It's not even cutting corners, the Google guy is euphemistically
describing "illegal" activity by Google's rules. And while SEO
activities that break Google's rules aren't technically illegal other
than sanctions brought by Google for getting caught I think Cutts
makes an interesting and probably valid point.
Just because something isn't codified into law doesn't make it
ethical or right. Law can and will never model completely
human behavior, nor should it. But outside of the law there are
behaviors that demonstrate or point to probability someone would also
break codified law. SEO like any other discipline has approaches that
work and are within ethical boundaries. But it also, like any other,
has approaches that are not okay.
IMO it's about boundaries, and the ramifications when activity infringes on
another's ability to freely engage in their own activity. Competition
is one thing. Subverting a mechanism is quite another, especially
when subversion comes at others' expense.
As for the quasi-argument from the summary:
there would
seem to be quite a leap between risking the death penalty from Google
and risking a stint in prison
The whole MO of people like this is they don't think
they're risking a stint in prison. They completely rationalize their
behaviors beyond any reasonable state of self-denial. Watch some of
the videos of the Enron depositions... these guys (IMO) truly believe
their actions were within the bounds of legal activity. (Actually
some probably were, the shame of the whole Enron scam is a lot of
goats took the fall for the more powerful, though it was nice to see
at least a couple of high level execs finally taken out.)
So, it has a color gamut of 117%! I just read the wikipedia
description of color gamut and still can't figure how to apply this
number. Anyone? Bueller? (Yeah, TFA article describes it, but I want an independent verification!)
And, I suppose the volume on this puppy goes up to 11.
I suppose if NASA's Space Shuttle can throttle up to 104% (it
actually does), anything's possible.
This should be a nice switch, I've already been purchasing from
amazon's mp3 store and find the ergonomics, the quality, and price all
to my liking. And, if I find something I really like I
purchase the real deal, the CD. I for one welcome our former DRM
overlords into the fold.
This only widens and expands the music industry's audience, it is
the logical conclusion to a stupid experiment. I suspect there are
other efforts in the works to try and keep a grip on their "property",
but this is yet another death knell to the music industry as
they (the execs, etc) know/knew it. Wait until some
breakthrough artist figures out they no longer need to be beholden to
the record labels for their livelihoods.
Now, if only we could see some of this sanity become contagious and
spread into some of the other media. DRM is a pain and it's
ineffective. Just 2 days ago I watched on DVD a movie still only in
theater-release -- I won't say where (it wasn't at my house), and I
won't say who (it wasn't someone I knew). I would never do this, but
it's obvious DRM only makes life more difficult for the honest
consumers. (Wasn't there an article recently here about someone's
collection of media getting wrapped around the DRM axle because he
bought a nice new monitor on which to watch his movies?)
So, what might the Fool say about our Friend, Microsoft, which in
the last year has at least put forth the specter of litigation in
light of its agreement with Novell. Yes, they've assured the
community they won't litigate, but only if within the imprimatur of
Novell's "version" of open source. This, coupled with a seemingly
possible failure of Vista, reviewed by many as lacking in innovation.
Could these be first signs of another failing "industry"?
well, not effortlessly
on
RTF Vs. OOXML
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Up front disclaimer: This article has a tangible odor of troll, so don't blame me and
the other posters for responding in kind (flamebait, troll, offtopic,
etc.)
FTS:
By owning the 'standard' and developing it in
secret, in an Ecma rubber-stamp process, Microsoft rigs the system so
they can author an ISO standard with which they are effortlessly
compatible
I wouldn't say this is entirely true (effortless) on Microsoft's
part. Any user of any Microsoft product is well aware of how
difficult it is to work in and out of various new vs. old formats.
Yes, even Microsoft has a difficult time being compatible and
interoperable with Microsoft (actually, I seem to have better luck
overall with interoperability using OpenOffice...).
And, also FTS:
Is this how an open standard is
developed?
Actually no, usually Microsoft takes an existing open standard
(e.g., sockets), implements it poorly (winsock), and puts it
everywhere (95,98, NT, XP, etc.) forcing the technical community to
re-adopt the standard in Microsoft's cast.
This problem isn't necessarily an overload of information. It's just a
transformation. From the article:
Workers get disoriented every
time they stop what they are doing to reply to an e-mail or answer a
follow-up phone call because they didn't reply within minutes. Spira said
workers can spend 10 to 20 times the length of the original interruption
trying to get back on track.
These disoriented workers just found their new diversion.
Workers are mostly effective, or not effective. Effective workers long ago
folded the explosion of information into their daily work flow and are mostly
more efficient because of it. Ineffective workers can now use and point to
e-mail as their nemesis preventing them from being efficient and getting work done.
But, before the (alleged) explosion, ineffective workers had
minesweeper and solitaire. Before that they had a water
cooler and last night's shows to talk about. Before that it was real
solitaire with real cards.
Yes, the information is overwhelming, but it's mostly easy to filter.
I have found anecdotally that even with the exploding amount of information,
that not only is it not overwhelming, it's more topical and current
than ever possible in the past, and it's actually more easily searched than
in the past. If any of you out there remember the old days of writing
research papers, it was far more difficult to gather all the necessary
research and organize when the only option was the local library, or if you
were lucky and in college with a computing center, the other option was the
time-share terminals in the computing building.
As for interruptions and avoiding them, it's easy enough to minimize
e-mail interruptions -- establish and stick to an e-mail policy. If you
don't want to be interrupted, don't allow people to interrupt you.
If you're using the Google Suggest page, I think the width is sufficient if you have the browser at any reasonable width, so I'm assuming you're talking about the drop down from the toolbar, in which case you're in luck. Type something to invoke the drop down, or click the arrow to look at history. In the lower right, you should see a handle, expand to your heart's content. It's nicely implemented, even pushes the box to the left if you're browser's too close to the right side of your screen. Enjoy.
I tend to agree with Norvig's focus on keywords and less emphasis
on natural language. Trying to even define a natural language on top
of a query engine introduces a layer of complexity probably
unnecessary. Natural Language even introduces a level of noise to interfere with
accurately (as possible) defining what the user is asking for.
Google has done a good job, and they get better each iteration
figuring out what the user is looking for. I
find their suggestion
an effective way to not only constrain
a query, it actually provides a way to spell check in a
pre-emptive way. If you've not used this, install the Firefox Google
toolbar, or use the experimentalGoogle
"Suggest". Often
Google will provide suggestions in the drop down menu that refine your
search in ways you hadn't considered that drive to a more direct and
accurate representation of your intended query. Of course if their
suggestions don't satisfy, you get to continue typing your
keywords to your heart's desire.
(I have to offer an example of suggestion's effectiveness.
I often Google to get to the Chicago Tribune (I don't visit there
often enough to have created a bookmark, plus it's easy to do this in
anyone's browser). Simply typing the first four letters, "chic", I
see the first suggestion is "Chicago Tribune". A simple TAB and
RETURN, I'm on the Google page with the first link or so my link to
the Tribune (with the added bonus of Google's breakout of sublinks).)
Your mileage may vary (Google's ranking system may vary the order and
options that appear in the drop-down over time),
but I find it an amazingly effective research
tool (suggestion, not the Trib).
Natural language is mostly trying to guess intent with structure
and key words (as opposed to keywords), but at the end of the day, if
you filter out the natural language, and focus on keywords you're
going to end up in close to the same place.
It appears the infraction was probably closer to being for
disobeying the teacher than for using Firefox. While it exposes an
interesting deficiency in the general knowledge of educators about
browser technology, it isn't necessarily their specialty. (We don't
know if this was some proxy of a teacher who was unaware of options
for browsers.)
Without any more information, this is merely a potential story... I
wouldn't bother sending e-mails to the school. You may want to
consider first:
did this student have a history of infractions?
was the student explaining his choice as a better browser as a
canard?
was the assignment specifically geared toward, or requiring of IE?
was the firefox browser installed as an option and available, or,
did the student download and install without authorization?
I don't blame anyone, even government in this case, for
avoiding the hassle of getting everything converted to IPv6. Maybe
eventually we all will have to be there, but there always seems to be
workarounds that work for everyone, minimal hassle, minimal pain.
If you wanted a Starbucks coffee, and it was one street down, and
someone told you you had to go through the in-between building, climb
up and down its twenty flights of stairs just to get to the next
street for you coffee, and you knew you could just walk around the
building on the sidewalk, what would you do? Now, if the building
were only two stories high, and the block to walk around were 600 ft
each side, it might be a different choice.
An interesting aside, meeting the mandate only requires they are
IPv6 capable, not running it. This is the same
height bar the government set for Microsoft in the early nineties when
Microsoft delivered the DOA POSIX-compliant (never to be really used)
NT. NT, with its barely implemented POSIX subsystem (only implemented
the library portion, btw, not the user interface) got to put a check
in the POSIX checkbox for government contracts.
Lesson to be learned? If you want to make an effective mandate,
make it a mandate for implementation, not capability.
I know employers can apply pressure, but employees should try to
establish early and firmly what extended accessibility means. Pagers
have been around for millenia, Blackberrys simply give better message.
Arrange and agree to a schedule for which you consider yourself
"on call", publish those times, and make it clear you aren't "on call"
when you aren't.
Personally, I see the encroachment more often by those who have
some tension with their personal life whereby this constant
connectivity to their job elevates somehow their status, and provides
instant and real-time reason/excuse to be unavailable in their
personal lives. In other words, lots of those who "get connected"
like this do so willingly, and with a certain sense of
self-importance.
My other observation has been that those who are not to be bothered
by work when they're not expected to be available off-hours simply
don't carry their Blackberry, or turn it off.
I know there's always the exception, but I think most
employer-employee relationships can and do strike equilibrium with
minimal fuss. If your employer is that horrid in their insistence and
demands, find another employer. I did.
First, it requests the Commission to
obligate Microsoft to unbundle Internet Explorer from Windows and/or
carry alternative browsers pre-installed on the desktop.
Wasn't this part of the settlement before? I often wonder why we have
to see other countries doing the heavy lifting to throttle Microsoft.
Microsoft lost, was set up for some pretty severe controls to be
administered and lucked out with a changing of the guard and a Justice
Department that lost any appetite to really control Microsoft.
Also,
Second, it asks the European Commission to
require Microsoft to follow fundamental and open Web standards
accepted by the Web-authoring communities.
This one does get interesting. Maybe this is the avenue
required to get Microsoft to move closer to compliance on the accepted
standards. There certainly hasn't been any bending to pressures from
developers.
It's a hard point to argue if you had only two options, food, or a laptop,
the food seems a better choice. Of course there's no reason it can't be
both. I think his point is worth thinking on, there are people for whom
getting a computer is not much more than some diversion before they die of
whatever disease they're slated to die from if they're lucky enough not to
die of starvation (or unlucky enough, pick your idealogical slant).
True that no matter how much money you send, it's never going to be
enough, but also true, for the lucky ones if they manage to survive their
poverty, exposure to something like a computer may offer them a
starting point.
He also raises good points... computers are hardly more than advertising
pipelines, and unless you're already savvy, it's hard to suppress an rid the
experience of the deluge of ads. Also, how many sites are in
SiSwati or isiZulu these days?
Heck, I've seen and read of schools investing millions in computers with
no tangible results in students' scores, grades, or even elevated interests
in learning. The big problem is actually teaching something at all, ever, no
matter the tools selected for education.
Yeah, sometimes Dvorak's nothing more than a grumpy old man who rants. I
see him in this article as a grumpy old thoughtful and compassionate
man. Kudos to him for raising the issue.
encrypt your data you choose to store online with them
use some other service
Seriously, the issues raised are the same as with the other
on-line storage services. And, this move by Google mostly
integrates/consolidates what they already offer, albeit with the
extension of storing any kind of data. I think it's great, I've
started storing much of my data on line in various forums and I
love the internet access. At your parents house and need a file?
Download from the clouds. Got a special inside track on a new job
and they need your resume, quick? From the clouds. Serenity now!
If you've got data you think sensitive, encrypt it, or figure
out a different way to store it. Personally, from anecdotal, but
plentiful, observation, those who store their data "in"/on the
internet:
are far less likely to lose data
have much
more universal access to their data
will probably spend less
overall (no upgrades to disk drives) to store their data
and bother me far less
with support issues
As for the screaming about Google figuring out a way to make
money doing this, hwah? Kind of what running a company is about.
And the more money they figure out how to make by ads makes the
price point that much less for you and me, or anyone willing to
trust Google. For the moment, I am. I'm assuming I'll get enough
warning signs to not trust them, I'll move my data elsewhere. For
now, good for Google.
This isn't new, just big. And, from a personal standpoint, I
hope it's one more ding in Microsoft's armor. The more there are
alternatives to data locked up in Microsoft's products, the better
chances of real competition, and ultimately progress (finally!) in
technology. (sorry, had to dig... this is slashdot, right?)
It's in reference to a joke I'd heard a while back...
In his early morning Iraq war briefing Bush's advisor said 2 Brazilian soldiers had died the day before. After a pause, Bush leaned over to Cheney and asked him, "How many zeros are in a brazillion?"
No political affiliation or skewering intended... just a funny joke.
Hmmmm, btw, I apologize for the tone... prolly teeing off after some bad karma with some others (recruiters, actually, sigh)... and am kicking the dog. Sorry... (but, this is, after all, slashdot).
That said, I appreciate you concede the difficulty of battery life measurement. I'd long since given up on paying too much attention to gauges, and instead pay more attention to keeping backup batteries for devices which have removeable ones (it actually is a large factor in my decision making process whether or not I can swap in a spare battery, proprietary or otherwise.)
Even the best battery "life" indicators I've ever seen mostly
suck. If this one uses the dropoff in voltage as a detection
device like every other one has for the last brazillion years,
it'll basically be completely full for the life of the charge, and
about 10 minutes before it tanks, if you're lucky, you'll get the
joy of the sensation of a sloshing, albeit mostly empty sloshing,
in your digital device.
Now, as for the detecting how many messages there are by
simulating the sound of balls rattling around in a box, it's kind
of cute, as long as they're not my balls. Again, though, if you
already have the device out, why not put a little numeric in the
display? Huh?
Perhaps the biggest roadblock is the general inability of the masses to grasp technology and at the same time technology's allure and ubiquity. Unlike other nuanced sciences (rocket science, brain surgery, etc), computer technology is trotted out as "easy enough for the masses".
That "easy enough" has trickled down from the anointed few to the general population, both in the work place and in homes.
Now, what drives decisions and directions for technology is driven more by uninformed Golf Course conversations than true understanding and needs and the ability to match technology to solutions correctly. Heck, I experienced an entire abandonment of one technology at management's whim to implement a newer and better solution. This, while the existing solution worked fine, and the new solution was unproven. (coda to that story, five years later, that team is busily re-converting the "new" back to the "old".)
Time and again I see people doing bizarre things with technology... in the workplace, with hubris, unwilling to ask others what is most appropriate, and in the home, where ignorance, while benign in intent, rules. I don't know how many times I've encountered things like people with multiple virus checkers running on their machine because they figure more is better.
At the same time, I remember a salesman trying to steer me away from a PC that wasn't their "hot" item because it had a video card with FOUR megabytes memory (this was a LONG time ago)... his reasoning? Who in their right mind would ever USE four megabytes memory for video??? Yeah, this salesman was senior. Yeah, I got it, he was an idiot. But these are the drivers of technology.... people not in the know.
And, while I only have limited direct anecdotal experience of this in well-known companies, I would expect it to be more widespread than many might realize.
I think this is what is most bothersome, and tiresome, about the
treadmill that is Microsoft's products, advertising, etc. From the
article, yet again:
Only recently has the company admitted
what was clear from the outset: the first Zune was rushed to market
(it was a "sprint cycle," in Microsoft terms), and "compromises" were
made in order to make that happen.
It's hard to imagine how this goes on and on, but it does. I don't
know who it reflects more poorly on, Microsoft's disingenuousness (word?), or
the public's collective willingness to be fooled again and again.
I've often referred to the Charlie Brown - Lucy tension as the
perfect metaphor... Lucy promises to placehold the football so Charlie
can kick it. He falls for it every time and she
never fails to pull it away at the last second (I
keep hoping there's one strip where she doesn't pull it away,
but I never saw it.... anyone?). We,
the public are Microsoft's Charlie Brown. Sigh.
Everything you need to know starts in paragraph eighteen:
Unfortunately, after they did such a great job designing the hardware,
T-Mobile's chief executive and his ex-Apple designer punted on the software. They
equipped this phone with Microsoft's Windows Mobile 6. As it turns out, that
decision is just as much an impediment to the Shadow's greatness as AT&T exclusivity
is to the iPhone.
And, this isn't even Microsoft's fault! It's T-Mobile's CEO who had the hubris
to think he could design this thing just like Jobs. Not.
I think the article actually goes a little easy on the critique of the hardware.
I doesn't break any ground. It has too many or too few buttons. The middle ground
they took with the Blackberry licensed keyboard was just plain wrong. This phone is
just a mess. Apple kinda pulled this feat off, designing a do-everything phone (I
kinda disagree, btw), and now everybody else thinks they can do it too. They even
think it's the right thing to do (it's not).
But, what were they thinking going with MS Mobile? Wth? Sheeesh... it even
comes with a Task Monitor? Yeah, I'm gonna help my Dad with his new phone... "Bring
up the Task Monitor... now click on the Processes tab. Now click on the CPU column
twice. What's eating up the most CPU?... That's the central processing unit....
ummm... Okay, now highlight the one eating up all the CPU and click the "End
Process" button.... " Not.
Another place the article "gets it wrong" trying to be kind in his
critique:
Now, there are certainly advantages to having Microsoft inside
your phone. For example, this phone can open and edit (but not create) Microsoft
Office documents.
Wrong! That's not an advantage, that's insane. At least, I can't remember the
last time I was looking at my cellphone thinking, "Damn, I wish right now I could
open up a Word document!", not even if one was attached to an e-mail.
I'm still waiting for the phone that sounds and works like a phone.
Bit of trivia, speaking of phones... Know what the little graphic on the Sprint
logo stands for? Didn't think so. It represents a stop-motion pin dropping.
Remember when Sprint's commercials were about phone call sound quality and how
it was so good you could hear a pin drop? Didn't think so. Please, oh, please, let
me hear the pin drop again!
Slashdot Mirror
It's not even cutting corners, the Google guy is euphemistically describing "illegal" activity by Google's rules. And while SEO activities that break Google's rules aren't technically illegal other than sanctions brought by Google for getting caught I think Cutts makes an interesting and probably valid point.
Just because something isn't codified into law doesn't make it ethical or right. Law can and will never model completely human behavior, nor should it. But outside of the law there are behaviors that demonstrate or point to probability someone would also break codified law. SEO like any other discipline has approaches that work and are within ethical boundaries. But it also, like any other, has approaches that are not okay.
IMO it's about boundaries, and the ramifications when activity infringes on another's ability to freely engage in their own activity. Competition is one thing. Subverting a mechanism is quite another, especially when subversion comes at others' expense.
As for the quasi-argument from the summary:
The whole MO of people like this is they don't think they're risking a stint in prison. They completely rationalize their behaviors beyond any reasonable state of self-denial. Watch some of the videos of the Enron depositions... these guys (IMO) truly believe their actions were within the bounds of legal activity. (Actually some probably were, the shame of the whole Enron scam is a lot of goats took the fall for the more powerful, though it was nice to see at least a couple of high level execs finally taken out.)
So, it has a color gamut of 117%! I just read the wikipedia description of color gamut and still can't figure how to apply this number. Anyone? Bueller? (Yeah, TFA article describes it, but I want an independent verification!)
And, I suppose the volume on this puppy goes up to 11.
I suppose if NASA's Space Shuttle can throttle up to 104% (it actually does), anything's possible.
This should be a nice switch, I've already been purchasing from amazon's mp3 store and find the ergonomics, the quality, and price all to my liking. And, if I find something I really like I purchase the real deal, the CD. I for one welcome our former DRM overlords into the fold.
This only widens and expands the music industry's audience, it is the logical conclusion to a stupid experiment. I suspect there are other efforts in the works to try and keep a grip on their "property", but this is yet another death knell to the music industry as they (the execs, etc) know/knew it. Wait until some breakthrough artist figures out they no longer need to be beholden to the record labels for their livelihoods.
Now, if only we could see some of this sanity become contagious and spread into some of the other media. DRM is a pain and it's ineffective. Just 2 days ago I watched on DVD a movie still only in theater-release -- I won't say where (it wasn't at my house), and I won't say who (it wasn't someone I knew). I would never do this, but it's obvious DRM only makes life more difficult for the honest consumers. (Wasn't there an article recently here about someone's collection of media getting wrapped around the DRM axle because he bought a nice new monitor on which to watch his movies?)
So, what might the Fool say about our Friend, Microsoft, which in the last year has at least put forth the specter of litigation in light of its agreement with Novell. Yes, they've assured the community they won't litigate, but only if within the imprimatur of Novell's "version" of open source. This, coupled with a seemingly possible failure of Vista, reviewed by many as lacking in innovation. Could these be first signs of another failing "industry"?
Up front disclaimer: This article has a tangible odor of troll, so don't blame me and the other posters for responding in kind (flamebait, troll, offtopic, etc.)
FTS:
I wouldn't say this is entirely true (effortless) on Microsoft's part. Any user of any Microsoft product is well aware of how difficult it is to work in and out of various new vs. old formats. Yes, even Microsoft has a difficult time being compatible and interoperable with Microsoft (actually, I seem to have better luck overall with interoperability using OpenOffice...).
And, also FTS:
Actually no, usually Microsoft takes an existing open standard (e.g., sockets), implements it poorly (winsock), and puts it everywhere (95,98, NT, XP, etc.) forcing the technical community to re-adopt the standard in Microsoft's cast.
This problem isn't necessarily an overload of information. It's just a transformation. From the article:
These disoriented workers just found their new diversion. Workers are mostly effective, or not effective. Effective workers long ago folded the explosion of information into their daily work flow and are mostly more efficient because of it. Ineffective workers can now use and point to e-mail as their nemesis preventing them from being efficient and getting work done.
But, before the (alleged) explosion, ineffective workers had minesweeper and solitaire. Before that they had a water cooler and last night's shows to talk about. Before that it was real solitaire with real cards.
Yes, the information is overwhelming, but it's mostly easy to filter. I have found anecdotally that even with the exploding amount of information, that not only is it not overwhelming, it's more topical and current than ever possible in the past, and it's actually more easily searched than in the past. If any of you out there remember the old days of writing research papers, it was far more difficult to gather all the necessary research and organize when the only option was the local library, or if you were lucky and in college with a computing center, the other option was the time-share terminals in the computing building.
As for interruptions and avoiding them, it's easy enough to minimize e-mail interruptions -- establish and stick to an e-mail policy. If you don't want to be interrupted, don't allow people to interrupt you.
Ha, you only think this is offtopic!
If you're using the Google Suggest page, I think the width is sufficient if you have the browser at any reasonable width, so I'm assuming you're talking about the drop down from the toolbar, in which case you're in luck. Type something to invoke the drop down, or click the arrow to look at history. In the lower right, you should see a handle, expand to your heart's content. It's nicely implemented, even pushes the box to the left if you're browser's too close to the right side of your screen. Enjoy.
I tend to agree with Norvig's focus on keywords and less emphasis on natural language. Trying to even define a natural language on top of a query engine introduces a layer of complexity probably unnecessary. Natural Language even introduces a level of noise to interfere with accurately (as possible) defining what the user is asking for.
Google has done a good job, and they get better each iteration figuring out what the user is looking for. I find their suggestion an effective way to not only constrain a query, it actually provides a way to spell check in a pre-emptive way. If you've not used this, install the Firefox Google toolbar, or use the experimental Google "Suggest". Often Google will provide suggestions in the drop down menu that refine your search in ways you hadn't considered that drive to a more direct and accurate representation of your intended query. Of course if their suggestions don't satisfy, you get to continue typing your keywords to your heart's desire.
(I have to offer an example of suggestion's effectiveness. I often Google to get to the Chicago Tribune (I don't visit there often enough to have created a bookmark, plus it's easy to do this in anyone's browser). Simply typing the first four letters, "chic", I see the first suggestion is "Chicago Tribune". A simple TAB and RETURN, I'm on the Google page with the first link or so my link to the Tribune (with the added bonus of Google's breakout of sublinks).) Your mileage may vary (Google's ranking system may vary the order and options that appear in the drop-down over time), but I find it an amazingly effective research tool (suggestion, not the Trib).
Natural language is mostly trying to guess intent with structure and key words (as opposed to keywords), but at the end of the day, if you filter out the natural language, and focus on keywords you're going to end up in close to the same place.
It appears the infraction was probably closer to being for disobeying the teacher than for using Firefox. While it exposes an interesting deficiency in the general knowledge of educators about browser technology, it isn't necessarily their specialty. (We don't know if this was some proxy of a teacher who was unaware of options for browsers.)
Without any more information, this is merely a potential story... I wouldn't bother sending e-mails to the school. You may want to consider first:
I don't blame anyone, even government in this case, for avoiding the hassle of getting everything converted to IPv6. Maybe eventually we all will have to be there, but there always seems to be workarounds that work for everyone, minimal hassle, minimal pain.
If you wanted a Starbucks coffee, and it was one street down, and someone told you you had to go through the in-between building, climb up and down its twenty flights of stairs just to get to the next street for you coffee, and you knew you could just walk around the building on the sidewalk, what would you do? Now, if the building were only two stories high, and the block to walk around were 600 ft each side, it might be a different choice.
An interesting aside, meeting the mandate only requires they are IPv6 capable, not running it. This is the same height bar the government set for Microsoft in the early nineties when Microsoft delivered the DOA POSIX-compliant (never to be really used) NT. NT, with its barely implemented POSIX subsystem (only implemented the library portion, btw, not the user interface) got to put a check in the POSIX checkbox for government contracts.
Lesson to be learned? If you want to make an effective mandate, make it a mandate for implementation, not capability.
The government:
Maybe, possibly. Or maybe you aren't familiar with, or are unable to recognize hyperbole.
;-)
I know employers can apply pressure, but employees should try to establish early and firmly what extended accessibility means. Pagers have been around for millenia, Blackberrys simply give better message.
Arrange and agree to a schedule for which you consider yourself "on call", publish those times, and make it clear you aren't "on call" when you aren't.
Personally, I see the encroachment more often by those who have some tension with their personal life whereby this constant connectivity to their job elevates somehow their status, and provides instant and real-time reason/excuse to be unavailable in their personal lives. In other words, lots of those who "get connected" like this do so willingly, and with a certain sense of self-importance.
My other observation has been that those who are not to be bothered by work when they're not expected to be available off-hours simply don't carry their Blackberry, or turn it off.
I know there's always the exception, but I think most employer-employee relationships can and do strike equilibrium with minimal fuss. If your employer is that horrid in their insistence and demands, find another employer. I did.
Hey elda... good point.
And, evermore, TANSTAAFL axiomatically holds true. It's a gem of a philosophical nugget I've held dear since reading "Moon".
From the article:
Wasn't this part of the settlement before? I often wonder why we have to see other countries doing the heavy lifting to throttle Microsoft. Microsoft lost, was set up for some pretty severe controls to be administered and lucked out with a changing of the guard and a Justice Department that lost any appetite to really control Microsoft.Also,
This one does get interesting. Maybe this is the avenue required to get Microsoft to move closer to compliance on the accepted standards. There certainly hasn't been any bending to pressures from developers.Should have parked farther out, not close to any other solar systems. Probably won't even meet the deductible.
It's a hard point to argue if you had only two options, food, or a laptop, the food seems a better choice. Of course there's no reason it can't be both. I think his point is worth thinking on, there are people for whom getting a computer is not much more than some diversion before they die of whatever disease they're slated to die from if they're lucky enough not to die of starvation (or unlucky enough, pick your idealogical slant).
True that no matter how much money you send, it's never going to be enough, but also true, for the lucky ones if they manage to survive their poverty, exposure to something like a computer may offer them a starting point.
He also raises good points... computers are hardly more than advertising pipelines, and unless you're already savvy, it's hard to suppress an rid the experience of the deluge of ads. Also, how many sites are in SiSwati or isiZulu these days?
Heck, I've seen and read of schools investing millions in computers with no tangible results in students' scores, grades, or even elevated interests in learning. The big problem is actually teaching something at all, ever, no matter the tools selected for education.
Yeah, sometimes Dvorak's nothing more than a grumpy old man who rants. I see him in this article as a grumpy old thoughtful and compassionate man. Kudos to him for raising the issue.
You have the choice to:
Seriously, the issues raised are the same as with the other on-line storage services. And, this move by Google mostly integrates/consolidates what they already offer, albeit with the extension of storing any kind of data. I think it's great, I've started storing much of my data on line in various forums and I love the internet access. At your parents house and need a file? Download from the clouds. Got a special inside track on a new job and they need your resume, quick? From the clouds. Serenity now!
If you've got data you think sensitive, encrypt it, or figure out a different way to store it. Personally, from anecdotal, but plentiful, observation, those who store their data "in"/on the internet:
As for the screaming about Google figuring out a way to make money doing this, hwah? Kind of what running a company is about. And the more money they figure out how to make by ads makes the price point that much less for you and me, or anyone willing to trust Google. For the moment, I am. I'm assuming I'll get enough warning signs to not trust them, I'll move my data elsewhere. For now, good for Google.
This isn't new, just big. And, from a personal standpoint, I hope it's one more ding in Microsoft's armor. The more there are alternatives to data locked up in Microsoft's products, the better chances of real competition, and ultimately progress (finally!) in technology. (sorry, had to dig... this is slashdot, right?)
It's in reference to a joke I'd heard a while back...
In his early morning Iraq war briefing Bush's advisor said 2 Brazilian soldiers had died the day before. After a pause, Bush leaned over to Cheney and asked him, "How many zeros are in a brazillion?"
No political affiliation or skewering intended... just a funny joke.
That said, I appreciate you concede the difficulty of battery life measurement. I'd long since given up on paying too much attention to gauges, and instead pay more attention to keeping backup batteries for devices which have removeable ones (it actually is a large factor in my decision making process whether or not I can swap in a spare battery, proprietary or otherwise.)
Cheers. :-)
Even the best battery "life" indicators I've ever seen mostly suck. If this one uses the dropoff in voltage as a detection device like every other one has for the last brazillion years, it'll basically be completely full for the life of the charge, and about 10 minutes before it tanks, if you're lucky, you'll get the joy of the sensation of a sloshing, albeit mostly empty sloshing, in your digital device.
Now, as for the detecting how many messages there are by simulating the sound of balls rattling around in a box, it's kind of cute, as long as they're not my balls. Again, though, if you already have the device out, why not put a little numeric in the display? Huh?
Perhaps the biggest roadblock is the general inability of the masses to grasp technology and at the same time technology's allure and ubiquity. Unlike other nuanced sciences (rocket science, brain surgery, etc), computer technology is trotted out as "easy enough for the masses".
That "easy enough" has trickled down from the anointed few to the general population, both in the work place and in homes.
Now, what drives decisions and directions for technology is driven more by uninformed Golf Course conversations than true understanding and needs and the ability to match technology to solutions correctly. Heck, I experienced an entire abandonment of one technology at management's whim to implement a newer and better solution. This, while the existing solution worked fine, and the new solution was unproven. (coda to that story, five years later, that team is busily re-converting the "new" back to the "old".)
Time and again I see people doing bizarre things with technology... in the workplace, with hubris, unwilling to ask others what is most appropriate, and in the home, where ignorance, while benign in intent, rules. I don't know how many times I've encountered things like people with multiple virus checkers running on their machine because they figure more is better.
At the same time, I remember a salesman trying to steer me away from a PC that wasn't their "hot" item because it had a video card with FOUR megabytes memory (this was a LONG time ago)... his reasoning? Who in their right mind would ever USE four megabytes memory for video??? Yeah, this salesman was senior. Yeah, I got it, he was an idiot. But these are the drivers of technology.... people not in the know.
And, while I only have limited direct anecdotal experience of this in well-known companies, I would expect it to be more widespread than many might realize.
I think this is what is most bothersome, and tiresome, about the treadmill that is Microsoft's products, advertising, etc. From the article, yet again:
It's hard to imagine how this goes on and on, but it does. I don't know who it reflects more poorly on, Microsoft's disingenuousness (word?), or the public's collective willingness to be fooled again and again.
I've often referred to the Charlie Brown - Lucy tension as the perfect metaphor... Lucy promises to placehold the football so Charlie can kick it. He falls for it every time and she never fails to pull it away at the last second (I keep hoping there's one strip where she doesn't pull it away, but I never saw it.... anyone?). We, the public are Microsoft's Charlie Brown. Sigh.
I was part of AT briefly. Yeah, I remember all that.
Everything you need to know starts in paragraph eighteen:
And, this isn't even Microsoft's fault! It's T-Mobile's CEO who had the hubris to think he could design this thing just like Jobs. Not.
I think the article actually goes a little easy on the critique of the hardware. I doesn't break any ground. It has too many or too few buttons. The middle ground they took with the Blackberry licensed keyboard was just plain wrong. This phone is just a mess. Apple kinda pulled this feat off, designing a do-everything phone (I kinda disagree, btw), and now everybody else thinks they can do it too. They even think it's the right thing to do (it's not).
But, what were they thinking going with MS Mobile? Wth? Sheeesh... it even comes with a Task Monitor? Yeah, I'm gonna help my Dad with his new phone... "Bring up the Task Monitor... now click on the Processes tab. Now click on the CPU column twice. What's eating up the most CPU? ... That's the central processing unit....
ummm... Okay, now highlight the one eating up all the CPU and click the "End
Process" button.... " Not.
Another place the article "gets it wrong" trying to be kind in his critique:
Wrong! That's not an advantage, that's insane. At least, I can't remember the last time I was looking at my cellphone thinking, "Damn, I wish right now I could open up a Word document!", not even if one was attached to an e-mail.
I'm still waiting for the phone that sounds and works like a phone.
Bit of trivia, speaking of phones... Know what the little graphic on the Sprint logo stands for? Didn't think so. It represents a stop-motion pin dropping. Remember when Sprint's commercials were about phone call sound quality and how it was so good you could hear a pin drop? Didn't think so. Please, oh, please, let me hear the pin drop again!