Call me a number crunching freak, but I personally found this the most interesting aspect of the article:
Jeff Garzik comes out on top of this particular measurement by virtue of having deleted the long-unmaintained floppy tape subsystem.
garnishing a 6% slice of "shovel and shuck duty" for that one, and then couple that metric with the one following showing Jeff atop the leaderboard with 12.4% for "most lines removed". That tells me this guy is blood and guts knee deep in the trenches. After porting a legacy system to linux for the Navy myself some time ago, I gotta give mad props to this guy. I feel your pain and salute you! Of course, I'm still standing at attention for all the other devs too.
> What's going to change when it "moves" from beta?
Speed, hopefully. Gmail literally takes 10 seconds after logging in before I can even see the actual interface, and another good 10 seconds or so after logging off and switching to another gmail account.
Hey, I love gmail - especially since it has free POP access (while yahoo requests "30 pieces of silver" for it). I agree that beta really is just a matter of semantics here; although, gmail also keeps adding many other rich features (like the chat feature) every so often. Maybe they should put a release freeze on it and iron out the interface a tad bit. I like the nested thread structure of posts and replies, but sometimes I find it difficult to determine what is actually new in a massively threaded post.
> Does anyone not believe Google is a wakeup call to Microsoft?
Yahoo is the only search engine that appears to be holding Google off.
Does anyone not believe Yahoo is a wakeup call to Google? Why have all others declined while yahoo's cleats are so firmly entrenched at the 3 yard line? That should at least give google inc some pause for concern. I say the reason is in small part because yahoo mail is so popular - driving so many users to their other services in part from clickity click convenience alone. Personally, I still find myself using yahoo mail exclusively over gmail. That thing ever gonna move from beta?
> This guy is obviously intelligent and motivated.
How intelligent can one be when applying for a job with no college degree while claiming to hold a PhD? I'll give him this - his pair makes mine look like a set of raisins.
IANA Geologist, but I always found mudslide type stories on the news quite fascinating; you know, the videos showing entire sections of land just dropping straight down. Is it possible some of this evaporation is in part responsible for these slump landslides?
It's funny you mention Atlantis. I saw a PBS special just last nite, and several archaeologists were using Plato's story of Atlantis as their guide (since it was told in great detail by him). Currently, the best guess is if Atlantis truly existed, it was located somewhere along the western coastal sections of South America (near Chile and Peru along the Andes mountain range). I found one such article related to this one, and it states seismic waves sent to the "[...] transition zone beneath the Andes could be either saturated with water or dry as a desert". I think it's the first guess. I got my shovel and plane ticket ready.
> the constitution has undergone HUGE changes since it was first written. where is the corresponding self-improvement mechanism for the patent system?
I do agree there has been an explosion of technology since 1990. Self improvement mechanism? The USPTO has shown remarkable resilience over it's 200 year history.
Pasteur - pasteurization Edison - phonograph, light bulb, and (literally) thousands of other revolutionary concepts in his period. Alexanderson - radio Faggin - CPU Evans - steam engine Hollerith - every CS student should know him.
etc.
By these examples, wouldn't you agree "self improvement" is self implied here?
> this newfangled computer software thang
There's nothing particularly unique about software patents, nanotechnology, or whatever else you could throw against the USPTO that it hasn't handled with distinction in the past since it's inception. How are modern day revolutionary technologies any different than those I already cited above? The Patent Examiners (PE) _are_ comprised of scientists, artists, and every other profession imaginable. As Duda cites, he just needs more of them.
On a historical note, the USPTO had a fire in 1836 and some 10000 papers, books, and models were all destroyed. Talk about a back log. It survived that. Surely, it can survive far worse. Both Thomas Jefferson and Madison _insisted_ from the very beginning that IP rights be safe guarded by the Constitution. Hey, I'm no Jefferson, but I fully respect and defer to his better judgement over mine (now and in the future) - whether we apply IP patents to Software, spaceships, or even fembots.
> But I still think that a ratio of 6.*10^5 people to 1 representative is phenomenally oversized. Let alone an average of 3*10^6 : 1 for the Senate.
Interesting. I never really looked at our own representation (or lack thereof) with that perspective. Then, are you suggesting we need more reps? I would tend to agree. If so, then Duda is merely requesting the very same here with more PEs.
> Why don't we use evidence from the world since the Internet was invented, and base our new system upon the modern world?
What about our current Constitution? It's over 200 years old and a proven system. Would you replace it and start from scratch as well?
I think Dudas' claim here is a valid one. Just like our own 200+ year old governing documents, the patent system has undergone changes over time as well as our own government. It adapts to the times.
I think the problem is they have been severely swamped in recent decades - 400,000 last year alone. With 5500 PEs, that's about 70 patents per PE/year (or 1 patent review every business week). Plus, they are backlogged 700,000 more. Hire more officers and they'll meet people's expectations here. They have a 3.5% error rate, and he's striving for zero (though by own admission will never occur). More personnel will help in that end. The USPTO works. If not, what's your alternative? Seems time proven and quite adaptable to me.
Oops. I should have continued reading the article...
There are also more draconian measures that weren't invoked Tuesday. Known as "circuit breakers," these safeguards force traders to take a time-out. The Big Board developed these measures following the October 1987 crash and a mini-crash in October 1989.
Seems they didn't trip the switch here and went to plan B instead.
"I've never seen a collapse like that, and I've only been doing this for 47 years," said Alfred E. Goldman
Huh? I remember Black Monday in 87. That was a huge (freakin' huge I tell ya!) % drop. I thought they had fixed these systems to just temporarily shut down in such a scenario. I wonder if that backup switch was part of that system.
Not for me either. I still got my M. He's been my faithful fox hole buddy as my fingers wage battle with C/C++. M has bellied many nades for me too - tobacco nerve agents, coffee napalm, salsa ICBMs, and many other weapons of mass code construction. They just don't make 'em any tougher than the 'ole M. I salute you brother!
"When you talk about an operating system, if Dell is going to install it and test it, it takes a lot of work" before getting it ready for the marketplace, including having training and support in place.
and...
He is looking for ways to re-energize the company's sales and financial performance after several disappointing quarters.
I agree with you Dog. This move would be a huge risk, and with some investors suing Dell already over perceived Intel kickbacks, this whole PR move by Dell with desktop linuxes could be nothing more than a preemptive PR strike of their own concerning claims about Microsoft kickbacks. It seems nonsensical on the surface, but maybe Suse and RedHat are making waves on their own which just isn't reported. I dunno. Who knows. Maybe Dell investors are just looking for some ripe apples to start falling off the Dell orchard here, and any NEW news is better than no news when it comes to investing. Linux is just that news.
Personally, I think Dell can mitigate any risks here by just selling preloaded "legacy" hardware linux systems at substantial cost reductions. Surely Dell has a large inventory of two to three year old systems collecting dust in their warehouses. Cheap e-machines were a hit way back when, and they were basically nothing more than email/tube clients anyways. Just imagine a beowulf cluster of Dell linux machines sold across America at _half_ their cheapest current model offerings. Linux has a stable and proven track record on "older" systems. Sounds like a good entry level market to me, and a great way to pump up sales figures at the same time. Linux support is not an issue - there are so many ways to materialize an acceptable linux support contract (with caveats and limitations). With all the RHEL and Ubuntu certs to be had (and hired for Dell tech support), what's the dealio? Well, you get the picture. You can fill in all the possible blanks here. It's feasible, and doable, imo. It just requires some _small_ risk - no need to plunge naked head first into an icy arctic fishing hole just yet.
If you look at our own history, NASA's own budget _doubled_ during the Vietnam War with the Apollo project and shortly trickled off just a bit after we landed on the moon. And during the First Gulf War, the budget actually _increased_ leading to and including the Mars Observer and Hubble Telescope projects. There is no 1:1 correlation to war expenditures and NASAs budget (and actually just the opposite or indifferent). I think agencies just need to learn how to focus and market the government's attention to specific projects with a possible and predictable ROI.
Most importantly, have a good budget track record - your last example (with the Relativistic Collider) reminded me of the runaway costs associated with the Texas Superconducting Super Collider and why it got deep fried in the McWashington potato cage.
> Who gives a shit. They're just threads, man. Both work.
You know, I said this very same thing back in the 70s. However, my buddy with the bell bottoms and KISS shirt got more play than I ever did with my adidas shorts and Vader cape.
You make an interesting observation - but compare the revenue from a select few targeted high traffic websites to the unwashed masses and their stream of revenue. Which is more in line with the traditional and successful advertising formulas (used by TV, newspaper, etc)? Personally, every time I see a googlevert it feels like walking by a hodgepodge mess of papers stapled to a telephone pole.
I felt empathy for the gentleman above this post (mwvdlee) who mentioned adSense linking to illegal copies of his commercial software. For many reasons besides this, I think within short order other big rollers will be following espn, cox, fox, and others to AdSonar (or a google recreation thereof). Yes, so far Google's model works. But so far, online advertising itself is just now learning how to shuffle fins on beaches while their gills continue gasping in the open air.
IATRM, I think you make a fair observation here. Can I offer you a different philosophical reason why most of us developers take a seemingly harsher stance with this one developer?
We all recognize piracy of our software -- as civil engineers recognize fleeing bank robbers will eventually jump his drawbridge. However, Ethics in Engineering classes teach us prudence in our designs; to minimize collateral damage at all costs. In effect, this developer designed a remote push button switch to raise the drawbridge with no assurances of driver intent. Even if we had those assurances, it is not in our jurisdiction (as developers) to enlist as police, jury, and judge.
I personally have no sympathy for that warez feller, but I DO have greater concerns when an "engineer" intentionally designs for discipline.
Interestingly enough, I thought this was just another example of internet mob activism (which/. covered a few days ago). However,
"In this instance with the Go Large plan our internal technical review showed we had made an error and we believe that we are doing the right thing by crediting customers."
Internal review? I think you are right. But what initiated this review?
"The Commerce Commission is also investigating after receiving complaints the service was not delivering what was promised."
Hard to tell here one way or the other, but I tend to agree with you -- maybe since it's the weekend and my corporate boom stick is getting waxed right now. I dunno. But let's give these guys a pass for now, shall we?
Since several states are considering this tells me the distinction between law enforcement reach and Freedom of Speech issues at school is blurry. Neither the police or school quite know how to address these internet cases; apparently, even the Supreme Court has yet to deal with such a case.
"More than a year before the April 20 massacre at Columbine High School, police and school officials were warned that one of the gunmen, Eric Harris, was detonating pipe bombs and talking about killing people on his Web site.
But no charges were filed because investigators could not locate the Web site. And even if they had, it is apparently not illegal to post threats on the Internet, said Lt. John Kiekbusch of the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department."
* My concern is that even after some 8 years of high profile cases like these, it is still occurring (as this article points out with the little girl). Apparently, law enforcement and schools are still equally confused here. Still believe no changes or review of existing laws are necessary?
> if death threats are illegal anyway, you don't need new laws.
Yes, you do. Or at least consider a careful re-examination of the old ones. FTA,
"On the other hand, most student speech is protected, even if insulting or hurtful. Courts have gradually increased the protection for student speech over the last 100 years"
Which is what I tried to infer in my first post. Something is broken here. Do you really think local law enforcement municipalities are ignorant of the law, allowing this to occur over several years? The article even addresses at length the complications between freedom of speech issues (taken on school grounds, which this example had) and law enforcement. In case you missed it FTA, students were using the school internet here.
"Kylie Kenney explained how some kids at her school had created a web site that called for her death, then harassed her for several years with phone calls and e-mails, even after she transferred schools."
Death threats? Something seriously wrong with local police departments allowing death threats to continue like this for years.
After 13 years of blood sweat and tears with RH, what you are asking for here is a nice quiet easy divorce. It's obvious he still cares about RH, but the "solution" was another woman, not marriage counseling.
What if Steve Ballmer started using OS X? These iconoclasts are much like whistle blowers in the workplace today. Wouldn't you like to know what's been brewing inside? When one goose breaks off from the triangle, other geese tend to follow. "Lu lu lu lu Can you smell, what the flock, is cookin'?! Lu lu lu lu"
Slashdot Mirror
> What's going to change when it "moves" from beta?
Speed, hopefully. Gmail literally takes 10 seconds after logging in before I can even see the actual interface, and another good 10 seconds or so after logging off and switching to another gmail account.
Hey, I love gmail - especially since it has free POP access (while yahoo requests "30 pieces of silver" for it). I agree that beta really is just a matter of semantics here; although, gmail also keeps adding many other rich features (like the chat feature) every so often. Maybe they should put a release freeze on it and iron out the interface a tad bit. I like the nested thread structure of posts and replies, but sometimes I find it difficult to determine what is actually new in a massively threaded post.
> This guy is obviously intelligent and motivated.
How intelligent can one be when applying for a job with no college degree while claiming to hold a PhD? I'll give him this - his pair makes mine look like a set of raisins.
IANA Geologist, but I always found mudslide type stories on the news quite fascinating; you know, the videos showing entire sections of land just dropping straight down. Is it possible some of this evaporation is in part responsible for these slump landslides?
It's funny you mention Atlantis. I saw a PBS special just last nite, and several archaeologists were using Plato's story of Atlantis as their guide (since it was told in great detail by him). Currently, the best guess is if Atlantis truly existed, it was located somewhere along the western coastal sections of South America (near Chile and Peru along the Andes mountain range). I found one such article related to this one, and it states seismic waves sent to the "[...] transition zone beneath the Andes could be either saturated with water or dry as a desert". I think it's the first guess. I got my shovel and plane ticket ready.
> the constitution has undergone HUGE changes since it was first written. where is the corresponding self-improvement mechanism for the patent system?
I do agree there has been an explosion of technology since 1990. Self improvement mechanism? The USPTO has shown remarkable resilience over it's 200 year history.
Pasteur - pasteurization
Edison - phonograph, light bulb, and (literally) thousands of other revolutionary concepts in his period.
Alexanderson - radio
Faggin - CPU
Evans - steam engine
Hollerith - every CS student should know him.
etc.
By these examples, wouldn't you agree "self improvement" is self implied here?
> this newfangled computer software thang
There's nothing particularly unique about software patents, nanotechnology, or whatever else you could throw against the USPTO that it hasn't handled with distinction in the past since it's inception. How are modern day revolutionary technologies any different than those I already cited above? The Patent Examiners (PE) _are_ comprised of scientists, artists, and every other profession imaginable. As Duda cites, he just needs more of them.
On a historical note, the USPTO had a fire in 1836 and some 10000 papers, books, and models were all destroyed. Talk about a back log. It survived that. Surely, it can survive far worse. Both Thomas Jefferson and Madison _insisted_ from the very beginning that IP rights be safe guarded by the Constitution. Hey, I'm no Jefferson, but I fully respect and defer to his better judgement over mine (now and in the future) - whether we apply IP patents to Software, spaceships, or even fembots.
> But I still think that a ratio of 6.*10^5 people to 1 representative is phenomenally oversized. Let alone an average of 3*10^6 : 1 for the Senate.
Interesting. I never really looked at our own representation (or lack thereof) with that perspective. Then, are you suggesting we need more reps? I would tend to agree. If so, then Duda is merely requesting the very same here with more PEs.
> Why don't we use evidence from the world since the Internet was invented, and base our new system upon the modern world?
What about our current Constitution? It's over 200 years old and a proven system. Would you replace it and start from scratch as well?
I think Dudas' claim here is a valid one. Just like our own 200+ year old governing documents, the patent system has undergone changes over time as well as our own government. It adapts to the times.
I think the problem is they have been severely swamped in recent decades - 400,000 last year alone. With 5500 PEs, that's about 70 patents per PE/year (or 1 patent review every business week). Plus, they are backlogged 700,000 more. Hire more officers and they'll meet people's expectations here. They have a 3.5% error rate, and he's striving for zero (though by own admission will never occur). More personnel will help in that end. The USPTO works. If not, what's your alternative? Seems time proven and quite adaptable to me.
I guess you either swallow it or wait for diamonds on the other end.
Not for me either. I still got my M. He's been my faithful fox hole buddy as my fingers wage battle with C/C++. M has bellied many nades for me too - tobacco nerve agents, coffee napalm, salsa ICBMs, and many other weapons of mass code construction. They just don't make 'em any tougher than the 'ole M. I salute you brother!
...and Michael snips back, "Sounds delicious Bill. How about a nice steaming plate full of Vista support calls?"
and...
I agree with you Dog. This move would be a huge risk, and with some investors suing Dell already over perceived Intel kickbacks, this whole PR move by Dell with desktop linuxes could be nothing more than a preemptive PR strike of their own concerning claims about Microsoft kickbacks. It seems nonsensical on the surface, but maybe Suse and RedHat are making waves on their own which just isn't reported. I dunno. Who knows. Maybe Dell investors are just looking for some ripe apples to start falling off the Dell orchard here, and any NEW news is better than no news when it comes to investing. Linux is just that news.
Personally, I think Dell can mitigate any risks here by just selling preloaded "legacy" hardware linux systems at substantial cost reductions. Surely Dell has a large inventory of two to three year old systems collecting dust in their warehouses. Cheap e-machines were a hit way back when, and they were basically nothing more than email/tube clients anyways. Just imagine a beowulf cluster of Dell linux machines sold across America at _half_ their cheapest current model offerings. Linux has a stable and proven track record on "older" systems. Sounds like a good entry level market to me, and a great way to pump up sales figures at the same time. Linux support is not an issue - there are so many ways to materialize an acceptable linux support contract (with caveats and limitations). With all the RHEL and Ubuntu certs to be had (and hired for Dell tech support), what's the dealio? Well, you get the picture. You can fill in all the possible blanks here. It's feasible, and doable, imo. It just requires some _small_ risk - no need to plunge naked head first into an icy arctic fishing hole just yet.
If you look at our own history, NASA's own budget _doubled_ during the Vietnam War with the Apollo project and shortly trickled off just a bit after we landed on the moon. And during the First Gulf War, the budget actually _increased_ leading to and including the Mars Observer and Hubble Telescope projects. There is no 1:1 correlation to war expenditures and NASAs budget (and actually just the opposite or indifferent). I think agencies just need to learn how to focus and market the government's attention to specific projects with a possible and predictable ROI.
Most importantly, have a good budget track record - your last example (with the Relativistic Collider) reminded me of the runaway costs associated with the Texas Superconducting Super Collider and why it got deep fried in the McWashington potato cage.
> Who gives a shit. They're just threads, man. Both work.
You know, I said this very same thing back in the 70s. However, my buddy with the bell bottoms and KISS shirt got more play than I ever did with my adidas shorts and Vader cape.
You make an interesting observation - but compare the revenue from a select few targeted high traffic websites to the unwashed masses and their stream of revenue. Which is more in line with the traditional and successful advertising formulas (used by TV, newspaper, etc)? Personally, every time I see a googlevert it feels like walking by a hodgepodge mess of papers stapled to a telephone pole.
I felt empathy for the gentleman above this post (mwvdlee) who mentioned adSense linking to illegal copies of his commercial software. For many reasons besides this, I think within short order other big rollers will be following espn, cox, fox, and others to AdSonar (or a google recreation thereof). Yes, so far Google's model works. But so far, online advertising itself is just now learning how to shuffle fins on beaches while their gills continue gasping in the open air.
IATRM, I think you make a fair observation here. Can I offer you a different philosophical reason why most of us developers take a seemingly harsher stance with this one developer?
We all recognize piracy of our software -- as civil engineers recognize fleeing bank robbers will eventually jump his drawbridge.
However, Ethics in Engineering classes teach us prudence in our designs; to minimize collateral damage at all costs. In effect, this developer designed a remote push button switch to raise the drawbridge with no assurances of driver intent. Even if we had those assurances, it is not in our jurisdiction (as developers) to enlist as police, jury, and judge.
I personally have no sympathy for that warez feller, but I DO have greater concerns when an "engineer" intentionally designs for discipline.
42 million? Hmm, 42. 42? Where have I heard that number before?
Interestingly enough, I thought this was just another example of internet mob activism (which /. covered a few days ago). However,
"In this instance with the Go Large plan our internal technical review showed we had made an error and we believe that we are doing the right thing by crediting customers."
Internal review? I think you are right. But what initiated this review?
"The Commerce Commission is also investigating after receiving complaints the service was not delivering what was promised."
Hard to tell here one way or the other, but I tend to agree with you -- maybe since it's the weekend and my corporate boom stick is getting waxed right now. I dunno. But let's give these guys a pass for now, shall we?
Since several states are considering this tells me the distinction between law enforcement reach and Freedom of Speech issues at school is blurry. Neither the police or school quite know how to address these internet cases; apparently, even the Supreme Court has yet to deal with such a case.
Maybe this will shed some light on my concerns:
"More than a year before the April 20 massacre at Columbine High School, police and school officials were warned that one of the gunmen, Eric Harris, was detonating pipe bombs and talking about killing people on his Web site.
But no charges were filed because investigators could not locate the Web site. And even if they had, it is apparently not illegal to post threats on the Internet, said Lt. John Kiekbusch of the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department."
* My concern is that even after some 8 years of high profile cases like these, it is still occurring (as this article points out with the little girl). Apparently, law enforcement and schools are still equally confused here. Still believe no changes or review of existing laws are necessary?
> if death threats are illegal anyway, you don't need new laws.
Yes, you do. Or at least consider a careful re-examination of the old ones. FTA,
"On the other hand, most student speech is protected, even if insulting or hurtful. Courts have gradually increased the protection for student speech over the last 100 years"
Which is what I tried to infer in my first post. Something is broken here. Do you really think local law enforcement municipalities are ignorant of the law, allowing this to occur over several years? The article even addresses at length the complications between freedom of speech issues (taken on school grounds, which this example had) and law enforcement. In case you missed it FTA, students were using the school internet here.
Not for the courts? I disagree.
"Kylie Kenney explained how some kids at her school had created a web site that called for her death, then harassed her for several years with phone calls and e-mails, even after she transferred schools."
Death threats? Something seriously wrong with local police departments allowing death threats to continue like this for years.
> So what's with the drama if there's a solution?
After 13 years of blood sweat and tears with RH, what you are asking for here is a nice quiet easy divorce. It's obvious he still cares about RH, but the "solution" was another woman, not marriage counseling.
What if Steve Ballmer started using OS X? These iconoclasts are much like whistle blowers in the workplace today. Wouldn't you like to know what's been brewing inside? When one goose breaks off from the triangle, other geese tend to follow. "Lu lu lu lu Can you smell, what the flock, is cookin'?! Lu lu lu lu"