So, they say "yes" to the IP restriction laws until they know how to do it well.
Then they repudiate it all, and set up shop, once they feel economicially strong strong enough.
Note, I am all for India having a strong economy, and I wish nothing but the best for them. And any other countries in the same boat. And America also.
Depends on your definition of 'net neutrality'. The one I iike is that you can do QoS, but not based on source or destination, not based on "I want my packets to have priority".
I have a hard time believing the telco's would build new features in a way that others could reuse it, as general transport, so that others could use it for other things. They will be preoccupied with making sure they can bill, and making *that* customer happy.
The executives making the decisions are making lots on inflated stock prices.
See? It is OK. And those executives will need lots of servants around the house, and those cant be outsourced.
Never mind in 10 or 20 years, the companies in the countries being outsourced to will have all the expertise they need, and the American partners will be told to pound sand. And the weakened American middle class will not have what it take to float things along.
Yes, and that is fine, but why would anyone that can use their head take this drug until it *can* be shown to have a positive effect on the problem, and not just on the symptom?
Bringing down cholesteral in and of itself is not all that usefull, IMHO, unless that is the precursor to reducing heart disease.
I recall seeing a commercial for some cholesteral reducing medication, and the fine print said something to the effect that "this medication has not been shown to reduce heart disease". Glad that was there, it made me wonder why they are allowed to market such, if the symptom and not the problem is the only thing treated....
Yeah, I've a bit seen that. Salesmen will try to get you every time. Document what you agreed to in an email copied to your boss. If that doenst work ( and it wont at first ), key their BMW. ( jk ).
I would add, dont let them sucker you into making an estimate without doing the decomposition, if there are items that are risky because it is something newish, allow time ( up front is best ) to do some empirical development to figure out how it all works, and if you normally pad estimates with a x 2 factor, pad this part with a x10 factor.
*Dont* succumb to the temptation to cut back any estimates once you see what the totals come out to. Do your estimation at the "leaf nodes" only, and let the numbers come out as they come out.
And even if the managers dont like the big numbers, at least *you* will know. They may well tell you you have less time than you asked for. Dont agree when they come out with the "it wont *really* take that long, will it?" stuff. Stand your ground, but realize you may not get the time. Then you can pre-prioritize how you execute on the project, so that the most important stuff is done ( hopefully ) when their stupid deadline comes up. Now, that does not mean that you should be disagreeable in your disagreement. But when they throw on the pressure to bring forward the deadline, find a way to remind them that you are working toward that deadline, but you dont think it achievable. Course, then they will try the "we cant have you lead unless you buy into our stupidity" kind of stuff. Dont have an answer to that.
I agree, except I would have said that Microsoft better figure it out, else that Collateral Damage is going to harm some people, regardless of their inclination and ability to sue.
potential harm to valid users. - I think you are trying too hard to find some nefarious harm to valid users, you would LIKE there to be harm to valid users, so you could blame MS, but I don't see any harm for them.
There are claims that people who had valid licensed copies of windows are getting the "your windows copy is not valid". I think it reasonable to assume that if you are getting that message, and Microsoft elects to shut machines down that they believe are not genuine, that your machine will be shut down. I would call that "potential harm".
Slashdot Mirror
One order of (DMCA)^100 coming up!
They will pass a law making router intrusions illegal.
There, taken care of.
Laws change, governments change.
Laws are broken.
Nationalizations happen.
So, they say "yes" to the IP restriction
laws until they know how to do it well.
Then they repudiate it all, and set up
shop, once they feel economicially strong
strong enough.
Note, I am all for India having a strong
economy, and I wish nothing but the best
for them. And any other countries in the
same boat. And America also.
Depends on your definition of 'net neutrality'. The one I iike is
that you can do QoS, but not based on source or destination, not
based on "I want my packets to have priority".
I have a hard time believing the telco's would build new features
in a way that others could reuse it, as general transport, so that
others could use it for other things. They will be preoccupied
with making sure they can bill, and making *that* customer happy.
The "mirror" of a "microsoft". Like in star trek.
Excepting the one in our universe has the beards
and the pain devices.
You are forgetting something.
The executives making the decisions are making
lots on inflated stock prices.
See? It is OK. And those executives will need
lots of servants around the house, and those cant
be outsourced.
Never mind in 10 or 20 years, the companies in the
countries being outsourced to will have all the
expertise they need, and the American partners will
be told to pound sand. And the weakened American
middle class will not have what it take to float
things along.
Remote Surgery? Across the internet?
That just seems like a bad idea.
And offering their premium customers
more and better without a bigger "pipe"
to run it thru will result in a degradation
to the non-premium customers.
:-)
There is a hidden flag you can test for.
So that the oursourced-to crew can say
" we love deadlines, the whooshing
sound as they go by, priceless ".
Or something like that.
Sarcasm, Joebert. Joebert, Sarcasm.
( Unsafe, unreliable, inconvenient ) == ( We are not making money on this )
I believe you will find this translation in the Appendices, page 197, column 3,
halfway down in the "business for really incredible dummies" handbook.
You understand that the "i love you" thing would
have been less effective, excepting for the Windows
feature of hiding file extensions.
His mom missed the chance to name him Charles.
And this family should definitely marry into
( hyphenated, of course ) the backslash-greaterthan
family.
And, sometimes, you can add "and what makes you qualified to judge them"? :-)
Not that I recommend this approach....
Yes, and that is fine, but why would anyone that
can use their head take this drug until it *can*
be shown to have a positive effect on the problem,
and not just on the symptom?
Bringing down cholesteral in and of itself is not
all that usefull, IMHO, unless that is the
precursor to reducing heart disease.
I recall seeing a commercial for some cholesteral reducing
medication, and the fine print said something to the effect
that "this medication has not been shown to reduce heart
disease". Glad that was there, it made me wonder why
they are allowed to market such, if the symptom and not the
problem is the only thing treated....
Perhaps they are using the Political definition?
Yeah, I've a bit seen that. Salesmen will try
to get you every time. Document what you agreed
to in an email copied to your boss. If that doenst
work ( and it wont at first ), key their BMW. ( jk ).
I think there is a DM out there with mod points.
Absolutely.
I would add, dont let them sucker you into making
an estimate without doing the decomposition, if there
are items that are risky because it is something
newish, allow time ( up front is best ) to do some
empirical development to figure out how it all works,
and if you normally pad estimates with a x 2 factor,
pad this part with a x10 factor.
*Dont* succumb to the temptation to cut back any
estimates once you see what the totals come out
to. Do your estimation at the "leaf nodes" only, and
let the numbers come out as they come out.
And even if the managers dont like the big numbers,
at least *you* will know. They may well tell you you
have less time than you asked for. Dont agree when
they come out with the "it wont *really* take that
long, will it?" stuff. Stand your ground, but realize
you may not get the time. Then you can pre-prioritize
how you execute on the project, so that the most important
stuff is done ( hopefully ) when their stupid deadline
comes up. Now, that does not mean that you should be
disagreeable in your disagreement. But when they
throw on the pressure to bring forward the deadline,
find a way to remind them that you are working toward
that deadline, but you dont think it achievable. Course,
then they will try the "we cant have you lead unless you
buy into our stupidity" kind of stuff. Dont have
an answer to that.
Wow! I love it. Wish I had mod points.
No, you cant rely on goodwill of large companies.
But, it makes good discussion here on SlashDot, eh?
I agree, except I would have said that Microsoft better figure it out,
else that Collateral Damage is going to harm some people, regardless of
their inclination and ability to sue.
When you say "I dont see any harm", it sounds as though you are
saying that zero ( 0 ) legitimate users will be affected by this.
I think you are using the 30,000 ft view.
There are claims that people who had valid licensed copies of windows are
getting the "your windows copy is not valid". I think it reasonable to
assume that if you are getting that message, and Microsoft elects to
shut machines down that they believe are not genuine, that your machine
will be shut down. I would call that "potential harm".