Absolutely right, but at what point do we decide that a weapon would be so powerful, there's no advantage to building or using it, because it would mean our own destruction too?
I think many people feel nuclear weapons are already at this point, but the problem is, there are plenty of military-sponsored studies showing the contrary. They firmly believe that used tactically, a nuclear bomb or three wouldn't necessarily mean life ends for the nation using it against an enemy nation. (Of course, much depends on the ability for the enemy to retaliate in kind.)
Taking things to the next level though? I can't see the logic behind it, unless you really are dealing with interplanetary battles. (EG. We feel a need to completely wipe out another planet, before they do the same to ours.)
I don't know... The thing that impressed me the most about Leo is he comes across as the "teacher" type of person. He presents things well, and almost always has a quick, informed response when questions are thrown at him. He may not be quite as "technical" as some people, but most "very technical" people aren't so skilled at communicating their knowledge so others can understand them (especially when they have a small time window to do it in).
I think Patrick does a good job too, and agree that he "belongs on the show". To be honest though, I'm not sure it's possible to please "the masses" with any type of computer-centric program. It's the same problem you have if you try to get women to sit down with you and enjoy some show about hot-rodding cars. The majority of them are going to complain and ask you to change channels.
I suspect the women (Morgan, Cat, etc.) were brought in to try to cancel some of this effect out. Sort of a "Hey, look - here are women who actually LIKE this stuff. See girls, you should give it a chance!" But that's shallow and people generally see right through it.
Personally, I find it a little insulting that Comcast would even think TechTV makes sense to merge with a *gaming channel*.
Is that really all they think TechTV was --- a bunch of people PLAYING with their computers for fun and entertainment?
It seems to me TechTV served a few very useful purposes, not the least of which was providing free, quality phone support to callers. (In this day and age of "prices shaved to the bone PCs", the average consumer is pretty much left in the dark if he/she has questions not covered by the instructions that came with a hardware or software product. What options do they get? Call India and have someone rattle off canned answers from a card?)
Also, I found a number of very informative bits on TechTV over the years that even the most advanced computer user could appreciate. I remember enjoying an interview Leo did with the man who invented the first mouse (had his working prototype made out of wood on the show). I remember an interesting piece they did just recently with the site operator of rootkit.com. The list goes on, but the point is, TechTV wasn't just some show hawking the latest video games. They covered them, of course - but not without balance.
With the original staff gone, and merging with G4, it sounds to me like it's going to get turned into a big promotional channel for selling video games and related gaming hardware, and will run off anyone just trying to be more productive with their PC, learn more about system security and administration, and so on.
No, like many PC die-hard users, you're completely missing the point.
As much as anything, the Mac is about the OS and the applications. Can you run Mac OS X on your PC? I think not. Do you have Final Cut Pro or Express in a Windows version? Again, I think not.
I happen to use both a PC and a Mac, and each has strengths and weaknesses, mostly with their roots in either the OS or the software.
Hardware-wise, sure, a Mac is fairly similar to a PC in construction, other than using an alternate processor type. But the CPU is the "brain" of the whole box - so I'd say that, alone, can make some difference. Furthermore, when you buy a Mac, you generally get better quality of construction and interesting little "extras" that add nice touches. You also get technical support that speaks English and answers the phone in under 5 minutes most of the time.
Take Apple's Powerbook laptop, for example. If you want a laptop with a 17" screen, tell me which Windows PC laptop is going to be as thin and lightweight as Apple's? So far, the most popular 17" display PC laptops I've seen are an HP Pavilion and a Toshiba, both of which are thick bricks by comparison (and neither offers the backlit keyboard of the Powerbook 17" either).
But I digress.... When it comes to video editing, I run into hassles all the time with the popular consumer-grade Windows/PC packages. Take, for example, Pinnacle Studio. That thing has more update patches than you can shake a stick at, and if you don't apply them all, you get all sorts of issues with video freezing in the middle of downloading from your DV camcorder, GPF's while adding transitions, etc. etc. And Pinnacle is probably a better package than some.
On something like Apple's iMovie, you can buy all sorts of quality 3rd. party transitions and effects plug-ins (like "Slick Transitions" or the eZedia packages), and do some pretty advanced stuff, all for well under $200. (These things do everything from simulated snowing/raining in your video to transposing backgrounds onto blue-screens.) I don't see almost anyone producing worthwhile stuff with Microsoft's answer to iMovie, Windows Movie Maker.
Cancel your Gartner Group newsletter subscription! Last time I checked (and this was years ago), they wanted several hundred bucks a year for the thing - and all you got in the mail each month was a stapled-together newsletter consisting of under 30 pages!
I mean, honestly, all the Gartner Group ever seems to do is publish generic assessments on operating system upgrades, database packages, and the like -- and anyone surfing the net for a few hours a month, reading up on computer related news would be just as informed, if not more so.
Ok, but to this I say - "Apple Mac". Seriously, if there was ever a strong argument for buying today's PowerMac system, it's got to be for video editing.
The G5 systems support up to 8GB of RAM, and it's not at all uncommon to find people configuring them with at least 2GB - 4GB right now. (Because quite frankly, it's not really that costly to do so using 512MB PC3200 DIMMs. They have 8 slots on their board.)
I've done video editing from a DV camcorder on my Pentium 4, and believe me, I get *much* more accomplished without crashes and hassles using Final Cut Express or even iMovie with some 3rd. party plug-ins. Don't forget, Steve Jobs owns Pixar, along with being Apple's C.E.O. That means he's VERY attuned to the needs of movie producers and editors. His systems practically revolve around it. So I'm only concerned with what Apple does, when it comes to a need for more CPU, RAM or disk space + video editing, and I suspect I'm in the majority in that particular niche of the market.
My big issue with these ads are the way they tend to bog down the connection.... I have no problem ignoring the advertising, but what I can't ignore is reduced xfer rates due to them streaming updated ads to me the whole time I'm connected!
I guess it really depends on how it's implemented. Software like ICQ has advertising running with it, and it never really bothers me in the least. The ads are small, and generally use very little bandwidth. Besides, they only seem to display 2 or 3 at a time.
But I could easily see this turning into a big annoyance, with hundreds of rotating ads, some including sound and streaming video.
Perhaps, but perhaps not. I'm more inclined to refrain from pre-judging a person based on their clothing choices. I'll agree that, all else being equal, odds are greater that the sloppy dresser in worn-out sneakers and holes in their jeans also lacks some basic social skills. But there's no direct correlation between the two. (EG. My I.Q., personality and/or skillset doesn't change when I dress nicely.)
Proper hygene and a personal choice to wear more "casual" clothing are two completely different issues. There's no excuse for not washing one's hair, taking a shower, and so forth. That's just laziness and a lack of self-respect, and as you said - indicates a person you can't really trust to take care of important matters in the workplace.
With clothing, there are so many reasons someone opts to dress a particular way. I've worn the shirt, tie and dress slacks before, when employers required it. My opinion is, it's just not very comfortable or practical. I remember working as a computer technician for a store that required it, and I actually got my tie caught in a CPU fan once! Even where I work now, doing on-site service, I was originally told I couldn't wear jeans to work. Initially, I obeyed the rules, wearing kackis/dress slacks instead, but I had enough of that after shreding up a couple pairs while crawling around on the floor, stringing network cables for people, and helping remove old monitors and re-arrange systems. I just started wearing jeans (but always new-looking, clean ones), coupled with nice shirts - and nobody so much as commented once on my breaking the dress code.
To be honest, the RFID tag issue seems relatively minor compared to the privacy issues we're already forced to endure when shopping at some of the larger retailers.
I was just watching a news piece on last night's local TV broadcast about how sophisticated the cameras have become at Home Depot stores. Apparently, their entire store is covered by cameras on the ceiling, and photos are taken and digitally stored of each person as they make purchases at the checkout counter.
They were bragging about how a murder case was solved in this manner, because a label and UPC code were found on the handle of a rake used in the crime. This traced it back to Home Depot, where they were able to input the UPC code and retreive perfectly clear photos of the person buying the rake. Home Depot claims they store all of this information for at least 1 year.
Perhaps just as interesting was that despite Home Depot's assertion that "This information is only used internally, and not provided to govt. agencies or any private outside individuals." - the police were able to get those photos of the guy buying the rake just by walking in a store and asking for them.
Target stores are also known for using sophisticated surveillance systems (and similar to Home Depot's setup, they're obviously able to retreive photos of who bought what in the past - as witnessed by the recent case where the college student faked being kidnapped, and was caught when they showed camera footage of her purchasing duct tape and rope, etc. at the local Target store just before it happened).
A private investigator interviewed on the news was quoted as having obtained this type of evidence from a retail store in New York, after he was hired to try to spy on a suspected cheating husband. (He purchased lingerie on his credit card, and then tried to claim his card was stolen - so the P.I. obtained photographic evidence that it was indeed him buying the items.) They asked the P.I. if he had permission to obtain this information from the retail store. He said no, but he had "confidential sources" that got it for him anyway.
That's the problem with all of this stuff. Once this type of data is indexed and stored somewhere, it has the potential to fall into the wrong hands - and eventually *will* do so. It's only a matter of time.
Well, you're not exactly wrong - but I'd also add that a broad skillset can be pretty darn useful when it comes to trying to make "horizontal" moves within a company you're hired with.
Sure, you don't want to know "just enough to screw up" all sorts of scattered things... but people narrowing focusing/concentrating on a single specialty eventually burn out, or find their work obsolete - and then what?
Most mid-sized or larger corporations like to hire from within, so you have the chance to move around into different areas once your foot is in the door. I think it's best to keep a varied enough skillset so you have these options open to you.
Actually, I haven't used a decent 35mm camera in quite some time that didn't also have this delay in taking a photo.
The big problem is, all the automatic features on today's cameras mean they have to calculate a bit (figure out light levels and appropriate shutter speed, auto-focus, etc.) before the picture is taken.
The film cameras that respond instantly are either cheap "box cameras" with a fixed focus, or expensive SLRs with all the auto features disabled. I imagine a good digital camera could snap an instant photo just like the film cameras, but you'd have to have one that let you set up everything manually first. All of the $100-600 digitals I've seen are still trying to do some automatic exposure adjusting for you.
Again though, it just depends on which apps you use. I've crashed OS X *plenty* of times myself, on a G4 tower as well as on a PowerMac G5 system. But then, I like to play games on my Macs - and for whatever reason, UT2003 still doesn't seem to cope well with custom downloaded maps when playing online. When it hiccups on a map it doesn't like - OS X is completely frozen, requiring a hard power off.
Halo eventually causes hard system crashes too, though not all that often.
Precisely, AND many times, things that should be criminal go completely unpunished too.
I just got a close-up, personal look at this when my wife decided to leave me. She broke into my house (with the aid of friends), and literally cleaned the whole place out. They used a U-Haul (paid for with money from one of my credit cards, via a cash-advance check), and did it while I was at work.
Of course, when I got home and found a broken window and doors wide open, I called the police. But as soon as they determined my wife was behind it, they backed off, refusing to so much as write up a report. In their eyes, "It's half hers, so there's no way she can be stealing it from you." Last I checked, marriage meant things were EQUAL property, 50/50. Why can I legally be denied my 50% of everything and the law defends her, yet I'm told if I set foot on her property, it's "trespassing" and I'll be arrested?
All I hear is "it'll get resolved in the courts". Yeah, maybe in a year from now or so... but I'm expected to sit around in my empty house, with collectors down my throats about repaying maxxed out credit cards, in the meantime? But oh yeah... pirate a few games, and the FBI is all over it. Justice? I think not.
Hmm... I wish it was that simple. In my case, it was "Find a woman you hate, and watch as she breaks into your place multiple times, eventually stealing everything of value you own, and moves away with your daughter. Request police assistance, and get none. Spend money you don't even have on legal assistance, and get nothing. Rinse, repeat...."
If I could have just signed over the house to her and been done with it, that would have been a bargain. (I still owe more on my place than it's worth, anyway!)
If you actually could, magically, stop everyone from buying music from the recording industry tomorrow - do you really think all the world's musicians would just decide to quit creating music, ditch their instruments and recording gear, etc. ??
I think not! Rather, you'd simply force a revolution in how music is bought and sold. Believe me, I used to play in a local band and I still have many musically inclined friends. Almost all of us believe in the mantra of "once a musician, always a musician". Many of us have sold off our drum sets or guitars for one reason or another (often marriage), and yet we've all purchased replacements for them again. It's just a creative outlet for people... a way to have one's voice heard and feelings expressed. It's human nature to enjoy listening to music, and it's also in some people's nature to enjoy creating it! None of this will ever go away, just because some big conglomerates can't figure out a way to package and resell it with a big chunk of profit in it for themselves.
The key point you've made revolves around *sustained* overtime hours. In many businesses where I've seen people qualify for overtime pay, it's not a situation where week after week, the same person is clocking 50 or 60 hour weeks.
Rather, it's a mechanism to compensate people for the occasional extra long day they put in.
In computer support or software development type roles, in particular, a project can run into much longer hours than planned. While you may not be at peak productivity after 9 hours straight, it's still better if you finish the whole thing while you're focused on it - instead of break your train of thought because it's 5PM and "time to call it a day". (Worse yet, if the project has a tight deadline, companies not letting you put in overtime on it might start someone from the next shift on your problem. This wastes hours as they "reinvent the wheel", preparing to pick up where you left off.)
Actually, yes, I am in I.T. and have been working in the field for 14+ years now.
I never said that I neglected to put security measures in place, as part of the server migration. My point was, everything ran just fine without it for years and years - so the alarmist attitude some I.T. folks might take upon seeing this seems a little "over the top".
Furthermore, I think that sometimes, I.T. admins feel like the security permissions and account restrictions they apply serve as the only safeguard preventing employees from committing corporate crimes (leaking proprietary information, for example, or editing documents they're not supposed to have authority to change). In reality, I suspect that these only provide mild stumbling blocks to those bent on breaking company rules and/or the law.
Unless you've gone to the extremes of such things as fingerprint identification for logins, it's just not that difficult to obtain someone else's password in a small business. Social engineering gets people right past most account restriction/security rights issues.
Lastly, even though a Win2K or NT server may have permissions set for "everyone" to have full control, that doesn't automatically imply that "anyone on the planet" could really go in and access those files. If the firm was using wireless networking, I'd say "Yes, that's a big potential issue." If they didn't have a firewall in place, again, I'd agree that it's a real issue. In this case, they did have a firewall proeprly set up and they had no wi-fi devices in use, which helped minimize their risk.
In many cases, I think the employees are actually right, too! Just last week, I completed the migration of a network from an old Windows 2000 server to a brand new one with Active Directory put in place, etc.
During the migration, I discovered that the vast majority of the file shares were configured so "everyone" had full control. The only "security measure" they really had in place for them was hiding them (putting $ on the end of the share name so it didn't show up in browse lists).
They'd been happily using this environment for years, with no real incidents, too.
The average I.T. worker loves to analyze this type of enviroment, and go ballistic about the lack of security -- but in reality, you're talking about a fairly small business where if something really needs to be "kept away from prying eyes", it's not going on the file server in the first place. Passwords really are a non-issue for people like this, because everyone pretty much has equal access anyway.
As an I.T. worker myself, sure, I'm interested in keeping up with what's happening in my field. But at the same time, I think I've seen the same basic topic on Slashdot at least 10 different times now - all with slightly different initial "takes" on the theme.
What can the U.S. I.T. worker do to remain competitive? Simple, folks! Hone those communications skills! The most important skill you possess that the foreigners generally DON'T is the ability to speak clear, fluent English, and understand complex problems, even when the person describing them to you isn't doing a very good job of it.
You can be the most efficient programmer in the world, but if you can't follow directions and explain your progress (and pitfalls) while you're assigned to a project, you're not really wanted.
Why is all the outsourcing of helpdesk jobs failing miserably (causing firms like Dell to bring some of it back to the U.S.)? Customers don't like fighting a communications barrier when they're already frustrated and need assistance!
There's no doubt in my mind that some of the best and brightest software developers are in other countries. Some of the best remote control/remote desktop type packages I've seen for Windows come from Russia, for example. (By contrast, the U.S. firms offer bloated, inferior, and overpriced solutions like "PC Anywhere".) IMHO, if they're providing a better product than we can make here in the U.S. - so be it. Support whatever's "best of breed". But U.S. firms aren't going to see real gains in the long run if they "outsource, outsource, outsource!" with salary as the only motivator.
I really have no big worries about this whole thing.... The "dot bomb" was much more harmful to my career than this outsourcing trend will ever be.
Wow - people sure do love to sling around the term "monopoly" without a full realization of what the word means....
Apple really isn't a monopoly in the true sense of the word, because that would imply you couldn't buy a computer or software for it without going through them to do so. Obviously, that's not the case.
With your logic, Ford is a monopoly too - because there's no other dealer I can buy a Mustang or an Explorer from.
Yeah.... but your argument doesn't sound quite so convincing when you think of some of the potential consequences of driving nothing but "beaters".
1. What if my $500-1000 car breaks down on me when I'm in a hurry to get to work? Is it really worth the cost savings if it causes me to lose my job?
2. Like it or not, the car you drive makes a statement about you. (Just like the clothes you choose to wear, others make initial judgements about you based on them.) When I'm driving to a client's place for consulting work, do I want them to see me pulling up in some rusty, 10+ year old junker car?
I'm not denying there are some really good reasons to own a well-used, cheap car. I just think it's often wiser to own one of them in conjunction with something a little bit nicer. Use your beater car for days when the weather's bad, or for generic errands around town, etc. Keep your nicer car for situations where minimal risk of a breakdown (and lost time) is important.
Not necessarily! He said "more based on what you use", NOT completely based on what is used!
The likely scenario, if this was adopted as policy, would be to still tax at current rates, but discount tax payments by predetermined amounts if you filled out additional "exemption" forms for certain areas (such as road/highway usage).
Honestly, I think it's difficult to determine if someone really "uses the roads" based on whether or not they drive a vehicle. They still might ride around with other people, use public transportation, etc. Is it fair for them to shove ALL the road maintenance fees off to their friends and businesses that help them get around?
Nonetheless, there are probably areas where small discounts could be given. Maybe more on local/state levels than federal. (EG. Why make people pay for a tax funded, free admission zoo, museum or other public facility if they don't ever use it?)
As an American citizen myself, I'm stuck contributing funds against my will to prop up the airline industry, which largely crumbled and collapsed under the government's anti-terror policies.
IMHO, this situation should never have happened in the first place. It was our govt. that slipped up and didn't catch the terrorists before they actually carried out their hijaacking plans. The fallout from their mistakes ended up being covered up by our tax dollars.
Yep... I don't see the necessity for long-running TV series, really. Most of the time, the "great" shows turn "mediocre" as the writers run low on fresh ideas, and the actors and actresses get burnt out on doing the same roles year after year.
If a show is a big hit and people want more after the first season or two, then take it to the big screen. (Hey, maybe this will put an end to Hollywood's seeming need to crank out "1 star rated" films that are just rehashes of the same, tired ideas they did in previous movies.)
I think budgets are way too high on most TV shows, for the value viewers get out of them. The fact is, plenty of people clamor for the chance to be on TV. You can run a game show with a $1000 or a $100,000 prize, and really - you won't be short of participants either way.
I'm not convinced you "need" exceptionally high-priced talent for almost anything in the world of TV shows, either. You might think "Ideally, I'll hire actor X for the lead role." but if his asking price is way out there, screw it. Invest a little cash in seeking out talented beginners and use the best one of them instead. You give people the chance to see a new face on TV that they might really like... someone deserving a job gets one, and you save loads of cash to boot.
Seriously, walking around in the "wrong neighborhood" with anything of value means you're at risk of having said item forcibly removed from your person.
If it's not your iPod, it's your wristwatch or your new pair of sneakers, or maybe your new leather jacket.... Whatever....
This isn't really news, and probably is only relevant at all because too many ignorant teenagers run around with their iPods conspicuously displayed for the "coolness" factor, instead of just using them as the music listening devices they are.
Most of us with nice car audio systems already learned long ago that it's best to hide them when they're not in use, or perhaps even turn them down if you're driving in a bad area. (You can scarcely buy a new stereo head unit that doesn't have some sort of ability to remove the faceplate or have it flip around backwards so only a blank panel is showing.) Use the same common sense with your iPod and you should be fine.
Slashdot Mirror
Absolutely right, but at what point do we decide that a weapon would be so powerful, there's no advantage to building or using it, because it would mean our own destruction too?
I think many people feel nuclear weapons are already at this point, but the problem is, there are plenty of military-sponsored studies showing the contrary. They firmly believe that used tactically, a nuclear bomb or three wouldn't necessarily mean life ends for the nation using it against an enemy nation. (Of course, much depends on the ability for the enemy to retaliate in kind.)
Taking things to the next level though? I can't see the logic behind it, unless you really are dealing with interplanetary battles. (EG. We feel a need to completely wipe out another planet, before they do the same to ours.)
I don't know... The thing that impressed me the most about Leo is he comes across as the "teacher" type of person. He presents things well, and almost always has a quick, informed response when questions are thrown at him. He may not be quite as "technical" as some people, but most "very technical" people aren't so skilled at communicating their knowledge so others can understand them (especially when they have a small time window to do it in).
I think Patrick does a good job too, and agree that he "belongs on the show". To be honest though, I'm not sure it's possible to please "the masses" with any type of computer-centric program. It's the same problem you have if you try to get women to sit down with you and enjoy some show about hot-rodding cars. The majority of them are going to complain and ask you to change channels.
I suspect the women (Morgan, Cat, etc.) were brought in to try to cancel some of this effect out. Sort of a "Hey, look - here are women who actually LIKE this stuff. See girls, you should give it a chance!" But that's shallow and people generally see right through it.
Personally, I find it a little insulting that Comcast would even think TechTV makes sense to merge with a *gaming channel*.
Is that really all they think TechTV was --- a bunch of people PLAYING with their computers for fun and entertainment?
It seems to me TechTV served a few very useful purposes, not the least of which was providing free, quality phone support to callers. (In this day and age of "prices shaved to the bone PCs", the average consumer is pretty much left in the dark if he/she has questions not covered by the instructions that came with a hardware or software product. What options do they get? Call India and have someone rattle off canned answers from a card?)
Also, I found a number of very informative bits on TechTV over the years that even the most advanced computer user could appreciate. I remember enjoying an interview Leo did with the man who invented the first mouse (had his working prototype made out of wood on the show). I remember an interesting piece they did just recently with the site operator of rootkit.com. The list goes on, but the point is, TechTV wasn't just some show hawking the latest video games. They covered them, of course - but not without balance.
With the original staff gone, and merging with G4, it sounds to me like it's going to get turned into a big promotional channel for selling video games and related gaming hardware, and will run off anyone just trying to be more productive with their PC, learn more about system security and administration, and so on.
No, like many PC die-hard users, you're completely missing the point.
As much as anything, the Mac is about the OS and the applications. Can you run Mac OS X on your PC? I think not. Do you have Final Cut Pro or Express in a Windows version? Again, I think not.
I happen to use both a PC and a Mac, and each has strengths and weaknesses, mostly with their roots in either the OS or the software.
Hardware-wise, sure, a Mac is fairly similar to a PC in construction, other than using an alternate processor type. But the CPU is the "brain" of the whole box - so I'd say that, alone, can make some difference. Furthermore, when you buy a Mac, you generally get better quality of construction and interesting little "extras" that add nice touches. You also get technical support that speaks English and answers the phone in under 5 minutes most of the time.
Take Apple's Powerbook laptop, for example. If you want a laptop with a 17" screen, tell me which Windows PC laptop is going to be as thin and lightweight as Apple's? So far, the most popular 17" display PC laptops I've seen are an HP Pavilion and a Toshiba, both of which are thick bricks by comparison (and neither offers the backlit keyboard of the Powerbook 17" either).
But I digress.... When it comes to video editing, I run into hassles all the time with the popular consumer-grade Windows/PC packages. Take, for example, Pinnacle Studio. That thing has more update patches than you can shake a stick at, and if you don't apply them all, you get all sorts of issues with video freezing in the middle of downloading from your DV camcorder, GPF's while adding transitions, etc. etc. And Pinnacle is probably a better package than some.
On something like Apple's iMovie, you can buy all sorts of quality 3rd. party transitions and effects plug-ins (like "Slick Transitions" or the eZedia packages), and do some pretty advanced stuff, all for well under $200. (These things do everything from simulated snowing/raining in your video to transposing backgrounds onto blue-screens.) I don't see almost anyone producing worthwhile stuff with Microsoft's answer to iMovie, Windows Movie Maker.
Cancel your Gartner Group newsletter subscription! Last time I checked (and this was years ago), they wanted several hundred bucks a year for the thing - and all you got in the mail each month was a stapled-together newsletter consisting of under 30 pages!
I mean, honestly, all the Gartner Group ever seems to do is publish generic assessments on operating system upgrades, database packages, and the like -- and anyone surfing the net for a few hours a month, reading up on computer related news would be just as informed, if not more so.
Ok, but to this I say - "Apple Mac".
Seriously, if there was ever a strong argument for buying today's PowerMac system, it's got to be for video editing.
The G5 systems support up to 8GB of RAM, and it's not at all uncommon to find people configuring them with at least 2GB - 4GB right now. (Because quite frankly, it's not really that costly to do so using 512MB PC3200 DIMMs. They have 8 slots on their board.)
I've done video editing from a DV camcorder on my Pentium 4, and believe me, I get *much* more accomplished without crashes and hassles using Final Cut Express or even iMovie with some 3rd. party plug-ins. Don't forget, Steve Jobs owns Pixar, along with being Apple's C.E.O. That means he's VERY attuned to the needs of movie producers and editors. His systems practically revolve around it. So I'm only concerned with what Apple does, when it comes to a need for more CPU, RAM or disk space + video editing, and I suspect I'm in the majority in that particular niche of the market.
My big issue with these ads are the way they tend to bog down the connection.... I have no problem ignoring the advertising, but what I can't ignore is reduced xfer rates due to them streaming updated ads to me the whole time I'm connected!
I guess it really depends on how it's implemented. Software like ICQ has advertising running with it, and it never really bothers me in the least. The ads are small, and generally use very little bandwidth. Besides, they only seem to display 2 or 3 at a time.
But I could easily see this turning into a big annoyance, with hundreds of rotating ads, some including sound and streaming video.
Perhaps, but perhaps not. I'm more inclined to refrain from pre-judging a person based on their clothing choices. I'll agree that, all else being equal, odds are greater that the sloppy dresser in worn-out sneakers and holes in their jeans also lacks some basic social skills. But there's no direct correlation between the two. (EG. My I.Q., personality and/or skillset doesn't change when I dress nicely.)
Proper hygene and a personal choice to wear more "casual" clothing are two completely different issues. There's no excuse for not washing one's hair, taking a shower, and so forth. That's just laziness and a lack of self-respect, and as you said - indicates a person you can't really trust to take care of important matters in the workplace.
With clothing, there are so many reasons someone opts to dress a particular way. I've worn the shirt, tie and dress slacks before, when employers required it. My opinion is, it's just not very comfortable or practical. I remember working as a computer technician for a store that required it, and I actually got my tie caught in a CPU fan once! Even where I work now, doing on-site service, I was originally told I couldn't wear jeans to work. Initially, I obeyed the rules, wearing kackis/dress slacks instead, but I had enough of that after shreding up a couple pairs while crawling around on the floor, stringing network cables for people, and helping remove old monitors and re-arrange systems. I just started wearing jeans (but always new-looking, clean ones), coupled with nice shirts - and nobody so much as commented once on my breaking the dress code.
To be honest, the RFID tag issue seems relatively minor compared to the privacy issues we're already forced to endure when shopping at some of the larger retailers.
I was just watching a news piece on last night's local TV broadcast about how sophisticated the cameras have become at Home Depot stores. Apparently, their entire store is covered by cameras on the ceiling, and photos are taken and digitally stored of each person as they make purchases at the checkout counter.
They were bragging about how a murder case was solved in this manner, because a label and UPC code were found on the handle of a rake used in the crime. This traced it back to Home Depot, where they were able to input the UPC code and retreive perfectly clear photos of the person buying the rake. Home Depot claims they store all of this information for at least 1 year.
Perhaps just as interesting was that despite Home Depot's assertion that "This information is only used internally, and not provided to govt. agencies or any private outside individuals." - the police were able to get those photos of the guy buying the rake just by walking in a store and asking for them.
Target stores are also known for using sophisticated surveillance systems (and similar to Home Depot's setup, they're obviously able to retreive photos of who bought what in the past - as witnessed by the recent case where the college student faked being kidnapped, and was caught when they showed camera footage of her purchasing duct tape and rope, etc. at the local Target store just before it happened).
A private investigator interviewed on the news was quoted as having obtained this type of evidence from a retail store in New York, after he was hired to try to spy on a suspected cheating husband. (He purchased lingerie on his credit card, and then tried to claim his card was stolen - so the P.I. obtained photographic evidence that it was indeed him buying the items.) They asked the P.I. if he had permission to obtain this information from the retail store. He said no, but he had "confidential sources" that got it for him anyway.
That's the problem with all of this stuff. Once this type of data is indexed and stored somewhere, it has the potential to fall into the wrong hands - and eventually *will* do so. It's only a matter of time.
Well, you're not exactly wrong - but I'd also add that a broad skillset can be pretty darn useful when it comes to trying to make "horizontal" moves within a company you're hired with.
Sure, you don't want to know "just enough to screw up" all sorts of scattered things... but people narrowing focusing/concentrating on a single specialty eventually burn out, or find their work obsolete - and then what?
Most mid-sized or larger corporations like to hire from within, so you have the chance to move around into different areas once your foot is in the door. I think it's best to keep a varied enough skillset so you have these options open to you.
Actually, I haven't used a decent 35mm camera in quite some time that didn't also have this delay in taking a photo.
The big problem is, all the automatic features on today's cameras mean they have to calculate a bit (figure out light levels and appropriate shutter speed, auto-focus, etc.) before the picture is taken.
The film cameras that respond instantly are either cheap "box cameras" with a fixed focus, or expensive SLRs with all the auto features disabled. I imagine a good digital camera could snap an instant photo just like the film cameras, but you'd have to have one that let you set up everything manually first. All of the $100-600 digitals I've seen are still trying to do some automatic exposure adjusting for you.
Again though, it just depends on which apps you use. I've crashed OS X *plenty* of times myself, on a G4 tower as well as on a PowerMac G5 system. But then, I like to play games on my Macs - and for whatever reason, UT2003 still doesn't seem to cope well with custom downloaded maps when playing online. When it hiccups on a map it doesn't like - OS X is completely frozen, requiring a hard power off.
Halo eventually causes hard system crashes too, though not all that often.
Precisely, AND many times, things that should be criminal go completely unpunished too.
... but I'm expected to sit around in my empty house, with collectors down my throats about repaying maxxed out credit cards, in the meantime? But oh yeah... pirate a few games, and the FBI is all over it. Justice? I think not.
I just got a close-up, personal look at this when my wife decided to leave me. She broke into my house (with the aid of friends), and literally cleaned the whole place out. They used a U-Haul (paid for with money from one of my credit cards, via a cash-advance check), and did it while I was at work.
Of course, when I got home and found a broken window and doors wide open, I called the police. But as soon as they determined my wife was behind it, they backed off, refusing to so much as write up a report. In their eyes, "It's half hers, so there's no way she can be stealing it from you." Last I checked, marriage meant things were EQUAL property, 50/50. Why can I legally be denied my 50% of everything and the law defends her, yet I'm told if I set foot on her property, it's "trespassing" and I'll be arrested?
All I hear is "it'll get resolved in the courts". Yeah, maybe in a year from now or so
Hmm... I wish it was that simple. In my case, it was "Find a woman you hate, and watch as she breaks into your place multiple times, eventually stealing everything of value you own, and moves away with your daughter. Request police assistance, and get none. Spend money you don't even have on legal assistance, and get nothing. Rinse, repeat...."
If I could have just signed over the house to her and been done with it, that would have been a bargain. (I still owe more on my place than it's worth, anyway!)
If you actually could, magically, stop everyone from buying music from the recording industry tomorrow - do you really think all the world's musicians would just decide to quit creating music, ditch their instruments and recording gear, etc. ??
I think not! Rather, you'd simply force a revolution in how music is bought and sold. Believe me, I used to play in a local band and I still have many musically inclined friends. Almost all of us believe in the mantra of "once a musician, always a musician". Many of us have sold off our drum sets or guitars for one reason or another (often marriage), and yet we've all purchased replacements for them again. It's just a creative outlet for people... a way to have one's voice heard and feelings expressed. It's human nature to enjoy listening to music, and it's also in some people's nature to enjoy creating it! None of this will ever go away, just because some big conglomerates can't figure out a way to package and resell it with a big chunk of profit in it for themselves.
The key point you've made revolves around *sustained* overtime hours. In many businesses where I've seen people qualify for overtime pay, it's not a situation where week after week, the same person is clocking 50 or 60 hour weeks.
Rather, it's a mechanism to compensate people for the occasional extra long day they put in.
In computer support or software development type roles, in particular, a project can run into much longer hours than planned. While you may not be at peak productivity after 9 hours straight, it's still better if you finish the whole thing while you're focused on it - instead of break your train of thought because it's 5PM and "time to call it a day". (Worse yet, if the project has a tight deadline, companies not letting you put in overtime on it might start someone from the next shift on your problem. This wastes hours as they "reinvent the wheel", preparing to pick up where you left off.)
Actually, yes, I am in I.T. and have been working in the field for 14+ years now.
I never said that I neglected to put security measures in place, as part of the server migration. My point was, everything ran just fine without it for years and years - so the alarmist attitude some I.T. folks might take upon seeing this seems a little "over the top".
Furthermore, I think that sometimes, I.T. admins feel like the security permissions and account restrictions they apply serve as the only safeguard preventing employees from committing corporate crimes (leaking proprietary information, for example, or editing documents they're not supposed to have authority to change). In reality, I suspect that these only provide mild stumbling blocks to those bent on breaking company rules and/or the law.
Unless you've gone to the extremes of such things as fingerprint identification for logins, it's just not that difficult to obtain someone else's password in a small business. Social engineering gets people right past most account restriction/security rights issues.
Lastly, even though a Win2K or NT server may have permissions set for "everyone" to have full control, that doesn't automatically imply that "anyone on the planet" could really go in and access those files. If the firm was using wireless networking, I'd say "Yes, that's a big potential issue." If they didn't have a firewall in place, again, I'd agree that it's a real issue. In this case, they did have a firewall proeprly set up and they had no wi-fi devices in use, which helped minimize their risk.
In many cases, I think the employees are actually right, too! Just last week, I completed the migration of a network from an old Windows 2000 server to a brand new one with Active Directory put in place, etc.
During the migration, I discovered that the vast majority of the file shares were configured so "everyone" had full control. The only "security measure" they really had in place for them was hiding them (putting $ on the end of the share name so it didn't show up in browse lists).
They'd been happily using this environment for years, with no real incidents, too.
The average I.T. worker loves to analyze this type of enviroment, and go ballistic about the lack of security -- but in reality, you're talking about a fairly small business where if something really needs to be "kept away from prying eyes", it's not going on the file server in the first place. Passwords really are a non-issue for people like this, because everyone pretty much has equal access anyway.
As an I.T. worker myself, sure, I'm interested in keeping up with what's happening in my field. But at the same time, I think I've seen the same basic topic on Slashdot at least 10 different times now - all with slightly different initial "takes" on the theme.
What can the U.S. I.T. worker do to remain competitive? Simple, folks! Hone those communications skills! The most important skill you possess that the foreigners generally DON'T is the ability to speak clear, fluent English, and understand complex problems, even when the person describing them to you isn't doing a very good job of it.
You can be the most efficient programmer in the world, but if you can't follow directions and explain your progress (and pitfalls) while you're assigned to a project, you're not really wanted.
Why is all the outsourcing of helpdesk jobs failing miserably (causing firms like Dell to bring some of it back to the U.S.)? Customers don't like fighting a communications barrier when they're already frustrated and need assistance!
There's no doubt in my mind that some of the best and brightest software developers are in other countries. Some of the best remote control/remote desktop type packages I've seen for Windows come from Russia, for example. (By contrast, the U.S. firms offer bloated, inferior, and overpriced solutions like "PC Anywhere".) IMHO, if they're providing a better product than we can make here in the U.S. - so be it. Support whatever's "best of breed". But U.S. firms aren't going to see real gains in the long run if they "outsource, outsource, outsource!" with salary as the only motivator.
I really have no big worries about this whole thing.... The "dot bomb" was much more harmful to my career than this outsourcing trend will ever be.
Wow - people sure do love to sling around the term "monopoly" without a full realization of what the word means....
Apple really isn't a monopoly in the true sense of the word, because that would imply you couldn't buy a computer or software for it without going through them to do so. Obviously, that's not the case.
With your logic, Ford is a monopoly too - because there's no other dealer I can buy a Mustang or an Explorer from.
Yeah.... but your argument doesn't sound quite so convincing when you think of some of the potential consequences of driving nothing but "beaters".
1. What if my $500-1000 car breaks down on me when I'm in a hurry to get to work? Is it really worth the cost savings if it causes me to lose my job?
2. Like it or not, the car you drive makes a statement about you. (Just like the clothes you choose to wear, others make initial judgements about you based on them.) When I'm driving to a client's place for consulting work, do I want them to see me pulling up in some rusty, 10+ year old junker car?
I'm not denying there are some really good reasons to own a well-used, cheap car. I just think it's often wiser to own one of them in conjunction with something a little bit nicer. Use your beater car for days when the weather's bad, or for generic errands around town, etc. Keep your nicer car for situations where minimal risk of a breakdown (and lost time) is important.
Not necessarily! He said "more based on what you use", NOT completely based on what is used!
The likely scenario, if this was adopted as policy, would be to still tax at current rates, but discount tax payments by predetermined amounts if you filled out additional "exemption" forms for certain areas (such as road/highway usage).
Honestly, I think it's difficult to determine if someone really "uses the roads" based on whether or not they drive a vehicle. They still might ride around with other people, use public transportation, etc. Is it fair for them to shove ALL the road maintenance fees off to their friends and businesses that help them get around?
Nonetheless, there are probably areas where small discounts could be given. Maybe more on local/state levels than federal. (EG. Why make people pay for a tax funded, free admission zoo, museum or other public facility if they don't ever use it?)
As an American citizen myself, I'm stuck contributing funds against my will to prop up the airline industry, which largely crumbled and collapsed under the government's anti-terror policies.
IMHO, this situation should never have happened in the first place. It was our govt. that slipped up and didn't catch the terrorists before they actually carried out their hijaacking plans. The fallout from their mistakes ended up being covered up by our tax dollars.
Yep... I don't see the necessity for long-running TV series, really. Most of the time, the "great" shows turn "mediocre" as the writers run low on fresh ideas, and the actors and actresses get burnt out on doing the same roles year after year.
If a show is a big hit and people want more after the first season or two, then take it to the big screen. (Hey, maybe this will put an end to Hollywood's seeming need to crank out "1 star rated" films that are just rehashes of the same, tired ideas they did in previous movies.)
I think budgets are way too high on most TV shows, for the value viewers get out of them. The fact is, plenty of people clamor for the chance to be on TV. You can run a game show with a $1000 or a $100,000 prize, and really - you won't be short of participants either way.
I'm not convinced you "need" exceptionally high-priced talent for almost anything in the world of TV shows, either. You might think "Ideally, I'll hire actor X for the lead role." but if his asking price is way out there, screw it. Invest a little cash in seeking out talented beginners and use the best one of them instead. You give people the chance to see a new face on TV that they might really like... someone deserving a job gets one, and you save loads of cash to boot.
My first thought is "Who cares!?!"
Seriously, walking around in the "wrong neighborhood" with anything of value means you're at risk of having said item forcibly removed from your person.
If it's not your iPod, it's your wristwatch or your new pair of sneakers, or maybe your new leather jacket.... Whatever....
This isn't really news, and probably is only relevant at all because too many ignorant teenagers run around with their iPods conspicuously displayed for the "coolness" factor, instead of just using them as the music listening devices they are.
Most of us with nice car audio systems already learned long ago that it's best to hide them when they're not in use, or perhaps even turn them down if you're driving in a bad area. (You can scarcely buy a new stereo head unit that doesn't have some sort of ability to remove the faceplate or have it flip around backwards so only a blank panel is showing.) Use the same common sense with your iPod and you should be fine.