I agree with the posts that recommend doing something you are passionate about.
I would add though that it is a good idea to specialize. In all professions, a specialist gets paid more than a generalist.
I think their is a reason that these are not very close. The challengers know that Ken is tough to beat so they they figure the only way to beat him is to take chances... and they get burned. Their were a couple of shows where he won by only a slim margin a couple of weeks ago.
Google has some other advantages that phoning and the Library don't have:
1. Google is pretty much 'always on'. I can do a Google search any time of day where as I can't use the phone or the library at 3 am.
2. The ability to Find a keyword. Usually when I use a google search I use the google cache. This highlights the terms I am looking for so I can find them easily on the page. This is an inherent advantage of the computer over people or your eyes - scanning through text looking for what you really want.
you could become the next Google, by beating Google at their own game and not have to worry about developing the underlying technology (which Google does).
That is totally the underlying tone of the article. I don't think this amounts to 'no barrier to entry' but this would remove barrier of proprietary and extremely complex technology our of the way.
* Many people have accounts on many, many systems (thanks to websites with accounts).
I think you are on the right track here. If you go one step further, ask yourself why do websites have logins? Aside from getting your personal info, they want to identify who you are.
So what if we switched from dynamic IP addresses to static IP addresses? Then assuming you can prevent IP-spoofing, websites could use your IP address to identify you. It kind of makes sense if you compare it to real street addresses. Could you imagine the havoc that would be caused if you street address changed every few days (or even months)?
Of course this doesn't prevent people with access from the same computer from logging in but I think this could go a long way to solving the problem...
Micropayments won't work. As soon as you start charging for email messages spammers will figure out a way to avoid the charges by getting legitimate Mail servers to send their email (hey, I mean they do that already). Then legit businesses will get their bill the next month and say 'Hey wait a minute, I didn't send all those emails'
The real penalty for Microsoft is having to extract it's media player from the OS and collaborate with other software company media companies. This will increase their support costs in the long run.
I think this merger makes perfect sense for Microsoft. They don't want any AOL technology. What they want is their customers.
The first thing MS will do is get AOL customers to switch to MSN and boom they have just double their subscriber base. and since AOL has ties to so many of their competitors, this is how they can switch these customers in many different industries with one blow.
Just think what would happen if AOL went out of business tomorrow? Their customers will go out and get alternatives- and some if not most will go for Microsoft. If MS buys AOL then they will put them out of business for sure and give the customers 'a better alternative' securing more market share in several different industries for themselves.
I will bet dollars to donuts that this is a phake. It doesn't sound right to me... anonymous source... nothing from the AV companies on it... slashdotters should be able to find some information about it somewhere.... and that features list - it sounds like an 'everything you ever wanted list' by spammers or anyone else who wants to do something *evil*.
The exact same thing happened to me when I watched "Welcome Back Kotter" about 20 years after seeing it as a kid. Those guys were some really bad actors. And how could anyone think they were young enough to be in high school?
And speaking of high school shows, what was the name of that show that had Howard Hessman (goog ol' Johnny Fever from WKRP-which does not belong in this category)as a teacher in New York for a bunch of gifted teenagers? That one stunk pretty bad too.
The idea of "heavy peer review" and "many eyes" doesn't play out in the real world.
I would have to agree because there is no guarantee that there would be "heavy" peer review or any peer review at all. Then you are stuck implementing something that is untested or testing it yourself which gets us back to spending $$ developing the code.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with the posts that recommend doing something you are passionate about. I would add though that it is a good idea to specialize. In all professions, a specialist gets paid more than a generalist.
I think their is a reason that these are not very close. The challengers know that Ken is tough to beat so they they figure the only way to beat him is to take chances... and they get burned. Their were a couple of shows where he won by only a slim margin a couple of weeks ago.
Google has some other advantages that phoning and the Library don't have:
1. Google is pretty much 'always on'. I can do a Google search any time of day where as I can't use the phone or the library at 3 am.
2. The ability to Find a keyword. Usually when I use a google search I use the google cache. This highlights the terms I am looking for so I can find them easily on the page. This is an inherent advantage of the computer over people or your eyes - scanning through text looking for what you really want.
you could become the next Google, by beating Google at their own game and not have to worry about developing the underlying technology (which Google does).
That is totally the underlying tone of the article. I don't think this amounts to 'no barrier to entry' but this would remove barrier of proprietary and extremely complex technology our of the way.
* Many people have accounts on many, many systems (thanks to websites with accounts).
I think you are on the right track here. If you go one step further, ask yourself why do websites have logins? Aside from getting your personal info, they want to identify who you are.
So what if we switched from dynamic IP addresses to static IP addresses? Then assuming you can prevent IP-spoofing, websites could use your IP address to identify you. It kind of makes sense if you compare it to real street addresses. Could you imagine the havoc that would be caused if you street address changed every few days (or even months)?
Of course this doesn't prevent people with access from the same computer from logging in but I think this could go a long way to solving the problem...
Micropayments won't work. As soon as you start charging for email messages spammers will figure out a way to avoid the charges by getting legitimate Mail servers to send their email (hey, I mean they do that already). Then legit businesses will get their bill the next month and say 'Hey wait a minute, I didn't send all those emails'
Micropayments would just make more of a mess.
The real penalty for Microsoft is having to extract it's media player from the OS and collaborate with other software company media companies. This will increase their support costs in the long run.
...and even though most of the postings are against the article, we are participating in an online community.
The first thing MS will do is get AOL customers to switch to MSN and boom they have just double their subscriber base. and since AOL has ties to so many of their competitors, this is how they can switch these customers in many different industries with one blow.
Just think what would happen if AOL went out of business tomorrow? Their customers will go out and get alternatives- and some if not most will go for Microsoft. If MS buys AOL then they will put them out of business for sure and give the customers 'a better alternative' securing more market share in several different industries for themselves.
and that features list - it sounds like an 'everything you ever wanted list' by spammers or anyone else who wants to do something *evil*.
yup, I bet it is a fake
And speaking of high school shows, what was the name of that show that had Howard Hessman (goog ol' Johnny Fever from WKRP-which does not belong in this category)as a teacher in New York for a bunch of gifted teenagers? That one stunk pretty bad too.
I would have to agree because there is no guarantee that there would be "heavy" peer review or any peer review at all. Then you are stuck implementing something that is untested or testing it yourself which gets us back to spending $$ developing the code.