We should have an online town hall meeting to discuss whether this is truth or not.
IMO it's true, meetings require consensus building and 'LCD' communication ( least-common-denominator)--which usually takes up 75% of the meeting's time. So there's little chance anything creative comes out of it.
"We've scared ourselves half to death and thus practically demand that those entrusted with keeping us safe go to absurd extremes to keep from being scapegoated should something go wrong.... And something will go wrong. That part of the equation is not irrational."
Reasons why DHS (a.k.a. you) is in this situation:
Trust Factor: Why? because I don't trust you that you'll keep me safe. Cause I don't believe your methods of safety. Cause I'm lazy to analyze the problems myself (why I pay taxes). Cause I don't even know you.
Responsibilty factor: Since I pay taxes and my taxes represent my interest, and if I empower you to carry out my interests--YOU are responsible. You can't avoid it no matter how much you try (people tend torwards laziness due to conflicting interests). And you do try, hence causing the trust factor issue.
Fear of Failure factor: Since security in DHS is based on taxes, hence a economic driven system, if you (DHS) are held responsible and a failure occurs (a terrorist act), then guess what, I will blame you. Therefore you lose your job or lose funding. Hence creating a fear of failure from being solely responsible.
Remove the fear of failure factor (on both sides), enforce responsibility and make the people aware of the risks and costs, then you'll gain the trust of the people and the system will work. Just like our postal system...;)
Was Norway hasn't been terrorized is because they pay the US (and other miltarized nations) to do it (through so called agreements of course like the world bank).
Terrorism is not a linear, universal thing. It is about an idea, but a localized one.
Hence, get rid of the oil problem. Problem solved.
And the users decided they like clips from copyrighted content. Even most user generated content has copyrighted music. The media companies mind because of the situation that only Google profits!
Of those five companies, I was hired totally cold by only one of them. In all the other cases
And I bet that's the company you would go back to if given a choice?
I find that employment through a rigorous process, i.e. cold, yields a better long term career--you work hard at it and you expect the company to follow up and treat you well. And you don't have the social ills that come with using your network: your rated by merit and if you leave, you'll be sure why you did vs. the politics of a network. A lot of the jobs I've taken through a network have been horrible, politically. In the end you have to have a quality network...if networking going to work for you.
Hence, one needs to ask with all the startups in the valley, how much innovation are we really getting out of it (or is it just a money game). Just like if google has 1 billion searches a day, how many of those really product effective results (used).
It would be neat one day to have a fingerprint login to your phone and GPS capability. Then if you lose your phone, no one will really bother with it (i.e. hopefully not throw it in the trash) and you can call it, get the location (mapquest) and recover the phone (with all it's valuable info).
With GooTube's history of resisting gov't requests, I wonder if the subpoena was pretty a dead horse and Fox really threaten to pull the plug from the $900m Myspace-Google deal.
I think one main reason (like myself) has switched to Macs is the hardware. I mean were thing is compatible and the drivers work, period. Also, all mac laptops have the latest and greatest stuff--they're fast.
Yes, OSX is fast and has some bling, but I mainly run SuSE 10.2 with XGL on my MacBookPro--the OS (Linux) is the best of both worlds for a power user bar none.
Doesn't matter--regardless if you discovered Colbert on YouTube, you would have discovered him sooner of later.
With our information wants to be free mentality, good, quality content will always be discovered and exploited--you would have discovered it elsewhere. It's just that free services for ads forces us to consume [content] faster than before. As for advertising flat out, it's a chicken-n-egg issue.
Anyway, I thought AJAX was Microsoft's answer to Java Applets & Webstart--in the browser wars back then, IE/ActiveX was a natural competitor to Applets & Webstart. Of course, IE/ActiveX did beat applets since they ran at OS speed--and that's the main cause of derailing AJAX back then--why write javascript when you can have full [activeX] access to the OS stack!!
Funny thing is regardless of AJAX and ActiveX becoming dominant back then, we'd still had the security issues with IE today. Too bad cpus weren't fast enough for [gasp] applets back then.
You are correctly. More time and enough cash to live outweight all these perks--which cost nothing to an employer as they get it at discount. basically, they want you to live there--so all that brain trust is focused, so much for any hobbies. Investors like focused, predictable companies.
I don't know, I work in a small R&D division in a big company and though the people are great, and the thinking and creativity is endless, the perfect picture comes to a complete halt at least 1/3 of the year due to budgets. And like gov't budget fighting, makes the job 100% less desirable. It's makes you burn out or jaded even faster.
And in big companies, budgets, funding, and how much you market (especially for tech) is pretty much the whole game, period.
I love it how the word USER got a lot of respect before 1980 (DOS release), then near the OS2 release (1987), then near the windows 95 release (1995) and now near the Vista release (2007). Otherwise, the USER wasn't that much important.
So it looks like users will be forgotten soon after this month and until Vienna comes out.
Really, if all web2.0 is about ad supported services, then we are truly heading for a bust. Ads are like having prostitiution support your schools. Also, features such as "more collaboration" is great, but it not a revolutionary thing.
Great, another fine use of all those MBA degrees on Wall Street.
"The Model 'T' was revolutionary in that it made available a new technology that people already wanted available in quantity, and at a price most could afford.
Yeah and in WiMax case, it will not be at a price most could afford unless subsidized. I don't care if they can offer it at 29.95/mo, it's still not the order of the model T (4.95/mo would be at that level). And it's because the corporations are planning for this rollout vs. the WiFi era (WiFi was more riskier biz oppty)--they can squeeze every penny out if this technology before making it ubiquitous.
Well, no. Blogs and wikis are just new media outlets of information. The agencies just discovered that they are being used more by those they are spying on (i.e. more accurate and time-sensitive) versus the older channels of communications.
The agencies made the same transistion we're seeing today during the radio -- TV/Video Tapes switch over. It's just they gotten so huge that the organizations are slow to respond compared to the last transition (not to mention budget cuts and mission snafus)--the problem is it's not the technology, it's not the information wants to be free thing, it's the mission, the organization and the politics. In the 9/11 report, sharing is a 1/4 of the problem. Imagine monitoring the telco network (that was back in thec cold war era). Now imagine 2 (ethernet), of even 3 (cells) networks to monitor... then look at interoperability between these nets--definitely difficult by an exponential factor.
"Today's spies exist in an age of constant information exchange"
If anything, monitoring interoperable technologies is the real pain in their analysis.
Remember it was PS/2 that was the innovation during the UNIX wars. IBM just muck-up the marketing of it and their partner (Microsoft) took the baton and ran with it.
Slashdot Mirror
We should have an online town hall meeting to discuss whether this is truth or not.
IMO it's true, meetings require consensus building and 'LCD' communication ( least-common-denominator)--which usually takes up 75% of the meeting's time. So there's little chance anything creative comes out of it.
Reasons why DHS (a.k.a. you) is in this situation:
Trust Factor: Why? because I don't trust you that you'll keep me safe. Cause I don't believe your methods of safety. Cause I'm lazy to analyze the problems myself (why I pay taxes). Cause I don't even know you.
Responsibilty factor: Since I pay taxes and my taxes represent my interest, and if I empower you to carry out my interests--YOU are responsible. You can't avoid it no matter how much you try (people tend torwards laziness due to conflicting interests). And you do try, hence causing the trust factor issue.
Fear of Failure factor: Since security in DHS is based on taxes, hence a economic driven system, if you (DHS) are held responsible and a failure occurs (a terrorist act), then guess what, I will blame you. Therefore you lose your job or lose funding. Hence creating a fear of failure from being solely responsible.
Remove the fear of failure factor (on both sides), enforce responsibility and make the people aware of the risks and costs, then you'll gain the trust of the people and the system will work. Just like our postal system... ;)
ok, there's the anti-microsoft angle, but why not had he switched to OpenSUSE? For a power users such as himself, it would have been a natural choice.
Terrorism is not a linear, universal thing. It is about an idea, but a localized one.
Hence, get rid of the oil problem. Problem solved.
And the users decided they like clips from copyrighted content. Even most user generated content has copyrighted music. The media companies mind because of the situation that only Google profits!
I can't wait until we get the current generation of engineers out and replaced with some younger engineers and some fresh ideas.
And I bet that's the company you would go back to if given a choice?
I find that employment through a rigorous process, i.e. cold, yields a better long term career--you work hard at it and you expect the company to follow up and treat you well. And you don't have the social ills that come with using your network: your rated by merit and if you leave, you'll be sure why you did vs. the politics of a network. A lot of the jobs I've taken through a network have been horrible, politically. In the end you have to have a quality network...if networking going to work for you.
Hence, one needs to ask with all the startups in the valley, how much innovation are we really getting out of it (or is it just a money game). Just like if google has 1 billion searches a day, how many of those really product effective results (used).
Go outside and enjoy the polluted air generated by the engine that runs the internet (energy).
No, really, go outside and enjoy the peaceful/chaotic thing we call nature and ignore the chatter for once (sigh).
Simplicity. It's a good thing against entropy
It would be neat one day to have a fingerprint login to your phone and GPS capability. Then if you lose your phone, no one will really bother with it (i.e. hopefully not throw it in the trash) and you can call it, get the location (mapquest) and recover the phone (with all it's valuable info).
Conspiracy no, business yes
fund terrorism? fund porn? fund politicial issues? acquire drugs (illegal that is...)?
Guilty by association? Hardly. But is there a law that can be enforced against Google--possibly.
Social Law is only law when it's enforced.
I think one main reason (like myself) has switched to Macs is the hardware. I mean were thing is compatible and the drivers work, period. Also, all mac laptops have the latest and greatest stuff--they're fast. Yes, OSX is fast and has some bling, but I mainly run SuSE 10.2 with XGL on my MacBookPro--the OS (Linux) is the best of both worlds for a power user bar none.
With our information wants to be free mentality, good, quality content will always be discovered and exploited--you would have discovered it elsewhere. It's just that free services for ads forces us to consume [content] faster than before. As for advertising flat out, it's a chicken-n-egg issue.
Yes, this was mobile computing 101:
1. Enterprise users == thick clients (installed)
2. B2B == semi-thick/JSF/Applet clients (downloadable thick clients)
3. B2C == thin clients (web)
Anyway, I thought AJAX was Microsoft's answer to Java Applets & Webstart--in the browser wars back then, IE/ActiveX was a natural competitor to Applets & Webstart. Of course, IE/ActiveX did beat applets since they ran at OS speed--and that's the main cause of derailing AJAX back then--why write javascript when you can have full [activeX] access to the OS stack!!
Funny thing is regardless of AJAX and ActiveX becoming dominant back then, we'd still had the security issues with IE today. Too bad cpus weren't fast enough for [gasp] applets back then.
Labels are [immutable] references to an entity.
Looking at the behavior/context of Web2.0, it's a tag.
or better yet, metadata.
Metadata-beta, that's sounds cool.
You are correctly. More time and enough cash to live outweight all these perks--which cost nothing to an employer as they get it at discount. basically, they want you to live there--so all that brain trust is focused, so much for any hobbies. Investors like focused, predictable companies.
And in big companies, budgets, funding, and how much you market (especially for tech) is pretty much the whole game, period.
So it looks like users will be forgotten soon after this month and until Vienna comes out.
"We shall not ..."
or
"We will never ... "
As in ebay's, aol, or any bank's policies. Makes you wonder.
Anyhoo, the statements are 'feel-goods', but really show nothing to protect you. Obviously these items were crafted by a good legal team.
Really, if all web2.0 is about ad supported services, then we are truly heading for a bust. Ads are like having prostitiution support your schools. Also, features such as "more collaboration" is great, but it not a revolutionary thing.
Great, another fine use of all those MBA degrees on Wall Street.
"The Model 'T' was revolutionary in that it made available a new technology that people already wanted available in quantity, and at a price most could afford. Yeah and in WiMax case, it will not be at a price most could afford unless subsidized. I don't care if they can offer it at 29.95/mo, it's still not the order of the model T (4.95/mo would be at that level). And it's because the corporations are planning for this rollout vs. the WiFi era (WiFi was more riskier biz oppty)--they can squeeze every penny out if this technology before making it ubiquitous.
In Debian's perspective, taking money for support is acceptable. Taking for profit is not. And the money lever operates differently in both cases.
Well, no. Blogs and wikis are just new media outlets of information. The agencies just discovered that they are being used more by those they are spying on (i.e. more accurate and time-sensitive) versus the older channels of communications.
The agencies made the same transistion we're seeing today during the radio -- TV/Video Tapes switch over. It's just they gotten so huge that the organizations are slow to respond compared to the last transition (not to mention budget cuts and mission snafus)--the problem is it's not the technology, it's not the information wants to be free thing, it's the mission, the organization and the politics. In the 9/11 report, sharing is a 1/4 of the problem. Imagine monitoring the telco network (that was back in thec cold war era). Now imagine 2 (ethernet), of even 3 (cells) networks to monitor... then look at interoperability between these nets--definitely difficult by an exponential factor.
"Today's spies exist in an age of constant information exchange"
If anything, monitoring interoperable technologies is the real pain in their analysis.
Remember it was PS/2 that was the innovation during the UNIX wars. IBM just muck-up the marketing of it and their partner (Microsoft) took the baton and ran with it.