Lets use a real life example. Couple A goes shopping. The man always buys a suit for $1000. The woman buys a hat for $10 half the time, but nothing at other times. Couple B goes shopping. The man always buys a suit for $1000. The woman buys a hat for $10 every time.
Average cost of couple A: $1005. Average cost of couple B: $1010
Real life outcome: Both men poisoned by their wives for their money.
Additionally in the cockpit there is/ used to be a button labeled CVR Erase which after pulling up to the gate pilots would press because they didn't want chats about their g/f's getting out to their wives.
I'm sure if you spent a couple dozen million dollars, you would find your car keys very quickly.
Surely at that price it would be more cost effective to just buy a new car every day. $24M @ $30k per car would get you 800 days or over 2 years before you have to go searching for another day's car. If you drive a cheaper car and/or buy in bulk you could probably push that to 3 1/2 years. Or better yet buy or fit one out so that it's keyless. Of course your car won't be as cool as anything that can submerge a few thousand feet and still operate, but hey thems the breaks kid.
...don't use visual tools. They describe the GUI in assembly language, or use torturous frameworks. Of course it is this elitist attitude of making things as difficult as possible that has resulted in 2 decades of user experience that stinks. I don't know how many times I've seen programmers rant that Visual Basic was evil because it was too easy and let anyone program. They somehow think putting together a user form should require 2 weeks and multiple degrees in computer science. On the contrary, it should be ridiculously simple to throw together a user form. There are things you can't simplify like algorithms and complex logic in science and business and THAT is where you NEED to focus and concentrate a developer's attention. Bloated frameworks and non-visual building tools from hell that make things unnecessarily hard are nothing but a hindrance and should be eliminated. There's no shortage of work to go around.
You paid the equivalent of $700 for that setup. Did you pay that for your current media or audio center? People just barely pay that for a game console with an expected life of less-than-5 years.
Yes, for the whole setup. A full stereo, not just a CD player. That included a tuner, turntable, 2 speakers, an amp, and control panels including an equalizer. The CD player was probably worth $200-$250 of that $700. And you would pay that today for a good Blu-ray player. Blu-ray now is at about the same point that CDs were when I bought in.
So your quote of $1000 for a DVD player is a huge and ridiculous exaggeration. Quality control does not increase price by 2 orders of magnitude, and old tech gets cheaper as factories tool up and familiarity is gained with the ins and outs of the format.
And I wasn't the only person that bought it.
True. They would not have become ubiquitous otherwise. However, that market really wasn't sustainable, was it? Not in light of how many more people paid for cheaper versions of it. As time goes by, the desire to upgrade these components will go up as new fancy ways to use digital processors become fashionable. Again, this is the market dictating this, not the manufacturers. If it were the latter, we'd still have all those little repair shops all over the place like we did in the 80's.
The market is quite sustainable. People haven't stopped buying gadgets. More people are able to afford them etc.
The reason that you had little repair shops all over the place was that it cost more to replace than to fix. One reason for that was that quality control hadn't been thrown out the window. Today a manufacturer will put out shoddy rubbish to save $2 a unit. Most customers would pay an extra $2 for something that worked properly and lasted so blaming the consumer is just ridiculous misdirection. The blame lies squarely with manufacturers who refuse to back the quality of their products and instead compete on price point. The first few shoddy products ruin that manufacturer's reputation and they find they can no longer compete on quality.
Of course they still work, both of those devices are infinitely simpler than a DVD player. Niether are a testament to excellent engineering.
That, however, was not the question. I'll rephrase it if it helps: If a company would guarantee that a DVD (or even Blu Ray) player would last 20 years, what's the maximum you would pay?
You're just trying to be difficult. I have a CD player from the 80s that still works. Can't give you an exact year - somewhere around '84 to '86. It was sold with a tuner and turndeck. Together they cost around $350. The CD player would have been less than half of that. Yes that was a lot of money at the time but not comparable to $1000 today. And I wasn't the only person that bought it.
Does every conversation on slashdot have to turn into a tirade about how stupid and frustrating and awful and shoddy and worthless and disappointing and shitty and aggravating and horrible windows is? We know already! It's also despicable and unreliable and saddening and ugly and untrustworthy and pernicious and inadequate and etc etc etc...
Reminds me of a time when I worked at my school's I.T. department, and they were considering whether we should block pornography in the dorms because it was consuming a lot of bandwidth. My solution? Host our own porn server!
My proposal was rejected.
|Gee, d'ya think. It's one thing to act as a common carrier. It's another to actively host legally dubious material. This is akin to suggesting you pirate everything when you find you're underlicensed. Even as a joke there are some suggestions you shouldn't be making.
You seem confused, the current situation in Australia is THEIR IS NO CHOICE. games are banned if they are of a violent, sexual or drug use related. for instance Mortal Kombat is banned as is Left for Dead 2. R18+ would at least allow the majority of games onto the market here instead of completely cock blocking them.
I'm not confused at all, you are. The current situation in Australia (where I live by the way) is an international joke, and I am well aware there is no R18+ category, and that this has resulted in game bans. We're not discussing that specifically. We're discussing plans to finally add an R18+ rating but coupled with removing MA15+ supposedly so that there is a "clear distinction" between adult games and those targeted at children.. That is also a bad joke that means if a parent disagrees they are breaking the law by exposing their child to R18+ material AND we have a situation where a young adult is only allowed to play childish games then suddenly one day they turn 18 and all the blood, sex and gore is unleashed on them in one hit.
Ummmm I think this is actually very good for children, It allows PARENTS to introduce the material to them as appropriate rather than kids running down to the local store and getting whatever they want. Parents should be responsible for raising their children not a government censorship system. R18+ would at least allow adult games to be sold to adults (something we have lacked in Aus) and where parents think appropriate given to their children. The government should not be responsible for how children are introduced to such content.
How the fuck does making a game R18+ instead of MA15+ give the parent control? It criminalises their choice if that choice is to introduce material earlier!
We keep insisting in this society that children must be protected at all costs until some magic age, when we suddenly rip away all that protection. It's clearly easier to pretend children go from 8 to 18 in one giant step than to actually teach them responsibility slowly and gradually. And then we wonder why 8 to 18 year olds go stupid and make choices that have devastating consequences, or are selfish. They've not been taught responsibility in a calm and gradual fashion. They've been treated like infants for a decade instead. What do you expect!? It's like teaching someone primary school math for a decade then expecting them to jump to vector calculus literally overnight.
I think the point was more along the lines that the system doesn't have any value at all unless you run it. Yet when you run it the cost is high.
Houses on the other hand you can simply stop building so many and the ones you have go up in value eventually.
That's a myth. Houses only go up in value while there's demand. That demand goes to 0 as the price goes up because people can no longer afford them. If they are unaffordable yet you stop building anyway, you end up with a slum with people cramming into less buildings so that they can afford them, squatting or being homeless. Those few who can afford nice houses move away or move into gated communities. You're talking about replacing one bubble with another, only this bubble leaves people poor and destitute.
The fact that Zhao Jian doesn't appear to understand this makes me question all of his economic conclusions.
I was hoping to see some intelligent discussion of the pros/cons of choosing careers in science, but of course this is Slashdot, and all career discussions must degenerate into bashing mangers, finance, and boo-hooing the dangers of outsourcing.
Some of these people have seen their parents - very good at what they do - forced into early retirement or financial hardship by outsourcing through the actions of managers and finance people. What did you expect? People not to speak out?
So let me inject some positive and rational comments into this mess.
The financial industry is full of climbers, and it sucks to work with those people. Smart people get jammed into confining roles with no ability to solve problems or exercise creativity. I know some really smart people who have left finance to return to academia, leaving behind $500K+ salaries.
FIrst, way to go with the positive and rational comments. The first thing you've done is bash the finance industry yourself.
Second, it's amazing what earning $500K+ for a few years does to open your options up. Also amazing how those salaries dry up during downturns. So intelligent people laving those jobs doesn't mean much.
Almost everyone I know who works in finance/accounting hates their job or boss.
There are plenty of jobs outside of management that pay livable wages.
You don't have to be a manager to be in finance. I've actively avoided management and graciously declined being groomed for such promotions. As for hating your boss that's got something to do with the bosses but a lot to do with attitude too. I know plenty of people who work in various industries who hate their bosses and plenty who like or tolerate them. For the most part that just goes with the territory when you manage. Middle managers aren't always able to make decisions that make them popular.
Live within your means, and find a spouse who makes a decent living too. Americans are so damn greedy they don't understand that driving an economy car and living in a normal house doesn't mean that you are poor.
You're an idiot. You don't choose your spouse solely on whether or not they make a decent living. If you raise a family chances are you or your spouse will need to take some time off. Living within your means is always the goal. But what if you or your family gets sick? The extra cash on silly luxuries isn't needed for happiness but if you can't treat your son for terminal cancer I challenge the humblest most down to earth person to be happy under those circumstances. By the way as you grow older you'll realise that while you can make decisions that improve your life, not everything is your fault or under your control, and extra cash stashed away for security is very important.
Finally, outsourcing. HAHAHAHAHA. Having seen it in action, I think it's hilarious that people feel threatened by it. Sorry folks, American and European universities still churn out the best qualified engineers in the world. The people willing to work for $5/hr aren't nearly as competent, and you have the global economy to thank for that. Would someone please offer some evidence of a outsourcing success story?
Guess what? It doesn't need to be a success story for you to lose your job. The right managers just need to be convinced and then it's all over.
My friends who work in science (PhD candidates, receiving full-tuition and stipends) get drunk on Tuesday nights. They travel to conferences in San Francisco and Prague. They set their own hours and work on stuff that means the world to them. There is some guidance in their research but they call the shots and decide what to research. That is pretty damn cool. One of my friends has parents who are professors and they sure do alright.
If you want to work in science, or engineering, don't listen to the Slashdot hate
Oh ya... it's getting close to election time again. This is just the first gentle tug of it's grandstanding gravitational pull into the singularity known as US elections.
Fool me once...shame on you! Fool me 8 or 9 times, shame on me.
I see posts like this all the time. "We can't punish the companies, because they'll just jack up prices to push the cost on to us!" That's what the companies want you to think, because that way they don't get punished.
That is NOT what I'm saying AT ALL. I said they should not be punished in that way and you leapt to the conclusion I wanted to let them get away with it. They should be forced to reinstate the feature, not charged money (ultimately passed on to the consumer) and allowed to continue on their merry way. You should not be permitted to take away something you've sold after the fact. Period.
Joke's on them. The GPS in my Nokia phone is so piss poor as to be unusable. 5-10 mins to lock on a signal and requires clear view of the sky (In pocket won't do). If they try to track me using that my response is simple laughter.:P
That's should stop a lot of companies from removing features at will..
Sorry if this sounds like a flame but are you insane or obtuse? All this will do is jack up the price of consoles, dev licenses and games, so that games companies can cover their losses when forced to pay punitive damages.
I suggested that the creator should be allowed to sue (or perhaps claim would be a better word) if someone uses their work.
So instead of the lawyers getting rich on copyrights and patents, as happens now, you want the lawyers to get rich on things that aren't copyrighted and patented?
Good going! Way to completely fail to comprehend what I've said!
Slashdot Mirror
Lets use a real life example.
Couple A goes shopping. The man always buys a suit for $1000. The woman buys a hat for $10 half the time, but nothing at other times.
Couple B goes shopping. The man always buys a suit for $1000. The woman buys a hat for $10 every time.
Average cost of couple A: $1005. Average cost of couple B: $1010
Real life outcome: Both men poisoned by their wives for their money.
Additionally in the cockpit there is/ used to be a button labeled CVR Erase which after pulling up to the gate pilots would press because they didn't want chats about their g/f's getting out to their wives.
Or in some cases chatting TO their girlfriends...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1180864/Chilling-recordings-reveal-moments-doomed-Buffalo-flight-killed-50.html
I have trouble finding my car keys some days.
I'm sure if you spent a couple dozen million dollars, you would find your car keys very quickly.
Surely at that price it would be more cost effective to just buy a new car every day. $24M @ $30k per car would get you 800 days or over 2 years before you have to go searching for another day's car. If you drive a cheaper car and/or buy in bulk you could probably push that to 3 1/2 years. Or better yet buy or fit one out so that it's keyless. Of course your car won't be as cool as anything that can submerge a few thousand feet and still operate, but hey thems the breaks kid.
...don't use visual tools. They describe the GUI in assembly language, or use torturous frameworks. Of course it is this elitist attitude of making things as difficult as possible that has resulted in 2 decades of user experience that stinks. I don't know how many times I've seen programmers rant that Visual Basic was evil because it was too easy and let anyone program. They somehow think putting together a user form should require 2 weeks and multiple degrees in computer science. On the contrary, it should be ridiculously simple to throw together a user form. There are things you can't simplify like algorithms and complex logic in science and business and THAT is where you NEED to focus and concentrate a developer's attention. Bloated frameworks and non-visual building tools from hell that make things unnecessarily hard are nothing but a hindrance and should be eliminated. There's no shortage of work to go around.
You paid the equivalent of $700 for that setup. Did you pay that for your current media or audio center? People just barely pay that for a game console with an expected life of less-than-5 years.
Yes, for the whole setup. A full stereo, not just a CD player. That included a tuner, turntable, 2 speakers, an amp, and control panels including an equalizer. The CD player was probably worth $200-$250 of that $700. And you would pay that today for a good Blu-ray player. Blu-ray now is at about the same point that CDs were when I bought in.
So your quote of $1000 for a DVD player is a huge and ridiculous exaggeration. Quality control does not increase price by 2 orders of magnitude, and old tech gets cheaper as factories tool up and familiarity is gained with the ins and outs of the format.
And I wasn't the only person that bought it.
True. They would not have become ubiquitous otherwise. However, that market really wasn't sustainable, was it? Not in light of how many more people paid for cheaper versions of it. As time goes by, the desire to upgrade these components will go up as new fancy ways to use digital processors become fashionable. Again, this is the market dictating this, not the manufacturers. If it were the latter, we'd still have all those little repair shops all over the place like we did in the 80's.
The market is quite sustainable. People haven't stopped buying gadgets. More people are able to afford them etc.
The reason that you had little repair shops all over the place was that it cost more to replace than to fix. One reason for that was that quality control hadn't been thrown out the window. Today a manufacturer will put out shoddy rubbish to save $2 a unit. Most customers would pay an extra $2 for something that worked properly and lasted so blaming the consumer is just ridiculous misdirection. The blame lies squarely with manufacturers who refuse to back the quality of their products and instead compete on price point. The first few shoddy products ruin that manufacturer's reputation and they find they can no longer compete on quality.
Of course they still work, both of those devices are infinitely simpler than a DVD player. Niether are a testament to excellent engineering.
That, however, was not the question. I'll rephrase it if it helps: If a company would guarantee that a DVD (or even Blu Ray) player would last 20 years, what's the maximum you would pay?
You're just trying to be difficult. I have a CD player from the 80s that still works. Can't give you an exact year - somewhere around '84 to '86. It was sold with a tuner and turndeck. Together they cost around $350. The CD player would have been less than half of that. Yes that was a lot of money at the time but not comparable to $1000 today. And I wasn't the only person that bought it.
Does every conversation on slashdot have to turn into a tirade about how stupid and frustrating and awful and shoddy and worthless and disappointing and shitty and aggravating and horrible windows is? We know already! It's also despicable and unreliable and saddening and ugly and untrustworthy and pernicious and inadequate and etc etc etc...
Take your blinkers off. It's not just Windows.
I saw it on Star Trek, TMP!
...and as long as it stays on Star Trek and doesn't move to "Voyager: Excrement my dad says", it'll be just fine!
Reptiles' version should be in python.
...and have a Corba interface
Seems that maybe they should have programmed it in Lisp?
Thanks, I'm here all week!
Children's version should be in Smalltalk.
The 10,000 number was pulled out of the air for emphasis.
It was pulled from somewhere with foul air where the sun does not shine.
Reminds me of a time when I worked at my school's I.T. department, and they were considering whether we should block pornography in the dorms because it was consuming a lot of bandwidth. My solution? Host our own porn server!
My proposal was rejected.
|Gee, d'ya think. It's one thing to act as a common carrier. It's another to actively host legally dubious material. This is akin to suggesting you pirate everything when you find you're underlicensed. Even as a joke there are some suggestions you shouldn't be making.
Am I only one who has no clue how to tell if excrement is from an armadillo or not? Much less whether a patch of dirt has a lot in it?
It doesn't matter. Just run this and you'll be fine:
sudo apt-get uninstall armadillo
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/armadillo/
You seem confused, the current situation in Australia is THEIR IS NO CHOICE. games are banned if they are of a violent, sexual or drug use related. for instance Mortal Kombat is banned as is Left for Dead 2. R18+ would at least allow the majority of games onto the market here instead of completely cock blocking them.
I'm not confused at all, you are. The current situation in Australia (where I live by the way) is an international joke, and I am well aware there is no R18+ category, and that this has resulted in game bans. We're not discussing that specifically. We're discussing plans to finally add an R18+ rating but coupled with removing MA15+ supposedly so that there is a "clear distinction" between adult games and those targeted at children.. That is also a bad joke that means if a parent disagrees they are breaking the law by exposing their child to R18+ material AND we have a situation where a young adult is only allowed to play childish games then suddenly one day they turn 18 and all the blood, sex and gore is unleashed on them in one hit.
Ummmm I think this is actually very good for children, It allows PARENTS to introduce the material to them as appropriate rather than kids running down to the local store and getting whatever they want. Parents should be responsible for raising their children not a government censorship system. R18+ would at least allow adult games to be sold to adults (something we have lacked in Aus) and where parents think appropriate given to their children. The government should not be responsible for how children are introduced to such content.
How the fuck does making a game R18+ instead of MA15+ give the parent control? It criminalises their choice if that choice is to introduce material earlier!
What are some good bookmark apps that I can install on my own server?
vi or Emacs.
and Apache
(Actually i'd recommend vim not vi)
We keep insisting in this society that children must be protected at all costs until some magic age, when we suddenly rip away all that protection. It's clearly easier to pretend children go from 8 to 18 in one giant step than to actually teach them responsibility slowly and gradually. And then we wonder why 8 to 18 year olds go stupid and make choices that have devastating consequences, or are selfish. They've not been taught responsibility in a calm and gradual fashion. They've been treated like infants for a decade instead. What do you expect!? It's like teaching someone primary school math for a decade then expecting them to jump to vector calculus literally overnight.
I think the point was more along the lines that the system doesn't have any value at all unless you run it. Yet when you run it the cost is high.
Houses on the other hand you can simply stop building so many and the ones you have go up in value eventually.
That's a myth. Houses only go up in value while there's demand. That demand goes to 0 as the price goes up because people can no longer afford them. If they are unaffordable yet you stop building anyway, you end up with a slum with people cramming into less buildings so that they can afford them, squatting or being homeless. Those few who can afford nice houses move away or move into gated communities. You're talking about replacing one bubble with another, only this bubble leaves people poor and destitute.
The fact that Zhao Jian doesn't appear to understand this makes me question all of his economic conclusions.
What a fantastic official response. If only managers in America would openly admit to being the dickheads they are...
He didn't admit to BEING a dickhead, just to the story making him look like one. Big difference.
I was hoping to see some intelligent discussion of the pros/cons of choosing careers in science, but of course this is Slashdot, and all career discussions must degenerate into bashing mangers, finance, and boo-hooing the dangers of outsourcing.
Some of these people have seen their parents - very good at what they do - forced into early retirement or financial hardship by outsourcing through the actions of managers and finance people. What did you expect? People not to speak out?
So let me inject some positive and rational comments into this mess.
The financial industry is full of climbers, and it sucks to work with those people. Smart people get jammed into confining roles with no ability to solve problems or exercise creativity. I know some really smart people who have left finance to return to academia, leaving behind $500K+ salaries.
FIrst, way to go with the positive and rational comments. The first thing you've done is bash the finance industry yourself.
Second, it's amazing what earning $500K+ for a few years does to open your options up. Also amazing how those salaries dry up during downturns. So intelligent people laving those jobs doesn't mean much.
Almost everyone I know who works in finance/accounting hates their job or boss.
There are plenty of jobs outside of management that pay livable wages.
You don't have to be a manager to be in finance. I've actively avoided management and graciously declined being groomed for such promotions. As for hating your boss that's got something to do with the bosses but a lot to do with attitude too. I know plenty of people who work in various industries who hate their bosses and plenty who like or tolerate them. For the most part that just goes with the territory when you manage. Middle managers aren't always able to make decisions that make them popular.
Live within your means, and find a spouse who makes a decent living too. Americans are so damn greedy they don't understand that driving an economy car and living in a normal house doesn't mean that you are poor.
You're an idiot. You don't choose your spouse solely on whether or not they make a decent living. If you raise a family chances are you or your spouse will need to take some time off. Living within your means is always the goal. But what if you or your family gets sick? The extra cash on silly luxuries isn't needed for happiness but if you can't treat your son for terminal cancer I challenge the humblest most down to earth person to be happy under those circumstances. By the way as you grow older you'll realise that while you can make decisions that improve your life, not everything is your fault or under your control, and extra cash stashed away for security is very important.
Finally, outsourcing. HAHAHAHAHA. Having seen it in action, I think it's hilarious that people feel threatened by it. Sorry folks, American and European universities still churn out the best qualified engineers in the world. The people willing to work for $5 /hr aren't nearly as competent, and you have the global economy to thank for that. Would someone please offer some evidence of a outsourcing success story?
Guess what? It doesn't need to be a success story for you to lose your job. The right managers just need to be convinced and then it's all over.
My friends who work in science (PhD candidates, receiving full-tuition and stipends) get drunk on Tuesday nights. They travel to conferences in San Francisco and Prague. They set their own hours and work on stuff that means the world to them. There is some guidance in their research but they call the shots and decide what to research. That is pretty damn cool. One of my friends has parents who are professors and they sure do alright.
If you want to work in science, or engineering, don't listen to the Slashdot hate
Oh ya... it's getting close to election time again. This is just the first gentle tug of it's grandstanding gravitational pull into the singularity known as US elections.
Fool me once...shame on you! Fool me 8 or 9 times, shame on me.
I see posts like this all the time. "We can't punish the companies, because they'll just jack up prices to push the cost on to us!" That's what the companies want you to think, because that way they don't get punished.
That is NOT what I'm saying AT ALL. I said they should not be punished in that way and you leapt to the conclusion I wanted to let them get away with it. They should be forced to reinstate the feature, not charged money (ultimately passed on to the consumer) and allowed to continue on their merry way. You should not be permitted to take away something you've sold after the fact. Period.
As a consumer, I assumed security.
As a technological thinker, I feared this.
Joke's on them. The GPS in my Nokia phone is so piss poor as to be unusable. 5-10 mins to lock on a signal and requires clear view of the sky (In pocket won't do). If they try to track me using that my response is simple laughter. :P
That's should stop a lot of companies from removing features at will..
Sorry if this sounds like a flame but are you insane or obtuse? All this will do is jack up the price of consoles, dev licenses and games, so that games companies can cover their losses when forced to pay punitive damages.
So instead of the lawyers getting rich on copyrights and patents, as happens now, you want the lawyers to get rich on things that aren't copyrighted and patented?
Good going! Way to completely fail to comprehend what I've said!
I'm done arguing straw men.