That was quite likely his point, but your reply misses mine. My point is that putting out useful information on the web is now a collaborative process made possible by technologies like Wikis.
And I think you're missing my point. I want a product, not a process. My employer makes the same mistake, by the way. When I go to an encyclopedia, I want accurate information, not collaboration. The people involved in wikipedia have gotten themselves so focused on the process of collaboration that they have forgotten about the product of accurate peer reviewed knowledge.
p.s. By "peer reviewed" I mean that the articles have been reviewed by experts in the appropriate fields, and not be generalists with a hard-on for collaborative processes.
If all you want is a calculator in the position, appoint a calculator!
Although you may not agree with this current vote, there may be others in the future where you would want the ministers to vote for what is right rather than to rubberstamp what they are told to. It's called statesmanship. What if the voting were reversed? What if their briefs said to vote for software patents but they decided not to?
Do you want that job? Then follow their silly rules. It's that simple. Really. You do not have an unalienable right to free broadband, pagers and blackberries.
Are they assholes? Yes. Will whining to Slashdot about it help? No. There's a reason I don't clean sewer systems for a living: I choose not to.
If you don't like that example, then use credit cards instead. By giving the credit card company access to my purchasing decisions, I get... wait for it... the ability to use the credit card!!!
To take it to an economic level, you will not disclose personal information during a transaction unless you perceive that you will gain a net benefit for doing so.
If they're worried about ministers not voting according to their briefs, then dump the whole system of ministers and just mail in the briefs! I mean, what's the point of appointing a human being if you're going to get pissed everytime he or she acts like a human being? Why don't you appoint a rubber stamp instead?
If you recommend something, you incur and obligation to support it. Tou don't want to go telling someone to specifically use X.org when you have not fully tested KDE under it.
Face it folks, X.org is brand new. I don't know of any currently shrink-wrapped distro on the store shelves that has it. Do you really want KDE to recommend users to uninstall their distro-supplied XFree86 package and build their won X.org? This may be a no brainer for experienced Gentoo users, but it's going to drive Mandrake newbies up the wall.
we should be able to collect everything that the government has on us
If that information is accurate, then I already have it. Think about it!
I suspect that people aren't concerned about the government knowing about us, but instead keeping that information in a database. Once you say the word "database", everyone's paranoia gland goes off. It's almost like we're willing to give them our address, just as long as they don't write it down.
It sounds like you weren't testing properly, if you think there is a linear relationship between lines of code and testing time. Each line of code incrementally adds to the overall complexity. It's a logarithmic relationship.
One example is regression testing. Each bug fixed adds to the regression suite, and thus to the time required to test a new release. For non-initial releases, regression testing is often the longest part.
And for the record, being wealthy, popular and beautiful *would* make me happy - because being poor, alone and ugly really, really sucks.
You're missing the point. While I would agree that being wealthy, popular and beautiful would make it easier to find happiness, it is not happiness itself. I think your problem is that you equate poverty, loneliness and ugliness with sadness. Not true.
When you see two equally poor lonely twins, and one is happy and the other not, you can only conclude that happiness does not come from the wallet, groin or makeup bottle.
This article at least suggests that we'll be getting something back for it.
You're giving something back for it right now! I have a card that allows the supermarket to track my purchases. What I do I get back for giving up this tiny bit of my privacy? Significant discounts! Thus I use my card to buy milk and bread, but keep it in my wallet when I buy Preparation H and Lowrider magazine.
If we did not value what we get in exchange for our privacy, then we would not given it up. It's as simple as that. The problem arises because we treat privacy as a vague generality and mistake it as an unalienable right.
His point is that false information was being presented as true. While it certainly can be corrected, that doesn't make little Emily's fifth grade report on Puerto Rico any more accurate.
People use encyclopedias so they can look up accurate information. They don't want to be forced into the role of reviewer and editor.
Articles in the Encyclopedia Britannica are written by experts and reviewed by their peers. Articles in Wikipedia are written by random authors and the review left to the hapless reader.
Don't pretend that this is open source. If open source software is written by a moron, the user instantly knows as the program crashes, corrupts their harddrives, or is otherwise exceedingly lame. It will die before it ever sees its fiftieth user. A Wikipedia article, on the other hand, will be accepted as the truth by all non-experts. Oh, another difference. Open Source software does not have anonymous authors...
Unfortunately, the political bias of the random unnamed editors creep in with alarming frequency. Apparently their viewpoint is that if you believe it with a religious intensity, why bother to check the facts.
I think it's taking long because all of the entries were so überlame they're embarassed to pick one. I haven't even seen the entries, have you? I'll bet...
Firefox developers, if they want their browser to be successful, need to have it render pages EXACTLY the same way IE does.
Actually, it already is successful. Don't measure success by the raw number of users. That's Microsoftthink. You don't have to have the entire world as a customer in order to call yourself successful.
I prefer Konqueror over Firefox, and I don't see myself switching anytime soon. But when I have to use Windows, it's Firefox or Mozilla everytime.
At the time we had 1,200 employees worldwide, but yes, we did read about it in the paper first. That's because we usually read the paper before going in to work.
An extra click or two would cause them too much pain and suffering.
But what about businesses where employees are paid? Surely if someone can't endure an extra mouse click even after getting paid to do it, fire their lazy asses!
I send a document to the printer and it doesn't get printed. I'm not about to troubleshoot the printing system and do your job for your. All I care about is that I can't print. So that's what I tell you: "Hey, the printer don't work!"
As for unjamming the printer, this five thousand dollar piece of equipment looks like a miniature five color Heidelberg. I ain't about to open it up and mess about on the insides!
It's only reasonable if your business is engaged in hyper sensitive data. Otherwise the cost of treating your employees shabbily far outweighs the gains of security.
My company has actually had an incident with corporate espionage. The FBI caught the perp with blueprints and software in his briefcase on the airport tarmac about to board a jet to mainland China. Yet no one here is even remotely considering banning any form of memory storage devices. They might as well close up shop and send all the employees home if they do.
More and more it seems to me that Gartner's target audience is the stupid inexperienced MBA right out of Harvard. Because no one else is dense enough to believe this tripe.
Slashdot Mirror
That was quite likely his point, but your reply misses mine. My point is that putting out useful information on the web is now a collaborative process made possible by technologies like Wikis.
And I think you're missing my point. I want a product, not a process. My employer makes the same mistake, by the way. When I go to an encyclopedia, I want accurate information, not collaboration. The people involved in wikipedia have gotten themselves so focused on the process of collaboration that they have forgotten about the product of accurate peer reviewed knowledge.
p.s. By "peer reviewed" I mean that the articles have been reviewed by experts in the appropriate fields, and not be generalists with a hard-on for collaborative processes.
If all you want is a calculator in the position, appoint a calculator!
Although you may not agree with this current vote, there may be others in the future where you would want the ministers to vote for what is right rather than to rubberstamp what they are told to. It's called statesmanship. What if the voting were reversed? What if their briefs said to vote for software patents but they decided not to?
Do you want that job? Then follow their silly rules. It's that simple. Really. You do not have an unalienable right to free broadband, pagers and blackberries.
Are they assholes? Yes. Will whining to Slashdot about it help? No. There's a reason I don't clean sewer systems for a living: I choose not to.
If you don't like that example, then use credit cards instead. By giving the credit card company access to my purchasing decisions, I get... wait for it... the ability to use the credit card!!!
To take it to an economic level, you will not disclose personal information during a transaction unless you perceive that you will gain a net benefit for doing so.
If they're worried about ministers not voting according to their briefs, then dump the whole system of ministers and just mail in the briefs! I mean, what's the point of appointing a human being if you're going to get pissed everytime he or she acts like a human being? Why don't you appoint a rubber stamp instead?
Frankly, as the "wm" prefixes for Windowmaker dockapps is driving me nuts!
If you recommend something, you incur and obligation to support it. Tou don't want to go telling someone to specifically use X.org when you have not fully tested KDE under it.
Face it folks, X.org is brand new. I don't know of any currently shrink-wrapped distro on the store shelves that has it. Do you really want KDE to recommend users to uninstall their distro-supplied XFree86 package and build their won X.org? This may be a no brainer for experienced Gentoo users, but it's going to drive Mandrake newbies up the wall.
You don't have to use the Keramic theme. Use my Phase theme instead. No "K" anywhere!
we should be able to collect everything that the government has on us
If that information is accurate, then I already have it. Think about it!
I suspect that people aren't concerned about the government knowing about us, but instead keeping that information in a database. Once you say the word "database", everyone's paranoia gland goes off. It's almost like we're willing to give them our address, just as long as they don't write it down.
It sounds like you weren't testing properly, if you think there is a linear relationship between lines of code and testing time. Each line of code incrementally adds to the overall complexity. It's a logarithmic relationship.
One example is regression testing. Each bug fixed adds to the regression suite, and thus to the time required to test a new release. For non-initial releases, regression testing is often the longest part.
And for the record, being wealthy, popular and beautiful *would* make me happy - because being poor, alone and ugly really, really sucks.
You're missing the point. While I would agree that being wealthy, popular and beautiful would make it easier to find happiness, it is not happiness itself. I think your problem is that you equate poverty, loneliness and ugliness with sadness. Not true.
When you see two equally poor lonely twins, and one is happy and the other not, you can only conclude that happiness does not come from the wallet, groin or makeup bottle.
This article at least suggests that we'll be getting something back for it.
You're giving something back for it right now! I have a card that allows the supermarket to track my purchases. What I do I get back for giving up this tiny bit of my privacy? Significant discounts! Thus I use my card to buy milk and bread, but keep it in my wallet when I buy Preparation H and Lowrider magazine.
If we did not value what we get in exchange for our privacy, then we would not given it up. It's as simple as that. The problem arises because we treat privacy as a vague generality and mistake it as an unalienable right.
His point is that false information was being presented as true. While it certainly can be corrected, that doesn't make little Emily's fifth grade report on Puerto Rico any more accurate.
People use encyclopedias so they can look up accurate information. They don't want to be forced into the role of reviewer and editor.
Articles in the Encyclopedia Britannica are written by experts and reviewed by their peers. Articles in Wikipedia are written by random authors and the review left to the hapless reader.
Don't pretend that this is open source. If open source software is written by a moron, the user instantly knows as the program crashes, corrupts their harddrives, or is otherwise exceedingly lame. It will die before it ever sees its fiftieth user. A Wikipedia article, on the other hand, will be accepted as the truth by all non-experts. Oh, another difference. Open Source software does not have anonymous authors...
Unfortunately, the political bias of the random unnamed editors creep in with alarming frequency. Apparently their viewpoint is that if you believe it with a religious intensity, why bother to check the facts.
Reason number 57 while I will never respect Wikipedia as a serious reference source.
I think it's taking long because all of the entries were so überlame they're embarassed to pick one. I haven't even seen the entries, have you? I'll bet...
Firefox developers, if they want their browser to be successful, need to have it render pages EXACTLY the same way IE does.
Actually, it already is successful. Don't measure success by the raw number of users. That's Microsoftthink. You don't have to have the entire world as a customer in order to call yourself successful.
I prefer Konqueror over Firefox, and I don't see myself switching anytime soon. But when I have to use Windows, it's Firefox or Mozilla everytime.
At the time we had 1,200 employees worldwide, but yes, we did read about it in the paper first. That's because we usually read the paper before going in to work.
1999 Free Software Advocate: It's not fair! I don't have a choice of browsers!
2004 Free Software Advocate: Don't give them a choice and they won't be able to use IE!
An extra click or two would cause them too much pain and suffering.
But what about businesses where employees are paid? Surely if someone can't endure an extra mouse click even after getting paid to do it, fire their lazy asses!
I send a document to the printer and it doesn't get printed. I'm not about to troubleshoot the printing system and do your job for your. All I care about is that I can't print. So that's what I tell you: "Hey, the printer don't work!"
As for unjamming the printer, this five thousand dollar piece of equipment looks like a miniature five color Heidelberg. I ain't about to open it up and mess about on the insides!
It's only reasonable if your business is engaged in hyper sensitive data. Otherwise the cost of treating your employees shabbily far outweighs the gains of security.
My company has actually had an incident with corporate espionage. The FBI caught the perp with blueprints and software in his briefcase on the airport tarmac about to board a jet to mainland China. Yet no one here is even remotely considering banning any form of memory storage devices. They might as well close up shop and send all the employees home if they do.
More and more it seems to me that Gartner's target audience is the stupid inexperienced MBA right out of Harvard. Because no one else is dense enough to believe this tripe.
Hopefully the much talked about, but never released, plot will be included on one of those discs...
Husband: "Woo hoo! I saved us $50 by buying this 500 pound bag of dogfood at CostCo!"
Wife: "Honey, we don't have a dog..."