I'm not saying Bank of America looked at SV and said "Man, you can't pull the wool over the eyes of them smart programmer dudes, let's don't even try to scam them with automatic billpay". I'm saying that programmers in SV, being smart and mroe to the point-knowledgeable, have largely opted to not USE the automatic billpay, meaning banks (and vendors, don't forget vendors) don't offer it anymore (if they ever did).
As for push versus pull: True, it cuts down on the NUMBER of companies doing the screwing, but it still increases the chances that a screwing will occur. If every transaction against my account MUST pass through my hands to get posted, I have a lot more control and information.
Let's put it this way: I don't weld the hood down on my software, my car or my bank accounts. ---
If you think open source software is something that has some thread of ethical or moral content, then consider yourself a "fringe" element of the open source movement. The main thrust of this movement is driven by the commercial requirement that no one company be able to control the means to the success of any other company.
How soon we forget! The Open Source movement (note capital letters) is the fringe movement to the Free Software Foundation that was started 15 years ago. The main thrust of which is decidedly not about protecting companies from one another.
Before you get all wet about some company releasing open source software, figure out whether or not the software they are offering is important for the correct operation of other parts of the system. If not, then who cares?
I care. Even if there is some software the the "other parts of the system" aren't affected by, I will be affected by non-correct operation. Therefore I want every piece of software I use to be open source. ---
Disclaimer: I don't live or work in Silicon Valley, but I AM a programmer at a bank.
Here's the reason SV doesn't have the advanced banking tech: because programmers know better.
I HATE direct bill pay systems. There's no way in hell I'm letting Vast Conglomerate A ask Vast Bank B for some of my money. Trying to fix a problem would combine the worst aspects of dealing with a teller and calling tech support. There would be no way of fixing it short of closing the account--and even then I probably would never see that one payment again.
I ALWAYS opt for the "bill me" or "check only" option. If there is no such option, I do without the service. If I can't do without the service (cf. my recent cable modem purchase) I keep bugging the company by asking when I can stop the auto-debiting. ---
First, not everyone is criticizing Sun because they aren't open. They are criticizing Sun because they IMPLYING they are open ("Community License", indeed) when they really aren't.
Second, why can't I criticize Sun's choice of license? They are a business providing a product. If I don't like the product I am free to explain why. Example: You buy a car from GM and it turns out they covered the interior body with cheap plastic that cracked a few years after the purchase date. Would you say "he who makes the car picks the interior body design"? Or would you complain about poor manufacturing? ---
No, using Linux won't make your penis larger. BUT, by not knuckling under to Microsoft it is easier to present yourself as an Alpha Geek to Geek Hotties. So using Linux can make your penis more in demand, which is really the outcome we want anyway, right? ---
...but let's make it REALLY fair: eliminate patents, copyrights, trademarks, "intellectual property", etc.
The Sherman Act (anti-bankruptcy), consumer protection laws and so on are really just laws to counteract the effects of already existing anti-capitalist legislation. ---
A lot of people are saying "breaking MS up won't make them go away". So? The point here isn't to crush MS out of existence. The point is to make the tech industry safe for diversity. ---
Hemos asked: "Is that the only solution? The alternative is regulation...."
So the simple answer is "if there is an alternative, by definition there is more than one solution." The longer answer is: "What's wrong with (the right) legislation?"
For instance, why not just enforce false advertising laws? If a product is claimed to have feature A but turns out not to, that's a lawsuit. If a product is claimed to have feature A in "the next release" but turns out not to, that's a lawsuit.
Another example: Contracts that too heavily favor one party are illegal. So when company C makes a deal with company D that favors C's products at the expense of D's, that's a lawsuit.
Most of the evilness of Microsoft is a result of the non-enforcement of existing laws. ---
It doesn't matter whether this movie will be good or bad. It is guaranteed to pack the D&D people in like sardines (much the same way the uber-suck Star Wars prequel did). All we have to do is set the theaters on fire on opening night to make the world safe for shower-takers. ---
I agree with some of your points, but I have to wonder how knowledgeable you are, given your lumping of fusion (relatively harmless) with fission (potentially dangerous) in your phrase "nuclear technology". ---
First of all, why do I need recovery during an install? It only takes 15 minutes to install Linux, how likely is it that the power will fail in that window? And even if it did, I could do full re-install (maybe even twice more) before the Window98 install finished once. Useless feature. Second, you do NOT get "a lot more stuff" with Win98. The Linux install gives you gcc, devel libs, games, browsers, databases, servers (web, ftp, etc). A Linux install CD is packed with software. A Windows install CD is packed with demos of other "Fine Microsoft Products". ---
I've had plenty of PCs where I couldn't figure out what video card it had installed. These were mostly crap PCs with everything, video, sound, modem, etc is all "built right in". ---
I'm not saying eBay should XML their data up to make it usable by outside search engines. I'm saying they need to pull their own search engine into the 19th century and allow a little leeway on criteria. ---
First, if eBay doesn't want to make things public, they shouldn't be on the Internet. There are plenty of tech fixes to this "issue".
Second, if they want people to use their search engine, why not make it usable? Simple text matches is not enough. I want to be able to say: "Give me all Nintendo 64 or N64 games under $25. Return back the seller, the price, the closing time and shipping terms". ---
"I know I won't have any cash in the bank, just because I don't trust people not to panic and riot."
Obviously this makes you part of the problem. I'm sure you are aware of that. What you may not be clear on is exactly how stupid your plan is. Let's follow the logic. One of four outcomes are possible:
1) Everybody removes their money from the bank. Outcome: economic chaos and the money is worthless.
2) Nobody removes their money from the bank. Outcome: economic stability.
3) Everybody EXCEPT YOU removes their money from the bank. Outcome: same economic chaos, including for you since the money is worthless.
4) Nobody EXCEPT YOU removes their money from the bank. Outcome: economic stability for everyone, possible minor repurcussions for you (early withdrawl fees, account re-open costs, mocking and taunting etc).
The best outcome is 2, the worst is 1 or 3. 4 is intermediary. In any case, the global outcome is the same as the local outcome. Let me rephrase and repeat that: Whatever happens to everyone else, economically speaking, will also happen to you. In still other words, it mostly doesn't matter if you take your money out or leave it in. And the extent to which it does matter it is slightly weighted towards leaving your money in (outcome 4). So leaving it in is the best strategy. Which further means most people should do it and we will avoid economic chaos. What we have here is a graphic representation of Hofstadter's solution to the Prisoner's Dilemna. ---
1) Paper is portable. For instance, if I am working on Machine A and the docs are on Machine B, I print them out and carry them over to A. Now that I have a Pilot this is already lessening. If/when I upgrade to something with more mem (not to mention buy another cradle) I may be able to stop this altogether.
2) Paper is proof. People are not comfortable saving, say, an email for later proof that they were told to do something. This is especially the case in the Windows world with it's a) less computer-savvy users and b) tendency to crash and lose files.
First, the disclaimer: I am a programmer working at a bank. I don't work on the mainframe, but I have been involved with Y2k testing and remediation.
. The FDIC has sent competent examiners to go over everything with a fine-toothed comb, so I can guarantee that our particular chances of failure are NOT as high as 10%.
But let's interpret your 10:1 odds as "1 bank in 10 will fail" rather than "every bank has a 10% chance of failing". Even this is implausible. What with recent mergers and acquisitions most banks are medium to large (mine is medium). The larger the bank, the more the scrutiny and the less the chance of failure. My bank is fine and large banks are even more fine.
How about a third interpretation: "There is a 10% chance that, somewhere in the US, a bank will fail on 1/1/2000". So what? Bank failures happen all the time--that's why we have FDIC insurance. As long as you put less than 100,000 in each of your accounts, you will get reimbursed by the gov't. Furthermore, given all the above, that bank will probably be small and therefore affect very few people.
So, despite the way you flippantly dismiss the bank reaction of "it's not that big a problem", that is the correct reaction to have. It clearly is important that the banking system survive Y2k (which it will, as demonstrated above), but any one bank is no big deal. A couple people would lose their jobs, some paperwork would ensue and that would be the end. A Y2k-failed airplane, OTOH, would be a disaster. ---
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not saying Bank of America looked at SV and said "Man, you can't pull the wool over the eyes of them smart programmer dudes, let's don't even try to scam them with automatic billpay". I'm saying that programmers in SV, being smart and mroe to the point-knowledgeable, have largely opted to not USE the automatic billpay, meaning banks (and vendors, don't forget vendors) don't offer it anymore (if they ever did).
As for push versus pull: True, it cuts down on the NUMBER of companies doing the screwing, but it still increases the chances that a screwing will occur. If every transaction against my account MUST pass through my hands to get posted, I have a lot more control and information.
Let's put it this way: I don't weld the hood down on my software, my car or my bank accounts.
---
If you think open source software is something that has some thread of ethical or moral content, then consider yourself a "fringe" element of the open source movement. The main thrust of this movement is driven by the commercial requirement that no one company be able to control the means to the success of any other company.
How soon we forget! The Open Source movement (note capital letters) is the fringe movement to the Free Software Foundation that was started 15 years ago. The main thrust of which is decidedly not about protecting companies from one another.
Before you get all wet about some company releasing open source software, figure out whether or not the software they are offering is important for the correct operation of other parts of the system. If not, then who cares?
I care. Even if there is some software the the "other parts of the system" aren't affected by, I will be affected by non-correct operation. Therefore I want every piece of software I use to be open source.
---
Disclaimer: I don't live or work in Silicon Valley, but I AM a programmer at a bank.
Here's the reason SV doesn't have the advanced banking tech: because programmers know better.
I HATE direct bill pay systems. There's no way in hell I'm letting Vast Conglomerate A ask Vast Bank B for some of my money. Trying to fix a problem would combine the worst aspects of dealing with a teller and calling tech support. There would be no way of fixing it short of closing the account--and even then I probably would never see that one payment again.
I ALWAYS opt for the "bill me" or "check only" option. If there is no such option, I do without the service. If I can't do without the service (cf. my recent cable modem purchase) I keep bugging the company by asking when I can stop the auto-debiting.
---
First, not everyone is criticizing Sun because they aren't open. They are criticizing Sun because they IMPLYING they are open ("Community License", indeed) when they really aren't.
Second, why can't I criticize Sun's choice of license? They are a business providing a product. If I don't like the product I am free to explain why. Example: You buy a car from GM and it turns out they covered the interior body with cheap plastic that cracked a few years after the purchase date. Would you say "he who makes the car picks the interior body design"? Or would you complain about poor manufacturing?
---
No, using Linux won't make your penis larger. BUT, by not knuckling under to Microsoft it is easier to present yourself as an Alpha Geek to Geek Hotties. So using Linux can make your penis more in demand, which is really the outcome we want anyway, right?
---
But GPG uses IDEA, how can it be patented?
---
...but let's make it REALLY fair: eliminate patents, copyrights, trademarks, "intellectual property", etc.
The Sherman Act (anti-bankruptcy), consumer protection laws and so on are really just laws to counteract the effects of already existing anti-capitalist legislation.
---
A lot of people are saying "breaking MS up won't make them go away". So? The point here isn't to crush MS out of existence. The point is to make the tech industry safe for diversity.
---
Hemos asked: "Is that the only solution? The alternative is regulation...."
So the simple answer is "if there is an alternative, by definition there is more than one solution." The longer answer is: "What's wrong with (the right) legislation?"
For instance, why not just enforce false advertising laws? If a product is claimed to have feature A but turns out not to, that's a lawsuit. If a product is claimed to have feature A in "the next release" but turns out not to, that's a lawsuit.
Another example: Contracts that too heavily favor one party are illegal. So when company C makes a deal with company D that favors C's products at the expense of D's, that's a lawsuit.
Most of the evilness of Microsoft is a result of the non-enforcement of existing laws.
---
It doesn't matter whether this movie will be good or bad. It is guaranteed to pack the D&D people in like sardines (much the same way the uber-suck Star Wars prequel did). All we have to do is set the theaters on fire on opening night to make the world safe for shower-takers.
---
I agree with some of your points, but I have to wonder how knowledgeable you are, given your lumping of fusion (relatively harmless) with fission (potentially dangerous) in your phrase "nuclear technology".
---
...why they left C in the first place.
---
...I can endure a lot of hardship. I can also act responsibly. Why can't they?
---
Here's a better version of the same thing: "In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice they aren't."
---
Man, does that ever take me back....
---
...just a hidden assumption.
"I don't know how to fly an airplane, it's too hard. Therefore all airplanes suck for my uses."
This is exactly what the "can't install Linux" guy was saying and it's what Petreley meant to say, but didn't.
---
So how long did the W2k install actually take?
---
First of all, why do I need recovery during an install? It only takes 15 minutes to install Linux, how likely is it that the power will fail in that window? And even if it did, I could do full re-install (maybe even twice more) before the Window98 install finished once. Useless feature. Second, you do NOT get "a lot more stuff" with Win98. The Linux install gives you gcc, devel libs, games, browsers, databases, servers (web, ftp, etc). A Linux install CD is packed with software. A Windows install CD is packed with demos of other "Fine Microsoft Products".
---
I've had plenty of PCs where I couldn't figure out what video card it had installed. These were mostly crap PCs with everything, video, sound, modem, etc is all "built right in".
---
"let me shut off the ability for sites to spawn new windows"
Oh yeah, can I get a "Praise the Lord"??
This "feature" is so DAMN ANNOYING!!! You'd think it was a JavaScript thing, but no....
I've got to end this comment before I have a stroke....
---
I'm not saying eBay should XML their data up to make it usable by outside search engines. I'm saying they need to pull their own search engine into the 19th century and allow a little leeway on criteria.
---
First, if eBay doesn't want to make things public, they shouldn't be on the Internet. There are plenty of tech fixes to this "issue".
Second, if they want people to use their search engine, why not make it usable? Simple text matches is not enough. I want to be able to say: "Give me all Nintendo 64 or N64 games under $25. Return back the seller, the price, the closing time and shipping terms".
---
"I know I won't have any cash in the bank, just because I don't trust people not to panic and riot."
Obviously this makes you part of the problem. I'm sure you are aware of that. What you may not be clear on is exactly how stupid your plan is. Let's follow the logic. One of four outcomes are possible:
1) Everybody removes their money from the bank. Outcome: economic chaos and the money is worthless.
2) Nobody removes their money from the bank. Outcome: economic stability.
3) Everybody EXCEPT YOU removes their money from the bank. Outcome: same economic chaos, including for you since the money is worthless.
4) Nobody EXCEPT YOU removes their money from the bank. Outcome: economic stability for everyone, possible minor repurcussions for you (early withdrawl fees, account re-open costs, mocking and taunting etc).
The best outcome is 2, the worst is 1 or 3. 4 is intermediary. In any case, the global outcome is the same as the local outcome. Let me rephrase and repeat that: Whatever happens to everyone else, economically speaking, will also happen to you. In still other words, it mostly doesn't matter if you take your money out or leave it in. And the extent to which it does matter it is slightly weighted towards leaving your money in (outcome 4). So leaving it in is the best strategy. Which further means most people should do it and we will avoid economic chaos. What we have here is a graphic representation of Hofstadter's solution to the Prisoner's Dilemna.
---
1) Paper is portable. For instance, if I am working on Machine A and the docs are on Machine B, I print them out and carry them over to A. Now that I have a Pilot this is already lessening. If/when I upgrade to something with more mem (not to mention buy another cradle) I may be able to stop this altogether.
2) Paper is proof. People are not comfortable saving, say, an email for later proof that they were told to do something. This is especially the case in the Windows world with it's a) less computer-savvy users and b) tendency to crash and lose files.
---
First, the disclaimer: I am a programmer working at a bank. I don't work on the mainframe, but I have been involved with Y2k testing and remediation.
. The FDIC has sent competent examiners to go over everything with a fine-toothed comb, so I can guarantee that our particular chances of failure are NOT as high as 10%.
But let's interpret your 10:1 odds as "1 bank in 10 will fail" rather than "every bank has a 10% chance of failing". Even this is implausible. What with recent mergers and acquisitions most banks are medium to large (mine is medium). The larger the bank, the more the scrutiny and the less the chance of failure. My bank is fine and large banks are even more fine.
How about a third interpretation: "There is a 10% chance that, somewhere in the US, a bank will fail on 1/1/2000". So what? Bank failures happen all the time--that's why we have FDIC insurance. As long as you put less than 100,000 in each of your accounts, you will get reimbursed by the gov't. Furthermore, given all the above, that bank will probably be small and therefore affect very few people.
So, despite the way you flippantly dismiss the bank reaction of "it's not that big a problem", that is the correct reaction to have. It clearly is important that the banking system survive Y2k (which it will, as demonstrated above), but any one bank is no big deal. A couple people would lose their jobs, some paperwork would ensue and that would be the end. A Y2k-failed airplane, OTOH, would be a disaster.
---