It is perhaps a sign of the times that the same principles do not apply when it comes to immigrant workers.
Actually, the same principles do apply and H1Bs pervert the process. Instead of bringing the best and the brightest to the US, as the policy was designed to do, it is used far more often to bring the cheapest.
Are they qualified? Many certainly are, but that is not the requirement. The requirement is they have specific talents or knowledge that makes them unique. Something a US citizen could not supply.
What I have see instead is a company will bring over 100 developers. They will then put then put them, dorm style, into apartments. These workers are then paid a good wage in terms of where they came from, while undercutting and undermining the US worker they displaced. In essence, they are subsidized workers.
In a few months they move on or go home. Having made a fair living considering their point of origin while at the same time, making the contracting company a bundle and displacing American workers. All while taking money out of the country, without adding value.
Let us do this - let us stop all immigration and close the borders completely. All jobs will go only to (native-born) Americans. Hooray! However, we should also stop exporting software to other countries so that they can enjoy the same benefits. How about that?
Irrational and extreme come to mind. Other countries are not forced to buy software from us and many have government policies specifically protecting their workers in such cases. Or, should India create a package like MS Office and ship it here, I see no issue, just competition. Why is an American worker worth less than other coutnries doing the same?
"There's no way I'd approve it for installation on any system I have to administer."
My organization is spread over the world and must leverage every technology to improve overall customer satisfaction.
We have cell-phones for production support, phones for interaction with peers and email for non-time sensitive information. When I am on a project call, anywhere from 60 to 90 minutes, life does not stop. I can be pinged and ignore it or answer it. The same is said for any of the 30+ people on my IM list. Simplest case, Jim who is not in the meeting knows when "ProjectW" will be done. It comes up in relation to his availability to work on "ProjectX." We can mark it an "action item" or we go on with the meeting and someone pings him for the information. Better communication and collaboration.
When the networking team decided IM was a potential problem, they blocked the ports. That lasted 24 hours before they had created more problems than the potential existed. They recited the reasons we should not have it, how it was dangerous, etc. but no alternatives. The difference was they report to me.
As the IT Director, my rules on IM are simple. Treat it like the phone. Keep it business, block outside messages from people not on your list, and use other means to transfer files of any size about "X". It's a tool, not good or bad. If you misuse it, then the issue is a career development one, not an issue with the tool.
If I come across a little strong it is because I see this time and again. People forgetting the big picture is not IT, it is the service we provide. That their decisions have an impact good and bad on everyone.
If people wish to improve their career dramatically, next time figure how to meet the needs of your customers (which is anyone who needs your help). "No" is not a solution, its a career decision. And remember it is a career decision you are making for everyone in your department.
"You can't restrict branching in a high traffic forum without some sort of syncronization"
Certainly you can and Slashdot does it on a regular basis. You see it happen when you post to a popular topic. Go in when the number is in the 30s and if you open a reply and take your time, you may end up in the 80s or higher.
On his board, your comment appears further down the line, is that any different?
I believe this is a good indication of split from how Bill Gates sees the world and how the rest of the world sees itself. The problem is a touch of reality. One where the business is not technology but the use of technology for business. An area that MS seems to fail at way too often, given their scope. Instead, their success tends to be from the hard work of developers outside of the products themselves.
From the article: "...It will be common sense that you can correspond with your doctor and ask him questions electronically. It will be common sense that if you go to a meeting that's recorded digitally... you can go back and get that information." It is not common sense. My doctor does not correspond electronically for two reasons. He is busy and he gains no revenue from it. Doctor's do not sit in their office waiting for someone to show up.(Try to see your doctor the same day you call). As for recording digitally that again is economically available today, but it fails to meet a wide business need. Instead, I call up Jane and ask "Was that two foobars or three you wanted?" I don't go to the archives and pull the video. Perhaps it is just his lawyers talking, in which case the video will expire in 30 days and be self destructive.
as for
If it works as planned, an airline would be able to update a passenger's on-line calendar if a flight were delayed, while notifying the passenger of the change with an e-mail and a phone message. One goal is to create a standard format so that data could be read by whatever device the passenger uses. Again, a solution looking for a problem. Since a flight is not legally "late" until it does not push off, do you really expect an airline to send you an email in the morning?
As for a standard message format, they could have that today. They selected to remain proprietary, no one is holding a gun to their head. Let's see support for a universal open document standard and we would all be happy.(Well, except MS.)
"In addition to creating new software to entice people to buy more powerful computers, Microsoft is designing new types of computers, encouraging PC makers to build them." Yes, the do this and not for the business' that is using it. Who wanted to go to an OS who's base requirements were four or five times the previous release? Hardware makers. Do I like having a 2.0ghz chip and a gig of memory for compiles? You bet. Does business appreciate needing to update an entire administration pool to run W2k and XP? Not even a little.
and finally, the "lost leader" thrown in to later claim "everyone knew it was coming:" One key feature is expected to be a new file-storage system for better organizing things stored on a Windows-based PC. It could finally make it easy for people to search and find all sorts of files -- contacts, printers, documents, programs, photos -- with a single search tool. Sadly, almost no one in the mainstream recognizes this for what it is. A shutout of other devices, services and software. I predict this is going to be a 100% legally encased product that will prevent or impede anything from interacting that is not MS. Anyone (i.e. SAMBA) trying to engineer a solution can look to DCMA for guidence. Nothing more complicated than that.
Tony does have a good point. In a way he is carrying the same tone he complains about. (A common issue). The Open Source Movement is a collection of individuals. Unlike a corporation where you check your words before speaking, we have our collection of people who feel the need to speak, "from the heart", if not always in the most tactful, thought out, and marketable fashion.
While the rogue/rambo programmer doing all nighters and running on Jolt cola and oreos has an allure to it. It makes the mainstream industry nervous and Microsoft does capitalize on nervousness.
Now, should Microsoft be there? Why not? Ours is OSS and they can get it just like everyone else. Does it hurt to hear where they see the future, what direction they take, and what direction they think the industry will take? If it makes you feel better put it in the context that they are MS and a competitor. We should look at this as the opportunity to interact with our competitors. And understand what they think. We do not have to agree on approach or direction. But open animosity? It benefits MS more than OSS.
That being said, Tony also needs to understand that the feelings people have are fostered by MS's actions past and present. In a way, it is like inviting someone to your house and finding things missing when they leave. You do have a feeling that you should watch them next time they visit.
Rick Berman's First Post-NEMESIS Interview: Future of Feature Franchise Unclear Posted: 12:22:56 on February 04 2003 By: Steve Krutzler Dept: Star Trek: Nemesis In his first interview since the debacle of STAR TREK NEMESIS at the North American box office, producer Rick Berman says the future of the feature franchise is uncertain and he and the studio are not ready to jump back in immediately. "I don't think this is like falling off a horse, and you want to jump right back on it," he told Sci-Fi Wire. "There's a theory that there was too much time [between Insurrection and Nemesis]. There's another theory that there wasn't too much time. I, along with the people at Paramount, need a few months of perspective and thinking about it to then decide what's the best thing to do next."
The exec is also cautious about explaning the film's poor performance.
"There's no way of telling what happened," Berman said. "I'm convinced that we made a very good movie, and I'm also convinced that the movie was promoted properly. I thought the trailers and the television spots were all excellent. It's easy to blame that sort of thing, but I don't think we can in this situation. I think that the competition of other films may have played some part in it, but I can't be certain of that, either. It's very, very hard to tell."
STAR TREK NEMESIS debuted in U.S. and Canadian theatres on December 13th and went on to the #2 spot in its debut weekend with $18.5 million, the lowest opening weekend gross of any STAR TREK picture. The film's domestic total currently stands well short of $50 million. 1989's STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER was the previous record-holder for lowest domestic box office with $52 million.
Check out the original article here.
It then linked to:
ScifiWire Nemesis
Trek Film Future Unsure
Star Trek Nemesis executive producer Rick Berman told SCI FI Wire that several factors likely contributed to the film's lackluster box-office performance, and he added that the future of the film franchise remains uncertain. "There's no way of telling what happened," Berman said in an interview. "I'm convinced that we made a very good movie, and I'm also convinced that the movie was promoted properly."
Berman added, "I thought the trailers and the television spots were all excellent. It's easy to blame that sort of thing, but I don't think we can in this situation. I think that the competition of other films may have played some part in it, but I can't be certain of that, either. It's very, very hard to tell."
Berman sounded disappointed. "Obviously, you want a film to do well," he said. "You work for a long time, and you work for a long time, and if it doesn't do well, it's not fun."
Berman went on to say that he's not sure what the future will hold for the Trek film franchise. "There's a theory that there was too much time [between Insurrection and Nemesis]," he said. "There's another theory that there wasn't too much time. I, along with the people at Paramount, need a few months of perspective and thinking about it to then decide what's the best thing to do next. I don't think this is like falling off a horse, and you want to jump right back on it. But we'll see."
One of the better descriptions or perhaps essay, to the principle of being a software engineer was in an editorial by Charles Connell in Dr. Dobbs several years ago. Why Software Engineering is not BS
Interesting note, while a Systems Engineer for a top two IT company, we were told that they would be renaming the Architects. It appears that some words (Engineer, Architect) have legal meanings in some states. Apparently in some states you cannot call yourself an engineer unless you can prove certification by a standards body.
IANAL, but I would be interested in hearing from one on how that gets resolved.
Despite the slick graphical interfaces, nice thread stack traces and local variable browsers, I still make sure I have on hand plenty of notepads, graph paper, pens and pencils so I can try to build up a picture of what state the program is in and to help me play detective in pinpointing what is going wrong with my (or other peoples) programs. Do other developers have similar problems?
Several people have mentioned feature enhancements, many I would also like to see. However, your statement about stuck me as being a little deeper. Yes, we have the same problems. However, it is not the debugger it is the interface in general. Your desires are for the "paperless office." For years we heard about it, but it never came to fruition. In fact, it may never come. The problem with a User Interface is it presumes users think, and behave in the a similar fashion doing the same job. Ask two secretaries how they file paperwork for themselves. Look at the notes written by two experienced developers during a debugging session. Similar results? Certainly. Similar approaches? Possibly. Identical methods for getting there? Doubtful.
You need hand plenty of notepads, graph paper, pens and pencils because the task at hand requires you to keep track of abstract data. Why not screen prints, cut/paste of images, text, etc? Because the #2 pencil in your hand forces your to iterate you understanding (I am writing down X=2, then 3, then 4, then -32767 -- whoa!). In addition, you remove the "clutter" while also reducing the effort. Consider that you could cut/paste any sub area of the screen. X=2, now becomes X=2, cut, paste. X=3, cut, paste. X=-32767, cut, paste. X=2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 , 9, 37, -32767 looks very obvious. 37 records you must now relate together do not.
I have also come to believe that the device interface is part of the issue. It is easier (for me) to mentally connect the window on a monitor with the printed surface than it is two windows. Perhaps the solution is a 36 inch monitor where I can have multiple windows open, so I can see everything at once. But it would still suffer from relating data, which also includes looking away from the code. Perhaps avoiding the "deer in the headlights" visual lock.
The issue is not whether we should be afraid they may find something, it is that they will.
For years, the NRA has been fighting gun registration. Guess what, they just lost and it did not even require a vote. If I can record every electronic transaction, then the legal purchase you just made at Walmart was recorded and we know who bought the gun, where you live, etc... Now before you hit reply with "maybe we should know.." maybe we should. But, it should be explained to people that way, no usurped.
Working in the travel business, specifically hotel systems, we try to have a "no spook" policy. We do not tie anything about your stay together. We don't send a "thank you for staying" note to you and your spouse just because two stayed in the room. We also don't comment on things you did there. (Porn channel, liter of scotch, etc.). This makes people uncomfortable, because they learn they are being tracked to an incredible detail. (when you entered and left your room, what you ate, drank and purchased in the hotel shop)
The Information Awareness Office(IAO) is going the opposite route. They will be tying all this type of information together with your financial, banking, medical and police records. Consider what Bill Clinton or Newt Gingrich would have been willing to do, to avoid having their "indescretions" revealed? Simply tying Newt's calendar to the hotel registrations in the area to the credit card paying for it...
The problem with this information is we cannot trust people not to abuse it. The IAO is currently being run by John Poindexter a person convicted of five felony counts of lying to Congress, destroying official documents and obstructing the congressional inquiry. He thought he knew the best course of action for the country. Now given the information that would influence where we might go, that beats dollars any day.
So if you don't do anything wrong why do you care? Because people in power will do something wrong and this makes Hoover's files first grade stuff.
I suggest Twiki. This is a pretty rich set of functions and plug-ins that make it a top notch option.
If it is a little too much, try another wiki as suggested here. The benefits are they can be used in various different fashions, from bulletin boards to help desk info.
SCOOP is also very good, but so would Slashcode if that is the type of setup you are looking for. In the case of a LUG, I would suggest you look at broader option and Wikis are there.
What I would hope to see is a case where the Navy says: We do these things and we use these products/applications. This should cut the number from 100,000 to 1000. While not every government agency needs to act like a business, in 99.9999999999999999% of the cases the Navy (Marines, Air Force, etc.) could.
They intent would be to standardize on a set of products such that an application requester would not build their own or for that matter go off on their own to decide.
You need a database, choose DB1, DB2, DB3...
You need a procurement application: PA1, PA2 no others and these interface with each other.
You need a desktop, choose Vendor1Product1...
You need an OS, OSA, OSL, OSM, etc. and it must be an xyz compliant version, this network support. any step toward a consistent infrastructure that does NOT list parts. (I was talking with a guy from my State government who was ordering outdated computers because they are force to list the components. What $2000 got you in 2001, is different from today, but buracracy only lets them buy what was specified in the budget.)
We do not want to see is 100,000 applications rewritten in VB, or C++ or anything. 100,000 came from attrition. If they are going to have to convert get them prove you cannot use one from the list.
I doubt however this will happen. There are too many interests that do not benefit from a smooth, consistent approach. Too many contractors who cannot make money selling packages, and too many buracrates who benefit from a custom approach.
My cynical side says to look for it to be $12 billion, and 99,999 systems.
I have to agreee with "Unruly". The intent of the browser in most cases is it allows cross platform support without the need to build the infrastructure. If you have a standardized desktop, then you may have other options, however your application will be limited or limiting the future choice of platforms.
For the record, SomaFM feels that 5469 is far from a perfect bill. However, we think it is a good starting point.
A "good starting point" are words we would probably hear describe the DMCA at its inception. However, instead of moving back to a more reasoned approach, it continues toward even more draconian measures such as Fritz's most recent incantation of what Fair Use and infringement mean. Of the now infamous, "skipping commercials is a contract violation" speach.
I believe Rusty is sincere in his belief that this is a good start. However, I also believe it naive to think the tail will ever wag the dog. However, when the RIAA sent in a team of people to "re-write" this bill, looking out for "others" best interests is not why they are there. Further, to think that the bill will at any time in our life time be "revisited", except to make the restrictions greater and the fees higher, is unrealistic.
As the saying goes "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
I believe Clark has the right idea "...the health care industry needs to go to Microsoft with a joint NDA (nondisclosure agreement) and indemnification agreement, requiring Microsoft to hold their HIPAA-compliant customers harmless should patient information be leaked via this mechanism."
Not a prayer that MS would agree, but it will be interesting when they get pulled into court the first time a provider claims it was the update and MS forced them to allow it.
The regulatory oversight may do more to open MS software than the DOJ. Logic, reason, and innovation are not the watch words of these organizations. Regulations were passed, comply or be destroyed.
It is hard for me to decide who I want to win. MS or the regulators...
I believe he hit the nail on the head with: "But don't blame me for it. Most readers had never heard of BayTSP and had no idea how the DMCA was enforced until last week's column, "
We talk about the DMCA just about weekly here and in other forums, never seen by mainstream Americans. When/. does get mentioned it is usually with the word "hacker" or that some site was "slash dotted" like it had been subject to DOS on purpose. [and please let's not even start about the difference between "hacker", "cracker", "Blackhat", "Whitehat and "Grayhat"]
If we want to change the DMCA, we need to start talking to mom, dad and the neighbors. They need to understand that shortly they will be buying a CD of their favorite music that will only play on registered devices. That these devices will require replacement on a regular basis and they will will be paying for it. That the DVD they bought their grand-daughter forces her to watch more commericals before she can seen her movie, than a network Saturday morning. That the networks consider video taping programs theft and are working on making it illegal to fast forward through commericals and the device will prevent it and keeping the current vcr will not be an option.
They are soon going to hear Britney Spears tell them that downloading songs is a crime. They are going to hear it on TV and they are going to believe it is a crime (the distinction of ownership, and fair use is not going to be made by RIAA or MPAA).
We need Americans to start looking at the DMCA, the RIAA and the MPAA with the same eye they used when the tabacco companies told us "Smoking is not addictive." We need to do just as much to show them that if they are not concerned, their representatives will go to the mine and leave them with the shaft.
This is getting to be standard operating procedure. In an effort to avoid future legal action they force you to sign. While IANAL, this has been talked about in many places in the US. Most of it is legal, except where asking you to do something illegal.
Your choice is to take the money or plan to win it in court. If you do not have a court case now, take the money and run. If it really is a dot bomb, what will you get in court, your cubicle?
That strategy might make sense as Microsoft attempts to attract Hollywood movie studios with its digital rights management and anti-copying technologies.
This is NOT DOA, because it is not about PCs or PVRs or multimedia control. It is a Proof of Concept to sell the Digital Rights Management of MS to the MPAA and RIAA. Then the MPAA and RIAA will then use their money to ensure that ALL PCs have a DRM built into them.
While we can whine and cry that "no machine we buy will!!!", It is a non-issue. Dell, Gateway, Compac/HP, etc. will continue to sell their millions of boxes to the various businesses, and Mom & Dad like always. Legislation will pass that requires DRM and those that do not have it will be marginalized as criminals.
This is not the war, this is just the start of the battle. MPAA/RIAA make be seeing they will never get another DMCA, so they need to control "just content". MS sees the opportunity to manage every piece of electronic data on the web. 95% of the OS market is child's play by comparison.
The way these things fail is if someone manages to circumvent it in the first few months in a way that every 12 year with a 56k connection can bypass it.
You are correct (but you knew that). In my haste I typed HIPAA instead of HCFA. In thinking it over however, I seem to recall the GAO got involved some time back and that caused responsibility for enforcement to the States. If so, getting an answer especially if his company is multi-state will be real fun. (Unless they have Federal oversight somewhere)
HIPAA is like any other oversight group and only it can decide this is "okay" or a "violation". However, since logic cannot be guaranteed to rule, you cannot guess which. Have your company, preferably through your legal consul, submit a binding request for clarification.
Be certain your lawyer understands he should ask for an exemption until this is clarified. (This will prevent them from sitting on it for two years and then you getting in trouble later.)
Later when HIPAA says it is okay to do "X" and you find MS (or anyone with such an EULA) has absorbed records, your company is in the clear. Do not presume you can later claim a technical solution that was "just as good as..."
This is an issue for your lawyer(s) to resolve, not Slashdot.
Wow, I am really impressed. While some responses are amusing, most are seriously thought out and most stress the importance of diversity.
Take the outlandish class, interact with your classmates and enjoy the time. This is a rare time not to be seen again in most people's lives. When going through it I missed some of the experience as I attempted to "focus". Luckily, I met a lady who helped me see the forest through the trees. [We met the first semester in a Dark Age Studies class, an optional course that just sounded interesting. 20 years later we are still together.]
Good luck and thanks to the slash dotters who showed why I read here daily.!
While this looks good on the surface, it is a very few representatives. The RIAA can even use this as PR. "Look even Congress thinks changing the laws are a bad idea." The RIAA has shown little hesitation in throwing money at the issue of their bottom line. If this gets any headway at all, it will die in committee.
Until someone shows Congress why they should not support the RIAA/MPAA (i.e. they do not get re-elected) expect it to be a long cold winter.
Sadly, this is exactly the attitude the RIAA wishes to foster...hopelessness.
The media will become free after the inital investor gives shares the media with only one who made no payment.
Perhaps. However, it will also be far more difficult to claim the "unfairness of the RIAA" was the motivation.
Should you be found with illegal copies, it would be the same as being found with illegal copies of software. Should your machine be used as a repository, you would be designated a "dealer". Like drugs, a far worse crime. In this way, the p2p network could be used to police itself. Not hacking your machine, merely locating it and reporting it to local authorities. While this may smack of "big brother" that fact that the system was open for consumption would appear (IANAL) to limit the claim to privacy.
Is it a perfect solution? No, however it is workable and a good start. One that could be refined as we went along.
You are correct, they did not require I sign it to take the children home (that would be interesting wouldn't it?)
However, I do wish to get as much of my money back from the government as possible, so I did "need" to fill it out if I wished to ever claim them or get medical benefits, or get them a driver's license [hmmm... should have thought that one out;-) ]
It is like the idea that a credit card/cell phone/auto dealership/etc. cannot require your SSN but they do not have to provide service if they do not get it. As the guy from the SS adminstration explained it "the laws have fallen behind times"
We have still not finalized the penalty phase. So now that MS has "true competition" the DOJs proposal makes perfect sense. MS has been pushed aside in the onslaught of the IBM/Linux OS machine.
While the sarcasm light was on, let's face it, MS announces nothing that does not benefit them directly. If they are claiming IBM/Linux is a threat it is because they need to be seen as having a competitor.
Slashdot Mirror
It is perhaps a sign of the times that the same principles do not apply when it comes to immigrant workers.
Actually, the same principles do apply and H1Bs pervert the process. Instead of bringing the best and the brightest to the US, as the policy was designed to do, it is used far more often to bring the cheapest.
Are they qualified? Many certainly are, but that is not the requirement. The requirement is they have specific talents or knowledge that makes them unique. Something a US citizen could not supply.
What I have see instead is a company will bring over 100 developers. They will then put then put them, dorm style, into apartments. These workers are then paid a good wage in terms of where they came from, while undercutting and undermining the US worker they displaced. In essence, they are subsidized workers.
In a few months they move on or go home. Having made a fair living considering their point of origin while at the same time, making the contracting company a bundle and displacing American workers. All while taking money out of the country, without adding value.
Let us do this - let us stop all immigration and close the borders completely. All jobs will go only to (native-born) Americans. Hooray! However, we should also stop exporting software to other countries so that they can enjoy the same benefits. How about that?
Irrational and extreme come to mind. Other countries are not forced to buy software from us and many have government policies specifically protecting their workers in such cases. Or, should India create a package like MS Office and ship it here, I see no issue, just competition. Why is an American worker worth less than other coutnries doing the same?
"There's no way I'd approve it for installation on any system I have to administer."
My organization is spread over the world and must leverage every technology to improve overall customer satisfaction.
We have cell-phones for production support, phones for interaction with peers and email for non-time sensitive information. When I am on a project call, anywhere from 60 to 90 minutes, life does not stop. I can be pinged and ignore it or answer it. The same is said for any of the 30+ people on my IM list. Simplest case, Jim who is not in the meeting knows when "ProjectW" will be done. It comes up in relation to his availability to work on "ProjectX." We can mark it an "action item" or we go on with the meeting and someone pings him for the information. Better communication and collaboration.
When the networking team decided IM was a potential problem, they blocked the ports. That lasted 24 hours before they had created more problems than the potential existed. They recited the reasons we should not have it, how it was dangerous, etc. but no alternatives. The difference was they report to me.
As the IT Director, my rules on IM are simple. Treat it like the phone. Keep it business, block outside messages from people not on your list, and use other means to transfer files of any size about "X". It's a tool, not good or bad. If you misuse it, then the issue is a career development one, not an issue with the tool.
If I come across a little strong it is because I see this time and again. People forgetting the big picture is not IT, it is the service we provide. That their decisions have an impact good and bad on everyone.
If people wish to improve their career dramatically, next time figure how to meet the needs of your customers (which is anyone who needs your help). "No" is not a solution, its a career decision. And remember it is a career decision you are making for everyone in your department.
"You can't restrict branching in a high traffic forum without some sort of syncronization"
Certainly you can and Slashdot does it on a regular basis. You see it happen when you post to a popular topic. Go in when the number is in the 30s and if you open a reply and take your time, you may end up in the 80s or higher.
On his board, your comment appears further down the line, is that any different?
I believe this is a good indication of split from how Bill Gates sees the world and how the rest of the world sees itself. The problem is a touch of reality. One where the business is not technology but the use of technology for business. An area that MS seems to fail at way too often, given their scope. Instead, their success tends to be from the hard work of developers outside of the products themselves.
... you can go back and get that information."
From the article:
"...It will be common sense that you can correspond with your doctor and ask him questions electronically. It will be common sense that if you go to a meeting that's recorded digitally
It is not common sense. My doctor does not correspond electronically for two reasons. He is busy and he gains no revenue from it. Doctor's do not sit in their office waiting for someone to show up.(Try to see your doctor the same day you call). As for recording digitally that again is economically available today, but it fails to meet a wide business need. Instead, I call up Jane and ask "Was that two foobars or three you wanted?" I don't go to the archives and pull the video. Perhaps it is just his lawyers talking, in which case the video will expire in 30 days and be self destructive.
as for
If it works as planned, an airline would be able to update a passenger's on-line calendar if a flight were delayed, while notifying the passenger of the change with an e-mail and a phone message. One goal is to create a standard format so that data could be read by whatever device the passenger uses.
Again, a solution looking for a problem. Since a flight is not legally "late" until it does not push off, do you really expect an airline to send you an email in the morning?
As for a standard message format, they could have that today. They selected to remain proprietary, no one is holding a gun to their head. Let's see support for a universal open document standard and we would all be happy.(Well, except MS.)
"In addition to creating new software to entice people to buy more powerful computers, Microsoft is designing new types of computers, encouraging PC makers to build them."
Yes, the do this and not for the business' that is using it. Who wanted to go to an OS who's base requirements were four or five times the previous release? Hardware makers. Do I like having a 2.0ghz chip and a gig of memory for compiles? You bet. Does business appreciate needing to update an entire administration pool to run W2k and XP? Not even a little.
and finally, the "lost leader" thrown in to later claim "everyone knew it was coming:"
One key feature is expected to be a new file-storage system for better organizing things stored on a Windows-based PC. It could finally make it easy for people to search and find all sorts of files -- contacts, printers, documents, programs, photos -- with a single search tool.
Sadly, almost no one in the mainstream recognizes this for what it is. A shutout of other devices, services and software. I predict this is going to be a 100% legally encased product that will prevent or impede anything from interacting that is not MS. Anyone (i.e. SAMBA) trying to engineer a solution can look to DCMA for guidence. Nothing more complicated than that.
Tony does have a good point. In a way he is carrying the same tone he complains about. (A common issue). The Open Source Movement is a collection of individuals. Unlike a corporation where you check your words before speaking, we have our collection of people who feel the need to speak, "from the heart", if not always in the most tactful, thought out, and marketable fashion.
While the rogue/rambo programmer doing all nighters and running on Jolt cola and oreos has an allure to it. It makes the mainstream industry nervous and Microsoft does capitalize on nervousness.
Now, should Microsoft be there? Why not? Ours is OSS and they can get it just like everyone else. Does it hurt to hear where they see the future, what direction they take, and what direction they think the industry will take? If it makes you feel better put it in the context that they are MS and a competitor. We should look at this as the opportunity to interact with our competitors. And understand what they think. We do not have to agree on approach or direction. But open animosity? It benefits MS more than OSS.
That being said, Tony also needs to understand that the feelings people have are fostered by MS's actions past and present. In a way, it is like inviting someone to your house and finding things missing when they leave. You do have a feeling that you should watch them next time they visit.
Rick Berman's First Post-NEMESIS Interview: Future of Feature Franchise Unclear
Posted: 12:22:56 on February 04 2003
By: Steve Krutzler
Dept: Star Trek: Nemesis
In his first interview since the debacle of STAR TREK NEMESIS at the North American box office, producer Rick Berman says the future of the feature franchise is uncertain and he and the studio are not ready to jump back in immediately.
"I don't think this is like falling off a horse, and you want to jump right back on it," he told Sci-Fi Wire. "There's a theory that there was too much time [between Insurrection and Nemesis]. There's another theory that there wasn't too much time. I, along with the people at Paramount, need a few months of perspective and thinking about it to then decide what's the best thing to do next."
The exec is also cautious about explaning the film's poor performance.
"There's no way of telling what happened," Berman said. "I'm convinced that we made a very good movie, and I'm also convinced that the movie was promoted properly. I thought the trailers and the television spots were all excellent. It's easy to blame that sort of thing, but I don't think we can in this situation. I think that the competition of other films may have played some part in it, but I can't be certain of that, either. It's very, very hard to tell."
STAR TREK NEMESIS debuted in U.S. and Canadian theatres on December 13th and went on to the #2 spot in its debut weekend with $18.5 million, the lowest opening weekend gross of any STAR TREK picture. The film's domestic total currently stands well short of $50 million. 1989's STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER was the previous record-holder for lowest domestic box office with $52 million.
Check out the original article here.
It then linked to:
ScifiWire Nemesis
Trek Film Future Unsure
Star Trek Nemesis executive producer Rick Berman told SCI FI Wire that several factors likely contributed to the film's lackluster box-office performance, and he added that the future of the film franchise remains uncertain. "There's no way of telling what happened," Berman said in an interview. "I'm convinced that we made a very good movie, and I'm also convinced that the movie was promoted properly."
Berman added, "I thought the trailers and the television spots were all excellent. It's easy to blame that sort of thing, but I don't think we can in this situation. I think that the competition of other films may have played some part in it, but I can't be certain of that, either. It's very, very hard to tell."
Berman sounded disappointed. "Obviously, you want a film to do well," he said. "You work for a long time, and you work for a long time, and if it doesn't do well, it's not fun."
Berman went on to say that he's not sure what the future will hold for the Trek film franchise. "There's a theory that there was too much time [between Insurrection and Nemesis]," he said. "There's another theory that there wasn't too much time. I, along with the people at Paramount, need a few months of perspective and thinking about it to then decide what's the best thing to do next. I don't think this is like falling off a horse, and you want to jump right back on it. But we'll see."
One of the better descriptions or perhaps essay, to the principle of being a software engineer was in an editorial by Charles Connell in Dr. Dobbs several years ago. Why Software Engineering is not BS
Interesting note, while a Systems Engineer for a top two IT company, we were told that they would be renaming the Architects. It appears that some words (Engineer, Architect) have legal meanings in some states. Apparently in some states you cannot call yourself an engineer unless you can prove certification by a standards body.
IANAL, but I would be interested in hearing from one on how that gets resolved.
Despite the slick graphical interfaces, nice thread stack traces and local variable browsers, I still make sure I have on hand plenty of notepads, graph paper, pens and pencils so I can try to build up a picture of what state the program is in and to help me play detective in pinpointing what is going wrong with my (or other peoples) programs. Do other developers have similar problems?
Several people have mentioned feature enhancements, many I would also like to see. However, your statement about stuck me as being a little deeper. Yes, we have the same problems. However, it is not the debugger it is the interface in general. Your desires are for the "paperless office." For years we heard about it, but it never came to fruition. In fact, it may never come. The problem with a User Interface is it presumes users think, and behave in the a similar fashion doing the same job. Ask two secretaries how they file paperwork for themselves. Look at the notes written by two experienced developers during a debugging session. Similar results? Certainly. Similar approaches? Possibly. Identical methods for getting there? Doubtful.
You need hand plenty of notepads, graph paper, pens and pencils because the task at hand requires you to keep track of abstract data. Why not screen prints, cut/paste of images, text, etc? Because the #2 pencil in your hand forces your to iterate you understanding (I am writing down X=2, then 3, then 4, then -32767 -- whoa!). In addition, you remove the "clutter" while also reducing the effort. Consider that you could cut/paste any sub area of the screen. X=2, now becomes X=2, cut, paste. X=3, cut, paste. X=-32767, cut, paste. X=2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 , 9, 37, -32767 looks very obvious. 37 records you must now relate together do not.
I have also come to believe that the device interface is part of the issue. It is easier (for me) to mentally connect the window on a monitor with the printed surface than it is two windows. Perhaps the solution is a 36 inch monitor where I can have multiple windows open, so I can see everything at once. But it would still suffer from relating data, which also includes looking away from the code. Perhaps avoiding the "deer in the headlights" visual lock.
The issue is not whether we should be afraid they may find something, it is that they will.
For years, the NRA has been fighting gun registration. Guess what, they just lost and it did not even require a vote. If I can record every electronic transaction, then the legal purchase you just made at Walmart was recorded and we know who bought the gun, where you live, etc... Now before you hit reply with "maybe we should know.." maybe we should. But, it should be explained to people that way, no usurped.
Working in the travel business, specifically hotel systems, we try to have a "no spook" policy. We do not tie anything about your stay together. We don't send a "thank you for staying" note to you and your spouse just because two stayed in the room. We also don't comment on things you did there. (Porn channel, liter of scotch, etc.). This makes people uncomfortable, because they learn they are being tracked to an incredible detail. (when you entered and left your room, what you ate, drank and purchased in the hotel shop)
The Information Awareness Office(IAO) is going the opposite route. They will be tying all this type of information together with your financial, banking, medical and police records. Consider what Bill Clinton or Newt Gingrich would have been willing to do, to avoid having their "indescretions" revealed? Simply tying Newt's calendar to the hotel registrations in the area to the credit card paying for it...
The problem with this information is we cannot trust people not to abuse it. The IAO is currently being run by John Poindexter a person convicted of five felony counts of lying to Congress, destroying official documents and obstructing the congressional inquiry. He thought he knew the best course of action for the country. Now given the information that would influence where we might go, that beats dollars any day.
So if you don't do anything wrong why do you care? Because people in power will do something wrong and this makes Hoover's files first grade stuff.
I suggest Twiki. This is a pretty rich set of functions and plug-ins that make it a top notch option.
If it is a little too much, try another wiki as suggested here. The benefits are they can be used in various different fashions, from bulletin boards to help desk info.
SCOOP is also very good, but so would Slashcode if that is the type of setup you are looking for. In the case of a LUG, I would suggest you look at broader option and Wikis are there.
What I would hope to see is a case where the Navy says:
...
We do these things and we use these products/applications. This should cut the number from 100,000 to 1000. While not every government agency needs to act like a business, in 99.9999999999999999% of the cases the Navy (Marines, Air Force, etc.) could.
They intent would be to standardize on a set of products such that an application requester would not build their own or for that matter go off on their own to decide.
You need a database, choose DB1, DB2, DB3...
You need a procurement application: PA1, PA2 no others and these interface with each other.
You need a desktop, choose Vendor1Product1
You need an OS, OSA, OSL, OSM, etc. and it must be an xyz compliant version, this network support.
any step toward a consistent infrastructure that does NOT list parts. (I was talking with a guy from my State government who was ordering outdated computers because they are force to list the components. What $2000 got you in 2001, is different from today, but buracracy only lets them buy what was specified in the budget.)
We do not want to see is 100,000 applications rewritten in VB, or C++ or anything. 100,000 came from attrition. If they are going to have to convert get them prove you cannot use one from the list.
I doubt however this will happen. There are too many interests that do not benefit from a smooth, consistent approach. Too many contractors who cannot make money selling packages, and too many buracrates who benefit from a custom approach.
My cynical side says to look for it to be $12 billion, and 99,999 systems.
I have to agreee with "Unruly". The intent of the browser in most cases is it allows cross platform support without the need to build the infrastructure. If you have a standardized desktop, then you may have other options, however your application will be limited or limiting the future choice of platforms.
For the record, SomaFM feels that 5469 is far from a perfect bill. However, we think it is a good starting point.
A "good starting point" are words we would probably hear describe the DMCA at its inception. However, instead of moving back to a more reasoned approach, it continues toward even more draconian measures such as Fritz's most recent incantation of what Fair Use and infringement mean. Of the now infamous, "skipping commercials is a contract violation" speach.
I believe Rusty is sincere in his belief that this is a good start. However, I also believe it naive to think the tail will ever wag the dog. However, when the RIAA sent in a team of people to "re-write" this bill, looking out for "others" best interests is not why they are there. Further, to think that the bill will at any time in our life time be "revisited", except to make the restrictions greater and the fees higher, is unrealistic.
As the saying goes "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
I believe Clark has the right idea
"...the health care industry needs to go to Microsoft with a joint NDA (nondisclosure agreement) and indemnification agreement, requiring Microsoft to hold their HIPAA-compliant customers harmless should patient information be leaked via this mechanism."
Not a prayer that MS would agree, but it will be interesting when they get pulled into court the first time a provider claims it was the update and MS forced them to allow it.
The regulatory oversight may do more to open MS software than the DOJ. Logic, reason, and innovation are not the watch words of these organizations. Regulations were passed, comply or be destroyed.
It is hard for me to decide who I want to win. MS or the regulators...
I believe he hit the nail on the head with:
/. does get mentioned it is usually with the word "hacker" or that some site was "slash dotted" like it had been subject to DOS on purpose. [and please let's not even start about the difference between "hacker", "cracker", "Blackhat", "Whitehat and "Grayhat"]
"But don't blame me for it. Most readers had never heard of BayTSP and had no idea how the DMCA was enforced until last week's column, "
We talk about the DMCA just about weekly here and in other forums, never seen by mainstream Americans. When
If we want to change the DMCA, we need to start talking to mom, dad and the neighbors. They need to understand that shortly they will be buying a CD of their favorite music that will only play on registered devices. That these devices will require replacement on a regular basis and they will will be paying for it. That the DVD they bought their grand-daughter forces her to watch more commericals before she can seen her movie, than a network Saturday morning. That the networks consider video taping programs theft and are working on making it illegal to fast forward through commericals and the device will prevent it and keeping the current vcr will not be an option.
They are soon going to hear Britney Spears tell them that downloading songs is a crime. They are going to hear it on TV and they are going to believe it is a crime (the distinction of ownership, and fair use is not going to be made by RIAA or MPAA).
We need Americans to start looking at the DMCA, the RIAA and the MPAA with the same eye they used when the tabacco companies told us "Smoking is not addictive." We need to do just as much to show them that if they are not concerned, their representatives will go to the mine and leave them with the shaft.
This is getting to be standard operating procedure. In an effort to avoid future legal action they force you to sign. While IANAL, this has been talked about in many places in the US. Most of it is legal, except where asking you to do something illegal.
Your choice is to take the money or plan to win it in court. If you do not have a court case now, take the money and run. If it really is a dot bomb, what will you get in court, your cubicle?
That strategy might make sense as Microsoft attempts to attract Hollywood movie studios with its digital rights management and anti-copying technologies.
This is NOT DOA, because it is not about PCs or PVRs or multimedia control. It is a Proof of Concept to sell the Digital Rights Management of MS to the MPAA and RIAA. Then the MPAA and RIAA will then use their money to ensure that ALL PCs have a DRM built into them.
While we can whine and cry that "no machine we buy will!!!", It is a non-issue. Dell, Gateway, Compac/HP, etc. will continue to sell their millions of boxes to the various businesses, and Mom & Dad like always. Legislation will pass that requires DRM and those that do not have it will be marginalized as criminals.
This is not the war, this is just the start of the battle. MPAA/RIAA make be seeing they will never get another DMCA, so they need to control "just content". MS sees the opportunity to manage every piece of electronic data on the web. 95% of the OS market is child's play by comparison.
The way these things fail is if someone manages to circumvent it in the first few months in a way that every 12 year with a 56k connection can bypass it.
Beat me like a rented mule!
You are correct (but you knew that). In my haste I typed HIPAA instead of HCFA. In thinking it over however, I seem to recall the GAO got involved some time back and that caused responsibility for enforcement to the States. If so, getting an answer especially if his company is multi-state will be real fun. (Unless they have Federal oversight somewhere)
HIPAA is like any other oversight group and only it can decide this is "okay" or a "violation". However, since logic cannot be guaranteed to rule, you cannot guess which. Have your company, preferably through your legal consul, submit a binding request for clarification.
Be certain your lawyer understands he should ask for an exemption until this is clarified. (This will prevent them from sitting on it for two years and then you getting in trouble later.)
Later when HIPAA says it is okay to do "X" and you find MS (or anyone with such an EULA) has absorbed records, your company is in the clear. Do not presume you can later claim a technical solution that was "just as good as..."
This is an issue for your lawyer(s) to resolve, not Slashdot.
Wow, I am really impressed. While some responses are amusing, most are seriously thought out and most stress the importance of diversity.
Take the outlandish class, interact with your classmates and enjoy the time. This is a rare time not to be seen again in most people's lives. When going through it I missed some of the experience as I attempted to "focus". Luckily, I met a lady who helped me see the forest through the trees. [We met the first semester in a Dark Age Studies class, an optional course that just sounded interesting. 20 years later we are still together.]
Good luck and thanks to the slash dotters who showed why I read here daily.!
While this looks good on the surface, it is a very few representatives. The RIAA can even use this as PR. "Look even Congress thinks changing the laws are a bad idea." The RIAA has shown little hesitation in throwing money at the issue of their bottom line. If this gets any headway at all, it will die in committee.
Until someone shows Congress why they should not support the RIAA/MPAA (i.e. they do not get re-elected) expect it to be a long cold winter.
Sadly, this is exactly the attitude the RIAA wishes to foster...hopelessness.
The media will become free after the inital investor gives shares the media with only one who made no payment.
Perhaps. However, it will also be far more difficult to claim the "unfairness of the RIAA" was the motivation.
Should you be found with illegal copies, it would be the same as being found with illegal copies of software. Should your machine be used as a repository, you would be designated a "dealer". Like drugs, a far worse crime.
In this way, the p2p network could be used to police itself. Not hacking your machine, merely locating it and reporting it to local authorities. While this may smack of "big brother" that fact that the system was open for consumption would appear (IANAL) to limit the claim to privacy.
Is it a perfect solution? No, however it is workable and a good start. One that could be refined as we went along.
You are correct, they did not require I sign it to take the children home (that would be interesting wouldn't it?)
;-) ]
However, I do wish to get as much of my money back from the government as possible, so I did "need" to fill it out if I wished to ever claim them or get medical benefits, or get them a driver's license [hmmm... should have thought that one out
It is like the idea that a credit card/cell phone/auto dealership/etc. cannot require your SSN but they do not have to provide service if they do not get it. As the guy from the SS adminstration explained it "the laws have fallen behind times"
"Technically, no, because you don't have to have a social security number"
No longer true. When my children were born, a SSN form was required for them prior to leaving the hospital. The days of an "optional" SSN are gone.
We have still not finalized the penalty phase. So now that MS has "true competition" the DOJs
proposal makes perfect sense. MS has been pushed aside in the onslaught of the IBM/Linux OS machine.
While the sarcasm light was on, let's face it, MS announces nothing that does not benefit them directly. If they are claiming IBM/Linux is a threat it is because they need to be seen as having a competitor.
Now the question remains "Why?"