In spite of what some would like to tell you, IQ is not a measurement of intelligence. It could be considered a measurement of knowledge and training. Admittedly those who are "More intelligent" in theory could learn better, but these things are so screwy that this is essentially meaningless.
Maybe first born are just home bodies, and thus spend more time studying.
I have noticed a measurable decline in the total quantity of spam that I get in any given week (as measured by how much gets caught in my spam filter, almost none gets through).
I don't know if Microsoft is the only cause, but something is improving it for me, and my e-mail address hasn't changed.
Ok, call me paranoid, but it seems that the no DRM in a virtual machine component is trying very hard to make it so that people can't use office on a Macintosh. Sure you can pay for Windows, but you can't use office, which is really the only reason to run office on a Mac.
I know there is a Mac version of office. But it doesn't have the VBA components that drive many corporations.
I would postulate that his duty was to return fire when missles were launched. Missles were not launched, and he did not fire. Using good old common sense. That would mean he did his duty.
What I wish they did is what they did for Y2K. Put a military officer from the other country in the head quarters of the other. Then they could call and state what the exact situation was. It added an extra level of failsafe.
I have seen arguments that Digg will take over slashdot. But when a site grows, it always faces these types of issues, and editorial oversight is the only defense.
It is not a patent lawsuit, but an Anti-Trust lawsuit. That to me implies that there is no intellectual property rights that Adobe could use to try and bully Microsoft with.
If Anti-Trust is the only tool Adobe has, then none of the other solutions would be at risk.
There were far more than 40 viruses for Mac OS in the late 80's. I believe I used Virex, having to clean up one of my room mate's computers. Then there were the cross platform word Macro viruses.
Thankfully, Mac tightened up its security in the move to OS X. Windows tightened up security in.....?
1) Changing licensing schemes, raising costs for companies dramatically, and having the nerve to call it "to lower customer costs". 2) Sending nasty letters to school districts at the end of the semester saying that they are about to have an audit of their licensing scheme, when they are short staffed as it is. 3) Purposely building their technology so it won't work well with other environment, thus preventing interoperability. 4) Illegal contracts regarding what computer companies can or can't sell if they want to be able to sell windows.
Just because they aren't found guilty of a crime in court, doesn't mean their activities are moral or ethical.
The problem doesn't seem to be his technical skills, but his management/time management skills. If you are fixing something, and he sits around watching, then that is a waste of his time. The fact that he doesn't know how to do something isn't the problem, the problem is that he doesn't recognize it, and instead of letting those who know just do it, he tries to, or has someone do it and watches them (a waste of his time).
A good manager should be able to let those with the best skills for the job get those jobs done.
If his technical ability is so low, that he can't understand the projects, and thus can't manage those, then there is a real issue.
Once you get a "manager" title, your technical skill immediately start degrading to some level, but theoretically your management skills should improve.
Jock does not necessarily correlate to popular. I was a geek. I was a jock (or maybe an athlete). I was not in the "Popular Crowd". Never joined a frat. Definite geek.
Not in the higher eschelons of looks thats for sure (but enough to be able to find a spouse).
Being a (former) chemist I agree. The key is to use the best model for your needs. Chemists and earth scientists have different needs, thus they may end up using different tables.
The key difference between the service of a plumber, and the service of a software writer, is that the work that a plumber does cannot be easily replicated. If you want a comparison, then you need to compare to artists, writers, etc. The exact purpose of copyright law. I think the previous example of JK Rowling is an excellent example.
Also, your example of each company having a single copy is about as inefficient a model as is possible. It just doesn't make business sense. Also, your model only applies to large contracts. How about games? No one would pay tens of millions of dollars to create a single game, but by using the market system, and spreading the cost out over millions of people it becomes viable.
Without copyright, I can guarantee that almost no games would be written (how many open source PC games are there that are close to the purchased games.)
I don't know why Disney decided to share the patents (the cynic in me says they did some research and realized that the public relations benefit outweighed the actual cost benefit).
Anything that reduces enviromental impact, distributed for free, is good.
Having gone to a liberal (in all senses of the word) arts college, and now being an IT manager responsible for a few hundred machines I can understand both sides.
Yes. There is a more central location for someone to attack. However, the average user doesn't take care of their system. In this case, you have to defend a single, actively malicious individual targetting your environment, rather than having to deal with the after effects of the bzillions of non-targetted attacks.
Unfortunately, as usually happens in situations like this, it is the conscientious user that has their system's security lowered. While, on average, the general security of the population is improved.
In my new position I can completely understand it.
When I was in college, I would have despised the very concept.
Overall, I think that this is probably better for the system. But I can sure understand why the "good" ones would feel like they are being punished for someone elses actions.
Side note: The people who are truly technical will probably be running some flavor of Linux/Unix so they won't be affected by this.
Being an IT Manager myself, and having IE available on all of my workstations, and listening to the extreme frustration amongst my peers regarding the insecurity of IE, I think it is a distinct possibility.
Yes, there are items that can only be accessed through IE. But as security holes continue to rear their ugly head, it starts becoming economical to find other solutions.
In the corporate environment, many of the items that you describe above not done by the end user anyway (patches, registration, etc. are all managed centrally).
Microsoft used IE as a strategic tool. When it did so, browsers were in such a state of flux, that changing from Netscape 3 to 4 to wasn't much different than changing from Netscape 3 to IE 4. The mistake Microsoft is making is that if people start migrating away from IE, then there is no turning back. The browser market is moving slow, so the ease/incentive to move is significantly lower.
IT departments are going to be looking at changing browsers, and once they change, I doubt Microsoft will be able to regain the foothold.
In response to both this and flok above. The article I remember reading was in Science News (a relatively reputable science journal). However, I could not find it in an online search. So, at this point I concede that I can't back it up.
I don't view prayer as a subsitute for medicine. Nor do I claim that it always works.
Even if it exclusively from the placebo effect (I'll let you find that evidence on your own).
Would someone please explain to me why someone wishing others well, is a bad thing?
I am a firm agnostic. As far as I'm concerned, when it comes to religion, I start by assuming everyone's wrong (even me).
With that in mind, they are starting to be scientific studies that show the power of prayer and how it helps. People who set out to disprove it, end up getting data that actually supports it.
I guess the bottom line is: Why degrade any form of positive support?
Walmart is the one forcing them to drive up prices. Walmart tells record labels: We are the lowest price or else. Record companies bow to the power of the mightiest retailer.
Steve Jobs once again is shown that he doesn't understand the power circles of most of the corporate America.
Slashdot Mirror
In spite of what some would like to tell you, IQ is not a measurement of intelligence. It could be considered a measurement of knowledge and training. Admittedly those who are "More intelligent" in theory could learn better, but these things are so screwy that this is essentially meaningless.
Maybe first born are just home bodies, and thus spend more time studying.
This is a little different as the co.uk is a government determined domain, not a individually registerable domain.
Not entirely accurate, as you then have to define computers, but as close as I can come.
I have noticed a measurable decline in the total quantity of spam that I get in any given week (as measured by how much gets caught in my spam filter, almost none gets through).
I don't know if Microsoft is the only cause, but something is improving it for me, and my e-mail address hasn't changed.
Ok, call me paranoid, but it seems that the no DRM in a virtual machine component is trying very hard to make it so that people can't use office on a Macintosh. Sure you can pay for Windows, but you can't use office, which is really the only reason to run office on a Mac.
I know there is a Mac version of office. But it doesn't have the VBA components that drive many corporations.
I would postulate that his duty was to return fire when missles were launched. Missles were not launched, and he did not fire. Using good old common sense. That would mean he did his duty.
What I wish they did is what they did for Y2K. Put a military officer from the other country in the head quarters of the other. Then they could call and state what the exact situation was. It added an extra level of failsafe.
I have seen arguments that Digg will take over slashdot. But when a site grows, it always faces these types of issues, and editorial oversight is the only defense.
Yes. Yes. Yes. I can't mod otherwise +1 insightful.
Scientific theory is always just a model to explain the evidence. Some models do a much better job than others, but there are very few facts.
One thing that doesn't get mentioned here:
It is not a patent lawsuit, but an Anti-Trust lawsuit. That to me implies that there is no intellectual property rights that Adobe could use to try and bully Microsoft with.
If Anti-Trust is the only tool Adobe has, then none of the other solutions would be at risk.
There were far more than 40 viruses for Mac OS in the late 80's. I believe I used Virex, having to clean up one of my room mate's computers. Then there were the cross platform word Macro viruses.
Thankfully, Mac tightened up its security in the move to OS X. Windows tightened up security in.....?
I submitted that to Wired, yesterday. They ignored me. I'm glad someone here pointed it out.
I doubt that 99.9% safe would be deemed safe enough. 1 accident in every 1000 hours of driving would be a horrendous driving record.
(That is if I am interpretting the 99.9% the way you intended to).
The parts that torque people:
1) Changing licensing schemes, raising costs for companies dramatically, and having the nerve to call it "to lower customer costs".
2) Sending nasty letters to school districts at the end of the semester saying that they are about to have an audit of their licensing scheme, when they are short staffed as it is.
3) Purposely building their technology so it won't work well with other environment, thus preventing interoperability.
4) Illegal contracts regarding what computer companies can or can't sell if they want to be able to sell windows.
Just because they aren't found guilty of a crime in court, doesn't mean their activities are moral or ethical.
The problem doesn't seem to be his technical skills, but his management/time management skills. If you are fixing something, and he sits around watching, then that is a waste of his time. The fact that he doesn't know how to do something isn't the problem, the problem is that he doesn't recognize it, and instead of letting those who know just do it, he tries to, or has someone do it and watches them (a waste of his time).
A good manager should be able to let those with the best skills for the job get those jobs done.
If his technical ability is so low, that he can't understand the projects, and thus can't manage those, then there is a real issue.
Once you get a "manager" title, your technical skill immediately start degrading to some level, but theoretically your management skills should improve.
Jock does not necessarily correlate to popular. I was a geek. I was a jock (or maybe an athlete). I was not in the "Popular Crowd". Never joined a frat. Definite geek.
Not in the higher eschelons of looks thats for sure (but enough to be able to find a spouse).
Being a (former) chemist I agree. The key is to use the best model for your needs. Chemists and earth scientists have different needs, thus they may end up using different tables.
The key difference between the service of a plumber, and the service of a software writer, is that the work that a plumber does cannot be easily replicated. If you want a comparison, then you need to compare to artists, writers, etc. The exact purpose of copyright law. I think the previous example of JK Rowling is an excellent example.
Also, your example of each company having a single copy is about as inefficient a model as is possible. It just doesn't make business sense. Also, your model only applies to large contracts. How about games? No one would pay tens of millions of dollars to create a single game, but by using the market system, and spreading the cost out over millions of people it becomes viable.
Without copyright, I can guarantee that almost no games would be written (how many open source PC games are there that are close to the purchased games.)
I don't know why Disney decided to share the patents (the cynic in me says they did some research and realized that the public relations benefit outweighed the actual cost benefit).
Anything that reduces enviromental impact, distributed for free, is good.
Having gone to a liberal (in all senses of the word) arts college, and now being an IT manager responsible for a few hundred machines I can understand both sides.
Yes. There is a more central location for someone to attack. However, the average user doesn't take care of their system. In this case, you have to defend a single, actively malicious individual targetting your environment, rather than having to deal with the after effects of the bzillions of non-targetted attacks.
Unfortunately, as usually happens in situations like this, it is the conscientious user that has their system's security lowered. While, on average, the general security of the population is improved.
In my new position I can completely understand it.
When I was in college, I would have despised the very concept.
Overall, I think that this is probably better for the system. But I can sure understand why the "good" ones would feel like they are being punished for someone elses actions.
Side note: The people who are truly technical will probably be running some flavor of Linux/Unix so they won't be affected by this.
Being an IT Manager myself, and having IE available on all of my workstations, and listening to the extreme frustration amongst my peers regarding the insecurity of IE, I think it is a distinct possibility.
Yes, there are items that can only be accessed through IE. But as security holes continue to rear their ugly head, it starts becoming economical to find other solutions.
In the corporate environment, many of the items that you describe above not done by the end user anyway (patches, registration, etc. are all managed centrally).
You do have a valid point. Time will tell.
Microsoft used IE as a strategic tool. When it did so, browsers were in such a state of flux, that changing from Netscape 3 to 4 to wasn't much different than changing from Netscape 3 to IE 4. The mistake Microsoft is making is that if people start migrating away from IE, then there is no turning back. The browser market is moving slow, so the ease/incentive to move is significantly lower.
IT departments are going to be looking at changing browsers, and once they change, I doubt Microsoft will be able to regain the foothold.
Wow. There are 4 articles (or at least links) for slashdotters to not read before posting.
Or will the posts be based on the sound bites?
In response to both this and flok above. The article I remember reading was in Science News (a relatively reputable science journal). However, I could not find it in an online search. So, at this point I concede that I can't back it up.
I don't view prayer as a subsitute for medicine. Nor do I claim that it always works.
Even if it exclusively from the placebo effect (I'll let you find that evidence on your own).
Would someone please explain to me why someone wishing others well, is a bad thing?
I am a firm agnostic. As far as I'm concerned, when it comes to religion, I start by assuming everyone's wrong (even me).
With that in mind, they are starting to be scientific studies that show the power of prayer and how it helps. People who set out to disprove it, end up getting data that actually supports it.
I guess the bottom line is: Why degrade any form of positive support?
Conspiracy Theory 1:
Walmart is the one forcing them to drive up prices. Walmart tells record labels: We are the lowest price or else. Record companies bow to the power of the mightiest retailer.
Steve Jobs once again is shown that he doesn't understand the power circles of most of the corporate America.