This code isn't complete of course, it's not working. I hope you don't get into trouble if you modify it enough to do so:-) But you get the idea. Part of a happy breakfast!
If this committee was already implemented 10 years ago and you were a part of it, what strategies and actions that Microsoft took during this period would you consider monopolistic? Would you change anything, and what alternatives would you suggest?
Hey, when is this thing going to work? 100% sure someone will make a way to remove the 'Magic Lantern' from your computer the minute after it's released.
People already manage to break into computers and softwares. The Windows XP warez version was getting trade on the internet 4 hours after it was released. (okay, lame point for secure system, but you get the picture)
If there are people that can crack whole operating systems, what skills will be needed to remove a simple trojan horse? It's not like the most difficult job in the world. The Magic Lantern will simple not work, specially for folks who do NOT want it to.
Yes, it's a good idea and I am doing it. Five years ago I bought my stereo. Always had it connected on the computer to replace the lousy speakers. Then came TV cards, and I got one. With the capability of pluging your favorite cable company, it is a must. Screen capture and movies saving, also a plus. I can store movies that I sa on television and see them again over and over. Musicals, shows, cerimonies, everything I like it's saved somewhere over a dozen hard drives.
Then came the computer's DVD, and I got one. It's possible to watch DVD, play DVD games, watch TV, record TV, play music, etc..., all in one computer.
I believe it's nice to integrate those things.
But the relationship between my computer and other media devices are only, sort of, physical. This integration will really take off the day someone makes software for this purpose. You won't need a full featured television, just a computer connected to a tv that can accept commands from the computer.
With computers as the central piece of this organism, we will be able to maintain a highly purpose and generic device (the computer) while cheaper parts could be connected and integrated.
Too bad traditional eletronics companies are investing time and research pratically only enhancing their own devices. While an easier and less expensive setup would be to make the computer the device that glues everything together.
I guess for now, we will have to depend on small 'hacks', turnarounds, to integrate them.
it's NOT your decision. It's the parent's decision.
But can't we help them to make this decision? I don't see why telling them that some toys are dangerous is fine (and yes, I belive it's fine), while at the same time telling them that this list is ridiculous! What's the problem with adding a few more ideas to enhance the discussion with the parents. They need to see both sides to have a decision. Ie: the list and those who don't agree with the list.
What non-techie people, ie: who doesn't write code or is actively involved in computers, can do to help our ideas come true?
From lawyers to musicians, how can we discuss with them and present arguments that will convince them that this is a good war to fight for? Why should they 'buy it'?
Here's the thing I don't get: (and since I don't get it, I must be a closed-minded jingoist...sheesh)
Hell no! Lol.. you do make awesome points on this discussion, but you begun saying that you don't get just one thing and went to comment the whole situation. No problem with that, I believe it's a nice argument strategy, but you did lose focus while typing. Okay, so I bashing you, that's how I start MY long posts:-)
This vision, this 'rethought Marxism', doesn't have any real meat to it. Now, I'd love to join the mailing list and see if anyone has come up with any substance to back these ideas. The thing is, I don't believe there can be any substance to them.
And what's meat for you? Meat for me is my thoughts, my brain, the way I perceive and see the whole world. It's not something phisical. Okay, so most of the world believe the latest BMW is something to fight for. Isn't this wrong? In the shadows of recent way of thinking in the world, ie. 'Do whatever you want as long you don't hurt anyone', the idea that the meat you want is not something to further discuss or critize is plausible. But free software isn't only about source code or pure software utility. It's a train of thought, at least I see it this way, where you can free yourself from several bad things that we, as a human race, since the beggining of time, have developed a taste for. I, for one, really don't care for money. I do believe it's necessary, of course, we can't live without it. It's necessary to trade your work power/knowledge for things that you want/need.
Do I need a huge house? No. Do I need a 100.000 dollar car? No. You have to see these flaws on the human desires, and critize them, to support free software. In a world with 3 billion people suffering from hunger, to discuss our meat is a little selfish.
If we do lower our futile desires for such useless itens, we can begin to see where Free Software can help us.
it exists because those people who are contributing to it do not rely on their creation for survival.
How come can you say that? There are several people making money with their knowledge of free software. I am one of these. I program on PHP for living. I can survive only on this, for a long time. I do not empty my client's wallet for anything I develop. I think that before I even begin to think about how much I want to get from a project, I need to think if it is a reasonable amount. Every knowledge I have, since birth, comes from someone else. Heck, everyone is like this. Our culture is constructed by other people. Some of this might sound old based on a philosophical analisys, but I do believe it's true. So, what is the right path? I belive is to give back to those who helped.
It sure is impossible to give to EVERYONE something that ever helped me, including the lady this morning that told me what time it was. So I choose a path that I believe I will give more back to the world. That's the technological field. In a few decades, we will be able to rearrange molecules.
Craziness? Not even close. It will be possible. So I am developing my skills toward this way. Some might say: 'Huehuahue, and he knows PHP?. Well, it does have to start somewhere. The goals and what we do to achieve them it's very important. In the deep bottom, free software/open source is another reason to wake up in the morning, but more important, to sleep knowing that we helped shape the future in a better way.
The only way I can have a better chance is if I can offer some incentive to the teacher
No, it's not the only way. If you have 2 teachers like this, the need is lowered. If you have 3, 4, 10, 20, 150, 400, 1000, 00, your argument fails completely. That's what an open source software does for you. It helps you to become that necessary piece on the grand schema of things. It teaches you that this is possible, and how we can do it. It gives you a reason to develop other magnific teachers.
Yes, yes, there will be always someone with more knowledge about anything that you can imagine than someone else. But if this person realizes that he's got there with the help of others, he will help someone who wants to be like him. If he doesn't want, it's a character flaw.
I understand the concepts I presented here are my personal point of view over a lot of things. I do not claim they are the best way that exists, but the best way that I, on my limited knowledge, know that exists. These are humanitarian views over something often considered tecnical, the source code of software. But, like you, I am analizing something from a particular point of view. You analized the monetary reward of the free software movement, while I analized from another perspective. And I believe the values I am defending this moment (always keep your mind open to possibilities), are the best one availables.
It's not about free beer, it's about freedom should resume well this line of thought.
PS: English is not my primary language, so sorry for any grammar or misspellings (I *know* everyone saw them:-))
Okay, so I am from Brazil and this might sound a little biased. But Marcello won't be maintaining the kernel alone. The open source commmunity, so proud that they have something where everyone can contribute and modify to their needs, can't see this?
He works for Conectiva, which is IMHO a large player on the Linux distribution companies. They went to the 'give support and consulting' model of business way before many of United States companies. They have a Debian's apt similar tool that can fetch and check for RMPs (from Red Hat) dependencies, and install everything from the internet. They contribued a lot with the code on every part of Linux, and a lot of documentation and HOW-TOs.
So, based on Marcello's answer, I don't believe he will add, delete or modify almost anything on the kernel without heavily input from his co-workers.
Just to remind that one of the main ideas behind open source (collaboration...) can, and probaly WILL, be applied.
Hey, Arnold is getting older (54 years)... Maybe we will have to see him get a little help from a pill?
Just imagine... he connecting a disc with advanced sensorial perceptions, to upload the sex module... then a little oil here and there, a help from a new set of mechanical suspensions, and vòila! You have the strangest preliminaries ever filmed on Earth...
And heck, will he say 'I will be back' after the first cigarrete?
I guess to apply for a job with Santa this year, being a short green elf is not enough anymore... You have to add to your resume: computer Skills, email management, spread sheets and word processor...
Hey, maybe in the future kids will believe gifts come from a network administrator with strange and obscure skills on Unix... ooops, in that a lot of people already do:-)
There could be two major reasons for doing this. You can preserve Africa animals and flora, and you could enhance Australia's turistic appeal.
But why not simple inest on Africa? That continent need a major improvement on the quality of life. With investiments there, a huge help to mankind will be done. Won't sleep better after this? I know I will.
There are also several other points. If you lower the airplane ticket, heck, could be with the governament help, will Australians travel to Africa? Of course they would. You would help Australia turism agencies, and still keep the people's desire to see lions and elephants.
Damn, let Africa keep their animals! Other comments already mentioned the ecological impact to bring strange life forms. Hey, how about these virus and germs from another specie to come infect yours?
Nature has balanced the enviroment, and instead of living with this ecosystem, this fellow is trying to destroy it. What a STUPID idea. No, I mean, the last step of this path is good. But I believe that to put money on our African friends will do a MUCH better to the world, AND you still gonna have all (okay, not all, but the majotity) of the good outcomes of this idea.
It was hard to get the article once I began to read it. Written in first person, you begin to think it is a testimonial. Then just 4 or 5 lines after the beginning you realize it is another article, that could be written in thousand different ways.
I like first-person point of views. But what they did is just too simple... 'Tell a story'. And what is the moral of the story? I think the writer tried to meant it is the consumers. Look at how absurd that is! 'I make broadband companies go bankrupt'.
Well, and it asks for the governament to take care. This article is pretty much of a joke. A bad joke. It's a historical analisys of who went down on the broadband business, told in a bad way.
That's all I hear everywhere on corporative talk nowadays.
Everyone wants you to be a 'team-player'.
But here's the deal. I interviewed people to work here on my company. If you ask most of them what they think it is their best qualities, they will say "I am a team player".
Ask back, "Why?". Most will go 'duh'...
Those folks from 'self-motivation' who write books based on little injections of happyness, small phrases that when someone read makes them think that work is worth.
I am not saying that is not, but take for example some of these phrases:
"Fight the battle. The war is worth to be won".
Or some BS like that. These 'gurus of administration' are ruining some people's mind.
They come to me and answer "I am a team player", and heck, they don't know what this is. Because of an 'unified way of thinking' from those 'gurus', people are becoming automatic on everything, and all the same.
For me, that's exactly the opposite of team wok. My definition of a good team is to have several different 'types' of people, each one with their strenghts and weakness.
For example lots of people told me that I have an unique style of resolving problems. I can think in new ways, new discoveries from one point that leads to many ideas.
But, I admit, I don't have the skill to develop these ideas into something useful for any company that I own (er.. it's only one btw:-)) or work with.
So, I need another people to do that for me.
That's what a team, I think, it is good for.
If you have a prima donna on your team, gosh, enjoy his/her skills. Extract, develop, unfold, learn, grow with the prima donna. There's little really that you can make to change one.
There's a problem where you see one. Spoons too;-) Some management folks will see in prima donnas a good, productive, useful, style of working.
Some will not. Those, will follow 'gurus' unified way of thinking forever.
"Team work" is not everything, neither should be discharged. But when you look at anything with only one perspective, you are just part of a giant crowd that can go and buy the last self motivation book on the shelf, thanks, while I stay here coding what the 'upper management team wants' (quoted from the article).
First of all, nice article. I am a newbiew around here (two days:-)) and this is the best I have seen so far.
Second, I am not from USA. I may have a different perspective from the average american, altought it is obvious that I do not have from who wrote this text.
That said, I think the weather challenge cannot be won without the USA.
That's quite obvious analizing the reasons that lead to the Kyoto protocol, which may fall without USA support.
The United States is responsible for much of the pollution that goes to our air, land and water. There's no doubt about this, numbers everywhere to confirm.
Per person, it is the country that produces more pollution.
But at the same time, I believe a lot more is going on. USA has taken in the past years a role of technological leader in the world. Most research breakthroughs (spelling?) come from there. So much ahead of other countries, that the other countries are fighting back with more 'humanitary' global actions.
ONU's chair in human rights was the 'concrete' action of something bigger. Slodoban's and Pinochet's happening on Europe enlarge that continent's role of 'social', 'humanitary' leader. What we have now are two sides of serious future consequences that need to develop and unfold together.
In one corner you have tech development. On the other human society. Body and mind, matter and spirit if you wish. You cannot separate them, cannot only concentrate on one side. They must grow together for a better future.
But, a historial view of the last years, after the Industrial Revolution, will make you think that we as humans have pend much more to the tech side than the spiritual one.
Antique societies, old religions, they all got weaker since the beggining of the century. I am not talking about christianins (again, sorry for the misspelling, english is not my primarly languague), but instead, almost every other religion on the world, that takes the perception of life after dead very different than our ocidental way.
To simplify, west tries to enjoy life at maximum because we all gonna die, so do it quickly and do it now. East, on the contrary, have a vision more like "we all gonna die anyway, why do it?".
But, tech improvement is changing this. We don't die at 30 now, like 150 years ago. Most people that are 20 years old nowadays with go beyond 100, easy, easy.
This perception that life has increased, that we really don't have to do it fast and do it now, the 'eastern' life and death vision, is losing its forces.
With this in mind, you can justify people's concern with the weather. At the same time we are taking care of our lives, improving it, we are taking away the force of who gave us life, 'Mother Nature'.
Prodigal sons, we are now taking the harder route to the 'eco growth', an economy based on the principles that we must take care of the enviroment.
Earth has been around for billions of years with or without us, and will probaly be after we are gone from here to other planets. What we say now, is a 'rearrange' of forces, like a system where it must balance what is inside. There's no weather problem for Earth. Our planet is what it is. There is weather problem for ourselves, for our future as a race.
I hope as soon as is possible we learn how to balance matter and spirit, tech and religion inside us, so we can exist in union with our planet.
About the first news, I really do hope an Open Source implementations of.NET is released at the same time, but before is optimal, than.NET itself.
This way, both are new, both do similar things. People will be able to choose what they want, analize the lists of features.
Not trying to enter a market already dominated by a giant corporation. This is too hard. I am not saying that it can't be done or even tried, but a 'fresh start' in a field with Open Source applications might be better for the community.
I hope this project goes very well, that it is make with superior quality than.NET. It can be another factor to convince people of the good things about Open Source.
Running side-by-side on the new tech field will help to remove people's perception, generally speaking, that Open Source only has antique apps. I heard someone saying once "How can I use Linux? It has a command line to do things, that's old". That kind of thing, new Open Source projects can help to eliminate.
Beer ads uses female sensuality to sell beers. They put beautiful ladies to sell it, associating the product name/brand with the idea of having easy chances to have one, just go and drink it. The bar will be happier when you drink beer X, everybody will start talking to you, and women, well, they will not resist. At least here in Brazil, most beer ads uses gorgeous women to sell the product.
So that what is advertiment. Give you a reason to buy something. Might be something tangible or or not.
So here comes the explanation:-)
Probaly the TOS (Terms of Service) has clause/paragraph protecting the company. So, don't believe in advertisiment (I am a college student of publicity, btw...). Don't drink beer thinking that you will get Crawford.
Seriously, it's sad that such strategic area of research is getting each day less public and financial attention. Bush's administration seems to care more about 'ground' stuff.
These are some of my impressions that I got when I look at the 'bigger' picture of current USA's governament.
For the public, they will say 'Nasa takes much and does nothing'.
If so is true, don't cut their money but instead, fix the erros. By denying Nasa to improve their work and to make a better job is the wrong way. To realize that there are areas that can be improved (and in Nasa, they are many), you can make a good job.
Seems like there's no future planning. Just fix it using any way now to look good to voters.
Nasa should be and can be one of the most important areas of any administration. The impact of their research in incomensurable.
But then again, I guess I am just an old romantic old fool that still promises the moon to ladies;-)
Slashdot Mirror
Better yet, setup a script to do this for you. Something like (PHP code):
y words=bulk+email&Search=Search';
:-) But you get the idea. Part of a happy breakfast!
$filename = 'http://www.overture.com/d/search/?type=topbar&Ke
$fd = fopen ($filename, 'r');
$read = fread($fd, 20000);
fclose($fd);
// preg_match_all ('/f="(.*)"+/', $read, $links);
foreach ($links[1] as $value)
$fd = fopen ($value, 'r');
$read = fread($fd, 20000);
fclose($fd);
}
This code isn't complete of course, it's not working. I hope you don't get into trouble if you modify it enough to do so
Could you install this beauty there? :-)
I mean, will you be able to kick at an office's door, shout at Bill and demand "Show me your Sent Items list"?
Just what kind of privileged information do you expect to have access?
Hypothetical question:
If this committee was already implemented 10 years ago and you were a part of it, what strategies and actions that Microsoft took during this period would you consider monopolistic? Would you change anything, and what alternatives would you suggest?
Hey, when is this thing going to work? 100% sure someone will make a way to remove the 'Magic Lantern' from your computer the minute after it's released.
People already manage to break into computers and softwares. The Windows XP warez version was getting trade on the internet 4 hours after it was released. (okay, lame point for secure system, but you get the picture)
If there are people that can crack whole operating systems, what skills will be needed to remove a simple trojan horse? It's not like the most difficult job in the world. The Magic Lantern will simple not work, specially for folks who do NOT want it to.
Yes, it's a good idea and I am doing it. Five years ago I bought my stereo. Always had it connected on the computer to replace the lousy speakers. Then came TV cards, and I got one. With the capability of pluging your favorite cable company, it is a must. Screen capture and movies saving, also a plus. I can store movies that I sa on television and see them again over and over. Musicals, shows, cerimonies, everything I like it's saved somewhere over a dozen hard drives.
Then came the computer's DVD, and I got one. It's possible to watch DVD, play DVD games, watch TV, record TV, play music, etc..., all in one computer.
I believe it's nice to integrate those things.
But the relationship between my computer and other media devices are only, sort of, physical. This integration will really take off the day someone makes software for this purpose. You won't need a full featured television, just a computer connected to a tv that can accept commands from the computer.
With computers as the central piece of this organism, we will be able to maintain a highly purpose and generic device (the computer) while cheaper parts could be connected and integrated.
Too bad traditional eletronics companies are investing time and research pratically only enhancing their own devices. While an easier and less expensive setup would be to make the computer the device that glues everything together.
I guess for now, we will have to depend on small 'hacks', turnarounds, to integrate them.
In case you were wondering who is Brett Brewer, named on the PHP changelog, I did a Google search, and found that he's Co-President and Chief Operating Officer of a company name EUniverse.
But can't we help them to make this decision? I don't see why telling them that some toys are dangerous is fine (and yes, I belive it's fine), while at the same time telling them that this list is ridiculous!
What's the problem with adding a few more ideas to enhance the discussion with the parents. They need to see both sides to have a decision. Ie: the list and those who don't agree with the list.
What non-techie people, ie: who doesn't write code or is actively involved in computers, can do to help our ideas come true?
From lawyers to musicians, how can we discuss with them and present arguments that will convince them that this is a good war to fight for? Why should they 'buy it'?
Show me someone who knows anything about a topic who isn't biased.
Not to mention the low self esteem of the poster, automatically discrediting what he says surely doesn't help :-)
Here's the thing I don't get: (and since I don't get it, I must be a closed-minded jingoist...sheesh)
Hell no! Lol.. you do make awesome points on this discussion, but you begun saying that you don't get just one thing and went to comment the whole situation. No problem with that, I believe it's a nice argument strategy, but you did lose focus while typing. Okay, so I bashing you, that's how I start MY long posts :-)
This vision, this 'rethought Marxism', doesn't have any real meat to it. Now, I'd love to join the mailing list and see if anyone has come up with any substance to back these ideas. The thing is, I don't believe there can be any substance to them.
And what's meat for you? Meat for me is my thoughts, my brain, the way I perceive and see the whole world. It's not something phisical. Okay, so most of the world believe the latest BMW is something to fight for. Isn't this wrong? In the shadows of recent way of thinking in the world, ie. 'Do whatever you want as long you don't hurt anyone', the idea that the meat you want is not something to further discuss or critize is plausible.
But free software isn't only about source code or pure software utility. It's a train of thought, at least I see it this way, where you can free yourself from several bad things that we, as a human race, since the beggining of time, have developed a taste for. I, for one, really don't care for money. I do believe it's necessary, of course, we can't live without it. It's necessary to trade your work power/knowledge for things that you want/need.
Do I need a huge house? No. Do I need a 100.000 dollar car? No. You have to see these flaws on the human desires, and critize them, to support free software. In a world with 3 billion people suffering from hunger, to discuss our meat is a little selfish.
If we do lower our futile desires for such useless itens, we can begin to see where Free Software can help us.
it exists because those people who are contributing to it do not rely on their creation for survival.
How come can you say that? There are several people making money with their knowledge of free software. I am one of these. I program on PHP for living. I can survive only on this, for a long time. I do not empty my client's wallet for anything I develop. I think that before I even begin to think about how much I want to get from a project, I need to think if it is a reasonable amount. Every knowledge I have, since birth, comes from someone else. Heck, everyone is like this. Our culture is constructed by other people. Some of this might sound old based on a philosophical analisys, but I do believe it's true. So, what is the right path? I belive is to give back to those who helped.It sure is impossible to give to EVERYONE something that ever helped me, including the lady this morning that told me what time it was. So I choose a path that I believe I will give more back to the world. That's the technological field. In a few decades, we will be able to rearrange molecules.
Craziness? Not even close. It will be possible. So I am developing my skills toward this way.
Some might say: 'Huehuahue, and he knows PHP?. Well, it does have to start somewhere. The goals and what we do to achieve them it's very important. In the deep bottom, free software/open source is another reason to wake up in the morning, but more important, to sleep knowing that we helped shape the future in a better way.
The only way I can have a better chance is if I can offer some incentive to the teacher
No, it's not the only way. If you have 2 teachers like this, the need is lowered. If you have 3, 4, 10, 20, 150, 400, 1000, 00, your argument fails completely. That's what an open source software does for you. It helps you to become that necessary piece on the grand schema of things. It teaches you that this is possible, and how we can do it. It gives you a reason to develop other magnific teachers.
Yes, yes, there will be always someone with more knowledge about anything that you can imagine than someone else. But if this person realizes that he's got there with the help of others, he will help someone who wants to be like him. If he doesn't want, it's a character flaw.
I understand the concepts I presented here are my personal point of view over a lot of things. I do not claim they are the best way that exists, but the best way that I, on my limited knowledge, know that exists. These are humanitarian views over something often considered tecnical, the source code of software. But, like you, I am analizing something from a particular point of view. You analized the monetary reward of the free software movement, while I analized from another perspective. And I believe the values I am defending this moment (always keep your mind open to possibilities), are the best one availables.
It's not about free beer, it's about freedom should resume well this line of thought.
PS: English is not my primary language, so sorry for any grammar or misspellings (I *know* everyone saw them :-))
Okay, so I am from Brazil and this might sound a little biased. But Marcello won't be maintaining the kernel alone. The open source commmunity, so proud that they have something where everyone can contribute and modify to their needs, can't see this?
He works for Conectiva, which is IMHO a large player on the Linux distribution companies. They went to the 'give support and consulting' model of business way before many of United States companies. They have a Debian's apt similar tool that can fetch and check for RMPs (from Red Hat) dependencies, and install everything from the internet. They contribued a lot with the code on every part of Linux, and a lot of documentation and HOW-TOs.
So, based on Marcello's answer, I don't believe he will add, delete or modify almost anything on the kernel without heavily input from his co-workers.
Just to remind that one of the main ideas behind open source (collaboration...) can, and probaly WILL, be applied.
Hey, Arnold is getting older (54 years)... Maybe we will have to see him get a little help from a pill?
Just imagine... he connecting a disc with advanced sensorial perceptions, to upload the sex module... then a little oil here and there, a help from a new set of mechanical suspensions, and vòila! You have the strangest preliminaries ever filmed on Earth...
And heck, will he say 'I will be back' after the first cigarrete?
Problemos!
I guess to apply for a job with Santa this year, being a short green elf is not enough anymore... You have to add to your resume: computer Skills, email management, spread sheets and word processor...
:-)
Hey, maybe in the future kids will believe gifts come from a network administrator with strange and obscure skills on Unix... ooops, in that a lot of people already do
D'oh!
There could be two major reasons for doing this. You can preserve Africa animals and flora, and you could enhance Australia's turistic appeal.
But why not simple inest on Africa? That continent need a major improvement on the quality of life. With investiments there, a huge help to mankind will be done. Won't sleep better after this? I know I will.
There are also several other points. If you lower the airplane ticket, heck, could be with the governament help, will Australians travel to Africa? Of course they would. You would help Australia turism agencies, and still keep the people's desire to see lions and elephants.
Damn, let Africa keep their animals! Other comments already mentioned the ecological impact to bring strange life forms. Hey, how about these virus and germs from another specie to come infect yours?
Nature has balanced the enviroment, and instead of living with this ecosystem, this fellow is trying to destroy it. What a STUPID idea. No, I mean, the last step of this path is good. But I believe that to put money on our African friends will do a MUCH better to the world, AND you still gonna have all (okay, not all, but the majotity) of the good outcomes of this idea.
The proposed implementation is just horrible.
It was hard to get the article once I began to read it. Written in first person, you begin to think it is a testimonial. Then just 4 or 5 lines after the beginning you realize it is another article, that could be written in thousand different ways.
I like first-person point of views. But what they did is just too simple... 'Tell a story'. And what is the moral of the story? I think the writer tried to meant it is the consumers. Look at how absurd that is! 'I make broadband companies go bankrupt'.
Well, and it asks for the governament to take care. This article is pretty much of a joke. A bad joke. It's a historical analisys of who went down on the broadband business, told in a bad way.
Usuless article that could be resumed to:
"Companies X,Y,Z doesn't exists anymore".
Ha, the lost minutes.
Team, Team, and Team again.
:-)) or work with.
;-) Some management folks will see in prima donnas a good, productive, useful, style of working.
Team one more time.
That's all I hear everywhere on corporative talk nowadays.
Everyone wants you to be a 'team-player'.
But here's the deal. I interviewed people to work here on my company. If you ask most of them what they think it is their best qualities, they will say "I am a team player".
Ask back, "Why?". Most will go 'duh'...
Those folks from 'self-motivation' who write books based on little injections of happyness, small phrases that when someone read makes them think that work is worth.
I am not saying that is not, but take for example some of these phrases:
"Fight the battle. The war is worth to be won".
Or some BS like that. These 'gurus of administration' are ruining some people's mind.
They come to me and answer "I am a team player", and heck, they don't know what this is. Because of an 'unified way of thinking' from those 'gurus', people are becoming automatic on everything, and all the same.
For me, that's exactly the opposite of team wok. My definition of a good team is to have several different 'types' of people, each one with their strenghts and weakness.
For example lots of people told me that I have an unique style of resolving problems. I can think in new ways, new discoveries from one point that leads to many ideas.
But, I admit, I don't have the skill to develop these ideas into something useful for any company that I own (er.. it's only one btw
So, I need another people to do that for me.
That's what a team, I think, it is good for.
If you have a prima donna on your team, gosh, enjoy his/her skills. Extract, develop, unfold, learn, grow with the prima donna. There's little really that you can make to change one.
There's a problem where you see one. Spoons too
Some will not. Those, will follow 'gurus' unified way of thinking forever.
"Team work" is not everything, neither should be discharged. But when you look at anything with only one perspective, you are just part of a giant crowd that can go and buy the last self motivation book on the shelf, thanks, while I stay here coding what the 'upper management team wants' (quoted from the article).
First of all, nice article. I am a newbiew around here (two days :-)) and this is the best I have seen so far.
Second, I am not from USA. I may have a different perspective from the average american, altought it is obvious that I do not have from who wrote this text.
That said, I think the weather challenge cannot be won without the USA.
That's quite obvious analizing the reasons that lead to the Kyoto protocol, which may fall without USA support.
The United States is responsible for much of the pollution that goes to our air, land and water. There's no doubt about this, numbers everywhere to confirm.
Per person, it is the country that produces more pollution.
But at the same time, I believe a lot more is going on. USA has taken in the past years a role of technological leader in the world. Most research breakthroughs (spelling?) come from there. So much ahead of other countries, that the other countries are fighting back with more 'humanitary' global actions.
ONU's chair in human rights was the 'concrete' action of something bigger. Slodoban's and Pinochet's happening on Europe enlarge that continent's role of 'social', 'humanitary' leader. What we have now are two sides of serious future consequences that need to develop and unfold together.
In one corner you have tech development. On the other human society. Body and mind, matter and spirit if you wish. You cannot separate them, cannot only concentrate on one side. They must grow together for a better future.
But, a historial view of the last years, after the Industrial Revolution, will make you think that we as humans have pend much more to the tech side than the spiritual one.
Antique societies, old religions, they all got weaker since the beggining of the century. I am not talking about christianins (again, sorry for the misspelling, english is not my primarly languague), but instead, almost every other religion on the world, that takes the perception of life after dead very different than our ocidental way.
To simplify, west tries to enjoy life at maximum because we all gonna die, so do it quickly and do it now. East, on the contrary, have a vision more like "we all gonna die anyway, why do it?".
But, tech improvement is changing this. We don't die at 30 now, like 150 years ago. Most people that are 20 years old nowadays with go beyond 100, easy, easy.
This perception that life has increased, that we really don't have to do it fast and do it now, the 'eastern' life and death vision, is losing its forces.
With this in mind, you can justify people's concern with the weather. At the same time we are taking care of our lives, improving it, we are taking away the force of who gave us life, 'Mother Nature'.
Prodigal sons, we are now taking the harder route to the 'eco growth', an economy based on the principles that we must take care of the enviroment.
Earth has been around for billions of years with or without us, and will probaly be after we are gone from here to other planets. What we say now, is a 'rearrange' of forces, like a system where it must balance what is inside. There's no weather problem for Earth. Our planet is what it is. There is weather problem for ourselves, for our future as a race.
I hope as soon as is possible we learn how to balance matter and spirit, tech and religion inside us, so we can exist in union with our planet.
Sorry mister or madam. English is not my primary language.
About the first news, I really do hope an Open Source implementations of .NET is released at the same time, but before is optimal, than .NET itself.
.NET. It can be another factor to convince people of the good things about Open Source.
This way, both are new, both do similar things. People will be able to choose what they want, analize the lists of features.
Not trying to enter a market already dominated by a giant corporation. This is too hard. I am not saying that it can't be done or even tried, but a 'fresh start' in a field with Open Source applications might be better for the community.
I hope this project goes very well, that it is make with superior quality than
Running side-by-side on the new tech field will help to remove people's perception, generally speaking, that Open Source only has antique apps. I heard someone saying once "How can I use Linux? It has a command line to do things, that's old". That kind of thing, new Open Source projects can help to eliminate.
Er...
:-)
Beer ads uses female sensuality to sell beers. They put beautiful ladies to sell it, associating the product name/brand with the idea of having easy chances to have one, just go and drink it. The bar will be happier when you drink beer X, everybody will start talking to you, and women, well, they will not resist. At least here in Brazil, most beer ads uses gorgeous women to sell the product.
So that what is advertiment. Give you a reason to buy something. Might be something tangible or or not.
So here comes the explanation
Probaly the TOS (Terms of Service) has clause/paragraph protecting the company. So, don't believe in advertisiment (I am a college student of publicity, btw...). Don't drink beer thinking that you will get Crawford.
Advertisiment is different from TOS.
It's the same as waking up with an ugly lady next to you opposed as Cindy Crawford after drinking beer.
Just go IPO Nasa. :)
;-)
Seriously, it's sad that such strategic area of research is getting each day less public and financial attention. Bush's administration seems to care more about 'ground' stuff.
These are some of my impressions that I got when I look at the 'bigger' picture of current USA's governament.
For the public, they will say 'Nasa takes much and does nothing'.
If so is true, don't cut their money but instead, fix the erros. By denying Nasa to improve their work and to make a better job is the wrong way. To realize that there are areas that can be improved (and in Nasa, they are many), you can make a good job.
Seems like there's no future planning. Just fix it using any way now to look good to voters.
Nasa should be and can be one of the most important areas of any administration. The impact of their research in incomensurable.
But then again, I guess I am just an old romantic old fool that still promises the moon to ladies