If you look to films and television for career guidance, chances are you wouldn't make a good programmer anyway.
This is true of all careers of course. I've recently found a number of students here at the uni who want to become "crime scene investigators." (It was hard to keep a straight face the first time I heard this one!) Look for new, record high unemployment figures for BS chemists in about 3-4 years and lots of interviews of wankers complaining that there is nothing to do but go to grad school. Then again, this may help out schools fighting to find science teachers.
Never underestimate the depths of lameness that an 18 year old kid can reach.
It is certainly a much funnier response, and it must have been a load of fun for the people on the team who did this. Unfortunately, I doubt that it is very effective. The relatively small number of current opera users will probably think it is great, but it will have absolutely no impact on Microsoft.
It might make a great advertisement for opera. At the same time they are letting people know that if they use opera then they will have problems on at least one (big) web site.
If I have to set up a service on a machine that is not sitting in my basement then I don't want to bother playing around with my own little.name. For me, the novelty of a.name address is the ability to play with as little fuss as possible. If I am going to set up a server account with someone then I might as well use.net and use it as an online resume. I would rather have a.name to display pictures of the family cat and keep it in the basement.
There is not much incentive for individuals to get this. Broadband seems to be the fastest growing way to establish a full time internet connection. Most broadband suppliers do not want people running servers on their networks. What would be the point of buying your own name when you can't flaunt your vanity by actually using it!
It can go on for a very long time. This is what happened to IBM. When they got huge and started pushing the markets around, governments were hitting them from all sides. Between the constant nit-picking and their own lethargy, they eventually lost their market share.
It seems that history is repeating itself. MS is trying to get involved in everything under the sun [sic] and governments have their sights set on them. MS will eventually lose focus as it worries about revenue from the x-box, personal PC's, cell phones, internet ready refrigerators, and maybe even operating systems and software. At the same time, governments are looking for ways to reduce the power of this growing company.
..if it sold for almost nothing, and THEN what would open source have to bank on?
There have been lots of posts on/. explaining how the competion from open source is good and will cause MS to provide a better product. Now they are making their product better by making it cheaper.
This is where the logic comes around and bites us in the ass. Open source will now have to innovate and produce a better product. It is possible to reduce the cost by making open source codes easier to install and maintain, and it is possible to innovate on the technilogical end.
If competition is a good thing in and of itself, then this is a good thing. Sometimes it sucks to be on the other end of the struggle!
Actually, it would be a very close parallel to the story if they applied for a patent like this....
Patent ###### Title
Communication Between a Person Sitting on the Crapper Who Forgot to Bring in the Reading Material and the Person Outside Who Will go Fetch the Reading Material.
Description of the problem
A person on the crapper without reading material and the ability to yell to a partner who has the ability to hear.....
That idea would be fine if you were allowed to view the movie *before* you buy it and then make an informed decision about your purchase. You are right that a company has every right to decide the quality of their product. At the same time consumers have a right to know what they are buying. If they are not given the right to know what they are buying they should have the right to ask for a return on their money.
There are some good reasons to put people in orbit and have a semi-permanent presence in orbit. Unfortunately, NASA has presented no grand vision of what they will do and seems more intent on propagating itself rather than moving forward. Our politicians have been so scared to say anything bad about NASA for fear of being labeled un-american that they continue to dump money into an agency whose only missions seems to be to grow itself.
NASA can only talk about a few general reasons on why they should keep doing what they are doing, and they like to point to a number of advances that they have made. I fear that if they are allowed to continue to just grow for no good reason with no real mission then one day someone will point out that the emporer has no clothes. The repercussions will be much worse then if they get pressure now to justify these sorts of expenses.
I too am conflicted in that I think that NASA can serve an important function. Unless the organization gets its derrier in gear the organization will suffer in the long run.
I know I shouldn't make a response to a joke, but... I find it very interesting that the Microsoft mission is becoming incredibly diffuse. They went from OS to applications over a very long time. In a relatively small amount of time they have added peripherils, hotmail, pocket PCs, the XBox, and now phones. Now their mission statement is reduced to "software for stuff."
This sort of diversification may be good for the company, but when they loose focus on their core it becomes very difficult to maintain the kinds of market share that they are used to. Of course, these other things rely on their dominance on the desktop but at some point something has to give.
The fact that you can ask that question is a key issue. MS has made a decision to be backwards compatible. This represents a huge liability. It isn't such a big deal for BSD since upgrading is just a matter of typing "make."
What MS is doing makes a heck of a lot more sense to me than what Appled has done. (Oh great, here goes my karma, but now I've started...) Apple built a culture of bravado about how advanced its OS (interface really) is. Then when they hit a wall they decided to just change the processor and the instruction set. They then did it again when going to OSx.
MS on the other hand is trying to evolve rather than start over. If they are willing to admit that there are flaws then they can make necessary changes. That is the reason that you can ask how old Windows is.
Personally, I wished that they had tossed out a lot of bad baggage a long time ago. I especially liked the last paragraph from the Guardian:
It is terrifying to contemplate the efficiency bonus MS would have enjoyed if it had only been willing to base its entire corporate operations on UNIX instead of eating its own dog food. The software monopolist might today be in the bizarre position of being the world's only consumer of unices.
The rumor is that they started out with something that they found in the bottom of the coffee pot in the math department. After much debate they felt that the bug that causes crotch wrotch was less intimidating.
It is not uncommon to find a cluster of networked computers acting as a distributed system. They are usually implemented using things like MPI or other message passing protocols. The programs tend to be written "in house" and are generally written for specific applications.
Grid Mathematica is different because it is a commerical application, can be used for general problems, and is used for symbolic computations. This makes it much easier to implement an algorithm on a distributed platform. The results may take longer than a program written specifically for a particular application, but distributed environments can be exploited by many more people with this product.
If these people really believe that the internet is one big conduit to steal music and movies then there is no way on earth that they would release the movie. The money that they think they would lose would be better spent greasing the palm of their local congress-person even if the released movie is a horrible quality. More than that they must also realize that they would be running the risk of proving that they are wrong when a sure fire hit like this will make a gazillion dollars. If this was their plan they would have done it on a stinker that they thought wouldn't make any money.
I'll probably be there opening night. - Commander Taco
Not only that but you can't watch it with Commander Taco. I know my kid would be screaming if I tried to go a Harry Potter movie without the commander. Fortunately, the folks at Warner Brothers realize this and won't be too upset over the whole affair.
Now if I can only keep him from spilling his soft drink on me when he tries to get past us, then I would be happy...
Great, now the spammers will hire mathematicians to figure out how to best defeat the common algorithms used to calculate Pr(D|h). It is the same old story. In a war over information only the mathematicians win.
< standard free market blather >
If the EU decides that linux is a better way to go then perhaps MS should try doing some of that innovation stuff that American businesses are supposed to be so good at.
</standard free market blather >
Perhaps instead the MS marketing machine will get cranked up in Europe? I'm more torn by the idea that an undemocratic body like the EU sees linux as a way to put an end to monopolistic practices. This is especially ironic in light of the big announcement that is likely to come later today. In all likelyhood MS will get off the hook once again.
I visited Washington DC only once. After going through and visiting all of the sites one thing really stuck with me. The supreme court building was the only place where people would immediately become quiet when they entered the building. Not only that but they were generally more respectful of the place itself. There was something different about the place they were in.
The capitol building was a loud, almost raucus place. The various memorials were different but all had many people and families making noises. The supreme court, however, was just the opposite. Afterwards when I thought about it, I realized that this is just the way it ought to be.
Given that Penfield was given the ability to order the break up of a public corporation he should have been much more respectful of that responsibility. I can also see both sides of the case. Rather than being torn, I am quite unhappy with both sides.
The article has little to do with Microsoft. It is about the conduct of the judge. Regardless of how the defendent acts a judge should not go on record using harsh metaphors describing the conduct of the people that he is supposed to be presiding over. Because of the incredible responsibilites given to the courts the people who run them should show the utmost respect to all parties. They should also conduct themselves in a way that does not lead people to believe that they are biased.
It is silly to think that they do not have biases, but they should at least demonstrate that they can take an even handed approach despite their views. When Penfield went on record and sharply rebuked the conduct of Microsoft before hearing all of the arguments then his decisions became suspect.
No matter which side of the fence you are on with respect to Microsoft all parties should be unhappy with Penfield's conduct. It hurt the cause of everybody involved in the case.
Just imagine how small you could make a laptop if its storage was kept separate from it.
On an airplane you could be running the laptop while the disk is in the overhead. (After getting squashed by the people who boarded after you...)
At work you could keep your disk on your desk while you move your laptop around. (And you have to make room for yet another piece of clutter for your office that needs a power source...)
On the road you could keep your disk in your car while you move about. (And the wardrivers converge on your car from every direction so that they can tell their friends that they saw your hard drive...)
There are some downsides of course, but you could have a really super light laptop.
It wasn't long ago people were piling obscene amounts of moneys on start ups because they might be the next microsoft. Now this joker (and I've heard it elsewhere lately) is saying that start ups are bad because they don't have the wisdom to compete in the big bad marketplace. Did all companies just spring forth from one big meta-company called Adam and Eve LLC while all of the start ups have failed?
We want to know what interfaces and features future versions of the LSB and Li18nux should include. For that matter, we would like to know what interfaces and features Linux itself is missing.
They don't want to be the authority for the kernel. They want to know what new features to add to the interface and the features. THere is a very large development community that does not do kernel programming that cares a lot about these issues, although many certainly don't care what the FSF's views on this are.
By the way, GNU has had a huge impact on the useability of linux even if they don't have the impact they would have hoped on the kernel. I don't like some of the arrogance coming out of Stallman's office either, but the GNU folks to deserve a lot of credit.
Slashdot Mirror
This is true of all careers of course. I've recently found a number of students here at the uni who want to become "crime scene investigators." (It was hard to keep a straight face the first time I heard this one!) Look for new, record high unemployment figures for BS chemists in about 3-4 years and lots of interviews of wankers complaining that there is nothing to do but go to grad school. Then again, this may help out schools fighting to find science teachers.
Never underestimate the depths of lameness that an 18 year old kid can reach.
It is certainly a much funnier response, and it must have been a load of fun for the people on the team who did this. Unfortunately, I doubt that it is very effective. The relatively small number of current opera users will probably think it is great, but it will have absolutely no impact on Microsoft.
It might make a great advertisement for opera. At the same time they are letting people know that if they use opera then they will have problems on at least one (big) web site.
If I have to set up a service on a machine that is not sitting in my basement then I don't want to bother playing around with my own little .name. For me, the novelty of a .name address is the ability to play with as little fuss as possible. If I am going to set up a server account with someone then I might as well use .net and use it as an online resume. I would rather have a .name to display pictures of the family cat and keep it in the basement.
There is not much incentive for individuals to get this. Broadband seems to be the fastest growing way to establish a full time internet connection. Most broadband suppliers do not want people running servers on their networks. What would be the point of buying your own name when you can't flaunt your vanity by actually using it!
How long can this go on for?
It can go on for a very long time. This is what happened to IBM. When they got huge and started pushing the markets around, governments were hitting them from all sides. Between the constant nit-picking and their own lethargy, they eventually lost their market share.
It seems that history is repeating itself. MS is trying to get involved in everything under the sun [sic] and governments have their sights set on them. MS will eventually lose focus as it worries about revenue from the x-box, personal PC's, cell phones, internet ready refrigerators, and maybe even operating systems and software. At the same time, governments are looking for ways to reduce the power of this growing company.
There have been lots of posts on /. explaining how the competion from open source is good and will cause MS to provide a better product. Now they are making their product better by making it cheaper.
This is where the logic comes around and bites us in the ass. Open source will now have to innovate and produce a better product. It is possible to reduce the cost by making open source codes easier to install and maintain, and it is possible to innovate on the technilogical end.
If competition is a good thing in and of itself, then this is a good thing. Sometimes it sucks to be on the other end of the struggle!
Running Redhat without advanced server: augment risk 500% unless you upgrade more than once a year and drive your sysadmins nuts.
Patent ######
Title
Communication Between a Person Sitting on the Crapper Who Forgot to Bring in the Reading Material and the Person Outside Who Will go Fetch the Reading Material.
Description of the problem
A person on the crapper without reading material and the ability to yell to a partner who has the ability to hear.....
That idea would be fine if you were allowed to view the movie *before* you buy it and then make an informed decision about your purchase. You are right that a company has every right to decide the quality of their product. At the same time consumers have a right to know what they are buying. If they are not given the right to know what they are buying they should have the right to ask for a return on their money.
There are some good reasons to put people in orbit and have a semi-permanent presence in orbit. Unfortunately, NASA has presented no grand vision of what they will do and seems more intent on propagating itself rather than moving forward. Our politicians have been so scared to say anything bad about NASA for fear of being labeled un-american that they continue to dump money into an agency whose only missions seems to be to grow itself.
NASA can only talk about a few general reasons on why they should keep doing what they are doing, and they like to point to a number of advances that they have made. I fear that if they are allowed to continue to just grow for no good reason with no real mission then one day someone will point out that the emporer has no clothes. The repercussions will be much worse then if they get pressure now to justify these sorts of expenses.
I too am conflicted in that I think that NASA can serve an important function. Unless the organization gets its derrier in gear the organization will suffer in the long run.
I know I shouldn't make a response to a joke, but... I find it very interesting that the Microsoft mission is becoming incredibly diffuse. They went from OS to applications over a very long time. In a relatively small amount of time they have added peripherils, hotmail, pocket PCs, the XBox, and now phones. Now their mission statement is reduced to "software for stuff."
This sort of diversification may be good for the company, but when they loose focus on their core it becomes very difficult to maintain the kinds of market share that they are used to. Of course, these other things rely on their dominance on the desktop but at some point something has to give.
Absolutely correct, this is the devil's OS! However, I hear that if you run the disk backwards it boots up Windows 95.
The fact that you can ask that question is a key issue. MS has made a decision to be backwards compatible. This represents a huge liability. It isn't such a big deal for BSD since upgrading is just a matter of typing "make." What MS is doing makes a heck of a lot more sense to me than what Appled has done. (Oh great, here goes my karma, but now I've started...) Apple built a culture of bravado about how advanced its OS (interface really) is. Then when they hit a wall they decided to just change the processor and the instruction set. They then did it again when going to OSx.
MS on the other hand is trying to evolve rather than start over. If they are willing to admit that there are flaws then they can make necessary changes. That is the reason that you can ask how old Windows is.
Personally, I wished that they had tossed out a lot of bad baggage a long time ago. I especially liked the last paragraph from the Guardian:
It is terrifying to contemplate the efficiency bonus MS would have enjoyed if it had only been willing to base its entire corporate operations on UNIX instead of eating its own dog food. The software monopolist might today be in the bizarre position of being the world's only consumer of unices.
The rumor is that they started out with something that they found in the bottom of the coffee pot in the math department. After much debate they felt that the bug that causes crotch wrotch was less intimidating.
It is not uncommon to find a cluster of networked computers acting as a distributed system. They are usually implemented using things like MPI or other message passing protocols. The programs tend to be written "in house" and are generally written for specific applications.
Grid Mathematica is different because it is a commerical application, can be used for general problems, and is used for symbolic computations. This makes it much easier to implement an algorithm on a distributed platform. The results may take longer than a program written specifically for a particular application, but distributed environments can be exploited by many more people with this product.
If these people really believe that the internet is one big conduit to steal music and movies then there is no way on earth that they would release the movie. The money that they think they would lose would be better spent greasing the palm of their local congress-person even if the released movie is a horrible quality. More than that they must also realize that they would be running the risk of proving that they are wrong when a sure fire hit like this will make a gazillion dollars. If this was their plan they would have done it on a stinker that they thought wouldn't make any money.
Not only that but you can't watch it with Commander Taco. I know my kid would be screaming if I tried to go a Harry Potter movie without the commander. Fortunately, the folks at Warner Brothers realize this and won't be too upset over the whole affair.
Now if I can only keep him from spilling his soft drink on me when he tries to get past us, then I would be happy...
Great, now the spammers will hire mathematicians to figure out how to best defeat the common algorithms used to calculate Pr(D|h). It is the same old story. In a war over information only the mathematicians win.
If the EU decides that linux is a better way to go then perhaps MS should try doing some of that innovation stuff that American businesses are supposed to be so good at.
<
Perhaps instead the MS marketing machine will get cranked up in Europe? I'm more torn by the idea that an undemocratic body like the EU sees linux as a way to put an end to monopolistic practices. This is especially ironic in light of the big announcement that is likely to come later today. In all likelyhood MS will get off the hook once again.
Must refrain from blowing my top because people are assuming that the rest of the world can deal with their files in yet another format...
The capitol building was a loud, almost raucus place. The various memorials were different but all had many people and families making noises. The supreme court, however, was just the opposite. Afterwards when I thought about it, I realized that this is just the way it ought to be.
Given that Penfield was given the ability to order the break up of a public corporation he should have been much more respectful of that responsibility. I can also see both sides of the case. Rather than being torn, I am quite unhappy with both sides.
It is silly to think that they do not have biases, but they should at least demonstrate that they can take an even handed approach despite their views. When Penfield went on record and sharply rebuked the conduct of Microsoft before hearing all of the arguments then his decisions became suspect. No matter which side of the fence you are on with respect to Microsoft all parties should be unhappy with Penfield's conduct. It hurt the cause of everybody involved in the case.
- On an airplane you could be running the laptop while the disk is in the overhead. (After getting squashed by the people who boarded after you...)
- At work you could keep your disk on your desk while you move your laptop around. (And you have to make room for yet another piece of clutter for your office that needs a power source...)
- On the road you could keep your disk in your car while you move about. (And the wardrivers converge on your car from every direction so that they can tell their friends that they saw your hard drive...)
There are some downsides of course, but you could have a really super light laptop.It wasn't long ago people were piling obscene
amounts of moneys on start ups because they might be the next microsoft. Now this joker (and I've heard it elsewhere lately) is saying that start ups are bad because they don't have the wisdom to compete in the big bad marketplace. Did all companies just spring forth from one big meta-company called Adam and Eve LLC while all of the start ups have failed?
They don't want to be the authority for the kernel. They want to know what new features to add to the interface and the features. THere is a very large development community that does not do kernel programming that cares a lot about these issues, although many certainly don't care what the FSF's views on this are.
By the way, GNU has had a huge impact on the useability of linux even if they don't have the impact they would have hoped on the kernel. I don't like some of the arrogance coming out of Stallman's office either, but the GNU folks to deserve a lot of credit.