"None of the Microsoft people I met had anything to say about their deal with Novell, working with the Open Document Format (ODF), acceptance of the GNU General Public License (GPL) as a legitimate software license, how DRM built into Vista may anger users, or other topics I thought might interest you."
More to the point: If you expect anything informative or meaningful from this article, don't. Here's the summary of gaming on Vista (I only wish the other observations had been so contrite--would have saved me from wasting my time):
Games on Vista
I tuned out the game-related stuff. I'm not a computer gamer. I figure I already spend more time staring at a monitor for work purposes than is healthy for me. I don't need to become a game addict and spend even more hours in front of a computer or game console. But for those interested in computer games, I'm sure Vista is wonderful. I'm sure XBox is great, too. A Microsoft person said so.
But it's much tougher--if not downright impossible--to remotely improve that network.
Organizations who are interested in outsourcing are also generally interested in growing their business; and when they grow, so does their infrastructure, including their networks, both in size and complexity. Expanding a network involves a tremendous number of physical resources and processes, including obtaining and installing cable, routers, servers, software, etc. Trust me, you want to have a knowledgeable network staff *on-site* to coordinate such a movement. I suppose that someone across the ocean could simply call up contractors to install all of this stuff, but the cost in time and efficiency, especially during the troubleshooting phase, would be enormous.
If your company wishes to maintain a stagnant network--one that can't adapt to the growth of their company; then by all means, outsource all your network management. Just hope your hardware never breaks.
Under what system of morality is copyright infringement worse than drugging somebody and raping them?
Well, any system that relies on money to maintain influence and power. Date rape, I fear, doesn't impact on corporate profits (and hence, it doesn't impact the politicians that the corporations support).
That's just me being cynical, of course. It's more than just money. After all, murderers certainly pay their due with life sentences and capital punishment, and murderers generally don't cause a decrease in sales revenue (unless your Arthur Miller).
The article boils down to: XSL (FO) is harder to use than CSS, so CSS r0xx0r5!
Actually, the article boils down to: CSS is easier to use by those who must lay out both the electronic and printed page, so CSS r0xx0r5.
This is very true since those who spend time designing and laying out readable pages are generally NOT programmers and may not have the desire or aptitude to decipher/code hundreds of lines of XSL prose.
Basically, it's a matter of using the right tool for the right job. The article fully admits that XSL is much more powerful than CSS and can certainly overcome CSS's deficiencies, but the overall simplicity of CSS might be more suitable for this particular job.
In a way it is strange how much information is searchable... and how the action of searching the web has taken over. Back when younger we were supposed to LEARN the history...:)
Yes, but information retrieval is a necessary means to learning. Think of it this way: Back in the day,
(1) I probably never would have learned about this quiz because it's an esoteric test found in England.
(2) Even if I *had* learned about it, I never would have bothered to learn about the answers because it would have been too time-consuming to research.
Two of the main reasons I search through Google and read Slashdot is to learn. Praise be to the power of the Internet!
Very enlightening to see how much farther the video game industry needs to climb before the average "Joe" recognizes the industry as he does Hollywood. But the overall point of these comparisons is that the game industry is still in its fledgling years (having been around for 20+ years), and it's not going to stop growing. It's an entertainment revolution in the making, one worth investing some time and money in.
I've been conversing with a variety of successful tech entrepeneurs lately, and I'm still amazed at *their* amazement when I point out the current revenues for video games. It's as if a whole flood of capital has passed by without notice. And one of the major reasons, I believe, is that they simply dismiss this genre of games like one might dismiss a child's idea. But even children grow up.
Alleged "zero-day viruses and affinity worms" will sunder business records, as reported in Network World Fusion and credited to a Schmidt speech at an Information Systems Audit and Control Association (ISACA) conference. Brokerage house trading records will be scrambled, corporate networks rendered molten, CEOs humiliated.
There will be a disaster! Investor panic! A slump in the DOW!
Oh, wait...
Just replace "zero-day viruses and affinity worms" with "zero earnings and an affinity to cook the books" and that paragraph pretty much sums up Wall Street right now.
While it's nice that more people in the public eye are speaking out against copy protection, it's not bound to help much.
I disagree with this. Currently, it seems that only a few folk are really aware of what is being threatened. Once the rest of the public realizes that they are being affected by these idiotic measures, then they'll speak up. Especially when they buy a CD that won't work.
Money makes the world go round, as long as the RIAA and MPAA see money "lost" that could be theirs, they're not gonna stop
True, but having more folk who know about the scam means that more will be royally pissed about it. Hopefully, this will one day be the majority of customers. And even the MPAA/RIAA/Congressmen know that a majority of pissed off customers generally equates with a loss of money;)
The article paints an interesting and informative picture of the publishing industry for us wannabe authors, but did anyone else note that it's over two years-old (posted Feb 3, 2000)?
Are there any agents or published authors out there who can update us? Do the facts and figures in this article still hold true today? Based on the comments that I have read so far, it seems that the article still stands, but I could be wrong...
I am not in favor of this settlement by any means, but...
(1) Department of Justice is arguing in favour of the proposed settlement, because the government's case was too weak to impose additional penalties on Microsoft.
Of course the DOJ is "arguing in favor" of their own settlement. They helped draft it, for goodness sake, and now they must defend it before the judge who will either accept or reject the deal.
(2) Somehow this seems like a very odd thing to me, effectively the prosecution is pleading on the part of the defendant..."
I believe this comment could be applied to many court settlements. After all, a settlement is generally when the two parties make concessions with one another. But let's be fair: This is indicative of the US judicial system, not just the Microsoft trial.
In any case, based on the AP article, the settlement has yet to be sanctioned by the judge, and indeed, she is making certain that the DOJ is thoroughly explaining why they *did* settle.
And let's not forget that AOL is taking legal action against MS. Even if this horrible settlement goes through, MS's battle is far from over. Just a shame it has reached this point...
Let's try to shed a *little* insight next time...
on
Movie Review: John Q
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
First, for those who want a real review, try this page.
I will give Jon credit where credit is due: His overall description of the movie, though poorly written, isn't too far off the mark. But as usual, there's some important information left out. For example, one of the reasons that the director became involved in the movie is because his own child was on a donated organ recipient list. An important tidbit when trying to understand why the movie may be the way it is. Background research never hurt anyone, Jon. If you're gonna use Slashdot's bandwidth to review a movie, at least try to make it somewhat insightful.
Speaking of which, why is this review even included on Slashdot? What is the "geekiness" factor of this movie?
John Q is contemporary Hollywood's idea of an issue movie: preachiness hiding behind a superstar.
*sigh*
Better read as "Jon Katz is Slashdot's idea of a columnist: preachiness hiding behind a Net celebrity."
Slashdot Mirror
"None of the Microsoft people I met had anything to say about their deal with Novell, working with the Open Document Format (ODF), acceptance of the GNU General Public License (GPL) as a legitimate software license, how DRM built into Vista may anger users, or other topics I thought might interest you."
More to the point: If you expect anything informative or meaningful from this article, don't. Here's the summary of gaming on Vista (I only wish the other observations had been so contrite--would have saved me from wasting my time):
Games on Vista
I tuned out the game-related stuff. I'm not a computer gamer. I figure I already spend more time staring at a monitor for work purposes than is healthy for me. I don't need to become a game addict and spend even more hours in front of a computer or game console. But for those interested in computer games, I'm sure Vista is wonderful. I'm sure XBox is great, too. A Microsoft person said so.
But it's much tougher--if not downright impossible--to remotely improve that network.
Organizations who are interested in outsourcing are also generally interested in growing their business; and when they grow, so does their infrastructure, including their networks, both in size and complexity. Expanding a network involves a tremendous number of physical resources and processes, including obtaining and installing cable, routers, servers, software, etc. Trust me, you want to have a knowledgeable network staff *on-site* to coordinate such a movement. I suppose that someone across the ocean could simply call up contractors to install all of this stuff, but the cost in time and efficiency, especially during the troubleshooting phase, would be enormous.
If your company wishes to maintain a stagnant network--one that can't adapt to the growth of their company; then by all means, outsource all your network management. Just hope your hardware never breaks.
Well, any system that relies on money to maintain influence and power. Date rape, I fear, doesn't impact on corporate profits (and hence, it doesn't impact the politicians that the corporations support).
That's just me being cynical, of course. It's more than just money. After all, murderers certainly pay their due with life sentences and capital punishment, and murderers generally don't cause a decrease in sales revenue (unless your Arthur Miller).
The article boils down to: XSL (FO) is harder to use than CSS, so CSS r0xx0r5!
Actually, the article boils down to: CSS is easier to use by those who must lay out both the electronic and printed page, so CSS r0xx0r5.
This is very true since those who spend time designing and laying out readable pages are generally NOT programmers and may not have the desire or aptitude to decipher/code hundreds of lines of XSL prose.
Basically, it's a matter of using the right tool for the right job. The article fully admits that XSL is much more powerful than CSS and can certainly overcome CSS's deficiencies, but the overall simplicity of CSS might be more suitable for this particular job.
In a way it is strange how much information is searchable... and how the action of searching the web has taken over. Back when younger we were supposed to LEARN the history...:)
Yes, but information retrieval is a necessary means to learning. Think of it this way: Back in the day,
(1) I probably never would have learned about this quiz because it's an esoteric test found in England.
(2) Even if I *had* learned about it, I never would have bothered to learn about the answers because it would have been too time-consuming to research.
Two of the main reasons I search through Google and read Slashdot is to learn. Praise be to the power of the Internet!
Very enlightening to see how much farther the video game industry needs to climb before the average "Joe" recognizes the industry as he does Hollywood. But the overall point of these comparisons is that the game industry is still in its fledgling years (having been around for 20+ years), and it's not going to stop growing. It's an entertainment revolution in the making, one worth investing some time and money in.
I've been conversing with a variety of successful tech entrepeneurs lately, and I'm still amazed at *their* amazement when I point out the current revenues for video games. It's as if a whole flood of capital has passed by without notice. And one of the major reasons, I believe, is that they simply dismiss this genre of games like one might dismiss a child's idea. But even children grow up.
Alleged "zero-day viruses and affinity worms" will sunder business records, as reported in Network World Fusion and credited to a Schmidt speech at an Information Systems Audit and Control Association (ISACA) conference. Brokerage house trading records will be scrambled, corporate networks rendered molten, CEOs humiliated.
There will be a disaster! Investor panic! A slump in the DOW!
Oh, wait...
Just replace "zero-day viruses and affinity worms" with "zero earnings and an affinity to cook the books" and that paragraph pretty much sums up Wall Street right now.
While it's nice that more people in the public eye are speaking out against copy protection, it's not bound to help much.
I disagree with this. Currently, it seems that only a few folk are really aware of what is being threatened. Once the rest of the public realizes that they are being affected by these idiotic measures, then they'll speak up. Especially when they buy a CD that won't work.
Money makes the world go round, as long as the RIAA and MPAA see money "lost" that could be theirs, they're not gonna stop
True, but having more folk who know about the scam means that more will be royally pissed about it. Hopefully, this will one day be the majority of customers. And even the MPAA/RIAA/Congressmen know that a majority of pissed off customers generally equates with a loss of money ;)
The article paints an interesting and informative picture of the publishing industry for us wannabe authors, but did anyone else note that it's over two years-old (posted Feb 3, 2000)?
Are there any agents or published authors out there who can update us? Do the facts and figures in this article still hold true today? Based on the comments that I have read so far, it seems that the article still stands, but I could be wrong...
I am not in favor of this settlement by any means, but...
(1) Department of Justice is arguing in favour of the proposed settlement, because the government's case was too weak to impose additional penalties on Microsoft.
Of course the DOJ is "arguing in favor" of their own settlement. They helped draft it, for goodness sake, and now they must defend it before the judge who will either accept or reject the deal.
(2) Somehow this seems like a very odd thing to me, effectively the prosecution is pleading on the part of the defendant..."
I believe this comment could be applied to many court settlements. After all, a settlement is generally when the two parties make concessions with one another. But let's be fair: This is indicative of the US judicial system, not just the Microsoft trial.
In any case, based on the AP article, the settlement has yet to be sanctioned by the judge, and indeed, she is making certain that the DOJ is thoroughly explaining why they *did* settle.
And let's not forget that AOL is taking legal action against MS. Even if this horrible settlement goes through, MS's battle is far from over. Just a shame it has reached this point...
First, for those who want a real review, try this page.
I will give Jon credit where credit is due: His overall description of the movie, though poorly written, isn't too far off the mark. But as usual, there's some important information left out. For example, one of the reasons that the director became involved in the movie is because his own child was on a donated organ recipient list. An important tidbit when trying to understand why the movie may be the way it is. Background research never hurt anyone, Jon. If you're gonna use Slashdot's bandwidth to review a movie, at least try to make it somewhat insightful.
Speaking of which, why is this review even included on Slashdot? What is the "geekiness" factor of this movie?
John Q is contemporary Hollywood's idea of an issue movie: preachiness hiding behind a superstar.
*sigh*
Better read as "Jon Katz is Slashdot's idea of a columnist: preachiness hiding behind a Net celebrity."