I am guessing that is because most photographs dont have their metadata "filled in". And where your camera/capture program does it automatically, I guess it will be something as descriptive as 'DSC00101' or '11102004_mytrip'.
This is fine till a HIGHER ranked HR person hauls in the lower ranker's ass for having incomplete files. What if someone marked that "item in file" as a precondition for employment.
More often then not, you will be faced with a bubbly HR exec eager to "get you onboard", unable to fathom the reason you are getting too worked up about "some routinue paperwork". Even if you spend the time to get it into their thick skulls, putting in an amendment request that ends up with lawyers at one end means you might as well kiss your job good bye.
This is what 'process' does. More often than not, hiring is a process, which cannot handle the exceptions well. And if you insist, the process will be started for someone else.
True. Just to add, number of hits is not a sign of objectivity. Search for "microsoft" and MSN returns 3937 as opposed to 40,500,000 odd on google. The number of results hence does not seem very relevant anymore, does it? ~!nrk
Oh right! Now we can have FDA approved 'patcher' worms released under virulent GPL going after M$ approved 'vulnerability detection' worms, chasing each other and crawling up and down the wires, looking for machines to declare battles and wars.
Good point, -- Ballot stuffing is difficult because of limited papers and limited volume in the box
Cant we implement the same in a digital sense? Limit count(*) -- Trail exists in paper world because I know WHO has voted, HOW many have voted and privacy because i dont know WHAT everyone voted.
Implement the same digitally - two tables one user table and one vote table. Continuously compare 'count(*) where' from both...? -- Paper world has a check because I can trace back to voting centers.
Do the same with each voting center receiving separate IDs -- Difficult to tamper with voting boxen because it is so simple any tampering will be GLARING...
Do the same with your voting boxes. Dont put dell boxes with windows xp and network enabled, use an embedded system, running a custom linux which can only generate a screen and accept clickys from thouse mousy things. -- 'I cannot sit in my room and hack into a metal box in the voting booth'
Do the same electronically. Use only Booth wide LANs, with IDS and network monitoring turned on. Once voting is on, use periodic updates to the nationawide central server in a specified, atomic, roll-backable transaction and not continuous real-time updates. This gives greater control, smaller hack window and another 'trail'. -- It is simple waaaahhhh!!
what the difference betweek a paper and a tft screen, a pen and a mouse? -- dont attribute lack of thought to a fundamental inapplicability of the digital process
What 'trail' exactly? Okay so you 'trailed' back to a sheet of paper? What then? ~!nrk
Re: Interesting but somewhat unrealistic
on
Software For Ransom
·
· Score: 1
Touche, Seems we are focussing on the HOW of the process rather than the WHY-WILL-IT-WORK of the process. I really dont understand why we are doign this? a) we lose out on the early advantages of Open source - eyeballs-looking-for-bugs-effect, large user base reporting bugs etc. b) Losing out on advantages any user might have. Look at it from the point of view of some serious user for some serious software (define serious as something done for money, coz it is all about money in the end) For such a user this does not make sense at all. What on earth will be do knowing the Source Code of a project he has implemented successfully? Please dont tell me he is going to hire programmers who are just going to hang around looking at the code so that they can modify it. (Coz they could have done it two years earlier and would have had their own proprietary software by now) c) What are the liabilities of the programmer? And again looking at it from a corporate point of view. Can you see theat some 3 to 4 deals are being worked out where just one deal with a Closed Source company will work? Why will someone do that? Philantrophy? Think again...
I dont really see any reason to make once-closed-code open other than a) for an end user benefit (as proposed in the parent post) b) as an offensive weapon by a company getting out of a segment (Imagine if and company exiting could somehow make what they did Open Source. That would reduce entry to barriers in the segment, increase competition and make it exceedingly difficult for the incumbent to make too much of money)
Good question Googling gave this which says quite the opposite.
quote"
Finally, NiCd batteries aren't significantly affected by cold weather. NiMH batteries lose power at cold temperatures since the battery's chemicals interact at a slower rate. "/quote
Wonder if this was physics favouring the unlucky....
This will not work.. before the fact that the HOW of this solution will fail, the WHY also does not make sense...
A better way would be to use the facilities of a site like the/. to build up a list of the sites that are being blocked. with users posting site names and these being validated by others etc. we can come up with a list of sitenames, that, given/. will be highly accurate and might also end up being exhaustive...:D
Today we outsource wire tapping.Tommorrow we will outsource the analysis of the wiretaps.Then outsource "crime detection and response systems" and mebbe do away with judiciary. Bah!
What is concerning is that this is the same company that does not think twice about either law or morality when it comes to business. Mebbe with companies as liberal as Verisign we will also be able to buy wire tapping services on ebay.
~!nrk
This Me-too-for-open-source seems to be the latest fad amongst all the developing countries. Checking the posts in the article almost makes this sound like a US (read advanced countries) Vs the rest of the world (read not so advanced) phenomenon. Are we looking at the beginning of the Great Divide - in the electronic age? Open source with third world countries - the panacea for all evils?
Slashdot Mirror
Same here. Try logging onto Passport first and then going onto live.com. IE survives then.
Mod Parent Up! As compared to the "Save As... html" option, this is a *lot* better.
Mebbe, that makes more sense as a topic of this.. ahem.. article.
I am guessing that is because most photographs dont have their metadata "filled in". And where your camera/capture program does it automatically, I guess it will be something as descriptive as 'DSC00101' or '11102004_mytrip'.
This is fine till a HIGHER ranked HR person hauls in the lower ranker's ass for having incomplete files. What if someone marked that "item in file" as a precondition for employment.
More often then not, you will be faced with a bubbly HR exec eager to "get you onboard", unable to fathom the reason you are getting too worked up about "some routinue paperwork". Even if you spend the time to get it into their thick skulls, putting in an amendment request that ends up with lawyers at one end means you might as well kiss your job good bye.
This is what 'process' does. More often than not, hiring is a process, which cannot handle the exceptions well. And if you insist, the process will be started for someone else.
Dont talk to me about life - Marvin
You mean Mike Hint, dont you
Yup, I know this one...
it has an undocumented feature which causes it to explode when you use the words "al quaeda" or "osama" or "george bush"...
and there is a documented bug that causes the phone to mistake "all kinds of" or "oh some more" or "keanu reeves" for the above
4. ???
5. Profit?
~!nrk
True.
Just to add, number of hits is not a sign of objectivity. Search for "microsoft" and MSN returns 3937 as opposed to 40,500,000 odd on google. The number of results hence does not seem very relevant anymore, does it?
~!nrk
Oh right!
Now we can have FDA approved 'patcher' worms released under virulent GPL going after M$ approved 'vulnerability detection' worms, chasing each other and crawling up and down the wires, looking for machines to declare battles and wars.
Whoopeeeee, mama I wanna be a worm.
~!nrk
Volume will...
Sea Level wont...
Coz what was above water now (as ice), will occupy the drop in volume when the ice under water changes into water
~!nrk
Good point,
--
Ballot stuffing is difficult because of limited papers and limited volume in the box
Cant we implement the same in a digital sense? Limit count(*)
--
Trail exists in paper world because I know WHO has voted, HOW many have voted and privacy because i dont know WHAT everyone voted.
Implement the same digitally - two tables one user table and one vote table. Continuously compare 'count(*) where' from both...?
--
Paper world has a check because I can trace back to voting centers.
Do the same with each voting center receiving separate IDs
--
Difficult to tamper with voting boxen because it is so simple any tampering will be GLARING...
Do the same with your voting boxes. Dont put dell boxes with windows xp and network enabled, use an embedded system, running a custom linux which can only generate a screen and accept clickys from thouse mousy things.
--
'I cannot sit in my room and hack into a metal box in the voting booth'
Do the same electronically. Use only Booth wide LANs, with IDS and network monitoring turned on. Once voting is on, use periodic updates to the nationawide central server in a specified, atomic, roll-backable transaction and not continuous real-time updates. This gives greater control, smaller hack window and another 'trail'.
--
It is simple waaaahhhh!!
what the difference betweek a paper and a tft screen, a pen and a mouse?
--
dont attribute lack of thought to a fundamental inapplicability of the digital process
warm regards,
~!nrk
What 'trail' exactly? Okay so you 'trailed' back to a sheet of paper? What then?
~!nrk
Touche,
Seems we are focussing on the HOW of the process rather than the WHY-WILL-IT-WORK of the process. I really dont understand why we are doign this?
a) we lose out on the early advantages of Open source - eyeballs-looking-for-bugs-effect, large user base reporting bugs etc.
b) Losing out on advantages any user might have. Look at it from the point of view of some serious user for some serious software (define serious as something done for money, coz it is all about money in the end) For such a user this does not make sense at all. What on earth will be do knowing the Source Code of a project he has implemented successfully? Please dont tell me he is going to hire programmers who are just going to hang around looking at the code so that they can modify it. (Coz they could have done it two years earlier and would have had their own proprietary software by now)
c) What are the liabilities of the programmer? And again looking at it from a corporate point of view. Can you see theat some 3 to 4 deals are being worked out where just one deal with a Closed Source company will work? Why will someone do that? Philantrophy? Think again...
I dont really see any reason to make once-closed-code open other than
a) for an end user benefit (as proposed in the parent post)
b) as an offensive weapon by a company getting out of a segment (Imagine if and company exiting could somehow make what they did Open Source. That would reduce entry to barriers in the segment, increase competition and make it exceedingly difficult for the incumbent to make too much of money)
So why are we doing this again?
~!nrk
(Score:5, Informative)??????
*Informative*!!!!??? Is that what this post was?????
~!nrk
...get it to run on a cash register or something.
Mebbe I can then get it to fly and fire sparrows at other unidentified flying things...
~!nrk
Good question
Googling gave this which says quite the opposite.
Wonder if this was physics favouring the unlucky....
~!Q
This will not work..
/. to build up a list of the sites that are being blocked. with users posting site names and these being validated by others etc. we can come up with a list of sitenames, that, given /. will be highly accurate and might also end up being exhaustive... :D
before the fact that the HOW of this solution will fail, the WHY also does not make sense...
A better way would be to use the facilities of a site like the
~!nrk
Today we outsource wire tapping.Tommorrow we will outsource the analysis of the wiretaps.Then outsource "crime detection and response systems" and mebbe do away with judiciary. Bah!
What is concerning is that this is the same company that does not think twice about either law or morality when it comes to business. Mebbe with companies as liberal as Verisign we will also be able to buy wire tapping services on ebay. ~!nrk
This Me-too-for-open-source seems to be the latest fad amongst all the developing countries. Checking the posts in the article almost makes this sound like a US (read advanced countries) Vs the rest of the world (read not so advanced) phenomenon. Are we looking at the beginning of the Great Divide - in the electronic age? Open source with third world countries - the panacea for all evils?