Oh boy! 15% lighter...It hasn't reduced my taxes any. Is it 15% more reliable? Are we seeing 15% more launches every year? Has the cost of each launch gone down by 15%? Are they putting 15% more useful stuff into the cargo bay? Or just 15% less fuel into the tank? I'll betcha that 15% just ended up going down the drain in Iraq.
Or even into the back pocket of a contractor who was ment to fix the drains in Iraq:)
Besides, hollywood movies don't have a piracy problem. TV and music industries do,
It very much depends if the people "pirating" would have bought the "legitimate version". If people are "pirating" because they can't actually get hold of the "legitimate version". Then the fault is actually with the industry in question (something which may also be applicable to "Hollywood movies"). In some cases the situation with delays with TV showings between different parts of the world is actually worst than it was 20-30 years ago.
The whole industry, from the guys setting up the buffet tables to the CEOs at the top has been in the past, and can be in the future, supported by that revenue stream.
The first thing these people need to get their heads around is that if the whatever is in English (any dialect) then the audience is the entire planet. (The same is also applicable to Arabic and possibly Spanish).
The vast majority of the people who work on a film set (caterers, electricians, photographers, camera crew, hairdressers, costume managers, props masters, set builders, etc.) are all paid up front. They do a job and are paid for it, just like any other contractor. Once they are finished, they receive no more money.
This probably also applies to "extras", "stunt/body doubles", etc. Effectivly the vast majority of actors...
He represents the 28th congressional district in California, which includes parts of Hollywood and the San Fernando Valley. People in the film industry are his constituents.
Assuming they actually live there. It's quite likely that many of the people who actually do live there, even if they work in the movie industry, would receive no benefit from copyright at all. AFAIK set builders, cameramen just get paid for the work they actually do. The same may even to stunt performers who are highly skilled (but often uncredited) actors.
It is more than just their separation from the real world. Congress seems to believe that it is their job to pass new laws on a regular basis. It doesn't seem to really matter what direction the new laws seem to go, just as long as we get that new law.
In some cases without even bothering to read what they are passing. A great pity nobody has ever inserted something the the effect of "Any Congressman who didn't vote against this bill is immediatly fired, barred from ever standing for public office again, forfits their pension and must repay all their salary/expenses." That might teach them...
I also think that Congress does not tend to stop and think about potential consequences of their actions.
Even though that is actually a major part of their job.
I'd bet some lobbyist told this Congress-critter that this would be a great thing for Hollywood (which is in his district) by maying a list of advantages about how great it is. I'd also bet this same congress-critter never stopped to wonder how many items on that list of advantages are true and if there is a list of disadvantages that needs to be examined as well.
Let alone such things as if the lobbyiest is actually working for whoever they claim to be working for.
Considering that he's been representing the same district since 1983, I don't think the Republican/Democrat shift had much to do with this bill.
Anyone who has been in politics that long is virtually guarenteed to be completly out of touch with the real world. What's needed is something a long time lines of "no person can be in public office longer that 5 years in any one decade and no longer than a total of 10 years in their lifetime". Upping the minimum age of US Senators to 60 probably wouldn't be a bad idea either.
Actually, the client who really doesn't know anything and knows they don't know anything is a lot easier to work with than the client who is ignorant and wastes my time by demonstrating their ignorance.
For one thing the former is more likely to actually clearly describe the problem. Something the latter may well be incapable of doing. e.g. insisting on using their own made up jargon or trying to "diagnose" the problem.
what the fuck are you on mate? the US is BY FAR the nastier regimen on earth, not to its citizens, of course, but to the world as a whole.
US don't tend to fair too well if they find themselves on the wrong side of a US backed regime.
I don't give shit about what the north koreans and south koreans want to do between them, but when the us decides to impose any kind of measure on almost anything, my life is personally affected, and this measures tend to be fascist, unilateral and with no consideration for my dignity.
The vast majority of US citizens probably don't care much about them either. Both South Korea and Taiwan are probably rich enough to pay for their own weapons anyway. It's rather doubtful that the vast majority of US citizens support the huge economic and military support provided to Israel, dispite the way that US politicans are literally queueing up to praise Israel. (To the extent that you are more likely to see a politican opposing the Israeli government in the Kenesset and more likely to see a critical article in an Israeli newspaper than a US one.)
I do not want to be treated like a criminal in airports,
It turns out that this even applies to people who arn't even entering the US. But who just have a connection, possibly even just a "technical stop" at a US airport.
but now the US decided to do just that, and here, all the way across the world, we suffer, adn this is just ONE example
Probably the most suffering is that of the US itself. Since huge numbers of people just don't want to go there. It wouldn't be too much of a suprise if airlines want to move flights from New York to Toronto and from LA to Vancover.
Military superiority is a stabalizing force on this planet in a similar way to how shows like "World's Best Police Chases!" discourage crime. If your adversary believes you to be unbeatable, he doesn't even try, saving money for both sides.
Except that if you invade someone else's country they generally will fight you. Unless your army is larger than the population of the country you intend invading any technical superiority of weapons isn't really of much help. Militia groups in invaded countries don't tend to be convinced that the invader is unbeatable. This certainly wasn't the case in WWII France or when the USSR invaded Afghanistan, in these cases the invader had simply crossed a land border. In current Afghanistan and Iraq you have invading soldiers from thousands of miles away, it's more a question of when rather than if they will be driven out.
So in the mean time the least bloody solution is for the americans to keep (albeit hamfistedly) casting a shadow over all the upstart dictatorships.
Considering how many of these "upstart dictatorships" appear to have been funded by the US a better idea might be for the US to stop doing this. Thus avoiding "foreign entanglements" as Washington suggested. On the other hand it might be possible to generate several megawatts from his grave:) If the US Government were to take such a radical step then it should probably include jail time (or expulsion) for anyone trying to emulate Prescott Bush too.
Anti-nukes are not a stabilizer, they destroy the doctrine of MAD by allowing one side to use a nuclear strike without fear of retaliation.
The only way they could be is if they were posessed by a country without nukes which is being threatened by at least one nuclear armed country. i.e. it would be a good thing if Iran were developing anti-nukes. But it is a bad thing for the US (along with the UK, France, Russia, China, Israel, India and Pakistan) to develop them.
The only logical response for a country with nukes but no antinukes is to launch the nukes NOW and eliminate the antinuke country before it turns into a onesided nuclear war.
There's also the issue of what happens in the case of a country without either which is threatened by a nuclear armed country. Should they get nukes or anti-nukes first?
Without nukes the cold war wouldn't have stayed cold, nukes just make sure there is no possible gain in a war.
It was probably more important that the USSR was able to get it's own nukes so soon after 1945. The biggest problem here is in South West Asia where you have a nuclear armed country without any of it's possible enemies having any nukes. Even if this where not an aggressive country with a talent for making enemies the situation would be dangerous.
Improved Infrastucture? Look, we already budget more than enough to fix and maintain what we have. The problem is that Congress takes the money allocated and redirects it to new projects. You then have government incompetence at the state level as well. Ever wonder why a certain bridge disaster disappeared from the news so quickly? Because it was exposing the system that is failing. You cannot just throw more money at a failing system and expect good results. If that were the case we would have best schools and roads in the world!
If the actual problem is one of corruption then more money certainly isn't the answer. Indeed more money may make things worst as it attracts more crooks to try and fill their own pockets, thus leaving even less to go where it was ment to be going.
you put "your name" in quotes, everyone who didn't get that error, except the first, was in fact not following your directsion.
next time try Type $YOUR_NAME+" MS" into the box.
In which case some of them might enter exactly this. Remember the phrase "fools are infinitly resourceful". If the application is something like a word processor even using a different font isn't "foolproof".
And you can't usually point out to a boss that someone's complete lack of computer skills means they're not qualified for their job, because the boss will take that as an attack on their hiring skills. All you can do is say "I think so-and-so would really benefit from some additional training for computer skills. Let me recommend some courses you could send them to, I think they'd be much happier with the training."
There's no guarentee that they will actually apply anything they might learn on said course to their day to day work. It's possible that they might be more interested in getting a certificate.
In my experience, voodoo users are never people who CAN'T learn, they're UNWILLING to learn.
Possibly even it's a point of "pride" to not learn. e.g. because they are blonde/female/management/etc.
Hell, I'm even ok with being unwilling to learn, as long as you call it like it is. There's no crime in that, I have no interest in learning how to fix my car. I will not, however, sit and insist that it's too hard for me even as I refuse to try.
You probably also wouldn't insist on telling a mechanic "it's broken you fix it", especially if you had just driven the car to the mechanic:)
I've encountered "voodoo users" of all ages - I have a colleague in her early twenties who has to write down every step in how to complete a task in standard software applications she has been using for over two years in our office, and cannot do it without her notes.
At the same time my mother who is in her 70s can reinstall the operataing system software on her computer unaided.
Maybe "voodoo user" actually translates into a certain mental process. Especially if similar behaviour is observed in non computer contexts.
So the mac solution is to redesign the entire interface for 5% of idiot users. Man, if apple was a car company they would swap the gas and break because steve jobs is left footed.
IIRC it's taken quite a long time for cars to get standard controls. Including such things as fitting automatic cars with foot operated parking brakes where the clutch would otherwise be. An apparently random choice of which side of the steering wheel to put the "stalk" which controls the indicators, etc, etc.
One time when I ordered a pizza, I had to spell out my name to the order taker. I said one of the letters was "T, as in Tom." When it arrived and I looked at the bill, it had been transcribed as D instead of a T...presumably as in Dom, given the context. I started using "T, as in Thomas" after that, but "T, as in tango" would probably be better still.
Or it might confuse them into thinking you want a soft drink with your pizza.
But my favorite: We had a manager who liked to use the speakerphone (we were in cubes). One day he had a very confused woman with a printing problem. He asked her what (software) she was printing from. Her answer: "At my DESK!" He had to quickly grab the receiver because both my boss and I broke up.
Probably one of these people who insist on calling their computer a "hard disk". This also brings to mind the "poor communicator". Who is only capable of saying "my computer's not working". But unable to identify what the fault is, which computer and in extreme cases even who they are.
I guess we all have true stories like these....my favourite is as follows. An update to users' PCs was sent round in an email which basically said "click on the icon in this email to start the process, then do the following...you may want to print off this email to refer to the instructions as you go along."
It would probably be even funnier had this failed due to the machines in question refusing to run the executable or the users actually following a sensible security policy:)
Yes folks, this lady had successfully plugged her power strip into itself! I tried a snarky comment on how if you removed the shielding on the wire and ran a magnet REALLY fast...didn't seem to catch on. I don't think she was the technical type!
A subspecies of the finger pointer is the flustered user. As soon as a problem comes up, his blood pressure soars, his heartbeat accelerates, he sweats glands go into overdrive, and his brain shuts down. Generally the cause of his problems are pretty obvious - all it takes is a little clear thinking
Don't forget that there's also "Ms Panic". Just change the gender of all the applicable pronouns for a description...
The password policy in place requires users to change their password periodically and be of a certain complexity level. Most users have their SafeBoot password written on a piece of paper and taped to their machine, now...
Which is effectivly no password at all...
There's a line between security and usability.
It isn't anything like that simple. There are plenty of things which make little difference to security (or even reduce it) which also reduce usability. There are also things which can increase both security and usability.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh boy! 15% lighter...It hasn't reduced my taxes any. Is it 15% more reliable? Are we seeing 15% more launches every year? Has the cost of each launch gone down by 15%? Are they putting 15% more useful stuff into the cargo bay? Or just 15% less fuel into the tank? I'll betcha that 15% just ended up going down the drain in Iraq.
:)
Or even into the back pocket of a contractor who was ment to fix the drains in Iraq
Besides, hollywood movies don't have a piracy problem. TV and music industries do,
It very much depends if the people "pirating" would have bought the "legitimate version". If people are "pirating" because they can't actually get hold of the "legitimate version". Then the fault is actually with the industry in question (something which may also be applicable to "Hollywood movies"). In some cases the situation with delays with TV showings between different parts of the world is actually worst than it was 20-30 years ago.
The whole industry, from the guys setting up the buffet tables to the CEOs at the top has been in the past, and can be in the future, supported by that revenue stream.
The first thing these people need to get their heads around is that if the whatever is in English (any dialect) then the audience is the entire planet. (The same is also applicable to Arabic and possibly Spanish).
The vast majority of the people who work on a film set (caterers, electricians, photographers, camera crew, hairdressers, costume managers, props masters, set builders, etc.) are all paid up front. They do a job and are paid for it, just like any other contractor. Once they are finished, they receive no more money.
This probably also applies to "extras", "stunt/body doubles", etc. Effectivly the vast majority of actors...
He represents the 28th congressional district in California, which includes parts of Hollywood and the San Fernando Valley. People in the film industry are his constituents.
Assuming they actually live there. It's quite likely that many of the people who actually do live there, even if they work in the movie industry, would receive no benefit from copyright at all. AFAIK set builders, cameramen just get paid for the work they actually do. The same may even to stunt performers who are highly skilled (but often uncredited) actors.
There is no difference between the Republicans and Democrats.
:)
They're both as stupid, evil, corrupt, and greedy as the Republicans.
Maybe one lot is "stupid, evil, corrupt and greedy". Whereas the other lot is "greedy, corrupt, evil and stupid". That's a difference
It is more than just their separation from the real world. Congress seems to believe that it is their job to pass new laws on a regular basis. It doesn't seem to really matter what direction the new laws seem to go, just as long as we get that new law.
In some cases without even bothering to read what they are passing. A great pity nobody has ever inserted something the the effect of "Any Congressman who didn't vote against this bill is immediatly fired, barred from ever standing for public office again, forfits their pension and must repay all their salary/expenses." That might teach them...
I also think that Congress does not tend to stop and think about potential consequences of their actions.
Even though that is actually a major part of their job.
I'd bet some lobbyist told this Congress-critter that this would be a great thing for Hollywood (which is in his district) by maying a list of advantages about how great it is. I'd also bet this same congress-critter never stopped to wonder how many items on that list of advantages are true and if there is a list of disadvantages that needs to be examined as well.
Let alone such things as if the lobbyiest is actually working for whoever they claim to be working for.
Considering that he's been representing the same district since 1983, I don't think the Republican/Democrat shift had much to do with this bill.
Anyone who has been in politics that long is virtually guarenteed to be completly out of touch with the real world. What's needed is something a long time lines of "no person can be in public office longer that 5 years in any one decade and no longer than a total of 10 years in their lifetime". Upping the minimum age of US Senators to 60 probably wouldn't be a bad idea either.
Actually, the client who really doesn't know anything and knows they don't know anything is a lot easier to work with than the client who is ignorant and wastes my time by demonstrating their ignorance.
For one thing the former is more likely to actually clearly describe the problem. Something the latter may well be incapable of doing. e.g. insisting on using their own made up jargon or trying to "diagnose" the problem.
what the fuck are you on mate? the US is BY FAR the nastier regimen on earth, not to its citizens, of course, but to the world as a whole.
US don't tend to fair too well if they find themselves on the wrong side of a US backed regime.
I don't give shit about what the north koreans and south koreans want to do between them, but when the us decides to impose any kind of measure on almost anything, my life is personally affected, and this measures tend to be fascist, unilateral and with no consideration for my dignity.
The vast majority of US citizens probably don't care much about them either. Both South Korea and Taiwan are probably rich enough to pay for their own weapons anyway. It's rather doubtful that the vast majority of US citizens support the huge economic and military support provided to Israel, dispite the way that US politicans are literally queueing up to praise Israel. (To the extent that you are more likely to see a politican opposing the Israeli government in the Kenesset and more likely to see a critical article in an Israeli newspaper than a US one.)
I do not want to be treated like a criminal in airports,
It turns out that this even applies to people who arn't even entering the US. But who just have a connection, possibly even just a "technical stop" at a US airport.
but now the US decided to do just that, and here, all the way across the world, we suffer, adn this is just ONE example
Probably the most suffering is that of the US itself. Since huge numbers of people just don't want to go there. It wouldn't be too much of a suprise if airlines want to move flights from New York to Toronto and from LA to Vancover.
Military superiority is a stabalizing force on this planet in a similar way to how shows like "World's Best Police Chases!" discourage crime. If your adversary believes you to be unbeatable, he doesn't even try, saving money for both sides.
Except that if you invade someone else's country they generally will fight you. Unless your army is larger than the population of the country you intend invading any technical superiority of weapons isn't really of much help. Militia groups in invaded countries don't tend to be convinced that the invader is unbeatable. This certainly wasn't the case in WWII France or when the USSR invaded Afghanistan, in these cases the invader had simply crossed a land border.
In current Afghanistan and Iraq you have invading soldiers from thousands of miles away, it's more a question of when rather than if they will be driven out.
So in the mean time the least bloody solution is for the americans to keep (albeit hamfistedly) casting a shadow over all the upstart dictatorships.
:)
Considering how many of these "upstart dictatorships" appear to have been funded by the US a better idea might be for the US to stop doing this. Thus avoiding "foreign entanglements" as Washington suggested. On the other hand it might be possible to generate several megawatts from his grave
If the US Government were to take such a radical step then it should probably include jail time (or expulsion) for anyone trying to emulate Prescott Bush too.
Anti-nukes are not a stabilizer, they destroy the doctrine of MAD by allowing one side to use a nuclear strike without fear of retaliation.
The only way they could be is if they were posessed by a country without nukes which is being threatened by at least one nuclear armed country. i.e. it would be a good thing if Iran were developing anti-nukes. But it is a bad thing for the US (along with the UK, France, Russia, China, Israel, India and Pakistan) to develop them.
The only logical response for a country with nukes but no antinukes is to launch the nukes NOW and eliminate the antinuke country before it turns into a onesided nuclear war.
There's also the issue of what happens in the case of a country without either which is threatened by a nuclear armed country. Should they get nukes or anti-nukes first?
Without nukes the cold war wouldn't have stayed cold, nukes just make sure there is no possible gain in a war.
It was probably more important that the USSR was able to get it's own nukes so soon after 1945.
The biggest problem here is in South West Asia where you have a nuclear armed country without any of it's possible enemies having any nukes. Even if this where not an aggressive country with a talent for making enemies the situation would be dangerous.
Improved Infrastucture? Look, we already budget more than enough to fix and maintain what we have. The problem is that Congress takes the money allocated and redirects it to new projects. You then have government incompetence at the state level as well. Ever wonder why a certain bridge disaster disappeared from the news so quickly? Because it was exposing the system that is failing. You cannot just throw more money at a failing system and expect good results. If that were the case we would have best schools and roads in the world!
If the actual problem is one of corruption then more money certainly isn't the answer. Indeed more money may make things worst as it attracts more crooks to try and fill their own pockets, thus leaving even less to go where it was ment to be going.
you put "your name" in quotes, everyone who didn't get that error, except the first, was in fact not following your directsion.
next time try Type $YOUR_NAME+" MS" into the box.
In which case some of them might enter exactly this. Remember the phrase "fools are infinitly resourceful". If the application is something like a word processor even using a different font isn't "foolproof".
And you can't usually point out to a boss that someone's complete lack of computer skills means they're not qualified for their job, because the boss will take that as an attack on their hiring skills. All you can do is say "I think so-and-so would really benefit from some additional training for computer skills. Let me recommend some courses you could send them to, I think they'd be much happier with the training."
There's no guarentee that they will actually apply anything they might learn on said course to their day to day work. It's possible that they might be more interested in getting a certificate.
In my experience, voodoo users are never people who CAN'T learn, they're UNWILLING to learn.
:)
Possibly even it's a point of "pride" to not learn. e.g. because they are blonde/female/management/etc.
Hell, I'm even ok with being unwilling to learn, as long as you call it like it is. There's no crime in that, I have no interest in learning how to fix my car. I will not, however, sit and insist that it's too hard for me even as I refuse to try.
You probably also wouldn't insist on telling a mechanic "it's broken you fix it", especially if you had just driven the car to the mechanic
I've encountered "voodoo users" of all ages - I have a colleague in her early twenties who has to write down every step in how to complete a task in standard software applications she has been using for over two years in our office, and cannot do it without her notes.
At the same time my mother who is in her 70s can reinstall the operataing system software on her computer unaided.
Maybe "voodoo user" actually translates into a certain mental process. Especially if similar behaviour is observed in non computer contexts.
So the mac solution is to redesign the entire interface for 5% of idiot users. Man, if apple was a car company they would swap the gas and break because steve jobs is left footed.
IIRC it's taken quite a long time for cars to get standard controls. Including such things as fitting automatic cars with foot operated parking brakes where the clutch would otherwise be. An apparently random choice of which side of the steering wheel to put the "stalk" which controls the indicators, etc, etc.
One time when I ordered a pizza, I had to spell out my name to the order taker. I said one of the letters was "T, as in Tom." When it arrived and I looked at the bill, it had been transcribed as D instead of a T...presumably as in Dom, given the context. I started using "T, as in Thomas" after that, but "T, as in tango" would probably be better still.
Or it might confuse them into thinking you want a soft drink with your pizza.
But my favorite: We had a manager who liked to use the speakerphone (we were in cubes). One day he had a very confused woman with a printing problem. He asked her what (software) she was printing from. Her answer: "At my DESK!" He had to quickly grab the receiver because both my boss and I broke up.
Probably one of these people who insist on calling their computer a "hard disk".
This also brings to mind the "poor communicator". Who is only capable of saying "my computer's not working". But unable to identify what the fault is, which computer and in extreme cases even who they are.
I guess we all have true stories like these....my favourite is as follows. An update to users' PCs was sent round in an email which basically said "click on the icon in this email to start the process, then do the following...you may want to print off this email to refer to the instructions as you go along."
:)
It would probably be even funnier had this failed due to the machines in question refusing to run the executable or the users actually following a sensible security policy
Yes folks, this lady had successfully plugged her power strip into itself! I tried a snarky comment on how if you removed the shielding on the wire and ran a magnet REALLY fast...didn't seem to catch on. I don't think she was the technical type!
Why would you want a shielded power cable?
A subspecies of the finger pointer is the flustered user. As soon as a problem comes up, his blood pressure soars, his heartbeat accelerates, he sweats glands go into overdrive, and his brain shuts down. Generally the cause of his problems are pretty obvious - all it takes is a little clear thinking
Don't forget that there's also "Ms Panic". Just change the gender of all the applicable pronouns for a description...
The password policy in place requires users to change their password periodically and be of a certain complexity level. Most users have their SafeBoot password written on a piece of paper and taped to their machine, now...
Which is effectivly no password at all...
There's a line between security and usability.
It isn't anything like that simple. There are plenty of things which make little difference to security (or even reduce it) which also reduce usability. There are also things which can increase both security and usability.
the real problem was an overuse and failure to appropriately oversee third party contractors.
Which is the kind of thing buying lots of encryption software (especially proprietary) is unlikely to help with much.