mindless routine for the "knowledge worker." But, yes. I would take a Perl program anyday over a 12 worksheet spreadsheet that has complex if statements and decision tables when it would only take 20 lines of Perl to complete the entire algorthim.
I see Perl's only drawback is its flexibility, which can make it sometimes a challenge for others to read. However, what other language did you have in mind? We are talking about replacing workers with very short scripts, here. As long as you keep things short, which Perl allows you to do, I don't see a problem. Especially if you are only using it as a database interface.
Has always been a MUCH better experience for me than on Windows. Maybe it is because all those things people really hate about realplayer can only occur in a Windows environment or maybe they just figure the community wouldn't stand for it.
Anyway, it doesn't seem to make sense ranting and bashing Realplayer when you have partially already decided to be treated like a mindless consumer by your choice in operating systems.
Before you flame me, tell me that all adware or nasty take-control-ware would disappear from Windows if Realplayer were to suddenly disappear.
Face it, it is like spam. For every one of you who got sick of it and just figured a way to uninstall it, 10 other windows users just gave up and decided to live with it.
Maybe if you want software companies to behave differently, you should come to terms with what REALLY is most important about the software you use.
'cause it seems more and more that Microsoft is the only company these days that can make money off of software the good ol' fasion way.
But I quietly wait for the day when stupid managers are replaced by smatter managers who realize that Excel, Access, and its ilk only create drones that copy and paste all day, tend to their macros that greatly complicate "simple" programming problems(therefore, must be tended to), and create "irreplaceable employees" that you can't fire because what they do is so poorly documented the business would stop running for an unexceptable time if you did (hmm, what does this cell do . ..).
I can't wait . . . until outsourcing to India and China makes programming so cheap that all those drones who think they are "knowledge workers" can finally be set free to get real careers because companies can now afford masters of Perl and the DBI module to actually bring back efficiency and dignitiy to the human race by expressing human thought in a burst of insightful code ONCE, instead of mindless clicks and grunts every month, an endless cycle of futility.
Mind you, these new knowledge workers will most likely be home grown, once unemployed programmers who went back to school to learn accounting and finance. They will believe in solving the same problem ONCE and will not be afraid to code to get the job done. They will also have seen how accountants have bettered their own profession by making it independent of corporate interests and hopefully will bring the same to the IT profession (which I will work hard to become a member of).
Until then, it is back to writing Perl to deal with the stupidity that apps like Excel and Access breed . ..
Why does the survey have to be "closed" when it is on an "Open" community? Closing the survey does nothing but decrease accountability and credibility and increase the probability of error and misrepresentation of the data.
How about we have an "Open" survey with the exact same questions, and MS can get its data from the same place that everyone else can.
If I am going to contribute to something, I need to know my contributions are not going to be used against me, at the very least, and I probably will also need some kind of incentive other than "we'll be able to better misrepresent your community to the rest of the world."
Perhaps another company would not require so much scrutiny, but MS has very little goodwill left when it comes to "integrity."
I am sorry, but I believe this to be the point which they continue to miss . . . and apparently you do too. Without a process being "Open" there is no accountability and no assurance that the process meets the claimed criteria.
What value is there for me to fill out this closed survey? So that MS can later make false claims about Linux users that I can never check because the survey was closed?
It is not a matter of MS being able to scrutinize the community through surveys. It is a matter of the community being able to scrutinize the claims MS makes that affect us. The goal is to attain the truth, which is impossible in a closed process.
I am not trying to convince everyone to stop following their vendor's EULA's, I am merely conveying that the IT industry lacks accountability and Open Source is a solution to that lacking.
It is still very immature compared to say the procedures set in place by the SEC, but having several separate and competing companies vouch of the Linux kernel's stability and security is far more accountable than a single vendor (read:MS) vouching of the advantages of their closed to the public code (btw, source that can't be compiled is like a balance sheet that doesn't balance).
Working for a corporation as a regular employee you must assume that everyone above you is doing the right thing, and all you must do is what you are told. However, a CPA or lawyer need not make these assumptions, because they risk their careers if they do, and it is understood that they are heald at a higher standard (read: respect).
Maybe it is high time that IT "professionals" created their own legitimate profession in the better interest of society as a whole (long-term) verse working for that next paycheck (short-term).
Being open is not for your benefit because you have any clue how things work. Being open allows objective 3rd parties who have a clue to give an opinion on the matter so that the clueless masses (though shrinking everyday) can make a decent decision. To benefit to you is indirect, but it is a real tangible benefit, nonetheless.
Now, objectivity and expertise to you might simply be synonymous with "MS," but if the financial market were that naive I doubt we would have ever recovered from the great depression . ..
At least, that is what America always seems to preach: "Democracy and Free market spur technological advancement which increases the quality of life."
If you are a company, what else do you have to control other than the "social" aspect.
I think MS implying "social superiority" to the Open Source model is far more damning than admitting technical superiority, because the latter implies a "point of advancement" while the former implies a "rate of advancement." Plus, very few companies have been able to reap the benefits of both the Open Source and Corporate worlds at the same time (though, Mandrake is getting pretty close).
How do you recreate the structure that naturally appears when you open the source and all future benefits derived from that source to all of humanity? Isn't that kind of like trying to recreate the functions of a living organism without DNA?
If you ask me, the best "social" aspect to open source is the amount of heart people pour into it.
Yeah, that sounds REALLY interesting, moderators . . . I think this poster got confused with the KDE team (which is COMPLETELY different from the Linux kernel project) and the moderators didn't seem to notice, which really damages my faith in the/. system (not too late to redeem yourselves, though).
Or do you really think Linux developers are copying code from the Windows' core into the kernel (perhaps we have found the cause of some of the more unstable releases . ..)?
Of course, that is assuming they haven't already sold into.NET . . . maybe that is why SETI is not letting the world know where the signals are coming from yet.
Bottom of page 9 in IBM's recent filing. Supposedly, as an obvious delay strategy, SCO tried to give IBM 1 MILLION dead tree pages of the source code instead of a digital version.
WTF!? What kind of judge stands by and let's such obvious waste of the court's time occur? That's TAX dollars being wasted (judges and courts are paid by tax payers, right?) on childish delay tactics!
Damn, this is starting to sound like the plot of a very stupid movie . . .
If you head over to groklaw, you will see the latest filings. I am not even finished reading them yet and IBM has pulled several examples of public statements SCO has made about it knowing exactly what code infringes in order to convince the court that it should not allow SCO to delay anymore.
It felt really good to see all that crap they have been spouting out to finally be used against them. I am sure there is a lot more from where that came from.
Btw, I donated money to Groklaw today , and it felt very, very good.
Things may suck, but if you decide to give in, so do you.
Maybe it is the fact that FAT is actually a pretty sucky filesystem and the only reason everyone uses it is because of Microsoft's monopoly.
This is a prime example of a monopoly creating inefficiencies (i.e. hurting the economy and industry) by charging monopoly rents on their inferior but inelastically demanded products.
And maybe just the idea of having to pay for FAT makes people sick to the stomach . ..
Or maybe I just believe that the U.S. IP system is eventually going to be the U.S.'s undoing . . .
We have gotten into a "perpetual" war, with no end in site (LAST month was the bloodiest for us . . . exactly WHEN did major combat end!?). We have already committed $83 BILLION dollars, and we will have to commit more.
I have always thought space expoloration to be the most nobel activity any nation could invest in, but is this REALITY, folks? Seems to me that this is more about distracting us from the HUGE problems that exist, than anything else.
I thought the idea was to either go commericial or international with space exploration . . . I think our relationships with some MAJOR space fairing nations are still weak as a result of our unilateral military adventures, so I doubt we could do this internationally . ..
So we are going to fight an expensive and costly war (this is starting to look more and more like Vietnam, thought I am too young to know that for certain), give MAJOR tax breaks, AND return to the moon.
Come on . . . some ideas are ambitious and some things are just political agendas to get you looking the other way.
IANAL (did you forget YOUR IANAL?), but I know that if a delivery boy were to crash into my car, during his delivery, I could not only sue him but his company, as well (did the legal department sanction that crash?).
I also know that an "x-buyer" for company has the "appearance" of authority for up to 2 years. What does that mean? Even if he doesn't work for the company anymore, he can still order from suppliers and the company will be liable. The company has to notify each supplier or public announce the guy no longer works there.
The law doesn't care what GOES INSIDE THE COMPANY. The law cares about what appears to be the situation to your average reasonable individual.
Employees are the "agents" of the company. Though their scope is "narrow", if they act within the scope of their employment, it is as if the company is acting, itself.
Legal department != company. Otherwise, the legal department would just go on break, and the company would never be liable for anything . . .
Maybe they are not really trying to maximize profits from litigation?
Maybe they just seem stupid because we make simple assumptions like SCO wants to maximize their earnings for investors. Maybe management at SCO is simply not acting in the best interest of its investors anymore and is motivated to do something else.
Unfortunately, since they are no longer playing by the rules that are established in the market place, it is very difficult for us to actually pin-point what their agenda is, or who is supporting it (don't expect to find anything in their SEC filings . ..). We can only help to gain circumstantial evidence and, since making conclusions from circumstantial evidence is normally not required, our conclusions based on circumstantial evidence will be labeled paranoid by the public.
This is a fundamental breakdown in the free-market system, the same break-down that resulted in the great depression. This is the primary reason that the SEC, GAAP, and all the laws that protect investors were created. Yet it appears these measures were not enough . . .
I think you RH desktop users should take a look at Mandrake. Not only is it rpm based, but most of its revenue comes from the a club of desktop users so you don't have to worry about them dumping you for servers (there are currently 18,500 club members).
There also is a wide variety of support options.
As far as financial stability, I am pretty sure that their next financial statements will show profitability (they were very close 6 months ago).
Oh yeah, and it is MUCH easier to install and maintain then RH (imho).
Slashdot Mirror
mindless routine for the "knowledge worker." But, yes. I would take a Perl program anyday over a 12 worksheet spreadsheet that has complex if statements and decision tables when it would only take 20 lines of Perl to complete the entire algorthim.
I see Perl's only drawback is its flexibility, which can make it sometimes a challenge for others to read. However, what other language did you have in mind? We are talking about replacing workers with very short scripts, here. As long as you keep things short, which Perl allows you to do, I don't see a problem. Especially if you are only using it as a database interface.
Has always been a MUCH better experience for me than on Windows. Maybe it is because all those things people really hate about realplayer can only occur in a Windows environment or maybe they just figure the community wouldn't stand for it.
Anyway, it doesn't seem to make sense ranting and bashing Realplayer when you have partially already decided to be treated like a mindless consumer by your choice in operating systems.
Before you flame me, tell me that all adware or nasty take-control-ware would disappear from Windows if Realplayer were to suddenly disappear.
Face it, it is like spam. For every one of you who got sick of it and just figured a way to uninstall it, 10 other windows users just gave up and decided to live with it.
Maybe if you want software companies to behave differently, you should come to terms with what REALLY is most important about the software you use.
'cause it seems more and more that Microsoft is the only company these days that can make money off of software the good ol' fasion way.
But your job sounds like a cost center. To IBM, Linux is a revenue center. Which do you think IBM is going to prioritize!?
Hope you have a change in attitude and become a little more proactive. Otherwise, I hope you don't mind doing your job with kpaint:)
But I quietly wait for the day when stupid managers are replaced by smatter managers who realize that Excel, Access, and its ilk only create drones that copy and paste all day, tend to their macros that greatly complicate "simple" programming problems(therefore, must be tended to), and create "irreplaceable employees" that you can't fire because what they do is so poorly documented the business would stop running for an unexceptable time if you did (hmm, what does this cell do . .
I can't wait . . . until outsourcing to India and China makes programming so cheap that all those drones who think they are "knowledge workers" can finally be set free to get real careers because companies can now afford masters of Perl and the DBI module to actually bring back efficiency and dignitiy to the human race by expressing human thought in a burst of insightful code ONCE, instead of mindless clicks and grunts every month, an endless cycle of futility.
Mind you, these new knowledge workers will most likely be home grown, once unemployed programmers who went back to school to learn accounting and finance. They will believe in solving the same problem ONCE and will not be afraid to code to get the job done. They will also have seen how accountants have bettered their own profession by making it independent of corporate interests and hopefully will bring the same to the IT profession (which I will work hard to become a member of).
Until then, it is back to writing Perl to deal with the stupidity that apps like Excel and Access breed . .
Seek the truth, and ye will find Open Source.
Why does the survey have to be "closed" when it is on an "Open" community? Closing the survey does nothing but decrease accountability and credibility and increase the probability of error and misrepresentation of the data.
How about we have an "Open" survey with the exact same questions, and MS can get its data from the same place that everyone else can.
If I am going to contribute to something, I need to know my contributions are not going to be used against me, at the very least, and I probably will also need some kind of incentive other than "we'll be able to better misrepresent your community to the rest of the world."
Perhaps another company would not require so much scrutiny, but MS has very little goodwill left when it comes to "integrity."
I am sorry, but I believe this to be the point which they continue to miss . . . and apparently you do too. Without a process being "Open" there is no accountability and no assurance that the process meets the claimed criteria.
What value is there for me to fill out this closed survey? So that MS can later make false claims about Linux users that I can never check because the survey was closed?
It is not a matter of MS being able to scrutinize the community through surveys. It is a matter of the community being able to scrutinize the claims MS makes that affect us. The goal is to attain the truth, which is impossible in a closed process.
Just post your answers at newsforge after only "looking" at the MS survey.
/. poster says they said "submit." I hope this is an innocent mistake . . .
Newsforge says "look" at the survey, while the
and it plays fine on mplayer. The question is, who isn't too cheap to put out 88 cents to see if paid for download works?
I dunno . . . PAYING to download music . . . it seems so alien to me.
I am not trying to convince everyone to stop following their vendor's EULA's, I am merely conveying that the IT industry lacks accountability and Open Source is a solution to that lacking.
It is still very immature compared to say the procedures set in place by the SEC, but having several separate and competing companies vouch of the Linux kernel's stability and security is far more accountable than a single vendor (read:MS) vouching of the advantages of their closed to the public code (btw, source that can't be compiled is like a balance sheet that doesn't balance).
Working for a corporation as a regular employee you must assume that everyone above you is doing the right thing, and all you must do is what you are told. However, a CPA or lawyer need not make these assumptions, because they risk their careers if they do, and it is understood that they are heald at a higher standard (read: respect).
Maybe it is high time that IT "professionals" created their own legitimate profession in the better interest of society as a whole (long-term) verse working for that next paycheck (short-term).
Sorry if my bubble burst your reality.
I guess you don't invest in any stock then . . .
.
Being open is not for your benefit because you have any clue how things work. Being open allows objective 3rd parties who have a clue to give an opinion on the matter so that the clueless masses (though shrinking everyday) can make a decent decision. To benefit to you is indirect, but it is a real tangible benefit, nonetheless.
Now, objectivity and expertise to you might simply be synonymous with "MS," but if the financial market were that naive I doubt we would have ever recovered from the great depression . .
Hope my reality wasn't too harsh for your bubble.
Screw the national debt, I've got to get re-elected!
Sorry, I was having an identity crisis there for a second . . .
At least, that is what America always seems to preach: "Democracy and Free market spur technological advancement which increases the quality of life."
If you are a company, what else do you have to control other than the "social" aspect.
I think MS implying "social superiority" to the Open Source model is far more damning than admitting technical superiority, because the latter implies a "point of advancement" while the former implies a "rate of advancement." Plus, very few companies have been able to reap the benefits of both the Open Source and Corporate worlds at the same time (though, Mandrake is getting pretty close).
How do you recreate the structure that naturally appears when you open the source and all future benefits derived from that source to all of humanity? Isn't that kind of like trying to recreate the functions of a living organism without DNA?
If you ask me, the best "social" aspect to open source is the amount of heart people pour into it.
Yeah, that sounds REALLY interesting, moderators . . . I think this poster got confused with the KDE team (which is COMPLETELY different from the Linux kernel project) and the moderators didn't seem to notice, which really damages my faith in the /. system (not too late to redeem yourselves, though).
.)?
Or do you really think Linux developers are copying code from the Windows' core into the kernel (perhaps we have found the cause of some of the more unstable releases . .
I think I will go meta-moderate now . . .
Of course, that is assuming they haven't already sold into .NET . . . maybe that is why SETI is not letting the world know where the signals are coming from yet.
Bottom of page 9 in IBM's recent filing. Supposedly, as an obvious delay strategy, SCO tried to give IBM 1 MILLION dead tree pages of the source code instead of a digital version.
WTF!? What kind of judge stands by and let's such obvious waste of the court's time occur? That's TAX dollars being wasted (judges and courts are paid by tax payers, right?) on childish delay tactics!
Damn, this is starting to sound like the plot of a very stupid movie . . .
If you head over to groklaw, you will see the latest filings. I am not even finished reading them yet and IBM has pulled several examples of public statements SCO has made about it knowing exactly what code infringes in order to convince the court that it should not allow SCO to delay anymore.
It felt really good to see all that crap they have been spouting out to finally be used against them. I am sure there is a lot more from where that came from.
Btw, I donated money to Groklaw today , and it felt very, very good.
Things may suck, but if you decide to give in, so do you.
Maybe it is the fact that FAT is actually a pretty sucky filesystem and the only reason everyone uses it is because of Microsoft's monopoly.
.
This is a prime example of a monopoly creating inefficiencies (i.e. hurting the economy and industry) by charging monopoly rents on their inferior but inelastically demanded products.
And maybe just the idea of having to pay for FAT makes people sick to the stomach . .
Or maybe I just believe that the U.S. IP system is eventually going to be the U.S.'s undoing . . .
Just think for a second . . .
.) remain neglected.
.
We have just given a major tax break.
We have gotten into a "perpetual" war, with no end in site (LAST month was the bloodiest for us . . . exactly WHEN did major combat end!?). We have already committed $83 BILLION dollars, and we will have to commit more.
Domestic problems (healthcare, SS, etc . .
Our surplus budget has become a major deficit.
I have always thought space expoloration to be the most nobel activity any nation could invest in, but is this REALITY, folks? Seems to me that this is more about distracting us from the HUGE problems that exist, than anything else.
I thought the idea was to either go commericial or international with space exploration . . . I think our relationships with some MAJOR space fairing nations are still weak as a result of our unilateral military adventures, so I doubt we could do this internationally . .
So we are going to fight an expensive and costly war (this is starting to look more and more like Vietnam, thought I am too young to know that for certain), give MAJOR tax breaks, AND return to the moon.
Come on . . . some ideas are ambitious and some things are just political agendas to get you looking the other way.
what would become of /. !?
Don't like the direction this country has taken? Go to www.blogforamerica.com
IANAL (did you forget YOUR IANAL?), but I know that if a delivery boy were to crash into my car, during his delivery, I could not only sue him but his company, as well (did the legal department sanction that crash?). I also know that an "x-buyer" for company has the "appearance" of authority for up to 2 years. What does that mean? Even if he doesn't work for the company anymore, he can still order from suppliers and the company will be liable. The company has to notify each supplier or public announce the guy no longer works there. The law doesn't care what GOES INSIDE THE COMPANY. The law cares about what appears to be the situation to your average reasonable individual. Employees are the "agents" of the company. Though their scope is "narrow", if they act within the scope of their employment, it is as if the company is acting, itself. Legal department != company. Otherwise, the legal department would just go on break, and the company would never be liable for anything . . .
SCO 1 sucked that they will pretty much ignore SCO 2. Not to mention that a legal precedent will be in place.
Thanks guys. . . . Now I have a valid excuse for not RTFA-ing.
The Future is Open.
Maybe they are not really trying to maximize profits from litigation?
.). We can only help to gain circumstantial evidence and, since making conclusions from circumstantial evidence is normally not required, our conclusions based on circumstantial evidence will be labeled paranoid by the public.
Maybe they just seem stupid because we make simple assumptions like SCO wants to maximize their earnings for investors. Maybe management at SCO is simply not acting in the best interest of its investors anymore and is motivated to do something else.
Unfortunately, since they are no longer playing by the rules that are established in the market place, it is very difficult for us to actually pin-point what their agenda is, or who is supporting it (don't expect to find anything in their SEC filings . .
This is a fundamental breakdown in the free-market system, the same break-down that resulted in the great depression. This is the primary reason that the SEC, GAAP, and all the laws that protect investors were created. Yet it appears these measures were not enough . . .
Didn't MS try to BUY google but google refused? Then MS said that they would compete with google.
.
I guess we are seeing how MS intends to compete with google . .
I think you RH desktop users should take a look at Mandrake. Not only is it rpm based, but most of its revenue comes from the a club of desktop users so you don't have to worry about them dumping you for servers (there are currently 18,500 club members).
There also is a wide variety of support options.
As far as financial stability, I am pretty sure that their next financial statements will show profitability (they were very close 6 months ago).
Oh yeah, and it is MUCH easier to install and maintain then RH (imho).