Re:Clearly not a student of history...
on
Why I.T. Matters
·
· Score: 1
American steel refused to retool and reinvest... Germany and Japanese steel makers rolled right over the top, and now American steel is a novelty item.
US steel production is at the same level as it was in the 70s. How is that a novelty item?
Sorry Jess, but English has no specific neutral noun, hence 'he'.
Re:Oh yeah, blame the management
on
Why I.T. Matters
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
IT used to be bleeding edge. IT used to be high-tech. IT used to be high-tech magic to which only the annointed had access.
Still is. Just because Joe Schmoe can install Oracle on a box for free doesn't make him a Data Warehouse expert, and it doesn't mean that he's capable of implementing an enterprise wide inventory management system.
Today IT is being outsourced. Today universities spew out masses of IT "experts" even if the job markets are already saturated. Today being an IT expert means that you know Java, can hack HTML and do bullet-point presentations for your managers.
Boo hoo, management is blind to the value of having workers that understand their business and can communicate with their clients and this somehow means that IT experts are worthless. Bitter much?
IT is dead. Get over it.
It's not dead, it just smells funny. You can still make a pile of cash - just convince a business that you can either increase their bottom line or lower their costs.
Re:The swing of the pendulum
on
Why I.T. Matters
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The question here is whether an emphasis on cutting-edge IT makes businesses more profitable. What else factors into that besides profit?
The point he was making (let me restate it) is that treating everything solely on its ability to make money for you (usually in the next quarter) is a sure way to lose money. I think that matters a fair bit when you're trying to turn a profit.
That isn't a legal difference, it is a difference obfuscation. If you really do see a legal difference, point that out.
The difference is that one tactic is easier to prove in court, so it is more likely to cause a legal liability. Maybe that doesn't count to you, but it makes a large difference once you get to court.
I see no legal difference between taking a competitors traffic and putting in a low queue, and simply blocking Vonage's entire IP range for the PSTN gateways totally. Poof, end of competition. The effect is the same, why not just be explicit and target individuals?
I do. It's a lot easier to prove that someone is blocking your service than it is to demonstrate that they are degrading data transfers to/from you, especially since it would only result in intermittent outages under load, which the company could plausibly claim as normal behavior.
There are a lot of things you can't legally remove from your car (presuming we're talking street vehicles) that are of questionable usefulness. Various emissions equipment come to mind. You may not become a felon, but if you get caught without them on the street, you will get a fine, and you might get a record. If you replaced them with something else that's not street legal, you could go to jail or lose your license altogether.
More likely, you'll get a fix-it ticket if your exhaust is too loud. If you aren't very loud, the cop isn't going to check it, nor will he be able to. I can remove other thing from the car if I like - seats, trim, the radio, even the computer (I would need a new one if I did that). This is very much like removing a hunk of electronics from my car, or reflashing the computer.
You're talking about a different law entirely when you bring up circumvention, which, while related, is not a core peice of this discussion.
It most certainly is core to the issue. Without the DMCA and its follow on laws, the broadcast flag would be a minor hassle. With it, it's now a felony offense.
It STILL doesn't become a freedom of speech issue, unless you can manage to convince the court that you express yourself through the redistribution of other people's music.
It violates the doctrine of fair use, so it should either be prohibited or content that is thus protected should lose some legal protection, like reducing the term to the original length of 14+14 years>
Who cares if it's elective or not. The point is that it isn't a vacation. Oh and since you seem to want to offer no support to pregnant women, we already tried that - that's why we have the maternity laws we have now. I'm sure you would love to live in a Randian dreamworld, but the reality is much like the worker's paradise that Rand fled.
With regard to maternity leave, it is basically paid vacation. Vacation is expensive for an employeer. From the employees side, it is a great help in the balance between work and family.
More like recovery from surgery. The fact is that we, in this society, recognize that people need to have kids in order to continue the species, and that it's a good idea to support this. The only reason it's even an issue is that the dominant sex in business suffers minimal impact when they get someone pregnant.
Some people would say my employeer should be required to take me back, I don't. Perhaps its cause I'm young, single, and stupid. I would like to think otherwise.
More like young and naive. If you gave notice, who'd pay the dentist - oh wait, dentists aren't usually covered anyway. It sounds like you've never had to deal with being out of work for a long period, or pay for medical care in said jobless period.
No, the law is fine. The problem is that certain lawmakers (and probably lawyers, too) fail to realize that Email is not mail. It just sounds like mail - we have no reliability infrastructure beyond TCP and disk-backed storage, so there's no possible guarantee wrt email.
Right, let's start out by including a patented product in construction which will likely involve a long-term contract with NASA
The mission th Mars is in about 20 years. Patents last 17 years. What's the big deal? Besides, it's a layer of fabric. How hard can it be to update the design to use something else, should that be necessary?
traditional telcos must follow traditional regulations for VoIP, but those regulations do not apply to non-telcos such as cable companies, Vonage, etc... that offer/will soon offer VoIP services in Canada. Seriously hurts the ability for telcos to compete.
Then maybe it's time for the incumbent telco to offer VOIP.
Satellite companies have been able (for the most part) to avoid this because of their model (only downlink located in most localities, and that downlink is privately owned).
So, are you saying that cable companies want the satellite companies subject to the same regs? How do they justify this? Like you say, the satellite companies are a purely private venture - they don't need a right of way from the city or the state government.
This is pretty much like the vonage case - the only shared resource in use are phone numbers. Vonage pays for terminating calls to POTS (apparently), but the VOIP portion is already paid for through existing bandwidth and connection contracts.
The problem is that this secret must be transferred from one party to the other before it can be used. That makes it much less secretive. A discussion of the key exchange problem (of which this is a subset) is beyond the scope of this thread.
Not in this case. They just have to track what secret they use, possibly changing it regularly, as all they use it for is generating and then verifying a hash.
Joking aside, the number of patches and tools that you can put on a USB Drive(256 MB, last I heard) is always being dwarfed by bigger and bigger installs of software.
Of course, what REALLY burns me is the line that says For almost thirty years, programmers have tried to build a Unix-like system and couldn't, somehow suggesting that UNIX is like the the tinfoil hat version of the pyramids of Egypt--some mysterious advanced technology that no one understands and couldn't possibly replicate.
Apparently BSD isn't written by programmers either.
Slashdot Mirror
American steel refused to retool and reinvest... Germany and Japanese steel makers rolled right over the top, and now American steel is a novelty item.
US steel production is at the same level as it was in the 70s. How is that a novelty item?
Sorry Fulcrum of Pee-ville, but I think you mean "pronoun", not noun.
Looks like someone needs to work on their people skills. Or do you want to build websites forever?
Sorry Jess, but English has no specific neutral noun, hence 'he'.
IT used to be bleeding edge. IT used to be high-tech. IT used to be high-tech magic to which only the annointed had access.
Still is. Just because Joe Schmoe can install Oracle on a box for free doesn't make him a Data Warehouse expert, and it doesn't mean that he's capable of implementing an enterprise wide inventory management system.
Today IT is being outsourced. Today universities spew out masses of IT "experts" even if the job markets are already saturated. Today being an IT expert means that you know Java, can hack HTML and do bullet-point presentations for your managers.
Boo hoo, management is blind to the value of having workers that understand their business and can communicate with their clients and this somehow means that IT experts are worthless. Bitter much?
IT is dead. Get over it.
It's not dead, it just smells funny. You can still make a pile of cash - just convince a business that you can either increase their bottom line or lower their costs.
The question here is whether an emphasis on cutting-edge IT makes businesses more profitable. What else factors into that besides profit?
The point he was making (let me restate it) is that treating everything solely on its ability to make money for you (usually in the next quarter) is a sure way to lose money. I think that matters a fair bit when you're trying to turn a profit.
That isn't a legal difference, it is a difference obfuscation. If you really do see a legal difference, point that out.
The difference is that one tactic is easier to prove in court, so it is more likely to cause a legal liability. Maybe that doesn't count to you, but it makes a large difference once you get to court.
I see no legal difference between taking a competitors traffic and putting in a low queue, and simply blocking Vonage's entire IP range for the PSTN gateways totally. Poof, end of competition. The effect is the same, why not just be explicit and target individuals?
I do. It's a lot easier to prove that someone is blocking your service than it is to demonstrate that they are degrading data transfers to/from you, especially since it would only result in intermittent outages under load, which the company could plausibly claim as normal behavior.
Granted I was using the personal free version of Oracle not the 30K version.
What's the difference (besides a 30k license)?
They get what they always get - screwed.
If you absolutely, positively must be raided today - illegally enter a restricted area.
Which would be where? the sensors in question were on public parkland.
There are a lot of things you can't legally remove from your car (presuming we're talking street vehicles) that are of questionable usefulness. Various emissions equipment come to mind. You may not become a felon, but if you get caught without them on the street, you will get a fine, and you might get a record. If you replaced them with something else that's not street legal, you could go to jail or lose your license altogether.
More likely, you'll get a fix-it ticket if your exhaust is too loud. If you aren't very loud, the cop isn't going to check it, nor will he be able to. I can remove other thing from the car if I like - seats, trim, the radio, even the computer (I would need a new one if I did that). This is very much like removing a hunk of electronics from my car, or reflashing the computer.
You're talking about a different law entirely when you bring up circumvention, which, while related, is not a core peice of this discussion.
It most certainly is core to the issue. Without the DMCA and its follow on laws, the broadcast flag would be a minor hassle. With it, it's now a felony offense.
It STILL doesn't become a freedom of speech issue, unless you can manage to convince the court that you express yourself through the redistribution of other people's music.
It violates the doctrine of fair use, so it should either be prohibited or content that is thus protected should lose some legal protection, like reducing the term to the original length of 14+14 years>
This is no different than putting a chip in a car that doesn't let you resell or give away the vehicle.
Sure it is - if I had a car like that, I could legally remove the chip. If I did the same thing with this stuff, I'd be a felon.
before you know it the property damage will be in the millions
This is New York - that's like trashing 2 or 3 small apartments on 45th st.
Recovery from elective surgery.
Who cares if it's elective or not. The point is that it isn't a vacation. Oh and since you seem to want to offer no support to pregnant women, we already tried that - that's why we have the maternity laws we have now. I'm sure you would love to live in a Randian dreamworld, but the reality is much like the worker's paradise that Rand fled.
With regard to maternity leave, it is basically paid vacation. Vacation is expensive for an employeer. From the employees side, it is a great help in the balance between work and family.
More like recovery from surgery. The fact is that we, in this society, recognize that people need to have kids in order to continue the species, and that it's a good idea to support this. The only reason it's even an issue is that the dominant sex in business suffers minimal impact when they get someone pregnant.
Some people would say my employeer should be required to take me back, I don't. Perhaps its cause I'm young, single, and stupid. I would like to think otherwise.
More like young and naive. If you gave notice, who'd pay the dentist - oh wait, dentists aren't usually covered anyway. It sounds like you've never had to deal with being out of work for a long period, or pay for medical care in said jobless period.
Is it just me or is this another ridiculous law?
No, the law is fine. The problem is that certain lawmakers (and probably lawyers, too) fail to realize that Email is not mail. It just sounds like mail - we have no reliability infrastructure beyond TCP and disk-backed storage, so there's no possible guarantee wrt email.
Dunno. Maybe too much crack in the pipe?
Right, let's start out by including a patented product in construction which will likely involve a long-term contract with NASA
The mission th Mars is in about 20 years. Patents last 17 years. What's the big deal? Besides, it's a layer of fabric. How hard can it be to update the design to use something else, should that be necessary?
Mars has an atmosphere
Not much of one, though.
traditional telcos must follow traditional regulations for VoIP, but those regulations do not apply to non-telcos such as cable companies, Vonage, etc... that offer/will soon offer VoIP services in Canada. Seriously hurts the ability for telcos to compete.
Then maybe it's time for the incumbent telco to offer VOIP.
Satellite companies have been able (for the most part) to avoid this because of their model (only downlink located in most localities, and that downlink is privately owned).
So, are you saying that cable companies want the satellite companies subject to the same regs? How do they justify this? Like you say, the satellite companies are a purely private venture - they don't need a right of way from the city or the state government.
This is pretty much like the vonage case - the only shared resource in use are phone numbers. Vonage pays for terminating calls to POTS (apparently), but the VOIP portion is already paid for through existing bandwidth and connection contracts.
The problem is that this secret must be transferred from one party to the other before it can be used. That makes it much less secretive. A discussion of the key exchange problem (of which this is a subset) is beyond the scope of this thread.
Not in this case. They just have to track what secret they use, possibly changing it regularly, as all they use it for is generating and then verifying a hash.
Joking aside, the number of patches and tools that you can put on a USB Drive(256 MB, last I heard) is always being dwarfed by bigger and bigger installs of software.
Well, I have this iPod here - it's got 20 gigs.
Of course, what REALLY burns me is the line that says For almost thirty years, programmers have tried to build a Unix-like system and couldn't, somehow suggesting that UNIX is like the the tinfoil hat version of the pyramids of Egypt--some mysterious advanced technology that no one understands and couldn't possibly replicate.
Apparently BSD isn't written by programmers either.
Or different lengths of blackness per document distributed. That way you'd identify the leak.
Who in their right mind would leak a declassified document?