So you are saying that AT&T was correct also when they made a statement several years ago against the net neutrality principle and insists on having the right to charge both big content rich providers (Youtube, Google, etc.) as well as the content receivers (poor suckers using AT&T's service watching YouTube video) a premium charge simply because the contents are "bandwidth intensive"? I realize Comcast is the one in question here but AT&T was the first to brought it up. Comcast is simply the poor suckers that got caught without enough political clout to protect itself.
When I pay the service provider for Internet service I expect them to allow me to go to the site that I wanted, and download/view the contents from that website without my ISP telling me what I can or cannot see. Furthermore I want only ME be the only person deciding on the priority between watching a streaming baseball game or my sister's googy video on her website.
So first Yahoo doesn't want MS to buy them out. Next they don't like the fact that Microsoft only want part of the assets(instead of the entire company). Really, what does Yahoo wants? Sounds like asking your wife which restaurant for dinner. And she always says any one of them is fine, but just don't like the one you pick.
Well said my friend. I cannot imagine a good reason why would a reasonably sized company would not host their own HR system. Also a half-way descent system like this will most likely have a fairly straight forward data-entry mechanism that anyone with some training can reasonably pickup and process it.
Sensitive data as such should almost always handled in-house, unless the third party and the senior executive will pickup the responsibility should anything go south (not a very likely scenario in most cases).
Yup they do. First they are considered a legal entity, giving a legally equal status as a person. Also secondly a corporation has no obligation on disclosing ALL of their inner workings and their rules and by laws to general public any more than required by law. The public traded corporation has more restriction than the privately held company. A privately held company (especially the one owned by one person) has no real obligation on telling you, for example, how they promote certain person or why they got fired, as long as they have proper reasoning and can explained to the government agencies when requested (by legal action, for example). They certainly don't have to tell you anything that would considered a "trade secret" as well.
However I do see a difference on "not required" and "nice thing to do". I do think the LDS as an organization should not worry too much about the release of documents. They certainly have no good reason to broadcast the handbook, but I think it was nice to be able to read it and understand (especially for a non-LDS member) that this is an religious organization that has well thoughtout rules and bylaws that doesn't resemble a nut-job cult. Personally I respect the organization even more now that I have read the document itself, although I wouldn't be considering to become an LDS member any time soon.
----------------
It is neither the same to respect or agreeing with someone, nor are the two mutually exclusive of each other.
I hope everyone who played their part in this sordid venture has plenty of time to repent at leisure when they realise that the ISO can never, WILL never, be trusted again. Com'on guys. It's April Fools. Laught it off until tomorrow, will you?
Hypothetical example: most new developers can quickly setup a streaming video from their website, but have little or no idea how TCP/IP nor video decoding actually works. Yes, I know it's sort of a pointless thing to know when you don't "need" to know it, just saying that the previous generation seemed to have been a bit more curious about things, even if they didn't "need" to know them. This is the reason why many IT jobs is moving off-shore: They can do it without knowing how it all works fundamentally. In another word, the job itself has becoming a commodity. The cheaper one always wins.
Random House is a book publisher, not RIAA and associates. They had to weather the change in the way customers view and buy books before. Somehow it take some objective reasoning and common business sense and make appropriate changes in the publishing business. I don't think we would be talking about Random House if all they simply whine and not able to coop with the changing marketplace. Heck, the reason audio books exist in the first place is to increase the revenue from publishing a book.
As far as for myself, I will purchase audio books. But why would I want to release an mp3 file containing watermark of my personal identifiable information in it? Sure I can circumvent that, but why take the trouble? I'm glad there is a company sponsored research that can quantify this and allow their executives to make a good choice in public.
Seriously, does Taliban expect a business to bend over and get ass-f*cked by them, knowing that if they came in power they will cease to be in business anyway? At least there are "business activities", even by Taliban, at this moment of time.
Foxconn is NOT a Chinese Company by nationality
on
Replacing a Thinkpad?
·
· Score: 1
Foxconn is a Taiwanese company, with facilities in China. It also has operations here in Houston, TX as well as across the border in Mexico. It is true that a majority of assembly work or low-end, intensive labor are done in China. It's owner/Chairman of the company is one of the wealthiest person in Taiwan. And yes, his residency is in Taiwan. The information above are well documented and available on the Internet.
Foxconn is also a public traded company in Taiwan's stock market.
The Land of Taiwan has a fully democratic government with a president directly elected by its people. The official name of the government is The Republic of China. However the mainland Chinese government (with the official name People's Republic of China) does not rule Taiwan. The last time I checked (few minutes ago) people in Taiwan still runs their own government without directions from the Chinese government. It has laws and regulations to protect its citizens, just as it is here in Western countries.
Please check your resources before dogging another company who are in the same position as Dell, HP. Those are OEM companies, but they are OEMs that are based in Taiwan and have the same delima as HP and Dell does.
A side note: Most of the WD harddrives I have come across are made in Singapore. Another Democratic country. Seagate's harddrive are partly made in Malaysia and partly made in China.
One big exception: Apple's iPhone, distributed exclusively in the USA by AT&T. "That's different," says AT&T spokesman Mark Siegel.
iPhone is different in the sense that user pay for the phone entirely. ATT provides no subsidy to the customers. They have no rights to lock your phone down to recapture the cost of the phone, the reason why cell phones were locked down in the first place.
Re:Back when people could actually code..
on
DOS 5 Upgrade Video
·
· Score: 1
You are right! Today it doesn't take much to become a "programmer" to program in C# and Java. Script kiddies got out of trade school start programming things they have no idea about, only following someone's example and under the instructions of someone else. They are truely writing codes only, with no regards to exactly how the computer works.
I have came across a web developer in charge of server administration. As a senior staff of an IT department she cannot distinguish the difference between Mega-Hertz and Mega-Bytes in computer hardware specification. Makes you wonder if they truely knows what they are doing or just taking vendor's advertising for granted, word by word.
Top reason for a conservative Republican to vote for a liberal Democrat next year will be for the net neutrality. The GOP just don't understand that young conservatives lives with their computers, not their moms. They would want "cheap" internet access without discrimination of the contents or origin of the data.
If they struck out there then they're down to the French, Taiwanese, North Koreans and a half-dozen other countries happy to sell them weapons systems under the table. Fact check: Taiwan is a democratic country whose primary weapon provider happends to be companies like Lockeed Martin. They have to get the permission before they can even buy a single model of aircraft from US (because they are not recognized as a nation seperate from China, which is beside the point of this argument).
Taiwan does not produce any weapon other than maybe small arms locally. Any advance weapons they own came from US, France, or Isreal. They will not sell weapons to Iran because it is not in their best interest to piss off US government. We don't have to remind you the fact that they are not technically capaple, do we?
Yup. If people have at least read the summary, it states that J&J is doing this only after ARC is enforcing its trademark to make money off first-aid kits. In reality what J&J is doing is simply fire off a warning shot and allow itself to continue selling product under their brand. After all, they are in the business of selling the first-aid product before the ARC do. (Even though ARC was technically in the business of saving people yearlier than J&J was).
Honestly in this day and age it is getting easier to twist the truth by presenting only partial facts and much harder to see the real picture now. Where did all the real honest falks go? The day where business were built on honesty and reputation were definitely gone...
Red Hat Global Desktop 'would be sold with a one-year subscription to security updates.'"
As much as I like open system. I don't like the idea that 1) I have to pay $$ for Linux and 2)the fee only covers 1 year of "security updates"? Where is the concept that if the software broke, the company is suppose to fix that? We're not talking about feature updates here.
You've got some good point. However, that's not the opionions of the majority of the CIOs in US. What I'm trying to say is that for the CIOs it is far more important for them to look good while keeping their job, and in many cases their conclusion is staying with MS Prodouct, non-withstanding the Office 2007 and Windows Vista. They look far too different for too many average Joe to accpet them. However, Office 2000 and Office 2003 are just fine for most people.
I have used Open Office myself. Be honest with you however, I can still tell the subtle difference between it and Office 2k or 2k3 that may cause issues with the Average Joe. My parents both decides it is far easier to use Office 2000 and 2003 than using Open Office, just to give you two examples of people who won't care about "getting screwed" by MS licensing issue. Now if a lot of people don't care about the issue itself, then by definition liking the deal or not becomes a moral issue, whether you like the terms or not.
Do they really? Which version should we standardize on, then?
The cheapest one they found. Before office 2007 the small changes in Word and Excel are not too visible to the end users. Other word processing Suites can claim that they are similar, but again to a lot of people, they are not the same. (Unless the software "copies" MS's navigation style. And in this case, they are liable of being sued of the content, as the copyright law today would dictate).
Smart CIOs would ban MS products from the office, not standardize on them. No. A Smart CIO will standardize on MS Office products because the average Joe and Jane knows their ways around Office Suite. Throw in something slightly different and people start freaking out because they look different. Oh, not to mention that you don't want to have to re-train the senior executives. For every issue they have b/c they havn't figure out how to navigate the software to do what they wanted, it is the software's fault that it cannot be done right now.
If the senior executives are happy with the system, the CIO come out smelling like roses. Software selection was never about superior technology and morale high ground in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
So you are saying that AT&T was correct also when they made a statement several years ago against the net neutrality principle and insists on having the right to charge both big content rich providers (Youtube, Google, etc.) as well as the content receivers (poor suckers using AT&T's service watching YouTube video) a premium charge simply because the contents are "bandwidth intensive"? I realize Comcast is the one in question here but AT&T was the first to brought it up. Comcast is simply the poor suckers that got caught without enough political clout to protect itself.
When I pay the service provider for Internet service I expect them to allow me to go to the site that I wanted, and download/view the contents from that website without my ISP telling me what I can or cannot see. Furthermore I want only ME be the only person deciding on the priority between watching a streaming baseball game or my sister's googy video on her website.
So first Yahoo doesn't want MS to buy them out. Next they don't like the fact that Microsoft only want part of the assets(instead of the entire company). Really, what does Yahoo wants? Sounds like asking your wife which restaurant for dinner. And she always says any one of them is fine, but just don't like the one you pick.
As far as the off-site security, a better question would be:
Why is the management not the one sending this information out instead of YOU, an non-HR personnel, is sending it.
I think you can figure out very quickly if you do care about the security once the data gets there.
Well said my friend. I cannot imagine a good reason why would a reasonably sized company would not host their own HR system. Also a half-way descent system like this will most likely have a fairly straight forward data-entry mechanism that anyone with some training can reasonably pickup and process it.
Sensitive data as such should almost always handled in-house, unless the third party and the senior executive will pickup the responsibility should anything go south (not a very likely scenario in most cases).
And I don't like censorship. Oh, wait, may be I do. I just don't know it yet. I'm sure the government already voted "preferred" for me on the survey.
Yup they do. First they are considered a legal entity, giving a legally equal status as a person. Also secondly a corporation has no obligation on disclosing ALL of their inner workings and their rules and by laws to general public any more than required by law. The public traded corporation has more restriction than the privately held company. A privately held company (especially the one owned by one person) has no real obligation on telling you, for example, how they promote certain person or why they got fired, as long as they have proper reasoning and can explained to the government agencies when requested (by legal action, for example). They certainly don't have to tell you anything that would considered a "trade secret" as well.
However I do see a difference on "not required" and "nice thing to do". I do think the LDS as an organization should not worry too much about the release of documents. They certainly have no good reason to broadcast the handbook, but I think it was nice to be able to read it and understand (especially for a non-LDS member) that this is an religious organization that has well thoughtout rules and bylaws that doesn't resemble a nut-job cult. Personally I respect the organization even more now that I have read the document itself, although I wouldn't be considering to become an LDS member any time soon.
----------------
It is neither the same to respect or agreeing with someone, nor are the two mutually exclusive of each other.
I think in the Peoples Republic of China, you CAN disappear into a puf of paradoxial smoke.
----------------------
Happy April Fools!
You sire, are an arrogant son of a gun. And I like it!!!
We don't like it. But that's the truth.
Random House is a book publisher, not RIAA and associates. They had to weather the change in the way customers view and buy books before. Somehow it take some objective reasoning and common business sense and make appropriate changes in the publishing business. I don't think we would be talking about Random House if all they simply whine and not able to coop with the changing marketplace. Heck, the reason audio books exist in the first place is to increase the revenue from publishing a book.
As far as for myself, I will purchase audio books. But why would I want to release an mp3 file containing watermark of my personal identifiable information in it? Sure I can circumvent that, but why take the trouble? I'm glad there is a company sponsored research that can quantify this and allow their executives to make a good choice in public.
Seriously, does Taliban expect a business to bend over and get ass-f*cked by them, knowing that if they came in power they will cease to be in business anyway? At least there are "business activities", even by Taliban, at this moment of time.
Foxconn is a Taiwanese company, with facilities in China. It also has operations here in Houston, TX as well as across the border in Mexico. It is true that a majority of assembly work or low-end, intensive labor are done in China. It's owner/Chairman of the company is one of the wealthiest person in Taiwan. And yes, his residency is in Taiwan. The information above are well documented and available on the Internet.
Foxconn is also a public traded company in Taiwan's stock market.
The Land of Taiwan has a fully democratic government with a president directly elected by its people. The official name of the government is The Republic of China. However the mainland Chinese government (with the official name People's Republic of China) does not rule Taiwan. The last time I checked (few minutes ago) people in Taiwan still runs their own government without directions from the Chinese government. It has laws and regulations to protect its citizens, just as it is here in Western countries.
Please check your resources before dogging another company who are in the same position as Dell, HP. Those are OEM companies, but they are OEMs that are based in Taiwan and have the same delima as HP and Dell does.
A side note: Most of the WD harddrives I have come across are made in Singapore. Another Democratic country. Seagate's harddrive are partly made in Malaysia and partly made in China.
SCO will still have bankrupcy protection. Chapter 7 will close the business for good.
for insightful "insider" information
You are right! Today it doesn't take much to become a "programmer" to program in C# and Java. Script kiddies got out of trade school start programming things they have no idea about, only following someone's example and under the instructions of someone else. They are truely writing codes only, with no regards to exactly how the computer works.
I have came across a web developer in charge of server administration. As a senior staff of an IT department she cannot distinguish the difference between Mega-Hertz and Mega-Bytes in computer hardware specification. Makes you wonder if they truely knows what they are doing or just taking vendor's advertising for granted, word by word.
Top reason for a conservative Republican to vote for a liberal Democrat next year will be for the net neutrality. The GOP just don't understand that young conservatives lives with their computers, not their moms. They would want "cheap" internet access without discrimination of the contents or origin of the data.
Taiwan does not produce any weapon other than maybe small arms locally. Any advance weapons they own came from US, France, or Isreal. They will not sell weapons to Iran because it is not in their best interest to piss off US government. We don't have to remind you the fact that they are not technically capaple, do we?
Yup. If people have at least read the summary, it states that J&J is doing this only after ARC is enforcing its trademark to make money off first-aid kits. In reality what J&J is doing is simply fire off a warning shot and allow itself to continue selling product under their brand. After all, they are in the business of selling the first-aid product before the ARC do. (Even though ARC was technically in the business of saving people yearlier than J&J was).
Honestly in this day and age it is getting easier to twist the truth by presenting only partial facts and much harder to see the real picture now. Where did all the real honest falks go? The day where business were built on honesty and reputation were definitely gone...
As much as I like open system. I don't like the idea that 1) I have to pay $$ for Linux and 2)the fee only covers 1 year of "security updates"? Where is the concept that if the software broke, the company is suppose to fix that? We're not talking about feature updates here.
That BlackBerry is made of a Canadian Company?
You've got some good point. However, that's not the opionions of the majority of the CIOs in US. What I'm trying to say is that for the CIOs it is far more important for them to look good while keeping their job, and in many cases their conclusion is staying with MS Prodouct, non-withstanding the Office 2007 and Windows Vista. They look far too different for too many average Joe to accpet them. However, Office 2000 and Office 2003 are just fine for most people.
I have used Open Office myself. Be honest with you however, I can still tell the subtle difference between it and Office 2k or 2k3 that may cause issues with the Average Joe. My parents both decides it is far easier to use Office 2000 and 2003 than using Open Office, just to give you two examples of people who won't care about "getting screwed" by MS licensing issue. Now if a lot of people don't care about the issue itself, then by definition liking the deal or not becomes a moral issue, whether you like the terms or not.
If the senior executives are happy with the system, the CIO come out smelling like roses. Software selection was never about superior technology and morale high ground in the first place.