With the right tools it's almost like being in the office. The team that I'm currently working on is only about 7 large and we're using Scrum. 3 of us don't even live in the same city where our company is HQ'ed (1 is in Vancouver, 1 in London England, the 3rd, myself, about 2.5 hours away). We have our morning meeting in which we each discuss a) what we did since our last meeting b) what we're doing until our next meeting, and c) what our impediments are During this time we also go over everybody's burn down chart and track progress.
It's pretty hard *not* to get stuff done when everybody is keeping everybody else accountable. In 6 months we put together an incredibly complex enterprise system that goes from a pda to a laptop, across some web services and into an as/400, complete with a web front end. And it works.
My experience is leading me to believe that telecommuting isn't the culprit for poor productivity - rather it's the lack of appropriate processes and tools. We use Skype and iChat to video conference, desktop sharing and collaborative design tools - this has made remote communication almost as effective as in office communication.
Personally, I don't think technology is the problem for airport security wait lines. I don't travel as much as a salesman, but I did 4 internations trips in 2007, and was on a plane about 15 or so times. During these flights I noticed something: Longer wait times occured in older airports - but the same technology and process was being used for all airports.
So what's the causing the long waits? What I noticed was that the older airports simply had less space; typically the older airport security troughs (or whatever you call the things they herd us through) had really short conveyor belts. So you'd get 2 or 3 people through the metal detector, and all of a sudden there were a half dozen people in about a 25 sq. ft. area, and the security guard couldn't wave anybody to come through the metal detector until the space cleared up.
The security check point when flying from Saskatchewan Canada into Minneapolis MN is a perfect example of this (several LAX security points are good exampls too): The line is configured such that it winds and weeaves and can hold 100s of people. There are multiple metal detectors and accompanying x-ray scanners... however, as soon as you pass through the detector you only have about 10 feet between you and the rest of the airport. What results is a lot of waiting for very few people to put their laptops back in their bags, put their jackets and belts back on, simply because there's no space to wave more people through.
Any airport security check point that's been recently built or renovated, from what I've seen, tends to have way more space post x-ray/metal-detector, thus allowing more people to get their stuff back on at a time and get the hell out and onto their next flight. Result: very little waiting.
Sure, we could design technology that doesn't require people to take off their shoes, but it goes beyond that. I think we simply need more space to put the stuff back (or repack) the stuff we had to remove prior to going through the checkpoint.
1. I read album reviews (www.pitchforkmedia.com, www.lostatsea.net, and www.popmatters.com) 2. I go to www.allmusic.com and start cross referencing artists that I know about. So, for example, perhaps I'll start with Elliot Smith and see whose listed under "similar artists", then I'll check out his influences and his followers. I'll repeat that process for any of the bands I stumble across and enjoy.
To hear the music I do the tried and true "Download it first" thing. I'll use Usenext or bittorrent to download the albums I'm interested in hearing and check them out. I'll eventually, at some point that same year, buy the album.
Since I've been doing this (about 4 years) my record collection has grown by about 300 albums, dwarfing what it once was. My musical taste has expanded into genres I used to think were "lame"; I've started to enjoy a huge array of genres, and I'm find listening to music to be a far richer experience compared to what it once was.
Whether the artists in question are RIAA or Non-RIAA I don't typically care (I'm a small label guy for the most part, though) - all I want is some good music.
I listened to this guy on CBC this weekend being interviewed. It was interesting, and I'm intrigued to read his book just for the sake of hearing more about what he has to say. I'm not a doctor (although I come from a family of doctors), and I'm not a dietitian (again, some in the family however), but I think there's something to it.
But lets be honest - north america is so immersed in carbohydrates, wouldn't simply levelling out our calorie intake be enough? To my understanding, the standard "healthy" intake of calories across the spectrum is 50% from carbs, 30% from protein, and 20% from fat. My question is, given our culture, how many of us actually adhere to that? i started counting calories a few months back and realised that while my fat intake was super low, my carb intake was through the roof at around 70-80% (which is actually an argument that the author makes during the podcast - you supplement your low fat intake with a higher protein or, in most of our cases, higher carb intake). So instead of stripping carbs out and treating it like fat, shouldn't we simply strive for a better balance? Everything's fine in moderation, but when crap gets out of whack, bad things happen.
In any case - the real point to my post is this question here: Having low amounts of fat is all fine and dandy, but one thing I didn't hear the author address (and maybe I missed it) was the cholesterol factor. I've known a few people that are pretty skinny, but their cholesterol levels are out of this world - so much so that their doctors have told them that, at the age of 27 and 29, they have to scale back or put themselves at severe risk of a cardiac arrest by the time they're 30. So while this whole "drop the carbs lets get skinny!" thing is all fine and dandy, I'm more curious as to whether or not that actually makes you healthier.
Too bad, too - DFA's live shows were some of the best I've ever seen. Ridiculous sound and energy generated from 2 guys.
If you're new to DFA and you acquire You're A Woman, I'm a Machine, try and keep in mind that there's only 2 musicians and instruments in this band - drums and bass - and they'll rock your testicles right off.
We now see what Schmidt thinks - I'm curious as to what Google employees actually think, however, because I hear a lot of the same rhetoric spewing from the mouth of our CEO here, and although what he says might be ideal and true in his little arrogant fantasy world, it's far from the truth.
So, what's Google actually like to work for?
Of course in order for them to profit they need people to use their software.
In order for people to use their software, the software has to work as expected, be easy to use, and help the end user accomplish whatever task it is they are to perform.
It is ILLEGAL to use allofmp3.com from the United States, it is probably illegal from most other countries as well. As it is it's only specifically LEGAL in Russia, they just have a loop hole that allows them to put the burden of illegally using their site on the customer.
Really? How so?
The artist will NEVER see ANY of the MONEY you give them.
And that's different than giving money directly to the RIAA because...?
no, they're handing a printout with what files were available to be shared - there's no proof, however, that anything was actually shared - which is the point of the grandparent. If memory serves me correct, this is exactly why the judge in Canada threw out the case (i think - can i get a confirmation on this?)
But there's not a whole lot of thing to go through - just type the feature you want in a textbox. But whatever...
The real problem I see with the new Office 12 from watching the PDC webcast today is they haven't improved the end user experience *at all* from a usability standpoint. Sure, there's lots of eye candy, but that doesn't mean "ease of use". They claim they got rid of the menu system and implemented a new tab system with lots of visual icons and such. I was watching it thinking "holy crap! It's worse than before!" There's so much clutter, and even then a lot of the tab-menu item buttons are actually menus with sub-menus. It's attrocious.
When you have 15,000 commands in a product (which MS claims they have in office) you can't just revamp the menu system a little bit, you have to get rid of it completely. As far as I'm concerned all they've done is make the hunting-for-commands process different, not better. What they need to do, however, is get rid of the hunting-for-commands process all together - either that or start massively cutting out features... 15,000 commands in a product? Way too many.
What you're talking about has more or less been done in OSX with Spotlight. I was pleasently surprised when I loaded up my system preference window (i'm totally new with OS X), wanting to create a new VPN connection but didn't know where to start. I simply typed "VPN" in the spotlight bar on the System Preferences window and it dimmed everything and highlighted the preference group where I would find that functionality.
Man, lemme know what theater you're going to. I'm at a point that I only hit up at theater about once every 4 - 6 months because I simply can't stand the people that go there... loud, talking, cell phones, pda's, everything... i leave pissed off every time and it rarely has to do with the quality of the picture, but the quality of the people viewing the picture.
I bought a 40G iPod Photo in december of 2004. It came with AV cables, a dock, a carrying case, a USB and a FireWire cable. It cost me $500 CAD. I come home from work and I connect it to my home stereo and voila, away I go.
What value/benefits does this $900 USD unit provide that my iPod + AV cables does not? Seriously, I just don't see the value in this thing at all.
It never ceases to amaze me that companies and the government can take this kind of action for somebody merely giving a presentation on the security vulnerabilities of a router, or a chunk of code, or how to bypass encryption. What the hell has happened to us?
When I was growing up, my grandmother told me there's three things I should never talk about in public: sex, politics, and religion. I guess now we can say the three things you should never talk about in public are security vulnerabilities, P2P, and political dissent.
Reading on this board, it seems to me that everybody's thinking that the iPod will be the primary means of digesting movies sold through iTunes. It strikes me that this is totally geared towards mac mini's (struck me the day after it's release, actually)... The way I see it, the iPod's integration into all of this (other than TV Out for the video, much like the iPod photo already has) is for previewing chapters and scene selections. IE - build in some video and a bit of bluetooth and control your mac mini from your sofa using your fnacy shmancy iPod remote.
No, iPods are for listening to music on the go. Are you actually suggesting that their main function is to allow you to take your music to a friends house and play on their stereo?
I do it all the time, actually. I bought a 40gig iPod Photo. It came with a dock, carrying case, and a/v out cables to connect to a home entertainment system. I use it at home all the time and I often take it to my friend's house. I've also co-hosted a radio show and have hooked up my iPod to the system and streamed a short (2 - 3 song) playlist over the air. What's so crazy about that?
I have 40 gigs of music at my finger tips... enough to drive from coast to coast 3 or 4 times and never hear the same song twice. Why would I want an FM tuner? So I can turn to the radio and hear the same shitty song every hour and indulge in my dark guilty pleasures of prepackaged pop? Gee, thanks.
I bought my iPod because a) It stores 40 gigs, b) It stores cover art, and c) It's super easy to use and gives kick ass quality sound.
It had nothing to do with "hip". Who gives a shit about "hip"? Is it stylish? yes, but it fills soooooo many other, more important requirements.
Slashdot Mirror
With the right tools it's almost like being in the office. The team that I'm currently working on is only about 7 large and we're using Scrum. 3 of us don't even live in the same city where our company is HQ'ed (1 is in Vancouver, 1 in London England, the 3rd, myself, about 2.5 hours away).
We have our morning meeting in which we each discuss
a) what we did since our last meeting
b) what we're doing until our next meeting, and
c) what our impediments are
During this time we also go over everybody's burn down chart and track progress.
It's pretty hard *not* to get stuff done when everybody is keeping everybody else accountable. In 6 months we put together an incredibly complex enterprise system that goes from a pda to a laptop, across some web services and into an as/400, complete with a web front end. And it works.
My experience is leading me to believe that telecommuting isn't the culprit for poor productivity - rather it's the lack of appropriate processes and tools. We use Skype and iChat to video conference, desktop sharing and collaborative design tools - this has made remote communication almost as effective as in office communication.
Personally, I don't think technology is the problem for airport security wait lines. I don't travel as much as a salesman, but I did 4 internations trips in 2007, and was on a plane about 15 or so times. During these flights I noticed something: Longer wait times occured in older airports - but the same technology and process was being used for all airports.
So what's the causing the long waits? What I noticed was that the older airports simply had less space; typically the older airport security troughs (or whatever you call the things they herd us through) had really short conveyor belts. So you'd get 2 or 3 people through the metal detector, and all of a sudden there were a half dozen people in about a 25 sq. ft. area, and the security guard couldn't wave anybody to come through the metal detector until the space cleared up.
The security check point when flying from Saskatchewan Canada into Minneapolis MN is a perfect example of this (several LAX security points are good exampls too): The line is configured such that it winds and weeaves and can hold 100s of people. There are multiple metal detectors and accompanying x-ray scanners... however, as soon as you pass through the detector you only have about 10 feet between you and the rest of the airport. What results is a lot of waiting for very few people to put their laptops back in their bags, put their jackets and belts back on, simply because there's no space to wave more people through.
Any airport security check point that's been recently built or renovated, from what I've seen, tends to have way more space post x-ray/metal-detector, thus allowing more people to get their stuff back on at a time and get the hell out and onto their next flight. Result: very little waiting.
Sure, we could design technology that doesn't require people to take off their shoes, but it goes beyond that. I think we simply need more space to put the stuff back (or repack) the stuff we had to remove prior to going through the checkpoint.
First, I educate myself about what's out there
1. I read album reviews (www.pitchforkmedia.com, www.lostatsea.net, and www.popmatters.com)
2. I go to www.allmusic.com and start cross referencing artists that I know about. So, for example, perhaps I'll start with Elliot Smith and see whose listed under "similar artists", then I'll check out his influences and his followers. I'll repeat that process for any of the bands I stumble across and enjoy.
To hear the music I do the tried and true "Download it first" thing. I'll use Usenext or bittorrent to download the albums I'm interested in hearing and check them out. I'll eventually, at some point that same year, buy the album.
Since I've been doing this (about 4 years) my record collection has grown by about 300 albums, dwarfing what it once was. My musical taste has expanded into genres I used to think were "lame"; I've started to enjoy a huge array of genres, and I'm find listening to music to be a far richer experience compared to what it once was.
Whether the artists in question are RIAA or Non-RIAA I don't typically care (I'm a small label guy for the most part, though) - all I want is some good music.
You also lost 25 pounds of good-times. ;)
I listened to this guy on CBC this weekend being interviewed. It was interesting, and I'm intrigued to read his book just for the sake of hearing more about what he has to say. I'm not a doctor (although I come from a family of doctors), and I'm not a dietitian (again, some in the family however), but I think there's something to it.
But lets be honest - north america is so immersed in carbohydrates, wouldn't simply levelling out our calorie intake be enough? To my understanding, the standard "healthy" intake of calories across the spectrum is 50% from carbs, 30% from protein, and 20% from fat. My question is, given our culture, how many of us actually adhere to that? i started counting calories a few months back and realised that while my fat intake was super low, my carb intake was through the roof at around 70-80% (which is actually an argument that the author makes during the podcast - you supplement your low fat intake with a higher protein or, in most of our cases, higher carb intake). So instead of stripping carbs out and treating it like fat, shouldn't we simply strive for a better balance? Everything's fine in moderation, but when crap gets out of whack, bad things happen.
In any case - the real point to my post is this question here: Having low amounts of fat is all fine and dandy, but one thing I didn't hear the author address (and maybe I missed it) was the cholesterol factor. I've known a few people that are pretty skinny, but their cholesterol levels are out of this world - so much so that their doctors have told them that, at the age of 27 and 29, they have to scale back or put themselves at severe risk of a cardiac arrest by the time they're 30. So while this whole "drop the carbs lets get skinny!" thing is all fine and dandy, I'm more curious as to whether or not that actually makes you healthier.
Unfortunately, Death From Above 1979 broke up last summer.s _id=7019
http://www.aversion.com/news/news_article.cfm?new
Too bad, too - DFA's live shows were some of the best I've ever seen. Ridiculous sound and energy generated from 2 guys.
If you're new to DFA and you acquire You're A Woman, I'm a Machine, try and keep in mind that there's only 2 musicians and instruments in this band - drums and bass - and they'll rock your testicles right off.
We now see what Schmidt thinks - I'm curious as to what Google employees actually think, however, because I hear a lot of the same rhetoric spewing from the mouth of our CEO here, and although what he says might be ideal and true in his little arrogant fantasy world, it's far from the truth. So, what's Google actually like to work for?
...OK Go can use all the help they can get
that i should have RTFA'd before making the exact same joke as is in the article's headline. oye.
all your base are belong to google.
Of course in order for them to profit they need people to use their software. In order for people to use their software, the software has to work as expected, be easy to use, and help the end user accomplish whatever task it is they are to perform.
Why worry about encoding when *massive assumption coming up* you could just purchase the vids through iTunes?
It is ILLEGAL to use allofmp3.com from the United States, it is probably illegal from most other countries as well. As it is it's only specifically LEGAL in Russia, they just have a loop hole that allows them to put the burden of illegally using their site on the customer.
Really? How so?
The artist will NEVER see ANY of the MONEY you give them.
And that's different than giving money directly to the RIAA because...?
no, they're handing a printout with what files were available to be shared - there's no proof, however, that anything was actually shared - which is the point of the grandparent. If memory serves me correct, this is exactly why the judge in Canada threw out the case (i think - can i get a confirmation on this?)
But there's not a whole lot of thing to go through - just type the feature you want in a textbox. But whatever...
The real problem I see with the new Office 12 from watching the PDC webcast today is they haven't improved the end user experience *at all* from a usability standpoint. Sure, there's lots of eye candy, but that doesn't mean "ease of use". They claim they got rid of the menu system and implemented a new tab system with lots of visual icons and such. I was watching it thinking "holy crap! It's worse than before!" There's so much clutter, and even then a lot of the tab-menu item buttons are actually menus with sub-menus. It's attrocious.
When you have 15,000 commands in a product (which MS claims they have in office) you can't just revamp the menu system a little bit, you have to get rid of it completely. As far as I'm concerned all they've done is make the hunting-for-commands process different, not better. What they need to do, however, is get rid of the hunting-for-commands process all together - either that or start massively cutting out features... 15,000 commands in a product? Way too many.
What you're talking about has more or less been done in OSX with Spotlight. I was pleasently surprised when I loaded up my system preference window (i'm totally new with OS X), wanting to create a new VPN connection but didn't know where to start. I simply typed "VPN" in the spotlight bar on the System Preferences window and it dimmed everything and highlighted the preference group where I would find that functionality.
It was most excellent.
Man, lemme know what theater you're going to. I'm at a point that I only hit up at theater about once every 4 - 6 months because I simply can't stand the people that go there... loud, talking, cell phones, pda's, everything... i leave pissed off every time and it rarely has to do with the quality of the picture, but the quality of the people viewing the picture.
I bought a 40G iPod Photo in december of 2004. It came with AV cables, a dock, a carrying case, a USB and a FireWire cable. It cost me $500 CAD. I come home from work and I connect it to my home stereo and voila, away I go. What value/benefits does this $900 USD unit provide that my iPod + AV cables does not? Seriously, I just don't see the value in this thing at all.
It never ceases to amaze me that companies and the government can take this kind of action for somebody merely giving a presentation on the security vulnerabilities of a router, or a chunk of code, or how to bypass encryption. What the hell has happened to us?
When I was growing up, my grandmother told me there's three things I should never talk about in public: sex, politics, and religion. I guess now we can say the three things you should never talk about in public are security vulnerabilities, P2P, and political dissent.
Dear America, I miss you. Come home soon.
Reading on this board, it seems to me that everybody's thinking that the iPod will be the primary means of digesting movies sold through iTunes. It strikes me that this is totally geared towards mac mini's (struck me the day after it's release, actually)... The way I see it, the iPod's integration into all of this (other than TV Out for the video, much like the iPod photo already has) is for previewing chapters and scene selections. IE - build in some video and a bit of bluetooth and control your mac mini from your sofa using your fnacy shmancy iPod remote.
No, iPods are for listening to music on the go. Are you actually suggesting that their main function is to allow you to take your music to a friends house and play on their stereo?
I do it all the time, actually. I bought a 40gig iPod Photo. It came with a dock, carrying case, and a/v out cables to connect to a home entertainment system. I use it at home all the time and I often take it to my friend's house. I've also co-hosted a radio show and have hooked up my iPod to the system and streamed a short (2 - 3 song) playlist over the air. What's so crazy about that?
Holy Crap! Michael Jackson is, uh, was, err, kinda... aw fuck it...
regardless of intent, I 100% agree with the above poster. Guinness should be 10$ a week!
I have 40 gigs of music at my finger tips... enough to drive from coast to coast 3 or 4 times and never hear the same song twice. Why would I want an FM tuner? So I can turn to the radio and hear the same shitty song every hour and indulge in my dark guilty pleasures of prepackaged pop? Gee, thanks.
I bought my iPod because a) It stores 40 gigs, b) It stores cover art, and c) It's super easy to use and gives kick ass quality sound.
It had nothing to do with "hip". Who gives a shit about "hip"? Is it stylish? yes, but it fills soooooo many other, more important requirements.
In the US, the latter would be an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech, not to mention completely impossible to enforce
I would agree except the US doesn't seem to care a whole lot about what is and is not constitutional with the passing of the USA PATRIOT ACT...