The airline flights - as miserable as they are - are some of my few respites from work. If I can be connected (and thus available) while flying, it's a very short jump to I must be connected while traveling.
Everybody with a brain knows (or should know) that the best jobs and the best employees are brought together by word of mouth.
If that's alternative, so be it. Get in front of actual people. Go to social events. Attend symposia. Lift a glass or two. Get to know individuals as human beings. Watch them when they are interacting with others - not just you. Don't talk to people you might want to hire with a desk in between you.
Let people get to know you. Be accessible.
Get out there, for catssakes! What's keeping you? What the hell are you asking us for? Go! If you don't have a network already, you're behind. If you have one but it's not actively working for you, you're behind.
Yes, it's possible to do everything the ping tag does by using javascript or redirects. Let sites that want to engage in such practices pay the penalty. Display of such sites should be slower.
The benefits to the site developers who want to track clicks are clear, the benefits to the person looking at the page is less so.
If anybody thinkks this will turn into either (a) lower prices to consumers or (b) lower revenue to the cable companies, you're not thinking clearly.
Some consumers will pay less, many will pay more. Total revenue to cable companies will stay about the same. Some content providers will prosper and some will suffer. It is they for whom we should be worried.
Regulations already force cable companies to carry local channels, so they are safe. Popular mainstream cable channels like ESPN, CNN, MTV, FoxNews, and even History and Discovery are probably safe. The feds will make them carry C-SPAN. What this does primarily is raise the barrier for entry of new content providers. With no means to build an audience, I don't see very many willing to risk putting their new channel on an a la carte menu.
I'm not sure I understand the logic behind your argument.
I'll give it a shot.
The choice to carry a pager/blackberry/cellphone is not typically that of the wearer. It's the boss's. The "off" switch is a function to be used at the considerable peril of the user.
Why is it necessary to eliminate technology simply because you don't know how to manage your free time in its presence?
The presence of the device removes time management power from the wearer and transfers it to remote controllers.
No one ever said that you have to answer the phone just because it's ringing. You can even turn the ringer off.
See above.
How did this ever get to +5, insightful?
Perhaps drawing the inferences requires nearly as much insight as making the implication.
As long as there are people willing to pay for support, there will be people willing to do it for money.
The thing about support of Open Source Software is that quality support demands above all else a stable product. No, not one that doesn't crash very often, one that doesn't change very often. Every change a programmer makes to a program introduces a risk of retraining for the support staff. The last thing a customer wants to hear from Technical Support is "your programmers changed the source and that's why it doesn't work any more.".
That's why it's important for enterprises to keep programmers away from the programs unless the company is prepared to support itself. This is not a problem for proprietary software because the programmers don't have the source code. For open source, though, the temptation to "change that routine so it works better in our environment" is pretty overwhelming and absolutely toxic to the support scenario.
It will be interesting to see if a shift to product placement ousts these local businesses and we see more national companies bidding the price up on stadium billboards.
It's already happening in many stadiums. For example, if you ever go to a Cubs game at Wrigley field, You'll see a plain green panel on the wall behind and to the left (as seen from the pitcher's mound) of home plate. Very unobtrusive. If you watch the game on TV, though, that green panel shows up as billboard ads that change throughout the game. The ads are electronically superimposed.
There's nothing that prevents different ads for different markets being placed on those panels by the cable/satellite TV companies.
I expect that same technology will be employed on outfield walls, the boards at hockey games, end zones at football games, and even on the playing fields.
On a slightly different subject, ads can already be tailored to individual homes, and that tailoring is already being done. Market research firms work with advertisers and cable companies to plant different ads in different neighborhoods - but not individual households, although nothing prevents it - in order to test effectiveness of one ad over another. For example, one neighborhood might see one Frosted Flakes ad while another neighborhood might see a different one. Then sales of Frosted Flakes at each neighborhood's supermarkets are tracked and ad effectiveness is measured by looking at sales movements.
Wouldn't the costs of consumable items like paper and toner be better allocated to their respective departments?
I can't argue with this. My experience, though, is that the more purchasing centralization you can do in a small firm, the better for the firm, even if that complicates matters for the poor guy who has to buy the consumables.
Look at it this way: the buyer will accumulate a lifetime supply of caps and t-shirts.
You do make a good point, though, since some sort of budget paper-money chargeback for the using departments is useful to incent conservation.
What's the business strategy of the firm and how can technology best support it?
Don't stop with PC's and applications. Include phones, Internet access, printers, faxes, document repositories, paper, toner, CD's, you name it. If the business strategy is best supported by quill pens and parchment paper, though, don't be afraid to go low-tech.
The partners probably have an idea of how much they want to spend on you, your team, and what you and your team do. Find out.
Do not trifle with that step. If they think they can afford $30,000 a year on technology and you present a $300,000 budget, the next sound you hear will be the axe falling.
Never forget that your firm is in the business of architecting things. Having cool computers with the latest applications that do not contribute directly and measurably to the architecting of things is deadly.
Slashdot Mirror
You youngsters and your low expectations.
IEFBR14 takes up exactly 2 bytes of executable code.
Never fails, ever.
sigh...
If it doesn't solve a problem I have, I'm not using it.
Sorry...pet peeve. Mod me down if you must.
If that's alternative, so be it. Get in front of actual people. Go to social events. Attend symposia. Lift a glass or two. Get to know individuals as human beings. Watch them when they are interacting with others - not just you. Don't talk to people you might want to hire with a desk in between you.
Let people get to know you. Be accessible.
Get out there, for catssakes! What's keeping you? What the hell are you asking us for? Go! If you don't have a network already, you're behind. If you have one but it's not actively working for you, you're behind.
Just a guess here, but I think you're behind.
As a self-interested user, I have a preference...
Yes, it's possible to do everything the ping tag does by using javascript or redirects. Let sites that want to engage in such practices pay the penalty. Display of such sites should be slower.
The benefits to the site developers who want to track clicks are clear, the benefits to the person looking at the page is less so.
Anyway, "measuring quality by counting defects" is a fool's errand to begin with.
Either by bandwidth-hog bloatware-infested websites or by actually useful applications. I'm not sure which one I'd bet on.
Some consumers will pay less, many will pay more. Total revenue to cable companies will stay about the same. Some content providers will prosper and some will suffer. It is they for whom we should be worried.
Regulations already force cable companies to carry local channels, so they are safe. Popular mainstream cable channels like ESPN, CNN, MTV, FoxNews, and even History and Discovery are probably safe. The feds will make them carry C-SPAN. What this does primarily is raise the barrier for entry of new content providers. With no means to build an audience, I don't see very many willing to risk putting their new channel on an a la carte menu.
I think it was Wilt Chamberlain who said, "Nobody roots for Goliath".
I'll give it a shot.
The choice to carry a pager/blackberry/cellphone is not typically that of the wearer. It's the boss's. The "off" switch is a function to be used at the considerable peril of the user.
Why is it necessary to eliminate technology simply because you don't know how to manage your free time in its presence?
The presence of the device removes time management power from the wearer and transfers it to remote controllers.
No one ever said that you have to answer the phone just because it's ringing. You can even turn the ringer off.
See above.
How did this ever get to +5, insightful?
Perhaps drawing the inferences requires nearly as much insight as making the implication.
Maybe we can rediscover the pleasure of being out of touch.
Maybe my time can be mine again.
You're right. My remark was driven by the comment added by "Dinosaur". The original author was bothered by JPF(tm).
I don't think it's the average user, the author is bothered by, it's the average technology person.
I'm often unpleasantly surprised with some of my supposedly technical colleagues' ignorance as to how computers work.
Why on earth would anybody want to steal a turd?
Why does this statement make my blood run cold?
Jonathan Livingston Drone just doesn't have the right mix of romance, awe, dread, and reverence if you ask me.
The thing about support of Open Source Software is that quality support demands above all else a stable product. No, not one that doesn't crash very often, one that doesn't change very often. Every change a programmer makes to a program introduces a risk of retraining for the support staff. The last thing a customer wants to hear from Technical Support is "your programmers changed the source and that's why it doesn't work any more.".
That's why it's important for enterprises to keep programmers away from the programs unless the company is prepared to support itself. This is not a problem for proprietary software because the programmers don't have the source code. For open source, though, the temptation to "change that routine so it works better in our environment" is pretty overwhelming and absolutely toxic to the support scenario.
It's already happening in many stadiums. For example, if you ever go to a Cubs game at Wrigley field, You'll see a plain green panel on the wall behind and to the left (as seen from the pitcher's mound) of home plate. Very unobtrusive. If you watch the game on TV, though, that green panel shows up as billboard ads that change throughout the game. The ads are electronically superimposed.
There's nothing that prevents different ads for different markets being placed on those panels by the cable/satellite TV companies.
I expect that same technology will be employed on outfield walls, the boards at hockey games, end zones at football games, and even on the playing fields.
On a slightly different subject, ads can already be tailored to individual homes, and that tailoring is already being done. Market research firms work with advertisers and cable companies to plant different ads in different neighborhoods - but not individual households, although nothing prevents it - in order to test effectiveness of one ad over another. For example, one neighborhood might see one Frosted Flakes ad while another neighborhood might see a different one. Then sales of Frosted Flakes at each neighborhood's supermarkets are tracked and ad effectiveness is measured by looking at sales movements.
No, that's actual verifiable BS by a factor of at least 12.
If you have, say, 15 minutes of downtime last month and 0 minutes of downtime this month, how much less downtime did you have?
100%.
Zealot, no. Authoritative voice, also no.
As an academic exercise, I guess there's some value, but as a practical matter, I think I'll just buy trucks.
I think they'd have called themselves "Postflix" if they didn't have this in mind all along...
I can't argue with this. My experience, though, is that the more purchasing centralization you can do in a small firm, the better for the firm, even if that complicates matters for the poor guy who has to buy the consumables.
Look at it this way: the buyer will accumulate a lifetime supply of caps and t-shirts.
You do make a good point, though, since some sort of budget paper-money chargeback for the using departments is useful to incent conservation.
Don't stop with PC's and applications. Include phones, Internet access, printers, faxes, document repositories, paper, toner, CD's, you name it. If the business strategy is best supported by quill pens and parchment paper, though, don't be afraid to go low-tech.
The partners probably have an idea of how much they want to spend on you, your team, and what you and your team do. Find out.
Do not trifle with that step. If they think they can afford $30,000 a year on technology and you present a $300,000 budget, the next sound you hear will be the axe falling.
Never forget that your firm is in the business of architecting things. Having cool computers with the latest applications that do not contribute directly and measurably to the architecting of things is deadly.