It'll be interesting to see if I can make this work with the stacks of old LC520s in my garage. I've been wanting to cluster them for a while. If Xgrid will work on those, Mac just saved me a ton of work. Not that I wasn't going to have fun with it....
Very cool! I'm not sure I even care how they compare to previous pictures. There's something about knowing these are from virgin ground (so to speak). Alien landscape. I can't get enough. Right now, it just doesn't get much better.
We're forgetting one thing: we'll buy this thing. There is positive geek stigma surrounding it that Microsoft couldn't attain with years of apologizing and giving good, free sourcecode.
So far we've had no problems with GotY, but it's really tough to tell...crashes don't happen everyday, only when you least expect them and it's the most inconvenient time.
Actually, that could well be so. I've always had the dvd sensor plugged in. Crashing isn't common for me, but it has happened on a number of different games and a few dvds.
Now you've got me thinking. I'll be unplugging the dvd sensor tomorrow for my GF's Morrowind marathon.
Common or not, mine's crashed occassionally; this can be very frustrating after an hour of intense RPG gameplay. You're about to save, wait for the cutscene, and the box crashes trying to load it. That IS unacceptable.
And yes, I know. It's a Microsoft product. I'm the idiot for not saving.
Good point. I think that's why [it looks like] Apex is talking with developers:
We were also told that versions of games are being developed that you do not have to "load". Simply put the CD in and play, much like is used on other consoles.
I've always been a fan of Apex, and this looks fun. Competition for the Xbox with configurable, customizable components? And support for PC games? I'm all for it. It's about time we see something that isn't proprietary.
Unfortunately high usage does not immediately equte to high revenue.
Very true. I have a feeling though they're counting on that geek factor to carry them through any potential tough times (like perhaps a downswing after some fast initial sales). The trick now is to simply stay true to their roots. Don't worry about impressing investors. It was those decisions from the gut that got them where they are today.
Even at the possible 7% mentioned, I'm sure it wouldn't take long to make a lot of money considering how ridiculously well-established google is in so many homes and businesses. One wonders how inflated they could wind up looking though. Could the google stigma raise their own market value above what it will be able to maintain? I guess this is why they're selling that 33% and not 49.
I'm very interested in your story and history with the company. In my position there'd be very little I could do to recompensate, but I came on only a few years ago and to my knowledge there have been no true layoffs since. I was under the impression our IT was, for the most part, outsourced, but of course I could be wrong (considering they operate now out of a completely different department and cost center than my own).
Our current upper management has made an attempt to put on a face to the frontline employees of consideration and a promotion of customer service; however, I have seen customer service be put aside time and again in favor of padding our numbers in order to gain a higher "service level" average within the company. I think I'm one of the only administrators who sees the irony.
Finally, we've had to do a lot of cut-backs of management itself, as well as collapse a lot of routes in order to save hours and, ultimately, lose less money over the past two years. What is interesting is that FedEx, while still maintaining that they will by no means lay off anybody, has been eliminating positions left and right. However, in order to maintain, they have kept those employees in the ledger, pointed them to our internal open-position postings, converted them to "casual employees" and told them that when anything comes up they're welcome to take it. Many of these employees have opted to resign because most of the open positions were on a lower pay-scale and often only part-time. I do admire the company's efforts though, considering that we HAVE gone through hard times (I've watched the numbers myself). They've made a stringent effort to "promote from within" even if the shuffling really isn't promotion at all, as opposed to hiring and training new employees. I know it's been tough and we've lost some people, but the truth is that we've not gone out and hired a bunch of new people (company-wide, anyway). It doesn't make your situation better, but it doesn't look as bad.
I'm hoping for a profit too, naturally. I think it is something of a positive direction, and actually a smart wait. Some people may think that FedEx is just being a copycat (after UPS buying out Mailboxes, Etc.) but FedEx and Kinkos have had a close relationship for years. I sincerely doubt the buyout was a recent idea. We simply wanted to see if it could work and what mistakes UPS made that we can avoid. By doing so we stand to improve our margins beyond those of UPS simply because of the stigma of our ongoing success (a no-layoffs policy, full benefits for full- and part-time employees, etc.)
And considering our meager earnings after the weeks we were shut down by the FAA (9/11), I'm pretty sure everyone saw this as a money-making thing, or we'd have never done it. There isn't a lot of room for error for airlines these days.
Being a FedEx employee I think it's obvious which one I hope will survive.
However, massive restructuring will have to occur if this is to happen. Sure we are a market leader in margins and, as a cargo airline we have a good record of adapting new technologies, but we're still running on a heirarchy reminiscent of the generation that brought us Fred Smith. Reworking our buildings from warehouses to more dynamically creativity-inspiring circular buildings would be a decent start. We work on a hub concept. We need more creativity and flexibility in on-road route planning, more power taken from beaurocrats in Memphis who really don't get a good picture of on-road day to day activity other than pages full of numbers at the end of the day and share that power in the form of actual couriers and managers being able to make more broad decisions based on their locality. We have our own form of standards. The point is that practices that work in an inner city (which spawns the greatest density of deliveries and pickups) are completely wrong for people out in the country who may have ten to twenty stops a day.
And I'm not saying this as a courier. I'm an administrator, but I think it's very important to put more faith in our frontline employees. Unfortunately not all of the higher-ups share that point of view.
Dotcom ventures, all negative late-nineties stigma aside, are still in the realm of providing virtual services. Even if those are for real products, people will STILL want to feel like they're interacting with other people. Make it too impersonal, and you'll ultimately lose touch with your customers (and their reality). It'll be interesting to see what "they" do to reverse the trend.
Not to mention there will, in the forseable future, be a consistent and even increasing demand for companies like FedEx. As more people migrate to do their shopping online, they'll need companies like us to deliver the goods.
I'm also not quite sure if you're saying that it's OK to murder people as long as they agree to be filmed, but it sure sounds like it.
Sorry, that's not quite what I meant. I said a staged murder. They happen all the time in the movies. Do you believe Hollywood really kills that many actors?
She was in an adult establishment, by the looks of it. As for being outside, no, if I had kids I wouldn't appreciate you stripping in front of them, but if there are places for you in which it is legal to do so it would be my reponsibility to avoid those areas when my children are with me. There are such things as nudist colonies and beaches. It didn't look like there were any children in the backgrounds of any of her pictures.
Now whether this girl's pictures are doctored or not, that's not the issue. The point is that a crime does not have to be witnessed in the act to be found guilty of. That's all we're trying to correct you on.
Actually, considering you were replying to a point I was free to make, I find it highly amusing that you're trying to "correct" me in "assisting" me in staying on topic with my own post, when I was later qualifying WHY I feel that there is no need to go after this girl when I didn't see any clear indication (I could have missed it though) that the authorities really investigated the photos themselves. There's no reason to believe they're false and the girl seems to have admitted to it, but I'm STILL implying that them ticketing her is absurd, especially considering their only evidence wasn't even called into question. (The owner of the establishment sure didn't see it happen.)
Your original argument was "I wasn't caught in the act, so therefore I'm not guilty". Your above post is now is a disagreement as to whether certain laws should be even valid. What's rediculous is your inabilty to apply consistent reasoning to law.
Both arguments work in the context of each-other. Obviously there have to be reasonable limits. I'm saying if they couldn't prove she did it, it's crazy to try to ticket her for something this antiquated.
In Bismarck, North Dakota it is technically illegal for two people of the opposite sex to co-habit outside the bounds of a family relationship. This too is antiquated. I'm saying that because I rent two apartments they can't prove I live with my fiancee, and even though technically I'm breaking the law, the law itself is outdated and not consistent with the laws of other states. Why waste money going after me when there are more serious crimes happening just across the street (at our neighborhood methlab)?
I think the same applies here.
Either way though, she doesn't seem too concerned about it. And like so many others have said, this will only help business.
Not exactly. Pictures of yourself in a public establishment showing your bare top (which is only illegal because of laws based on gross and outdated cultural taboo) are quite a bit different than staged murder of persons not in agreement to appear in your picture. Your analogy was more than a little rediculous.
If she didn't get caught at the time, why is she being ticketed now? How can they prove she was really there? Photoshop can do some amazing things these days.
Well, what always happens to a typical Dell user? Either they don't know better and are content with what they have, or they'll upgrade in a year or two. I don't see the problem here.
Slashdot Mirror
It'll be interesting to see if I can make this work with the stacks of old LC520s in my garage. I've been wanting to cluster them for a while. If Xgrid will work on those, Mac just saved me a ton of work. Not that I wasn't going to have fun with it....
Damon,
Very cool! I'm not sure I even care how they compare to previous pictures. There's something about knowing these are from virgin ground (so to speak). Alien landscape. I can't get enough. Right now, it just doesn't get much better.
Damon,
We're forgetting one thing: we'll buy this thing. There is positive geek stigma surrounding it that Microsoft couldn't attain with years of apologizing and giving good, free sourcecode.
Damon,
So far we've had no problems with GotY, but it's really tough to tell...crashes don't happen everyday, only when you least expect them and it's the most inconvenient time.
Damon,
Actually, that could well be so. I've always had the dvd sensor plugged in. Crashing isn't common for me, but it has happened on a number of different games and a few dvds.
Now you've got me thinking. I'll be unplugging the dvd sensor tomorrow for my GF's Morrowind marathon.
Why thank you good sir. Believe it or not, I wasn't even trying.
Maybe it's a generational thing? When did you and your friends all get yours?
Damon,
Common or not, mine's crashed occassionally; this can be very frustrating after an hour of intense RPG gameplay. You're about to save, wait for the cutscene, and the box crashes trying to load it. That IS unacceptable.
And yes, I know. It's a Microsoft product. I'm the idiot for not saving.
Damon,
Good point. I think that's why [it looks like] Apex is talking with developers:
We were also told that versions of games are being developed that you do not have to "load". Simply put the CD in and play, much like is used on other consoles.
Sounds like they've got their bases covered.
Damon,
I've always been a fan of Apex, and this looks fun. Competition for the Xbox with configurable, customizable components? And support for PC games? I'm all for it. It's about time we see something that isn't proprietary.
Damon,
Unfortunately high usage does not immediately equte to high revenue.
Very true. I have a feeling though they're counting on that geek factor to carry them through any potential tough times (like perhaps a downswing after some fast initial sales). The trick now is to simply stay true to their roots. Don't worry about impressing investors. It was those decisions from the gut that got them where they are today.
Damon,
I'd buy some.
Even at the possible 7% mentioned, I'm sure it wouldn't take long to make a lot of money considering how ridiculously well-established google is in so many homes and businesses. One wonders how inflated they could wind up looking though. Could the google stigma raise their own market value above what it will be able to maintain? I guess this is why they're selling that 33% and not 49.
Damon,
Well, I imagine they'll throw some technologically advanced copymachines in existing fedex service centers, and purple shirts on the Kinko's people.
I'm very interested in your story and history with the company. In my position there'd be very little I could do to recompensate, but I came on only a few years ago and to my knowledge there have been no true layoffs since. I was under the impression our IT was, for the most part, outsourced, but of course I could be wrong (considering they operate now out of a completely different department and cost center than my own).
Our current upper management has made an attempt to put on a face to the frontline employees of consideration and a promotion of customer service; however, I have seen customer service be put aside time and again in favor of padding our numbers in order to gain a higher "service level" average within the company. I think I'm one of the only administrators who sees the irony.
Finally, we've had to do a lot of cut-backs of management itself, as well as collapse a lot of routes in order to save hours and, ultimately, lose less money over the past two years. What is interesting is that FedEx, while still maintaining that they will by no means lay off anybody, has been eliminating positions left and right. However, in order to maintain, they have kept those employees in the ledger, pointed them to our internal open-position postings, converted them to "casual employees" and told them that when anything comes up they're welcome to take it. Many of these employees have opted to resign because most of the open positions were on a lower pay-scale and often only part-time. I do admire the company's efforts though, considering that we HAVE gone through hard times (I've watched the numbers myself). They've made a stringent effort to "promote from within" even if the shuffling really isn't promotion at all, as opposed to hiring and training new employees. I know it's been tough and we've lost some people, but the truth is that we've not gone out and hired a bunch of new people (company-wide, anyway). It doesn't make your situation better, but it doesn't look as bad.
Maybe your stocks will split?
I'm hoping for a profit too, naturally. I think it is something of a positive direction, and actually a smart wait. Some people may think that FedEx is just being a copycat (after UPS buying out Mailboxes, Etc.) but FedEx and Kinkos have had a close relationship for years. I sincerely doubt the buyout was a recent idea. We simply wanted to see if it could work and what mistakes UPS made that we can avoid. By doing so we stand to improve our margins beyond those of UPS simply because of the stigma of our ongoing success (a no-layoffs policy, full benefits for full- and part-time employees, etc.)
And considering our meager earnings after the weeks we were shut down by the FAA (9/11), I'm pretty sure everyone saw this as a money-making thing, or we'd have never done it. There isn't a lot of room for error for airlines these days.
Damon,
Being a FedEx employee I think it's obvious which one I hope will survive.
However, massive restructuring will have to occur if this is to happen. Sure we are a market leader in margins and, as a cargo airline we have a good record of adapting new technologies, but we're still running on a heirarchy reminiscent of the generation that brought us Fred Smith. Reworking our buildings from warehouses to more dynamically creativity-inspiring circular buildings would be a decent start. We work on a hub concept. We need more creativity and flexibility in on-road route planning, more power taken from beaurocrats in Memphis who really don't get a good picture of on-road day to day activity other than pages full of numbers at the end of the day and share that power in the form of actual couriers and managers being able to make more broad decisions based on their locality. We have our own form of standards. The point is that practices that work in an inner city (which spawns the greatest density of deliveries and pickups) are completely wrong for people out in the country who may have ten to twenty stops a day.
And I'm not saying this as a courier. I'm an administrator, but I think it's very important to put more faith in our frontline employees. Unfortunately not all of the higher-ups share that point of view.
Dotcom ventures, all negative late-nineties stigma aside, are still in the realm of providing virtual services. Even if those are for real products, people will STILL want to feel like they're interacting with other people. Make it too impersonal, and you'll ultimately lose touch with your customers (and their reality). It'll be interesting to see what "they" do to reverse the trend.
Not to mention there will, in the forseable future, be a consistent and even increasing demand for companies like FedEx. As more people migrate to do their shopping online, they'll need companies like us to deliver the goods.
Damon,
I'm also not quite sure if you're saying that it's OK to murder people as long as they agree to be filmed, but it sure sounds like it.
Sorry, that's not quite what I meant. I said a staged murder. They happen all the time in the movies. Do you believe Hollywood really kills that many actors?
She was in an adult establishment, by the looks of it. As for being outside, no, if I had kids I wouldn't appreciate you stripping in front of them, but if there are places for you in which it is legal to do so it would be my reponsibility to avoid those areas when my children are with me. There are such things as nudist colonies and beaches. It didn't look like there were any children in the backgrounds of any of her pictures.
Now whether this girl's pictures are doctored or not, that's not the issue. The point is that a crime does not have to be witnessed in the act to be found guilty of. That's all we're trying to correct you on.
Actually, considering you were replying to a point I was free to make, I find it highly amusing that you're trying to "correct" me in "assisting" me in staying on topic with my own post, when I was later qualifying WHY I feel that there is no need to go after this girl when I didn't see any clear indication (I could have missed it though) that the authorities really investigated the photos themselves. There's no reason to believe they're false and the girl seems to have admitted to it, but I'm STILL implying that them ticketing her is absurd, especially considering their only evidence wasn't even called into question. (The owner of the establishment sure didn't see it happen.)
Your original argument was "I wasn't caught in the act, so therefore I'm not guilty". Your above post is now is a disagreement as to whether certain laws should be even valid. What's rediculous is your inabilty to apply consistent reasoning to law.
Both arguments work in the context of each-other. Obviously there have to be reasonable limits. I'm saying if they couldn't prove she did it, it's crazy to try to ticket her for something this antiquated.
In Bismarck, North Dakota it is technically illegal for two people of the opposite sex to co-habit outside the bounds of a family relationship. This too is antiquated. I'm saying that because I rent two apartments they can't prove I live with my fiancee, and even though technically I'm breaking the law, the law itself is outdated and not consistent with the laws of other states. Why waste money going after me when there are more serious crimes happening just across the street (at our neighborhood methlab)?
I think the same applies here.
Either way though, she doesn't seem too concerned about it. And like so many others have said, this will only help business.
Damon,
I wonder if they talked to the other women in the first pic before they ticketed her? As for other evidence, did the cops dust for boobie-prints?
Damon,
Not exactly. Pictures of yourself in a public establishment showing your bare top (which is only illegal because of laws based on gross and outdated cultural taboo) are quite a bit different than staged murder of persons not in agreement to appear in your picture. Your analogy was more than a little rediculous.
If she didn't get caught at the time, why is she being ticketed now? How can they prove she was really there? Photoshop can do some amazing things these days.
Stupid stupid stupid.
Damon,
Well, what always happens to a typical Dell user? Either they don't know better and are content with what they have, or they'll upgrade in a year or two. I don't see the problem here.
Damon,
Did the check the back room? Maybe the Beagle is hiding in there.
Damon,