I have been running ZoneAlarm on Win2000 for over a year now. I know of no major problems with it. Been running it on my wife's WinXP ( home ) machine for about 6 months, again, no major problems that I know of.
The Indian worker will not accept that they have to charge American wages. It works like this.
You have two people, one in India, one local. They both cost the same ( fallout from your concept ), they are roughly equivilent in terms of productivity. Which one will you chose? I cant help but think you will chose the local person. You can set up face to face meetings anytime you want, and it will, by and large, work out. No locality issues, no time zone issues.
The company executives will win. There will be more money available for bonuses and pay raises for thier smart policies.
For a while. Till the company cant sell it's product here in the US because no one has any money to purchase it.
But see, it all works out. The company relocates to where they outsourced to, and the people that they outsourced to will have money to buy these products.
See? It all work out. For the wealthy. So, there are some for whom it all works out.
When Google makes an aquisition, they havent, to my knowledge, done things with the aquisition to make their monopoly stronger ( note, yes, it was one Av producer, it is not a mortal blow to Unix/Linux, etc, etc, but it is an attempted step in that direction... )
Maybe the company wouldnt have worked. It sure would have been nice to be able to fail on our merits. Microsoft sure talked about push while we were standing.
As soon as we started talking about what we were doing, suddenly Microsoft had a competing product. Not that they did, but they did have a plan. As soon as iFusion went under, Microsoft stopped talking about push.
Almost forgot... If the English had lost control of the English channel, there is reason to believe that the naval blockade of Germany would have been broken, which would probably have increased Germany's war fighting abilities.
You can bet the British didnt want any hint of the German codes being broken to get out. The only reason the RN got a strategic victory at Jutland was because they were able to muster the entire fleet on the basis of codebreaking. It might have been a strategic as well as a tactical German victory otherwise. And the KM still had teeth after Jutland.
If Britain had not been able to command the English channel, she might have been pushed out of the war. And the French were already hanging on by the skin of their teeth with the British in the game.
Management hammers you with timelines until the product is shipped, never mind that they set the date without asking if it feasiable. Then, when the product is released, they hammer you with quality concerns.
A: Patton was censured for this statements on this subject. And he was hardly setting policy. It's kinda like saying that what Tim McViegh said is important to US policy ( a bit of an exageration, I will grant you, but I think I made my point.. )
I think you have a good point about the message that the bomb sent to Russia, but I dont think it was "the reason", but one of many ( personally, I dont think it was the most important, but that is certainly a subject for debate.. )
On a Japanese surrender, all my reading leads me to the conclusion that as a nation, Japan was not ready to surrender. Sure, there were factions driving for it, but as I understand it, they had no real power. Japan would have had to have sunk a lot lower before that was a reality, I think.
Yes, they sanctioned their use, but I dont think that that means that they did not ponder the issue, that it was a glad/happy/joyful decision for them to make.
America ( and Russia and China ) have a lot to loose, and a lot of reasons not to use Nuclear weapons. North Korea, Iraq under Saddam, Iran, and some others had much less ( percieved ) to lose, and more ( percieved ) reasons to want to use them.
I would much rather no one had them, but that is not reality. Name a reasonable path to that end.
I think that the current non-proliferation idea is about the best that we can manage.
but I thought the Japanese actually offered to withdraw (without actually technically surrendering)
A: My understanding is that a faction within the Japanese Govt was attempting to negotiate this. My understanding is that that faction did not have the power to make this happen, I think, at best, it was wishful thinking.
B: This does not answer the issue of gamesmanship with terms. It does not cover the issue of the political makeup of the not unconditonally surrendered Japan. Would you want to leave the people that thought that making war for the reasons they had, and in the way they had in power? I dont think I would have been excited about that prospect.
Almost forgot. The Lusitania was a British cargo and passenger ship. The American involvment was that there were Americans aboard her. A note on that, the Germans had publicized that they considered the waters around England as an area in which British flagged vessels were "liable for destruction". This in return for the British blockade of Germany. There is also a claim that the Lusitania was carrying munitions, which, if true, made her a legitimate target of the German navy. Also, according to my reading, the Lusitania was built with the capacity of conversion to what is called and "Armed Merchant Cruiser". This would mean that it was possible for the Luistania to be carrying guns, and serving as part of the Royal Navy. How much the captain of the sub that sank the Lusitania knew about this, I dont know.
The Zimmerman telegram showed that Kaiser Wilhelm was trying to entice Mexico into the war. Hitler was a corporal about that time, and had no real input into policy.
And why does everything have to be 100% one thing? There were elements of self and other interest, in my opinion, in intervening in South Korea.
Slashdot Mirror
No, that is not her core competency.
Only if emulated in Excel's scripting language.
I have been running ZoneAlarm on Win2000 for over a year now. I know of no major problems with it. Been running it on my wife's WinXP ( home ) machine for about 6 months, again, no major problems that I know of.
Perhaps you would like to lead the way? :-)
You. I have all the permissions paperwork here. Dont you remember? Well, in any case, please report for the procedure, and Good Luck!
So, is that what the goatse picture is all about? The man trying to get the CPU back out?
The Indian worker will not accept that they have to charge American wages. It works like this.
You have two people, one in India, one local. They both cost the same ( fallout from your concept ), they are roughly equivilent in terms of productivity. Which one will you chose? I cant help but think you will chose the local person. You can set up face to face meetings anytime you want, and it will, by and large, work out. No locality issues, no time zone issues.
The company executives will win. There will be more money available for bonuses and pay raises for thier smart policies.
For a while. Till the company cant sell it's product here in the US because no one has any money to purchase it.
But see, it all works out. The company relocates to where they outsourced to, and the people that they outsourced to will have money to buy these products.
See? It all work out. For the wealthy. So, there are some for whom it all works out.
Yes, I have said that about a man.
Is when the judges start to accept small honorarium from people. And somehow, those donators dont have their land taken...
The door is now open.
When Google makes an aquisition, they havent, to my knowledge, done things with the aquisition to make their monopoly stronger ( note, yes, it was one Av producer, it is not a mortal blow to Unix/Linux, etc, etc, but it is an attempted step in that direction... )
Dont worry. I wont work for you.
Maybe the company wouldnt have worked. It sure would have been nice to be able to fail on our merits. Microsoft sure talked about push while we were standing.
Your experience has been very different from mine.
:-)
I guess the world is bigger than I knew.
Apologies for the insinuation.
As soon as we started talking about what we were doing, suddenly Microsoft had a competing product. Not that they did, but they did have a plan. As soon as iFusion went under, Microsoft stopped talking about push.
Almost forgot... If the English had lost control of the English channel, there is reason to believe that the naval blockade of Germany would have been broken, which would probably have increased Germany's war fighting abilities.
You can bet the British didnt want any hint of the German codes being broken to get out. The only reason the RN got a strategic victory at Jutland was because they were able to muster the entire fleet on the basis of codebreaking. It might have been a strategic as well as a tactical German victory otherwise. And the KM still had teeth after Jutland.
If Britain had not been able to command the English channel, she might have been pushed out of the war. And the French were already hanging on by the skin of their teeth with the British in the game.
You obviously have not worked in development.
Management hammers you with timelines until the product is shipped, never mind that they set the date without asking if it feasiable. Then, when the product is released, they hammer you with quality concerns.
How would you have run the war?
A: Patton was censured for this statements on this subject. And he was hardly setting policy. It's kinda like saying that what Tim McViegh said is important to US policy ( a bit of an exageration, I will grant you, but I think I made my point.. )
I think you have a good point about the message that the bomb sent to Russia, but I dont think it was "the reason", but one of many ( personally, I dont think it was the most important, but that is certainly a subject for debate.. )
On a Japanese surrender, all my reading leads me to the conclusion that as a nation, Japan was not ready to surrender. Sure, there were factions driving for it, but as I understand it, they had no real power. Japan would have had to have sunk a lot lower before that was a reality, I think.
On pt #2.
Yes, they sanctioned their use, but I dont think that that means that they did not ponder the issue, that it was a glad/happy/joyful decision for them to make.
America ( and Russia and China ) have a lot to loose, and a lot of reasons not to use Nuclear weapons. North Korea, Iraq under Saddam, Iran, and some others had much less ( percieved ) to lose, and more ( percieved ) reasons to want to use them.
I would much rather no one had them, but that is not reality. Name a reasonable path to that end.
I think that the current non-proliferation idea is about the best that we can manage.
A: My understanding is that a faction within the Japanese Govt was attempting to negotiate this. My understanding is that that faction did not have the power to make this happen, I think, at best, it was wishful thinking.
B: This does not answer the issue of gamesmanship with terms. It does not cover the issue of the political makeup of the not unconditonally surrendered Japan. Would you want to leave the people that thought that making war for the reasons they had, and in the way they had in power? I dont think I would have been excited about that prospect.
Almost forgot. The Lusitania was a British cargo and passenger ship. The American involvment was that there were Americans aboard her. A note on that, the Germans had publicized that they considered the waters around England as an area in which British flagged vessels were "liable for destruction". This in return for the British blockade of Germany. There is also a claim that the Lusitania was carrying munitions, which, if true, made her a legitimate target of the German navy. Also, according to my reading, the Lusitania was built with the capacity of conversion to what is called and "Armed Merchant Cruiser". This would mean that it was possible for the Luistania to be carrying guns, and serving as part of the Royal Navy. How much the captain of the sub that sank the Lusitania knew about this, I dont know.
The Zimmerman telegram showed that Kaiser Wilhelm was trying to entice Mexico into the war. Hitler was a corporal about that time, and had no real input into policy.
And why does everything have to be 100% one thing? There were elements of self and other interest, in my opinion, in intervening in South Korea.