Actually, I'd just put it back in my pocket as my iPAQ is also my cell phone. The only value is with international calls as my domestic calling plan comes with nationwide LD included.
However, I spend a lot of time on the phone to both Europe and Asia. Skype works and saves me a lot of $$$
Lots, including a couple of great relationships, notr to mention most of my hair.
The point is that all three of those men had an extreme vision for their industries that significantly large portions of the population doubted, but no one calls them zealots. The same is true of Stallman, yet people who don't understand his vision constantly label him a nut or zealot.
I work in the industry and I don't get him, you are right. In the case of the other three, the "mainstream" not only knows who they are, but "get them". Not being "gotten" by the mainstream puts one on the fringe.
There are other words besides zealot to describe people who eagerly and ardently pursue something perceived as being on the fringe, but they tend to have more negative connotations.
Yet another high-id dotter dissing Stallman for all the wrong reasons.
Funny comment from user id 831,679.
I've paid to work with *NIX since 1983. You? For the record, I've never been 100% comfortable with Stallman.
Do you really belive Stallman is no more a zealot than the other people you cite? You start with a definitive statement and then modify it by saying, "just like those three had in varying degrees". Which is it? The same or different?
No, I'm saying quite the opposite. That's its not OK in either case and that to snicker about it in one instance and publicly condemn in the other is beyond hypocritical.
Pray tell, why do you need HD for face-to-face conferencing?
I have installed videoconferencing at 6 companies over the past 15 years. It has never received the widespread use it was initially purchased for. Videoconferencing solves a technical problem. In a purely technical environment, they may be successful.
However, put a bunch of PHBs in a room and if they encounter any problems using the equipment, the liklihood of it being used again is slim. One thing a PHB hates more than anything is knowingly looking stupid.
Well, I know it's a pretty far-out concept, but your employer could hire a contractor to come in on and take care of it. Think about it. They have the contractor come in on the weekend when your not around and get familiar with the place. Then they show up on the day you're getting whacked to lock you out of the systems. It's not as hard as it sounds.
Also, do you realize that there is a management concept that goes something like 'as soon as you identify somebody as irreplaceable, you should fire them immediately', because that will only get worse over time?
What is a privacy "violation"? Is that like a parking violation? A 3-second violation in basketball?
Or are you saying it's illegal? If illegal, please cite the relevant statute.
Also, hasn't the "tech community" (aka the good guys) also published personal information? The DiDio flap comes to mind and I fail to recall oodles of people rallying that her privacy had been violated. It seems more like a case of having one's cake and eating it too.
I don't believe that either PJ or O'Gara are paid shills and Dvorak does a good job of explaining why.
I also believe that O'Gara was merely being controversial.
Interesting conspiracy theory that the rabid zealotry may be astroturfing on the part of MSFT, etc... I'll point out that said zealotry has existed for much longer than MSFT has been concerned about FOSS as a threat. Case in point: Stallman.
You could. Assuming yuou knew them all and had the time to waste tracking them all down. And find photos. This guy did and provides a nice retrospective.
But then again, this is Slashdot. You have to try and impress us with how smart you are. Has anybody ever told you how assholic that behavior is?
If they held out for what? MSFT makes an announcement for a hostile takeover of RHAT at a 20% premium to tday's closing price. There's nothing that compels them to pay any more. Plus the people who decide are the big institutional investors, not the rank & file employees (or even the BoD).
While the articles make a case that it might be beneficial for RedHat, what's in it for Microsoft? Plus, what are the chances of it clearing anti-trust hurdles?
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I'd just put it back in my pocket as my iPAQ is also my cell phone. The only value is with international calls as my domestic calling plan comes with nationwide LD included.
However, I spend a lot of time on the phone to both Europe and Asia. Skype works and saves me a lot of $$$
And how much did it cost you?
Lots, including a couple of great relationships, notr to mention most of my hair.
The point is that all three of those men had an extreme vision for their industries that significantly large portions of the population doubted, but no one calls them zealots. The same is true of Stallman, yet people who don't understand his vision constantly label him a nut or zealot.
I work in the industry and I don't get him, you are right. In the case of the other three, the "mainstream" not only knows who they are, but "get them". Not being "gotten" by the mainstream puts one on the fringe.
There are other words besides zealot to describe people who eagerly and ardently pursue something perceived as being on the fringe, but they tend to have more negative connotations.
Walk into hotspot.
Acquire connection.
Start Skype.
Make call.
Yet another high-id dotter dissing Stallman for all the wrong reasons.
Funny comment from user id 831,679.
I've paid to work with *NIX since 1983. You? For the record, I've never been 100% comfortable with Stallman.
Do you really belive Stallman is no more a zealot than the other people you cite? You start with a definitive statement and then modify it by saying, "just like those three had in varying degrees". Which is it? The same or different?
No, I'm saying quite the opposite. That's its not OK in either case and that to snicker about it in one instance and publicly condemn in the other is beyond hypocritical.
Pray tell, why do you need HD for face-to-face conferencing?
I have installed videoconferencing at 6 companies over the past 15 years. It has never received the widespread use it was initially purchased for. Videoconferencing solves a technical problem. In a purely technical environment, they may be successful.
However, put a bunch of PHBs in a room and if they encounter any problems using the equipment, the liklihood of it being used again is slim. One thing a PHB hates more than anything is knowingly looking stupid.
So it's about degrees of violation then? You sir, are on a very slippery slope.
Well, I know it's a pretty far-out concept, but your employer could hire a contractor to come in on and take care of it. Think about it. They have the contractor come in on the weekend when your not around and get familiar with the place. Then they show up on the day you're getting whacked to lock you out of the systems. It's not as hard as it sounds.
Also, do you realize that there is a management concept that goes something like 'as soon as you identify somebody as irreplaceable, you should fire them immediately', because that will only get worse over time?
Nice selective trimming. What about her phone number?
What is a privacy "violation"? Is that like a parking violation? A 3-second violation in basketball?
Or are you saying it's illegal? If illegal, please cite the relevant statute.
Also, hasn't the "tech community" (aka the good guys) also published personal information? The DiDio flap comes to mind and I fail to recall oodles of people rallying that her privacy had been violated. It seems more like a case of having one's cake and eating it too.
I'll say Dvorak has some good points.
I don't believe that either PJ or O'Gara are paid shills and Dvorak does a good job of explaining why.
I also believe that O'Gara was merely being controversial.
Interesting conspiracy theory that the rabid zealotry may be astroturfing on the part of MSFT, etc... I'll point out that said zealotry has existed for much longer than MSFT has been concerned about FOSS as a threat. Case in point: Stallman.
A pansy with all his toes, Hopalong.
here
And it's one button.
Um, what about the safety?
Education I get, I meant production uses.
and not meant in a trollish way, but what is Pascal used for these days? What are it's inherent advantages over other languages?
Oh. At red lights. Not at highway speeds. Never mind.
You could. Assuming yuou knew them all and had the time to waste tracking them all down. And find photos. This guy did and provides a nice retrospective.
But then again, this is Slashdot. You have to try and impress us with how smart you are. Has anybody ever told you how assholic that behavior is?
If they held out for what? MSFT makes an announcement for a hostile takeover of RHAT at a 20% premium to tday's closing price. There's nothing that compels them to pay any more. Plus the people who decide are the big institutional investors, not the rank & file employees (or even the BoD).
It's all moot anyways.
It can potentially reduce the number of choices in the market by taking out the #1 player in "commercial linux".
Only this and nothing more.
While the articles make a case that it might be beneficial for RedHat, what's in it for Microsoft? Plus, what are the chances of it clearing anti-trust hurdles?
Of that 83%, 64.6% contain the word firefox.
Suffice to say it's a subset of Slashdot readers who get to popular articles fairly quickly.
They've publicly announced they want to put Linux on every desktop. What browser do you think they're going to use? lynx?
I dunno. This is the stock output from webalizer.