When people ask simple questions because everything in linux is new to them, the common reply is "RTFM!" or "go learn it yourself!".
I have found that people who answer legitimate questions with rude answers like that don't know dick themselves and can't help out the new user with an intelligent answer.
Don't they have a return policy? Seems to me if it doesn't work return it. Much better than FUD about how Linux will never be accepted by the masses.
Right on! I bought a HP scanner that didn't work on slackware and it went back to OfficeMax. Nothing gets a distributors attention faster than returned goods with a tag saying NOT LINUX COMPATIBLE. I was lucky enough to get into the store before they sold out of their Astra scanners (Umax Astra 2200 = Linux compatible) and bought one. It works like a charm:). The store manager told me he has a really hard time keeping the Astra's in stock and it's the #1 seller.Doesn't sound to me like Linux isn't accepted by a good chunk of the masses.
Most users are babyboomers that have trouble finding the on switch.
Actually, most users are middle and high school students that think AOL is god's gift to the computer industry. They all buy their *hot* systems at Gateway and rush it back to the store the minute something goes wrong.
I know a lot of babyboomers that use Winblows and are happily computer illiterate too, but it's wrong to say that most computer *idjits* are babyboomers. They are the ones that got into computers on the ground floor of PC (and other) developments and brought computers to the masses. They were bottle-fed on UNIX and most cringe at the sorry state of industry today. It's the younger generation (not the Babyboomers), that demand instant gratification at any cost.
Be careful what you wish for -- you just might get it
Wow. I pity the other users of my ISP right now. My DSL's upstream bandwidth is *pegged*, simply by putting a link....
If you can't be part of the solution, at least be part of the problem. (My ISP needs to improve its infrastructure a bit, anyway...)
Maybe you didn't read the last paragraph....
Release 1.1 products will migrate into the subscriber base over the next several years.
Subscribers will then be able to choose the capacity they require for their purposes and pay an appropriate fee. The
effect will be to discourage bandwidth hogs and ensure that those who need high capacity, and are willing to pay for it, get it. And market segmentation will provide financial justification to implement even more comprehensive nodalization. After enough
time has passed for these system upgrades to be deployed, the traffic jam should resolve itself.
Kind of reminds me of my first internet connection back in 1993-paying hourly rates. Power users paid more than moderate to low-end users. Is what we're seeing now a rerun of the old internet connection fee structures? Is that like one step forward and three steps back?
I received a spam snail mail from Adelphia Power Link today offering an internet cable connection for $19.95/mo and free installation.... catch? For the first 3 months. Then it's $39.95/mo IF you already have cable TV service. Others will pay $49.95/mo. Gee! What a deal....... if I only use e-mail services down the line I guess. I think I'll stick with my simple, reliable, and ultimately cheaper (for now), Kflex connection:).
I read somewhere that "the right to bear arms was intended to mean "Coat of Arms" as opposed to arms and amunition. Again that could be the same as Madisonian school's intent of "the right OF property as opposed to the right TO propery.
I have not heard anyone but the geeks mention any of the alternatives on your list. The music industry didn't win the removal of the ability to get free music.. they just removed the one way most people knew about - which is all that matters.
Naw... all that really matters is that they don't go after the alt sites that have the really good selections of MP3s.
I also feel that if I am going to pay anywhere between $13 and $20 for a CD, I also bought the rights to do whatever I want with it.
In the case of older music... the classics for example... you may have bought the album, the cassette, and the cd. Seems to me you've overpaid the royalties and hidden taxes already no? So you're right... you should be able to do whatever you want with your copy or copies.
But executives from both [Pressplay and MusicNet] have reiterated that the music in each--at least in the early stages--would be "tethered" to personal computers, in large part to prevent unauthorized copying and transfers of music.
Does anyone else see the flipflop in this statement? One word jumps out at me... unauthorized as opposed to the use of the word illegal copying and transfers of music... remember the word illegal which was being promoted by the RIAA and their coherts in the not to distant past ?Which brings me to another question.... who is the authority and who elected them to be?
From Imperial Tacohead..
Don't forget that some of the best rock and roll of the last century was made by the Beatles after they had stopped touring altogether
The Beatles were young and ambitious. They did the same thing every other budding artist (group) does. First they did the club scene (The Cave for those of you who don't remember), then they made one or two good albums, then they toured, then they made some more albums and toured less and less - enjoying the spoils of their labour:). Others like the Stones went through the same motions and then, when the money dried up, they tried to comeback which is rarely successful. Most artists sell out the the RIAA early in their careers and live to regret it.
However, there are exceptions to this rule. One such exception was Frank Zappa. He was the artist that couldn't get play because his music was politically incorrect.. to put it gently. In the 1970s, he created Pumpkin Records and distributed his own music. He was a music revolutionary 25 - 30 years before the term got popular. He hardly got any play on mainstream radio and his music was largely unkown to the masses. BUT, he got huge play underground (univ. campus stations and by word of mouth) and sold millions of albums.
Zooming ahead 20-30 years, I see the same sort of revolution taking place. This time though it involves the majority of mainstream artists and has mass consumer support. The article on Zdnet states, in part, that there was little turnout for the party they gave (summit). Well, why would they expect there would be? The music has gone underground! It's the end of the road for the RIAA as it pertains to business-as-usual.... it certainly isn't the end of the road for music.
MP3s are alive and well.. they just aren't under the tight grip of the RIAA and those that would sing the praises of per subscription downloads. It's just not going to happen and I think the poor attendance at the summit said it loud and clear. So let the Yahoo's and the Sony's and the M$'s go head on with their utopian plans for per subscription downloads and let them flop.
MP3s for free is not the only issue here. People will always want high quality (cough) copies of their favorite music in cd format. They will buy their music, but they will not buy garbage filler cds any longer and they will demand to preview artists before buying. MP3s for free allow for that and it's way too mainstream now to reverse. Consumers will start demanding that record stores distribute artists consumers want to buy. The stores will comply or go out of business. The RIAA are fighting mad about the loss of control they've suffered over MP3s, but they will come to grips with widespread distribution of a myriad of artists' music or they too will go out of business. Newer and better recording labels will appear and startups will have a shot at REAl success. The key... free MP3 distribution and slow steady progress to the top. Only the really good artists that are in it for the long run will survive and the consumers will win too in the end.
All of this is, of course, is my personal opinion and completely without prejudice.
The reason we don't do it is that we are terrified of the reprisal from Islamic nutcase terrorists and from our "ally" Arab nations if we undertook an all-out attack on Bin Laden camps.
Yea and besides that the price of a barrel of oil would go through the roof. Don't be calling every nation that doesn't suck up to the USA terrorist nations. We back many many terrorist acts ourselves. What's wrong with this picture?
"... the main thing that keeps the US economy alive is consumer confidence; people are still spending, despite the problems companies are having. If that confidence disappers, it could lead to stagflation. In reality,"
I may be wrong here, but there is another very important factor in consumer and public confidence that comes into play. While what you say is true about an abrupt change wreaking havoc on the stock market, I don't think it will be longterm and I certainly don't think it will spell the end of Microsoft.
Consider that if the DOJ let MS off with a slap on the hand.... or worse... an insignificant breakup that may only have the effect of creating two monopolies down the line... then the public will see right through the sham and lose even more confidence in the DOJ and government as a whole. That can have some very long effects on the stockmarket. So, the DOJ is caught in a Catch22.
I cannot see that the DOJ has any choice but to apply the anti-trust law and proceed to inflict some REAL pocketbook damages against MS. Suspending the release of XP is not going to appease anyone beyond the short-sited. They need to break the monopoly and free up the desktop and applications markets for real competition without intimidation from M$. That may very well send some shockwaves through the stockmarket in the interim, but it will hardly bring down M$, MS will just have to start playing on a more level playing field and considering they already have a greater chunk of the market, their chances are better than good to continue their success. The only difference will be that they will have to actually compete with other products and start providing quality.
I can see this as a win-win situation for business and consumers alike. It may even restore some confidence in government. Then again, maybe it's too simple and obvious to work.
People who have memorized the interface, rather than using their brains and learning to interpret what they see in an interface, are incredibly unwilling to memorize another interface, and even more unwilling to actually take the time to learn how to interpret new interfaces quickly.
Umm I'm sorry but your argument falls apart when you consider that office people learned Word from Wordperfect in the early 90s without too many problems.
Other businesses will send them all kinds of Microsoft crap. More problems.
Staroffice.
Longer training time for new employees. More expense as a result.
Unless the company has a staff of no-brainers, desktops like RedHat's, for example, are cleaner and 100% nicer to work with than any winblows d/t I've ever used. Since I moved off windows completely (Nov.99) I have not missed one single application that I previously used in windows. Linux had them all and the speed difference was incredible making for a more productive working environment.
4) Needing intelligent people to run the networks - yes, you should have that anyway, for a large number of reasons, but the need is more visible with other systems.
How is the need more visible for other systems when the network uptime for MOSt other systems is far greater than that of Windows. WindowsNT uptime top (29 days), Linux uptime (420 days and counting) Damn that jerk that ripped the plug out of the wall:P.
In theory it does work just fine. RedHat is an easy, user-friendly interface and the o/s offers just about any application found in Windows. If people cannot install the o/s then it's to the advantage of the company to have the o/s pre-installed and let the employees get used to the difference (like getting used to a new car) and then slowly teach them to troubleshoot the o/s. What's the advantage? You'll have a smarter and more diversified staff working with a more reliable, stable, and faster o/s. Seems to me the change is worth the minimum training required in the short run.
Re:Too bad it wasn't a FRENCH Canadian company
on
Death of a Rebel
·
· Score: 1
Millions of People? Really? Why would you make up some crap to try and prove your point?
D'oh.... think globally my friend. Do you really think they ship the workforce from Canada all around the world to work on their international projects?
Re:Too bad it wasn't a FRENCH Canadian company
on
Death of a Rebel
·
· Score: 1
Good post... btw Bombardier has a plant in Kingston Ontario too:).
Re:Too bad it wasn't a FRENCH Canadian company
on
Death of a Rebel
·
· Score: 1
Taking money from other provinces and dumping it into Quebec is practically the official sport of the politicians up here...
It's remarks like that that undermine the success of Canada as a world leader in industry and commerce. It is also a false statement. You would have readers believing that Canada does not subsidize (through investments) other industries outside of Quebec. What about the oil and gas exploration industries (offshore and in the west), the wheat industry (prairies), the fisheries (maritimes), the forestry industry (western), and probably even the technology industries throughout the country?
Further, Bombardier has many joint ventures with industry throughout Canada and thus is not limited to only one province. They compete (and allow other Canadian firms to compete) favorably on International development projects.
If ALL Canadians (inside and outside of Quebec) would support Canadian industy as a whole, we would have many more success stories like Bombardier. Comments like this
scream of "reverse racism" and only serve to harm us all.
Re:Too bad it wasn't a FRENCH Canadian company
on
Death of a Rebel
·
· Score: 1
I can think of a few reasons why Quebec (and it should have been Canada) would subsidize Bombardier Inc.
Wholey owned Canadian company that has been in existence for 60+ years.
Design and engineering or snowmobiles, mass rapid transit systems and aerospace engineering.
Employs millions of people in Canada (not just in Quebec) and internationally.
Internationally known and respected as the undisputed leader in mass rapid transportation systems.
Did I mention wholey owned Canadian company?
Bombardier have survived and flourished as a major player in multiple engineering and design fields despite the reluctance of the Canadian government to infuse monies into a winning international corporation. But then again, isn't that just the Canadian way? Alexander G. Bell couldn't get the Canadian gov't. to cough up investments bucks either.:P.
Re:It's not the Linux appliance concept...
on
Death of a Rebel
·
· Score: 1
Isn't that a fact! The more companies keep paying the big bucks for consultants and listening to the fast-talking suits, the more it seals its fate. The story is the same universally.
Companies need to realize that it's the big guy with the jeans and t-shirt that's crawling into tiny spaces to run wire and developing the scripts that run networks more efficiently that really earns the bucks for the bottom line. These are the guys the customers contact when there's a problem. They're not polish and shine, perhaps, but they know their shit.
My husband is a network admin/scripter/programmer/etc/etc/etc with 18 yrs of experience and the ambition to keep-up-to-date with technology. When he heard his superiors say "the network runs itself", he knew the writing was on the wall.
He moved on and got a very lucrative job where his skills and professionalism are appreciated and I'll give you two guesses what happened in his former company:P.
Damn! Why did I switch from political science to sociology??? All I had to do was get a PS degree, piggyback onto a lucrative corporate suite, sit back and catch the bucks they throw at me.
The court also said that companies may not harass or intimidate persons from speaking freely if no proof of harm is present and that is up to the plaintiff to prove harm In this case, the plaintiff assumed harm with no facts (or erroneously stated facts) to back up their claim of harm against John Does.
"moreover, John Doe No. 3 made nine postings, two on the same day. On three of the days that immediately followed a posting by John Doe No. 3, Dendrite's stock value decreased. However, on five of the days that
immediately followed a posting by John Doe No. 3, Dendrite's stock value increased. The net change in Dendrite's stock value over those seven days was actually an increase of 3 and 5/8 points.
Although the motion judge stated Dendrite was "entitled to every reasonable inference of fact in this analysis[,]" he [the judge] refused to "take the leap to linking messages posted on an internet message board regarding
individual opinions, albeit incorrect opinions, to a decrease in stock prices
without something more concrete." The record does not support the conclusion that John Doe's postings negatively affected the value of Dendrite's stock, nor does Dendrite offer evidence or information that these postings have actually inhibited its hiring practices, as it alleged they would.
... the motion judge appropriately concluded that Dendrite failed to establish a sufficient nexus between John Doe No. 3's statements and Dendrite's allegations of harm.
It seems that lately large corporations are using their legal depts to intimidate individuals from expressing their opinions online or otherwise. The judge rightfully accorded this as a "frivolous" suit and rightfully rejected it. There seemed more ASS U ME (tion) on the part of the plaintiff than fact.
This subject is not only about intimidation and harassement of individuals' right to express themselves fairly and freely, but also about intimidations directed at ISPs to disclose identifying information on their clients. This is a dangerous trend of late and I'm glad the judges recognized it as such.
I was on DALnetsux for 5 yrs. I joined when there were only about a dozen channels and less than 500 users (Oct.95). I started a channel and kept it going successfully for 5 yrs.
When running a channel you often have to deal with ego's and power trippers. We had our fair share of that for sure. We ran a family channel and thus our policies were a little bit stricter than most channels but all-in-all, most ppl agreed with the policies and it was stable.
A former disgruntled channelop sucked up to one of DALnetsux's admins and was given the channel password so we lost the channel. Since then it has been reduced to a smut channel at best. Myself and a lot of the original users moved on and now we have our own little network where we (and any user) KNOWS that if they want to have a family channel (or any other kind of channel), they can do so and feel secure knowing that no oper or admin will take it away from them.
IRC is a community and always has been. There are enough networks out there now that ppl can pick and choose one to their own liking. As you said: [you] now run a server on a small network with just some friends on it. That's what IRC is coming to, much to the dismay of the larger and more corrupt networks. While a lot of people start out on larger networks, I would dare to say that a good percentage of them eventually move on to smaller and more user-friendly nets. Change can be a good thing:).
DALnetsux is lame because it's got more ego than anything else going for it. The opers don't even follow their own policies. It's a network of old boys who will forgo all of their stated ethical policies for anyone who can suck up to the oper/admins ego's.
If you think that DALnetsux is the only (or one of the few) networks with services, then you better try again. There's a shitload of networks on IRC with full services.
Exactly - well said. These damn skript kiddies don't realize the damage they do.. they don't even care. They'll kill IRC before they're happy.
We have a small IRC network and it can get bloody expensive. We've been hit by DOS attacks too for no apparent reason. You're right, they do it just coz they can. These stupid kids aren't hackers, they aren't even wannabe hackers, they hit and run with point n click kiddie scripts.
I've been on IRC for almost 7 yrs. I started on Efnet then moved to DALnetsux and now on my own small network. All we want to do is have fun chatting and we provide the service to people for free so they can enjoy it too.
More and more the shell providers are shying away from offering IRCDs precicely because they are so bandwidth heavy thanks to these damn kids. It just sux. I'd like to be their parent for about a week.. man they'd be afraid to fart w/o my permission when I got thru with them.
Slashdot Mirror
When people ask simple questions because everything in linux is new to them, the common reply is "RTFM!" or "go learn it yourself!".
I have found that people who answer legitimate questions with rude answers like that don't know dick themselves and can't help out the new user with an intelligent answer.
Don't they have a return policy? Seems to me if it doesn't work return it. Much better than FUD about how Linux will never be accepted by the masses.
:). The store manager told me he has a really hard time keeping the Astra's in stock and it's the #1 seller.Doesn't sound to me like Linux isn't accepted by a good chunk of the masses.
Right on! I bought a HP scanner that didn't work on slackware and it went back to OfficeMax. Nothing gets a distributors attention faster than returned goods with a tag saying NOT LINUX COMPATIBLE. I was lucky enough to get into the store before they sold out of their Astra scanners (Umax Astra 2200 = Linux compatible) and bought one. It works like a charm
Most users are babyboomers that have trouble finding the on switch.
Actually, most users are middle and high school students that think AOL is god's gift to the computer industry. They all buy their *hot* systems at Gateway and rush it back to the store the minute something goes wrong.
I know a lot of babyboomers that use Winblows and are happily computer illiterate too, but it's wrong to say that most computer *idjits* are babyboomers. They are the ones that got into computers on the ground floor of PC (and other) developments and brought computers to the masses. They were bottle-fed on UNIX and most cringe at the sorry state of industry today. It's the younger generation (not the Babyboomers), that demand instant gratification at any cost.
Be careful what you wish for -- you just might get it
Maybe you didn't read the last paragraph
Kind of reminds me of my first internet connection back in 1993-paying hourly rates. Power users paid more than moderate to low-end users. Is what we're seeing now a rerun of the old internet connection fee structures? Is that like one step forward and three steps back?
I received a spam snail mail from Adelphia Power Link today offering an internet cable connection for $19.95/mo and free installation
" Its time to start worrying "
:P.
Geez get a grip! When machines are capable of having sex then I'll start to worry
I read somewhere that "the right to bear arms was intended to mean "Coat of Arms" as opposed to arms and amunition. Again that could be the same as Madisonian school's intent of "the right OF property as opposed to the right TO propery.
"Also, killers usually serve less time because they get paroled. Drug offenders often serve long sentences "without possibility of parole".
:P.
But but but drug offenders will have a good shot at parole when they move them out to make room for the MP3 pirates
I have not heard anyone but the geeks mention any of the alternatives on your list. The music industry didn't win the removal of the ability to get free music.. they just removed the one way most people knew about - which is all that matters.
... all that really matters is that they don't go after the alt sites that have the really good selections of MP3s.
Naw
I also feel that if I am going to pay anywhere between $13 and $20 for a CD, I also bought the rights to do whatever I want with it.
... the classics for example ... you may have bought the album, the cassette, and the cd. Seems to me you've overpaid the royalties and hidden taxes already no? So you're right ... you should be able to do whatever you want with your copy or copies.
In the case of older music
From the Zdnet article:
... unauthorized as opposed to the use of the word illegal copying and transfers of music ... remember the word illegal which was being promoted by the RIAA and their coherts in the not to distant past ?Which brings me to another question .... who is the authority and who elected them to be?
..
:). Others like the Stones went through the same motions and then, when the money dried up, they tried to comeback which is rarely successful. Most artists sell out the the RIAA early in their careers and live to regret it.
.. to put it gently. In the 1970s, he created Pumpkin Records and distributed his own music. He was a music revolutionary 25 - 30 years before the term got popular. He hardly got any play on mainstream radio and his music was largely unkown to the masses. BUT, he got huge play underground (univ. campus stations and by word of mouth) and sold millions of albums.
.... it certainly isn't the end of the road for music.
.. they just aren't under the tight grip of the RIAA and those that would sing the praises of per subscription downloads. It's just not going to happen and I think the poor attendance at the summit said it loud and clear. So let the Yahoo's and the Sony's and the M$'s go head on with their utopian plans for per subscription downloads and let them flop.
... free MP3 distribution and slow steady progress to the top. Only the really good artists that are in it for the long run will survive and the consumers will win too in the end.
But executives from both [Pressplay and MusicNet] have reiterated that the music in each--at least in the early stages--would be "tethered" to personal computers, in large part to prevent unauthorized copying and transfers of music.
Does anyone else see the flipflop in this statement? One word jumps out at me
From Imperial Tacohead
Don't forget that some of the best rock and roll of the last century was made by the Beatles after they had stopped touring altogether
The Beatles were young and ambitious. They did the same thing every other budding artist (group) does. First they did the club scene (The Cave for those of you who don't remember), then they made one or two good albums, then they toured, then they made some more albums and toured less and less - enjoying the spoils of their labour
However, there are exceptions to this rule. One such exception was Frank Zappa. He was the artist that couldn't get play because his music was politically incorrect
Zooming ahead 20-30 years, I see the same sort of revolution taking place. This time though it involves the majority of mainstream artists and has mass consumer support. The article on Zdnet states, in part, that there was little turnout for the party they gave (summit). Well, why would they expect there would be? The music has gone underground! It's the end of the road for the RIAA as it pertains to business-as-usual
MP3s are alive and well
MP3s for free is not the only issue here. People will always want high quality (cough) copies of their favorite music in cd format. They will buy their music, but they will not buy garbage filler cds any longer and they will demand to preview artists before buying. MP3s for free allow for that and it's way too mainstream now to reverse. Consumers will start demanding that record stores distribute artists consumers want to buy. The stores will comply or go out of business. The RIAA are fighting mad about the loss of control they've suffered over MP3s, but they will come to grips with widespread distribution of a myriad of artists' music or they too will go out of business. Newer and better recording labels will appear and startups will have a shot at REAl success. The key
All of this is, of course, is my personal opinion and completely without prejudice.
The reason we don't do it is that we are terrified of the reprisal from Islamic nutcase terrorists and from our "ally" Arab nations if we undertook an all-out attack on Bin Laden camps.
Yea and besides that the price of a barrel of oil would go through the roof. Don't be calling every nation that doesn't suck up to the USA terrorist nations. We back many many terrorist acts ourselves. What's wrong with this picture?
"... the main thing that keeps the US economy alive is consumer confidence; people are still spending, despite the problems companies are having. If that confidence disappers, it could lead to stagflation. In reality,"
.... or worse ... an insignificant breakup that may only have the effect of creating two monopolies down the line ... then the public will see right through the sham and lose even more confidence in the DOJ and government as a whole. That can have some very long effects on the stockmarket. So, the DOJ is caught in a Catch22.
I may be wrong here, but there is another very important factor in consumer and public confidence that comes into play. While what you say is true about an abrupt change wreaking havoc on the stock market, I don't think it will be longterm and I certainly don't think it will spell the end of Microsoft.
Consider that if the DOJ let MS off with a slap on the hand
I cannot see that the DOJ has any choice but to apply the anti-trust law and proceed to inflict some REAL pocketbook damages against MS. Suspending the release of XP is not going to appease anyone beyond the short-sited. They need to break the monopoly and free up the desktop and applications markets for real competition without intimidation from M$. That may very well send some shockwaves through the stockmarket in the interim, but it will hardly bring down M$, MS will just have to start playing on a more level playing field and considering they already have a greater chunk of the market, their chances are better than good to continue their success. The only difference will be that they will have to actually compete with other products and start providing quality.
I can see this as a win-win situation for business and consumers alike. It may even restore some confidence in government. Then again, maybe it's too simple and obvious to work.
People who have memorized the interface, rather than using their brains and learning to interpret what they see in an interface, are incredibly unwilling to memorize another interface, and even more unwilling to actually take the time to learn how to interpret new interfaces quickly.
:P.
Umm I'm sorry but your argument falls apart when you consider that office people learned Word from Wordperfect in the early 90s without too many problems.
Other businesses will send them all kinds of Microsoft crap. More problems.
Staroffice.
Longer training time for new employees. More expense as a result.
Unless the company has a staff of no-brainers, desktops like RedHat's, for example, are cleaner and 100% nicer to work with than any winblows d/t I've ever used. Since I moved off windows completely (Nov.99) I have not missed one single application that I previously used in windows. Linux had them all and the speed difference was incredible making for a more productive working environment.
4) Needing intelligent people to run the networks - yes, you should have that anyway, for a large number of reasons, but the need is more visible with other systems.
How is the need more visible for other systems when the network uptime for MOSt other systems is far greater than that of Windows. WindowsNT uptime top (29 days), Linux uptime (420 days and counting) Damn that jerk that ripped the plug out of the wall
In theory it does work just fine. RedHat is an easy, user-friendly interface and the o/s offers just about any application found in Windows. If people cannot install the o/s then it's to the advantage of the company to have the o/s pre-installed and let the employees get used to the difference (like getting used to a new car) and then slowly teach them to troubleshoot the o/s. What's the advantage? You'll have a smarter and more diversified staff working with a more reliable, stable, and faster o/s. Seems to me the change is worth the minimum training required in the short run.
Millions of People? Really? Why would you make up some crap to try and prove your point?
.... think globally my friend. Do you really think they ship the workforce from Canada all around the world to work on their international projects?
D'oh
Good post ... btw Bombardier has a plant in Kingston Ontario too :).
Taking money from other provinces and dumping it into Quebec is practically the official sport of the politicians up here...
It's remarks like that that undermine the success of Canada as a world leader in industry and commerce. It is also a false statement. You would have readers believing that Canada does not subsidize (through investments) other industries outside of Quebec. What about the oil and gas exploration industries (offshore and in the west), the wheat industry (prairies), the fisheries (maritimes), the forestry industry (western), and probably even the technology industries throughout the country?
Further, Bombardier has many joint ventures with industry throughout Canada and thus is not limited to only one province. They compete (and allow other Canadian firms to compete) favorably on International development projects.
If ALL Canadians (inside and outside of Quebec) would support Canadian industy as a whole, we would have many more success stories like Bombardier. Comments like this scream of "reverse racism" and only serve to harm us all.
- Wholey owned Canadian company that has been in existence for 60+ years.
- Design and engineering or snowmobiles, mass rapid transit systems and aerospace engineering.
- Employs millions of people in Canada (not just in Quebec) and internationally.
- Internationally known and respected as the undisputed leader in mass rapid transportation systems.
- Did I mention wholey owned Canadian company?
Bombardier have survived and flourished as a major player in multiple engineering and design fields despite the reluctance of the Canadian government to infuse monies into a winning international corporation. But then again, isn't that just the Canadian way? Alexander G. Bell couldn't get the Canadian gov't. to cough up investments bucks either.Isn't that a fact! The more companies keep paying the big bucks for consultants and listening to the fast-talking suits, the more it seals its fate. The story is the same universally.
:P.
Companies need to realize that it's the big guy with the jeans and t-shirt that's crawling into tiny spaces to run wire and developing the scripts that run networks more efficiently that really earns the bucks for the bottom line. These are the guys the customers contact when there's a problem. They're not polish and shine, perhaps, but they know their shit.
My husband is a network admin/scripter/programmer/etc/etc/etc with 18 yrs of experience and the ambition to keep-up-to-date with technology. When he heard his superiors say "the network runs itself", he knew the writing was on the wall. He moved on and got a very lucrative job where his skills and professionalism are appreciated and I'll give you two guesses what happened in his former company
Damn! Why did I switch from political science to sociology??? All I had to do was get a PS degree, piggyback onto a lucrative corporate suite, sit back and catch the bucks they throw at me.
I agree . You need a starting point or it's just an endless loop. Without these standards that work very very well, you have chaos.
.whatevers!
It's easy to bash the standards but you better know what ur doing before you start creating endless loops of
M$ tried this overthrow of DNS called WINS (hahah we all love wins don't we... NOT). Talk about corrupt databases.
My absolute defense against bogus legislation would be to insert "Without Prejudice" in all my postings :P.
Sig. Without Prejudice
The court also said that companies may not harass or intimidate persons from speaking freely if no proof of harm is present and that is up to the plaintiff to prove harm In this case, the plaintiff assumed harm with no facts (or erroneously stated facts) to back up their claim of harm against John Does.
... the motion judge appropriately concluded that Dendrite failed to establish a sufficient nexus between John Doe No. 3's statements and Dendrite's allegations of harm.
"moreover, John Doe No. 3 made nine postings, two on the same day. On three of the days that immediately followed a posting by John Doe No. 3, Dendrite's stock value decreased. However, on five of the days that immediately followed a posting by John Doe No. 3, Dendrite's stock value increased. The net change in Dendrite's stock value over those seven days was actually an increase of 3 and 5/8 points.
Although the motion judge stated Dendrite was "entitled to every reasonable inference of fact in this analysis[,]" he [the judge] refused to "take the leap to linking messages posted on an internet message board regarding individual opinions, albeit incorrect opinions, to a decrease in stock prices without something more concrete." The record does not support the conclusion that John Doe's postings negatively affected the value of Dendrite's stock, nor does Dendrite offer evidence or information that these postings have actually inhibited its hiring practices, as it alleged they would.
It seems that lately large corporations are using their legal depts to intimidate individuals from expressing their opinions online or otherwise. The judge rightfully accorded this as a "frivolous" suit and rightfully rejected it. There seemed more ASS U ME (tion) on the part of the plaintiff than fact.
This subject is not only about intimidation and harassement of individuals' right to express themselves fairly and freely, but also about intimidations directed at ISPs to disclose identifying information on their clients. This is a dangerous trend of late and I'm glad the judges recognized it as such.
I was on DALnetsux for 5 yrs. I joined when there were only about a dozen channels and less than 500 users (Oct.95). I started a channel and kept it going successfully for 5 yrs. When running a channel you often have to deal with ego's and power trippers. We had our fair share of that for sure. We ran a family channel and thus our policies were a little bit stricter than most channels but all-in-all, most ppl agreed with the policies and it was stable.
:).
A former disgruntled channelop sucked up to one of DALnetsux's admins and was given the channel password so we lost the channel. Since then it has been reduced to a smut channel at best. Myself and a lot of the original users moved on and now we have our own little network where we (and any user) KNOWS that if they want to have a family channel (or any other kind of channel), they can do so and feel secure knowing that no oper or admin will take it away from them.
IRC is a community and always has been. There are enough networks out there now that ppl can pick and choose one to their own liking. As you said: [you] now run a server on a small network with just some friends on it. That's what IRC is coming to, much to the dismay of the larger and more corrupt networks. While a lot of people start out on larger networks, I would dare to say that a good percentage of them eventually move on to smaller and more user-friendly nets. Change can be a good thing
DALnetsux is lame because it's got more ego than anything else going for it. The opers don't even follow their own policies. It's a network of old boys who will forgo all of their stated ethical policies for anyone who can suck up to the oper/admins ego's.
If you think that DALnetsux is the only (or one of the few) networks with services, then you better try again. There's a shitload of networks on IRC with full services.
Exactly - well said. These damn skript kiddies don't realize the damage they do .. they don't even care. They'll kill IRC before they're happy.
.. man they'd be afraid to fart w/o my permission when I got thru with them.
:P
We have a small IRC network and it can get bloody expensive. We've been hit by DOS attacks too for no apparent reason. You're right, they do it just coz they can. These stupid kids aren't hackers, they aren't even wannabe hackers, they hit and run with point n click kiddie scripts.
I've been on IRC for almost 7 yrs. I started on Efnet then moved to DALnetsux and now on my own small network. All we want to do is have fun chatting and we provide the service to people for free so they can enjoy it too.
More and more the shell providers are shying away from offering IRCDs precicely because they are so bandwidth heavy thanks to these damn kids. It just sux. I'd like to be their parent for about a week
End of rant