A college is a business. There's no such thing as a University that is in it for the education anymore. It's all about money. This is an excellent cost-savings for them, so of course they implemented it. Less work and more return. That doesn't mean it's ethical. An education in a lot of fields is rather worthless. You learn how to do things the way "the company" does and you use those skills at later jobs, if they're valid. I have seen people with Masters degrees go without a job for a year, and people that didn't finish high school constantly employed, or employed within a week. I don't know when people are going to realize that education does not make or break a person - it's their ability to convince others of their worth that makes the difference. In summary: 1. School is bullshit. You can learn anything you need to without the help of a school. Anyone who says otherwise is not educated; they are either fooled or helplessly gullible. 2. Colleges are businesses. They are in business to make money, and this is a good way for them to make a buck with minimal marginal expenditure. 3. It's unethical, but this is a business. Business and ethics are antonyms. At least, they should be. 4. It's unfortunate. The world is a screwed-up place. If you want fairness and truth, Computer Science is hardly the degree you want to be shooting for (if you even want to be shooting for one.)
The general rule when it comes to corporations and software is this: 1. If it can be purchased, purchase it. We'll be able to sue someone if we screw up. 2. If it can be written in-house, encourage the people who could write it to become familiar with the product we're getting ready to purchase. This way, they won't be able to hold anything over your head or try to claim rights to anything. No source ownership issues. 3. If it's free, it's no good. Why would they be giving it away if it was any good?
I don't agree with any of it, just for the record. That's just how the conversations usually end up when I have them.
Oh, I completely agree. Don't get me wrong... It's just a way to avoid (in the short term) the phone ringing unless it IS someone I know or gave my number to.
I believe the collective opinion is that people don't want to hear the phone ring unless it's something that requires their time. I, for one, don't want to hear the thing ring all day and night - period. My local carrier has something called "private Time." I'm using it 24/7. It makes sure the phone doesn't ring unless the number calling is on a 5-long "allow list" or the caller knows a two-digit code (entered while ringing to the caller). That deals with the problem quite nicely. That is, until a list of IDs starts floating around... but they can be changed.
I believe the collective opinion is that people don't want to hear the phone ring unless it's something that requires their time. I, for one, don't want to hear the thing ring all day and night - period. My local carrier has something called "private Time." I'm using it 24/7. It makes sure the phone doesn't ring unless the number calling is on a 5-long "allow list" or the caller knows a two-digit code (entered while ringing to the caller). That deals with the problem quite nicely. That is, until a list of IDs starts floating around... but they can be changed.
I bet if you loaded up fsf.org tomorrow morning and saw, "windows is TEH R00LZ!!!", the government's response would be:
"too bad, so sad... guess that Linux thing isn't so great after all!"
Not until they released an official statement condemning it as an act of terrorism, then spending hundreds of millions on a federal task force to examine the role of '133+ $p33k' in terror cells.
Then you'll get sued by the criminal's family for needlessly endangering his life. Hell, he might not even have to get hurt as long as the house was messy enough to present the risk of tripping.
Computer is equipped with the programmed ("logical") or physical (by means of a barrier, physical security device, or enclosure [such as a room]) ability to deny or restrict access to data2
Physical barrier is compromised by or through:
The use of force
The use of deceptive language, practices, or other means (example: "Social Engineering3") whereby physical access to computer is obtained by a party not expressly authorized4 to have or gain access to said computer
Logical barrier is compromised by or through:
Attachment to a physical communication medium used by one or more computers in "private communication5", by a device or entity that is not a party to the private communication, or has not been authorized to become party to the private communication An exception to this item would be the use of an interception or monitoring device that reveals only the source and destination of the private communication, characteristics of the packet or datagram being communicated privately, or other "control information" which is not part of the actual information being communicated within the packet or datagram
Compromising encrypted communication between one or more computers by any device or entity not expressly authorized to be a party to the encrypted communication, by means of causing the encryption to become disabled or degraded, or decrypting the communication
Causing any private communication between one or more computers to be directed to a device or intercepted by a device or entity not expressly authorized to be a party to the private communication An exception to this item would be the use of an interception or monitoring device that reveals only the source and destination of the private communication, characteristics of the packet or datagram being communicated privately, or other "control information" which is not part of the actual information being communicated within the packet or datagram
The disclosure to any party not expressly authorized to be party to any communication between any computer or computers in private communication, by any device or entity not party to the private communication
Computer is not equipped with a physical or logical barrier and:
Communication is initiated with the computer by any other computer not authorized to initiate communication with the subject computer, whereby access to information within the subject computer is obtained, excluding:
Banners
Welcomes
Legal notices
Disclaimers
Login prompts, challenges, or the name of the computer
Packets which are designed to communicate status or availability information
The properties of the computer (excluding password or access properties, unless the operator of the source computer has allowed these properties to be available, intentionally or unintentionally)
Communication is initiated that:
Disables the source computer
Causes the source computer to become unresponsive
Computer: a programmable electronic device that can store, retrieve, and process data (courtesy Merriam-Webster)
Information as it pertains to the computer as a concept, with regard to a specific computer's ability or property to control access to said information or manipulation of said information
Process by which access is gained through deceptive means involving the revelation of information by a trusted party
Given permission by a party that can legally be verified to be in ownership of the computer or information in question, that person's direct designees (by or through written or programatic acceptance [limited to uniquely identifyable persons or computers]) to communicate with a computer by means of physical, verbal, visual, p
I found in the time I worked for Crap Company (real name omitted to prevent libel suits) that they refuse to consider open source options because of one thing: Accountability. They want to hold another large company (buku $$) responsible for their (Crap Company's) own mistakes and bad judgment. If you install iPlanet on several hundred servers with a promise from them (iPlanet) that it will perform function X, then it fails to perform that function to the level they want*, then they (Crap Company) want to be able to go back and recover costs from iPlanet... or get nice little license discounts as settlement. In this particular Crap Company, they used their manufacturing data analysis and quality control processes to measure and control information technology. Their quality control directives were geared towards the manufacture of large machines, not the experience of a user sitting at a web browser filling out part orders. The users want fast response times and solid uptime, but the basis for comparison is a server ping and a hit to a static page, not the end user experience. How does that accomplish anything? Right. It doesn't. If they use a vendor, they can just force the vendor to come in and spend time analyzing their bad decisions and bad architecture, then sue them if they don't provide an immediate solution (read: free products or consulting time.) Instead of asking the technical experts (the IT staff) what the right way to do something is, they ask management and vendors. Management is driven by cost, and the venders are driven by profit. Is this starting to all come into focus now?:)
* Measured by data. For instance (loose example), you can have up to 100 client threads at a time simultaneously serving up pages at the rate of Y per second. Well, that's only if it's static HTML, not if the freaking server's connected to a crappy application server farm.
This is what I discovered in my time at GEAE: They want someone to sue when all hell breaks loose. They (GEAE) want to hold another business financially liable for their own (GEAE's) bad judgment and architectual direction.
Compile all the costs, slap it on the CFO's desk and say "Ok I'm ready to implement all this just buy all that stuff." Then the CFO will scratch his head and say "Maybe this open-source stuff isn't such a bad idea after all."
You didn't work for GEAE, did you? There, they would say "Hmm... Thanks."
Then they would bring in a consultant backed by a large corporation (cuz there's incentive not to consult badly) to develop a strategy. Then they would compare that to the strategy you provided. Open source always loses because there's no one to directly hold accountable in the event of catastrophy (read: sue)
Also, they want to be able to say "I want this product to do X. What? It doesn't? Well we need to speak wih the vendor and get them to incorporate it into the software."
God I hate corporations.
The SIMS. You'll definitely want to pick up a copy. You essentially control a set of virtual "people" whose personality traits and attributes you define. You create a house, furnish it, etc. You can make the people do things.. you can have them interact with the objects and other people. You can have them form relationships with each other. Very addictive.
Slashdot Mirror
Very insightful. That's the best statement I've heard in a long time - it describes the reality of the situation perfectly.
That was intended to be humorous.
Thank you for proving your point without resorting to flaming or name-calling. The information you presented is definitely noted. :)
For some professions, IT and CS being the main ones, yes, school doesn't mean a fucking thing. I hope that's what you were referring to
Yes. Implied by tone and content of original.
A college is a business. There's no such thing as a University that is in it for the education anymore. It's all about money.
This is an excellent cost-savings for them, so of course they implemented it. Less work and more return. That doesn't mean it's ethical.
An education in a lot of fields is rather worthless. You learn how to do things the way "the company" does and you use those skills at later jobs, if they're valid.
I have seen people with Masters degrees go without a job for a year, and people that didn't finish high school constantly employed, or employed within a week.
I don't know when people are going to realize that education does not make or break a person - it's their ability to convince others of their worth that makes the difference.
In summary:
1. School is bullshit. You can learn anything you need to without the help of a school. Anyone who says otherwise is not educated; they are either fooled or helplessly gullible.
2. Colleges are businesses. They are in business to make money, and this is a good way for them to make a buck with minimal marginal expenditure.
3. It's unethical, but this is a business. Business and ethics are antonyms. At least, they should be.
4. It's unfortunate. The world is a screwed-up place. If you want fairness and truth, Computer Science is hardly the degree you want to be shooting for (if you even want to be shooting for one.)
The general rule when it comes to corporations and software is this:
1. If it can be purchased, purchase it. We'll be able to sue someone if we screw up.
2. If it can be written in-house, encourage the people who could write it to become familiar with the product we're getting ready to purchase. This way, they won't be able to hold anything over your head or try to claim rights to anything. No source ownership issues.
3. If it's free, it's no good. Why would they be giving it away if it was any good?
I don't agree with any of it, just for the record. That's just how the conversations usually end up when I have them.
Oh, I completely agree. Don't get me wrong... It's just a way to avoid (in the short term) the phone ringing unless it IS someone I know or gave my number to.
Sure.. they're trying to sell you bullshit. ;)
Oh, hush. You're making sense. That has no place is business or government.
I believe the collective opinion is that people don't want to hear the phone ring unless it's something that requires their time.
I, for one, don't want to hear the thing ring all day and night - period.
My local carrier has something called "private Time."
I'm using it 24/7. It makes sure the phone doesn't ring unless the number calling is on a 5-long "allow list" or the caller knows a two-digit code (entered while ringing to the caller).
That deals with the problem quite nicely. That is, until a list of IDs starts floating around... but they can be changed.
I believe the collective opinion is that people don't want to hear the phone ring unless it's something that requires their time.
I, for one, don't want to hear the thing ring all day and night - period.
My local carrier has something called "private Time."
I'm using it 24/7. It makes sure the phone doesn't ring unless the number calling is on a 5-long "allow list" or the caller knows a two-digit code (entered while ringing to the caller).
That deals with the problem quite nicely. That is, until a list of IDs starts floating around... but they can be changed.
That source of revenue will disappear in due time, once the list is in place and people DON'T buy. Especially from a violator.
I'd just like to see a piece of software with a sticker that says "(c) 2003 DickBreath. All Rights Reserved."
I bet if you loaded up fsf.org tomorrow morning and saw, "windows is TEH R00LZ!!!", the government's response would be: "too bad, so sad... guess that Linux thing isn't so great after all!"
Not until they released an official statement condemning it as an act of terrorism, then spending hundreds of millions on a federal task force to examine the role of '133+ $p33k' in terror cells.
There are too many steps in that. Most won't get it.
Yeah.. it might try to assimilate you or connect unwanted and unneeded electrodes to your body, while in the process, faking a normal heart rate.
Then you'll get sued by the criminal's family for needlessly endangering his life.
Hell, he might not even have to get hurt as long as the house was messy enough to present the risk of tripping.
Sounds to me like a great and easy way for the government to make "friends" with political dissidents or suspected criminals of any nature.
I found in the time I worked for Crap Company (real name omitted to prevent libel suits) that they refuse to consider open source options because of one thing: Accountability. :)
They want to hold another large company (buku $$) responsible for their (Crap Company's) own mistakes and bad judgment. If you install iPlanet on several hundred servers with a promise from them (iPlanet) that it will perform function X, then it fails to perform that function to the level they want*, then they (Crap Company) want to be able to go back and recover costs from iPlanet... or get nice little license discounts as settlement.
In this particular Crap Company, they used their manufacturing data analysis and quality control processes to measure and control information technology. Their quality control directives were geared towards the manufacture of large machines, not the experience of a user sitting at a web browser filling out part orders.
The users want fast response times and solid uptime, but the basis for comparison is a server ping and a hit to a static page, not the end user experience. How does that accomplish anything? Right. It doesn't.
If they use a vendor, they can just force the vendor to come in and spend time analyzing their bad decisions and bad architecture, then sue them if they don't provide an immediate solution (read: free products or consulting time.)
Instead of asking the technical experts (the IT staff) what the right way to do something is, they ask management and vendors. Management is driven by cost, and the venders are driven by profit. Is this starting to all come into focus now?
* Measured by data. For instance (loose example), you can have up to 100 client threads at a time simultaneously serving up pages at the rate of Y per second. Well, that's only if it's static HTML, not if the freaking server's connected to a crappy application server farm.
This is what I discovered in my time at GEAE:
They want someone to sue when all hell breaks loose. They (GEAE) want to hold another business financially liable for their own (GEAE's) bad judgment and architectual direction.
Compile all the costs, slap it on the CFO's desk and say "Ok I'm ready to implement all this just buy all that stuff." Then the CFO will scratch his head and say "Maybe this open-source stuff isn't such a bad idea after all." You didn't work for GEAE, did you? There, they would say "Hmm... Thanks." Then they would bring in a consultant backed by a large corporation (cuz there's incentive not to consult badly) to develop a strategy. Then they would compare that to the strategy you provided. Open source always loses because there's no one to directly hold accountable in the event of catastrophy (read: sue) Also, they want to be able to say "I want this product to do X. What? It doesn't? Well we need to speak wih the vendor and get them to incorporate it into the software." God I hate corporations.
One word: voyeurism. Otherwise, I'm inclined to agree with you. I just like how complex it is at its core.
He's 33.. he'll get addicted and spend hour and hours playing it like a kid. His wife will think it's "cute" ;)
The SIMS. You'll definitely want to pick up a copy.
You essentially control a set of virtual "people" whose personality traits and attributes you define. You create a house, furnish it, etc. You can make the people do things.. you can have them interact with the objects and other people. You can have them form relationships with each other.
Very addictive.