Yeah, and so does most hip-hop. And so does most blues. And so does most rock. And so does most jazz. And so does most of your favorite genre.
Most music out there sucks. Saying that there is a genre that sucks harder or more is stupid. Just like tv, there are awesome examples of every genre, but the vast majority blows.
Reverse-engineering is perfectly legal (when done correctly) and is employed by proprietary folks regularly. How do you think the PC-clone market got started?
That's not a fair analogy. IBM, unlike BK, never tried to use proprietary components in its PCs. It used open standards and off-the-shelf components and didn't complain when people started copying them.
You ask a school teacher why 40% of their budget is spent on microsoft products, and the only answer is: "That's what the industry uses, we'd be failing our kids if we taught them anything else". Hence our kids come out knowing MS Word, not word processing, MS Excel, not spreadsheets, and so on, and those kids will be buying MS software for life.
I'd like you to find a school teacher who says that 40% of their budget is spent on Microsoft products. If you do, I'll show you a liar. There's no way the entire software allocation makes up 40% of any school's budget. Indianapolis Public Schools estimates that their technology initiatives will require $17 million per year for the next four years. That's out of a half-billion dollar total budget. That's about 3.2%. All that information is available on their site. Most of that budget is spent on hardware and teaching, according to the last school board meeting I went to.
So, you're saying that it's impossible to learn word processing using Word? Buhhhh-loney. Word is a tool (and not just in the pejorative sense). The problem isn't that they're using Word, it's that they're not using it to properly teach the students the proper skills needed to use a general word processor. They're taking a hammer and showing kids how to use it as a screwdriver. Word is a great tool for word processing. It has too many features, but for the steal that schools get it for, it's great. Again, it's not the tool, it's the teaching. And, AFAIK, OOo doesn't integrate with EndNote, which many universities give their students for citation management.
When I took a "business computing" class in high school (1994 or 1995), we used WordPerfect for DOS. That thing was horrible. I had nightmares of white text with red highlights on blue screens. I cried every time the book called for setting tabs or creating a hanging indent.
There's no sound logic for why every place on the globe has to be open from 9-5 or 7-3 every day, except maybe Sunday/Saturday, in their "local timezone".
Yes there is. My family once owned a cafe, and we had many discussions about hours of operation. Between certain hours (for us it was from 3pm - 5am since we were in the middle of an industrial park), it doesn't make sense to be open because you spend more money on employees than you get in revenue.
If I'm spending $35.00 an hour (plus benefits) for 4 people to work, and I'm only taking in $15.00 an hour, it'd be stupid to be open.
Therefore, being "open" 24/7 is not plausible. This logic works not just for retail establishments, but call centers, order processing centers, and any service industry business besides hotels.
Like I said, generally, they're for it. It's not about energy conservation at this point. It's about not being stuck behind the rest of the country. It's about not having to explain to your business contacts what time it is in Indiana. We deal with a business in Chicago, and every time we set a date for a meeting or a conference call, they always have to ask, "Now, are we on the same time now or not?" It gets frustrating.
Yep, you're right. Basically, all of Indiana is on EST year-round. However, a few counties in the SE corner (around Cincinnati) go with DST. In addition, some counties in the NW and SW corners (basically the Chicago and Louisville areas) are in the Central time zone and observe DST. (map)
There's a bill just about every session of the state legislature to change this. There's a boost right now in that the new governor is actually pushing for it. I might go through this year, probably (the plan would be to switch on June 5 this year), but they amended the bill in the House to say that counties could "opt out" of DST. The feds came in (Dept. of Transportation, I believe) and said that that would be illegal, it's either all or none. But, the House passed it anyway. The Senate leaders have said they won't touch the bill until it goes through a conference committee to take that part out.
It's not as clear cut as this, though. It's a hotly debated topic in Indiana, with most of the business people for it (they say not having it hurts business) and farmers against it (they say it makes no sense). Generally, Republicans are for it, and Democrats are against it. Technology people that I know are generally for it, but the timeline (June 5) has them worried about keeping systems up to date.
I'm agnostic on it, though I do follow it closely.
Which is why informatics programs like the one Indiana offers (especially the program at its Indianapolis campus) are so important. It gives people the education needed to bridge the two areas.
BTW, the term is "bioinformaticists", not "bioinformaticians"
Oh, and here's part of the Indianapolis ordinance that governs how cable tv is dealt with:
Sec. 851-104. Franchise required.
No person or entity shall operate a cable system within the city for which a franchise is required under Title VI of the Act without having first obtained a franchise granted subject to this chapter.
(G.O. 125, 1996, 1)
Sec. 851-105. Franchises not exclusive.
The granting of a cable franchise shall not grant the operator any rights to exclude any other franchised operator from providing services within the geographic areas included in the cable franchise..
Of course, the same document defines a "person" as and individual.
There is nothing stopping any other company from laying it's own lines like most of the cable companies did an offer compeating services today.
What these "alternative" companies want is a free ride on the hard work and expense of others. They will bering nothing to the table and will actually deteriorate service.
And what did these established cable companies do to deserve the free ride? They didn't lay the wires. You and I paid for them. Municipalities for the large part own these systems. They give cable companies a "charter" to operate in their area.
The actual Phone service today is WORSE than it was when the telco was a monopoly. Price competition leads to inferior service on all fronts to the point of almost not being worth having.
What sources do you have? I get a better deal now than I ever did (and not with SBC), and with more services.
However, isn't it the case that the phone network is considered to be a public asset whereas the cable network is a private one?
No. The phone companies own the wires. They are required, however, to allow other companies to "lease" their lines at cost.
The problem was that breaking up Ma Bell didn't solve anything because the baby bells were still monopolies in their areas. Then, the telcos started merging (SBC with Ameritech and some others) and now, you've got almost the same situation. You've got four or five companies that own all the lines. So, the FCC forced the companies to open their lines up.
Cable is usually just the opposite. Usually a municipality owns the cable network and grants licenses to companies. These companies in turn lobby so that they can get a monopoly over an area. Here in Indianapolis, there's two cable companies. Bright House serves the center of the city and Comcast serves the outlying areas (relatively outlying, that is).
That's interesting. What service do you have? I have Bright House in Indianapolis. At first, I too had both digital basic and high speed internet. Then I realized that my tv habits didn't justify the cost, so I called and said that I wanted to cancel the cable tv, but keep the internet service. I found out what you did, that the non-subscriber rate was $20 more than the subscriber rate. The customer service rep was nice. She told me that if I changed to the "basic" basic cable at $6.95/mo, which only includes local channels, I would still be considered a subscriber. So I did that.
But here's the sweet part. Although they picked up the digital box, they forgot to switch me down to the basic basic cable. So, for the last 3 months, I've been paying $6.95 for the $40 full basic cable service.
So, let me get this straight, in order to use the bank's site "securely", I have to reboot my computer? And while I'm doing that, I can't access any of my Windows apps, like Quicken or Excel?
That's retardulous. That's not the case at all. You are a contract worker (aka independent contractor) when you sign a contract saying so. It has nothing to do with responsibilities or deadlines.
And the determination of what is an employee is set by the federal government, including IRS guidelines, labor guidelines, tax code, and congressional laws. State laws may provide certain benefit to non-employees, but that doesn't make them an employee.
When you sign a contract, you are agreeing that you will do X amount of work (hours, units, a project) for Y amount of money (whether flat or per hour). Often, other responsibilities such as work hours are specified in the contract, or there's a clause stating that the employer will decide those terms.
As a contract worker, you are not entitled to any benefits whatsoever. Under some cicumstances, the "employer" doesn't pay payroll taxes, and you are responsible for all taxes, because you are effectively self-employed. My father got swindled into this as a dealer rep for an auto auction in the 80s. The owner of that auction eventually went to prison for tax evasion and ghost employment (big surprise).
And yes, if you plan on working as a contract worker, get an attorney to look over the contract. It'll cost you some (it cost my former roommate $150), but is well worth it. Not just any attorney, though, an employment attorney.
IT people need to read about how law affects them. I've always found that Nolo has great books for us non-lawyers. Those in IT would be most interested in this book, which provides guidance on these issues for both employers and employees.
If you look through the CSS and XHTML specs on the W3C site, you'll find the answers to this. They tell you how a user agent (browser) is supposed to behave.
Since IE is the standard broswer for computers, isn't being compatable with IE the defacto standard for websites? Therefore shouldn't other browsers conform to MS standards?
No. Web people have worked very hard to come up with standards (MS is even on committees in some of these areas). Standards make it easier for someone to create something once and not have to worry about what platforms it works on. One of the hardest parts of any web developer's job is to troubleshoot why webapp X won't work in browser Y. Thankfully, IE is pretty much there with the DOM, but CSS support is still lacking, and it's riddled with rendering bugs.
Like the one for xHTML 1.0. The one that currently has IE in my doghouse is CSS2 support, especially the Box Model. Firefox gets it right. Opera gets it right. But IE gets it totally wrong, forcing web designers to use unsightly hacks to get CSS to behave the same way in IE.
The web community has always had this consensus, going back to HTML 3.2 and even further back. It's the browser makers that can't seem to come to a consensus, which is ridiculous because the W3C tells you how a user agent should behave.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, and yes, most pop music sux. Get over it.
Yeah, and so does most hip-hop. And so does most blues. And so does most rock. And so does most jazz. And so does most of your favorite genre.
Most music out there sucks. Saying that there is a genre that sucks harder or more is stupid. Just like tv, there are awesome examples of every genre, but the vast majority blows.
Reverse-engineering is perfectly legal (when done correctly) and is employed by proprietary folks regularly. How do you think the PC-clone market got started?
That's not a fair analogy. IBM, unlike BK, never tried to use proprietary components in its PCs. It used open standards and off-the-shelf components and didn't complain when people started copying them.
So, basically, CA's plan is to come up with a Creative Commons-type license structure for software? Sounds good to me.
You ask a school teacher why 40% of their budget is spent on microsoft products, and the only answer is: "That's what the industry uses, we'd be failing our kids if we taught them anything else". Hence our kids come out knowing MS Word, not word processing, MS Excel, not spreadsheets, and so on, and those kids will be buying MS software for life.
I'd like you to find a school teacher who says that 40% of their budget is spent on Microsoft products. If you do, I'll show you a liar. There's no way the entire software allocation makes up 40% of any school's budget. Indianapolis Public Schools estimates that their technology initiatives will require $17 million per year for the next four years. That's out of a half-billion dollar total budget. That's about 3.2%. All that information is available on their site. Most of that budget is spent on hardware and teaching, according to the last school board meeting I went to.
So, you're saying that it's impossible to learn word processing using Word? Buhhhh-loney. Word is a tool (and not just in the pejorative sense). The problem isn't that they're using Word, it's that they're not using it to properly teach the students the proper skills needed to use a general word processor. They're taking a hammer and showing kids how to use it as a screwdriver. Word is a great tool for word processing. It has too many features, but for the steal that schools get it for, it's great. Again, it's not the tool, it's the teaching. And, AFAIK, OOo doesn't integrate with EndNote, which many universities give their students for citation management.
When I took a "business computing" class in high school (1994 or 1995), we used WordPerfect for DOS. That thing was horrible. I had nightmares of white text with red highlights on blue screens. I cried every time the book called for setting tabs or creating a hanging indent.
There's no sound logic for why every place on the globe has to be open from 9-5 or 7-3 every day, except maybe Sunday/Saturday, in their "local timezone".
Yes there is. My family once owned a cafe, and we had many discussions about hours of operation. Between certain hours (for us it was from 3pm - 5am since we were in the middle of an industrial park), it doesn't make sense to be open because you spend more money on employees than you get in revenue.
If I'm spending $35.00 an hour (plus benefits) for 4 people to work, and I'm only taking in $15.00 an hour, it'd be stupid to be open.
Therefore, being "open" 24/7 is not plausible. This logic works not just for retail establishments, but call centers, order processing centers, and any service industry business besides hotels.
Ubuntu is an "unofficial" version of Debian.
c ument_view
No. Ubuntu isn't a version of Debian, it's a fork.
http://www.ubuntulinux.org/ubuntu/relationship/do
It's based on Debian, but its development runs seperately.
This was why I had to drop Winamp. My choices were to either run Winamp as Administrator or not have access to the media library function.
Blah. It's a good thing iTunes rocks.
Like I said, generally, they're for it. It's not about energy conservation at this point. It's about not being stuck behind the rest of the country. It's about not having to explain to your business contacts what time it is in Indiana. We deal with a business in Chicago, and every time we set a date for a meeting or a conference call, they always have to ask, "Now, are we on the same time now or not?" It gets frustrating.
IIRC Indiana has some bizarreness
Yep, you're right. Basically, all of Indiana is on EST year-round. However, a few counties in the SE corner (around Cincinnati) go with DST. In addition, some counties in the NW and SW corners (basically the Chicago and Louisville areas) are in the Central time zone and observe DST. (map)
There's a bill just about every session of the state legislature to change this. There's a boost right now in that the new governor is actually pushing for it. I might go through this year, probably (the plan would be to switch on June 5 this year), but they amended the bill in the House to say that counties could "opt out" of DST. The feds came in (Dept. of Transportation, I believe) and said that that would be illegal, it's either all or none. But, the House passed it anyway. The Senate leaders have said they won't touch the bill until it goes through a conference committee to take that part out.
See stories here and here.
It's not as clear cut as this, though. It's a hotly debated topic in Indiana, with most of the business people for it (they say not having it hurts business) and farmers against it (they say it makes no sense). Generally, Republicans are for it, and Democrats are against it. Technology people that I know are generally for it, but the timeline (June 5) has them worried about keeping systems up to date.
I'm agnostic on it, though I do follow it closely.
Which is why informatics programs like the one Indiana offers (especially the program at its Indianapolis campus) are so important. It gives people the education needed to bridge the two areas.
BTW, the term is "bioinformaticists", not "bioinformaticians"
That's what you get for having a LinuxFest in a building that houses the journalism and music schools. :o)
Oh, and here's part of the Indianapolis ordinance that governs how cable tv is dealt with:
Sec. 851-104. Franchise required.
No person or entity shall operate a cable system within the city for which a franchise is required under Title VI of the Act without having first obtained a franchise granted subject to this chapter.
(G.O. 125, 1996, 1)
Sec. 851-105. Franchises not exclusive.
The granting of a cable franchise shall not grant the operator any rights to exclude any other franchised operator from providing services within the geographic areas included in the cable franchise..
Of course, the same document defines a "person" as and individual.
Yeah, but I'm moving out of town at the end of the month anyway, so it won't affect me. They're coming next tuesday to disconnect wire.
There is nothing stopping any other company from laying it's own lines like most of the cable companies did an offer compeating services today.
What these "alternative" companies want is a free ride on the hard work and expense of others. They will bering nothing to the table and will actually deteriorate service.
And what did these established cable companies do to deserve the free ride? They didn't lay the wires. You and I paid for them. Municipalities for the large part own these systems. They give cable companies a "charter" to operate in their area.
The actual Phone service today is WORSE than it was when the telco was a monopoly. Price competition leads to inferior service on all fronts to the point of almost not being worth having.
What sources do you have? I get a better deal now than I ever did (and not with SBC), and with more services.
However, isn't it the case that the phone network is considered to be a public asset whereas the cable network is a private one?
No. The phone companies own the wires. They are required, however, to allow other companies to "lease" their lines at cost.
The problem was that breaking up Ma Bell didn't solve anything because the baby bells were still monopolies in their areas. Then, the telcos started merging (SBC with Ameritech and some others) and now, you've got almost the same situation. You've got four or five companies that own all the lines. So, the FCC forced the companies to open their lines up.
Cable is usually just the opposite. Usually a municipality owns the cable network and grants licenses to companies. These companies in turn lobby so that they can get a monopoly over an area. Here in Indianapolis, there's two cable companies. Bright House serves the center of the city and Comcast serves the outlying areas (relatively outlying, that is).
Then how did I call my sister in another state last night with SkypeOut?
That's interesting. What service do you have? I have Bright House in Indianapolis. At first, I too had both digital basic and high speed internet. Then I realized that my tv habits didn't justify the cost, so I called and said that I wanted to cancel the cable tv, but keep the internet service. I found out what you did, that the non-subscriber rate was $20 more than the subscriber rate. The customer service rep was nice. She told me that if I changed to the "basic" basic cable at $6.95/mo, which only includes local channels, I would still be considered a subscriber. So I did that.
But here's the sweet part. Although they picked up the digital box, they forgot to switch me down to the basic basic cable. So, for the last 3 months, I've been paying $6.95 for the $40 full basic cable service.
Make sure your site is in the main Yahoo index first. It seems to me that that's where they're pulling this stuff.
So, let me get this straight, in order to use the bank's site "securely", I have to reboot my computer? And while I'm doing that, I can't access any of my Windows apps, like Quicken or Excel?
Oh, yeah, that'll catch on.
No, because those charges were unrelated to the situation with my father.
That's retardulous. That's not the case at all. You are a contract worker (aka independent contractor) when you sign a contract saying so. It has nothing to do with responsibilities or deadlines.
And the determination of what is an employee is set by the federal government, including IRS guidelines, labor guidelines, tax code, and congressional laws. State laws may provide certain benefit to non-employees, but that doesn't make them an employee.
When you sign a contract, you are agreeing that you will do X amount of work (hours, units, a project) for Y amount of money (whether flat or per hour). Often, other responsibilities such as work hours are specified in the contract, or there's a clause stating that the employer will decide those terms.
As a contract worker, you are not entitled to any benefits whatsoever. Under some cicumstances, the "employer" doesn't pay payroll taxes, and you are responsible for all taxes, because you are effectively self-employed. My father got swindled into this as a dealer rep for an auto auction in the 80s. The owner of that auction eventually went to prison for tax evasion and ghost employment (big surprise).
And yes, if you plan on working as a contract worker, get an attorney to look over the contract. It'll cost you some (it cost my former roommate $150), but is well worth it. Not just any attorney, though, an employment attorney.
IT people need to read about how law affects them. I've always found that Nolo has great books for us non-lawyers. Those in IT would be most interested in this book, which provides guidance on these issues for both employers and employees.
True, but people are still using 5.5. My workplace didn't dump 5.5 until this year, when they switched to XP from 2000.
If you look through the CSS and XHTML specs on the W3C site, you'll find the answers to this. They tell you how a user agent (browser) is supposed to behave.
Since IE is the standard broswer for computers, isn't being compatable with IE the defacto standard for websites? Therefore shouldn't other browsers conform to MS standards?
No. Web people have worked very hard to come up with standards (MS is even on committees in some of these areas). Standards make it easier for someone to create something once and not have to worry about what platforms it works on. One of the hardest parts of any web developer's job is to troubleshoot why webapp X won't work in browser Y. Thankfully, IE is pretty much there with the DOM, but CSS support is still lacking, and it's riddled with rendering bugs.
Yes, it's called W3C specifications.
Like the one for xHTML 1.0. The one that currently has IE in my doghouse is CSS2 support, especially the Box Model. Firefox gets it right. Opera gets it right. But IE gets it totally wrong, forcing web designers to use unsightly hacks to get CSS to behave the same way in IE.
The web community has always had this consensus, going back to HTML 3.2 and even further back. It's the browser makers that can't seem to come to a consensus, which is ridiculous because the W3C tells you how a user agent should behave.