1. You are going to university for a piece of paper. If you actually learn something useful, its a side effect of getting that piece of paper. (To those of you who disagree: Couldn't you learn all the technical stuff in university outside of university either on your own or in the workplace? How about learning it in a technical school or a community college?) 2. 4 years at working at something says alot to a future employeer. 3. You are wasting your time. Not by going to McMaster for Computer Science, but by not utilizing your free time. University is (can be?) more than just a series of classes and exams.
Assume that this guy did all the physical labour and didn't buy it off of someone.
You walk in and put it on the table. Show it works and open it up.
Talk about how you saw something similar and how they did it, then how you learned from them and used it into your project. What did you use exactly from them. What problems you had and the solutions you came up with. What would you do to improve it to make things better if you had the time and the money.
But IBM, the holder of the patents, is a corporation. I'm not saying that corporation = EVIL, but its not a human whom has shown goodwill towards you either.
Nick Donofrio, the human, is acting as Senior Vice President for Technology and Manufacturing of IBM, the company.
Which human will be in this position when a juicy opportunity to enforce the patents come up years from now?
From the article: He cited a recent economic study that stated some 91 million new jobs would be created in the coming years, but that it is yet to be determined in which countries most of those jobs would be based. "It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that many of the best jobs will go to those countries that create the most fertile environments for innovation," Donofrio said.
"Innovation"? Its better to have a fertile environment for the least cost man-power.
There are only so many high-level, innovative people are going to be required in the "coming years".
And if the nation where these jobs are created are yet to be determined (so they are not location-based), lowest-cost will win almost everytime.
>Why do you expect them to give it to you and get nothing in return?
This issue here is that people are giving them information, but its faked information. So if its invalid information, how good is it? Why even have registration anymore if there is nothing for publishers to gain from it?
>Starting to sound like Open Source Fear Mongering to me.
The article is fairly well balanced.
>I don't know of any product that doesn't "potentially infringe" on other patents.
The article mentions that. "That number isn't unusually high for a package comparable to Linux, he added. Microsoft, for example, faces several patent suits, he said."
>Certainly for every software product I've worked on, when we did a patent search,
Its not a case of Linux people not doing a patent search or not caring, its that they are better off not doing one.
From the article: >"If you have knowledge and are found to infringe, a court can punish you," tripling financial penalties, Ravicher said. "If you say you didn't know and didn't see it, a court can't punish you. It's a screwed-up rule."
One way is to be proactive, as your companies were. Another is to remain ignorant, but still take responsible action if informed of an infringment. Sounds legally ok either way.
>But for what he did, I'd say the equivalent would be putting a camera outside the ladies room, which is a totally different thing.
Ok, ask your HR person if its ok for you to put a hidden camera outside of the ladies room. Explain that you think that people are spending too much time there and that you need to record it as evidence.
Lock down the computer. Remove admin rights and give him only stuff he justifiably needs to do.
Block access to certain websites.
If the boss raises these restrictions up, talk to him about how that would be conflicting with official policies. Ask for confirmation in an email if he still objects and want things changed.
If you work in government these are all things that set the trail for accountablitity and responsiblity (and yes that scares the crap out of people).
Spying in the workplace, unless its 100% cleared from above, is immoral.
Could I, as a janitor, put cameras in the woman's washroom because I wanted to prove that too much time was being spent there?
>However, your first point sounds eerily fallacious to me. "It will eventually get discovered"
The atomic race was based entirely on this. Who will get the bomb first? Those in charge on either side did not have the luxury of sitting back and saying "Maybe we shouldn't" because the other side might succeed before them.
Look at today and how many countries can produce the bomb. Most of them got the know-how independently from each other. And the US is running around trying to control it from getting out of hand.
1. It will eventually get discovered. Could we have ignored radar/gunpowder/pointy sticks inventions for this long? 2. No matter how long you think of something or plan something out, there will be someone who comes up with a flaw in your plans. Think bugs in software or man tampering with nature.
So its ok for Mozilla/Firebird to utilize security through obscurity, yet when a closed source application?
And aren't a thousand eyes suppose to be looking at the code and fixing it? So shouldn't the fix come quickly? Isn't that the strength of OpenSource? If in theory it sounds good but in reality it doesn't work, what good is it to have a thousand eyes looking at the code for security purposes?
Outsourcing is a problem because it ruins people's lives and therefore companies should stop it.
Fine, I get this. But what I don't like about this is that you have an individual relying on the whims of a company. A individual relying on a organization for their survival, is more or less state welfare.
Couldn't individuals adjust? Couldn't an individual change? Would it be hard? Hell, yes. For some painfully so. But alot in life is painful. And sometimes change is good and liberating.
If you call outsourcing evil, then so are the companies actions of layoffs, firing for just cause and not hiring everyone who asks for a job.
>But we won't be able to do anything about it because noone will be left to compete.
Why won't "we" be able to? You bring up the idea about how Netscape got crushed but what about Mozilla/Firebird? Have you've seen the excellent free content in Wikipedia? There are alot of people in "we" and some of us don't feel like we are helpless unless some big corporation is on ourside.
Have you've ever thought that "ethical perception" is Google's branding/marketting?
Running shoe companies brand/market with "what the cool people are wearing". Fast food companies brand/market with "cheap, consistent food in a clean and fun environment"
Google's is "We are not Microsoft." Who cares how good their service or product is, its the branding that you care about.
Slashdot Mirror
1. You are going to university for a piece of paper. If you actually learn something useful, its a side effect of getting that piece of paper. (To those of you who disagree: Couldn't you learn all the technical stuff in university outside of university either on your own or in the workplace? How about learning it in a technical school or a community college?)
2. 4 years at working at something says alot to a future employeer.
3. You are wasting your time. Not by going to McMaster for Computer Science, but by not utilizing your free time. University is (can be?) more than just a series of classes and exams.
Has HD really caught on?
Do the super-bit editions of dvds really make a big difference? Will these 25 Gig version make that much of an impression to justifiy things?
What work?
Assume that this guy did all the physical labour and didn't buy it off of someone.
You walk in and put it on the table. Show it works and open it up.
Talk about how you saw something similar and how they did it, then how you learned from them and used it into your project. What did you use exactly from them. What problems you had and the solutions you came up with. What would you do to improve it to make things better if you had the time and the money.
It would be a damned impressive interview.
1. Didn't stop SCO.
2. As will be mentioned, GPL hasn't be validated in a US court of law. So that part might not be enforcable.
>because human nature is to trust people?
But IBM, the holder of the patents, is a corporation. I'm not saying that corporation = EVIL, but its not a human whom has shown goodwill towards you either.
Nick Donofrio, the human, is acting as Senior Vice President for Technology and Manufacturing of IBM, the company.
Which human will be in this position when a juicy opportunity to enforce the patents come up years from now?
From the article:
He cited a recent economic study that stated some 91 million new jobs would be created in the coming years, but that it is yet to be determined in which countries most of those jobs would be based.
"It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that many of the best jobs will go to those countries that create the most fertile environments for innovation," Donofrio said.
"Innovation"? Its better to have a fertile environment for the least cost man-power.
There are only so many high-level, innovative people are going to be required in the "coming years".
And if the nation where these jobs are created are yet to be determined (so they are not location-based), lowest-cost will win almost everytime.
American thinking spreads to other countries. Film at 11. :)
>DVDShrink 3.2 and the lastest DVD Decrypter are awesome especially with the new AEC algorithms that rivals if not beats Instant Copy 8.
You mean I can't use Locksmith 6 or NibblesAway II anymore?
>The cost of producing and supporting Linux games will hopefully get cheaper as the platform matures.
Linux is pretty mature as it is now.
What is going to cost them is the different flavours of Linux.
If you run RedHat 9.0, then you need to set this.
If you run Slackware 0.01, then you need to do this.
Publishers are moving towards consoles because its cheaper to produce (there is only one Xbox, one Playstation 2...)
>Why do you expect them to give it to you and get nothing in return?
This issue here is that people are giving them information, but its faked information. So if its invalid information, how good is it? Why even have registration anymore if there is nothing for publishers to gain from it?
>a croipduster loaded with smallpox crashed into an anonymous waffle house in SaddleCloth, Iowa would have a pretty big effect
It really depends.
If what you do is immediate, very visual and could happen anywhere then you have a good case.
But if its radiation in certain foods, which would only show years later, then it wouldn't have its "terrorist" effect.
Obviously they couldn't figure out the elusive "Step 2: ???" part.
More realistic was that, if it was real money, at 4% they would have had $2,038,302.72 by now.
>Starting to sound like Open Source Fear Mongering to me.
The article is fairly well balanced.
>I don't know of any product that doesn't "potentially infringe" on other patents.
The article mentions that.
"That number isn't unusually high for a package comparable to Linux, he added. Microsoft, for example, faces several patent suits, he said."
>Certainly for every software product I've worked on, when we did a patent search,
Its not a case of Linux people not doing a patent search or not caring, its that they are better off not doing one.
From the article:
>"If you have knowledge and are found to infringe, a court can punish you," tripling financial penalties, Ravicher said. "If you say you didn't know and didn't see it, a court can't punish you. It's a screwed-up rule."
One way is to be proactive, as your companies were. Another is to remain ignorant, but still take responsible action if informed of an infringment. Sounds legally ok either way.
>But for what he did, I'd say the equivalent would be putting a camera outside the ladies room, which is a totally different thing.
Ok, ask your HR person if its ok for you to put a hidden camera outside of the ladies room. Explain that you think that people are spending too much time there and that you need to record it as evidence.
What sort of response do you think you would get?
Lock down the computer. Remove admin rights and give him only stuff he justifiably needs to do.
Block access to certain websites.
If the boss raises these restrictions up, talk to him about how that would be conflicting with official policies. Ask for confirmation in an email if he still objects and want things changed.
If you work in government these are all things that set the trail for accountablitity and responsiblity (and yes that scares the crap out of people).
Spying in the workplace, unless its 100% cleared from above, is immoral.
Could I, as a janitor, put cameras in the woman's washroom because I wanted to prove that too much time was being spent there?
No, the bug report didn't have thousands of eyes looking at it.
The code does have thousands of eyes looking at it, yet this one was missed for the past five years.
>However, your first point sounds eerily fallacious to me. "It will eventually get discovered"
The atomic race was based entirely on this. Who will get the bomb first? Those in charge on either side did not have the luxury of sitting back and saying "Maybe we shouldn't" because the other side might succeed before them.
Look at today and how many countries can produce the bomb. Most of them got the know-how independently from each other. And the US is running around trying to control it from getting out of hand.
The problem of this is that;
1. It will eventually get discovered. Could we have ignored radar/gunpowder/pointy sticks inventions for this long?
2. No matter how long you think of something or plan something out, there will be someone who comes up with a flaw in your plans. Think bugs in software or man tampering with nature.
So its ok for Mozilla/Firebird to utilize security through obscurity, yet when a closed source application?
And aren't a thousand eyes suppose to be looking at the code and fixing it? So shouldn't the fix come quickly? Isn't that the strength of OpenSource? If in theory it sounds good but in reality it doesn't work, what good is it to have a thousand eyes looking at the code for security purposes?
I honestly don't get your line of thinking.
Outsourcing is a problem because it ruins people's lives and therefore companies should stop it.
Fine, I get this. But what I don't like about this is that you have an individual relying on the whims of a company. A individual relying on a organization for their survival, is more or less state welfare.
Couldn't individuals adjust? Couldn't an individual change? Would it be hard? Hell, yes. For some painfully so. But alot in life is painful. And sometimes change is good and liberating.
If you call outsourcing evil, then so are the companies actions of layoffs, firing for just cause and not hiring everyone who asks for a job.
>if he isn't, that means he doesn't know Google has ads, proving his own point.
How good are the ads then anyways if someone doesn't notice them? Isn't that the point?
>Mozilla/Fire[creature]'s percentage is negligible
You are mistaking "is popular" with "can exist at all". And there is a big difference.
>Google left out (Ads
Google is a serious innovator in serving ads.
http://www.google.ca/ads/index.html
>But we won't be able to do anything about it because noone will be left to compete.
Why won't "we" be able to? You bring up the idea about how Netscape got crushed but what about Mozilla/Firebird? Have you've seen the excellent free content in Wikipedia?
There are alot of people in "we" and some of us don't feel like we are helpless unless some big corporation is on ourside.
Have you've ever thought that "ethical perception" is Google's branding/marketting?
Running shoe companies brand/market with "what the cool people are wearing". Fast food companies brand/market with "cheap, consistent food in a clean and fun environment"
Google's is "We are not Microsoft." Who cares how good their service or product is, its the branding that you care about.
>It seems that since Gates is rich, he is able to buy the support of politicians using fancy parties.
You get as much support as Gates does by getting involved with politics just like Gates.
You can write/talk to them for FREE.
You can join political groups.
Most importantly, you get to choose who next year Gates want to be talking to.