Would it be too much trouble to think of a better name? We went through this when the 9-11 report called for a "Intelligence Czar", naming a government position after a line of Russian monarchs is not the best public relations move one can make.
Ok then, what organization is he the executive of? Last I checked, the thing he is most famous for (Linux) was developed by the community, not an organization.
No, I've distinctly indicated that we are all better off with a heterogeneous browser market as that keeps any single vulnerability from being so widespread that it could do massive damage.
If you are a farmer, you don't want all your crops to be too related or else one single disaster (such as disease or a parasite) could wipe out your entire crop.
Unless you are one of those idiots who thinks Firefox is invulnerable to any type of security problem.
If he were suggesting to put a decent Linux distro on some old computer, that would be one thing. I am considering doing that for my family (they have this one old computer on which Windows has basically been destroyed and no one knows where the origional install disk is). However, he is talking about giving out live CDs, which are a bit different.
Ok, Linux may still be used by university CS students, but what the article is probably saying (I would know for sure had it not been/.ed) is that Linux will lose out in the server market. IT departments won't make that kind of decision based on which OS is loved by more geeks.
If all those people used firefox, the same hackers out there exploiting IE flaws would be exploiting firefox flaws, and you would still have viruses flooding your email.
"Once Firefox takes the lead in the web client arena, I guess we will all switch to IE because Firefox would be the new target of exploits, not IE."
The result of which will be there will be no one dominate browser, making it difficult for hackers to exploit near universal security issues. Many will use IE, many will use Mozilla/Firefox, many will use Opera, many may even use Konqueror.
I know my family uses Firefox. I had installed it on the main computer a few months ago when I was home, and since it has become their default browser (without me pushing it on them or anything, all I did was have a little icon on the desktop), and my dad has it installed on his laptop.
People don't need to be forced to do anything, given a choice they will choose what they think is best. And if they choose an obsolete browser like IE 6, who cares? They are the ones who end up suffering. In fact, having them using IE keeps hackers trying to exploit IE security flaws instead of Firefox flaws (and yes, those do exist).
Re:how is that different from other companies
on
NYT on EA Games
·
· Score: 1
"It does not say: anything about EA in general, anything about this story in particular, or anything about this story being posted on Slashdot or run in the NYT. You'd think at least ONE of those would have been in there if you'd meant to say them."
I apologize, I had expected you, the reader, to have RTFA (or at least the/. summary) and know what I was talking about. I expected you to know EA was the company in question, and I expected you to understand that both this and the parent were prompted by the exposure this story was getting. It seems my expectations were too high.
Re:how is that different from other companies
on
NYT on EA Games
·
· Score: 1
"We're not fighting over the legitimacy of the story, we're fighting becuase you said the above. "
And why do you think I said the above? Try hard, this requires some thought on your part. I said it because one or two people whining about their job is not a news story. Get it? Or do I have to draw a pretty little picture for you?
The problem is that most of those tools require one to spend lots of resources (read money) to develop.
Besides, why should someone who is working for the betterment of our health not be allowed to profit from his work while someone working to create the newest hit video game be allowed to make millions? Doesn't that sort of send the wrong message, that we are willing to pay for graphic video games but not for something that will actually make our lives better?
Re:how is that different from other companies
on
NYT on EA Games
·
· Score: 1
"First point: please show me where I suggested there was "massive disapproval" "
In short: they want fair compensation for their work and they're making noise to try and get it, deal with it.
"as opposed to saying that if they really are abusing their employees then retaliation would be perfectly legitimate."
Where did this thing about "retaliation" being legitimate or not come about? We were complaining that a few people griping about their jobs isn't newsworthy, not about what they should or should not be allowed to do about it.
"Second point: if wife beating were a relevant topic to Slashdot or NYT and the story was big enough, yes. And they would."
Whether or not a story about a dispute between EA and a few employees and their families (and pretty much no one else) is relevant to/. or the NYT is what we have been discussing. Pay attention.
" I fail to see what starting a business has to do with Mr. Probst or EA Games in general."
Running a business, genius. You were complaining that their jobs were too easy, we are pointing out that no they are not.
Re:how is that different from other companies
on
NYT on EA Games
·
· Score: 1
"The implication being that starting businesses is irrelevant here as we are talking about a man who has INHERITED an established company. "
I suggested that you start a business as opposed to inherit one because I suspected that you would be in better position to become CEO through starting your own business rather than by inheriting one. But if you know a CEO about to die who would put you in his will, by all means inherit one instead. Either way, you will learn there is more to running a business than wearing a suit.
"In case you're having trouble following along, which you obviously are, the point is that trying to better your CURRENT position is as valid an action as LEAVING it for something better."
The New York Times (who if you failed to RFTA was the author of this article) is trying to better their current situation at EA?
One person filed a lawsuit against the company. Another employee's wife wrote a mean letter ($5 says the reason the guy was never home is because he is banging someone else). Where is this "massive disaproval" within EA that you are referring to?
"And, again, I note that I've already beaten you to the punch on your last statement as you even quoted me saying "if the recent allegations are true""
Once again you miss the point. If the recent allegations that you beat your wife are true, you should go to jail. Does that mean the NYT should write an article about your wife-beating? Or that/. should put it on the front page.
Re:how is that different from other companies
on
NYT on EA Games
·
· Score: 1
"Probst did not start EA Games"
Did I say he did? Oh, I'm sorry, I accidently expected you to be able to take part in critical thinking. My bad.
"if the recent allegations are true, EA Games is clearly exploiting its grunt workers. They're pissed."
Yet they are still working for EA.
Actually, more accurately a worker's spouse and the New York Times are pissed. That says nothing about the rest of the employees. Fact is, at virtually any company you will find someone who hates their job. That doesn't mean/. and the New York Times should put stories on their front pages about it.
Re:how is that different from other companies
on
NYT on EA Games
·
· Score: 1
Tell you what, if those upper management people are doing nothing to help the business and are only stealing its profits, why don't you start your own business? You know, be your own boss. Whats that? Oh, its not that easy? Hmm, guess those execs are doing something after all.
Toiling like galley slaves?
on
NYT on EA Games
·
· Score: 0, Troll
Unlike slaves, they get paid, get to choose their line of work, are not routinely physically abused and worked to death, etc.
This type of hyperbole is inappropriate, potentially offensive, and merely portrays programmers as whiny brats.
"What if this bad chuck told 999 of his mates to do the same?"
They are chickens. They have brains the size of acorns. They lack that ability.
Guess computer skills do not necessarily translate to the ability to write coherent analogies. Either that or that post was intended to be satire and the mods missed the point.
Re:how is that different from other companies
on
NYT on EA Games
·
· Score: -1, Troll
Because they hire people who expect to work hard for their paychecks. Programmers are often (not always) young spoiled brats who have never had to lift a finger in their lives and thus expect to get huge paychecks to sit at their desk staring at a computer screen.
Slashdot Mirror
Would it be too much trouble to think of a better name? We went through this when the 9-11 report called for a "Intelligence Czar", naming a government position after a line of Russian monarchs is not the best public relations move one can make.
There he is a fellow. A tad different from an executive.
"He is also a Benevolent Dictator for Life. "
Thats Guido.
Ok then, what organization is he the executive of? Last I checked, the thing he is most famous for (Linux) was developed by the community, not an organization.
If you are a farmer, you don't want all your crops to be too related or else one single disaster (such as disease or a parasite) could wipe out your entire crop.
Unless you are one of those idiots who thinks Firefox is invulnerable to any type of security problem.
Would you prefer a government run rail like Amtrak in the US?
A better analogy would be splitting up so the enemy couldn't fire a single RPG and get all of us.
If he were suggesting to put a decent Linux distro on some old computer, that would be one thing. I am considering doing that for my family (they have this one old computer on which Windows has basically been destroyed and no one knows where the origional install disk is). However, he is talking about giving out live CDs, which are a bit different.
Ok, Linux may still be used by university CS students, but what the article is probably saying (I would know for sure had it not been /.ed) is that Linux will lose out in the server market. IT departments won't make that kind of decision based on which OS is loved by more geeks.
I'm sorry, but if you are giving these to "normal people", you might as well just be giving them coasters, as that is what they will end up as.
If all those people used firefox, the same hackers out there exploiting IE flaws would be exploiting firefox flaws, and you would still have viruses flooding your email.
The result of which will be there will be no one dominate browser, making it difficult for hackers to exploit near universal security issues. Many will use IE, many will use Mozilla/Firefox, many will use Opera, many may even use Konqueror.
People don't need to be forced to do anything, given a choice they will choose what they think is best. And if they choose an obsolete browser like IE 6, who cares? They are the ones who end up suffering. In fact, having them using IE keeps hackers trying to exploit IE security flaws instead of Firefox flaws (and yes, those do exist).
I apologize, I had expected you, the reader, to have RTFA (or at least the /. summary) and know what I was talking about. I expected you to know EA was the company in question, and I expected you to understand that both this and the parent were prompted by the exposure this story was getting. It seems my expectations were too high.
And why do you think I said the above? Try hard, this requires some thought on your part. I said it because one or two people whining about their job is not a news story. Get it? Or do I have to draw a pretty little picture for you?
Besides, why should someone who is working for the betterment of our health not be allowed to profit from his work while someone working to create the newest hit video game be allowed to make millions? Doesn't that sort of send the wrong message, that we are willing to pay for graphic video games but not for something that will actually make our lives better?
"as opposed to saying that if they really are abusing their employees then retaliation would be perfectly legitimate."
Where did this thing about "retaliation" being legitimate or not come about? We were complaining that a few people griping about their jobs isn't newsworthy, not about what they should or should not be allowed to do about it.
"Second point: if wife beating were a relevant topic to Slashdot or NYT and the story was big enough, yes. And they would."
Whether or not a story about a dispute between EA and a few employees and their families (and pretty much no one else) is relevant to /. or the NYT is what we have been discussing. Pay attention.
" I fail to see what starting a business has to do with Mr. Probst or EA Games in general."
Running a business, genius. You were complaining that their jobs were too easy, we are pointing out that no they are not.
I suggested that you start a business as opposed to inherit one because I suspected that you would be in better position to become CEO through starting your own business rather than by inheriting one. But if you know a CEO about to die who would put you in his will, by all means inherit one instead. Either way, you will learn there is more to running a business than wearing a suit.
"In case you're having trouble following along, which you obviously are, the point is that trying to better your CURRENT position is as valid an action as LEAVING it for something better."
The New York Times (who if you failed to RFTA was the author of this article) is trying to better their current situation at EA?
One person filed a lawsuit against the company. Another employee's wife wrote a mean letter ($5 says the reason the guy was never home is because he is banging someone else). Where is this "massive disaproval" within EA that you are referring to?
"And, again, I note that I've already beaten you to the punch on your last statement as you even quoted me saying "if the recent allegations are true""
Once again you miss the point. If the recent allegations that you beat your wife are true, you should go to jail. Does that mean the NYT should write an article about your wife-beating? Or that /. should put it on the front page.
Did I say he did? Oh, I'm sorry, I accidently expected you to be able to take part in critical thinking. My bad.
"if the recent allegations are true, EA Games is clearly exploiting its grunt workers. They're pissed."
Yet they are still working for EA.
Actually, more accurately a worker's spouse and the New York Times are pissed. That says nothing about the rest of the employees. Fact is, at virtually any company you will find someone who hates their job. That doesn't mean /. and the New York Times should put stories on their front pages about it.
Tell you what, if those upper management people are doing nothing to help the business and are only stealing its profits, why don't you start your own business? You know, be your own boss. Whats that? Oh, its not that easy? Hmm, guess those execs are doing something after all.
This type of hyperbole is inappropriate, potentially offensive, and merely portrays programmers as whiny brats.
While they may not be living in a life of luxury, 60 grand still is a nice salary right out of college.
They are chickens. They have brains the size of acorns. They lack that ability.
Guess computer skills do not necessarily translate to the ability to write coherent analogies. Either that or that post was intended to be satire and the mods missed the point.
Because they hire people who expect to work hard for their paychecks. Programmers are often (not always) young spoiled brats who have never had to lift a finger in their lives and thus expect to get huge paychecks to sit at their desk staring at a computer screen.
That works too.
Then shouldn't everything have an "Online" at the end of the name? Or is the games section really being discussed on an offline forum?