It's the easy RAW processing that is the unique selling proposition in Aperture. RAW processing has been in the past a binary-only kind of thing. Photoshop certainly doesn't have this kind of workflow. Yes, it has the features hidden in menus, but doesn't execute them like Aperture.
Native (whatever that means) RAW handling is also why the system requirements are high(ish).
Based on my experience, Apple should win far more creative users with this application. Many photographers working in digital use(d) Windows and Adobe certainly hasn't made anything like this.(yet)
There are online retailers that sell systems with no OS or Linux.
Just because some-retailer-somewhere doesn't sell linux just means they can't pay the vig to get into the store. Once you are in the store there are more fees to pay. Unless customers are beating down the doors to buy, it's a difficult place to have a successful product be profitable without tons of advertising and a great price.
1. In the licenses I've read through, they do not make much, if anything clear as to what exactly the customer gets with the license. 2. What are their unique selling points? Don't say "java" because it's free. Or, maybe it's not. It's too hard to tell. 3. Is their hardware sooo much better than vanilla PC's?
If someone could please post a list of their strongest products that would be helpful. I have a hard time understanding their relevance. Again, "java" isn't helpful because it seems to be there are a number of alternatives fast-approaching.
Seriously though, remember it's not about the science.
It's about making it safe for corporations to own things in space. Corporations need people in space, not robots. Right now, the people are cheaper and do more than robots.
Not researching robots and spending lots of money figuring out how to make them do things is another public policy misstep. Sad.
almost 60% of the U.S. population now has access to broadband
Just because they have access doesn't mean they HAVE broadband, much less a computer. Please note a significant portion of American homes still do not have PC's. It really bugs me when stats are used in this way.
At this point, it's kind of like the phone I'd guess in that its only a matter of time (non-computer users dying) before it gets much closer to the entire population.
Maybe 20 years ago, some powerful politician declared and implemented policy around the idea, "The American economy will be transitioning from a manufacturing economy to a service/information economy."
In principal, it made perfect sense, but in practice service and knowledge can come from anywhere and they do. So, the Mode (Average) American is screwed because they provide no value.
Now, the average quickie-mart capitalist is yelling, "Let Capitalism work its magic and we'll all be better off!" I say to all of them, has capitalism made health care more affordable? Has it made housing more affordable? Is your water cleaner? Instead of making Mode Americans wealthier, capitalism is lowering your wages and delivering medical care and a safe environment only to those who can afford to pay for them.
There is plenty to be said for the overwhelming sense of entitlement and general lack of initiative at the individual level, but I do think the "service/knowledge economy" policy was flawed from the beginning.
Re: Sweeping Generalizations Solve Most Problems
on
Linux Instant Messengers
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Mod parent Troll.
With Windows, you can download an installation file and know it'll install on any Windows box without any problem. That has got to be -the- most innacurate generalization I've heard about Windows in a long time. I can't be the only one with horror stories.
With Linux, you get all sorts of package dependency crap If you attempt to install joe-shmoe's downloaded package of software not included in a stable distro repository, then you are asking for dependency issues. The same is true of windows freeware downloaded from joe-shmoe's site too. Please do the following: 1. Install a popular distro 2. Don't fsck with the repository url's 3. enjoy
Packaging mayhem indeed... Mayhem is roughly defined as willfully maiming or crippling. Which is exactly what your post is to Linux.
1. New MS technology to revolutionize some industry MS doesn't dominate. 2. Feature list that makes you say "wow." 3. Feature list, like most MS products is 99.9% over-promised. 4. Does anyone really want a TV that downloads spam? 5. Does anyone want a TV that can interrupt them? 6. How about a TV that controls what you watch?
I seem to remember some TV viewing software in Windows 95 that made similar promises.
If you broke desktop publishing into two groups like consumer/SOHO and Professional, it would be a really good consumer product assuming -all- of the applications features make it into the linux version.
It will be interesting to see how much gets pulled from the OSS version.
On the higher end side of desktop publishing in Linux, you've got a handful of good applications. -Gimp (please refrain from "It's not PS!") It's the best on Linux and generally really good for many things.
-Scribus Very good DTP application. See Gimp comments and substitute Illustrator.
-Inkscape/Sodipodi Very nice drawing applications.
-Quanta+/Bluefish Nice HTML editors. Good project management features. See Gimp comments and substitute Dreamweaver. I'd be interested to hear some preferences between these two as I don't exhaust the features of Quanta+.
For big documents creation with a GUI, there's Lyx.
I wonder about Suse too though. They've generated much buzz lately, I think they've set themselves up to be *the* legitimate alternative to Red Hat, but they aren't generating RH-level revenue. (yet?)
Perpetual #2 is a very tough spot though and: 1. opens the door to MS adopting redhat and sucking all the money out of linux. 2. keeping Novell and any other commercial Linux distros as MS competitors in name only. Which would be the point for Microsoft.
At the PHB/consumer market level where RedHat/Suse/Lindows/MS are trying to compete, no one is going to be sensitive to the underlying differences between distros. Once you get used to the desktop, they work the same. Yast is good, but it's hard to say, "Our system tools are the best!" to most PHB/Consumers who DON'T want to look at system tools, ever. So it comes down to, "is the price/feature combination right?" and "I do/do not trust this company."
Sadly, it's inevitable that there be one or two major distros. At some point, commercial resources kick in and overwhelm the smaller distros in terms of features/functionality. Even if you make a 1:1 copy, (CentOS) wealthier paying corporate consumers clearly prefer one over the other.
So at some point, there should be a clear first tier Linux 1 or 2 companies garnering most platform market share, I'm sure this sounds crazy, but I think MS will try to grab as much of the Linux money they can. Then a bunch of other small Linux distro related companies. Ideally there will still be numerous OSS distros and applications with lots of volunteers doing innovative work.
Personally I think that extra million should go to the people actually doing the work but that's just me. Wait a minute, that's my contribution to the Union. I "produced" $500 million. Members don't work for free and neither do I. My point was overpaid management makes the exact same arguement to justify their wages.
poor state of public schools Hmmm, no. I can argue the following: 1. Taxpayers don't want to pay for public schools and a host of other public services. They haven't for decades. Privatizing schools effectively prices most american children out of an education. (See public university tuition inflation rates as an example) 2. You will find public schools in areas where parents are involved and generally wealthy enough to make the time to attend to their children are quite good. Teachers are in unions at those schools too! Wow!
Unions deprive me of a more diversified national economy. How exactly? When in the history of the world was there was a union for an industry that didn't exist?
I'll throw you a bone: Maybe you think they deprive the nation of a fully-employed workforce? If you would like to see an example of a fully-employed population, examine farm communities where there is practically no unemployment. No one I've ever met wanted to pick produce because "the money is good."
people who are no longer providing any benefit to the community at the expense of the community. What?! You are using the fruits of their work right now! The computer you are using didn't just magically appear. Neither did the road, power and water services.
you will consistently see that pensions are always one of the biggest issues Ummm. No. Their biggest issue is they don't have the income to support the pension promises they made. Now,they made lots of profits many years ago and magically, most of it didn't end up in the pension pool like it was supposed to. Hmmm, where did it go? Who diverted it? Why? I'll leave that one for you to research.
They are demanding that I spend my tax dollars to cover the unsustainable pensions Really? Demanding? Ummm. No. Again, many communities have very irresponsible fiscal management practices with an electorate that want to behave like children and blame someone else for their financial foolishness. That's generally what gets them into this situation.
Please take the time to develop thoughtful, well-informed ideas based on many different opinions. Better yet, get involved in local government. I urge you.
I think we can both agree that both sides labor/capitalists can over-reach.
At the end of the year who ends up with the larger salaries... the union chiefs or the people they "represent"? Let's talk valuation for a minute. If I as a representative get another $500 million out of an organization for it's workers, it is the equivalent of a CEO who increases the value of a corporation. If I ask for $1 million of that,(0.2%) there's $499 million to distribute to the workers. No, it's not overpaying.
I stated "Unions as bargaining units are the only tool the worker has to wield in American Capitalism." That you grossly simplified my statement regarding unions just tells me you've got to stop watching so much TV.
Here's my personal opinion: That unions in general are in decline in the U.S. has as much to do with the way the declining unions are operate as the capitalists failure to adjust to the changing markets and failure to stay ahead of new competitors. (A general example would be GM/Ford)
And this assessment is based on.... ? I had a professor in finance class 2/3 years ago that studied it as his research area and used only airline industry examples. Wouldn't stop talking about it either. It was a good class for me, but he wasn't a popular teacher.
For example, I think pilots are grossly overpaid because there is a tremendous glut of perfectly qualified pilots.... More quickie-mart rationalizations. Unplug the TV and turn off the radio. Controlling the supply of resources to increase profits is used by anyone who can do it successfully every day. The evil labor empire is going to deprive you of low wages, no medical care and unfunded pensions! Oh no! Send in the military!!! But it's okay when Microsoft, the Music distribution industry, AMA, etc. do it?
public employees should never be allowed to unionize. You choose one Union out of many and generalize to all others. C'mon it isn't an axis of evil. Yet.
In California, non-competes are basically unenforceable and it hasn't changed anything. Management is paid astronomical multiples of the non-management workers just like the rest of the country.
Please spare us all the "Unions are evil" diatribe because it's baseless dogma brought to you by the wealthiest Americans. Your going to need to re-read the next couple of lines a few times because it will shock you.
The "unions are evil" dogma is designed to minimize competition for wealth and labor. 1. It prevents you from maximizing the wealth from your activities and instead passes most of it onto the owners. 2. The wealthiest individuals remain just that. It protects the rich from the poor. 3. Bargaining units are the only way to effectively negotiate with the property-owning class. They want your labor to make them richer and you'll work when they want, not when you want. If that's 7-days a week, then work or you are fired. The EA story is a perfect example.
Now, please do not run on about the airlines. You know nothing about the economics of the airline industry: 1. The big players are failing to adapt to a deregulated market 2. Maybe more importantly, the price of fuel figures very highly into the prosperity of the airline industry.
Now, I accept you have an opinion that is different than mine, but your reliance on dogmatic beliefs is obvious. Please do not stae them as fact.
When you buy a CD you purchase the priviledge to play the CD in a manner that the record company approves. Repeat three times.
Now, for every person that says "No way! The law says..." They may be right, but I submit that the music distributors (via RIAA) are training people to believe and behave according to the statement above and completely ingnoring the law. (not breaking, but pretending it doesn't exist) These laws in particular protect the rich from the poor.
Whatever laws may say otherwise, I submit that a coherent challenge to this mission won't be happening because the resources required to do so are:
-out of reach of nearly all the people consuming music. -lack of incentive on the part of the people with the resources to challenge the RIAA. They are most likely shareholders garnering a return or otherwise can pay the price without concern. -Mounting a challenge to this is likely to be criminalized outright because it's easy to label it "they just want to steal our music." (reminds me of the medical marijuana lobby) -Allowing a CD to be used for more than one purpose is bad capitalism. The owner wants to monetize every single use and the current political climate in the US encourages this.
small business investment should reap 20% dividends
This may be obvious to some: The theory is that VC's fund many projects with one or two actually hitting the big payout and paying for all of the others.
More is profit is better, but the average over many VC is slightly above the average rate of return on an investment. What the ARR is these days I don't know.
How you define the word dividends? Net Margin? EBITDA? EBIT? Have you gotten this return very consistently in the past?
for any christmas product. For example, Apple's Nano while recently unveiled must have already been discussed and purchasing planned for any retailers that matter to Apple through 12/05.
Most of the purchasing for large retailers christmas season was done over the summer. The only thing left by now is for the product brands to make their delivery dates.
Unless they've made some commitments they won't be able to keep to retailers, I'm not sure how getting it done before christmas helps.
I have good friends that love their retail jobs Married? Most likey not. Living at home? Possible. Working more than 1 job? Likely because retail doesn't pay well. Health Insurance with $100 deductable? I'd say impossible. Now it is possible that they live some place with low cost of living, but it's only a matter of time before they are priced out. Wait, don't tell me, they'll get by on Love right?
I personally love doing residential construction. I also happen to enjoy technology management, teaching, and volunteer supervision. There's little money or prestige in swinging a hammer. Unless it's the family business... So you get into tech management.
You certainly were chosen for management over others and you didn't turn down the position. So, you are disguising the crassness of capitalism and your own drive to succeed at the expense of others, not to mention your greed. Your sanctimonious position is the eqivalent of putting frosting on a sh*t cake. You won't eat it, so you feed it to others.
if that means I have to take a paycut so that others can enjoy themselves as well, I'm more than willing to do so. Where's all your money coming from? Better yet, I'll hire you for 5.50 an hour no benefits here in L.A. doing residential construction. Your kids can go to one of the many public schools that are losing their certification and watch TV in their classes all day. Meanwhile you and your family can sleep 5 to a room because you won't be able to afford an apartment on $5.50/hr. And I'm not sure how you're going to pay for a car either. According to everything you've said, you'll still be in shang-gri-la.
Your post reeks of bourgeois (Marxist def.) sympathy and quickie-mart self-actualization that has no connection to the crassness of capitalism and little basis in economic reality. I suspect the attitude generally comes from some kind of benefactor funding you at your beckon call.
We're all greedy competitive individuals who are totally willing to gain at someone else's expense. Some people have more opportunity to do that than others too. Wrapping that up in feel-good phrases is an odd choice, but an individual can't get far in life without a whole lot of denial.
What if your source of happiness was playing the piano? According to the original post, it's recommended you quit your IT job and immediately try to find work playing the piano because as he states, "do what you enjoy and the rest will follow."
Based on my experience living in Los Angeles and working with countless musicians/actors that did and didn't make it in entertainment, The most likely turnout of "The rest" in this case would be debt, hunger and homelessness because you'll be in a very long line of unemployed musicians.
Therefore, the "do what you enjoy" is more greeting card platitude that gets one into dire straits than anything else.
From dictionary.com, the meaning of work: # Physical or mental effort or activity directed toward the production or accomplishment of something.
1. A job; employment: looking for work.
2. A trade, profession, or other means of livelihood.
Hmmm, there is NO mention of happiness or pleasure in that definition. But there is something about livelihood though. Another common description "Exchange labor for money." No, no happiness mentioned there either.
Maybe then, you have the resources to become what I officially declare today on/. for the first time a "Luxury Worker." The term's official meaning: Any person who can wait as long as needed to choose the job that most pleases you. That truly is rare and far from the modal (as in most frequent number) American's income and working capacity.
Casually throwing out feel-good statements like "just do what makes you happy and the rest will come" is potentially very damaging because it doesn't work out like that sometimes.
Furthermore, it flies in the face of many of the unspoken rules, status and career path expectations that are a part of today's working world.
What happens if everyone in America suddenly decided to follows this advice?
Some of the more immediate impacts would be: -Would anyone work at a retail chain? -How may garbage collectors find driving a truck around the city their eternal source of happiness? -Do you think postal workers get their happiness needs met at work? I believe the term "go postal" pretty much makes my point. -What about air traffic controllers? Managing airspace would have to be another eternal spring of happiness. -In a serious blow to most/.'ers the pool of available talent for pornography would likely get a great deal smaller. Because, every woman I've met *really* wants to be in porn for the artistic value rather than the money.
The vast majority of jobs are just that, jobs. Do your work, get your pay and go home. Now, if you have the financial resources to wait until your perfect job comes, then you are indeed part of a small group of luxury workers.
I'm not saying don't seek happines and fulfillment. But just casually throwing out feel-good statements in this context is potentially damaging.
in caps in your license is the common knowledge legal method of saying, If you use this software, it is at your own peril.
Anyone ignoring EULA's is in for a sad surprise if they attempt to challenge a EULA in the American legal system. It reminds me of those Americans that challenge the Federal Govt right or ability to collect taxes because of the wording in the legislation.
Entire software and entertainment industries are built on EULA enforceability, so if they can't get it through courts, they most certainly will get it through legislation.
Slashdot Mirror
It's the easy RAW processing that is the unique selling proposition in Aperture. RAW processing has been in the past a binary-only kind of thing. Photoshop certainly doesn't have this kind of workflow. Yes, it has the features hidden in menus, but doesn't execute them like Aperture.
Native (whatever that means) RAW handling is also why the system requirements are high(ish).
Based on my experience, Apple should win far more creative users with this application. Many photographers working in digital use(d) Windows and Adobe certainly hasn't made anything like this.(yet)
There are online retailers that sell systems with no OS or Linux.
Just because some-retailer-somewhere doesn't sell linux just means they can't pay the vig to get into the store. Once you are in the store there are more fees to pay. Unless customers are beating down the doors to buy, it's a difficult place to have a successful product be profitable without tons of advertising and a great price.
IMHO, they've still got serious marketing issues.
1. In the licenses I've read through, they do not make much, if anything clear as to what exactly the customer gets with the license.
2. What are their unique selling points? Don't say "java" because it's free. Or, maybe it's not. It's too hard to tell.
3. Is their hardware sooo much better than vanilla PC's?
If someone could please post a list of their strongest products that would be helpful. I have a hard time understanding their relevance. Again, "java" isn't helpful because it seems to be there are a number of alternatives fast-approaching.
Gov't employees laid off..
Is this April 1st?
Seriously though, remember it's not about the science.
It's about making it safe for corporations to own things in space. Corporations need people in space, not robots. Right now, the people are cheaper and do more than robots.
Not researching robots and spending lots of money figuring out how to make them do things is another public policy misstep. Sad.
almost 60% of the U.S. population now has access to broadband
Just because they have access doesn't mean they HAVE broadband, much less a computer. Please note a significant portion of American homes still do not have PC's. It really bugs me when stats are used in this way.
At this point, it's kind of like the phone I'd guess in that its only a matter of time (non-computer users dying) before it gets much closer to the entire population.
Let's go back in history a little...
Maybe 20 years ago, some powerful politician declared and implemented policy around the idea, "The American economy will be transitioning from a manufacturing economy to a service/information economy."
In principal, it made perfect sense, but in practice service and knowledge can come from anywhere and they do. So, the Mode (Average) American is screwed because they provide no value.
Now, the average quickie-mart capitalist is yelling, "Let Capitalism work its magic and we'll all be better off!" I say to all of them, has capitalism made health care more affordable? Has it made housing more affordable? Is your water cleaner? Instead of making Mode Americans wealthier, capitalism is lowering your wages and delivering medical care and a safe environment only to those who can afford to pay for them.
There is plenty to be said for the overwhelming sense of entitlement and general lack of initiative at the individual level, but I do think the "service/knowledge economy" policy was flawed from the beginning.
Mod parent Troll.
With Windows, you can download an installation file and know it'll install on any Windows box without any problem.
That has got to be -the- most innacurate generalization I've heard about Windows in a long time. I can't be the only one with horror stories.
With Linux, you get all sorts of package dependency crap
If you attempt to install joe-shmoe's downloaded package of software not included in a stable distro repository, then you are asking for dependency issues. The same is true of windows freeware downloaded from joe-shmoe's site too. Please do the following:
1. Install a popular distro
2. Don't fsck with the repository url's
3. enjoy
Packaging mayhem indeed... Mayhem is roughly defined as willfully maiming or crippling. Which is exactly what your post is to Linux.
I've seen this article before.
1. New MS technology to revolutionize some industry MS doesn't dominate.
2. Feature list that makes you say "wow."
3. Feature list, like most MS products is 99.9% over-promised.
4. Does anyone really want a TV that downloads spam?
5. Does anyone want a TV that can interrupt them?
6. How about a TV that controls what you watch?
I seem to remember some TV viewing software in Windows 95 that made similar promises.
Yeah, the hyperbole goes way over the top.
If you broke desktop publishing into two groups like consumer/SOHO and Professional, it would be a really good consumer product assuming -all- of the applications features make it into the linux version.
It will be interesting to see how much gets pulled from the OSS version.
On the higher end side of desktop publishing in Linux, you've got a handful of good applications.
-Gimp (please refrain from "It's not PS!")
It's the best on Linux and generally really good for many things.
-Scribus
Very good DTP application. See Gimp comments and substitute Illustrator.
-Inkscape/Sodipodi
Very nice drawing applications.
-Quanta+/Bluefish
Nice HTML editors. Good project management features. See Gimp comments and substitute Dreamweaver. I'd be interested to hear some preferences between these two as I don't exhaust the features of Quanta+.
For big documents creation with a GUI, there's Lyx.
Scribus. Check it out.
I wonder about Suse too though. They've generated much buzz lately, I think they've set themselves up to be *the* legitimate alternative to Red Hat, but they aren't generating RH-level revenue. (yet?)
Perpetual #2 is a very tough spot though and:
1. opens the door to MS adopting redhat and sucking all the money out of linux.
2. keeping Novell and any other commercial Linux distros as MS competitors in name only. Which would be the point for Microsoft.
At the PHB/consumer market level where RedHat/Suse/Lindows/MS are trying to compete, no one is going to be sensitive to the underlying differences between distros. Once you get used to the desktop, they work the same. Yast is good, but it's hard to say, "Our system tools are the best!" to most PHB/Consumers who DON'T want to look at system tools, ever. So it comes down to, "is the price/feature combination right?" and "I do/do not trust this company."
Sadly, it's inevitable that there be one or two major distros. At some point, commercial resources kick in and overwhelm the smaller distros in terms of features/functionality. Even if you make a 1:1 copy, (CentOS) wealthier paying corporate consumers clearly prefer one over the other.
So at some point, there should be a clear first tier Linux 1 or 2 companies garnering most platform market share, I'm sure this sounds crazy, but I think MS will try to grab as much of the Linux money they can. Then a bunch of other small Linux distro related companies. Ideally there will still be numerous OSS distros and applications with lots of volunteers doing innovative work.
Personally I think that extra million should go to the people actually doing the work but that's just me.
Wait a minute, that's my contribution to the Union. I "produced" $500 million. Members don't work for free and neither do I. My point was overpaid management makes the exact same arguement to justify their wages.
poor state of public schools
Hmmm, no. I can argue the following:
1. Taxpayers don't want to pay for public schools and a host of other public services. They haven't for decades. Privatizing schools effectively prices most american children out of an education. (See public university tuition inflation rates as an example)
2. You will find public schools in areas where parents are involved and generally wealthy enough to make the time to attend to their children are quite good. Teachers are in unions at those schools too! Wow!
Unions deprive me of a more diversified national economy.
How exactly? When in the history of the world was there was a union for an industry that didn't exist?
I'll throw you a bone: Maybe you think they deprive the nation of a fully-employed workforce? If you would like to see an example of a fully-employed population, examine farm communities where there is practically no unemployment. No one I've ever met wanted to pick produce because "the money is good."
people who are no longer providing any benefit to the community at the expense of the community.
What?! You are using the fruits of their work right now! The computer you are using didn't just magically appear. Neither did the road, power and water services.
you will consistently see that pensions are always one of the biggest issues
Ummm. No.
Their biggest issue is they don't have the income to support the pension promises they made. Now,they made lots of profits many years ago and magically, most of it didn't end up in the pension pool like it was supposed to. Hmmm, where did it go? Who diverted it? Why? I'll leave that one for you to research.
They are demanding that I spend my tax dollars to cover the unsustainable pensions
Really? Demanding? Ummm. No. Again, many communities have very irresponsible fiscal management practices with an electorate that want to behave like children and blame someone else for their financial foolishness. That's generally what gets them into this situation.
Please take the time to develop thoughtful, well-informed ideas based on many different opinions. Better yet, get involved in local government. I urge you.
I want to bottle. I'd put Bill Gates' fortune to shame.
Copying competitor's products and then having it praised as "innovative" is a mind trick I've never, ever been able to pull off.
I'm thinking it's because they pay to advertise their message and it keeps the writer's food on the table.
Any clues?
I think we can both agree that both sides labor/capitalists can over-reach.
At the end of the year who ends up with the larger salaries... the union chiefs or the people they "represent"?
Let's talk valuation for a minute. If I as a representative get another $500 million out of an organization for it's workers, it is the equivalent of a CEO who increases the value of a corporation. If I ask for $1 million of that,(0.2%) there's $499 million to distribute to the workers. No, it's not overpaying.
I stated "Unions as bargaining units are the only tool the worker has to wield in American Capitalism." That you grossly simplified my statement regarding unions just tells me you've got to stop watching so much TV.
Here's my personal opinion:
That unions in general are in decline in the U.S. has as much to do with the way the declining unions are operate as the capitalists failure to adjust to the changing markets and failure to stay ahead of new competitors. (A general example would be GM/Ford)
And this assessment is based on.... ?
I had a professor in finance class 2/3 years ago that studied it as his research area and used only airline industry examples. Wouldn't stop talking about it either. It was a good class for me, but he wasn't a popular teacher.
For example, I think pilots are grossly overpaid because there is a tremendous glut of perfectly qualified pilots....
More quickie-mart rationalizations. Unplug the TV and turn off the radio. Controlling the supply of resources to increase profits is used by anyone who can do it successfully every day. The evil labor empire is going to deprive you of low wages, no medical care and unfunded pensions! Oh no! Send in the military!!! But it's okay when Microsoft, the Music distribution industry, AMA, etc. do it?
public employees should never be allowed to unionize.
You choose one Union out of many and generalize to all others. C'mon it isn't an axis of evil. Yet.
In California, non-competes are basically unenforceable and it hasn't changed anything. Management is paid astronomical multiples of the non-management workers just like the rest of the country.
Please spare us all the "Unions are evil" diatribe because it's baseless dogma brought to you by the wealthiest Americans. Your going to need to re-read the next couple of lines a few times because it will shock you.
The "unions are evil" dogma is designed to minimize competition for wealth and labor.
1. It prevents you from maximizing the wealth from your activities and instead passes most of it onto the owners.
2. The wealthiest individuals remain just that. It protects the rich from the poor.
3. Bargaining units are the only way to effectively negotiate with the property-owning class. They want your labor to make them richer and you'll work when they want, not when you want. If that's 7-days a week, then work or you are fired. The EA story is a perfect example.
Now, please do not run on about the airlines. You know nothing about the economics of the airline industry:
1. The big players are failing to adapt to a deregulated market
2. Maybe more importantly, the price of fuel figures very highly into the prosperity of the airline industry.
Now, I accept you have an opinion that is different than mine, but your reliance on dogmatic beliefs is obvious. Please do not stae them as fact.
When you buy a CD you purchase the priviledge to play the CD in a manner that the record company approves. Repeat three times.
Now, for every person that says "No way! The law says..." They may be right, but I submit that the music distributors (via RIAA) are training people to believe and behave according to the statement above and completely ingnoring the law. (not breaking, but pretending it doesn't exist) These laws in particular protect the rich from the poor.
Whatever laws may say otherwise, I submit that a coherent challenge to this mission won't be happening because the resources required to do so are:
-out of reach of nearly all the people consuming music.
-lack of incentive on the part of the people with the resources to challenge the RIAA. They are most likely shareholders garnering a return or otherwise can pay the price without concern.
-Mounting a challenge to this is likely to be criminalized outright because it's easy to label it "they just want to steal our music." (reminds me of the medical marijuana lobby)
-Allowing a CD to be used for more than one purpose is bad capitalism. The owner wants to monetize every single use and the current political climate in the US encourages this.
What's the deal? HP does nothing for free.
There's got to be something more attractive to HP here besides revenue sharing from landing one or two ISP accounts. (That's so 90's)
Did AOL simply fork over the cash? Hmmm, doubt it. Then what?
And it sure does make it easy to build a better distro.
He's certainly made me believe he's sticking to Debian for the heavy lifting then Q/A and patching to make the packages perform the way he wants them.
I do wonder though if the Debian volunteers will really stick around and still take pride in working on the distro that makes Ubuntu so good.
small business investment should reap 20% dividends
This may be obvious to some:
The theory is that VC's fund many projects with one or two actually hitting the big payout and paying for all of the others.
More is profit is better, but the average over many VC is slightly above the average rate of return on an investment. What the ARR is these days I don't know.
How you define the word dividends? Net Margin? EBITDA? EBIT? Have you gotten this return very consistently in the past?
for any christmas product. For example, Apple's Nano while recently unveiled must have already been discussed and purchasing planned for any retailers that matter to Apple through 12/05.
Most of the purchasing for large retailers christmas season was done over the summer. The only thing left by now is for the product brands to make their delivery dates.
Unless they've made some commitments they won't be able to keep to retailers, I'm not sure how getting it done before christmas helps.
I have good friends that love their retail jobs
/hr. And I'm not sure how you're going to pay for a car either. According to everything you've said, you'll still be in shang-gri-la.
Married? Most likey not. Living at home? Possible. Working more than 1 job? Likely because retail doesn't pay well. Health Insurance with $100 deductable? I'd say impossible. Now it is possible that they live some place with low cost of living, but it's only a matter of time before they are priced out. Wait, don't tell me, they'll get by on Love right?
I personally love doing residential construction. I also happen to enjoy technology management, teaching, and volunteer supervision.
There's little money or prestige in swinging a hammer. Unless it's the family business... So you get into tech management.
You certainly were chosen for management over others and you didn't turn down the position. So, you are disguising the crassness of capitalism and your own drive to succeed at the expense of others, not to mention your greed. Your sanctimonious position is the eqivalent of putting frosting on a sh*t cake. You won't eat it, so you feed it to others.
if that means I have to take a paycut so that others can enjoy themselves as well, I'm more than willing to do so.
Where's all your money coming from? Better yet, I'll hire you for 5.50 an hour no benefits here in L.A. doing residential construction. Your kids can go to one of the many public schools that are losing their certification and watch TV in their classes all day. Meanwhile you and your family can sleep 5 to a room because you won't be able to afford an apartment on $5.50
Your post reeks of bourgeois (Marxist def.) sympathy and quickie-mart self-actualization that has no connection to the crassness of capitalism and little basis in economic reality. I suspect the attitude generally comes from some kind of benefactor funding you at your beckon call.
We're all greedy competitive individuals who are totally willing to gain at someone else's expense. Some people have more opportunity to do that than others too. Wrapping that up in feel-good phrases is an odd choice, but an individual can't get far in life without a whole lot of denial.
Show me the money!
What if your source of happiness was playing the piano? According to the original post, it's recommended you quit your IT job and immediately try to find work playing the piano because as he states, "do what you enjoy and the rest will follow."
Based on my experience living in Los Angeles and working with countless musicians/actors that did and didn't make it in entertainment, The most likely turnout of "The rest" in this case would be debt, hunger and homelessness because you'll be in a very long line of unemployed musicians.
Therefore, the "do what you enjoy" is more greeting card platitude that gets one into dire straits than anything else.
From dictionary.com, the meaning of work:
/. for the first time a "Luxury Worker." The term's official meaning: Any person who can wait as long as needed to choose the job that most pleases you. That truly is rare and far from the modal (as in most frequent number) American's income and working capacity.
# Physical or mental effort or activity directed toward the production or accomplishment of something.
1. A job; employment: looking for work.
2. A trade, profession, or other means of livelihood.
Hmmm, there is NO mention of happiness or pleasure in that definition. But there is something about livelihood though. Another common description "Exchange labor for money." No, no happiness mentioned there either.
Maybe then, you have the resources to become what I officially declare today on
Casually throwing out feel-good statements like "just do what makes you happy and the rest will come" is potentially very damaging because it doesn't work out like that sometimes.
Furthermore, it flies in the face of many of the unspoken rules, status and career path expectations that are a part of today's working world.
What happens if everyone in America suddenly decided to follows this advice?
/.'ers the pool of available talent for pornography would likely get a great deal smaller. Because, every woman I've met *really* wants to be in porn for the artistic value rather than the money.
Some of the more immediate impacts would be:
-Would anyone work at a retail chain?
-How may garbage collectors find driving a truck around the city their eternal source of happiness?
-Do you think postal workers get their happiness needs met at work? I believe the term "go postal" pretty much makes my point.
-What about air traffic controllers? Managing airspace would have to be another eternal spring of happiness.
-In a serious blow to most
The vast majority of jobs are just that, jobs. Do your work, get your pay and go home. Now, if you have the financial resources to wait until your perfect job comes, then you are indeed part of a small group of luxury workers.
I'm not saying don't seek happines and fulfillment. But just casually throwing out feel-good statements in this context is potentially damaging.
Please STOP spreading this myth.
AS IS
in caps in your license is the common knowledge legal method of saying, If you use this software, it is at your own peril.
Anyone ignoring EULA's is in for a sad surprise if they attempt to challenge a EULA in the American legal system. It reminds me of those Americans that challenge the Federal Govt right or ability to collect taxes because of the wording in the legislation.
Entire software and entertainment industries are built on EULA enforceability, so if they can't get it through courts, they most certainly will get it through legislation.