...what they're doing here is far simpler than quantum computing. Basically, all they're doing is using nanotubes as conductive elements that have feature sizes smaller than what they can fab with copper (currently). To me, the interesting thing is that they have at least made an initial step toward fabbing the stuff.
Also, as I recall, the major problem with using nanotubes in this way is going to be getting a number of them with similar characteristics. So far, no one's been able to get a good handle on how to really tailor properties finely (length, twist angle, etc).
India, and the rest of Asia, has alot of smart, talented people who can live middle - class lifestyles on a whole lot less than it takes here
If there are that many smart talented people in India, it won't be long until they're running their own businesses. At that point, *they* will be hiring people, and India will be creating as many jobs as they "steal."
. I work in manufacturing, and take it from me - companies will farm out anything they can to make an extra buck.
Yeah, but they won't farm out stuff where there are significant IP issues at hand or where the product is more intellectual as opposed to physical. This is why I think we won't see the same sort of outsourcing in IT that we do in, say, cars.
As to your articles, a lot of it is intended to develop an IT industry in India. This is startup company funds - not outsourcing, which would be different. Tapping the Indian economy is a Good Thing, and will only serve to increase the cost and standard of living in those areas, as I discussed. The other thing they talk about is back-office type stuff, which is the dregs of programming, which I would expect to be outsourced.
So I'm still trying to find a company that closed a research center in this country and moved it to India. I can see a glut of mediocre programmers dragging down salaries of the mediocre. But if you have a degree from a good college, solid experience, and are a very talented coder, you won't have problems.
It's not a question of work quality. An electrical engineer in India with a bachelors degree and 3-4 years of experience earns about $8000 US per year. Wanna compete with that?
IN INDIA. And if it's worth it, go to India and make that. Realistically, most Indian programmers working for US companies are living in the US, because they don't want to live in India much more than you do. So you're playing on a pretty level playing field.
As far as outsourcing work TO India, please find me an example of a company that farmed out work to India that wasn't bottom-of-the-barrel type work. So this only affects the crappiest American programmers. So I'm still not feeling the pity.
Bottom line is, if you're good at what you do, you'll have work. If you aren't, you might not. I'm still having a hard time seeing anything wrong with that. And I still want to know where all the programmers were when all the textile jobs moved to the South Pacific, and manufacturing jobs to Mexico. Seems a lot of people are spouting a different tune now that outsourcing has shifted to low-level white-collar jobs.
Reuters, April 15 2003 - Water and Oxygen Molecules Found to be Hazardous!
Today, researchers at Wahoo State University found that nanoscale-sized water molecules can be extremely hazardous. "People may not realize, but water molecules are small enough to penetrate the lungs, skin, and even cell membranes," claims Dr. Phil McCracken, who performed the research. "Our work has shown that sufficient inhalation of small water molecules can even be fatal within minutes."
Researchers at Dumas College have also shown that our atmosphere is littered with extremely tiny, sub-nanoscale molecules such as oxygen and nitrogen. According to Dr. Benjamin Dover, "these molecules are even smaller than the hazardous, nano-scale water molecules. Some of these may be as small as two atoms, occasionally even a single atom!" Dr. Dover recommends avoiding such molecules, especially oxygen, which has been demonstrated to have damaging effects upon the human body, including a strange addictive behavior. "We have found that many subjects become dependent upon this nano-substance, and removal from a source of oxygen can be just as fatal as acute water toxicity," he says. "Additionally, because it is so small, oxygen has found to be extremely flammable in the presence of innocuous non-nanoscale materials such as wood or coal." Dr. Dover recommends that people avoid oxygen, as even newborn children become addicted to it immediately after removal of the umbilical cord.
Drs. Dover and McCracken agree that the best course of action is the removal of these dangerous nano-materials from the earth's environment. This will be difficult, as 75% of the earth's surface consists of water and 21% of the earth's atmosphere consists of oxygen. However, the benefits outweigh the costs. "Think of the children!" says Senator Fouckwidt (D-Ca). "We must immediately stop research on these dangerous nano-chemicals before they lead to widescale deaths."
Mr. von Lohman doesn't know what he's talking about. The issue is not that musicians aren't getting paid. Record companies have been ripping off musicians for years and the RIAA couldn't care less. The issue is that the record companies see file sharing as a threat to their profits (it's not) and their monopoly (it is).
I think von Lohman is a bit more savvy than you're giving him credit for. He knows there's know way in hell the RIAA will go for this, he's with the freaking EFF for God's sake. What I believe he's attempting is two things, both of which you address:
Artists vs. Labels
monetary losses vs. loss of monopoly
Under the first point, he tries to divide the artists and the labels, which have somehow united on this issue after being at each other's throats forever. He says we'll make sure we pay both camps, and while he doesn't specify, I have a feeling that he intends a split that is more artist-rich than the typical deal (I'm going off of his comments in the article). This would, ostensibly, bring support of artists around to the side of the artist-sympathetic P2P user. That would be good.
Under the second point, his method would pay the labels back without allowing them to maintain a bit of control of distribution of the music, as you point out. We would have all the freedom we do now, save financial, stealing the record company's ability to concentrate sales in a few low-risk, cookie-cutter artists as they do now. You are correct in pointing out the monopoly angle - people have to consider this issue in the greater context of what the RIAA has done lately, including their destruction of streaming 'net radio. That was all about control - at the time, stream-ripping software wasn't being used all that widely. They didn't want to have to offer payola to a massive group of stations, and that instinct overwhelmed the massive free advertising they would have gotten. Think about that, people, and this issue is clearly not about the money.
If you were to get von Lohman off the record, I guarantee you he knows that the RIAA will never go for this. But he wants them to have to abandon the profit/loss argument so the artists and public (and, God forbid, Congresscritters) realize that this isn't about money - it's about control over artists and over distribution. Getting the artists on board would be key - right now they're the most dim-witted, unwitting shills ever. And I imagine they're more successful than Hillary Rosen was.
You said that better than I could have. Good luck with what you're working on - I'm assuming you're over there currently.
Also, I agree with your solutions, that will definitely help with budding industry. Know of anything that will help from the top-up? I realize that that is where the curruption is rife, but is there anything we can do that isn't "steal-able?" I mean, I would like to build schools, but I know exactly where the building materials and computers are going if we send them.
btw, my favorite bit:
5) the deployment of western hippies with no understanding of what makes a capitalist economy tick; hippies that are given the chance to implement their dream of how they would like an economy to work (which never works in the real world) by pushing the recipients of foreign aid to accept their warped view of civilisation.
Trying to put a computer in every home? Try getting clean water in every home first. For now lets work on that. We can put in computers once we can help them READ.
As much as I applaud foreign aid, the way we've been doing it DOESN'T WORK. When we go in and feed people, guess what happens when we leave (and leave we will!)? They starve again. If anything, they're worse off, because they've gotten used to a steady stream of aid.
This is why we need to educate them, and computers is a good way to provide maximum education/$. Right now, in the third world, there is no meritocracy - so there are, quite likely, very intelligent people who don't have any means of improving themselves. However, they could do very well with some investment in education in these countries.
So, what we need is to educate the populace while we feed them. Give them a chance to learn either a trade skill, or to go to university. Then, the educated can help rebuild the country. Admittedly, computers aren't the sole answer to this, but it would be a part. Those who have the intelligence and literacy would be able to teach themselves, and as other posters have said, Google is a better textbook than nothing for schools that lack resources.
Yes, Africa needs food....but it might need civil engineers even more. That's why we need to work really hard to educate them. If you wait to educate until no one is starving, no one will ever be educated and everyone will starve when we stop spoon-feeding them. That's why it has to be a concerted effort.
Sorry, but I have personally seen a number of indian workers in positions at Cisco which they were not in any way talented enough to fill, to the point where other (more capable) engineers had to hold their hand to make sure they didn't do more harm than good.
Can you honestly say that there aren't Caucasian, American workers about whom you can say the same? That's just called hiring. Sometimes it goes well, sometimes not. I have some coworkers who are so damned dumb I don't know how they remember to breathe. They happen to be white. It's not fair to hold foreign workers to a higher standard than domestic.
I'm not advocating oppression of any people. I just want people to know that quality is not the only reason for outsourcing.
I appreciate that, but even then, all it's doing is spreading out a certain number of jobs throughout a diluted working pool. As this happens, India's standard of living is increasing quite quickly. And, I guarantee you, the parent poster is just as unhappy about people from third-world nations working in this country too (don't know if you were around for the H-1B visa flame war or not about a month ago...).
And ultimately, there are disadvantages to shipping projects overseas. There is less contact among work teams, and, for a variety of reasons, the quality ends up pretty shoddy. Much of this, I'm sure, is because so many of the talented coders from other countries come *here* to work.
Finally, there are so many advantages, for an employer, to having their intellectual capital in this country, that it should be easy for Americans to outcompete. I've never heard of a company sending the development of mission-critical stuff overseas. It's generally the mundane stuff.
So my point is basically, if someone can't do better than the crap coming back from from foreign outsourcing, I won't cry for them.
I think what we need to do here in the U.S. to boost productivity is to use the 'virtually no contact with management' model by out sourcing managerial positions instead of technical positions.
I think you may be on to something! American middle management is the problem. Execute the middle-managers and the bureaucrats, and watch the economy soar!
If I might share a quote:
"I can't stand this proliferation of paperwork. It's useless to fight the forms. You've got to kill the people producing them."
--Vladimir Kabaidze, general director of the Ivanivo Machine Building Works, in a speech to the Communist Party Conference
I couldn't say it any better....and I'd say it applies to middle managers just as well as bureaucrats.
...you deserve your spot in the unemployment line.
Nice idea - maintain the low standard of living in India so undereducated, soft, lazy Americans can maintain their high standard of living.
It's amazing how people can believe in equal rights until it's they that have to give something up to a more talented but previously repressed foreign worker.
My advice? Start writing better code or further your education if you don't want your job given to someone willing to do a better job than you. And don't give me this outsourcing sob story - if your job can be done capably by someone who has virtually no contact with management, halfway around the world, then you're not doing a good job. If you are a good, educated programmer, you have nothing to worry about. If you have the ability to lead and manage projects, you have nothing to worry about. If not, then you're screwed, and you have no one to blame but yourself.
Seriously, though, I see major problems with this device with the Slashdot community. What happens to your online relationship when your significant other wants to call you on the videophone? I see many broken hearts in the future.
What, do you mean when she has to put the thing across the room just so she can fit in the picture? Or when she de-focuses it so you can't tell just how hideous the beast is?
Because 4% mortality is damned high for any contagious disease, that's why. Because it's more contagious than the clap in Tijuana, that's why. Combine those two and you have the potential (yes I said POTENTIAL) for this to be the biggest killing virus (among otherwise healthy people) since polio.
As I said, it's one of the more contagious viruses (yes, that's the correct plural, asshole, you know who you are), and we have no idea how it is spread. I'm not sure, but I'm guessing that for each person who has gotten it, they've given it to 2-3 people (I'm guessing from the speed of symtom development as well as the growth of the disease, and case studies). That, given your 4% mortality, means that if they have 500 people with the disease, NOT quarantining them will kill about 50 people. Not much fun, eh? And that's just in the first generation of spread.
Glad you're not in charge of the CDC. To sum up, this thing is incredibly acute, has a currently unknown vector other than general proximity/air, has no real cure, and is contagious. If there were ever a case for quarantine, you just found it.
But if I sell my modified version, I have to pay royalities per copy.
Actually, what they mean here is that, as an OEM reseller, you still have to pay a windows license whether or not you modify it. But you don't have to pay extra to modify it. That clause isn't very onerous. The "all your source are belong to us" clause is the kicker.
It would be nice and kludgey, but I think the best route around this would be to make the released changes to the binary instead of the source. Easiest way would probably be to coimpile the original source, make your changes to the source, compile again, run a glorified "diff" on the before/after binaries, and figure out what changed. That way, you could collect your changes to the binary into a patch. Then, you could redistribute your patch to people who HAVE windows, and you can NOT give them your source code.
Not the best solution, but it involves as little money hitting M$ as possible. Now I wonder if they already have a provision against this in the EULA of the Shared-Source dev kits?
2000kbps might not be a lot over there but it's still faster than the 512k/1024k that's the norm over here.
Hmmm...most consumer broadband options are in the 500kbps area in the US too. If this stuff were to become viable, it would certainly shutup the damned telcos and their last mile, I expect, as it's already wired.
I'm sure this is exactly what the current providers want, though. Not only do they have to compete with cable companies (and now satellite as well) to provide internet, now they have the frikkin' power company too. They're just lucky the power companies are too busy price-fixing to bother with this.
A lot of people seem dead set on comparing an entry level printer of 100 buck or less to what used to be a 1k+ printer. Hp's at the grand level, still pretty sweet. And they've learned new tricks.
I understand that...I'm not comparing apples to oranges here (if you read what I originally said). I'm saying that, at a given price point, HP's quality has been declining. They used to produce reliable printers for $150, now they make defective printers for that price. One should expect the opposite in the computer industry - namely, that over time quality increases at a price point. But not with HP - their quality control has taken a nose dive. Note I'm not talking about features and such, and I'm not complaining that I can't get a top-of-the-line printer for $50. But when DOA rates start going up, that's bad. And I've even started noticing HP's with plain defective paper feeder designs, which is sad since that used to be the thing that they did the best.
And all I'm saying is it doesn't HAVE to be this way. Like I said, Canon seems to be making great printers still.
As I recall, some would-be cartridge vendors have sued printer manufactuters claimin that this practice is anti-competitive. At the moment I don't recall which companies this relates to. I believe it was one of Cannon, Brother or HP, and that there was a story about it on/. a year or so ago.
I know Lexmark is currently using the DMCA to bludgeon their competition with regard to this.
Also, if I might make a recommendation, Canon seems to be the least obnoxious with the ink issues - their printers are a little more expensive, but the quality is a good bit higher, including a lower consumables cost. This even applies to their ~$150 printers. But that's just me.
Also, I think HP's entry level printers, even at a constant price point, have turned to crap. I've noticed a lot of DOA printers among my friends and family (I, like most of you, am the local "computer guy," so I have a decent sample size;)), much more than they used to. Seems like they really are determined to quit doing what they did well and turn into Compaq.
Benetton being popular in the US was those bright logo sweatshirts from the mid-80's were everyone would roll up the sleeves, right around the members-only jacket phenomenon. I guess they are still popular in the EU?
Well, shit, David Hasselhoff still has a career over there. A SINGING career. And those crazy bastards even think he was the best thing about Baywatch. Kinda makes me wonder about the REAL reason for the low birthrate over there...
But, with a few google searches, I can find most everything I need about common topics, like MacOS X.
I'm usually in agreement - I find that google is nearly always the best reference for everthing...except computer how-to. Usually, what I find, is my searches turn up 1000 people with the same/related question as me, but usually, either no one answered, or the advice sucked. It takes me usually a lot of searching through google to find someone who had the exact problem adequately answered.
By then, with a good book, I have found the answer far sooner. Of course, the main advantage of google is it's free, so I end up repeating the above process a lot...
Yes, as a computer scientist, I obviously know more about farming than the farmers. They should listen to what I have to say since I undoubtedly understand the complexities of running a modern business (farm). Those farmers are obviously too stupid to make decisions on their own, and those years of college they took were obviously a waste.
I also don't trust the crowd that seems to think subsistence farming is some sort of idyllic lifestyle and just throwing away all technology will lead to some sort of paradise. I'd like to see some of these guys actually try to live without technology and see how much they like it.
What the hell post are you responding to - it's obviously not mine! First, I'm not a programmer, I'm a scientist (NOT of the computer variety), so I'm a lot closer to the genetically modified food debate. Second, I'm from Kentucky, so I come from and know a lot of farmers. I never insulted farmers, or farming. I hung out with a lot of them in college, seeing as how we had a huge agriculture program.
Should you actually talk to a farmer, you will find that nearly to a man they hate monsanto. You're right, they have no choice but to use their seed - the yields from it, combined with pest disease resistance make it nearly mandatory. And where you got the idea that I was advocating subsistence farming I DON'T know. But, that doesn't mean that monsanto is the solution to your problems. Once you start using it, you almost can't stop - they've gone after farmers before who stopped using it, and if they find a single stray plant, they nail them.
So you might want to look at this monsanto thing a little closer. If you think they're the farmer's friend, you know nothing of farming.
Slashdot Mirror
I assume you are the guy who thought he was JFK? Did you get to fuck a bitch who thought she was Marilyn Monroe?
Also, as I recall, the major problem with using nanotubes in this way is going to be getting a number of them with similar characteristics. So far, no one's been able to get a good handle on how to really tailor properties finely (length, twist angle, etc).
But one day, perhaps.
Thankfully, my wife doesn't read slashdot.
If there are that many smart talented people in India, it won't be long until they're running their own businesses. At that point, *they* will be hiring people, and India will be creating as many jobs as they "steal."
. I work in manufacturing, and take it from me - companies will farm out anything they can to make an extra buck.
Yeah, but they won't farm out stuff where there are significant IP issues at hand or where the product is more intellectual as opposed to physical. This is why I think we won't see the same sort of outsourcing in IT that we do in, say, cars.
As to your articles, a lot of it is intended to develop an IT industry in India. This is startup company funds - not outsourcing, which would be different. Tapping the Indian economy is a Good Thing, and will only serve to increase the cost and standard of living in those areas, as I discussed. The other thing they talk about is back-office type stuff, which is the dregs of programming, which I would expect to be outsourced.
So I'm still trying to find a company that closed a research center in this country and moved it to India. I can see a glut of mediocre programmers dragging down salaries of the mediocre. But if you have a degree from a good college, solid experience, and are a very talented coder, you won't have problems.
IN INDIA. And if it's worth it, go to India and make that. Realistically, most Indian programmers working for US companies are living in the US, because they don't want to live in India much more than you do. So you're playing on a pretty level playing field.
As far as outsourcing work TO India, please find me an example of a company that farmed out work to India that wasn't bottom-of-the-barrel type work. So this only affects the crappiest American programmers. So I'm still not feeling the pity.
Bottom line is, if you're good at what you do, you'll have work. If you aren't, you might not. I'm still having a hard time seeing anything wrong with that. And I still want to know where all the programmers were when all the textile jobs moved to the South Pacific, and manufacturing jobs to Mexico. Seems a lot of people are spouting a different tune now that outsourcing has shifted to low-level white-collar jobs.
Today, researchers at Wahoo State University found that nanoscale-sized water molecules can be extremely hazardous. "People may not realize, but water molecules are small enough to penetrate the lungs, skin, and even cell membranes," claims Dr. Phil McCracken, who performed the research. "Our work has shown that sufficient inhalation of small water molecules can even be fatal within minutes."
Researchers at Dumas College have also shown that our atmosphere is littered with extremely tiny, sub-nanoscale molecules such as oxygen and nitrogen. According to Dr. Benjamin Dover, "these molecules are even smaller than the hazardous, nano-scale water molecules. Some of these may be as small as two atoms, occasionally even a single atom!" Dr. Dover recommends avoiding such molecules, especially oxygen, which has been demonstrated to have damaging effects upon the human body, including a strange addictive behavior. "We have found that many subjects become dependent upon this nano-substance, and removal from a source of oxygen can be just as fatal as acute water toxicity," he says. "Additionally, because it is so small, oxygen has found to be extremely flammable in the presence of innocuous non-nanoscale materials such as wood or coal." Dr. Dover recommends that people avoid oxygen, as even newborn children become addicted to it immediately after removal of the umbilical cord.
Drs. Dover and McCracken agree that the best course of action is the removal of these dangerous nano-materials from the earth's environment. This will be difficult, as 75% of the earth's surface consists of water and 21% of the earth's atmosphere consists of oxygen. However, the benefits outweigh the costs. "Think of the children!" says Senator Fouckwidt (D-Ca). "We must immediately stop research on these dangerous nano-chemicals before they lead to widescale deaths."
I think von Lohman is a bit more savvy than you're giving him credit for. He knows there's know way in hell the RIAA will go for this, he's with the freaking EFF for God's sake. What I believe he's attempting is two things, both of which you address:
Artists vs. Labels
monetary losses vs. loss of monopoly
Under the first point, he tries to divide the artists and the labels, which have somehow united on this issue after being at each other's throats forever. He says we'll make sure we pay both camps, and while he doesn't specify, I have a feeling that he intends a split that is more artist-rich than the typical deal (I'm going off of his comments in the article). This would, ostensibly, bring support of artists around to the side of the artist-sympathetic P2P user. That would be good.
Under the second point, his method would pay the labels back without allowing them to maintain a bit of control of distribution of the music, as you point out. We would have all the freedom we do now, save financial, stealing the record company's ability to concentrate sales in a few low-risk, cookie-cutter artists as they do now. You are correct in pointing out the monopoly angle - people have to consider this issue in the greater context of what the RIAA has done lately, including their destruction of streaming 'net radio. That was all about control - at the time, stream-ripping software wasn't being used all that widely. They didn't want to have to offer payola to a massive group of stations, and that instinct overwhelmed the massive free advertising they would have gotten. Think about that, people, and this issue is clearly not about the money.
If you were to get von Lohman off the record, I guarantee you he knows that the RIAA will never go for this. But he wants them to have to abandon the profit/loss argument so the artists and public (and, God forbid, Congresscritters) realize that this isn't about money - it's about control over artists and over distribution. Getting the artists on board would be key - right now they're the most dim-witted, unwitting shills ever. And I imagine they're more successful than Hillary Rosen was.
Can the phone companies in Michigan offer caller-ID block? Should be illegal to do that too.
Also, I agree with your solutions, that will definitely help with budding industry. Know of anything that will help from the top-up? I realize that that is where the curruption is rife, but is there anything we can do that isn't "steal-able?" I mean, I would like to build schools, but I know exactly where the building materials and computers are going if we send them.
btw, my favorite bit:
5) the deployment of western hippies with no understanding of what makes a capitalist economy tick; hippies that are given the chance to implement their dream of how they would like an economy to work (which never works in the real world) by pushing the recipients of foreign aid to accept their warped view of civilisation.
Beautiful.
As much as I applaud foreign aid, the way we've been doing it DOESN'T WORK. When we go in and feed people, guess what happens when we leave (and leave we will!)? They starve again. If anything, they're worse off, because they've gotten used to a steady stream of aid.
This is why we need to educate them, and computers is a good way to provide maximum education/$. Right now, in the third world, there is no meritocracy - so there are, quite likely, very intelligent people who don't have any means of improving themselves. However, they could do very well with some investment in education in these countries.
So, what we need is to educate the populace while we feed them. Give them a chance to learn either a trade skill, or to go to university. Then, the educated can help rebuild the country. Admittedly, computers aren't the sole answer to this, but it would be a part. Those who have the intelligence and literacy would be able to teach themselves, and as other posters have said, Google is a better textbook than nothing for schools that lack resources.
Yes, Africa needs food....but it might need civil engineers even more. That's why we need to work really hard to educate them. If you wait to educate until no one is starving, no one will ever be educated and everyone will starve when we stop spoon-feeding them. That's why it has to be a concerted effort.
Can you honestly say that there aren't Caucasian, American workers about whom you can say the same? That's just called hiring. Sometimes it goes well, sometimes not. I have some coworkers who are so damned dumb I don't know how they remember to breathe. They happen to be white. It's not fair to hold foreign workers to a higher standard than domestic.
I appreciate that, but even then, all it's doing is spreading out a certain number of jobs throughout a diluted working pool. As this happens, India's standard of living is increasing quite quickly. And, I guarantee you, the parent poster is just as unhappy about people from third-world nations working in this country too (don't know if you were around for the H-1B visa flame war or not about a month ago...).
And ultimately, there are disadvantages to shipping projects overseas. There is less contact among work teams, and, for a variety of reasons, the quality ends up pretty shoddy. Much of this, I'm sure, is because so many of the talented coders from other countries come *here* to work.
Finally, there are so many advantages, for an employer, to having their intellectual capital in this country, that it should be easy for Americans to outcompete. I've never heard of a company sending the development of mission-critical stuff overseas. It's generally the mundane stuff.
So my point is basically, if someone can't do better than the crap coming back from from foreign outsourcing, I won't cry for them.
I think you may be on to something! American middle management is the problem. Execute the middle-managers and the bureaucrats, and watch the economy soar!
If I might share a quote:
"I can't stand this proliferation of paperwork. It's useless to fight the forms. You've got to kill the people producing them."
--Vladimir Kabaidze, general director of the Ivanivo Machine Building Works, in a speech to the Communist Party Conference
I couldn't say it any better....and I'd say it applies to middle managers just as well as bureaucrats.
Nice idea - maintain the low standard of living in India so undereducated, soft, lazy Americans can maintain their high standard of living.
It's amazing how people can believe in equal rights until it's they that have to give something up to a more talented but previously repressed foreign worker.
My advice? Start writing better code or further your education if you don't want your job given to someone willing to do a better job than you. And don't give me this outsourcing sob story - if your job can be done capably by someone who has virtually no contact with management, halfway around the world, then you're not doing a good job. If you are a good, educated programmer, you have nothing to worry about. If you have the ability to lead and manage projects, you have nothing to worry about. If not, then you're screwed, and you have no one to blame but yourself.
What, do you mean when she has to put the thing across the room just so she can fit in the picture? Or when she de-focuses it so you can't tell just how hideous the beast is?
As I said, it's one of the more contagious viruses (yes, that's the correct plural, asshole, you know who you are), and we have no idea how it is spread. I'm not sure, but I'm guessing that for each person who has gotten it, they've given it to 2-3 people (I'm guessing from the speed of symtom development as well as the growth of the disease, and case studies). That, given your 4% mortality, means that if they have 500 people with the disease, NOT quarantining them will kill about 50 people. Not much fun, eh? And that's just in the first generation of spread.
Glad you're not in charge of the CDC. To sum up, this thing is incredibly acute, has a currently unknown vector other than general proximity/air, has no real cure, and is contagious. If there were ever a case for quarantine, you just found it.
You can support it by colunteering for after-school programs and voting for that tax levy next time it comes up.
But if I sell my modified version, I have to pay royalities per copy.
Actually, what they mean here is that, as an OEM reseller, you still have to pay a windows license whether or not you modify it. But you don't have to pay extra to modify it. That clause isn't very onerous. The "all your source are belong to us" clause is the kicker.
It would be nice and kludgey, but I think the best route around this would be to make the released changes to the binary instead of the source. Easiest way would probably be to coimpile the original source, make your changes to the source, compile again, run a glorified "diff" on the before/after binaries, and figure out what changed. That way, you could collect your changes to the binary into a patch. Then, you could redistribute your patch to people who HAVE windows, and you can NOT give them your source code.
Not the best solution, but it involves as little money hitting M$ as possible. Now I wonder if they already have a provision against this in the EULA of the Shared-Source dev kits?
Hmmm...most consumer broadband options are in the 500kbps area in the US too. If this stuff were to become viable, it would certainly shutup the damned telcos and their last mile, I expect, as it's already wired.
I'm sure this is exactly what the current providers want, though. Not only do they have to compete with cable companies (and now satellite as well) to provide internet, now they have the frikkin' power company too. They're just lucky the power companies are too busy price-fixing to bother with this.
I understand that...I'm not comparing apples to oranges here (if you read what I originally said). I'm saying that, at a given price point, HP's quality has been declining. They used to produce reliable printers for $150, now they make defective printers for that price. One should expect the opposite in the computer industry - namely, that over time quality increases at a price point. But not with HP - their quality control has taken a nose dive. Note I'm not talking about features and such, and I'm not complaining that I can't get a top-of-the-line printer for $50. But when DOA rates start going up, that's bad. And I've even started noticing HP's with plain defective paper feeder designs, which is sad since that used to be the thing that they did the best.
And all I'm saying is it doesn't HAVE to be this way. Like I said, Canon seems to be making great printers still.
I know Lexmark is currently using the DMCA to bludgeon their competition with regard to this.
Also, if I might make a recommendation, Canon seems to be the least obnoxious with the ink issues - their printers are a little more expensive, but the quality is a good bit higher, including a lower consumables cost. This even applies to their ~$150 printers. But that's just me.
Also, I think HP's entry level printers, even at a constant price point, have turned to crap. I've noticed a lot of DOA printers among my friends and family (I, like most of you, am the local "computer guy," so I have a decent sample size ;)), much more than they used to. Seems like they really are determined to quit doing what they did well and turn into Compaq.
Well, shit, David Hasselhoff still has a career over there. A SINGING career. And those crazy bastards even think he was the best thing about Baywatch. Kinda makes me wonder about the REAL reason for the low birthrate over there...
I'm usually in agreement - I find that google is nearly always the best reference for everthing...except computer how-to. Usually, what I find, is my searches turn up 1000 people with the same/related question as me, but usually, either no one answered, or the advice sucked. It takes me usually a lot of searching through google to find someone who had the exact problem adequately answered.
By then, with a good book, I have found the answer far sooner. Of course, the main advantage of google is it's free, so I end up repeating the above process a lot...
I also don't trust the crowd that seems to think subsistence farming is some sort of idyllic lifestyle and just throwing away all technology will lead to some sort of paradise. I'd like to see some of these guys actually try to live without technology and see how much they like it.
What the hell post are you responding to - it's obviously not mine! First, I'm not a programmer, I'm a scientist (NOT of the computer variety), so I'm a lot closer to the genetically modified food debate. Second, I'm from Kentucky, so I come from and know a lot of farmers. I never insulted farmers, or farming. I hung out with a lot of them in college, seeing as how we had a huge agriculture program.
Should you actually talk to a farmer, you will find that nearly to a man they hate monsanto. You're right, they have no choice but to use their seed - the yields from it, combined with pest disease resistance make it nearly mandatory. And where you got the idea that I was advocating subsistence farming I DON'T know. But, that doesn't mean that monsanto is the solution to your problems. Once you start using it, you almost can't stop - they've gone after farmers before who stopped using it, and if they find a single stray plant, they nail them.
So you might want to look at this monsanto thing a little closer. If you think they're the farmer's friend, you know nothing of farming.
Bet you didn't know that, huh?