In the United States, I don't think you can even send your kid to school until after they have had their shots. You have to have evidence from a doctor proving that you've had the shots before they'll admit you at your school . . .
. . . but are we to believe that, if it weren't for offshoring, none of the tens of thousands of microsoft employees working in this country would ever go outside of the country - even overseas - and possibly bring back a flue or a cold or the mumps or something?
Also, how do you bring back the measles? Aren't we inocculated against measles when you're maybe six years old?
Look, men are groomed from childhood to be smart, be athletic, make money, get a hot girlfriend or wife and work for a living their entire life.
Women are groomed to be cute, pretty and attract a rich, athletic, successful, smart man.
Women have as much potential as men. It's just a matter of where we, as a society, influence them to go. Girls are never praised for being so smart, but you're praised for being so cute and adorable the day you're born, then hot and sexy the rest of your life after some teen-ish age.
I'm not willing to pay $16.99 for a CD in a store. I'm not willing to pay $99/track via iTunes. I'm willing to pay ~$1.00/CD for tracks from mp3search.ru
What does this say? Well, I (and many other people) are not willing to pay what the RIAA or Apple say music is worth, but I'm willing to pay something - even though it seems an insigificant amount - rather than wasting my time downloading off of p2p.
An artist could charge $1/album if they released them online and that would be about as much (or more) than they would have gotten through the traditional industry distribution and production channels. Granted, there's a good chance most of us wouldn't know who they were without the pumping done by their RIAA masters, but that's a little bit beside the point.
I'm not willing to pay $5 parking, $20 for two tickets and spend several hours of my time round trip to go see a movie that may end up being complete crap in a theater with a sticky floor, shifty seats and annoying audiences. I'm not willing to pay $25 or $30 for a DVD, either. Especially since I'm only going to watch it one time.
But you know what? Give me a site that I can download any movie from as soon as it is released into theaters (including all of your back-archive) for $3 each in high quality with DRM - but capable of being viewed on whatever hardware I want to for up to, say, 72 hours - and you'll have yourself a happy, frequent customer.
For the record, I also don't buy books anymore unless I have to. I can't find the justification in charging $10 for a flimsy PAPERBACK *FICTION* book that will give me all of a few hours entertainment.
On the other hand, with rare exception, I'm willing to pay $40 to $50 for a videogame, because I'll get plenty of use out of it and I'll have a VERY good time in the process. Of course, I have a mac now, so that's kind of a moot point. But... I sure kick ass at multi-player-text-editing!!!
As much as I like to quote that myself, I have to admit that if someone came and ripped off my website or art or some other content that I produced and represented it as their own or gave it away, I would be upset.
Really, I think that copyright infringement, theft - whatever we want to call it - is just as wrong when it's done to the big guys as it would be when it happens to the little guy.
There is not necessarily any real justification for it, other than a manifested hate and dislike for the RIAA/MPAA/Hollywood/Corporations in general. And don't get me wrong - I'm all for hating them and watch movies acquired from bit torrent as much as I possibly can (I haven't been to the theater since 1998 to watch X-Files), but I won't try to justify it in any way other than I hate them and want to see shit for free.
I bought Equilibrium on DVD. If you make a high quality movie, I will pay for it. Your half assed crap will just get downloaded and deleted after a viewing, because that's all it's worth.
And we can reasonably argue that whoever produced The Pacifier is guilty of small increments of murder by chewing away small niblets of time from millions of suckers who paid to see that piece of crap.
Well, if you're downloading the movies from BitTorrent, you're not exactly a customer anymore than a shoplifter is a customer at a store. I mean, he might buy stuff now and again just like we might watch a movie now and again, but . . .
What I don't get is, since they have said they couldn't (or wouldn't) go after downloaders, exactly how is this going to work? Has it been deemed that downloading via torrents is inherently the same activity of UPLOADING, even if you terminate your connection before you've fully uploaded the file? or rather, how can they be at all sure that you have ever uploaded the entire file back to the community? I could have a 500:1 upload ratio on a file, but that doesn't mean i haven't just been uploading the same 30 seconds worth to everyone.
Very excellent points. And to what degree does this same problem exist on consoles, I wonder? I wouldn't know, since I don't own or play any of them.
Imagine if, back in the day, you found out that you couldn't play Burger Time anymore because Atari had decided it wasn't making enough money or they went out of business and yanked your ability to play it?
A series of giant translucent displays hanging from the ceiling like giant columns throughout the NOC that show three-dimensional renderings of everything that is occuring on the network at the moment, like in the movie Hackers. Also, at least one of your main guys in the NOC should wear all black, have funky hair and carry a skateboard around with him through the office. Also, liberally spread around a few terminals. Most important of all, have a couple geeky/emo looking trogs arguing about RISC architecture off in some corner of the room, rather loudly. Follow my suggestions and you will not fail to impress!
You need a lot more ram. Then fine-tune your server so that it will use that ram efficiently.
Also, you need to look into the queries that are being made to the database. One database isn't necessarily going to be any more efficient with its SQL queries than another just because more people like it.
Lets not kid ourselves here, the poor developers in India are exploited. The average salary is around $390/month, the kids down at the local fast food joint here in the US make more money than that. Sure the cost of living is a little lower over there, but things like books, computers etc, still cost the same or more than they do here.
Of course, most of your money goes to food and shelter, which I doubt is nearly expensive.
Anyway, it doesn't matter. There's singapore, vietnam, china and russia still.
I wonder how they plan to compete with the distributed/remote computing power provided by all of the unpatched and unprotected Windows based systems in the world that are freely available to anyone with a couple scripts and an internet connection?
Google is not putting out a client. They are running a jabber server.
There are plenty of full fledged jabber clients. GAIM, PSI, Adium, Exodus and tKabber to name only a few.
This makes up a full-fledged messaging system, without reinventing the wheel.
I think the original poster's reference to it as a program was clear in that they were speaking of it as a "system" as was my reply.
I really don't see a reason for people not to use Jabber. I only touch AIM because so many peopel I know are on AIM and it's difficult for them to find a good public jabber server (other than the main jabber one). Being able to point them to talk.google will make it much easier to convince and convert them now.
We've written some really amazing applications that work over Jabber through any of the jabber clients on our Jabber network (pretty much our entire corporation uses it) and these custom apps have made life a lot easier.
Having a really big player like Google take on the role of hosting a jabber server for the public is just what Jabber has needed. I think this is an absolutely awesome development and I only hope that Google is keeping their "first, do no evil" mission statement in mind.
This is basically just google providing a public jabber server. I haven't gotten around to setting one up for myself, but have wanted to use a high quality, highly available, reliable jabber server to stick an account on. Now that google is doing it - I absolutely will.
This is exactly what I said they should do in the first place. Hurray!
What is the point of science in a country that outsources everything that isn't a management or service job? Yeah, wasting your time on science is great if you want to be unemployed - or only employed by a university or something. But if you want a real paying job with security, you have to do something that is unlikely to be "outsourced" or handed off to an automated process.
Currently, janitorial jobs are good. Jobs where you have to run a cash register or fold clothes or make change are good. I guess science-related jobs where you have to physically be on-site are good (surgery, though it looks like that can technically be done remotely in the future).
Oh - the one exception being government related jobs, of course. They tend not to contract with non-citizens for most jobs, even if they could actually be done by them.
If they do, I'll be VERY HAPPY to use it, as long as it's Jabber.
If they're just going to create their own stupid protocol rather than going with open-source, open-standards that already have a ton of existing clients - then I'm not interested.
Slashdot Mirror
In the United States, I don't think you can even send your kid to school until after they have had their shots. You have to have evidence from a doctor proving that you've had the shots before they'll admit you at your school . . .
IF YOU WANT BETTER STORIES SUBMIT THEM!!!!
:(
You must be new here . . .
Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!
Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
. . . but are we to believe that, if it weren't for offshoring, none of the tens of thousands of microsoft employees working in this country would ever go outside of the country - even overseas - and possibly bring back a flue or a cold or the mumps or something?
Also, how do you bring back the measles? Aren't we inocculated against measles when you're maybe six years old?
This whole idea is rather obvious and simple.
Look, men are groomed from childhood to be smart, be athletic, make money, get a hot girlfriend or wife and work for a living their entire life.
Women are groomed to be cute, pretty and attract a rich, athletic, successful, smart man.
Women have as much potential as men. It's just a matter of where we, as a society, influence them to go. Girls are never praised for being so smart, but you're praised for being so cute and adorable the day you're born, then hot and sexy the rest of your life after some teen-ish age.
...I can only imagine how many women are going to protest this.
If only they were smart enough to organize.
I'll tell you a business model that works.
I'm not willing to pay $16.99 for a CD in a store.
I'm not willing to pay $99/track via iTunes.
I'm willing to pay ~$1.00/CD for tracks from mp3search.ru
What does this say? Well, I (and many other people) are not willing to pay what the RIAA or Apple say music is worth, but I'm willing to pay something - even though it seems an insigificant amount - rather than wasting my time downloading off of p2p.
An artist could charge $1/album if they released them online and that would be about as much (or more) than they would have gotten through the traditional industry distribution and production channels. Granted, there's a good chance most of us wouldn't know who they were without the pumping done by their RIAA masters, but that's a little bit beside the point.
I'm not willing to pay $5 parking, $20 for two tickets and spend several hours of my time round trip to go see a movie that may end up being complete crap in a theater with a sticky floor, shifty seats and annoying audiences. I'm not willing to pay $25 or $30 for a DVD, either. Especially since I'm only going to watch it one time.
But you know what? Give me a site that I can download any movie from as soon as it is released into theaters (including all of your back-archive) for $3 each in high quality with DRM - but capable of being viewed on whatever hardware I want to for up to, say, 72 hours - and you'll have yourself a happy, frequent customer.
For the record, I also don't buy books anymore unless I have to. I can't find the justification in charging $10 for a flimsy PAPERBACK *FICTION* book that will give me all of a few hours entertainment.
On the other hand, with rare exception, I'm willing to pay $40 to $50 for a videogame, because I'll get plenty of use out of it and I'll have a VERY good time in the process. Of course, I have a mac now, so that's kind of a moot point. But... I sure kick ass at multi-player-text-editing!!!
As much as I like to quote that myself, I have to admit that if someone came and ripped off my website or art or some other content that I produced and represented it as their own or gave it away, I would be upset.
Really, I think that copyright infringement, theft - whatever we want to call it - is just as wrong when it's done to the big guys as it would be when it happens to the little guy.
There is not necessarily any real justification for it, other than a manifested hate and dislike for the RIAA/MPAA/Hollywood/Corporations in general. And don't get me wrong - I'm all for hating them and watch movies acquired from bit torrent as much as I possibly can (I haven't been to the theater since 1998 to watch X-Files), but I won't try to justify it in any way other than I hate them and want to see shit for free.
I bought Equilibrium on DVD. If you make a high quality movie, I will pay for it. Your half assed crap will just get downloaded and deleted after a viewing, because that's all it's worth.
And we can reasonably argue that whoever produced The Pacifier is guilty of small increments of murder by chewing away small niblets of time from millions of suckers who paid to see that piece of crap.
Well, if you're downloading the movies from BitTorrent, you're not exactly a customer anymore than a shoplifter is a customer at a store. I mean, he might buy stuff now and again just like we might watch a movie now and again, but . . .
What I don't get is, since they have said they couldn't (or wouldn't) go after downloaders, exactly how is this going to work? Has it been deemed that downloading via torrents is inherently the same activity of UPLOADING, even if you terminate your connection before you've fully uploaded the file? or rather, how can they be at all sure that you have ever uploaded the entire file back to the community? I could have a 500:1 upload ratio on a file, but that doesn't mean i haven't just been uploading the same 30 seconds worth to everyone.
Very excellent points. And to what degree does this same problem exist on consoles, I wonder? I wouldn't know, since I don't own or play any of them.
Imagine if, back in the day, you found out that you couldn't play Burger Time anymore because Atari had decided it wasn't making enough money or they went out of business and yanked your ability to play it?
WoW!
A series of giant translucent displays hanging from the ceiling like giant columns throughout the NOC that show three-dimensional renderings of everything that is occuring on the network at the moment, like in the movie Hackers. Also, at least one of your main guys in the NOC should wear all black, have funky hair and carry a skateboard around with him through the office. Also, liberally spread around a few terminals. Most important of all, have a couple geeky/emo looking trogs arguing about RISC architecture off in some corner of the room, rather loudly. Follow my suggestions and you will not fail to impress!
You need a lot more ram. Then fine-tune your server so that it will use that ram efficiently.
Also, you need to look into the queries that are being made to the database. One database isn't necessarily going to be any more efficient with its SQL queries than another just because more people like it.
Lets not kid ourselves here, the poor developers in India are exploited. The average salary is around $390/month, the kids down at the local fast food joint here in the US make more money than that. Sure the cost of living is a little lower over there, but things like books, computers etc, still cost the same or more than they do here.
Of course, most of your money goes to food and shelter, which I doubt is nearly expensive.
Anyway, it doesn't matter. There's singapore, vietnam, china and russia still.
I don't get it.
Are you saying they're all going to catch a cold?
Arnold jokes aside...
My vote is for HairNet
While I haven't read the article, I believe that's $1 per CPU-hour.
If you're running a program that consumes 25% CPU, you'd be paying $1 for every four real-time hours.
Likewise, if you're running some massive number-cruncher, you may be using a dozen CPUs at 100% and paying $12/hr.
On the positive side, you're not paying for hardware or maintenance or facilities or manpower (directly) either.
I wonder how they plan to compete with the distributed/remote computing power provided by all of the unpatched and unprotected Windows based systems in the world that are freely available to anyone with a couple scripts and an internet connection?
Everywhere... except the United States.
The most robotic thing we seem to make are vintage juke boxes.
Grandpa?!
What are you doing on the internet?!?!
Google is not putting out a client. They are running a jabber server.
There are plenty of full fledged jabber clients. GAIM, PSI, Adium, Exodus and tKabber to name only a few.
This makes up a full-fledged messaging system, without reinventing the wheel.
I think the original poster's reference to it as a program was clear in that they were speaking of it as a "system" as was my reply.
I really don't see a reason for people not to use Jabber. I only touch AIM because so many peopel I know are on AIM and it's difficult for them to find a good public jabber server (other than the main jabber one). Being able to point them to talk.google will make it much easier to convince and convert them now.
We've written some really amazing applications that work over Jabber through any of the jabber clients on our Jabber network (pretty much our entire corporation uses it) and these custom apps have made life a lot easier.
Having a really big player like Google take on the role of hosting a jabber server for the public is just what Jabber has needed. I think this is an absolutely awesome development and I only hope that Google is keeping their "first, do no evil" mission statement in mind.
Um... Aren't most people like.. you know... going out? Drinking? Clubbing? Dating? Getting laid?
Seriously - I'm not trolling here - but what *is* the "Saturday night" crowd? Is that like the... homebound geratric crowd or something?
No, that's a googol
Um. Jabber is a full fledged messaging program.
This is basically just google providing a public jabber server. I haven't gotten around to setting one up for myself, but have wanted to use a high quality, highly available, reliable jabber server to stick an account on. Now that google is doing it - I absolutely will.
This is exactly what I said they should do in the first place. Hurray!
What is the point of science in a country that outsources everything that isn't a management or service job? Yeah, wasting your time on science is great if you want to be unemployed - or only employed by a university or something. But if you want a real paying job with security, you have to do something that is unlikely to be "outsourced" or handed off to an automated process.
Currently, janitorial jobs are good. Jobs where you have to run a cash register or fold clothes or make change are good. I guess science-related jobs where you have to physically be on-site are good (surgery, though it looks like that can technically be done remotely in the future).
Oh - the one exception being government related jobs, of course. They tend not to contract with non-citizens for most jobs, even if they could actually be done by them.
And I'm actually only being partially snyde here.
If they do, I'll be VERY HAPPY to use it, as long as it's Jabber.
If they're just going to create their own stupid protocol rather than going with open-source, open-standards that already have a ton of existing clients - then I'm not interested.