Just try explaining it to your insurance company after your house gets robbed, or some idiot airport security inspector accidently trashes your laptop.
Heck, given that theory, one fire should net me more than enough to retire on.
Everyone makes valid points, but experience has taught me (at least in my current environment)that the most troublesome people to support are those with more than they need. The costs are hidden, things like hours of down time, tech pay while a drive defrags and rebuilding BRAND NEW SYSTEMS (!?) stuff like that. Not to mention that as soon as users here see available space, they find a way to fill it in the most heinous ways. We've already gotten smacked by the RIAA for someones mp3 share. And illegitamate software is a constant worry. Mind you, the true cause of all this is upper managements "no policies" policy. IT doesnt govern the systems (eeep) so users can do what they like. It would just make things better for everyone if they didn't have the space to. Hence partial drive partitioning.
"Urie says his company doesn't heavily research consumer attitude, noting, "We tend to ask how can we make more money and sell more product, not deal with consumer gripes."
Perhaps he needs to re-introduce the word "customer" into his vocabulary. How many items that you've purchased recently (besides food/drink) have you actually consumed?
Why doesn't anyone make cheap, fast, small (3-6gig) HDs?
There really is ZERO reason for the office folk at my workplace to have the 30gig drives that we are getting these days. And we cant get smaller drives. So they just wind up only getting a 6 gig partition. Lotta waste.
No, but I'd imagine it would be very similar to broadcasters digitally changing ads at sports venues, like baseball stadiums, during the telecast of the game.
"Equipped with Longhorn, your PC will keep track of how you work, whom you talk to, what sites you look at, how you make documents and whom you share them with, which data on the network are yours--making all those things easier."
I can do that all myself thank you very much, I don't need a machine to babysit me.
"Just wait till they sue over the LoTR Part II title claiming it's offensive."
Too late, sortof. Some idiot has already created a petition movement to have the movie retitled. They seem to think there was never a book written by that name dozens of years ago.
And did you hear about the Starbucks ad campaign that was pulled? Two bottles of iced tea with a dragonfly in the background, can't have that happening. This country if full of idiots.
Not quite, you need a majority of legislators in agreement to pass a Very Bad Law, and that generally means currying favor, which often means cash or back scratching. Perfect hunting ground for big-money lobbiests. Who generally get fed by big-money corps. "Democratic" countries need more than one legislator for a Very Bad Law.
Granted the subject matter involved is spooky, and I really dont want anyone monkeying with any train with a nuclear payload, but still.
We're back to ANOTHER linking issue! WTF? Did the New York Times ever go down for doing the same exact thing as 2600?
The principle issue at hand is the general ignorance (about the net and how it works) of those who create, enforce, and rule on the laws.
There are a great number of people with a decent level of understanding about the internet, and sufficient common sense to know what just is a Very Bad Idea(TM). But basically none of them are in lawmaking bodies around the world. They aren't greatly organized, they don't have a powerful lobby, they don't pack the monsterous cash warchests that the corps have. So what happens?
You get:
1)Trigger situation - someone does something somewhere related to computers or the net that some other body disapproves of, legal or otherwise.
2)Very Bad Law - disapproving body (often big corp) goes after (paid for or otherwise) new law that is so over the top that it looks completely loony to anyone who understands the technologies involved.
3)Uproar - you and I and everyone else wets themself laughing then realizes that there could be very bad consequences.
4)Sacrifical Lamb - some poor bastard (usually the poor soul from item 1) is hung out to dry while courts and lawmakers argue point they likely don't understand, insert paid experts from all sides. And lawyers, lots of lawyers.
5)Bad Law - eventually everything settles down and Very Bad Law goes away, but Bad Law is put in its place. Compromise isn't always a good thing.
Most Bad Laws regarding technology that we have now are actually the sons of Very Bad Laws.
Thats the problem. The inevitable compromise. A compromise about an issue that should never been an issue.
Granted the subject matter involved is spooky, and I really dont want anyone monkeying with any train with a nuclear payload, but still.
We're back to ANOTHER linking issue! WTF? Did the New York Times ever go down for doing the same exact thing as 2600?
The principle issue at hand is the general ignorance (about the net and how it works) of those who create, enforce, and rule on the laws.
There are a great number of people with a decent level of understanding about the internet, and sufficient common sense to know what just is a Very Bad Idea(TM). But basically none of them are in lawmaking bodies around the world. They aren't greatly organized, they don't have a powerful lobby, they don't pack the monsterous cash warchests that the corps have. So what happens?
You get:
1)Trigger situation - someone does something somewhere related to computers or the net that some other body disapproves of, legal or otherwise.
2)Very Bad Law - disapproving body (often big corp) goes after (paid for or otherwise) new law that is so over the top that it looks completely loony to anyone who understands the technologies involved.
3)Uproar - you and I and everyone else wets themself laughing then realizes that there could be very bad consequences.
4)Sacrifical Lamb - some poor bastard (usually the poor soul from item 1) is hung out to dry while courts and lawmakers argue point they likely don't understand, insert paid experts from all sides. And lawyers, lots of lawyers.
5)Bad Law - eventually everything settles down and Very Bad Law goes away, but Bad Law is put in its place. Compromise isn't always a good thing.
Most Bad Laws regarding technology that we have now are actually the sons of Very Bad Laws.
If integratd cameras are to be all the rage, then why hasn't anyone (to my knowledge, and if I'm wrong please correct me) build a PDA with a Sony Picturebook style camera in it? I would find it many times more useful than a "phone-cam". And while they're at it, put a phone in the PDA, with just a headset jack for mic/speaker. Small device, easy enough to carry on a belt, in a pocket or a shoulder rig.
2) Yes, but a camera in my phone wouldn't be my first, or even second choice.
3) Uh, nope.
While its cool the tech sector and mad scientists everywhere are trying to put everything we'll ever use into one little box, I want them to get re-focused on the important stuff.
First off, figure out a way I can safely put metal in a microwave. And secondly, I want my flying car damnit! I mean, its 2002 for crying out loud. Where the hell are the flying cars!?
Blah, all in all, cute toy, but doomed I would think.
Slashdot Mirror
Just try explaining it to your insurance company after your house gets robbed, or some idiot airport security inspector accidently trashes your laptop.
Heck, given that theory, one fire should net me more than enough to retire on.
No, but my P4 can brew a nice cup of tea =]
Everyone makes valid points, but experience has taught me (at least in my current environment)that the most troublesome people to support are those with more than they need. The costs are hidden, things like hours of down time, tech pay while a drive defrags and rebuilding BRAND NEW SYSTEMS (!?) stuff like that. Not to mention that as soon as users here see available space, they find a way to fill it in the most heinous ways. We've already gotten smacked by the RIAA for someones mp3 share. And illegitamate software is a constant worry. Mind you, the true cause of all this is upper managements "no policies" policy. IT doesnt govern the systems (eeep) so users can do what they like. It would just make things better for everyone if they didn't have the space to. Hence partial drive partitioning.
Except you can't heat your home with email. =]
"Urie says his company doesn't heavily research consumer attitude, noting, "We tend to ask how can we make more money and sell more product, not deal with consumer gripes."
Perhaps he needs to re-introduce the word "customer" into his vocabulary. How many items that you've purchased recently (besides food/drink) have you actually consumed?
Why doesn't anyone make cheap, fast, small (3-6gig) HDs?
There really is ZERO reason for the office folk at my workplace to have the 30gig drives that we are getting these days. And we cant get smaller drives.
So they just wind up only getting a 6 gig partition. Lotta waste.
There are only two words that need to be said to explain why the music industry is tanking (if it is indeed, which I doubt):
American Idol
No, but I'd imagine it would be very similar to broadcasters digitally changing ads at sports venues, like baseball stadiums, during the telecast of the game.
"Equipped with Longhorn, your PC will keep track of how you work, whom you talk to, what sites you look at, how you make documents and whom you share them with, which data on the network are yours--making all those things easier."
I can do that all myself thank you very much, I don't need a machine to babysit me.
"Just wait till they sue over the LoTR Part II title claiming it's offensive."
Too late, sortof. Some idiot has already created a petition movement to have the movie retitled. They seem to think there was never a book written by that name dozens of years ago.
And did you hear about the Starbucks ad campaign that was pulled? Two bottles of iced tea with a dragonfly in the background, can't have that happening. This country if full of idiots.
Very true, but with so many lawmakers to choose from, its easy to find one ignorant/corrupt enough to get the ball rolling.
As for term limits, I've been in favor of that for aeons.
And actually Nixon is starting to look pretty good lately. =P
Not quite, you need a majority of legislators in agreement to pass a Very Bad Law, and that generally means currying favor, which often means cash or back scratching. Perfect hunting ground for big-money lobbiests. Who generally get fed by big-money corps. "Democratic" countries need more than one legislator for a Very Bad Law.
Granted the subject matter involved is spooky, and I really dont want anyone monkeying with any train with a nuclear payload, but still.
We're back to ANOTHER linking issue! WTF? Did the New York Times ever go down for doing the same exact thing as 2600?
The principle issue at hand is the general ignorance (about the net and how it works) of those who create, enforce, and rule on the laws.
There are a great number of people with a decent level of understanding about the internet, and sufficient common sense to know what just is a Very Bad Idea(TM). But basically none of them are in lawmaking bodies around the world. They aren't greatly organized, they don't have a powerful lobby, they don't pack the monsterous cash warchests that the corps have. So what happens?
You get:
1)Trigger situation - someone does something somewhere related to computers or the net that some other body disapproves of, legal or otherwise.
2)Very Bad Law - disapproving body (often big corp) goes after (paid for or otherwise) new law that is so over the top that it looks completely loony to anyone who understands the technologies involved.
3)Uproar - you and I and everyone else wets themself laughing then realizes that there could be very bad consequences.
4)Sacrifical Lamb - some poor bastard (usually the poor soul from item 1) is hung out to dry while courts and lawmakers argue point they likely don't understand, insert paid experts from all sides. And lawyers, lots of lawyers.
5)Bad Law - eventually everything settles down and Very Bad Law goes away, but Bad Law is put in its place. Compromise isn't always a good thing.
Most Bad Laws regarding technology that we have now are actually the sons of Very Bad Laws.
Thats the problem. The inevitable compromise. A compromise about an issue that should never been an issue.
Granted the subject matter involved is spooky, and I really dont want anyone monkeying with any train with a nuclear payload, but still.
We're back to ANOTHER linking issue! WTF? Did the New York Times ever go down for doing the same exact thing as 2600?
The principle issue at hand is the general ignorance (about the net and how it works) of those who create, enforce, and rule on the laws.
There are a great number of people with a decent level of understanding about the internet, and sufficient common sense to know what just is a Very Bad Idea(TM). But basically none of them are in lawmaking bodies around the world. They aren't greatly organized, they don't have a powerful lobby, they don't pack the monsterous cash warchests that the corps have. So what happens?
You get:
1)Trigger situation - someone does something somewhere related to computers or the net that some other body disapproves of, legal or otherwise.
2)Very Bad Law - disapproving body (often big corp) goes after (paid for or otherwise) new law that is so over the top that it looks completely loony to anyone who understands the technologies involved.
3)Uproar - you and I and everyone else wets themself laughing then realizes that there could be very bad consequences.
4)Sacrifical Lamb - some poor bastard (usually the poor soul from item 1) is hung out to dry while courts and lawmakers argue point they likely don't understand, insert paid experts from all sides. And lawyers, lots of lawyers.
5)Bad Law - eventually everything settles down and Very Bad Law goes away, but Bad Law is put in its place. Compromise isn't always a good thing.
Most Bad Laws regarding technology that we have now are actually the sons of Very Bad Laws.
I think I need to walk away now, go live in the woods away from human stupidity, before I have a 'Scannrs' moment.
Would the last of you to leave please lock up and make sure the internet is switched off?
If they want fees for netcasts, so be it.
But only if THEY GIVE US BACK THE FUCKING D CLASS BROADCASTING LICENSES!!!
I hate these bastards so much its going to eventually kill me, must we be spoon fed everything?
ENOUGH! They want a war, fine, they got it. Anyone want to try to organize a broadcast radio blackout of some sort?
Cool. I hadn't (obviously) been on top of all these nifty little toys. Now if they were just popular enough to be widely available. =P
(There isn't much to be had in local electronics shops, and I'd like to handle one before buying it)
If integratd cameras are to be all the rage, then why hasn't anyone (to my knowledge, and if I'm wrong please correct me) build a PDA with a Sony Picturebook style camera in it? I would find it many times more useful than a "phone-cam". And while they're at it, put a phone in the PDA, with just a headset jack for mic/speaker. Small device, easy enough to carry on a belt, in a pocket or a shoulder rig.
uh...
1) Very rarely, if ever.
2) Yes, but a camera in my phone wouldn't be my first, or even second choice.
3) Uh, nope.
While its cool the tech sector and mad scientists everywhere are trying to put everything we'll ever use into one little box, I want them to get re-focused on the important stuff.
First off, figure out a way I can safely put metal in a microwave. And secondly, I want my flying car damnit! I mean, its 2002 for crying out loud. Where the hell are the flying cars!?
Blah, all in all, cute toy, but doomed I would think.
Would they have been something along the lines of
"Bite my shiny metal a**!
or
"Worst. Convention. Ever."?
As long as it doesn't begin with "i" or "e".
That troubles you? Imagine how troubling it is to realise that you're the first to think of it.
Damn. Renting LP's. That takes me back.
Yeah its the JHU shop, basically all CD. Weird.
Normal's is cool. As is Music Exchange for vinyl (are they still around?).
BTW, it figures the only slashdotter that happens to pick up on an obscure yet coincidental GIJoe reference is somehow connected to B-more.
...could he split a beer atom?
Man, half of me just went "Oh, cool!" and the other half said "Dear god, why?"