Other computing luminaries were noticably absent from the gala affair including Drs. J Presper Eckert and John Mauchly, designers of the ENIAC machine. The creator of the Antikythera Mechanism was also not in attendence. Conference organizers said that the originator of the ancient greek computer was unknown, so it was understandable that an invitation was not sent. Similar reasons were given for not inviting the designer of the abacus.
"'I have never, honestly, thrown a chair in my life,' Microsoft's CEO said
Right. All Chief Executives make these kind of proclaimations, sometimes just before they are indicted.
He should have just ignored the issue. What is really imporatant is how Microsoft's stock has performed and how their product shipment schedules have been met since he took control of the day-to-day operation at Microsoft. Whether or not he threw a chair in a confrontation is a sideshow and irrelevent to running a multi-billion dollar corporation.
Keeping his eye on the company's bottom line is the most important task he has, not responding to every disclosure in a deposition.
dude, if u had one (I have the 2GB nano) you'd be singing a different tune.
No, what I've said is that there are other avenues other than organizing a class-action lawsuit. The number of complaints of scratching is less than 1% of units sold. There are dealers who have been offering replacements, so why sue?
At no point did they claim apple was evil or tried to ripoff people who purchased the nano - so no, relating apple to someone who rigged grandma's respirator is completely false.
I'm not spouting falsehoods, I am just utilizing strong lawyer-speak language.
It seemed to run just dandy before the flood of business method and software patents hit the system.
Perhaps we need to define what is "patentable" rather than just throw up our hands and resign ourselves to bureaucratic mediocrity (of the system, not the examiners).
"The amount and durability of the resin applied as a protective coating during the Nano manufacturing process is clearly defective in that it is not sufficient to adequately protect the face of the Nano from extreme scratching and ultimately irreparable damage," the lawsuit says.
Notice that this statement is meant to sound like Apple just rigged Grandma's respirator to fail due to shoddy workmanship. While there is certainly damage to the Nano, and the coating process is "clearly defective", I don't buy for a minute the last statment that the players are irrparably damaged. There are plenty ways that Apple can make good without paying a fucking nickle to these assholes.
Mind you, I am no Apple fanboy and am not against filing law suits when people are being scammed, but this suit is just one more reason to ship lawyers to the Moon to minimize contamination of the rest of the world's population.
What's worse, even with these draconian measures, they were still roughly two years behind on processing patent applications.
The sad thing is that, regardless of whether there is a Republican or Democratic Administration sitting in the White House, this problem will persist. Congress needs to step up and reform the patent process.
Not much hope of that hoping until the whole system crashes.
Charlotte, N.C.-based Scientigo owns two patents (No. 5,842,213 and No. 6,393,426) covering the transfer of "data in neutral forms." These patents, one of which was applied for in 1997, are infringed upon by the data-formatting standard XML, Scientigo executives assert.
combined with this fact:
Daly noted that companies or even individuals often make patent claims on XML. For example, Microsoft, which uses XML as the foundation of many of its products, was awarded a patent for programming techniques related to XML.
shows me that the USPTO hopelessly is fucked up.
These people are either overwhelmed by the number of claims and have no time to do the proper research before granting a patent, or they are are just plain stupid. I'm going to be generous and assume that these examiners are given a quota that they have to have resolved each week and that they haven't the time or resources to validate every claim. There is probably also a lack of expertise in the USPTO to properly vet the claims made in these applications.
There are plenty of compensation programs in the industry to copy. Find one that looks the most like your organization and copy it. Change whatever areas you feel don't suit your particular organization (how promotions are handled, vesting, etc.). Get a good HR professional in the discussion to avoid opening up a can of whoopass on your company by how you handle benefits.
However, if $Corporation knows it could be taken to court, and its insurance rates would then rise, it would be motivated to, at least, have proper testing.
It would also be irresponsible for the $Corporation to just eat the cost of this insurance but would instead have to raise the price of its products. It would also be prudent for the $Corporation to be risk averse and not change the code too often leading to feature stagnation.
The only winners in this situation are the insurance companies and chest puffing politicians who can claim they "did something" about bad code.
The worst part of the story was that the lawyer couldn't tell anyone about the security problem because he was no longer retained by his original client. I believe that in the US attorneys are obliged to come forward with information related to a criminal nature because they are officers of the court. I don't know if that distiction would have helped in this case, but the fact that the whole system perched precariously on the fact that only a few criminals knew how to bilk the system is disturbing.
I know that this may sound like a fantasy equal to those in the 419 scams but when I was an undergraduate two decades ago, there were LOTS of women in the computer labs. The women who worked on computers back then were mathematics majors, accounting majors, and a few who were working toward a degree in computer science. The number of women in computer science was small (2% of the total in the department), but when you added in all of the other majors using the VAX system for their classes, the number was probably closer to 40%. The university I attended has a strong business school and the accounting majors have been recruited nationally for three decades. By the early 1980s, the population of the accounting department more than 50% women.
Almost all other professions have to take responsibility for their work and constructs - why are programmers an exception?!
Well, they aren't. Doctors and lawyers have certifying boards (here in the US) that can sanction irresponsible behavior, and the worst cases can result in lawsuits. Architects and engineers usually have to find an insurance carrier who will underwrite their work. That is what errors and omissions insurance is for. It is expensive and hard to qualify for.
Great news for the E&O insurance industry! When programmers become liable for the mistakes (read: human nature) of their creations then everyone who codes for a living will have to consider buying insurance to hedge their risk, or find another form of work.
E&O is incredibly expensive. I looked into buying a policy when I started doing environmental work due to the possibility that I could be named a 'potentially responsible party' in an environmental enforcement action by the government. I side-stepped that need when I went to work for a large firm that could afford the E&O insurance. You can bet that cost was included in my chargeout rate.
That is what this effort will lead to for independent programmers. You will have the choice of buying E&O insurance, provided you qualify, and jacking your prices up to cover your costs, or you will have to work for a company that already has it. Hobby/free software enthusiasts are screwed.
I prefer the policy of 'caveat emptor'. If you install free software on your production machine without properly vetting it you are not only a fool but should bear all of the costs yourself.
Whatever. It can happen. I mean it. Slashdotters, don't let disparaging slobs like the parent get you down! Cool, good-looking geek-chics ARE out there!
This message was brought to you by the 419 Industry Consortium.
Slashdot Mirror
I have no idea what you are talking about.
(cue X Files theme song)
Other computing luminaries were noticably absent from the gala affair including Drs. J Presper Eckert and John Mauchly, designers of the ENIAC machine. The creator of the Antikythera Mechanism was also not in attendence. Conference organizers said that the originator of the ancient greek computer was unknown, so it was understandable that an invitation was not sent. Similar reasons were given for not inviting the designer of the abacus.
What a chicken shit way to attack my post.
How many other posts made the same point?
"'I have never, honestly, thrown a chair in my life,' Microsoft's CEO said
Right. All Chief Executives make these kind of proclaimations, sometimes just before they are indicted.
He should have just ignored the issue. What is really imporatant is how Microsoft's stock has performed and how their product shipment schedules have been met since he took control of the day-to-day operation at Microsoft. Whether or not he threw a chair in a confrontation is a sideshow and irrelevent to running a multi-billion dollar corporation.
Keeping his eye on the company's bottom line is the most important task he has, not responding to every disclosure in a deposition.
Great comment!
dude, if u had one (I have the 2GB nano) you'd be singing a different tune.
No, what I've said is that there are other avenues other than organizing a class-action lawsuit. The number of complaints of scratching is less than 1% of units sold. There are dealers who have been offering replacements, so why sue?
At no point did they claim apple was evil or tried to ripoff people who purchased the nano - so no, relating apple to someone who rigged grandma's respirator is completely false.
I'm not spouting falsehoods, I am just utilizing strong lawyer-speak language.
... there is no good way to run a patent office.
It seemed to run just dandy before the flood of business method and software patents hit the system.
Perhaps we need to define what is "patentable" rather than just throw up our hands and resign ourselves to bureaucratic mediocrity (of the system, not the examiners).
"The amount and durability of the resin applied as a protective coating during the Nano manufacturing process is clearly defective in that it is not sufficient to adequately protect the face of the Nano from extreme scratching and ultimately irreparable damage," the lawsuit says.
Notice that this statement is meant to sound like Apple just rigged Grandma's respirator to fail due to shoddy workmanship. While there is certainly damage to the Nano, and the coating process is "clearly defective", I don't buy for a minute the last statment that the players are irrparably damaged. There are plenty ways that Apple can make good without paying a fucking nickle to these assholes.
Mind you, I am no Apple fanboy and am not against filing law suits when people are being scammed, but this suit is just one more reason to ship lawyers to the Moon to minimize contamination of the rest of the world's population.
What's worse, even with these draconian measures, they were still roughly two years behind on processing patent applications.
The sad thing is that, regardless of whether there is a Republican or Democratic Administration sitting in the White House, this problem will persist. Congress needs to step up and reform the patent process.
Not much hope of that hoping until the whole system crashes.
This fact:
Charlotte, N.C.-based Scientigo owns two patents (No. 5,842,213 and No. 6,393,426) covering the transfer of "data in neutral forms." These patents, one of which was applied for in 1997, are infringed upon by the data-formatting standard XML, Scientigo executives assert.
combined with this fact:
Daly noted that companies or even individuals often make patent claims on XML. For example, Microsoft, which uses XML as the foundation of many of its products, was awarded a patent for programming techniques related to XML.
shows me that the USPTO hopelessly is fucked up.
These people are either overwhelmed by the number of claims and have no time to do the proper research before granting a patent, or they are are just plain stupid. I'm going to be generous and assume that these examiners are given a quota that they have to have resolved each week and that they haven't the time or resources to validate every claim. There is probably also a lack of expertise in the USPTO to properly vet the claims made in these applications.
This gives a another huge wage advantage to offshored foriegn workers and provides an accelerator to companies to offshore programming work.
Good point.
make sure you keep the jackscrews lubed!
No shit. You know it will be a bad day when your tail section shears off.
There are plenty of compensation programs in the industry to copy. Find one that looks the most like your organization and copy it. Change whatever areas you feel don't suit your particular organization (how promotions are handled, vesting, etc.). Get a good HR professional in the discussion to avoid opening up a can of whoopass on your company by how you handle benefits.
However, if $Corporation knows it could be taken to court, and its insurance rates would then rise, it would be motivated to, at least, have proper testing.
It would also be irresponsible for the $Corporation to just eat the cost of this insurance but would instead have to raise the price of its products. It would also be prudent for the $Corporation to be risk averse and not change the code too often leading to feature stagnation.
The only winners in this situation are the insurance companies and chest puffing politicians who can claim they "did something" about bad code.
The worst part of the story was that the lawyer couldn't tell anyone about the security problem because he was no longer retained by his original client. I believe that in the US attorneys are obliged to come forward with information related to a criminal nature because they are officers of the court. I don't know if that distiction would have helped in this case, but the fact that the whole system perched precariously on the fact that only a few criminals knew how to bilk the system is disturbing.
That is a well-reasoned, tightly worded response.
What are you doing on Slashdot?
You mean the other woman in the computer lab?
I know that this may sound like a fantasy equal to those in the 419 scams but when I was an undergraduate two decades ago, there were LOTS of women in the computer labs. The women who worked on computers back then were mathematics majors, accounting majors, and a few who were working toward a degree in computer science. The number of women in computer science was small (2% of the total in the department), but when you added in all of the other majors using the VAX system for their classes, the number was probably closer to 40%. The university I attended has a strong business school and the accounting majors have been recruited nationally for three decades. By the early 1980s, the population of the accounting department more than 50% women.
Now why didn't I see that one coming?
you fucking pussy faggot
In America, if I fuck a pussy, I am not a faggot.
Please stop your complaining until you show you actually know what you're talking about.
You, sir, have single-handedly brought Slashdot to a stand still.
I hope you are happy.
Almost all other professions have to take responsibility for their work and constructs - why are programmers an exception?!
Well, they aren't. Doctors and lawyers have certifying boards (here in the US) that can sanction irresponsible behavior, and the worst cases can result in lawsuits. Architects and engineers usually have to find an insurance carrier who will underwrite their work. That is what errors and omissions insurance is for. It is expensive and hard to qualify for.
Great news for the E&O insurance industry! When programmers become liable for the mistakes (read: human nature) of their creations then everyone who codes for a living will have to consider buying insurance to hedge their risk, or find another form of work.
E&O is incredibly expensive. I looked into buying a policy when I started doing environmental work due to the possibility that I could be named a 'potentially responsible party' in an environmental enforcement action by the government. I side-stepped that need when I went to work for a large firm that could afford the E&O insurance. You can bet that cost was included in my chargeout rate.
That is what this effort will lead to for independent programmers. You will have the choice of buying E&O insurance, provided you qualify, and jacking your prices up to cover your costs, or you will have to work for a company that already has it. Hobby/free software enthusiasts are screwed.
I prefer the policy of 'caveat emptor'. If you install free software on your production machine without properly vetting it you are not only a fool but should bear all of the costs yourself.
Whatever. It can happen. I mean it. Slashdotters, don't let disparaging slobs like the parent get you down! Cool, good-looking geek-chics ARE out there!
This message was brought to you by the 419 Industry Consortium.
I'm sorry, but you need to get over your MS-hate and see what's really going on here.
Who said I hated Microsoft?
Projecting much?