I think the best line in this rant is about 3/4ths the way down:
I think we should work on understanding how people can make a living by creating new things and providing services, rather than by restricting the duplication of existing things.
Afterall, isn't that what open source is all about?
OK fine, there were 1.4 million downloads of songs from artists who had record contracts. How many people already owned the CD with the song they were downloading? How many already had the CD and were downloading a copy for personal use? That's the real crime, and I think even Lars would agree with that.
Many people are too stupid to make MP3s themselves, so they download them from other people. I have seen it. Don't believe there is that many idiots on the planet?... check AOL's current subscriber count.
What's the difference between this and radio?
on
MP3.com's Beam-It
·
· Score: 4
Ok, here's a thought... What's the difference between this and an all-request radio station? Answer: You *own* the CDs already (at least in theory).
Think about it. If there were a request radio station, and you were the only listener, is there a law preventing them from playing whatever you request? So what's to stop MP3.com from just streaming to you personally *ANY* music you choose to listen to? (Regardless album ownership.) It's theoretically no different than request radio.
Yeah, we can *record* a media stream, but I can also record songs off the radio. What's the difference? Just because this is more customized? Because it's on the Internet? Big whoop -- every real life radio station tries to do this exactly: play songs I want to hear. It just so happens that online they can do it to perfection through mass customization.
I don't think MP3.com has gone far enough! I shouldn't need the CD to listen to music - I should be able to listen to ANYTHING they have available.
The really amazing part about all this isn't that the $600-billion behemoth didn't pay their bill, nor is it the fact that they did not get any special treatment from the domain name folks. It's not even the fact that a Linux programmer (who says their zealots?) paid the bill.
The amazing story here is that Hotmail was essentially unavailable to an alleged 52 million people for several hours, and M$ was not even *AWARE* of the problem - let alone finding a solution.
Michael Chaney did not find and fix this problem by himself. He was online with other geeks when, like the others, he was unable to get his mail. They *COLLABORATED* to figure out the problem. Chaney happened to be the guy who paid the bill, but he wasn't the first to figure out what the problem was.
This is more than embarrassing to M$, it is a sign of things to come. The problem was made public (by virtue of the fact that Hotmail is publicly available), diagnosed through collaboration across the Internet, and *fixed* by a rogue individual who simply wanted to get his email. The open source model proved faster and more efficient than M$. It got the job done before M$ was even aware there was a problem.
"The problem with standards bodies is... They can be very political and they need money to run and they have to listen to their constituents, which change over time."
M$ fought java every step of the way... first with web browsers (IE 2.0 didn't support Java), then with VBScript, then with 'ActiveX' (remember how they claimed it was designed for networks simply by dumping a few of the weighty COM interfaces), then by the old standby embrace and extend
Oh yeah, and let's not forget DHTML, and now XML!!!
How quickly we forget what made Windows popular in the first place... Tools! (It certainly wasn't the Win 3.1 interface.) Microsoft has always supported developers fantastically. It's a symbiotic relationship - they get to control the standards and the platform, and we write tons of apps and make their platform ubiquitous. We get great documentation and productive tools, they get sales.
Since Sun now controls the standards (come on - you know they do), Microsoft wants no part in it. If they can't embrace, extend, and... well, you know. What is in it for them to promote Java? They are going to take their ball and go home! The last thing they want is to make it easy for another company to muscle in on *their* platform.
Don't get me wrong. I use the MS JVM on my IIS servers to host several objects written in Java, and I access those components in ASPs as COM objects. It's easy and convienent.
BUT, there is a *reason* I used Java to make COM objects (instead of C++ or VB)... because I knew someday M$ would yank the Java chain. How could I know this? M$ fought java every step of the way... first with web browsers (IE 2.0 didn't support Java), then with VBScript, then with 'ActiveX' (remember how they claimed it was designed for networks simply by dumping a few of the weighty COM interfaces), then by the old standby embrace and extend. I chose Java because I didn't want to get tied to M$'s 'technology of the month' as they thrashed over Java.
But so what? It is not outside the realm of possibility for me to port ~1,000 ASP pages to Linux/Apache/TowerJ/PHP because of the technologies I chose: SQL, Java, COM/Javabeans, and little bit of forethought. That's the great thing about *real* standards.
Today, I am more comfortable using Java knowing that the irresponsible and greedy hands of Bill Gates are out of the cookie jar. I just hope the developers get the documentation and support they need to succeed with Java - even on M$ platforms.
First, I ranted on another post. You may want to check that.
As for the differing views:
Administration- They see online courses as a huge revenue generator. They *think* they'll be able to have one instructor teach hundreds (thousands?) of students simultaneously, without having to spend a lot of money on buildings, equipment, etc. This is (of course) totally false. It has been my impression that the amount of work it takes to teach a course (properly) online is directly proportional to the number of students. Unlike a traditional classroom, where most interaction is in plain view, online courses require a lot of one on one communication between the faculty and the student. If you have 100 students, you have 100x as much email than if you have 1 student.
Faculty (camp #1)- They fear online classrooms for the same reason administration likes it; they think it will take their jobs. These are the luddites. They know what they are doing, they've always done it this way, and the new way is worse! (yeah, right... and the Internet is a fad - soon we'll go back to mimeographs because that was so much better.)
Faculty (camp #2)- These are the people that *think* they know how to do all this. They'll use some POS software and create a message board, maybe a chatroom and a Real video clip, then post their syllabus online and think they've just re-invented education. These are the zealots. They don't realize what they don't know about the technology, or the frankenstien they've just created.
Students- Hey, anything to get out of class. Seriously though, DL is really best for *adult* students who *can't* make it to a traditional classroom because of careers, families, location, etc. Adults are best because it takes a LOT of intiative to take an online course... there is no (IMHO shouldn't be) *set* class time. Without that constant, regular, and scheduled face time that a traditional class brings it can be easy to fall behind. You really have to take reasponsibility for your own learning.
Of course the truth to all this is somewhere in the middle. What is the web all about? Information... Communication. It is inevitable that *class* will be taught online - but the final form will not be any of these views.
Right now there is a lot of snake oil. Everyone wants to be first, but not many are trying to be the best, but give it time. As someone who reads slashdot, and probably is familiar with opensource, you know that the cream will rise to the top. The best ideas, the best programs, and the best implementations will prevail. That's what you are looking for now, isn't it?;-)
I actually work for a university as the webmaster responsible for our online distance learning department. We don't offer any kind of CS degree, so my opinion is only biased by my own prejudices. These are also just my personal opinions. Now, to the questions I may be able to help you answer...
> What are the policies on transfered credits, and 'Challenge for Credit' (testing out of a course for full credit) ?
Every program is accredited by one or more accrediting bodies. There is no such thing as "fully accredited". There are only agreements between colleges and accrediting agencies on what a course or program is *worth*. Therefore, if you plan on transferring credits between institutions you will need to contact the destination institution to find out if that course (and be specific that it is a DL course) will transfer and how the credits will be treated (i.e. if and how they can be applied toward the degree).
>I do NOT want a buy-a-degree type thing. I'm more then willing to put in the effort and go through the course load...
I would not recommend Phoenix. They are the most together, have the most courses, the most degrees, the best marketing, and are pretty high on customer service. However, they are also the most expensive, most commercial (as in for-profit-mercenary), and least interested in providing a good education. They can get you your degree - though not an education - and they will make sure you pay for it.
In the *realm* of distance learning Maryland and Colorado are good schools. (I'd like to think we are too, but I'm biased and we don't offer CS anyhow.)
Also, watch out for programs that make you use *special* software to access their classrooms or that outsource their online materials. A lot of this software is terrible. If the university doesn't have or is not willing to commit the resources to develop their own online classrooms then they probably aren't ready to deliver at a distance. Think about it: do would you outsource your core business functions?
<rant>This software/outsourcing course creation thing chaps my beans... it's whole purpose is to allow the instructors to create courses on their own, so the university doesn't have to make a large investment in actually supporting the development, the faculty, or the students. Don't get me wrong, the instructors are always experts in their fields, but is it really reasonable to expect them to be experts in multimedia development and online delivery as well? They don't even write books without a team of editors and graphic designers to support them! How can you expect them to be experts at web and media design and the tools they require? Is it reasonable to think we can *dumb* the process down that far and still produce a quality product? I don't think so either... no wonder DL is getting a bad name. A good course can only be created by a team that includes experts in design, programming, and GUI as well as experts on the subject matter.</rant>
Wait... he said he didn't want to buy a degree, he said he wanted to actually learn something. I don't think you should recommend Phoenix. They are a private institution out to make a buck off working adults, not provide a good education. If all you want is a piece of paper, Phoenix is the place to be... but don't expect the degree to be worth more than Phoenix's reputation (poor).
I think univerisity of Maryland is a better bet.
But whatever you do, make sure you preview their online materials first. A lot of the for-credit online courses rely on email, poorly designed messaging systems (bulliten boards), and a pitance of multimedia apps to convey the subject matter. You often don't get as much from the instructor out of online classrooms as you do in a brick and mortar setting.
I followed the instructions on the TRUSTe site and filed a complaint. If enough people do this, then *maybe* they'll start taking themselves seriously. The ball is in their court. They need to take their mission seriously before they'll get any respect from the public or their licensees.
Does anyone know who we can email at the ISP? It seems reasonable for us to ask what their policies are before we consider them as possible hosts...;-)
The boys story, while *unusual*, is not a problem. It is our reaction to it that causes long term damage. What did the boy learn from this? Violence and the implied threat of it scares people, and that gives him a sort of power, if not respect.
How many of us have suffered through diversity training? Well, diversity is more than race and sex. It includes social behavior. As a general rule, a person who thinks, acts, or believes differently does not need to be locked up. When we learn to accept and appreciate people at the fringe of society we learn to stop pushing them over the edge.
Nice to see what can be done when you cut Ma' Bell out of the loop. Further proof that the telecos in the US are corrupt and don't serve the interest of their customers.
First hockey, then comedians and musicians, now the world's fastest network. How do I move to emigrate?
RedHat is a business. Their model is like few others, and they do a lot of good things(TM) for the open source community and for Linux, but they are still a business.
You pose the question "where does Linux and open source get the most bang for the buck?"
This is the wrong question. It should read: "Where does RedHat get the most bang for the buck?"
Let's face it, the value of the free publicity RedHat receives is greater than their $10M in gross sales. The last thing they need to do is buy software companies or vendors and *give* their goods away. They need a solid foothold in something more than an emerging market. What is best for linux, and best for open source, is not always what is best for RedHat.
Purchasing SCO seems like a sound business decision... and very cool. It would benifit Linux, RedHat, and Un*x administrators and developers as a whole. Exciting!
Actually, he started by offering $.01 for the first bug found in TeX. Then doubling it for every bug found after that... 7 bugs later the pot would be $2.56. Of course, it doesn't get interesting until the 14th bug or so.
As a standing offer, he pay $2.56 for each error in any of the books he's written. Why?... because it's a "hexadecimal dollar".
Hmmm. I guess there *is* a way to drain the M$ multi-billion dollar war chest...
I get a kick out of everyone here telling this guy he doesn't need the stress or the company. I'm young. I'm single. I make *multiples* of the average salary. I freak out every time I even consider making a major change to my server configurations or the network. I have a very small social life because I work an average 60+ hours a week.
And I love it.
I come in come in to work every morning and start pounding coffee and keyboards. Half a dozen operating systems... 4 programming languages... 4 tons of manuals... 300 emails a day... multiple T1s... a bookmark list that rivals Yahoo. AAhhh... Home.
I've got at least $25k worth of computer equipment on my desk at any given moment. Every day I learn something new. Every day I do something I've never done before. Every day something interesting happens that forces me to think and learn. I still can't believe they are actually *paying ME* to play, learn, fix, and know all this stuff. What a trip!
And you know what? You love it just as much as I do. Let's face it, being a geek rocks... and their's no shortage of places to be a geek. We all know this guy can get a job somewhere else, and that it will be basically the same job with the same hours. Just new faces and a new desk. The only difference is the money really. Which is probably why we're so well paid -- we're free agents. We play for whoever pays us best, and we all love the game.
But don't crank about the hours. I'll gladly take Pep-Boy wages for playing 65 hours a week over mindless manual labor. Social life? I can recite the original 5 minute southpark short (remember Spirit of Christmas?) word for word. As an encore I'll do Return of the Jedi. Make my social life ICQ thank you very much.
Love being a geek! Live it! In 200 years they are going to make *westerns* about us: the people who built the Internet. I'm not going to complain one word about what I get to do.
Do I have any sympathy for this guy? Yeah... some crank took the last Dew. That's rough man.
First, did anyone get the sense that Yoda is a grumpy old fart? He _never_ wants to train anyone... they're always too young, not ready, have uncertain futures. Sheesh! No one makes that wrinkled sack of constipation happy.
Other things I noticed:
The folks from the *evil trade federation* spoke with accents (did you notice what kind?). Hmmm... social commentary?
How many bigger fish can live in a planet's core?
Is it required that a Jedi Knight have a bad hair cut?
Ok, all kidding aside, I think Lucas lived up to his legacy. The original starwars was not spectacular because of character development or plot. It was, simply put, a well told story. Menace is the same: a well told story.
In my mind, there is a difference between art and entertainment. Entertainment is simple and can be enjoyed by all. Art presses the boundaries, often to the pain of some. Lucas' art is his cinematography and vison... as illustrated in the ground breaking effects required by ANH. That is what the critics loved in ANH. His art, this time, was in the visionary world he created. I mean, how could they possibly do that wonderfull Jedi-Sith fight on the cat walks if it were not for computers? Of course, art also brought us pain in the form of Jar-Jar Binks.
But people love Lucas' stories. Lucas is, above all else, an entertainer. Looking for redeeming qualities in the plot, character development, or other element you learned about in your 9th grade literature class is to miss the true genius of Star Wars. Lucas masterfully told a compelling story about the attack, capture, and liberation of lovely Naboo. All the while he left room for the rest of the series.
As for other comments I've read here:
Of course the Jedi fights were great. This movie is set in the hay-day of the Jedi.
*Meta-Calorians* or whatever only link living cells to the force, they are not the force.
The movie needs to be evaluated on it's own terms. Trying to place it in the tapestry of the whole saga is premature, and will spoil the experience.
The movie gets better as you watch it more (I've only seen it three times).
Yoda died in his bed, and was whisked away by the force. Obi-wan voluntarily died to free Luke... and if you watch the scene carefully you'll see he disappears before Darth kills him. And he was never *violent* during that fight.
I think only Jedi who are at peace with the force when they die disappear. I don't think combat or other violence counts as at peace.
Exactly. The *meta calorians* (does anyone know the correct way to spell this?) act as a gateway to the force, allowing us to interact with it. They are not the force themselves. At least, that was my understanding.
Also, it seems I read that after Return the Rebels found a device developed by the empire that allows you to scan people for the stregnth in the force... allowing you to mass identify potential Jedi's. Is it wrong for me to reference materials other than the movies? Much of this was explained...
I'm responsible for maintaining about 15,000 web pages, and we use FrontPage to do it. And we have conflicting religions here too (Mac, PC).
I would recommend FP if site management and end-user ease are concerns. If your concern is WYSIWYG, then you are an idiot. There is no such thing... and it's WAAAYYYY too soon to start using CSS/DHTML.
That being said, let me dispell a couple myths stated in this thread.
Frontpage can't be used for 'dynamic' pages. False. I use frontpage to create and edit ASPs, and it *does* fight you sometimes, but if you have any competence at all you'll be able to overcome the challanges advanced development poses.
You can't manage large webs with it. False. If you have clients and servers with enough horse power you can handle webs up to ~1000 pages. This doesn't sound like much, until you realize you can have hundreds of webs on one server -- each with a thousand pages.
If you have a site with lots of #includes FP is no good. False. FP has an 'include' bot that lets you create pages for inclusion, *visually*. If you are a crafty developer, this can save TONS of work. You can even refer to a common page for background settings and such. And no, FP extensions don't need to be installed on the production server to use these elements in design stages.
FP messes up your HTML. False. FP has (had up to 98) two components: the editor and the explorer. Explorer is mostly for site management, and the editor is configurable. In fact, at one point I had FP setup to open all graphics with Photoshop, HTML with the Netscape composer,.htm files with FP Editor, ASPs with Textpad, and PDF files with Acrobat. All by just clicking the files. Point being, if you want to write your own HTML, FP will let you... and won't touch your code.
Ok, that's the good news, heres the bad:
FP 98 sucks. We *still* use FP 97 (but FP 98 server extensions) because FP 98 uses CSS. For example, FP 97 uses the FONT tag while 98 uses CSS. Pages created with Editor 98 don't *look* right under navigator 3.
FP 98 J/JavaScript code is just as bad as all the other code spewed forth by WYSIWYG editors... doesn't work as advertised in many (mostly non-M$) browsers.
Of course, I have a lot of experience with FP, and I've learned all the little nasties... but there hasn't been anything I've wanted to do where Frontpage got in the way. I've evaluated other systems, and I'd like to thing I've been pretty fair (obviously, I choose not to upgrade our dept to FP 98).
Slashdot Mirror
I think we should work on understanding how people can make a living by creating new things and providing services, rather than by restricting the duplication of existing things.
Afterall, isn't that what open source is all about?
-the Babushka
One point that seems to get overlooked here...
OK fine, there were 1.4 million downloads of songs from artists who had record contracts. How many people already owned the CD with the song they were downloading? How many already had the CD and were downloading a copy for personal use? That's the real crime, and I think even Lars would agree with that.
Many people are too stupid to make MP3s themselves, so they download them from other people. I have seen it. Don't believe there is that many idiots on the planet?... check AOL's current subscriber count.
Ok, here's a thought... What's the difference between this and an all-request radio station? Answer: You *own* the CDs already (at least in theory).
Think about it. If there were a request radio station, and you were the only listener, is there a law preventing them from playing whatever you request? So what's to stop MP3.com from just streaming to you personally *ANY* music you choose to listen to? (Regardless album ownership.) It's theoretically no different than request radio.
Yeah, we can *record* a media stream, but I can also record songs off the radio. What's the difference? Just because this is more customized? Because it's on the Internet? Big whoop -- every real life radio station tries to do this exactly: play songs I want to hear. It just so happens that online they can do it to perfection through mass customization.
I don't think MP3.com has gone far enough! I shouldn't need the CD to listen to music - I should be able to listen to ANYTHING they have available.
The really amazing part about all this isn't that the $600-billion behemoth didn't pay their bill, nor is it the fact that they did not get any special treatment from the domain name folks. It's not even the fact that a Linux programmer (who says their zealots?) paid the bill.
The amazing story here is that Hotmail was essentially unavailable to an alleged 52 million people for several hours, and M$ was not even *AWARE* of the problem - let alone finding a solution.
Michael Chaney did not find and fix this problem by himself. He was online with other geeks when, like the others, he was unable to get his mail. They *COLLABORATED* to figure out the problem. Chaney happened to be the guy who paid the bill, but he wasn't the first to figure out what the problem was.
This is more than embarrassing to M$, it is a sign of things to come. The problem was made public (by virtue of the fact that Hotmail is publicly available), diagnosed through collaboration across the Internet, and *fixed* by a rogue individual who simply wanted to get his email. The open source model proved faster and more efficient than M$. It got the job done before M$ was even aware there was a problem.
Who says good help is hard to find?
My favorite is the McNealy quote...
"The problem with standards bodies is... They can be very political and they need money to run and they have to listen to their constituents, which change over time."
M$ fought java every step of the way... first with web browsers (IE 2.0 didn't support Java), then with VBScript, then with 'ActiveX' (remember how they claimed it was designed for networks simply by dumping a few of the weighty COM interfaces), then by the old standby embrace and extend
Oh yeah, and let's not forget DHTML, and now XML!!!
How quickly we forget what made Windows popular in the first place... Tools! (It certainly wasn't the Win 3.1 interface.) Microsoft has always supported developers fantastically. It's a symbiotic relationship - they get to control the standards and the platform, and we write tons of apps and make their platform ubiquitous. We get great documentation and productive tools, they get sales.
Since Sun now controls the standards (come on - you know they do), Microsoft wants no part in it. If they can't embrace, extend, and... well, you know. What is in it for them to promote Java? They are going to take their ball and go home! The last thing they want is to make it easy for another company to muscle in on *their* platform.
Don't get me wrong. I use the MS JVM on my IIS servers to host several objects written in Java, and I access those components in ASPs as COM objects. It's easy and convienent.
BUT, there is a *reason* I used Java to make COM objects (instead of C++ or VB)... because I knew someday M$ would yank the Java chain. How could I know this? M$ fought java every step of the way... first with web browsers (IE 2.0 didn't support Java), then with VBScript, then with 'ActiveX' (remember how they claimed it was designed for networks simply by dumping a few of the weighty COM interfaces), then by the old standby embrace and extend. I chose Java because I didn't want to get tied to M$'s 'technology of the month' as they thrashed over Java.
But so what? It is not outside the realm of possibility for me to port ~1,000 ASP pages to Linux/Apache/TowerJ/PHP because of the technologies I chose: SQL, Java, COM/Javabeans, and little bit of forethought. That's the great thing about *real* standards.
Today, I am more comfortable using Java knowing that the irresponsible and greedy hands of Bill Gates are out of the cookie jar. I just hope the developers get the documentation and support they need to succeed with Java - even on M$ platforms.
First, I ranted on another post. You may want to check that.
;-)
As for the differing views:
Administration- They see online courses as a huge revenue generator. They *think* they'll be able to have one instructor teach hundreds (thousands?) of students simultaneously, without having to spend a lot of money on buildings, equipment, etc. This is (of course) totally false. It has been my impression that the amount of work it takes to teach a course (properly) online is directly proportional to the number of students. Unlike a traditional classroom, where most interaction is in plain view, online courses require a lot of one on one communication between the faculty and the student. If you have 100 students, you have 100x as much email than if you have 1 student.
Faculty (camp #1)- They fear online classrooms for the same reason administration likes it; they think it will take their jobs. These are the luddites. They know what they are doing, they've always done it this way, and the new way is worse! (yeah, right... and the Internet is a fad - soon we'll go back to mimeographs because that was so much better.)
Faculty (camp #2)- These are the people that *think* they know how to do all this. They'll use some POS software and create a message board, maybe a chatroom and a Real video clip, then post their syllabus online and think they've just re-invented education. These are the zealots. They don't realize what they don't know about the technology, or the frankenstien they've just created.
Students- Hey, anything to get out of class. Seriously though, DL is really best for *adult* students who *can't* make it to a traditional classroom because of careers, families, location, etc. Adults are best because it takes a LOT of intiative to take an online course... there is no (IMHO shouldn't be) *set* class time. Without that constant, regular, and scheduled face time that a traditional class brings it can be easy to fall behind. You really have to take reasponsibility for your own learning.
Of course the truth to all this is somewhere in the middle. What is the web all about? Information... Communication. It is inevitable that *class* will be taught online - but the final form will not be any of these views.
Right now there is a lot of snake oil. Everyone wants to be first, but not many are trying to be the best, but give it time. As someone who reads slashdot, and probably is familiar with opensource, you know that the cream will rise to the top. The best ideas, the best programs, and the best implementations will prevail. That's what you are looking for now, isn't it?
I actually work for a university as the webmaster responsible for our online distance learning department. We don't offer any kind of CS degree, so my opinion is only biased by my own prejudices. These are also just my personal opinions. Now, to the questions I may be able to help you answer...
> What are the policies on transfered credits, and 'Challenge for Credit' (testing out of a course for full credit) ?
Every program is accredited by one or more accrediting bodies. There is no such thing as "fully accredited". There are only agreements between colleges and accrediting agencies on what a course or program is *worth*. Therefore, if you plan on transferring credits between institutions you will need to contact the destination institution to find out if that course (and be specific that it is a DL course) will transfer and how the credits will be treated (i.e. if and how they can be applied toward the degree).
>I do NOT want a buy-a-degree type thing. I'm more then willing to put in the effort and go through the course load...
I would not recommend Phoenix. They are the most together, have the most courses, the most degrees, the best marketing, and are pretty high on customer service. However, they are also the most expensive, most commercial (as in for-profit-mercenary), and least interested in providing a good education. They can get you your degree - though not an education - and they will make sure you pay for it.
In the *realm* of distance learning Maryland and Colorado are good schools. (I'd like to think we are too, but I'm biased and we don't offer CS anyhow.)
Also, watch out for programs that make you use *special* software to access their classrooms or that outsource their online materials. A lot of this software is terrible. If the university doesn't have or is not willing to commit the resources to develop their own online classrooms then they probably aren't ready to deliver at a distance. Think about it: do would you outsource your core business functions?
<rant>This software/outsourcing course creation thing chaps my beans... it's whole purpose is to allow the instructors to create courses on their own, so the university doesn't have to make a large investment in actually supporting the development, the faculty, or the students. Don't get me wrong, the instructors are always experts in their fields, but is it really reasonable to expect them to be experts in multimedia development and online delivery as well? They don't even write books without a team of editors and graphic designers to support them! How can you expect them to be experts at web and media design and the tools they require? Is it reasonable to think we can *dumb* the process down that far and still produce a quality product? I don't think so either... no wonder DL is getting a bad name. A good course can only be created by a team that includes experts in design, programming, and GUI as well as experts on the subject matter.</rant>
Wait... he said he didn't want to buy a degree, he said he wanted to actually learn something. I don't think you should recommend Phoenix. They are a private institution out to make a buck off working adults, not provide a good education. If all you want is a piece of paper, Phoenix is the place to be... but don't expect the degree to be worth more than Phoenix's reputation (poor).
I think univerisity of Maryland is a better bet.
But whatever you do, make sure you preview their online materials first. A lot of the for-credit online courses rely on email, poorly designed messaging systems (bulliten boards), and a pitance of multimedia apps to convey the subject matter. You often don't get as much from the instructor out of online classrooms as you do in a brick and mortar setting.
That's my personal opinion.
I followed the instructions on the TRUSTe site and filed a complaint. If enough people do this, then *maybe* they'll start taking themselves seriously. The ball is in their court. They need to take their mission seriously before they'll get any respect from the public or their licensees.
Does anyone know who we can email at the ISP? It seems reasonable for us to ask what their policies are before we consider them as possible hosts... ;-)
The boys story, while *unusual*, is not a problem. It is our reaction to it that causes long term damage. What did the boy learn from this? Violence and the implied threat of it scares people, and that gives him a sort of power, if not respect.
How many of us have suffered through diversity training? Well, diversity is more than race and sex. It includes social behavior. As a general rule, a person who thinks, acts, or believes differently does not need to be locked up. When we learn to accept and appreciate people at the fringe of society we learn to stop pushing them over the edge.
Nice to see what can be done when you cut Ma' Bell out of the loop. Further proof that the telecos in the US are corrupt and don't serve the interest of their customers.
First hockey, then comedians and musicians, now the world's fastest network. How do I move to emigrate?
RedHat is a business. Their model is like few others, and they do a lot of good things(TM) for the open source community and for Linux, but they are still a business.
You pose the question "where does Linux and open source get the most bang for the buck?"
This is the wrong question. It should read: "Where does RedHat get the most bang for the buck?"
Let's face it, the value of the free publicity RedHat receives is greater than their $10M in gross sales. The last thing they need to do is buy software companies or vendors and *give* their goods away. They need a solid foothold in something more than an emerging market. What is best for linux, and best for open source, is not always what is best for RedHat.
Purchasing SCO seems like a sound business decision... and very cool. It would benifit Linux, RedHat, and Un*x administrators and developers as a whole. Exciting!
Actually, he started by offering $.01 for the first bug found in TeX. Then doubling it for every bug found after that... 7 bugs later the pot would be $2.56. Of course, it doesn't get interesting until the 14th bug or so.
As a standing offer, he pay $2.56 for each error in any of the books he's written. Why?... because it's a "hexadecimal dollar".
Hmmm. I guess there *is* a way to drain the M$ multi-billion dollar war chest...
I get a kick out of everyone here telling this guy he doesn't need the stress or the company. I'm young. I'm single. I make *multiples* of the average salary. I freak out every time I even consider making a major change to my server configurations or the network. I have a very small social life because I work an average 60+ hours a week.
And I love it.
I come in come in to work every morning and start pounding coffee and keyboards. Half a dozen operating systems... 4 programming languages... 4 tons of manuals... 300 emails a day... multiple T1s... a bookmark list that rivals Yahoo. AAhhh... Home.
I've got at least $25k worth of computer equipment on my desk at any given moment. Every day I learn something new. Every day I do something I've never done before. Every day something interesting happens that forces me to think and learn. I still can't believe they are actually *paying ME* to play, learn, fix, and know all this stuff. What a trip!
And you know what? You love it just as much as I do. Let's face it, being a geek rocks... and their's no shortage of places to be a geek. We all know this guy can get a job somewhere else, and that it will be basically the same job with the same hours. Just new faces and a new desk. The only difference is the money really. Which is probably why we're so well paid -- we're free agents. We play for whoever pays us best, and we all love the game.
But don't crank about the hours. I'll gladly take Pep-Boy wages for playing 65 hours a week over mindless manual labor. Social life? I can recite the original 5 minute southpark short (remember Spirit of Christmas?) word for word. As an encore I'll do Return of the Jedi. Make my social life ICQ thank you very much.
Love being a geek! Live it! In 200 years they are going to make *westerns* about us: the people who built the Internet. I'm not going to complain one word about what I get to do.
Do I have any sympathy for this guy? Yeah... some crank took the last Dew. That's rough man.
I suggest we keep both teams... in fact, some people should switch over to Slashdot so we can capture first AND second place! ;-)
Other things I noticed:
Ok, all kidding aside, I think Lucas lived up to his legacy. The original starwars was not spectacular because of character development or plot. It was, simply put, a well told story. Menace is the same: a well told story.
In my mind, there is a difference between art and entertainment. Entertainment is simple and can be enjoyed by all. Art presses the boundaries, often to the pain of some. Lucas' art is his cinematography and vison... as illustrated in the ground breaking effects required by ANH. That is what the critics loved in ANH. His art, this time, was in the visionary world he created. I mean, how could they possibly do that wonderfull Jedi-Sith fight on the cat walks if it were not for computers? Of course, art also brought us pain in the form of Jar-Jar Binks.
But people love Lucas' stories. Lucas is, above all else, an entertainer. Looking for redeeming qualities in the plot, character development, or other element you learned about in your 9th grade literature class is to miss the true genius of Star Wars. Lucas masterfully told a compelling story about the attack, capture, and liberation of lovely Naboo. All the while he left room for the rest of the series.
As for other comments I've read here:
Yoda died in his bed, and was whisked away by the force. Obi-wan voluntarily died to free Luke... and if you watch the scene carefully you'll see he disappears before Darth kills him. And he was never *violent* during that fight.
I think only Jedi who are at peace with the force when they die disappear. I don't think combat or other violence counts as at peace.
Exactly. The *meta calorians* (does anyone know the correct way to spell this?) act as a gateway to the force, allowing us to interact with it. They are not the force themselves. At least, that was my understanding.
Also, it seems I read that after Return the Rebels found a device developed by the empire that allows you to scan people for the stregnth in the force... allowing you to mass identify potential Jedi's. Is it wrong for me to reference materials other than the movies? Much of this was explained...
I would recommend FP if site management and end-user ease are concerns. If your concern is WYSIWYG, then you are an idiot. There is no such thing... and it's WAAAYYYY too soon to start using CSS/DHTML.
That being said, let me dispell a couple myths stated in this thread.
Ok, that's the good news, heres the bad:
Of course, I have a lot of experience with FP, and I've learned all the little nasties... but there hasn't been anything I've wanted to do where Frontpage got in the way. I've evaluated other systems, and I'd like to thing I've been pretty fair (obviously, I choose not to upgrade our dept to FP 98).