If you're making money for the company, they may whine and complain, but you'll have a job.
So, go ahead and give the "fast/cheap/correct: pick 2" argument to management. That argument is a false choice. If you're the person responsible for the execution of the project, it's up to you to find the balance that will satisfy your Customer. Here is the process that I use; YMMV:
1. Identify the Customer. The Customer is defined as "the person/company to whom I have committed to provide something". Usually, there are several in a project. Your Boss. The Project Team Leader. The Client. The End User. Regulatory Agencies (OSHA, FDA, NRC, etc.)
2. For each Customer: Identify the Customer's Requirements. This is usually the hardest part of the process, as often the Customers
a) Truly don't know their requirements.
b) Have trouble being specific.
c) Ask for conflicting requirements. This is the part of planning where you should spend the most effort. It is an iterative process.
3. Requirements can be broken down into three categories: Functionality, Schedule, and Cost. They are listed in order of priority. Notice that Cost is last. This is actually the Customer's least significant requirement, but the one they think is most important. Remember this.
4. Resolve conflicting requirements: "Yes, Boss--I can put a back door into the log. But didn't you say you wanted it to be secure and auditable?" "Yes, Mr. Maintenance manager, I can put quick-release guards over all the couplings. But, the OSHA inspector is going to throw us both in jail if I do!"
4.5 Set your own limits as to what you'll deliver and stick to them. Know what sticking to those limits will cost you. "I will only write proper code, for I am REAL PROGRAMMER" might not be such a good idea. "I will not design or participate in the design of unsafe equipment--even if it costs me my job." might be a good idea.
5. Document commitments to Customers. If the requirements are vague, make the commitments specific, but limited to what you know you can provide.
6. Specify Change Control procedures. If you ask for a change, you get a document showing impact to Functionality, Schedule, and Cost. Boss gets a memo and he has to understand it. Client gets a change control form--which he has to sign, and maybe he has to write a PO addendum.
7. Follow Change Control Procedure! Stick to it! Everybody wants you to "just add this bit/indicator/field, it's no big deal". A thousand little changes can kill you. Don't let it happen. There will by crying and gnashing of teeth. Be ready for it. Endure it. It will pass.
8. The Customer will screw up. All of them. So will you. Deal with it by fixing the problem as quietly and professionally as possible. Don't ever point fingers. Especially when you're right.
9. Protect your Customer from embarrasment. Let him know you have done this without embarrasing him. If you deliver the goods, and protect your Customers from embarrasment, they will sing your praises to high heaven. Guaranteed.
10. If you have a big ego, turn it off and remember you're a professional. If you can't, get out; this is not your field.
Sometimes, you do the best you can and realize that the "corporate culture" where you work means that you get yelled at a lot. BFD. It's a job, not a play date.
Sometimes, you realize that management is going to drive this ship onto the rocks and kill all aboard. Jump ship before the wreck.
Hmmm....
Killing kittens, eh? Sure you're posting to the right forum?
You should use SCUBA gear to catch catfish:
See, all you do is jump in the lake, swim down to an old log, make a fist and stick your arm in.
The catfish will clamp down on your hand (they don't have any teeth, you see) and never let go. Then you just swim to the surface, pop him in the head with a.22, and toss him in the boat.
Doesn't it seem a little silly to divide everything in the world into exactly 3 categories: those that can only be used for good, those that can only be used for bad, and those that could be used for either?
Yes, it is very silly.
There are two independant conditions involved:
"This can be used for good"--Call that G
"This can be used for bad"--Call that B
Properly, you should have exactly four categories: --, G-, -B, and GB.
Basically, the court is saying that when U-Haul publishes a web page, I have the right to look at it with whatever funny-colored glasses I choose to wear.
"Choose to wear" is a different issue. In fact, I choose to run all the web pages I view through one of several filters, depending on what OS I happen to be using at the time. In theory, gator users have chosen gator as their "filter".
While I think gator is a PITA, I also think that anyone who does a little research will find it easy enought to not to use gator if they don't want to.
Give gator et. al. their due...Think about the light bulb that lit up over someone's head: "Hey--we can write a filter proxy. But instead of taking the ads out--we can put ads in! And we can sell ad space that our audience will see when they view the web pages of our clients competitors! We'll make millions [angry with us]. Mwuahahahaha..." Wish I'd thought of it.
I think this is a good decision. I would find it disconcerting to hear the courts say that I must view a web page as its author intended. I get to choose how I view something. If I want to read a magazine back to front, I get to choose. If I want to filter the web content I view, I get to choose
Think of that barfight at Mos Eisley. Maybe Ben used the force to keep the cops from showing up? I'm no Jedi Master, so I don't realy know.
Wouldn't you prefer this scene? Billy Badass threatens to pound you. You yawn and stretch and Billy's left arm falls off just below the elbow. As you quietly wind up the filament into your false thumb..."Gee, Billy, what happened to your arm? You're bleedin' kinda bad there, dude. Want me to call 911?"
with the introduction of an infinitely strong weightless fiber.
Space elevator.
Variable sword.
Shadow-square wire.
Don't write these off as goofy SF ideas. These are well-thought-out designs with only one "If Only". When the final engineering solution for the "if only" part of the design appears (and it will), the prediction is realized.
Remember when "desktop publishing" was new and hip? Everybody seemed to find it necessary to use every one of the fonts they had installed at least once in every letter! Now, the requirement seems to be to produce a correct and useful document.
Perhaps someday in a similar fashion, html authors will quit trying to impress their clients with their 1337 5k1||z and just create informative, navigable websites.
Yeah, it's mostly cr@p.
What you want is a book published around 1933 called "The Chemical Dictionary". Laboratory procedures to synthesize *all sorts* of interesting stuff. They work, too.
Well, that's what I heard, anyhow.
Mommy's off shopping at Bloomie's, and Scooter is out playing with his new basketball...
A new family has just moved into the neighborhood. They're a hippie bunch, they all work different jobs, and even the kids work around the house to help out. Mommy says they're kinda low-class.
The primary purpose of the GNU organization is to create free software based on valuable commercial software.
Translation: "Mommy, that new kid wants my spot on the team. He's picking on me."
As long as the Linux development process remained uncoordinated and random, it posed little or no threat to SCO...
Translation: "Hee Hee The new kid sucks."
IBM initiated a course of conduct with the purpose and effect of using Linux to unfairly compete in the enterprise market.
Translation: "That new kid's kicking my ass. Cheater!!!"
It is not possible for Linux to rapidly reach UNIX performance standards for complete enterprise functionality without the misappropriation of UNIX code, methods or concepts to achieve such performance, and coordination by a larger developer, such as IBM.
Translation: "My mommy bought me a whole home gym and personal trainer. That new kid must be using steroids."
And, finally, this quote from IBM with which SCO takes issue in their complaint:
?IBM will put US $1 billion this year into Linux, the free operating system.
Translation: "Hey! That new kid just got recruited by State!"
"Ancient nanotechnoligsts" is condescention. It is analogous to "noble savage".
Q: Why is it necessary to shoehorn our understanding of an alien culture (alien in time or viewpoint) into the context of our "culture" of the moment?
A: The popular press--by necessity of appeal and accessibity to the general populace--must provide glib explanations of fact in terms of trendy misunderstings.
This is the sacrifice of critical thought on the altar of market share.
The best way to absorb heat would be a phase change, but not of LN2. For the best cal/gm from liquid to gas at a reasonable temperature, use plain old water.
Go look it up. I don't think that word means what you think it means.
I give RMS his due resepct. They guy has done the work of a titan, and been instrumental in providing all of us with something great.
Talking to humans is part of the job. It's just another task, you're a programmer, learn the freakin' language! So the OS you're writing for is wet, squishy, and inconsistent? Fine; it's a flaky language. But if you're going to use it, use it right.
To all who act as spokespersons for the freedom in general and free software in particular:
When you speak in the popular press, (ZD-Net is not 2600.com, folks!): Try not to make us look like the whackjobs!
Really, people. How seriously does the mainstream take the Libertarian Party? How effective are they in real-world politics? Do you really want that for all of us?
Don't want the government to control you? Leave society and become a hermit...but you lose lots of practical benefits, like convenience stores, electricity, the internet, public sanitation systems, health insurance, etc.
Your preface is inflammatory and irrelevant. Go look up "False Choice" in any internet reference of logical fallacies.
Your comparison--that the DRM "outlaws" (those who choose to operate outside the law) are like societal outlaws--is correct as far as it goes, but it is incomplete.
If we assume that only an extreme situation will persist in the end--anarchy or totalitarianism, then the appropriate action is to pick a position and push it farther to the edge. But the inevetability of extremes is not generally supportable. The world will not erupt into anarchy because a 5-year old steals a candy bar.
In most instances, it is possible for an agreeable compromise between competing desires to be reached. Admittedly, there are sociapaths on either side of this issue that would prefer absolute anarchy or absolute regulation. But sociopaths are generally not as effective as social participants in defining society.
For you to concede to either camp at this point is throwing in the towel way too early.
Hmmm... IANAL, so this is the layperson's understanding of fair use: If I buy a CD/DVD/Album/Tape/whatever then I can pretty much listen to it/watch it on whatever I want to.
It seems to me that the media companies are going for a power grab in the "confusion" caused by actual violations of copyright.
Not a bad idea for them. "Hey, guys--we want to intrusively regulate our Customer's behaviour. Some of them are breaking the law. Let's confuse fair use with lawbreaking. Then we can cry "foul" when fair use is exercised and get congress to take it away from the consumers."
Excuse me for a moment; I have to send my credit card number to American Standard. In case I need to take a pee while I'm at work.
Discovered this one on spring break; it involves solid CO2, not liquid nitrogen. We didn't have a dewar for the ln2, and the Pensacola phone book listed dry ice sellers. I guess we could have gone to a welding supply to get the ln2, but whatever. Anyhow...
Get a bucket o' margarita mix, (one that takes a fifth of tequila). Put in the recommended tequila (or more), and half again as much triple sec. Throw in dry ice and stir until sherbet forms. Serve in 2 16oz plastic Dixie cups with a paper towel in between for insulation.
You can put 2 or 3 times as much alcohol in it and it will still taste good 'cause it's so cold. Keep a little lump of dry ice in the glass or the bucket to keep it frozen.
Once your friends become less "safety conscious", quit putting the dry ice in the cups.
NEVER quit job "A" until you have job "B" lined up! NEVER.
If you want to try strong-arm tactics against your employer, form a union.
A couple things follow:
If you can't come up with job "B", that means that you should probably keep working at job "A" and deal with it as best you can. Work slowdowns and other means of "giving management the finger" may make you feel good for the moment. Don't screw yourself.
If you can't get enough support from your co-workers to form a union, that's a pretty good indicator that your brilliant plan to "show management whose boss" is going to fail.
An note to employers here: Loyalty flows both ways. If you're screwing your employees, you can be sure they are going to screw you back. And you, as the employer, have to be the first to show respect. Most employers would prefer to use manipulation and intimidation than respect. Fact is, intimidation is a better short-term solution.
I must say this comes from a voice of experience. I left my previous job mainly because I did not respect my boss. I will not iterate his shortcomings here; just say that he did not meet my criteria for respect. I hired on with another (much smaller) company whose leader I did (and do) respect.
In tough economic times, the company I work for has had to cut back on some benefits simply because the money was not there. Some employees would have dragged out their offer of employment and cried "FOUL". No. Most employers will give you some song and dance about "we have to face reality her...we are no longer able to..." Fine, that's probably true. But when economics improve, does management restore vacations? Benefits? My boss did.. When money got even tighter, the management cut salaries, too. Their own salaries, that is. And that means president, veep, etc. Not "project managers", etc. The people with the power to make the cuts cut themselves first.
Listen up, bosses reading this: This is respect. All of these "Who Cut My Cheese" books won't tell you the simple truth: "If you take care of your people, they will take care of you". And if you screw them, don't expect any better back.
I like that position. Can you get M$ to accept it? "The only cost associated with our product is producing the media."
That would be admitting that the publisher suffers no damages when someone pirates and distributes the work. Since the publisher did not have to pay for the CD or time to burn it!
No damages->No standing->No lawsuits by copyright holders!
Slashdot Mirror
So, go ahead and give the "fast/cheap/correct: pick 2" argument to management. That argument is a false choice. If you're the person responsible for the execution of the project, it's up to you to find the balance that will satisfy your Customer. Here is the process that I use; YMMV:
1. Identify the Customer. The Customer is defined as "the person/company to whom I have committed to provide something". Usually, there are several in a project. Your Boss. The Project Team Leader. The Client. The End User. Regulatory Agencies (OSHA, FDA, NRC, etc.)
2. For each Customer: Identify the Customer's Requirements. This is usually the hardest part of the process, as often the Customers
a) Truly don't know their requirements.
b) Have trouble being specific.
c) Ask for conflicting requirements.
This is the part of planning where you should spend the most effort. It is an iterative process.
3. Requirements can be broken down into three categories: Functionality, Schedule, and Cost. They are listed in order of priority. Notice that Cost is last. This is actually the Customer's least significant requirement, but the one they think is most important. Remember this.
4. Resolve conflicting requirements: "Yes, Boss--I can put a back door into the log. But didn't you say you wanted it to be secure and auditable?" "Yes, Mr. Maintenance manager, I can put quick-release guards over all the couplings. But, the OSHA inspector is going to throw us both in jail if I do!"
4.5 Set your own limits as to what you'll deliver and stick to them. Know what sticking to those limits will cost you. "I will only write proper code, for I am REAL PROGRAMMER" might not be such a good idea. "I will not design or participate in the design of unsafe equipment--even if it costs me my job." might be a good idea.
5. Document commitments to Customers. If the requirements are vague, make the commitments specific, but limited to what you know you can provide.
6. Specify Change Control procedures. If you ask for a change, you get a document showing impact to Functionality, Schedule, and Cost. Boss gets a memo and he has to understand it. Client gets a change control form--which he has to sign, and maybe he has to write a PO addendum.
7. Follow Change Control Procedure! Stick to it! Everybody wants you to "just add this bit/indicator/field, it's no big deal". A thousand little changes can kill you. Don't let it happen. There will by crying and gnashing of teeth. Be ready for it. Endure it. It will pass.
8. The Customer will screw up. All of them. So will you. Deal with it by fixing the problem as quietly and professionally as possible. Don't ever point fingers. Especially when you're right.
9. Protect your Customer from embarrasment. Let him know you have done this without embarrasing him. If you deliver the goods, and protect your Customers from embarrasment, they will sing your praises to high heaven. Guaranteed.
10. If you have a big ego, turn it off and remember you're a professional. If you can't, get out; this is not your field.
Sometimes, you do the best you can and realize that the "corporate culture" where you work means that you get yelled at a lot. BFD. It's a job, not a play date.
Sometimes, you realize that management is going to drive this ship onto the rocks and kill all aboard. Jump ship before the wreck.
Sometimes, it's good just to have a job.
You should use SCUBA gear to catch catfish:
See, all you do is jump in the lake, swim down to an old log, make a fist and stick your arm in.
The catfish will clamp down on your hand (they don't have any teeth, you see) and never let go. Then you just swim to the surface, pop him in the head with a .22, and toss him in the boat.
Try it and tell me how it works for you ;)
Oh, yeah--don't shoot your hand.
a-la Al Green?
What'd Natalie Portman ever do to you?
Yes, it is very silly.
There are two independant conditions involved:
"This can be used for good"--Call that G
"This can be used for bad"--Call that B
Properly, you should have exactly four categories: --, G-, -B, and GB.
Three categories is silly.
"Choose to wear" is a different issue. In fact, I choose to run all the web pages I view through one of several filters, depending on what OS I happen to be using at the time. In theory, gator users have chosen gator as their "filter".
While I think gator is a PITA, I also think that anyone who does a little research will find it easy enought to not to use gator if they don't want to.
Give gator et. al. their due...Think about the light bulb that lit up over someone's head: "Hey--we can write a filter proxy. But instead of taking the ads out--we can put ads in! And we can sell ad space that our audience will see when they view the web pages of our clients competitors! We'll make millions [angry with us]. Mwuahahahaha..." Wish I'd thought of it.
I think this is a good decision. I would find it disconcerting to hear the courts say that I must view a web page as its author intended. I get to choose how I view something. If I want to read a magazine back to front, I get to choose. If I want to filter the web content I view, I get to choose
Huh?
Someone takes a picture for a hairdresser? ..really...how much volume are they losing for that?
Sounds like they have the same lawyers we have over here--turn "not probably impossible" into "happens all the time and it's a serious problem."
This is completely stupid.
People who don't want to buy the magazines READ them in the store.
What are they going to do? Photograph a magazine, take it home, print it out, and read it on the crapper?
Seems a lot of work to save $3.95--especially for someone who can affoard the latest cell phone.
Followed your link... Scrith is the substrate of the ring. Where's the math for the shadow square wires?
What's wrong with a variable sword?
Think of that barfight at Mos Eisley. Maybe Ben used the force to keep the cops from showing up? I'm no Jedi Master, so I don't realy know.
Wouldn't you prefer this scene? Billy Badass threatens to pound you. You yawn and stretch and Billy's left arm falls off just below the elbow. As you quietly wind up the filament into your false thumb..."Gee, Billy, what happened to your arm? You're bleedin' kinda bad there, dude. Want me to call 911?"
Space elevator.
Variable sword.
Shadow-square wire.
Don't write these off as goofy SF ideas. These are well-thought-out designs with only one "If Only". When the final engineering solution for the "if only" part of the design appears (and it will), the prediction is realized.
Ever heard of geostationary satellites?
Perhaps someday in a similar fashion, html authors will quit trying to impress their clients with their 1337 5k1||z and just create informative, navigable websites.
I can dream.
Yeah, it's mostly cr@p. What you want is a book published around 1933 called "The Chemical Dictionary". Laboratory procedures to synthesize *all sorts* of interesting stuff. They work, too. Well, that's what I heard, anyhow.
Ebay is the world's largest yard sale.
Not the worlds largest fence.
I believe the correct response is "If you're so smart, why aren't you rich?"
A new family has just moved into the neighborhood. They're a hippie bunch, they all work different jobs, and even the kids work around the house to help out. Mommy says they're kinda low-class.
The primary purpose of the GNU organization is to create free software based on valuable commercial software.
Translation: "Mommy, that new kid wants my spot on the team. He's picking on me."
As long as the Linux development process remained uncoordinated and random, it posed little or no threat to SCO...
Translation: "Hee Hee The new kid sucks."
IBM initiated a course of conduct with the purpose and effect of using Linux to unfairly compete in the enterprise market.
Translation: "That new kid's kicking my ass. Cheater!!!"
It is not possible for Linux to rapidly reach UNIX performance standards for complete enterprise functionality without the misappropriation of UNIX code, methods or concepts to achieve such performance, and coordination by a larger developer, such as IBM.
Translation: "My mommy bought me a whole home gym and personal trainer. That new kid must be using steroids."
And, finally, this quote from IBM with which SCO takes issue in their complaint: ?IBM will put US $1 billion this year into Linux, the free operating system.
Translation: "Hey! That new kid just got recruited by State!"
Which makes the summary of the whole suit:
"Mommy! Waaaa!!!"
/python
I so agree with your position!
"Ancient nanotechnoligsts" is condescention. It is analogous to "noble savage".
Q: Why is it necessary to shoehorn our understanding of an alien culture (alien in time or viewpoint) into the context of our "culture" of the moment?
A: The popular press--by necessity of appeal and accessibity to the general populace--must provide glib explanations of fact in terms of trendy misunderstings.
This is the sacrifice of critical thought on the altar of market share.
Do the math and answer your own question.
The best way to absorb heat would be a phase change, but not of LN2. For the best cal/gm from liquid to gas at a reasonable temperature, use plain old water.
But you'd have to carry a lot of it.
Go look it up. I don't think that word means what you think it means.
I give RMS his due resepct. They guy has done the work of a titan, and been instrumental in providing all of us with something great.
Talking to humans is part of the job. It's just another task, you're a programmer, learn the freakin' language! So the OS you're writing for is wet, squishy, and inconsistent? Fine; it's a flaky language. But if you're going to use it, use it right.
To all who act as spokespersons for the freedom in general and free software in particular:
When you speak in the popular press, (ZD-Net is not 2600.com, folks!): Try not to make us look like the whackjobs!
Really, people. How seriously does the mainstream take the Libertarian Party? How effective are they in real-world politics? Do you really want that for all of us?
nevermind.
Your preface is inflammatory and irrelevant. Go look up "False Choice" in any internet reference of logical fallacies.
Your comparison--that the DRM "outlaws" (those who choose to operate outside the law) are like societal outlaws--is correct as far as it goes, but it is incomplete.
If we assume that only an extreme situation will persist in the end--anarchy or totalitarianism, then the appropriate action is to pick a position and push it farther to the edge. But the inevetability of extremes is not generally supportable. The world will not erupt into anarchy because a 5-year old steals a candy bar.
In most instances, it is possible for an agreeable compromise between competing desires to be reached. Admittedly, there are sociapaths on either side of this issue that would prefer absolute anarchy or absolute regulation. But sociopaths are generally not as effective as social participants in defining society.
For you to concede to either camp at this point is throwing in the towel way too early.
It seems to me that the media companies are going for a power grab in the "confusion" caused by actual violations of copyright.
Not a bad idea for them. "Hey, guys--we want to intrusively regulate our Customer's behaviour. Some of them are breaking the law. Let's confuse fair use with lawbreaking. Then we can cry "foul" when fair use is exercised and get congress to take it away from the consumers."
Excuse me for a moment; I have to send my credit card number to American Standard. In case I need to take a pee while I'm at work.
Get a bucket o' margarita mix, (one that takes a fifth of tequila). Put in the recommended tequila (or more), and half again as much triple sec. Throw in dry ice and stir until sherbet forms. Serve in 2 16oz plastic Dixie cups with a paper towel in between for insulation.
You can put 2 or 3 times as much alcohol in it and it will still taste good 'cause it's so cold. Keep a little lump of dry ice in the glass or the bucket to keep it frozen.
Once your friends become less "safety conscious", quit putting the dry ice in the cups.
In this market, be grateful you got a job.
NEVER quit job "A" until you have job "B" lined up! NEVER.
If you want to try strong-arm tactics against your employer, form a union.
A couple things follow:
If you can't come up with job "B", that means that you should probably keep working at job "A" and deal with it as best you can. Work slowdowns and other means of "giving management the finger" may make you feel good for the moment. Don't screw yourself.
If you can't get enough support from your co-workers to form a union, that's a pretty good indicator that your brilliant plan to "show management whose boss" is going to fail.
An note to employers here: Loyalty flows both ways. If you're screwing your employees, you can be sure they are going to screw you back. And you, as the employer, have to be the first to show respect. Most employers would prefer to use manipulation and intimidation than respect. Fact is, intimidation is a better short-term solution.
I must say this comes from a voice of experience. I left my previous job mainly because I did not respect my boss. I will not iterate his shortcomings here; just say that he did not meet my criteria for respect. I hired on with another (much smaller) company whose leader I did (and do) respect.
In tough economic times, the company I work for has had to cut back on some benefits simply because the money was not there. Some employees would have dragged out their offer of employment and cried "FOUL". No. Most employers will give you some song and dance about "we have to face reality her...we are no longer able to..." Fine, that's probably true. But when economics improve, does management restore vacations? Benefits? My boss did.. When money got even tighter, the management cut salaries, too. Their own salaries, that is. And that means president, veep, etc. Not "project managers", etc. The people with the power to make the cuts cut themselves first.
Listen up, bosses reading this: This is respect. All of these "Who Cut My Cheese" books won't tell you the simple truth: "If you take care of your people, they will take care of you". And if you screw them, don't expect any better back.
That would be admitting that the publisher suffers no damages when someone pirates and distributes the work. Since the publisher did not have to pay for the CD or time to burn it!
No damages->No standing->No lawsuits by copyright holders!
I like it!