Actually, the suck-iest (is that a word?) search engine name is Clusty. Oddly enough, the name of Clusty's parent company, Vivisimo, is probably also ahead of A9 on the "suck meter".
The weird thing about it is that I believe Clusty's seach engine is much better than Google. Go ahead and try it, check out how it clusters the results.
I think it has to do with when the organization is tasked, scheduled and run exclusively by business-types, as opposed to engineers, who have some notion of how long things take.
Note that I am not saying that engineers shouldn't be involved in sheduling. The PMs need to ask the engineers what each task is and then have the engineers give a timeline on completing said tasks. If the PM's are creating project plans without the input of the folks that are supposed to do the task, then those project plans are not very useful.
But, after the engineers help fill out the plan, then they need to be held to the timelines they agreed to in the project plan. Weekly meetings to review the status are required. If there is a delay, then someone needs to explain why. It may not be the fault of the team. And, anyway, the point is not to blame someone for delays, but to PLAN, so risks can be identified and mitigated early in the project.
Yes, but their method of changing the world is to enshrine the scientific method as a litmus test, a scripture if you will- non believers need not apply.
Obviously, you and I are on two different worlds on this matter.
I consider science to be the study and explanation of the surrounding world. I don't believe science includes a religious component. In fact, I consider religion to simply be the result of man's imagination as he tries to explain the unexplainable. I consider science to be a serious attempt to address the same issues. Religion is based on faith. Science is based on fact. I don't necessarily believe that science can explain everything, nor do I believe that the scientific method is set in stone. IMHO, The method could be changed, if other steps prove to be more effective in finding the answers to why the universe is the way it is.
From what you have written, you appear to believe that science includes a significant religious aspect. And, it appears you consider 'science' to be a religion just like Catholocism or Buddhism.
There is no way either of us will change each other's mind.
Well, the term "objectivism" specifically refers to her ideology
True, but the way I've been reading Marxist Harcker is that he is stating that the scientific method is part of a religious ideology (Objectivism). I must admit that I missed the Ayn Rand connection when I first read his/her posts. But, even so, I do disagree with the thought that scientists are part of a religious group. And, just because Ayn Rand proposed that Objectivism had metaphysical components, doesn't mean I buy into that line of thought.
Of course, the entire intent of this 527 group though is to use the scientific method politically- to change the world.
Don't confuse the political process with the scientific method. The scientific method is a standard set of steps that analyze and explain. This group is not using analytical tools (well, I guess telephone polls are analytical) and they SURE aren't following the seven (or was that six?) sequential steps of the scientific method when they run a pro-evolution advertisement in Kansas.
Instead, they intend to use the political process, including political fundraising and advertising, to change the world.
From Encyclopedia Britannica (while I enjoy Wikipedia, I don't use it as a serious source of information):
IDEOLOGY -- a form of social or political philosophy in which practical elements are as prominent as theoretical ones. It is a system of ideas that aspires both to explain the world and to change it.
SCIENTIFIC METHOD -- Mathematical and experimental techniques employed in the natural sciences.
Note that an ideology sets out to both explain and CHANGE the world. The scientists use the scientific method to explain it.
Everyone thinks that in order to bring stability to an IT organization you have to have process, and this might be true if you hire run of the mill low quality techs, but if you hire smart, you'd be amazed what you can get done when your employees can take ownership.
If you have an IT staff of 10, you can get away with this. If you have an organization that has over 400 IT employees; a non-IT it staff that is close to 50,000 people; are running nearly 900 applications on everything from Windows to Mainframe to AS/400 OS to seven different flavors of UNIX; and have are managing about 500TB of storage; then you can't get away with what you are describing for very long.
From your series of posts, it sounds like you are a smaller organization. If I am wrong, and you happend to have a couple of hundred IT employees, you need to look into ITIL. Otherwise, it is only a matter of time before you run into serious problems with your production environment.
Sure, I know you need to do some of this stuff, but, really...often these days, all you have are mgmt types that know nothing besides these buzzwords, meetings and paperwork....the actual work to be done and deliverables to be produced are merely a nagging side item.
While I admit that sometimes the process does get in the way, the fact is there is a good reason for 'process'. Presently, I am consulting at a place that doesn't really HAVE a process. They don't have meetings to complete paperwork or to discuss plans. They are very much into cutting edge technology. Every critical application is on the very latest OS and Hardware combination possible. They purchase the latest version of everything the very week it is released. And, their developers are busy coding away, instead of worrying about submitting documents or creating change requests.
While that may SOUND like a great place to work, the fact is, the place is a disaster. They are almost entirely in reaction mode. They never use project plans, so no one has any idea how long it will take to complete a task. That is a bad thing, if YOUR project is dependent upon someone else complete that task and you don't know how long it will take them.
They are always rushing to place a hardware order, or to configure the hardware to get it in place, because they want to have the latest and greatest of everything. Unfortunately, because most of their application vendors haven't even agreed to support the latest technology, they are either installing the latest technology without support (a very dangerous thing) or they are always on the phone to various developers, trying to get support.
Because they don't plan their system changes (using formal change procedures), I know of at least one example where payroll production crashed and burned because of an unrequested change (that is completely unacceptable when you have thousands of employees waiting for their pay stubs).
Oh, the developers? They are putting in 60 hour weeks, always juggling tasks, trying to complete EVERYTHING, because EVERYTHING is last-minute rush.
I could go on for pages, but I think you get the point.
Just like it's illegel to fire someone for being gay.
I realize this is off-topic, but depending upon where the employer is located, it may be legal to fire someone based on their sexual orientation. In some states/localitites, sexual orientation is a protected trait. In other states/localities, it is not protected. So, in some situations, your employer can fire you based on the fact that you may be gay, straight, or somewhere in-between.
Here is an article on it. You have to scroll down a few pages in the PDF file.
They will be forbidden by the law to pass the cost on to consumers, so this will NOT raise gas prices.
The costs will be passed on to SOMEONE. My initial guess would be that since oil companies aren't allowed to raise prices in California, they'll simply raise prices in Oregon, Nevada, Arizona and Texas and make up the difference in lost profit that way.
Hollywood needs to close for a few years Till they can come up with a new idea.
You've got to remember that these are just simple actors, directors, producers and gaffers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons.
Has Mel Brooks done anything worthwhile since -- I can't even remember a recent Mel Brooks movie -- Young Frankenstein?
I was about to say "You have High Anxiety (1977), History of the World (1981), Spaceballs (1987)". Then I realized that Spaceballs is a 19-year-old movie. So, let's try this: Young Frankenstein is arguably the funniest movie of all time (Personally, I try to watch the DVD every year or so and I laugh hysterically every time). So, I think Mel deserves at least a small bit of extra credit for that movie.
The problem with the producers movie: What works in theatre *DOES NOT* work on film. Repeat it with me, WHAT WORKS IN THEATRE DOES NOT WORK ON FILM!!!
The producers movie was a fairly accurate recreation of the producers brodway production. Matthew Broderick's sniveling character just did't work on film.
You are forgetting that the Broadway Play was simply an accurate recreation of the 1968 ORIGINAL Movie (starring Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder). And, Gene Wilder's sniveling character did work on film.
For the record, I thought the 2005 version of the movie was pretty good. Mel had to update some of the jokes for 2005, (but he kept the 'blonde bombshell'). Very funny. He also wrote a couple of pretty good new songs.
The main page you link to only lists "Box Office" receipts. If you click on the DVD Rental/Sales link, you'll see that they made $25 million in DVD sales. So, the movie made a nice buck. And the Broadway show opened on March 21, 2001. While it may not be selling out anymore, it is STILL running, over 5 years later. Trust me, Mel is raking in the cash.
Slashdot Mirror
Seven hours? Amateur. No wonder you posted AC.
I just tried the clusty cloud technology. Way cool: http://cloud.clusty.com/
You can even have the results generated in the 'Slashdot Green' color.
Actually, the suck-iest (is that a word?) search engine name is Clusty. Oddly enough, the name of Clusty's parent company, Vivisimo, is probably also ahead of A9 on the "suck meter".
The weird thing about it is that I believe Clusty's seach engine is much better than Google. Go ahead and try it, check out how it clusters the results.
"What America needs is a good 25-cent Beer" ~ me
Are those English Wheels or Metric Wheels?
Note that I am not saying that engineers shouldn't be involved in sheduling. The PMs need to ask the engineers what each task is and then have the engineers give a timeline on completing said tasks. If the PM's are creating project plans without the input of the folks that are supposed to do the task, then those project plans are not very useful.
But, after the engineers help fill out the plan, then they need to be held to the timelines they agreed to in the project plan. Weekly meetings to review the status are required. If there is a delay, then someone needs to explain why. It may not be the fault of the team. And, anyway, the point is not to blame someone for delays, but to PLAN, so risks can be identified and mitigated early in the project.
Obviously, you and I are on two different worlds on this matter.
I consider science to be the study and explanation of the surrounding world. I don't believe science includes a religious component. In fact, I consider religion to simply be the result of man's imagination as he tries to explain the unexplainable. I consider science to be a serious attempt to address the same issues. Religion is based on faith. Science is based on fact. I don't necessarily believe that science can explain everything, nor do I believe that the scientific method is set in stone. IMHO, The method could be changed, if other steps prove to be more effective in finding the answers to why the universe is the way it is.
From what you have written, you appear to believe that science includes a significant religious aspect. And, it appears you consider 'science' to be a religion just like Catholocism or Buddhism.
There is no way either of us will change each other's mind.
True, but the way I've been reading Marxist Harcker is that he is stating that the scientific method is part of a religious ideology (Objectivism). I must admit that I missed the Ayn Rand connection when I first read his/her posts. But, even so, I do disagree with the thought that scientists are part of a religious group. And, just because Ayn Rand proposed that Objectivism had metaphysical components, doesn't mean I buy into that line of thought.
Don't confuse the political process with the scientific method. The scientific method is a standard set of steps that analyze and explain. This group is not using analytical tools (well, I guess telephone polls are analytical) and they SURE aren't following the seven (or was that six?) sequential steps of the scientific method when they run a pro-evolution advertisement in Kansas.
Instead, they intend to use the political process, including political fundraising and advertising, to change the world.
Interesting. Contradictory, but interesting.
From Encyclopedia Britannica (while I enjoy Wikipedia, I don't use it as a serious source of information):
Note that an ideology sets out to both explain and CHANGE the world. The scientists use the scientific method to explain it.
So, I MUST believe it because Ayn Rand said so.
Your story reminds me of the old joke: What do you get when you merge Tivoli and IBM?
IBM.
What do you mean 'current'? Emotion has been a very critical part of election campaigns since Ancient Athens.
If you have an IT staff of 10, you can get away with this. If you have an organization that has over 400 IT employees; a non-IT it staff that is close to 50,000 people; are running nearly 900 applications on everything from Windows to Mainframe to AS/400 OS to seven different flavors of UNIX; and have are managing about 500TB of storage; then you can't get away with what you are describing for very long.
From your series of posts, it sounds like you are a smaller organization. If I am wrong, and you happend to have a couple of hundred IT employees, you need to look into ITIL. Otherwise, it is only a matter of time before you run into serious problems with your production environment.
While I admit that sometimes the process does get in the way, the fact is there is a good reason for 'process'. Presently, I am consulting at a place that doesn't really HAVE a process. They don't have meetings to complete paperwork or to discuss plans. They are very much into cutting edge technology. Every critical application is on the very latest OS and Hardware combination possible. They purchase the latest version of everything the very week it is released. And, their developers are busy coding away, instead of worrying about submitting documents or creating change requests.
While that may SOUND like a great place to work, the fact is, the place is a disaster. They are almost entirely in reaction mode. They never use project plans, so no one has any idea how long it will take to complete a task. That is a bad thing, if YOUR project is dependent upon someone else complete that task and you don't know how long it will take them.
They are always rushing to place a hardware order, or to configure the hardware to get it in place, because they want to have the latest and greatest of everything. Unfortunately, because most of their application vendors haven't even agreed to support the latest technology, they are either installing the latest technology without support (a very dangerous thing) or they are always on the phone to various developers, trying to get support.
Because they don't plan their system changes (using formal change procedures), I know of at least one example where payroll production crashed and burned because of an unrequested change (that is completely unacceptable when you have thousands of employees waiting for their pay stubs).
Oh, the developers? They are putting in 60 hour weeks, always juggling tasks, trying to complete EVERYTHING, because EVERYTHING is last-minute rush.
I could go on for pages, but I think you get the point.
I realize this is off-topic, but depending upon where the employer is located, it may be legal to fire someone based on their sexual orientation. In some states/localitites, sexual orientation is a protected trait. In other states/localities, it is not protected. So, in some situations, your employer can fire you based on the fact that you may be gay, straight, or somewhere in-between.
Here is an article on it. You have to scroll down a few pages in the PDF file.
The costs will be passed on to SOMEONE. My initial guess would be that since oil companies aren't allowed to raise prices in California, they'll simply raise prices in Oregon, Nevada, Arizona and Texas and make up the difference in lost profit that way.
You just ruined my day. Your line above gave me a vision of Robot Lawyers....
Why would it need telephone operators? Isn't Manhattan Island one big prison?
The way I figure it, at $60 a game, the developer may lose money on each game sold, but they'll make it up in volume...
I couldn't agree more. In fact: I HATE FASHION.
You've got to remember that these are just simple actors, directors, producers and gaffers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons.
I was about to say "You have High Anxiety (1977), History of the World (1981), Spaceballs (1987)". Then I realized that Spaceballs is a 19-year-old movie. So, let's try this: Young Frankenstein is arguably the funniest movie of all time (Personally, I try to watch the DVD every year or so and I laugh hysterically every time). So, I think Mel deserves at least a small bit of extra credit for that movie.
You are forgetting that the Broadway Play was simply an accurate recreation of the 1968 ORIGINAL Movie (starring Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder). And, Gene Wilder's sniveling character did work on film.
For the record, I thought the 2005 version of the movie was pretty good. Mel had to update some of the jokes for 2005, (but he kept the 'blonde bombshell'). Very funny. He also wrote a couple of pretty good new songs.
The main page you link to only lists "Box Office" receipts. If you click on the DVD Rental/Sales link, you'll see that they made $25 million in DVD sales. So, the movie made a nice buck. And the Broadway show opened on March 21, 2001. While it may not be selling out anymore, it is STILL running, over 5 years later. Trust me, Mel is raking in the cash.