It's not a word for word thing, its an ideology thing. Constantly trying to prove that they were right, that people enjoy their style of economics more than the other. Thus propoganda, the sputnik, the moon landing, coca cola, civil rights. It was all them trying to boast about which side was better. I remember a quote somewhere about how if a corporation was actually a person as it is somewhat legally it would be dangerously psychotic. I wonder what would be said of nation states if they were people. It;s kinda depressing when you think of that.
Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I have the impression that you're not old enough to have been around during those times. That impression is because it appears that your view is all slanted toward a large conspiracy theory. You can't keep a secret like that between ten people for very long, much less the thousands involved, and the decades that this would have covered. Having grown up during those times, and serving in the military during the Cold War, my impressions may be a bit biased, but my point on the theory is rock solid.
The problem, which is obvious when you think about it, is that capitalism no longer has competition from communism. When communism promised "the worker's paradise", and at least took some steps towards delivering it, the capitalist world had to treat its workers better than the communists did, out of fear that the workers would revolt, or vote in a different system.
With that competitive threat removed, capitalism can be as nasty as it wants to be. Because it has monopoly power now.
Nice theory, but it's not based upon reality. If you disagree, please supply some examples where corporations, or the government made changes to improve worker conditions in order to prevent their employees from defecting to the U.S.S.R. There's been no serious fear of a revolt in this nation since the Civil War.
Stockades (no abbrev.) Sunken Temple (ST)...I forget the real name of this place, but it's what everyone calls it. Wailing Caverns (WC) Blackrock Depths (BRD)
Wind power takes wind energy out of the atmosphere, which could cause climate change if used on a large scale.
By "large scale", I presume you mean something that would produce more energy than all the humans that ever existed have used. Even if we tried really hard, I doubt that we could pull enough energy from the winds to affect anything more than a very small local area. Just to quote NOAA here... According to the 1993 World Almanac, the entire human race used energy at a rate of 1013 watts in 1990, a rate less than 20% of the power of a hurricane.
Having just switched over to HD last month (our 7 yr old Phillips tube died, so it was time to upgrade), I can see how it would be easy for alot of folks to misunderstand. Here are some of the problems I had to overcome...
* Purchased new HD set, but didn't know I needed HD service, and a new set top box to get the broadcast. * Purchased HD service and don't realize that not all the channels are HD...nobody tells you this stuff. * Purchase HD service, and don't receive a manual for the DVR box (damn you Cox/Sci-Atlanta!).
None of this was that difficult for me, and I had no previous experience with HD. But what alot of engineers haven't figured out yet is that if it's as hard as programming the clock on an old VCR, than it's too hard for Joe Sixpack.
Someone above asked if it is really worth upgrading. Considering that I was able to get a 62" Mitsu DLP ($2800 at Costco), and HD service with an HD DVR (installed free) for an additional $20/mo, I'd say yes. For that price, I've got a picture that's twice the size, much higher quality, and the DVR is a godsend.
Unfortunately, they have insurance liability if they don't lock you out and something bad happens.
No different than the liability of some employee who's not leaving though. This is really another non-risk.
I'm only posting once, so this part is not in direct response to the parent... This boggles my mind. If you don't trust the person, then they shouldn't have still been an employee in the first place. Once you've shown that giving 2-weeks notice results in immediate termination, it becomes obvious to anyone that would actually do something malicous, that they should do it prior to giving notice...so you've effectively gained nothing, and protected your company against nothing, and created nothing but ill will, and bad feelings. Do you think that the current employees don't notice how people are being treated, and resent it? That's the kind of thing that actually causes problems. Stating that it's "policy" or SOP, is bullshit. Policies aren't made in a vacuum, people make them, and people can change them. If this was the kind of policy I saw at my place of employment, you can rest assured that I'd be turning in my two-week notice, but only at a point when I was prepared to walk out the door on that day. Try treating people with the respect they deserve as a risk mitigation plan, not some phony balony crap like this. I'm getting frickin' tired of some of the policies I see generated by corporate security folks...most of whom (my apology for the generalization, and it's certainly not true for all of them) are former military police, who got that job because they couldn't score high enough to qualify for anything else...I've seen it numerous times.
This is not an attempt to flame the parent, only to open a discussion about the ethics of the actions sited.
Let me make sure I understand this properly. You purchase something at a price that you know was mistaken. You justify your action by claiming that it's the stores fault, and sort of a retribution for the way they treat their employees?
The ethics of the store in question are not the issue here...and I don't "shed no tears" for certain businesses when they lose out either. But, what is in question is if it's ok to buy something that's mispriced. Your second wrong doesn't make it right.
If you honestly had issues with the way the store treated employees, why would you be shopping there in the first place?
I wouldn't call it theft. But I would call it dishonest and immoral. If you can explain to me why it's otherwise, I'm all eyes & ears. And the same goes for the person that took $18 in change from their $2 coin.
Disclaimer: I'm not attempting to argue in favor of the Iraqi war, only to expose the holes in the parents post. I'm so tired of seeing this type of anti-American, and anti-Euro posting...last time I looked, we were allies. If we could focus on the issues rather than attacking each other, maybe we could actually get something productive accomplished.
Your world view is entirely moronic. One or two businessmen in one or two countries may have felt that way, but not "Europe opposed because...". We don't have the fascist government/corporation linking that rules US politics; our leaders aren't tied to these businessmen.
This comment is so naive that it warrents no further response. Do you truly believe that nonsense? I'd expect that kind of lunacy from a fifteen year old.
Most of us opposed it because it was based on lies and done entirely for profit. Go check my posting history on any political topic if you don't believe me
Nobody cares about your personal history/opinion...get over it. Yes, I argued against it at the time, due to the lack of evidence shown to support it, but held hopes (as many did) that there was classified info that they couldn't share with the public. Many have argued about an "intelligence failure"...personally, I blame congress for the lack of oversight, and budget slashing of the intel community after the cold war.
Speaking of which, 9/11 was the US's only taste of conflict on your homeland. How did it feel? Did you like it?
A bit of Schadenfreude? Guess it depends on how far back you want to look at our history (you went back to WWII, so obviously Pearl Harbor comes to mind), but there have been plenty of attacks on U.S. soil. Obviously we loved it, and did it for the oil, so we could pay double what we used to at the pumps...sheesh. I'm not in any way saying that going to war was the right decision...I argued with my own father about it before the invasion.
Oh yes, that's war. Europe on the other hand KNOWS war; we've seen enough of it. I just have to look out of my lounge window to see the impact of WW2; new out-of-place buildings, bunkers etc, they are all there.
Having spent six years of my life living in, and helping to defend Europe, I find this a typical response from the younger generation of Euros that truly *don't* know war, and make smartass all encompassing statements about fat cowboy Americans...just like this one (yes, I'm being sarcastic). You make it sound like the U.S. just sat back and watched WWII...shame on you. Maybe you should take a closer look at some of the graveyards littered with American bodies around Europe. Why would you attempt to make any linkage between WWII and the Iraqi war, except maybe in an attempt to bolster your image as an authority?
As we're all well aware, there are many brilliant people who end up doing nothing of significance with their lives. You see it all the time in the Mensa ads, where they talk about the genius truck driver, or used car salesman. What we really need is a way to instill a motivation to apply all that brainpower. What can we do with our kids to spark the drive that makes them want to change the world? Obviously, Edison's quote applies: "Genius is one percent inspiration,. and ninety-nine per cent perspiration."
In a way, I'm dealing with a bit of this at home. My 14 yr old is rather bright (not brilliant), and been in some gifted classes. Motivating her has been a challenge for me because I know she can do well in any class that she's interested in. The trouble comes when she doesn't like an instructor and just stops trying to do more than the minimum. It's also often difficult to decide if we should have her in the GT class (which is frequently using the same text, and just doing more with it), and possibly only get average grades, or go with the regular classes and end up with A's. I wish I had insight into how college admissions officers viewed a comparision of someone in regular classes with a 3.75 vs. someone taking all GT classes with a 3.0...If someone does, I'd be grateful for their feedback.
at a cost to the EU of $3000 per inhabitant - a cost far below what the average citizen pay in taxes in a single year.
So they don't use that tax money for other stuff? You make it sound like they're not getting anything for their tax money, so they deserve it.
That said, I'm not against it if that's what the citizens of the town really want to spend the money on...every place has funds that are just for keeping the people happy (think parks & recreation money). Having worked in darkend computer labs (not allowed to turn up the lighting cuz it bothers the operators) for many years, I can sympathize when people talk about lost productivity. It just makes me want to go to sleep.
Mod parent down, his conclusion is neither interesting nor logical at all given the previous statement. They discovered afterall that the tests wern't botched. This really leads to two possible explanations, the basic tests have a flaw allowing occasional misdiagnosis (this wouldn't make the hospital liabel, cause it wouldn't be there fault), or he is cured.
Please feel free to mod down my comment above. However, when you say "they discovered..." isn't this a case of the fox watching the hen house? Are you stating that this isn't a possiblity, and in fact a more likely one than him possibly curing himself? Sure the tests could have a flaw, but if that were the case, wouldn't we see this outcome much more frequently? So, go ahead and disagree with my theory, but please don't state that it's not logical until you've shown that it couldn't have actually been the case. And, while I've got my tinfoil hat on, might I suggest that you're posting as an AC because you're the one that got sued?...no, I don't really believe that, but geez, grow some balls.
Uh, no. He sued them when the first negative test came back, on (what would normally be) the sound theory that was evidence that the original positive test had been botched. The hospital then did extensive testing on both the positive and negative samples, at which point they came to the stunning conclusion that both results were correct. The lawsuit ended at that point.
So, in order to cover their legal arses, the hospital came up with this miracle? 1. Botch HIV test 2. Get sued 3. Generate Hocus Pocus theory 4. Profit (or at least don't lose a few million)
The dream of striking it rich with a patent is a nice one, but it's more like a lottery than anything. Extremely rarely, someone wins, but most of the time even those who invest large amounts (people who actually invent/create things) lose out.
This seems to be the majority opinion here, so I'm wondering why you bothered posting as AC. And though I will agree that the patent system is currently broken, I'll disagree with your opinion that "the little guy" can't do this. Certainly, it's not as easy to do as it used to be. My anecdotal evidence is my own father, who holds several patents. He started his own business on a shoestring, and over a period of about twenty years did very well for himself. During that time, he did have to go after a few companies that attempted to co-opt his ideas (a couple times after he had presented them, they'd try to do it themselves, or get a third party to), but that's why small businesses have attornies on retainer...it's not *that* difficult to defend under normal circumstances. You mentioned "incredible financing"...you've obviously not done your homework. Nearly anyone can start a small business if you've got decent credit, and small business loans are relatively easy to obtain. So, now that I've posted for the unpopular side, I'm sure I've shot my karma in the foot.
I recall attending a briefing given by SGI reps several years back. They were explaining to us how they were getting in bed with Intel, and planned on producing top notch windows machines. Many of us left that meeting shaking our heads. Among our many concerns was, how do you expect to take a company full of *NIX geeks, and make them work on MS stuff? Also, how could we continue to use their products for our mission critical applications (we knew Windows wasn't up to it)? I don't know, and maybe someone can fill in the gaps here, how long they spent on this experiment before falling back to what they did, and did well (and hopefully, it's not too late).
You're very correct. (If it possible to more correct than just normally correct)
VOIP can be tunnled to that it loooks like any other encrypted traffic. Are the feds going to start block:443 traffic because I may be tunneling my weekly call to my mom in the traffic?
I work for a state agencey. I've spent the betterm part of days explainging to the higher ups what a certain technology can do and what it can't.
Has anyone been pondering a way to provide politicians w/ this infornmation?
I'm not trying to flame the gov't, just trying to find a way to get them unbiased technoligically corrext info.
I realize that headlines sell and flinging mud wins campaigns. I'm probably too disillusioned to think can't be corrected.
Any ideas out there?
Yes. Though your ideas may be sound, it's highly likely that you're not being listened to due to your inablity to express your ideas in a manner that doesn't appear uneducated. Please don't take this as an insult. None is intended. If you want to get people to listen, you'll need to change your stated (in your sig) dislike of spell checking.
It's a single-problem solving analog computer of the classic, pre-Turing sense. They used to have all kinds of crap like this for solving various problems. Easier (at the time) (and probably cooler) than a book filled with lists. Not a Turing complete machine by any sense... more like the ABC device that people are always claiming was the "first computer," than an ENIAC.
I'm sure that there's a better definition around. Otherwise, I'd be able to make a problem statement like...the room is dark. And, then the switch/wiring/bulb would be the computer and I'd be programming when I turned it on/off. My house has a whole network of these:P
Maybe it's the type of problem that matters? Where do we split the definition of computer from the definition of tool?
Your disagreement with the Constitution simply doesn't matter. If you don't like it, you've got exactly five choices...
1. Work within the system to change it...not much chance due to the fact that all of us gun owners would revolt. 2. Revolt against the system to change it...even less chance unless you'd enjoy sharing a cell with Bubba. 3. Leave the country. Probably your best bet. 4. Learn to live with it...maybe you could try D.C. with it's strong anti-gun laws and low crime rate (not). 5. Become a Darwin awards candidate (please).
Certainly there might be a case for putting some blame on the coders, but I'm not going to argue the value of finding a scapegoat here. However, how about adding to this list...
1. The customer with constant requirements changes 2. The manager that expects the job done with an unrealistic budget or schedule. 3. The systems engineer that screwed up the design 4. The QA guy that didn't properly test, and find the bug. 5. The folks that all signed off on the formal inspection of that code 6. etc.
If you want rock solid code, you're going to have to pay for it with both schedule and budget. When people
While I don't have numbers to back it up, I do have anecdotal evidence that e-mail works just fine. I've written to several state and federal congressmen, and while they didn't all send replies, I've received several written responses (via snail mail), that were not simple canned messages.
Just my opinion, but unless you've got data to back up the assertion that snail-mail is more valued, I'll continue to call BS. But please do link the data if you've got it.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not a word for word thing, its an ideology thing. Constantly trying to prove that they were right, that people enjoy their style of economics more than the other. Thus propoganda, the sputnik, the moon landing, coca cola, civil rights. It was all them trying to boast about which side was better. I remember a quote somewhere about how if a corporation was actually a person as it is somewhat legally it would be dangerously psychotic. I wonder what would be said of nation states if they were people. It;s kinda depressing when you think of that.
Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I have the impression that you're not old enough to have been around during those times. That impression is because it appears that your view is all slanted toward a large conspiracy theory. You can't keep a secret like that between ten people for very long, much less the thousands involved, and the decades that this would have covered. Having grown up during those times, and serving in the military during the Cold War, my impressions may be a bit biased, but my point on the theory is rock solid.
The problem, which is obvious when you think about it, is that capitalism no longer has competition from communism. When communism promised "the worker's paradise", and at least took some steps towards delivering it, the capitalist world had to treat its workers better than the communists did, out of fear that the workers would revolt, or vote in a different system.
With that competitive threat removed, capitalism can be as nasty as it wants to be. Because it has monopoly power now.
Nice theory, but it's not based upon reality. If you disagree, please supply some examples where corporations, or the government made changes to improve worker conditions in order to prevent their employees from defecting to the U.S.S.R. There's been no serious fear of a revolt in this nation since the Civil War.
You've left out a few:
Stockades (no abbrev.)
Sunken Temple (ST)...I forget the real name of this place, but it's what everyone calls it.
Wailing Caverns (WC)
Blackrock Depths (BRD)
Wind power takes wind energy out of the atmosphere, which could cause climate change if used on a large scale.
By "large scale", I presume you mean something that would produce more energy than all the humans that ever existed have used. Even if we tried really hard, I doubt that we could pull enough energy from the winds to affect anything more than a very small local area. Just to quote NOAA here...
According to the 1993 World Almanac, the entire human race used energy at a rate of 1013 watts in 1990, a rate less than 20% of the power of a hurricane.
But you're simply incorrect in your statement.
Agreed. Working for one of the major defense contractors, I can tell you that we've been using C++ for many systems.
Emacs 22 will have many new features such as support for Mac OS X
I thought all macs came with OS X.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Yes, I'm kidding.
Having just switched over to HD last month (our 7 yr old Phillips tube died, so it was time to upgrade), I can see how it would be easy for alot of folks to misunderstand. Here are some of the problems I had to overcome...
* Purchased new HD set, but didn't know I needed HD service, and a new set top box to get the broadcast.
* Purchased HD service and don't realize that not all the channels are HD...nobody tells you this stuff.
* Purchase HD service, and don't receive a manual for the DVR box (damn you Cox/Sci-Atlanta!).
None of this was that difficult for me, and I had no previous experience with HD. But what alot of engineers haven't figured out yet is that if it's as hard as programming the clock on an old VCR, than it's too hard for Joe Sixpack.
Someone above asked if it is really worth upgrading. Considering that I was able to get a 62" Mitsu DLP ($2800 at Costco), and HD service with an HD DVR (installed free) for an additional $20/mo, I'd say yes. For that price, I've got a picture that's twice the size, much higher quality, and the DVR is a godsend.
Unfortunately, they have insurance liability if they don't lock you out and something bad happens.
No different than the liability of some employee who's not leaving though. This is really another non-risk.
I'm only posting once, so this part is not in direct response to the parent...
This boggles my mind. If you don't trust the person, then they shouldn't have still been an employee in the first place. Once you've shown that giving 2-weeks notice results in immediate termination, it becomes obvious to anyone that would actually do something malicous, that they should do it prior to giving notice...so you've effectively gained nothing, and protected your company against nothing, and created nothing but ill will, and bad feelings. Do you think that the current employees don't notice how people are being treated, and resent it? That's the kind of thing that actually causes problems. Stating that it's "policy" or SOP, is bullshit. Policies aren't made in a vacuum, people make them, and people can change them. If this was the kind of policy I saw at my place of employment, you can rest assured that I'd be turning in my two-week notice, but only at a point when I was prepared to walk out the door on that day. Try treating people with the respect they deserve as a risk mitigation plan, not some phony balony crap like this. I'm getting frickin' tired of some of the policies I see generated by corporate security folks...most of whom (my apology for the generalization, and it's certainly not true for all of them) are former military police, who got that job because they couldn't score high enough to qualify for anything else...I've seen it numerous times.
This is not an attempt to flame the parent, only to open a discussion about the ethics of the actions sited.
Let me make sure I understand this properly. You purchase something at a price that you know was mistaken. You justify your action by claiming that it's the stores fault, and sort of a retribution for the way they treat their employees?
The ethics of the store in question are not the issue here...and I don't "shed no tears" for certain businesses when they lose out either. But, what is in question is if it's ok to buy something that's mispriced. Your second wrong doesn't make it right.
If you honestly had issues with the way the store treated employees, why would you be shopping there in the first place?
I wouldn't call it theft. But I would call it dishonest and immoral. If you can explain to me why it's otherwise, I'm all eyes & ears. And the same goes for the person that took $18 in change from their $2 coin.
Disclaimer: I'm not attempting to argue in favor of the Iraqi war, only to expose the holes in the parents post. I'm so tired of seeing this type of anti-American, and anti-Euro posting...last time I looked, we were allies. If we could focus on the issues rather than attacking each other, maybe we could actually get something productive accomplished.
Your world view is entirely moronic. One or two businessmen in one or two countries may have felt that way, but not "Europe opposed because...". We don't have the fascist government/corporation linking that rules US politics; our leaders aren't tied to these businessmen.
This comment is so naive that it warrents no further response. Do you truly believe that nonsense? I'd expect that kind of lunacy from a fifteen year old.
Most of us opposed it because it was based on lies and done entirely for profit. Go check my posting history on any political topic if you don't believe me
Nobody cares about your personal history/opinion...get over it. Yes, I argued against it at the time, due to the lack of evidence shown to support it, but held hopes (as many did) that there was classified info that they couldn't share with the public. Many have argued about an "intelligence failure"...personally, I blame congress for the lack of oversight, and budget slashing of the intel community after the cold war.
Speaking of which, 9/11 was the US's only taste of conflict on your homeland. How did it feel? Did you like it?
A bit of Schadenfreude? Guess it depends on how far back you want to look at our history (you went back to WWII, so obviously Pearl Harbor comes to mind), but there have been plenty of attacks on U.S. soil. Obviously we loved it, and did it for the oil, so we could pay double what we used to at the pumps...sheesh. I'm not in any way saying that going to war was the right decision...I argued with my own father about it before the invasion.
Oh yes, that's war. Europe on the other hand KNOWS war; we've seen enough of it. I just have to look out of my lounge window to see the impact of WW2; new out-of-place buildings, bunkers etc, they are all there.
Having spent six years of my life living in, and helping to defend Europe, I find this a typical response from the younger generation of Euros that truly *don't* know war, and make smartass all encompassing statements about fat cowboy Americans...just like this one (yes, I'm being sarcastic). You make it sound like the U.S. just sat back and watched WWII...shame on you. Maybe you should take a closer look at some of the graveyards littered with American bodies around Europe. Why would you attempt to make any linkage between WWII and the Iraqi war, except maybe in an attempt to bolster your image as an authority?
The french have given us great wine and great cheese. Texas has given un George Bush.
But you forgot a few...
fries
dressing
maids
vanilla
doors
horns
and the #1 French contribution: tickler
As we're all well aware, there are many brilliant people who end up doing nothing of significance with their lives. You see it all the time in the Mensa ads, where they talk about the genius truck driver, or used car salesman. What we really need is a way to instill a motivation to apply all that brainpower. What can we do with our kids to spark the drive that makes them want to change the world? Obviously, Edison's quote applies: "Genius is one percent inspiration,. and ninety-nine per cent perspiration."
In a way, I'm dealing with a bit of this at home. My 14 yr old is rather bright (not brilliant), and been in some gifted classes. Motivating her has been a challenge for me because I know she can do well in any class that she's interested in. The trouble comes when she doesn't like an instructor and just stops trying to do more than the minimum. It's also often difficult to decide if we should have her in the GT class (which is frequently using the same text, and just doing more with it), and possibly only get average grades, or go with the regular classes and end up with A's. I wish I had insight into how college admissions officers viewed a comparision of someone in regular classes with a 3.75 vs. someone taking all GT classes with a 3.0...If someone does, I'd be grateful for their feedback.
at a cost to the EU of $3000 per inhabitant - a cost far below what the average citizen pay in taxes in a single year.
So they don't use that tax money for other stuff? You make it sound like they're not getting anything for their tax money, so they deserve it.
That said, I'm not against it if that's what the citizens of the town really want to spend the money on...every place has funds that are just for keeping the people happy (think parks & recreation money). Having worked in darkend computer labs (not allowed to turn up the lighting cuz it bothers the operators) for many years, I can sympathize when people talk about lost productivity. It just makes me want to go to sleep.
A quick unscientific poll of coworkers agrees with the grandparent...100%
Ok, so /. links a story to them, and they link one back. The question is, who's servers are gonna melt down first?
You have to realize, though, that we only use words like "xyzzy," "zorkmid," and "blorple" on formal occasions.
Glad I checked before posting those, but don't forget "plugh"!
Mod parent down, his conclusion is neither interesting nor logical at all given the previous statement. They discovered afterall that the tests wern't botched. This really leads to two possible explanations, the basic tests have a flaw allowing occasional misdiagnosis (this wouldn't make the hospital liabel, cause it wouldn't be there fault), or he is cured.
Please feel free to mod down my comment above. However, when you say "they discovered..." isn't this a case of the fox watching the hen house? Are you stating that this isn't a possiblity, and in fact a more likely one than him possibly curing himself? Sure the tests could have a flaw, but if that were the case, wouldn't we see this outcome much more frequently? So, go ahead and disagree with my theory, but please don't state that it's not logical until you've shown that it couldn't have actually been the case. And, while I've got my tinfoil hat on, might I suggest that you're posting as an AC because you're the one that got sued?...no, I don't really believe that, but geez, grow some balls.
Uh, no. He sued them when the first negative test came back, on (what would normally be) the sound theory that was evidence that the original positive test had been botched. The hospital then did extensive testing on both the positive and negative samples, at which point they came to the stunning conclusion that both results were correct. The lawsuit ended at that point.
So, in order to cover their legal arses, the hospital came up with this miracle?
1. Botch HIV test
2. Get sued
3. Generate Hocus Pocus theory
4. Profit (or at least don't lose a few million)
The dream of striking it rich with a patent is a nice one, but it's more like a lottery than anything. Extremely rarely, someone wins, but most of the time even those who invest large amounts (people who actually invent/create things) lose out.
This seems to be the majority opinion here, so I'm wondering why you bothered posting as AC. And though I will agree that the patent system is currently broken, I'll disagree with your opinion that "the little guy" can't do this. Certainly, it's not as easy to do as it used to be. My anecdotal evidence is my own father, who holds several patents. He started his own business on a shoestring, and over a period of about twenty years did very well for himself. During that time, he did have to go after a few companies that attempted to co-opt his ideas (a couple times after he had presented them, they'd try to do it themselves, or get a third party to), but that's why small businesses have attornies on retainer...it's not *that* difficult to defend under normal circumstances. You mentioned "incredible financing"...you've obviously not done your homework. Nearly anyone can start a small business if you've got decent credit, and small business loans are relatively easy to obtain. So, now that I've posted for the unpopular side, I'm sure I've shot my karma in the foot.
I recall attending a briefing given by SGI reps several years back. They were explaining to us how they were getting in bed with Intel, and planned on producing top notch windows machines. Many of us left that meeting shaking our heads. Among our many concerns was, how do you expect to take a company full of *NIX geeks, and make them work on MS stuff? Also, how could we continue to use their products for our mission critical applications (we knew Windows wasn't up to it)? I don't know, and maybe someone can fill in the gaps here, how long they spent on this experiment before falling back to what they did, and did well (and hopefully, it's not too late).
You're very correct. (If it possible to more correct than just normally correct)
:443 traffic because I may be tunneling my weekly call to my mom in the traffic?
VOIP can be tunnled to that it loooks like any other encrypted traffic. Are the feds going to start block
I work for a state agencey. I've spent the betterm part of days explainging to the higher ups what a certain technology can do and what it can't.
Has anyone been pondering a way to provide politicians w/ this infornmation?
I'm not trying to flame the gov't, just trying to find a way to get them unbiased technoligically corrext info.
I realize that headlines sell and flinging mud wins campaigns. I'm probably too disillusioned to think can't be corrected.
Any ideas out there?
Yes. Though your ideas may be sound, it's highly likely that you're not being listened to due to your inablity to express your ideas in a manner that doesn't appear uneducated. Please don't take this as an insult. None is intended. If you want to get people to listen, you'll need to change your stated (in your sig) dislike of spell checking.
P.S. Feel free to flame my grammer.
It's a single-problem solving analog computer of the classic, pre-Turing sense. They used to have all kinds of crap like this for solving various problems. Easier (at the time) (and probably cooler) than a book filled with lists. Not a Turing complete machine by any sense... more like the ABC device that people are always claiming was the "first computer," than an ENIAC.
:P
I'm sure that there's a better definition around. Otherwise, I'd be able to make a problem statement like...the room is dark. And, then the switch/wiring/bulb would be the computer and I'd be programming when I turned it on/off. My house has a whole network of these
Maybe it's the type of problem that matters? Where do we split the definition of computer from the definition of tool?
Your disagreement with the Constitution simply doesn't matter. If you don't like it, you've got exactly five choices...
1. Work within the system to change it...not much chance due to the fact that all of us gun owners would revolt.
2. Revolt against the system to change it...even less chance unless you'd enjoy sharing a cell with Bubba.
3. Leave the country. Probably your best bet.
4. Learn to live with it...maybe you could try D.C. with it's strong anti-gun laws and low crime rate (not).
5. Become a Darwin awards candidate (please).
Certainly there might be a case for putting some blame on the coders, but I'm not going to argue the value of finding a scapegoat here. However, how about adding to this list...
1. The customer with constant requirements changes
2. The manager that expects the job done with an unrealistic budget or schedule.
3. The systems engineer that screwed up the design
4. The QA guy that didn't properly test, and find the bug.
5. The folks that all signed off on the formal inspection of that code
6. etc.
If you want rock solid code, you're going to have to pay for it with both schedule and budget. When people
While I don't have numbers to back it up, I do have anecdotal evidence that e-mail works just fine. I've written to several state and federal congressmen, and while they didn't all send replies, I've received several written responses (via snail mail), that were not simple canned messages.
Just my opinion, but unless you've got data to back up the assertion that snail-mail is more valued, I'll continue to call BS. But please do link the data if you've got it.