I had a very similar experience recently. Having purchased a copy of Windows XP only a few days before, I had to telephone a number which at first told me I had to purchase a new copy, and then on calling again I managed to speak to a real person who asked me a bunch of questions and then gave me about 30 digits I had to type in before it would work again.
With that kind of treatment of its customers, Microsoft can go **** itself - I've switched to a Mac.
There you go - you're displaying exactly the kind of understanding of evolution that makes it difficult to accept for most people. Random mutations might have been the main mechanism for evolution when life was primordial sludge, and it still is for very basic life like viruses, but amongst higher lifeforms it is not the main mechanism. (I'm not saying it is not an important element of evolution -- it is very important -- but the evolution of higher lifeforms is a lot more complex than a series of random mutations).
I think the main problem with people's understanding of evolution is the fact that it is not taught very well in schools, and people get the strong idea that evolution is a random process. I also think it is a problem with the timescales involved, which are hard for the human mind to grasp.
My mother was a teacher of younger children and told me that it was fairly easy to guess what the parents of children were going to be like just by observing the child.
I used to work in a company that used to put a lot of pressure on the programmers to work long hours. One old guy there came at 9am and left at 5pm every day, and refused to work any later. They didn't get rid of him because he was good and reliable. In retrospect I realise all of us ambitious youngsters were being taken for a ride and the old guy just wasn't having it.
Personally I think Sun secretly never wanted Java to succeed, at least on the web/desktop. That is the only way I can explain what an incredible screw-up they made of it.
I remember what Java was at the height of its hype. Joe Public would come across a website that required Java, they'd click on the link to go to the site to download it, and be presented with a page where it was very difficult to tell what you should download - there would be a list of a dozen things with meaningless code names (Java 1.2 SDK, Java 1.2 XYZ APIs, etc, - meaningless to a non-programmer) and even once you had selected one there would be a complex install process, only to find out you'd chosen the wrong one.
Or perhaps they guy in charge of their "download Java" page was receiving brown envelopes from Microsoft? I just find it hard to believe that with the billion dollars worth of free hype Sun got with Java, they managed to screw up such a fundamental and simple aspect of it as making it easy for end users to install.
Through that site I came across the "Microsoft Permissive License". The "conditions and limitations" of the license have this clause:
3(B) If you bring a patent claim against any contributor over patents that you claim are infringed by the software, your patent license from such contributor to the software ends automatically.
I don't understand this - can someone explain? If you bring a patent claim against a contributor then how does that contributor have a "patent license" that then ends?
I have an apple TV, and various DVD players and amps. The tiny clicker that comes with the Apple TV is a joy to use compared with the horrible big remote controls covered in buttons of the other hardware.
I would hope, as a designer of interfaces, that you would at least be able to appreciate some of the good things of apple design. Otherwise I'm afraid you're probably doing the wrong job!
Of course, if like 99.9% of people, you would rather have a safe and steady job with regular salary paid, and not put up with rejection, sarcasm, derision, and general apathy for those years, with no pension, no career structure, and absolutely no certainty of ever making more than minimum wage, then that's fine,
Hey, I have my own business and all those things apply to me too. But there are no special laws for me that say I should continue to profit from work I did decades ago.
but since the life expectancy of great software is shorter then great music lets say after 5 years software becomes public domain
I think you're just trying to be provocative, and you've chosen a deliberately very short length of time because this would have impact on the incomes of a lot of Slashdotters.
But I think if you're trying to provoke your point is not valid anyway - I expect very few of us would be affected if a copyright length term on software was reasonable, say 20 years, and most people who create software would not object to it. The objections would come from the big software companies, just as the we hear from the big music companies when it comes to music copyright terms.
We would all be enriched by having access to a huge library of old code if copyright on software was set at 20 years, and more importantly it would give some companies a strong motivation to keep innovating...
Linux on the desktop has been gradually improving, and is now at a point when it is probably pretty much equal to Windows. It may even surpass it in the medium term.
But how good it is isn't really the issue. The fact is, Microsoft has an incredible lock-in, and it is going to take many years to chip away at that. But Firefox has demonstrated that it is possible to win market share from Microsoft. The two essential ingredients are persistence and time. If Microsoft continue to stumble - as they have with Vista - then Linux on the desktop will happen more quickly.
The US will always have it's place at the top table
Why is that? You're chosen by God?
This kind of attitude has been heard many times before going back through history. Ask the Brits. Or the Spanish. Or the French. Or the Chinese. Or the Iranians (yes, they too where once "at the top table"). I could go on, but you get the point I hope...
When my great grandmother was alive the Brits dominated the world as comprehensively as the USA does today.
Why? If Linux evolved like animals, then only the strongest would survive, and characteristics of the weaker distros (even good ones) would die with them. But distro evolution is even better, the good characteristics of all distros make their way into the strongest distros.
The evolution of Linux distros may look messy, but it is underpinned by natural force that, over time, comes up with wonderful results.
I thought it was already public knowledge that there is a backdoor in Windows that the security services can use? At least, the NSA - as I recall an NSA key that was discovered when some windows code was leaked some years ago.
Oh, so that naturally explains why the internet is full of Microsoft IE ONLY web sites.
It is?
Maybe for you, but I haven't used IE for over a year and I don't recall coming across a single site that I haven't been able to access. Although I've read that in the US lots of banks require IE - perhaps that's what gives you the impression that there are lots of IE sites?
Personally, I think file formats will become irrelevant to the end user.
It's really dumb that (for instance) we produce documents in Word, convert them to PDF, email them to someone else, who will read them on a computer screen. We are stuck in last generation technology, and people growing up with the web today just won't do it. Although many of us find it hard to believe, on-line systems will eventually replace Microsoft Word, OpenOffice etc. completely.
When that happens, the file formats will be irrelevant to the end user, just as web page formats are pretty much irrelevant to current web users. This is bad news for Microsoft, since they have an incredible amount of lock-in at the moment due to their proprietary formats. However, they are not going to be able to transition that lock-in to the web.
The main point is that they did not secure the nuclear facilities. I mentioned the oil wells because actions communicate motives. Your words suggest that you think they secured the oil wells for the benefit of the Iraqi economy and the Iraqis themselves. Other actions of this administration suggest that they aren't really concerned with helping the Iraqis or the economy of Iraq.
I don't think this administration is worried about terrorism at all. Terrorism is just a useful justification for what they do, and keeping the people scared.
The thing that really convinced me of this was how they handled the Iraq war. Leaving aside for a moment that bombing the crap out of people is probably a pretty good way to make new terrorists, they did the following:
1) Failed to secure nuclear facilities in Iraq. (They did however make a big effort to secure the oil wells). 2) Distributed in Iraq, without care or record, twelve billions dollars of Iraqs money in cash.
Are those the actions of an administration that is worried about terrorism? To me, they are the actions of an administration that wants to create them...
No, if people want to do it, they should be able to do it in the privacy of their own home, where it won't endanger the lives of others.
I bet the chance of having a car accident after drinking just one pint is hundreds of times higher than the chance of you getting cancer from someone smoking near you. And sometimes people have more than one pint before driving home, don't they? And so we should ban drinking alcohol except at home.
Not too keen on that? Enjoy a drink at the pub, do you?
Slashdot Mirror
I recognise it because my three year old son for some reason finds that page very funny, and wants me to repeat it over and over again...
I had a very similar experience recently. Having purchased a copy of Windows XP only a few days before, I had to telephone a number which at first told me I had to purchase a new copy, and then on calling again I managed to speak to a real person who asked me a bunch of questions and then gave me about 30 digits I had to type in before it would work again.
With that kind of treatment of its customers, Microsoft can go **** itself - I've switched to a Mac.
There you go - you're displaying exactly the kind of understanding of evolution that makes it difficult to accept for most people. Random mutations might have been the main mechanism for evolution when life was primordial sludge, and it still is for very basic life like viruses, but amongst higher lifeforms it is not the main mechanism. (I'm not saying it is not an important element of evolution -- it is very important -- but the evolution of higher lifeforms is a lot more complex than a series of random mutations).
I think the main problem with people's understanding of evolution is the fact that it is not taught very well in schools, and people get the strong idea that evolution is a random process. I also think it is a problem with the timescales involved, which are hard for the human mind to grasp.
Not just Americans, but most people across the world don't believe in evolution.
Got any proof? Because I've got some that shows you're wrong. Link.
The guy made a mistake. We don't know him or the situation. He may be otherwise great at his job.
What's all this crap about his punishment should match the cost of the mistake rubbish?
If a doctor makes a mistake and a patient dies, do we kill the doctor?
Great post innerweb.
My mother was a teacher of younger children and told me that it was fairly easy to guess what the parents of children were going to be like just by observing the child.
I used to work in a company that used to put a lot of pressure on the programmers to work long hours. One old guy there came at 9am and left at 5pm every day, and refused to work any later. They didn't get rid of him because he was good and reliable. In retrospect I realise all of us ambitious youngsters were being taken for a ride and the old guy just wasn't having it.
Personally I think Sun secretly never wanted Java to succeed, at least on the web/desktop. That is the only way I can explain what an incredible screw-up they made of it.
I remember what Java was at the height of its hype. Joe Public would come across a website that required Java, they'd click on the link to go to the site to download it, and be presented with a page where it was very difficult to tell what you should download - there would be a list of a dozen things with meaningless code names (Java 1.2 SDK, Java 1.2 XYZ APIs, etc, - meaningless to a non-programmer) and even once you had selected one there would be a complex install process, only to find out you'd chosen the wrong one.
Or perhaps they guy in charge of their "download Java" page was receiving brown envelopes from Microsoft? I just find it hard to believe that with the billion dollars worth of free hype Sun got with Java, they managed to screw up such a fundamental and simple aspect of it as making it easy for end users to install.
Through that site I came across the "Microsoft Permissive License". The "conditions and limitations" of the license have this clause:
3(B) If you bring a patent claim against any contributor over patents that you claim are infringed by the software, your patent license from such contributor to the software ends automatically.
I don't understand this - can someone explain? If you bring a patent claim against a contributor then how does that contributor have a "patent license" that then ends?
Buttons are intuitive.
I think you mean, some buttons are intuitive.
I have an apple TV, and various DVD players and amps. The tiny clicker that comes with the Apple TV is a joy to use compared with the horrible big remote controls covered in buttons of the other hardware.
I would hope, as a designer of interfaces, that you would at least be able to appreciate some of the good things of apple design. Otherwise I'm afraid you're probably doing the wrong job!
Of course, if like 99.9% of people, you would rather have a safe and steady job with regular salary paid, and not put up with rejection, sarcasm, derision, and general apathy for those years, with no pension, no career structure, and absolutely no certainty of ever making more than minimum wage, then that's fine,
Hey, I have my own business and all those things apply to me too. But there are no special laws for me that say I should continue to profit from work I did decades ago.
but since the life expectancy of great software is shorter then great music lets say after 5 years software becomes public domain
I think you're just trying to be provocative, and you've chosen a deliberately very short length of time because this would have impact on the incomes of a lot of Slashdotters.
But I think if you're trying to provoke your point is not valid anyway - I expect very few of us would be affected if a copyright length term on software was reasonable, say 20 years, and most people who create software would not object to it. The objections would come from the big software companies, just as the we hear from the big music companies when it comes to music copyright terms.
We would all be enriched by having access to a huge library of old code if copyright on software was set at 20 years, and more importantly it would give some companies a strong motivation to keep innovating...
Linux on the desktop has been gradually improving, and is now at a point when it is probably pretty much equal to Windows. It may even surpass it in the medium term.
But how good it is isn't really the issue. The fact is, Microsoft has an incredible lock-in, and it is going to take many years to chip away at that. But Firefox has demonstrated that it is possible to win market share from Microsoft. The two essential ingredients are persistence and time. If Microsoft continue to stumble - as they have with Vista - then Linux on the desktop will happen more quickly.
Ah - the "it's different this time" argument - I think you will find that one repeated throughout history as well!
Nuclear weapons don't help maintain scientific supremacy.
It wasn't an outburst, it was just challenging common assumptions.
The US will always have it's place at the top table
Why is that? You're chosen by God?
This kind of attitude has been heard many times before going back through history. Ask the Brits. Or the Spanish. Or the French. Or the Chinese. Or the Iranians (yes, they too where once "at the top table"). I could go on, but you get the point I hope...
When my great grandmother was alive the Brits dominated the world as comprehensively as the USA does today.
It's like evolution, only better.
Why? If Linux evolved like animals, then only the strongest would survive, and characteristics of the weaker distros (even good ones) would die with them. But distro evolution is even better, the good characteristics of all distros make their way into the strongest distros.
The evolution of Linux distros may look messy, but it is underpinned by natural force that, over time, comes up with wonderful results.
I thought it was already public knowledge that there is a backdoor in Windows that the security services can use? At least, the NSA - as I recall an NSA key that was discovered when some windows code was leaked some years ago.
Or which company will host your files?
I don't know. The one that currently does? Another one? Who can predict the future?!
These "web-2.0" morons are starting to piss me off.
Are you one of those idiots that insists that your public company website is hosted internally because you think it is safer?
Oh, so that naturally explains why the internet is full of Microsoft IE ONLY web sites.
It is?
Maybe for you, but I haven't used IE for over a year and I don't recall coming across a single site that I haven't been able to access. Although I've read that in the US lots of banks require IE - perhaps that's what gives you the impression that there are lots of IE sites?
Personally, I think file formats will become irrelevant to the end user.
It's really dumb that (for instance) we produce documents in Word, convert them to PDF, email them to someone else, who will read them on a computer screen. We are stuck in last generation technology, and people growing up with the web today just won't do it. Although many of us find it hard to believe, on-line systems will eventually replace Microsoft Word, OpenOffice etc. completely.
When that happens, the file formats will be irrelevant to the end user, just as web page formats are pretty much irrelevant to current web users. This is bad news for Microsoft, since they have an incredible amount of lock-in at the moment due to their proprietary formats. However, they are not going to be able to transition that lock-in to the web.
Reference
The main point is that they did not secure the nuclear facilities. I mentioned the oil wells because actions communicate motives. Your words suggest that you think they secured the oil wells for the benefit of the Iraqi economy and the Iraqis themselves. Other actions of this administration suggest that they aren't really concerned with helping the Iraqis or the economy of Iraq.
I don't think this administration is worried about terrorism at all. Terrorism is just a useful justification for what they do, and keeping the people scared.
The thing that really convinced me of this was how they handled the Iraq war. Leaving aside for a moment that bombing the crap out of people is probably a pretty good way to make new terrorists, they did the following:
1) Failed to secure nuclear facilities in Iraq. (They did however make a big effort to secure the oil wells).
2) Distributed in Iraq, without care or record, twelve billions dollars of Iraqs money in cash.
Are those the actions of an administration that is worried about terrorism? To me, they are the actions of an administration that wants to create them...
No, if people want to do it, they should be able to do it in the privacy of their own home, where it won't endanger the lives of others.
I bet the chance of having a car accident after drinking just one pint is hundreds of times higher than the chance of you getting cancer from someone smoking near you. And sometimes people have more than one pint before driving home, don't they? And so we should ban drinking alcohol except at home.
Not too keen on that? Enjoy a drink at the pub, do you?