I go to GATech, and it's one of the most tech-savvy and wired campuses that I've seen and answers in the affirmitive for almost all the questions in the list.
Worst part is that UGA is mentioned in the list, while they are nowhere close to how wired GATech's campus is. Also, the numbers are plain wrong - GATech has a lot of other programs which do not necessiate computers (Linguistics, International Affairs, History and the like - that skews up the list a real lot).
And the number of computers is just plain wrong. Hell, am sure my department itself has so many. What crap, we've LARGE exlcuisve labs dedicated to various types of research.
It was neither rape, nor exploitation. Merely a woman being taken advantage of, and the story was quite fitting with several such stories from that time.
We needed a story arc, and we chose one with blacks because it was easy to portray them and we had a voice-over.
I think it would be in the best interests of humanity if you did not breed
When someone does not agree with you, go ahead and put them down without any arguments. Nice.
but if the above post is typical of your behaviour and attitude
I'm all for political correctness, but if you're getting mad at someone for portraying a Civil War era story with racial and sexist discrimination, I'm sure you also don't support Nazi era stories where Jews are being killed.
Get over it, it's your history. You pretending that it didn't happen isn't going to change a damn thing.
And yeah, those three statements were meant in this context. IMNSHO, most feminists are a hypocritical bunch - they whine about stupid things in a place and time where they know they'll have their way, but I don't see any of them doing a damn thing to stop the flesh trade in Asia or protesting against women's rights in the Middle-East. Bah.
True story - we were working on a project for an Augmented Reality class, and it involved a real experience set in one of Atlanta's historical venues, the Oakland Cemetery. So mind you - this is a story set in the south, during the war and at a time when slavery was not merely common but was encouraged too. Anyway, we build this story and a world of a Black Slave woman who is "used" by a confederate soldier, and leaves her pregnant. You would not believe at the indignation that -this- simple story generated.
We had historical facts to prove that several such events had happened, and that this was common for that day and age.
But no. Stupid idiotic feminists in class with nothing better to do made a protest against the story - and what was the worst part? Our team had a girl in the team who was the person who had actually come up with the story.
Blah. Feminists are funny people, they'd protest for something like this when their argument has no basis whatsoever - would they rather have us portray black women as plantation owners? It was a HISTORICAL story - how else did they expect us to set it up as?
End result? We ended up with a politically correct story set in times - and it was so out of place.
I mean, these same would not raise their voices when women in Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries are being abused, and when flesh-trade is so rampant in Asia. But they'd raise hue and cry over a graduate class project.
More like an Engrish speaking ad-agency could not spell right;-)
I think it means "any" water, because I've observed that a lot of teenagers tend to use "ne" as a chat substitute for "any" ((especially common in Asia).
Man, I would not be surprised if some smart-ass didn't come up with the equivalent of that.
PHB1 - Hey! Let's create more legspace. PHB2 - I know! Let's hide the clutch & brakes PHB1 - But what about in case of an emergency PHB2 - Let's build a $20,000 automatic braking system.
Unfortunately, it is not all black and white. Ideals are nice to an extent, but as you grow bigger you are not the sole person in control of your company.
You're right, your last statement just about sums it all up beautifully. Unfortunately, investors also have a set of principles that they think are essential to business - tried and trusted, so to speak.
In the present state of the economy, they would rather that their "old-economy" principles are tried and trusted, rather than the new "upstart hippie hacker ideals" (that's what one investor I know actually called Open Source).
Unlike during the DotCom boom, present-day investors do not invest first and wait for returns later. These days, getting investment is quite hard during the initial stages of a company's development.
You'd have to look out for either customers willing to trust a startup or angel investors, to kickstart your venture. VCs only invest when you've shown for a year or two that you can sustain development and profitability while staying afloat with a steady positive profit margin.
The days when investment for any technology venture would come flowing are over, so it is really hard to get any and all kinds of investment. Under such circumstances, companies are forced to make choices for survival even if it would contradict the ethos that the company was built on. Would you rather observe Open Source ideals, or cause the loss of jobs for a significant number of your employees? When it comes to questions like that, companies are often forced with hard decisions. Starting a company is hard, closing down one is harder:)
We've a policy to release all our work as Open Source at some point in time or the other, however we are not certain how long that would last as we grow bigger. I think that as we grow, we maybe able to do that to some of our products, but definitely not all. It's a hard choice, and one that we would have to make at some point of time or the other.
And I will answer your question for you - corporate customers do not care about anything except the bottom line. Hook or crook - give us what we need for as cheap as possible. If that were not the case, people like Fiorina would not be taking salary hikes for firing off a good thousand people and downsizing her own company while terminating or outsourcing the very foundations that HP was built on.
It's like having the Beware of Pickpocketers boards in London tubes - the moment folks read that, they subconsciously make sure they have their wallets on them. The bad guys look out for this, and so now they know where you have your wallet, making their job easier. And so, the boards had to be removed in the end.
This will just make it easy for the bad guys to spot American tourists, than anything else.
You should probably not be posting these logged in, if you want to preserve your karma -- since you said you are new here.
If you do, you're likely to get modded down - and once your Karma goes below zero, it reaches bad-status all your comments will have a score of 0 by default, rather than the existing 1. So far, it looks like you've a vaguely positive karma (+4 moderations, -3 moderations). That's walking the thin line, IMHO:-)
Just talk useful stuff and ignore most of the offtopic threads and you'll be fine!
The DotCom boom was necessary for the Internet to be made popular and the new technology economy to settle in.
There was simply no other way - it was just a means of the new economy setting in, and the dust is beginning to settle now. It could not have happened any other way - this is the only way large scale adoption would have been made possible.
And so, contrary to any and all assumptions, it has done a lot of good than bad. Today, despite anything, the US is numero uno in IT. If stupid politicians don't hurt it, it would stay that way too. Countries like India and China merely provide the equivalent of labour - very small amount of true innovation comes out. The real innovation happens at places like MSR or IBM or PARC.
So yeah, the DotCom has indeed done a great deal of good, too!
There are a lot of stories here on Slashdot that would qualify - this one, for instance. And I'm sure there are quite a lot of geeks out there with enough and more knowledge of finance.
Hey, if we can have IANAL, why not IANAE (economist) and the like.
Personally, I think finance.slashdot.org would be a good idea.
I'm the co-founder of a small technology startup, and it is for this very reason that we do not want to look out for VC investment.
But the unfortunate problem is that VC investment is quite inevitable, especially if you want to grow. And once VC investments come in, they would most certainly insist on an IPO, because that increases their profit margins, too.
That's a vicious circle - it's very hard for an entirely privately held company to make it big. The biggest thing that VC investments bring in is not just the money - it is the contacts and the pedigree. If you are a company in whom Vulcan or ING Barings have invested, then you must be good.
That brings in more business, and you grow. So yeah, I can pretty much relate to what you're saying!
Well, I don't think it's entirely ads (emphasis mine)-
Google and rival Yahoo each get a significant portion of their revenue from Web search advertisements, a lucrative and fast-growing market.
That must mean that they have alternate sources. For instance, Google does sell search-boxes and the like. I'm sure there are other sources of income, too.
But I just hope that after all this, Google does not turn into yet-another-evil-corporation. A lot of companies started out with benign ideals, only to be corrupted as they grew bigger and were taken over by selfish MBA types.
I just hope that that the Google share-holders realize that what makes Google important are not just its ideas, but also the nature of their ideas.
Slashdot Mirror
Not just that, there has been something similar by Apple - don't remember what it's called.
And musicians have been using such stuff since time immemorial.
A sonification lab I used to work at has been using such an off-the shelf knob made by Apple for quite sometime.
Exactly.
I go to GATech, and it's one of the most tech-savvy and wired campuses that I've seen and answers in the affirmitive for almost all the questions in the list.
Worst part is that UGA is mentioned in the list, while they are nowhere close to how wired GATech's campus is. Also, the numbers are plain wrong - GATech has a lot of other programs which do not necessiate computers (Linguistics, International Affairs, History and the like - that skews up the list a real lot).
And the number of computers is just plain wrong. Hell, am sure my department itself has so many. What crap, we've LARGE exlcuisve labs dedicated to various types of research.
This survey is just bullshit.
Obviously!
:-)
HYBTT --> Have you been trolled today
On Usenet when spent enough time you have, attain you shall enlightenment, young paduwan.
And the fact that you have been modded insightful and not funny, has subtle irony written all over :-).
From your own comment -
no sane leader of the free world would be thinking along those lines...
Fundamentalists for the most part are neither sane leaders, nor are they from free worlds.
the choice was to focus on rape and exploitation.
It was neither rape, nor exploitation. Merely a woman being taken advantage of, and the story was quite fitting with several such stories from that time.
We needed a story arc, and we chose one with blacks because it was easy to portray them and we had a voice-over.
I think it would be in the best interests of humanity if you did not breed
When someone does not agree with you, go ahead and put them down without any arguments. Nice.
but if the above post is typical of your behaviour and attitude
I'm all for political correctness, but if you're getting mad at someone for portraying a Civil War era story with racial and sexist discrimination, I'm sure you also don't support Nazi era stories where Jews are being killed.
Get over it, it's your history. You pretending that it didn't happen isn't going to change a damn thing.
And yeah, those three statements were meant in this context. IMNSHO, most feminists are a hypocritical bunch - they whine about stupid things in a place and time where they know they'll have their way, but I don't see any of them doing a damn thing to stop the flesh trade in Asia or protesting against women's rights in the Middle-East. Bah.
True story - we were working on a project for an Augmented Reality class, and it involved a real experience set in one of Atlanta's historical venues, the Oakland Cemetery. So mind you - this is a story set in the south, during the war and at a time when slavery was not merely common but was encouraged too. Anyway, we build this story and a world of a Black Slave woman who is "used" by a confederate soldier, and leaves her pregnant. You would not believe at the indignation that -this- simple story generated.
We had historical facts to prove that several such events had happened, and that this was common for that day and age.
But no. Stupid idiotic feminists in class with nothing better to do made a protest against the story - and what was the worst part? Our team had a girl in the team who was the person who had actually come up with the story.
Blah. Feminists are funny people, they'd protest for something like this when their argument has no basis whatsoever - would they rather have us portray black women as plantation owners? It was a HISTORICAL story - how else did they expect us to set it up as?
End result? We ended up with a politically correct story set in times - and it was so out of place.
I mean, these same would not raise their voices when women in Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries are being abused, and when flesh-trade is so rampant in Asia. But they'd raise hue and cry over a graduate class project.
Bleh. Stupid females.
That's a story that I've heard so many times in so many versions that it's really sad.
Yeah, VC investment is a double edged sword and most people don't quite realize it, either.
Hopefully, Google will pull through fine.
Actually, no - we are not looking at VC money. That's the point I was trying to highlight there.
:)
Although we could, we're not - we're just sustaining ourselves on services projects for the moment.
This was just something that some of the VCs that we had talked to had indicated to us about, nothing more
No.
;-)
:-)
More like an Engrish speaking ad-agency could not spell right
I think it means "any" water, because I've observed that a lot of teenagers tend to use "ne" as a chat substitute for "any" ((especially common in Asia).
"ne1 here?" --> That's just a sample
Well, atleast the sense of humour is more or less still intact ;-)
Man, I would not be surprised if some smart-ass didn't come up with the equivalent of that.
PHB1 - Hey! Let's create more legspace.
PHB2 - I know! Let's hide the clutch & brakes
PHB1 - But what about in case of an emergency
PHB2 - Let's build a $20,000 automatic braking system.
Well, while you are at it, why not.
Intel is evil, AMD is hot.
There!
http://highbrew.com/about/crew.html
Now this is when one of those Netcraft style Intel is dying joke would be appropriate ;-)
Unfortunately, it is not all black and white. Ideals are nice to an extent, but as you grow bigger you are not the sole person in control of your company.
You're right, your last statement just about sums it all up beautifully. Unfortunately, investors also have a set of principles that they think are essential to business - tried and trusted, so to speak.
In the present state of the economy, they would rather that their "old-economy" principles are tried and trusted, rather than the new "upstart hippie hacker ideals" (that's what one investor I know actually called Open Source).
Unlike during the DotCom boom, present-day investors do not invest first and wait for returns later. These days, getting investment is quite hard during the initial stages of a company's development.
:)
You'd have to look out for either customers willing to trust a startup or angel investors, to kickstart your venture. VCs only invest when you've shown for a year or two that you can sustain development and profitability while staying afloat with a steady positive profit margin.
The days when investment for any technology venture would come flowing are over, so it is really hard to get any and all kinds of investment. Under such circumstances, companies are forced to make choices for survival even if it would contradict the ethos that the company was built on. Would you rather observe Open Source ideals, or cause the loss of jobs for a significant number of your employees? When it comes to questions like that, companies are often forced with hard decisions. Starting a company is hard, closing down one is harder
We've a policy to release all our work as Open Source at some point in time or the other, however we are not certain how long that would last as we grow bigger. I think that as we grow, we maybe able to do that to some of our products, but definitely not all. It's a hard choice, and one that we would have to make at some point of time or the other.
And I will answer your question for you - corporate customers do not care about anything except the bottom line. Hook or crook - give us what we need for as cheap as possible. If that were not the case, people like Fiorina would not be taking salary hikes for firing off a good thousand people and downsizing her own company while terminating or outsourcing the very foundations that HP was built on.
Exactly.
It's like having the Beware of Pickpocketers boards in London tubes - the moment folks read that, they subconsciously make sure they have their wallets on them. The bad guys look out for this, and so now they know where you have your wallet, making their job easier. And so, the boards had to be removed in the end.
This will just make it easy for the bad guys to spot American tourists, than anything else.
More harm than good.
I like my women the way I like my coffee and $20 bills - roasted black with a hole in between ;-)
You should probably not be posting these logged in, if you want to preserve your karma -- since you said you are new here.
:-)
If you do, you're likely to get modded down - and once your Karma goes below zero, it reaches bad-status all your comments will have a score of 0 by default, rather than the existing 1. So far, it looks like you've a vaguely positive karma (+4 moderations, -3 moderations). That's walking the thin line, IMHO
Just talk useful stuff and ignore most of the offtopic threads and you'll be fine!
Cheers & welcome to Slashdot.
On the contrary.
The DotCom boom was necessary for the Internet to be made popular and the new technology economy to settle in.
There was simply no other way - it was just a means of the new economy setting in, and the dust is beginning to settle now. It could not have happened any other way - this is the only way large scale adoption would have been made possible.
And so, contrary to any and all assumptions, it has done a lot of good than bad. Today, despite anything, the US is numero uno in IT. If stupid politicians don't hurt it, it would stay that way too. Countries like India and China merely provide the equivalent of labour - very small amount of true innovation comes out. The real innovation happens at places like MSR or IBM or PARC.
So yeah, the DotCom has indeed done a great deal of good, too!
Actually that is not necessarily a _bad_ idea.
There are a lot of stories here on Slashdot that would qualify - this one, for instance. And I'm sure there are quite a lot of geeks out there with enough and more knowledge of finance.
Hey, if we can have IANAL, why not IANAE (economist) and the like.
Personally, I think finance.slashdot.org would be a good idea.
I know exactly what you mean.
I'm the co-founder of a small technology startup, and it is for this very reason that we do not want to look out for VC investment.
But the unfortunate problem is that VC investment is quite inevitable, especially if you want to grow. And once VC investments come in, they would most certainly insist on an IPO, because that increases their profit margins, too.
That's a vicious circle - it's very hard for an entirely privately held company to make it big. The biggest thing that VC investments bring in is not just the money - it is the contacts and the pedigree. If you are a company in whom Vulcan or ING Barings have invested, then you must be good.
That brings in more business, and you grow. So yeah, I can pretty much relate to what you're saying!
Well, I don't think it's entirely ads (emphasis mine)-
Google and rival Yahoo each get a significant portion of their revenue from Web search advertisements, a lucrative and fast-growing market.
That must mean that they have alternate sources. For instance, Google does sell search-boxes and the like. I'm sure there are other sources of income, too.
Atleast, they deserve it.
But I just hope that after all this, Google does not turn into yet-another-evil-corporation. A lot of companies started out with benign ideals, only to be corrupted as they grew bigger and were taken over by selfish MBA types.
I just hope that that the Google share-holders realize that what makes Google important are not just its ideas, but also the nature of their ideas.
Kudos, Google! You guys deserve it.