"In any case, a lock-in is a strategic problem of your IT infrastructure which needs to get fixed."
This is just a peeve of mine, but any chance this is a myth? I mean, really - who gets harmed by being "locked-in"? I can think of senarios, but how much do those senarios actually impact real world? I think this strategic problem that needs fixing exists only in the minds of MBAs.
With all of the mergers/acquisitions that have happened in the last10 years, I'd think it would be increasing difficult NOT to be locked in, in spite of efforts to avoid it. Do you think there folks who went with hp and Compaq, to avoid being locked in? I know of some. So much for that effort. Or someone who bought Mercury monitoring because they didn't want to increase hp presence by purchasing OpenView?
In spite of their efforts, they are increasingly "locked in"... and despite the lock in, they aren't suffering. Other than angst over strategic problems
Medicaid & Social Security is very popular. Heck, I'm alright with the Postal Service... While we might disagree with the idea of the welfare state, the majority of US voters disagree the the haters. And we have a ton of boomers, getting older, who now get to take advantage of the welfare state...
I disagree with your thought that the non-left of the public would support it if it were better run. Mostly because we don't know how well it's run. We don't have a reliable source of information, as well as someone to put it into context. Instead, we have so much data we can't make sense of it. Anyone who does have the resources to go through it is inevitably compromised (by party affiliation, or drive for ratings) to "spin" that information to further their ambitions. In this context, the folks opposed claim mismanagement and program failure due to cost overruns. OK. While I don't disagree, I want to apply that standard everywhere. So lets look at another Government run program though the same lens; is the Iraq war a failure because of cost overruns? I think we have more money lost there through abuse than we do in the social programs.
As I've gotten older, especially in the last decade, my feelings have shifted. And I'm years away from Social security. Here's my thought; if we can spend the money we do to wage war, I think we can spend to take care of our society as well. Seems only fair. I'd like this bill to get killed. I think it's a mess. But, in return, I want discussion about cost the next time we want to sic our military on someone. "How much will this cost? Can we afford it?"
Somehow, the voices screaming for fiscal responsibility aren't as loud when munitions are involved.
Just because 'someone' thinks it's porn does not make it so.
Sure it does. Hell, that's the definition. If I think it's porn, then it's porn. The reason "porn" is difficult to define is because what turns nudity into pornography is subjective.
This isn't about sex or nudity, it's about control. Always has been
Teens don't have fewer preconceptions, just different ones. You neglected to factor in physical/emotional changes (esp hormonal changes). Sorry, but teens are LESS likely to apply rationality. especially when you remember that rationality gets defined by the adults, not the teen. One of the few perks to becoming an adult.
Part of being American is support of strange ideas like civil liberties. C'mon, you remember your civic lessons, don't you?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Not just when it's easy. Not just taking the government's word for it. Oddly enough, I think this is a very American thing to do. What is objectionable about holding our political leadership accountable to the people?
The real issue isn't the existence (or lack there of) of a "god". That is so abstract that no one can really care. What people care about is themselves. I submit the real drive is to bolster ego by being right. Those of us on the sidelines see both sides claim their infallibility by using nothing but clever (and seemingly similar) arguments.
"God exists - the Bible says so. I'll use the word faith like is has meaning in this context. Not because I'm really practicing faith, I just want to make you think I'm right."
"God doesn't exist - because I can't see any proof presented in a form that I already agree with. I'll use the word science like it has meaning in this context. Not because I'm really practicing science, I just want to make you think I'm right"
Neither side seems particularly interested in a search for truth. The desire is one for security. Ironically, both sides will claim an open mind, and that it is beneficial, even needed. Both in science and in faith. But the open mind ideal goes out the window as soon as the discussion goes to an area that is emotionally important to the debaters.
We're Americans and we don't speak that dialect... Actually, it has been awhile since Britain had a king, so it might be a dead language at this point...
Catholics started it. Those Evangelicals you disparage are merely standing on shoulders, following a path blazed by the Holy Roman Church.
In terms you might understand better, remove the beam from your eye. You don't get a pass because your speech is more polite and reasonable today.
How is it the Church doesn't admit past mistakes, and ask forgiveness? Not just empty talk, but showing some genuine contrition. No one is impressed by this "Oh, look how reasonable WE are compare to those crazy fill-in-the-blanks". The day the church sells all of it's shit to pay reparations for harms the institution has inflicted on the world, I'll be impressed. Till that happens, the church and it's apologists can fuck off. The fake understanding and reasonableness is just as phony as anything ever espoused by the Church.
Here's my candidate for a precursor; the Compaq tc1100. I use it to browse the web & read email. If it was a bit more responsive, I think watching movies would be a real treat as well. Portrait or landscape orientation depending on how I hold it. With the keyboard detached, it's about the size of an analog notebook. The kind of notebook that is spiral bound and contains paper.
I love the form factor. Web browsing on that screen size is just about right for holding in your lap.
I hate the response. Slow, and getting slower with either Win7 or XP SP3. Almost unusable at this point. I tried to use an Ubuntu netbook distro, but the configuration challenges after install ended up being a show stopper. I couldn't get the full tablet functionality I had under Windows. There were great resources and plenty of forums to help with the challenges, but at some point it just became more trouble than it was worth. I'm sure some one smarter than me has made it happen, but I ended up with a Netbook. I was hoping for a more responsive Tablet.
I'm not wild about the Wacom pen interface when the keyboard isn't attached. It works, and the handwriting recognition works really well. But a touch interface would be awesome. Attach the keyboard and it's too thick and a pain to use. It isn't a good laptop:)
While it runs a full OS, let me point out that I don't use or need/want most of that. And, because of resource constraints, it isn't able to do much more than browse the web and read email.
After having one for 4 months, I can see why someone would like a small tablet to browse the web. It feels right. Plus, never underestimate the coolness factor. The form factor is pretty cool. The key thing will be response. If I touch an app, the app must load quickly. With what I saw at the keynote, Apple hit the mark. Everything I want, nothing I don't want. And it's FAST.
So we find the deviants, (homos, left-handed, pedophiles,...) and take out our fearful frustrations on them. On this specific matter, I think real children will always be used, because there is always going to be a desire for people to control others. A simulation (porn) doesn't address the real issue.
The fantasy isn't "I like 13 yr olds" (or whatever), that's a justification. Or perhaps symptom is a better word. The REAL fantasy is "I like complete domination of another. I can do whatever I want. I'm a God" The fantasy of control for people who are overwhelmed by being powerless.
Not just about the physical, there is a psychological component that is in play, too. Seems to me all of the attention on the sex act, the titillation, ignores a more fundamental drive. And, stops the issue from being dealt with intelligently. God forbid we address the fundamental issue(s) with offenders, finding a way to help them overcome the obsessions. Nope, it's easier to label them pariah and to punish them forever.
What if it's not just about the sex drive? If a driving force is a desire to dominate, to have control over another... well, porn isn't going to satisfy THAT urge.
It seems to me if I ignore the offender's desire for control, to have things their way, I'm ignoring a fundamental drive.
Why is someone younger attractive? It's not just physical/biological. Sometimes it's the idea that the young are easily manipulated.
Good point. Wanna hear the bad news? I just read through some other posts here, and I realized that I probably didn't vote against everyone who was in office then, or as soon after as I could.
I'm on the hook for not holding people these responsible, too.
We want them to catch the bad guys - AND WHEN THEY FAIL to do that job, hold them accountable. Which wasn't clear in the summary, but was clear in the article.
George Tenet was the CIA director. CIA's job is to get all of the intelligence information in a CENTRAL agency (who knew?). Mandated by congress at it's creation after WWII.
9/11 happened. CIA blew it, and there was no consequence for the people We The People hired. Tenet wasn't fired for NOT DOING HIS GODDAMN JOB.
Instead of holding the CIA accountable for their failure, we create Homeland Security, National terrorism center, TSA, Patriot Act, so-on and so-forth, ad infinitum. We declare "War on Terror" - which will end up like the War on Poverty or the War on Drugs. Generate a lot of money for a lot of technology and industry without ever providing a path to victory.
Bureaucracy at it's finest.
Too bad we didn't have a President. He could've said "CIA blew it. Tenet, you're fired. Let's get someone in here who can be bothered to be responsible." Instead we have all of the BS that's been justified in the name of security, and we're worse off (security-wise) than we were on 9/12/2001.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for the reply. The longevity point is well made.
Ah. I was thinking of it from a technical standpoint (go figure), rather than a market one. Thanks
"In any case, a lock-in is a strategic problem of your IT infrastructure which needs to get fixed."
This is just a peeve of mine, but any chance this is a myth? I mean, really - who gets harmed by being "locked-in"? I can think of senarios, but how much do those senarios actually impact real world? I think this strategic problem that needs fixing exists only in the minds of MBAs.
With all of the mergers/acquisitions that have happened in the last10 years, I'd think it would be increasing difficult NOT to be locked in, in spite of efforts to avoid it. Do you think there folks who went with hp and Compaq, to avoid being locked in? I know of some. So much for that effort. Or someone who bought Mercury monitoring because they didn't want to increase hp presence by purchasing OpenView?
In spite of their efforts, they are increasingly "locked in"... and despite the lock in, they aren't suffering. Other than angst over strategic problems
Medicaid & Social Security is very popular. Heck, I'm alright with the Postal Service... While we might disagree with the idea of the welfare state, the majority of US voters disagree the the haters. And we have a ton of boomers, getting older, who now get to take advantage of the welfare state...
I disagree with your thought that the non-left of the public would support it if it were better run. Mostly because we don't know how well it's run. We don't have a reliable source of information, as well as someone to put it into context. Instead, we have so much data we can't make sense of it. Anyone who does have the resources to go through it is inevitably compromised (by party affiliation, or drive for ratings) to "spin" that information to further their ambitions. In this context, the folks opposed claim mismanagement and program failure due to cost overruns. OK. While I don't disagree, I want to apply that standard everywhere. So lets look at another Government run program though the same lens; is the Iraq war a failure because of cost overruns? I think we have more money lost there through abuse than we do in the social programs.
As I've gotten older, especially in the last decade, my feelings have shifted. And I'm years away from Social security. Here's my thought; if we can spend the money we do to wage war, I think we can spend to take care of our society as well. Seems only fair. I'd like this bill to get killed. I think it's a mess. But, in return, I want discussion about cost the next time we want to sic our military on someone. "How much will this cost? Can we afford it?"
Somehow, the voices screaming for fiscal responsibility aren't as loud when munitions are involved.
Great. I've turned into a hippie.
Well said
Just because 'someone' thinks it's porn does not make it so.
Sure it does. Hell, that's the definition. If I think it's porn, then it's porn. The reason "porn" is difficult to define is because what turns nudity into pornography is subjective.
This isn't about sex or nudity, it's about control. Always has been
Teens don't have fewer preconceptions, just different ones.
You neglected to factor in physical/emotional changes (esp hormonal changes). Sorry, but teens are LESS likely to apply rationality. especially when you remember that rationality gets defined by the adults, not the teen. One of the few perks to becoming an adult.
I'd be interested on how often mistakes are made.
Part of being American is support of strange ideas like civil liberties. C'mon, you remember your civic lessons, don't you?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Not just when it's easy. Not just taking the government's word for it. Oddly enough, I think this is a very American thing to do. What is objectionable about holding our political leadership accountable to the people?
And shouldn't there be oversight to verify that the targets are legitimate combatants?
How are the 2 connected?
The real issue isn't the existence (or lack there of) of a "god". That is so abstract that no one can really care. What people care about is themselves. I submit the real drive is to bolster ego by being right. Those of us on the sidelines see both sides claim their infallibility by using nothing but clever (and seemingly similar) arguments.
"God exists - the Bible says so. I'll use the word faith like is has meaning in this context. Not because I'm really practicing faith, I just want to make you think I'm right."
"God doesn't exist - because I can't see any proof presented in a form that I already agree with. I'll use the word science like it has meaning in this context. Not because I'm really practicing science, I just want to make you think I'm right"
Neither side seems particularly interested in a search for truth. The desire is one for security. Ironically, both sides will claim an open mind, and that it is beneficial, even needed. Both in science and in faith. But the open mind ideal goes out the window as soon as the discussion goes to an area that is emotionally important to the debaters.
Here's the thing. It's a failure of leadership. What does Al's example teach us? It teaches us to find a way to get out of sacrifice.
Want to encourage people to use less? Use less yourself. Show us. The "Do as I say, not as I do" style of leadership has never been very effective.
Welcome to the human race
I thought that was a glitch in the Matrix...
King's English? Really?
We're Americans and we don't speak that dialect... Actually, it has been awhile since Britain had a king, so it might be a dead language at this point...
Are there ANY defined psychological terms? :) Not exactly a "hard" science...
Thank you! I immediately thought of her as soon as I read the summary.
Catholics started it. Those Evangelicals you disparage are merely standing on shoulders, following a path blazed by the Holy Roman Church.
In terms you might understand better, remove the beam from your eye. You don't get a pass because your speech is more polite and reasonable today.
How is it the Church doesn't admit past mistakes, and ask forgiveness? Not just empty talk, but showing some genuine contrition. No one is impressed by this "Oh, look how reasonable WE are compare to those crazy fill-in-the-blanks". The day the church sells all of it's shit to pay reparations for harms the institution has inflicted on the world, I'll be impressed. Till that happens, the church and it's apologists can fuck off. The fake understanding and reasonableness is just as phony as anything ever espoused by the Church.
Need? No. Want? I think so.
:)
Here's my candidate for a precursor; the Compaq tc1100. I use it to browse the web & read email. If it was a bit more responsive, I think watching movies would be a real treat as well. Portrait or landscape orientation depending on how I hold it. With the keyboard detached, it's about the size of an analog notebook. The kind of notebook that is spiral bound and contains paper.
I love the form factor. Web browsing on that screen size is just about right for holding in your lap.
I hate the response. Slow, and getting slower with either Win7 or XP SP3. Almost unusable at this point. I tried to use an Ubuntu netbook distro, but the configuration challenges after install ended up being a show stopper. I couldn't get the full tablet functionality I had under Windows. There were great resources and plenty of forums to help with the challenges, but at some point it just became more trouble than it was worth. I'm sure some one smarter than me has made it happen, but I ended up with a Netbook. I was hoping for a more responsive Tablet.
I'm not wild about the Wacom pen interface when the keyboard isn't attached. It works, and the handwriting recognition works really well. But a touch interface would be awesome. Attach the keyboard and it's too thick and a pain to use. It isn't a good laptop
While it runs a full OS, let me point out that I don't use or need/want most of that. And, because of resource constraints, it isn't able to do much more than browse the web and read email.
After having one for 4 months, I can see why someone would like a small tablet to browse the web. It feels right. Plus, never underestimate the coolness factor. The form factor is pretty cool. The key thing will be response. If I touch an app, the app must load quickly. With what I saw at the keynote, Apple hit the mark. Everything I want, nothing I don't want. And it's FAST.
The real fear is that society IS "such people".
We are. We just don't want to admit it.
So we find the deviants, (homos, left-handed, pedophiles,...) and take out our fearful frustrations on them. On this specific matter, I think real children will always be used, because there is always going to be a desire for people to control others. A simulation (porn) doesn't address the real issue.
The fantasy isn't "I like 13 yr olds" (or whatever), that's a justification. Or perhaps symptom is a better word. The REAL fantasy is "I like complete domination of another. I can do whatever I want. I'm a God" The fantasy of control for people who are overwhelmed by being powerless.
Not just about the physical, there is a psychological component that is in play, too. Seems to me all of the attention on the sex act, the titillation, ignores a more fundamental drive. And, stops the issue from being dealt with intelligently. God forbid we address the fundamental issue(s) with offenders, finding a way to help them overcome the obsessions. Nope, it's easier to label them pariah and to punish them forever.
What if it's not just about the sex drive? If a driving force is a desire to dominate, to have control over another... well, porn isn't going to satisfy THAT urge.
It seems to me if I ignore the offender's desire for control, to have things their way, I'm ignoring a fundamental drive.
Why is someone younger attractive? It's not just physical/biological. Sometimes it's the idea that the young are easily manipulated.
Bruce Campbell
Good point. Wanna hear the bad news? I just read through some other posts here, and I realized that I probably didn't vote against everyone who was in office then, or as soon after as I could.
I'm on the hook for not holding people these responsible, too.
BZZZ. Thanks for playing.
We want them to catch the bad guys - AND WHEN THEY FAIL to do that job, hold them accountable. Which wasn't clear in the summary, but was clear in the article.
George Tenet was the CIA director. CIA's job is to get all of the intelligence information in a CENTRAL agency (who knew?). Mandated by congress at it's creation after WWII.
9/11 happened. CIA blew it, and there was no consequence for the people We The People hired. Tenet wasn't fired for NOT DOING HIS GODDAMN JOB.
Instead of holding the CIA accountable for their failure, we create Homeland Security, National terrorism center, TSA, Patriot Act, so-on and so-forth, ad infinitum. We declare "War on Terror" - which will end up like the War on Poverty or the War on Drugs. Generate a lot of money for a lot of technology and industry without ever providing a path to victory.
Bureaucracy at it's finest.
Too bad we didn't have a President. He could've said "CIA blew it. Tenet, you're fired. Let's get someone in here who can be bothered to be responsible."
Instead we have all of the BS that's been justified in the name of security, and we're worse off (security-wise) than we were on 9/12/2001.