"Facebook has to allow people to access their relationships however they want through other businesses or tools that are not controlled by Facebook," Matt Stoller, a fellow at the Open Markets Institute, said. "Having them control and mediate the structure of those relationships -- that's not right."
Why and why? If we're going to decry the existence of monocultures, the agriculture industry is a much better place to look first. There are serious potential consequences to limiting bio-diversity unlike the consequences to limiting diversity in playgrounds.
It's not quite that simple. I've been teaching math for years and I see this happen all the time with classes that use products like MyMathLab. Students use all of the "help" tools, get the right result and think they know what they're doing. In reality, they didn't solve the problem - the computer did. Many of the students who do this stumble badly when they're presented with a problem that they have to solve without any support. That sounds like what's happening here. There's a very big cliff between drag and drop and looking at a blank page.
The summary makes the naive assumption that a financial accounting is the only way to evaluate the benefits of the transaction. If Sterling didn't want to sell the team and give up the profits and benefits of ownership then the sale could be a net loss for him even if he turns a profit on the sale. This position is particularly surprising given that the summary identifies the players as losers even though I don't believe they're going to suffer any financial loss form the transaction.
References, please? When my business students make an assertion like that it negatively impacts their grade. There's no denying that there have been multiple, high profile cases of corruption and greed in the news but a handful of cases can't be taken as an indictment of the entire system.
Experience of which industry? I'm a physics prof. [...] Being involved in research means that I can take the latest research results and bring them into lectures so the students learn about them and perhaps find ways to apply that knowledge wherever they end up. This is not only good for the student but good for society as a whole and someone from industry is unlikely to be able to do that.
You may be a great researcher but can you teach worth a damn? One doesn't automatically imply the other. I've had plenty of professors who were well respected in their fields but had no business being in a classroom. I can see how being a good researcher could be beneficial to teaching but it shouldn't be the end of the conversation in a University job interview.
My biggest issue with Amazon is delivery. It seems like most of the time when I need something, I need it now. For example, the other day I broke the microphone/headset that I use to record video presentations and make Skype calls with my students. I drove down to Best Buy, picked one off the shelf and was back home at work in less than an hour. Waiting two or three days for Amazon to get it to my door really wasn't an option.
I'll admit up front that I haven't read the article but, based just on,
"'involves a graphical user interface on a computer that includes a graphic of an athletic playing field or a portion thereof, and a plurality of player positions on the athletic field. At least some of the player positions contain thumbnail images selected by a first user."
I think we can be pretty confident that he won't be posting the security camera video on YouTube. I don't think you can say the same for video taken by patrons.
I'm a college professor, and my students seem to follow a relatively normal distribution. I have a few who can write well, a few who would have a hard time making a grocery list and a large majority that do okay. The ones who do poorly often do very *very* poorly and I think their relative impact may cause outside observers to overstate the situation. I've also noticed that, predictably, full length papers tend to be more problematic than individual discussion posts. Students who do okay in the discussion often start to go down hill when they have to put together a multi-page argument.
I would be very reluctant to use almost any kind of technology at the elementary school level. In my experience, computers are a great tool for expressing your imagination but they're not so great for helping to develop one which is what students should be doing at that age.
As an IT manager, I would be pissed if someone came to me with leverage.
I've never understood this sentiment although I've heard it many times from my father who was a manager for a large part of his career. Why is it okay for management to come to me and say, "We've got some problems with our relationship and, if you don't make some changes, you'll be fired.", but it isn't okay for me to go to management and say, "We've got some problems with our relationship and, if you don't make some changes, I'm going to quit."? Most of the time, management is in a superior bargaining position because it's harder for me to do without a job for a period of time than it is for them to do without someone in my position for a period of time. Would you, as a manager, be reluctant to use that advantage to bring an employ into line with a new set of job requirements that you or senior management felt were necessary?
"What does a software developer know about editing movies?"
If he's spent years developing software for doing it - probably quite a lot. After I spent ten years developing software for a home health company, I knew at least as much about the industry and our specific approach to it as most of the managers who used the software that I developed.
In what other business do people get to take your money and then tell you what you are getting?
Almost any business that sells information follows this model, e.g. the publishing and movie industries. You may have some idea of what you're going to get but you don't get full disclosure until after you've opened your wallet.
But I don't think that's what you meant. I think you meant, "In what other business do people get to take your money and then tell you the terms under which you can use the product?" I'll admit that that's a strange way to do business but the author of the article isn't even telling his customers the terms after they've got the product. He's just assuming that they're going to know and agree with his position.
When you by software in a store, it comes with a license agreement that lays out what you're getting and what you're not. It sounds like the article's author has his own personal understanding and is assuming that his client is going to pick that up from him telepathically.
Do you have a masters degree? I teach math for two (fully accredited) schools in their online degree programs and make almost as much from that as from my programming job. For many adjunct positions, a masters is all that's required.
I may not have a lot of money but Google has plenty. I suspect that they'll take exception to Rogers fiddling with their carefully designed home page - a page where simplicity and a clean layout are defining characteristics.
I also suspect that there's a copyright claim here somewhere. If Rogers took Google's home page and modified it then that's a derived work which they would have to have Google's permission to distribute.
I think the context matters. If some one posts a question on a forum, "How do I do x?" and some posts a reply, "This is how you do it . .." then I think it's safe to assume that the code is going to be used.
But seriously, how does one prove that BEST BUY was the one at fault?
Best Buy is at fault because they're the ones who sold him the box. If the box was a return that they didn't check properly then it's clearly their fault. If the box was direct from the manufacturer and someone switched it out in transit then that's a problem that they should take up with Western Digital. I don't have a relationship with Western Digital, I have a relationship with Best Buy. I hate it when companies try to pawn me off on their upstream business partners when there's a problem.
It really isn't his beliefs that concern me. If someone wants to believe the moon is made of swiss cheese, their welcome to it. My concern is that, as far as I can tell, one person complained. One crackpot raises his hand and the course of an entire school district changes.
Even if he did lie about his age, the fundamental question to me is, "Why is any of what happened MySpace's fault?" I realize our legal system has some curious notions about liability so I'm not necessarily asking this from a legal perspective but I think the point an earlier poster raised about people meeting in a mall was on point. If an entity, corporate or individual, provides a method/location for people to meet, are they then responsible for anything that happens as a result of that meeting?
Slashdot Mirror
"Facebook has to allow people to access their relationships however they want through other businesses or tools that are not controlled by Facebook," Matt Stoller, a fellow at the Open Markets Institute, said. "Having them control and mediate the structure of those relationships -- that's not right."
Why and why? If we're going to decry the existence of monocultures, the agriculture industry is a much better place to look first. There are serious potential consequences to limiting bio-diversity unlike the consequences to limiting diversity in playgrounds.
I can't tell if it works or not. The first question you have to ask is, "What's it supposed to do?"
I lost my key once when I was a student and called the campus police. They sent someone out the same day to cut through the lock.
It's not quite that simple. I've been teaching math for years and I see this happen all the time with classes that use products like MyMathLab. Students use all of the "help" tools, get the right result and think they know what they're doing. In reality, they didn't solve the problem - the computer did. Many of the students who do this stumble badly when they're presented with a problem that they have to solve without any support. That sounds like what's happening here. There's a very big cliff between drag and drop and looking at a blank page.
If the software is only accessing publicly available information as advertised then what specific laws do you think are being broken?
If this were a high school class, you'd have a point. In an elementary school class, I'd say it's more about teaching them basics skills and concepts.
The efficient use of limited funding. How big a tax increase would you be willing to support to fully fund their operation?
The summary makes the naive assumption that a financial accounting is the only way to evaluate the benefits of the transaction. If Sterling didn't want to sell the team and give up the profits and benefits of ownership then the sale could be a net loss for him even if he turns a profit on the sale. This position is particularly surprising given that the summary identifies the players as losers even though I don't believe they're going to suffer any financial loss form the transaction.
References, please? When my business students make an assertion like that it negatively impacts their grade. There's no denying that there have been multiple, high profile cases of corruption and greed in the news but a handful of cases can't be taken as an indictment of the entire system.
Experience of which industry? I'm a physics prof. [...] Being involved in research means that I can take the latest research results and bring them into lectures so the students learn about them and perhaps find ways to apply that knowledge wherever they end up. This is not only good for the student but good for society as a whole and someone from industry is unlikely to be able to do that.
You may be a great researcher but can you teach worth a damn? One doesn't automatically imply the other. I've had plenty of professors who were well respected in their fields but had no business being in a classroom. I can see how being a good researcher could be beneficial to teaching but it shouldn't be the end of the conversation in a University job interview.
My biggest issue with Amazon is delivery. It seems like most of the time when I need something, I need it now. For example, the other day I broke the microphone/headset that I use to record video presentations and make Skype calls with my students. I drove down to Best Buy, picked one off the shelf and was back home at work in less than an hour. Waiting two or three days for Amazon to get it to my door really wasn't an option.
I'll admit up front that I haven't read the article but, based just on,
isn't this Madden NFL?
I think we can be pretty confident that he won't be posting the security camera video on YouTube. I don't think you can say the same for video taken by patrons.
I'm a college professor, and my students seem to follow a relatively normal distribution. I have a few who can write well, a few who would have a hard time making a grocery list and a large majority that do okay. The ones who do poorly often do very *very* poorly and I think their relative impact may cause outside observers to overstate the situation. I've also noticed that, predictably, full length papers tend to be more problematic than individual discussion posts. Students who do okay in the discussion often start to go down hill when they have to put together a multi-page argument.
I would be very reluctant to use almost any kind of technology at the elementary school level. In my experience, computers are a great tool for expressing your imagination but they're not so great for helping to develop one which is what students should be doing at that age.
As an IT manager, I would be pissed if someone came to me with leverage.
I've never understood this sentiment although I've heard it many times from my father who was a manager for a large part of his career. Why is it okay for management to come to me and say, "We've got some problems with our relationship and, if you don't make some changes, you'll be fired.", but it isn't okay for me to go to management and say, "We've got some problems with our relationship and, if you don't make some changes, I'm going to quit."? Most of the time, management is in a superior bargaining position because it's harder for me to do without a job for a period of time than it is for them to do without someone in my position for a period of time. Would you, as a manager, be reluctant to use that advantage to bring an employ into line with a new set of job requirements that you or senior management felt were necessary?
"What does a software developer know about editing movies?"
If he's spent years developing software for doing it - probably quite a lot. After I spent ten years developing software for a home health company, I knew at least as much about the industry and our specific approach to it as most of the managers who used the software that I developed.
In what other business do people get to take your money and then tell you what you are getting?
Almost any business that sells information follows this model, e.g. the publishing and movie industries. You may have some idea of what you're going to get but you don't get full disclosure until after you've opened your wallet.
But I don't think that's what you meant. I think you meant, "In what other business do people get to take your money and then tell you the terms under which you can use the product?" I'll admit that that's a strange way to do business but the author of the article isn't even telling his customers the terms after they've got the product. He's just assuming that they're going to know and agree with his position.
When you by software in a store, it comes with a license agreement that lays out what you're getting and what you're not. It sounds like the article's author has his own personal understanding and is assuming that his client is going to pick that up from him telepathically.
Do you have a masters degree? I teach math for two (fully accredited) schools in their online degree programs and make almost as much from that as from my programming job. For many adjunct positions, a masters is all that's required.
I may not have a lot of money but Google has plenty. I suspect that they'll take exception to Rogers fiddling with their carefully designed home page - a page where simplicity and a clean layout are defining characteristics.
I also suspect that there's a copyright claim here somewhere. If Rogers took Google's home page and modified it then that's a derived work which they would have to have Google's permission to distribute.
I think the context matters. If some one posts a question on a forum, "How do I do x?" and some posts a reply, "This is how you do it . . ." then I think it's safe to assume that the code is going to be used.
But seriously, how does one prove that BEST BUY was the one at fault?
Best Buy is at fault because they're the ones who sold him the box. If the box was a return that they didn't check properly then it's clearly their fault. If the box was direct from the manufacturer and someone switched it out in transit then that's a problem that they should take up with Western Digital. I don't have a relationship with Western Digital, I have a relationship with Best Buy. I hate it when companies try to pawn me off on their upstream business partners when there's a problem.
It really isn't his beliefs that concern me. If someone wants to believe the moon is made of swiss cheese, their welcome to it. My concern is that, as far as I can tell, one person complained. One crackpot raises his hand and the course of an entire school district changes.
Even if he did lie about his age, the fundamental question to me is, "Why is any of what happened MySpace's fault?" I realize our legal system has some curious notions about liability so I'm not necessarily asking this from a legal perspective but I think the point an earlier poster raised about people meeting in a mall was on point. If an entity, corporate or individual, provides a method/location for people to meet, are they then responsible for anything that happens as a result of that meeting?