Unless Slashdot has a very high percentage of entymologists, I don't think it is that newsworthy for slashdot readers. BTW the submitter was flogging his own book it seems?
Note how the submitter carefully injected a story into the central nervous system of the blog site.
Using carefully crafted words, the readers were left with their ability to evaluate the value of the link paralyzed, but still completely capable of actually moving on the the site.
And once in the submitter's lair, the pitch is made and the book is pushed.
And although this tactic may be considered by some as proof of an intelligently designed marketing scheme, you can see how it may just as easily have evolved from more crude but similar methods. Previous book-pushers would simply welcome with delight the random web visitor. Then they would notice how "lucky" their friends were when popular blogs noted works and puched more "random visitors" to their book sites. And then finally to the inevitable proactive, nearly parasitic methods employed here.
This is kind of a deal breaker for me, as I make my living using Photoshop to a VERY large degree. Using it with Rosetta may be "passable"...it's just not going to cut it in the long run.
Same here, though the conclusion will differ. I am sitting in front of a 400MHz G3 iMac, and just finished filling out my tax forms. The sizable refund will be going towards a Mac and a PC (PC for both Windows and Linux toying). I was really excited about going for an iMacintel, though I was also wondering how tempted I would be by the drop in G5 prices I expected to see. When none occured, I wondered. I think we are now seeing why.
The Ars Technica tests were interesting. Rosetta is great, but not that great. It really will be nothing more than a crutch to help those who are willing and able to stay cutting edge get along until the vendors get up to date.
the eprformance hits are not slight. And hence, I think we are now understanding why Apple can still charge just as much for their G5 iMacs as their Intel iMacs, despite the "twice as many clock cycles per buck" argument.
So for many, this may be an incentive to stay away until the Macintel version 2.0 series of pooters come out. For myself, who was recently laid off and therefore separated from real computers sans his rinkydinky G3 iMac, and who has the luxury of a wad of cash coming his way, I think it means I'll be among the last wave of G5 buyers.
by the way... can I have a job?
Hmmmm...
Geeks are the kinds of people who enjoy things like gadgets, the best example of which could be today's slew of robot house cleaners, right? I mean, the normal people look at these devices and say "Why the hell would I want to shell out $x dollars for that," where x is a figure carefully calculated to make the object seem cool, causing an increase in sales equal to y, such that the increase more than offsets the loss in revenue caused by fewer people buying it.
Geeks and nerds all getting hoopy about robots and ensuing revolutions, then paying the price when civilization reverts back to anialistic lawlessness.... where have I heard before?
The Encyclopaedia Galactica defines a robot as a mechanical apparatus designed to do the work of a man. The marketing division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation defines a robot as "Your Plastic Pal Who's Fun To Be With."
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy defines the marketing division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation as "a bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes,"...
Curiously enough, an edition of the Encyclopaedia Galactica that had the good fortune to fall through a time warp from a thousand years in the future defined the marketing division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation as "a bunch of mindless jerks who were the first against the wall when the revolution came."
Successful geeks have really hot wives...
I am a female, heterosexual geek, you insensitive clod!
Ok, actually, I'm a guy. But no women seem to be standing up for the "women are good at math and science, too" argument, which I actually do believe. I figure I can make the point, rake in the karma (real karma, not that fake slashdot karma krap), and cash it in for an actual date with a woman who is first attracted to my sensitivity.
For the record, at one AU distance, it would take the system 5.64701404*10^17 years for an orbit. That's like 10 order of magnitude longer then the sun's life span.
I'm taking your calcualtions for granted. But this seems to pretty well blow this puppy out of the water. Even if such a star were to exist, I can hardly see us as a binary pair. More like two ships passing in the night, sharing a very slight influence on each other's systems via gravity.
I agree that checks and balances are the only things we can count on.
I also point out, and I haven't seen this anywhere else yet, that these kinds of systems are inevitable. I believe we should actually welcome this kind of system, if only because resisting it would be like holding back the tide. Holland aside, you can't fight progress. If the government doesn't do it, some company eventually will, and they'll do it without any limits on what they can do with the information, except for the Darwinian "Free Market" ideals that only the rich believe work.
Instead, our only hope is to fight more strongly than ever for those checks and balances within our governments. They are failing miserably now, especially here in America. That can be used as an argument against camera systems like these. But stopping the surveillance because of what can be done with it is like outlawing guns for what can be done with them. It just doesn't stop the people who would do ill with them. Those who would break the law with surveillance would more than likely break the law to get surveillance if need be.
Get active in government. Become an activist. Make DAMN sure the politicians know we're watching them, and that we don't like it when they break the rules, even if their intentions when doing so are good. Only then will we make sure they won't break the rules when their intentions are bad. Hmmm... thinking of the parallels between Watergate wire tapping and Bush's True Lies confession: "Yes we're bypassing checks and balances to wire tap people, but they were all bad."
One problem IT/IS/geeks have, myself being the prime example, is that we expect concepts like logic to have weight with the PHB's.
Consider: in many companies, there are shipping managers, production managers, acquisition managers, etc. All of these positions need management, and these managers are recognized for the needs they have and the accomplishments they make getting their tasks done. Rightly so.
But in how many places is the IT department looked on with no more forethought than the secretary who buys pens, staplers and paper for the office?
Every company is different, but I'd wager that in most, the IT infrastructure (be it phone or data or both) is so crucial to the day to day operations as well as the long term growth that IT people should in a perfect world be in the board room (or whatever lesser equivalent you have) contributing to the decision making process.
That just isn't the case, however. I also experience the problem. I used to manage our web services ($3million/year printer). But I was needed in production, so without discussion, the responsibilities were handed over to a consultant. I've spent the last year helping them put out the fires they caused by (1) using Windows 2k3 server, and (2) having a poor understanding of web services. How can people like you and I convice the PHB that reverse dns lookups are importnat when the consultants they hire tell them (to cover the fact they don't understand and can't get classless delegation working) that it isn't?
The cause, and unfortunately the answer too, is politics. It's not that they reject the logical arguments. It's that they don't speak that language. I took Russian in high school, and could converse by the time my 4 years were up. But conversing was a matter of thinking in English and translating pre-vocalization to Russian. So it is with IT and business.
We're like the stone masons of old, living in our own temples while constructing the fortresses financed and managed by others.
No the link was not at all necessary in a journalistic sense. But my guess, looking at the post in its entirety, is that the link was absolutely necessary for other reasons.
Consider that the post as a whole has an accusatory tone. To my eyes, it smacks of What kind of person, after all, would feel the need to buy this collection and at this price?
If indeed I am not reading too much between roelbj's well thought out prose, then the Hey look at the fat person link is not at all out of place. Indeed, it becomes not only on-topic, but also necessary to further the point of We're not like them. by forwarding what is obviously in his minds another example of a subgroup he wants to publicly separate himself from.
Furthermore, one can read into roelbj's inclusion of the link a need to connect with his reader through a mutual separation from suspect subgroups. Could the need to drive home the point We're not like them been a subconscious justification of the inclusion of the fat person post? And if so, from whence the need to emphasize commonality with others? Is that connection somehow lacking in roelbj's life? Hey look everybody... let's all do something together! Please?becomes a search for a link that nearly everyone would surely look upon in the same light as he, and the need for contact is fulfilled.
In the interests of full disclosure... Yes, I struggle with my weight, but no am not presently nor have I ever been bonded with my sofa. I also have a nagging, hard-to-let-go-of belief in journalism, and that even Slashdot may someday climb one more rung on the ladder up towards a journalistic ideal.
I was surprised to read the oops reference, because I actually thought something similar recently as well.
I hate Britney's music as much as the next guy - perhaps more owing to my BFA - Music/Recording degree.
But while being subjected to my young girls' favorite CD (Kids Bop #whatever), I was listening to Oops. As it was a remake, I wasn't, *ahem* visualizing Britney, and I heard the song for what (or whatever) it really is.
And as pop goes, it really isn't badly written at all. The phrasing matches the lyrics superbly. And it's not really that simple, despite its pop-tart packaging.
she'll later decide that detainees (as opposed to prisoners) at Guantanamo Bay are not being injured, but are instead merely being inconvenienced?
Not that I mind there are actually one or two real terrorists among the other political prisoners being held there against their will and without legal recourse - hey I'm American too, turn off the Patriot Act Special Forces and call off the FBI, there's no need to come and arrest my ass for speakin....... [NO CARRIER]
[RESUME TRANSMISSION]
To all Slashdot Denizons... notnAP has been inconvenienced, but we assure you, not injured.
I understand the "we're better than Geico" implications... how can you stop people from looking for instances like that, even if it's a trademarked name you are looking for?
But then again, people use Google like a phone book nowadays. Typing in Geico is a way to quickly find their web site. I myself do this quite a bit when searching for sites whose domain name approximates but is not a perfect match for the company name. In that way, it more closely approximates a dns search than a word search. In this light, I can understand the ruling.
I'm torn between the two viewpoints. It's a cultural issue, it seems to me. How is Google used? Is it more like a research tool (in which case I don't agree with the ruling) or a directory assistance tool (in which case I do)?
Playboy checks Wayback to look for infringers of its trademark bunny or other images.
In a related story, managers at Playboy have taken note of productivity differences between John Salem, who was tasked with finding instances of people illegally using the playboy logo, and Henry Waxman, who has been looking for instances of "other images," but has been observed taking frequent bathroom breaks.
Call it "oid"
That way, the name will be informative, and will help alleviate future pointless debate over whether it is a planet (It is, and it's called Oid) or a planetoid (that's what I said... planet-oid).
-nAP
I know the primary reason for collecting these items has little to do with actual investment value. But I do have to wonder... Will these items ever be more valuable than they are now, at the height of the SW I, II, and III hype. With ROTS putting what most consider to be a fitting end to the story line (albeit in the middle of the story line), will there ever be as much SW hype as there is now?
Inflation will add to the price over time, but I can't imagine that ever again there will be as much interest in these itmes as there is now. Hard time recooping the money, the purchaser will have.
Slashdot Mirror
Note how the submitter carefully injected a story into the central nervous system of the blog site.
Using carefully crafted words, the readers were left with their ability to evaluate the value of the link paralyzed, but still completely capable of actually moving on the the site.
And once in the submitter's lair, the pitch is made and the book is pushed.
And although this tactic may be considered by some as proof of an intelligently designed marketing scheme, you can see how it may just as easily have evolved from more crude but similar methods. Previous book-pushers would simply welcome with delight the random web visitor. Then they would notice how "lucky" their friends were when popular blogs noted works and puched more "random visitors" to their book sites. And then finally to the inevitable proactive, nearly parasitic methods employed here.
This is kind of a deal breaker for me, as I make my living using Photoshop to a VERY large degree. Using it with Rosetta may be "passable"...it's just not going to cut it in the long run.
Same here, though the conclusion will differ. I am sitting in front of a 400MHz G3 iMac, and just finished filling out my tax forms. The sizable refund will be going towards a Mac and a PC (PC for both Windows and Linux toying). I was really excited about going for an iMacintel, though I was also wondering how tempted I would be by the drop in G5 prices I expected to see. When none occured, I wondered. I think we are now seeing why.
The Ars Technica tests were interesting. Rosetta is great, but not that great. It really will be nothing more than a crutch to help those who are willing and able to stay cutting edge get along until the vendors get up to date.
the eprformance hits are not slight. And hence, I think we are now understanding why Apple can still charge just as much for their G5 iMacs as their Intel iMacs, despite the "twice as many clock cycles per buck" argument.
So for many, this may be an incentive to stay away until the Macintel version 2.0 series of pooters come out. For myself, who was recently laid off and therefore separated from real computers sans his rinkydinky G3 iMac, and who has the luxury of a wad of cash coming his way, I think it means I'll be among the last wave of G5 buyers.
by the way... can I have a job?
Geeks are the kinds of people who enjoy things like gadgets, the best example of which could be today's slew of robot house cleaners, right? I mean, the normal people look at these devices and say "Why the hell would I want to shell out $x dollars for that," where x is a figure carefully calculated to make the object seem cool, causing an increase in sales equal to y, such that the increase more than offsets the loss in revenue caused by fewer people buying it.
Geeks and nerds all getting hoopy about robots and ensuing revolutions, then paying the price when civilization reverts back to anialistic lawlessness.... where have I heard before?
-Douglas Adams,I am a female, heterosexual geek, you insensitive clod!
Ok, actually, I'm a guy. But no women seem to be standing up for the "women are good at math and science, too" argument, which I actually do believe. I figure I can make the point, rake in the karma (real karma, not that fake slashdot karma krap), and cash it in for an actual date with a woman who is first attracted to my sensitivity.
I'm taking your calcualtions for granted. But this seems to pretty well blow this puppy out of the water. Even if such a star were to exist, I can hardly see us as a binary pair. More like two ships passing in the night, sharing a very slight influence on each other's systems via gravity.
I also point out, and I haven't seen this anywhere else yet, that these kinds of systems are inevitable. I believe we should actually welcome this kind of system, if only because resisting it would be like holding back the tide. Holland aside, you can't fight progress. If the government doesn't do it, some company eventually will, and they'll do it without any limits on what they can do with the information, except for the Darwinian "Free Market" ideals that only the rich believe work.
Instead, our only hope is to fight more strongly than ever for those checks and balances within our governments. They are failing miserably now, especially here in America. That can be used as an argument against camera systems like these. But stopping the surveillance because of what can be done with it is like outlawing guns for what can be done with them. It just doesn't stop the people who would do ill with them. Those who would break the law with surveillance would more than likely break the law to get surveillance if need be.
Get active in government. Become an activist. Make DAMN sure the politicians know we're watching them, and that we don't like it when they break the rules, even if their intentions when doing so are good. Only then will we make sure they won't break the rules when their intentions are bad. Hmmm... thinking of the parallels between Watergate wire tapping and Bush's True Lies confession: "Yes we're bypassing checks and balances to wire tap people, but they were all bad."
Consider: in many companies, there are shipping managers, production managers, acquisition managers, etc. All of these positions need management, and these managers are recognized for the needs they have and the accomplishments they make getting their tasks done. Rightly so.
But in how many places is the IT department looked on with no more forethought than the secretary who buys pens, staplers and paper for the office?
Every company is different, but I'd wager that in most, the IT infrastructure (be it phone or data or both) is so crucial to the day to day operations as well as the long term growth that IT people should in a perfect world be in the board room (or whatever lesser equivalent you have) contributing to the decision making process.
That just isn't the case, however. I also experience the problem. I used to manage our web services ($3million/year printer). But I was needed in production, so without discussion, the responsibilities were handed over to a consultant. I've spent the last year helping them put out the fires they caused by (1) using Windows 2k3 server, and (2) having a poor understanding of web services. How can people like you and I convice the PHB that reverse dns lookups are importnat when the consultants they hire tell them (to cover the fact they don't understand and can't get classless delegation working) that it isn't?
The cause, and unfortunately the answer too, is politics. It's not that they reject the logical arguments. It's that they don't speak that language. I took Russian in high school, and could converse by the time my 4 years were up. But conversing was a matter of thinking in English and translating pre-vocalization to Russian. So it is with IT and business.
We're like the stone masons of old, living in our own temples while constructing the fortresses financed and managed by others.
While funny, this post would have been even funnier if posted as Anonymous Coward.
Consider that the post as a whole has an accusatory tone. To my eyes, it smacks of What kind of person, after all, would feel the need to buy this collection and at this price?
If indeed I am not reading too much between roelbj's well thought out prose, then the Hey look at the fat person link is not at all out of place. Indeed, it becomes not only on-topic, but also necessary to further the point of We're not like them. by forwarding what is obviously in his minds another example of a subgroup he wants to publicly separate himself from.
Furthermore, one can read into roelbj's inclusion of the link a need to connect with his reader through a mutual separation from suspect subgroups. Could the need to drive home the point We're not like them been a subconscious justification of the inclusion of the fat person post? And if so, from whence the need to emphasize commonality with others? Is that connection somehow lacking in roelbj's life? Hey look everybody... let's all do something together! Please?becomes a search for a link that nearly everyone would surely look upon in the same light as he, and the need for contact is fulfilled.
In the interests of full disclosure... Yes, I struggle with my weight, but no am not presently nor have I ever been bonded with my sofa. I also have a nagging, hard-to-let-go-of belief in journalism, and that even Slashdot may someday climb one more rung on the ladder up towards a journalistic ideal.
If this article sucks, it is a good read?
I hate Britney's music as much as the next guy - perhaps more owing to my BFA - Music/Recording degree.
But while being subjected to my young girls' favorite CD (Kids Bop #whatever), I was listening to Oops. As it was a remake, I wasn't, *ahem* visualizing Britney, and I heard the song for what (or whatever) it really is.
And as pop goes, it really isn't badly written at all. The phrasing matches the lyrics superbly. And it's not really that simple, despite its pop-tart packaging.
OBR* - And Ms. Spears has nice breasts.
* - Obligatory Breast Reference
Not that I mind there are actually one or two real terrorists among the other political prisoners being held there against their will and without legal recourse - hey I'm American too, turn off the Patriot Act Special Forces and call off the FBI, there's no need to come and arrest my ass for speakin....... [NO CARRIER]
[RESUME TRANSMISSION] To all Slashdot Denizons... notnAP has been inconvenienced, but we assure you, not injured.
*grin* I like our chances...
Actually, if you crash hard enough, you will form Helium pellets.
... and a very small pile of carbon dust.
Only the ancient synth geeks among us will have understood this emu pun/reference.
See here for emu info.
about 1 second in jail for each 175 spams sent out.
But then again, people use Google like a phone book nowadays. Typing in Geico is a way to quickly find their web site. I myself do this quite a bit when searching for sites whose domain name approximates but is not a perfect match for the company name. In that way, it more closely approximates a dns search than a word search. In this light, I can understand the ruling.
I'm torn between the two viewpoints. It's a cultural issue, it seems to me. How is Google used? Is it more like a research tool (in which case I don't agree with the ruling) or a directory assistance tool (in which case I do)?
And for those who do not know, NTSC stands for Never Twice the Same Color.
Playboy checks Wayback to look for infringers of its trademark bunny or other images.
In a related story, managers at Playboy have taken note of productivity differences between John Salem, who was tasked with finding instances of people illegally using the playboy logo, and Henry Waxman, who has been looking for instances of "other images," but has been observed taking frequent bathroom breaks.
Planet Reagan
*shiver*
Call it "oid"
That way, the name will be informative, and will help alleviate future pointless debate over whether it is a planet (It is, and it's called Oid) or a planetoid (that's what I said... planet-oid). -nAP
either funny or redundant. whatever.
This ying-yang philosophy is clearly shown
Firefox and the world in a perfectly symbiotic, harmonious relationship. Firefox helps the world, and the world helps Firefox.
Actually, this sounds more and more like Microsoft's corporate game plan.
You forgot "you insensitive clod," you insensitive clod.
See here.
I know the primary reason for collecting these items has little to do with actual investment value. But I do have to wonder... Will these items ever be more valuable than they are now, at the height of the SW I, II, and III hype. With ROTS putting what most consider to be a fitting end to the story line (albeit in the middle of the story line), will there ever be as much SW hype as there is now?
Inflation will add to the price over time, but I can't imagine that ever again there will be as much interest in these itmes as there is now. Hard time recooping the money, the purchaser will have.