There was a very interesting study done about great scientists that ties in here nicely. Essentially, the finding was that they didn't produce better stuff in total, they mostly produced more stuff (papers, articles, research reports, etc.) - thus raising their statistical chances of hitting gold.
I fear Gates understands that method. If you make lots of predictions, chances are some of them will be right. The general public usually remembers your correct predictions, not your failures. Just look at how many journalists consider Gates a visionary.
One wonders how the US government would react if a foreign nation tried a similar approach.
Really? Isn't it trivially predictable how the US would have reacted? For all intents and purposes, the US behaves like the alpha male in a pack - namely as if the rules would not apply to them, only to others.
Incidently, that is exactly what is usually meant when we say someone is arrogant.
Microsoft doesn't have a business problem - it has a political problem.
I call bullshit on that one.
"Monopoly" is a term from the business/economics area, not from politics. Politics is the cluster around "democracy", "monarchy", "elections", "parliament", "president", etc.
Even in anarchy, i.e. ignoring all politics, there are good economic reasons to limit monopolies.
Couldnt they just say 'okay, BYE' and not sell in Europe anymore?
Yes, and in addition to the other commenters, I'd like to point out that Microsoft is a registered company in most european countries.
M$ USA can just let them hang to dry, but M$ the corporation stands to lose them. Not just the revenue, but the assets as well. I'm sure the EU would really like a corporation trying to play hardball, just to have an opportunity to show them that they can close them down, confiscate everything they own, and sue them for some ridiculous amount just to make sure it hurts.
As other commenters said: This also has some problems (I still like it better, but they are right).
One simple fix would be to go by degrees. There are many degrees in which a case can end. For example, in criminal cases you can be pronounced innocent, or you can be let go because of lack of evidence, or because of formal mistakes in the prosecution.
In civil suits, some degrees would be helpful. For example:
* Case thrown out (no merit, frivolous, plain bullshit) * Defendant is right * Plaintiff is right * Plaintiff is totally right and defendant is a bad boy to boot
You could then have the "loser pays all" scenario only for the two extreme cases, where someone did something bad and clearly could or should have known that he did, so it's only right that he pays all the costs for pointing that out.
The commission is not elected, and is in fact more powerful than the parliament. Not very democratic, but on the other hand also not subject to the kind of manipulation that you point out (and that is so common in the US).
The EU can and will enforce this like any other fine. You forget that microsoft is a registered corporation in most EU member countries. Refusing to pay may seem tempting at first, but I'm pretty sure that it would get very nasty very quickly.
And yes, the EU commission actually can ban sales of not only windos, but any and all microsoft products. Sure, the computer resellers would run screaming, but so would microsoft. Check how much of their revenue comes from europe...
I used to work as a sysadmin, so I know the problem. My hard-learned lessons was: Keep your stuff out of the company. You will regret it.
If you need a cell phone to get emergency messages, have your company get you one. Yes, that means carrying around two cell phones.
I'm currently the local security dude, and our policy is no non-company hardware on the company network. Other posters have explained why. But you as a private person really should run the same policy regarding your private stuff.
Why exactly - marketing aside - should the installer care about an average luser? People with no clue nor willingness to acquire one are the main source of virtually any computing problem we have, be it security, spam, worms, whatever.
I don't want Joe Idiot being able to install a computer. No matter how you do it - and Debian is quite good in warning users about unsafe settings - Joe will fuck it up and bring another machine that's already as good as compromised online. Thanks a lot, Joe!
Please, care about the clued-in sysadmin. Give Joe the finger. In fact, IMHO the install should fail and tell the user in no uncertain terms that he's too dumb to run this system if he tries something like setting an empty root password.
Take a number. I think I've heard this about once every 2-3 years pretty much ever since I learned C.
As far as I can recall, none of the alternatives proposed ever came even close to replacing it, and none of the vocal C opponents are still around or being listened to.
Geez, chill. It's just some doctors fighting back against the criminally insane legal system.
You know, some people would prefer to spend more time actually doing the line of work they chose than in court. Doctors are among the most-often sued professionals, and the majority of cases don't have anything even resembling credibility.
As always, Gates has no clue whatsoever and is merely reitterating 10-year old ideas to the general public. How exactly is this news?
I, for one, am utterly convinced that no anti-spam measure will work that does not target the spammers themselves. They will find ways around any and all technological measures - there just is too much money in the business for them not to. Yes, that means we need laws. Get over your stupid american "weee, government baaaad" attitude. I haven't yet heard a convincing argument why laws against theft and rape are bad, and while both problems persist they are at a manageable level.
More important than the laws is that they're actually enforced, though. I want to see the Top 200 spammers in jail. (actually, I want to see them drawn and quartered, then coated in sugar-water and left for the ants, unless someone can suggest a slower and more painful death; I just realize that this wish isn't realistic)
Why don't these "hackers" use their skills to do something productive.
They are.
Do you seriously think that Microsoft would have invested a single dollar into security if it weren't for the malware that's floating around? Even at the current level, they don't exactly take the issue very serious (except during PR time).
I have something I want to do in mind (security research, new frontier stuff, I've made some publications already), so if someone were to offer me a job in that area, I wouldn't think twice.
It boils down to "do I want to do what I'm doing currently?". I know few people who left a job they enjoyed. I know tons of people who would jump at the very first chance they get.
The specific elements differ. Your immediate surrounding (co-workers and the boss) are major points, as is the actual job itself.
So while the governments may be applying policies that 'people' want, they are often horribly counter productive.
Note how I never argued that democracy is the perfect government system. Or in fact, even remotely acceptable. As a matter of fact, it sucks. But that's the way it is.
Slashdot Mirror
There was a very interesting study done about great scientists that ties in here nicely. Essentially, the finding was that they didn't produce better stuff in total, they mostly produced more stuff (papers, articles, research reports, etc.) - thus raising their statistical chances of hitting gold.
I fear Gates understands that method. If you make lots of predictions, chances are some of them will be right. The general public usually remembers your correct predictions, not your failures. Just look at how many journalists consider Gates a visionary.
Big boss of huge software company predicts that hardware prices will drop, software prices not.
In other news, Coca Cola has announced that demand for alcoholic beverages is stagnating while soft drink consumption is up.
One wonders how the US government would react if a foreign nation tried a similar approach.
Really? Isn't it trivially predictable how the US would have reacted?
For all intents and purposes, the US behaves like the alpha male in a pack - namely as if the rules would not apply to them, only to others.
Incidently, that is exactly what is usually meant when we say someone is arrogant.
That are the fines for breaking antitrust laws. I'm sure there are other and additional fines for not paying up fines or ignoring a commission order.
Microsoft doesn't have a business problem - it has a political problem.
I call bullshit on that one.
"Monopoly" is a term from the business/economics area, not from politics. Politics is the cluster around "democracy", "monarchy", "elections", "parliament", "president", etc.
Even in anarchy, i.e. ignoring all politics, there are good economic reasons to limit monopolies.
Couldnt they just say 'okay, BYE' and not sell in Europe anymore?
Yes, and in addition to the other commenters, I'd like to point out that Microsoft is a registered company in most european countries.
M$ USA can just let them hang to dry, but M$ the corporation stands to lose them. Not just the revenue, but the assets as well. I'm sure the EU would really like a corporation trying to play hardball, just to have an opportunity to show them that they can close them down, confiscate everything they own, and sue them for some ridiculous amount just to make sure it hurts.
You didn't get it. This is the fine for having broken the law. It doesn't mean they can continue to do so. It's "stop and pay up", not or.
With the current fine being larger than expected, you can be very sure that if M$ tries the "so what?" game, Monti will get nasty.
and they've managed to threaten the Regents of the University of California
You mean the guys who hold the to some of the header files that SCO at one time listed as proof of violation of their code?
As other commenters said: This also has some problems (I still like it better, but they are right).
One simple fix would be to go by degrees. There are many degrees in which a case can end. For example, in criminal cases you can be pronounced innocent, or you can be let go because of lack of evidence, or because of formal mistakes in the prosecution.
In civil suits, some degrees would be helpful. For example:
* Case thrown out (no merit, frivolous, plain bullshit)
* Defendant is right
* Plaintiff is right
* Plaintiff is totally right and defendant is a bad boy to boot
You could then have the "loser pays all" scenario only for the two extreme cases, where someone did something bad and clearly could or should have known that he did, so it's only right that he pays all the costs for pointing that out.
Who modded the parent as insightful when there are already several comments below refuting it?
Read up on EU political workings.
The commission is not elected, and is in fact more powerful than the parliament. Not very democratic, but on the other hand also not subject to the kind of manipulation that you point out (and that is so common in the US).
The EU can and will enforce this like any other fine. You forget that microsoft is a registered corporation in most EU member countries. Refusing to pay may seem tempting at first, but I'm pretty sure that it would get very nasty very quickly.
And yes, the EU commission actually can ban sales of not only windos, but any and all microsoft products. Sure, the computer resellers would run screaming, but so would microsoft. Check how much of their revenue comes from europe...
I used to work as a sysadmin, so I know the problem. My hard-learned lessons was: Keep your stuff out of the company. You will regret it.
If you need a cell phone to get emergency messages, have your company get you one. Yes, that means carrying around two cell phones.
I'm currently the local security dude, and our policy is no non-company hardware on the company network. Other posters have explained why. But you as a private person really should run the same policy regarding your private stuff.
Why exactly - marketing aside - should the installer care about an average luser? People with no clue nor willingness to acquire one are the main source of virtually any computing problem we have, be it security, spam, worms, whatever.
I don't want Joe Idiot being able to install a computer. No matter how you do it - and Debian is quite good in warning users about unsafe settings - Joe will fuck it up and bring another machine that's already as good as compromised online. Thanks a lot, Joe!
Please, care about the clued-in sysadmin. Give Joe the finger. In fact, IMHO the install should fail and tell the user in no uncertain terms that he's too dumb to run this system if he tries something like setting an empty root password.
Only if he posts pictures of himself doing so in the Internet...
Miguel's view that 'C is dead!'
Take a number. I think I've heard this about once every 2-3 years pretty much ever since I learned C.
As far as I can recall, none of the alternatives proposed ever came even close to replacing it, and none of the vocal C opponents are still around or being listened to.
Geez, chill. It's just some doctors fighting back against the criminally insane legal system.
You know, some people would prefer to spend more time actually doing the line of work they chose than in court. Doctors are among the most-often sued professionals, and the majority of cases don't have anything even resembling credibility.
As always, Gates has no clue whatsoever and is merely reitterating 10-year old ideas to the general public. How exactly is this news?
I, for one, am utterly convinced that no anti-spam measure will work that does not target the spammers themselves. They will find ways around any and all technological measures - there just is too much money in the business for them not to.
Yes, that means we need laws. Get over your stupid american "weee, government baaaad" attitude. I haven't yet heard a convincing argument why laws against theft and rape are bad, and while both problems persist they are at a manageable level.
More important than the laws is that they're actually enforced, though. I want to see the Top 200 spammers in jail. (actually, I want to see them drawn and quartered, then coated in sugar-water and left for the ants, unless someone can suggest a slower and more painful death; I just realize that this wish isn't realistic)
it's damn near impossible to fight your way back.
It is possible. You just need something that you rarely find on pubs: Teamwork.
Why don't these "hackers" use their skills to do something productive.
They are.
Do you seriously think that Microsoft would have invested a single dollar into security if it weren't for the malware that's floating around? Even at the current level, they don't exactly take the issue very serious (except during PR time).
I have something I want to do in mind (security research, new frontier stuff, I've made some publications already), so if someone were to offer me a job in that area, I wouldn't think twice.
It boils down to "do I want to do what I'm doing currently?". I know few people who left a job they enjoyed. I know tons of people who would jump at the very first chance they get.
The specific elements differ. Your immediate surrounding (co-workers and the boss) are major points, as is the actual job itself.
It doesn't have a 3rd button. No way I'm gonna buy it.
How can people live without the 3rd button in X ???
(and no, the wheel doesn't count. try clicking it repeatedly and reliably and you'll know why.)
Gentoo has the Live-CD market cornered, with Knoppix remaining as the only serious competitor. :)
In fact, the Hardened-Gentoo CD rocks. Get it, burn it, take it with you wherever you go, you won't be sorry.
So, China doesn't do those things?
For all I know, they do. But compared to the main offender, their actions pale.
Would it be fair to say countries just do things in their own interest?
Not fair, but honest. That's the word that doesn't work well with politics in the same sentence.
So while the governments may be applying policies that 'people' want, they are often horribly counter productive.
Note how I never argued that democracy is the perfect government system. Or in fact, even remotely acceptable. As a matter of fact, it sucks. But that's the way it is.