Yea, just one. What happens when you leave Toronto and have to rent a car in Detroit? No Autocar.
Seriously. Autocar may be a nice little business that works great in Toronto - but is the ONLY city they appear to be in (from what I can see on the website). The point of my previous post is that this business model does NOT scale very well to serve lots and lots of people (and cities). It just won't work on that level for the (some of) the reasons I outlined earlier.
Management of the fleet is hard enough for companies that do have people onsite. Much less remotely. Call me when Autocar has locations in the largest 50 cities in North America.
So what happens if something is "wrong" with the car (broken, doesn't run, is damaged, 3rd gear doesn't work, etc)? What redress do you have to fix the problem? Do you really believe they can solve problems remotely? All problems? What about the missing passenger mirror? Somebody has to fix that eventually, don't they? How about changing the oil? And right now - they rely on the kindness of their customers to wash the car, keep it clean, gas it up, etc. That works great until you get a tragedy of commons situation. And it will happen.
That is just some of the 10,000 reasons I think this is a bad idea and won't fly. There is nothing I hate more than "self service" that doesn't take into account ALL situations the customer might have. Self service is great for simple businesses. But renting a car (and everything that comes with it) is not simple. Things can and do go wrong sometimes. Unexpected situations arise. When you pump your gas, it's a pretty well-defined process. Yes, there are things that can go wrong. But if you break it down step by step, the transaction is simple. That works great for self-service. Now compare that to renting, running, maintaining, managing, moving, and parking a large fleet of highly valuable vehicles. MUCH more complex to run a car rental business than a gas station.
Its the same reason I absolutely fucking hate the stupid self serve checkouts at grocery store. In simplest terms: they are ALWAYS half-baked solutions that are not ready for primetime and I wind up wasting MY time trying to make the simplest transaction happen (pay for my G**DAMN food and go home!). It rarely works smoothly and a solid 50% of the time, some "assistance" is needed. Yet they have no one stationed there to assist you. Brillant!
They don't realize that the 2 billion people of China and India far eclipse the American market
Except the fact that the VAST majority of those 2 billion ppl are poor as shit and can't buy anything you have to sell. Numbers of people do not equate to a "large market". Numbers of people with money to spend is what qualifies as a "large market".
And when you measure like that, the US IS the largest and most well funded market for products in the world. By a long way.
If google is profiting, then aren't the telcos ALSO profiting from this? I mean, after all we've heard about Google "making money on the backs of the telco's networks", shouldn't the telcos be the real profiteers?
Yea, that would be REALLY weird because, technically, you aren't "trying to enter the country" -- only passing through via an involuntary fuel stop. So as far as I know, customs does NOT apply.
I am *REALLY* intrigued by this because I did not think all of this was required for passing through. I mean, if I fly from US to Australia and we stop in South Africa for fuel, I don't have to go through customs -- I simply wait on the plane or in their designated "non-customs" area for passers through and then go on with the rest of my journey as if I had never stopped there. No stamped passport, etc ----- unless I decide to go through customs and wander around the city for a while.
This is the first time I've EVER heard of a transitional stop requiring ppl to go through customs. So another question (if you will indulge me): did you officially go through customs? (ie: get your passport checked, stamped, etc) or did they just photo and fingerprint you?
OMG. I read through the entire thread and I honestly have to say - I have no earthly idea what you people are talking about.
Yea, I know D&D and played it as a kid. But I haven't the foggiest clue about anything else mentioned on this entire page. It's like I just got a blinding hot dose of unexpected geekdom and I kind of dig it.
What happens if you refused to be photo'd and fingerprinted?
And I presume that you did not have previous warning about the stop. If you did, then disregard my question. But if it was a surprise to the passengers, I am curious what happens if one of the passengers doesn't cooperate.
Blocking is blocking. Period. When you start saying "well, in this case, blocking is OK", then you open up the door to what we have in front of us. It doesn't matter whether its a site, a port, or a specific protocol. In all of those cases, the ISP has inserted themselves between you and your endpoint site/host so they can make decisions for you as to what does and does not get passed between you and the other party.
One could certainly argue that there are real positive uses of this model -- like closing port 25 on residential IP's -- but by doing this, don't forget that you give the ISP's a slippery slope that they can travel down. The way IP is designed, I should be able to get a packet of content (ANY content) from point A to point B, as long as both of those points exist. The travel route and the content of the package are irrelevant.
That's it. That's the internet in a nutshell. Anything that is done between point A and point B (filtering, spoofing, blocking, whatever), is by nature, altering the transmission. So if you want to block, fine, but don't call it the INTERnet. Call it a "bunch of networks that might be able to talk to each other, if allowed"
We know that every single packet from every single customer CAN be inspected and approved or denied by anyone in the middle of point A and point B. The question is: Are we, as a society, going to allow our Internet Providers to selectively choose what can and can not be sent between the endpoints?
(I didn't mean to but I think I just gave a resounding support post for net-neutrality.)
Right. A software company. Of course you and your company SHOULD be comfortable on Linux.
But for the other 97% out there, Linux is just nowhere near ready for desktop use.
(and I am no MSFT fanboy, I just think it's better for a large proportion of the population. And apparently, I am not alone. They have 85% of the desktop market for a reason other than just being a monopoly.)
Seconded. I "get" Linux and use it for some things I do. I am very proficient in getting it to do what I want it to do. BUT the usability of the OS as a desktop stinks. It is nowhere close to Microsoft in that realm. KDE/Gnome/whatever....I don't care. It's still not close (Aqua excluded).
Great for servers. Terrible for desktops. And I don't even want to imagine taking support calls from my employees using Linux. It's hard enough to walk someone through "simple" things in Windows, much less Linux.
I can only imagine the call:
Me: "Yea, so go in and edit your/etc/fstab"
them: "What do you mean edit?"
Me: "Open Gedit, and modify the file"
them: "So how do I open Gedit?"
Me: (sigh) "I quit"
I am just now starting to see most people grasp the concept of files and directories. And that's people who have been working on "business" computers for most of their adult lives. Never underestimate how clueless the typical computer user is and always overestimate how much time you have to spend with them to do the simplest things.
First, let me say that I agree with your post. But I do have to respond to something that jumped out at me.
You asked, "In fact, why in the world don't prices drop further for established services? Why do all your typical monthly bills seem to bottom out at around $20 to $30 (a single person, living alone). Why are they all about the same, even for completely differing services. Ever notice that you will never get an electric bill for less than $30 dollars? Why doesn't a land line phone only cost $5.00 a month in 2006? If I get a bill for $30 dollars a month, and so do 100 million other people, then that's 3 billion dollars a month going somewhere? So where?"
And I would like to provide a (short) list of where that money is going. It's not that the companies are just printing money, rather, the COSTS just to be in business are much higher than they used to be. I am not going to get into the cultural/economic/societal reasons for that but I will only say that they are very real costs. And those costs get passed DIRECTLY to customers. Here is a start of where the money is going: (in no particular order and with no comment on whether the costs are justified or not. They are what they are.)
- benefits
- sexual harassment suits
- workman's comp suits
- disability insurance
- class action suits
- licensing of IP
- salaries
- plants, property, and equipment
- insurance (liability, medical for employees, etc)
- regulatory requirements (there are a TON of these)
All of those - and more - before you make a single widget!
It's a fact that it's expensive just to stay in business. The old days of starting a company on a shoestring and actually "making it" are pretty much over. You have to be able to defend your business because there are a LOT of systematic costs that you have to pay just to be in the game. And that, my friend, is a very simplified version of WHY your bill is $30/mo minimum every single month.
Well, you can certainly read whatever you want to. But when I make investments with my money, I tend to stay away from the fringes. And the articles you point to are, most certainly, fringe.
I put little stock in "the sky is falling" prognostications. People like you have existed for many more years than the stock market. And more recently, they said the exact same thing back in 1910, 1920, 1923 (they were close to right on this one), 1939, 1953, 1968, 1970-1978, 1983-1984, and a few times since then.
And everytime, they have been wrong. The stock market has more "wealth/value" than it has ever had in it's history. It's the most efficient free-market in the world. It's not perfect information (see your economics class for what this means) but it is as close to perfect information as you will see in the world. And that is precisely why it is so valuable -- because the companies that trade on that market are successful and "open" relative to the rest of the world (ie: there is a reason that the US has more wealth than any nation on earth -- right now, at least.)
So, if you truly believe what you say you believe, then why don't you "short" the market and make gobs of money? You certainly have a big-time advantage if it works the way YOU say it does. I happen to disagree. But thats what makes the market -- people investing on both sides of the equation.
So, put your money where your mouth is and back it up! (and hurry because I can't wait to bet against you)
Now that's an eye-opening stat. (and yes, I know its the LA City beat, but the numbers are verified on a ton of other sites/news services. And its a pretty easy fact to fact check)
I can hardly respond. Go take an Economics course and just one finance/banking course and you will understand why your post makes absolutely no sense. The economy does not work according to how you describe. That's not how it goes down.
And not to be a total dick but I HAVE taken those courses and you are so far off with your "theory" that I can barely make sense of what it is you are trying to say. Read some books on how the capitalist economy works. Its far from perfect, to be sure, but you clearly do not understand the very basics.
Put the Capital Gains tax up to 60% where it belongs
Are you kidding me? You don't fix the country by taxing the people MORE. Who do you think pays the difference between 15% (now) and the 60% you propose?
It's us! Guys/gals like you and I. Along with the "fat cats" you want to slaughter, you take out a lot of people. If you own ANY stocks or have (almost) ANY retirement fund of ANY kind, then you are affected. And you want to take an extra 45% of MY money?
Things certainly need fixed. But this is NOT the way to do it. Find something else.
Well, here's a thought -- you are number 50 on a list of 50 most important "targets" this law would go after. Yes, I'd say there's a small chance they will harass you but I think there are WAY bigger and WAY more targets of interest out there besides you.
If you are in a group and being chased by bears, you don't have to be the fastest person in the group. You just don't want to be the slowest. Same thing here.
Yep, in the whole state. It's not just a community thing....
And yea, I am blown away by it too. The only reason I know so much about it is because I thought it was odd too when I first learned about it. But it is, in fact, against the state law to sell any pr0n that shows penetration of anykind (vaginal or oral).
If you ever pass through, stop in to an adult bookstore and you will see that all they sell is "soft core" type stuff. You will see dildos, lubes, adult toys, and everything else under the sun -- but you won't see penetration mags or videos.
Oklahoma does not allow the sale of books showing sexual penetration. Same for movies. Same for magazines. There may be some educational exceptions but pornography, in the traditional fellatio and intercourse sense, is not legal in Oklahoma. I don't think it's even technically legal to possess it - but I can't recall anyone ever being arrested for possessing porn.
It's been that way for a loooooong time. I know because I've lived here 30+ years.
And don't get me wrong. It's available. It's just not legal. So your post is incorrect. All kinds of things are banned. Well... except carrying guns.:-D
I understand. But wouldn't a product that offers BOTH be a better fit?
And I am not trying to beat you up because I was in your exact shoes less than 8 months ago. I relented and wound up getting the Cable co DVR (motorola) and it just barely works. But it does fast-forward and skip ahead reasonably well (ie: no better/worse than my Tivo).
Everybody can do what they want but honestly, I don't want some hodge-podge mix and match of components just so I can DVR ALL of the channels I receive. The technology to make this work PERFECTLY exists and so far, Tivo got the closest. But they lost ALL of that momentum by being so damn late to the HD market.
Hell, I even have a CableCard in my TV right now. In theory, if Tivo had their box available tommorrow -- I could use a Series 3 Tivo.
But it isn't. So all I have left now is to bitch about it on/. It really is a miserable situation with HD-DVR's and Cable/Satellite.
Slashdot Mirror
I am curious to hear from the attorneys out there: how does this fit (or not fit) into whistleblower statutes?
Could someone publicly release bug info and claim they are a whistleblower?
Whistleblowers enjoy a special legal status so I am curious if that could be applied to disclosing software bugs.
Any more thoughs?
Yea, just one. What happens when you leave Toronto and have to rent a car in Detroit? No Autocar.
Seriously. Autocar may be a nice little business that works great in Toronto - but is the ONLY city they appear to be in (from what I can see on the website). The point of my previous post is that this business model does NOT scale very well to serve lots and lots of people (and cities). It just won't work on that level for the (some of) the reasons I outlined earlier.
Management of the fleet is hard enough for companies that do have people onsite. Much less remotely. Call me when Autocar has locations in the largest 50 cities in North America.
I'm wondering if his story is true....
So what happens if something is "wrong" with the car (broken, doesn't run, is damaged, 3rd gear doesn't work, etc)? What redress do you have to fix the problem? Do you really believe they can solve problems remotely? All problems? What about the missing passenger mirror? Somebody has to fix that eventually, don't they? How about changing the oil? And right now - they rely on the kindness of their customers to wash the car, keep it clean, gas it up, etc. That works great until you get a tragedy of commons situation. And it will happen.
That is just some of the 10,000 reasons I think this is a bad idea and won't fly. There is nothing I hate more than "self service" that doesn't take into account ALL situations the customer might have. Self service is great for simple businesses. But renting a car (and everything that comes with it) is not simple. Things can and do go wrong sometimes. Unexpected situations arise. When you pump your gas, it's a pretty well-defined process. Yes, there are things that can go wrong. But if you break it down step by step, the transaction is simple. That works great for self-service. Now compare that to renting, running, maintaining, managing, moving, and parking a large fleet of highly valuable vehicles. MUCH more complex to run a car rental business than a gas station.
Its the same reason I absolutely fucking hate the stupid self serve checkouts at grocery store. In simplest terms: they are ALWAYS half-baked solutions that are not ready for primetime and I wind up wasting MY time trying to make the simplest transaction happen (pay for my G**DAMN food and go home!). It rarely works smoothly and a solid 50% of the time, some "assistance" is needed. Yet they have no one stationed there to assist you. Brillant!
They don't realize that the 2 billion people of China and India far eclipse the American market
Except the fact that the VAST majority of those 2 billion ppl are poor as shit and can't buy anything you have to sell. Numbers of people do not equate to a "large market". Numbers of people with money to spend is what qualifies as a "large market".
And when you measure like that, the US IS the largest and most well funded market for products in the world. By a long way.
If google is profiting, then aren't the telcos ALSO profiting from this? I mean, after all we've heard about Google "making money on the backs of the telco's networks", shouldn't the telcos be the real profiteers?
Can't have it both ways.
Yea, that would be REALLY weird because, technically, you aren't "trying to enter the country" -- only passing through via an involuntary fuel stop. So as far as I know, customs does NOT apply.
I am *REALLY* intrigued by this because I did not think all of this was required for passing through. I mean, if I fly from US to Australia and we stop in South Africa for fuel, I don't have to go through customs -- I simply wait on the plane or in their designated "non-customs" area for passers through and then go on with the rest of my journey as if I had never stopped there. No stamped passport, etc ----- unless I decide to go through customs and wander around the city for a while.
This is the first time I've EVER heard of a transitional stop requiring ppl to go through customs. So another question (if you will indulge me): did you officially go through customs? (ie: get your passport checked, stamped, etc) or did they just photo and fingerprint you?
OMG. I read through the entire thread and I honestly have to say - I have no earthly idea what you people are talking about.
Yea, I know D&D and played it as a kid. But I haven't the foggiest clue about anything else mentioned on this entire page. It's like I just got a blinding hot dose of unexpected geekdom and I kind of dig it.
What happens if you refused to be photo'd and fingerprinted?
And I presume that you did not have previous warning about the stop. If you did, then disregard my question. But if it was a surprise to the passengers, I am curious what happens if one of the passengers doesn't cooperate.
And what difference is that?
Blocking is blocking. Period. When you start saying "well, in this case, blocking is OK", then you open up the door to what we have in front of us. It doesn't matter whether its a site, a port, or a specific protocol. In all of those cases, the ISP has inserted themselves between you and your endpoint site/host so they can make decisions for you as to what does and does not get passed between you and the other party.
One could certainly argue that there are real positive uses of this model -- like closing port 25 on residential IP's -- but by doing this, don't forget that you give the ISP's a slippery slope that they can travel down. The way IP is designed, I should be able to get a packet of content (ANY content) from point A to point B, as long as both of those points exist. The travel route and the content of the package are irrelevant.
That's it. That's the internet in a nutshell. Anything that is done between point A and point B (filtering, spoofing, blocking, whatever), is by nature, altering the transmission. So if you want to block, fine, but don't call it the INTERnet. Call it a "bunch of networks that might be able to talk to each other, if allowed"
We know that every single packet from every single customer CAN be inspected and approved or denied by anyone in the middle of point A and point B. The question is: Are we, as a society, going to allow our Internet Providers to selectively choose what can and can not be sent between the endpoints?
(I didn't mean to but I think I just gave a resounding support post for net-neutrality.)
Man, I was gonna laugh at this but my pedantic side got the best of me and I just can't do it.
CH4, or methane, is odorless. If you are "smelling" methane, then what you are really smelling is one of two things: H2S (rotton eggs) or Mercaptins.
They add mercaptins to CH4 (or natural gas) so you can smell it. Easy leak detection and all...
At the software company I work for...
Right. A software company. Of course you and your company SHOULD be comfortable on Linux.
But for the other 97% out there, Linux is just nowhere near ready for desktop use.
(and I am no MSFT fanboy, I just think it's better for a large proportion of the population. And apparently, I am not alone. They have 85% of the desktop market for a reason other than just being a monopoly.)
Seconded. I "get" Linux and use it for some things I do. I am very proficient in getting it to do what I want it to do. BUT the usability of the OS as a desktop stinks. It is nowhere close to Microsoft in that realm. KDE/Gnome/whatever....I don't care. It's still not close (Aqua excluded).
/etc/fstab"
Great for servers. Terrible for desktops. And I don't even want to imagine taking support calls from my employees using Linux. It's hard enough to walk someone through "simple" things in Windows, much less Linux.
I can only imagine the call:
Me: "Yea, so go in and edit your
them: "What do you mean edit?"
Me: "Open Gedit, and modify the file"
them: "So how do I open Gedit?"
Me: (sigh) "I quit"
I am just now starting to see most people grasp the concept of files and directories. And that's people who have been working on "business" computers for most of their adult lives. Never underestimate how clueless the typical computer user is and always overestimate how much time you have to spend with them to do the simplest things.
First, let me say that I agree with your post. But I do have to respond to something that jumped out at me.
You asked, "In fact, why in the world don't prices drop further for established services? Why do all your typical monthly bills seem to bottom out at around $20 to $30 (a single person, living alone). Why are they all about the same, even for completely differing services. Ever notice that you will never get an electric bill for less than $30 dollars? Why doesn't a land line phone only cost $5.00 a month in 2006? If I get a bill for $30 dollars a month, and so do 100 million other people, then that's 3 billion dollars a month going somewhere? So where?"
And I would like to provide a (short) list of where that money is going. It's not that the companies are just printing money, rather, the COSTS just to be in business are much higher than they used to be. I am not going to get into the cultural/economic/societal reasons for that but I will only say that they are very real costs. And those costs get passed DIRECTLY to customers. Here is a start of where the money is going: (in no particular order and with no comment on whether the costs are justified or not. They are what they are.)
- benefits
- sexual harassment suits
- workman's comp suits
- disability insurance
- class action suits
- licensing of IP
- salaries
- plants, property, and equipment
- insurance (liability, medical for employees, etc)
- regulatory requirements (there are a TON of these)
All of those - and more - before you make a single widget!
It's a fact that it's expensive just to stay in business. The old days of starting a company on a shoestring and actually "making it" are pretty much over. You have to be able to defend your business because there are a LOT of systematic costs that you have to pay just to be in the game. And that, my friend, is a very simplified version of WHY your bill is $30/mo minimum every single month.
Well, you can certainly read whatever you want to. But when I make investments with my money, I tend to stay away from the fringes. And the articles you point to are, most certainly, fringe.
:-)
I put little stock in "the sky is falling" prognostications. People like you have existed for many more years than the stock market. And more recently, they said the exact same thing back in 1910, 1920, 1923 (they were close to right on this one), 1939, 1953, 1968, 1970-1978, 1983-1984, and a few times since then.
And everytime, they have been wrong. The stock market has more "wealth/value" than it has ever had in it's history. It's the most efficient free-market in the world. It's not perfect information (see your economics class for what this means) but it is as close to perfect information as you will see in the world. And that is precisely why it is so valuable -- because the companies that trade on that market are successful and "open" relative to the rest of the world (ie: there is a reason that the US has more wealth than any nation on earth -- right now, at least.)
So, if you truly believe what you say you believe, then why don't you "short" the market and make gobs of money? You certainly have a big-time advantage if it works the way YOU say it does. I happen to disagree. But thats what makes the market -- people investing on both sides of the equation.
So, put your money where your mouth is and back it up! (and hurry because I can't wait to bet against you)
Cheers!
In fact, we send them BACK to Congress more often than the Soviet politburo
Now that's an eye-opening stat. (and yes, I know its the LA City beat, but the numbers are verified on a ton of other sites/news services. And its a pretty easy fact to fact check)
I can hardly respond. Go take an Economics course and just one finance/banking course and you will understand why your post makes absolutely no sense. The economy does not work according to how you describe. That's not how it goes down.
And not to be a total dick but I HAVE taken those courses and you are so far off with your "theory" that I can barely make sense of what it is you are trying to say. Read some books on how the capitalist economy works. Its far from perfect, to be sure, but you clearly do not understand the very basics.
Put the Capital Gains tax up to 60% where it belongs
Are you kidding me? You don't fix the country by taxing the people MORE. Who do you think pays the difference between 15% (now) and the 60% you propose?
It's us! Guys/gals like you and I. Along with the "fat cats" you want to slaughter, you take out a lot of people. If you own ANY stocks or have (almost) ANY retirement fund of ANY kind, then you are affected. And you want to take an extra 45% of MY money?
Things certainly need fixed. But this is NOT the way to do it. Find something else.
Well, here's a thought -- you are number 50 on a list of 50 most important "targets" this law would go after. Yes, I'd say there's a small chance they will harass you but I think there are WAY bigger and WAY more targets of interest out there besides you.
If you are in a group and being chased by bears, you don't have to be the fastest person in the group. You just don't want to be the slowest. Same thing here.
Yep, in the whole state. It's not just a community thing....
And yea, I am blown away by it too. The only reason I know so much about it is because I thought it was odd too when I first learned about it. But it is, in fact, against the state law to sell any pr0n that shows penetration of anykind (vaginal or oral).
If you ever pass through, stop in to an adult bookstore and you will see that all they sell is "soft core" type stuff. You will see dildos, lubes, adult toys, and everything else under the sun -- but you won't see penetration mags or videos.
Odd, but true.
They are available. I have one. Now all I need is an capture card that can use a CableCard. And guess what? There aren't any.
And that, my friend, is the bigger issue.
Oklahoma does not allow the sale of books showing sexual penetration. Same for movies. Same for magazines. There may be some educational exceptions but pornography, in the traditional fellatio and intercourse sense, is not legal in Oklahoma. I don't think it's even technically legal to possess it - but I can't recall anyone ever being arrested for possessing porn.
... except carrying guns. :-D
It's been that way for a loooooong time. I know because I've lived here 30+ years.
And don't get me wrong. It's available. It's just not legal. So your post is incorrect. All kinds of things are banned. Well
You know you can change that, right?
Check here and read this thread.
I understand. But wouldn't a product that offers BOTH be a better fit?
/. It really is a miserable situation with HD-DVR's and Cable/Satellite.
And I am not trying to beat you up because I was in your exact shoes less than 8 months ago. I relented and wound up getting the Cable co DVR (motorola) and it just barely works. But it does fast-forward and skip ahead reasonably well (ie: no better/worse than my Tivo).
Everybody can do what they want but honestly, I don't want some hodge-podge mix and match of components just so I can DVR ALL of the channels I receive. The technology to make this work PERFECTLY exists and so far, Tivo got the closest. But they lost ALL of that momentum by being so damn late to the HD market.
Hell, I even have a CableCard in my TV right now. In theory, if Tivo had their box available tommorrow -- I could use a Series 3 Tivo.
But it isn't. So all I have left now is to bitch about it on
Uh-huh. You must have standard def TV, huh? Wait until you go high-def.
I said the EXACT same thing - until I moved to HD. See my post above.