I actually read the book they wrote after the movie, and in it you learn some interesting facts.
The Terminator was sent into the past just before the big mainframe was to be destroyed by the rebels. John Connor had just about won the war.
The materials from the Terminator sent into the past created Skynet. This plot line was addressed in T2.
A la Hawkins, the Terminator could never succeed. If it did, it would cease to exist. Skynet would not have been created, and thus, it could never have existed. Ergo, no Terminator.
T2 took some of this plot, but conveniently forgot that the humans were about to win, and created the second movie.
Problem: it's a time causality loop. You cannot stop it! Why? Because if you do stop the war, you stop the Terminators, and you then never get them sent into the past. Without them in the past, you cannot have Skynet. Get it?!!?!
T3 is thus the real stumper to me. By this time, all info about the cyborg chips was to be destroyed (remember going back to the office building and performing a bit of good "Office Space"-ish reconstruction). AAMOF, with the destruction of the Terminator in T2, there are to be no systems left. Recall Linda's final dialog . . . (paraphrase)I look to the future with hope...
And now, there's to be a T4 in discussions? Why would the Terminator be molded after an old man? Arnold looks great, but he's not the glistening Austrian god he was in T1. Oh well, I hear money calling...
We tend to have such an ego about ourselves. We think that we are the only ones who've ever had running septic systems, who moved mountains, and now, it appears, to use binary. Think: how else to you code data on a string? Our ancestors are not all that stupid. They helped us get to where we are today.
The more we learn, the more we forget. For example, who can tell me the best mix for bronze? Not many now. How about what's best to plant after sowing rye for two years? As we continue to move into a more technological society, there is quite a bit of knowledge we are losing. Remember the famous ancient battery?
I'd suggest that if we got off of our superiority high horse, we'd find that we've always been quite ingenious. 7-bit though, that's what I find interesting. Wonder where 7 bits comes from. 10 or 5 --that I'd understand. 7, perhaps someone who'd been in a terrible accident?!
It's not the legitimacy of the case, whether or not IP was stolen from SCO. It's all about lawyers, people who make their money be suing, buying, and financially bullying others. Thus, I predict there is no real IP violation here. The reality is that the case is vague enough and can be argued effectively by effectively lawyers to make it look like there is a violation. Whether or not there is one or not is immaterials, not germaine to the case.
Does this strategy perhaps demonstrate the lack of any real basis to the case? Or is it that the case is vague enough so that there's the opportuninity for legal FUD to churn cash?
Stuck in the UK on business, but I know my TiVO is at home working its way to saving my shows.
Now that Faith (can't remember the actress' name) has committed to another show, something like a 7 Days but only going back over one day, I wonder how it will end?
I used to run IBM's Main Web Support. In 1999, we were creating a portal at that site that not only offered links to the other businesses but also provided access to all content in the Support organization.
In the architecture, each master document had actually a 1:M relationship with its geodocuments. The geodocument carried the contents of the document, translated for that geo and also located on a different geo-based server (IBM has a very large network). Every document had to have a version in Simple English (SE), the level of English used so that auto-translators could achieve a high probability of success during the translation. Note that the SE version might not ever be directly displayed, since it could be more simplistic than a standard English version.
User preferences could be set in one of several ways:
Show me content in my native language only
Show me content in my native language if possible, offer transations
Show me content in all languages, let me decide
In this way, the architecture could flex to the abilities of the user. If a user could only read their language, that's all they saw. If they could try the SE version, the architecture offered it. If they wanted to try a translation, they could.
The geodocuments also supported the distribution of the documents into their cache-optimized locations, so that a user's request would be routed most effectively to servers most likely located near them. Regardless of the way we'd like the web to work, location does account for speed.
All in all, it was a bold design and one of which I am proud. Too bad I left to go start my own.com, but we did get the first versions done. Now, it really appears IBM has gone back to links.
As long as most people blindly accept the pap they get from Dell, they will buy printers like this one as well. The end result? Dell sells printers and ties them to the cartidges. They're just looking to capitalize on their place in the market . . . appealing to the ignorant buyers in households who know no better options.
Real markets depend upon easy access of producers and consumers, and an informed consumer on the products of the market. In this case, we have neither; ergo, we have no market. We have another Windoze in the making.
It's situations like this one that make me doubt the "free market."
For those not sure what a BOM is, it stands for bill of materials. In those relationships, you have a part. It is made up of other parts. Each of those parts is made up of parts, etc. etc. The end result of large complex parts is a non-determinant SQL join. Say you need to find how many screws you need for a car. It's a nasty issue for relationals. XML systems, OTOH, handle it beautifully. XPath would do that query simply, pulling out a single part throughout wherever it's used. Bingo, you have the part count.
That type of indeterminantly nested relationship, it brings relational dbs to their knees -- all of them.
I teach this subject to MsC and PhD students at a university, and I tell them not to buy into the hype. Use the best DB type for your data. Relationals are one type, not the only type.
Remember the hand displays they used in Red Planet? A slightly cheezy film, but nonetheless, when the team crashes, they whip out the flexible displays. The team uses them to accertain their location. In it, they also can see through the screen to the background features (mountains and such) and then overlaying a 3D map, determine their position (guess we still don't have GPS on Mars by then).
Also look at the handhelds in E:FC. They have a pullout screen that rolls into the handheld portion. I have a Sony NR70V, and the video on that is quite nice. With a rolling screen, you could seriously make one running with 3G.
They have much better SPAM filters on. To them, we're just SPAM.
But, did you know the net is only for commerce?
on
Dow vs. Parody
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
(If anyone says "who cares," when they dump the chemicals in your neighborhood and your kid is born with flippers, realize that the great wheel has come full cirle. You get back what you deserve!)
What gets me here is that, get this, from Dow's own web site:
The provider, Verio, graciously complied with our letter citing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Not only did they shut down Dow-Chemical.com, but as a good corporate citizen, they agreed to shut down an entire network (Thing.net) of websites many of which, while unrelated to dow-chemical.com, appear to serve no commercial purpose, being dedicated to the unproductive analysis and critique of society and corporate behaviour.
Yep, that's right, sports fans. If you serve no commercial purpose, you have no right to exist. Such corporate arrogance is horrid. In true W-esque fashion, unless you consume, you're worthless. What do these guys want? Web sites for companies only? What a yawn that would be. Remember the article a while back, noting that the web has been growing in capabilities and innovation not by big corporate bozo's but by, yep, web porn. We may not like it, but those sleazy guys are the ones Dow can sell fiber in the first place!
Lastly, I am so pleased to have Dow no inform me as to the unproductive analysis and critique that Thing.net was providing. Before, I considered it merely satire or commentary. Now I see what it truly was . . . a communist plot to keep Dow from cleaning our water and preserving our precious bodily fluids. Thanks Dow!
It is interesting that everyone is talking about UI code tools this, and compilers that... Now, not having seen the code base, or understanding the business requirements, I'm going to take a wild stab at an idea...
Why not take a chance and refactor the entire process, not just the code? How on earth can you justify that many platforms with a common code base? If you calculated out all the additional costs and quality issues with supporting such a monstrocity, would it just be more cost-effective and improve the customer experience to change the product and make it only on 64-bit platforms? Just *nix? Is anyone asking these real business issues? They are the most important to ask first. Then, we get into the code parts.
IMHO, if you still had to support all the platforms, I'd take the opportunity to radically change the concepts. Use a common C++ code set for any core objects that you use in the business. Make sure that the abstractions sit around any errant issues you really have with 64-bit code (data size requirements?) Also, just be honest with people. Be willing to sunset platforms.
Don't try and be all things to all people. You need to position such a change as for quality and form improved stability.
I'd then take the entire set of UI functions and write them tailored to each platform. Again, and IMHO, cross-platform UI never makes anyone happy. The dev's complain about the complexity, the users complain because it's not quite right, etc. etc. So just don't do it (I like QT, but QT on Win hurts.)
Lastly, I'd create a client/server construct so that you can optimize the back-end and front-end operations. That way, should you want, you can run on one system, or run a client/server set. That's what web dev's do all day testing out on their local systems.
(Now, if I can just find the time to get my website done...)
With the merge of Palm and mobile phones (I own a lovely Treo 270 color dual-band), I do hope they move to a Palm environment soon. Sadly, it's only got 16 MB on it (and non-expandable at that).
3 pages. CEO's don't have 3 page resumes. Go with 2 or under. A good rule: don't have a longer resume than the people with whom you're interviewing. Americans want resumes, not CVs.
Re:Tips from a Chief Architect/Tech Officer
on
Resume Tips For Jobs
·
· Score: 1
It implies that you worked in an architectural capacity. In that case then, you're usually running the show for the approach, having a team or engineering lead implementing the vision. "Designed" is a bit light. Hey, it's got me a nice 6 figure salary.;-)
Tips from a Chief Architect/Tech Officer
on
Resume Tips For Jobs
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Having been a CTA and CTO for many companies including IBM and many start-ups, I wanted to share a few ideas for good resumes.
Make it look nice. If it looks like crap, I think your code looks like crap. Marketing is critical here.
Don't include every technology you've ever touched. If you do, I love calling people on their tech knowledge. You've used Intermedia, interesting. Tell me, what's the function of a stemmer and how does it work in Intermedia? Don't be too agressive. You cannot know everything.
If you put multiple tools or editors down, make sure you know them. I used to ask people what they liked about a Visual Cafe over JBuilder, and, more importantly, why. If they used BEA and Websphere, great, tell me why I would use one or the other. If you can't do that, then you don't know the tools.
IMHO Certifications quite frankly are crap. They show you can take tests, not that you understand the tools or languages. Mention them later, not at the top.
A style note: use verbs!!!! Developed, Created, Architected, Designed, Coded, Documented etc. Do not use sentences. I was responsibile for is a banned phrase.
If you have any other questions or comments, just let me know. Hope it helps.
Slashdot Mirror
- The Terminator was sent into the past just before the big mainframe was to be destroyed by the rebels. John Connor had just about won the war.
- The materials from the Terminator sent into the past created Skynet. This plot line was addressed in T2.
- A la Hawkins, the Terminator could never succeed. If it did, it would cease to exist. Skynet would not have been created, and thus, it could never have existed. Ergo, no Terminator.
T2 took some of this plot, but conveniently forgot that the humans were about to win, and created the second movie.Problem: it's a time causality loop. You cannot stop it! Why? Because if you do stop the war, you stop the Terminators, and you then never get them sent into the past. Without them in the past, you cannot have Skynet. Get it?!!?!
T3 is thus the real stumper to me. By this time, all info about the cyborg chips was to be destroyed (remember going back to the office building and performing a bit of good "Office Space"-ish reconstruction). AAMOF, with the destruction of the Terminator in T2, there are to be no systems left. Recall Linda's final dialog . . . (paraphrase)I look to the future with hope...
And now, there's to be a T4 in discussions? Why would the Terminator be molded after an old man? Arnold looks great, but he's not the glistening Austrian god he was in T1. Oh well, I hear money calling...
Very funny. LOL? But then, if I crinkle the strings, would that be encryption? Or just plain obfuscation?
The more we learn, the more we forget. For example, who can tell me the best mix for bronze? Not many now. How about what's best to plant after sowing rye for two years? As we continue to move into a more technological society, there is quite a bit of knowledge we are losing. Remember the famous ancient battery?
I'd suggest that if we got off of our superiority high horse, we'd find that we've always been quite ingenious. 7-bit though, that's what I find interesting. Wonder where 7 bits comes from. 10 or 5 --that I'd understand. 7, perhaps someone who'd been in a terrible accident?!
Does this strategy perhaps demonstrate the lack of any real basis to the case? Or is it that the case is vague enough so that there's the opportuninity for legal FUD to churn cash?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Stuck in the UK on business, but I know my TiVO is at home working its way to saving my shows.
Now that Faith (can't remember the actress' name) has committed to another show, something like a 7 Days but only going back over one day, I wonder how it will end?
Oh well, too bad I don't touch spoilers!
In the architecture, each master document had actually a 1:M relationship with its geodocuments. The geodocument carried the contents of the document, translated for that geo and also located on a different geo-based server (IBM has a very large network). Every document had to have a version in Simple English (SE), the level of English used so that auto-translators could achieve a high probability of success during the translation. Note that the SE version might not ever be directly displayed, since it could be more simplistic than a standard English version.
User preferences could be set in one of several ways:
- Show me content in my native language only
- Show me content in my native language if possible, offer transations
- Show me content in all languages, let me decide
In this way, the architecture could flex to the abilities of the user. If a user could only read their language, that's all they saw. If they could try the SE version, the architecture offered it. If they wanted to try a translation, they could.The geodocuments also supported the distribution of the documents into their cache-optimized locations, so that a user's request would be routed most effectively to servers most likely located near them. Regardless of the way we'd like the web to work, location does account for speed.
All in all, it was a bold design and one of which I am proud. Too bad I left to go start my own .com, but we did get the first versions done. Now, it really appears IBM has gone back to links.
I had not considered the DMCA's application here, but it could open up a whole new torrent of stupidity issuing forth from Dell Legal. Nice point.
I don't think it will.
As long as most people blindly accept the pap they get from Dell, they will buy printers like this one as well. The end result? Dell sells printers and ties them to the cartidges. They're just looking to capitalize on their place in the market . . . appealing to the ignorant buyers in households who know no better options.
Real markets depend upon easy access of producers and consumers, and an informed consumer on the products of the market. In this case, we have neither; ergo, we have no market. We have another Windoze in the making.
It's situations like this one that make me doubt the "free market."
Take the simple instance of a BOM relationship.
For those not sure what a BOM is, it stands for bill of materials. In those relationships, you have a part. It is made up of other parts. Each of those parts is made up of parts, etc. etc. The end result of large complex parts is a non-determinant SQL join. Say you need to find how many screws you need for a car. It's a nasty issue for relationals. XML systems, OTOH, handle it beautifully. XPath would do that query simply, pulling out a single part throughout wherever it's used. Bingo, you have the part count.
That type of indeterminantly nested relationship, it brings relational dbs to their knees -- all of them.
I teach this subject to MsC and PhD students at a university, and I tell them not to buy into the hype. Use the best DB type for your data. Relationals are one type, not the only type.
Also look at the handhelds in E:FC. They have a pullout screen that rolls into the handheld portion. I have a Sony NR70V, and the video on that is quite nice. With a rolling screen, you could seriously make one running with 3G.
They have much better SPAM filters on. To them, we're just SPAM.
What gets me here is that, get this, from Dow's own web site: Yep, that's right, sports fans. If you serve no commercial purpose, you have no right to exist. Such corporate arrogance is horrid. In true W-esque fashion, unless you consume, you're worthless. What do these guys want? Web sites for companies only? What a yawn that would be. Remember the article a while back, noting that the web has been growing in capabilities and innovation not by big corporate bozo's but by, yep, web porn. We may not like it, but those sleazy guys are the ones Dow can sell fiber in the first place!
Lastly, I am so pleased to have Dow no inform me as to the unproductive analysis and critique that Thing.net was providing. Before, I considered it merely satire or commentary. Now I see what it truly was . . . a communist plot to keep Dow from cleaning our water and preserving our precious bodily fluids. Thanks Dow!
Why not take a chance and refactor the entire process, not just the code? How on earth can you justify that many platforms with a common code base? If you calculated out all the additional costs and quality issues with supporting such a monstrocity, would it just be more cost-effective and improve the customer experience to change the product and make it only on 64-bit platforms? Just *nix? Is anyone asking these real business issues? They are the most important to ask first. Then, we get into the code parts.
IMHO, if you still had to support all the platforms, I'd take the opportunity to radically change the concepts. Use a common C++ code set for any core objects that you use in the business. Make sure that the abstractions sit around any errant issues you really have with 64-bit code (data size requirements?) Also, just be honest with people. Be willing to sunset platforms. Don't try and be all things to all people. You need to position such a change as for quality and form improved stability.
I'd then take the entire set of UI functions and write them tailored to each platform. Again, and IMHO, cross-platform UI never makes anyone happy. The dev's complain about the complexity, the users complain because it's not quite right, etc. etc. So just don't do it (I like QT, but QT on Win hurts.)
Lastly, I'd create a client/server construct so that you can optimize the back-end and front-end operations. That way, should you want, you can run on one system, or run a client/server set. That's what web dev's do all day testing out on their local systems.
(Now, if I can just find the time to get my website done...)
With the merge of Palm and mobile phones (I own a lovely Treo 270 color dual-band), I do hope they move to a Palm environment soon. Sadly, it's only got 16 MB on it (and non-expandable at that).
3 pages. CEO's don't have 3 page resumes. Go with 2 or under. A good rule: don't have a longer resume than the people with whom you're interviewing. Americans want resumes, not CVs.
It implies that you worked in an architectural capacity. In that case then, you're usually running the show for the approach, having a team or engineering lead implementing the vision. "Designed" is a bit light. Hey, it's got me a nice 6 figure salary. ;-)
- Make it look nice. If it looks like crap, I think your code looks like crap. Marketing is critical here.
- Don't include every technology you've ever touched. If you do, I love calling people on their tech knowledge. You've used Intermedia, interesting. Tell me, what's the function of a stemmer and how does it work in Intermedia? Don't be too agressive. You cannot know everything.
- If you put multiple tools or editors down, make sure you know them. I used to ask people what they liked about a Visual Cafe over JBuilder, and, more importantly, why. If they used BEA and Websphere, great, tell me why I would use one or the other. If you can't do that, then you don't know the tools.
- IMHO Certifications quite frankly are crap. They show you can take tests, not that you understand the tools or languages. Mention them later, not at the top.
- A style note: use verbs!!!! Developed, Created, Architected, Designed, Coded, Documented etc. Do not use sentences. I was responsibile for is a banned phrase.
If you have any other questions or comments, just let me know. Hope it helps.