because you don't have the same amount of control you feel like it is riskier. But it isn't
I have a real problem with "cloud computing" and the lack of control is just once piece. With google, there is no assurance that *my* problem is being worked on. *My* problem will get handled in the order in which it was reported. (if at all) To me, MY problem is the most important problem.
The problem with "cloud" computing, and probably the biggest IMHO, is the importance of "you" and your interests to the company providing your service. Suppose that you build your own business on a company providing virtual machine services. All is going well, you are profitable, and poof!! they decide to drop the service because it isn't profitable for them. What if they see what you are doing and say "hey, that's a great business idea, how does he do that, lets look at the code." and so on.
I could go on, but there is a lot to be said about "building" your own business, and my rule of thumb is: "Committing to a single vendor lock-in, in the long run, will always be worse than doing it yourself."
Yeah, corporate america. Where everyone plays fair? Right? Right? Welcome to the real world kid.
I'd hardly call myself a kid, pushing half a century.
Second, industries pushing standards and competing on features and products are the hallmarks of good business. Just think of all the industries built on standards. Constructions and materials, plumbing, electronics, HVAC, etc. A home owner can go to a hardware store and buy a standard drain fitting, sink, stove, dishwasher, cabinet, etc. Do they have to worry about which company produced the plumbing? No, the threads and fittings are ALL standard.
Software needs "good business" practices. Microsoft and its proprietary crap is inhibiting software and keeping the industry at an immature state.
This is not a troll, but an observation and opinion.
Microsoft, as a company, is in a perfect position, as many companies before, to "contribute" to the industry. Maybe a new language would be a good thing, maybe not, but the fact is it is being developed and people will be "evangelized" into trying to use it.
There is an old saying, "A rising tide lifts all boats." If it is a good language, why not make it open source? Why not develop it for everyone?
This is where Microsoft *always* tries for the exclusion. Always tries for hook. Never truly contributes to its industry. The Microsoft "evangelists" (an actual title) try to convert you and keep you. They even use fear of "open source" as a tactic.
With presidential politics in the air, maybe the analogy is forced because of information overload. By its like McCain's campaign. McCain has no substantive message that can inspire an impression that he's the guy who can really "help." So what does he do? He uses the Bush campaign machine that whips up the crowds with fear and hate. Dividing the country when we really really need to working together.
The software industry needs to come together. There are too many duplicative API sets. Too many differences for differences sake. Too much man power and expense wasted on porting.
Don't use stored procedures. They concentrate computation in the database server which is harder to scale than the application servers.
Ahh, sadly this is what "MySQL database thinking" has wrought.
The mystical grail of the enterprise "scaling." Like many things, conventional wisdom often evaporates when confronted with facts. Can stored procedures load the server? Sure, if you are doing something bad. For the most part stored procedures reduce server load.
(1) Stored procedures can be "pre-compiled" SQL which saves CPU time in the planner. (In databases with such an architecture).
(2) Stored procedures allow data selection beyond mere SQL and can lead to the reduction of data transfered from server to application.
(3) In PostgreSQL, for instance, one can create an index based on a function (like a stored procedure), so:
create index on mytable myindex (foobar(mycol) );
select * from mytable where foobar('froboz') = foobar(mycol) ;
Generates a query that uses and index and doesn't do a full table scan.
(4) Computers today are seriously fast, so much faster than the data storage systems that CPU capability is almost infinite with regards to I/O. Any CPU work that can be done at the server to reduce I/O load will probably improve general scalability.
Basically, stored procedures and functions would not exist, i.e. no one would have created them, if they did not help. Saying that "don't use stored procedures because they load the server" is the same logic behind "don't use power tools because they are dangerous." Yes, if you are ignorant, power tools present a huge danger, however, neglecting them means a lot more work. It is better to educate ones self and use the more powerful tools. Those tools would not exist if they did not provide a positive contribution.
I was indirectly discussing the pros and cons of the patent system, of course it is a patent. Did you even go to high school?
The question is: what should be patentable? What shouldn't? It is not an easy question. Those who are quick to decry patents, sometimes agree with the general principle when presented in a sympathetic example.
Most all patents, IMHO, are bogus. They don't seem to embody any real investment and thus do not really enrich the society or promote innovation. (The purpose of patents, people forget.) However, there are some patents that really do protect valuable work.
Do you eliminate patents because of the unavoidable abuse? One man's hard work an inspiration may be another's common sense.
Sure, the notion of fast forward, pause, and reverse is obvious, but the methodology and working device was, at the time, non-trivial it took some work to get it good, and dish network did "steal" their technique.
Now, are all patents bogus? I tend to think so. There is too much historical account of inventors "rushing to the patent office" to beat their competitor. Now, too me, that seems terribly unfair, one will get the benefit of their research, and another will not.
On the other hand, if you spend a good deal of time and money developing a technology for your business, and a better funded competitor comes along and copies your work and tries to put you out of business, there has to be a way to protect yourself.
My dad used to say, "believe none of what you hear, half of what you read, and everything that you see."
I think people need to take more responsibility for what they think is real. Currently people believe everything that they read, be it FOX "news" CNN, political ads, car dealers, commercials, etc. "Citizen Journalists" are no less honest or motivated by self interest than any other entity, they are just smaller.
We need to get to a place where pundits, news, politicians, and everyone else are, by default, considered biased and everything they say needs to be double checked.
The notion of "unbiased" news is an artifact of the later 20th century and people like FOX news have been exploiting people's misplaced trust for too long. I would LOVE to see a prison time for bloggers, news agencies, and politicians for knowingly making false statements intended for public distribution.
The standard "non-compete" has been beaten in court so many times it is ridiculous.
First, they should pay you well for your time prior and future. If the money is worth it, go for it.
Get a lawyer.
Typically speaking, when you eventually leave the company, I presume you will be an "expert" in the field. No "non-compete" can keep you from working in your field, these are seen as overly broad and unconscionable.
Get a lawyer.
Negotiate the contract.
Most importantly, understand exactly what your expectations are, determine exactly what line you will not cross, and negotiate.
Remember, I presume they are offering you a lot of money for your expertise. They have a business reason to do so, that puts you in a "power" position. Don't forget that.
Second, make sure they put, IN WRITING, that for any lasting "non-compete" there must be on-going compensation. If they are deriving value from your work and they wish for you to NOT derive value from your expertise, they they should compensate you for what you would otherwise be doing.
Generally speaking, a "non-compete" is only enforceable within the context of the on-going business and customers of the previous employer. If you leave "World Wide Widgets" and create "Universal Widgets" because you are a widget expert, they can't keep you from earning a living. They can, however, keep you from poaching their existing customers and employees by using "business" and contact information gained at the prior employer. Your "core" competency is yours and they can't keep you from earning a living with it.
This country has a serious mental problem in government. "of the people, by the people, and for the people" is not just a slogan, it is supposed to be the core value of the law.
I understand what the judge is doing, and in some circles it will be seen as a "responsible" thing to do. In a democracy, especially in a country that is supposed to be "for the people," it rings as cynical protection for an entity that actually harms "we the people" and our rights.
The "aging" of wine in a bottle is active yeast dying a slow and horrible death of suffocation on the ever decreasing amount of dissolved oxygen in the wine. There is always a slight pressure and gas leak within the bottle of CO2 generated by the yeast digesting the remaining sugars and O2. A wine will be "done" aging in the bottle and start to spoil when all the dissolved oxygen is gone. The yeast dies and no more CO2 is produced. The pressure in the bottle drops to zero, and air flow starts to reverse and foreign elements like bacteria can get in. The bacteria can now start to feed on the remaining sugars and produce acid. This is when wine turns to vinegar.
Ultrasonic ager moving around alcohol molecules! Changing them so you have no hangover! What a sham! The only way, I suppose, it could work is to free up dissolved O2 in the wine (much like shaking a soda bottle frees up dissolved CO2) and supercharge the yeast, but I suspect that won't work in 30 minutes.
Sorry, it is getting nearly impossible for humans to understand the image a system generates. Maybe its a reverse type of system, if the user actually manages to "get it," its a bot.
Since I just got through replacing a 200G with a 1Tb I'll comment. That old drive has a couple uses. One it can be a backup if the new drive goes south and you need to RMA it. The other is putting it in an external box and using it as backup.
(1) As a backup, you need a 5:1 compression ratio for it to actually backup the 1TB drive.
(2) It can't be used to replace the 1TB once you pass 200G utilization.
(3) Using it in a USB box as a backup also fails under reasons 1 and 2.
Yea, I have done the same thing, but the point was the actual use to an organization. Is your IT department going to replace your 200G hard disk if your 1TB hard disk fails? No, it will get another 1TB disk and get a refund on the failed 1TB (It probably has an "in the mail" swap provision with a vendor.) Is your IT department going to cobble together a USB container for an old hard disk? No, they'll buy something new from CDW and get a warranty.
Not sure if depreciation can be taken into account when calculating the value of a theft. If that's the case, by the time they get to court, all that equipment will be almost worthless.
I'm self employed, and you calculate depreciation for your taxes, but computer stuff is valueless long before its depreciated value reaches zero.
That's the big problem You got a ton of junk that carries accounting value, but provides no operational value. Sort of like high-tech tribbles.
Hard drives are now $6.00? What did he grab? The MFM lying around? The drum over in the corner?
The average estimated value of each item was $6.09. OK, what is a hard disk worth?
I have 200G ATA hard disk, what is it worth? Seriously, what is it worth? It has two values, the "book" value which you use for accounting and things like insurance, and you have the "functional" value. The functional value is nothing, zip, nada. It was upgraded to a 500G gig. I don't need to 200G hard disk, there no point in putting it into a system as it uses more power than it is worth. I can get a "green" drive with 2 to 4 times the storage that will cost me less in a year of electricity.
For me, I'll keep it in case I need to build a test system. For a big organization, it is actually best to let it "walk away" and take the deduction for loss.
Steal $120,000 from a local bank and see how many years in jail you end up with.
Hardly the same thing, money is valued as, well, money. Computer gear has an estimated book value. That $120,000 book value is probably a $0.00 institutional value. It is likely stuff that would have never been used again by the organization.
I don't know the specifics, but in my basement, I have over $50,000 estimated value of equipment. Stuff that I can't sell, don't use, would probably just toss next time I get a dumpster, I have two DEC Shark thin clients, numerous P.C.s, hundreds of CDs, motherboards, RAM, hard disks, power supplies, a few UPS that need batteries, a couple oscilloscopes, soltering irons, etc.
If the house burned down, I'd claim the insurance.
No one is saying that stuff walking away is a good thing, but 19+ thousand items at about $6.00 (est) average per item is typical office flow.
Listen, workers often bring things "into" work that are not counted, and some bring things back. I wouldn't even call it "quid pro quo," I'd call it humans working as humans do. We all do it, nothing bad mind you, I'll burn a DVD of stuff and bring it to work. I'll use my laptop because the company I may be working doesn't want to buy me one if I don't need it.
We are not machines, humans become "part" of the organizations to which they belong, and without malice "communal" supplies and things just get used.
Also, in a large technology environment, there is so much stuff that either gets tossed or walks. Think about keyboards, how many people order a cordless keyboard/mouse for their PCs? Well, what happens to the OEM keyboard/mouse? I'll tell you, it sits in a closet until it gets tossed or walks.
We setup a big data center a number of years back, we ordered 300 Dell servers, each and every damn one came with a keyboard and a mouse. We had a small mountain of brand-new mice and keyboards we didn't know what to do with. Dell would ship without them, and we couldn't get rid of them. So, we left them in a pile, and about 50% walked away.
Then there are hard disks, you upgrade a 100G hard disk to a 250G hard disk, 250g to 500g, what do you do with the old ones? They, too, sit in a closet. They have "book" value but no actual usable value. Computers, jeez, you can't get rid of them, but after 18 months they have "book" value but no practical resale value. It costs more in man-power to dispose of a 2 years old computer than it does to buy a new one. So it sits in a corner or a closet until someone asks "will that be missed?" and the response is "its just taking up space, I know nothing."
Your "human community" will use these things. The books will show a loss, but no real loss has occurred. Bonus! You get to deduct the loss, blame pilfering, and in the end stuff useless to organization stops taking up space and gets used, employees are better off, and there's room in the closets.
This is actually the best way. If they "gave" it to the employees, it would mean paperwork and taxes. This way, its just "lost" so sad. Everyone knows it, everyone does it, and this article is just a CYA piece.
Slashdot Mirror
because you don't have the same amount of control you feel like it is riskier. But it isn't
I have a real problem with "cloud computing" and the lack of control is just once piece. With google, there is no assurance that *my* problem is being worked on. *My* problem will get handled in the order in which it was reported. (if at all) To me, MY problem is the most important problem.
The problem with "cloud" computing, and probably the biggest IMHO, is the importance of "you" and your interests to the company providing your service. Suppose that you build your own business on a company providing virtual machine services. All is going well, you are profitable, and poof!! they decide to drop the service because it isn't profitable for them. What if they see what you are doing and say "hey, that's a great business idea, how does he do that, lets look at the code." and so on.
I could go on, but there is a lot to be said about "building" your own business, and my rule of thumb is: "Committing to a single vendor lock-in, in the long run, will always be worse than doing it yourself."
Someone else deals with all the problems, right?
Set up a server in some god-forsaken 3rd world country with no cyber monitoring capability or laws, lease VPN accounts to anyone who wants privacy.
Once connected to the VPN, you use that for web browsing, email, and IM.
What the hell is going on in the UK? I mean, shit, the U.S. is bad, but at least we have the EFF and the ACLU to slow this stuff down.
This is fucked up. UK citizens, how do we help? I mean, shit, if it happens in the UK, it will probably come to the U.S. (and vice versa)
It must really suck when a law you voted for doesn't work out the way you like.
The law of unintended results.
Yeah, corporate america. Where everyone plays fair? Right? Right? Welcome to the real world kid.
I'd hardly call myself a kid, pushing half a century.
Second, industries pushing standards and competing on features and products are the hallmarks of good business. Just think of all the industries built on standards. Constructions and materials, plumbing, electronics, HVAC, etc. A home owner can go to a hardware store and buy a standard drain fitting, sink, stove, dishwasher, cabinet, etc. Do they have to worry about which company produced the plumbing? No, the threads and fittings are ALL standard.
Software needs "good business" practices. Microsoft and its proprietary crap is inhibiting software and keeping the industry at an immature state.
Would this "multi-stage" process simply be highly active green algae producing sugars that are then fermented, and then distilled?
It takes CO2 and produces fuel.
This is not a troll, but an observation and opinion.
Microsoft, as a company, is in a perfect position, as many companies before, to "contribute" to the industry. Maybe a new language would be a good thing, maybe not, but the fact is it is being developed and people will be "evangelized" into trying to use it.
There is an old saying, "A rising tide lifts all boats." If it is a good language, why not make it open source? Why not develop it for everyone?
This is where Microsoft *always* tries for the exclusion. Always tries for hook. Never truly contributes to its industry. The Microsoft "evangelists" (an actual title) try to convert you and keep you. They even use fear of "open source" as a tactic.
With presidential politics in the air, maybe the analogy is forced because of information overload. By its like McCain's campaign. McCain has no substantive message that can inspire an impression that he's the guy who can really "help." So what does he do? He uses the Bush campaign machine that whips up the crowds with fear and hate. Dividing the country when we really really need to working together.
The software industry needs to come together. There are too many duplicative API sets. Too many differences for differences sake. Too much man power and expense wasted on porting.
Don't use stored procedures. They concentrate computation in the database server which is harder to scale than the application servers.
Ahh, sadly this is what "MySQL database thinking" has wrought.
The mystical grail of the enterprise "scaling." Like many things, conventional wisdom often evaporates when confronted with facts. Can stored procedures load the server? Sure, if you are doing something bad. For the most part stored procedures reduce server load.
(1) Stored procedures can be "pre-compiled" SQL which saves CPU time in the planner. (In databases with such an architecture).
(2) Stored procedures allow data selection beyond mere SQL and can lead to the reduction of data transfered from server to application.
(3) In PostgreSQL, for instance, one can create an index based on a function (like a stored procedure), so:
create index on mytable myindex (foobar(mycol) );
select * from mytable where foobar('froboz') = foobar(mycol) ;
Generates a query that uses and index and doesn't do a full table scan.
(4) Computers today are seriously fast, so much faster than the data storage systems that CPU capability is almost infinite with regards to I/O. Any CPU work that can be done at the server to reduce I/O load will probably improve general scalability.
Basically, stored procedures and functions would not exist, i.e. no one would have created them, if they did not help. Saying that "don't use stored procedures because they load the server" is the same logic behind "don't use power tools because they are dangerous." Yes, if you are ignorant, power tools present a huge danger, however, neglecting them means a lot more work. It is better to educate ones self and use the more powerful tools. Those tools would not exist if they did not provide a positive contribution.
Funny you bring that up. They call it a patent.
I was indirectly discussing the pros and cons of the patent system, of course it is a patent. Did you even go to high school?
The question is: what should be patentable? What shouldn't? It is not an easy question. Those who are quick to decry patents, sometimes agree with the general principle when presented in a sympathetic example.
Most all patents, IMHO, are bogus. They don't seem to embody any real investment and thus do not really enrich the society or promote innovation. (The purpose of patents, people forget.) However, there are some patents that really do protect valuable work.
Do you eliminate patents because of the unavoidable abuse? One man's hard work an inspiration may be another's common sense.
Is kooldoc now illegal?
This is insanity.
Sure, the notion of fast forward, pause, and reverse is obvious, but the methodology and working device was, at the time, non-trivial it took some work to get it good, and dish network did "steal" their technique.
Now, are all patents bogus? I tend to think so. There is too much historical account of inventors "rushing to the patent office" to beat their competitor. Now, too me, that seems terribly unfair, one will get the benefit of their research, and another will not.
On the other hand, if you spend a good deal of time and money developing a technology for your business, and a better funded competitor comes along and copies your work and tries to put you out of business, there has to be a way to protect yourself.
My dad used to say, "believe none of what you hear, half of what you read, and everything that you see."
I think people need to take more responsibility for what they think is real. Currently people believe everything that they read, be it FOX "news" CNN, political ads, car dealers, commercials, etc. "Citizen Journalists" are no less honest or motivated by self interest than any other entity, they are just smaller.
We need to get to a place where pundits, news, politicians, and everyone else are, by default, considered biased and everything they say needs to be double checked.
The notion of "unbiased" news is an artifact of the later 20th century and people like FOX news have been exploiting people's misplaced trust for too long. I would LOVE to see a prison time for bloggers, news agencies, and politicians for knowingly making false statements intended for public distribution.
The standard "non-compete" has been beaten in court so many times it is ridiculous.
First, they should pay you well for your time prior and future. If the money is worth it, go for it.
Get a lawyer.
Typically speaking, when you eventually leave the company, I presume you will be an "expert" in the field. No "non-compete" can keep you from working in your field, these are seen as overly broad and unconscionable.
Get a lawyer.
Negotiate the contract.
Most importantly, understand exactly what your expectations are, determine exactly what line you will not cross, and negotiate.
Remember, I presume they are offering you a lot of money for your expertise. They have a business reason to do so, that puts you in a "power" position. Don't forget that.
Second, make sure they put, IN WRITING, that for any lasting "non-compete" there must be on-going compensation. If they are deriving value from your work and they wish for you to NOT derive value from your expertise, they they should compensate you for what you would otherwise be doing.
Generally speaking, a "non-compete" is only enforceable within the context of the on-going business and customers of the previous employer. If you leave "World Wide Widgets" and create "Universal Widgets" because you are a widget expert, they can't keep you from earning a living. They can, however, keep you from poaching their existing customers and employees by using "business" and contact information gained at the prior employer. Your "core" competency is yours and they can't keep you from earning a living with it.
This country has a serious mental problem in government. "of the people, by the people, and for the people" is not just a slogan, it is supposed to be the core value of the law.
I understand what the judge is doing, and in some circles it will be seen as a "responsible" thing to do. In a democracy, especially in a country that is supposed to be "for the people," it rings as cynical protection for an entity that actually harms "we the people" and our rights.
This is just plain nonsense.
The "aging" of wine in a bottle is active yeast dying a slow and horrible death of suffocation on the ever decreasing amount of dissolved oxygen in the wine. There is always a slight pressure and gas leak within the bottle of CO2 generated by the yeast digesting the remaining sugars and O2. A wine will be "done" aging in the bottle and start to spoil when all the dissolved oxygen is gone. The yeast dies and no more CO2 is produced. The pressure in the bottle drops to zero, and air flow starts to reverse and foreign elements like bacteria can get in. The bacteria can now start to feed on the remaining sugars and produce acid. This is when wine turns to vinegar.
Ultrasonic ager moving around alcohol molecules! Changing them so you have no hangover! What a sham! The only way, I suppose, it could work is to free up dissolved O2 in the wine (much like shaking a soda bottle frees up dissolved CO2) and supercharge the yeast, but I suspect that won't work in 30 minutes.
Sorry, it is getting nearly impossible for humans to understand the image a system generates. Maybe its a reverse type of system, if the user actually manages to "get it," its a bot.
Are you in the Boston area?
Since I just got through replacing a 200G with a 1Tb I'll comment. That old drive has a couple uses. One it can be a backup if the new drive goes south and you need to RMA it. The other is putting it in an external box and using it as backup.
(1) As a backup, you need a 5:1 compression ratio for it to actually backup the 1TB drive.
(2) It can't be used to replace the 1TB once you pass 200G utilization.
(3) Using it in a USB box as a backup also fails under reasons 1 and 2.
Yea, I have done the same thing, but the point was the actual use to an organization. Is your IT department going to replace your 200G hard disk if your 1TB hard disk fails? No, it will get another 1TB disk and get a refund on the failed 1TB (It probably has an "in the mail" swap provision with a vendor.) Is your IT department going to cobble together a USB container for an old hard disk? No, they'll buy something new from CDW and get a warranty.
Not sure if depreciation can be taken into account when calculating the value of a theft. If that's the case, by the time they get to court, all that equipment will be almost worthless.
I'm self employed, and you calculate depreciation for your taxes, but computer stuff is valueless long before its depreciated value reaches zero.
That's the big problem You got a ton of junk that carries accounting value, but provides no operational value. Sort of like high-tech tribbles.
Hard drives are now $6.00? What did he grab? The MFM lying around? The drum over in the corner?
The average estimated value of each item was $6.09. OK, what is a hard disk worth?
I have 200G ATA hard disk, what is it worth? Seriously, what is it worth? It has two values, the "book" value which you use for accounting and things like insurance, and you have the "functional" value. The functional value is nothing, zip, nada. It was upgraded to a 500G gig. I don't need to 200G hard disk, there no point in putting it into a system as it uses more power than it is worth. I can get a "green" drive with 2 to 4 times the storage that will cost me less in a year of electricity.
For me, I'll keep it in case I need to build a test system. For a big organization, it is actually best to let it "walk away" and take the deduction for loss.
Steal $120,000 from a local bank and see how many years in jail you end up with.
Hardly the same thing, money is valued as, well, money. Computer gear has an estimated book value. That $120,000 book value is probably a $0.00 institutional value. It is likely stuff that would have never been used again by the organization.
I don't know the specifics, but in my basement, I have over $50,000 estimated value of equipment. Stuff that I can't sell, don't use, would probably just toss next time I get a dumpster, I have two DEC Shark thin clients, numerous P.C.s, hundreds of CDs, motherboards, RAM, hard disks, power supplies, a few UPS that need batteries, a couple oscilloscopes, soltering irons, etc.
If the house burned down, I'd claim the insurance.
No one is saying that stuff walking away is a good thing, but 19+ thousand items at about $6.00 (est) average per item is typical office flow.
Listen, workers often bring things "into" work that are not counted, and some bring things back. I wouldn't even call it "quid pro quo," I'd call it humans working as humans do. We all do it, nothing bad mind you, I'll burn a DVD of stuff and bring it to work. I'll use my laptop because the company I may be working doesn't want to buy me one if I don't need it.
We are not machines, humans become "part" of the organizations to which they belong, and without malice "communal" supplies and things just get used.
Also, in a large technology environment, there is so much stuff that either gets tossed or walks. Think about keyboards, how many people order a cordless keyboard/mouse for their PCs? Well, what happens to the OEM keyboard/mouse? I'll tell you, it sits in a closet until it gets tossed or walks.
We setup a big data center a number of years back, we ordered 300 Dell servers, each and every damn one came with a keyboard and a mouse. We had a small mountain of brand-new mice and keyboards we didn't know what to do with. Dell would ship without them, and we couldn't get rid of them. So, we left them in a pile, and about 50% walked away.
Then there are hard disks, you upgrade a 100G hard disk to a 250G hard disk, 250g to 500g, what do you do with the old ones? They, too, sit in a closet. They have "book" value but no actual usable value. Computers, jeez, you can't get rid of them, but after 18 months they have "book" value but no practical resale value. It costs more in man-power to dispose of a 2 years old computer than it does to buy a new one. So it sits in a corner or a closet until someone asks "will that be missed?" and the response is "its just taking up space, I know nothing."
Your "human community" will use these things. The books will show a loss, but no real loss has occurred. Bonus! You get to deduct the loss, blame pilfering, and in the end stuff useless to organization stops taking up space and gets used, employees are better off, and there's room in the closets.
This is actually the best way. If they "gave" it to the employees, it would mean paperwork and taxes. This way, its just "lost" so sad. Everyone knows it, everyone does it, and this article is just a CYA piece.
When applications go up (or down) in a puff of blue smoke (or vapor)
But your delusional and increasingly demented ravings give all supporters of free software a bad name.
Please name 3 things he's been wrong about. His is more frighteningly dead on accurate.