Jean Piaget was a developmental psychologist and one of his notable beliefs were his four stages of cognitive development (this won't explain memory, but I know where memory came in for me).
For me, memories started developing during the preoperational phase (which would make me another case of having memories around the time when i started developing language skills too).
Sensorimotor 0-2 Years Your child will begin to make use of her ability to imitate, to think, and to memorize. She will begin to realize that objects don't cease to exist when they are out-of-sight. Her actions will become more goal-oriented, rather than motivated through reflexes.
Preoperational 2-7 Years Your child's language skills will begin to develop. She will be able to think in symbolic forms. Your child will be able to think mental operations through in one direction. Your child will have difficulty seeing another person's point of view.
Concrete Operational 7-11 Years Your child will be able to solve concrete, hands-on problems in logical fashion. She will be able to understand laws of conservation and will be able to classify and seriate. She will also understand reversibility.
Formal Operational 11-15+ Years Your child will be able to solve abstract problems in a logical fashion. Her thinking will become more scientific and she will develop concerns about social issues and her identity.
I once took an intro psychology course and one of the things we learned was child development. They had different stages like persistence (when you hide the ball under the blanket the ball is still there, you just can't see it... which is, btw, why babies are so amused when you hide your face behind your hands and then reveal yourself with a "boo"), and other various things like getting potty trained, language etc. I think, or at least from my own personal experience, one of them is sentience.
Let me explain from my own personal story of one of my most notable earliest memories. I was in kindergarten and we took individual pictures by the swingset. We had them developed and the teachers gave us a copy of the pictures. I went out to the playground sat on the swingset and looked at the picture. The realization that I was looking at myself sitting at that same spot but at a different point in time sort of made a light bulb fire in my head. I guess that's what I meant by "sentience".
Other than that, I think most memories we keep are large events that shifted our way of thinking (whether we are young or old). Perhaps it's a memory of getting burned as a child by a hot pan, or almost drowning. Later on in life it's relationships etc etc.
Lastly, it is my belief that the older we get the more we discard "useless" information and only archive those most significant events. I liken our memories to computers: short-term is readily accessible (Cache) but not necessarily permanent, while long term memory is not always so readily accessible (tape drives) but can be remembered with a picture, smell or taste.
Come on people! For once when the word "Windows" is mentioned let's not all freak out and start flaming left and right. For once, can we look on the positive side of things?
True companies may not want to switch if they already have a working environment but what about companies that are starting up? Sure this may not be Windows button for button and panel for panel but the general familiarity would help one crossover imho.
I also think that the familiarity in the design won't necessarily confuse people but it will allow them to start at step 25 of 50 of learning a gui as opposed to step 1.
What linux/*nix freaks don't understand is that not everyone wants to spend all their free time learning a new environment. GUIs are like relationships; they take a long time to get really familiar with.
I'm doing some research on Microsoft technologies (more specifically C#/.Net) being used in universities and colleges. Could you email me (or give me your email) or just tell me which school you're going to and which course is offering this? Thanks.
I see what you're saying as far as monopolies are concerned and I do think Microsoft should be forced to play fair (meaning no purposeful sabotage of Java running on Windows).
However due to the nature of OSs and software, it's not as if Java could not be used if it were not included. Ergo I do not see why it must necessarily be included (and shipped) with Windows. That's ludicrous. If people want it they should download it or buy it just like any other piece of software.
Otherwise perhaps we should convince the courts that Windows should also be shipped with Sun Office.
I can't believe the court ordered Microsoft to include Java in their OS. That's just plain ludicrous.
While I do think it's evil to "sabotage" Java working in the Windows environment, how is there any justification to be obligated to include a competitor's piece of software in your environment? Perhaps we should start forcing Linux/*nix to come packaged with the.Net framework.
If anything, Microsoft should be punished for unfair practices but they shouldn't be forced to make another company's piece of software more visible.
In the end, this all means nothing. All it really means is that Microsoft will find another way of making Java not work with their OS. So I hardly call this a victory for Sun.
You're the only person to notice this because this is not the reality of things.
If Microsoft wanted Apple dead they would've been dead several years ago. Don't you recall when Microsoft invested in Apple to keep ti alive? This was right around when the anti-trust lawsuits began. Basically Microsoft wanted to keep them around so that they (Microsoft) could claim that Apple was indeed a viable competitors and that they (Microsoft) were not a monopoly.
Taking a look at Apple now they are basically dead. They still have some dedicated designers but they're basically losing the educational sector. If anything this is a move against Java.
I think you have missed the point slightly.
on
Yahoo Buying Inktomi
·
· Score: 2, Informative
While one of Google's main strong point is the lack of ads, I doubt it would be as popular as it is if it did not return such high quality results.
Secondly, as I understand it, Inktomi actually has 2 primary search engines. One is geared towards business use and the other towards consumers (which they got from a recent company they acquired). According to reports Yahoo is basically interested in the business search engine and not the consumer one.
Lastly, I don't see how Yahoo does not focus on users needs. I believe they offer a great suite of online applications, many of them being free. I would disagree if you believe that just because they engage in online advertising that they are not focusing on users.
You sound like an ultra-extremist just like Fischer.
Sure, as a human, he does have a right to play chess in a sanctioned nation. I don't think there's any doubt about that. However, the US has a right to arrest him if he does that. Why? Because those are laws that we create by politicians we put into office. That is the voice of the people. That is the voice of the nation. If Fischer doesn't like it he can keep his ass in Yugoslavia/Iraq or wherever he is now (Phillipines/Germany/etc).
I don't think there's any argument whether or not he can hold his opinions about Jews or 9/11. Just because he was a great chess champion shouldn't buy him any favor when violating US laws.
I'm not going to justify the US government's actions like you tried justifying Bobby Fischer's racism, but this was during a time where there was a lot of "red" threat. And, as a government, I'd be keeping my eyes on people who are very anti-US. That's how terrorists within the US get created.
I recently purchased a nifty Toshiba 5105-607 which was, sadly, neglected from the last shashdot poll concerning laptops.
I have a 17" lcd monitor and I dont' know the manufacturer the but monitor is awesome. The max rez (which i run at) is 1600x1200. One thing I wonder is why LCDs are so expensive when the total cost of this laptop was purchased for $1500 off of Fleabay (and probably around $1700-$2000 msrp). It tends to make me think that LCDs (alone) are overpriced (since something similar to this would cost an easy $1000).
Btw I'm not a monitor freak but for Warcraft and Unreal it's performed quite well. Actually this is my only gaming machine and i think for hte majority of people otu there it wouldn't matter (since I do consider myself an avid Counterstrike player where ghosting really counts).
I think that's a pretty narrow way to look at it. Yes, their initial product was a search engine but you may want to think of Google News as an extension of what they do. I'm sure they used a lot of the search/index tools for their search engine to create the news site. They've certainly used to find the stories and then provide related stories thereafter (just like Similar Page for link results).
Also, I don't think they've gone all out and created a portal (at least in comparison to what's out there). What really struck me was that they had almost no graphics and pure content. Portals, in themselves, are not bad; I just think many people have done them bad.
Lastly, I don't think they are really working twice as hard on this. It just seems like a way to extend their user base and grow. If they just stayed with a search engine that would mean a lot less expansion of the company (and companies usually always need to expand and re-invent themselves to stay in the game).
I understand the analogy you're making by measuring the distance between people per capita, but I think it would still be fairly accurate to compare say the people connected in Tokyo to those connected in San Francisco or New York. So, if you do make the correct analogy, it does make sense. I'm sure the broadband companies are also smart enough to aim for these markets (urban and more technology oriented) since that is probably where they make most of their money.
Well, unfortunately, I cannot get to thenewrepublic but here's my take:
As a person who once has broadband, and now does not, I can think of the following reasons why I don't "need" it anymore:
1) I've seen the whole internet and i'm sick of it. Of course I haven't seen the whole thing internet and I'm not totally sick of it but I'm implying two facts: i) I do a lot of my browsing at work and don't mind seeing much internet while at home, ii) is it just me, or has the internet lost a lot of good content it used to back in the day??? Perhaps it's a combination of personal decrease in mp3 downloading...so maybe the RIAA is having some indirect affect on me. I can admit that the less accessibility (and more effort it takes to get) of mp3s has made me throw my hands up in the air.
2) Gaming. I know for a fact that Korea probably has the strongest Starcraft culture out there. I'm not sure how Warcraft is faring but I'm sure it's become a craze there. I definitely needed broadband when I was playing my network game of choice (Counterstrike). Why don't I have broadband now?? Personally I felt like I was spending too much time indoors rather than outdoors. I'm not railing against gamers/nerds but the average person probably feels more along the same way I do.
Necessity and demand. There's no real necessity for broadband (as of now) and so there is no demand. Perhaps people should start making webpages so that they are pretty much impossible to view with a 56k connection (kind of like trying to run windows 95 with 8 megs of ram) and try increasing the availability and lower the pricing models.
Wow. (sarcasm) So now that I've read that I'm thoroughly convinced time travel is NOT possible. (/sarcasm).
For the love of God, give me a break!
You're telling me that you come up with some potential scenarios based on human tendencies that is proof why time travel isn't possible? Sure..let's not base it on any real scientific proof. I could draw a simple couple scenarios that would disprove your weak arguments.
1) In reference to the article, time travel IS possible but limited. As stated in the article, a wormhole is a potential way to go into the passed. But, according the nature of how it works, one could only go back in the past to the point where the wormhole was created, but NOT before. That would easily stop you from going to the "beginning of time".
2) Let's not confuse time-travel with space-travel. And let's not assume you could necessarily start and end at arbitrary points. These limitations knock most of your arguments down. Even if you assumed the above, you'd have to assume that these "alien beings" of yours could survive indefinite amounts of time aboard some sort of space ship.
All in all, your arguments are weak. There are too many holes.
What we often do is hire peopel we like part time to see try them out for 6 months or so and, this is where my boss comes in, we give 'em the axe if we've totally failed or hire them full-time if they are as awesome as we thought.
I am in the same position at a small company and we've had our share of hiring bombs (excluding me:) ). Here, I think, are some core issues to consider:
1) Decide what you want. Uber genius or uber implementer. Everyone falls in between but I beware of people who claim themselves to be "really into design" when we really need implementers.
2) Don't ask the same old questions. I think most everyone is aware that a book of interview questions can be found online. Sometimes learning the answers to these is as easy as memorization.
3) Find out what the interviewee knows and doesn't know, never just one. One beef I always have is that when I'm being interviewed the interviewer would assume I know some very specific about a certain technology I worked with. Why would I know the specific way threading works on web servers when I've done web applications?
4) Technology and experience must go hand in hand. I think every programmer knows that technology can sometimes be seen in terms of an API. While experience is useful, so is design experience (and vice-versa). One doesn't necessarily make up for the other.
5) Ask relevant stuff. While intelligent people may correlate to good programmers, intelligence alone might not make up for lack of experience and/or the ability to learn new technologies quickly. I've had my fair share of algorithms and trick questions asked to me at jobs where I never implemented any sorting/searching algorithm nor did a project on how to measure time by burning candles. One thing I would look for is initiative to learn new technologies. Did they learn how to design and implement a web application on a short 6 month project? Or did they just manually fix html bugs for 1 year?
Lastly, if you're unsure to hire than pick the hotter chick (or the only chick).
Write off Arsdigita as a loss ($$$) (because that's basically what it is)
If Red Hat hat really wanted some java programmer they would've gone out there and hired some (theyre' a dime a dozen in case you haven't looked at the current economy). And it doesn't really make sense that they basically just fired everyone in aD except those who are needed to clean the rest of the $hit up.
Re:A POV from an ex-employee (again, sorry)
on
ArsDigita Shut Down
·
· Score: 1
My job? Coder.
My position? Bent over an ass f0cked (grunt programmer:) )
A POV from an ex-employee (again, sorry)
on
ArsDigita Shut Down
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
(sorry admins. "accidently" clicked on to post anonymously. forgive the repost)
Let's see. I joined aD in the summer of 2000 and worked there for about a year.
I think there are many many misconceptions about Arsdigita and Phil Greenspun that people get having not worked with Arsdigita. (Disclaimer: as an ex-employee I'm sure my views are biased too.).
1) Phil Greenspun was not a genius (as some people thought him to be). Don't get me wrong. He's extremely smart and he was good at writing books and giving seminars and that kinda crap that can get people excited about software. I met him personally and I, myself, was excited. In a nerd-to-nerd way he can be inspirational in making you want to be something more than you are. Part of Phil's problem is that he kind of has a chip on his shoulder. He's not a REAL MIT professor. All these claims of starting the business from $10,000 and other exaggerated claims are simply that: exaggerations.
2) Arsdigita is kinda like communism (as some might say). It's good on paper but doesn't work in real life. Sure there were the cars, (the hoes), the food, the money, the vacation houses, etc. I don't think anyone ever got hooked up with a ferrari. I don't think anyone really went to the vacation houses except for him and a select few. If anything, all these utopian ideas were part of the same gimick to hire more employees and give the illusion of his ability to run the "cool" internet company. He was using the same (dare i say) "marketing techniques" to promote ACS to show the "success" of arsdigita.
Having been there a limited time, my view is that aD was f0cked froma little bit of everything. It wasn't really the board that put aD into the dump (they just took them there slightly quicker). If anything was to be a main factor to their failure it was the economy (look around). So it's not one persons fault but a lack of demand. No clients = no company. I'm glad to see Ybos is still up, though. Go Ybos!
PhilG was, needless to say, not a people person. Simply put (as stated somewhere above) he wasn't a people person. He knew how to make people in the company f-ing pissed and a good number of engineers quit because of his being a "loose cannon". You can't have someone like that in control (you don't want nazi germany either despite the level of efficiency the achieved).
So lets review:
1) (before my employment ( summer'00)), there were already incidents with philg alienating aD employees. some good ones left. aD still had life.
2) (during employment (next year or so)), aD had already begun to die. I think this is the same for most internet companies out there. Back then nobody thought it was a recession but basically the economy (and demand) was basically coming to a halt. So what was left was a bunch of "business consultants" scrambling to get whatever they could.
3) (post employment) philg gets the boot. he actually gets the better end of the deal. they pay him $$$$$ to leave and go away. this is what makes me laugh. the business people were just so stingy to grab control of the company that they were blind in seeng that they were fighting for a lost cause. they basically paid him $$$ so they could lose more money. fools.
4) aD FINALLY dies. (it should've been dead.5 - 1 year ago). Trust me. Red hat buys aD. What a waste of money. Inside word is that Greylock (investors of both) didn't want aD to look like a complete failure. (It really wasn't a complete failure. It was just another dot-com tragedy).
P.S. One more thing. You could go on to say that if someone else had run it has truly "open source" that it would've been still alive. Possibly. But living for another.5 - 1 year and dying is still dying. Basically I don't think their model worked (or it was stable enough to work in a poor economy (given the amount of cash they were burning)). Maybe that's why Ybos is still alive.
This reminds me very much of a poster I had in college about the Rules Of Life or How to Succeed (or something more clever..i forget). Anyway it went something like:
Bug:
My proposal of "give those kids somethign to do" is not a proposed all-out solution. I just want to support more proactive measures to helping keep kids out of trouble instead of concentrating on what kind of sentences we should give them.
Yes, DARE was a basically ineffective program and I think I even heard that, as a result, more kids ended up doing drugs.
I'm not sure which programs are more effective but an example of programs that do work are things like Midnight Basketball. Basically in different 'hoods around the country kids get together to play basketball at night and so since they're in a gym they're not on the street. I think kids would actually actively participate in activities like this.
Replies^3:
1. Your formula for a perfect society may work but, in my humble opinion, is not how the world works nor how everyones mindset functions.
Learning english does help but it doesn't negate the fact that you're still (in the case i was arguing) a migrant worker with little or no education and little or no experience.
These people believe that they are taking the initiative by working very long hours. This is their idea of "parenting". Right or wrong, i think we both agree something is missing here. Unfortunately parenting is not as easy as 1-2-3 like your solutions seem to imply.
Yes, kids SHOULD be good citizens but this falls back to the idea of what kind of parenting is right so I won't go into this.
2. I agree with you. We should take a strong stand against violent crimes. Punishing the shop owners is wrong. Agreed.
I'm not too familiar how effective creative sentencing is. I'm just saying that I like idea of making proactive programs. I like the idea of giving more attention to kids (in this case after school) some intermediate supervision.
3. That's interesting. In my humble opinion, if this were strictly the case then private entities would eventually disappear. The rich will get richer and see no point in contributing money to lower parts of society. Meanwhile the lower parts of society are already working 16 hour days to make a living, so they already have no money to fund programs.
4. Uh ok. I'm not calling u names or a bigot. In my opinion republican ideals lean more towards of an idea of "don't take care of the people, help them take care of themselves" as opposed to democrats who seem to be more proponents of programs that directly help people and lean a bit away from the "leave them on their own" mentality.
I like your ideals of "it's the job of the people". I agree that citizens have a large role in society. The only problem I have with it is that, to me, the government serves as an entity to GOVERN the people. To keep it short I think the government (federal and/or city) SHOULD play a central role as far as oversee, coodinator, planner, etc. To me this makes sense. I figure we pay taxes and vote for these people so that they can run society and our country. Yes, they do need normals citizens to run and actively participant in programs, but we still need central order to start them up (in the least).
>>The government should not proactively stop kids from misbehaving. That is not the role of the government. That is the role of the governed.
In reference to waht I just previously said, the catch 22 I see here is that you are saying "The governmetn should not govern bad kids. That is not the role of the government. That is the role of the governed."
govern (v):
1. To make and administer the public policy and affairs of; exercise sovereign authority in.
2.To control the actions or behavior of
3.To keep under control; restrainTo exercise a deciding or determining influence on
1. I agree but I'm sure the greater reality amongst these immigrants who don't speak english all that well (and thus are most likely to hold lower paying blue collar jobs) is that they do find themselves having to work crazy hours along with having children. That's the reality. People do need some measure of responsibility but social service programs were created for a reason.
2. I agree. I think we should also keep in mind that working with youth and preventing this type of behavior (and social atmosphere) is probably a lot more effective then "getting tough with criminals" and these so called "gangs". I grew up in large minority cities like these in southern california and these "gangs" are nothing but a bunch asian kids who like to hang out. I'm sure some of them front themselves with wanna-be gang names but if you ever go out to these suburban cities I think you'd laugh at what these news reports call gangs.
3. Sorry let me clarify. I used the term "government" to encompass these private entities. The reason why I do that is because many of these private entities are largely funded by the government (I know because I work with some of them). So, in the end, I feel like the government does play a big role since they do give out the money and they play a large role in making these private entities possible.
4.
>>It is not the city's job to babysit.
You must be republican.:] I think the what-it-comes-down-to mentality you are approachign this part of the subject on is narrowminded. Sure it's not the job's city but if that were the case why do we have programs like social security, unemployment and other social programs and help the people. "It is not the city's job to babysit". Literally that is true but I was saying that city government should take more time thinking about proactive ways of keeping kids out of trouble.
>>Its pretty basic - if you unleash kids on this society it is your responsibility to make sure they are good citizens. If they are not then they will go to jail.
Agreed, but that's not to say that the government could do something about providing means to keeping a society safe.
From the few comments I've read on this thread everyone is eager to blame the parents as would I (upon first thought).
I tend to think that people who make the sort of comment that goes like "f-ing parents should spend some more f-ing time with their kids" come from a background where they observed (first hand or second) parents that did this.
The problem with this logic is that sometimes the parents and other family members are busy with work trying to "make a living for their family". You COULD blame parents saying they should take the time out to spend it with the kids but couldn't you really feel good about putting a father and mother in jail for life knowing that they were workign 16 hour days trying to make ends meet?
I wouldn't shift all blame away from parents nor would I place all blame on the government (or the city). I say that instead of shutting down internet cafes, they should be regulated (with some moderation either way). THEN the city government should try creating after school programs.m I think the business have a right to run a business but after school programs have shown to be effective in keeping kids out of trouble.
My thoughts are that a bunch of these kids don't have jack crap to do after school so there's nothing like playing a bit of Counterstrike (at age 23 i find myself doing the same thing). What these kids need are safe alternatives to life after school. That is a big role the government/city needs to take up.
Slashdot Mirror
(Several google searches later..)
Jean Piaget was a developmental psychologist and one of his notable beliefs were his four stages of cognitive development (this won't explain memory, but I know where memory came in for me). For me, memories started developing during the preoperational phase (which would make me another case of having memories around the time when i started developing language skills too).
Sensorimotor 0-2 Years Your child will begin to make use of her ability to imitate, to think, and to memorize. She will begin to realize that objects don't cease to exist when they are out-of-sight. Her actions will become more goal-oriented, rather than motivated through reflexes.
Preoperational 2-7 Years Your child's language skills will begin to develop. She will be able to think in symbolic forms. Your child will be able to think mental operations through in one direction. Your child will have difficulty seeing another person's point of view.
Concrete Operational 7-11 Years Your child will be able to solve concrete, hands-on problems in logical fashion. She will be able to understand laws of conservation and will be able to classify and seriate. She will also understand reversibility.
Formal Operational 11-15+ Years Your child will be able to solve abstract problems in a logical fashion. Her thinking will become more scientific and she will develop concerns about social issues and her identity.
I once took an intro psychology course and one of the things we learned was child development. They had different stages like persistence (when you hide the ball under the blanket the ball is still there, you just can't see it ... which is, btw, why babies are so amused when you hide your face behind your hands and then reveal yourself with a "boo"), and other various things like getting potty trained, language etc. I think, or at least from my own personal experience, one of them is sentience.
Let me explain from my own personal story of one of my most notable earliest memories. I was in kindergarten and we took individual pictures by the swingset. We had them developed and the teachers gave us a copy of the pictures. I went out to the playground sat on the swingset and looked at the picture. The realization that I was looking at myself sitting at that same spot but at a different point in time sort of made a light bulb fire in my head. I guess that's what I meant by "sentience".
Other than that, I think most memories we keep are large events that shifted our way of thinking (whether we are young or old). Perhaps it's a memory of getting burned as a child by a hot pan, or almost drowning. Later on in life it's relationships etc etc.
Lastly, it is my belief that the older we get the more we discard "useless" information and only archive those most significant events. I liken our memories to computers: short-term is readily accessible (Cache) but not necessarily permanent, while long term memory is not always so readily accessible (tape drives) but can be remembered with a picture, smell or taste.
Come on people! For once when the word "Windows" is mentioned let's not all freak out and start flaming left and right. For once, can we look on the positive side of things?
True companies may not want to switch if they already have a working environment but what about companies that are starting up? Sure this may not be Windows button for button and panel for panel but the general familiarity would help one crossover imho.
I also think that the familiarity in the design won't necessarily confuse people but it will allow them to start at step 25 of 50 of learning a gui as opposed to step 1.
What linux/*nix freaks don't understand is that not everyone wants to spend all their free time learning a new environment. GUIs are like relationships; they take a long time to get really familiar with.
Interesting.
I'm doing some research on Microsoft technologies (more specifically C#/.Net) being used in universities and colleges. Could you email me (or give me your email) or just tell me which school you're going to and which course is offering this? Thanks.
I see what you're saying as far as monopolies are concerned and I do think Microsoft should be forced to play fair (meaning no purposeful sabotage of Java running on Windows).
However due to the nature of OSs and software, it's not as if Java could not be used if it were not included. Ergo I do not see why it must necessarily be included (and shipped) with Windows. That's ludicrous. If people want it they should download it or buy it just like any other piece of software.
Otherwise perhaps we should convince the courts that Windows should also be shipped with Sun Office.
But doing it because you want to versus doing it because you MUST are 2 different situations.
I can't believe the court ordered Microsoft to include Java in their OS. That's just plain ludicrous.
.Net framework.
While I do think it's evil to "sabotage" Java working in the Windows environment, how is there any justification to be obligated to include a competitor's piece of software in your environment? Perhaps we should start forcing Linux/*nix to come packaged with the
If anything, Microsoft should be punished for unfair practices but they shouldn't be forced to make another company's piece of software more visible.
In the end, this all means nothing. All it really means is that Microsoft will find another way of making Java not work with their OS. So I hardly call this a victory for Sun.
You're the only person to notice this because this is not the reality of things.
If Microsoft wanted Apple dead they would've been dead several years ago. Don't you recall when Microsoft invested in Apple to keep ti alive? This was right around when the anti-trust lawsuits began. Basically Microsoft wanted to keep them around so that they (Microsoft) could claim that Apple was indeed a viable competitors and that they (Microsoft) were not a monopoly.
Taking a look at Apple now they are basically dead. They still have some dedicated designers but they're basically losing the educational sector. If anything this is a move against Java.
While one of Google's main strong point is the lack of ads, I doubt it would be as popular as it is if it did not return such high quality results.
Secondly, as I understand it, Inktomi actually has 2 primary search engines. One is geared towards business use and the other towards consumers (which they got from a recent company they acquired). According to reports Yahoo is basically interested in the business search engine and not the consumer one.
Lastly, I don't see how Yahoo does not focus on users needs. I believe they offer a great suite of online applications, many of them being free. I would disagree if you believe that just because they engage in online advertising that they are not focusing on users.
You sound like an ultra-extremist just like Fischer.
Sure, as a human, he does have a right to play chess in a sanctioned nation. I don't think there's any doubt about that. However, the US has a right to arrest him if he does that. Why? Because those are laws that we create by politicians we put into office. That is the voice of the people. That is the voice of the nation. If Fischer doesn't like it he can keep his ass in Yugoslavia/Iraq or wherever he is now (Phillipines/Germany/etc).
I don't think there's any argument whether or not he can hold his opinions about Jews or 9/11. Just because he was a great chess champion shouldn't buy him any favor when violating US laws.
I'm not going to justify the US government's actions like you tried justifying Bobby Fischer's racism, but this was during a time where there was a lot of "red" threat. And, as a government, I'd be keeping my eyes on people who are very anti-US. That's how terrorists within the US get created.
I recently purchased a nifty Toshiba 5105-607 which was, sadly, neglected from the last shashdot poll concerning laptops.
I have a 17" lcd monitor and I dont' know the manufacturer the but monitor is awesome. The max rez (which i run at) is 1600x1200. One thing I wonder is why LCDs are so expensive when the total cost of this laptop was purchased for $1500 off of Fleabay (and probably around $1700-$2000 msrp). It tends to make me think that LCDs (alone) are overpriced (since something similar to this would cost an easy $1000).
Btw I'm not a monitor freak but for Warcraft and Unreal it's performed quite well. Actually this is my only gaming machine and i think for hte majority of people otu there it wouldn't matter (since I do consider myself an avid Counterstrike player where ghosting really counts).
I think that's a pretty narrow way to look at it. Yes, their initial product was a search engine but you may want to think of Google News as an extension of what they do. I'm sure they used a lot of the search/index tools for their search engine to create the news site. They've certainly used to find the stories and then provide related stories thereafter (just like Similar Page for link results).
Also, I don't think they've gone all out and created a portal (at least in comparison to what's out there). What really struck me was that they had almost no graphics and pure content. Portals, in themselves, are not bad; I just think many people have done them bad.
Lastly, I don't think they are really working twice as hard on this. It just seems like a way to extend their user base and grow. If they just stayed with a search engine that would mean a lot less expansion of the company (and companies usually always need to expand and re-invent themselves to stay in the game).
Congrats Google!
I understand the analogy you're making by measuring the distance between people per capita, but I think it would still be fairly accurate to compare say the people connected in Tokyo to those connected in San Francisco or New York. So, if you do make the correct analogy, it does make sense. I'm sure the broadband companies are also smart enough to aim for these markets (urban and more technology oriented) since that is probably where they make most of their money.
Well, unfortunately, I cannot get to thenewrepublic but here's my take: As a person who once has broadband, and now does not, I can think of the following reasons why I don't "need" it anymore:
1) I've seen the whole internet and i'm sick of it. Of course I haven't seen the whole thing internet and I'm not totally sick of it but I'm implying two facts: i) I do a lot of my browsing at work and don't mind seeing much internet while at home, ii) is it just me, or has the internet lost a lot of good content it used to back in the day??? Perhaps it's a combination of personal decrease in mp3 downloading...so maybe the RIAA is having some indirect affect on me. I can admit that the less accessibility (and more effort it takes to get) of mp3s has made me throw my hands up in the air.
2) Gaming. I know for a fact that Korea probably has the strongest Starcraft culture out there. I'm not sure how Warcraft is faring but I'm sure it's become a craze there. I definitely needed broadband when I was playing my network game of choice (Counterstrike). Why don't I have broadband now?? Personally I felt like I was spending too much time indoors rather than outdoors. I'm not railing against gamers/nerds but the average person probably feels more along the same way I do.
Necessity and demand. There's no real necessity for broadband (as of now) and so there is no demand. Perhaps people should start making webpages so that they are pretty much impossible to view with a 56k connection (kind of like trying to run windows 95 with 8 megs of ram) and try increasing the availability and lower the pricing models.
Wow. (sarcasm) So now that I've read that I'm thoroughly convinced time travel is NOT possible. (/sarcasm).
For the love of God, give me a break!
You're telling me that you come up with some potential scenarios based on human tendencies that is proof why time travel isn't possible? Sure..let's not base it on any real scientific proof. I could draw a simple couple scenarios that would disprove your weak arguments.
1) In reference to the article, time travel IS possible but limited. As stated in the article, a wormhole is a potential way to go into the passed. But, according the nature of how it works, one could only go back in the past to the point where the wormhole was created, but NOT before. That would easily stop you from going to the "beginning of time".
2) Let's not confuse time-travel with space-travel. And let's not assume you could necessarily start and end at arbitrary points. These limitations knock most of your arguments down. Even if you assumed the above, you'd have to assume that these "alien beings" of yours could survive indefinite amounts of time aboard some sort of space ship.
All in all, your arguments are weak. There are too many holes.
What we often do is hire peopel we like part time to see try them out for 6 months or so and, this is where my boss comes in, we give 'em the axe if we've totally failed or hire them full-time if they are as awesome as we thought.
I am in the same position at a small company and we've had our share of hiring bombs (excluding me :) ). Here, I think, are some core issues to consider:
1) Decide what you want. Uber genius or uber implementer. Everyone falls in between but I beware of people who claim themselves to be "really into design" when we really need implementers.
2) Don't ask the same old questions. I think most everyone is aware that a book of interview questions can be found online. Sometimes learning the answers to these is as easy as memorization.
3) Find out what the interviewee knows and doesn't know, never just one. One beef I always have is that when I'm being interviewed the interviewer would assume I know some very specific about a certain technology I worked with. Why would I know the specific way threading works on web servers when I've done web applications?
4) Technology and experience must go hand in hand. I think every programmer knows that technology can sometimes be seen in terms of an API. While experience is useful, so is design experience (and vice-versa). One doesn't necessarily make up for the other.
5) Ask relevant stuff. While intelligent people may correlate to good programmers, intelligence alone might not make up for lack of experience and/or the ability to learn new technologies quickly. I've had my fair share of algorithms and trick questions asked to me at jobs where I never implemented any sorting/searching algorithm nor did a project on how to measure time by burning candles. One thing I would look for is initiative to learn new technologies. Did they learn how to design and implement a web application on a short 6 month project? Or did they just manually fix html bugs for 1 year?
Lastly, if you're unsure to hire than pick the hotter chick (or the only chick).
- Greylock owns Red Hat
- Greylock owns Arsdigita
- Arsdigta is a failure
- Use Red Hat money to "buy" Arsdigita
- Write off Arsdigita as a loss ($$$) (because that's basically what it is)
If Red Hat hat really wanted some java programmer they would've gone out there and hired some (theyre' a dime a dozen in case you haven't looked at the current economy). And it doesn't really make sense that they basically just fired everyone in aD except those who are needed to clean the rest of the $hit up.My job? Coder. :) )
My position? Bent over an ass f0cked (grunt programmer
(sorry admins. "accidently" clicked on to post anonymously. forgive the repost)
.5 - 1 year ago). Trust me. Red hat buys aD. What a waste of money. Inside word is that Greylock (investors of both) didn't want aD to look like a complete failure. (It really wasn't a complete failure. It was just another dot-com tragedy).
P.S. One more thing. You could go on to say that if someone else had run it has truly "open source" that it would've been still alive. Possibly. But living for another .5 - 1 year and dying is still dying. Basically I don't think their model worked (or it was stable enough to work in a poor economy (given the amount of cash they were burning)). Maybe that's why Ybos is still alive.
Let's see. I joined aD in the summer of 2000 and worked there for about a year. I think there are many many misconceptions about Arsdigita and Phil Greenspun that people get having not worked with Arsdigita. (Disclaimer: as an ex-employee I'm sure my views are biased too.). 1) Phil Greenspun was not a genius (as some people thought him to be). Don't get me wrong. He's extremely smart and he was good at writing books and giving seminars and that kinda crap that can get people excited about software. I met him personally and I, myself, was excited. In a nerd-to-nerd way he can be inspirational in making you want to be something more than you are. Part of Phil's problem is that he kind of has a chip on his shoulder. He's not a REAL MIT professor. All these claims of starting the business from $10,000 and other exaggerated claims are simply that: exaggerations. 2) Arsdigita is kinda like communism (as some might say). It's good on paper but doesn't work in real life. Sure there were the cars, (the hoes), the food, the money, the vacation houses, etc. I don't think anyone ever got hooked up with a ferrari. I don't think anyone really went to the vacation houses except for him and a select few. If anything, all these utopian ideas were part of the same gimick to hire more employees and give the illusion of his ability to run the "cool" internet company. He was using the same (dare i say) "marketing techniques" to promote ACS to show the "success" of arsdigita. Having been there a limited time, my view is that aD was f0cked froma little bit of everything. It wasn't really the board that put aD into the dump (they just took them there slightly quicker). If anything was to be a main factor to their failure it was the economy (look around). So it's not one persons fault but a lack of demand. No clients = no company. I'm glad to see Ybos is still up, though. Go Ybos! PhilG was, needless to say, not a people person. Simply put (as stated somewhere above) he wasn't a people person. He knew how to make people in the company f-ing pissed and a good number of engineers quit because of his being a "loose cannon". You can't have someone like that in control (you don't want nazi germany either despite the level of efficiency the achieved). So lets review: 1) (before my employment ( summer'00)), there were already incidents with philg alienating aD employees. some good ones left. aD still had life. 2) (during employment (next year or so)), aD had already begun to die. I think this is the same for most internet companies out there. Back then nobody thought it was a recession but basically the economy (and demand) was basically coming to a halt. So what was left was a bunch of "business consultants" scrambling to get whatever they could. 3) (post employment) philg gets the boot. he actually gets the better end of the deal. they pay him $$$$$ to leave and go away. this is what makes me laugh. the business people were just so stingy to grab control of the company that they were blind in seeng that they were fighting for a lost cause. they basically paid him $$$ so they could lose more money. fools. 4) aD FINALLY dies. (it should've been dead
Beautiful.
This reminds me very much of a poster I had in college about the Rules Of Life or How to Succeed (or something more clever..i forget). Anyway it went something like:
If you can't beat them, join them then beat them.
Bug:
My proposal of "give those kids somethign to do" is not a proposed all-out solution. I just want to support more proactive measures to helping keep kids out of trouble instead of concentrating on what kind of sentences we should give them.
Yes, DARE was a basically ineffective program and I think I even heard that, as a result, more kids ended up doing drugs.
I'm not sure which programs are more effective but an example of programs that do work are things like Midnight Basketball. Basically in different 'hoods around the country kids get together to play basketball at night and so since they're in a gym they're not on the street. I think kids would actually actively participate in activities like this.
Finally, I am not against internet-cafes.
Replies^3: 1. Your formula for a perfect society may work but, in my humble opinion, is not how the world works nor how everyones mindset functions.
Learning english does help but it doesn't negate the fact that you're still (in the case i was arguing) a migrant worker with little or no education and little or no experience.
These people believe that they are taking the initiative by working very long hours. This is their idea of "parenting". Right or wrong, i think we both agree something is missing here. Unfortunately parenting is not as easy as 1-2-3 like your solutions seem to imply.
Yes, kids SHOULD be good citizens but this falls back to the idea of what kind of parenting is right so I won't go into this.
2. I agree with you. We should take a strong stand against violent crimes. Punishing the shop owners is wrong. Agreed.
I'm not too familiar how effective creative sentencing is. I'm just saying that I like idea of making proactive programs. I like the idea of giving more attention to kids (in this case after school) some intermediate supervision.
3. That's interesting. In my humble opinion, if this were strictly the case then private entities would eventually disappear. The rich will get richer and see no point in contributing money to lower parts of society. Meanwhile the lower parts of society are already working 16 hour days to make a living, so they already have no money to fund programs.
4. Uh ok. I'm not calling u names or a bigot. In my opinion republican ideals lean more towards of an idea of "don't take care of the people, help them take care of themselves" as opposed to democrats who seem to be more proponents of programs that directly help people and lean a bit away from the "leave them on their own" mentality.
I like your ideals of "it's the job of the people". I agree that citizens have a large role in society. The only problem I have with it is that, to me, the government serves as an entity to GOVERN the people. To keep it short I think the government (federal and/or city) SHOULD play a central role as far as oversee, coodinator, planner, etc. To me this makes sense. I figure we pay taxes and vote for these people so that they can run society and our country. Yes, they do need normals citizens to run and actively participant in programs, but we still need central order to start them up (in the least).
>>The government should not proactively stop kids from misbehaving. That is not the role of the government. That is the role of the governed.
In reference to waht I just previously said, the catch 22 I see here is that you are saying "The governmetn should not govern bad kids. That is not the role of the government. That is the role of the governed."
govern (v):
1. To make and administer the public policy and affairs of; exercise sovereign authority in.
2.To control the actions or behavior of
3.To keep under control; restrainTo exercise a deciding or determining influence on
Replies:
:] I think the what-it-comes-down-to mentality you are approachign this part of the subject on is narrowminded. Sure it's not the job's city but if that were the case why do we have programs like social security, unemployment and other social programs and help the people. "It is not the city's job to babysit". Literally that is true but I was saying that city government should take more time thinking about proactive ways of keeping kids out of trouble.
1. I agree but I'm sure the greater reality amongst these immigrants who don't speak english all that well (and thus are most likely to hold lower paying blue collar jobs) is that they do find themselves having to work crazy hours along with having children. That's the reality. People do need some measure of responsibility but social service programs were created for a reason.
2. I agree. I think we should also keep in mind that working with youth and preventing this type of behavior (and social atmosphere) is probably a lot more effective then "getting tough with criminals" and these so called "gangs". I grew up in large minority cities like these in southern california and these "gangs" are nothing but a bunch asian kids who like to hang out. I'm sure some of them front themselves with wanna-be gang names but if you ever go out to these suburban cities I think you'd laugh at what these news reports call gangs.
3. Sorry let me clarify. I used the term "government" to encompass these private entities. The reason why I do that is because many of these private entities are largely funded by the government (I know because I work with some of them). So, in the end, I feel like the government does play a big role since they do give out the money and they play a large role in making these private entities possible.
4. >>It is not the city's job to babysit.
You must be republican.
>>Its pretty basic - if you unleash kids on this society it is your responsibility to make sure they are good citizens. If they are not then they will go to jail.
Agreed, but that's not to say that the government could do something about providing means to keeping a society safe.
From the few comments I've read on this thread everyone is eager to blame the parents as would I (upon first thought).
I tend to think that people who make the sort of comment that goes like "f-ing parents should spend some more f-ing time with their kids" come from a background where they observed (first hand or second) parents that did this.
The problem with this logic is that sometimes the parents and other family members are busy with work trying to "make a living for their family". You COULD blame parents saying they should take the time out to spend it with the kids but couldn't you really feel good about putting a father and mother in jail for life knowing that they were workign 16 hour days trying to make ends meet?
I wouldn't shift all blame away from parents nor would I place all blame on the government (or the city). I say that instead of shutting down internet cafes, they should be regulated (with some moderation either way). THEN the city government should try creating after school programs.m I think the business have a right to run a business but after school programs have shown to be effective in keeping kids out of trouble.
My thoughts are that a bunch of these kids don't have jack crap to do after school so there's nothing like playing a bit of Counterstrike (at age 23 i find myself doing the same thing). What these kids need are safe alternatives to life after school. That is a big role the government/city needs to take up.