The transporter system is well conceived. There are the Heisenberg Compensators, as well as the equalizer-like control with two sets of five sliders so the person controlling the transporter can use all his fingers to adjust your molecular re-assembly in case he notices a problem such as your good and evil sides being separated.
For those who leave school early and go for a job (yes people have to work), Office on their resume will do fine, for those who want to continue at school, they can afford to explore other 'office' like solutions. Oops, this last quotation is from your post. Vocational training is important. How else could legal secretaries learn WordPerfect 5.1?:o)
I leave your poor reductio ad absurdam to your own reflection. As for the moral polarity of capitalism, you have all the evidence you need.
Once they've learn't Office they can learn pretty much any office like tools. I'd reverse this: once they learn office software, they can learn other office software, including MS Office. OpenOffice is both good in quality, easy on the taxpayer and school budget, and beyond the influence and temptations of the market system. If this means nothing to you, then I suppose you will be happy to find Coca-Cola vending machines and no water fountains in the school where you will be sending your children to use MS Office.
For those who leave school early and go for a job (yes people have to work), Office on their resume will do fine, for those who want to continue at school, they can afford to explore other 'office' like solutions.
Give students tools that they can use freely and change to build new tools with if they want to. Education money should be spent educating students and training teachers, not on something as costly and hopeless as software licensing.
The Real World is a jumble of versions and standards of everything, differing remarkably from job to job. The only way to prepare for the Real World is to understand the concepts.
And start with the important concept that a salesman does not have your best interest in mind and would advertise his product on the inside of your eyelids if he could.
I've already agreed that Symantec blundered. Your point is understood.
Anti-virus software is a Monkeysoft-based market.
You say it's because Monkeysoft is popular. But you admit that Redmond has made a seriously bad design decision. If not for the Internet, Monkeysoft wouldn't have these costly episodes. You called its permissiveness "moronic", I didn't. But we agree there too.
Anti-virus isn't designed to protect the OS, its designed to protect people from themselves.
Hmmm. Given that the OS was damaged in this case, it appears that the OS needs protection too. Bot networks and honeypots prove that this isn't just about userland files. Now in this case, the AV software itself harmed the OS. That SHOULD NOT be possible... but it ~has~ to be possible to give the AV software such access, because other applications have the same access too. Set aside the current news: there are many other examples of Monkeysoft OS being harmed or altered by malware and spyware. I worked in a corporate environment for several years and I know how easily the computer of even a careful Monkeysoft user can be compromised.
In the end, this story has nothing to do with any particular OS.
Given that AV software is a Monkeysoft market, and the fact that well over 98% of all virus reports are about Redmond, this is a nonsensical statement. But we'll agree to disagree.
What does any of this have to do with good design? Are you serious? The whole AV software market is a crutch for the lame design of Monkeysoft.
When you are using the most common OS, you will need some form of anti-virus software. I see you've been drinking the Redmond Red flavour of Kool-Aid. UNIX is a common OS and it's been around for 37 years and networked for all that time. Why is there no AV software market for UNIX? What are the two most common implementation languages for Monkeysoft viruses? Monkeysoft has been on the Internet since about 1995. How much time have Monkeysoft users lost to viruses? Whose OS is the most 'botted?
Is all this Symantec's fault for not protecting Monkeysoft better?
If you replace "common" with "most vulnerable", your statement makes sense.
If a program can be downloaded and run from the internet, it can be a virus. Sure... and if it runs with root or root-like privileges, it can do serious damage. Guess which OS lets that happen? To protect yourself, you can install AV software and dedicate one (or both) of your dual CPU cores to constantly scanning every file that is accessed so you can be "safe". A fine value proposition for your computer investment.
This is Symantec being incredibly irresponsible. Failing to find something like this in pre-update testing (or the failure to test updates) is insane and they should be required to pay for repairs. I agree that Symantec made a serious error in deploying an updated defence for the weak OS that they make money defending. But I bet they'll pay nothing, or at least as much to pirates as they do to licensed owners.
As a Linux and OS X user who only runs Monkeysoft in virtualization, I can only squeeze out a little amount pity for the affected folks.
EEEERRRRK. URGGGGGGGG. Hah! There it is.
1) Monkeysoft Windows is a weak OS that requires anti-virus software to keep it safe. The OS tells you as much itself.
2) Security starts with good design. Any OS that depends on third-party tools to be safe is not designed for networking. And THAT is Monkeysoft's real problem. The Internet has done more damage to their products than any competition.
3) The computing model in which anti-virus software companies manage users' safety remotely is a bad idea. Do they know what they are doing, and do you want them doing it? Probably not, and probably not.
As has been said, there are jobs that require background checks.
Worry more about what the employment contract says. Some of them are feudal slavery. If the employer is going to own everything that you code at any time of the day or night, whether at the office or at home, you won't be doing any open-source contributing and any personal projects that you create might not be yours without a fight involving lawyers.
You should be aware of what you are signing away when you accept a job.
Would there be any point in offering a counter-argument? If you haven't read what Torvalds said, if you don't feel the need to read what he said in order to discuss it, and most notably of all if you don't feel the need to read what he said in order to characterize it, you're too formidable a debater for any merely sensible person.
I read that phrase in a Cormac McCarthy novel and it stuck with me. I don't know--I could see what he meant to describe, and I think it fits here. Gadzooks, Sir. Do you work on a corporate UI standards team? If not, I suspect that a glorious career opportunity awaits your embrace.
You're being critical about UI design but using terms that you can't define, saying they are appropriate and citing an American novel for the obscure usage. Being 2-for-2 in name-dropping strongly supports your literary reputation at the water cooler but brings me no further in understanding what the devil you are saying. I suspect that you've put a regal costume on a fully banal observation and you've evidently dazzled our Moderators.
"Judicious use of dissimilar UI paradigms can emphasize the aspects of your application that are dissimilar to others, the aspects that need special attention from the user."
I sure hope Emerson said that first sentence better, unless you meant "Emerson, New Jersey", in which case I will have to take your word on it.
Because they take millions of dollars from gullible people, they are a corporation of ignorance posing as a religion, they have killed [scientology-kills.org], and they censor and lash out at people who investigate them. It's a shame that their evils are not unique.
Taking money from the gullible is a cornerstone of the consumer economy... and income tax.
Ignorance posing as a religion is, well, ~every~ religion.
Murder is the way of fanatics, psychopaths and profiteers, but there are worseoffenders.
Reacting aggressively to investigation and criticism... welcome to humannature!
Does no one listen to CDs in their car anymore? I do not. I have FLAC audio on a hard-disk player. The 20GB disk gives me about 30 hours of losslessly encoded, unrepeated music of my choosing and I can carry it all in my pocket.
I think it's stupid to pay money for less-than-CD quality sound. Then again, I also think it's stupid to buy less-than-nutritious food... and there's clearly a huge (as in ass) market for Windy's, Burger Kong, and Dreckdonald's.
Citing the expense of providing and repairing laptops, difficulties of network management, and discipline problems stemming from pornography, cheating, and cracking that more than outweighed the productivity benefits, management at Armonk-based IBM is taking thousands of laptops away from employees.
The laptops are reportedly being sent to India and China, where labour is so cheap that low productivity doesn't exist.
And you can find a company that doesn't have that philosophy. There is much wisdom in your post. I can only add this: the probability is that such a company is a small, local one.
The big companies have "management teams" whose goal is to earn their bonuses by talking as though they are doing something useful. Their bonuses are tied to share price, directly or indirectly. The management team does not care about the local community - senior managers plan to go anywhere in the world if the pay and rank flatter their ambition.
The senior management will hire toady dynasty-builders for middle management. These are the people who nod Yes the most.
The people who do the real work will receive as much reward as the peasant labourers of other times in history. But they will enjoy the "job security".
We're pleased that you are on board with our vision initiative. Together, we can outward and inward face the value-proposition challenges and look for the upward opportunities to business-transform and culture-transform while strengthening our foundation relationships.
Those of us who are not fired will be meeting on the golf course at 10:00 tomorrow.
Slashdot Mirror
The transporter system is well conceived. There are the Heisenberg Compensators, as well as the equalizer-like control with two sets of five sliders so the person controlling the transporter can use all his fingers to adjust your molecular re-assembly in case he notices a problem such as your good and evil sides being separated.
For those who leave school early and go for a job (yes people have to work), Office on their resume will do fine, for those who want to continue at school, they can afford to explore other 'office' like solutions.
Mod the parent +1 Wise (or /. equivalent).
Give students tools that they can use freely and change to build new tools with if they want to. Education money should be spent educating students and training teachers, not on something as costly and hopeless as software licensing.
The Real World is a jumble of versions and standards of everything, differing remarkably from job to job. The only way to prepare for the Real World is to understand the concepts.
And start with the important concept that a salesman does not have your best interest in mind and would advertise his product on the inside of your eyelids if he could.
I've heard they're good quality: Deck keyboards.
Connect two users by whatever protocol and you have a network. It doesn't have to be a "modern" one.
Anti-virus software is a Monkeysoft-based market.
You say it's because Monkeysoft is popular. But you admit that Redmond has made a seriously bad design decision. If not for the Internet, Monkeysoft wouldn't have these costly episodes. You called its permissiveness "moronic", I didn't. But we agree there too.
Hmmm. Given that the OS was damaged in this case, it appears that the OS needs protection too. Bot networks and honeypots prove that this isn't just about userland files. Now in this case, the AV software itself harmed the OS. That SHOULD NOT be possible... but it ~has~ to be possible to give the AV software such access, because other applications have the same access too. Set aside the current news: there are many other examples of Monkeysoft OS being harmed or altered by malware and spyware. I worked in a corporate environment for several years and I know how easily the computer of even a careful Monkeysoft user can be compromised.
Given that AV software is a Monkeysoft market, and the fact that well over 98% of all virus reports are about Redmond, this is a nonsensical statement. But we'll agree to disagree.
Is all this Symantec's fault for not protecting Monkeysoft better?
If you replace "common" with "most vulnerable", your statement makes sense. If a program can be downloaded and run from the internet, it can be a virus. Sure... and if it runs with root or root-like privileges, it can do serious damage. Guess which OS lets that happen? To protect yourself, you can install AV software and dedicate one (or both) of your dual CPU cores to constantly scanning every file that is accessed so you can be "safe". A fine value proposition for your computer investment. This is Symantec being incredibly irresponsible. Failing to find something like this in pre-update testing (or the failure to test updates) is insane and they should be required to pay for repairs. I agree that Symantec made a serious error in deploying an updated defence for the weak OS that they make money defending. But I bet they'll pay nothing, or at least as much to pirates as they do to licensed owners.
I'd mod you up for the "pale, lifeless thing in a cave" metaphor. And the abbreviation, "PLTIAC", is amusing too!
As a Linux and OS X user who only runs Monkeysoft in virtualization, I can only squeeze out a little amount pity for the affected folks.
EEEERRRRK. URGGGGGGGG. Hah! There it is.
1) Monkeysoft Windows is a weak OS that requires anti-virus software to keep it safe. The OS tells you as much itself.
2) Security starts with good design. Any OS that depends on third-party tools to be safe is not designed for networking. And THAT is Monkeysoft's real problem. The Internet has done more damage to their products than any competition.
3) The computing model in which anti-virus software companies manage users' safety remotely is a bad idea. Do they know what they are doing, and do you want them doing it? Probably not, and probably not.
As has been said, there are jobs that require background checks.
Worry more about what the employment contract says. Some of them are feudal slavery. If the employer is going to own everything that you code at any time of the day or night, whether at the office or at home, you won't be doing any open-source contributing and any personal projects that you create might not be yours without a fight involving lawyers.
You should be aware of what you are signing away when you accept a job.
Would there be any point in offering a counter-argument? If you haven't read what Torvalds said, if you don't feel the need to read what he said in order to discuss it, and most notably of all if you don't feel the need to read what he said in order to characterize it, you're too formidable a debater for any merely sensible person.
You haven't read what Torvalds said, have you?
You're being critical about UI design but using terms that you can't define, saying they are appropriate and citing an American novel for the obscure usage. Being 2-for-2 in name-dropping strongly supports your literary reputation at the water cooler but brings me no further in understanding what the devil you are saying. I suspect that you've put a regal costume on a fully banal observation and you've evidently dazzled our Moderators.
"Judicious use of dissimilar UI paradigms can emphasize the aspects of your application that are dissimilar to others, the aspects that need special attention from the user."
I sure hope Emerson said that first sentence better, unless you meant "Emerson, New Jersey", in which case I will have to take your word on it.
Would you explain what "autistic" means in this context?
Here's Stallman citing the original report, in context:- transcript.en.html#patents
http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3/tokyo-rms
Squirts Ballboy is just showing what a fine leader of Monkeysoft he is.
Squirts is trying to be "aggressive". He consistently talks like a fool.
- transcript.en.html#patents
Here's what Stallman really said, in context:
http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3/tokyo-rms
Taking money from the gullible is a cornerstone of the consumer economy... and income tax.
Ignorance posing as a religion is, well, ~every~ religion.
Murder is the way of fanatics, psychopaths and profiteers, but there are worse offenders.
Reacting aggressively to investigation and criticism... welcome to human nature!
In Soviet Russia, ees illegal to drive while you text!
I think it's stupid to pay money for less-than-CD quality sound. Then again, I also think it's stupid to buy less-than-nutritious food... and there's clearly a huge (as in ass) market for Windy's, Burger Kong, and Dreckdonald's.
Citing the expense of providing and repairing laptops, difficulties of network management, and discipline problems stemming from pornography, cheating, and cracking that more than outweighed the productivity benefits, management at Armonk-based IBM is taking thousands of laptops away from employees.
The laptops are reportedly being sent to India and China, where labour is so cheap that low productivity doesn't exist.
That's the theory, in any case.
Don't worry about the facts. Hollywood will pick this story up and turn into "Entertainment".
"Nicholas Cage in... HellReiser!"
"Real democracy" doesn't exist.
If it did, it would be crushed by plutocratic capitalism.
The big companies have "management teams" whose goal is to earn their bonuses by talking as though they are doing something useful. Their bonuses are tied to share price, directly or indirectly. The management team does not care about the local community - senior managers plan to go anywhere in the world if the pay and rank flatter their ambition.
The senior management will hire toady dynasty-builders for middle management. These are the people who nod Yes the most.
The people who do the real work will receive as much reward as the peasant labourers of other times in history. But they will enjoy the "job security".
The illusion of it, I should say.
We're pleased that you are on board with our vision initiative. Together, we can outward and inward face the value-proposition challenges and look for the upward opportunities to business-transform and culture-transform while strengthening our foundation relationships.
Those of us who are not fired will be meeting on the golf course at 10:00 tomorrow.