amount of time, yes, things should be public domain. Do the heirs of Robert Frost still deserve royalty checks for his poems, or should they be released into the public domain? Should the silent movies be released to the public domain, or should some company own them and just sit on them because they can? There are many people out there who can argue this point better than I can, and have. Do a search on google to find more info. The problem is that companies are lobbying for laws to extend the copyright laws to some ridiculous amount of time after the author's death. It is all about control, and stifles creativity because no matter what you do, you may be infringing on someone else's copyright. Don't release a CD with 4 minutes of silence on it, someone has that copyrighted. Don't use a term that is similar to Mickey Mouse, or you'll hear from Disney's lawyers.