Explaining it's egyption or norse mythology probably would not have helped. Paganism, worshipping idols, even the acceptance of the concept of multiple gods is really not something even more mainstream non-church going concerned parents would want for their kids. They'd really rather see their kids taking up a sport. These parents are the ones asking "Is my kid normal for playing RPGs?", and they're asking because they know NOTHING about it but want to know what their kid is up to. It might scare them to know their child is participating in the worship of some strange egyptian god, even if they have no beliefs of their own. I'd want my child to be as thoroughly agnostic as I am, not a worshipper of Ra. Hell, I'd be happier if he chose a "normal" religion instead of some long dead one that has gone retro for no clear reason. That's my opinion but I think many parents would probably sympathize.
If the author had done a better job of dropping the reality from it, and explained how the various gods etc. made the game more interesting and added depth to this make believe world, then at least some resistant parents would accept it more. Belief in egyption gods is at least as insane as almost any other religion, but in the context of playing a game it can be fun. It's just yet another set of arbitrary rules that modify the game experience, only that by knowing the foundation for the rule it allows players to be more subtle and more creative. The author should give examples.
In chess you are given the rules for how each piece moves (and a few "special" moves that somehow worked in there). Your objective is simple, kill the opponents King. You can do this by, one turn at a time, moving your pieces around the board to trap the opposing players king (while he does exactly the same to you). Surely this is a very complex game, with no guaranteed strategies. But it's a bit arbitrary, and can get dull after a while, and ultimately there are only so many things you can do.
In RPGs you're given situations and objectives that may be more subtle. Maybe it's to kill the guy who killed your teacher, maybe it's to steal a thingamabob, maybe your objective is to craft a perfect piece of armor, etc. Each plan of action must be evaluated against your setting, situation, antagonists and friends. There is right and wrong, and a whole bunch in between. That's more fun. You don't have to REALLY believe in Poseidon to summon rain, but you can appreciate how useful it might be to summon a particularly nasty rain storm against people who use fireballs, or conversely use a certain characters desire to remain strong in that house of magic to also be his undoing. The more you put yourself in your characters place, the better able you are to think outside the box and solve problems creatively. You don't necessarily have predefined "moves", at least not in the better games with better GMs. I obviously have never played D&D but I'm trying to illustrate my point based on other games I did play.
I think that maybe D&D sometimes hit a bit too close to home created a lot of these misconceptions. If it were more obviously made up from nowhere, it might cause less trouble. If the author focused on how the games are played and what their kids are REALLY thinking (in terms of problem solving, meeting objectives, critical thinking), rather than how evil the books look, it would probably go further to helping parents understand healthy gaming, versus unhealthy gaming which I think is what parents NEED. Games, like guns, aren't evil, but the people playing with them might be.
Too bad that's not going to happen. Why would women want to jump in a field whose skillset is on the export list?
Obviously if the conclusion is people aren't doing CS because there's no money in it (which I do think is a valid conclusion, judging by the falling engineering enrollment from my own former school as well), there's a bigger problem than gender disparity.
Want more women in tech? Quit teaching them as zygotes that math is nerdy and for boys. If you look around it's really all over, in kids shows, in those pre-teen girly detective shows etc. Always the strong female character who is "not good at math, but very good with people". I notice it a lot at least, I'm sure there's more to it.
Unlike liberal arts subjects, math and science build on each other from the very beginning. Start with a weak foundation and you won't build a very tall building.
Re:The days of myst are over
on
Myst IV Postmortem
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I'd love to play one...if it was fun. I never cared much for Myst but the old Kings/Space/Porn Quest games were great fun, until they either disappeared or turned into Police Quest N - Advanced Bureacratic Tactics.
Graphics should help make games more compelling, but just because you can render a billion triangles in a microsecond, doesn't mean you HAVE to.
It's not even "how much is your time worth", it's that there is usually no significant price differences, except when quality or features are lobbed off.
Where I live there are 2 choices, countem, 2. Cable (Time Warner) or DSL (SBC). No 3rd party DSL provider can get there. They have this fake "competition" nonsense which is as transparent as plastic wrap. SBC and Time Warner "compete" for the "lowest cost" combined TV/Broadband/Phone package, but then if you look closely you'll realize a few things: 1) You don't want the package they offer on TV, it's the lowest quality, lowest feature offering that 2) To get anything above the bare bones you have to spend 2 hours on the phone with each vendor to get an estimate for what may or may not be what you asked for 3) The price tag jumps exponentially with each new feature, no matter how simple it is (ex. static IP), and the vendors are ultimately within $5/month of each other 4) There is a significant price disadvantage to picking and choosing between providers for the three services. For example Dish Network + Time Warner broadband is a poor choice. SBC Broadband + Cell Phones + Time Warner cable = real ugly. I recently moved and went through this excersize, just to figure out what the better deal is. There IS NO advantage, the deeper you dig, the more you realize it's a sham.
This is not competition, it's a joke. Yet, as the article points out, SBC and TW spend a lot of time advertising on TV about this new "competition" and how prices have improved. They have even bought TV news times to talk about how great this new competition is (for them). It's complete bullshit.
So yeah, I advocate the Marxist part of communism where the people overthrow the monopolies and take over the means of production, and figure out a better way to offer these services, as capitalism is failing us.
Consider a historical invention that was truly worth patenting, like the transistor. By demonstrating and explaining the benefits of technology to any number of huge companies, most of them with R&D interests and good technical people would see how valuable the invention is. They'd also know that they may not be smart enough to invent it on their own and would pay.
Consider on the other hand someone giving a power point presentation on the concept of one click shopping. I know that I could hire any given ambitious junior high school student a minimum wage job to build that for me if I describe it to him. To sue me for doing so because I didn't pay said presentor simply because he had a "patent" on this idea is pretty lame. If this is the case, I'm afraid I'm with Microsoft on this issue. MS is evil, I agree and they will burn in hell. But they do not have the market cornered on evil.
It would be amusing if each MS hater went about patenting every single thing that crossed our mind and sued MS for infringement. We could "prosecute" on the cheap, and MS would be forced to fight us all off. Death by a hundred million mosquitos. Hey, the patent system might even get a much needed reform out of it.
I hereby patent this process, but I grant each person license to use it against MS, free of charge.
Or there was nothing there. I can't count how many start ups I've worked with that have shown me slideware of "patent pending" technology that was not implemented, not thought through or otherwise junk. Obviously if I'm looking to buy enough to sit through a meeting or sign an NDA, I understand what's needed and want someone to deliver. After said company then asks for an outrageous sum for their technology (usually a sum that equals or exceeds the cost for us to develop on our own) we'll tell them to shove it and develop it ourselves.
I've never had (or wanted) to work for Microsoft, so no one has ever haunted me, but I can probably see where microsoft may just be victim of the patent system they themselves are abusing.
That's even better than the david vs. goliath theme.
In other words you're just angry and have no point?
You think Mr Trenery was the only person who evaluated the Metrocard system? He wasn't. I know the present boss (last name Reuter), I knew the previous boss (Keiper). Neither one of them has/had ultimate authority. Their bosses are a committee, none of which singly have ultimate authority.
I admit this person, whoever he was, excersized poor judgement, however I have seen no evidence whatever that Cubic is either unqualified or corrupt. If you can produce it, I'm willing to read. Afaik, and I'm married to the daughter of a former token booth clerk, there weren't any layoffs. It turns out enough token booth clerks wish to not do that job anymore that simply not hiring new ones works just fine. Imagine, it's a dangerous, unrewarding job. Reducing the # of public employees through attrition is good for the tax payer and good for the employees.
As far as the article, there are many good facts in there that are true, but that does not make the article true or even factual. There are some inferences the article wishes to be drawn that are incorrect or one sided. As an example, smart cards are not intended to replace metrocards and never were. They're intended for regular riders, such as yourself who will ultimately benefit financially by not having to use disposable cards (and hey, they won't require reswipes by clogged readers!). This isn't without precedent, I believe a similar system exists in Washington DC. Traditional metrocards work best for people like myself, who now use the system somewhat irregularly. Paper cards are for tourists.
I don't know that cubic has a good name, even within the MTA but I think they have held their end of the bargain. The system is pretty robust, secure and has the right accounting. Corrupt politicians and all, it works. Can it be improved? Sure, the card readers definitely could use some improvement, but you'll just have to trust me the problem is purely mechanical and the solution is slow in coming due to budget issues.
Washington DC uses a similar system to the Path. IIRC the rationale behind the NYC system is that they wanted people to reuse the cards as much as possible to help save money.
That's part of the motivation for why you can't (or maybe they changed it) buy a card with a certain # of exact fares. The idea being you'd never toss a card with money on it, so you'd take it in to get refilled. If the clerk decided it was too screwed up, they could then issue you a new card when you want to refill.
As the troll indicated, those plastic cards are not ideal. However he overlooks that for a system with the usage statistics that the NYC system has, the proprietary plastic cards are actually cheaper and more eco friendly. For the non-repeat user, there are the day pass cards and I believe paper cards with magnetic strips.
If you have a card that has money on it but the card is expired or defunct, you can be refunded, it's not hard, I've done it. Go to the MTA website and read a FAQ or if you can't read call customer support. If you still have problems, I will even go out of my way and find resolution for you, even though I now live far away from NY I bet the solution is far easier than you make it seem.
Jumping a turnstyle is the same as stealing. If you don't like your state legislature, as a NYC citizen you may vote them out. Last I checked NYC was part of the larger NY State. If you wish to succeed from the union, I think NY state would love to see you gone. At least my one year in Poughkeepsie led me to believe that. Fortunately I think your fellow citizens would think that's an idiotic idea.
Everything else you said is bullshit of such a high level, I suspect YOU write for the Daily News.
You clearly were either not alive, or not conscious back when NYC ran the transit system, it was put under state control precisely because NYC mayors, at that time, lacked the ability to manage it and the state was tired of throwing money at NYC and watching it get misused. In short the transit system was filthy, falling apart and infinitely less reliable. Addicts lived in the subway system and forget mere muggings, you used to run a risk of getting stabbed or shot. I commuted past midnight every night for 5 years and have yet to have even been hit up for spare change in recent years. I didn't live in Manhattan either.
I don't know where you live, but the subway system in NY is far superior today than it was 15 years ago.
Your entire argument makes you sound like the relative of some failed politician who still has an old grudge. Whose coffers are being filled? What is the relation between Albany "fat cats" and this "failed defense contractor". In fact who is that contractor, do you even know? Who are said pimps? Whose jobs were taken away? I've heard of firemen and teachers losing jobs in NYC, but not many layoffs from the MTA? Who would ultimately fund the NYC Transit if not the working men and women of NYC and would that be different if NYC was running the system? Do you really think NYC politicians are less corrupt and more capable than Albany? I believe perhaps Giuliani was the better leader, but I'm not sure about Bloomberg (and Dinkins was a total nitwit).
If you're just going to troll, troll better.
I wouldn't worry about the conductors, most likely they simply will not hire as many new ones.
As for the monopoly, afaicr, that's temporary. Now that the system is chosen more suppliers will build components to fit the system. Siemens simply has a leg up on them.
People have tried to hack the metrocard system for years. The closest they came was a decidedly non-l33t solution involving demagnetising part of the strip relating to card expiration date. It gave access for a week, only because they MTA had the system set for "be generous". Some NYers, led by the local tabloid "The Daily News" tend to be moderate to extremely luddite when it comes to technology, and the metrocard was not welcomed with open arms. When it was first released the MTA went to great lengths to ensure that no one felt the metro card system was "ripping them off". So rather than properly rejecting expired cards (that may have had money on them, you see), they let them through. Some smartass realised that by erasing the part of the strip that contained the expiration date, the reader would automatically decide the card was expired. Since the system was set to ignore that on initial release, they got through. Once the exploit got out, they stopped it, iirc within 3 days of the first occurance (the system tracks this too, you see).
Things have changed since then, and in light of a recent subway fire that caused great inconvenience, NYers have gone the other way, wishing that the entire system was computerized. Yea, even the Daily News quite vociferously raised the cry for greater computerization in the MTA switching network.
The MTA is underfunded but not stupid or poorly run. The system is well designed and the underlying databases are also redundant and protected. The hardest part of the job for them is getting funding approved for their various efforts, they usually do a good job of executing once they get it. They've worked quite hard on this new system, it'll be a step forward in spite of the pundits.
You might as well ask why people still use money instead of debit cards pulling directly from their banks.
Debit card withdrawals are traceable for one, that can be evil. They require some sort of communications device which is not always practical on a vending machine for two. The third is do you really want to trust every little mom and pop shop with your bank account info and PIN code? Sure you enter it into a keypad, but it's not a hard job to figure out what buttons were pushed...
Credit cards are better if you have the discipline to pay them off monthy. Cash is still king though, I don't want anyone knowing what, when or where I buy stuff. It can only hurt or at best irritate me.
The problem with your argument is that companies do not move their businesses over there at all, they just hire employees at arms length and pay them at cut rate, but still keep their businesses in the US. The OWNERS and EXECUTIVES don't want to go to India, it sucks there, and can be dangerous. It's far away from their family, friends, banks, wall street, etc. To them India is a cheap people farm. They're not investing in India, they're not trying to build it up as an industrial or business superpower, they're just using it and if it gets expensive they'll find another impovrished country to bully.
Meanwhile jobs are taken away from American workers in their own country. The same country whose taxes fund a legal system, military and police force which allows them to retain their money (be it real estate, investments or liquid cash). The same country were the average guy will have to go fight in a war to protect their business interests at pretty much their own whim. In some of the countries they are using for cheap labor, each executive, owner or investment company has enough in LIQUID cash to feed a city for years, don't tell me that their governments would try hard to find someone who in fact stole their money should it have been placed overseas. This person only got caught because he stole so little and stole from an American bank. If it was the First Bank of Nowhere India, who knows what would have happened.
No I don't give a rats ass about the average Indian, but unless India wants to pledge itself as a commonwealth of the US I don't have to. They're on their own. In my opinion US companies should not be allowed to use their labor. Those companies need to stand on their own, and sell their services (properly tariffed) to US companies. The government could then control the cost of living in the US with respect to other places and reduce it slowly, which I think is probably necessary. Watching so much of this contries technical experience get outsourced only makes me wonder if we'll be able to do anything locally in the US in 20 years except make bad music and TV and change bedpans.
I used to not know anyone who did not have a VCR, but now most people only have 1 for "legacy" uses. More and more people are getting rid of their VCRs as they convert.
Five to seven years ago, when DVDs first came out, people didn't understand why they were needed. Then slowly as people saw the quality and other benefits things changed.
It's not hard for me to believe that something will replace a DVD but broadband seems funny.
1) Piracy makes content owners distrust it 2) Broadband transfer speed is not high enough to stream "real-time" at DVD quality for say, a neighborhood of people. 3) Routing issues such as packet delays, lost packets, etc. require either a substantial amount of buffering or a lot of network engineering to happen, this is something neither cable companies nor telephone companies are incentivized to do.
I still, maybe uniquely, believe in TiVO or workalikes. The idea that you can "program" your cable box to download OR record stuff you want, so you can watch it when you're ready is pretty nice. Plus you could (in my fantasy) record saved stuff to whatever medium for later use. If HDTV++++ comes out, but a new box that can play your old stuff, plus the new uber content. No more VHS, Beta, DVD, LaserDisc etc. causing us to have to either buy new stuff or keep 2 machines around. I hate keeping my VHS movies but I refuse to buy them again on DVD...
Ah the much praised "get it done at any cost" attitude. Just what America needs more of. I'm not impressed.
I'm more impressed with people who worked hard, and have genuine creditials daddy didn't buy for them. People who played the game, followed the rules and still landed on top. I'll never know who they are, and usually they don't look as good on paper because the riff-raff knows how to work the system to their advantage. But this is great, given all the rope they needed, 119 people hung themselves opening the door for other, more honest people.
As for how you should know it's hacking? Well clearly it wasn't highlighted "Click here to see your acceptance letter early!". People had to follow some instructions some guy came up with to beat the system. That should have tipped them off. If I locked my house and hid a key somewhere, and my neighbor told you where to find the key, do you think it'd be right for you to come in my house just because I invited you over for dinner next month?
Anyhow life will go on for these people, Harvard isn't the only game in town. They may start with a slightly lower salary/bonus structure but they'll land on their feet ok and maybe think twice about the "at any cost" portion of their code.
Apple was Microsoft before Microsoft was Microsoft. There was a time, back when, when Apple had the upper hand, and their own combination of imperious decision making and greed opened the door for Microsoft who at the time was more able to give people 'what the want'. Now the tables have turned.
Apple is worse really, they would have a monopoly over both hardware AND software. I never understand people who favor Apple over Microsoft. Both companies are evil, our best hope is to manipulate one to keep the other in control. Our interests do not lie in seeing either one succeed at anything. The only solution to either one is linux or a workalike, on the desktop, somehow in a way the average Joe could use. With open hardware and an open operating system, there is more hope at removing the monopolies.
I suspect that he would. Unanswerable question have no place being taught in school.
I agree with you in spirit, the "answers" to unanswerable questions have no place being taught in school. But fundamentally the purpose of education is to teach you those skills required to logically approach and rationalize unanswered questions, and determine what is unanswerable. More often than not, the most important questions people face in life are unanswerable, either because the facts are not available in time, or because no valid facts can be supplied. Schools should not be shy of examining such questions, and showing systems by which they can be rationalized. They should always fall short of answering them, that is the excersize for the pupil.
Really, in the grand scheme of things, the only questions worth talking about are unanswerable in nature. We should all be prepared to find and support our answers to them, or to evaluate the answers others provide. TJ himself did it a number of times, the Declaration of Independence being the most well known. He held 'certain truths to be self evident' that he surely knew were neither true nor self evident to everyone reading his note. He had a system of reasoning based on the beliefs of his peers that came to the conclusion that the colonies deserved independence. Was it right? That's not a subject for a school to teach, but a student should be well prepared to weigh his arguments and put them in context with known facts from the time.
Parents, governments, MTV and peer pressure will all provide answers to unanswerable questions. Schools should just set the ground rules and ensure that every student has the tools to make decisions on what he believes.
...he signs his email "l33t h4x0r"...she makes more weekly on "w4r3z" than you make at a real job....his friend call him "Juarez"....he wants to name your new born child "Fsck r0x0rs"
Tip your waitresses, I'll be here all day. Tip me and I leave pronto.
I question why the ruling of French courts matter period. They have a different (and in my opinion stupid) way of doing business. It obviously does not affect the way google will operate anywhere but France.
Germany has laws restricting companies from advertising in certain ways, those companies do not follow those rules here in the US. It's one of the many landmines that companies deal with when doing business overseas.
I don't see how anyone could see this as anything new, or something that should fall in the "YRO" section...this is just France excersizing their old law concepts on new territory.
I agree, love him or hate him, do not underestimate him. He is an excellent leader, including his ability to know when to let someone else lead (i.e. Ballmer). Similarly Blair did not get to be PM by confusion and uncertainty, he too knows how to lead and develop a following.
The only thing we've proved is that graphology is complete crap.
Slashdot Mirror
Explaining it's egyption or norse mythology probably would not have helped. Paganism, worshipping idols, even the acceptance of the concept of multiple gods is really not something even more mainstream non-church going concerned parents would want for their kids. They'd really rather see their kids taking up a sport. These parents are the ones asking "Is my kid normal for playing RPGs?", and they're asking because they know NOTHING about it but want to know what their kid is up to. It might scare them to know their child is participating in the worship of some strange egyptian god, even if they have no beliefs of their own. I'd want my child to be as thoroughly agnostic as I am, not a worshipper of Ra. Hell, I'd be happier if he chose a "normal" religion instead of some long dead one that has gone retro for no clear reason. That's my opinion but I think many parents would probably sympathize.
If the author had done a better job of dropping the reality from it, and explained how the various gods etc. made the game more interesting and added depth to this make believe world, then at least some resistant parents would accept it more. Belief in egyption gods is at least as insane as almost any other religion, but in the context of playing a game it can be fun. It's just yet another set of arbitrary rules that modify the game experience, only that by knowing the foundation for the rule it allows players to be more subtle and more creative. The author should give examples.
In chess you are given the rules for how each piece moves (and a few "special" moves that somehow worked in there). Your objective is simple, kill the opponents King. You can do this by, one turn at a time, moving your pieces around the board to trap the opposing players king (while he does exactly the same to you). Surely this is a very complex game, with no guaranteed strategies. But it's a bit arbitrary, and can get dull after a while, and ultimately there are only so many things you can do.
In RPGs you're given situations and objectives that may be more subtle. Maybe it's to kill the guy who killed your teacher, maybe it's to steal a thingamabob, maybe your objective is to craft a perfect piece of armor, etc. Each plan of action must be evaluated against your setting, situation, antagonists and friends. There is right and wrong, and a whole bunch in between. That's more fun. You don't have to REALLY believe in Poseidon to summon rain, but you can appreciate how useful it might be to summon a particularly nasty rain storm against people who use fireballs, or conversely use a certain characters desire to remain strong in that house of magic to also be his undoing. The more you put yourself in your characters place, the better able you are to think outside the box and solve problems creatively. You don't necessarily have predefined "moves", at least not in the better games with better GMs. I obviously have never played D&D but I'm trying to illustrate my point based on other games I did play.
I think that maybe D&D sometimes hit a bit too close to home created a lot of these misconceptions. If it were more obviously made up from nowhere, it might cause less trouble. If the author focused on how the games are played and what their kids are REALLY thinking (in terms of problem solving, meeting objectives, critical thinking), rather than how evil the books look, it would probably go further to helping parents understand healthy gaming, versus unhealthy gaming which I think is what parents NEED. Games, like guns, aren't evil, but the people playing with them might be.
Too bad that's not going to happen. Why would women want to jump in a field whose skillset is on the export list?
Obviously if the conclusion is people aren't doing CS because there's no money in it (which I do think is a valid conclusion, judging by the falling engineering enrollment from my own former school as well), there's a bigger problem than gender disparity.
Want more women in tech? Quit teaching them as zygotes that math is nerdy and for boys. If you look around it's really all over, in kids shows, in those pre-teen girly detective shows etc. Always the strong female character who is "not good at math, but very good with people". I notice it a lot at least, I'm sure there's more to it.
Unlike liberal arts subjects, math and science build on each other from the very beginning. Start with a weak foundation and you won't build a very tall building.
I'd love to play one...if it was fun. I never cared much for Myst but the old Kings/Space/Porn Quest games were great fun, until they either disappeared or turned into Police Quest N - Advanced Bureacratic Tactics.
Graphics should help make games more compelling, but just because you can render a billion triangles in a microsecond, doesn't mean you HAVE to.
It's not even "how much is your time worth", it's that there is usually no significant price differences, except when quality or features are lobbed off.
Where I live there are 2 choices, countem, 2. Cable (Time Warner) or DSL (SBC). No 3rd party DSL provider can get there. They have this fake "competition" nonsense which is as transparent as plastic wrap. SBC and Time Warner "compete" for the "lowest cost" combined TV/Broadband/Phone package, but then if you look closely you'll realize a few things: 1) You don't want the package they offer on TV, it's the lowest quality, lowest feature offering that 2) To get anything above the bare bones you have to spend 2 hours on the phone with each vendor to get an estimate for what may or may not be what you asked for 3) The price tag jumps exponentially with each new feature, no matter how simple it is (ex. static IP), and the vendors are ultimately within $5/month of each other 4) There is a significant price disadvantage to picking and choosing between providers for the three services. For example Dish Network + Time Warner broadband is a poor choice. SBC Broadband + Cell Phones + Time Warner cable = real ugly. I recently moved and went through this excersize, just to figure out what the better deal is. There IS NO advantage, the deeper you dig, the more you realize it's a sham.
This is not competition, it's a joke. Yet, as the article points out, SBC and TW spend a lot of time advertising on TV about this new "competition" and how prices have improved. They have even bought TV news times to talk about how great this new competition is (for them). It's complete bullshit.
So yeah, I advocate the Marxist part of communism where the people overthrow the monopolies and take over the means of production, and figure out a better way to offer these services, as capitalism is failing us.
I agree mostly.
Consider a historical invention that was truly worth patenting, like the transistor. By demonstrating and explaining the benefits of technology to any number of huge companies, most of them with R&D interests and good technical people would see how valuable the invention is. They'd also know that they may not be smart enough to invent it on their own and would pay.
Consider on the other hand someone giving a power point presentation on the concept of one click shopping. I know that I could hire any given ambitious junior high school student a minimum wage job to build that for me if I describe it to him. To sue me for doing so because I didn't pay said presentor simply because he had a "patent" on this idea is pretty lame. If this is the case, I'm afraid I'm with Microsoft on this issue. MS is evil, I agree and they will burn in hell. But they do not have the market cornered on evil.
It would be amusing if each MS hater went about patenting every single thing that crossed our mind and sued MS for infringement. We could "prosecute" on the cheap, and MS would be forced to fight us all off. Death by a hundred million mosquitos. Hey, the patent system might even get a much needed reform out of it.
I hereby patent this process, but I grant each person license to use it against MS, free of charge.
Or there was nothing there. I can't count how many start ups I've worked with that have shown me slideware of "patent pending" technology that was not implemented, not thought through or otherwise junk. Obviously if I'm looking to buy enough to sit through a meeting or sign an NDA, I understand what's needed and want someone to deliver. After said company then asks for an outrageous sum for their technology (usually a sum that equals or exceeds the cost for us to develop on our own) we'll tell them to shove it and develop it ourselves.
I've never had (or wanted) to work for Microsoft, so no one has ever haunted me, but I can probably see where microsoft may just be victim of the patent system they themselves are abusing.
That's even better than the david vs. goliath theme.
In other words you're just angry and have no point?
You think Mr Trenery was the only person who evaluated the Metrocard system? He wasn't. I know the present boss (last name Reuter), I knew the previous boss (Keiper). Neither one of them has/had ultimate authority. Their bosses are a committee, none of which singly have ultimate authority.
I admit this person, whoever he was, excersized poor judgement, however I have seen no evidence whatever that Cubic is either unqualified or corrupt. If you can produce it, I'm willing to read. Afaik, and I'm married to the daughter of a former token booth clerk, there weren't any layoffs. It turns out enough token booth clerks wish to not do that job anymore that simply not hiring new ones works just fine. Imagine, it's a dangerous, unrewarding job. Reducing the # of public employees through attrition is good for the tax payer and good for the employees.
As far as the article, there are many good facts in there that are true, but that does not make the article true or even factual. There are some inferences the article wishes to be drawn that are incorrect or one sided. As an example, smart cards are not intended to replace metrocards and never were. They're intended for regular riders, such as yourself who will ultimately benefit financially by not having to use disposable cards (and hey, they won't require reswipes by clogged readers!). This isn't without precedent, I believe a similar system exists in Washington DC. Traditional metrocards work best for people like myself, who now use the system somewhat irregularly. Paper cards are for tourists.
I don't know that cubic has a good name, even within the MTA but I think they have held their end of the bargain. The system is pretty robust, secure and has the right accounting. Corrupt politicians and all, it works. Can it be improved? Sure, the card readers definitely could use some improvement, but you'll just have to trust me the problem is purely mechanical and the solution is slow in coming due to budget issues.
Washington DC uses a similar system to the Path. IIRC the rationale behind the NYC system is that they wanted people to reuse the cards as much as possible to help save money. That's part of the motivation for why you can't (or maybe they changed it) buy a card with a certain # of exact fares. The idea being you'd never toss a card with money on it, so you'd take it in to get refilled. If the clerk decided it was too screwed up, they could then issue you a new card when you want to refill. As the troll indicated, those plastic cards are not ideal. However he overlooks that for a system with the usage statistics that the NYC system has, the proprietary plastic cards are actually cheaper and more eco friendly. For the non-repeat user, there are the day pass cards and I believe paper cards with magnetic strips.
If you have a card that has money on it but the card is expired or defunct, you can be refunded, it's not hard, I've done it. Go to the MTA website and read a FAQ or if you can't read call customer support. If you still have problems, I will even go out of my way and find resolution for you, even though I now live far away from NY I bet the solution is far easier than you make it seem.
Jumping a turnstyle is the same as stealing. If you don't like your state legislature, as a NYC citizen you may vote them out. Last I checked NYC was part of the larger NY State. If you wish to succeed from the union, I think NY state would love to see you gone. At least my one year in Poughkeepsie led me to believe that. Fortunately I think your fellow citizens would think that's an idiotic idea.
Everything else you said is bullshit of such a high level, I suspect YOU write for the Daily News.
You clearly were either not alive, or not conscious back when NYC ran the transit system, it was put under state control precisely because NYC mayors, at that time, lacked the ability to manage it and the state was tired of throwing money at NYC and watching it get misused. In short the transit system was filthy, falling apart and infinitely less reliable. Addicts lived in the subway system and forget mere muggings, you used to run a risk of getting stabbed or shot. I commuted past midnight every night for 5 years and have yet to have even been hit up for spare change in recent years. I didn't live in Manhattan either. I don't know where you live, but the subway system in NY is far superior today than it was 15 years ago. Your entire argument makes you sound like the relative of some failed politician who still has an old grudge. Whose coffers are being filled? What is the relation between Albany "fat cats" and this "failed defense contractor". In fact who is that contractor, do you even know? Who are said pimps? Whose jobs were taken away? I've heard of firemen and teachers losing jobs in NYC, but not many layoffs from the MTA? Who would ultimately fund the NYC Transit if not the working men and women of NYC and would that be different if NYC was running the system? Do you really think NYC politicians are less corrupt and more capable than Albany? I believe perhaps Giuliani was the better leader, but I'm not sure about Bloomberg (and Dinkins was a total nitwit). If you're just going to troll, troll better.
I wouldn't worry about the conductors, most likely they simply will not hire as many new ones.
As for the monopoly, afaicr, that's temporary. Now that the system is chosen more suppliers will build components to fit the system. Siemens simply has a leg up on them.
People have tried to hack the metrocard system for years. The closest they came was a decidedly non-l33t solution involving demagnetising part of the strip relating to card expiration date. It gave access for a week, only because they MTA had the system set for "be generous". Some NYers, led by the local tabloid "The Daily News" tend to be moderate to extremely luddite when it comes to technology, and the metrocard was not welcomed with open arms. When it was first released the MTA went to great lengths to ensure that no one felt the metro card system was "ripping them off". So rather than properly rejecting expired cards (that may have had money on them, you see), they let them through. Some smartass realised that by erasing the part of the strip that contained the expiration date, the reader would automatically decide the card was expired. Since the system was set to ignore that on initial release, they got through. Once the exploit got out, they stopped it, iirc within 3 days of the first occurance (the system tracks this too, you see).
Things have changed since then, and in light of a recent subway fire that caused great inconvenience, NYers have gone the other way, wishing that the entire system was computerized. Yea, even the Daily News quite vociferously raised the cry for greater computerization in the MTA switching network.
The MTA is underfunded but not stupid or poorly run. The system is well designed and the underlying databases are also redundant and protected. The hardest part of the job for them is getting funding approved for their various efforts, they usually do a good job of executing once they get it. They've worked quite hard on this new system, it'll be a step forward in spite of the pundits.
You might as well ask why people still use money instead of debit cards pulling directly from their banks.
Debit card withdrawals are traceable for one, that can be evil. They require some sort of communications device which is not always practical on a vending machine for two. The third is do you really want to trust every little mom and pop shop with your bank account info and PIN code? Sure you enter it into a keypad, but it's not a hard job to figure out what buttons were pushed...
Credit cards are better if you have the discipline to pay them off monthy. Cash is still king though, I don't want anyone knowing what, when or where I buy stuff. It can only hurt or at best irritate me.
The problem with your argument is that companies do not move their businesses over there at all, they just hire employees at arms length and pay them at cut rate, but still keep their businesses in the US. The OWNERS and EXECUTIVES don't want to go to India, it sucks there, and can be dangerous. It's far away from their family, friends, banks, wall street, etc. To them India is a cheap people farm. They're not investing in India, they're not trying to build it up as an industrial or business superpower, they're just using it and if it gets expensive they'll find another impovrished country to bully. Meanwhile jobs are taken away from American workers in their own country. The same country whose taxes fund a legal system, military and police force which allows them to retain their money (be it real estate, investments or liquid cash). The same country were the average guy will have to go fight in a war to protect their business interests at pretty much their own whim. In some of the countries they are using for cheap labor, each executive, owner or investment company has enough in LIQUID cash to feed a city for years, don't tell me that their governments would try hard to find someone who in fact stole their money should it have been placed overseas. This person only got caught because he stole so little and stole from an American bank. If it was the First Bank of Nowhere India, who knows what would have happened. No I don't give a rats ass about the average Indian, but unless India wants to pledge itself as a commonwealth of the US I don't have to. They're on their own. In my opinion US companies should not be allowed to use their labor. Those companies need to stand on their own, and sell their services (properly tariffed) to US companies. The government could then control the cost of living in the US with respect to other places and reduce it slowly, which I think is probably necessary. Watching so much of this contries technical experience get outsourced only makes me wonder if we'll be able to do anything locally in the US in 20 years except make bad music and TV and change bedpans.
I used to not know anyone who did not have a VCR, but now most people only have 1 for "legacy" uses. More and more people are getting rid of their VCRs as they convert.
Five to seven years ago, when DVDs first came out, people didn't understand why they were needed. Then slowly as people saw the quality and other benefits things changed.
It's not hard for me to believe that something will replace a DVD but broadband seems funny.
1) Piracy makes content owners distrust it
2) Broadband transfer speed is not high enough to stream "real-time" at DVD quality for say, a neighborhood of people.
3) Routing issues such as packet delays, lost packets, etc. require either a substantial amount of buffering or a lot of network engineering to happen, this is something neither cable companies nor telephone companies are incentivized to do.
I still, maybe uniquely, believe in TiVO or workalikes. The idea that you can "program" your cable box to download OR record stuff you want, so you can watch it when you're ready is pretty nice. Plus you could (in my fantasy) record saved stuff to whatever medium for later use. If HDTV++++ comes out, but a new box that can play your old stuff, plus the new uber content. No more VHS, Beta, DVD, LaserDisc etc. causing us to have to either buy new stuff or keep 2 machines around. I hate keeping my VHS movies but I refuse to buy them again on DVD...
Ah the much praised "get it done at any cost" attitude. Just what America needs more of. I'm not impressed.
I'm more impressed with people who worked hard, and have genuine creditials daddy didn't buy for them. People who played the game, followed the rules and still landed on top. I'll never know who they are, and usually they don't look as good on paper because the riff-raff knows how to work the system to their advantage. But this is great, given all the rope they needed, 119 people hung themselves opening the door for other, more honest people.
As for how you should know it's hacking? Well clearly it wasn't highlighted "Click here to see your acceptance letter early!". People had to follow some instructions some guy came up with to beat the system. That should have tipped them off. If I locked my house and hid a key somewhere, and my neighbor told you where to find the key, do you think it'd be right for you to come in my house just because I invited you over for dinner next month?
Anyhow life will go on for these people, Harvard isn't the only game in town. They may start with a slightly lower salary/bonus structure but they'll land on their feet ok and maybe think twice about the "at any cost" portion of their code.
Apple was Microsoft before Microsoft was Microsoft. There was a time, back when, when Apple had the upper hand, and their own combination of imperious decision making and greed opened the door for Microsoft who at the time was more able to give people 'what the want'. Now the tables have turned.
Apple is worse really, they would have a monopoly over both hardware AND software. I never understand people who favor Apple over Microsoft. Both companies are evil, our best hope is to manipulate one to keep the other in control. Our interests do not lie in seeing either one succeed at anything. The only solution to either one is linux or a workalike, on the desktop, somehow in a way the average Joe could use. With open hardware and an open operating system, there is more hope at removing the monopolies.
I agree with you in spirit, the "answers" to unanswerable questions have no place being taught in school. But fundamentally the purpose of education is to teach you those skills required to logically approach and rationalize unanswered questions, and determine what is unanswerable. More often than not, the most important questions people face in life are unanswerable, either because the facts are not available in time, or because no valid facts can be supplied. Schools should not be shy of examining such questions, and showing systems by which they can be rationalized. They should always fall short of answering them, that is the excersize for the pupil.
Really, in the grand scheme of things, the only questions worth talking about are unanswerable in nature. We should all be prepared to find and support our answers to them, or to evaluate the answers others provide. TJ himself did it a number of times, the Declaration of Independence being the most well known. He held 'certain truths to be self evident' that he surely knew were neither true nor self evident to everyone reading his note. He had a system of reasoning based on the beliefs of his peers that came to the conclusion that the colonies deserved independence. Was it right? That's not a subject for a school to teach, but a student should be well prepared to weigh his arguments and put them in context with known facts from the time.
Parents, governments, MTV and peer pressure will all provide answers to unanswerable questions. Schools should just set the ground rules and ensure that every student has the tools to make decisions on what he believes.
...he signs his email "l33t h4x0r" ...she makes more weekly on "w4r3z" than you make at a real job. ...his friend call him "Juarez". ...he wants to name your new born child "Fsck r0x0rs"
Tip your waitresses, I'll be here all day. Tip me and I leave pronto.
Those who can do, do. Those who can't become professors, those who can't pretend to teach become lawyers.
No, it means you can be a criminal [expert] and not know criminal law.
If there aren't open source drivers that support hardware then we will never be independent of microsoft.
Unless you have more guns, friends and power than I do, anarchy is bad for you.
I question why the ruling of French courts matter period. They have a different (and in my opinion stupid) way of doing business. It obviously does not affect the way google will operate anywhere but France.
Germany has laws restricting companies from advertising in certain ways, those companies do not follow those rules here in the US. It's one of the many landmines that companies deal with when doing business overseas.
I don't see how anyone could see this as anything new, or something that should fall in the "YRO" section...this is just France excersizing their old law concepts on new territory.
I agree, love him or hate him, do not underestimate him. He is an excellent leader, including his ability to know when to let someone else lead (i.e. Ballmer). Similarly Blair did not get to be PM by confusion and uncertainty, he too knows how to lead and develop a following.
The only thing we've proved is that graphology is complete crap.