Maybe it could be described that for each vector of space there is a concommitant time dimension which is intertwined with it, so it could also be described as three dimensions and each of those dimensions is split into its own space dimension and time dimension.
And the next step (after rolling it out nationwide) is to introduce a cheap ($30?) handset that accesses the network. A "cellphone" with free phone calls -- forever.
That whistling is the sound of every phone company imploding at once.
Thanks for the hope but you make it sound a bit easier than it is. (Getting half a million from friends and family isn't possible for many people.)
And while the advice is sound, I'd like to add to it: forget the basement. We're in Prague, and it's not just nicer, it's much cheaper. Anyone can take $50,000 and a year off and go to, say, Kiev, hire a few top developers and make whatever they want. The rest is having the business chops and people to take it all the way home.
By wiring up the country with WiFi and creating a cell phone that calls anywhere for free. They can make a lot of their money back with SoIP. If the volume is able to be supported, does this mean the end of the telephone industry?
According to the World Bank, sorted by GDP per capita, the rankings of wealthiest countries are as follows:
1 Liechtenstein 2 Luxembourg 3 Switzerland 4 Norway 5 Denmark 6 Japan 7 Singapore 8 US
The top 5 countries? That's right, are all in Europe. The EU is currently the largest economy in the world.
So what's with the statement "Europe is still second fiddle to the United States economically, and will probably never regain its former position in the world with the rising economies of the Far East."?
But I DO game, and I still agree with him. I got Doom 3 right when it came out, and I was also excited about Half-Life 2. And yet, I stop playing these games after a few weeks. The only difference between Quake and Doom 3 is the level of realism, which while considerable and amazing, isn't enough to sustain my interest.
I don't think the industry is doomed, but I do think that it's stale.
This was also said 15 years ago: go for vertical markets, nothing else is left. And it's good advice, unless you're ambitious.
It's b*llsh*t to say all companies needs have been met. Look around you. It's called the "software crisis" for a reason. There is something huge waiting, lurking around the corner. Be there for it.
I'm interested in hearing more about this. I'm starting an outsourcing startup in the Ukraine in the next few months and can use all the help I can get. Could you email me? XDavidBroderickX@yahoo.com (removing the X's)
thanks, David
Can I get the winner's personal information? I'm planning in the next few months to start an outsourcing company in the Ukraine, and I'm looking for good people.
You got it. It was clear to me when I read the title that this is what they're going after. If their new browser provides a rich integrated development environment (XUL or other), then the browser could truly support feature-rich applications. Imagine a complete office suite replete with word processor, spreadsheet, email client, file storage, etc. hosted in the browser, and you can see how it would become the desktop and relegate the OS to become the simply hardware abstraction layer.
If Google executes this correctly, Microsoft doesn't stand a chance. Linux itself can't beat Windows on the desktop because it requires people to switch completely. This, instead, allows a gradual process so that once a person finally has all the apps they need refactored as g-apps, they can then safely move to any OS (or even new computer) without having to install or copy a thing. Go Google!
You're cherry picking.
I live in Zurich, Switzerland, and when I mention that firearm proponents in the U.S. use Switzerland to promote gun usage, they always laugh.
Those assault weapons are under lock and key, as well as the ammo. You might say they could still be used in defence, but since they're property of the army that would have serious consequences for the gun owner. The result is that the guns are NEVER used for defense. Further, the rest of continental Europe also has low crime rates and very strong gun-control laws.
Why does Europe have such a low crime rate compared to America? It's an enormous question, but I think it has more to do with the distriution of wealth. Europe is much more socialistic than the states. There's almost no homelessness in Europe, and the poorest people here still have dignity and a chance to succeed. Universities are free, as is health care.
Look deeper into the issues. You're smart enough, and the issues are complex enough to deserve it.
Microsoft has really never innovated but instead looked around at what was successful and duplicated it. The problem is, they often then bury the innovator in doing so. Now look at the state of the software industry. There are so players and innovation is stifled. I mean who wants to be Microsoft's R&D department. And they, in turn, have no one to duplicate. They think they're successful, but only in the near term. This type of scortched earth policy simply can't sustain itself.
What a great post! It really brings me back. I also had a box of 5 1/4 disks that had all the best games (and my school work) which was stolen for a few weeks by some "friends". I was lost without that thing.
I did something similar to you. I was a junior in HS and a buddy had just been dumped by his girlfriend, so he coaxed me into extracting revenge. We took her disk and I wrote a small program that on boot would load up the FAT to memory and erase it off the disk. It explained that she had to answer several questions and the FAT would be rewritten, and everything would be fine, etc. Four hours later I was called out of history class (how did the teacher know it was me?) -- she had turned off the computer immediately despite all the warnings. Luckily I had just hidden the FAT, not deleted it, and soon it was fine again. Funny memories...
I used to work for Clorox and a marketing person explained that if a new, better bleach came along, it really wouldn't change anything for a long time. People will buy Clorox because their Mom and Dad bought Clorox.
And so it is with Windows. I use Windows. Why? Because I don't have a reason to change -- the risk inherent in change is too high of a cost and there is no benefit that Linux and Apple have that could justify that cost. Even if Linux was perfect and could do everything, I still wouldn't change for a long time. Marketing people have known this for years.
So geek on about how great Linux is. You're probably right, but it's irrelevant.
So you're saying your bank is more secure than UBS? And then you go on to say if someone calls in to say they've lost their password, they get a letter in the mail with a password (albeit a one-time password).
And this is better than having a card-reading device and a code-generating card?
I'm sure your bank is secure, but you certainly can't claim to surpass what most consider the safest bank in the world.
"... he laid out in the 1920s the foundations of software"
Actually it was the 30's (especially given that he was born in 1913, so even at the end of the 20's he was still a teenager).
But at that same time in the thirties, the German Conrad Zuse wasn't just 'thinking it up' but doing it. Unfortunately, by being in the wrong country at the wrong time, he still is rarely credited.
First, Marshal talks about raising the 25,000, but it would already be available. Remember that with automation of the jobs the GDP stays the same, so that 25,000 the company paid Joe Smith is now just going to the shareholders. So the money would be there.
The only viable option of the ones he lists is the 'economic security system'. To make it work though, we should go further than a heavy high-income tax. After 2 or 3 million in net worth, there should be 100% tax. No one needs more than a few million to live and the US/world certainly needs that money. This would be tough to implement (a lot of people would kick and scream), but it's definitely achievable.
Another unaddressed problem, though, is that we can't just give away 25,000. In Prague there is a useless wall (called 'the hunger wall') that Rudolph II had people build so he could give them money. Giving people money for nothing creates a bad precedent. Theoretically we could all become artists and earn it that way, but it's more likely 90% would become entertainment junkies -- living merely to consume. This wouldn't create the kind of society anyone would want. To quote Bill Joy, "the future doesn't need us".
I'm an American who has lived in Europe (Germany, Switzerland, and the Czech Republic) now for 8 years. And I won't go back. I'm contracting in Switzerland at around 85US/hr for, get this, VB Script! It is more expensive for some things over here, and cheaper for others, so it takes some getting used to. And nothing beats the quality of life here. For example, the crime rate in Germany, and Switzerland especially, is next to nothing. I couldn't give Europe a higher recommendation.
You're right, it is vague. I think pressure is always a good idea, but let's face it, nearly every country in the world is in Amnesty International's annual Human Rights Report. Further, this acts like sanctions and we have to be careful about that. Sanctions can be good for applying pressure, but they can also backfire and cause more problems than they solve.
Yeah, I saw it after I already posted. You're an AI member, right Jamyang? Me too. It's nice to know someone else out there gets involved. Drop me an email sometime: db927@hotmail.com
You know, when I submitted the story last night, I could have sworn the original article did say something about it being illegal. My mistake. But it's immoral and that's equivalent.
I think a lot of the posts agree that selling filtering products to China is wrong. But an opinion with action is worthless.
Contact MS, Sun, etc. and let them know that you find it irresponsible that they can contribute to the censorship happening in China!
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe it could be described that for each vector of space there is a concommitant time dimension which is intertwined with it, so it could also be described as three dimensions and each of those dimensions is split into its own space dimension and time dimension.
And the next step (after rolling it out nationwide) is to introduce a cheap ($30?) handset that accesses the network. A "cellphone" with free phone calls -- forever.
That whistling is the sound of every phone company imploding at once.
Thanks for the hope but you make it sound a bit easier than it is. (Getting half a million from friends and family isn't possible for many people.)
And while the advice is sound, I'd like to add to it: forget the basement. We're in Prague, and it's not just nicer, it's much cheaper. Anyone can take $50,000 and a year off and go to, say, Kiev, hire a few top developers and make whatever they want. The rest is having the business chops and people to take it all the way home.
By wiring up the country with WiFi and creating a cell phone that calls anywhere for free. They can make a lot of their money back with SoIP. If the volume is able to be supported, does this mean the end of the telephone industry?
You didn't do your homework:
According to the World Bank, sorted by GDP per capita, the rankings of wealthiest countries are as follows:
1 Liechtenstein
2 Luxembourg
3 Switzerland
4 Norway
5 Denmark
6 Japan
7 Singapore
8 US
The top 5 countries? That's right, are all in Europe. The EU is currently the largest economy in the world.
So what's with the statement "Europe is still second fiddle to the United States economically, and will probably never regain its former position in the world with the rising economies of the Far East."?
But I DO game, and I still agree with him. I got Doom 3 right when it came out, and I was also excited about Half-Life 2. And yet, I stop playing these games after a few weeks. The only difference between Quake and Doom 3 is the level of realism, which while considerable and amazing, isn't enough to sustain my interest.
I don't think the industry is doomed, but I do think that it's stale.
This was also said 15 years ago: go for vertical markets, nothing else is left. And it's good advice, unless you're ambitious. It's b*llsh*t to say all companies needs have been met. Look around you. It's called the "software crisis" for a reason. There is something huge waiting, lurking around the corner. Be there for it.
I'm interested in hearing more about this. I'm starting an outsourcing startup in the Ukraine in the next few months and can use all the help I can get. Could you email me? XDavidBroderickX@yahoo.com (removing the X's) thanks, David
Can I get the winner's personal information? I'm planning in the next few months to start an outsourcing company in the Ukraine, and I'm looking for good people.
Thanks, David
XDavidBroderickX@yahoo.com (without the X's)
You got it. It was clear to me when I read the title that this is what they're going after. If their new browser provides a rich integrated development environment (XUL or other), then the browser could truly support feature-rich applications. Imagine a complete office suite replete with word processor, spreadsheet, email client, file storage, etc. hosted in the browser, and you can see how it would become the desktop and relegate the OS to become the simply hardware abstraction layer.
If Google executes this correctly, Microsoft doesn't stand a chance. Linux itself can't beat Windows on the desktop because it requires people to switch completely. This, instead, allows a gradual process so that once a person finally has all the apps they need refactored as g-apps, they can then safely move to any OS (or even new computer) without having to install or copy a thing. Go Google!
You're cherry picking. I live in Zurich, Switzerland, and when I mention that firearm proponents in the U.S. use Switzerland to promote gun usage, they always laugh. Those assault weapons are under lock and key, as well as the ammo. You might say they could still be used in defence, but since they're property of the army that would have serious consequences for the gun owner. The result is that the guns are NEVER used for defense. Further, the rest of continental Europe also has low crime rates and very strong gun-control laws. Why does Europe have such a low crime rate compared to America? It's an enormous question, but I think it has more to do with the distriution of wealth. Europe is much more socialistic than the states. There's almost no homelessness in Europe, and the poorest people here still have dignity and a chance to succeed. Universities are free, as is health care. Look deeper into the issues. You're smart enough, and the issues are complex enough to deserve it.
Microsoft has really never innovated but instead looked around at what was successful and duplicated it. The problem is, they often then bury the innovator in doing so. Now look at the state of the software industry. There are so players and innovation is stifled. I mean who wants to be Microsoft's R&D department. And they, in turn, have no one to duplicate. They think they're successful, but only in the near term. This type of scortched earth policy simply can't sustain itself.
What a great post! It really brings me back. I also had a box of 5 1/4 disks that had all the best games (and my school work) which was stolen for a few weeks by some "friends". I was lost without that thing.
I did something similar to you. I was a junior in HS and a buddy had just been dumped by his girlfriend, so he coaxed me into extracting revenge. We took her disk and I wrote a small program that on boot would load up the FAT to memory and erase it off the disk. It explained that she had to answer several questions and the FAT would be rewritten, and everything would be fine, etc.
Four hours later I was called out of history class (how did the teacher know it was me?) -- she had turned off the computer immediately despite all the warnings. Luckily I had just hidden the FAT, not deleted it, and soon it was fine again.
Funny memories...
I used to work for Clorox and a marketing person explained that if a new, better bleach came along, it really wouldn't change anything for a long time. People will buy Clorox because their Mom and Dad bought Clorox.
And so it is with Windows. I use Windows. Why? Because I don't have a reason to change -- the risk inherent in change is too high of a cost and there is no benefit that Linux and Apple have that could justify that cost. Even if Linux was perfect and could do everything, I still wouldn't change for a long time. Marketing people have known this for years.
So geek on about how great Linux is. You're probably right, but it's irrelevant.
So you're saying your bank is more secure than UBS? And then you go on to say if someone calls in to say they've lost their password, they get a letter in the mail with a password (albeit a one-time password).
And this is better than having a card-reading device and a code-generating card?
I'm sure your bank is secure, but you certainly can't claim to surpass what most consider the safest bank in the world.
"... he laid out in the 1920s the foundations of software"
Actually it was the 30's (especially given that he was born in 1913, so even at the end of the 20's he was still a teenager).
But at that same time in the thirties, the German Conrad Zuse wasn't just 'thinking it up' but doing it. Unfortunately, by being in the wrong country at the wrong time, he still is rarely credited.
First, Marshal talks about raising the 25,000, but it would already be available. Remember that with automation of the jobs the GDP stays the same, so that 25,000 the company paid Joe Smith is now just going to the shareholders. So the money would be there.
The only viable option of the ones he lists is the 'economic security system'. To make it work though, we should go further than a heavy high-income tax. After 2 or 3 million in net worth, there should be 100% tax. No one needs more than a few million to live and the US/world certainly needs that money. This would be tough to implement (a lot of people would kick and scream), but it's definitely achievable.
Another unaddressed problem, though, is that we can't just give away 25,000. In Prague there is a useless wall (called 'the hunger wall') that Rudolph II had people build so he could give them money. Giving people money for nothing creates a bad precedent. Theoretically we could all become artists and earn it that way, but it's more likely 90% would become entertainment junkies -- living merely to consume. This wouldn't create the kind of society anyone would want. To quote Bill Joy, "the future doesn't need us".
I'm an American who has lived in Europe (Germany, Switzerland, and the Czech Republic) now for 8 years. And I won't go back. I'm contracting in Switzerland at around 85US/hr for, get this, VB Script! It is more expensive for some things over here, and cheaper for others, so it takes some getting used to. And nothing beats the quality of life here. For example, the crime rate in Germany, and Switzerland especially, is next to nothing. I couldn't give Europe a higher recommendation.
You're right, it is vague. I think pressure is always a good idea, but let's face it, nearly every country in the world is in Amnesty International's annual Human Rights Report.
Further, this acts like sanctions and we have to be careful about that. Sanctions can be good for applying pressure, but they can also backfire and cause more problems than they solve.
Yeah, I saw it after I already posted. You're an AI member, right Jamyang? Me too. It's nice to know someone else out there gets involved. Drop me an email sometime: db927@hotmail.com
You know, when I submitted the story last night, I could have sworn the original article did say something about it being illegal. My mistake. But it's immoral and that's equivalent.
I think a lot of the posts agree that selling filtering products to China is wrong. But an opinion with action is worthless.
Contact MS, Sun, etc. and let them know that you find it irresponsible that they can contribute to the censorship happening in China!
corporations exist for one reason: to make money. For good or for ill, there are no moral obligations placed on them.
But companies are made up of humans. So if some people form a company they no longer have to follow any moral code? What kind of reasoning is that?
So companies that did business with the Nazis were ok because they weren't breaking the law?