I think there's a difference between a product you sell, and something you use internally.
From the start we always said "no client software". We only developed server software, which made our life pretty easy. Theoretically we could still run our stuff on Windows 2000 if we'd choose. No need to upgrade anything, and management couldn't care less about which language we used (as long as it didn't cost too much).
So we could choose the slow road. But not everyone can, I agree. That's why I was curious.
From the osCommerce website: "osCommerce was started in March 2000 and has since matured to a solution that is currently powering 11,456 registered live shops around the world."
For 8 years we wrote everything in VB6. Then VB.NET came along, and we just ignored it. Only by.Net 3.0 have we started to actually use it for new projects. Old projects get converted when they need to be converted (like, when we have to rewrite the whole thing anyway) and otherwise they don't get converted at all. Why whould they? They run pretty good on Windows 2008.
So I'm wondering as to why this is an issue for you. Did everything stop running when you switched to Windows2008? Or did you write client-server apps (that was a no-no even in 1997)? I'm curious:)
It's not just C# that's thriving. The whole DotNet ecosystem is doing quite well.
Just a few days ago I read they have now implemented Contracts: basically a simple way to put all your pre and postconditions and invariants in the routines you write. So now everyone has a simple way of actually using one of the mainstays of verifiable programming.
Java is just a Cobol replacement at the moment. Look at the niche that J2EE is in: companies that scale up to mainframes.
If one my co-workers (of either sex) told me they loved me, that would make working with them at least a little uncomfortable.
No it wouldn't - you'd never have to get your own coffee again. And you'd have them bring nice sandwiches for lunch. I can see all kinds of possibilities to make your life pretty comfortable:)
Getting in trouble for making a co-worker uncomfortable by telling them you love them is a legitimate thing. It's totally inappropriate.
I make my co-workers uncomfortable all the time, by telling them they're idiots for instance, or just displaying my superior intelligence(*). I'm quite sure some of them would by now prefer to have me say that I love them:)
I will admit that in the past I did once have a crush on a male co-worker, but I would never have let him know. People have to behave professionally in the workplace so that everyone can be comfortable working there.
People who get uncomfortable about other people saying that they're the coolest guy/girl in the world for them, need to learn to accept a compliment with grace. Ofcourse, if people can't take the hint after you say "well, sorry, thanks for the compliment but I'm afraid the reverse isn't true." THEN you would have a case. But stating your feelings should be possible. At least for grown-ups. The state of the American public is ofcourse a subject for debate and one could argue that most American's are not grown-ups, at least not emotionally.
But what strikes me most is that venting negative emotions is apparently professional (Steven Ballmer's chair, pointy haired bosses, etc.) but showing positive emotions like appreciation and love are unprofessional. That statement speaks volumes about your (and other people's) ability to deal with emotions you cannot just ignore or shrug off.
Oh, Please! IT infrastructure is the plumbing of the 21st century. This guy is a plumber. It is not his job to decide who should or should not have access to the network any more than it is the job of the master control technician at NBC to decide what to air at 8pm on Thursday nights.
So, let's run by this completely hypothetical scenario then. Say, you are in charge of the plumbing at a facility called "Chernobyl" and your supervisor is asking you to run a few tests, that violate the security protocols. Since he's just a plumber (or operator) I guess you're with the Chernobyl supervisor here... enjoying the glow-in-the-dark effect...
Terry Childs said no. I'm with Terry. Policy isn't there to be ignored the first time someone tells you to. Especially if the policy is much smarter than the person telling you to ignore it.
Since the USA is a safe harbor for war criminals they don't want to prosecute, and we have an ICJ for dealing with that, my question is: when are they going to agree to having the International Court of Justice as a court of law for the warcriminals they don't want to prosecute?
Or would it be that if the USA doesn't prosecute for some reason, it's the due course of law, but if another country does not prosecute for some reason (like, people doing things not being punishable in their country) it is because the country is a "safe harbor"?
I've travelled to China regularly, and also to East Germany in 1987. Compared to the shit you've got to go through with US Customs (10 fingerprints, complete biography emailed before you go there, etc. and then all the risks of possesions being impounded) entering those countries was a breeze.
The onliest place I'd be less likely to visit than the USA in the near future is North Korea.
My son is learning to calculate, multiply etc. at the moment. I use the reduction method at every opportunity, showing him different means of reducing the sums to manageable proportions. Today we discussed 7x8. It took him a while to add up all the eights. Then I told him that 7x8 was 5x8 and 2x8. He knows that 5x8 = 8x5 = 40, so now he only needed to add 16. "Wow, that's easy dad!" was the reply.
He started asking about adding and counting a few months ago and ever since then I'm teaching him: break down the problem. He understands perfectly how it works.
In The Netherlands (and more countries in the EU) the recycling cost is already included in the purchase, the shop is required to pay this fee to a government recycling fund, and every shop is required to take back any stuff that has such a fee attached to it. I had to pay about 3 euros on my new 25 euro DVD player for recycling costs last week.
But for "western" (not to say "civilized") people to be even tempted by this, I find that outright despicable. We have so many other ways to make (granted, less) money that does not involve violence, terror (as in: extreme anxiety and fear, as opposed to terrorism), hostage-taking, and what is essentially simple theft of property.
I'm sure it's better to work for a bank and rob old people of their life-savings by giving them loans they can't repay. Or work for the RIAA and bankrupt unemployed single mothers, and earn some honest money. But I just happen to *like* pirates:)
Only when the webadmin is clueless. Otherwise he'd have configured a default website with a default page, informing you about the reason you arrived at that webpage, and what you need to do to change that.
... or you can just have loads of fun with the macro preprocessor in C. A friend of mine once used this with abandon. And then abandoned his no longer debug-able project:)
One country's terrorist is another country's freedom fighter.
That's a very rude thing to say to a country that was founded by freedom fighters and which currently thinks that it's under threat from terrorists. Somehow, they fail to see the hilarious irony of the situation.
The EU Directive (95/46/EG) is a little bit more relaxed than the parent made it out to be: you can't export personal data to countries that have less strict privacy laws than the EU. So if India has equally strict privacy laws, you could export the data there. But you can't export to the USA since the privacy laws are so bad. The onliest exception is when countries have ratified EU Treaty nr. 108, which deals with this subject. Even then, that is not enough if the country in question only has the laws on paper but does not enforce them.
However, the directive allows for this fact and gives another option for compliance, which is to have all parties involved sign binding contracts that basically put the same obligations as would be required of the EU company, on the shoulders of the other company. It's very much like the US export regulations: you can't export to people unless they agree to the same restrictions.
Apart from that, I don't know too many companies outsourcing customer service to India. Near-shoring to a country like Hungary is in most cases more effective (its in the EU so no hassle with laws or currency), you can be there in a few hours and it's nearly just as cheap.
Usually ends up with someone other than the criminal being shot. I.e. the guy who stabbed the egyptian woman in a courtroom in Dresden earlier this year - the cop shot her husband instead of the killer.
Bad example. A lot of the anger in that case being directed towards the cop was not that he missed, but that he was actually aiming for the husband.
So if we have no idea what will happen, is it really such a great idea to run an experiment on a planetary scale with no safeties, backups or fallbacks?
This was a fortune 500 company. We had many accountants. And many lawyers. My involvement was mainly informational. Since I was involved with patching software that was then sent to customers, I was told what I could and couldn't do and why. I was also asked how it would impact my work.
Okay - my mistake. I assumed it was a case of no accountants, but this looks more like a case of too many accountants:)
(or in my case, perhaps lack of specific knowledge:/ )
you were selling a (product-)lifetime subscription
Our products were not sold as a subscription service. But it's interesting that you bring up subscriptions in this context. I've heard that is why iPhone customers get free software updates while iPod Touch customers have to pay. The iPhone revenue is amortized because it is treated like a service contract, while the iPod Touch revenue is booked all at once because it is treated like a single sale.
Amazing. But this clarifies the problem a bit more. Basically you are creating a liability if you provide free upgrades, but you have no corresponding revenue stream since you took all the profit from the sale at once.
So to a lawyer it would look like: 'take the money and tell everyone you did great, but you have running expenses associated with the sale you're going to have to honour in years to come that you're not taking into account'. This would be a huge item if costs associated with sales would increase in volume with items sold. Like having to fix things manually or warranty costs for physical products.
But a patch is just as valid for one as for one million computers so it's a 'cost of doing business' like advertising and building up your brand, and could be counted as such. However, I can understand that accountants were going to sit on the safe side of the fence with this, after Enron.
Slashdot Mirror
Or you can nuke everyone and that will end fairly quickly as well...
Just pointing out an alternative option :)
I think there's a difference between a product you sell, and something you use internally.
From the start we always said "no client software". We only developed server software, which made our life pretty easy. Theoretically we could still run our stuff on Windows 2000 if we'd choose. No need to upgrade anything, and management couldn't care less about which language we used (as long as it didn't cost too much).
So we could choose the slow road. But not everyone can, I agree. That's why I was curious.
From the osCommerce website: "osCommerce was started in March 2000 and has since matured to a solution that is currently powering 11,456 registered live shops around the world."
I'll refrain from further comment.
For 8 years we wrote everything in VB6. Then VB.NET came along, and we just ignored it. Only by .Net 3.0 have we started to actually use it for new projects. Old projects get converted when they need to be converted (like, when we have to rewrite the whole thing anyway) and otherwise they don't get converted at all. Why whould they? They run pretty good on Windows 2008.
So I'm wondering as to why this is an issue for you. Did everything stop running when you switched to Windows2008? Or did you write client-server apps (that was a no-no even in 1997)? I'm curious :)
Java is alive and well and still running on platforms .NET could never dream of ....
All the platforms that used to run Cobol, you mean. I'm looking at you, J2EE.
It's not just C# that's thriving. The whole DotNet ecosystem is doing quite well.
Just a few days ago I read they have now implemented Contracts: basically a simple way to put all your pre and postconditions and invariants in the routines you write. So now everyone has a simple way of actually using one of the mainstays of verifiable programming.
Java is just a Cobol replacement at the moment. Look at the niche that J2EE is in: companies that scale up to mainframes.
If one my co-workers (of either sex) told me they loved me, that would make working with them at least a little uncomfortable.
No it wouldn't - you'd never have to get your own coffee again. And you'd have them bring nice sandwiches for lunch. I can see all kinds of possibilities to make your life pretty comfortable :)
Getting in trouble for making a co-worker uncomfortable by telling them you love them is a legitimate thing. It's totally inappropriate.
I make my co-workers uncomfortable all the time, by telling them they're idiots for instance, or just displaying my superior intelligence(*). I'm quite sure some of them would by now prefer to have me say that I love them :)
I will admit that in the past I did once have a crush on a male co-worker, but I would never have let him know. People have to behave professionally in the workplace so that everyone can be comfortable working there.
People who get uncomfortable about other people saying that they're the coolest guy/girl in the world for them, need to learn to accept a compliment with grace. Ofcourse, if people can't take the hint after you say "well, sorry, thanks for the compliment but I'm afraid the reverse isn't true." THEN you would have a case. But stating your feelings should be possible. At least for grown-ups. The state of the American public is ofcourse a subject for debate and one could argue that most American's are not grown-ups, at least not emotionally.
But what strikes me most is that venting negative emotions is apparently professional (Steven Ballmer's chair, pointy haired bosses, etc.) but showing positive emotions like appreciation and love are unprofessional. That statement speaks volumes about your (and other people's) ability to deal with emotions you cannot just ignore or shrug off.
(*) I'm kidding :)
Wrong.
The only way to be sure is to nuke it from orbit.
Have a nice day.
Oh, Please! IT infrastructure is the plumbing of the 21st century. This guy is a plumber. It is not his job to decide who should or should not have access to the network any more than it is the job of the master control technician at NBC to decide what to air at 8pm on Thursday nights.
So, let's run by this completely hypothetical scenario then. Say, you are in charge of the plumbing at a facility called "Chernobyl" and your supervisor is asking you to run a few tests, that violate the security protocols.
Since he's just a plumber (or operator) I guess you're with the Chernobyl supervisor here... enjoying the glow-in-the-dark effect...
Terry Childs said no. I'm with Terry. Policy isn't there to be ignored the first time someone tells you to. Especially if the policy is much smarter than the person telling you to ignore it.
I think this is great news.
Since the USA is a safe harbor for war criminals they don't want to prosecute, and we have an ICJ for dealing with that, my question is: when are they going to agree to having the International Court of Justice as a court of law for the warcriminals they don't want to prosecute?
Or would it be that if the USA doesn't prosecute for some reason, it's the due course of law, but if another country does not prosecute for some reason (like, people doing things not being punishable in their country) it is because the country is a "safe harbor"?
Naaaah...
I've travelled to China regularly, and also to East Germany in 1987. Compared to the shit you've got to go through with US Customs (10 fingerprints, complete biography emailed before you go there, etc. and then all the risks of possesions being impounded) entering those countries was a breeze.
The onliest place I'd be less likely to visit than the USA in the near future is North Korea.
Apparently, it's in Copenhagen at the moment. If you're quick you can still get in on the action :)
And I think we should name it "Stupid".
Even for Idle, this must be a new low.
By the time your children reach 14, don't you think you should have told them something about where babies come from?
My son is learning to calculate, multiply etc. at the moment. I use the reduction method at every opportunity, showing him different means of reducing the sums to manageable proportions. Today we discussed 7x8. It took him a while to add up all the eights. Then I told him that 7x8 was 5x8 and 2x8. He knows that 5x8 = 8x5 = 40, so now he only needed to add 16. "Wow, that's easy dad!" was the reply.
He started asking about adding and counting a few months ago and ever since then I'm teaching him: break down the problem. He understands perfectly how it works.
In The Netherlands (and more countries in the EU) the recycling cost is already included in the purchase, the shop is required to pay this fee to a government recycling fund, and every shop is required to take back any stuff that has such a fee attached to it. I had to pay about 3 euros on my new 25 euro DVD player for recycling costs last week.
...
But for "western" (not to say "civilized") people to be even tempted by this, I find that outright despicable. We have so many other ways to make (granted, less) money that does not involve violence, terror (as in: extreme anxiety and fear, as opposed to terrorism), hostage-taking, and what is essentially simple theft of property.
I'm sure it's better to work for a bank and rob old people of their life-savings by giving them loans they can't repay. Or work for the RIAA and bankrupt unemployed single mothers, and earn some honest money. But I just happen to *like* pirates :)
Only when the webadmin is clueless. Otherwise he'd have configured a default website with a default page, informing you about the reason you arrived at that webpage, and what you need to do to change that.
... or you can just have loads of fun with the macro preprocessor in C. A friend of mine once used this with abandon. And then abandoned his no longer debug-able project :)
That's a very rude thing to say to a country that was founded by freedom fighters and which currently thinks that it's under threat from terrorists. Somehow, they fail to see the hilarious irony of the situation.
The British folk might just see it, however.
The EU Directive (95/46/EG) is a little bit more relaxed than the parent made it out to be: you can't export personal data to countries that have less strict privacy laws than the EU. So if India has equally strict privacy laws, you could export the data there. But you can't export to the USA since the privacy laws are so bad. The onliest exception is when countries have ratified EU Treaty nr. 108, which deals with this subject. Even then, that is not enough if the country in question only has the laws on paper but does not enforce them.
However, the directive allows for this fact and gives another option for compliance, which is to have all parties involved sign binding contracts that basically put the same obligations as would be required of the EU company, on the shoulders of the other company. It's very much like the US export regulations: you can't export to people unless they agree to the same restrictions.
Apart from that, I don't know too many companies outsourcing customer service to India. Near-shoring to a country like Hungary is in most cases more effective (its in the EU so no hassle with laws or currency), you can be there in a few hours and it's nearly just as cheap.
Usually ends up with someone other than the criminal being shot. I.e. the guy who stabbed the egyptian woman in a courtroom in Dresden earlier this year - the cop shot her husband instead of the killer.
Bad example. A lot of the anger in that case being directed towards the cop was not that he missed, but that he was actually aiming for the husband.
I'd rather live in a hot planet with freedom, than a cool planet with modern-day feudalism
You just upgraded the old saying "I'd rather reign in Hell, than serve in Heaven" - congratulations :)
Other than that, it's a strawman argument because you present two choices that are both false. Well done! :)
So if we have no idea what will happen, is it really such a great idea to run an experiment on a planetary scale with no safeties, backups or fallbacks?
For this type of stuff, I hire an accountant.
This was a fortune 500 company. We had many accountants. And many lawyers. My involvement was mainly informational. Since I was involved with patching software that was then sent to customers, I was told what I could and couldn't do and why. I was also asked how it would impact my work.
Okay - my mistake. I assumed it was a case of no accountants, but this looks more like a case of too many accountants :)
(or in my case, perhaps lack of specific knowledge :/ )
you were selling a (product-)lifetime subscription
Our products were not sold as a subscription service. But it's interesting that you bring up subscriptions in this context. I've heard that is why iPhone customers get free software updates while iPod Touch customers have to pay. The iPhone revenue is amortized because it is treated like a service contract, while the iPod Touch revenue is booked all at once because it is treated like a single sale.
Amazing. But this clarifies the problem a bit more. Basically you are creating a liability if you provide free upgrades, but you have no corresponding revenue stream since you took all the profit from the sale at once.
So to a lawyer it would look like: 'take the money and tell everyone you did great, but you have running expenses associated with the sale you're going to have to honour in years to come that you're not taking into account'. This would be a huge item if costs associated with sales would increase in volume with items sold. Like having to fix things manually or warranty costs for physical products.
But a patch is just as valid for one as for one million computers so it's a 'cost of doing business' like advertising and building up your brand, and could be counted as such. However, I can understand that accountants were going to sit on the safe side of the fence with this, after Enron.