According to the Fedora desktop project page, the Desktop includes (among other things) the "email/calendaring" application. (Evolution, one presumes.)
<SOAPBOX>
Email and a calendar are not the same application. Doesn't anyone see this but me??
Let's have a lean, mean app whose function is to be a calendar, and another, equally tight app for email. They should exchange data easily. That's the unix way, and it's a good one. There's no reason for this to conflict with the goals of ease of use. (Trying to combine two disparate applications makes it harder to use IMHO.)
It comes down to where you think human life begins - in my opinion (and no doubt, not yours), human life begins at the point where the fetus can survive on its own. Until then, it's a parasite, and the host should be able to deal with it as the host sees fit.
So, like -- up through age 22...?
Oh, god. Did I just say that out loud, and with HTML tags?
It's kind of a big secret, and the government would prefer you not think too much about it but, believe or not, the Constitution of the US explicitly states that there are inalienable individual rights which it does not state and it does abridge those rights simply by not enumerating them.
In short, you have rights which are not explicitly listed in the Constitution.
Imagine when high-quality digital recording facilities are available at low cost to those that want to use them. The RIAA will have lost its hammerlock on both side of the music supply chain. Suddenly the arguments that say the RIAA are screwing the artists start to have a lot more validity: the artists will be able to create works and distribute them easily in return for a fair price.
Even if some other proprietary system is the standard, I hope artists sieze this opportunity. (If only so I can see the RIAA swallow their collective tongue.)
Hell, I would let the guy have a HUGE poster in his cube that said:
"The customer is wrong, bitch!"
The customers must not get up to your development lab much...
Every other week, a fresh batch of customers is in my office for training. Thursday afternoon, like clockwork, they are given a tour of the building, including the development area. The are marched past the They Might Be Giants concert poster, Alice puking on Dilbert's user interface design, and, until recently, and a wall full of "80% Awards" -- certificates printed up and posted for subsytems that were released in a "working...mostly" state. Those were removed because of fear they would make the customers nervous; ours tend to be a technophobic and volatile bunch.
I shudder to think what a "The customer is wrong, bitch!" poster would precipitate, even if I generally agree with the sentiment.
Disclaimer: I'm not a file trader. I think napster, as implemented, was a Bad Idea[tm]. OTOH, I believe we are seeing an outdated marketing model trying to fight the revolution (P2P and digital media) with a lot of other Bad Ideas[tm].
That said, let's talk about traffic violations for a minute. They happen all the time. Virtually everyone with a car participates from time to time in dangerous or illegal maneuvers in traffic. Much more often that with file trading, maneuvering one's vehicle in a dangerous or wreckless fashion can result in injury or death.
So, by simple extension of Hatch's logic, everyone who runs a red light or a stop sign, everyone who makes a U-turn to get a parking space or exceeds the posted speed limit, everyone who passes on the wrong side or fails to yield right-of-way when merging or accelerates through an yellow should have their cars destroyed by bazooka-wielding, traffic-monitoring vigilantes.
"I'm interested," Hatch interrupted. He said [destroying someone's car] "may be the only way you can teach somebody about [traffic safety]."
"There's no excuse for anyone violating [traffic] laws," Hatch said.
It seems to me the way to go would to be use virtual offices where people can do REAL work from the coffee shop or from home without having to feel guilty that they aren't in a cubicle. Why is that concept so hard for many companies to understand and implement?
Abso-stinking-lutely.
Some of my best and most productive days have been spent sitting on my front porch with a laptop, a wireless card, ssh, irc, and a cup of coffee. The secret is to be accountable during that time. It the weather's nice and the coffee's good, it's like a day of vacation without the drop in productivity.
There's nothing magic about a chair enclosed by cubicle walls. Managment insisting that there is something magical about this arrangement is what leads to people looking for ways to cheat.
A lot of people simply can't imagine a life with no higher power as being positive, good, or worth living. Others who see the existence of God as keeping them in check would suddenly feel free to break all 10 commandments and enjoy it. So all these people would likely become depressed, suicidal, putting a huge burden on our healthcare system.
So...religion is, like, the opiate of the masses or something.
The Fair Labor Standards Act, Sec. 13(a)(17), added by the Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996, specifically exempts certain computer industry professionsals from overtime requirements. The text of this section is as follows:
(17) any employee who is a computer systems analyst, computer programmer, software engineer, or other similarly skilled worker, whose primary duty is
(A) the application of systems analysis techniques and procedures, including consulting with users, to determine hardware, software, or system functional specifications;
(B) the design, development, documentation, analysis, creation, testing, or modification of computer systems or programs, including prototypes, based on and related to user or system design specifications;
(C) the design, documentation, testing, creation, or modification of computer programs related to machine operating systems; or
(D) a combination of duties described in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) the performance of which requires the same level of skills, and
who, in the case of an employee who is compensated on an hourly basis, is compensated at a rate of not less than $27.63 an hour.
We recently went through the painful process of re-assigning exemption status at the company for which I work. It was discovered that, though there might be cachet with a salary, an hourly wage can be very lucrative. (I'm salaried; no overtime for me.)
Remember when the web -- no, remember when the net was about sharing information? I miss that time. If somebody wrote a cool front end to your service, it was COOL and more power to them. If it made your service (site, whatever) more accessible, that mean more people were looking at your stuff, and that was COOL.
Now we have entities that threaten legal action for accessing the stuff they've made publically available. There may actually be a case when the software scrapes and repackages the content (or, more importantly, redistributes it), but I hope the stuff about decoding the URL for easy use is bogus. I have my doubts that a court will see it my way, but still I hope for reason. Nevertheless, the whole idea makes me sad and nostalgic.
Another thought: is my mozilla vulnerable to this sort of action because it blocks ads -- essentially repackaging the server output for display to me? Now I'm really depressed.
The system, as it turned out, belonged to one of their senior developer/programmers who, along with their system, had lost about seven years worth of intense work.
[...]
The moral of the story: Pay VERY close attention to what may be left on any hard drive[...]You could end up saving someone a ton of grief and lost hours.
It's an interesting story, I agree, but the real moral ought to be make backups! There's no excuse for losing years of work just because a box was stolen. Some negligent sysadmin should've been canned over that.
TV can be experienced passively, as you suggest. It is not a function of the medium that it must be experienced that way. People make concious decisions to experience crappy books, movies, music, and what-have-you all the time. Why don't we see condemnation of those media as well?
Why, I wonder, is it more socially acceptable to whip out your laptop and hammer away on the keyboard than to, say, start taking/making calls on your phone?
Both seem distracting to the surrounding students and disruptive of class interaction. And that's not even considering the impact on the student using the computer or phone.
The environmental impact of meat, even if mitigated by efficient production techniques (i.e., not "on the hoof"), is greater than that of a vegetarian foodstuffs.
As for the protein argument, forget it. If you give even the slightest thought to a balanced vegetarian diet, it's trivial to get enough protein. (See this.)
Besides lab-grown mean just sounds gross. "He suggests using a bioreactor with a branching network of hundreds of tiny edible tubes that act like artificial capillaries to convey nutrients to the growing meat."...bleah!
Much like karma (used to be), some people see racking up review counts as a game. There was a story about this sort of behavior on NPR recently, though I can't find a link for it. It was unclear from the story whether or not the reviews were based on any real experience of the product being reviewed.
I certainly do not depend on user/reader reviews as my sole basis for prejudging an item. Usually I know enough about what I am looking to buy to be able to tell if a reviewer is clueful. If the reviewer seems clueful, I will probably allow the review some weight in my decision. If not, I just throw it out.
Before this turns into a money maker for automated spam "readers", it will make spam unprofitable and spam will STOP. Sounds great to me!
If the spammers are dumb enough to keep sending me spam I'm charging them back for, then, by golly, I'll happily take their money while using some system (like spamassassin) to delete their crap.
When I was starting out with UNIX, I purchased the bunny book (UNIX for the Impatient by Abrahams and Larson) and, later, when I was setting up my own Linux installation, I picked up Running Linux by Matt Welsh. I'm not even sure what edition Running Linux is up to, now. The first is definitely user-oriented, while the latter gets more into the nuts and bolts.
In retrospect, though, for really being effective with my Linux machine, I got more out of the how-tos archived by the Linux Documentation Project, man pages, and searches on google. A little mentoring from someone already comfortable with the Linux environment doesn't hurt either.
No kidding. With the stroke of a pen, the "conservative" US president mandates a new, navel-gazing bureaucracy to decide what's "safe" and what's not, then enforce that in a dynamically changing medium -- or at least to figure out how "we're" going to do that.
Even if you iron out the philosophical problems ("Who gets to decide?"), it still seems like a technically infeasible idea.
That's the point. This doesn't ban anyone from doing anything. It doesn't force any content provider into any ghetto, be it the kidz-only ghetto or the pr0n ghetto. It does create a "zone", delimited by the confies of the domain, of "safe" content. (Whether or not the content is actually safe, or just whitewashed is open to debate. But that's a different question.) If you have content that doesn't fit the guidelines of the kids.gov domain, put it somewhere else. You're welcome to do that. Just like if you have a movie that doesn't get a G rating, it gets released as PG or R or whatever. Being a site in a kid.gov domain is something like having a G rating. (Except movie ratings are an example of industry self-regulation. kid.gov is government sponsored. Argh.)
How do you propose we place limitations on domains by age?
<RANT>Welcome to the US of A, where we have the First Amendment (at least we did last I checked). It's not criminal to express ideas that aren't kid-friendly, and you don't get marked for special processing if your expressions don't meet some government standard. It's not the responsibility of the government to kid-proof the effing internet (or any other medium for that matter), or cleanse it of bad thought so you and yours can be "safe".</RANT>
Was it? I saw that claim in another thread, and it looked to me like a tweak upon Taco's speling, i.e., a joke. It could be true for all I know, but it didn't seem that way from the context.
Slashdot Mirror
According to the Fedora desktop project page, the Desktop includes (among other things) the "email/calendaring" application. (Evolution, one presumes.)
<SOAPBOX>Email and a calendar are not the same application. Doesn't anyone see this but me??
Let's have a lean, mean app whose function is to be a calendar, and another, equally tight app for email. They should exchange data easily. That's the unix way, and it's a good one. There's no reason for this to conflict with the goals of ease of use. (Trying to combine two disparate applications makes it harder to use IMHO.)
</SOAPBOX>So, like -- up through age 22...?
Oh, god. Did I just say that out loud, and with HTML tags?
You use something else for the parts for which it can be shown that Python is insufficiently fast. You use Python for the rest.
It's kind of a big secret, and the government would prefer you not think too much about it but, believe or not, the Constitution of the US explicitly states that there are inalienable individual rights which it does not state and it does abridge those rights simply by not enumerating them.
In short, you have rights which are not explicitly listed in the Constitution.
Imagine when high-quality digital recording facilities are available at low cost to those that want to use them. The RIAA will have lost its hammerlock on both side of the music supply chain. Suddenly the arguments that say the RIAA are screwing the artists start to have a lot more validity: the artists will be able to create works and distribute them easily in return for a fair price.
Even if some other proprietary system is the standard, I hope artists sieze this opportunity. (If only so I can see the RIAA swallow their collective tongue.)
The customers must not get up to your development lab much...
Every other week, a fresh batch of customers is in my office for training. Thursday afternoon, like clockwork, they are given a tour of the building, including the development area. The are marched past the They Might Be Giants concert poster, Alice puking on Dilbert's user interface design, and, until recently, and a wall full of "80% Awards" -- certificates printed up and posted for subsytems that were released in a "working...mostly" state. Those were removed because of fear they would make the customers nervous; ours tend to be a technophobic and volatile bunch.
I shudder to think what a "The customer is wrong, bitch!" poster would precipitate, even if I generally agree with the sentiment.
Disclaimer: I'm not a file trader. I think napster, as implemented, was a Bad Idea[tm]. OTOH, I believe we are seeing an outdated marketing model trying to fight the revolution (P2P and digital media) with a lot of other Bad Ideas[tm].
That said, let's talk about traffic violations for a minute. They happen all the time. Virtually everyone with a car participates from time to time in dangerous or illegal maneuvers in traffic. Much more often that with file trading, maneuvering one's vehicle in a dangerous or wreckless fashion can result in injury or death.
So, by simple extension of Hatch's logic, everyone who runs a red light or a stop sign, everyone who makes a U-turn to get a parking space or exceeds the posted speed limit, everyone who passes on the wrong side or fails to yield right-of-way when merging or accelerates through an yellow should have their cars destroyed by bazooka-wielding, traffic-monitoring vigilantes.
Uh-huh.
Abso-stinking-lutely.
Some of my best and most productive days have been spent sitting on my front porch with a laptop, a wireless card, ssh, irc, and a cup of coffee. The secret is to be accountable during that time. It the weather's nice and the coffee's good, it's like a day of vacation without the drop in productivity.
There's nothing magic about a chair enclosed by cubicle walls. Managment insisting that there is something magical about this arrangement is what leads to people looking for ways to cheat.
So...religion is, like, the opiate of the masses or something.
At least one of the packages mentioned in this story (one that has been removed from CPAN) doesn't repackage anything either. It just generates URLs.
The Fair Labor Standards Act, Sec. 13(a)(17), added by the Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996, specifically exempts certain computer industry professionsals from overtime requirements. The text of this section is as follows:
We recently went through the painful process of re-assigning exemption status at the company for which I work. It was discovered that, though there might be cachet with a salary, an hourly wage can be very lucrative. (I'm salaried; no overtime for me.)
Remember when the web -- no, remember when the net was about sharing information? I miss that time. If somebody wrote a cool front end to your service, it was COOL and more power to them. If it made your service (site, whatever) more accessible, that mean more people were looking at your stuff, and that was COOL.
Now we have entities that threaten legal action for accessing the stuff they've made publically available. There may actually be a case when the software scrapes and repackages the content (or, more importantly, redistributes it), but I hope the stuff about decoding the URL for easy use is bogus. I have my doubts that a court will see it my way, but still I hope for reason. Nevertheless, the whole idea makes me sad and nostalgic.
Another thought: is my mozilla vulnerable to this sort of action because it blocks ads -- essentially repackaging the server output for display to me? Now I'm really depressed.
YM "In soviet Russia, the means of production controls you." HTH HAND.
It's an interesting story, I agree, but the real moral ought to be make backups! There's no excuse for losing years of work just because a box was stolen. Some negligent sysadmin should've been canned over that.
TV can be experienced passively, as you suggest. It is not a function of the medium that it must be experienced that way. People make concious decisions to experience crappy books, movies, music, and what-have-you all the time. Why don't we see condemnation of those media as well?
Should we avoid cinema too?
How about theater?
Should we throw away our books?
I'm curious: how much culture do we have to shed before we can "live life to the fullest"?
Why, I wonder, is it more socially acceptable to whip out your laptop and hammer away on the keyboard than to, say, start taking/making calls on your phone?
Both seem distracting to the surrounding students and disruptive of class interaction. And that's not even considering the impact on the student using the computer or phone.
The environmental impact of meat, even if mitigated by efficient production techniques (i.e., not "on the hoof"), is greater than that of a vegetarian foodstuffs.
As for the protein argument, forget it. If you give even the slightest thought to a balanced vegetarian diet, it's trivial to get enough protein. (See this.)
Besides lab-grown mean just sounds gross. "He suggests using a bioreactor with a branching network of hundreds of tiny edible tubes that act like artificial capillaries to convey nutrients to the growing meat."...bleah!
Much like karma (used to be), some people see racking up review counts as a game. There was a story about this sort of behavior on NPR recently, though I can't find a link for it. It was unclear from the story whether or not the reviews were based on any real experience of the product being reviewed.
I certainly do not depend on user/reader reviews as my sole basis for prejudging an item. Usually I know enough about what I am looking to buy to be able to tell if a reviewer is clueful. If the reviewer seems clueful, I will probably allow the review some weight in my decision. If not, I just throw it out.
Before this turns into a money maker for automated spam "readers", it will make spam unprofitable and spam will STOP. Sounds great to me!
If the spammers are dumb enough to keep sending me spam I'm charging them back for, then, by golly, I'll happily take their money while using some system (like spamassassin) to delete their crap.
When I was starting out with UNIX, I purchased the bunny book (UNIX for the Impatient by Abrahams and Larson) and, later, when I was setting up my own Linux installation, I picked up Running Linux by Matt Welsh. I'm not even sure what edition Running Linux is up to, now. The first is definitely user-oriented, while the latter gets more into the nuts and bolts.
In retrospect, though, for really being effective with my Linux machine, I got more out of the how-tos archived by the Linux Documentation Project, man pages, and searches on google. A little mentoring from someone already comfortable with the Linux environment doesn't hurt either.
No kidding. With the stroke of a pen, the "conservative" US president mandates a new, navel-gazing bureaucracy to decide what's "safe" and what's not, then enforce that in a dynamically changing medium -- or at least to figure out how "we're" going to do that.
Even if you iron out the philosophical problems ("Who gets to decide?"), it still seems like a technically infeasible idea.
That's the point. This doesn't ban anyone from doing anything. It doesn't force any content provider into any ghetto, be it the kidz-only ghetto or the pr0n ghetto. It does create a "zone", delimited by the confies of the domain, of "safe" content. (Whether or not the content is actually safe, or just whitewashed is open to debate. But that's a different question.) If you have content that doesn't fit the guidelines of the kids.gov domain, put it somewhere else. You're welcome to do that. Just like if you have a movie that doesn't get a G rating, it gets released as PG or R or whatever. Being a site in a kid.gov domain is something like having a G rating. (Except movie ratings are an example of industry self-regulation. kid.gov is government sponsored. Argh.)
How do you propose we place limitations on domains by age?
<RANT>Welcome to the US of A, where we have the First Amendment (at least we did last I checked). It's not criminal to express ideas that aren't kid-friendly, and you don't get marked for special processing if your expressions don't meet some government standard. It's not the responsibility of the government to kid-proof the effing internet (or any other medium for that matter), or cleanse it of bad thought so you and yours can be "safe".</RANT>
Uhhh...
AC + unsubstantiated claim + misspelling of "CmdrTaco" = +5? Maybe Taco can't spell, but to me it doesn't add up.
Am I missing something...?
Was it? I saw that claim in another thread, and it looked to me like a tweak upon Taco's speling, i.e., a joke. It could be true for all I know, but it didn't seem that way from the context.