Is it just me, or does Balmer sound like a desperate lawyer who collects every single possible argument he's heard for Microsoft, and then regurgitates them all at once?
Meanwhile skepticism reigns.
If NASA trusts it, is very interested in it, and uses it...then I think it's safe to say they did their homework. If an annoying know-it-all slashdotter comes along and thinks he or she can spend 10 minutes on the subject, and know more than both NASA and the person who researched this for 20 years, then I ignore them.
Another slashdot attitude of "I know it all, the professional who researched this for 20 years knows nothing" attitude strikes again!
The Hawthorne study is so tainted with problems it's hard to set up a study any worse. On the other hand, the researcher, who the statistical geniuses of NASA consult, set up a correct study. The problem with the Hawthorne study is that they had little to really compare against. They were only comparing two groups, and measuring if productivity went up, and not by what percentage.
An article like "color me productive" that doesn't mention the Hawthorne effect and explain why they don't think this is just more of the same... is garbage.
No, you're comparing apples and oranges.
The researcher did it very differently. Better setup, many more groups, and accurate measurement of productivity changes. This allows for effective comparison. The researcher can validly ask things like "How much more did red groups work than blue, green, yellow, and purple groups?"
Furthermore, any study that doesn't compare the relative effects of: spending money on painting the walls red; spending the same money on alternative improvements (bigger cubicles, better chairs, quieter rooms, better lighting); spending the same money on raises... is garbage.
What? You're just a cynical thinks-they-know-it-all.
This survey is very useful and desired, (unless you think the NASA folks are idiots). This study's stated goal was to see how colors effect productivity. Your stated goal for a study is also valid, but completely different...you want combine monetary costs and see what is most effective for real world business application.
The extension works pretty well for Firefox and Thunderbird, and if/when Sunbird allows extensions, it will be extended to work with that too. This of course means Sunbird/Calendar would always be running, able to send out alarms, but not taking up lots of room on the taskbar. At the moment, the minimize to tray extension is only for Windows, and it's not a perfect fix, but it may help out some people who just want any solution for this issue.
I plugged an 18 volt AC adapter into 6 volt computer speakers. They made a really high pitched sound before they popped and spewed lots and lots of acidy smoke.
We later found the correct AC adapter, plugged them back in, and to our surprise, both speakers worked just fine. It makes you wonder what useless part broke in the speakers, and why that part was in there to begin with.
I took one look at that headline, and said to myself...
"That has to be michael who posted it."
Once again, I was right. Michael really needs to be fired. Oh ya, and michael, I no longer have mod points (despite excellent karma), and you've modded down my comments to -1, but I can still meta mod. You should take that away from me too.
And I'm also disgusted by the constant Mormon bashing that takes place anytime a Mormon tries to do anything, no matter how unrelated. Senator Hatch is acting for Senator Hatch's interests here...religion has nothing to do with this.
I fully agreed with most of his article, right up until the end. He kept mentioning how breaking compatibility over and over again will cause.NET, Longhorn, Avalon, etc., to not be adopted (or if it is, not for many many years). Because of this, developers will be confused what to do. He then offers this alternative. As he said
Which means, suddenly, Microsoft's API doesn't matter so much. Web applications don't require Windows....and so we should make html the new API.
Web applications? Sure...but how about Java?
I would assume that when Longhorn is released with all its new changes, that Sun will still find a way to make Java applications run on it. If that's the case, why make such a fuss about Web applications when you could also develop in Java, and then not worry about what changes Microsoft makes?
As a VB 6.0 developer, I'd love to jump to.NET, but the major hold back is all of our Windows 98 customers. I don't want to force them to install the.NET runtime for win98, have their machine crash, and have them blame me. I just want to write an application, and know it will still work 5 or 10 years down the road, regardless of if our customers are still running the old win 98, or the new Longhorn. The author suggests the web, but Java sounds like a better alternative to me.
If books were like the spacial nautilus, every time you'd turn the page on your book, another book would suddenly appear. And if you wanted to go back and catch what you may have forgotten, you'd suddenly have twenty or thirty copies of the same book sitting in front of you.
I second this. The author of this article showed his stupidity in two glaringly obvious ways.
First, he still has some obnoxious ego problem. It's not "I'm smarter than you, neener neener!", but it's still "I don't mean to bother you, but I'm smarter than you." This is not a smart way of dealing with other people.
Second, people who are smart, yet do nothing with it, are also stupid. He derides school, yet obviously did not give his studies his full attention. If an assignment was mundance, did he try to spend his free time going above and beyond in learning more about the topic? It doesn't sound like it, he is too lazy and arrogant to believe should learn more. The world looks down on people who have talents and refuse to use them.
And as parent article explained, why not move onto other challenges in life? If he is so bright, can he go into a room full of people and carry on conversations with all of them? Being an amazing person requires far more than IQ. I'd honestly like to see if his maturity, common sense, people skills, and personal happiness are on par with his brightness. Somehow, I doubt they are. If the author feels he so amazing, then why doesn't he tackle some of life's other great challenges?
Heh, I don't hate the author at all, he just needs to realize he isn't nearly as smart as he thinks he is. And as soon as he realizes this, his questions of "How do I deal with being so great" will be replaced with "So many people can do things in life I can't. How can work harder at becoming like they are?"
I got the impression from Slashdot's interpretation of USA Today's rant that these people are getting implants against their will because they're drunk. Or that they don't want the implants, but they get them because they are drunk.
Then when I read the article, I found out volunteers willingly accepted them.
Gotta love Slashdot articles that throw in completely unwarranted, biased statements like "patrons are getting drunk and...", even though the article says nothing of the sort.
This would help Slashdot. How many times has Slashdot censored comments in threads that they didn't like? It's ironic that michael accepted this story, since he's the worst at twisting stories to fit his bias and modding down entire threads to -1.
I've never liked any "best state" surveys. It's all subjectively based upon whatever critera the company decided makes a "best state".
For example, per capita income is a criteria. That's a horrible measurement. States like California have high costs of living, and so they generally have higher per capita income to make up for how expensive it is to live there. California isn't "richer", it just costs more to live there. But that isn't factored in. Also, per capita income is horrible in that it counts the total state population, including chilren. States with lots of children appear to be poorer, since the average income will be lower, and states will few children (like Massachusets), will appear to have higher per capita income.
It's the same with any "best state" survey. My home state one year ranked #1 for livibility. Then people complained that we can't be number #1...so next year, the survey gave negative points to states that have lots of snow in the winter. Knocked us from #1 to about #9.
Other surveys like the "smartest state" lists don't really check if the state is performing well on tests and graduation rates, but rather, if the government is subsidizing and funding lots of education programs. That doesn't measure if a state is smart or not, it only measures if a government is funding it more.
Overall, these surveys can't be trusted until you know exactly what they're measuring.
Aaah, another michael article, another anti-right wing rant. Why am I not surprised? Michael has no objectivity whatsoever. His opinions are based almost solely on the liberal fad of the year. If he read a headline with blanks....
__________________ wants broadband for every home in America.
He'd naturally support it, because it was a good technology cause. If the blanks said "Kerry", we'd hear a flowerly article praising him. But when the blank says "Bush", he's mocks the idea.
This is pretty much how it works. I was listening to the Utah House Legistlative session online (listening for the UTOPIA bill) when I first heard about this anti-spyware bill. I can confirm that many bills are written and submitted by companies with the sole intention of trying to protect their interests and block out competition.
The problem is, there were hundreds of bills that needed to be debated, and so each individual bill gets little debate time. When a technology bill comes up, the attitude they all have is "Well...I really don't know what it means. However, I have to vote on it. If nobody else raises any serious objections, I'll assume its a good bill." This bill didn't have any serious objections, and so it was quickly passed.
On a side note, the anti-UTOPIA bill was written almost solely by Qwest to kill the fiber optic plan. The bill survived the first few legal hurdles before some representatives started to actively question the bill and how it was designed by Qwest solely to kill competition. Then representatives drastically amended the bill for the better.
Ya, the question did sound quite right. What I really meant was:
Why did they give us a definite number of 60, but say it exceeds it? Is there a legal rule saying after 60 you just say 60? If so, why is this legal cutoff at 60, and not say, 50? Or 70?
Slashdot Mirror
js7a, you use statistics like a drunk uses lamposts. For support rather than illumination.
Is it just me, or does Balmer sound like a desperate lawyer who collects every single possible argument he's heard for Microsoft, and then regurgitates them all at once?
Meanwhile skepticism reigns. If NASA trusts it, is very interested in it, and uses it...then I think it's safe to say they did their homework. If an annoying know-it-all slashdotter comes along and thinks he or she can spend 10 minutes on the subject, and know more than both NASA and the person who researched this for 20 years, then I ignore them.
For the english version of the optical illusion page, click here: http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/~akitaoka/index-e.html
The Hawthorne study is so tainted with problems it's hard to set up a study any worse. On the other hand, the researcher, who the statistical geniuses of NASA consult, set up a correct study. The problem with the Hawthorne study is that they had little to really compare against. They were only comparing two groups, and measuring if productivity went up, and not by what percentage.
An article like "color me productive" that doesn't mention the Hawthorne effect and explain why they don't think this is just more of the same... is garbage.
No, you're comparing apples and oranges.
The researcher did it very differently. Better setup, many more groups, and accurate measurement of productivity changes. This allows for effective comparison. The researcher can validly ask things like "How much more did red groups work than blue, green, yellow, and purple groups?"
Furthermore, any study that doesn't compare the relative effects of: spending money on painting the walls red; spending the same money on alternative improvements (bigger cubicles, better chairs, quieter rooms, better lighting); spending the same money on raises... is garbage.
What? You're just a cynical thinks-they-know-it-all.
This survey is very useful and desired, (unless you think the NASA folks are idiots). This study's stated goal was to see how colors effect productivity. Your stated goal for a study is also valid, but completely different...you want combine monetary costs and see what is most effective for real world business application.
http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/~akitaoka/rotsnake.gif.
Or, if productivity doesn't increase, the employees will end up killing themselves, thus saving the boss the effort of having to fire him.
Or as this person pointed out in this comment, there's a windows application that hides Sunbird into the tray when Sunbird's minimized.
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=1046 70&postdays=0&postorder=asc&postsperpage=15&start= 0
A minimize to tray extension is in the works that would help this problem out to a degree.
Minimize To Tray Extension
The extension works pretty well for Firefox and Thunderbird, and if/when Sunbird allows extensions, it will be extended to work with that too. This of course means Sunbird/Calendar would always be running, able to send out alarms, but not taking up lots of room on the taskbar. At the moment, the minimize to tray extension is only for Windows, and it's not a perfect fix, but it may help out some people who just want any solution for this issue.
I plugged an 18 volt AC adapter into 6 volt computer speakers. They made a really high pitched sound before they popped and spewed lots and lots of acidy smoke.
We later found the correct AC adapter, plugged them back in, and to our surprise, both speakers worked just fine. It makes you wonder what useless part broke in the speakers, and why that part was in there to begin with.
I took one look at that headline, and said to myself...
"That has to be michael who posted it."
Once again, I was right. Michael really needs to be fired. Oh ya, and michael, I no longer have mod points (despite excellent karma), and you've modded down my comments to -1, but I can still meta mod. You should take that away from me too.
Slashdot editor Pudge mentioned he uses a robotic mower in a recent journal entry. If you're too lazy to read it, the link to the mower is here http://www.robomower.com/robomo.htm.
I am Mormon, and I am disgusted by this bill.
And I'm also disgusted by the constant Mormon bashing that takes place anytime a Mormon tries to do anything, no matter how unrelated. Senator Hatch is acting for Senator Hatch's interests here...religion has nothing to do with this.
I fully agreed with most of his article, right up until the end. He kept mentioning how breaking compatibility over and over again will cause .NET, Longhorn, Avalon, etc., to not be adopted (or if it is, not for many many years). Because of this, developers will be confused what to do. He then offers this alternative. As he said
.NET, but the major hold back is all of our Windows 98 customers. I don't want to force them to install the .NET runtime for win98, have their machine crash, and have them blame me. I just want to write an application, and know it will still work 5 or 10 years down the road, regardless of if our customers are still running the old win 98, or the new Longhorn. The author suggests the web, but Java sounds like a better alternative to me.
Which means, suddenly, Microsoft's API doesn't matter so much. Web applications don't require Windows....and so we should make html the new API.
Web applications? Sure...but how about Java?
I would assume that when Longhorn is released with all its new changes, that Sun will still find a way to make Java applications run on it. If that's the case, why make such a fuss about Web applications when you could also develop in Java, and then not worry about what changes Microsoft makes?
As a VB 6.0 developer, I'd love to jump to
He didn't end the book analogy...
If books were like the spacial nautilus, every time you'd turn the page on your book, another book would suddenly appear. And if you wanted to go back and catch what you may have forgotten, you'd suddenly have twenty or thirty copies of the same book sitting in front of you.
Is this what he wanted?
I second this. The author of this article showed his stupidity in two glaringly obvious ways.
First, he still has some obnoxious ego problem. It's not "I'm smarter than you, neener neener!", but it's still "I don't mean to bother you, but I'm smarter than you." This is not a smart way of dealing with other people.
Second, people who are smart, yet do nothing with it, are also stupid. He derides school, yet obviously did not give his studies his full attention. If an assignment was mundance, did he try to spend his free time going above and beyond in learning more about the topic? It doesn't sound like it, he is too lazy and arrogant to believe should learn more. The world looks down on people who have talents and refuse to use them.
And as parent article explained, why not move onto other challenges in life? If he is so bright, can he go into a room full of people and carry on conversations with all of them? Being an amazing person requires far more than IQ. I'd honestly like to see if his maturity, common sense, people skills, and personal happiness are on par with his brightness. Somehow, I doubt they are. If the author feels he so amazing, then why doesn't he tackle some of life's other great challenges?
Heh, I don't hate the author at all, he just needs to realize he isn't nearly as smart as he thinks he is. And as soon as he realizes this, his questions of "How do I deal with being so great" will be replaced with "So many people can do things in life I can't. How can work harder at becoming like they are?"
I got the impression from Slashdot's interpretation of USA Today's rant that these people are getting implants against their will because they're drunk. Or that they don't want the implants, but they get them because they are drunk.
Then when I read the article, I found out volunteers willingly accepted them.
Gotta love Slashdot articles that throw in completely unwarranted, biased statements like "patrons are getting drunk and...", even though the article says nothing of the sort.
This would help Slashdot. How many times has Slashdot censored comments in threads that they didn't like? It's ironic that michael accepted this story, since he's the worst at twisting stories to fit his bias and modding down entire threads to -1.
I've never liked any "best state" surveys. It's all subjectively based upon whatever critera the company decided makes a "best state".
For example, per capita income is a criteria. That's a horrible measurement. States like California have high costs of living, and so they generally have higher per capita income to make up for how expensive it is to live there. California isn't "richer", it just costs more to live there. But that isn't factored in. Also, per capita income is horrible in that it counts the total state population, including chilren. States with lots of children appear to be poorer, since the average income will be lower, and states will few children (like Massachusets), will appear to have higher per capita income.
It's the same with any "best state" survey. My home state one year ranked #1 for livibility. Then people complained that we can't be number #1...so next year, the survey gave negative points to states that have lots of snow in the winter. Knocked us from #1 to about #9.
Other surveys like the "smartest state" lists don't really check if the state is performing well on tests and graduation rates, but rather, if the government is subsidizing and funding lots of education programs. That doesn't measure if a state is smart or not, it only measures if a government is funding it more.
Overall, these surveys can't be trusted until you know exactly what they're measuring.
Aaah, another michael article, another anti-right wing rant. Why am I not surprised? Michael has no objectivity whatsoever. His opinions are based almost solely on the liberal fad of the year. If he read a headline with blanks....
__________________ wants broadband for every home in America.
He'd naturally support it, because it was a good technology cause. If the blanks said "Kerry", we'd hear a flowerly article praising him. But when the blank says "Bush", he's mocks the idea.
Michael, grow up.
It's stories like this that helped inspire my sig
This is pretty much how it works. I was listening to the Utah House Legistlative session online (listening for the UTOPIA bill) when I first heard about this anti-spyware bill. I can confirm that many bills are written and submitted by companies with the sole intention of trying to protect their interests and block out competition.
The problem is, there were hundreds of bills that needed to be debated, and so each individual bill gets little debate time. When a technology bill comes up, the attitude they all have is "Well...I really don't know what it means. However, I have to vote on it. If nobody else raises any serious objections, I'll assume its a good bill." This bill didn't have any serious objections, and so it was quickly passed.
On a side note, the anti-UTOPIA bill was written almost solely by Qwest to kill the fiber optic plan. The bill survived the first few legal hurdles before some representatives started to actively question the bill and how it was designed by Qwest solely to kill competition. Then representatives drastically amended the bill for the better.
Don't forget Utopia, the plan to hook up fiber optic cable to hundreds of thousands of Utah homes. http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/18/083344. php.
Some people wonder why we hate slashdot so much.
This article is a prime example
Ya, the question did sound quite right. What I really meant was:
Why did they give us a definite number of 60, but say it exceeds it? Is there a legal rule saying after 60 you just say 60? If so, why is this legal cutoff at 60, and not say, 50? Or 70?