most of the slant seems to be definitely doomsday, environmental, and decidely anti-government..
Not surprising, given the audience. These are features of the target audience for video games, and "geeks" in general. Also unsurprising that such people would develop games and have a desire to spread their political beliefs...
From a personal perspective, I think those are laudable goals, I however disagree with the means to such an end...
By becoming public, google loses the ability to continue with constant steady growth and innovative R&D. These things will invariably lead to short sighted planning by the management to "make the numbers" for the next quarter, 6 months, or year. "Growth" will be expected year after year - the innovative ideas that have made google so successful will give way.
No, I won't bid on a share. I would hope that the IPO never happens, as google is still a quality company. I would hate to see that all change.
is simply a red herring. The airlines stand to make confiscatory profits from the seat-back phones, which charge upwards of $10/minute. Thus, there is no incentive for them to change. Why would this be adopted?
No, it only means that by discontinuation of support for the older versions of OS's they don't need such a requirement for enterprise. The lack of support will force corporations to upgrade to a new OS, and hence, the new licencing. Profits for all!*
Megacorporation TimeWarner (formerly AOL Timewarner) is eager to divest itself of the lagging AOL brand. This megamerger was a disaster for consumers (as all mergers are) as well as the interested parties, e.g., the capitalist shareholders.
Microsoft would make an equally odius partner to combine with AOL. Lie down with dogs, wake up with fleas...
Bush and Cheyney are beholden to BIG OIL, BIG ENERGY, and BIG BUSINESS. That's why. Who makes money by saving energy resources? Not Cheyney, not Bush, not their capitalist cronies. So nothing gets done.
This is the definition of compassionate conservatism.
Clark is fascinating despite his age - we should treasure the elderly, there is much knowledge there to be gained, but all too often we simply shuffle them to the side like a pair of worn shoes. Enjoy his insights while you still can. He has some fascinating opinions on Martian life, for example.
it is never in the interest of a corporation to stop any product from coming to market NO MATTER WHAT. There are intense pressures from higher management to perform, and to hell with the consequences.
Sure, this is "just" a hard drive, it can be replaced. What about when corporate negligance leads to permanent damage of people (e.g., health care)? What about deaths at the hands of corporations?
The latter is of course, tantamount in a for profit organization. Focus your research on these two items, and shy away from the "thousands of eyballs reviewing the code" arguments, as those are unlikely to carry the day.
Certainly, the energy corporations must be somewhat culpable for not rigorously testing the software in the first place? It is not in the interest of a for-profit company to see to it that such systems are functioning correctly, as that cost will detract from the bottom line profit. Only when disaster strikes can they be goaded into looking into problems.
Probably no true advances, due to the patented technology. This will allow the company who invented this to reap profits, with no incentive to improve. Don't expect larger leaps forward until the patent expires.
I have never understood the verulent resistance to unionization amongst the IT folks I know. During the "heyday" of the dot-com era, no one wanted to think about such issues, as you could seemingly skip from one job to another with a seemingly endless step up in salary each time. However, the realities of a capitalist system are inevitable, and the market dried up.
Think of how much better off in terms of job security, benefits, and salary the IT industry in the US could be today had they unionized early enough. Protection could have also been built in to protect the proletariate from the export of jobs overseas. It's truly a shame.
There are already similar functions for airplanes
on
A.I. Helicopter?
·
· Score: -1, Flamebait
they were used on 9/11 by the Mossad to steer jets into the World Trade Center.
With the $ saved on shoveling profits to software companies, the city government can focus its resources on providing more and better government services. Imagine the funding that could be invested in education (as an example) if the software "licencing" fees were diverted...
One can only hope this catches on in larger scale!!
Racism, pure and simple. Westerners are reluctant to adopt anything that they themselves have not come up with, especially if it is from someone who doesn't quite look and think they way they do. Also, there is an inherent bias in the west against the Chinese due to their chosen form of government. Support of multiple standards has not slowed down cellular phones, so why this? I think the IEEE argument is just a red herring.
Slashdot Mirror
Mega-corporations don't play nice? Really? I'm absolutely flabbergasted!
Advantage Linux!
The master would not approve.
I can't quite put my finger on the article in the constitution which permits agents of the government to do this.
That being said, it would be a good way to stomp out Dubya campaign rallies. I guess that's what the amendment process is for, right?
$699? Ouch...
I think I'd rather have a cheap used laptop for that price. More functionality, about the same weight.
Will this void my warranty? I paid sooo much for my Powerbook, I'd like to keep the warranty intact.
Not surprising, given the audience. These are features of the target audience for video games, and "geeks" in general. Also unsurprising that such people would develop games and have a desire to spread their political beliefs...
From a personal perspective, I think those are laudable goals, I however disagree with the means to such an end...
By becoming public, google loses the ability to continue with constant steady growth and innovative R&D. These things will invariably lead to short sighted planning by the management to "make the numbers" for the next quarter, 6 months, or year. "Growth" will be expected year after year - the innovative ideas that have made google so successful will give way.
No, I won't bid on a share. I would hope that the IPO never happens, as google is still a quality company. I would hate to see that all change.
is simply a red herring. The airlines stand to make confiscatory profits from the seat-back phones, which charge upwards of $10/minute. Thus, there is no incentive for them to change. Why would this be adopted?
When the cost of labor in Africa is even cheaper?
What is the end of the line for the capitalist?
No, it only means that by discontinuation of support for the older versions of OS's they don't need such a requirement for enterprise. The lack of support will force corporations to upgrade to a new OS, and hence, the new licencing. Profits for all!*
*Except the customer, who keeps getting fleeced.
Megacorporation TimeWarner (formerly AOL Timewarner) is eager to divest itself of the lagging AOL brand. This megamerger was a disaster for consumers (as all mergers are) as well as the interested parties, e.g., the capitalist shareholders.
Microsoft would make an equally odius partner to combine with AOL. Lie down with dogs, wake up with fleas...
Bush and Cheyney are beholden to BIG OIL, BIG ENERGY, and BIG BUSINESS. That's why. Who makes money by saving energy resources? Not Cheyney, not Bush, not their capitalist cronies. So nothing gets done.
This is the definition of compassionate conservatism.
Since when is a media player a core component of an operating system?
Then why not just call you in the first place, and do away with the email?
Clark is fascinating despite his age - we should treasure the elderly, there is much knowledge there to be gained, but all too often we simply shuffle them to the side like a pair of worn shoes. Enjoy his insights while you still can. He has some fascinating opinions on Martian life, for example.
Sure, this is "just" a hard drive, it can be replaced. What about when corporate negligance leads to permanent damage of people (e.g., health care)? What about deaths at the hands of corporations?
RISK
THE BOTTOM LINE
The latter is of course, tantamount in a for profit organization. Focus your research on these two items, and shy away from the "thousands of eyballs reviewing the code" arguments, as those are unlikely to carry the day.
Toodles!
How about the energy companies?
Certainly, the energy corporations must be somewhat culpable for not rigorously testing the software in the first place? It is not in the interest of a for-profit company to see to it that such systems are functioning correctly, as that cost will detract from the bottom line profit. Only when disaster strikes can they be goaded into looking into problems.
Probably no true advances, due to the patented technology. This will allow the company who invented this to reap profits, with no incentive to improve. Don't expect larger leaps forward until the patent expires.
I have never understood the verulent resistance to unionization amongst the IT folks I know. During the "heyday" of the dot-com era, no one wanted to think about such issues, as you could seemingly skip from one job to another with a seemingly endless step up in salary each time. However, the realities of a capitalist system are inevitable, and the market dried up.
Think of how much better off in terms of job security, benefits, and salary the IT industry in the US could be today had they unionized early enough. Protection could have also been built in to protect the proletariate from the export of jobs overseas. It's truly a shame.
they were used on 9/11 by the Mossad to steer jets into the World Trade Center.
One can only hope this catches on in larger scale!!
Racism, pure and simple. Westerners are reluctant to adopt anything that they themselves have not come up with, especially if it is from someone who doesn't quite look and think they way they do. Also, there is an inherent bias in the west against the Chinese due to their chosen form of government.
Support of multiple standards has not slowed down cellular phones, so why this? I think the IEEE argument is just a red herring.
At what point does the gulag become an option for cases like this? Where are the authorities?