Connections helps you get a start. They do almost nothing to help you succeed.
That is how I got my job, by knowing the right people.
But to really succeed, who you started out knowing does practically crap - if you work hard and have any thing but entirely bad luck, you can easily meet the people that you need to meet and make the connections that you need to make. It is pretty much a non-factor in making a start up business succesfull. To the extent that it is a factor, it is part of the 9% financing.
1) Rounders was bull crap. First of all Poker is mostly a game of skill, not luck, but they STILL considers anyone that wins twice to be amazing. How many times have the yankees won the world series? Any real poker play knows that even in the game of skill called poker, luck plays a large deal.
2) Did you read my email past the first line? I said hard work is just as important. And that was what BIll Gates did. He was not a computer genius - other people did the genius work on Windows. And he had a TON of luck.
Basically what happened was this: IBM created a killer app for their desktop by letting other people make the hardware and them selling the software (DOS). The courts said, no, that is a monoply, you must let another company sell the hardware. Boom Microsoft was born. They took IBM's Dos, turned it into MSDOS and began their climb to monoply that the courts said IBM was not allowed to have.
Bill gates worked hard, but to get where he ended up he used a lot of Luck, a lot of Hard work, a lot of financeing, some handy government rules, and maybe a tiny little bit of intelligence.
The point is that being intelligent is not that big a help to becoming succesfull.
But it is clear that talent/genius/great guys get nothing.
The people that make it in the real business world have a bit of luck, find some financing, work their asses off in the early years, get a some favorable government rules, and might have a passably good idea.
Bill gates is practically the posterboy for this formula. He had the luck, the cash, some hard work in the early years, a lot of favorabel USA rulings, and a very very few ideas taht weren't 1/2 bad.
Yes, most spammers do not use their own email boxes. They spoof things. Why? Because it is easy. Why? Because it is not worth it to the hardware people to create a system where things are secure. You charge for email and it suddenly BECOMES worth it.
The current system is incapable of charging for email. To make it capable of charging for email requires a massive upgrade of software. Guess what? When they upgrade their software making it keep track of email, they will be forced to make it secure and the spammers will not be able to hide their real names.
Just think about hotmail. If they charged for email, they would want a valid credit card. No more anonymous emailing. And you know that people might start noticing if they got 50,000 emails charges on their credit card. When you put a stop and refused to pay, Hotmail would be stuck with their charges. So damn right Hotmail would make it a LOT more secure, harder to spoof, and harder to break in.
Implementation is simple. You are NOT trying to charge for every kind of message transfer, just for the standard open system called email.
The ISP charges anyone everytime their system is used.
Companies etc. would implement systems that did not use their ISP's mail system, which is fine.
File transfer would also not use that system, so they would not be charged.
Obtaining my email address is easy. Just follow the instructions below.
Click (here) and enter your email here if you want to sell me methods to increase the size of my sexual organs.
Click (here) and enter your email if you want to sell me spam stopping software.
Click (here) and enter your email if you want to use me to transfer ridiculously large sums of cash for a profitable percentage.
Click (here) and enter your email if you want me to join your dating service
Click (here) and enter your email if you want me to refinance using your service.
EULA has small print that says:
Note, all buttons forward your email address to the previous clicker.
Too bad, I can't require emailers to give me their correct forwarding address.
I did read the entire story. Your problem seems to be that you do not understand the terms surgical strike.
It refers to a precise attempt to only affect the problem area.
As clearly indicated by the story, if you read it, the virus, even though it is initially injected into the tumor, does spread to the entire body of the cancer patient. The effects on the patient are minor, but it DOES affect them.
This is far more similar to a standard drug that such as asprin, that effects the entire body, but has most of it's effect on a specific problem area, than it is to any surgery that only affects the target area.
As such, the virus is definitely NOT a surgical strike type medicine.
It is however, a good idea, despite the general effect it has on the entire body.
Did you read the story? This is an all or nothing approach. You infect the entire patient and hope the virus will only kill the desired cells. If it turns out that the virus kills your healthy cells instead of the tumor, you die.
Radiation on the other hand is far MORE of a surgical strike approach. The radiate just the tumor area, not the entire body.
You are correct, it is NOT like we have anything that can be used to track down a person right now. Those things you mentioned are not directly connected to your identity, and can EASILY be negated.
Simple method #1:
Go to an internet cafe, pay cash, and no one can possibly back track that stuff directly to you.
Simple method #2:
Go to a library, use their computer for free, and no one can possibly back track that stuff directly to you.
More risky Method:
Use an anonymizer site to surf and trust that they will in fact keep your info secret.
But yes, it is possible for a fool/moron to give away their identity on the internet without knowing they have done it.
I wonder could the "WOW" signal be what you we detect when two governments on some alien planet decided that they could not trust each other, so they launched all their nuclear weapons.
Another foolish waste theory.
What spacerace? Who do you think we are "racing" against?
Every single dollar spent on Space research has returned approximately three times the return on non-space research has done.
Do you watch Cable TV?, Do you have a GPS device? Ever ride in a boat/plane?
40 years ago luddite idiots like you objected to the space race when we actually HAD a space race, and now they use products that DEPEND on the results of the space research every day,
People that object to spending money on "space research" have ZERO knowledge of history.
2003-04-30 14:28:07 Virginia outlaws Spam. (articles,spam) (rejected)
2003-07-02 17:27:33 Should we be allowed to Hack Spamer's clients? (polls,spam) (rejected)
2003-08-18 18:42:00 Code Green Worm "fixes" Blaster worm. (articles,news) (rejected)
2003-09-15 18:12:56 Making a video screen out of thin air (articles,displays) (rejected)
All rejected. I am not "grousing". What I want to know is, am I doing something wrong? Or do they only accept stories from their friends/top rated users? I would love some advice on how to get a story posted.
Enterprise, Smallville, Jake 2.0 (new show) make for three prime time Sci-Fi shows showing on broadcast TV. These are DEFINITELY mainstream. That is the practically the definition of broadcast over cable.
On basic cable, we have we have an entire channel of Sci-Fi TV, and they are producing new shows, not just showing repeats. (Granted, some like Stargate are not living up to it's potential)
And every season they come out with several movies.
Most importantly, Sci-Fi is recognized now. People do not look at you funny if you talk about sci-fi stuff like clones, artificial intelligence, laser weaponry, etc. In part because it has shifted from far flung to near-term, but still, it is sci-fi until they build it.
Yes, Star Trek is in decline, but other shows have taken over for it.
Some of them on Cable, but still out there.
And just because there aren't any good SCiFi/it doesn't make money doesn't mean it isn't main stream.
We have Enterprise, which may not be up to the standards of the older TV shows, but it has been picked up.
I disagree about Sci-Fi having a limited audience. SciFi is expensive, but it is fairly mainstream. Compare to other genres. There is ONE western on tv now. How many Medical shows? How many real(crap)ity shows? How many legal shows? How many political shows? How many cop shows? Now compare with Sci-Fi. And look at books. Sci fi is a strong genre that has almost as many shows on it as the other genres, and FAR more books and movies.
You are correct about the expense. It is incredibally expensive, with tons of costumes, make up, models and digital effects required to cut the mustard.
That is incorrect, although a popular idea among business attorneys.
MANY rights can not be given up, no matter what you sign.
For example, slavery is illegal no matter what you sign.
Parental rights also are sometimes considered valid, even if you signed them away (as in surrogate parents).
The question is, is it possible to give away your right to sell an object and still be considered the legal owner of it. And that is very much up in the air. The right to sell is considered by many to be inherent to ownership.
Consider a bankruptcy case. Assume someone went was rich and had a huge collection of purchased songs, say 50,000 at $1. each. Would a judge be able to legally order those songs sold for? Or could the rich man say, no I can't sell them according to the TOS.
I think the TOS would be thrown out and the songs sold.
This is a perfect example of people misusing PC ideas to disrespect the people they claim they are helping.
The article is specifically discussing their disability. As such it IS appropriate to identify the people by the fact that they are disabled.
Refering to them in this context as "people with disabilities" is INSULTING, it implies that this article is not for people that have the disabilities, but instead for those that are tending to them.
When talking about the disabilites themselves, it is appropriate to talk about the disabled people, but when talking about the people that have them, it is appropriate to talk about people with disabilities.
There is no need to police it. Or even to require it. By setting up the battery system, those that participate and pay for the emergency storage have energy during the rare black outs, those that don't, suffer.
Big deal
More importantly, there are side benefits. Those that have the battery system can "buy" energy form Con-Ed during off-peak times (night), store it in their battery, and use up some of it during Peak times (daytime) when it is more expensive to generate and more likely to cause problems. This is why the idea has some merit. But they really need to convince us why the battery should be "Hydrogen fuel-cell based" instead of other types.
Slashdot Mirror
That is how I got my job, by knowing the right people.
But to really succeed, who you started out knowing does practically crap - if you work hard and have any thing but entirely bad luck, you can easily meet the people that you need to meet and make the connections that you need to make. It is pretty much a non-factor in making a start up business succesfull. To the extent that it is a factor, it is part of the 9% financing.
2) Did you read my email past the first line? I said hard work is just as important. And that was what BIll Gates did. He was not a computer genius - other people did the genius work on Windows. And he had a TON of luck.
Basically what happened was this: IBM created a killer app for their desktop by letting other people make the hardware and them selling the software (DOS). The courts said, no, that is a monoply, you must let another company sell the hardware. Boom Microsoft was born. They took IBM's Dos, turned it into MSDOS and began their climb to monoply that the courts said IBM was not allowed to have.
Bill gates worked hard, but to get where he ended up he used a lot of Luck, a lot of Hard work, a lot of financeing, some handy government rules, and maybe a tiny little bit of intelligence.
The point is that being intelligent is not that big a help to becoming succesfull.
It is more like this: 30% pure luck
30% Financing
30% Perspiration
9% favorable government laws/rules
1% Inspiration/talent
But it is clear that talent/genius/great guys get nothing. The people that make it in the real business world have a bit of luck, find some financing, work their asses off in the early years, get a some favorable government rules, and might have a passably good idea.
Bill gates is practically the posterboy for this formula. He had the luck, the cash, some hard work in the early years, a lot of favorabel USA rulings, and a very very few ideas taht weren't 1/2 bad.
Could you get into Harvard with last year's brain chip?
Would all your friends stop talking to you because you "chip" was to slow?
And then of course there would be the hackers that insist on over-clocking their personal brains.
Link to Hover "scotter".
Yes, most spammers do not use their own email boxes. They spoof things. Why? Because it is easy. Why? Because it is not worth it to the hardware people to create a system where things are secure. You charge for email and it suddenly BECOMES worth it.
The current system is incapable of charging for email. To make it capable of charging for email requires a massive upgrade of software. Guess what? When they upgrade their software making it keep track of email, they will be forced to make it secure and the spammers will not be able to hide their real names.
Just think about hotmail. If they charged for email, they would want a valid credit card. No more anonymous emailing. And you know that people might start noticing if they got 50,000 emails charges on their credit card. When you put a stop and refused to pay, Hotmail would be stuck with their charges. So damn right Hotmail would make it a LOT more secure, harder to spoof, and harder to break in.
Implementation is simple. You are NOT trying to charge for every kind of message transfer, just for the standard open system called email. The ISP charges anyone everytime their system is used. Companies etc. would implement systems that did not use their ISP's mail system, which is fine. File transfer would also not use that system, so they would not be charged.
Click (here) and enter your email here if you want to sell me methods to increase the size of my sexual organs.
Click (here) and enter your email if you want to sell me spam stopping software.
Click (here) and enter your email if you want to use me to transfer ridiculously large sums of cash for a profitable percentage.
Click (here) and enter your email if you want me to join your dating service
Click (here) and enter your email if you want me to refinance using your service.
EULA has small print that says: Note, all buttons forward your email address to the previous clicker. Too bad, I can't require emailers to give me their correct forwarding address.
It refers to a precise attempt to only affect the problem area.
As clearly indicated by the story, if you read it, the virus, even though it is initially injected into the tumor, does spread to the entire body of the cancer patient. The effects on the patient are minor, but it DOES affect them.
This is far more similar to a standard drug that such as asprin, that effects the entire body, but has most of it's effect on a specific problem area, than it is to any surgery that only affects the target area.
As such, the virus is definitely NOT a surgical strike type medicine. It is however, a good idea, despite the general effect it has on the entire body.
Radiation on the other hand is far MORE of a surgical strike approach. The radiate just the tumor area, not the entire body.
Simple method #1: Go to an internet cafe, pay cash, and no one can possibly back track that stuff directly to you.
Simple method #2: Go to a library, use their computer for free, and no one can possibly back track that stuff directly to you.
More risky Method: Use an anonymizer site to surf and trust that they will in fact keep your info secret.
But yes, it is possible for a fool/moron to give away their identity on the internet without knowing they have done it.
To make it worthwhile, people would be required to type in their I.D.L. # to use a computer, destroying the entire concept of privacy.
I wonder could the "WOW" signal be what you we detect when two governments on some alien planet decided that they could not trust each other, so they launched all their nuclear weapons.
Every single dollar spent on Space research has returned approximately three times the return on non-space research has done.
Do you watch Cable TV?, Do you have a GPS device? Ever ride in a boat/plane?
40 years ago luddite idiots like you objected to the space race when we actually HAD a space race, and now they use products that DEPEND on the results of the space research every day,
People that object to spending money on "space research" have ZERO knowledge of history.
I bet it is maybe 10 cents, AFTER all "start up" costs have been paid.
2003-01-16 21:52:26 Information Copying or Information Theft? (polls,money) (rejected)
2003-01-21 16:12:29 Superman Vs. Batman (articles,humor) (rejected)
2003-01-24 17:43:52 Senate tries to limit Pentagon's Internet Spy Proj (articles,privacy) (rejected)
2003-02-14 20:39:28 Virus may Slow Aids. (articles,news) (rejected)
2003-03-31 15:53:36 Invisible Coat (camera+wearable Display (articles,displays) (rejected)
2003-04-30 14:28:07 Virginia outlaws Spam. (articles,spam) (rejected)
2003-07-02 17:27:33 Should we be allowed to Hack Spamer's clients? (polls,spam) (rejected)
2003-08-18 18:42:00 Code Green Worm "fixes" Blaster worm. (articles,news) (rejected)
2003-09-15 18:12:56 Making a video screen out of thin air (articles,displays) (rejected)
All rejected. I am not "grousing". What I want to know is, am I doing something wrong? Or do they only accept stories from their friends/top rated users? I would love some advice on how to get a story posted.
On basic cable, we have we have an entire channel of Sci-Fi TV, and they are producing new shows, not just showing repeats. (Granted, some like Stargate are not living up to it's potential)
And every season they come out with several movies.
Most importantly, Sci-Fi is recognized now. People do not look at you funny if you talk about sci-fi stuff like clones, artificial intelligence, laser weaponry, etc. In part because it has shifted from far flung to near-term, but still, it is sci-fi until they build it.
Yes, Star Trek is in decline, but other shows have taken over for it. Some of them on Cable, but still out there. And just because there aren't any good SCiFi /it doesn't make money doesn't mean it isn't main stream.
We have Enterprise, which may not be up to the standards of the older TV shows, but it has been picked up.
Theres a western version of CSI on free cable (USA or TNN, one of those channels)
You are correct about the expense. It is incredibally expensive, with tons of costumes, make up, models and digital effects required to cut the mustard.
It has no doors, because water might leak into the car if it had a door.
MANY rights can not be given up, no matter what you sign.
For example, slavery is illegal no matter what you sign.
Parental rights also are sometimes considered valid, even if you signed them away (as in surrogate parents).
The question is, is it possible to give away your right to sell an object and still be considered the legal owner of it. And that is very much up in the air. The right to sell is considered by many to be inherent to ownership.
Consider a bankruptcy case. Assume someone went was rich and had a huge collection of purchased songs, say 50,000 at $1. each. Would a judge be able to legally order those songs sold for? Or could the rich man say, no I can't sell them according to the TOS.
I think the TOS would be thrown out and the songs sold.
The concept of Politically correct has been high-jacked by the morons that want to discredit it.
The article is specifically discussing their disability. As such it IS appropriate to identify the people by the fact that they are disabled.
Refering to them in this context as "people with disabilities" is INSULTING, it implies that this article is not for people that have the disabilities, but instead for those that are tending to them.
When talking about the disabilites themselves, it is appropriate to talk about the disabled people, but when talking about the people that have them, it is appropriate to talk about people with disabilities.
Big deal
More importantly, there are side benefits. Those that have the battery system can "buy" energy form Con-Ed during off-peak times (night), store it in their battery, and use up some of it during Peak times (daytime) when it is more expensive to generate and more likely to cause problems. This is why the idea has some merit. But they really need to convince us why the battery should be "Hydrogen fuel-cell based" instead of other types.