I will apologize for the name calling, however, it's difficult for me to see how any knowledgable person can encourage a group to stay with a company that has been _convicted_ of monopolizing the software industry, lies to schools about the legality of changing the OS on their donated computers, and treats security as an afterthought -- all of which would be detrimental to a group providing a public service.
Another point I'd like to add, is that public comfort is hardly the priority in such a service. I would think comfort would take a backseat to economics, or more importantly education. I can't think of a better place to implement Linux on a large scale than as a public service where the data is not mission critical to the users, and where the users are less likely to be trained Windows users.
Figure out the difference between what you want to do and the tools you want to do it with. Rather than deciding that you want vaguely to do something with computers, figure out what you'd like the computers to help you accomplish, then figure out how other tools can help you accomplish the same goal.
Consider that the tools that will be used to accomplish those goals can and will change drastically in the next thirty years, and to assume that you want to become an expert in some specific programming platform, for example, is very shortsighted. Notice that your friend set out to be an expert in the very broad world of finance, and not a Quicken wiz.
I, personally, would like to spend the rest of my life developing tools to create a free and uncontrolled flow of information, whether that means using the existing Internet, a newer technology, or just reverting back to pidgeons. But the point is, I'm not locking myself into any set of tools to accomplish my goals, so my "career" is hopefully not going to be haphazardly controlled by bleeding edge technology, which always seems to be the thorn in the heel for programmers.
It is, I think, true to say that the intelligentsia have been more wrong about the progress of the war than the common people, and that they were more swayed by partisan feelings. The average intellectual of the Left believed, for instance, that the war was lost in 1940, that the Germans were bound to overrun Egypt in 1942, that the Japanese would never be driven out of the lands they had conquered, and that the Anglo-American bombing offensive was making no impression on Germany. He could believe these things because his hatred for the British ruling class forbade him to admit that British plans could succeed. There is no limit to the follies that can be swallowed if one is under the influence of feelings of this kind. I have heard it confidently stated, for instance, that the American troops had been brought to Europe not to fight the Germans but to crush an English revolution. One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that: no ordinary man could be such a fool. -- George Orwell
It's amazing how stupid some of the stuff the human brain comes up with when common sense is left behind in favor of over-rationalization.
a) does IT contribute to cash flow? (Over what term? 1 week, 1 month? 1 year?)
The reason I didn't answer this directly is because it's different for every company. I would suspect that for most companies, IT serves more of a "support" role, similar to the janitors. It's nice, it's somewhat necessary, but if we have to go without, we can. So, I'd guess, for most companies, IT does not contribute to cash flow, unless that is the foundation of the company, such as a software manufacturer.
That can definitely be changed, and this is how I, personally, would attempt it: I would create a product or service that was somehow linked into the products and services already provided by the company. "Value Added" services that are dependent on IT will enhance the value of IT. During hard economic times is not a good time to propose that the company fund your ideas, though, so I would eat the cost of my time to get the service rolled out in order to demonstrate that the welfare of the company matters to me, and that I believe in the product. In the short term, I'm working more hours, and not making any money, but in the longer term, I've established myself as a necessary part of the company that wants to see it succeed and expand, and I've also likely increased my personal value, as well. This is assuming the product works, of course, but there's no rule that says I can't keep trying.
b) can we actually quantify it? Does a spreadsheet show (as the CFO quite rightly demands) this effect? What is the spreadsheet effect of you having a PC? A fast Internet connection? Email once every 5 minutes rather than once a day?
As a support service, like I mentioned before, IT becomes very dispensible and if necessary, they'll figure out how to read the Outlook help files, and take out their own garbage while IT and the janitor look at help wanted ads.
As for the spreadsheet, I imagine it's much harder to crunch the numbers, when they're not in your favor. I would be brutally honest and see what the IT dept is actually providing instead of trying to see a light at the end of the tunnel if one doesn't exist. Consider that it's probably a good idea to cut down on the bandwidth, and it probably wouldn't hurt anybody to have mail checked once an hour instead of every five minutes. As the CTO, I'm sure you're more able than I am to see where IT costs can be cut at your company, but that's only if you maintain a support role instead of becoming an active and *direct* part of the bottom line that counts so much right now. If you can strip down IT to nothing by making the salesmen read a little bit and outsourcing repairs as needed, then you're doing too much internal service and not enough for the company's clients.
I hate that I'm being so vague, but the solutions are really company-specific.
If you want IT to be worth something to a company, then you'll have to do something that adds to the bottom line. That bottom line is how every decision is made during hard economic times, and without providing positive cashflow, IT is worth as much as the salesman that isn't meeting his quota.
And if somebody sends you an encrypted e-mail that is automatically decrypted by your mail client with whatever PGP implementation you happen to use, what do you suppose will happen if you FORWARD it? The recipient might actually be able to *gasp* READ IT!
Is this a problem with PGP or is it a problem with lusers?
This is going to fix things, because spammers always obey the law, right? The solution is not more laws; it's educated users and sysadmins. The last thing we need is government getting involved with technology problems.
I've been using this procmail script that works flawlessly. It's very simple and I can't remember the last time I got spam. It works much better than trying to catch spam based on headers and key words in the subject. Basically, it implements an accept list, so that only users that respond to an auto-reply will be added to the list and thereby get their message through. Simple and effective.
XUL is just a part of the whole Mozilla project. That's the beauty of it all. Now we can have a great rendering engine, Gecko, and interface with it however we want. If you don't like the XUL interface, use Skipstone, Galeon, K-Meleon, or any number of other projects in the works. Just be glad these other apps are even an option. If you're concerned that XUL doesn't work and look like a native app, then, by all means, use one of these other apps and you can still have a great, fast, secure, stable, free browser, but it sure is silly to throw the whole project away based on your opinion of one part of the project that isn't even necessary.
I've been using this procmail script for quite a while now. Basically, it implements an "accept list" as described in this OSOpinion article, whereby only people that respond to an auto-reply are added to the accept list, which means that none of the automated spam apps can get their crap through to you. I can't remember the last time I got any spam.
Netscape crumbled into a dismal failure under the Andreessen leadership, then later he went off to form another wobbly dotcom spawn. Why does anybody think this guy has a clue what is happening and is going to happen on the browser front? I'm not saying I do, but wouldn't it make more sense to discuss the browser war with somebody who has demonstrated real compentence? Is there such a person or group?
Since Mozilla has the option of a minimum font size, wouldn't it be trivial to have a preference for a maximum font size, as well? That'd be a good feature to have even if the X bug didn't exist.
Anybody using a little common sense can see that this is not an attempt to create a completely flawlessly unhackable Linux distro. This is merely good marketing for a distro with security as its focus. If Joe Sysadmin walks into a store and sees Redhat Linux, Caldera Linux, SuSE Linux and Unbreakable Linux all on a shelf side by side, which one is he going to immediately think of as secure?
This is to Linux as "light" is to cigarettes. It's not necessarily evil. It's just a marketing tactic that's proven.
Sorry to be off-topic, but are you really naive enough to think that banning soft money will actually prevent politicians from being bought using other methods?
The only way you're going to make money less of an issue is if it becomes a non-issue. What we need is GNU Government, where everybody participates because they want to see high quality, and not because there is a financial incentive. Sure it's a pipe-dream to expect that this would actually be implementable, but, I guess people were saying that about GNU software 10 years ago.
This is the one thing that really irritates me about SuSE. I love it otherwise. Strange thing is, SuSE ranked very well according to this Linux Standards Base test. I don't know related it is, but it's being touted as SuSE's commitment to standards. I would guess that the system configuration is related to the way YAST is set up.
My former ISP cached on specific URLs. So, the most popular exact URLs were the ones being updated the most often, and those that didn't get much traffic usually lagged by up to two weeks in updates. The way I found to get around this was by tagging on a query string to whatever URL I was trying to access.
Something like http://www.slashdot.org/?123 or http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/03/22/194823 6&mode=thread&tid=95&123
would easily break the cache, and I could guarantee that I was seeing the most up-to-date information. I always thought it'd be nice to have this type of URL re-writing feature incorporated into a Squid.
This is obviously only a short term solution. I wouldn't want to have to modify URLs for the rest of my life.
I you really want/have to use Netscape6 instead of Mozilla, you can always copy the searchplugins directory from Mozilla. These go directly to the sites, and work fine.
The latest marketing gimmick that seems to be catching on is selling products by providing you with a trusted, informed, and seemingly unbiased opinion. Can you really trust the biggest competitors' opinions of anything? Sure, they may have valid points, but what are they *not* pointing out? IBM probably has just as many reasons as to why Sun's implementation is clunky, illogical, etc., but it really doesn't matter. What matters is if the tools meet the specifications that you, the consumer need. Maybe we can hurry and give this type of marketing a bad label so the suits can move on with their next gimmick.
Slashdot Mirror
I will apologize for the name calling, however, it's difficult for me to see how any knowledgable person can encourage a group to stay with a company that has been _convicted_ of monopolizing the software industry, lies to schools about the legality of changing the OS on their donated computers, and treats security as an afterthought -- all of which would be detrimental to a group providing a public service.
Another point I'd like to add, is that public comfort is hardly the priority in such a service. I would think comfort would take a backseat to economics, or more importantly education. I can't think of a better place to implement Linux on a large scale than as a public service where the data is not mission critical to the users, and where the users are less likely to be trained Windows users.
It's been so long since I did this, I forgot about JonKatz.
Do you not read the myriad horror stories posted on here about Microsoft extorting schools and other public organizations for expensive license fees?
Is the troll well fed, now?
The "stuff" is called Peek-A-Booty.
What about the "older folks" that still don't have a clue what they want to do with their lives? :)
Figure out the difference between what you want to do and the tools you want to do it with. Rather than deciding that you want vaguely to do something with computers, figure out what you'd like the computers to help you accomplish, then figure out how other tools can help you accomplish the same goal.
Consider that the tools that will be used to accomplish those goals can and will change drastically in the next thirty years, and to assume that you want to become an expert in some specific programming platform, for example, is very shortsighted. Notice that your friend set out to be an expert in the very broad world of finance, and not a Quicken wiz.
I, personally, would like to spend the rest of my life developing tools to create a free and uncontrolled flow of information, whether that means using the existing Internet, a newer technology, or just reverting back to pidgeons. But the point is, I'm not locking myself into any set of tools to accomplish my goals, so my "career" is hopefully not going to be haphazardly controlled by bleeding edge technology, which always seems to be the thorn in the heel for programmers.
It's amazing how stupid some of the stuff the human brain comes up with when common sense is left behind in favor of over-rationalization.
a) does IT contribute to cash flow? (Over what term? 1 week, 1 month? 1 year?)
The reason I didn't answer this directly is because it's different for every company. I would suspect that for most companies, IT serves more of a "support" role, similar to the janitors. It's nice, it's somewhat necessary, but if we have to go without, we can. So, I'd guess, for most companies, IT does not contribute to cash flow, unless that is the foundation of the company, such as a software manufacturer.
That can definitely be changed, and this is how I, personally, would attempt it:
I would create a product or service that was somehow linked into the products and services already provided by the company. "Value Added" services that are dependent on IT will enhance the value of IT. During hard economic times is not a good time to propose that the company fund your ideas, though, so I would eat the cost of my time to get the service rolled out in order to demonstrate that the welfare of the company matters to me, and that I believe in the product. In the short term, I'm working more hours, and not making any money, but in the longer term, I've established myself as a necessary part of the company that wants to see it succeed and expand, and I've also likely increased my personal value, as well. This is assuming the product works, of course, but there's no rule that says I can't keep trying.
b) can we actually quantify it? Does a spreadsheet show (as the CFO quite rightly demands) this effect? What is the spreadsheet effect of you having a PC? A fast Internet connection? Email once every 5 minutes rather than once a day?
As a support service, like I mentioned before, IT becomes very dispensible and if necessary, they'll figure out how to read the Outlook help files, and take out their own garbage while IT and the janitor look at help wanted ads.
As for the spreadsheet, I imagine it's much harder to crunch the numbers, when they're not in your favor. I would be brutally honest and see what the IT dept is actually providing instead of trying to see a light at the end of the tunnel if one doesn't exist. Consider that it's probably a good idea to cut down on the bandwidth, and it probably wouldn't hurt anybody to have mail checked once an hour instead of every five minutes. As the CTO, I'm sure you're more able than I am to see where IT costs can be cut at your company, but that's only if you maintain a support role instead of becoming an active and *direct* part of the bottom line that counts so much right now. If you can strip down IT to nothing by making the salesmen read a little bit and outsourcing repairs as needed, then you're doing too much internal service and not enough for the company's clients.
I hate that I'm being so vague, but the solutions are really company-specific.
If you want IT to be worth something to a company, then you'll have to do something that adds to the bottom line. That bottom line is how every decision is made during hard economic times, and without providing positive cashflow, IT is worth as much as the salesman that isn't meeting his quota.
And if somebody sends you an encrypted e-mail that is automatically decrypted by your mail client with whatever PGP implementation you happen to use, what do you suppose will happen if you FORWARD it? The recipient might actually be able to *gasp* READ IT!
Is this a problem with PGP or is it a problem with lusers?
This is going to fix things, because spammers always obey the law, right? The solution is not more laws; it's educated users and sysadmins. The last thing we need is government getting involved with technology problems.
In Windows XP, it's called the Automatic Update "feature".
I've been using this procmail script that works flawlessly. It's very simple and I can't remember the last time I got spam. It works much better than trying to catch spam based on headers and key words in the subject. Basically, it implements an accept list, so that only users that respond to an auto-reply will be added to the list and thereby get their message through. Simple and effective.
XUL is just a part of the whole Mozilla project. That's the beauty of it all. Now we can have a great rendering engine, Gecko, and interface with it however we want. If you don't like the XUL interface, use Skipstone, Galeon, K-Meleon, or any number of other projects in the works. Just be glad these other apps are even an option. If you're concerned that XUL doesn't work and look like a native app, then, by all means, use one of these other apps and you can still have a great, fast, secure, stable, free browser, but it sure is silly to throw the whole project away based on your opinion of one part of the project that isn't even necessary.
"Weave this bad boy into a full body suit..."
TELETUBBIES!
I've been using this procmail script for quite a while now. Basically, it implements an "accept list" as described in this OSOpinion article, whereby only people that respond to an auto-reply are added to the accept list, which means that none of the automated spam apps can get their crap through to you. I can't remember the last time I got any spam.
Netscape crumbled into a dismal failure under the Andreessen leadership, then later he went off to form another wobbly dotcom spawn. Why does anybody think this guy has a clue what is happening and is going to happen on the browser front? I'm not saying I do, but wouldn't it make more sense to discuss the browser war with somebody who has demonstrated real compentence? Is there such a person or group?
Since Mozilla has the option of a minimum font size, wouldn't it be trivial to have a preference for a maximum font size, as well? That'd be a good feature to have even if the X bug didn't exist.
Anybody using a little common sense can see that this is not an attempt to create a completely flawlessly unhackable Linux distro. This is merely good marketing for a distro with security as its focus. If Joe Sysadmin walks into a store and sees Redhat Linux, Caldera Linux, SuSE Linux and Unbreakable Linux all on a shelf side by side, which one is he going to immediately think of as secure?
This is to Linux as "light" is to cigarettes. It's not necessarily evil. It's just a marketing tactic that's proven.
"Of course, the ban on soft money should help..."
Sorry to be off-topic, but are you really naive enough to think that banning soft money will actually prevent politicians from being bought using other methods?
The only way you're going to make money less of an issue is if it becomes a non-issue. What we need is GNU Government, where everybody participates because they want to see high quality, and not because there is a financial incentive. Sure it's a pipe-dream to expect that this would actually be implementable, but, I guess people were saying that about GNU software 10 years ago.
This is the one thing that really irritates me about SuSE. I love it otherwise. Strange thing is, SuSE ranked very well according to this Linux Standards Base test. I don't know related it is, but it's being touted as SuSE's commitment to standards. I would guess that the system configuration is related to the way YAST is set up.
My former ISP cached on specific URLs. So, the most popular exact URLs were the ones being updated the most often, and those that didn't get much traffic usually lagged by up to two weeks in updates. The way I found to get around this was by tagging on a query string to whatever URL I was trying to access.
3 6&mode=thread&tid=95&123
would easily break the cache, and I could guarantee that I was seeing the most up-to-date information. I always thought it'd be nice to have this type of URL re-writing feature incorporated into a Squid.
This is obviously only a short term solution. I wouldn't want to have to modify URLs for the rest of my life.
Something like http://www.slashdot.org/?123 or http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/03/22/19482
I you really want/have to use Netscape6 instead of Mozilla, you can always copy the searchplugins directory from Mozilla. These go directly to the sites, and work fine.
The latest marketing gimmick that seems to be catching on is selling products by providing you with a trusted, informed, and seemingly unbiased opinion. Can you really trust the biggest competitors' opinions of anything? Sure, they may have valid points, but what are they *not* pointing out? IBM probably has just as many reasons as to why Sun's implementation is clunky, illogical, etc., but it really doesn't matter. What matters is if the tools meet the specifications that you, the consumer need. Maybe we can hurry and give this type of marketing a bad label so the suits can move on with their next gimmick.
Version X = "We didn't get it right the last X-1 times."
There are gonna be a lot of Windows versions.