Personally, I think that telecommuting rules, and working in an office sucks.:)
However, here are some valid counterpoints to ponder:
The Agile Manifesto states that -- "The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation."
Any job you can do well from home, someone else can do from Bangalore, at a fraction of the cost.
I am an amateur with a Computer Science degree, working on the Hamiltonian Cycle problem.
Here's a site where you can try out my code. I will be releasing it under an open-source license this year.
Right on!
Google was attacked from within China. Change.org was attacked from within China when they were supporting a petition to release Ai WeiWei.
Are these attackers government sponsored? Let's hope so! If not, our predicament is even worse -- If relations between the US and China were to deteriorate, the Chinese government would try a plethora of other alternatives to meet its objectives, before escalating to full cyberwar. An independent, cybervigilante group would escalate to cyberwar much sooner.
After all this, denying not just the possibility, but the very existence, of cyberwar, is wilful ignorance.
As they say, democracy doesn't guarantee a good government, it guarantees a government the electorate deserves.
People always get a government they deserve, even when it is a dictatorship.
Nothing guarantees a good government.
So your statement is saying nothing at all.
Dr. Negroponte has convinced Google to sponsor OLPC. Google becomes a group of educators, hackers, tinkerers, who wander the globe and organize the world's information, and make it easy for everyone to use. Something like the primer in Diamond Age, or the million copies of a comprehensive, integrated education and training program. A million kids in India, a million in China, and so forth.
There's real critical mass behind this idea. A kid turns on their XO, or XO2, and there's Google, ready to educate them, as the content provider. Primary colored LEGO's, open-source, ABC, 123. Google manages the complexity of the world, and explains the world to you.
The localized content is designed to boot up a new human mind. It's like a planetarium show, that says, "This is the Universe; these are superclusters of galaxies; this is our galaxy; this is our Sun and the solar system. You are here in space. These are the various places on Earth. These are the people who inhabit these places and speak different languages and eat different foods. This is the history of Earth. You are here in time. You are here in cultural context."
Google can integrate, sponsor and execute OLPC better than Intel. Once you get past certain details, hardware doesn't matter so much. It is educational content that will succeed in helping people add more value to the collective pot.
Google can foster a fun, science-based learning environment, in which hackers get children enthused about hacking the Earth, and exploring the Universe."
The OLPC gains economies of scale by launching in wealthier, and more populous countries such as China and India, first. China has a long history of expertise in making inexpensive copies of anything that can be manufactured.
Consider the Monty Hall problem.
We know that the best strategy is to always switch. Switching gives you a 2/3 probability of winning.
I've written several programs to verify it, and you probably have too.
As we know, if you computationally simulate the conditions of Monty Hall problem, for a large enough number of trials, the probability of winning by always switching, converges to ~66.67%
Here's the surprising part -- if you do the trials the Monty Hall problem empirically, with actual people physically playing the roles of host and contestant, you get a different result. Empirically, the probability of winning by always switching, converges to ~50.00%.
Computed Reality is not the same as Empirical Reality! It's counter-intuitive. I have done this experiment on a large enough scale to detect a possible anomaly. The deviation is statistically significant. Don't take my word for it. Try it yourself!
I intend to conduct empirical trials on a much larger scale.
My ideal office would be virtual. Everybody would wear ultralight mobile devices ( e.g., translucent datagoggles, datagloves, microphone ). Most of the concrete & steel of cities would be dismantled. We would walk around, or ride bicycles, in a vast, green urban garden. There will be no cars. Broadband wireless would be ubiquitous. There would be no physical offices. We would conduct meetings virtually, or spontaneously congregate in cafes which look like geodesic dome-shaped atria.
Programming will no longer be sedentary work. We will walk around in sunlight and fresh air while programming, and get plenty of exercise doing it.
Or, you could get a big, cushy recliner, and a swivel rack that holds a huge LCD monitor, and a keyboard and mouse tray.
1) What makes you think that they will subpena MS's code?
A: You often hear urban legends of the format --/(Firefox|Opera|Konqueror|Safari) performs (slower|faster) than MSIE on (Windows|Linux|Mac OS X), for this URL (.+)/.
Isn't it time Prof. Edward Felten did some analysis and got objective metrics? Is it possible that Microsoft deliberately slows down competing products and services, thereby using its monopoly in a breach of antitrust law?
These issues are at the heart of this antitrust lawsuit, and the objective facts need to be discovered, and published for the public.
We want the source, and the build scripts, and binary builds, and checksums, and source-code audits.
2) What makes you think that even if they were to get that code that it would ever be seen anywhere but a lawyers office?
A: It would have to be examined by a panel of expert witnesses. Prof. Felten is very likely to be called upon, among a team chosen to analyze the source code to make sure it is fair.
As an anti-trust measure, Windows source code is subpoenaed, to ensure that IE is not getting preferential API's in the OS, a hidden home-team advantage.
Since Windows is now Open Source, and a way exists for Open Source to periodically call Closed Source's cards, the nature of the playing field will be changed.
Windows is called before the court, source, build process, build, statistical analyses surrounding the build.
I haven't been able to find a "full screen" version of either Emacs or vi. Something you can run within KDE / GNOME. An OpenGL emulation of console mode. Now that would be useful!
I agree. Any kernel programmer is capable of either writing userspace code, or learning how to write userspace code.
We have to keep the bigger picture in mind -- Do you want to see Linux succeed?
If so, then you have to think for the whole, and do what it takes, instead of pointing out the differences between kernel and userspace.
"Too many programmers, not enough challenges" seems like a resource allocation issue.
Reallocate the programmers to write userspace code. Are they against learning userspace programming?
What exactly, is the objection to doing whatever it takes?
..of all, why are they excluding printers? The fact that Linux printing is done is userspace is not an excuse.
When I want to print or scan on a Linux machine, I don't want to hear that technicality.
I just want it to work.
Not so fast!
When hardware prices are high, it makes sense to use GNU/Linux or BSD on barebones legacy hardware.
Falling hardware prices means that it is cheaper to feed Vista's gluttonous hardware requirements.
So you submitted a patch, and made the Linux kernel use 1% fewer cycles, or 2% less core.
Big f'in deal!
So you increased the network throughput, and think you're smart because of that? You're not!
In the bigger picture, tightening the screws to squeeze out a little extra performance out of the kernel isn't significant.
Think in utilitarian terms!
Make Linux and/or BSD more usable. The more usable it is, the more users will be drawn to it; more developers, more resources will become available to the cause. Improving Linux / BSD usability will give you far more return on investment ( time and energy ), than optimizing the kernel.
Sure, he should not have been arrested. But why did Michael Righi choose his little sister's birthday to defy Circuit City protocol and create a scene? Was he feeling short of attention?
We've all done defiant stuff to mess with authorities and test the limits.
But really, you gotta know how to choose your fights.
"Ender's Game" is an excellent book, and those are very cogent quotes.
You can love and transcend Steve Ballmer all you want.
You can create a lofty cosmology in which Ballmer is just another "you" in your head.
But if one of me was lying as blatantly as Ballmer, wouldn't I want to get me to tell the truth?
The beauty of the company is that it cloaks individual liars. It's no longer just Steve Ballmer telling lies, it is a Microsoft's corporate action. The following quote from Huxley is very applicable to Microsoft as well.
One of the great attractions of patriotism - it fulfills our worst wishes. In the person of our nation we are able, vicariously, to bully and cheat. Bully and cheat, what's more, with a feeling that we are profoundly virtuous.
-- Aldous Huxley Q: What's the difference between Ken Lay and Steve Ballmer?
A: Ken Lay bungled.
People admire Microsoft for one reason only -- Microsoft made money.
I wish I could make money, so I blindly admire Microsoft.
Microsoft's goal -- more money for Microsoft!
Free Software Foundation's goal -- better software for everybody!
Sure, it sounds all macho to fight an enemy who doesn't fight fair.
But why have enemies at all? If you truly knew your enemy as yourself, there would be no enemies, and nobody to fight.
Shouldn't we all simply be making better software?
That said, disrespect is a weapon of the underdog.
Nothing gets a company's goat as much as bad PR.
I ask more more disrespect for Microsoft.
I urge Microsoft employees to start questioning their leader's ethics.
It should no longer be enough to keep blinders on, go to work at Microsoft, get paid, and feel justified.
One needs to start thinking -- is my leader a person of integrity? Are they willing to tell the truth?
Or is my leader an amoralist tough, who will lie, loudly, for the sake of money?
There is a school of engineering in Hoboken -- Stevens Institute of Technology.
( I attended it myself, as an undergrad. )
Reverse-engineering the robotic software, and releasing the source code as Free Software should be an interesting challenge for Stevens students and faculty.
Stevens, please help your lovely town out!
Slashdot Mirror
However, here are some valid counterpoints to ponder:
I am an amateur with a Computer Science degree, working on the Hamiltonian Cycle problem.
Here's a site where you can try out my code. I will be releasing it under an open-source license this year.
Right on! Google was attacked from within China. Change.org was attacked from within China when they were supporting a petition to release Ai WeiWei. Are these attackers government sponsored? Let's hope so! If not, our predicament is even worse -- If relations between the US and China were to deteriorate, the Chinese government would try a plethora of other alternatives to meet its objectives, before escalating to full cyberwar. An independent, cybervigilante group would escalate to cyberwar much sooner. After all this, denying not just the possibility, but the very existence, of cyberwar, is wilful ignorance.
As they say, democracy doesn't guarantee a good government, it guarantees a government the electorate deserves.
People always get a government they deserve, even when it is a dictatorship. Nothing guarantees a good government. So your statement is saying nothing at all.
A: Wait, I can explain Everything! It's not what it looks like!
The OLPC gains economies of scale by launching in wealthier, and more populous countries such as China and India, first. China has a long history of expertise in making inexpensive copies of anything that can be manufactured.
http://www.livenudejournal.com/
Here's the surprising part -- if you do the trials the Monty Hall problem empirically , with actual people physically playing the roles of host and contestant, you get a different result. Empirically, the probability of winning by always switching, converges to ~50.00% .
Computed Reality is not the same as Empirical Reality! It's counter-intuitive. I have done this experiment on a large enough scale to detect a possible anomaly. The deviation is statistically significant. Don't take my word for it. Try it yourself! I intend to conduct empirical trials on a much larger scale.
Programming will no longer be sedentary work. We will walk around in sunlight and fresh air while programming, and get plenty of exercise doing it.
Or, you could get a big, cushy recliner, and a swivel rack that holds a huge LCD monitor, and a keyboard and mouse tray.
A: It would have to be examined by a panel of expert witnesses. Prof. Felten is very likely to be called upon, among a team chosen to analyze the source code to make sure it is fair.
As an anti-trust measure, Windows source code is subpoenaed, to ensure that IE is not getting preferential API's in the OS, a hidden home-team advantage.
Since Windows is now Open Source, and a way exists for Open Source to periodically call Closed Source's cards, the nature of the playing field will be changed.
Windows is called before the court, source, build process, build, statistical analyses surrounding the build.
I haven't been able to find a "full screen" version of either Emacs or vi. Something you can run within KDE / GNOME. An OpenGL emulation of console mode. Now that would be useful!
I agree. Any kernel programmer is capable of either writing userspace code, or learning how to write userspace code.
We have to keep the bigger picture in mind -- Do you want to see Linux succeed? If so, then you have to think for the whole, and do what it takes, instead of pointing out the differences between kernel and userspace.
"Too many programmers, not enough challenges" seems like a resource allocation issue. Reallocate the programmers to write userspace code. Are they against learning userspace programming? What exactly, is the objection to doing whatever it takes?
..of all, why are they excluding printers? The fact that Linux printing is done is userspace is not an excuse. When I want to print or scan on a Linux machine, I don't want to hear that technicality. I just want it to work.
Microsoft + Violence + Religion
How much more evil can it possibly get?
Not so fast! When hardware prices are high, it makes sense to use GNU/Linux or BSD on barebones legacy hardware. Falling hardware prices means that it is cheaper to feed Vista's gluttonous hardware requirements.
Here's a similar proposal for distributed, extensible, language-neutral spreadsheets! Someone at Google, please implement this? Cheers!
Open a Google Docs spreadsheet. Type =COMBIN(55,27)
So you submitted a patch, and made the Linux kernel use 1% fewer cycles, or 2% less core. Big f'in deal! So you increased the network throughput, and think you're smart because of that? You're not!
In the bigger picture, tightening the screws to squeeze out a little extra performance out of the kernel isn't significant. Think in utilitarian terms!
Make Linux and/or BSD more usable. The more usable it is, the more users will be drawn to it; more developers, more resources will become available to the cause. Improving Linux / BSD usability will give you far more return on investment ( time and energy ), than optimizing the kernel.
Don't game consoles have browsers? Inexpensive too, because they hook to the TV, and don't require a monitor.
Sure, he should not have been arrested. But why did Michael Righi choose his little sister's birthday to defy Circuit City protocol and create a scene? Was he feeling short of attention?
We've all done defiant stuff to mess with authorities and test the limits. But really, you gotta know how to choose your fights.
A: Ken Lay bungled.
People admire Microsoft for one reason only -- Microsoft made money. I wish I could make money, so I blindly admire Microsoft.
Microsoft's goal -- more money for Microsoft! Free Software Foundation's goal -- better software for everybody!
Sure, it sounds all macho to fight an enemy who doesn't fight fair. But why have enemies at all? If you truly knew your enemy as yourself, there would be no enemies, and nobody to fight. Shouldn't we all simply be making better software?
That said, disrespect is a weapon of the underdog. Nothing gets a company's goat as much as bad PR. I ask more more disrespect for Microsoft. I urge Microsoft employees to start questioning their leader's ethics. It should no longer be enough to keep blinders on, go to work at Microsoft, get paid, and feel justified. One needs to start thinking -- is my leader a person of integrity? Are they willing to tell the truth? Or is my leader an amoralist tough, who will lie, loudly, for the sake of money?
"You must realize the truth. There *is* no Copyright law."
Please email me to help raise capital, and develop a working prototype. - Ashwin. dj.perl@gmail.com
There is a school of engineering in Hoboken -- Stevens Institute of Technology. ( I attended it myself, as an undergrad. ) Reverse-engineering the robotic software, and releasing the source code as Free Software should be an interesting challenge for Stevens students and faculty. Stevens, please help your lovely town out!
This is most definitely a positive thing! ( That I got the first comment, for once. )