The best way to run Debian is not to run Debian. It is to pick one of the better derivative distros like Ubuntu, Mephis, Libranet, etc and go. Debian even in it's current imperfect form has generated some amazing distros - some of which make the case for Linux on the desktop and some of which make fantastic servers. Debian itself is difficult to install compared to some of it's derivatives and a little more difficult to manage.
Debian is fueling an incredible ammount of invention and innovation, and I for one am happy to have benefited from the project.
If not, point out the various problems with using a consumer level connection. You're going to be living on the net, so you'd better have that link locked down tight.
Speaking as one of those bosses, I'd laugh my ass off and say, "ummmmm... no" if someone tried to say they needed a fixed IP business grade high upstream cable connection for their home office. I would probably be concerned about what all they were going to spend company time playing with with that server bandwidth:)
I can't find pricing, but I can't imagine it would be more than $200/month, which I would think is well within the parameters for your company.
I would think that $200 is roughly four times the cost of the standard connection, so you were going to get four times the ammount done? Right?
Not necessarily. But when the evidence for whether a phenomenon occurs is ambiguous, as is the case here, one tries to address the question theoretically--is there any any plausible known mechanism by which it could occur?
Um... I think you seek out better controls and devise a better experiment that yields less systematic error. One would think zapping chimps with a GSM phone would not be all that difficult to do... I'd rather know than guess. Of course, that takes a lot of the fun and grants off the table when you are done.
I also know that what the real world cares about is: 1) Does it work and 2) Do I have to learn anything new about how it works
Actually, there is a third issue that is vastly more important to many buyers than #1 and #2: Cost. NT4 sold for what, $250/workstation and most Unix vendors were getting $495 for the base system and $295-795 more for the GUI? It's hard to justify spending 4-6 times the money... for something that is very difficult to explain why it's better in layman's terms.
Our existing understanding of physics and biochemistry is simply insufficient to account for any interaction between microwave radiation and DNA.
Our understanding of the mechanisms of biochemistry and physics is insufficient to explain with athority why and how RF/DNA interactions occur.
Our ability to observe is more than up to the task of determining if and what ammount of exposure to cell phone RF causes tissue damage.
You don't need to explain why a phenomena occurs to tell if it occurs. Explaining why it happens is the step you take after you determine that something does happen. Personally, I'd like to know how much dammage that 45-60 minutes per day of cell time is doing.
Marketing is much, much worse than that in a technology driven company because the marketers do not understand even the current products and how they are used.
This is BS. The marketing vs. engineering argument is stupid. To succeed you have to have both a strong marketing team and a strong engineering team that work hand in hand to succeed. Good marketing is essential for success in a tech company. If you have the best tech in the world and can't package and sell it, you basically are useles as a corporation. HPs marketing is awful because they don't understand what their customers want and they certainly don't feedback the information to R&D and engineering that is needed to get the best possible product into the marketplace.
The best companies get both the R/D and Marketing ballance right - and they wipe the floor with the competition.
See the Dyson vacuum cleaner as another example of marketers misreading how new technology might completely change a mature market.
Dyson is a blue ocean concept - a different look at the entire market that delivers a product, service or organization that basically turns the market upide down. HP used to specialize in blue ocean work. Now they are just another red ocean commodity player. Evidence: witness the rise of the razor blade model. You only see it when a company view their product to be a commodity, much like toilet paper, with a few little differentiators (quilted, softer, large format, bigger ink tanks...). HP would be totally screwed if someone came out with a cheap, high capacity inkjet that was built to be refilled from bulk ink.
Actually, they are related. HP and similar companies are moving their R&D to low-wage countries and getting the same research for less money.
Horse-poo. Human tallent is not the biggest expense in R&D and moving out of the US does little to curb - in fact it often increases facilities and equipment costs by a factor of two or three. And increases travel costs by a factor of 4.
Fact is that when you move R&D out of it's original home, you often lose the culture and the ability to invent and trade it in for small incremental improvements.
A lab of 50 PhD's in the US or a lab of 200 PhD's for the same price in India or Indonesia? And, they don't need to be "close to the customer" because they are researching physical processes, not customer preference.
Inventing marketable tech isn't an excercise in pure physics or chemistry. You have to be able to spot a diamond in the rough - or you never find the real marketable invention. Cutting costs on R&D is cutting cost in R&D. Rarely does cutting costs in R&D do anything for anyone. Witness HP's track record of market leading innovation over the past few years (LOL).
Regardless, small venture funded companies are generating the most innovation in the US anyway.
The good news is that Carly is gone. HP is actually three great companies that have been fused together: HP bought Compaq and Compaq bought Digital. The strength that HP should have is the ability to create. Carly gutted that, sold most of it off with Agilent and then proceeded to count on ink-jet and toner cartridge sales for long term profit while watching Dell eat their lunch in computer sales.
The new slogan "invent" was ment for the marketing department and not for engineering. Thanks Carly for gutting one of America's best. Idiot.
IF you enjoy what you do, then alter your life to do it. Move closer to work. Eliminate the comute. Join a local gym. Find a buddy at work to take lunch and squeeze in a solid jog, rollerblade or bike ride.
If you don't like what you do and are doing so for the money, unless it's 7 figures and you will be able to retire in a few years, then do it no longer and seek some ballance in your life.
I've got a little experience with this having managed work from home salespeople for a while:
Internet Find out the full cost of the highest speed internet you can get - include the phone line or minimum legal cable rate (that is different than basic cable usually by $15-$20 per month). Get it in writing or an email from the cable or DSL company.
Phones The question here is home phone or cell phone. If your company provides cells, then this issue is dead. If your company doesn't then find out what the 1500 minute per month or better plans cost and submit that for your budget.
If it's a home phone, Packet 8 and Vonage are great and give you business class features for $29-$39/month. Your boss will like unlimited long distance and the fact that you have real voice mail and the ability to handle multiple calls elegantly.
Fax The question here is do you need to send them or just get them. If you are just getting them, your company's fax server or eFax is great. If you are sending, get a fax machine or multifunction device that can work without the computer being turned on.
Supplies Ink cartridges are expensive. Figure out how much printing you will do and add 25% for crappy inkjet scammage (i.e cleaning mode & so on). Then calculate ink jet carts+$20/mo for supplies (pens, paper, etc...)
Up Front. You might get $150 up front for furniture if you ask nice. You'll also need to buy a multifunction/fax machine ($150 for a good one), pay any set up fees for DSL/Cable, purchase a good router if you don't have one ($50).
There are many well funded thinktanks that poll Americans on what their opinions are on many subjects (including this municipal wifi). These think tanks and the corporate lobbyists work hand in hand with the politicians and the media to keep the American populace under control so that the world can be kept safe for capitalism and profits and wealth
And there are none who promote socialism 'communism and other "isms"? this is a normal part of political life. This is a normal part of our social debate... and its entirely likely SBC will fail because the politicians and public love to beat upon them.
Apple dropped the plan to sue people because they got more than their money's worth of free promotion out of this. I think I'm going to try this model next time my company come out with something:
1. Create a really cool artsy product that works well. 2. Leak it to bloggers... 3. Wait for buzz to begin. 4. Threaten to sue bloggers to get major links from media outlets to bloggers. 5. Get some DCMA takedowns done and get more major press coverage. Links are now 1/2 gone so people really want to be in the know. 6. Release new product... PROFITs are 40% higher because of incredile reach of message. 6. Drop the matter entirely and make friends out of the Slashdot crowd. "Apple finally got it they are good people"
Until you answer the question of _how_ you propose to save the environment without sacrificing an inch of your (admirable) political ideals you only look like so much of an hypocrit.
I'm not about to say that I know how to fix the environment -- like you actually do. Why so eager to see me sacrifice and give up what I have? Why so quick to call names like hypocrite? Arrogance -- especially since I did not.
Thank you for making my point so eloquently. If those who really wanted to save the environment weren't so eager to people give up "admirable" ideals like freedom... then you could bring a consensus together and get the things done that need to be.
Right now the environment movement is a trojan horse carrying a payload of the worst sort of socialism and statism. Fix that, get the socialist wackos out of the driver's seat, and you can easily get us conservatives to come right along and actually save the earth. But never at the price of liberty.
I really think I understand what you mean, but frankly, i cannot help but reading "I sure as hello _don't_ want to change so I'll make any excuse I can for doing nothing".
I don't mind change. I just see the environment and social order, morality, the economy and form of government as different issues.
It's fine to dislike a large part of the environmental movement, ignorant to dismiss all of it (you don't know enough to make such a blanket statement about it), and stupid to use it as an excuse for doing nothing.
Actually, I do know enough to make the statement. I'd rather see humanity extinct than give up freedom. Fixing the envionment doesn't require changing to a socialist government or taking rights from anyone.
The way I see it, the US just wants to remain the Big Man on the Block, the only ones "authorized" to have 'weapons of mass destruction' just because we had them first. Frankly, in that reguard, the US can stuff it if they don't like being equals on an international basis.
The issue is not a DPRK nuke attack on S. Korea. The issue is an invasion of S. Korea under threat of nuclear attack, which would preven S. Korea from fully defending itself.
The US's position is anywhere near as simple as what you make out. We actually like equals because most forms of war are flat out of the question. The only question is trade or not trade. We like trade.
Getting nukes doesn not make you an equal to the US. It does raise the stakes on everything your nation does. Having nuclear weapons does not help in any way N. Korea other than protecting the current brutal regime:
* Sanctions will get worse.
* The US would respond with massive nuclear retaliation should N. Korea attempt to use it's nukes or mobilizes its forces to attack S. Korea.
* The risk of a nuclear escallation is very high if N. Korea continues it's erratic behavior. Should there be an escallation, S. Korea would become an island instead of a peninsula.
The losers in all of this remain the same: the people of North Korea.
I never ceases to amaze me how so many people frown upon protecting the world we live in, the air we breath, the water we drink, and the food we eat. "Liberal agenda" my ass. This is about our survival as a species
Before you knee-jerk post a response, please read the following completely as it explains a great deal about why the right does not like the current brand of envionmentalism. It also gives a big clue to those of you who really are trying to save the earth on how to engage with your conservative counterparts (who really do want to help):
I would rather go extinct and maintain my freedom than allow radical environmentalism to be the vehicle that is used for radical soclialists to assume power. Don't get me wrong: I do want to see global warming stopped and to avert future envionmentally driven natural disasters . I really don't want the human race to go extinct. It's just that I want to do so because it's the right thing to do and I want to do it, not because someone passes laws that redefine society, alteer freedoms and change our country's morality.
If the best we have to offer to save our race is a brand of tolatarianism where the govenment knows what is best for me and I am forced at gunpoint or worse to comply, then perhaps the human race deserves to join the Dinossaurs and Wooly Mammoths. Saving the environment should not be allowed to be the vehicle where the world gets it's next Stalin or Hitler. The close association with radical leftist idealogues, pundits, politicians, agendas and envionmentalism prevents me from contributing time, money and even my company's resources to the cause. I will not invest in a future where we live in fear of the government or where destiny is determined by bureaucrats.
In other words: focus on saving the envionment and stop using it as a pretense to totally re-engineer social order, morality and the economy.
Slashdot Mirror
What did you expect from the Grumpy Gamer? A happy review? Sunshine?
The best way to run Debian is not to run Debian. It is to pick one of the better derivative distros like Ubuntu, Mephis, Libranet, etc and go. Debian even in it's current imperfect form has generated some amazing distros - some of which make the case for Linux on the desktop and some of which make fantastic servers. Debian itself is difficult to install compared to some of it's derivatives and a little more difficult to manage.
Debian is fueling an incredible ammount of invention and innovation, and I for one am happy to have benefited from the project.
Not to rain on the parade, but I don't think OOo has the legal features that have been a staple of WP since version 4.2.
If not, point out the various problems with using a consumer level connection. You're going to be living on the net, so you'd better have that link locked down tight.
:)
Speaking as one of those bosses, I'd laugh my ass off and say, "ummmmm... no" if someone tried to say they needed a fixed IP business grade high upstream cable connection for their home office. I would probably be concerned about what all they were going to spend company time playing with with that server bandwidth
I can't find pricing, but I can't imagine it would be more than $200/month, which I would think is well within the parameters for your company.
I would think that $200 is roughly four times the cost of the standard connection, so you were going to get four times the ammount done? Right?
Not necessarily. But when the evidence for whether a phenomenon occurs is ambiguous, as is the case here, one tries to address the question theoretically--is there any any plausible known mechanism by which it could occur?
Um... I think you seek out better controls and devise a better experiment that yields less systematic error. One would think zapping chimps with a GSM phone would not be all that difficult to do... I'd rather know than guess. Of course, that takes a lot of the fun and grants off the table when you are done.
I also know that what the real world cares about is: 1) Does it work and 2) Do I have to learn anything new about how it works
Actually, there is a third issue that is vastly more important to many buyers than #1 and #2: Cost. NT4 sold for what, $250/workstation and most Unix vendors were getting $495 for the base system and $295-795 more for the GUI? It's hard to justify spending 4-6 times the money... for something that is very difficult to explain why it's better in layman's terms.
Our existing understanding of physics and biochemistry is simply insufficient to account for any interaction between microwave radiation and DNA.
Our understanding of the mechanisms of biochemistry and physics is insufficient to explain with athority why and how RF/DNA interactions occur.
Our ability to observe is more than up to the task of determining if and what ammount of exposure to cell phone RF causes tissue damage.
You don't need to explain why a phenomena occurs to tell if it occurs. Explaining why it happens is the step you take after you determine that something does happen. Personally, I'd like to know how much dammage that 45-60 minutes per day of cell time is doing.
Marketing is much, much worse than that in a technology driven company because the marketers do not understand even the current products and how they are used.
This is BS. The marketing vs. engineering argument is stupid. To succeed you have to have both a strong marketing team and a strong engineering team that work hand in hand to succeed. Good marketing is essential for success in a tech company. If you have the best tech in the world and can't package and sell it, you basically are useles as a corporation. HPs marketing is awful because they don't understand what their customers want and they certainly don't feedback the information to R&D and engineering that is needed to get the best possible product into the marketplace.
The best companies get both the R/D and Marketing ballance right - and they wipe the floor with the competition.
See the Dyson vacuum cleaner as another example of marketers misreading how new technology might completely change a mature market.
Dyson is a blue ocean concept - a different look at the entire market that delivers a product, service or organization that basically turns the market upide down. HP used to specialize in blue ocean work. Now they are just another red ocean commodity player. Evidence: witness the rise of the razor blade model. You only see it when a company view their product to be a commodity, much like toilet paper, with a few little differentiators (quilted, softer, large format, bigger ink tanks...). HP would be totally screwed if someone came out with a cheap, high capacity inkjet that was built to be refilled from bulk ink.
Actually, they are related. HP and similar companies are moving their R&D to low-wage countries and getting the same research for less money.
Horse-poo. Human tallent is not the biggest expense in R&D and moving out of the US does little to curb - in fact it often increases facilities and equipment costs by a factor of two or three. And increases travel costs by a factor of 4.
Fact is that when you move R&D out of it's original home, you often lose the culture and the ability to invent and trade it in for small incremental improvements.
A lab of 50 PhD's in the US or a lab of 200 PhD's for the same price in India or Indonesia? And, they don't need to be "close to the customer" because they are researching physical processes, not customer preference.
Inventing marketable tech isn't an excercise in pure physics or chemistry. You have to be able to spot a diamond in the rough - or you never find the real marketable invention. Cutting costs on R&D is cutting cost in R&D. Rarely does cutting costs in R&D do anything for anyone. Witness HP's track record of market leading innovation over the past few years (LOL).
Regardless, small venture funded companies are generating the most innovation in the US anyway.
The good news is that Carly is gone. HP is actually three great companies that have been fused together:
HP bought Compaq and Compaq bought Digital. The strength that HP should have is the ability to create. Carly gutted that, sold most of it off with Agilent and then proceeded to count on ink-jet and toner cartridge sales for long term profit while watching Dell eat their lunch in computer sales.
The new slogan "invent" was ment for the marketing department and not for engineering. Thanks Carly for gutting one of America's best. Idiot.
IF you enjoy what you do, then alter your life to do it. Move closer to work. Eliminate the comute. Join a local gym. Find a buddy at work to take lunch and squeeze in a solid jog, rollerblade or bike ride.
If you don't like what you do and are doing so for the money, unless it's 7 figures and you will be able to retire in a few years, then do it no longer and seek some ballance in your life.
Internet
Find out the full cost of the highest speed internet you can get - include the phone line or minimum legal cable rate (that is different than basic cable usually by $15-$20 per month). Get it in writing or an email from the cable or DSL company.
Phones
The question here is home phone or cell phone. If your company provides cells, then this issue is dead. If your company doesn't then find out what the 1500 minute per month or better plans cost and submit that for your budget.
If it's a home phone, Packet 8 and Vonage are great and give you business class features for $29-$39/month. Your boss will like unlimited long distance and the fact that you have real voice mail and the ability to handle multiple calls elegantly.
Fax
The question here is do you need to send them or just get them. If you are just getting them, your company's fax server or eFax is great. If you are sending, get a fax machine or multifunction device that can work without the computer being turned on.
Supplies
Ink cartridges are expensive. Figure out how much printing you will do and add 25% for crappy inkjet scammage (i.e cleaning mode & so on). Then calculate ink jet carts+$20/mo for supplies (pens, paper, etc...)
Up Front.
You might get $150 up front for furniture if you ask nice. You'll also need to buy a multifunction/fax machine ($150 for a good one), pay any set up fees for DSL/Cable, purchase a good router if you don't have one ($50).
So here's the deal:
Am I a fool for giving up steady work and good pay?
No fool are you. Do what you believe in and what you enjoy. Life is too short for any other way.
But in the end, it didn't really matter. When the bill came up, there was lots of snickering, and the bill died a quick and painless death.
Something tells me this law is a total abridgement of freedom of the press anyway.
There are many well funded thinktanks that poll Americans on what their opinions are on many subjects (including this municipal wifi). These think tanks and the corporate lobbyists work hand in hand with the politicians and the media to keep the American populace under control so that the world can be kept safe for capitalism and profits and wealth
And there are none who promote socialism 'communism and other "isms"? this is a normal part of political life. This is a normal part of our social debate... and its entirely likely SBC will fail because the politicians and public love to beat upon them.
MS Windows Calculator.
Apple dropped the plan to sue people because they got more than their money's worth of free promotion out of this. I think I'm going to try this model next time my company come out with something:
1. Create a really cool artsy product that works well.
2. Leak it to bloggers...
3. Wait for buzz to begin.
4. Threaten to sue bloggers to get major links from media outlets to bloggers.
5. Get some DCMA takedowns done and get more major press coverage. Links are now 1/2 gone so people really want to be in the know.
6. Release new product... PROFITs are 40% higher because of incredile reach of message.
6. Drop the matter entirely and make friends out of the Slashdot crowd. "Apple finally got it they are good people"
It doesn't matter whether a country's economy benifits from this. The safety of our Evironment is more important than the economy of a country.
And some values are worth dying for - like freedom. Why is it that environmental doomsayers are so quick to check in their rights at the door?
Until you answer the question of _how_ you propose to save the environment without sacrificing an inch of your (admirable) political ideals you only look like so much of an hypocrit.
I'm not about to say that I know how to fix the environment -- like you actually do. Why so eager to see me sacrifice and give up what I have? Why so quick to call names like hypocrite? Arrogance -- especially since I did not.
Thank you for making my point so eloquently. If those who really wanted to save the environment weren't so eager to people give up "admirable" ideals like freedom... then you could bring a consensus together and get the things done that need to be.
Right now the environment movement is a trojan horse carrying a payload of the worst sort of socialism and statism. Fix that, get the socialist wackos out of the driver's seat, and you can easily get us conservatives to come right along and actually save the earth. But never at the price of liberty.
I really think I understand what you mean, but frankly, i cannot help but reading "I sure as hello _don't_ want to change so I'll make any excuse I can for doing nothing".
I don't mind change. I just see the environment and social order, morality, the economy and form of government as different issues.
It's fine to dislike a large part of the environmental movement, ignorant to dismiss all of it (you don't know enough to make such a blanket statement about it), and stupid to use it as an excuse for doing nothing.
Actually, I do know enough to make the statement. I'd rather see humanity extinct than give up freedom. Fixing the envionment doesn't require changing to a socialist government or taking rights from anyone.
The way I see it, the US just wants to remain the Big Man on the Block, the only ones "authorized" to have 'weapons of mass destruction' just because we had them first. Frankly, in that reguard, the US can stuff it if they don't like being equals on an international basis.
The issue is not a DPRK nuke attack on S. Korea. The issue is an invasion of S. Korea under threat of nuclear attack, which would preven S. Korea from fully defending itself.
The US's position is anywhere near as simple as what you make out. We actually like equals because most forms of war are flat out of the question. The only question is trade or not trade. We like trade.
Getting nukes doesn not make you an equal to the US. It does raise the stakes on everything your nation does. Having nuclear weapons does not help in any way N. Korea other than protecting the current brutal regime:
* Sanctions will get worse.
* The US would respond with massive nuclear retaliation should N. Korea attempt to use it's nukes or mobilizes its forces to attack S. Korea.
* The risk of a nuclear escallation is very high if N. Korea continues it's erratic behavior. Should there be an escallation, S. Korea would become an island instead of a peninsula.
The losers in all of this remain the same: the people of North Korea.
As long as you click on the ads on my site, I'm OK with you paying for my $100 ads.
I never ceases to amaze me how so many people frown upon protecting the world we live in, the air we breath, the water we drink, and the food we eat. "Liberal agenda" my ass. This is about our survival as a species
Before you knee-jerk post a response, please read the following completely as it explains a great deal about why the right does not like the current brand of envionmentalism. It also gives a big clue to those of you who really are trying to save the earth on how to engage with your conservative counterparts (who really do want to help):
I would rather go extinct and maintain my freedom than allow radical environmentalism to be the vehicle that is used for radical soclialists to assume power. Don't get me wrong: I do want to see global warming stopped and to avert future envionmentally driven natural disasters . I really don't want the human race to go extinct. It's just that I want to do so because it's the right thing to do and I want to do it, not because someone passes laws that redefine society, alteer freedoms and change our country's morality.
If the best we have to offer to save our race is a brand of tolatarianism where the govenment knows what is best for me and I am forced at gunpoint or worse to comply, then perhaps the human race deserves to join the Dinossaurs and Wooly Mammoths. Saving the environment should not be allowed to be the vehicle where the world gets it's next Stalin or Hitler. The close association with radical leftist idealogues, pundits, politicians, agendas and envionmentalism prevents me from contributing time, money and even my company's resources to the cause. I will not invest in a future where we live in fear of the government or where destiny is determined by bureaucrats.
In other words: focus on saving the envionment and stop using it as a pretense to totally re-engineer social order, morality and the economy.
do you think the rest of the world would look favorably on the US if they went ahead with it anyways?
What if the alternative was the invasion of say, South Korea?