There's a lot more to HL7 v3 than just changing the message format to XML. They've completely redefined the message development process, for one. Also the range of things you can express in a message is comparable with any decent ontological language, although that expression itself may be very complex. I'm curious to know exactly what relationship cardinalities you can't express.
It's well known that customer service isn't the primary factor in consumer choice. The biggest factor is price... as long as a store offers the cheapest goods, they can treat their customers like camel dung and the customers will keep coming back. Oh sure, they'll complain, but they will return. Plenty of examples to support this, Best Buy being just one of the worst.
Even for well-established artists, they frequently make more money touring and doing live shows than off selling recorded music. Use the Internet for promotional purposes. Keep a mailing list of your fans, and send them information and maybe give them access to some sneak previews of your music online. Make sure you have the registered publishing rights to your music, and look for ancillary streams of revenue.
I measure respect in dollars. And I don't derive my self-worth from my occupation.
having said that, though, it IS nice for people to listen when I am trying to explain something to them. credibility is king!
Btw. Some of technical details in the article (notably about parametric stereo) are *complete bollocks*. What they describe is Mide-Side stereo.
Parametric stereo transmits only a mono channel plus a very small amount of sideband information that describes how to reconstruct the stereo image (via decorrelation and fading).
so in other words, they transmit mono (L+R, let's call it A) plus information that can be used to reconstruct the stereo signals (L-R, let's call it B, likely to be quite small when L and R are very similar). L is reconstructed from (A + B) / 2, and R is reconstructed from (-A + B) / 2.
There are some situations where server performance matters... heavily-trafficked dynamic content comes to mind. Akamai solves this problem, but is damned expensive. So try to think of BT as a poor man's Akamai.:)
The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer had a discussion on the declining trustworthiness of the media in various opinion polls. Turns out that they think the public either cannot or chooses not to distinguish between reporters who report facts and pundits & commentators who offer opinions. They also pointed out that a lot of so-called reporters (the Anderson Coopers, Christiane Amanpours, Wolf Blitzers... recognizable names from CNN, Fox News, etc.) have gone out of their way to inject opinion into what they report.
I think this trend can be found throughout all media. I understand blogs to be purely opinion-based; I would not rely on them for any pure factual reporting. Same can be said of Armstrong Williams, although that says to me more horrible things about the Bush administration than it does the media. The media has always been a tool for manipulation by politicians and governments, even here in the land of the "free press". Ask Valerie Plame how she feels about it.
As a developer who works almost daily with Eclipse and various Rational products (Clearcase, Clearquest, etc), I can say that the passion with which I hate Clearcase knows no bounds. It's a classic case of someone building a hammer, then going looking for nails. I find it funny that no one will own up to who in our organization decided to license the entire Rational suite for our entire organization without having any of the software groups pilot test it first.
I also find it funny that the curious Frankenstein XDE (Eclipse + Rose welded together) product wasn't mentioned anywhere in the article... despite that being in the suite, none of our developers actually use it. They all still use Rose and Eclipse separately.
Anyway, since I can't read the story, I'll just blather on about conditions here where I work... the #1 cause of failed software projects is poor client management. We all know that the client doesn't know jack about making software... if they did, they wouldn't need to hire us. Yet when the client contradicts themself, the opportune moment to flash that consulting brilliance and prove why we cost so much is immediate. It would be so easy to say "what you've just asked for is impossible because it conflicts with this other thing you asked for". Yet from a marketing perspective, that's bad for business. Why? Because our company's goal is to maximize profit, not to maximize software quality. Believe it or not, we often get contract modifications to fix those very problems we could have circumvented because the developers foresaw them coming. Essentially, we get paid to build the same system twice. How's that for consulting brilliance!
It used to be when a publisher released a product, it was bug-free and of good quality. Nowadays, and this doesn't apply specifically to games -- the same can be said for movies, music and all other "software", you're taking your chances when you purchase something. At least half the products on the market aren't worthy and are just fluff, and the other half are un-original and derivative. And products don't stand on their own any more... they're part of a larger franchised marketing and merchandising plan designed to squeeze as much money from you as possible.
The most notable examples are the hoards of terminally-boring FPS games... Wow, it's just like the last 20 games except now you can sit in a turret or your shots damage texture maps.. oooh.
Your memory is a bit rosy, or perhaps you aren't old enough to remember the Pac-Man product tie-ins (cereal , clothes, etc.) sequels (Ms Pac-Man, Baby Pac-Man, etc.) and clones (Mousetrap, etc.) ? And let's not even talk about movies based on Space Invaders....
It's nice to see someone (Joel Spolsky) rip into.NET as it deserves. I've never worked with.NET or C#, and I understand it has some things going for it (the language itself and the IDE are often mentioned), but I've never been able to grasp what.NET actually _was_.
If you've never worked with it, and don't grasp it, what qualifies you to judge it as deserving of being ripped up?
If you come in and wish to interview only for the advertised position, you might be missing out on an opportunity in an area you really want to work in or would excel at (being a new, unpublicized area, you might be brilliant at it and love it, but not be aware it even exists), and so oftentimes the company puts you through interviews (in this case, ump-teen interviews), so that people in each of those areas have an opportunity to speak-up on your behalf and say, "you know, I could really use him/her here, but the position we have open hasn't been advertised." Putting you in an area that you are likely to love is worth the time "wasted" because you are more likely to be productive.
"Sorry, we've filled all our burger-flipper positions, but we've just bought this newfangled machine that can cook potato strips in about 30 seconds flat, and we think you'd be a perfect fit.... "
If the people making the purchase decisions aren't the software engineers, then why should the advertisements be tailored to them?
of course I am speaking out of the side of my neck... in a more ideal environment, the purse-string-holder would consult the geeky-technician for an opinion before pulling the trigger on any tech purchases.
if we accept that value of a thing is driven by the relative supply and demand of the thing, then a scarce supply (the very definition of a thing that is "difficult to obtain") must drive up the value, irrespective of the actual demand for it.
There are many people with degrees who are terrible workers, and plenty of people without degrees who are excellent workers. (Or spellers.) For what it's worth, I don't think using any sort of blanket disqualification is a good idea, either ethically or from a business perspective.
Depends how you look at the process. From the company's perspective, finding a good candidate for an open position is like a massive search problem, and anything that improves the odds of payoff is a benefit to them, even if its an imperfect process.
Slashdot Mirror
Software patents are evil. Full stop.
I wonder if you would feel the same way if, for example, you came up with an algorithm to factor integers in polynomial time.
There's a lot more to HL7 v3 than just changing the message format to XML. They've completely redefined the message development process, for one. Also the range of things you can express in a message is comparable with any decent ontological language, although that expression itself may be very complex. I'm curious to know exactly what relationship cardinalities you can't express.
You can do XML with v2.x now, anyway.
you buy an airplane ticket on US Airways. They just outsourced their call-center operations.
It's well known that customer service isn't the primary factor in consumer choice. The biggest factor is price... as long as a store offers the cheapest goods, they can treat their customers like camel dung and the customers will keep coming back. Oh sure, they'll complain, but they will return. Plenty of examples to support this, Best Buy being just one of the worst.
Even for well-established artists, they frequently make more money touring and doing live shows than off selling recorded music. Use the Internet for promotional purposes. Keep a mailing list of your fans, and send them information and maybe give them access to some sneak previews of your music online. Make sure you have the registered publishing rights to your music, and look for ancillary streams of revenue.
I measure respect in dollars. And I don't derive my self-worth from my occupation. having said that, though, it IS nice for people to listen when I am trying to explain something to them. credibility is king!
Btw. Some of technical details in the article (notably about parametric stereo) are *complete bollocks*. What they describe is Mide-Side stereo.
Parametric stereo transmits only a mono channel plus a very small amount of sideband information that describes how to reconstruct the stereo image (via decorrelation and fading).
so in other words, they transmit mono (L+R, let's call it A) plus information that can be used to reconstruct the stereo signals (L-R, let's call it B, likely to be quite small when L and R are very similar). L is reconstructed from (A + B) / 2, and R is reconstructed from (-A + B) / 2.
what's bollocks, again?
There are some situations where server performance matters... heavily-trafficked dynamic content comes to mind. Akamai solves this problem, but is damned expensive. So try to think of BT as a poor man's Akamai. :)
The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer had a discussion on the declining trustworthiness of the media in various opinion polls. Turns out that they think the public either cannot or chooses not to distinguish between reporters who report facts and pundits & commentators who offer opinions. They also pointed out that a lot of so-called reporters (the Anderson Coopers, Christiane Amanpours, Wolf Blitzers... recognizable names from CNN, Fox News, etc.) have gone out of their way to inject opinion into what they report.
I think this trend can be found throughout all media. I understand blogs to be purely opinion-based; I would not rely on them for any pure factual reporting. Same can be said of Armstrong Williams, although that says to me more horrible things about the Bush administration than it does the media. The media has always been a tool for manipulation by politicians and governments, even here in the land of the "free press". Ask Valerie Plame how she feels about it.
I would think, legally speaking, it would be more important to hide the source address.
As a developer who works almost daily with Eclipse and various Rational products (Clearcase, Clearquest, etc), I can say that the passion with which I hate Clearcase knows no bounds. It's a classic case of someone building a hammer, then going looking for nails. I find it funny that no one will own up to who in our organization decided to license the entire Rational suite for our entire organization without having any of the software groups pilot test it first.
I also find it funny that the curious Frankenstein XDE (Eclipse + Rose welded together) product wasn't mentioned anywhere in the article... despite that being in the suite, none of our developers actually use it. They all still use Rose and Eclipse separately.
You jackass! I actually clicked on that....
Anyway, since I can't read the story, I'll just blather on about conditions here where I work... the #1 cause of failed software projects is poor client management. We all know that the client doesn't know jack about making software... if they did, they wouldn't need to hire us. Yet when the client contradicts themself, the opportune moment to flash that consulting brilliance and prove why we cost so much is immediate. It would be so easy to say "what you've just asked for is impossible because it conflicts with this other thing you asked for". Yet from a marketing perspective, that's bad for business. Why? Because our company's goal is to maximize profit, not to maximize software quality. Believe it or not, we often get contract modifications to fix those very problems we could have circumvented because the developers foresaw them coming. Essentially, we get paid to build the same system twice. How's that for consulting brilliance!
It used to be when a publisher released a product, it was bug-free and of good quality. Nowadays, and this doesn't apply specifically to games -- the same can be said for movies, music and all other "software", you're taking your chances when you purchase something. At least half the products on the market aren't worthy and are just fluff, and the other half are un-original and derivative. And products don't stand on their own any more... they're part of a larger franchised marketing and merchandising plan designed to squeeze as much money from you as possible.
The most notable examples are the hoards of terminally-boring FPS games... Wow, it's just like the last 20 games except now you can sit in a turret or your shots damage texture maps.. oooh.
Your memory is a bit rosy, or perhaps you aren't old enough to remember the Pac-Man product tie-ins (cereal , clothes, etc.) sequels (Ms Pac-Man, Baby Pac-Man, etc.) and clones (Mousetrap, etc.) ? And let's not even talk about movies based on Space Invaders....
It's nice to see someone (Joel Spolsky) rip into .NET as it deserves. I've never worked with .NET or C#, and I understand it has some things going for it (the language itself and the IDE are often mentioned), but I've never been able to grasp what .NET actually _was_.
If you've never worked with it, and don't grasp it, what qualifies you to judge it as deserving of being ripped up?
If you come in and wish to interview only for the advertised position, you might be missing out on an opportunity in an area you really want to work in or would excel at (being a new, unpublicized area, you might be brilliant at it and love it, but not be aware it even exists), and so oftentimes the company puts you through interviews (in this case, ump-teen interviews), so that people in each of those areas have an opportunity to speak-up on your behalf and say, "you know, I could really use him/her here, but the position we have open hasn't been advertised." Putting you in an area that you are likely to love is worth the time "wasted" because you are more likely to be productive.
"Sorry, we've filled all our burger-flipper positions, but we've just bought this newfangled machine that can cook potato strips in about 30 seconds flat, and we think you'd be a perfect fit.... "If the people making the purchase decisions aren't the software engineers, then why should the advertisements be tailored to them? of course I am speaking out of the side of my neck... in a more ideal environment, the purse-string-holder would consult the geeky-technician for an opinion before pulling the trigger on any tech purchases.
if we accept that value of a thing is driven by the relative supply and demand of the thing, then a scarce supply (the very definition of a thing that is "difficult to obtain") must drive up the value, irrespective of the actual demand for it.
There are many people with degrees who are terrible workers, and plenty of people without degrees who are excellent workers. (Or spellers.) For what it's worth, I don't think using any sort of blanket disqualification is a good idea, either ethically or from a business perspective.
Depends how you look at the process. From the company's perspective, finding a good candidate for an open position is like a massive search problem, and anything that improves the odds of payoff is a benefit to them, even if its an imperfect process.
the USPS does this also... keep this in mind the next time you move and file a request for mail forwarding.
I have run without anti-virus for almost seven years, on various Windows boxes. I have never been virus-infected.
How, exactly, do you know you've never been infected, if you don't use any anti-virus tools to validate that fact for you?
Um, wasn't Krusty Jewish?