"Clearly Sony developed this on their own, so you can't even say they stole it."
Really? Given that her patent claim is 12 YEARS OLD, I don't think the word "clearly" means what you think it means.
"U.S. Patent No. 4,904,618, "Process for Doping Crystals of Wide Band Gap Semiconductors," and U.S. Patent No. 5,252,499, "Wide Band-Gap Semiconductors Having Low Bipolar Resistivity and Method of Formation"
* Defining the skill sets required for each job.
* Select workers with appropriate abilities for each job.
* Setting standards on method for performing each job.
* Training for standard task.
* Planning work and eliminating interruptions.
* Wage incentive for increased output.
How many rants on/. have there been about nebulous skill requirements, jobs that don't use the skills one has, arbitrary judgments of personal performance, lack of training, lack of proper planning, and lack of raises for working your ass off?
It looks like the problem is that corporations DON'T employ Taylorism.
While I won't say that the Fed and the SEC have handled this whole situation well, I don't see this particular situation as having ANY good outcome. A run had actually started on Bear Stearns, and it was going to collapse totally within a couple of days. So their creditors would need to write off those debts. And since those debts are often held as collateral by other organizations, that puts them at risk too.
And before going all populist with the "Good - serves them right" bit, remember that as it spreads, it starts affecting institutions closer to home - pension funds, mutual funds (got a 401k?), local depositor banks, etc. And the Federal Gov't has a legal obligation to bail some of them out.
It's all ugly, but gone are the days of the proletariat vs. the capitalists - if you have a 401k, own any stock, have deposits in a bank, have a pension, you ARE a capitalist.
Uh, yeah - state regulation of communication assets has worked SO WELL in the past. Like giving us local monopolies on cable. And refusing/extorting permits for sell towers (until the Feds stopped that).
This in turn has led to SS benefits being increased at a rate greater than the real rate of inflation, having a twofold effect: 1) Increasing the SS burden on the federal budget and current wage earners. 2) Creating a "moral hazard" in that it is a disincentive for people to save for retirement. When Social Security was begun, it was seen as a means to keep the poorest of the elderly from starving - the "old lady eating cat food" scenario. It was NOT supposed to be a "state pension". But through the miracle of compounding, the overestimation of the CPI has increased SS benefits to where it CAN be used in lieu of any other support - not well, and not with risk, but it's doable. As a result, there is a disincentive to save on your own. For instance, whenever you use one f those "retirement calculators", they ALWAYS take SS into account, and then tell you what you need to save after that. But in it's original "safety net" form, the amount would be low enough that it would not be wise to calculate it in. 3) Concurrent with #2, it has tended to let the children of the elderly "off the hook". Prior to SS, adults were expected to take care of their elderly relatives. That is not the case any more - it's the government's job.
This is the medical equivalent of bogus patents - take an old, well established idea, add "on the internet" at the end, and all of the sudden it's new?
Addiction to Internet pornography? No, it's addiction to pornography.
Addiction to Internet gaming? No, it's addiction to gaming.
Addiction to Internet gambling? No, it's addiction to gambling.
Addiction to Internet communication? That's a little tougher, but I'd view that more as low self esteem/insecurity - i.e. constantly needing to feel "connected". I'd bet these folks are the same ones used to who spend hours on the phone with their friends. Addiction? Hardly
This is psychiatrists trying to drum up more work for themselves.
"Like it or not, I believe "humans" are the worst of all monsters. Unlimited potential for evil, and the will to do so at any time."
I nominate that, in the "Idle" section of Slashdot, "insightful" mods DOWN, not up. This is not the place for trenchant analysis or social commentary. Go away.
"hmm, was there not some USA bigwig that ones stated something to the tune that no market had the right to exist for eternity?"
"There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary to public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute or common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back."
"Israelites" are an historical Jewish people who lived in and around the are currently occupied by Israel and other states until around 50 AD (I think).
"Israelis" are citizens of the state of Israel, a large portion of which are Jewish.
"Jews" are those that follow the Jewish religion and culture or ethnic background, a great many of whome live in Israel, followed by the US and other, mainly European, countries.
Actually, it's not a quibble - understanding these definitions is the key to understanding a lot of what is going on now.
"If a thief steals something from me, and then gives me 75% of it back, should I be grateful then?"
If a gang of neighbors tries a surprise home invasion and I not only kick there asses back to their property, but I plant a fence well on their side so I have a buffer, why should I give the land back?
See, inappropriate analogies can be fun AND informative.
"Arafat totally could have come back and continued negotiations but he did not."
Funny you mentioned Clinton later in your post - he was the REASON the Palestinians didn't come back.
When the last, most important round of talks started, Clinton assured everyone that, no matter what the outcome, no one was to apportion blame. Immediately after the talks ended without a resolution, Clinton held a press conference where he SPECIFICALLY blamed the Palestinian delegation for not accepting the last Israeli offer. The negotiators were shocked and felt betrayed, and carried home the message that, whatever the US may say, in the end the US will always land on Israel's side. In the face of that, why BOTHER coming back to the table?
Clinton sacrificed chances at peace in the Middle east to protect his approval rating by deflecting blame for the failure of the talks in which he had invested so much.
How could I have been so stupid - OF COURSE it's totally impossible to verify identity in he Internet.
Well, except for eCommerce.
Or private access to proprietary data.
Or access to government data where one must provide something like your driver's license number.
Or having the user provide verified identity data prior to issuing a username.
Are any of these 100%? No.
Would they work with a large site like/. where one of the attractions is the practical application of the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory? Not if they want to be successful. But for this guy's site? Certainly, if he wanted to.
Interesting...sources? Though I won't consider myself a Heinlein scholar, I read a lot of his autobiographical stuff and can't remember any reference to LRH at all.
Yes, I could - if it's my website I can set the rules any damned way I please. I agree wholeheartedly that the State should not ban anonymous speech, but I'm not the state.
- it is necessary to the functioning of the business - unless you are a toilet manufacturer or a landlord, it is NOT part of your central business - ideally it "just works", allowing you to focus on more important things - when it doesn't "just work", things start to stink.
The difference is that it is unthinkable that most companies should have a "Chief Plumbing Officer", but the IT world seems to think that they need to be involved at the highest reaches of every company's management.
"Do what/. did: sell memberships for no advertisements."
Interesting, but what would a Wikipedia "Member" get as a benefit? Slashdot subscribers can see things early (or so the front page keeps telling me) and gets ads blocked at the source. What would Wiki offer? Maybe "special" editing status?
Another member model is the Public Broadcasting model. In that model, "members" really don't get a lot for their $$$, except for a Car Talk mug. The reason it works is because it is INTRUSIVE - breaking into the programming you are used to hearing/seeing and begging for cash, laying on the guilt trip. This could work for Wikipedia - do a 10 second redirect to a "beg for cash" page, or periodically throw in a popup. But I get the feeling the directors think that would be "crass".
I work for a non-profit that is feeling a money pinch - badly. Part of the reason is that everyone babbles about The Mission, and having faith that if we just focus on The Mission, the money will take care of itself. Or, the "finance guys" will take care of it. But at the rate we are burning cash, the organization will need to start selling hard assets - it's pretty hard to do The Mission when your facility has just been repossessed, or the lights are turned off.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean, really - is this a joke?
Repeat after me - "In terms of fundamental human behavior, the internet has not, and will not, change JACK SHIT."
Politics is the way it is because of fundamental human behavior - greed, ambition, and apathy. No "series of tubes" will change that.
"Clearly Sony developed this on their own, so you can't even say they stole it."
Really? Given that her patent claim is 12 YEARS OLD, I don't think the word "clearly" means what you think it means.
"U.S. Patent No. 4,904,618, "Process for Doping Crystals of Wide Band Gap Semiconductors," and U.S. Patent No. 5,252,499, "Wide Band-Gap Semiconductors Having Low Bipolar Resistivity and Method of Formation"
Can't wait for the code name for the 24th release (yes, you can count on your fingers if you need to.)
Hmmm...From your link:
/. have there been about nebulous skill requirements, jobs that don't use the skills one has, arbitrary judgments of personal performance, lack of training, lack of proper planning, and lack of raises for working your ass off?
General approach
* Defining the skill sets required for each job.
* Select workers with appropriate abilities for each job.
* Setting standards on method for performing each job.
* Training for standard task.
* Planning work and eliminating interruptions.
* Wage incentive for increased output.
How many rants on
It looks like the problem is that corporations DON'T employ Taylorism.
While I won't say that the Fed and the SEC have handled this whole situation well, I don't see this particular situation as having ANY good outcome. A run had actually started on Bear Stearns, and it was going to collapse totally within a couple of days. So their creditors would need to write off those debts. And since those debts are often held as collateral by other organizations, that puts them at risk too.
And before going all populist with the "Good - serves them right" bit, remember that as it spreads, it starts affecting institutions closer to home - pension funds, mutual funds (got a 401k?), local depositor banks, etc. And the Federal Gov't has a legal obligation to bail some of them out.
It's all ugly, but gone are the days of the proletariat vs. the capitalists - if you have a 401k, own any stock, have deposits in a bank, have a pension, you ARE a capitalist.
Uh, yeah - state regulation of communication assets has worked SO WELL in the past. Like giving us local monopolies on cable. And refusing/extorting permits for sell towers (until the Feds stopped that).
"The government cooks the books on things like CPI so it doesn't have to meet social security obligations"
Huh? It's generally acknowledged that the CPI OVER-estimates inflation, and has done so for years (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boskin_Commission )
This in turn has led to SS benefits being increased at a rate greater than the real rate of inflation, having a twofold effect:
1) Increasing the SS burden on the federal budget and current wage earners.
2) Creating a "moral hazard" in that it is a disincentive for people to save for retirement. When Social Security was begun, it was seen as a means to keep the poorest of the elderly from starving - the "old lady eating cat food" scenario. It was NOT supposed to be a "state pension". But through the miracle of compounding, the overestimation of the CPI has increased SS benefits to where it CAN be used in lieu of any other support - not well, and not with risk, but it's doable. As a result, there is a disincentive to save on your own. For instance, whenever you use one f those "retirement calculators", they ALWAYS take SS into account, and then tell you what you need to save after that. But in it's original "safety net" form, the amount would be low enough that it would not be wise to calculate it in.
3) Concurrent with #2, it has tended to let the children of the elderly "off the hook". Prior to SS, adults were expected to take care of their elderly relatives. That is not the case any more - it's the government's job.
I think he was referring to EFFECTIVE armed revolt.
That blue guy Stan Jones http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stan_Jones was pretty cool.
Just picture him at a Senate costume party with deelybobbers on - instant Andorean.
This is the medical equivalent of bogus patents - take an old, well established idea, add "on the internet" at the end, and all of the sudden it's new?
Addiction to Internet pornography? No, it's addiction to pornography.
Addiction to Internet gaming? No, it's addiction to gaming.
Addiction to Internet gambling? No, it's addiction to gambling.
Addiction to Internet communication? That's a little tougher, but I'd view that more as low self esteem/insecurity - i.e. constantly needing to feel "connected". I'd bet these folks are the same ones used to who spend hours on the phone with their friends. Addiction? Hardly
This is psychiatrists trying to drum up more work for themselves.
Speed cameras in the 70's? Sure about that?
"Like it or not, I believe "humans" are the worst of all monsters. Unlimited potential for evil, and the will to do so at any time."
I nominate that, in the "Idle" section of Slashdot, "insightful" mods DOWN, not up. This is not the place for trenchant analysis or social commentary. Go away.
1) Listen to Web pundits make predictions about anything.
2) Bet your money on the EXACT OPPOSITE.
3) Wait a few years
4) Profit!
Please show me the flaw in my plan.
"hmm, was there not some USA bigwig that ones stated something to the tune that no market had the right to exist for eternity?"
"There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary to public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute or common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back."
Robert A. Heinlein, "Life-Line", 1939.
A quibble:
"Israelites" are an historical Jewish people who lived in and around the are currently occupied by Israel and other states until around 50 AD (I think).
"Israelis" are citizens of the state of Israel, a large portion of which are Jewish.
"Jews" are those that follow the Jewish religion and culture or ethnic background, a great many of whome live in Israel, followed by the US and other, mainly European, countries.
Actually, it's not a quibble - understanding these definitions is the key to understanding a lot of what is going on now.
"If a thief steals something from me, and then gives me 75% of it back, should I be grateful then?"
If a gang of neighbors tries a surprise home invasion and I not only kick there asses back to their property, but I plant a fence well on their side so I have a buffer, why should I give the land back?
See, inappropriate analogies can be fun AND informative.
"Arafat totally could have come back and continued negotiations but he did not."
Funny you mentioned Clinton later in your post - he was the REASON the Palestinians didn't come back.
When the last, most important round of talks started, Clinton assured everyone that, no matter what the outcome, no one was to apportion blame. Immediately after the talks ended without a resolution, Clinton held a press conference where he SPECIFICALLY blamed the Palestinian delegation for not accepting the last Israeli offer. The negotiators were shocked and felt betrayed, and carried home the message that, whatever the US may say, in the end the US will always land on Israel's side. In the face of that, why BOTHER coming back to the table?
Clinton sacrificed chances at peace in the Middle east to protect his approval rating by deflecting blame for the failure of the talks in which he had invested so much.
How could I have been so stupid - OF COURSE it's totally impossible to verify identity in he Internet.
/. where one of the attractions is the practical application of the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory? Not if they want to be successful. But for this guy's site? Certainly, if he wanted to.
Well, except for eCommerce.
Or private access to proprietary data.
Or access to government data where one must provide something like your driver's license number.
Or having the user provide verified identity data prior to issuing a username.
Are any of these 100%? No.
Would they work with a large site like
Interesting...sources? Though I won't consider myself a Heinlein scholar, I read a lot of his autobiographical stuff and can't remember any reference to LRH at all.
Yes, I could - if it's my website I can set the rules any damned way I please. I agree wholeheartedly that the State should not ban anonymous speech, but I'm not the state.
Best.Imaginary.Conversation.EVAR!
"(Now if only all the commentators were Bob Costas in dominatrix gear...)"
I just threw up in my mouth a little...
...is the same as the value of a toilet.
- it is necessary to the functioning of the business
- unless you are a toilet manufacturer or a landlord, it is NOT part of your central business
- ideally it "just works", allowing you to focus on more important things
- when it doesn't "just work", things start to stink.
The difference is that it is unthinkable that most companies should have a "Chief Plumbing Officer", but the IT world seems to think that they need to be involved at the highest reaches of every company's management.
"Do what /. did: sell memberships for no advertisements."
Interesting, but what would a Wikipedia "Member" get as a benefit? Slashdot subscribers can see things early (or so the front page keeps telling me) and gets ads blocked at the source. What would Wiki offer? Maybe "special" editing status?
Another member model is the Public Broadcasting model. In that model, "members" really don't get a lot for their $$$, except for a Car Talk mug. The reason it works is because it is INTRUSIVE - breaking into the programming you are used to hearing/seeing and begging for cash, laying on the guilt trip. This could work for Wikipedia - do a 10 second redirect to a "beg for cash" page, or periodically throw in a popup. But I get the feeling the directors think that would be "crass".
I work for a non-profit that is feeling a money pinch - badly. Part of the reason is that everyone babbles about The Mission, and having faith that if we just focus on The Mission, the money will take care of itself. Or, the "finance guys" will take care of it. But at the rate we are burning cash, the organization will need to start selling hard assets - it's pretty hard to do The Mission when your facility has just been repossessed, or the lights are turned off.
"Episodes will be broadcast as a series on ESPNU..."
Look at the "U" on the keyboard.
What's the closest key? "8"
That's right - "The Ocho" is just over the horizon!
(Now, if only all the commentators were cute blonds in dominatrix gear...)