I'm not a corporate douchebag, but I use my table to record meetings, then convert the recording to text, which is semantically analyzed. The content, in RDF is inserted into a graph database which is searchable using SPARQL. Data is presented in knowledge graphs, with voice and text annotations from the original meeting. Whiteboard drawings and text are also recorded, and similarly encoded.
When creating documents, I mostly use voice input, which is converted to text, then fit into template defined document forms. Often, knowledge graphs are created as an intermediate representation, which are automatically converted into standard forms, through the tablet UI.
This table-based technology helps me to be productive in the office.
When producing programs I often define UML models, using the tablet drawing and voice interface. Most of the models are detailed enough to generate the code. When interacting with the code, I may elect to use a bluetooth keyboard. I often use a large format HD display, connected to the tablet, when I'm at my desk.
Networks enable me to connect to a wide variety of computing resources, including the cloud, and supercomputers.
Are the corporate douchebags, with whom you work, not using similar methods?
Even using today's technology, one can plug their tablet (nexus 10) into a large format display. I use a 52 inch display when I'm in workstation mode, and a bluetooth full sized keyboard.
I can use the tablet's display surface as an input device for handwritten notes and drawings. The best voice interface I've experienced is with my tablet. When I take a crap or a bath, I read books I've downloaded.
All of the input and output modalities of the tablet will continue to improve the content creation experience.
This decade, tablets will have 64 or more cores. For most purposes, they will replace desktops, laptops, game consoles, dvd players, and hard copy books. Phones will be wearable, like watches or glasses.
I'm happy you appreciate my sense of humor -- people have an easy time taking offense. What's more you even got the point. You make a good case in your reply -- it would be even better if you offered a little evidence -- there's plenty of it around. As Christopher Hitchens has often remarked, "Religion is the original form of tyranny."
I was quite sincere in my reply -- I had to look back 60 years to have thoughts of the same resonance. For a moment, innocence and a sense of wonder were restored -- I felt the warmth of being wrapped in a blanket of security. I recalled Pinocchio singing "When you wish upon a star."
Perhaps it's simply that atheists are open to discussing all delusions, such as God, and computer simulations, on an equal footing. I entertain notions about God almost daily -- I'm fascinated by the breadth and depth of man's imagination.
Religions were invented to motivate fear, to shift the reasons for actions unknown, to a supreme being whom no one can see. Correctly applied, religion does help people construct psychological barriers. The way I see things, it's like in marriage -- if you talk to your spouse, then eventually a wall will develop between you, making the relationship colder and less meaningful. Just by abusing each other, you can feel much relieved. A belief in an abusive supreme being accomplishes the same thing, as He (always a he in most religions) supposedly always loves you. I'm a believer who finds no flaws in religion. But I always deny it's benefits, in some cases. After all, your body is much stronger than your mind.;-)
Some people turn to God and other non-productive behaviors, but non-believers go help other people with their issues. Reason provides the tools to handle life -- what's done with the tools depends on the person.
Thank you for opening my eyes -- it never occurred to me to hold belief in faith and belief in hypothesis testing (proof), as equivalent. It also never occurred to me, given that faith and proof are given equal weight, fortune telling and magic, are as likely as testable physical reality. I like unicorns, who are magical creatures, so they may exist. In my old age, I can hold the same beliefs I did as a child. Santa Claus, and "The Giving Tree" are real once again. Perhaps I can regress back to my infancy, when I had my nice warm blanket, and all things are possible. Innocence and a sense of wonder is restored.
I find it interesting you know the community is filled with raging atheists, who think the universe is a computer simulation. Did I miss the slashdot poll which tests your thesis? Is this not a gross simplification and generalization? I thought the slashdot community was filled with angry theists. Then again, perhaps you're the only one.
Your definition of free market is literally, "free to do whatever they want." You do not exclude, bribery, fraud, extortion, child labor and slavery, as corporate freedoms, which have been practiced in the recent past, as well as currently. It is interesting to note how you feel free to speculate about what I think or desire, instead of asking. When you have asked, instead of questioning my motives, I've responded, in some detail, in answer. As it happens, to put it simply, I do mean a FREE, well REGULATED market, but not necessasarily unionization. Here is my thinking, in some detail.
I agree with the following two quotes.
"From Smith to Ricardo and Mill, classical liberalism was a revolutionary doctrine that attacked the privileges of the great landlords and the mercantile interests. Today, we see vulgar libertarians perverting ‘free market’ rhetoric to defend the contemporary institution that most closely resembles, in terms of power and privilege, the landed oligarchies and mercantilists of the Old Regime: the giant corporation."
"While its supporters argue that only a free market can create healthy competition and therefore more business and reasonable prices, opponents say that a free market in its purest form may result in the opposite."
I agree most with the view of Adam Smith.
"Critics of laissez-faire capitolism since Adam Smith variously sees the unregulated market as an impractical ideal or as a rhetorical device that puts the concepts of freedom and anti-protectionism at the service of vested wealthy interests, allowing them to attack labor laws and other protections of the working classes."
Unionization is a response to the government allowing vested wealthy interests to attack the working classes. I prefer unions not be necessary.
You made any empty accusation, to which I humbly disagreed. Of course I see not only legitimate, but good purpose in the H-1B program, but what I strongly object to is corporate giants using it, and other methods to surpress wages. As I said in my first response, it's economics 101 that in a free market, where demand exceeds supply, the price will rise until demand is met. This isn't happening, because of the manipulation of the market, with the H-1B program and other methods. I would add, another indication of market manipulation, is productivity has risen as indicated by the following, "Software engineers today are about 200-400% more productive than software engineers were 10 years ago," while salaries remain flat. The share of the wealth created, by the work of the engineer, has decreased proportionately -- that is 200 to 400 perrcent. If there was competition in the marketplace, there would be high levels of movement of engineers, from company to company, but there is not. There is corporate abuse of the H-1B program, in at least three respects, artificially increasing supply, paying lower wages, and overworking the H-1B engineer. When companies stop manipulating the market, letting salaries rise, then revisit the question of increasing the H-1B quota. I've never advocated eliminating it, or even reducing it, just eliminating the manipulation of it by corporations, to keep salaries low.
Methinks you've been brainwashed by the corporate line, and have taken it up, at best, and are disingenuous at worst. As is said in Matthew 25:32-33 "They will train an old goat, appropriately called a "Judas," to lead sheep to the pens for slaughter. A well-trained Judas will lead group after group of sheep to the slaughter all day long."
Congradulations -- you've found a niche for yourself, where you can make a living or even shine. Your example is equivalent to a software engineer, being an expert in the C implementation of bubble sort, who persists in asking everyone who comes in the door, to demonstrate they know it as well. Why not give the community an example complex design you built, where you used your in-depth understanding of the theory of analog design, by describing it's corresponding differential model? Your equations will fit in this space. Bertrand Russell once said, "There is much pleasure to be gained from useless knowledge." Socrates is reported to have said, "The more you know, the more you realize you know nothing." These are only two minor observerations, from which we might learn.
You may ask -- software development is has always been my muse, and continues to be -- I've saved enough money to be financially independent, and live simply.
I have over 30 years working on the cutting edge of software development, at some the the leading companies in the field, in Silicon Valley. I have difficulty in restraining myself from challenging your credibility, so I'll focus on what you said. It is economics 101 that if there is a shortage of engineers, salaries should be increasing, until supply meets demand. There should be a lot of movement of engineers from company to company as the competion and salaries increase -- this isn't happening -- salaries remain flat.
As you've read here, and elsewhere companies like Google and Apple have agreed not to seek to hire engineers from each other, eliminating competion in engineers and salaries.
I know H1B software engineers working 60 to 70 hours a week, just so they can keep their jobs. Senior engineers, like myself and others I know, who have modern and even cutting edge skills, are sitting out, because we won't take the low salaries. I'm offered salaries in the neighborhood of the same salary I was making 20 years ago. I code and do research everyday, because it's what I love to do, not because I'm getting payed any longer.
What's needed in not more H1B's but for the industry to stop manipulating the market for engineers and set the market free to work. I've been at this long enough to realize it won't happen -- the industry leaders will continue to manipulate the market, hold down salaries, abuse H1B's, and demand an increasing supply -- because they can.
I and others I know, aren't employed, and aren't counted in the 2.2%, so the rate is higher. In my long career, I've never collected unemployment, so how would I ever be counted as unemployed, by the Labor Department?
So the Microsoft Studios Creative Director's views have no impact on what he does at work? He has nothing to do with Microsoft. Wow. Then why is he a director? These Microsoft Corp. Comm. people are more disconnected from reality than I expected.
By the way, the new Windows 360 Office for 2013 ( or whatever it is called ) is moving towards always on cloud connectivity. And directors at Microsoft are actually idiots who have no impact on product direction. Give me a break. First, fire the Creative Director for speaking the truth. Next fire the Microsoft Corp. Comm. for regurgitating canned responses that makes the company look dumb.
Of course, the previous observation is only stating the obvious, which needs repeating. Microsoft, has always been managed by arrogance, and continues. They'll do whatever they want, and customers will have nothing to say about it, unless they vote with their dollars, in droves. Lest you think I'm a Sony troll, I say much the same about them -- I have a bricked Playstation III, which will stay bricked.
I would prefer to solve the problem of publishing research in an open, free, non-commercial environment, but don't know of one. I wonder, if it wouldn't be workable to self-publish on Amazon.com, which has the bandwidth, storage, and infrastructure to support the publishing of the research and associated reviews.
USA has made a deal with the devil, and is betrayed one more time. Leave Pakistan to their own devices, and get out of the arena. Bin Laden is no longer an excuse for American occupation. The generals led in Viet Nam, and Afghanistan, with the same results. History has repeated itself - enough.
What a pile of crap this guy pushes. Some of us are fed up with jerks like this guy. I read over and over again job requirements as long as your arm, were the perspective employer wants to pay $25 per hour.
If there's so few americans who can write software, how did all of the technology that represented the Internet boom get written? It wasn't bad technology that caused the bust, it was bad business management/investment.
There was hundreds of thousands of software engineering jobs lost during the bust - were
are the engineers that held those jobs?
I guess they are among the 500 who can't get
an interview with this clown, like myself.
Just for the record, I've got 30 years experience as a software engineer, and I've written, professionally, a million lines of code. I've held Staff Software Engineer positions at Sun Microsystems and Microsoft. I've consulted at companies like IBM and Netscape.
I'd be happy to work for $90k.
At last - Slashdot is headed in the right direction. I've been reading and reading and waiting and waiting for more articles on Microsoft products.
I can't get enough on ZDNET and the rest of the true seekers of the TRUTH on other Microsoft supported sites.
The other systems like Linux don't support Excel so they are just wasting time with thier wannabe software.
Keep publishing great stories about Microsoft and thier great products - it's the stuff that matters.
Slashdot Mirror
It has value, so someone wants to profit from it.
One could as easily ask "why are Hollywood Movies behind a paywall", or "why is food behind a paywall at my grocery store".
Why isn't your comment behind a paywall? By your reasoning, if it had value, someone would want to profit from it.
I'm not a corporate douchebag, but I use my table to record meetings, then convert the recording to text, which is semantically analyzed. The content, in RDF is inserted into a graph database which is searchable using SPARQL. Data is presented in knowledge graphs, with voice and text annotations from the original meeting. Whiteboard drawings and text are also recorded, and similarly encoded. When creating documents, I mostly use voice input, which is converted to text, then fit into template defined document forms. Often, knowledge graphs are created as an intermediate representation, which are automatically converted into standard forms, through the tablet UI. This table-based technology helps me to be productive in the office. When producing programs I often define UML models, using the tablet drawing and voice interface. Most of the models are detailed enough to generate the code. When interacting with the code, I may elect to use a bluetooth keyboard. I often use a large format HD display, connected to the tablet, when I'm at my desk. Networks enable me to connect to a wide variety of computing resources, including the cloud, and supercomputers. Are the corporate douchebags, with whom you work, not using similar methods?
Even using today's technology, one can plug their tablet (nexus 10) into a large format display. I use a 52 inch display when I'm in workstation mode, and a bluetooth full sized keyboard. I can use the tablet's display surface as an input device for handwritten notes and drawings. The best voice interface I've experienced is with my tablet. When I take a crap or a bath, I read books I've downloaded. All of the input and output modalities of the tablet will continue to improve the content creation experience. This decade, tablets will have 64 or more cores. For most purposes, they will replace desktops, laptops, game consoles, dvd players, and hard copy books. Phones will be wearable, like watches or glasses.
Now you've made me sad. ;-(
I'm happy you appreciate my sense of humor -- people have an easy time taking offense. What's more you even got the point. You make a good case in your reply -- it would be even better if you offered a little evidence -- there's plenty of it around. As Christopher Hitchens has often remarked, "Religion is the original form of tyranny."
I was quite sincere in my reply -- I had to look back 60 years to have thoughts of the same resonance. For a moment, innocence and a sense of wonder were restored -- I felt the warmth of being wrapped in a blanket of security. I recalled Pinocchio singing "When you wish upon a star."
Perhaps it's simply that atheists are open to discussing all delusions, such as God, and computer simulations, on an equal footing. I entertain notions about God almost daily -- I'm fascinated by the breadth and depth of man's imagination.
Religions were invented to motivate fear, to shift the reasons for actions unknown, to a supreme being whom no one can see. Correctly applied, religion does help people construct psychological barriers. The way I see things, it's like in marriage -- if you talk to your spouse, then eventually a wall will develop between you, making the relationship colder and less meaningful. Just by abusing each other, you can feel much relieved. A belief in an abusive supreme being accomplishes the same thing, as He (always a he in most religions) supposedly always loves you. I'm a believer who finds no flaws in religion. But I always deny it's benefits, in some cases. After all, your body is much stronger than your mind. ;-)
I couldn't agree more -- excuse me while I pour another drink.
That's really interesting to know, I'd like to read the research which supports such a conclusion. What does cause mental illness -- Scientology.
Some people turn to God and other non-productive behaviors, but non-believers go help other people with their issues. Reason provides the tools to handle life -- what's done with the tools depends on the person.
Thank you for opening my eyes -- it never occurred to me to hold belief in faith and belief in hypothesis testing (proof), as equivalent. It also never occurred to me, given that faith and proof are given equal weight, fortune telling and magic, are as likely as testable physical reality. I like unicorns, who are magical creatures, so they may exist. In my old age, I can hold the same beliefs I did as a child. Santa Claus, and "The Giving Tree" are real once again. Perhaps I can regress back to my infancy, when I had my nice warm blanket, and all things are possible. Innocence and a sense of wonder is restored.
I find it interesting you know the community is filled with raging atheists, who think the universe is a computer simulation. Did I miss the slashdot poll which tests your thesis? Is this not a gross simplification and generalization? I thought the slashdot community was filled with angry theists. Then again, perhaps you're the only one.
Your definition of free market is literally, "free to do whatever they want." You do not exclude, bribery, fraud, extortion, child labor and slavery, as corporate freedoms, which have been practiced in the recent past, as well as currently. It is interesting to note how you feel free to speculate about what I think or desire, instead of asking. When you have asked, instead of questioning my motives, I've responded, in some detail, in answer. As it happens, to put it simply, I do mean a FREE, well REGULATED market, but not necessasarily unionization. Here is my thinking, in some detail. I agree with the following two quotes. "From Smith to Ricardo and Mill, classical liberalism was a revolutionary doctrine that attacked the privileges of the great landlords and the mercantile interests. Today, we see vulgar libertarians perverting ‘free market’ rhetoric to defend the contemporary institution that most closely resembles, in terms of power and privilege, the landed oligarchies and mercantilists of the Old Regime: the giant corporation." "While its supporters argue that only a free market can create healthy competition and therefore more business and reasonable prices, opponents say that a free market in its purest form may result in the opposite." I agree most with the view of Adam Smith. "Critics of laissez-faire capitolism since Adam Smith variously sees the unregulated market as an impractical ideal or as a rhetorical device that puts the concepts of freedom and anti-protectionism at the service of vested wealthy interests, allowing them to attack labor laws and other protections of the working classes." Unionization is a response to the government allowing vested wealthy interests to attack the working classes. I prefer unions not be necessary.
You made any empty accusation, to which I humbly disagreed. Of course I see not only legitimate, but good purpose in the H-1B program, but what I strongly object to is corporate giants using it, and other methods to surpress wages. As I said in my first response, it's economics 101 that in a free market, where demand exceeds supply, the price will rise until demand is met. This isn't happening, because of the manipulation of the market, with the H-1B program and other methods. I would add, another indication of market manipulation, is productivity has risen as indicated by the following, "Software engineers today are about 200-400% more productive than software engineers were 10 years ago," while salaries remain flat. The share of the wealth created, by the work of the engineer, has decreased proportionately -- that is 200 to 400 perrcent. If there was competition in the marketplace, there would be high levels of movement of engineers, from company to company, but there is not. There is corporate abuse of the H-1B program, in at least three respects, artificially increasing supply, paying lower wages, and overworking the H-1B engineer. When companies stop manipulating the market, letting salaries rise, then revisit the question of increasing the H-1B quota. I've never advocated eliminating it, or even reducing it, just eliminating the manipulation of it by corporations, to keep salaries low.
Methinks you've been brainwashed by the corporate line, and have taken it up, at best, and are disingenuous at worst. As is said in Matthew 25:32-33 "They will train an old goat, appropriately called a "Judas," to lead sheep to the pens for slaughter. A well-trained Judas will lead group after group of sheep to the slaughter all day long."
Taking your response at face value, then why not stop encouraging the abuse of the H1B system, as a first step -- you're not helping.
Congradulations -- you've found a niche for yourself, where you can make a living or even shine. Your example is equivalent to a software engineer, being an expert in the C implementation of bubble sort, who persists in asking everyone who comes in the door, to demonstrate they know it as well. Why not give the community an example complex design you built, where you used your in-depth understanding of the theory of analog design, by describing it's corresponding differential model? Your equations will fit in this space. Bertrand Russell once said, "There is much pleasure to be gained from useless knowledge." Socrates is reported to have said, "The more you know, the more you realize you know nothing." These are only two minor observerations, from which we might learn.
You may ask -- software development is has always been my muse, and continues to be -- I've saved enough money to be financially independent, and live simply.
I have over 30 years working on the cutting edge of software development, at some the the leading companies in the field, in Silicon Valley. I have difficulty in restraining myself from challenging your credibility, so I'll focus on what you said. It is economics 101 that if there is a shortage of engineers, salaries should be increasing, until supply meets demand. There should be a lot of movement of engineers from company to company as the competion and salaries increase -- this isn't happening -- salaries remain flat. As you've read here, and elsewhere companies like Google and Apple have agreed not to seek to hire engineers from each other, eliminating competion in engineers and salaries. I know H1B software engineers working 60 to 70 hours a week, just so they can keep their jobs. Senior engineers, like myself and others I know, who have modern and even cutting edge skills, are sitting out, because we won't take the low salaries. I'm offered salaries in the neighborhood of the same salary I was making 20 years ago. I code and do research everyday, because it's what I love to do, not because I'm getting payed any longer. What's needed in not more H1B's but for the industry to stop manipulating the market for engineers and set the market free to work. I've been at this long enough to realize it won't happen -- the industry leaders will continue to manipulate the market, hold down salaries, abuse H1B's, and demand an increasing supply -- because they can. I and others I know, aren't employed, and aren't counted in the 2.2%, so the rate is higher. In my long career, I've never collected unemployment, so how would I ever be counted as unemployed, by the Labor Department?
So the Microsoft Studios Creative Director's views have no impact on what he does at work? He has nothing to do with Microsoft. Wow. Then why is he a director? These Microsoft Corp. Comm. people are more disconnected from reality than I expected.
By the way, the new Windows 360 Office for 2013 ( or whatever it is called ) is moving towards always on cloud connectivity. And directors at Microsoft are actually idiots who have no impact on product direction. Give me a break. First, fire the Creative Director for speaking the truth. Next fire the Microsoft Corp. Comm. for regurgitating canned responses that makes the company look dumb.
Of course, the previous observation is only stating the obvious, which needs repeating. Microsoft, has always been managed by arrogance, and continues. They'll do whatever they want, and customers will have nothing to say about it, unless they vote with their dollars, in droves. Lest you think I'm a Sony troll, I say much the same about them -- I have a bricked Playstation III, which will stay bricked.
I would prefer to solve the problem of publishing research in an open, free, non-commercial environment, but don't know of one. I wonder, if it wouldn't be workable to self-publish on Amazon.com, which has the bandwidth, storage, and infrastructure to support the publishing of the research and associated reviews.
USA has made a deal with the devil, and is betrayed one more time. Leave Pakistan to their own devices, and get out of the arena. Bin Laden is no longer an excuse for American occupation. The generals led in Viet Nam, and Afghanistan, with the same results. History has repeated itself - enough.
What a pile of crap this guy pushes. Some of us are fed up with jerks like this guy. I read over and over again job requirements as long as your arm, were the perspective employer wants to pay $25 per hour. If there's so few americans who can write software, how did all of the technology that represented the Internet boom get written? It wasn't bad technology that caused the bust, it was bad business management/investment. There was hundreds of thousands of software engineering jobs lost during the bust - were are the engineers that held those jobs? I guess they are among the 500 who can't get an interview with this clown, like myself. Just for the record, I've got 30 years experience as a software engineer, and I've written, professionally, a million lines of code. I've held Staff Software Engineer positions at Sun Microsystems and Microsoft. I've consulted at companies like IBM and Netscape. I'd be happy to work for $90k.
At last - Slashdot is headed in the right direction. I've been reading and reading and waiting and waiting for more articles on Microsoft products. I can't get enough on ZDNET and the rest of the true seekers of the TRUTH on other Microsoft supported sites. The other systems like Linux don't support Excel so they are just wasting time with thier wannabe software. Keep publishing great stories about Microsoft and thier great products - it's the stuff that matters.