If you're talking about NPR's Talk of the Nation: Science Friday, they tend to stick to politically charged discussions like stem cell research, cloning, genetically-modified crops, the Endangered Species act, global warming, bio-fuels. You know, stuff that stirs people up.
Yeah, I agree they tend to follow the trendy research stories. I would also point out that despite their coverage of 'polically charged topics', they do commit more time to a particular subject than any other broadcast organization and they take listener comments, some of which take exception to the position of the guests on the show.
Also, I have heard several discussions about basic research in fields including cosmology, paleontology, and entomology. None of that stuff will ever be covered by MSNBC or Fox, much less the Big Three networks.
Hey, look! I can make Grandma's bloodpressure rise and fall with my handheld!
Making medical equipment network capable makes sense if you are talking about monitoring equipment (nurses station monitoring several patients simultanenously). I can't figure out why anyone would make a metering device or any other therapudic device network aware. I think it would be better to have the nurse around when administering medication, not doing it by remote control.
But you are right, there should be an air gap between the hospital nurses stations and the outside world (e.g., internet).
By the way, the digital divide is a social problem - it is unlikely to be solved simply by applying technology.
Agreed. There are places in Arizona and New Mexico that still do not have land-line telephone coverage. Granted, some of that is due to the lack of substantial penetration of technology into traditional communities (i.e., they LIKE being disconnected from modernity).
Interesting that it is 'mandated' to provide science coverage. Here in the States you have to listen to public radio to get any science news.
Or I should qualify that by saying that you get science news that isn't related to weight loss, plastic surgery, or abortion. Those topics get frontpage coverage on the commercial outlets.
Actually I was referring to other topic areas other than this one. I wasn't even referring to my own attempt at humor. I was making a rather broad commentary about moderations in general and how those marked 'funny' are running rather low today...
I don't think so. I wrote a submission on August 4th titled "When Does It Make Sense To Quit?" about a software developer who has not made a significant change to their premire application in nearly 7 years. I thought it an appropriate topic for Ask Slashdot.
Sounds like the moderators are having a case of the Mondays?
If you accept the notion that people are more prone to have a negative mood on a Monday than, say, a Friday when looking forward to a weekend, then yes they are having a case of Mondays.
It would be interesting to look at moderations over the course of a week to see if moderators are more generous in their assement of a posts "worth" at weeks end rather than on Monday morning.
Oh shit... I'm laughing so hard I think I'm going to pass out!
What a fucking dickhead you are. Nothing related to Linux gets posted before you find a way to run a fucking stake through it. What the fuck is your problem?
Oh, I know. It is the wonderful uptime of your webserver.
How did you keep it running through all 13 days? That's fucking amazing!
I liked that one and I think the Fool's analysis will be shown to be correct when the next quarterlies arrive. Most of the shorts will have left and only the most desperate holders will remain.
What a shame too. Here's an article I thought was remarkably sad when you consider "what could have been" in SCO's waning years.
So, why are they so happy with McBride?
.....
No, they like him--and SCO's people--because he gave them back the brand name, SCO, that they had learned to sell. It's because he's investing in the channel and in upgrading OpenServer, and to a far lesser extent upgrading UnixWare, never very popular with the channel.
.....
And there you have the real key to SCO's continued partner success: SCO knows how to talk and listen to its partners. It delivers updates to its operating system. The company works hard to get the hardware and software support for its operating systems without which SCO's partners can't do business.
Doing all that is right for your channel partners is what keeps you from going under without a peep. Darl could have coasted the company through tough times with a combination of cutting costs to the bone, keeping the channels happy, and looking for a market niche that kept the revenue flowing until better times could be had.
Instead he is destroying a venerable UNIX product line in a Quixotic quest to extort money from IBM and the Linux community.
The worst part is that, as the Motley Fool article you posted points out, the channel partners will eventually get screwed by Darl's tactics. Do the channel partners like the lawsuit?
Yes, Unix on Intel's market share is shrinking. Trust me, these guys know that. Yes, all of the uproar over SCO's Linux lawsuits is making their job a lot harder.
Indeed, when you get a partner in a bar, you'll find that many of them don't like SCO's Linux litigation one bit. For the most part, they just want that to go away.
So there you have it. Not even their partners think this is the best course of action for SCO. But sticking to the business of serving your users and channel partners isn't going to make Darl a multi-millionaire.
Looking at their quarterly income statements, balance sheet, and cash flow statement, you can see that they will need a good story to convince investors that they are not the smelliest turd on Wall Street. And their July 31, 2004 data is just about to drop another stinking pile of bad news on an already shitty company.
Too bad someone like Lyons doesn't read the financial sections of Yahoo! instead of hanging on Darl's every word.
IBM may have missed an i dotting/t crossing and may have realized it later.
Pretty unlikely.
An organization who makes a shit-load (metric) of cash from their IP doesn't let anything in or out of their organization without someone from their legal department digging into it to the foundations.
I work for a company who makes most of its revenues from IP and I can't even send out a proposal for work without having it checked for IP disclosure.
I'm not sure that Miguel is up to the challenge. He can coast on his reputations only so long and then he will have to actually sell a product to a mass market.
That is when the rubber meets the road. And by the looks of his efforts, he will have a long row to hoe.
I've been on the receiving end of his marketing push and I am stunningly unimpressed. A person of his standing in the open source community could pack a room of eager buyers, and it did, but when you don't show for the meeting all that goodwill and reputation is gone.
I know it wasn't Miguel who failed to show, but the company he led arranged for someone from senior management to show for a sales meeting. They canceled the meeting with no warning. That reflects poorly on his (former) company and its management.
Now that they have been consumed by Novel, one would think that they would be interested in following up on that previous sales event to attempt to repair their damaged reputation. Not a word has arrived from Novel's corporate headquarters.
I guess we will just continue buying our Linux software and services from Red Hat.
Yeah, that happens if you're using some of the oddball chipsets...
That ISN'T the point the previous post made. They said, categorically, that
"...[BSOD is a] non issue since Win 2000 and later Win XP"
I called bullshit. You supplied the proof.
The posters point would have been true if they had said
"...[BSOD has been largely a] non issue since Win 2000 and later Win XP. There are still some oddball chipsets with broken support... blah, blah, blah"
Slashdot Mirror
If you're talking about NPR's Talk of the Nation: Science Friday, they tend to stick to politically charged discussions like stem cell research, cloning, genetically-modified crops, the Endangered Species act, global warming, bio-fuels. You know, stuff that stirs people up.
Yeah, I agree they tend to follow the trendy research stories. I would also point out that despite their coverage of 'polically charged topics', they do commit more time to a particular subject than any other broadcast organization and they take listener comments, some of which take exception to the position of the guests on the show.
Also, I have heard several discussions about basic research in fields including cosmology, paleontology, and entomology. None of that stuff will ever be covered by MSNBC or Fox, much less the Big Three networks.
(geek with at PDA stading at bedside)
Hey, look! I can make Grandma's bloodpressure rise and fall with my handheld!
Making medical equipment network capable makes sense if you are talking about monitoring equipment (nurses station monitoring several patients simultanenously). I can't figure out why anyone would make a metering device or any other therapudic device network aware. I think it would be better to have the nurse around when administering medication, not doing it by remote control.
But you are right, there should be an air gap between the hospital nurses stations and the outside world (e.g., internet).
By the way, the digital divide is a social problem - it is unlikely to be solved simply by applying technology.
Agreed. There are places in Arizona and New Mexico that still do not have land-line telephone coverage. Granted, some of that is due to the lack of substantial penetration of technology into traditional communities (i.e., they LIKE being disconnected from modernity).
Interesting that it is 'mandated' to provide science coverage. Here in the States you have to listen to public radio to get any science news.
Or I should qualify that by saying that you get science news that isn't related to weight loss, plastic surgery, or abortion. Those topics get frontpage coverage on the commercial outlets.
If it bleeds, it leads.
Some of the trolls are quite good today as well. They have been unceremoniously drubbed off the boards as well.
Ah well, the tools we give to the masses.
Actually I was referring to other topic areas other than this one. I wasn't even referring to my own attempt at humor. I was making a rather broad commentary about moderations in general and how those marked 'funny' are running rather low today...
....you humorless fuck.
I'm thinking the same thing. Amazing how much activity we've had over the last two weeks on the War on Terror compared to the last five months.
bin Laden is probably in a hole somewhere in Leavenworth Penitentiary right now ready for his arrest just before Halloween.
I don't think so. I wrote a submission on August 4th titled "When Does It Make Sense To Quit?" about a software developer who has not made a significant change to their premire application in nearly 7 years. I thought it an appropriate topic for Ask Slashdot.
It has been in the 'pending' bin for five days.
Weird.
Sounds like the moderators are having a case of the Mondays?
If you accept the notion that people are more prone to have a negative mood on a Monday than, say, a Friday when looking forward to a weekend, then yes they are having a case of Mondays.
It would be interesting to look at moderations over the course of a week to see if moderators are more generous in their assement of a posts "worth" at weeks end rather than on Monday morning.
Moderators must be having a bad day. I've seen several other attempts at humor moderated 'offtopic'.
I wonder if this is a Monday phenomenon? I wonder what the distribution of 'Funny' moderation is through the week.
Also, why is the BBC the first news tidbit about NASA's new supercomputer?
Science isn't sexy news in America.
Not unless they declare they've created a satellite system that will track and kill bin Laden.
About $7.2 Million.
Talk about a software tax!
Oh shit... I'm laughing so hard I think I'm going to pass out!
What a fucking dickhead you are. Nothing related to Linux gets posted before you find a way to run a fucking stake through it. What the fuck is your problem?
Oh, I know. It is the wonderful uptime of your webserver.
How did you keep it running through all 13 days? That's fucking amazing!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAH!!
I liked that one and I think the Fool's analysis will be shown to be correct when the next quarterlies arrive. Most of the shorts will have left and only the most desperate holders will remain.
.....
.....
What a shame too. Here's an article I thought was remarkably sad when you consider "what could have been" in SCO's waning years.
So, why are they so happy with McBride?
No, they like him--and SCO's people--because he gave them back the brand name, SCO, that they had learned to sell. It's because he's investing in the channel and in upgrading OpenServer, and to a far lesser extent upgrading UnixWare, never very popular with the channel.
And there you have the real key to SCO's continued partner success: SCO knows how to talk and listen to its partners. It delivers updates to its operating system. The company works hard to get the hardware and software support for its operating systems without which SCO's partners can't do business.
Doing all that is right for your channel partners is what keeps you from going under without a peep. Darl could have coasted the company through tough times with a combination of cutting costs to the bone, keeping the channels happy, and looking for a market niche that kept the revenue flowing until better times could be had.
Instead he is destroying a venerable UNIX product line in a Quixotic quest to extort money from IBM and the Linux community.
The worst part is that, as the Motley Fool article you posted points out, the channel partners will eventually get screwed by Darl's tactics. Do the channel partners like the lawsuit?
Yes, Unix on Intel's market share is shrinking. Trust me, these guys know that. Yes, all of the uproar over SCO's Linux lawsuits is making their job a lot harder.
Indeed, when you get a partner in a bar, you'll find that many of them don't like SCO's Linux litigation one bit. For the most part, they just want that to go away.
So there you have it. Not even their partners think this is the best course of action for SCO. But sticking to the business of serving your users and channel partners isn't going to make Darl a multi-millionaire.
Only the Pump-and-Dump will achieve that goal.
Looking at their quarterly income statements, balance sheet, and cash flow statement, you can see that they will need a good story to convince investors that they are not the smelliest turd on Wall Street. And their July 31, 2004 data is just about to drop another stinking pile of bad news on an already shitty company.
Too bad someone like Lyons doesn't read the financial sections of Yahoo! instead of hanging on Darl's every word.
But I guess only zealots read Yahoo! financials.
IBM may have missed an i dotting/t crossing and may have realized it later.
Pretty unlikely.
An organization who makes a shit-load (metric) of cash from their IP doesn't let anything in or out of their organization without someone from their legal department digging into it to the foundations.
I work for a company who makes most of its revenues from IP and I can't even send out a proposal for work without having it checked for IP disclosure.
astroturf marketing
/.
Oh, I get it!
I'm supposed to be a Red Hat marketing droid?
I guess any complaint of poor customer service will be treated as astroturfing on
No surprise there.
This clown has been posting the same drivel on slashdot since time immemorial and I don't believe a word he says.
Funny that you spend so much time questioning my motives and integrity when you could simply call the folks at Novell and ask them about the matter.
That would certainly put it to rest once and for all, wouldn't it?
But that would take all the fun out of getting your panties ballled up in a bunch, now wouldn't it?
The fact is, if you say you will arrive for a sales meeting and then don't bother to show, people begin to wonder about your after-sales support.
I could care less if you believe me or not.
Mostly because I like pissing people like you off...
I wasn't pissed at your first post, nor am I pissed now.
I find it amusing that Microsoft users/supporters troll Linux threads in some vain attempt to make points with their other MS users/supporters.
Complete waste of time, from my perspective. But it is your time to waste, so by all means, waste away.
I'm not sure that Miguel is up to the challenge. He can coast on his reputations only so long and then he will have to actually sell a product to a mass market.
That is when the rubber meets the road. And by the looks of his efforts, he will have a long row to hoe.
I've been on the receiving end of his marketing push and I am stunningly unimpressed. A person of his standing in the open source community could pack a room of eager buyers, and it did, but when you don't show for the meeting all that goodwill and reputation is gone.
I know it wasn't Miguel who failed to show, but the company he led arranged for someone from senior management to show for a sales meeting. They canceled the meeting with no warning. That reflects poorly on his (former) company and its management.
Now that they have been consumed by Novel, one would think that they would be interested in following up on that previous sales event to attempt to repair their damaged reputation. Not a word has arrived from Novel's corporate headquarters.
I guess we will just continue buying our Linux software and services from Red Hat.
If the hypocrisy pisses you off so much, why the fuck do you post here?
"All you bad Linux people say nasty things about Microsoft! Whah, whah, whah!!!"
And why do you read threads in linux.slashdot.org?
Hmmm.... Me thinks thou dost protesteth too much.
You're hiding a penguin up your ass, aren't you?
If foreign manufacturers made their products to last 30+ years they would be out of business just like Digital.
The cheap-ass stuff made by today's computer manufacturers means my Bic lighter will last longer than your Dell 3.6GHz desktop.
mod parent up, please
Yeah, that happens if you're using some of the oddball chipsets...
That ISN'T the point the previous post made. They said, categorically, that
"...[BSOD is a] non issue since Win 2000 and later Win XP"
I called bullshit. You supplied the proof.
The posters point would have been true if they had said
"...[BSOD has been largely a] non issue since Win 2000 and later Win XP. There are still some oddball chipsets with broken support... blah, blah, blah"
The randomized screenshots viewer is the BOMB!
You click on the link and, POOF, you are redirected to a picture that is not the one you selected.
Leave it up to the id programming staff to create such innovative screenshot technology.