Is that you probably don't want to see the stuff that would be collected by real lesbians. (If this is lesbian porn, why is there a man in the photo? Oh, I see that's a chick... I thought that was a dude!!)
I purchased it myself. Mostly because I still think they have better potential for great music and I want them to make another CD. It would be nice for them to drop the whole grung bass/guitar crap and get back to metal with awe inspiring guitar riffs.
I think you're reasoning is screwy. If you want them to improve the quality of their music, the best strategy is to *NOT* buy the crappy albums.
There's an oft-repeated story about Marlon Brando. They say he does the first take without putting in any effort, just to see if anyone would notice. Then, if no one complains, he just phones in the movie.
I'm not saying that Bubba Ho-Tep is bad (I haven't seen it yet), just that with such a limited run, you're not getting a fair sample of movie-goers. And, frankly, I'm surprised that it's as low as 84%.
I'm going to take a wild stab here and speculate that you've never been to rottentomatoes.com either. If you had, you would know that the tomatometer is not a random sampling of Bruce Campbell fans, it's a sampling of published movie reviewers.
Meanwhile, as more reviews are added to the site, the rating has slipped to only 75% positive. -a
Capitalist countries should encourage free resources rather than limiting those resources in order to create jobs
True, but maybe not if the free resource comes with a price (the GPL) that will counteract the economic benefits of the free resource. That's evidence of your ignorance of capitalism. Capitalism is all based on the extreme-case estimations of a global, extermely huge market.
Typical of a/. reader to believe in extremes. That's when it is supposed to work well. The bigger the market, the closer capitalism theory is to capitalism in practice.
I guess it depends on whose theory you believe. The thing about theories is they often work well in theory, but not in practice. Lots of people (many of them economists) have observed that stifling competition is bad for everyone involved. My personal opinion is that you believe in extreme *anything* then you probably haven't thought your opinions through.
Interesting points you are making, however maybe the open-source project I've been working on was in fact the focus of my previous employment, i.e: it was developed on during working hours with the approval of the hierarchy.
In that case, I would put it on your resume, but as a job, not a hobby. I have hired several people who worked for companies that developed OSS products. As long as they're not the idealogical OSS type, it's okay. I just find it funny how many people put it on their resume that they would prefer to work on an OSS project, then they apply to a company that writes proprietary code. Those resumes get chucked immediately.
You start with agreeable arguments (People doing things for free in their spare time means less jobs in the field), and yet reach a very weird (and dangerous?) conclusion: We should limit what people do in their spare time for free. This is rediculous, capitalism should encourage resources that come for free.
I actually think you start with a ridiculous argument a reach an even more ridiculous conclusion. "Capitalism should encourage resources that come for free." My opinion is that you shouldn't try to personify capitalism. It seems to be that either capitalism encourages an output or it discourages an output. Telling it that it "should" encourage an input is meaningless.
Perhaps you are implying that capitalism works best when people work for free. That is a highly dubious conclusions. Capitalism is an economic system, based on statistics and game theory, that tends to increase the wealth of society. However, capitalism is not perfect. It only works well in the average case. Both globalization and the GPL lead to edge cases where the laws of capitalism don't lead to an optimal result.
Not really. The courts have decided there's legitimate uses for P2P and therefore they actually have to catch you in the act of violating the law to sue you.
That may be true, but I'm not really sure there's a legitimate reason for a P2P service to anonymize transations, except to evade law enforcement.
Just to clarify things, I happen to be one of the vast majority of people who don't believe in absolute privacy rights for everyone (although I realize we are a minority here on/.)
If (when) they lose, might this not create a precedent against any such clause? Surely there are people who'd like to restore a situation where, if you allow modification/redistribution, then it has to be a la BSD...
I, for one, would like that. It would give domestic software companies a fighting chance of making a profit again. I think the outcome will depend on how long this drags on and how the political climate plays out./. readers will scream bloody murder at anyone who even hints that the GPL is about communism, but I swear that as politicians start to get a better handle on what it's about, that's exactly what they're going to think. And the thing about politicians is you can't make them go away simply by modding them down.
With every message, you attempt to lead me further and further from my original thesis, which is that I would tend not to hire people who moonlight as OSS contributors, and that includes Linus.
I said that *I* wouldn't hire someone like Linus, except maybe for the prestige value. And my reasoning is based on exactly the reason why he had to take a leave of absence from Transmeta. The fact that they are now laying people off is beside the point. They certainly weren't counting on that when they hired him.
So Linus is famous and talented and everyone knows who he is; he has no problem getting a job if he wants one. But the rest of us have to sell ourselves based on our resumes. Most people here seem to think that OSS projects look good on a resume, but as I said, I tend to toss those ones out. Maybe I'm the only one, or it could be that this practice is common among hiring managers. It's hard to tell.../. readers lead a sheltered life, seeing as how anyone who posts an unpopular opinion gets quickly modded down (as my original post was).
His resume could have nothing but his name on it, and companies would fight to hire him.
If companies would hire him based only on his name then clearly that proves my point... that they would hire him for the prestige value. as I said, the reason Linus left Transmeta for now was precisely what you described. He felt bad because he spent so much time on the kernel instead of Transmeta
That's great that he had the ethics to tell his employer that he didn't have time for his day job, but it still proves my point. Transmeta invested time and money to hire him. Now they have to go through the inconvenience of replacing him, even if it's on a temporary basis. You said (and I quote): "No, probably not [hire Linus]. Anyway, last I checked he didn't turn Transmeta into a big success story."
In other words: "Linus works for Transmeta, and Transmeta didn't crush Intel in the mobile-space. Therefore I must not hire Linus".
Perhaps you don't understand the word "anyway". At least in this context, it means "I'm about to say something logically unconnected." "Anyway" certainly does not mean "therefore". In fact, I would say that they are practically antonyms. And now he works for OSDL, where he can focus on the kernel and nothing but the kernel. So his #1 priority right now (the kernel) also happens to be his employers #1 priority right now.
Right now, he got himself an academic position where he can do basically whatever he wants. Such is the advantage of being a cult of personality. Most of us don't have that luxury.
What's the relationship between slackers and open source? I do my own open source software project after hours, it's something I and my co-workers use daily. It seems to me a lot of open-source people actually work very hard, meet difficult deadlines and have great work ethics. What's your beef exactly?
I didn't mean that all open source programmers are slackers, but in filtering resumes you have to make some generalizations. I suspect that OSS contributors are the type of people who work really hard on a subject they are interested in, but what they're interested in is not necessarily the same as what needs to be done.
I'm not saying that I wouldn't hire someone who did a little bit of OSS work here and there, but my time reading/. has convinced me that I don't want to hire some hard core free software advocate. If they're not writing OSS software, then they're probably not going to be very committed to the company. And I don't really want to hire people who aren't motivated by money.
Transmetas success or failure is not up to Linus. He's but a one software-engineer at the company. You wouldn't hire anyone who has worked at a company that for some reason or another was not a huge success? Isn't that kinda stupid?
I think you're ignoring my point. Transmeta hired Linus for the prestige value. I'm 99% sure that he didn't do his darndest to give Midori Linux an edge up on the competition. He was too busy worrying about Linux as a whole. There was obviously some kind of conflict, as Linus cited vendor neutrality as one of his reasons for leaving.
And I never said that I wouldn't hire someone from a company that wasn't a success. That's just your attempt to twist my words. I said I probably wouldn't hire someone who wasn't willing to make their employer's success their #1 programming priority.
Let me guess. You wouldn't hire some slacker like Linus Torvalds in a million years, would you? Damned hippie programmers. Look what the 'great unwashed' have done with that kernel he gave them!
No, probably not. Anyway, last I checked he didn't turn Transmeta into a big success story.
You can flame me and call me a troll all you want, but the fact remains that people like me are out there reading resumes, perhaps for the job you want.
Despite your assumptions, I'm not looking for mindless robots. My coworkers are people that I still need to chat with and go to lunch with, so I prefer to hire interesting, personable people. And no, I don't expect them to be slaves. But the fact is, if my team's work doesn't get done on time, I'm the one who's going to be stuck working late to catch up. So from my perspective, I have a definite incentive not to hire slackers.
Ahh... if only this had been available during my university days. I would never have flunked out if I hadn't been too cheap to buy the textbooks. And if you took them out of the library, you had to give them back the next day. Of course, if this had been available during my university days, I probably would have been too cheap to go to university as well.
You're trying to tell me that you're having TROUBLE FINDING QUALIFIED SOFTWARE ENGINEERS? Surely you jest. Why not just put an ad on Monster.com and look through a few of the thousands of resumes you'll get.
My employer has trouble finding qualified people as well. It's not that they're not out there, but you just have to wade through so many resumes to find them. (Of course a lot of those rejects are people we might have hired a couple of years ago, but the standards are higher now.)
All I can say is "you asked for it, you got it."/. readers are always espousing some hair-brained business model or trumpeting the value of freedom. At the same time, they are always quick to opine that new business models will always spring up. Sure they will, but you may not like the result. Take away the opportunity for content makers to make money by providing content, and they will find another way, be it lawsuits, product placement, spyware, or copyright violations.
What about - working on that interesting open-source software project. Good for the resume as well
Speaking as a hiring manager who reads through a fair number of resumes every month, I have to say that I typically chuck the ones that talk about open source projects. I'm looking to hire someone who will put in the effort to grow our business and boost our stock price. I'm *not* looking for some hippie programmer who's going to bide time in their day job and spend his best effort writing P2P code for the great unwashed.
I must say it seemed rather budgo at the time filming an actual screen showing matrix code instead of adding it later. Kind of like photocopying your monitor display...
But that's what they did when filming the Matrix as well. I remember reading about it in the production notes on the Matrix website. The visual effects guy said the monitors were just showing a videotape. The far-off ones were using VHS, but the nearer ones had to use Beta because otherwise it would have been obvious it was a tape.
-a
Re:NDAs are a necessary evil to some environments
on
The Cult of the NDA
·
· Score: 1
Exactly. The thing you should be most afraid of is the "no competition whatsoever" case. People are not exactly stupid and the probability that someone looked at the same thing you are doing and found a fatal flow in the business is quite high.
Really? I've heard a lot of different business models espoused on/. Many of them were actually quite popular for a couple of years. It seemed to me that everyone suspended their disbelief at the same time during the dot com bubble.
And I still read daily on/. about how record labels and closed source software companies are using flawed business model, and yet there is plenty of competition in those two fields.
The counter-example only reenforces the claim. Of course there is no black and white rule for which scramblings we can read. Why would there be?
It looks to me like proximity of the letters to their original positions is the best indicator for whether we will be able to understand the result. But also, the words flow into each other, so I'm sure it's important that we are able to recognize "phenomenal" from the get-go.
Bizarre pattern recognition rules don't apply uniquely to words. In my Psych 101 text, there was an upside down picture of Madonna that looks perfectly normal and is very easy to recognize. But when you turn the book upside down, you see that actually all the features (nose, eyes, mouth) are inverted as well and it looks completely grotesque. So actually, we can recognize someone by their features as long as the features are the right way up, but the context can still be inappropriate.
This is why congress will mandate the use of DRM. It won't necessarily prevent you from playing a pirated movie, but it will alert you if you try to play a movie with the stenography removed. This removes one of the legal barriers to prosecution because it will be hard to argue that you didn't know the movie was pirated.
Slashdot Mirror
Is that you probably don't want to see the stuff that would be collected by real lesbians. (If this is lesbian porn, why is there a man in the photo? Oh, I see that's a chick... I thought that was a dude!!)
-a
I purchased it myself. Mostly because I still think they have better potential for great music and I want them to make another CD. It would be nice for them to drop the whole grung bass/guitar crap and get back to metal with awe inspiring guitar riffs.
I think you're reasoning is screwy. If you want them to improve the quality of their music, the best strategy is to *NOT* buy the crappy albums.
There's an oft-repeated story about Marlon Brando. They say he does the first take without putting in any effort, just to see if anyone would notice. Then, if no one complains, he just phones in the movie.
-a
Two words: Spike Jonze. Dont count him out just because he's a video director.
Too bad Spike Jonze isn't directing the movie then. For every Spike Jonze there are 3 Michael Bays (and 10 Paul Hunters).
-a
I'm not saying that Bubba Ho-Tep is bad (I haven't seen it yet), just that with such a limited run, you're not getting a fair sample of movie-goers. And, frankly, I'm surprised that it's as low as 84%.
I'm going to take a wild stab here and speculate that you've never been to rottentomatoes.com either. If you had, you would know that the tomatometer is not a random sampling of Bruce Campbell fans, it's a sampling of published movie reviewers.
Meanwhile, as more reviews are added to the site, the rating has slipped to only 75% positive.
-a
Capitalist countries should encourage free resources rather than limiting those resources in order to create jobs
True, but maybe not if the free resource comes with a price (the GPL) that will counteract the economic benefits of the free resource.
That's evidence of your ignorance of capitalism. Capitalism is all based on the extreme-case estimations of a global, extermely huge market.
Typical of a
That's when it is supposed to work well. The bigger the market, the closer capitalism theory is to capitalism in practice.
I guess it depends on whose theory you believe. The thing about theories is they often work well in theory, but not in practice. Lots of people (many of them economists) have observed that stifling competition is bad for everyone involved. My personal opinion is that you believe in extreme *anything* then you probably haven't thought your opinions through.
-a
Interesting points you are making, however maybe the open-source project I've been working on was in fact the focus of my previous employment, i.e: it was developed on during working hours with the approval of the hierarchy.
In that case, I would put it on your resume, but as a job, not a hobby. I have hired several people who worked for companies that developed OSS products. As long as they're not the idealogical OSS type, it's okay. I just find it funny how many people put it on their resume that they would prefer to work on an OSS project, then they apply to a company that writes proprietary code. Those resumes get chucked immediately.
-a
You start with agreeable arguments (People doing things for free in their spare time means less jobs in the field), and yet reach a very weird (and dangerous?) conclusion: We should limit what people do in their spare time for free. This is rediculous, capitalism should encourage resources that come for free.
I actually think you start with a ridiculous argument a reach an even more ridiculous conclusion. "Capitalism should encourage resources that come for free." My opinion is that you shouldn't try to personify capitalism. It seems to be that either capitalism encourages an output or it discourages an output. Telling it that it "should" encourage an input is meaningless.
Perhaps you are implying that capitalism works best when people work for free. That is a highly dubious conclusions. Capitalism is an economic system, based on statistics and game theory, that tends to increase the wealth of society. However, capitalism is not perfect. It only works well in the average case. Both globalization and the GPL lead to edge cases where the laws of capitalism don't lead to an optimal result.
-a
Not really. The courts have decided there's legitimate uses for P2P and therefore they actually have to catch you in the act of violating the law to sue you.
That may be true, but I'm not really sure there's a legitimate reason for a P2P service to anonymize transations, except to evade law enforcement.
Just to clarify things, I happen to be one of the vast majority of people who don't believe in absolute privacy rights for everyone (although I realize we are a minority here on
-a
If (when) they lose, might this not create a precedent against any such clause? Surely there are people who'd like to restore a situation where, if you allow modification/redistribution, then it has to be a la BSD...
I, for one, would like that. It would give domestic software companies a fighting chance of making a profit again. I think the outcome will depend on how long this drags on and how the political climate plays out.
-a
With every message, you attempt to lead me further and further from my original thesis, which is that I would tend not to hire people who moonlight as OSS contributors, and that includes Linus.
/. readers lead a sheltered life, seeing as how anyone who posts an unpopular opinion gets quickly modded down (as my original post was).
I said that *I* wouldn't hire someone like Linus, except maybe for the prestige value. And my reasoning is based on exactly the reason why he had to take a leave of absence from Transmeta. The fact that they are now laying people off is beside the point. They certainly weren't counting on that when they hired him.
So Linus is famous and talented and everyone knows who he is; he has no problem getting a job if he wants one. But the rest of us have to sell ourselves based on our resumes. Most people here seem to think that OSS projects look good on a resume, but as I said, I tend to toss those ones out. Maybe I'm the only one, or it could be that this practice is common among hiring managers. It's hard to tell...
-a
His resume could have nothing but his name on it, and companies would fight to hire him.
If companies would hire him based only on his name then clearly that proves my point... that they would hire him for the prestige value.
as I said, the reason Linus left Transmeta for now was precisely what you described. He felt bad because he spent so much time on the kernel instead of Transmeta
That's great that he had the ethics to tell his employer that he didn't have time for his day job, but it still proves my point. Transmeta invested time and money to hire him. Now they have to go through the inconvenience of replacing him, even if it's on a temporary basis.
You said (and I quote): "No, probably not [hire Linus]. Anyway, last I checked he didn't turn Transmeta into a big success story."
In other words: "Linus works for Transmeta, and Transmeta didn't crush Intel in the mobile-space. Therefore I must not hire Linus".
Perhaps you don't understand the word "anyway". At least in this context, it means "I'm about to say something logically unconnected." "Anyway" certainly does not mean "therefore". In fact, I would say that they are practically antonyms.
And now he works for OSDL, where he can focus on the kernel and nothing but the kernel. So his #1 priority right now (the kernel) also happens to be his employers #1 priority right now.
Right now, he got himself an academic position where he can do basically whatever he wants. Such is the advantage of being a cult of personality. Most of us don't have that luxury.
BTW, I'm not sure why I should be ecstatic.
-a
What's the relationship between slackers and open source? I do my own open source software project after hours, it's something I and my co-workers use daily. It seems to me a lot of open-source people actually work very hard, meet difficult deadlines and have great work ethics. What's your beef exactly?
I didn't mean that all open source programmers are slackers, but in filtering resumes you have to make some generalizations. I suspect that OSS contributors are the type of people who work really hard on a subject they are interested in, but what they're interested in is not necessarily the same as what needs to be done.
I'm not saying that I wouldn't hire someone who did a little bit of OSS work here and there, but my time reading
-a
Transmetas success or failure is not up to Linus. He's but a one software-engineer at the company. You wouldn't hire anyone who has worked at a company that for some reason or another was not a huge success? Isn't that kinda stupid?
I think you're ignoring my point. Transmeta hired Linus for the prestige value. I'm 99% sure that he didn't do his darndest to give Midori Linux an edge up on the competition. He was too busy worrying about Linux as a whole. There was obviously some kind of conflict, as Linus cited vendor neutrality as one of his reasons for leaving.
And I never said that I wouldn't hire someone from a company that wasn't a success. That's just your attempt to twist my words. I said I probably wouldn't hire someone who wasn't willing to make their employer's success their #1 programming priority.
-a
Let me guess. You wouldn't hire some slacker like Linus Torvalds in a million years, would you? Damned hippie programmers. Look what the 'great unwashed' have done with that kernel he gave them!
No, probably not. Anyway, last I checked he didn't turn Transmeta into a big success story.
You can flame me and call me a troll all you want, but the fact remains that people like me are out there reading resumes, perhaps for the job you want.
Despite your assumptions, I'm not looking for mindless robots. My coworkers are people that I still need to chat with and go to lunch with, so I prefer to hire interesting, personable people. And no, I don't expect them to be slaves. But the fact is, if my team's work doesn't get done on time, I'm the one who's going to be stuck working late to catch up. So from my perspective, I have a definite incentive not to hire slackers.
-a
Ahh... if only this had been available during my university days. I would never have flunked out if I hadn't been too cheap to buy the textbooks. And if you took them out of the library, you had to give them back the next day. Of course, if this had been available during my university days, I probably would have been too cheap to go to university as well.
-a
You're trying to tell me that you're having TROUBLE FINDING QUALIFIED SOFTWARE ENGINEERS? Surely you jest. Why not just put an ad on Monster.com and look through a few of the thousands of resumes you'll get.
My employer has trouble finding qualified people as well. It's not that they're not out there, but you just have to wade through so many resumes to find them. (Of course a lot of those rejects are people we might have hired a couple of years ago, but the standards are higher now.)
-a
All I can say is "you asked for it, you got it." /. readers are always espousing some hair-brained business model or trumpeting the value of freedom. At the same time, they are always quick to opine that new business models will always spring up. Sure they will, but you may not like the result. Take away the opportunity for content makers to make money by providing content, and they will find another way, be it lawsuits, product placement, spyware, or copyright violations.
-a
What about - working on that interesting open-source software project. Good for the resume as well
Speaking as a hiring manager who reads through a fair number of resumes every month, I have to say that I typically chuck the ones that talk about open source projects. I'm looking to hire someone who will put in the effort to grow our business and boost our stock price. I'm *not* looking for some hippie programmer who's going to bide time in their day job and spend his best effort writing P2P code for the great unwashed.
Of course, that's just me. Your results may vary.
-a
No, but greed, incompetence, short term thinking, and the outsourcing of everything does.
And don't free markets cause greed, incompetence, short term thinking, and the outsourcing of everything? (Certainly they cause short term thinking.)
-a
I must say it seemed rather budgo at the time filming an actual screen showing matrix code instead of adding it later. Kind of like photocopying your monitor display...
But that's what they did when filming the Matrix as well. I remember reading about it in the production notes on the Matrix website. The visual effects guy said the monitors were just showing a videotape. The far-off ones were using VHS, but the nearer ones had to use Beta because otherwise it would have been obvious it was a tape.
-a
Exactly. The thing you should be most afraid of is the "no competition whatsoever" case. People are not exactly stupid and the probability that someone looked at the same thing you are doing and found a fatal flow in the business is quite high.
Really? I've heard a lot of different business models espoused on
And I still read daily on
-a
Don't generally buy Linux before Service Pack 2 comes out.
Umm... or "don't generally buy Linux." You can get it for free, you know.
-a
The counter-example only reenforces the claim. Of course there is no black and white rule for which scramblings we can read. Why would there be?
It looks to me like proximity of the letters to their original positions is the best indicator for whether we will be able to understand the result. But also, the words flow into each other, so I'm sure it's important that we are able to recognize "phenomenal" from the get-go.
Bizarre pattern recognition rules don't apply uniquely to words. In my Psych 101 text, there was an upside down picture of Madonna that looks perfectly normal and is very easy to recognize. But when you turn the book upside down, you see that actually all the features (nose, eyes, mouth) are inverted as well and it looks completely grotesque. So actually, we can recognize someone by their features as long as the features are the right way up, but the context can still be inappropriate.
-a
With only 0.4% of sites in the first 6 months after release, Windows2003 has already failed.
Windows 2003 was released? No one ever told me.
-a
This is why congress will mandate the use of DRM. It won't necessarily prevent you from playing a pirated movie, but it will alert you if you try to play a movie with the stenography removed.
This removes one of the legal barriers to prosecution because it will be hard to argue that you didn't know the movie was pirated.
-a