This is my own musing on the subject - MS did the smart thing in just making software and letting people install it on whoever's hardware. This allowed dozens of companies to create systems for Windows to run. i think that was a big part of what allowed Windows to become dominant (more than the anti-competitive stuff they did later). Wouldn't the MacOS run on more machines if there was competition in the market to build hardware to run it? If Psystar can build less expensive and less queefy looking boxes, Apple might lose money on hardware but sell more copies of the OS. Part of the fun of playing in Windows world is that i've got dozens of vendors that can sell me an assemble system, or i can buy the parts from hundreds of vendors/manufacturers and build it myself. That's another thing Apple seemed to miss.... The MS model created entirely new industries. Apple spawned a few companies that make things for hte iPod, but that's about it. From a previous/. conversation i learned that it is possible to home brew a mac, but it's very difficult and few people have the knowledge to do it.
Could someone more familiar with the history post on why they this is their business model?
If the value of the stock exceeds the value of the company by too much, it can cause problems for the company, stockholders and the rest of the market. i'm not claiming to know what Apple is worth. Just don't want to see people take a bath if Apple tanks.
i bet that having a gov't that can say "Do this"/and it happens/, is a factor as well. In the US, we wait for the rich to decide that doing this will make them richer. Our regulation of media serves mostly to protect short sighted, huge companies at the expense of competition and the general welfare.
We'll have just enough bandwidth to buy stuff on Amazon and play X Box Live games. When the companies decide we want more (and want it enough to DO something about it [like switch providers]) they'll open things more. Our gov't will keep things as they are until the companies tell them it's ok. What they should be doing is burying fat cables of fiber and funding research to make the pr0n flow faster.
Let's also keep in mind that Japan is technophiliac in comparison to the US. They love their gadgets more than we do. And do the folks in Buttscratch, Wyoming really want broad band? Japan prolly doesn't have as much in the way of redundant gov't in the form of states. In the US could have 4 gov'ts to deal with.
From other/. discussions, i gather that competition in the cell phone market in Japan is fierce. Much of what we have as additional services are included as standard there.
i want a cheaper cell phone service (than 45$/mo) and i can't get it w/o going to a misnamed "pre"paid phone. With those the minutes expire and you can lose your phone number if you don't keep buying cards. i have about 10K rollover minutes. That's 7 days of talking. i'm not a 14 year old girl. i don't need hundreds of minutes/mo, i barely talk that much in meatspace. Gimme some real competition!
Imagine having 1GB to every room in the US (just musing here). You could have schools that are too small to justify this or that class pipe in a class from another school. You want to take Advanced Conversation Latin at B.F.E.H.S.? No problem! Log on at 2pm EST. Library too far? Download all of the Guttenberg Project to your internal network. Teachers in your area suck? Hire a teacher from... ANYWHERE!/has FiOS//Loves it
It's about learning how to reroute data through the parts of the brain that are damaged. Or perhaps to replace those parts.
Re:But can it grill cheese?
on
Bash Cookbook
·
· Score: 1
If you upgrade from Girlfriend 4.0 to Wife 2.0, you just might be able to do that. Just keep in mind that Wife 2.0 is more expensive in the long run and more likely to give you 403s. The cost of uninstallation if she finds Girlfriend 5.0 running in the background can be life ruining. But if you give Wife frequent upgrades, i hear it can be quite wonderful.
The AF run in an Army mindset? Egad, that would be terrible! The Army and Air Force use very different skills and for lack of a better term, types of people. The Army needs automatons that are essentially brainless, if they get smart they might start making their own decisions. The USAF needs technicians who can figure out things on their own. Autonamoustons? Retention of VERY expensive pilots and techies would be a nightmare. You can turn a kid into a tank driver or infantry goon in a few weeks. USAF training is typically months, sometimes up to a year.
The army *should* have all the helicopters.
Having the USAF run the cyber show is a natural progression, since they already run the satellites and are tech oriented. Or we could establish a cyber corp. Folks would join that just because it would sound cool.
Also, so what if they "banned" him from discussing certain things? He can still talk about them all he wants, and lose his job. That's up to him. It's not like he'd go to jail or be killed for it. They aren't forbidding him, or limiting his choices/freedoms in any way. They changed the conditions of his employment. This isn't any different than you company handing a form saying "don't divulge company secrets", you can if you like, and the company will fire you. Social Contract: The individual and the group exchange obligations to each other.
It's not just the technophobes, imagine the liability suits. The main reason cars aren't self driving already is not the tech, but knowing that if the tech fails the manufacturer could lose millions.
i'd rather see cars talking to each other, relaying their speed to the cars around them. Integrate that with GPS navigation and you've cut commute times, fuel consumption and accidents drastically and without exposure to liability. The cars ahead of you relay that they are slamming on the breaks, your car automatically decelerates. If there is a traffic jam, the cars report it and your GPS sends you on a back road. If cars know how fast all the other cars are going, they can go faster. One of the big dangers on the road is speed differentials. The slow pokes and hot rods mess up everything for the people going at the ambient speed of traffic. When *everyone* is driving 60/70/80, it's all good. The speed limit could be set dynamically.
Oooh I HATE the Colonel with his wee beady eyes and secret ingredient that makes you crave it fortnightly!/can't get to imdb to get the quote just right:(
Want karma? Just paint the US as aggressive, W as stupid, M$ as a monopoly, Jobs as the second coming and linux as the solution to all of life's ills.
Ignore that the US overthrew a horrific theocracy that harbored AQ. Dismiss that Saddam and Ba'ath party invaded two neighbors because they could and killed a million or so of their own people. Write off the billions in arms deals and oil concessions and debts between Saddam and France, Germany, China and Russia, the primary opposition to regime change. Forget that the sanctions were about to end, leaving Saddam free to rebuild his military and WMD programs. Ignore that Iraq (and its neighbors, and the international community) would have endured another decade of Saddam followed by rule by his equally vicious sons. Point out costs and troops losses, and ignore that both are the result of religious conflict and terrorists from other countries(or that the losses are comparatively low). Blame our soldiers for civilian deaths, instead of the insurgents and jihadists hiding behind the civilians, or directly killing the civilians. Talk about 'blood for oil' and ignore that we hadn't needed Iraq's oil for ten years prior to the invasion. Drone about not giving the inspectors a chance to finish instead of talking about the twelve years of diplomacy, sanctions, inspections and shell games played by Saddam.
If someone calls you out, call them names like neocon or jingoist or sheeple, or use your mod points to bury their post. Don't worry about citing evidence, only people who disagree with you need to do that. And if what you are claiming gives you a warm self-satisfied feeling, then the facts don't matter anyway.
It works because envy and greed and want are largely eliminated. The elimination of those wouldn't be communism or socialism. Such systems would be rendered obsolete. There would be little desire to (re)distribute something if everyone has it. People who want for little are generally easy going. People who have hope for something better are usually well behaved. Maybe you didn't watch enough of the show to learn how it worked.
Socialism is not about distributing wealth equally, even on paper. Please read up on what socialism IS before you talk about socialism. Germany, often described as socialist (though all countries are socialist to one degree or another {roads, public schools, cops}), does not try to make everyone equal. They just try to make sure that the disparity between the top and bottom isn't terrible. If you're sick in Germany, you go to the doctor. In the US, that's a privilege extended to those with (certain) jobs (not all jobs include benefits). Yet, it is still possible for someone through the sweat of their brow to become wealthy. Capitalism and socialism work beautifully together. But that's not what is going on in ST.
Communism, socialism, capitalism and so are moot when there's no point in being greedy, or there is less to "need". Why charge so much for medicine that certain people can't afford it, if there is no scarcity of medicine?
The social problems weren't described as evolution in the biological sense, they might have referred to it cultural evolution. The federation didn't have as many internal troubles as say, the Klingons. The federation didn't have as much external problems until something on the outside pushed in.
"But but but how did they get there?", you blubber, pretending to not understand. Time, pain and technology. Time and pain taught that version of Earth that the cause of much of their problems was want and greed. The former is mostly the result of the latter. Pain of wars and crime eventually taught them these lessons. Technology makes civilization possible. It also makes morality feasible. In an every man for themselves struggle to survive, moral decisions are a luxury. i can worry about whether is it right or wrong to kill you and take your land if i'm starving. Where people perceive that they have hope for something better, they are less likely to take stupid risks, or feel that it is ok to take from others.
The illusion of scarcity, or the sense that 'whoever dies with the most toys wins' drives most of the misery we see in the world. If i could get a Porsche from a replicator today, and get a Ferrari tomorrow, i would care far less about 'getting ahead'. i could put my time and effort into better things. Or do things and not worry about what it pays. It's the old "what would you do if you won the lottery?". i'd paint, write, travel, develop games, teach kids computers. i wouldn't be sitting in a cube farm working on TPS reports.
What would you do if someone came along and paid off your mortgage? Or your landlord said you could live rent free? Such an event would effectively double my income. i could take a lower paying job that would give me more satisfaction. Or i could spend that extra money to take art and language classes. i could buy lego sets and give them to kids so they could have fun and learn spacial and engineering skills.
If you find such a world hard to swallow, imagine how today's world would look to someone from 200 years ago. Marriages are for love? Blacks aren't farm equipment? Women leading nations? Widespread literacy? Conquest of weaker nations seen as bad? Some people of that time might see those as bad things, but i think their pretty groovy, and so would the people benefiting from those social evolutions.
Since i can't mod you as 'overrated' or 'pandering for karma', i'll post.
The pot and kettle are both black. So what of it? Does that make the pot's claim of the kettle's blackness any less true? You give the US less respect because the *current* gov't has been spying illegally than the Chinese who do so as matter of POLICY? At least in the US, if the gov't gets caught doing that there's SOME kind of recourse. We spy on them to find out what the threats might be. They do the same but also spy just to steal technology. They're notorious for reverse engineering (see Chinese MiGs).
Gov'ts spy on each other, that's a given. We spy on everyone and everyone spies on us, even our allies. The intel community has a saying, "there are friendly gov'ts, but there are no friendly intelligence agencies".
When Obama takes office, much of W's shenanigans will end, but you can't say that of China. Setting aside the Chinese gov't, the amount cyber crime originating in of China is staggering. Even if you only count copyright violation, it's a big deal. Here's a test for you: go do a few google searches on Tibet, Tienanmen Square, Hong Kong and Taiwan from your computer in any western nation. Then try the same thing in China. IF you manage to find anything, chances are it will be monitored and under control of the gov't. Then do searches on the net here for anything seditious you can think of. You'll find gigs and gigs of material criticizing the our gov't and no one will give a shit that you looked at it.
Then there's the matter of egomania that people think our gov't is spying on THEM personally. Who are you and what are you up to that you think the elephant gives a shit about the ant you are? Do you really think there's a GS-10 employee who cares that you rented Fahrenheit 9/11? Chances are he watched it too. And while we're at it... it rains because of condensation, not because God is crying because you touched yourself.
Does privacy protect criminal behavior? Your doctor is supposed to inform authorities if you are planning to commit a crime (iirc). i'm not being rhetorical, i don't know to what extent someone can hide crime behind privacy.
If a company or agency is doing sensitive work, something like this might be more effective than the piss test after the job interview/random screenings.
If i had a company and felt a need to weed out (so to speak) the junkies, i'd just be up front about it. "We're screening everyone, and constantly. If that's a problem for you, it was nice to meet you and goodbye. You can have your privacy and addiction, just not here."
IT, or maybe computers in general, have a hidden goal of making itself obsolete. As operating systems, software and hardware become more stable, the need for IT workers declines. At my previous position, i set turned a gaggle of workgroups into a tidy domain. i installed a power AV system. As i helped users, i showed them how to solve problems on there own (reboot, try again). Soon, i had much less work to do. Being laid off in this case was a matter of economics, than obsolescence, but the trend remains. i was making myself less necessary.
IT depts are pretty much pure overhead. Companies have IT staff because they need a wizard to heal the sick computers. IT generally doesn't bring in money for the company (at least not directly).
- Waxing Sci-Fi - Over a long enough time line, maybe we'll make machines that make us obsolete. Our technology could be a step of evolution. We might exist to bring create our replacements.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah.
Did those OSes fail after MS was ubiquitous?
Why does Apple do things this way?
This is my own musing on the subject - MS did the smart thing in just making software and letting people install it on whoever's hardware. This allowed dozens of companies to create systems for Windows to run. i think that was a big part of what allowed Windows to become dominant (more than the anti-competitive stuff they did later). Wouldn't the MacOS run on more machines if there was competition in the market to build hardware to run it? If Psystar can build less expensive and less queefy looking boxes, Apple might lose money on hardware but sell more copies of the OS. Part of the fun of playing in Windows world is that i've got dozens of vendors that can sell me an assemble system, or i can buy the parts from hundreds of vendors/manufacturers and build it myself. That's another thing Apple seemed to miss.... The MS model created entirely new industries. Apple spawned a few companies that make things for hte iPod, but that's about it. From a previous /. conversation i learned that it is possible to home brew a mac, but it's very difficult and few people have the knowledge to do it.
Could someone more familiar with the history post on why they this is their business model?
{Off Topic}
i figured that SotD was a Romantic Comedy in the middle of a zombie outbreak.
Has someone mentioned that yet?
If the value of the stock exceeds the value of the company by too much, it can cause problems for the company, stockholders and the rest of the market. i'm not claiming to know what Apple is worth. Just don't want to see people take a bath if Apple tanks.
hoough.
i bet that having a gov't that can say "Do this" /and it happens/, is a factor as well. In the US, we wait for the rich to decide that doing this will make them richer. Our regulation of media serves mostly to protect short sighted, huge companies at the expense of competition and the general welfare.
We'll have just enough bandwidth to buy stuff on Amazon and play X Box Live games. When the companies decide we want more (and want it enough to DO something about it [like switch providers]) they'll open things more. Our gov't will keep things as they are until the companies tell them it's ok. What they should be doing is burying fat cables of fiber and funding research to make the pr0n flow faster.
Let's also keep in mind that Japan is technophiliac in comparison to the US. They love their gadgets more than we do. And do the folks in Buttscratch, Wyoming really want broad band? Japan prolly doesn't have as much in the way of redundant gov't in the form of states. In the US could have 4 gov'ts to deal with.
From other /. discussions, i gather that competition in the cell phone market in Japan is fierce. Much of what we have as additional services are included as standard there.
i want a cheaper cell phone service (than 45$/mo) and i can't get it w/o going to a misnamed "pre"paid phone. With those the minutes expire and you can lose your phone number if you don't keep buying cards. i have about 10K rollover minutes. That's 7 days of talking. i'm not a 14 year old girl. i don't need hundreds of minutes/mo, i barely talk that much in meatspace. Gimme some real competition!
Imagine having 1GB to every room in the US (just musing here). You could have schools that are too small to justify this or that class pipe in a class from another school. You want to take Advanced Conversation Latin at B.F.E.H.S.? No problem! Log on at 2pm EST. Library too far? Download all of the Guttenberg Project to your internal network. Teachers in your area suck? Hire a teacher from... ANYWHERE! /has FiOS //Loves it
It's about learning how to reroute data through the parts of the brain that are damaged. Or perhaps to replace those parts.
If you upgrade from Girlfriend 4.0 to Wife 2.0, you just might be able to do that. Just keep in mind that Wife 2.0 is more expensive in the long run and more likely to give you 403s. The cost of uninstallation if she finds Girlfriend 5.0 running in the background can be life ruining. But if you give Wife frequent upgrades, i hear it can be quite wonderful.
Mr. Coward,
The plural of anecdote is "anecdotes", not "evidence".
It's a cookbook!!!
The AF run in an Army mindset? Egad, that would be terrible! The Army and Air Force use very different skills and for lack of a better term, types of people. The Army needs automatons that are essentially brainless, if they get smart they might start making their own decisions. The USAF needs technicians who can figure out things on their own. Autonamoustons? Retention of VERY expensive pilots and techies would be a nightmare. You can turn a kid into a tank driver or infantry goon in a few weeks. USAF training is typically months, sometimes up to a year.
The army *should* have all the helicopters.
Having the USAF run the cyber show is a natural progression, since they already run the satellites and are tech oriented. Or we could establish a cyber corp. Folks would join that just because it would sound cool.
[Off Topic Question]
Could someone 'splain to me why something i posted seconds ago already has a score of 2?
Mod 'em up!
Also, so what if they "banned" him from discussing certain things? He can still talk about them all he wants, and lose his job. That's up to him. It's not like he'd go to jail or be killed for it. They aren't forbidding him, or limiting his choices/freedoms in any way. They changed the conditions of his employment. This isn't any different than you company handing a form saying "don't divulge company secrets", you can if you like, and the company will fire you. Social Contract: The individual and the group exchange obligations to each other.
It's not just the technophobes, imagine the liability suits. The main reason cars aren't self driving already is not the tech, but knowing that if the tech fails the manufacturer could lose millions.
i'd rather see cars talking to each other, relaying their speed to the cars around them. Integrate that with GPS navigation and you've cut commute times, fuel consumption and accidents drastically and without exposure to liability. The cars ahead of you relay that they are slamming on the breaks, your car automatically decelerates. If there is a traffic jam, the cars report it and your GPS sends you on a back road. If cars know how fast all the other cars are going, they can go faster. One of the big dangers on the road is speed differentials. The slow pokes and hot rods mess up everything for the people going at the ambient speed of traffic. When *everyone* is driving 60/70/80, it's all good. The speed limit could be set dynamically.
Why? Why?! Why the hell can't i type? And why can't /. have an edit button like almost every other forum in the world?
Yeah, would be have let Nazi Germany host the Olympics?
Oooh I HATE the Colonel with his wee beady eyes and secret ingredient that makes you crave it fortnightly! /can't get to imdb to get the quote just right :(
All that junk?
All that junk inside yo' trunk.
Pandering karma whoring and history revision 4tW!
Want karma? Just paint the US as aggressive, W as stupid, M$ as a monopoly, Jobs as the second coming and linux as the solution to all of life's ills.
Ignore that the US overthrew a horrific theocracy that harbored AQ. Dismiss that Saddam and Ba'ath party invaded two neighbors because they could and killed a million or so of their own people. Write off the billions in arms deals and oil concessions and debts between Saddam and France, Germany, China and Russia, the primary opposition to regime change. Forget that the sanctions were about to end, leaving Saddam free to rebuild his military and WMD programs. Ignore that Iraq (and its neighbors, and the international community) would have endured another decade of Saddam followed by rule by his equally vicious sons. Point out costs and troops losses, and ignore that both are the result of religious conflict and terrorists from other countries(or that the losses are comparatively low). Blame our soldiers for civilian deaths, instead of the insurgents and jihadists hiding behind the civilians, or directly killing the civilians. Talk about 'blood for oil' and ignore that we hadn't needed Iraq's oil for ten years prior to the invasion. Drone about not giving the inspectors a chance to finish instead of talking about the twelve years of diplomacy, sanctions, inspections and shell games played by Saddam.
If someone calls you out, call them names like neocon or jingoist or sheeple, or use your mod points to bury their post. Don't worry about citing evidence, only people who disagree with you need to do that. And if what you are claiming gives you a warm self-satisfied feeling, then the facts don't matter anyway.
It's that easy!
It works because envy and greed and want are largely eliminated. The elimination of those wouldn't be communism or socialism. Such systems would be rendered obsolete. There would be little desire to (re)distribute something if everyone has it. People who want for little are generally easy going. People who have hope for something better are usually well behaved. Maybe you didn't watch enough of the show to learn how it worked.
Socialism is not about distributing wealth equally, even on paper. Please read up on what socialism IS before you talk about socialism. Germany, often described as socialist (though all countries are socialist to one degree or another {roads, public schools, cops}), does not try to make everyone equal. They just try to make sure that the disparity between the top and bottom isn't terrible. If you're sick in Germany, you go to the doctor. In the US, that's a privilege extended to those with (certain) jobs (not all jobs include benefits). Yet, it is still possible for someone through the sweat of their brow to become wealthy. Capitalism and socialism work beautifully together. But that's not what is going on in ST.
Communism, socialism, capitalism and so are moot when there's no point in being greedy, or there is less to "need". Why charge so much for medicine that certain people can't afford it, if there is no scarcity of medicine?
The social problems weren't described as evolution in the biological sense, they might have referred to it cultural evolution. The federation didn't have as many internal troubles as say, the Klingons. The federation didn't have as much external problems until something on the outside pushed in.
"But but but how did they get there?", you blubber, pretending to not understand. Time, pain and technology. Time and pain taught that version of Earth that the cause of much of their problems was want and greed. The former is mostly the result of the latter. Pain of wars and crime eventually taught them these lessons. Technology makes civilization possible. It also makes morality feasible. In an every man for themselves struggle to survive, moral decisions are a luxury. i can worry about whether is it right or wrong to kill you and take your land if i'm starving. Where people perceive that they have hope for something better, they are less likely to take stupid risks, or feel that it is ok to take from others.
The illusion of scarcity, or the sense that 'whoever dies with the most toys wins' drives most of the misery we see in the world. If i could get a Porsche from a replicator today, and get a Ferrari tomorrow, i would care far less about 'getting ahead'. i could put my time and effort into better things. Or do things and not worry about what it pays. It's the old "what would you do if you won the lottery?". i'd paint, write, travel, develop games, teach kids computers. i wouldn't be sitting in a cube farm working on TPS reports.
What would you do if someone came along and paid off your mortgage? Or your landlord said you could live rent free? Such an event would effectively double my income. i could take a lower paying job that would give me more satisfaction. Or i could spend that extra money to take art and language classes. i could buy lego sets and give them to kids so they could have fun and learn spacial and engineering skills.
If you find such a world hard to swallow, imagine how today's world would look to someone from 200 years ago. Marriages are for love? Blacks aren't farm equipment? Women leading nations? Widespread literacy? Conquest of weaker nations seen as bad? Some people of that time might see those as bad things, but i think their pretty groovy, and so would the people benefiting from those social evolutions.
Since i can't mod you as 'overrated' or 'pandering for karma', i'll post.
The pot and kettle are both black. So what of it? Does that make the pot's claim of the kettle's blackness any less true? You give the US less respect because the *current* gov't has been spying illegally than the Chinese who do so as matter of POLICY? At least in the US, if the gov't gets caught doing that there's SOME kind of recourse. We spy on them to find out what the threats might be. They do the same but also spy just to steal technology. They're notorious for reverse engineering (see Chinese MiGs).
Gov'ts spy on each other, that's a given. We spy on everyone and everyone spies on us, even our allies. The intel community has a saying, "there are friendly gov'ts, but there are no friendly intelligence agencies".
When Obama takes office, much of W's shenanigans will end, but you can't say that of China. Setting aside the Chinese gov't, the amount cyber crime originating in of China is staggering. Even if you only count copyright violation, it's a big deal. Here's a test for you: go do a few google searches on Tibet, Tienanmen Square, Hong Kong and Taiwan from your computer in any western nation. Then try the same thing in China. IF you manage to find anything, chances are it will be monitored and under control of the gov't. Then do searches on the net here for anything seditious you can think of. You'll find gigs and gigs of material criticizing the our gov't and no one will give a shit that you looked at it.
Then there's the matter of egomania that people think our gov't is spying on THEM personally. Who are you and what are you up to that you think the elephant gives a shit about the ant you are? Do you really think there's a GS-10 employee who cares that you rented Fahrenheit 9/11? Chances are he watched it too. And while we're at it... it rains because of condensation, not because God is crying because you touched yourself.
OK. You put down your spear first.
*geekmansworld drops his spear
*Apeiron ganks geeksmansworld and takes his stuff
Does privacy protect criminal behavior? Your doctor is supposed to inform authorities if you are planning to commit a crime (iirc). i'm not being rhetorical, i don't know to what extent someone can hide crime behind privacy.
If a company or agency is doing sensitive work, something like this might be more effective than the piss test after the job interview/random screenings.
If i had a company and felt a need to weed out (so to speak) the junkies, i'd just be up front about it. "We're screening everyone, and constantly. If that's a problem for you, it was nice to meet you and goodbye. You can have your privacy and addiction, just not here."
Yes. That and wars will be fought by robots in space or on top of very tall mountains. /JRRBS!
Start there and retrace your steps.
IT, or maybe computers in general, have a hidden goal of making itself obsolete. As operating systems, software and hardware become more stable, the need for IT workers declines. At my previous position, i set turned a gaggle of workgroups into a tidy domain. i installed a power AV system. As i helped users, i showed them how to solve problems on there own (reboot, try again). Soon, i had much less work to do. Being laid off in this case was a matter of economics, than obsolescence, but the trend remains. i was making myself less necessary.
IT depts are pretty much pure overhead. Companies have IT staff because they need a wizard to heal the sick computers. IT generally doesn't bring in money for the company (at least not directly).
- Waxing Sci-Fi -
Over a long enough time line, maybe we'll make machines that make us obsolete. Our technology could be a step of evolution. We might exist to bring create our replacements.