I don't see any justification for setting up a system that effectively pages you if a user decides to look at a naked woman/man where the actual net effect is a handful of web requests among 10's of 1000's. (streaming a 500kbs video is different). Management that is doing it's job will have other other proper ways of measuring an employee's productivity/contribution.
This has nothing to do with productivity and everything to do with corporate liability especially where sexual harassment is concerned. If a woman walks by seeing a man viewing porn on the company network she may sue the shit out of the company. There are plenty of other examples that justify preventing a user from doing something that have nothing to do with employee productivity.
Why is that the only option? I think these kinds of issues beg the question: Why won't a commercial Linux vendor bite the bullet and get the licensing they need to provide for things like legal DVD playback and other codecs? If someone like a Red Hat did not want to lose money on their investment they could always package the software separate from their Linux distribution under a different license and keep it closed source if that is what is required of them. That way one can still get their favorite Open Source, non-DRM infested OS while those who would be willing to add those capabilities or restrictions to their system can do it for a price. I, for one, have no plans to rip DVDs or audio and would not worry about DRM on a system that has no other purpose than to run my home theater. If something like I just described existed I would buy it, and so would others as not everyone who runs Linux screams OH NOES DRM IS TEH EVIL!!!111one!!1!
Anyone know what is going on with MythTV and Digital Cable or HDTV support? If I go myth I would like to know that I can get full res HDTV or to be able to get a "digital cable card" (does one even exist?) No sense in setting up a mythtv box if I don't know if I will be able to transition to these other technologies but companies like Microsoft can or eventually will.
McNealy seems to have thes attitude that computing should be centrally controlled or stored.
You are correct, and in Sun's target market, McNealy is right. That's the whole idea behind Sun Rays, clustering, computing grid, and "The network is the computer" approach that Sun currently lives by. With the exception of engineers and other techies who absolutely need workstations on which they can install their own hardware/software as necessary for their job, a corporate end user can work just as well with a thin client driven by a failover group of Sun Ray servers, a mail cluster and a file server/applications cluster. If the user's client fries, the user can simply move to another desk or aquire another thin client, plug it in, and get right back to work. Just make sure there is power and network redundancy plus UPS/generators to keep everything running in case of utility outages.
...I do believe this is the day that Slashdot has officially jumped the shark. Users of a forum which the majority claim to be "open" to things such as uncensored speech and expression, free software, public global exchange of information and knowledge are now discussing who to censor, who to exclude, who to ban, who is worthy or unworthy of a posting information in the form of an article submission, or how many times one is permitted to express this information. On top of this, CmdrTaco - the provider of this supposed open media - has watched this go on for so long that he feels the need to make a statement in the form of an article...a statement of which will probably do little except feed the flames of some people's rage, causing them to further desire the exclusion or censorship if those they disagree with.
I think it's amazing that some of those (some, not all) who argue so much for freedom of speech and open exchange of information are the same that make so many attempts to silence others. Many of those who say if you don't like what you hear, read, see, etc then change the channel, close the book, change the station. So many posts responding to this article call for the same type of censorship they complain organizations like the FCC try to implement on them. I personally do not use any filters on Slashdot, if you do not like seeing articles from a specific submitter I suggest you filter them if possible. If it is not possible, then maybe the addition of such a feature is necessary. If you are upset about someone else getting credit for articles over you, then it is not the submitter that is the problem, rather it is your own ego.
I personally do not give a rat's if all the accepted articles for a month are submitted solely by Beatles-Beatles, or anyone else including myself. It is the content of the article that matters, not the submitter. Readers still gain the same information from the articles no matter who posted them, do they not? Or is what really matters some pissing contest over who gets more exposure, publicity, recognition, or other gain? Cause I was under the impression that the whole ball of wax was simply about the free exchange of news and ideas among a group of people who share a common interest.
...when they say they "want to organize the world's data, including AOL's." Doesn't Google already crawl and catalog sites on AOL or created by AOL subscribers? Or are they talking about things like multimedia content that is only available to AOL users? I was under the impression that internet content served by AOL worked just like any other site on the internet. Does AOL currently block Google from cataloging/caching all content served by AOL via robots.txt or other methods? I am not an AOL subscriber so if someone out there could share with the rest of the class, it would be appreciated.
First post! and MS doesn't patch everything because they weigh cost of patching vs benefit of writing the patch and the risks associated with leaving it alone at the time. A seemingly small, unimportant issue will not get more attention than something that drives or will potentially make money.
How is this any different than...
on
The ESRB Gets An 'F'
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
...what the movie studios do? A movie is made and goes before the MPAA for rating. MPAA rates it R, but the studios were hoping for a PG-13. The MPAA tells them what they would need to cut for a PG-13 rating, so the studios comply and get the rating they need to sell their movie the way they want. The ESRB also includes some description on the box of the game that says why the game was rated the way it was...i.e. "intense blood and gore" or "drug use", etc. In a way they are doing better jobs than the MPAA. All music CDs say on the front of their packaging is "Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics", no mention of how explicit or the subject matter of the explicit areas. So they must suck worse than the MPAA. I don't understand how anyone can be upset with the ESRB rating process other than those who simply do not want the rest of society to have a choice as to how people go about entertaining themselves.
On another note, if the ESRB tightened their ratings, couldn't game vendors get around it by releasing expansion packs that make the game more graphic or explicit, much like "The Sims" has been doing? Rockstar could earn their weight in gold by offering expansions to GTA that make the game "AO" while selling the base game under an "M" rating. Would the expansion pack have to have an "AO" rating even if the expansion pack can not be played on its own, so if a kid bought it they would not be exposed to its content since a kid should not be able to buy an "M" rated game anyway?
...I actually have a life that prevents me from sitting in a lawn chair in the rain all night outside Circuit City to buy a buggy POS game console made by a company who makes other very buggy products.
Yeah, it's not like you'll need it for anything now that you've got the Messiah in the office. Once again, go hit the books.../snip/...As regards to USA's European Theatre contributions, don't get too haughty.
Um I wasn't making references to military contributions, just saying that if the litmus test for why someone or some people should or should not like a country is the gift of a large copper statue a hundred some odd years beforehand, said country can have it back. The damn thing is falling apart anyways and keeps getting closed for repairs. Nowadays, all it really is to most people here is a tourist trap. Immigrants don't get processed through Ellis Island anymore either, so it's not even the "first sign of freedom" to people entering the USA.
hey wish I had some mod points for this...both interesting and funny! That and I never worked with a woman in IT that either cared about her appearance or wore a skirt to work...lol.
The broadcast flag would be used for DRM, the flag will determine wether or not the content can be recorded. Devices would have to be able to interpret this flag and respond to the flag appropriately, meaning it will refuse to record a flagged TV show or movie.
Almost forgot - concerning the topic, looks like Google could get into even more revenue from advertising by selling space on their gaim-like instant messaging app by replacing AOL instant messenger with whatever comes of this new hire.
There are so many ways these three companies can benefit each other. Comcast could provide the AOL software as its own front end to the internet. "Hey, look how easy it is to use Comcast Cable as opposed to Verizon DSL!" This would reduce the number of people who drop AOL because they have to pay for a broadband service on top of AOL to get AOL on broadband. "Now I can get AOL and a high speed connection for one price!" Non-broadband users could still subscribe to AOL dial-up if they wish. "Broadband costs too much, I want to stay with dial-up." AOL could provide the massive userbase Google needs to make its potential Office software suite popular. AOL software could be the distribution channel for a Google Office product that comes installed with AOL, rather than supplying the Office apps as a purely internet-based application. "Check out this Google Word Processor and Spreadsheet application, it just came with my new version of AOL!" Google gains more advertising revenue because now it can be the default search engine and office application for AOL and Comcast users.
Some people here are suggesting that this will turn into an online office app that pushes targeted advertising based on the contents of your document. I don't think this is the way it is going, but if it is then it is a BIG mistake for Google.
How in the world would something like this get past corporate legal teams? I would worry about a massive leak of intellectual property or other sensitive information if the document I was working on is being evaluated for content across the public internet...there is no privacy in an application like this. Even if the data is encrypted, Google could potentially have a copy of every document and change to every document I write even if I never actually save it to Google's servers. How is this any better than spyware or keystroke loggers? No way they would make money off something like this in the corporate world, and I personally would never use it on my home system either.
How is that? Is taxing something not interfering with it? What would be considered 'interfering'?
Think of interfering as "interrupting" or making commerce "difficult to perform". For example, if my state banned all tractor trailers on their highways, that could be considered interference with interstate commerce because if the truck can not deliver its goods to my state, or even drive through my state to get to its destination in another state, then it severely hinders the ability of companies to trade. Now look at internet sales tax. A tax may raise the cost of goods for the purchaser, but it does not cripple the ability to trade. However the tax rate charged may or may not qualify as interference...if the tax rate is so high that it makes otherwise affordable goods unobtainable, you might have a case. But if a state charges 7% sales tax and suddenly is able to charge/enforce the same rate for internet sales, it is not interference. And technically you do owe taxes on internet purchased products as you do on mail order/catalog/phone purchases, it is just not enforced. Most people insist that is not true simply because they have lived their whole life not paying those taxes and never thought about it for a second. Regardless it is still the law in almost every state.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't see any justification for setting up a system that effectively pages you if a user decides to look at a naked woman/man where the actual net effect is a handful of web requests among 10's of 1000's. (streaming a 500kbs video is different). Management that is doing it's job will have other other proper ways of measuring an employee's productivity/contribution.
This has nothing to do with productivity and everything to do with corporate liability especially where sexual harassment is concerned. If a woman walks by seeing a man viewing porn on the company network she may sue the shit out of the company. There are plenty of other examples that justify preventing a user from doing something that have nothing to do with employee productivity.
"excuse me...I have a question..."
"WHAT...does...Alla...need...with-a-PC?"
Why is that the only option? I think these kinds of issues beg the question: Why won't a commercial Linux vendor bite the bullet and get the licensing they need to provide for things like legal DVD playback and other codecs? If someone like a Red Hat did not want to lose money on their investment they could always package the software separate from their Linux distribution under a different license and keep it closed source if that is what is required of them. That way one can still get their favorite Open Source, non-DRM infested OS while those who would be willing to add those capabilities or restrictions to their system can do it for a price. I, for one, have no plans to rip DVDs or audio and would not worry about DRM on a system that has no other purpose than to run my home theater. If something like I just described existed I would buy it, and so would others as not everyone who runs Linux screams OH NOES DRM IS TEH EVIL!!!111one!!1!
Anyone know what is going on with MythTV and Digital Cable or HDTV support? If I go myth I would like to know that I can get full res HDTV or to be able to get a "digital cable card" (does one even exist?) No sense in setting up a mythtv box if I don't know if I will be able to transition to these other technologies but companies like Microsoft can or eventually will.
McNealy seems to have thes attitude that computing should be centrally controlled or stored.
You are correct, and in Sun's target market, McNealy is right. That's the whole idea behind Sun Rays, clustering, computing grid, and "The network is the computer" approach that Sun currently lives by. With the exception of engineers and other techies who absolutely need workstations on which they can install their own hardware/software as necessary for their job, a corporate end user can work just as well with a thin client driven by a failover group of Sun Ray servers, a mail cluster and a file server/applications cluster. If the user's client fries, the user can simply move to another desk or aquire another thin client, plug it in, and get right back to work. Just make sure there is power and network redundancy plus UPS/generators to keep everything running in case of utility outages.
...I do believe this is the day that Slashdot has officially jumped the shark. Users of a forum which the majority claim to be "open" to things such as uncensored speech and expression, free software, public global exchange of information and knowledge are now discussing who to censor, who to exclude, who to ban, who is worthy or unworthy of a posting information in the form of an article submission, or how many times one is permitted to express this information. On top of this, CmdrTaco - the provider of this supposed open media - has watched this go on for so long that he feels the need to make a statement in the form of an article...a statement of which will probably do little except feed the flames of some people's rage, causing them to further desire the exclusion or censorship if those they disagree with.
I think it's amazing that some of those (some, not all) who argue so much for freedom of speech and open exchange of information are the same that make so many attempts to silence others. Many of those who say if you don't like what you hear, read, see, etc then change the channel, close the book, change the station. So many posts responding to this article call for the same type of censorship they complain organizations like the FCC try to implement on them. I personally do not use any filters on Slashdot, if you do not like seeing articles from a specific submitter I suggest you filter them if possible. If it is not possible, then maybe the addition of such a feature is necessary. If you are upset about someone else getting credit for articles over you, then it is not the submitter that is the problem, rather it is your own ego.
I personally do not give a rat's if all the accepted articles for a month are submitted solely by Beatles-Beatles, or anyone else including myself. It is the content of the article that matters, not the submitter. Readers still gain the same information from the articles no matter who posted them, do they not? Or is what really matters some pissing contest over who gets more exposure, publicity, recognition, or other gain? Cause I was under the impression that the whole ball of wax was simply about the free exchange of news and ideas among a group of people who share a common interest.
Someone MOD PARENT UP...this is so true...damn wish I had mod points.
...when they say they "want to organize the world's data, including AOL's." Doesn't Google already crawl and catalog sites on AOL or created by AOL subscribers? Or are they talking about things like multimedia content that is only available to AOL users? I was under the impression that internet content served by AOL worked just like any other site on the internet. Does AOL currently block Google from cataloging/caching all content served by AOL via robots.txt or other methods? I am not an AOL subscriber so if someone out there could share with the rest of the class, it would be appreciated.
yeah hams usse the 144-148 range quite often.
...How many libraries of Congress would all this code occupy?
First post! and MS doesn't patch everything because they weigh cost of patching vs benefit of writing the patch and the risks associated with leaving it alone at the time. A seemingly small, unimportant issue will not get more attention than something that drives or will potentially make money.
...what the movie studios do? A movie is made and goes before the MPAA for rating. MPAA rates it R, but the studios were hoping for a PG-13. The MPAA tells them what they would need to cut for a PG-13 rating, so the studios comply and get the rating they need to sell their movie the way they want. The ESRB also includes some description on the box of the game that says why the game was rated the way it was...i.e. "intense blood and gore" or "drug use", etc. In a way they are doing better jobs than the MPAA. All music CDs say on the front of their packaging is "Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics", no mention of how explicit or the subject matter of the explicit areas. So they must suck worse than the MPAA. I don't understand how anyone can be upset with the ESRB rating process other than those who simply do not want the rest of society to have a choice as to how people go about entertaining themselves.
On another note, if the ESRB tightened their ratings, couldn't game vendors get around it by releasing expansion packs that make the game more graphic or explicit, much like "The Sims" has been doing? Rockstar could earn their weight in gold by offering expansions to GTA that make the game "AO" while selling the base game under an "M" rating. Would the expansion pack have to have an "AO" rating even if the expansion pack can not be played on its own, so if a kid bought it they would not be exposed to its content since a kid should not be able to buy an "M" rated game anyway?
Exactly...it's the closest one can get to personal utopia!
...I actually have a life that prevents me from sitting in a lawn chair in the rain all night outside Circuit City to buy a buggy POS game console made by a company who makes other very buggy products.
I am the vinder viper!!!! I vill be there in three months!!! I come to vipe your vindows!!!
Yeah, it's not like you'll need it for anything now that you've got the Messiah in the office. Once again, go hit the books.../snip/...As regards to USA's European Theatre contributions, don't get too haughty.
Um I wasn't making references to military contributions, just saying that if the litmus test for why someone or some people should or should not like a country is the gift of a large copper statue a hundred some odd years beforehand, said country can have it back. The damn thing is falling apart anyways and keeps getting closed for repairs. Nowadays, all it really is to most people here is a tourist trap. Immigrants don't get processed through Ellis Island anymore either, so it's not even the "first sign of freedom" to people entering the USA.
OT: Next time your tongue itches to say something stupid about the French, remind yourself why the Statue of Liberty is in New York, again.
That's ok, they can have it back if it's being used to justify not bashing France...
hey wish I had some mod points for this...both interesting and funny! That and I never worked with a woman in IT that either cared about her appearance or wore a skirt to work...lol.
In Soviet Russia, girl screws YOU!!!
The broadcast flag would be used for DRM, the flag will determine wether or not the content can be recorded. Devices would have to be able to interpret this flag and respond to the flag appropriately, meaning it will refuse to record a flagged TV show or movie.
"Why on earth would anybody let an MSFT badge keynote a *nix conference is beyond me..."
LOL yeah it's like having gweeds ranting at H2K2 concerning hackers that sold out...
Almost forgot - concerning the topic, looks like Google could get into even more revenue from advertising by selling space on their gaim-like instant messaging app by replacing AOL instant messenger with whatever comes of this new hire.
There are so many ways these three companies can benefit each other. Comcast could provide the AOL software as its own front end to the internet. "Hey, look how easy it is to use Comcast Cable as opposed to Verizon DSL!" This would reduce the number of people who drop AOL because they have to pay for a broadband service on top of AOL to get AOL on broadband. "Now I can get AOL and a high speed connection for one price!" Non-broadband users could still subscribe to AOL dial-up if they wish. "Broadband costs too much, I want to stay with dial-up." AOL could provide the massive userbase Google needs to make its potential Office software suite popular. AOL software could be the distribution channel for a Google Office product that comes installed with AOL, rather than supplying the Office apps as a purely internet-based application. "Check out this Google Word Processor and Spreadsheet application, it just came with my new version of AOL!" Google gains more advertising revenue because now it can be the default search engine and office application for AOL and Comcast users.
Some people here are suggesting that this will turn into an online office app that pushes targeted advertising based on the contents of your document. I don't think this is the way it is going, but if it is then it is a BIG mistake for Google.
How in the world would something like this get past corporate legal teams? I would worry about a massive leak of intellectual property or other sensitive information if the document I was working on is being evaluated for content across the public internet...there is no privacy in an application like this. Even if the data is encrypted, Google could potentially have a copy of every document and change to every document I write even if I never actually save it to Google's servers. How is this any better than spyware or keystroke loggers? No way they would make money off something like this in the corporate world, and I personally would never use it on my home system either.
How is that? Is taxing something not interfering with it? What would be considered 'interfering'?
Think of interfering as "interrupting" or making commerce "difficult to perform". For example, if my state banned all tractor trailers on their highways, that could be considered interference with interstate commerce because if the truck can not deliver its goods to my state, or even drive through my state to get to its destination in another state, then it severely hinders the ability of companies to trade. Now look at internet sales tax. A tax may raise the cost of goods for the purchaser, but it does not cripple the ability to trade. However the tax rate charged may or may not qualify as interference...if the tax rate is so high that it makes otherwise affordable goods unobtainable, you might have a case. But if a state charges 7% sales tax and suddenly is able to charge/enforce the same rate for internet sales, it is not interference. And technically you do owe taxes on internet purchased products as you do on mail order/catalog/phone purchases, it is just not enforced. Most people insist that is not true simply because they have lived their whole life not paying those taxes and never thought about it for a second. Regardless it is still the law in almost every state.