And, if they are really clever, they will word the message such a way that the first letter of each word in the first sentence sends a somewhat crisper message. Since Google is in California, they can just call the guber to locate a specialist in this art
You mean like this (slightly improved) version:
Fair use is not what Mr. Murdoch makes it out to be;
until such time as this matter is resolved, we will be
careful to exclude all content, rather than have more bad
karma between him and ourselves.
Yesterday, we instituted a complete and total removal
of all references to News Corp properties; we trust that
ultimately, Mr. Murdoch will realize his mistake.
At the same time, we have asked our lawyers to
serve Mr. Murdoch with a demand that he stop
slandering us for "violating fair use".
His actions in this matter have left us no
other option to reduce our potential
liability, even though we feel we offer an
equitable and valuable service.
It says "XP or better". Surely, any recent distribution of Linux meets that, right?
Missing option: [_] I am Russian botmaster, you ignorant clod!
Besides, the "requirements" for this Esquire thing include "readers with IQ less than last years' Thanksgiving turkey". Considering where THAT turkey ended up...
Actually, they're lying. Robert Downey Jr. doesn't come alive on their cover. You use their cover instead of the mouse. Orient it different ways and the image on your computer (not the dead-tree cover) moves.
If this is "augmented reality", a Wii+balance board+wimote+nunchuck is SuperDuperAugmentedReality. As an added bonus, with a Wii I don't have to look at Robert Downey Jr.
It's official, folks, Esquire has jumped the shark.
Enjoying Esquire's AR issue requires downloading software -- Windows and Mac only
I use Linux, you insensitive clod!
It's LAME. Basically, it's some software that uses your webcam to recognize which page of the magazine you're holding up to the camera, and how the page is oriented - you're using the magazine as a mouse or pointer.
This is NOT "augmented reality" - it's print media going "OMFG I'M DYING HELP.Me.be.relevant.agggghhhhhh...." and FAILING!
This is about as "smart" an idea as the cue cat. Or for us really old farts, remember those weird graphics strips in PC Mag that you were supposed to scan in?
Why should I use a magazine as a controller? I'm going to look even stupider than the loon in the next cube with their light sabre.
Re:I think the big questions are "big"
on
The Big Questions
·
· Score: 1
For Hubbard, just look at all the people who denied (and still deny) that he's dead. There were law suits over it. For Hitler, look at how many people believed he escaped to South America. And you can do your own search - you're not crippled:-)
Perhaps you should re-read what I wrote. You completely missed the point of the examples.
I never said that skyscrapers were the most efficient shape for volume - I used them as an example of how you can't just blindly scale things up. Same as with ants the size of hippos - they wouldn't be able to walk because their legs don't have enough cross-sectional area. You can't just blindly scale things up.
Making a dome that covers 10x the area means much more than 10x the material, and much more than 10x the weight, because it has not only covermore area, it has to be thicker. Scaling up a dome from a couple of hundred feet to a mile is not simple, and requires a lot more material than covering the individual buildings.
Many smaller domes ends up using much less material than one large dome, for the same reason that a thin layer of saran wrap is sufficient to cover a bowl of leftovers, but the same thickness material would never be sufficiently strong to cover a swimming pool, never mind a city. If you scale up just the surface area of a small dome, without making the cross-sectional area much thicker to add more strength, it will tear itself apart.
Doming over individual houses is practical. Doming over an entire city is a disaster unless you're on another planet or moon.
I don't see why google just doesn't stop indexing their stuff for a while, and waiting for them to scream about how they're no longer in the serch results.
Then tell Murdoch "How much are you going to pay to be back in?"
Then, no matter how much he offers, say, "Not enough."
When he says "Well, how much would it cost?" reply "In your dreams, fatboy!"
Very true - they got caught hyping technology as being "best-in-breed" when it wasn't even released.
What amazes me is that anyone still listens to them, or Yankee Group, etc. Then again, the incompetent WOULD listen to the incompetent, since birds of a feather flock together...
Just goes to show that the Peter Principle is alive and well, I guess.
The only thing that can kill it is user disinterest.
But Oracle's lack of R&D commitment can cause user disinterest.
If users stop contributing, then it dies out. As long as users are still interested in netbeans being an active open-source project, it will continue whether Oracle contributes R&D or not.
However, I doubt the company and the employee are going to give up the bandwidth to do their communications over webcam all the time. Usually, the amount of email and IM chatter goes up, which is vastly inferior to face to face communication.
Bandwidth is so cheap it's virtually free.
As for email and IM going up, this is a "Good Thing!" Get people to put their thoughts into writing, and maybe they'll be less likely to issue so many brain farts (though slashdot appears to contradict that hope...)
I don't need full fidelity real-time audio-visual communications to be able to set out what I'm thinking. The written word is good enough. Anyone who can't put their thoughts coherently into a written format shouldn't be managing other people anyway. 50 years ago, it might have been different, but today basics such as email are a necessary skill for most businesses. We have too many "managers" who can't even write a coherent 2-page letter, and who, if they had to commit their "managing" to writing, would leave a blatantly obvious trail pointing to their incompetence.
The first 3 rules in business are still:
get it in writing
get it in writing
get it in writing
Let us know when that changes, and we'll reopen the issue.
How can you stock shelves, fix a broken sink, pour beer and mix drinks, or FUCK by telepresence? How can you fight a fire with telepresence? I think you're confusing telepresence with telekenesis.
I guess you don't know the difference between telecommuting and telepresence. Look them up. Doctors have performed surgery via telepresence. Police disarm bombs via telepresence.
The ability to manipulate a remote object or environment is an important aspect of real telepresence systems, and can be implemented in large number of ways depending on the needs of the user. Typically, the movements of the user's hands (position in space, and posture of the fingers) are sensed by wired gloves, inertial sensors, or absolute spatial position sensors. A robot in the remote location then copies those movements as closely as possible. This ability is also known as Teleoperation.
The more closely the robot re-creates the form factor of the human hand, the greater the sense of telepresence. Complexity of robotic effectors varies greatly, from simple one axis grippers, to fully anthropomorphic robot hands.
Haptic teleoperation refers to a system that provides some sort of tactile force feedback to the user, so the user feels some approximation of the weight, firmness, size, and/or texture of the remote objects manipulated by the robot.
What's non-committal about "NetBeans is expected to provide an additional open source option and complement to the two free tools Oracle already offers for enterprise Java development"
They say the same thing about OpenOffice, They expect netbeans to continue to remain a viable tool. Their history shows that they don't just throw tech out after spending money to buy it. Example: They didn't kill off InnoDB. they said virtually the same thing for OpenOffice
Oracle has a history of developing complete, integrated, and open products, making integration quicker and less costly for our customers. Based on the open ODF standard, OpenOffice is expected to create a compelling desktop integration bridge for our enterprise customers and offers consumers another choice on the desktop. After the transaction closes, Oracle plans to continue developing and supporting OpenOffice as open source.
NetBeans, OO, and MySQL are going to be open source projects under Oracles' roof. Being open source, it's not like Oracle can kill off any of them. They may not throw much financial or other muscle behind netbeans, but they don't have to for it to continue. If it were a closed-source product, that would be a different story. It's not. The only thing that can kill it is user disinterest.
In other words, Gartner are just trolling, like always.
Re:I think the big questions are "big"
on
The Big Questions
·
· Score: 1
So, suppose that Jesus really did just die. Then, inexplicably, a bunch of his followers, within 40 days after him being killed, run around telling everyone that he's alive and risen from the dead. Were they lying? Were they deceived? Were they crazy? Or were they telling the truth? There have been lots of examples of charismatic leaders gathering a following who thought he was something special. But how many other leaders, after being killed in a very public way, had their followers proclaim them still alive?
2 examples from recent history that you might recognize:
Hitler
L. Ron Hubbard
And that's with "modern people." How much more so for people when almost everyone believed in reincarnation, magic, etc.
Oracle has a strong track record of demonstrating commitment to choice for Java developers. As such, NetBeans is expected to provide an additional open source option and complement to the two free tools Oracle already offers for enterprise Java development: Oracle JDeveloper and Oracle Enterprise Pack for Eclipse. While Oracle JDeveloper remains Oracle's strategic development tool for the broad portfolio of Oracle Fusion Middleware products and for Oracle's next generation of enterprise applications, developers will be able to use whichever free tool they are most comfortable with for pure Java and Java EE development: JDeveloper, Enterprise Pack for Eclipse, or NetBeans.
The town is going to be generating a fair bit of heat (electrical appliances, people etc) and snow is a good insulator. Maybe with the right design the dome could turn into an igloo in the winter. Just ask the Canadians, they all live in igloos and they seem to get on just fine:)
I'll have to ask my neighbours when the sun comes back and the spring thaw melts the snow next July. That's if they survive the winter and haven't ended up like the Donners.
A better application of technology would be to cut the need for travel via telecomumting, telepresence, etc.
Except that most people who actually create wealth -- plumbers, electricians, carpenters, cooks, bartenders, etc., CAN'T telecommute.
With the right telepresence equipment, plumbers, electricians, carpenters, cooks, etc., CAN telecommute.
As can doctors, firemen, police, soldiers, stock boys, mechanics... teachers, students, programmers, customer service reps, etc.
Heck, with proper animatronics, even the bartender, the stripper and the prostitute could telecommute. Which leads to the question - if it's via telepresence and animatronics, is prostitution illegal?
The ice dam can actually form at any point on the roof - for example, on an area in the shade on even a well-insulated roof without much of a slope, or an accumulation of snow or ice.
There's also this from the article:
Fuller had built the "US Pavilion" at Expo Montreal in 1976 -- three-fourths of a sphere consisting of 1900 molded, transparent Plexiglas panels, 200 feet high and 250 feet in diameter, covering 1.1 acres.
We saw what happend later.
Also, if a large non-rigid dome deflates, or has a catastrophic failure, its' weight can cause a lot of damage. To get people who are trapped out, you're going to need to cut the dome.
Individual domes are cheaper, and don't present such a large disaster footprint in the event of failure.
The point is that there are lots of jobs that can be at least partially moved to either a telepresence or telecommute. Moving patients from floor to floor is something that can be completely automated.
Imagine being able to "see the doctor" without having to actually go to the hospital or clinic and wait wait wait around other sick people. Basic monitoring equipment (blood pressure, heart rate, blood sugar, temp) can be in every home for under $100.00. Heck, they're making the heart monitor into a gaming accessory. Web cams are so cheap they might as well be free.
We already do something like this over the phone, telling people if they should come in or not. This would just make it more effective in screening out false positives.
Why not? With the right waldos and other equipment on the other end, there's no reason why you couldn't do everything required, from checking for bugs to bundling up orders for shipping to watering to cutting and chilling, and maintaining the equipment - and this would mean that even people who are allergic to pollen or are hypersensitive to fragrances could work there.
Communication benefits greatly from gestures, facial cues, and subtle tone changes that can't be transmitted as well if they can be transmitted at all over a digital medium. For instance, if I were to say this in person, the meaning would change drastically depending on whether I was yelling while flipping you off or talking in a relative monotone. Digital communication can't fully replace face to face conversation, so it makes sense that in communication-rich environments telecommuting would be discouraged.
People's experience with TV and movies would disagree with you. Why can't gestures, facial cues, and tone changes be transmitted over a digital medium? Or is my TV an example of futuristic technology that I somehow got in a time warp? And hasn't the web cam been invented yet? And audio over the Internet? Maybe I should go out and patent it...
Maybe. But most jobs require people to be there, and those of us who support those people must "be there", too.
[citation required]
Most jobs, with the right technology, don't require the physical presence of people.
We just aren't there yet. Sure, some of the technology is lacking, but it's more a matter of willingness.
Most jobs that require people to consult with each other can be switched to telecommuting. We already have this for dangerous offenders and their court appearances. Also for education, surgery, some police work, call centers, etc.
We're supposed to be high-tech people, and yet we resist adopting high-tech solutions. Why do we still insist on wasting 20% of our time going to and from work? It's stupid, especially in this industry.
I personally like going into work. Yes, I have the ability to VPN in, but being in the office removes so many distractions, puts me in the right state of mind, and even though I am in a building full of about 1000 IT workers I still have at least one meeting per day, and it is so much more productive to have everyone there in person then to have to communicate over teleconference or screen sharing.
I found it to be the exact opposite. Too many distractions from co-workers, too much LACK of effective communications because people would sit around in meetings and talk/bullshit their way through stuff instead of properly writing it out, thinking it through, and documenting the whys and hows for their reasons. 3 rules: Put it in writing. Put it in writing. Put it in writing. But meetings tend to be excuses for lazy people to avoid thinking efficiently. I refuse to sit in any meeting where someone has a powerpoint presentation. I can read - don't waste my time making me listen to you lip-synching to your idiotgraphs because you never learned how to write effectively and need to put everyone into a brain-numbed state.
They come up with the stupidest things, stuff that, if they actually had to put it in a proper format, properly documented with references, they'd delete it after the first or second draft. but no, pretty pictures and bullet points instead of proper research and hard numbers. I would leave, come back when they're finished, and STILL demolish it in the first couple of minutes. Them: "You're so negative!" Me: "You obviously didn't spend 10 minutes researching this r you'd know it's been done a dozen times before, it's not some new idea. And your projections are pure wishful thinking, and have no basis in reality." What a waste.
Most meetings simply aren't necessary, and most of the time is spent in CYA (CoverYourAss) or JMJ (JustifyMyJob). Additionally, creative work sometimes needs solitude, rather than "I have to lok like I'm working, so I can't take time to do any really deep thinking." That's just f*ed up, but it's the way it is.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean like this (slightly improved) version:
Fair use is not what Mr. Murdoch makes it out to be;
until such time as this matter is resolved, we will be
careful to exclude all content, rather than have more bad
karma between him and ourselves.
Yesterday, we instituted a complete and total removal
of all references to News Corp properties; we trust that
ultimately, Mr. Murdoch will realize his mistake.
At the same time, we have asked our lawyers to
serve Mr. Murdoch with a demand that he stop
slandering us for "violating fair use".
His actions in this matter have left us no
other option to reduce our potential
liability, even though we feel we offer an
equitable and valuable service.
Somewhere in the world, an advertiser just pissed off another customer by insulting their intelligence.
There, fixed it for you.
... is the sound of magazine pages fluttering in the breeze as Esquire jumps the shark.
Actually, they're lying. Robert Downey Jr. doesn't come alive on their cover. You use their cover instead of the mouse. Orient it different ways and the image on your computer (not the dead-tree cover) moves.
If this is "augmented reality", a Wii+balance board+wimote+nunchuck is SuperDuperAugmentedReality. As an added bonus, with a Wii I don't have to look at Robert Downey Jr.
It's official, folks, Esquire has jumped the shark.
It's LAME. Basically, it's some software that uses your webcam to recognize which page of the magazine you're holding up to the camera, and how the page is oriented - you're using the magazine as a mouse or pointer.
This is NOT "augmented reality" - it's print media going "OMFG I'M DYING HELP.Me.be.relevant.agggghhhhhh...." and FAILING!
This is about as "smart" an idea as the cue cat. Or for us really old farts, remember those weird graphics strips in PC Mag that you were supposed to scan in?
Why should I use a magazine as a controller? I'm going to look even stupider than the loon in the next cube with their light sabre.
For Hubbard, just look at all the people who denied (and still deny) that he's dead. There were law suits over it. For Hitler, look at how many people believed he escaped to South America. And you can do your own search - you're not crippled :-)
Perhaps you should re-read what I wrote. You completely missed the point of the examples.
I never said that skyscrapers were the most efficient shape for volume - I used them as an example of how you can't just blindly scale things up. Same as with ants the size of hippos - they wouldn't be able to walk because their legs don't have enough cross-sectional area. You can't just blindly scale things up.
Making a dome that covers 10x the area means much more than 10x the material, and much more than 10x the weight, because it has not only covermore area, it has to be thicker. Scaling up a dome from a couple of hundred feet to a mile is not simple, and requires a lot more material than covering the individual buildings.
Many smaller domes ends up using much less material than one large dome, for the same reason that a thin layer of saran wrap is sufficient to cover a bowl of leftovers, but the same thickness material would never be sufficiently strong to cover a swimming pool, never mind a city. If you scale up just the surface area of a small dome, without making the cross-sectional area much thicker to add more strength, it will tear itself apart.
Doming over individual houses is practical. Doming over an entire city is a disaster unless you're on another planet or moon.
I don't see why google just doesn't stop indexing their stuff for a while, and waiting for them to scream about how they're no longer in the serch results.
Then tell Murdoch "How much are you going to pay to be back in?"
Then, no matter how much he offers, say, "Not enough."
When he says "Well, how much would it cost?" reply "In your dreams, fatboy!"
Very true - they got caught hyping technology as being "best-in-breed" when it wasn't even released.
What amazes me is that anyone still listens to them, or Yankee Group, etc. Then again, the incompetent WOULD listen to the incompetent, since birds of a feather flock together ...
Just goes to show that the Peter Principle is alive and well, I guess.
If users stop contributing, then it dies out. As long as users are still interested in netbeans being an active open-source project, it will continue whether Oracle contributes R&D or not.
Bandwidth is so cheap it's virtually free.
As for email and IM going up, this is a "Good Thing!" Get people to put their thoughts into writing, and maybe they'll be less likely to issue so many brain farts (though slashdot appears to contradict that hope ...)
I don't need full fidelity real-time audio-visual communications to be able to set out what I'm thinking. The written word is good enough. Anyone who can't put their thoughts coherently into a written format shouldn't be managing other people anyway. 50 years ago, it might have been different, but today basics such as email are a necessary skill for most businesses. We have too many "managers" who can't even write a coherent 2-page letter, and who, if they had to commit their "managing" to writing, would leave a blatantly obvious trail pointing to their incompetence.
The first 3 rules in business are still:
Let us know when that changes, and we'll reopen the issue.
I guess you don't know the difference between telecommuting and telepresence. Look them up. Doctors have performed surgery via telepresence. Police disarm bombs via telepresence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telepresence#Manipulation
You can apologize now.
Find someone you trust who's already a customer. Word of mouth beats any number of white papers or studies or guarantees.
What's non-committal about "NetBeans is expected to provide an additional open source option and complement to the two free tools Oracle already offers for enterprise Java development"
They say the same thing about OpenOffice, They expect netbeans to continue to remain a viable tool. Their history shows that they don't just throw tech out after spending money to buy it. Example: They didn't kill off InnoDB. they said virtually the same thing for OpenOffice
NetBeans, OO, and MySQL are going to be open source projects under Oracles' roof. Being open source, it's not like Oracle can kill off any of them. They may not throw much financial or other muscle behind netbeans, but they don't have to for it to continue. If it were a closed-source product, that would be a different story. It's not. The only thing that can kill it is user disinterest.
In other words, Gartner are just trolling, like always.
2 examples from recent history that you might recognize:
And that's with "modern people." How much more so for people when almost everyone believed in reincarnation, magic, etc.
TFA is quoting Gartner. When is the last time Gartner got something right? It's full of weasel words. Lots of "If ..."
Read what Oracle wrote. They're not abandoning NetBeans.
Fuck Gartner. Fuck them in the heart.
I'll have to ask my neighbours when the sun comes back and the spring thaw melts the snow next July. That's if they survive the winter and haven't ended up like the Donners.
With the right telepresence equipment, plumbers, electricians, carpenters, cooks, etc., CAN telecommute.
As can doctors, firemen, police, soldiers, stock boys, mechanics ... teachers, students, programmers, customer service reps, etc.
Heck, with proper animatronics, even the bartender, the stripper and the prostitute could telecommute. Which leads to the question - if it's via telepresence and animatronics, is prostitution illegal?
The ice dam can actually form at any point on the roof - for example, on an area in the shade on even a well-insulated roof without much of a slope, or an accumulation of snow or ice.
There's also this from the article:
The point is that there are lots of jobs that can be at least partially moved to either a telepresence or telecommute. Moving patients from floor to floor is something that can be completely automated.
Imagine being able to "see the doctor" without having to actually go to the hospital or clinic and wait wait wait around other sick people. Basic monitoring equipment (blood pressure, heart rate, blood sugar, temp) can be in every home for under $100.00. Heck, they're making the heart monitor into a gaming accessory. Web cams are so cheap they might as well be free.
We already do something like this over the phone, telling people if they should come in or not. This would just make it more effective in screening out false positives.
People's experience with TV and movies would disagree with you. Why can't gestures, facial cues, and tone changes be transmitted over a digital medium? Or is my TV an example of futuristic technology that I somehow got in a time warp? And hasn't the web cam been invented yet? And audio over the Internet? Maybe I should go out and patent it ...
[citation required]
Most jobs, with the right technology, don't require the physical presence of people.
We just aren't there yet. Sure, some of the technology is lacking, but it's more a matter of willingness.
Most jobs that require people to consult with each other can be switched to telecommuting. We already have this for dangerous offenders and their court appearances. Also for education, surgery, some police work, call centers, etc.
We're supposed to be high-tech people, and yet we resist adopting high-tech solutions. Why do we still insist on wasting 20% of our time going to and from work? It's stupid, especially in this industry.
I found it to be the exact opposite. Too many distractions from co-workers, too much LACK of effective communications because people would sit around in meetings and talk/bullshit their way through stuff instead of properly writing it out, thinking it through, and documenting the whys and hows for their reasons. 3 rules: Put it in writing. Put it in writing. Put it in writing. But meetings tend to be excuses for lazy people to avoid thinking efficiently. I refuse to sit in any meeting where someone has a powerpoint presentation. I can read - don't waste my time making me listen to you lip-synching to your idiotgraphs because you never learned how to write effectively and need to put everyone into a brain-numbed state.
They come up with the stupidest things, stuff that, if they actually had to put it in a proper format, properly documented with references, they'd delete it after the first or second draft. but no, pretty pictures and bullet points instead of proper research and hard numbers. I would leave, come back when they're finished, and STILL demolish it in the first couple of minutes. Them: "You're so negative!" Me: "You obviously didn't spend 10 minutes researching this r you'd know it's been done a dozen times before, it's not some new idea. And your projections are pure wishful thinking, and have no basis in reality." What a waste.
Most meetings simply aren't necessary, and most of the time is spent in CYA (CoverYourAss) or JMJ (JustifyMyJob). Additionally, creative work sometimes needs solitude, rather than "I have to lok like I'm working, so I can't take time to do any really deep thinking." That's just f*ed up, but it's the way it is.