I'm not doubting that, but most of their money does end up leaving; not going into a bank or buying a home or other things that really drive our economy.
And thats exactly the attitude that will have everyone living in a shack.. 'its cheaper i don't care how it got to be cheap i don't care if it destroys our country, as long as i don't spend as much!'
Ever stop to think that is the reason the number of poor continues to increase and the middle class is shrinking? Good paying jobs are leaving and being replaced with walmart cashiering positions. Great.
Its not part of the kernel, but you can't get rid of it either. So on your IIS server with ultra crappy video card, there DX is. Not being used, but neither is an unloaded kernel module either.
My point is that it gets installed and can't be removed from a business system, not that its part of the kernel. Try not to be so dense in the future..
This is not true; most that come here doing this send their money back to their families at home, since the dollar goes much further there, and is a great help to family.
Late binding is horrible for performance. Thats one good reason.
The macro kernel isn't a bad idea if you can easily exclude parts you don't want (which you can). It won't cause problems, you simply won't have the options you excluded.
You won't be hindered by excluding the options, and everyone else that wants them can do so.
"You need to change the oil in a car to keep it running." "No I don't!" "Do you even own a car?" "No, and its irrelevent."
Good job there, comparing something that is a proven fact (not chaning oil WILL damage your car) to something not proven (there's not experiment to prove that viewing porn is harmful to children). I suggest you drop the analogies now and stick to the topic at hand.
I think you have to have at least one child before you are qualified to have a reasonable opinion on the matter...or work with kids who have been addicted to porn. Something. ANYTHING.
Why? Having BEEN a child myself doesn't qualify me? Growing up with other children with similar expierience disqualifies me?
Do you now need to be a director to determine if a movie is poorly directed? How about art? I can't tell whats bad art because I'm not a master painter?
Get over yourself, knocking up a girl doesn't prove you know anything.
With all due respect, it depends largely on what you call "fine". I'm sure Osama Bin Laden thinks he's "fine".
Oh of course, I have an opinion different than yours, so I"m terrorist. Get a clue dumbass.
You're as bad as a woman with these logical leap fallicies.:) I don't even know how to respond to that one.:)
I'm not the one making logical leap fallicies. You must be a parent to have any clue at all, attempting to link me to a terrorist master mind, or that something which can be scientifically proven is at all analogous to something which is not.
And it would appear you're sexist as well. Tell me again, who's the one with the problem?
One interesting sentence from the article, "[The G] rating had become increasingly associated with films, often poorly made, intended specifically for children, while the PG rating became increasingly common for "family" films, with the G rating increasingly stigmatized by a public perception that a film so rated was a "dumb movie rated G for kids." This led to the PG rating becoming overloaded with everything from family films "spiced up" to avoid a G to very mature films that were "toned down" to avoid R ratings."
Hmm, sound familar? Not at all like PG-13 right?
Personally, I avoid almost all G or PG movies, and am incredibly leary of PG-13 (although alot of horror / suspence movies have been released under it, The Ring, etc.).
No, i couldn't. I had 2 prems. and digital on two tvs and internet..it was 175 / month. For everything, it would have been almost 200. Thats why I dropped the prems after the 'special' that i used to get them. When all was said and done, comcast was more money for the same service.
They assemble a reliable machine and, as a company, are a dream to work with. If you are a company of reasonable size, ordering and support are prompt and hassle-free. I work for a large leasing company, and since technically it's our cash upfront, we own tens of thousands of Dell PC's and servers. You ought to see the free stuff we get around here.
Are you saying they can't assemble a reliable machine on AMD chips? Would using AMD change any of the other reasons you sited?
Re:They just want better pricing from Intel
on
Dell Might do AMD
·
· Score: 1
Personall, except for laptops, I don't buy Dell because I can't get an AMD chip.
I'm not sure why more businesses don't demand AMD; I've found that AMD often performs better than a similar Intel chip, and the cost savings are great too.
It matters a great deal in real life whether employees like their workplace and workplace rules. It can matter as much as 30% in terms of productivity. Now lock down computers don't compare to things like reasonable raises in terms of employee satisfaction but I've seen lots of shops where "tight networks" lead employees to waste huge amounts of time out of spite. They go out of their way to do things ineffeciently on the applications they are forced to use as a way to get back at management.
Said employees are not valuable to the company and should be promptly terminated. those employees will likely find something else to bitch about; the truth is they are lazy and self important, and are quite good at wasting time and then finding justifcation for it.
Further you seem to have the attitude that the network is important in and of itself. The network exists to allow the subject matter experts to communicate with each other and the systems containing subject matter data. If those communications don't result in useful output at high levels of productivity who cares about the network?
So you can't possible have a secure network that allows users to get their work done? Sorry,your logic is way off. There's a difference between not having apps you ligitimatly need and letting users install anything they download off the net. As i stated before, what users need depends on their function.
Which makes they uncontrolled. What's your backup strategy for critical data being stored on database XYZ on some SME's home laptop? How do you find the contact list from a sales guy who was fired who keeps this information in his PDA? What is your source control policy for a developer who uses tools from home because he can't get the ones he likes at work.
How would said employee create mission critical databases on their home laptop to begin with? Why are you letting employees keep contact info on thier home PDA to begin with? If the employee needs a PDA, one should be suppiled by the company. Again, if thats what your employees are doing, they should be fired.
The most likely way you got into that situtation is that you didn't lock out outside laptops and PDAs to begin with.
You have a wonderful network, it just doesn't happen to have the business data on it.
If employees are not using the network to store company data, and instead store it on thier home computers, they should be fired.
Why? Lets say that an employee manages to screw up their home directory and a help desk guy loses a half-day fixing it. Lets say this happens to each employee 1x per year (a pretty bad case). So we are talking what an extra $200 per employee in a worst case scenerio. That's chicken feed compared to what real problems can cost after data migration occurs. Basically that's the same or less than the cost of an employee one time per year getting frustrated with network admin and goofing off the second half of the day.
And lets say you have 400 employees; thats $80,000 / year wasted because you let employees do stupid things that you could have prevented. $80,000 isn't exactly chicken feed as you claim. At one firm I worked that, thats easily an entire client project bill; so now you've let an entire project be done soley for covering losses created by out of control employees, you're in the hole now (since you still had to pay the employees for building the program too).
And lets not even talk about the real fun projects like trying to retake control of these applications once they migrate off the main IT systems. You can burn up man years by the dozen on these projects.
Projects should NOT be migrating off the IT systems to begin with. There's no reason to bring your personal laptop to work. There's no reason to hook your personal PDA up to your work computer.
In all seriousness, I've never heard of employees doing what you describe. If they are, they should be promply fired.
Reread the part about supporting the business. The network ain't the business.
I agree, but you need to understand that there's a difference between providing what employees need versus letting them install anything they want on their workstations.
This has been Sun's argument for the last decade. The fact of the matter is it isn't true. Joe average users wants the ability to install his own software and use particular apps as much as the technical people do. They don't like administrative fascism any more than we do.
Um, it doesn't matter if they like it or not. They are using thier company's computers, not thier home computers.
Of course, depending on job function the user may ligitimatly need to install apps...but it should be locked down so that said apps can't screw up the rest of the network.
When they are given a locked down environment work tends to migrate off the locked down environment to a completely uncontrolled environment (home systems, personal laptops, PDA's, physical notebooks...).
And such systems should be completely denied from accessng the network.
Now thin client doesn't require fascism in fact it can allow for more freedom if each user has liberal permissions in their home directory but the fact is this requires support.
This is probably true, if you can install apps to your home directory. In windows you can't yet, but *nix obviously it can be done. Of course if the app they install screws up thier home directory files, you'll still have to fix it. So even in that case it might be wise not to allow it.
There is no getting around high support costs and a high admin:employee ratio to actually support the business.
If your logic was so iron clad you'd realize that 1) this is a highly unlikely scenario and 2) you'd have to be drunk enough to not be able to reliably control the car, and thus would have trouble hitting your intended target and 3) you stated that you did in fact intend to kill me.
Anyone that attempts your little scenario is likely highly unstable to begin with, and proving so should be trivial.
So, given this post, and the one to which I replied, I stand by my assertation that you are without logic and reason.
I'd like to add another log to that fire; if in fact you were as logical as you claim, you'd also understand that no legal system can even be perfect, because we as humans are not perfect beings. You'd also understand that our system is setup on the premise that its better to let a guilty person go free than for an innocent man to be punished.
The number of laws was supposed to be minimal, so that the government can't just throw people in jail on a whim, which is the current state of affairs now (unfortunatly).
For one, how do you determine what is offensive for children? Hard core sex? any nudity at all? Where would playboy go? Maxium?
Secondly, once said system is in place, censorship becomes much much easier.
And lastly, whats to stop a kid from typing in the IP? Renaming the hardcoresex.xxx to myresearch.edu in the hosts file? You don't think kids can figure this out (or be shown how to do it by others)?
It seems doomed to fail. Why not just sit with your children, and accept the fact that seeing sex, a natural human action, won't destroy them.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, and after the installer says it must compile a driver for my kernel, and I tell it ok, it goes and does so, then finishes the installation.
I'm sorry, what was your point?
I'm not doubting that, but most of their money does end up leaving; not going into a bank or buying a home or other things that really drive our economy.
Cheaper isn't always better.
And thats exactly the attitude that will have everyone living in a shack.. 'its cheaper i don't care how it got to be cheap i don't care if it destroys our country, as long as i don't spend as much!'
Ever stop to think that is the reason the number of poor continues to increase and the middle class is shrinking? Good paying jobs are leaving and being replaced with walmart cashiering positions. Great.
Its not part of the kernel, but you can't get rid of it either. So on your IIS server with ultra crappy video card, there DX is. Not being used, but neither is an unloaded kernel module either.
My point is that it gets installed and can't be removed from a business system, not that its part of the kernel. Try not to be so dense in the future..
Are they unemployable because they don't have the skills, or they have the skills but you don't think they are worth as much as they do?
This is not true; most that come here doing this send their money back to their families at home, since the dollar goes much further there, and is a great help to family.
Doesn't really help much.. all it does is force everyone else's salary down, and lower our standard of living.
Globalization is great if you want to push just about everyone down to ground level..
Late binding is horrible for performance. Thats one good reason.
The macro kernel isn't a bad idea if you can easily exclude parts you don't want (which you can). It won't cause problems, you simply won't have the options you excluded.
You won't be hindered by excluding the options, and everyone else that wants them can do so.
I don't hear anyone complaining about DirectX 9 being included in WinXP pro.
"You need to change the oil in a car to keep it running."
:) I don't even know how to respond to that one. :)
"No I don't!"
"Do you even own a car?"
"No, and its irrelevent."
Good job there, comparing something that is a proven fact (not chaning oil WILL damage your car) to something not proven (there's not experiment to prove that viewing porn is harmful to children). I suggest you drop the analogies now and stick to the topic at hand.
I think you have to have at least one child before you are qualified to have a reasonable opinion on the matter...or work with kids who have been addicted to porn. Something. ANYTHING.
Why? Having BEEN a child myself doesn't qualify me? Growing up with other children with similar expierience disqualifies me?
Do you now need to be a director to determine if a movie is poorly directed? How about art? I can't tell whats bad art because I'm not a master painter?
Get over yourself, knocking up a girl doesn't prove you know anything.
With all due respect, it depends largely on what you call "fine". I'm sure Osama Bin Laden thinks he's "fine".
Oh of course, I have an opinion different than yours, so I"m terrorist. Get a clue dumbass.
You're as bad as a woman with these logical leap fallicies.
I'm not the one making logical leap fallicies. You must be a parent to have any clue at all, attempting to link me to a terrorist master mind, or that something which can be scientifically proven is at all analogous to something which is not.
And it would appear you're sexist as well. Tell me again, who's the one with the problem?
Why not get rid of the ratings then, and just have these helpful phrases?
Well, check out this on the Wiki..
t em
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPAA_film_rating_sys
One interesting sentence from the article, "[The G] rating had become increasingly associated with films, often poorly made, intended specifically for children, while the PG rating became increasingly common for "family" films, with the G rating increasingly stigmatized by a public perception that a film so rated was a "dumb movie rated G for kids." This led to the PG rating becoming overloaded with everything from family films "spiced up" to avoid a G to very mature films that were "toned down" to avoid R ratings."
Hmm, sound familar? Not at all like PG-13 right?
Personally, I avoid almost all G or PG movies, and am incredibly leary of PG-13 (although alot of horror / suspence movies have been released under it, The Ring, etc.).
No, and its irrelevent.
I was a child, I did see hardcore porn, and I turned out just fine.
Are you suggesting that having children removes any sense of reason and blocks out your own childhood?
No, i couldn't. I had 2 prems. and digital on two tvs and internet..it was 175 / month. For everything, it would have been almost 200. Thats why I dropped the prems after the 'special' that i used to get them. When all was said and done, comcast was more money for the same service.
They assemble a reliable machine and, as a company, are a dream to work with. If you are a company of reasonable size, ordering and support are prompt and hassle-free. I work for a large leasing company, and since technically it's our cash upfront, we own tens of thousands of Dell PC's and servers. You ought to see the free stuff we get around here.
Are you saying they can't assemble a reliable machine on AMD chips? Would using AMD change any of the other reasons you sited?
Personall, except for laptops, I don't buy Dell because I can't get an AMD chip.
I'm not sure why more businesses don't demand AMD; I've found that AMD often performs better than a similar Intel chip, and the cost savings are great too.
It matters a great deal in real life whether employees like their workplace and workplace rules. It can matter as much as 30% in terms of productivity. Now lock down computers don't compare to things like reasonable raises in terms of employee satisfaction but I've seen lots of shops where "tight networks" lead employees to waste huge amounts of time out of spite. They go out of their way to do things ineffeciently on the applications they are forced to use as a way to get back at management.
Said employees are not valuable to the company and should be promptly terminated. those employees will likely find something else to bitch about; the truth is they are lazy and self important, and are quite good at wasting time and then finding justifcation for it.
Further you seem to have the attitude that the network is important in and of itself. The network exists to allow the subject matter experts to communicate with each other and the systems containing subject matter data. If those communications don't result in useful output at high levels of productivity who cares about the network?
So you can't possible have a secure network that allows users to get their work done? Sorry,your logic is way off. There's a difference between not having apps you ligitimatly need and letting users install anything they download off the net. As i stated before, what users need depends on their function.
Which makes they uncontrolled. What's your backup strategy for critical data being stored on database XYZ on some SME's home laptop? How do you find the contact list from a sales guy who was fired who keeps this information in his PDA? What is your source control policy for a developer who uses tools from home because he can't get the ones he likes at work.
How would said employee create mission critical databases on their home laptop to begin with? Why are you letting employees keep contact info on thier home PDA to begin with? If the employee needs a PDA, one should be suppiled by the company. Again, if thats what your employees are doing, they should be fired.
The most likely way you got into that situtation is that you didn't lock out outside laptops and PDAs to begin with.
You have a wonderful network, it just doesn't happen to have the business data on it.
If employees are not using the network to store company data, and instead store it on thier home computers, they should be fired.
Why? Lets say that an employee manages to screw up their home directory and a help desk guy loses a half-day fixing it. Lets say this happens to each employee 1x per year (a pretty bad case). So we are talking what an extra $200 per employee in a worst case scenerio. That's chicken feed compared to what real problems can cost after data migration occurs. Basically that's the same or less than the cost of an employee one time per year getting frustrated with network admin and goofing off the second half of the day.
And lets say you have 400 employees; thats $80,000 / year wasted because you let employees do stupid things that you could have prevented. $80,000 isn't exactly chicken feed as you claim. At one firm I worked that, thats easily an entire client project bill; so now you've let an entire project be done soley for covering losses created by out of control employees, you're in the hole now (since you still had to pay the employees for building the program too).
And lets not even talk about the real fun projects like trying to retake control of these applications once they migrate off the main IT systems. You can burn up man years by the dozen on these projects.
Projects should NOT be migrating off the IT systems to begin with. There's no reason to bring your personal laptop to work. There's no reason to hook your personal PDA up to your work computer.
In all seriousness, I've never heard of employees doing what you describe. If they are, they should be promply fired.
Reread the part about supporting the business. The network ain't the business.
I agree, but you need to understand that there's a difference between providing what employees need versus letting them install anything they want on their workstations.
Users do NOT need to install their own apps; if they have a ligitimate need for one, IT should install it and lock it down appropriately as well.
IT is supposed to support the company, but that doesn't mean users get to do whatever they want.
This has been Sun's argument for the last decade. The fact of the matter is it isn't true. Joe average users wants the ability to install his own software and use particular apps as much as the technical people do. They don't like administrative fascism any more than we do.
Um, it doesn't matter if they like it or not. They are using thier company's computers, not thier home computers.
Of course, depending on job function the user may ligitimatly need to install apps...but it should be locked down so that said apps can't screw up the rest of the network.
When they are given a locked down environment work tends to migrate off the locked down environment to a completely uncontrolled environment (home systems, personal laptops, PDA's, physical notebooks...).
And such systems should be completely denied from accessng the network.
Now thin client doesn't require fascism in fact it can allow for more freedom if each user has liberal permissions in their home directory but the fact is this requires support.
This is probably true, if you can install apps to your home directory. In windows you can't yet, but *nix obviously it can be done. Of course if the app they install screws up thier home directory files, you'll still have to fix it. So even in that case it might be wise not to allow it.
There is no getting around high support costs and a high admin:employee ratio to actually support the business.
Sure there is; lock their systems down.
If your logic was so iron clad you'd realize that 1) this is a highly unlikely scenario and 2) you'd have to be drunk enough to not be able to reliably control the car, and thus would have trouble hitting your intended target and 3) you stated that you did in fact intend to kill me.
Anyone that attempts your little scenario is likely highly unstable to begin with, and proving so should be trivial.
So, given this post, and the one to which I replied, I stand by my assertation that you are without logic and reason.
I'd like to add another log to that fire; if in fact you were as logical as you claim, you'd also understand that no legal system can even be perfect, because we as humans are not perfect beings. You'd also understand that our system is setup on the premise that its better to let a guilty person go free than for an innocent man to be punished.
The number of laws was supposed to be minimal, so that the government can't just throw people in jail on a whim, which is the current state of affairs now (unfortunatly).
Except that, unless you reinvest your dividens, that is taxable income as well.
For one, how do you determine what is offensive for children? Hard core sex? any nudity at all? Where would playboy go? Maxium?
Secondly, once said system is in place, censorship becomes much much easier.
And lastly, whats to stop a kid from typing in the IP? Renaming the hardcoresex.xxx to myresearch.edu in the hosts file? You don't think kids can figure this out (or be shown how to do it by others)?
It seems doomed to fail. Why not just sit with your children, and accept the fact that seeing sex, a natural human action, won't destroy them.
The reason .com and .gov etc were English and exclusive to the US is because the US built the internet (formaly darpanet).
.us at all considering that..
I think its fair that we don't need to use
Comcast comes off as a bunch of dicks. Their service is ok, but very expensive.
I was paying 115 for cable internet + 1 tv with digital classic.
With adelphia we have cable internet, 5 digital boxs and ALL the premium channels (hbo, starz, etc) and pay only 150.