Re:The last time I criticized a government officia
on
Homer Becomes Omar
·
· Score: 1
One rogue cop (and how do you know it was really a cop?) does not equal the entire U.S. justice system. Does your city have a gulag full of dissidents? Somehow I doubt it. If you ever want to criticize anyone again, realize they may try some form of petty intimidation. If you can't grow a pair and handle this, just keep your mouth shut and take whatever comes your way.
Ah yes, blame it all on Whitey. 50 years is enough time to realize that things have changed and that real leadership is needed. But of course it's easier for them to blame the prosperous countries than to actually take a look at themselves and realize they are the ones that need to change.
No shit. I'm getting tired of hearing about all of these super-impractical broadband ideas. How much would it cost to keep these balloons floating continuously? And how much do they think people will pay for broadband? This idea is dead in the water (quite literally, if they are stupid enough to actually try it).
This is the biggest problem with giving the UN strong control over anything: lack of accountability. If the U.S. congress really screws something up in a way that pisses off the average person, they will be made to pay at the polls. What can people do about an out of control UN delegate?
I don't see how you could mandate licensing. If I hold a patent that I don't want to license but the government tells me I'm required to, I could just set the license fee at $99 billion and effectively prevent anyone from using it. I don't see how the patent office could ever determine a fair license value for every patent in existance.
Here's one example. I won't deny he has done some good in his career, but the story I link to shows a blatant abuse of power. But I forgot, Spitzer is a good guy according to Slashdot groupthink. This means the grandparent post and probably this one will be modded Troll.
It won't happen unless someone else forces them. The real purpose of any government organization, before anything else, is to justify it's own existance and make a case for growing it bigger. The FCC would never do something to make itself less relevant unless forced by outside powers. It may not be in the public's best interest, but it is certainly in the interest of the bureaucrats pulling in big salaries for not doing very much work.
Sounds like an Elliot Spitzer wannabe. For those that don't know, Spitzer is New York's attorney general who is known for shaking down corporations in the name of "fighting corruption". He started out with noble goals, but soon let the power go to his head.
I suspect there hasn't been much autonomy among developers for a long time. Look at how most of Microsoft product are designed. It's clear that the marketing department makes all product decision and engineers just get to figure out how to meet their demands. For example, why does Outlook inform me it is dangerous to display "active content"? What the hell is active content? In my case, it was apparently a font that someone used. Would any technical person use such a stupid, generic, meaningless phrase as "active content"?
Why don't more routers that are sold today tout their IPv6 compatibility?
Because IPv6 isn't yet a buzzword that non-technical buyers are looking for. This will probably change in the next few years when the business world becomes concerned with it. Once a company CIO hears that his internet connection will die without IPv6 support, there will be a huge marketing effort on the part of Cisco and other router makers.
If they're lucky, the people who bought this overpriced RAM will get a coupon for $1 off their next Samsung purchase. With the lawyers getting millions in fees, of course.
That's pretty much the nature of any news organization. Why? Because hysteria sells. And it's certainly not just an American thing. Just look at how sensational the British press is. It doesn't necessarily mean they are trying to push an agenda, but they are definitely trying to compete for sales/ratings.
I agree that it really does not matter what happens to AOL. They have done nothing but lose market share over the last few years. In fact, I'm seeing many parallels between AOL and Excite@Home. Within a few years, I think AOL will meet the same fate.
A signature does NOTHING to ensure security. All it does is provide me with something to practice with if I get ahold of someone's card. Why won't credit card companies start taking fraud seriously and put a PIN on the cards, just like ATM cards? Theft of ATM cards is a lot less common for this exact reason. Store employees are not trained in handwriting recognition and cannot ensure security through signature checking, even if they try.
Don't confine your reading to publications that are strictly about programming. Be sure to read about overall trends in the IT industry to stay up to date. CIO magazine is a good resource for this, and you can even get it free if you tell them you're a manager (no, they don't verify it). To have a long term rewarding career as a programmer, it is essential to know what the business trends are in IT so you don't find yourself suddenly outsourced and obsolete.
Because online sales allow the user to choose the tracks. They could only hope to get about $2 per song at the max instead of forcing people to pay $20 for 2 good songs and 15 filler songs. This would never fly with online sales and that is why the industry has been fighting so hard to end all online music distribution, legal or otherwise.
They don't want it to succeed. The recording industry actions over the last few years have pointed to a common goal: stop online music distribution. It could never be as profitable for the music cartel as physical distribution. I think they allowed iTunes to temporarily succeed with this plan in mind all along so they can later kill it, to establish that there is no market for online music distribution and people can now go back to paying $20 for a CD with 2 good songs on it. But it's too late for that to happen now. The only thing that will ultimately pull the music industry's collective head out of it's collective ass is when well-known artists bypass them altogether. When things like this happen, that day will come sooner rather than later.
This will never happen, ironically due to corporate interests. Most large companies now do business overseas. Would they want those customers cut off from their website? Would they no longer want their employees to be able to send email to business partners in other countries?
Although there will certainly be conflicts regarding the internet in the coming years, there is too much invested for people to just give up on a solution and resort to fractionalized intranets.
People have been cheating in school ever since the beginning of organized education. The internet just makes it easier and more obvious to observe. Besides, a halfway competent professor can detect internet-related cheating a lot easier than the old fashioned pay-the-smart-kid-to-do-your-assignment cheating.
What you described isn't so much a technology issue as it is a lack of professionalism, which is appallingly common these days. The scary thing is, this person probably didn't see anything wrong with what he did and may very well try the same thing again at another interview.
Microsoft clearly sees OSS as a competitive threat, otherwise they would not be sponsoring shill groups to defend them. I wouldn't say Microsoft is going down the tubes quite yet, but people are starting to look for alternatives. Their anti-open-source FUD is starting to work against them rather than for them.
This will be about as easy to implement as a ban on internet porn, which is to say impossible. Sure they can get the major providers to comply, but good luck tracking down every chat room operator.
Get a clue. Calling people who obviously don't want to be called, as anyone with an ounce of common sense can figure out, will only decrease your potential sales. For every minute you spend on the phone being abused, that's a minute that you won't get back which you could have been making a sale. You would think the telemarketing morons would figure this out and voluntarily trim their list of leads to get rid of people who will obviously not buy, but that seems not to be the case. The only logical conclusion is that telemarketing is not a legitimate means of making sales, but a scam designed to see who can be mislead enough to fork over a lot of money for some crap product.
I've always wondered this myself. Wouldn't they expect to not have much luck making a sale to someone who has specifically requested no sales calls? I think the reason is that telemarketed products and services are high cost and low value, so they wouldn't sell by more traditional methods. This also allows a huge overhead for the marketing firm. It becomes purely a numbers game. They know the vast majority of people they call will not buy, but it is still profitable just because they con some idiot into buying stuff every once in a while. This is a truly parasitic business model and I fully support legal efforts to shut it down.
Slashdot Mirror
One rogue cop (and how do you know it was really a cop?) does not equal the entire U.S. justice system. Does your city have a gulag full of dissidents? Somehow I doubt it. If you ever want to criticize anyone again, realize they may try some form of petty intimidation. If you can't grow a pair and handle this, just keep your mouth shut and take whatever comes your way.
The censor was obviously an ACLU member. Cursing is OK, only references to God will be censored.
Ah yes, blame it all on Whitey. 50 years is enough time to realize that things have changed and that real leadership is needed. But of course it's easier for them to blame the prosperous countries than to actually take a look at themselves and realize they are the ones that need to change.
No shit. I'm getting tired of hearing about all of these super-impractical broadband ideas. How much would it cost to keep these balloons floating continuously? And how much do they think people will pay for broadband? This idea is dead in the water (quite literally, if they are stupid enough to actually try it).
This is the biggest problem with giving the UN strong control over anything: lack of accountability. If the U.S. congress really screws something up in a way that pisses off the average person, they will be made to pay at the polls. What can people do about an out of control UN delegate?
I don't see how you could mandate licensing. If I hold a patent that I don't want to license but the government tells me I'm required to, I could just set the license fee at $99 billion and effectively prevent anyone from using it. I don't see how the patent office could ever determine a fair license value for every patent in existance.
Here's one example. I won't deny he has done some good in his career, but the story I link to shows a blatant abuse of power. But I forgot, Spitzer is a good guy according to Slashdot groupthink. This means the grandparent post and probably this one will be modded Troll.
It won't happen unless someone else forces them. The real purpose of any government organization, before anything else, is to justify it's own existance and make a case for growing it bigger. The FCC would never do something to make itself less relevant unless forced by outside powers. It may not be in the public's best interest, but it is certainly in the interest of the bureaucrats pulling in big salaries for not doing very much work.
Sounds like an Elliot Spitzer wannabe. For those that don't know, Spitzer is New York's attorney general who is known for shaking down corporations in the name of "fighting corruption". He started out with noble goals, but soon let the power go to his head.
I suspect there hasn't been much autonomy among developers for a long time. Look at how most of Microsoft product are designed. It's clear that the marketing department makes all product decision and engineers just get to figure out how to meet their demands. For example, why does Outlook inform me it is dangerous to display "active content"? What the hell is active content? In my case, it was apparently a font that someone used. Would any technical person use such a stupid, generic, meaningless phrase as "active content"?
Why don't more routers that are sold today tout their IPv6 compatibility?
Because IPv6 isn't yet a buzzword that non-technical buyers are looking for. This will probably change in the next few years when the business world becomes concerned with it. Once a company CIO hears that his internet connection will die without IPv6 support, there will be a huge marketing effort on the part of Cisco and other router makers.
If they're lucky, the people who bought this overpriced RAM will get a coupon for $1 off their next Samsung purchase. With the lawyers getting millions in fees, of course.
That's pretty much the nature of any news organization. Why? Because hysteria sells. And it's certainly not just an American thing. Just look at how sensational the British press is. It doesn't necessarily mean they are trying to push an agenda, but they are definitely trying to compete for sales/ratings.
I agree that it really does not matter what happens to AOL. They have done nothing but lose market share over the last few years. In fact, I'm seeing many parallels between AOL and Excite@Home. Within a few years, I think AOL will meet the same fate.
A signature does NOTHING to ensure security. All it does is provide me with something to practice with if I get ahold of someone's card. Why won't credit card companies start taking fraud seriously and put a PIN on the cards, just like ATM cards? Theft of ATM cards is a lot less common for this exact reason. Store employees are not trained in handwriting recognition and cannot ensure security through signature checking, even if they try.
Don't confine your reading to publications that are strictly about programming. Be sure to read about overall trends in the IT industry to stay up to date. CIO magazine is a good resource for this, and you can even get it free if you tell them you're a manager (no, they don't verify it). To have a long term rewarding career as a programmer, it is essential to know what the business trends are in IT so you don't find yourself suddenly outsourced and obsolete.
Because online sales allow the user to choose the tracks. They could only hope to get about $2 per song at the max instead of forcing people to pay $20 for 2 good songs and 15 filler songs. This would never fly with online sales and that is why the industry has been fighting so hard to end all online music distribution, legal or otherwise.
They don't want it to succeed. The recording industry actions over the last few years have pointed to a common goal: stop online music distribution. It could never be as profitable for the music cartel as physical distribution. I think they allowed iTunes to temporarily succeed with this plan in mind all along so they can later kill it, to establish that there is no market for online music distribution and people can now go back to paying $20 for a CD with 2 good songs on it. But it's too late for that to happen now. The only thing that will ultimately pull the music industry's collective head out of it's collective ass is when well-known artists bypass them altogether. When things like this happen, that day will come sooner rather than later.
This will never happen, ironically due to corporate interests. Most large companies now do business overseas. Would they want those customers cut off from their website? Would they no longer want their employees to be able to send email to business partners in other countries?
Although there will certainly be conflicts regarding the internet in the coming years, there is too much invested for people to just give up on a solution and resort to fractionalized intranets.
People have been cheating in school ever since the beginning of organized education. The internet just makes it easier and more obvious to observe. Besides, a halfway competent professor can detect internet-related cheating a lot easier than the old fashioned pay-the-smart-kid-to-do-your-assignment cheating.
What you described isn't so much a technology issue as it is a lack of professionalism, which is appallingly common these days. The scary thing is, this person probably didn't see anything wrong with what he did and may very well try the same thing again at another interview.
Microsoft clearly sees OSS as a competitive threat, otherwise they would not be sponsoring shill groups to defend them. I wouldn't say Microsoft is going down the tubes quite yet, but people are starting to look for alternatives. Their anti-open-source FUD is starting to work against them rather than for them.
This will be about as easy to implement as a ban on internet porn, which is to say impossible. Sure they can get the major providers to comply, but good luck tracking down every chat room operator.
Get a clue. Calling people who obviously don't want to be called, as anyone with an ounce of common sense can figure out, will only decrease your potential sales. For every minute you spend on the phone being abused, that's a minute that you won't get back which you could have been making a sale. You would think the telemarketing morons would figure this out and voluntarily trim their list of leads to get rid of people who will obviously not buy, but that seems not to be the case. The only logical conclusion is that telemarketing is not a legitimate means of making sales, but a scam designed to see who can be mislead enough to fork over a lot of money for some crap product.
I've always wondered this myself. Wouldn't they expect to not have much luck making a sale to someone who has specifically requested no sales calls? I think the reason is that telemarketed products and services are high cost and low value, so they wouldn't sell by more traditional methods. This also allows a huge overhead for the marketing firm. It becomes purely a numbers game. They know the vast majority of people they call will not buy, but it is still profitable just because they con some idiot into buying stuff every once in a while. This is a truly parasitic business model and I fully support legal efforts to shut it down.