I don't think AIG would want to implement an Asterisk solution solely for cost savings. As it stands, doing it in-house means that instead of spending thousands of dollars in licensing costs, you end up spending thousands of dollars in employee time implementing it. And if the system should for whatever reason go down in the middle of the night, who's going to come in and fix it? What's the SLA and is it guaranteed? Will it to five 9's of reliability?
There's probably some good money for the first company to really take Asterisk full-steam into big businesses and offer all the perks that corporations need.
I'm wondering if he's not seen the generation of wonderkids coming up these days that know better how to use the computer at age 7 than their parents do.
Oh, I know that well. My sister and I are only a year and a half apart, we were both exposed to computers as kids -- we had a Vic-20, Apple IIc, etc. at home and had the same exposure to computers in school. To this day, she has no interest in computers at all, whereas I might fit into your "wonderkid" category. And *her* kids can probably run circles around her, though they're a bit young still.
I just wonder how much of that is due to computer training in school vs. "Hey, this is just like a PlayStation... [click] [smash] [clickety-click]..."
Computers in schools are most certainly not the problem -- without them, some other facility would distract them.
No, I don't see computer use as particularly being a *problem* per se, rather that the impression I get is that sometimes they're seen as the magic cure-all that will *solve* kids problems. I've known enough parents who think that a school without rooms and rooms full of the newest computers will disadvantage their kids. That's the real issue.
And no, I certainly didn't mean to imply that *every* kid doesn't know their basic math, only that a substantially higher percentage today seems to be clueless. But that was a side-rant to my main point about saving money because computers aren't the necessities that people make them out to be.
But multiplication tables are just plain irrelevent. It took me about a month to learn multiplication, and for the rest of my school days I was irked at being forced to do pages and pages of multiplication...
I would disagree that they're irrelevant. I'm not talking about memorizing what 19*17 is, but people should know by memory what any two single digits multiplied together are as that's the basis for pretty much everything. Ditto goes for the other basic operations. It doesn't much matter that you can calculate factorials but that you know *how* to do it and you can multiply a couple of digits together to solve the steps involved. If you're reaching for a calculator to find out what 7*6 is, you might as well do the whole factorial on the calculator. As far as being forced to do pages and pages, I guess that's just to reinforce the concept and also because there's likely a lot slower kids out there who didn't quite grasp it fully (maybe they still don't) and they needed the practice to just understand it.
Want to really save money? Dump computers altogether in elementary schools. I didn't get involved with computers until grade 7, and even then it was a real stretch of the imagination -- a single LOGO class was about it. Even in high school, computers weren't all that prevalent until grade 11. As a result, I had to learn things the old fashioned way -- by figuring it out on my own without a computer doing it for me. I think things turned out fairly well as a result and my interest in computers carried me the rest of the way. Do kids these days even know multiplication tables without reaching for their cell phone's calculator app?
Look it up in Black's Law Dictionary sometime. Theft is generally defined as taking someone else's property with the intent to deprive the owner of its use. No deprivation? Then it's not theft.
Why evolve to eat plants and animals? I dunno, but it works for me too!
Given that the dinosaurs didn't have any Ex-Lax available to them, they found that a little bit of roughage helped pass the time while sitting on a stool.
Maybe they should have taken the slashdot approach with their blog. Let other readers judge the value of each comment. After reading what he wrote, it looks like he has more links to his own writing in that single comment than a Roland Piquepaille article. Not to mention that it wasn't the most on-topic post. At best, I'd give it a -1, Overrated.
From the article at 160characters, if you follow the links in TFA:
"Just 90 seconds after Mr Hill began transmitting, Mr Gibson announced that he had the message received and written down correctly. It took another 18 seconds for Miss Devlin's message to reach the mobile phone belonging to her friend. Mr Hill said that he was impressed by modern technology, even though his clunky telegraph machine emerged on top in three further contests."
Okay, so it's impressive that Hill transmitted in Morse code and Gibson had to transscribe it on the other side -- but that's essentially done simultaneously with perhaps only a 1 second delay from the transmission to the decoding (ie: you don't have to wait for the full message to be sent in order to begin decoding it). On the other hand, what's with the phrase "It took another 18 seconds for Miss Devlin's message to reach the mobile phone..."? Does this mean there was a lag involved in the SMS network and it took perhaps 30 seconds after pressing "SEND" for the message to get from the phone sending to the receiving phone, meaning that the girl beat him by 30 - 18 = 12 seconds?
When you can buy media wholesale (or own it) as those who deny global warming can, it's easy to come up with an article "proving" it doesn't exist.
But it still does.
Here endeth the lesson...
So which does your statement fall under: lies, damned lies, or politics? Your proof consists entirely of "but it still does" and "there is global warming". At least the media tries to use statistics... you just make an assertion and expect others to view it as proof.
Do you think the PG-13 rating is going to, overall, encourage MORE people to come or LESS people to come?
I generally don't even consider seeing a movie if it's rated PG or G unless I've heard about it before (eg: Star Wars, Shrek, Nemo, etc.). So for an average movie, it's possible that a PG-13 rating will encourage *more* adults to see it than a PG movie would. But again, Star Wars falls into the category of "gonna see it no matter what the rating" so you're right in that PG would likely result in more sales than PG-13.
I just love how you never see the really low userids posting much on slashdot. But as soon as there's a quip made about how someone's uid is lower than another's, all the low uids come out of the woodwork and claim their territory. Is there some offline network especially for original slashdot members? "Alert! Low uid discussion at..."
Yes, perhaps we should start moving to other sources where we can get some fresh writing and not be taken advantage of. Perhaps SecurityFocus would be a good source. Here's the first paragraph of their article titled Quantum crypto moves out of the lab:
"Quantum cryptography - long the stuff of cyberpunk novels and hi-tech spy stories - is leaving the laboratory and making its way into commercial markets. A briefing session at the UK's Department of Trade and Industry on Wednesday featured demonstrations of working quantum key exchange systems by QinetiQ, Toshiba Cambridge and US start-up MagiQ."
"Quantum cryptography - long the stuff of cyberpunk novels and hi-tech spy stories - is leaving the laboratory and making its way into commercial markets. A briefing session at the UK's Department of Trade and Industry on Wednesday featured demonstrations of working quantum key exchange systems by QinetiQ, Toshiba Cambridge and US start-up MagiQ."
Or another article and you can probably guess that the opening paragraph there will make you think there's a glitch in the matrix.
Both The Register and SecurityFocus show ads, and they're just rehashing some company's PR spam and profiting from readers. But this is all academic -- the more interesting question is why you don't seem to find it objectionable that the bulk of these articles, even if from reputable places, ARE ads themselves?
I don't see this as being really practical for security. So you've got all of this quantum-encrypted video which is infinitely better than an SSH-encrypted stream and you're feeling pretty smug about how unbreakable it is. Meanwhile, the janitor has planted a bug under your desk and is eavesdropping on everything you say. Or someone else hid a pinhole camera in a plant and is recording it all.
While I applaud the research and find the technology cool, I don't think a lack of decent encryption technology is the weakest link with regards to security.
I always thought that the idea of a price-fixing scheme was to drive prices *up*.
Yeah -- they'd make a better argument for product dumping, where an out-of-country manufacturer releases a product into the market at below cost. If this dude is serious about stomping out the GPL, he might try the dumping angle for GPLd projects whose development teams live outside of the country. There could be a strong argument made that developing software doesn't cost $0 -- factor in, at the very least, machine depreciation and bandwidth.
strlen mentioned in another topic that there's an OpenBSD-based firewall product which sounds like it may cut down on the task significantly. The upside is that it will save you tons of time in managing a network of that side -- I'd hesitate to call it a "small" network. 500 machines sounds like a full-time job depending on how much hand-holding you do. The downside is that it's about a $20K product, though that works out to be a bargain at $40 per station. However, it certainly sounds interesting and maybe that link will give you a start for a completely free version which you can build yourself if you have the time and knowledge.
Ok, fine. Lay out for me some experiment I can do in which one of the possible outcomes disproves the existance of God...
Oh joy... another "please prove the negative" request. I will disprove God as soon as you disprove that there is an invisible magical pink unicorn in orbit around the Earth. Can't see it? Of course not -- it's invisible! Nothing can detect it, but it's there. Can you disprove it? I look forward to hearing of the details of your experiment.
Slashdot Mirror
No mention in the article.
Of course not... it's just a press release meant to drum up business for Motorola, and generate ad revenue for PhysOrg.com.
I don't think AIG would want to implement an Asterisk solution solely for cost savings. As it stands, doing it in-house means that instead of spending thousands of dollars in licensing costs, you end up spending thousands of dollars in employee time implementing it. And if the system should for whatever reason go down in the middle of the night, who's going to come in and fix it? What's the SLA and is it guaranteed? Will it to five 9's of reliability?
There's probably some good money for the first company to really take Asterisk full-steam into big businesses and offer all the perks that corporations need.
Ah, you're one of those.
I'm wondering if he's not seen the generation of wonderkids coming up these days that know better how to use the computer at age 7 than their parents do.
Oh, I know that well. My sister and I are only a year and a half apart, we were both exposed to computers as kids -- we had a Vic-20, Apple IIc, etc. at home and had the same exposure to computers in school. To this day, she has no interest in computers at all, whereas I might fit into your "wonderkid" category. And *her* kids can probably run circles around her, though they're a bit young still.
I just wonder how much of that is due to computer training in school vs. "Hey, this is just like a PlayStation... [click] [smash] [clickety-click]..."
Computers in schools are most certainly not the problem -- without them, some other facility would distract them.
No, I don't see computer use as particularly being a *problem* per se, rather that the impression I get is that sometimes they're seen as the magic cure-all that will *solve* kids problems. I've known enough parents who think that a school without rooms and rooms full of the newest computers will disadvantage their kids. That's the real issue.
And no, I certainly didn't mean to imply that *every* kid doesn't know their basic math, only that a substantially higher percentage today seems to be clueless. But that was a side-rant to my main point about saving money because computers aren't the necessities that people make them out to be.
But multiplication tables are just plain irrelevent. It took me about a month to learn multiplication, and for the rest of my school days I was irked at being forced to do pages and pages of multiplication...
I would disagree that they're irrelevant. I'm not talking about memorizing what 19*17 is, but people should know by memory what any two single digits multiplied together are as that's the basis for pretty much everything. Ditto goes for the other basic operations. It doesn't much matter that you can calculate factorials but that you know *how* to do it and you can multiply a couple of digits together to solve the steps involved. If you're reaching for a calculator to find out what 7*6 is, you might as well do the whole factorial on the calculator. As far as being forced to do pages and pages, I guess that's just to reinforce the concept and also because there's likely a lot slower kids out there who didn't quite grasp it fully (maybe they still don't) and they needed the practice to just understand it.
Want to really save money? Dump computers altogether in elementary schools. I didn't get involved with computers until grade 7, and even then it was a real stretch of the imagination -- a single LOGO class was about it. Even in high school, computers weren't all that prevalent until grade 11. As a result, I had to learn things the old fashioned way -- by figuring it out on my own without a computer doing it for me. I think things turned out fairly well as a result and my interest in computers carried me the rest of the way. Do kids these days even know multiplication tables without reaching for their cell phone's calculator app?
Look it up in Black's Law Dictionary sometime. Theft is generally defined as taking someone else's property with the intent to deprive the owner of its use. No deprivation? Then it's not theft.
If it tastes like chicken, why not just eat chicken. Why get all exotic over the same taste.
You want exotic? Try plucking a chicken before you toss it on the campfire!
Why evolve to eat plants and animals? I dunno, but it works for me too!
Given that the dinosaurs didn't have any Ex-Lax available to them, they found that a little bit of roughage helped pass the time while sitting on a stool.
Maybe they should have taken the slashdot approach with their blog. Let other readers judge the value of each comment. After reading what he wrote, it looks like he has more links to his own writing in that single comment than a Roland Piquepaille article. Not to mention that it wasn't the most on-topic post. At best, I'd give it a -1, Overrated.
I found your post to be most bestest.
Dare you question their technology? That's HERISy!
From the article at 160characters, if you follow the links in TFA:
"Just 90 seconds after Mr Hill began transmitting, Mr Gibson announced that he had the message received and written down correctly. It took another 18 seconds for Miss Devlin's message to reach the mobile phone belonging to her friend. Mr Hill said that he was impressed by modern technology, even though his clunky telegraph machine emerged on top in three further contests."
Okay, so it's impressive that Hill transmitted in Morse code and Gibson had to transscribe it on the other side -- but that's essentially done simultaneously with perhaps only a 1 second delay from the transmission to the decoding (ie: you don't have to wait for the full message to be sent in order to begin decoding it). On the other hand, what's with the phrase "It took another 18 seconds for Miss Devlin's message to reach the mobile phone..."? Does this mean there was a lag involved in the SMS network and it took perhaps 30 seconds after pressing "SEND" for the message to get from the phone sending to the receiving phone, meaning that the girl beat him by 30 - 18 = 12 seconds?
When you can buy media wholesale (or own it) as those who deny global warming can, it's easy to come up with an article "proving" it doesn't exist.
...
But it still does.
Here endeth the lesson
So which does your statement fall under: lies, damned lies, or politics? Your proof consists entirely of "but it still does" and "there is global warming". At least the media tries to use statistics... you just make an assertion and expect others to view it as proof.
Do you think the PG-13 rating is going to, overall, encourage MORE people to come or LESS people to come?
I generally don't even consider seeing a movie if it's rated PG or G unless I've heard about it before (eg: Star Wars, Shrek, Nemo, etc.). So for an average movie, it's possible that a PG-13 rating will encourage *more* adults to see it than a PG movie would. But again, Star Wars falls into the category of "gonna see it no matter what the rating" so you're right in that PG would likely result in more sales than PG-13.
I just love how you never see the really low userids posting much on slashdot. But as soon as there's a quip made about how someone's uid is lower than another's, all the low uids come out of the woodwork and claim their territory. Is there some offline network especially for original slashdot members? "Alert! Low uid discussion at..."
Blue Windshield of Death jokes in 3... 2... 1...
Both The Register and SecurityFocus show ads, and they're just rehashing some company's PR spam and profiting from readers. But this is all academic -- the more interesting question is why you don't seem to find it objectionable that the bulk of these articles, even if from reputable places, ARE ads themselves?
I don't see this as being really practical for security. So you've got all of this quantum-encrypted video which is infinitely better than an SSH-encrypted stream and you're feeling pretty smug about how unbreakable it is. Meanwhile, the janitor has planted a bug under your desk and is eavesdropping on everything you say. Or someone else hid a pinhole camera in a plant and is recording it all.
While I applaud the research and find the technology cool, I don't think a lack of decent encryption technology is the weakest link with regards to security.
I always thought that the idea of a price-fixing scheme was to drive prices *up*.
Yeah -- they'd make a better argument for product dumping, where an out-of-country manufacturer releases a product into the market at below cost. If this dude is serious about stomping out the GPL, he might try the dumping angle for GPLd projects whose development teams live outside of the country. There could be a strong argument made that developing software doesn't cost $0 -- factor in, at the very least, machine depreciation and bandwidth.
They're just mad because you tk ther jeb!
Someone team-killed Jeb Bush? This is the games section right? Oh, wait...
strlen mentioned in another topic that there's an OpenBSD-based firewall product which sounds like it may cut down on the task significantly. The upside is that it will save you tons of time in managing a network of that side -- I'd hesitate to call it a "small" network. 500 machines sounds like a full-time job depending on how much hand-holding you do. The downside is that it's about a $20K product, though that works out to be a bargain at $40 per station. However, it certainly sounds interesting and maybe that link will give you a start for a completely free version which you can build yourself if you have the time and knowledge.
You assume that this starvation is not necessary or useful on a larger scale.
Necessary and useful starvation? Where have I heard that before? Hang on, I think I hear Godwin's Law calling...
Ok, fine. Lay out for me some experiment I can do in which one of the possible outcomes disproves the existance of God...
Oh joy... another "please prove the negative" request. I will disprove God as soon as you disprove that there is an invisible magical pink unicorn in orbit around the Earth. Can't see it? Of course not -- it's invisible! Nothing can detect it, but it's there. Can you disprove it? I look forward to hearing of the details of your experiment.