I think what I'm saying is that these people aren't your typical government workers. The staffers and the politians themselves have taken modern technology and are using it to their advantage.
Blackberries are just one example. Most politians now have blogs, use e-newsletters, use their websites to organize and rally their voluntters, etc. Assigning a staff worker to edit Wikipedia is not a far stretch by any means.
I believe there are 3 or 4 full-time employees for this district for just one congressman. If I had to guess, he may have as many as 50 statewide. When you realize just how many staff workers each politican in office has employed, I think it makes sense to reason that some may be asked to go online and check the "pulse" of things, add to discussions, etc.
Yeah I dunno about that "disorganization" part. I know my local reps for senate and congress, and they each have weekly video conference meetings with all of the other staffers and the senator/congressman. Each rep gets personally asked what they are up to, and what their constituents are talking about.
Further, one of the reps is wired to her Blackberry and is always getting pages about issues that relate to the congressman, so that she is "in the know" when talking to people. They use the Blackberrys to communicate moreso than email itself, and if they shut off their BB for more than an hour or so, people start wondering where they went.
Gone is the day where our politians know nothing about technology. They may not understand DRM or security or IP or TLDs like we do, but they certainly are "in the loop" when it comes to communicating and collaborating using tech.
Or are we upset because the entries were biased to begin with?
I'm not suggesting that the new entries are better, but if the original entries were bias because they were created by other people with an agenda, then cleaning them up (or at least offering another prospective) is a Good Thing.
And that is why Wikipedia is still awesome. Because anyone can create an entry, dispute it, edit it, and everything is logged for the world to see. People need to stop looking at Wikipedia as comparitive to a traditional encyclopedia. It's a collective of information from all different perspectives and allows the reader to decide which of those perspectives to believe.
I liked the subtle references in the show, mostly in the form of bumper stickers and signs on the wall. Did anyone notice the Flying Spaghetti Monster? What else was in there?
> They can obviously afford to sell the item at the after rebate price. So why not just sell it at that price to begin with?
Do you *really* think that?
Do you honestly think that Product X can sell for $10-100 off the retail price and the company will still make money?
I'm afraid that you're over simplifying a very complicated marketing concept. I guarantee you that if 100% of buyers started completing their rebates, there would be no more rebates.
A $50 USB stick with a $25 rebate absolutely *cannot* just be sold for $25.
Assuming that you have a printer, couldn't you just Print Screen for your "paper trail"?
So if you file your online rebate, print the screen, and don't get it in 6-8 weeks you now have your proof.
Why are people so negative about rebates on/.? Sure it's a gimmick to get you to buy something and forget to claim your rebate, but that's *your* fault, not the retailer's.
I've never had a problem with any rebate I've ever submitted, and lately I'm getting them back faster than ever.
They would have to have IP records from the search engine to make any corellation between the two logs, and they haven't asked for that. I imagine all they're going to get from those who participate is timestamp and search string.
...what's wrong with submitting this data to the government? Assuming that no IP addresses or login information is given (they aren't asking for that) what is Google "protecting" us from?
In my eyes, if there is data out there about search habits in general, what's wrong with the public (ie: government) using that information to make a decision?
Would we rather the government base decisions and reports on heresay?
I almost wonder if this is just a publicity stunt by Google to boost it's No Evil score. If the data were requested by - say, MIT - they'd hand it over without thinking.
From TFA, "A team led by Prof. Philip Kaaret of the University of Iowa, Iowa City, announced these results today in Science Express."
> What scientists were frustrated?
Although TFA doesn't specify, I think they're talking about "scientists" in general. Much as your comment talks about "stories"... in general, I presume.
You know, reading TFA wouldn't break the bank and it would really make your comment feel less lazy.
Quite a few people are happy paying $0.99 for a 3 minute song.
I find it hard to believe that fans of a TV series will not pay $2-3 for a show or movie, especially when many are already paying that to rent it from their local video store.
Considering the convinience of downloading your shows onto your video IPod or other portable device (if DRM permits it) and you've got yourself a great stream of revenue.
Then also consider those of us who don't want to pay upwards of $100/mo for cable TV. Soon (hopefully) we can just pay $2-3 per show and get our fill of just the shows we want for maybe $10 or $20/mo.
You've probably already thought of this, but just in case.... why not hook up an external monitor to the laptop, then copy your program via disk or network?
I dunno. I think if MS can integrate VoIP into Exchange/SBS and make it native to the OS, then great things will come out of it.
If you think about it, there's no reason why the telephone shouldn't be considered part of a communications network like email, IM, and faxing. With remote features that Exchange offers, I think it would be pretty cool to have all of that seamlessly work together.
But yes, Clippy would be annoying. Of course, he hasn't been around (by default) for the last two versions of Office. Maybe they'll bring him back just for you.:)
Because, to use your analogy, switching banks can be as difficult/painful/timeconsuming as switching lawns.
He probably, like many people, has had the bank for a long time. I have about 6 different accounts with my own bank. Switching to another bank, because of some software concern, is just not going to happen.
IANAMH (Media Whore) but I believe that U2's statement about not being directly involved in the lawsuit has some merit.
When you're a band signed to a label, even if you're one as big as U2, the label owns a lot of the material you create and they see it as their job to protect it. My guess is that the label's lawyer saw an opportunity to do his job and did it. Bono and band probably found out at the next quarterly meeting as a line-item on the agenda. And I imagine, had no right or influence to argue.
From what I remember of QuickBooks (at least, a recent version) it must be run as administrator. This was a huge issue with some computers we were setting up at a small office... trying to maintain some level of security and this just blew that out of the water.
What is so special about QuickBooks that it needs to be an administrator? Were the Intuit programmers just lazy or do you really need root to balance a checkbook?
From my ammature observations, it's not talking on the cell phone that makes people poor drivers. It's that their right (or left) hand is occupied holding the thing up to their head.
People are distracted all the time while driving. Whether they are talking to the passenger, listening to the radio, thinking about their upcoming meeting, or whatever. I cannot imagine how *talking* on the phone contributes to any more accidents than *talking* to your passenger.
However, all the time I am seeing people making extra-wide turns because they choose not to put the phone down to give them extra grip on the wheel. Or they aren't looking around them because they choose not to temporarily take the phone off their ear.
I would love to see tests comparing a baseline driver to a) someone talking to a passenger, b) someone holding/talking on a cell phone, c) someone on a cell phone but with a headset, d) someone moderately drunk, e) someone adjusting console settings (stereo, climate, etc), and just for fun f) someone surrounded by risque billboards.:)
Then let's publish the methodology and results, and end this argument once and for all.
Here's where I disagree. When I go out and by Windows, I *expect* it to come with such pieces of software. I would be very upset if I just paid $100-300 for an operating system and it didn't come with the ability to play DVDs or record CDs or have a browser out-of-the-box.
Most new computer users think that computers come with Office or Works, and are very surprised if they get one that doesn't. Imagine that experience ten-fold if it couldn't even play CDs.
Yes, clearly a mistake that has led to the sale of millions of copies of Exchange Server, Small Biz Server, and Microsoft Office. Not to mention the industry on top of that which supports consultants, trainers, hardware, software add-ons, books, and more.
Slashdot Mirror
I think what I'm saying is that these people aren't your typical government workers. The staffers and the politians themselves have taken modern technology and are using it to their advantage.
Blackberries are just one example. Most politians now have blogs, use e-newsletters, use their websites to organize and rally their voluntters, etc. Assigning a staff worker to edit Wikipedia is not a far stretch by any means.
I believe there are 3 or 4 full-time employees for this district for just one congressman. If I had to guess, he may have as many as 50 statewide. When you realize just how many staff workers each politican in office has employed, I think it makes sense to reason that some may be asked to go online and check the "pulse" of things, add to discussions, etc.
Yeah I dunno about that "disorganization" part. I know my local reps for senate and congress, and they each have weekly video conference meetings with all of the other staffers and the senator/congressman. Each rep gets personally asked what they are up to, and what their constituents are talking about.
Further, one of the reps is wired to her Blackberry and is always getting pages about issues that relate to the congressman, so that she is "in the know" when talking to people. They use the Blackberrys to communicate moreso than email itself, and if they shut off their BB for more than an hour or so, people start wondering where they went.
Gone is the day where our politians know nothing about technology. They may not understand DRM or security or IP or TLDs like we do, but they certainly are "in the loop" when it comes to communicating and collaborating using tech.
I couldn't agree more, and that is exactly what Wikipedia gives us the power to do.
Once an article is flagged for potential abuse, wiki editors can control the article in such a way that presents both sides of the issue.
This, in my mind, is far better than an empty entry.
Are we upset because the entires were "cleaned"?
Or are we upset because the entries were biased to begin with?
I'm not suggesting that the new entries are better, but if the original entries were bias because they were created by other people with an agenda, then cleaning them up (or at least offering another prospective) is a Good Thing.
And that is why Wikipedia is still awesome. Because anyone can create an entry, dispute it, edit it, and everything is logged for the world to see. People need to stop looking at Wikipedia as comparitive to a traditional encyclopedia. It's a collective of information from all different perspectives and allows the reader to decide which of those perspectives to believe.
I liked the subtle references in the show, mostly in the form of bumper stickers and signs on the wall. Did anyone notice the Flying Spaghetti Monster? What else was in there?
> They can obviously afford to sell the item at the after rebate price. So why not just sell it at that price to begin with?
Do you *really* think that?
Do you honestly think that Product X can sell for $10-100 off the retail price and the company will still make money?
I'm afraid that you're over simplifying a very complicated marketing concept. I guarantee you that if 100% of buyers started completing their rebates, there would be no more rebates.
A $50 USB stick with a $25 rebate absolutely *cannot* just be sold for $25.
Assuming that you have a printer, couldn't you just Print Screen for your "paper trail"?
/.? Sure it's a gimmick to get you to buy something and forget to claim your rebate, but that's *your* fault, not the retailer's.
So if you file your online rebate, print the screen, and don't get it in 6-8 weeks you now have your proof.
Why are people so negative about rebates on
I've never had a problem with any rebate I've ever submitted, and lately I'm getting them back faster than ever.
They would have to have IP records from the search engine to make any corellation between the two logs, and they haven't asked for that. I imagine all they're going to get from those who participate is timestamp and search string.
...what's wrong with submitting this data to the government? Assuming that no IP addresses or login information is given (they aren't asking for that) what is Google "protecting" us from?
In my eyes, if there is data out there about search habits in general, what's wrong with the public (ie: government) using that information to make a decision?
Would we rather the government base decisions and reports on heresay?
I almost wonder if this is just a publicity stunt by Google to boost it's No Evil score. If the data were requested by - say, MIT - they'd hand it over without thinking.
This review is pretty negative towards the book. Every paragraph mentions something the reviewer didn't like, even the price seemed steep.
But it gets a 7? On what scale is this? 7/100?
That statement is far less misleading than your analysis. Obviously you didn't read the entire summary, much less the article.
From TFA: "...the latest vulnerabilities appear to pose the risk of simply crashing the WMF-viewing software, typically Internet Explorer".
Crashing. Whoop-dee-doo. Annoying, sure. Hardly a security issue. (And no, the crash hasn't been shown to allow executed code, either.)
> What scientists spotted it?
From TFA, "A team led by Prof. Philip Kaaret of the University of Iowa, Iowa City, announced these results today in Science Express."
> What scientists were frustrated?
Although TFA doesn't specify, I think they're talking about "scientists" in general. Much as your comment talks about "stories"... in general, I presume.
You know, reading TFA wouldn't break the bank and it would really make your comment feel less lazy.
Quite a few people are happy paying $0.99 for a 3 minute song.
I find it hard to believe that fans of a TV series will not pay $2-3 for a show or movie, especially when many are already paying that to rent it from their local video store.
Considering the convinience of downloading your shows onto your video IPod or other portable device (if DRM permits it) and you've got yourself a great stream of revenue.
Then also consider those of us who don't want to pay upwards of $100/mo for cable TV. Soon (hopefully) we can just pay $2-3 per show and get our fill of just the shows we want for maybe $10 or $20/mo.
You've probably already thought of this, but just in case.... why not hook up an external monitor to the laptop, then copy your program via disk or network?
> I believe they're called New York, Tennessee Avenue and St. James Place.
The streets are named differently in other versions of Monopoly, you insensitive clod!
I dunno. I think if MS can integrate VoIP into Exchange/SBS and make it native to the OS, then great things will come out of it.
:)
If you think about it, there's no reason why the telephone shouldn't be considered part of a communications network like email, IM, and faxing. With remote features that Exchange offers, I think it would be pretty cool to have all of that seamlessly work together.
But yes, Clippy would be annoying. Of course, he hasn't been around (by default) for the last two versions of Office. Maybe they'll bring him back just for you.
> If I get sued by someone, the lawyer acts in the interest and name of the client.
I believe, in this example and others like it, the "client" is the record label and not the artist.
Because, to use your analogy, switching banks can be as difficult/painful/timeconsuming as switching lawns.
He probably, like many people, has had the bank for a long time. I have about 6 different accounts with my own bank. Switching to another bank, because of some software concern, is just not going to happen.
IANAMH (Media Whore) but I believe that U2's statement about not being directly involved in the lawsuit has some merit.
When you're a band signed to a label, even if you're one as big as U2, the label owns a lot of the material you create and they see it as their job to protect it. My guess is that the label's lawyer saw an opportunity to do his job and did it. Bono and band probably found out at the next quarterly meeting as a line-item on the agenda. And I imagine, had no right or influence to argue.
Does it consider the Chewbacca Factor when rating Starwars sequels?
From what I remember of QuickBooks (at least, a recent version) it must be run as administrator. This was a huge issue with some computers we were setting up at a small office... trying to maintain some level of security and this just blew that out of the water.
What is so special about QuickBooks that it needs to be an administrator? Were the Intuit programmers just lazy or do you really need root to balance a checkbook?
From my ammature observations, it's not talking on the cell phone that makes people poor drivers. It's that their right (or left) hand is occupied holding the thing up to their head.
:)
People are distracted all the time while driving. Whether they are talking to the passenger, listening to the radio, thinking about their upcoming meeting, or whatever. I cannot imagine how *talking* on the phone contributes to any more accidents than *talking* to your passenger.
However, all the time I am seeing people making extra-wide turns because they choose not to put the phone down to give them extra grip on the wheel. Or they aren't looking around them because they choose not to temporarily take the phone off their ear.
I would love to see tests comparing a baseline driver to a) someone talking to a passenger, b) someone holding/talking on a cell phone, c) someone on a cell phone but with a headset, d) someone moderately drunk, e) someone adjusting console settings (stereo, climate, etc), and just for fun f) someone surrounded by risque billboards.
Then let's publish the methodology and results, and end this argument once and for all.
The city has to *have* public transportation first. :P
Here's where I disagree. When I go out and by Windows, I *expect* it to come with such pieces of software. I would be very upset if I just paid $100-300 for an operating system and it didn't come with the ability to play DVDs or record CDs or have a browser out-of-the-box.
Most new computer users think that computers come with Office or Works, and are very surprised if they get one that doesn't. Imagine that experience ten-fold if it couldn't even play CDs.
Mistake?
Yes, clearly a mistake that has led to the sale of millions of copies of Exchange Server, Small Biz Server, and Microsoft Office. Not to mention the industry on top of that which supports consultants, trainers, hardware, software add-ons, books, and more.
I'll take a mistake like that any day.