So far, everyone's been suggesting "Use format X", but surely a variety of formats would ba far more useful.
Since the only reason for removable media is for students to move files to machines that are outside the network, you should pay attention to what those external machines are kitted out with. I would bet that pretty much all of them have a floppy (unless someone's got one of those posh translucent toasters), nearly all will have CD-ROMs, and a handful will have something else. (Such as zip, LS120, CD-RW, &c.) Bearing in mind that these are (mostly) students machines, (and not at a techie college),they're unlikely to be highly specced, and with loads of cool gadgets. Also, not all college hall rooms have phone lines or network cabling, so FileAttaching data, or just dropping out over the network may well be out as well.
Therefore, I would reckon that having reliable floppy drives on all machines would be a start. (They're dirt cheap, too - so you won't even need to get them cleaned - just drop a new one in) And maybe a few networked "posh" drives, like zip and CD-RW, for students with a shedload of data. If these start to get over-used, get some more. If they're not, then you don't need them.
... Or you could just give everyone that comes in to the computer rooms a wodge of punch cards, and let them work it out for themselves.:-)
=Quoted=
Fin-de-siecle France, or early Nineteenth Century Vienna (the former emerging when recorded music was only in its extreme infancy) were almost infinitely more "cultural" than 20th Century teen culture where all recorded music is simultaneously and instantaneously available, but yet most youths would rather play a Moby or Nine Inch Nails song really loud, than experience anything resembling serious cultural dialectic.
=/Quoted=
Disagree. The reason that the past seems more culturally-rich than the present, apart from a twinge of nostalgia, is that the shit sinks and art of quality stays. (By and large) The fact that music is not available to a much wider audience than previously can only be a good thing - part of which is the domain of mp3.
As recording technology lifted music out of the domain of the concert-going elite, mp3 should liberate music from the clutches of the recording companies and bring it to a wider audience. What I reckon will happen is that there will be fewer Britney-Spears-alikes, as the pace at which bad music fades from the collective consciousness increases. Proportionally, there will be more acts of quality, working on a similar basis to the software industry ("You want our music? Pay us, or we stop")
The only people that will lose out will be the middlemen, and those that they push to make a fast buck.
And this is similar to many other industries. (Although I don't like referring to music as an industry, it has become one) The big conglomerates of the 80s are splitting up, and breaking down into their constituent parts, becoming more agile and focused, a large number of cottages, all experts in their field. That is what a band is, effectively, a group of people that are experts in the field of making music that their fans like.
=Quoted=
Voting is a responsibility of the members of a democratic society. If you enjoy the privileges of our national defense, national resources, and society, you have the responsibility to participate in the process.
=/Quoted=
That's true. Some countries (like Australia, f'rinstance) make it illegal to not vote. Good plan, were it not for the fear (that it invokes in me, at least) that you get an enormous number of stupid, ignorant people voting for a vast number of ridiculous reasons. (My father voted conservative, and his father before him... &c..)
Moving towards a meritocratic electoral system, where one has to/justify/ one's vote would, IMHO, not only improve the quantity of voting, but also the quality of decisions made by the electorate.
Criminalize the production, sale, distribution or otherwise making available of devices or computer programs who's primary use is to access, intercept or interfere with computer systems or communications;
Of course, this also would have repercussions for government agencies attempting to engage in legitimate snooping work. (I'm sure some exists!) I'm sure that a "real-world" criminal would have a pretty strong defence if it could be proved that a law-enforcement agency used what would be an illegal method of information-gathering.
Mind, this would result in more work for those highly-paid lawyers out there.... Coincidence?
"This presented a problem: if Coventry was defended or evacuated, the enemy would realise that their cryptosystems had been compromised, which would cost the English a key strategic advantage. So the city was sacrificed."
..and if you've ever been to Coventry, you'd know why....;-)
A lot of the management paradigms that you've mentioned are very solid concepts that have been successfully implemented in a large number of companies. So they can work.
But a lot of the time (I would hazard a guess at most of the time!) they fail, or get sidelined. Why? Simple: Managers who don't understand, don't care, or are too keen to shirk their responsibilities. (Read: most of them)
Most of these quality-based operational philosophies require such a fundamental culture shift, that managers are unable, or unwilling, to cope. Especially if there is no commitment to the project to begin with. Sadly, there is no force greater than corporate inertia. ("But we've always done it this way!")
IME, employees stand to gain from these methodologies, since most of them incorporate elements of empowerment and reward. (See Silvestro's 6 precepts of TQM for a good hit-list)
Of course, when a director or some other senior mgmt figure dictates from on-high that this will be the new way of business, managers become disillusioned, and don't give the project the backing that it needs to gather employee commitment, so the whole thing falls flat, the managers blame the workers (and/or the consultants that were hired to oversee the project), and claim that everything was better off the way it was in the first place.
Short version: They/do/ work, but can require such a colossal change in the way that a company operates that corporate inertia will hold them back.
Slashdot Mirror
So far, everyone's been suggesting "Use format X", but surely a variety of formats would ba far more useful.
:-)
Since the only reason for removable media is for students to move files to machines that are outside the network, you should pay attention to what those external machines are kitted out with. I would bet that pretty much all of them have a floppy (unless someone's got one of those posh translucent toasters), nearly all will have CD-ROMs, and a handful will have something else. (Such as zip, LS120, CD-RW, &c.) Bearing in mind that these are (mostly) students machines, (and not at a techie college),they're unlikely to be highly specced, and with loads of cool gadgets. Also, not all college hall rooms have phone lines or network cabling, so FileAttaching data, or just dropping out over the network may well be out as well.
Therefore, I would reckon that having reliable floppy drives on all machines would be a start. (They're dirt cheap, too - so you won't even need to get them cleaned - just drop a new one in) And maybe a few networked "posh" drives, like zip and CD-RW, for students with a shedload of data. If these start to get over-used, get some more. If they're not, then you don't need them.
... Or you could just give everyone that comes in to the computer rooms a wodge of punch cards, and let them work it out for themselves.
=Quoted=
Fin-de-siecle France, or early Nineteenth Century Vienna (the former emerging when recorded music was only in its extreme infancy) were almost infinitely more "cultural" than 20th Century teen culture where all recorded music is simultaneously and instantaneously available, but yet most youths would rather play a Moby or Nine Inch Nails song really loud, than experience anything resembling serious cultural dialectic.
=/Quoted=
Disagree. The reason that the past seems more culturally-rich than the present, apart from a twinge of nostalgia, is that the shit sinks and art of quality stays. (By and large) The fact that music is not available to a much wider audience than previously can only be a good thing - part of which is the domain of mp3.
As recording technology lifted music out of the domain of the concert-going elite, mp3 should liberate music from the clutches of the recording companies and bring it to a wider audience. What I reckon will happen is that there will be fewer Britney-Spears-alikes, as the pace at which bad music fades from the collective consciousness increases. Proportionally, there will be more acts of quality, working on a similar basis to the software industry ("You want our music? Pay us, or we stop")
The only people that will lose out will be the middlemen, and those that they push to make a fast buck.
And this is similar to many other industries. (Although I don't like referring to music as an industry, it has become one) The big conglomerates of the 80s are splitting up, and breaking down into their constituent parts, becoming more agile and focused, a large number of cottages, all experts in their field. That is what a band is, effectively, a group of people that are experts in the field of making music that their fans like.
=Quoted=
/justify/ one's vote would, IMHO, not only improve the quantity of voting, but also the quality of decisions made by the electorate.
/there's/ a political hot potato.. :-)
Voting is a responsibility of the members of a democratic society. If you enjoy the privileges of our national defense, national resources, and society, you have the responsibility to participate in the process.
=/Quoted=
That's true. Some countries (like Australia, f'rinstance) make it illegal to not vote. Good plan, were it not for the fear (that it invokes in me, at least) that you get an enormous number of stupid, ignorant people voting for a vast number of ridiculous reasons. (My father voted conservative, and his father before him... &c..)
Moving towards a meritocratic electoral system, where one has to
Now
Criminalize the production, sale, distribution or otherwise making available of devices or computer programs who's primary use is to access, intercept or interfere with computer systems or communications;
Of course, this also would have repercussions for government agencies attempting to engage in legitimate snooping work. (I'm sure some exists!) I'm sure that a "real-world" criminal would have a pretty strong defence if it could be proved that a law-enforcement agency used what would be an illegal method of information-gathering.
Mind, this would result in more work for those highly-paid lawyers out there.... Coincidence?
"This presented a problem: if Coventry was defended or evacuated, the enemy would realise that their cryptosystems had been compromised, which would cost the English a key strategic advantage. So the city was sacrificed."
;-)
..and if you've ever been to Coventry, you'd know why....
"And oh, yeah. Don't believe what you read about yourself. "
I'd just like to mention how pleased I am that Jon Katz always writes witty, incisive, balanced, cutting-edge, and thought-provoking articles.
;-)
A lot of the management paradigms that you've mentioned are very solid concepts that have been successfully implemented in a large number of companies. So they can work.
/do/ work, but can require such a colossal change in the way that a company operates that corporate inertia will hold them back.
But a lot of the time (I would hazard a guess at most of the time!) they fail, or get sidelined. Why? Simple: Managers who don't understand, don't care, or are too keen to shirk their responsibilities. (Read: most of them)
Most of these quality-based operational philosophies require such a fundamental culture shift, that managers are unable, or unwilling, to cope. Especially if there is no commitment to the project to begin with. Sadly, there is no force greater than corporate inertia. ("But we've always done it this way!")
IME, employees stand to gain from these methodologies, since most of them incorporate elements of empowerment and reward. (See Silvestro's 6 precepts of TQM for a good hit-list)
Of course, when a director or some other senior mgmt figure dictates from on-high that this will be the new way of business, managers become disillusioned, and don't give the project the backing that it needs to gather employee commitment, so the whole thing falls flat, the managers blame the workers (and/or the consultants that were hired to oversee the project), and claim that everything was better off the way it was in the first place.
Short version: They
IMNSHO as a Mgmt student and consultant....