Admittedly the following should not be needed. However as this is the real world, these suggestions will help you a LOT. Note: I once spent 3 years doing support for a (now out of business) hardware company that made an awful product.
1) Before you get on the phone, get a pad of paper and something to write with.
2) Before you dial the number, write down the time and date of the call, and the number you are about to dial.
3) When you finally get through to a person, WRITE DOWN THIER NAME if they don't give it, ask for it. If you held for a long time, write down the time you got though to them.
3) Make notes about what they tell you to do. Write down any URL's, filenames, tracking numbers, RMA's, etc.
4) If they give you a phone number to call, make a break in the page (I use a line) and start the process again.
5) When recalling, read off the information above to whoever you get hold of, Include the names (note, sometimes this will get extra info about that person)
6) Keep the pad handy until the problem is resolved. Track everything that you do.
This is not a big PitA if you get the pad BEFORE you start the call, and given the reality of Tech Support it will help you get resolution a lot faster, especially once you have to escalate to supervisor. Remember that most escalations are result of STUBBORN PEBKAC. By reading this off, you will convince the supervisor that you have a real problem, not that you are just being a jerk.
I don't know of any Comics Shop that doesn't keep the adult comics in a separate section. I have seen Adult Book stores and "Head" Shops that only have one comics section, but the assumption there is that they're all adult.
The legal actions have generally tried to get the adult comics pulled entirely, often by criminally charging the owners of the shops (which turns it into a first amendment issue).
If you think supercomputers don't affect your daily life, then you must not think that reliable six-day (SIX Days) weather reports don't affect your life.
Unintentionally (I think) the article gives some credence to the Black-Hat attitude that "You should be thanking us for finding your security holes".
I'm not going to go that far, but this is really a question of how do we pay open source developers. Black-Hats are being effectively paid for their work, either by bragging rights or by illicitly made money.
Until someone comes up with another way to as effectively pay for this type of code review, we can expect this to be way to get the review done.
It's not a question of size of the company. It's a question of will the company make enough from the patent this year to justify the expense of maintaining the patent.
There are two reasons to use a patent (1) prevent compitition in an area and (2) make money from licensing. For (1) Doubling gets onerous quite quickly. Being big only gets you a few extra years. More importaintly, will you lose enough business to justify spending the money to keep people out. For (2) it's even simpler, is your expected income greater than the fee?
This system rewards truly great (in the business sense) ideas in that they generate enough revenue to justify the next year's fee.
The one year time frame is based on my experiance that US bean counters are quite good at doing one year analysis's, and will kill most patents quickly.
The six lines on the Shuttle Booster (STS SRB) had to do with lining up the segments of the boosters.
Feynman found that one of the problems in setting up the boosters had to do with aligning the segments at the launch site. He asked the technicians, if some alignment marks (six lines) painted on the booster would help. They said "yes, but we're not allowed to. It's not in the spec'"
BTW: This specific item turned out not to be directly involved in the disaster, but did point to the mind set that caused it.
Dissagreement with a point in the Article
on
Wired on Slashdot
·
· Score: 2
I strongly dissagree with one comment in the Wired article:
"I still believe that people go to sites like Wired News and PC Week because they have this curiosity for the truth and this underlying belief that services [like Slashdot] don't always get it right, and they need an independent verification," said Berinato.
I think he has it backwards, I go to/. to get commentary on the validity of the "journalist" publications. I have very little trust of what I see in print, because I don't think journalists have enough time to do good research. Admittidly, an individual commentor is no better, but the statistical nature of the mass of commentors provides a lot of total research effort.
Slashdot Mirror
That makes your vote traceable to you.
Bad idea for many reasons.
So this technology allows the user to create a security breach by transmitting secure info from the commputer at any time
Well I hope the tek is better then...
This is not a big PitA if you get the pad BEFORE you start the call, and given the reality of Tech Support it will help you get resolution a lot faster, especially once you have to escalate to supervisor. Remember that most escalations are result of STUBBORN PEBKAC. By reading this off, you will convince the supervisor that you have a real problem, not that you are just being a jerk.
Not only am I still programming at 42, after starting in my twenties, my Father is still programming at 65 after starting in _his_ twenties.
Yes we have both spent time in managment, he even did a stint in sales. We much prefer programming.
The legal actions have generally tried to get the adult comics pulled entirely, often by criminally charging the owners of the shops (which turns it into a first amendment issue).
If you think supercomputers don't affect your daily life, then you must not think that reliable six-day (SIX Days) weather reports don't affect your life.
But very entertaining...
I'm not going to go that far, but this is really a question of how do we pay open source developers. Black-Hats are being effectively paid for their work, either by bragging rights or by illicitly made money.
Until someone comes up with another way to as effectively pay for this type of code review, we can expect this to be way to get the review done.
More importantly, the fact that the human brain does this has significant impact on the communication question.
If you do not express yourself clearly, your readers will attempt to figure it out anyway. The result may bear little resemblance to your intent.
There are two reasons to use a patent (1) prevent compitition in an area and (2) make money from licensing. For (1) Doubling gets onerous quite quickly. Being big only gets you a few extra years. More importaintly, will you lose enough business to justify spending the money to keep people out. For (2) it's even simpler, is your expected income greater than the fee?
This system rewards truly great (in the business sense) ideas in that they generate enough revenue to justify the next year's fee.
The one year time frame is based on my experiance that US bean counters are quite good at doing one year analysis's, and will kill most patents quickly.
A patent is good for one year, but may be renewed as many times as you want, BUT the cost to renew doubles each time
Just how much is that patent worth to you?
Feynman found that one of the problems in setting up the boosters had to do with aligning the segments at the launch site. He asked the technicians, if some alignment marks (six lines) painted on the booster would help. They said "yes, but we're not allowed to. It's not in the spec'"
BTW: This specific item turned out not to be directly involved in the disaster, but did point to the mind set that caused it.
What I Love IS eazy money :-)
"I still believe that people go to sites like Wired News and PC Week because they have this curiosity for the truth and this underlying belief that services [like Slashdot] don't always get it right, and they need an independent verification," said Berinato.
I think he has it backwards, I go to /. to get commentary on the validity of the "journalist" publications. I have very little trust of what I see in print, because I don't think journalists have enough time to do good research. Admittidly, an individual commentor is no better, but the statistical nature of the mass of commentors provides a lot of total research effort.