And management signoff on changes is basically useless -- you get bitched at when something goes wrong, no matter how many many notes you make in change management that it's a bad idea, and it's going to break things.
Useless insofar as not getting chewed out is concerned, but it can help you keep your job, or even keep you out of jail. Never doubt the power of good record-keeping to help point the fickle-finger-of-blame in the proper direction. On the other hand, if you're in a job where you are being unfairly held responsible for management failures, then maybe it's time to polish that resume.
Re:Hopefully Dell will not make this mistake
on
Mark Vena on Dellienware
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
True... corporations that go on acquisition sprees would be better off, I'd say, using the Roman model for empire building. After completing the occupation, you install your own leader/watchdog to enforce overall policies but leave the culture and its own laws intact except where they conflict with yours. You also provide the subject people with legitimate protection from invaders (so they perceive you more as a benevolent overlord, not a dictator.) If you simply move in, knock off the existing ruling class and start issuing orders and changing things, you will immediately meet with resistance.
It won't stop another 9/11, not much can do that. A determined terrorist can always find a way to blow something up because it so easy to destroy. And groups like Al Quaeda are nothing if not determined.
The problem, from a security perspective, is that America is a goldfish bowl, and has always been a goldfish bowl. That transparency and openness has always been one of our greatest strengths, and to a certain extent an exploitable weakness. I fear that these ongoing attempts to turn this nation into an armored aquarium may ultimately succeed... but when that happens we won't be Americans anymore, and this country will be "America" in name only.
That's irrelevant. Governments don't care about slurs and the MPAA and their ilk aren't interested in buying laws whenever they want. Only in buying significant laws (such as the the United States' DMCA) that give them pretty much all the power they need to do whatever the hell they want with us. And yes, politicians are that cheap: the only issue is whether the politician can balance the graft he receives with the risk to his career. And it really doesn't take much to buy off a U.S. Congressperson. A few million here and there in campaign contributions buys you all the law you want. That sounds like a lot of money, and it is to the average Joe, but it's absolute peanuts to the multi-billion-dollar entertainment industry. That applies to many other corporations and organizations as well, of course, that also bribe^H^H^H^H^Hmake politicial contributions (see: Microsoft, which in the post-antitrust era has one of the biggest lobbying presences in Washington.) The RIAA, for example, has weaselled around the compaign finance laws by having their buddies at other law firms make contributions for them (without mentioning that fact to anyone.) So, it is absolutely not a "slur" to the Governments of the World when laws which are so patently anti-citizen, anti-consumer and pro-big-business get passed with such ease, and such monotonous regularity.
I know that until recently it was popular to (ahem) slander the United States Government for the DMCA, Sono Bono Copyright Extension Act, and other such examples of malfeasance in office. However, what's happening in Canada, England, Australia and now Germany shows that this infection is spreading internationally and at an accelerated pace. France, I must say, I'm impressed with what I've read about their handling of downloading. Too bad that other industrialized nations haven't followed their example, rather than ours.
'There should be no legal distinction between stealing chewing gum from a shop and performing an illegal download.'
From the "I have no brain but here I am anyway" department. People like this make instinctive value judgements based upon ignorance of history and technology, and that's unfortunate.
Actually, an electric heater is one of the most efficient devices known to Man. I mean, if you set up your device to waste energy and nothing comes out of it that qualifies as "work", then it's one hundred percent efficient.
Not the point. They are a huge customer of Microsoft's and they require (for whatever reason) support by U.S.-based staff. Certainly the Federal Government spends enough hard-earned taxpayer dollars on Microsoft that this shouldn't be a problem. However, if it's true that Microsoft is unwilling to meet their customers' requirements, then they should lose the business just like any other uncooperative vendor.
The real issue is that someone in a foreign country is not subject to United States law. That's a big deal, since if it can be shown that a Microsoft employee did something illegal he can be prosecuted. If the employee in question is in India, it's pretty much impossible to do anything about it.
Yes, but in the process of failing they appear progressive, with the intent of deflecting criticism.
"You see, Mr. Congressman? We tried the newfangled approach and it just doesn't work, you can't sell things on the Intarweb, so we're going back to our old-fashioned screw-the-consumer oligopoly. We know we can make money with that."
Wrong {...} they won't care if little niche companies or the next insanely great thing all get killed by being unable to afford to compete. They won't even know it has happened because they're snug in their world of familiar name brands.
Personally, I don't think this has anything to do with "thought." Matter of fact, the people promoting this crap aren't thinking at all, they're just drooling over the future profits they'll make by squeezing every last penny out of existing technology and suppressing anything that might threaten to replace it. Kiss our ability to ever again compete in the global economy if "Thought Patents" are given the force of law.
Frankly, I've not been happy with some of the recent decisions handed down by the Supreme Court. If they allow this go forward, so far as I'm concerned it will be evidence of malfeasance in office.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope Nope Nope Hehehehehehe.
does that mean mars exists, but water does not?
Yes, but only if you BELIEVE.
And management signoff on changes is basically useless -- you get bitched at when something goes wrong, no matter how many many notes you make in change management that it's a bad idea, and it's going to break things.
Useless insofar as not getting chewed out is concerned, but it can help you keep your job, or even keep you out of jail. Never doubt the power of good record-keeping to help point the fickle-finger-of-blame in the proper direction. On the other hand, if you're in a job where you are being unfairly held responsible for management failures, then maybe it's time to polish that resume.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
True ... corporations that go on acquisition sprees would be better off, I'd say, using the Roman model for empire building. After completing the occupation, you install your own leader/watchdog to enforce overall policies but leave the culture and its own laws intact except where they conflict with yours. You also provide the subject people with legitimate protection from invaders (so they perceive you more as a benevolent overlord, not a dictator.) If you simply move in, knock off the existing ruling class and start issuing orders and changing things, you will immediately meet with resistance.
"Dude ... you're getting an Alien!"
I'm sure Sigourney Weaver will be first in line.
It won't stop another 9/11, not much can do that. A determined terrorist can always find a way to blow something up because it so easy to destroy. And groups like Al Quaeda are nothing if not determined.
... but when that happens we won't be Americans anymore, and this country will be "America" in name only.
The problem, from a security perspective, is that America is a goldfish bowl, and has always been a goldfish bowl. That transparency and openness has always been one of our greatest strengths, and to a certain extent an exploitable weakness. I fear that these ongoing attempts to turn this nation into an armored aquarium may ultimately succeed
That's irrelevant. Governments don't care about slurs and the MPAA and their ilk aren't interested in buying laws whenever they want. Only in buying significant laws (such as the the United States' DMCA) that give them pretty much all the power they need to do whatever the hell they want with us. And yes, politicians are that cheap: the only issue is whether the politician can balance the graft he receives with the risk to his career. And it really doesn't take much to buy off a U.S. Congressperson. A few million here and there in campaign contributions buys you all the law you want. That sounds like a lot of money, and it is to the average Joe, but it's absolute peanuts to the multi-billion-dollar entertainment industry. That applies to many other corporations and organizations as well, of course, that also bribe^H^H^H^H^Hmake politicial contributions (see: Microsoft, which in the post-antitrust era has one of the biggest lobbying presences in Washington.) The RIAA, for example, has weaselled around the compaign finance laws by having their buddies at other law firms make contributions for them (without mentioning that fact to anyone.) So, it is absolutely not a "slur" to the Governments of the World when laws which are so patently anti-citizen, anti-consumer and pro-big-business get passed with such ease, and such monotonous regularity.
I know that until recently it was popular to (ahem) slander the United States Government for the DMCA, Sono Bono Copyright Extension Act, and other such examples of malfeasance in office. However, what's happening in Canada, England, Australia and now Germany shows that this infection is spreading internationally and at an accelerated pace. France, I must say, I'm impressed with what I've read about their handling of downloading. Too bad that other industrialized nations haven't followed their example, rather than ours.
'There should be no legal distinction between stealing chewing gum from a shop and performing an illegal download.'
From the "I have no brain but here I am anyway" department. People like this make instinctive value judgements based upon ignorance of history and technology, and that's unfortunate.
it measures the speed of electronic funds transfer, if you're foolish enough to actually buy that program.
You're right of course, but I was trying to use a little humor to point out that efficiency is relative to what it is you're trying to accomplish.
I think he spelled it correctly: ... pugrade: n. software which exudes an unpleasant odor. usage "P-U, this stuff STINKS."
a commercially-available dishwasher than anything else.
I was making what is called an "oblique reference" to Mr. Fusion.
Actually, an electric heater is one of the most efficient devices known to Man. I mean, if you set up your device to waste energy and nothing comes out of it that qualifies as "work", then it's one hundred percent efficient.
Doc would be proud. Beats Plutonium as a power source for your time-travelling DeLorean.
Not the point. They are a huge customer of Microsoft's and they require (for whatever reason) support by U.S.-based staff. Certainly the Federal Government spends enough hard-earned taxpayer dollars on Microsoft that this shouldn't be a problem. However, if it's true that Microsoft is unwilling to meet their customers' requirements, then they should lose the business just like any other uncooperative vendor.
The real issue is that someone in a foreign country is not subject to United States law. That's a big deal, since if it can be shown that a Microsoft employee did something illegal he can be prosecuted. If the employee in question is in India, it's pretty much impossible to do anything about it.
Hey, I'm just wondering if Mr Congressman knows what the hell an oligopoly is :P
I doubt it. Too many syllables.
What else will they prevent us from doing?
... not much.
Well, given how quickly every protection scheme that has come down the pike so far has been cracked, I'd have to say
Yes, but in the process of failing they appear progressive, with the intent of deflecting criticism.
"You see, Mr. Congressman? We tried the newfangled approach and it just doesn't work, you can't sell things on the Intarweb, so we're going back to our old-fashioned screw-the-consumer oligopoly. We know we can make money with that."
Wrong {...} they won't care if little niche companies or the next insanely great thing all get killed by being unable to afford to compete. They won't even know it has happened because they're snug in their world of familiar name brands.
... I think you just described AOL.
My God
... and that MSFT was bending over backwards to meet their needs.
... someone will be bending over and it won't be Microsoft.
Well, there's no doubt that when all is said and done
A scratch? Your wheel's off!
Not it's not.
Look!
It's just a thresh wound.
I'm just impressed that you actually have chicks at your LAN parties.
Personally, I don't think this has anything to do with "thought." Matter of fact, the people promoting this crap aren't thinking at all, they're just drooling over the future profits they'll make by squeezing every last penny out of existing technology and suppressing anything that might threaten to replace it. Kiss our ability to ever again compete in the global economy if "Thought Patents" are given the force of law.
Frankly, I've not been happy with some of the recent decisions handed down by the Supreme Court. If they allow this go forward, so far as I'm concerned it will be evidence of malfeasance in office.