And in other news, an ounce of gold really does weigh more than an ounce of feathers. Since gold is a precious metal, "ounce" means a troy ounce, which is one-twelfth of a pound. But for feathers, "ounce" means an avoirdupois (sp?) ounce, which is one-sixteenth of a pound.
I ran across this in elementary school in a math textbook, of all places. I've remembered it ever since.
The "loss of goodwill" means that a company they bought didn't do as well as they thought it would, as others have pointed out here. But near the bottom of this story on Groklaw, somebody anonymous points out the real dirt. The company that didn't do so well was Vultus. SCO bought Vultus from Canopy, which is the private outfit that owns almost half of SCO.
This sure smells like the minority owners (Canopy) are bleeding cash out of a publicly-traded company (SCO) by selling it a loser.
Canopy has done stuff like this before. When one of their companies goes bankrupt, they (Canopy) wind up with the assets that matter, whether or not the company was publicly traded. They do this by making sure that the company that is going under owes Canopy money, so that Canopy is a creditor at bankruptcy time.
In other words:
1. Create a private company (company A).
2. Take company A public. Company A now has lots of money.
3. Create another private company (company B).
4. Sell company B to company A.
5. Profit!
But wait, there's more...
6. Make sure company A owes you money.
7. Let company A go bankrupt.
8. Using the assets that you get back from the bankruptcy, go to step 1!
See, the root cause of these problems is that Microsoft took a bunch of architectural shortcuts that made it really easy for them to create a lot of nifty features, and also made it really easy for others to create a bunch of nifty exploits. And, surprise surprise, the exploits keep on coming.
But rather than fix the architectural problems, rather than admit that they messed up, rather than go back and try to re-create all those nifty features with a solid architecture, rather than remove features that depend on the shoddy design, instead Microsoft's response is to try to preserve their lousy architecture, and simply patch each individual hole as it is discovered. This is somewhat similar to plastering over the cracks in the walls as they keep appearing, rather than admitting that the foundation is failing and the whole house needs to be rebuild.
There is no relief in sight for Microsoft users, ever.
My wife understands that death marches happen. As long as it's not too often or too much of the time, she understands that it goes with the territory.
The flip side is that programming pays enough that she can stay home with the kids. She doesn't have to work for us to make it. And one parent home with the kids is much better than daycare...
Yes, the amount of time spent doing financial reports has pretty much stayed the same. But the ability to create scenarios, to play "what if" games, has led to much better financial information being available to corporate planners.
It's like many other situations: You'll pay for as much information as you can get, rather than just get the same information more cheaply.
I read somewhere an article where somebody from Chicago was giving advice to Seattle on their new transit system. The author said that the key to getting people out of their cars is rapid transit - defined as "faster than driving". Just having transit isn't enough. People will still take their cars because it's faster, which equates to more convenient. But if the transit is faster than driving, people are more inclined to take it.
San Francisco added a nice touch to this with their BART system. In some places, they build the rapid transit right up the freeway median. When you're stuck in traffic on the freeway, and the train blows past you at 80 MPH, it tends to make you think, "I wish I was on that!"
He had a Super8 movie camera that he single-framed once a second as we drove the freeways in LA. The part where we went around a cloverleaf in one of those big four-layer freeway junctions was pretty intense to watch. (As Super8 is normally 24 frames/second, that's (duh) a 24x speedup. So if we were doing 25 MPH around the cloverleaf, it looks like 600 MPH, which is a bit fast for a cloverleaf.)
My dad also did a couple of movies of old, abandoned railroad grades. In these, he would move a certain number of steps before single-framing the camera. One time, there were a bunch of abandoned railroad ties still lying beside the track. Before each frame, we moved a few ties onto place on the abandoned roadbed, so it looked like the ties were being laid right in front of you as you went along. (It would have been even better to lay ties and rails, but we didn't have any rails...)
SCO re-scheduled the earnings call for June 10. This is one day after the hearing on Daimler-Chrysler's motion to dismiss. Perchance SCO wants to have an early opportunity to spin the results of the hearing?
Almost all of these predictions were based on bigger - more power, more steel, etc. The big (no pun intended) thing that the predictions missed was smaller and smarter - the transistor, the (micro) computer, embedded systems.
But we may be making the same mistake. More power was the biggest deal until about 1970. Then smaller became the big deal. But this doesn't mean that smaller is going to rule forever. In particular, our predictions of nanotech and biotech may be just as naive as the predictions the site laughs at.
So what will the future really be? I don't know. Maybe "more connected" is going to be the next big area.
Yeah, but if you're concerned about growning the local software industry, and you're not the US government, your best way to do it is probably not by buying Microsoft...
No, there really is a problem. You said, "Acceleration, even small amounts of it, mean a lot in a vaccum." But the problem is that the second balloon doesn't take you to vacuum, it only takes you to where the atmosphere is thin enough that it can only just support the weight. That's where you turn on the ion drive, and now you have the atmospheric drag fighting against the ion drive.
Worse, the faster you go, the higher the drag force. I'd bet that terminal velocity of the balloon under the force of the ion engine is puny compared to the velocity required for orbit.
But this gives me a crazy idea: What if you fill the balloon with hydrogen instead of helium. Then, once the balloon has taken you as high as it can, you use the hydrogen as fuel for a conventional rocket?
You know, there are people in this world who literally spend one million dollars to broadcast a television commercial that is 30 seconds long. One million dollars.
Are they fools?
No, they are business men and women, who know that in 30 seconds they can make a change in people's behaviour that, collectively, is worth more than one million dollars. Any individual - most individuals, even - won't have any change of behaviour, but a measurable number will buy the advertised product because they saw the ad.
I keep hearing people claiming that hours and hours of sex and violence on TV don't change people's behaviour, or that looking at porn doesn't change people's behaviour, that "there's nothing wrong with just looking". Really? So all these advertisers are wrong? Sorry, they are very heavily researching, and are also putting their money where their mouths are, and I believe that they know what they are doing.
This stuff does change people's behaviour. Not the behaviour of everybody who looks at it, but enough people to matter.
Disclaimer: I have not read the patent. But I think it's got to be for software detecting how long the mouse pressed a GUI button.
Colorgraphics had this on their graphics products back in the mid-1990's, if not earlier. You had a bunch of color boxes with different colors in them. If you clicked on one of them, the current color was set to the color in the color box, but if you "mashed" (defined as clicking on the box for more than 3 seconds), the color in the color box was set to the current color.
Colorgraphics was part of Dynatech at the time. I'm not sure if they even exist any more - Dynatech tried to move the engineers from, IIRC, Madison, Wisconsin, to Utah, and most or all of them found other jobs instead.
Three IPs for the Linux kings under the sky, Seven for IBM in their halls of stone, Nine for SGI doomed to die, One for the dark Darl on his dark throne In the land of Utah where the shadows lie. One IP to rule them all, one IP to find them, One IP to sue them all and in the courtrooms bind them, In the land of Utah where the shadows lie.
(Yes, this has also been posted once on Groklaw. No, this isn't a karma whore - I'm the guy who posted it there. And no, I don't necessarily think that SGI is doomed to die, though things haven't been looking good for them lately...)
Microsoft is a monopoly. This doesn't mean that they are the only software company; it means that they are the dominant software company. They have so much power with respect to everybody else that, legally, different rules apply to them.
The same thing is true of humans in relation to the ecosystem. We've got so much power in relation to other species that, morally, different rules apply to us, and we have a responsibility to not trample on every other living thing. Yeah, we could. Yeah, nobody can stop us. So what? It's still not right.
Why isn't it right? It isn't right because we are conscious, moral beings.
If you don't agree that we are moral beings, that some things are right and some are wrong, then the only argument left for you is that of self-interest. For such people, nothing morally compels us to say that murder is wrong, but they don't want to live in a society where it's accepted, because it usually turns out to be a pretty unpleasant environment. In the same way, indiscriminately mucking with the environment could make things pretty unpleasant for us, so it's still a bad idea.
And if you think, "It may affect future generations, but it won't affect me", well, how long do you expect to live? Another 50 years, maybe? At 0.4 degrees per decade, that's 2 degrees C hotter in 50 years, which could change enough things to be pretty unpleasant...
Free tip, though: If you are convinced that global warming is happening, and is going to continue, buy land in Canada that's north of the wheat line as a long-term investment.
If you can't be more productive (in terms defined by your employer) than someone in India, then you aren't worth more to your employer than someone in India. It's as simple as that.
So, what can you do to increase your productivity? Really understanding what you're trying to build is a good start. Face-to-face communication is a big plus, too. (Studies show that 55% of communication is in facial expression and body language, 38% is in tone of voice, and only 7% is in the words.)
Quality counts. Code that actually works counts. Production-quality code counts, so that your employer doesn't have to hire somebody else to turn your code into something that can actually be shipped.
I remember a small town that we went through in the 1970s. They didn't have speed limits at all. But they had signs that said, "Traffic lights synchronized for 25 MPH". As soon as you figured out that the signs were telling the truth, you drove 25. If you didn't, you hit every single light red.
Sure, you can do this safely, if you do a few extra manual steps every time you download a new ASF or WMV file. That's not the point. The point is, Microsoft's wonderful feature is going to either expose you to being 0wned, or force you to jump through hoops to protect yourself. You may be cautious enough to be safe (if you never make a mistake), but 99% of users are needlessly exposed by a nifty "feature" that 99% of the users will probably never care about.
Slashdot Mirror
is dilithium cores!
I ran across this in elementary school in a math textbook, of all places. I've remembered it ever since.
This sure smells like the minority owners (Canopy) are bleeding cash out of a publicly-traded company (SCO) by selling it a loser.
Canopy has done stuff like this before. When one of their companies goes bankrupt, they (Canopy) wind up with the assets that matter, whether or not the company was publicly traded. They do this by making sure that the company that is going under owes Canopy money, so that Canopy is a creditor at bankruptcy time.
In other words:
1. Create a private company (company A).
2. Take company A public. Company A now has lots of money.
3. Create another private company (company B).
4. Sell company B to company A.
5. Profit!
But wait, there's more...
6. Make sure company A owes you money.
7. Let company A go bankrupt.
8. Using the assets that you get back from the bankruptcy, go to step 1!
The problem is that Microsoft is fixing holes.
See, the root cause of these problems is that Microsoft took a bunch of architectural shortcuts that made it really easy for them to create a lot of nifty features, and also made it really easy for others to create a bunch of nifty exploits. And, surprise surprise, the exploits keep on coming.
But rather than fix the architectural problems, rather than admit that they messed up, rather than go back and try to re-create all those nifty features with a solid architecture, rather than remove features that depend on the shoddy design, instead Microsoft's response is to try to preserve their lousy architecture, and simply patch each individual hole as it is discovered. This is somewhat similar to plastering over the cracks in the walls as they keep appearing, rather than admitting that the foundation is failing and the whole house needs to be rebuild.
There is no relief in sight for Microsoft users, ever.
Once Oracle went after PeopleSoft, it was pretty much inevitable that Microsoft would at least start looking at SAP. So, wow, Microsoft looked.
It's not like this is a transit of Venus or something...
My wife understands that death marches happen. As long as it's not too often or too much of the time, she understands that it goes with the territory.
The flip side is that programming pays enough that she can stay home with the kids. She doesn't have to work for us to make it. And one parent home with the kids is much better than daycare...
Yes, the amount of time spent doing financial reports has pretty much stayed the same. But the ability to create scenarios, to play "what if" games, has led to much better financial information being available to corporate planners.
It's like many other situations: You'll pay for as much information as you can get, rather than just get the same information more cheaply.
San Francisco added a nice touch to this with their BART system. In some places, they build the rapid transit right up the freeway median. When you're stuck in traffic on the freeway, and the train blows past you at 80 MPH, it tends to make you think, "I wish I was on that!"
My dad also did a couple of movies of old, abandoned railroad grades. In these, he would move a certain number of steps before single-framing the camera. One time, there were a bunch of abandoned railroad ties still lying beside the track. Before each frame, we moved a few ties onto place on the abandoned roadbed, so it looked like the ties were being laid right in front of you as you went along. (It would have been even better to lay ties and rails, but we didn't have any rails...)
SCO re-scheduled the earnings call for June 10. This is one day after the hearing on Daimler-Chrysler's motion to dismiss. Perchance SCO wants to have an early opportunity to spin the results of the hearing?
But we may be making the same mistake. More power was the biggest deal until about 1970. Then smaller became the big deal. But this doesn't mean that smaller is going to rule forever. In particular, our predictions of nanotech and biotech may be just as naive as the predictions the site laughs at.
So what will the future really be? I don't know. Maybe "more connected" is going to be the next big area.
Yeah, but if you're concerned about growning the local software industry, and you're not the US government, your best way to do it is probably not by buying Microsoft...
No, there really is a problem. You said, "Acceleration, even small amounts of it, mean a lot in a vaccum." But the problem is that the second balloon doesn't take you to vacuum, it only takes you to where the atmosphere is thin enough that it can only just support the weight. That's where you turn on the ion drive, and now you have the atmospheric drag fighting against the ion drive.
Worse, the faster you go, the higher the drag force. I'd bet that terminal velocity of the balloon under the force of the ion engine is puny compared to the velocity required for orbit.
But this gives me a crazy idea: What if you fill the balloon with hydrogen instead of helium. Then, once the balloon has taken you as high as it can, you use the hydrogen as fuel for a conventional rocket?
You know, there are people in this world who literally spend one million dollars to broadcast a television commercial that is 30 seconds long. One million dollars.
Are they fools?
No, they are business men and women, who know that in 30 seconds they can make a change in people's behaviour that, collectively, is worth more than one million dollars. Any individual - most individuals, even - won't have any change of behaviour, but a measurable number will buy the advertised product because they saw the ad.
I keep hearing people claiming that hours and hours of sex and violence on TV don't change people's behaviour, or that looking at porn doesn't change people's behaviour, that "there's nothing wrong with just looking". Really? So all these advertisers are wrong? Sorry, they are very heavily researching, and are also putting their money where their mouths are, and I believe that they know what they are doing.
This stuff does change people's behaviour. Not the behaviour of everybody who looks at it, but enough people to matter.
... don't forget to get a UPS for it.
Disclaimer: I have not read the patent. But I think it's got to be for software detecting how long the mouse pressed a GUI button.
Colorgraphics had this on their graphics products back in the mid-1990's, if not earlier. You had a bunch of color boxes with different colors in them. If you clicked on one of them, the current color was set to the color in the color box, but if you "mashed" (defined as clicking on the box for more than 3 seconds), the color in the color box was set to the current color.
Colorgraphics was part of Dynatech at the time. I'm not sure if they even exist any more - Dynatech tried to move the engineers from, IIRC, Madison, Wisconsin, to Utah, and most or all of them found other jobs instead.
Three IPs for the Linux kings under the sky,
Seven for IBM in their halls of stone,
Nine for SGI doomed to die,
One for the dark Darl on his dark throne
In the land of Utah where the shadows lie.
One IP to rule them all, one IP to find them,
One IP to sue them all and in the courtrooms bind them,
In the land of Utah where the shadows lie.
(Yes, this has also been posted once on Groklaw. No, this isn't a karma whore - I'm the guy who posted it there. And no, I don't necessarily think that SGI is doomed to die, though things haven't been looking good for them lately...)
... against cruel and unusual punishment.
In fact, it would probably be cruel and unusual punishment to both of them!
Microsoft is a monopoly. This doesn't mean that they are the only software company; it means that they are the dominant software company. They have so much power with respect to everybody else that, legally, different rules apply to them.
The same thing is true of humans in relation to the ecosystem. We've got so much power in relation to other species that, morally, different rules apply to us, and we have a responsibility to not trample on every other living thing. Yeah, we could. Yeah, nobody can stop us. So what? It's still not right.
Why isn't it right? It isn't right because we are conscious, moral beings.
If you don't agree that we are moral beings, that some things are right and some are wrong, then the only argument left for you is that of self-interest. For such people, nothing morally compels us to say that murder is wrong, but they don't want to live in a society where it's accepted, because it usually turns out to be a pretty unpleasant environment. In the same way, indiscriminately mucking with the environment could make things pretty unpleasant for us, so it's still a bad idea.
And if you think, "It may affect future generations, but it won't affect me", well, how long do you expect to live? Another 50 years, maybe? At 0.4 degrees per decade, that's 2 degrees C hotter in 50 years, which could change enough things to be pretty unpleasant...
Free tip, though: If you are convinced that global warming is happening, and is going to continue, buy land in Canada that's north of the wheat line as a long-term investment.
How scared should the rest of us be?
I don't know. Do you receive any packets via a BGP router?
If you can't be more productive (in terms defined by your employer) than someone in India, then you aren't worth more to your employer than someone in India. It's as simple as that.
So, what can you do to increase your productivity? Really understanding what you're trying to build is a good start. Face-to-face communication is a big plus, too. (Studies show that 55% of communication is in facial expression and body language, 38% is in tone of voice, and only 7% is in the words.)
Quality counts. Code that actually works counts. Production-quality code counts, so that your employer doesn't have to hire somebody else to turn your code into something that can actually be shipped.
But also, if I understand correctly, lower hospital bills. Which would you rather pay?
But watch out for the "dead cat bounce". If you short at the wrong time, even if you're right long-term, you can still lose your shirt...
I remember a small town that we went through in the 1970s. They didn't have speed limits at all. But they had signs that said, "Traffic lights synchronized for 25 MPH". As soon as you figured out that the signs were telling the truth, you drove 25. If you didn't, you hit every single light red.
Which is all pretty typical for Microsoft...