What are the top three lessons that the community has learned from Unix?
What are the top three lessons that the community has by and large FAILED to learn from Unix?
Consumer Reports (June 2004) advises that buyers
should weigh quality of technical support as much as any other factor.
They also note that quality of support is dropping
pretty much across the board, from all computer manufactuers. They note cost saving as an issue here.
And they take special note of offshoring affecting
quality.
They advise consumers that if you are having
trouble understanding or being understood on
tech support phone calls, ask to speak to
a manager.
So I'd say the problem has hit the mainstream.
However it's not exclusively an offshoring problem. It's a quality of service problem.
Good support costs the seller money. As buyers
we have the power to reward sellers who don't
short us on support.
If the claim was violation of copyright on the song, we would be talking about someone else performing the song.
What we are talking about insatead is a particular recording of a particular performance of the song.
That's also copyrighted. The two copyrights are not the same, just as the song is not the same as a performance of it.
This proves that those who exercise their empathy develop their amygdala.
Not unlike those who do a lot of walking develop their leg muscles.
Actually, no, it doesn't prove that. It's as just as plausible an inference from the correlation claimed as the other way around, is all.
The interesting thing is that the other way around is almost invariably the first and often the only inference made, when correlations like this are found. "Gotta be the genes". Genes cause CNS diferences which cause behavior, is the knee-jerk reaction.
In fact it's just as plausible that something that happened after conception changed behavior which changed CNS. And the evidence here does not favor one inference over the other.
Yes. If you use someone's content but you don't
copy her words, images, etc., you may be
plagiarizing her work (e.g. if you implicitly
claim it's your work by failing to give credit)
but you're not infringing on her copyright
(if any). You may be thrown out of school, you
may lose your job at the Times, but you won't
be a defendant in court.
There are no content restrictions here.
Everyone is perfectly free to take the
subject matter or information presented,
if any, and publish it elsewhere.
It is not possible to copywrite content.
Once I've uttered that green frogs exist
in the world, you're free to go about
repeating that. I can't stop you.
What you mean is, restriction on the bits
that encode a particular presentation.
Those are indeed copyrighted. The content,
if any, is however free.
University INGRES was Stonebraker's RDMBS designed
and implemented at UCB. He founded a company Ingres
to bring it to market. Ingres developed INGRES for
over 10 years into an industrial strength database system, adding query and application development
tools, forms tools, reporting tools, DBA tools, programming
language integration, application generation,
porting to all major
UNIX systems as well as VMS and MS-DOS, re-architected
it to a client-server model, added support for more
storage structures, a state-of-the-art query optimizer,
large objects, user-defined datatypes, transactions,
database procedures, database rules, SQL support,
client-server architecture, multi-threaded high performance database engine, network
and distributed databases, gateways to legacy databases,
and a GUI environment for developing
GUI database applications.
So it's not accurate to say that SQL, or any of the features
mentioned above, were added by CA.
Ingres the company became RTI became ASK.
Later ASK was acquired by Computer Associates.
Next month will mark10th anniversary of the
takeover of Ingres.
In 1981, I used the SuperSKED system to
implement the following in
the behavior lab: if the subject held the
lever down for less than 2 seconds, the
trial was aborted; if the subject held the
lever down for 2 seconds or more, the
stimulus was presented and the trial began.
I was not alone; lots of researchers were
doing the same thing; some well before that.
I see nothing in Microsoft's claims that isn't
present in this prior art.
You miss the point. Of course it's obvious to us.
And when one of us says the exact same things,
it doesn't have impact. It's perceived as whiny
and self-serving. But when a senior Microsoft
executive says it, it has IMPACT. It's an
admission. It's a smoking gun.
Same situation as with internal memos from the
tobacco industry. When an antismoking advocate
says the tobacco industry markets to kids,
it's one thing. When we discover
R. J. Reyholds and Philip Morris memos talking
about how to
get kids to smoke,
that's another thing entirely. The public
takes notice. It's proof from the horse's mouth.
Those once-secret tobacco industry memoshave had
impact, gotten the public to see the tobacco
industry for what it is.
Perhaps more Microsoft memos like this one
is exactly what we need.
My 15GB iPod doesn't have enough capacity for
my LPs.
I have 1100 LPs. Ends up about 40MB each
on the iPod. Do the math: I need a 40GB
iPod.
But then, I might also want to put my CDs on it too.
I guess I'm not the typical customer.
On the other hand, if all you want is 100 songs,
who needs an iPod at all? Burn a few CDs with
those songs and use an ordinary portable CD
player. They exist, and they work very well.
I thought a large local store was to enable
a large local library.
Or copy them to the next medium.
I'm copying my vinyl to CDs. Yet
the vinyl will outlast the CDs. Problem?
Not. The CDs don't have to last forever.
They just have to last until I copy them
to the next medium (DVDs or whatever).
I don't have to be faster than the
bear,
I just have to be faster than you.
Re:Unique? No... but legal questions?
on
Dual User Windows PC
·
· Score: 2, Funny
It's not unique. This has been around for more than a decade...
More like three decades.
Wow, a computer that lets 2 users run
different apps at the same time --
a bold leap into the 1970s!!
Not like the radio, no.
In my experience with iPod shuffle, I found (1) it's not highly random, and (2) the more truly random it is, the less it resembles radio.
(2) Most FM stations select which songs follow each other; it's not random. Either it's programmed well in advance (in both senses of programmed) by the station/owner/network, or the DJ selects. If you listen, you'll find there are a lot of rules, a lot of general guidelines used. When it's not possible to follow those rules, the station usually separates the two songs with ads, news, or DJ patter.
(1) iPod shuffle mode favors tracks from the a small subset of albums in the playlist.
At least South Park still manages to be fresh and timely after 8 years...It manages to be topical, but fresh doesn't always follow. As it demonstrates at times.
One problem that ala carte channels would
solve very well: it would let programming
providers justify their costs directly to
subscribers.
Case in point: the recent slapfight between
Viacom and Dish. The problem
wasn't that Viacom was charging too much, or Dish
was trying to pay too little. The problem was,
Viacom got to look like the injured party,
and Dish got to look the ogre, taking
goodies from subscribers but
raising their rates when programming costs
went up. With ala carte programming, if Viacom
wants to raise rates for its channels, Dish
can pass along those costs on those channels
only, with perhaps a note to subscribers that
this was a decision by Viacom and there are
other channels on the Dish lineup for subscribers
who wish to move their dollars.
I would think over the long haul that this would
provide an incentive for programming providers
to price their products more competitively.
I happen to see it as a bad thing that the U.S.
probably won't remain a center of
expertise in computers and technology. And to
the extent offshoring contributes to that, I
see offshoring as a bad thing.
Perhaps you, dear reader, see it otherwise,
and that's OK.
But either way, if a U.S. student asked you whether
opportunities in computers will be growing
in the future, you could hardly assure her yes,
that's a safe bet.
You'd probably have to advise her that, sorry,
in this field you'll increasingly be competing
for jobs with people whose cost of living is
a third of yours. That's not a good position
to be in.
"If instead of gross morphological changes,
thalidomide had caused a 5 point drop in IQ,
would it be on the market today?"
"Of course"
That little dictum of behavioral teratology
(originally a question posed by a reporter)
illustrates why "been around long enough"
doesn't establish safety when the damage is subtle
and the connection to the cause is not obvious.
Having a discussion about drunk driving, and
how to be effective in reducing the carnage
from drunk driving, and never mentioning the
liquor industry, is like having a discussion
about malaria, and how to reduce the toll
from malaria, and never mentioning the fly
that spreads malaria.
Here's
an example
Here's
another example
And here's how it's done (scroll or search to The Wheel Behind Drunk Driving). How the liquor industry uses money and PR talent to derail or weaken measures that would reduce drunk driving.
Don't get me wrong: I love devices, I love
discussion of devices, I love discussion
of devices that would reduce drunk driving.
I'll even sit still for
discussion of whether certain devices overly impinge on
individuals. But to have a discussion on
drunk driving, and not even mention the major
force against effective measures to
drunk driving, well
that's a discussion that's seriously missing
the point.
Slashdot Mirror
What are the top three lessons that the community has learned from Unix? What are the top three lessons that the community has by and large FAILED to learn from Unix?
Leadership is best learned by leading.
Simulation is better than nothing, better than books or lectures -- but not as good as doing. Why not the real thing?
Many groups offer leadership opportunities.
One group with an emphasis on learning leadership by leading: the Boy Scouts.
Simulation is great when the real thing is expensive or lethal. Leading needn't be either.
They also note that quality of support is dropping pretty much across the board, from all computer manufactuers. They note cost saving as an issue here.
And they take special note of offshoring affecting quality.
They advise consumers that if you are having trouble understanding or being understood on tech support phone calls, ask to speak to a manager.
So I'd say the problem has hit the mainstream.
However it's not exclusively an offshoring problem. It's a quality of service problem. Good support costs the seller money. As buyers we have the power to reward sellers who don't short us on support.
You mean copyrighted recordings.
If the claim was violation of copyright on the song, we would be talking about someone else performing the song.
What we are talking about insatead is a particular recording of a particular performance of the song. That's also copyrighted. The two copyrights are not the same, just as the song is not the same as a performance of it.
You mean, of course, movies and other content in HD format. There's no such thing as "HD content", any more than there's "paper content" for books.
It's possible to provide content in HD format, as well as in other formats.
Not unlike those who do a lot of walking develop their leg muscles.
Actually, no, it doesn't prove that. It's as just as plausible an inference from the correlation claimed as the other way around, is all.
The interesting thing is that the other way around is almost invariably the first and often the only inference made, when correlations like this are found. "Gotta be the genes". Genes cause CNS diferences which cause behavior, is the knee-jerk reaction.
In fact it's just as plausible that something that happened after conception changed behavior which changed CNS. And the evidence here does not favor one inference over the other.
I'd love to have a device that would recognize content and reject bits that are content-free.
What the device will do is deal with formats and protocols, not content.
Yet another example of use of "content" to refer to something else.
The article BTW comes up with the magnificent neologism "digital content format" by which it means format.
You mean per hour of recorded video, of course.
How many minutes of anything we could call "content" is captured in that hour, of course, varies.
Content does not mean bits. If it did, an empty disk would have exactly the same amount of content as a full one.
A range of such biofeedback sports would be more fun.
Yes. If you use someone's content but you don't copy her words, images, etc., you may be plagiarizing her work (e.g. if you implicitly claim it's your work by failing to give credit) but you're not infringing on her copyright (if any). You may be thrown out of school, you may lose your job at the Times, but you won't be a defendant in court.
It is not possible to copywrite content. Once I've uttered that green frogs exist in the world, you're free to go about repeating that. I can't stop you.
What you mean is, restriction on the bits that encode a particular presentation. Those are indeed copyrighted. The content, if any, is however free.
University INGRES was Stonebraker's RDMBS designed and implemented at UCB. He founded a company Ingres to bring it to market. Ingres developed INGRES for over 10 years into an industrial strength database system, adding query and application development tools, forms tools, reporting tools, DBA tools, programming language integration, application generation, porting to all major UNIX systems as well as VMS and MS-DOS, re-architected it to a client-server model, added support for more storage structures, a state-of-the-art query optimizer, large objects, user-defined datatypes, transactions, database procedures, database rules, SQL support, client-server architecture, multi-threaded high performance database engine, network and distributed databases, gateways to legacy databases, and a GUI environment for developing GUI database applications.
So it's not accurate to say that SQL, or any of the features mentioned above, were added by CA.
Ingres the company became RTI became ASK. Later ASK was acquired by Computer Associates.
Next month will mark10th anniversary of the takeover of Ingres.
"Oh...I'm sorry, I forgot to tell you...it only works for the pure of heart"
What I found surprising was the number of people who said:
"How did it know???"
I was not alone; lots of researchers were doing the same thing; some well before that.
I see nothing in Microsoft's claims that isn't present in this prior art.
Same situation as with internal memos from the tobacco industry. When an antismoking advocate says the tobacco industry markets to kids, it's one thing. When we discover R. J. Reyholds and Philip Morris memos talking about how to get kids to smoke, that's another thing entirely. The public takes notice. It's proof from the horse's mouth.
Those once-secret tobacco industry memoshave had impact, gotten the public to see the tobacco industry for what it is. Perhaps more Microsoft memos like this one is exactly what we need.
I have 1100 LPs. Ends up about 40MB each on the iPod. Do the math: I need a 40GB iPod.
But then, I might also want to put my CDs on it too.
I guess I'm not the typical customer.
On the other hand, if all you want is 100 songs, who needs an iPod at all? Burn a few CDs with those songs and use an ordinary portable CD player. They exist, and they work very well. I thought a large local store was to enable a large local library.
I don't have to be faster than the bear, I just have to be faster than you.
More like three decades.
Wow, a computer that lets 2 users run different apps at the same time -- a bold leap into the 1970s!!
What will they think of next???
Not like the radio, no. In my experience with iPod shuffle, I found (1) it's not highly random, and (2) the more truly random it is, the less it resembles radio. (2) Most FM stations select which songs follow each other; it's not random. Either it's programmed well in advance (in both senses of programmed) by the station/owner/network, or the DJ selects. If you listen, you'll find there are a lot of rules, a lot of general guidelines used. When it's not possible to follow those rules, the station usually separates the two songs with ads, news, or DJ patter. (1) iPod shuffle mode favors tracks from the a small subset of albums in the playlist.
At least South Park still manages to be fresh and timely after 8 years...It manages to be topical, but fresh doesn't always follow. As it demonstrates at times.
Case in point: the recent slapfight between Viacom and Dish. The problem wasn't that Viacom was charging too much, or Dish was trying to pay too little. The problem was, Viacom got to look like the injured party, and Dish got to look the ogre, taking goodies from subscribers but raising their rates when programming costs went up. With ala carte programming, if Viacom wants to raise rates for its channels, Dish can pass along those costs on those channels only, with perhaps a note to subscribers that this was a decision by Viacom and there are other channels on the Dish lineup for subscribers who wish to move their dollars.
I would think over the long haul that this would provide an incentive for programming providers to price their products more competitively.
Both libel and slander are verbal.
Verbal includes written and spoken word.
This is a common error, and appears to be
driven by avoiding the dread word "oral".
If so, "spoken" is a perfectly good synonym.
So you mean: libel is written, slander is spoken.
Please get your terminology straight before
orally expessing yourself out of your anus.
Perhaps you, dear reader, see it otherwise, and that's OK.
But either way, if a U.S. student asked you whether opportunities in computers will be growing in the future, you could hardly assure her yes, that's a safe bet.
You'd probably have to advise her that, sorry, in this field you'll increasingly be competing for jobs with people whose cost of living is a third of yours. That's not a good position to be in.
"Of course"
That little dictum of behavioral teratology (originally a question posed by a reporter) illustrates why "been around long enough" doesn't establish safety when the damage is subtle and the connection to the cause is not obvious.
Here's a fuller discussionfor those interested.
Here's an example Here's another example And here's how it's done (scroll or search to The Wheel Behind Drunk Driving). How the liquor industry uses money and PR talent to derail or weaken measures that would reduce drunk driving.
Don't get me wrong: I love devices, I love discussion of devices, I love discussion of devices that would reduce drunk driving. I'll even sit still for discussion of whether certain devices overly impinge on individuals. But to have a discussion on drunk driving, and not even mention the major force against effective measures to drunk driving, well that's a discussion that's seriously missing the point.