What is Google really worth? And will it be worth what it is worth today 5 years from now.
Considering Google made $256 million on $1.6 billion in revenue last year, I say they were worth a pretty penny. I don't know about the $20-30 billion numbers that are floating around, but I could see paying $12 billion for Google.
I am still keeping my fingers crossed that they can remain faithful to their customers
Oh, you mean the people who advertise on google? Yeah, I think they'll do a good job of keeping those people happy. But people who use google's search engine just to find stuff are not customers...they're the product. Google main business is not selling search results, it's selling eyeballs. Just like any other media company (television, radio, etc...) who's job is to sell advertising, google's customers are the people who pay for advertising. When you start paying google to do a search, then you'll be a google customer...until you're the product.
OK, assuming for a moment that each of those complaints in a violation (which I know is a grand overestimation, but stay with me for a second), that makes almost 5 Billion dollars in fines. Where is this money going? Surely the FTC doesn't need 5 billion dollars (or even 1/10th of that) to run the Do-Not-Call list!
I tell you where it should be going: To the people who filed the complaints. If your complaint was valid...you were illegally called even though you were on the DNC list...you shoulc get a percentage of the fine. Otherwise this money just gets tossed into the great financial landfill that is the U.S. Government, and gets used for some god-only-knows pork barrel project that has nothing to do with telemarketing and consumer privacy.
And system software. Even discounting the added development burden, with the addition of each additional platform the job of QA increases substantially. While clever QA management can minimize the burden somewhat, the complexity of multi-platform support is beyond the reach of most development organizations. Place your bets. Demand multi-platform support from your system software vendor, then build your product on the absolute fewest number of platforms possible.
Wow...yeah, that's Microsoft alright. Don't bother writing software for anything but the One True Platform. Amen. Never mind the fact that Windows runs on...hmm, lets see...x86 and ummm...well. I suppose there might be a few others, but I couldn't tell you for the life of me what they are. Linux on the other hand...
If you're writing a client side/GUI app, you can get away with this mentality. Try it on the server side and your product goes nowhere. I believe this is one of the reaons that Microsoft has had (and will continute to have) problems getting entrenched in the Enterprise computing market.
Not too sure about this...
on
Linux in Iraq
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
One of the major "selling" points of Linux is cost. Obviously there are other reasons to use it (security, flexibility, access to source code, etc.) but most laymen don't care about those reasons...they just care how much it's going to cost them.
As was mentioned in the article, most of the software in Iraq is pirated, so cost isn't really an issue since most people don't pay for software. So, in my opinion, Linux is going to have a bit of an uphill battle to gain wide acceptance among the people. Government instutions and large companies might see it a little differently since they're more likely to abide by the law, but I just don't see your average Iraqi citizen using Linux (which he's probaly has never heard of) when he can get Windows for free.
A sticking point was whether the United States, which has championed nearly unfettered free speech, would line up with European countries that have banned racist or anti-Semitic speech in public.
In order to do this, you'd have to repeal the First Amendment. And in order to do that, you'd have to repeal the Second Amendment.
Games made from movie franchises tend to suck, but that doesn't mean that they must. The reason they tend to suck is that the story has already been told, and in order to remain true to it, artifical limitiations must be placed on the user (you can't kill that person because they're your friend...the movie says so).
The best games let the gamer tell the story by making interesting choices about how to proceed. In many cases movies have already made those choices (implicitly and explicitly) so there's less potential for fun. That doesn't mean that there no fun left....just less than there would have been.
Groovy is a Python/Ruby style scripting language that runs anywhere Java runs, and it works and plays well with existing Java libraries, including the JDK. There's even a JSR for it.
Yeah, but I can read a license plate without any special equipment, and therefore I know exactly what information is being given to anyone who sees my plate. If you start putting RFID tags in license plates, who's knows what "extra" information they might start encoding on them.
I'm for anything that discourages the production of video games based on movie/tv/book franchises.
Video games are interactive. The "story" is told by the user and the charecters are defined and developed by playing the game (at least, in a good game, they are). When you have the baggage that comes with charecters that have already been defined by movies, television, or books, you take away power from the user for no good reason whatsoever. The less of these types of games there are, the better.
Actually, they don't. Regardless of the ruling in Quebec, section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states that Candadians have the right to "Freedom of Expression". However, according to section 1, all rights granted under this charter are subject to "reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society". In America, the Bill of Rights comes with no qualifications. In the specific case of free speech, this means that extreme political viewpoints cannot be labeled as hate speech and banned. Not so, in Canada.
The problem with this approach is it rules out an entire class of problems such as class B inherits from class A, has such and such static methods and member variables..... what is the output of this code?
Yes, but those aren't Computer Science problems, and they shouldn't be (and aren't) on this test. At best, they're problems suited for a prep-course for a technical certification. Specifically, the AP exam (as I remember it) deals with control flow, logic and data structures. Applying those principles requires nothing more than assembly instructions.
The point is, there's nothing on this test that is, or should be, language specific. They switch the test from one language to another to gain the added side benefit of exposing the students to the latest technology, but the concepts learned apply no matter what language (or operating system, or processor) you use.
I done some work in LISP, and there's nothing in LISP that isn't based on the same computer science principles that are used in C++ or Java. Obviously, the way they're applied is very different, but again...a Stack is a Stack.
My graduating class was the last one to take the Pascal AP exam. When I got to college, all of the classes were taught in C++, and I started in a second year class based on the AP credit I got from the exam. I was expecting it to be very difficult, considering I had never had C++ before, and it was...for about a week. Then I realized that a Stack is a Stack and a Linked List is a Linked list and once you learn the syntax of the particular language you're working in, Computer Science is really language-neutral.
Computer Science is not about programming. It's about finding solutions to problems using computers, which is a very different thing. Moving the AP exam to Java seems like a good idea to me, but I doubt it will have any real impact on the curriculums of the schools that make the switch. The principles and concepts taught in any decent Computer Science undergrad program were just as valid and relevant 50 years ago as they are today as, they will be 50 years from now.
Wow, for a brief second there, I almost considered using a Linux distribution that actually had popular, easy to use tools included with it. Thank you for pointing out that this distro has been infected with unFree-as-in-speech software, and therefore should be shunned to 7th Level of Hell along with the Sasser virus and Gator spyware.
[Ranting power...ACTIVATE!]
For all of you who don't understand this yet, let me spell it out one more time. 99% of the population doesn't give two shits what the license terms of thier software is. To these people, free-as-in-beer will always be way more important than free-as-in-speech. They don't care if it's open-source. They don't even care if RedHat says it's open-source and it's really not. They want to know two things..."Will it work?" and "How much does it cost?"
The vast majority of people (and the last time I checked, the users of RedHat's distro were people) want Java pre-installed. They want Acrobat pre-installed. They even want RealPlayer pre-installed because they just want thier computer to work and they don't want to have to spend a lot of time and money getting it to work.
RedHat knows exactly what they're doing. And they don't (and shouldn't) care if they ruffle the feathers of a few open-source zealots. One of the great things about the GPL is that you don't have to get anyone's permission to use the software...even if it means somebody does something you don't like and actually manages to make money with it.
Slashdot Mirror
You: Stay the f**k out of my life.
InsureCo: No problem. Have a nice day and good luck driving your car without insurance.
What is Google really worth? And will it be worth what it is worth today 5 years from now.
Considering Google made $256 million on $1.6 billion in revenue last year, I say they were worth a pretty penny. I don't know about the $20-30 billion numbers that are floating around, but I could see paying $12 billion for Google.
Sorry, that's taken.
...but the AT&T logo is.
...in the back of a Volkswagen?
I am still keeping my fingers crossed that they can remain faithful to their customers
Oh, you mean the people who advertise on google? Yeah, I think they'll do a good job of keeping those people happy. But people who use google's search engine just to find stuff are not customers...they're the product. Google main business is not selling search results, it's selling eyeballs. Just like any other media company (television, radio, etc...) who's job is to sell advertising, google's customers are the people who pay for advertising. When you start paying google to do a search, then you'll be a google customer...until you're the product.
OK, assuming for a moment that each of those complaints in a violation (which I know is a grand overestimation, but stay with me for a second), that makes almost 5 Billion dollars in fines. Where is this money going? Surely the FTC doesn't need 5 billion dollars (or even 1/10th of that) to run the Do-Not-Call list!
I tell you where it should be going: To the people who filed the complaints. If your complaint was valid...you were illegally called even though you were on the DNC list...you shoulc get a percentage of the fine. Otherwise this money just gets tossed into the great financial landfill that is the U.S. Government, and gets used for some god-only-knows pork barrel project that has nothing to do with telemarketing and consumer privacy.
12. Portability is for canoes.
And system software. Even discounting the added development burden, with the addition of each additional platform the job of QA increases substantially. While clever QA management can minimize the burden somewhat, the complexity of multi-platform support is beyond the reach of most development organizations. Place your bets. Demand multi-platform support from your system software vendor, then build your product on the absolute fewest number of platforms possible.
Wow...yeah, that's Microsoft alright. Don't bother writing software for anything but the One True Platform. Amen. Never mind the fact that Windows runs on...hmm, lets see...x86 and ummm...well. I suppose there might be a few others, but I couldn't tell you for the life of me what they are. Linux on the other hand...
If you're writing a client side/GUI app, you can get away with this mentality. Try it on the server side and your product goes nowhere. I believe this is one of the reaons that Microsoft has had (and will continute to have) problems getting entrenched in the Enterprise computing market.
One of the major "selling" points of Linux is cost. Obviously there are other reasons to use it (security, flexibility, access to source code, etc.) but most laymen don't care about those reasons...they just care how much it's going to cost them.
As was mentioned in the article, most of the software in Iraq is pirated, so cost isn't really an issue since most people don't pay for software. So, in my opinion, Linux is going to have a bit of an uphill battle to gain wide acceptance among the people. Government instutions and large companies might see it a little differently since they're more likely to abide by the law, but I just don't see your average Iraqi citizen using Linux (which he's probaly has never heard of) when he can get Windows for free.
A sticking point was whether the United States, which has championed nearly unfettered free speech, would line up with European countries that have banned racist or anti-Semitic speech in public.
In order to do this, you'd have to repeal the First Amendment. And in order to do that, you'd have to repeal the Second Amendment.
It's just not going to happen, people.
God, I wish I had Mod points. By far the most insightful thing I've heard all day.
Games made from movie franchises tend to suck, but that doesn't mean that they must. The reason they tend to suck is that the story has already been told, and in order to remain true to it, artifical limitiations must be placed on the user (you can't kill that person because they're your friend...the movie says so).
The best games let the gamer tell the story by making interesting choices about how to proceed. In many cases movies have already made those choices (implicitly and explicitly) so there's less potential for fun. That doesn't mean that there no fun left....just less than there would have been.
...but Groovy isn't.
Groovy is a Python/Ruby style scripting language that runs anywhere Java runs, and it works and plays well with existing Java libraries, including the JDK. There's even a JSR for it.
Yeah, but I can read a license plate without any special equipment, and therefore I know exactly what information is being given to anyone who sees my plate. If you start putting RFID tags in license plates, who's knows what "extra" information they might start encoding on them.
I'm for anything that discourages the production of video games based on movie/tv/book franchises.
Video games are interactive. The "story" is told by the user and the charecters are defined and developed by playing the game (at least, in a good game, they are). When you have the baggage that comes with charecters that have already been defined by movies, television, or books, you take away power from the user for no good reason whatsoever. The less of these types of games there are, the better.
Oh, and yes...I'm aware that I can't spell.
in South Korea, where, even more so than the U.S., there are increasingly highly paid professional teams competing in games
Jesus, are they outsourcing everything now?!?
Last I checked, Canada has both.
Actually, they don't. Regardless of the ruling in Quebec, section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states that Candadians have the right to "Freedom of Expression". However, according to section 1, all rights granted under this charter are subject to "reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society". In America, the Bill of Rights comes with no qualifications. In the specific case of free speech, this means that extreme political viewpoints cannot be labeled as hate speech and banned. Not so, in Canada.
I'm sure we will eventually be in the same boat, but currently, you can have a bit more peace of mind living in canada than the usa.
Hmmm...lets see. Free music or free speech.
I think I know which one I'd rather have.
What?
Maybe the first item on the list should have been "Another Web Server"
The problem with this approach is it rules out an entire class of problems such as class B inherits from class A, has such and such static methods and member variables..... what is the output of this code?
Yes, but those aren't Computer Science problems, and they shouldn't be (and aren't) on this test. At best, they're problems suited for a prep-course for a technical certification. Specifically, the AP exam (as I remember it) deals with control flow, logic and data structures. Applying those principles requires nothing more than assembly instructions.
The point is, there's nothing on this test that is, or should be, language specific. They switch the test from one language to another to gain the added side benefit of exposing the students to the latest technology, but the concepts learned apply no matter what language (or operating system, or processor) you use.
I done some work in LISP, and there's nothing in LISP that isn't based on the same computer science principles that are used in C++ or Java. Obviously, the way they're applied is very different, but again...a Stack is a Stack.
My graduating class was the last one to take the Pascal AP exam. When I got to college, all of the classes were taught in C++, and I started in a second year class based on the AP credit I got from the exam. I was expecting it to be very difficult, considering I had never had C++ before, and it was...for about a week. Then I realized that a Stack is a Stack and a Linked List is a Linked list and once you learn the syntax of the particular language you're working in, Computer Science is really language-neutral.
Computer Science is not about programming. It's about finding solutions to problems using computers, which is a very different thing. Moving the AP exam to Java seems like a good idea to me, but I doubt it will have any real impact on the curriculums of the schools that make the switch. The principles and concepts taught in any decent Computer Science undergrad program were just as valid and relevant 50 years ago as they are today as, they will be 50 years from now.
Copyright 2004 Exxon Mobile. All rights reserved. This material may be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
You're right, something is fishy. ExxonMobil probably wouldn't spell thier own name incorrectly.
Wow, for a brief second there, I almost considered using a Linux distribution that actually had popular, easy to use tools included with it. Thank you for pointing out that this distro has been infected with unFree-as-in-speech software, and therefore should be shunned to 7th Level of Hell along with the Sasser virus and Gator spyware.
[Ranting power...ACTIVATE!]
For all of you who don't understand this yet, let me spell it out one more time. 99% of the population doesn't give two shits what the license terms of thier software is. To these people, free-as-in-beer will always be way more important than free-as-in-speech. They don't care if it's open-source. They don't even care if RedHat says it's open-source and it's really not. They want to know two things..."Will it work?" and "How much does it cost?"
The vast majority of people (and the last time I checked, the users of RedHat's distro were people) want Java pre-installed. They want Acrobat pre-installed. They even want RealPlayer pre-installed because they just want thier computer to work and they don't want to have to spend a lot of time and money getting it to work.
RedHat knows exactly what they're doing. And they don't (and shouldn't) care if they ruffle the feathers of a few open-source zealots. One of the great things about the GPL is that you don't have to get anyone's permission to use the software...even if it means somebody does something you don't like and actually manages to make money with it.