The problem isn't that Indian coding droids are getting jobs. The problem is that American workers are losing jobs to overseas labour simply because they cost less. It's not that the Indian droids are any more skilled (The article quotes somebody as saying they are indeed less skilled), it's just that they work for next to nothing.
You imply that there is some sort of entitlement issue here. If this were indeed the case, why don't you hear more about the native Indian IT industry? Why can't they compete with products, rather than simply the ability to fill a job for less money? (Yes, it is conceded that there IS a native IT industry in India, but that's not at issue here)
This, of course, is what the company profiled in the article seems to be driving at. Great, kick off a native industry in-country. Launch Indian-made software products to compete in the market. Great, more power to them, and good luck! That's how it should work.
The seasonal reference has been an integral part of haiku since Time Immorial. The explanation has been an integral part of the lameness filter since the mid-90s.
Flash has one legitimate use: Strongbad Emails (Ok, and some of the 'fanimutations' are funny. Your various All Your Base, Hyakugojuuichi, et al). Everything else is evil. Comming soon to your computer: Full screen tv-style commercials from the people that brought you the animated page intro, the crazy rotating webpage icon bar, and other fun bits of webtastic 'enhancements'! The Brothers Chaps: Flash(tm) is not a technology that needs to be promoted or given any veil of legitimacy! I implore you to migrate to a less blatantly evil animation format!
There seems to be a false sense of 'security' running through the discussion on this article. I, like many people on this site, am using Mozilla with adblocker and a lack of odd-format plugins. I went to check out this companies site, and view the example ads, and was did a "Wait....that wasn't supposed to work!" when they did, in fact, play.
Misconception #1: Popup blockers will block these. Not so much. At least, not right this second. They're not really pop-up ads, afterall.
Misconception #2: These aren't going to play on anything other than IE with Media Player. No...they're just big Flash(tm) movies. They'll play if you have the plugin.
Not that there's nothing you can do. A suitable hosts or Adblocker entry will sort things out. Or the oft-mentioned Flash(tm) click-to-play button. Just saying that the situation isn't as happily mititated as people seem to believe, simply through a supposed technical incompatability.
That said, I believe that Flash(tm) is The Next Big Thing for web advertisers. This Unicast company for example, and their friends Ad4Ever are clearly going this route. Ad4Ever(tm): Not just an evil-sounding name! I feel dirty just going to these pages.
You're putting a lot of faith in the gamer community (Conversely, I'm demonstrating little...the reality is probably somewhere in the middle). As long as a game fits the basic formula for Popular Video Game, the gamers will go for it. The restrictions and invasions will come in easily managable bites, and as long as the game is still 'worthwhile' it will sell. They'll complain, but they'll buy it.
Is it just me, or are the majority of the technical solutions things that only Microsoft could make wide-spread enough to 'save the Internet'? Aside from the solutions directed at Redmond itself, many are things that need to be on every [desktop, email client, web browser, etc] on the planet in order to be effective. Or, in the case of common-sense solutions, implanted into the minds of the Windows-bound users of the world.
The sad implication is that the fate of the Internet is in the hands of Microsoft and The Teeming Million. I therefore propose this Item One Hundred and One (with appologies to the other #101's that people already put forth).
#101. Bring Free and Open Source Software to the Windows platform, and I don't mean just Cygwin.
Maybe it's horribly obvious. Maybe it's been done, and I don't know (not being a windows user, I'm not on the lookout for windows software!). Maybe the barriers are too high (especially things like libraries and API), but it seems like it might help out. The most difficult would be development and build tools suitable for the Average Home User. Installshield (tm), but it's building the software in the background. Configure and make, but with an animated mascot that suggests --enable switches. Or not. Distribute shiny packaged binaries and supply source.
Our Windows-bound brethren, sistren, and grand-motheren need to see that there is a world of software out there besides the spy- and nag-ware ridden stuff of download.com.com.com.
Here comes the punchline: Migration away from Windows will be that much easier if their favorite [P2P, email, grandchild-photo-sharing, etc] software is already waiting for them on the Linux side. Yes, ignoring the complication of cross-platform applications or source trees...it's still a decent idea! See also: x-chat, gaim, OpenOffice. It can be done.
'Mad crazy' shoutouts to GW-SEAS Senior Design and "Smartmail 4.0"! This is just such a project that's been worked on for a few years by different students. I'd like to see them release it open source, but who knows. P2P email, video, chat...lots of stuff. It's pretty impressive. It's in Java, though...
I'm still trying to figure out "Death to Verisign". On one hand, a lot of nifty things could be done if more people had smartcards and certificates. On the other it pretty swiftly does away with lots of anonimity, which the article seemed to be pretty big in to.
All in all, a half-decent article (Alright...'half in all'?). A few good suggestions, a few 'yeah, THAT's going to happen' suggestions. Lots of predictable things. A few 'Yeah, I'd work on that if a project were to materialize'. Maybe there's hope yet!
In my book, 'optimal PC performance' involves consistant operation over a long period of time. This ignores the fact that the processor may be capable of more speed because of the nature of MHz ratings, but in the long run, this is 'optimal'.
This is interesting, and impressive, and admirable as an engineering exercise, but not exactly in persuit of mainstream 'optimal' performance characteristics. (Unless I RTFA and find that the processor does indeed last a good long time, and not burn bright and die out as I imagine it to under these conditions).
I had this problem a long time ago. I would get a spam letter from Yahoo! with a link for removal. Of course you never click on those, but this is Yahoo, a more or less legitimate business. I found that clicking on the link and filling out the form or whatever didn't work. It didn't work the first time, and it didn't work the n-1th time.
That nth time came one day at work. I clicked the removal link, and something about the URL struck me as odd. It was so long ago, I unfortunately can't tell you what so you can do the same. But I changed that thing, and it went to *another*, different removal page.
This one worked. It actually worked.
The moral of the story is: look at that URL. Unless they changed the procedure since, of course. I wouldn't know, because I haven't gotten a message from them until this heads-up from the marketing department.
Ah, this old troll again. Always appears, in one form or another in a Slackware-related article. Guess I'll take this one...
Slackware Works. It does its job efficiently (despite your unsubstantiated claims to the contrary. What's so inefficient about it?), quietly, and without getting in your way. It runs on whatever hardware you throw at it. I've got Slack 9.1 running on my main Athlon machine, and the P133 laptop I kick around to do programming on. I'd like to see Red Hat or most other distro (save perhaps Gentoo and this Vector) do that.
What are these bugs of which you speak? The inefficiencies? The non-standards-compliancies? Heck WHAT are these standards? The filesystem hierarchy?
Package system? Who needs one. Build from source. That said, slackware HAS a package system. It's mainly useful for creating packages of programs you build from source so they can be moved around or uninstalled. Somebody wrote an apt-like thing for Slackware, but I don't plan on using it. Maybe I'm a huge geek with a little too much time on his hands, but there is something to be said from building from source, chasing down dependancies, chasing down THEIR dependancies, and sorting out build and config errors. Woe is they who try to build their first GTK2 app on a Slack 9.0 or earlier system, but when it's done an hour and three levels of ependancies later, you know you're set, and there's a feeling of having accomplished something. Non-geeks, the lazy, and the impatient won't appreciate this, of course, but not everything in this world has to be handed to you.
If you have to ask these questions, Slackware isn't for you. If you're just comming over from Windows, Slackware may also not be for you. If you're impatient and want to be hand-held by a distro that does everything for you, Slackware is not for you. If you're looking for a Windows clone, Slackware is not for you.
I wouldn't concern yourself too much about these questions and revelations. Slackware is not for you. Sorry, but it's your loss.
Have it running on my laptop of similar spec. It's pretty snappy in console, or running X with Fluxbox. Stay away from the obvious hogs like Mozilla or massive PDFs and you'll be fine.
Whenever we get a story on Slashdot about some new patent, usually by Big Evil Corperation, there are many posts citing possible prior art. Generally something like this:
"What about [big obvious example]?"
"Haven't they heard of [lesser known example, generally an Open Source project, or something that has been in UNIX distributions since time immemorial]?!"
"I remember I used to use [Obscure example from the days of yore] and it did basically the same thing"
But what do you DO with this information? It seems like a nice exercise to try and pick apart the claims and come up with increasingly obscure references for their prior expression, but is there any actual good that can come of it? (Ok, the last statement kind of implies that all patents are bad; they're not.)
Assuming that at least one or two of the cited examples are valid, there may well be legitimate challanges to the patent. The question is, what to do about it?
It seems infeasable for some random Slashdotter or group of Slashdotters to light up the Laywer Signal and engage Big Evil Corperation in fisticuffs. Afterall, where's the gain? Would the case even be accepted if you weren't the one holding the prior art? What, then, is the answer, or is this just a big geekly pissing contest?
Only thing that comes to mind is firing off a letter to the holder of the prior art, telling them that you enjoyed using their product on the old VAX system at school or whatever, and now Big Evil Corperation is trying to eat their lunch, patent-style.
When business interests have such a large influance on a major international governance (policy? diplomacy?) body. It's clear enough that business has a great deal of pull in US domestic policy, and I'm sure the same is true to some extent in other countries, but now they can tell the *United Nations* what to do (alright...strongly suggest what to do)? Hope they don't get inflated heads over this.
And no, this isn't the end of the world. This isn't the most important issue the UN is dealing with right now, and it certainly isn't time to 'welcome our new proprietary commercial software product masters'. However, it seems pretty clear that they had a plan going when they were going to look favorably on Open Source solutions for governments and developing nations, a position that was likely hatched internally. A position that was changed by outside pressure. Bet they thought it was a pretty good idea they had going!.
This probably isn't one of those "Who is REALLY in charge" issues, but it makes one think. Then again, maybe it doesn't.
Not to second-guess Hollywood's must cunning minds, but why is this important? You mean...they're just NOW able to do this? I'm sure they could have pulled it off in the past if they really cared that much.
You mean they finally got their distribution channels organized? They realized that people in the other 69+ countries were mad that they had to wait 6 months after the US release? That those people would just download the divx rather than wait, but now might buy a ticket? That we're supposed to feel the awe and wonderment of watching the same thing at the same time as n Million People Worldwide, that Fox or CBS would like us to feel during Major Television Event?
According to the A that I just FR (RTFA, get it?), this is, indeed, purely a money-making venture. They care not for the fans in other countries, just that they pony up the dough to see it rather than pirate it. And hype. Nothing improves a film like hype, Eh Mr. Lucas? (Full dicsulsure: I liked both the prequils, but hype did diminish them.) The answer to these questions and more on a very special episode of "Why Should Anybody But The Movie Studios, Its Subsidiaries, and Shareholders Care?"!
Does this somehow improve the movie-going experiance? Make the tickets less expensive? Have any effect on anything significant anywhere? Don't get me wrong, it's probably going to be an awsome flick, and I'm definately going to catch it (at least once...have to hit up the IMAX). However, other than being nifty in the "Hey, there's a sale on Super Soakers...those things are awsome" sense, there is no story here. There is, however, fodder for an overly drawn out, cynical, holier-than-Hollywood rant. And in the end, isn't that the greatest gift of all? The answer, of course, is 'no'.
One thing that I've always wondered is why no groups have embarked on a public education campaign against spam? These days, there are public service announcements for everything. How much could a 20 second spot between a Metamucil ad and a personal injury lawyer be during some Judge Shrill Crackpot at 2:30 on a Tuesday?
Hit the bootleg Viagra and weight loss crowd where they live: glued to their couches during prime soap and talk time when the rest of us are at work.
The only question is how long would 'the industry' sit on their laurls while we badmouth their fine, economy-stimulating trade. Do Not Call List, the fine folks at the DMA, and Federal judges, I'm looking in your direction.
Food for thought. I'm not sure who would be producing these ads, but I'd kick them some money...
There are a number of cameras that do this as the auto-focus aiming mechanism. It wouldn't be horrifically difficult to do for a computer monitor, though the camera viewfinder has the advantage of very close tracking range and predictable angle of attack. The only problem is that your eyes will get *tired*. I don't like using the eye focus when I'm on a so equipped camera for more than a few seconds, let alone a several-hour computer session.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem isn't that Indian coding droids are getting jobs. The problem is that American workers are losing jobs to overseas labour simply because they cost less. It's not that the Indian droids are any more skilled (The article quotes somebody as saying they are indeed less skilled), it's just that they work for next to nothing.
You imply that there is some sort of entitlement issue here. If this were indeed the case, why don't you hear more about the native Indian IT industry? Why can't they compete with products, rather than simply the ability to fill a job for less money? (Yes, it is conceded that there IS a native IT industry in India, but that's not at issue here)
This, of course, is what the company profiled in the article seems to be driving at. Great, kick off a native industry in-country. Launch Indian-made software products to compete in the market. Great, more power to them, and good luck! That's how it should work.
Candy Apple Island? What do they have there?
Viruses, but they're not as deadly.
"'Mac-ing' out one's car"
He just drove into a tunnel.
Perl Perl Perl Perl Perl
Perl Perl Perl Perl Perl Perl Perl
Perl Perl Perl Perl Snow
The seasonal reference has been an integral part of haiku since Time Immorial. The explanation has been an integral part of the lameness filter since the mid-90s.
It's a Flash movie. Just a matter of having the plugin.
Flash has one legitimate use: Strongbad Emails (Ok, and some of the 'fanimutations' are funny. Your various All Your Base, Hyakugojuuichi, et al). Everything else is evil. Comming soon to your computer: Full screen tv-style commercials from the people that brought you the animated page intro, the crazy rotating webpage icon bar, and other fun bits of webtastic 'enhancements'! The Brothers Chaps: Flash(tm) is not a technology that needs to be promoted or given any veil of legitimacy! I implore you to migrate to a less blatantly evil animation format!
There seems to be a false sense of 'security' running through the discussion on this article. I, like many people on this site, am using Mozilla with adblocker and a lack of odd-format plugins. I went to check out this companies site, and view the example ads, and was did a "Wait....that wasn't supposed to work!" when they did, in fact, play.
Misconception #1: Popup blockers will block these. Not so much. At least, not right this second. They're not really pop-up ads, afterall.
Misconception #2: These aren't going to play on anything other than IE with Media Player. No...they're just big Flash(tm) movies. They'll play if you have the plugin.
Not that there's nothing you can do. A suitable hosts or Adblocker entry will sort things out. Or the oft-mentioned Flash(tm) click-to-play button. Just saying that the situation isn't as happily mititated as people seem to believe, simply through a supposed technical incompatability.
That said, I believe that Flash(tm) is The Next Big Thing for web advertisers. This Unicast company for example, and their friends Ad4Ever are clearly going this route. Ad4Ever(tm): Not just an evil-sounding name! I feel dirty just going to these pages.
You're putting a lot of faith in the gamer community (Conversely, I'm demonstrating little...the reality is probably somewhere in the middle). As long as a game fits the basic formula for Popular Video Game, the gamers will go for it. The restrictions and invasions will come in easily managable bites, and as long as the game is still 'worthwhile' it will sell. They'll complain, but they'll buy it.
Is it just me, or are the majority of the technical solutions things that only Microsoft could make wide-spread enough to 'save the Internet'? Aside from the solutions directed at Redmond itself, many are things that need to be on every [desktop, email client, web browser, etc] on the planet in order to be effective. Or, in the case of common-sense solutions, implanted into the minds of the Windows-bound users of the world.
The sad implication is that the fate of the Internet is in the hands of Microsoft and The Teeming Million. I therefore propose this Item One Hundred and One (with appologies to the other #101's that people already put forth).
#101. Bring Free and Open Source Software to the Windows platform, and I don't mean just Cygwin.
Maybe it's horribly obvious. Maybe it's been done, and I don't know (not being a windows user, I'm not on the lookout for windows software!). Maybe the barriers are too high (especially things like libraries and API), but it seems like it might help out. The most difficult would be development and build tools suitable for the Average Home User. Installshield (tm), but it's building the software in the background. Configure and make, but with an animated mascot that suggests --enable switches. Or not. Distribute shiny packaged binaries and supply source.
Our Windows-bound brethren, sistren, and grand-motheren need to see that there is a world of software out there besides the spy- and nag-ware ridden stuff of download.com.com.com.
Here comes the punchline: Migration away from Windows will be that much easier if their favorite [P2P, email, grandchild-photo-sharing, etc] software is already waiting for them on the Linux side. Yes, ignoring the complication of cross-platform applications or source trees...it's still a decent idea! See also: x-chat, gaim, OpenOffice. It can be done.
'Mad crazy' shoutouts to GW-SEAS Senior Design and "Smartmail 4.0"! This is just such a project that's been worked on for a few years by different students. I'd like to see them release it open source, but who knows. P2P email, video, chat...lots of stuff. It's pretty impressive. It's in Java, though...
I'm still trying to figure out "Death to Verisign". On one hand, a lot of nifty things could be done if more people had smartcards and certificates. On the other it pretty swiftly does away with lots of anonimity, which the article seemed to be pretty big in to.
All in all, a half-decent article (Alright...'half in all'?). A few good suggestions, a few 'yeah, THAT's going to happen' suggestions. Lots of predictable things. A few 'Yeah, I'd work on that if a project were to materialize'. Maybe there's hope yet!
In my book, 'optimal PC performance' involves consistant operation over a long period of time. This ignores the fact that the processor may be capable of more speed because of the nature of MHz ratings, but in the long run, this is 'optimal'.
This is interesting, and impressive, and admirable as an engineering exercise, but not exactly in persuit of mainstream 'optimal' performance characteristics. (Unless I RTFA and find that the processor does indeed last a good long time, and not burn bright and die out as I imagine it to under these conditions).
Maybe I'm just old fashioned.
The Jedi are going to feel this one...
No. They just make you work for it.
I had this problem a long time ago. I would get a spam letter from Yahoo! with a link for removal. Of course you never click on those, but this is Yahoo, a more or less legitimate business. I found that clicking on the link and filling out the form or whatever didn't work. It didn't work the first time, and it didn't work the n-1th time.
That nth time came one day at work. I clicked the removal link, and something about the URL struck me as odd. It was so long ago, I unfortunately can't tell you what so you can do the same. But I changed that thing, and it went to *another*, different removal page.
This one worked. It actually worked.
The moral of the story is: look at that URL. Unless they changed the procedure since, of course. I wouldn't know, because I haven't gotten a message from them until this heads-up from the marketing department.
Ah, this old troll again. Always appears, in one form or another in a Slackware-related article. Guess I'll take this one...
Slackware Works.
It does its job efficiently (despite your unsubstantiated claims to the contrary. What's so inefficient about it?), quietly, and without getting in your way. It runs on whatever hardware you throw at it. I've got Slack 9.1 running on my main Athlon machine, and the P133 laptop I kick around to do programming on. I'd like to see Red Hat or most other distro (save perhaps Gentoo and this Vector) do that.
What are these bugs of which you speak? The inefficiencies? The non-standards-compliancies? Heck WHAT are these standards? The filesystem hierarchy?
Package system? Who needs one. Build from source. That said, slackware HAS a package system. It's mainly useful for creating packages of programs you build from source so they can be moved around or uninstalled. Somebody wrote an apt-like thing for Slackware, but I don't plan on using it. Maybe I'm a huge geek with a little too much time on his hands, but there is something to be said from building from source, chasing down dependancies, chasing down THEIR dependancies, and sorting out build and config errors. Woe is they who try to build their first GTK2 app on a Slack 9.0 or earlier system, but when it's done an hour and three levels of ependancies later, you know you're set, and there's a feeling of having accomplished something. Non-geeks, the lazy, and the impatient won't appreciate this, of course, but not everything in this world has to be handed to you.
If you have to ask these questions, Slackware isn't for you. If you're just comming over from Windows, Slackware may also not be for you. If you're impatient and want to be hand-held by a distro that does everything for you, Slackware is not for you. If you're looking for a Windows clone, Slackware is not for you.
I wouldn't concern yourself too much about these questions and revelations. Slackware is not for you. Sorry, but it's your loss.
Slackware 9.1.
Have it running on my laptop of similar spec. It's pretty snappy in console, or running X with Fluxbox. Stay away from the obvious hogs like Mozilla or massive PDFs and you'll be fine.
cat /dev/zero > /dev/eth0
Just, you know, cite me when you submit your findings to the IEEE or the ACM.
"What about [big obvious example]?"
"Haven't they heard of [lesser known example, generally an Open Source project, or something that has been in UNIX distributions since time immemorial]?!"
"I remember I used to use [Obscure example from the days of yore] and it did basically the same thing"
But what do you DO with this information? It seems like a nice exercise to try and pick apart the claims and come up with increasingly obscure references for their prior expression, but is there any actual good that can come of it? (Ok, the last statement kind of implies that all patents are bad; they're not.)
Assuming that at least one or two of the cited examples are valid, there may well be legitimate challanges to the patent. The question is, what to do about it?
It seems infeasable for some random Slashdotter or group of Slashdotters to light up the Laywer Signal and engage Big Evil Corperation in fisticuffs. Afterall, where's the gain? Would the case even be accepted if you weren't the one holding the prior art? What, then, is the answer, or is this just a big geekly pissing contest?
Only thing that comes to mind is firing off a letter to the holder of the prior art, telling them that you enjoyed using their product on the old VAX system at school or whatever, and now Big Evil Corperation is trying to eat their lunch, patent-style.
4. Where is Waldo?
SPARCBook 3XP
DEC Multia. Not sure what to do with this thing as yet. It gets FAR too hot to keep running for too long.
P2 233. Fileserver as of the weekend.
Computone 8-port serial card, circa 1988 (not using it, but I'd like to, somehow...)
When business interests have such a large influance on a major international governance (policy? diplomacy?) body. It's clear enough that business has a great deal of pull in US domestic policy, and I'm sure the same is true to some extent in other countries, but now they can tell the *United Nations* what to do (alright...strongly suggest what to do)? Hope they don't get inflated heads over this.
And no, this isn't the end of the world. This isn't the most important issue the UN is dealing with right now, and it certainly isn't time to 'welcome our new proprietary commercial software product masters'. However, it seems pretty clear that they had a plan going when they were going to look favorably on Open Source solutions for governments and developing nations, a position that was likely hatched internally. A position that was changed by outside pressure. Bet they thought it was a pretty good idea they had going!.
This probably isn't one of those "Who is REALLY in charge" issues, but it makes one think. Then again, maybe it doesn't.
Not to second-guess Hollywood's must cunning minds, but why is this important? You mean...they're just NOW able to do this? I'm sure they could have pulled it off in the past if they really cared that much.
You mean they finally got their distribution channels organized? They realized that people in the other 69+ countries were mad that they had to wait 6 months after the US release? That those people would just download the divx rather than wait, but now might buy a ticket? That we're supposed to feel the awe and wonderment of watching the same thing at the same time as n Million People Worldwide, that Fox or CBS would like us to feel during Major Television Event?
According to the A that I just FR (RTFA, get it?), this is, indeed, purely a money-making venture. They care not for the fans in other countries, just that they pony up the dough to see it rather than pirate it. And hype. Nothing improves a film like hype, Eh Mr. Lucas? (Full dicsulsure: I liked both the prequils, but hype did diminish them.)
The answer to these questions and more on a very special episode of "Why Should Anybody But The Movie Studios, Its Subsidiaries, and Shareholders Care?"!
Does this somehow improve the movie-going experiance? Make the tickets less expensive? Have any effect on anything significant anywhere?
Don't get me wrong, it's probably going to be an awsome flick, and I'm definately going to catch it (at least once...have to hit up the IMAX). However, other than being nifty in the "Hey, there's a sale on Super Soakers...those things are awsome" sense, there is no story here.
There is, however, fodder for an overly drawn out, cynical, holier-than-Hollywood rant. And in the end, isn't that the greatest gift of all? The answer, of course, is 'no'.
One thing that I've always wondered is why no groups have embarked on a public education campaign against spam? These days, there are public service announcements for everything. How much could a 20 second spot between a Metamucil ad and a personal injury lawyer be during some Judge Shrill Crackpot at 2:30 on a Tuesday?
Hit the bootleg Viagra and weight loss crowd where they live: glued to their couches during prime soap and talk time when the rest of us are at work.
The only question is how long would 'the industry' sit on their laurls while we badmouth their fine, economy-stimulating trade. Do Not Call List, the fine folks at the DMA, and Federal judges, I'm looking in your direction.
Food for thought. I'm not sure who would be producing these ads, but I'd kick them some money...
This has nothing to do with the consumer.
Redmond is just getting tired of having all it's Super Secret Damning Evidence Documents mysteriously leaked.
It is a truely sad state of affairs, and possibly telling of the "IT" world in general, where more education could even be considered a bad thing.
There are a number of cameras that do this as the auto-focus aiming mechanism. It wouldn't be horrifically difficult to do for a computer monitor, though the camera viewfinder has the advantage of very close tracking range and predictable angle of attack. The only problem is that your eyes will get *tired*. I don't like using the eye focus when I'm on a so equipped camera for more than a few seconds, let alone a several-hour computer session.