Just get some cat 5 cable and plug your computer in. Problem solved. If you have 6 guys in an apartment, you're probably not roaming around with your computers in a giant house, anyway. Not only will you have a flawless connection, it'll probably be a good bit faster, as well.
You know, with such a great attitude, I can't imagine how a fine person such as yourself would use a username like "HomelessInLaJolla". I can't imagine why employers aren't lining up to hire you.
The employees and customers are as much a part of the business as the major shareholders and executives.
No, they are not. The owners own the business. That means that they own it. They control it. The employees work for the business for an agreed-upon compensation. The owners can do whatever they'd like with the business, and do not have to have approval from the employees or the customers. If the employees don't like it, they have the right to leave the company. The parent is right... you're talking about Socialism, or you have no grasp of the fundamentals of private property.
Do you seriously view "less money" as an all or nothing thing?
Yes, I do. People are hired to produce (or save) a company more profit than they cost the company. If an employee can not produce or save more money than they cost, then they should not be working at that company. That's the whole point of employment.
And those people don't care enough to take risks, be creative or push boundaries.
I wouldn't want that from an IT person. I want things working predictably and consistently. I don't want a "creative" IT person any more than I want a "creative" plumber or a "creative" accountant. Do the job the way I ask you to do it. If you have a better idea, you're entitled to present it, but if I don't agree, you don't get to pitch a fit. If you want to take risks, be creative, and push boundaries, then I think that you're in the wrong profession.
My point is that most IT people don't understand their place in the business. Yes, you are being used to make profit. You are being paid less money than your create (or save) the business. Otherwise, you wouldn't have a job. That is how business works. That's how most of the world work This talk about "controlling people for profit" is patently absurd and is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. Grow up. It's a job. You have to do things you don't like to do, and in return, you're paid money.
The big problem as I see it is attitudes like yours: IT is a "creative" field, and profit is somehow evil. What needs to happen is that IT people need to stop being treated like children. Management needs to stop babying IT people, and explain to them that it's their (management's) way or the highway. It's that simple. IT isn't some kind of holy profession, around which the rest of the business revolves. IT is just one *tiny* aspect of most businesses, and should be given appropriate consideration. IT people with an overdeveloped sense of entitlement need to be weeded out of organizations. Finance people generally don't demand to be allowed to be "creative" in their jobs. Operations people don't bemoan the lack of "creativity" in the workplace, and the evil profit motive. Management needs to stop being afraid of IT people holding them hostage some kind of arcane knowledge, and insist on hiring only IT people who are professional, and understand the business needs.
A close friend of mine is a professional CEO at mid sized companies. He's a turnaround guy. He takes damaged companies and make them profitable. Very often, one of the first thing he has to do is to fire the existing IT staff or just the IT directors, and bring in real professionals. He's always bemoaning the lack of IT people who know a single thing outside of their narrow field of focus, and their inability to act as part of the organization.
Actually, my SOP is just to block all IP traffic from China and Russia and other such nasty places. That helps a LOT with all kinds of malware and spam.
I agree. I think that real journalists writing a story about (one of many) wrong Wikipedia articles is akin to Stephen Hawking writing a paper disproving Creationism. It should be obvious to anybody with a brain that these things are true (namely Wikipedia is often wrong, and Creationism is part of a particularly bad fairy tale). It seems odd that an organization with a good reputation would even bother acknowledging something as absurd as Wikipedia. The fact that the Sun-Times would even print this gives Wikipedia much more credibility than it deserves.
I suppose she expects us (programmers) to rush out and perfect natural language processing so all our spiders can read her stupid notice.
No, I think that if you spent about 5 seconds reading her web site, you'd see that she's mentally ill. I don't think it's appropriate to bash people like this, when they clearly don't have a good grip on reality.
If anybody had bothered to look at the web site in question, they'd instantly see that this woman is a real crackpot. I can't even figure out what in the hell her web site is about. She obviously has some serious mental issues. This case simply can't be taken seriously.
Actually, this is how Dell got to be so huge. The were one of the first to do customized PC's on a large scale. They were one of the pioneers in the PC industry. The only reason they're not selling Linux on workstations is because they can't make any money off of it. If anybody could do it profitably, it would be Dell.
One multinational corporation vs. another multinational corporation. Why should I care? Let 'em slug it out. It's not like video on the Net is going to go anywhere, anyway. Spam is illegal, and he have tons of that. Kiddie porn is illegal, and we have tons of that online. Phishing and all kinds of other scams are illegal, and we have plenty of that. Does anybody think that corporate lawsuit #50,401,432 over online video is going to make any kind of real difference to anybody but the attorneys getting paid?
Folding @ Home is already widely distributed on PC's. It's probably a 5-6 year old project. Plus, if you think that the PS3 isn't going to have a large market share eventually, you're nuts.
Well, the whole thing is that I need one device that does everything. When I get the PS3, the PS2 is probably going away for good. Real estate is very pricey around where I live, so if I can have one box that takes the place of 3 boxes, that's a really good thing. Space is tight. And of course, there's also the simplicity aspect. Most people have 14 different remote controls, and you have to use about 5 of them just to get the TV on, switched over to aux input, switch the stereo over to aux 2, yadda, yadda, yadda. With one box, it's simple. One remote. One set of wires. One remote control. Done! Contrary to popular believe, AV equipment is generally not very pretty to look at, either, so the less, the better.
The notion that the increased sophistication and "media center" uses of new consoles are driving factors in larger numbers of adults owning them is silly.
In no way is that silly. That's actually insightful. I'm one of those adult console owners who actually uses my PS2 (PS3 is coming this weekend) as part of my "media center". I use my PS2 for movies, music, AND games. That's part of the reason I would never buy a Wii (no DVD or audio CD playback at all) or an XBox (crappy DVD playback).
If this is really true, give it to a mainstream organization and let them figure it out.
Actually, I would say that they should hand off this info to some organization of scientists (biochemists?) who know what in the hell they're talking about. Greenpeace (like PETA), isn't an organization comprised of a lot of actual scientists (or scientific research), but is overflowing with lots of pseudo-science.
Anybody with half an ounce of business knowledge knows that the MPAA and RIAA are not going to be around much longer. Media distribution isn't a viable business any more. Times change. We also don't need buggy whip makers any more, either. So why not just relax, ignore them, and stop buying their products?
We already have tons and tons of *good* independent music that you can get without dealing with them. Movies will come soon. It'll be painful for them, and for the industry-created "artists" (ie: virtually all "musicians" that are invented for teen consumption), but they'll go away soon enough. I'm looking forward to seeing movies both becoming popular and being distributed via whatever the You-Tube equivalent is a few years from now.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go download some Pearl Jam shows.
Thanks for the info... I haven't bought my PS3 yet (waiting for some games that I NEED, and I just got God of War 2 for the PS2), but if it works as well as the PS2, I'll be using the PS3 as my main DVD player as well.
Does Bluetooth have the range that plain ol' infrared does? I thought Bluetooth gadgets were only good for a few feet.
Actually, I tend to agree. I can't imagine ever using wireless for anything more important than say, reading Slashdot or Perez Hilton. Slow, insecure by definition, and inconsistent. I'll take wires over wireless any day.
Oh, I completely agree. I don't personally believe the "ghost in the machine" type of description of "god". I'm actually friends with a few physicists that I've spoken with this about at length. We've seen in the history of science, that whenever there's something that we don't understand, that we eventually figure it out. Personally, I'm looking forward to breakthroughs in understanding multiple dimensions that we can't observe right now.
At least you CAN use the controller. With the XBox, you have to buy a remote control!
But seriously, the PS2 remote control is well worth the $20. It's a very good, regular remote control that anybody's grandmother can use. You wouldn't even know that it was pointing at a PS2 unless you looked at it. The PS2 actually has better pause, slow, fast forward features, than most straight DVD players that I've used.
The only even remotely rational way that an intelligent person can believe in any kind of "god" is to understand science, and see some of the freaky stuff that we can't understand (ie: "if all matter is made up of sub-atomic particles, and those particles appear to move randomly, then is there such a thing as free will?"). I could see how a particle physicist or astrophysicist with a good understanding of science could say, "Shit, I guess maybe there could be something else out there pushing around these particles or making these black holes, etc.").
That's extremely different than a mouth breather with an IQ of 90 saying, "God is real because my daddy says so" or even "regular" people saying "God is real because it says so in this book".
And, when I say scientist, I meant Scientist. When I say Scientist, I don't necessarily mean everybody who works in a lab. I'm referring to the kind of person that things rationally, and scientifically about all kinds of things, whether they happen to actually study science or not. There are plenty of people who may work in science, but still believe in gods and demons and devils and fairies etc, etc. But a truly Scientific person could never, and would never believe something is true based solely on heresay.
Real scientists don't bother to argue with religious people any more than they'd bother to argue with the guy on the corner talking to a leprechaun. You can't exactly reason or argue or even discuss with people who claim that they talk to invisible, omnipotent, omnipresent beings that live in the sky.
Slashdot Mirror
Just get some cat 5 cable and plug your computer in. Problem solved. If you have 6 guys in an apartment, you're probably not roaming around with your computers in a giant house, anyway. Not only will you have a flawless connection, it'll probably be a good bit faster, as well.
Get some spam... check the originator. Use and check the country or origin. If it's a zombie, there's not much you can do. If it's from China or a former Soviet state, then use Sam Spade again to look up the ISP's netblock, and block all IP traffic from that block of IP's.
You know, with such a great attitude, I can't imagine how a fine person such as yourself would use a username like "HomelessInLaJolla". I can't imagine why employers aren't lining up to hire you.
The employees and customers are as much a part of the business as the major shareholders and executives.
No, they are not. The owners own the business. That means that they own it. They control it. The employees work for the business for an agreed-upon compensation. The owners can do whatever they'd like with the business, and do not have to have approval from the employees or the customers. If the employees don't like it, they have the right to leave the company. The parent is right... you're talking about Socialism, or you have no grasp of the fundamentals of private property.
Do you seriously view "less money" as an all or nothing thing?
Yes, I do. People are hired to produce (or save) a company more profit than they cost the company. If an employee can not produce or save more money than they cost, then they should not be working at that company. That's the whole point of employment.
And those people don't care enough to take risks, be creative or push boundaries.
I wouldn't want that from an IT person. I want things working predictably and consistently. I don't want a "creative" IT person any more than I want a "creative" plumber or a "creative" accountant. Do the job the way I ask you to do it. If you have a better idea, you're entitled to present it, but if I don't agree, you don't get to pitch a fit. If you want to take risks, be creative, and push boundaries, then I think that you're in the wrong profession.
My point is that most IT people don't understand their place in the business. Yes, you are being used to make profit. You are being paid less money than your create (or save) the business. Otherwise, you wouldn't have a job. That is how business works. That's how most of the world work This talk about "controlling people for profit" is patently absurd and is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. Grow up. It's a job. You have to do things you don't like to do, and in return, you're paid money.
The big problem as I see it is attitudes like yours: IT is a "creative" field, and profit is somehow evil. What needs to happen is that IT people need to stop being treated like children. Management needs to stop babying IT people, and explain to them that it's their (management's) way or the highway. It's that simple. IT isn't some kind of holy profession, around which the rest of the business revolves. IT is just one *tiny* aspect of most businesses, and should be given appropriate consideration. IT people with an overdeveloped sense of entitlement need to be weeded out of organizations. Finance people generally don't demand to be allowed to be "creative" in their jobs. Operations people don't bemoan the lack of "creativity" in the workplace, and the evil profit motive. Management needs to stop being afraid of IT people holding them hostage some kind of arcane knowledge, and insist on hiring only IT people who are professional, and understand the business needs.
A close friend of mine is a professional CEO at mid sized companies. He's a turnaround guy. He takes damaged companies and make them profitable. Very often, one of the first thing he has to do is to fire the existing IT staff or just the IT directors, and bring in real professionals. He's always bemoaning the lack of IT people who know a single thing outside of their narrow field of focus, and their inability to act as part of the organization.
Actually, my SOP is just to block all IP traffic from China and Russia and other such nasty places. That helps a LOT with all kinds of malware and spam.
I agree. I think that real journalists writing a story about (one of many) wrong Wikipedia articles is akin to Stephen Hawking writing a paper disproving Creationism. It should be obvious to anybody with a brain that these things are true (namely Wikipedia is often wrong, and Creationism is part of a particularly bad fairy tale). It seems odd that an organization with a good reputation would even bother acknowledging something as absurd as Wikipedia. The fact that the Sun-Times would even print this gives Wikipedia much more credibility than it deserves.
I suppose she expects us (programmers) to rush out and perfect natural language processing so all our spiders can read her stupid notice.
No, I think that if you spent about 5 seconds reading her web site, you'd see that she's mentally ill. I don't think it's appropriate to bash people like this, when they clearly don't have a good grip on reality.
If anybody had bothered to look at the web site in question, they'd instantly see that this woman is a real crackpot. I can't even figure out what in the hell her web site is about. She obviously has some serious mental issues. This case simply can't be taken seriously.
Actually, this is how Dell got to be so huge. The were one of the first to do customized PC's on a large scale. They were one of the pioneers in the PC industry. The only reason they're not selling Linux on workstations is because they can't make any money off of it. If anybody could do it profitably, it would be Dell.
One multinational corporation vs. another multinational corporation. Why should I care? Let 'em slug it out. It's not like video on the Net is going to go anywhere, anyway. Spam is illegal, and he have tons of that. Kiddie porn is illegal, and we have tons of that online. Phishing and all kinds of other scams are illegal, and we have plenty of that. Does anybody think that corporate lawsuit #50,401,432 over online video is going to make any kind of real difference to anybody but the attorneys getting paid?
Folding @ Home is already widely distributed on PC's. It's probably a 5-6 year old project. Plus, if you think that the PS3 isn't going to have a large market share eventually, you're nuts.
Well, the whole thing is that I need one device that does everything. When I get the PS3, the PS2 is probably going away for good. Real estate is very pricey around where I live, so if I can have one box that takes the place of 3 boxes, that's a really good thing. Space is tight. And of course, there's also the simplicity aspect. Most people have 14 different remote controls, and you have to use about 5 of them just to get the TV on, switched over to aux input, switch the stereo over to aux 2, yadda, yadda, yadda. With one box, it's simple. One remote. One set of wires. One remote control. Done! Contrary to popular believe, AV equipment is generally not very pretty to look at, either, so the less, the better.
The notion that the increased sophistication and "media center" uses of new consoles are driving factors in larger numbers of adults owning them is silly.
In no way is that silly. That's actually insightful. I'm one of those adult console owners who actually uses my PS2 (PS3 is coming this weekend) as part of my "media center". I use my PS2 for movies, music, AND games. That's part of the reason I would never buy a Wii (no DVD or audio CD playback at all) or an XBox (crappy DVD playback).
If this is really true, give it to a mainstream organization and let them figure it out.
Actually, I would say that they should hand off this info to some organization of scientists (biochemists?) who know what in the hell they're talking about. Greenpeace (like PETA), isn't an organization comprised of a lot of actual scientists (or scientific research), but is overflowing with lots of pseudo-science.
Anybody with half an ounce of business knowledge knows that the MPAA and RIAA are not going to be around much longer. Media distribution isn't a viable business any more. Times change. We also don't need buggy whip makers any more, either. So why not just relax, ignore them, and stop buying their products?
We already have tons and tons of *good* independent music that you can get without dealing with them. Movies will come soon. It'll be painful for them, and for the industry-created "artists" (ie: virtually all "musicians" that are invented for teen consumption), but they'll go away soon enough. I'm looking forward to seeing movies both becoming popular and being distributed via whatever the You-Tube equivalent is a few years from now.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go download some Pearl Jam shows.
Thanks for the info... I haven't bought my PS3 yet (waiting for some games that I NEED, and I just got God of War 2 for the PS2), but if it works as well as the PS2, I'll be using the PS3 as my main DVD player as well. Does Bluetooth have the range that plain ol' infrared does? I thought Bluetooth gadgets were only good for a few feet.
Actually, I tend to agree. I can't imagine ever using wireless for anything more important than say, reading Slashdot or Perez Hilton. Slow, insecure by definition, and inconsistent. I'll take wires over wireless any day.
Oh, I completely agree. I don't personally believe the "ghost in the machine" type of description of "god". I'm actually friends with a few physicists that I've spoken with this about at length. We've seen in the history of science, that whenever there's something that we don't understand, that we eventually figure it out. Personally, I'm looking forward to breakthroughs in understanding multiple dimensions that we can't observe right now.
At least you CAN use the controller. With the XBox, you have to buy a remote control!
But seriously, the PS2 remote control is well worth the $20. It's a very good, regular remote control that anybody's grandmother can use. You wouldn't even know that it was pointing at a PS2 unless you looked at it. The PS2 actually has better pause, slow, fast forward features, than most straight DVD players that I've used.
The only even remotely rational way that an intelligent person can believe in any kind of "god" is to understand science, and see some of the freaky stuff that we can't understand (ie: "if all matter is made up of sub-atomic particles, and those particles appear to move randomly, then is there such a thing as free will?"). I could see how a particle physicist or astrophysicist with a good understanding of science could say, "Shit, I guess maybe there could be something else out there pushing around these particles or making these black holes, etc.").
That's extremely different than a mouth breather with an IQ of 90 saying, "God is real because my daddy says so" or even "regular" people saying "God is real because it says so in this book".
And, when I say scientist, I meant Scientist. When I say Scientist, I don't necessarily mean everybody who works in a lab. I'm referring to the kind of person that things rationally, and scientifically about all kinds of things, whether they happen to actually study science or not. There are plenty of people who may work in science, but still believe in gods and demons and devils and fairies etc, etc. But a truly Scientific person could never, and would never believe something is true based solely on heresay.
Real scientists don't bother to argue with religious people any more than they'd bother to argue with the guy on the corner talking to a leprechaun. You can't exactly reason or argue or even discuss with people who claim that they talk to invisible, omnipotent, omnipresent beings that live in the sky.