When the network takes a dive, he's the one working nights and weekends to get it back up, while you're at home playing WoW or watching Firefly on DVD.
If he never puts in the time, then he is a slacker and I hope he gets canned. If he is like most other netadmins I know, he probably logs a crapload of time when everyone else is away, yet he's still expected to put in face time during the workday. In cases like that, he's probably judged on network availability and other metrics. When all is going well, he has slack time. When all is not going well, he could put in a couple hundred hours in a couple of weeks.
If I were your manager, I'd be wondering how you found time to look at your netadmin's time in the ticket logs if you are already so busy--just something to think about.
I think there's a fine line (for some) between cyberslacking and taking periodic breaks from the tedium of work. For me, my periodic checks at Slashdot and other news sites are a way to stay sane, so I can hyper focus for other periods of time during the day to get things done. I have a set of sites I visit daily, mostly news/information sites, and my flow works something like this (my days average nine hours sans lunch):
*Arrive, log in, check voice/email messages, responding as appropriate. 30 min.
*Check my preferred websites. 30 min.
*Tackle biggest task(s) for the day. 2-3 hrs.
*Check my preferred websites. 10min.
*Tackle those annoying-but-not-critical tasks. 1-2 hrs.
*Lunch. 15-30 min. (usually at my desk while checking and replying to messages).
*Check my preferred websites. 10min.
*Project work, progress on multi-stage tasks. 2-3 hrs.
*Check my preferred websites. 10 min.
*Follow-up tasks, and assignments to other technology groups. 1-2 hrs.
*IF NOT at the end of the day, check some secondary sites or research some new topics until end of day. 15-30 minutes. This is the one time of day that, for me, comes closest to true cyberslacking. Often I'm just waiting for any final help calls or trouble tickets before our designated end-of-day.
The first site check of the day is longer because most headlines/topics refreshed overnight. Later in the day, I'm only scanning for new headlines or topics of interest. Of course, some days (about once a week), I never get to check my sites. Perhaps once a month I'll have a day where I can read every article that interests me. This works well for me and my employer, as my reading keeps me well aware of numerous trends in and outside of our industry, and it allows me to dive in with greater intesity when I am working. Of course, some will not believe this works without a scientific study, and I'll be the first to say this does not work for everyone. For me, however, I'm glad to work for an employer that allows for some personal use during the workday and is more focused on results than on managing every minute we're in the building. I get my work done on time, seek extra assignments, and pick up slack from my coworkers. Some would argue that my employer is overstaffed [I tried to make that point to a former employer for years until I finally bailed for my current gig, so I know the difference], but that is not the case--it comes down to how I handle my workload. I sprint, then I walk, then I sprint again. My diversions are those little walks that let me run full bore from time to time.
Why? Because everyone in the United States is now trained to first call for emergency help, then to try to put out the fire only if you feel safe. I think it was a good concept gone awry. I've seen my share of household fires over the past 20 years, and either I or my wife have extinguished them by ourselves.
1)Toaster fire a la [popular frosted toaster pastry] - extinguised with a cup of flour. 2)Oven fire due to grease in a broiler pan - extinguished with LOTS of flour and a blanket. 3) Microwave fire (One of the kids forgot about the "no metal rule"--I was in the bath, and at first thought they only burned some popcorn. When they opened the microwave door to put out the fire, being fueled with ample oxygen, it took off!) - I got to this one in a nick of time, and put it out by smothering the burning item with a wet hand towel after I sent one of the kids to trip the breaker. 4) AC Adapter brick - this one was absolutely the worst. An AC adapter brick overheated, melted, and caught fire. It dripped burning plastic onto the floor, burning the linoleum in spots, and it caught surrounding materials on fire. My wife, after evacuating the kids from the house (those who were not in school), ran back in and started attacking the fire with everything she could find. Afterwards, she called me, not the fire department. While quite annoyed with her risk-taking at the time, she did save the house.
Perhaps we've had worse luck than most regarding fire, but I'm thankful all ended well. So, yes, the laptop owner probably could have put out the fire, but courage to act in situations like that comes from being prepared and keeping a level head. I've heard too many stories of people who attempted to put out fires that should not have done so (using water on a grease fire, for example, or shooting a small extinguisher directly into a burning wastecan, sending flaming embers flying about the room). For this guy, calling 9-1-1 was probably a good call, even if their response (like this post) was overkill.
While the combat system was an oversimplification of combat mechanics, established players understood that a "hit" was not merely physical contact, but rather physical contact that conveyed damage to the target. After some really fun game sessions, my buddies and I would often write (or simply re-tell) the stories of the battles--full of glancing blows, hits, misses, and then those final blows that decimated the enemy (i.e., the places in the game where we rolled three "natural 20s" in a row for uber-damage).
Watching those kiosks like hawks? I don't know how busy your store is, but the stores I see (not exclusive to TJMax) have those kiosks near their customer service desks. They might be able to watch them during their slow periods, if they thought it was important enough, but go in when that service desk is busy and it is unlikely that the employees even care what is going on there since they are dealing with Mr. or Ms. "I-got-this-and-it-works-fine-but-its-broke-and-I- don't-need-it-because-my-uncle's-friend-bought-one -like-it-and-it-just-doesn't-match-my-decor-and-no -I-don't have-a-receipt-because-it-was-a-gift-and-all-I-wan t-is-cash-because-I-don't-buy-anything-from-your-s tore-because-of-your-position-on-union-labor-and-y ou-don't-carry-it-in-my-size, please."
In fact, check out Wal-Mart stores. Those kiosks are (9 times out of 10) located in the former layaway area near the rear of the store. Since they no longer offer layawy service, that area is often used to store overstock goods, rarely has anyone in it (unless they're cleaning the bathrooms or going to/from the back room), and would provide ample opportunities for a little kiosk-tampering. Of course, there are security cameras, but it is unlikely anyone would be watching that particular area long enough to figure out something odd was happening--those cameras are more often used after-the-fact to provide evidence, or in cases where they are actively trying to follow a suspected (read: observed) shoplifter.
I'm also skeptical of the validity of the test: levels of particulate were higher during the workday. Duh! People are walking around and moving things during the day. You could have had a toner spill somewhere, the night cleaning crew vacuums it up, effectively distributing the micro-particles everywhere. Then, during the daytime, as people are milling about, they kick up the residue, which includes toner.
Most businesses want to spend time deploying solutions, not evaluating options.
While I don't see the number of distros as a problem, IT management often does. There have been many illustrations used to highlight where a variety of options is good. Let me cite one where similar branching has been bad: the Church. Regardless where you weigh in on the whole concept of God, I think you'll agree that Christianity's voice is not as strong as it once was. I would argue that the constant multiplication of denominations has watered down the central message: there is often more focus on the areas where they disagree than on the area where they all (presumably) should agree.
Now, let's port that back to the whole *nix argument. [I won't explore the whole parallel with fan(boy)aticism.] While each distro has brought its unique flavor to the *nix buffet, most IT managers are looking for solutions that won't require a lot of advance time to decide which distro is best. They also are accustomed to a model that allows them to leverage training and support resources across the broadest possible base. While some of their concerns may be addressed through education (e.g., knowledge that techs who are up to speed on one distro already know 98%+ of every other distro), their concerns should not be dismissed out of hand. After all, one of the precepts of the open source community is that improvements made by one eventually benefit all.
Lost you there? Is there no room for the multiplicity of distros to begin to amalgamize into more normative releases? Can the diversity of choice be narrowed to provided clearer options? Sure, there will always be a place for specialized distros, but [imo] *nix could have already decimated Microsoft's house of cards had there been a unified front. Think of the unification of the Greek city-states. Compared to empire (Microsoft), those city-states are weak and prone to infighting. Heck, if the Church were to reconcile itself--thereby reducing the number of competing voices--people might actually think that there is something to its teachings (Wow! They're living in unity and harmony the way they're supposed to live! Maybe it isn't as much crap as I once thought it was.).
Now, I'm not proposing that there be a purge of distros. I'm just trying to highlight the fact that those unfamiliar with *nix--whether you think they should be in power or not--are in power, and they come at this issue from traditional business paradigms. Come to them with a unified voice, and they'll be more likely to listen. Preach unity (under the Linux banner) while squabbling between camps, and you'll end up like the church: dozens, hundreds, even thousands of self-satisfied communities, each working its hardest to spread the good news of Open Source until you have a cacophony of opinion so diverse that others won't see what you have in common.
I see a very simple way, in the ITI example, of stopping the online discount auctions: modify the wholesaler's contract so parts may only be sold to authorized retailers (or other authorized distributors). Were I in ITI's shoes, I would not see the eBayer as the problem, but rather the wholesaler who sold the parts.
The cosmetics example is more troubling. If the eBayer did buy the items at a flea market, then the manufacturer should no longer be able to dictate the terms of sale [I would propose that such contracts only be allowed through the first transaction in which a consumer acquires the products]. If the eBayer was buying gobs of this stuff from a local salon and re-selling it A) she would not be buying in the role of consumer, but as that of distributor or reseller, and thus not the end point for any manufacturer controls, and B) I can't imagine she was able to sell it at a profit while yet below the retail price she, presumably, paid as a consumer.
My concern is that any precedent limiting resale by private individuals after a retail (consumer) purchase could be used in other areas as well. I have friends who nicely supplement their income by selling retail goods they purchased at a discount (clearance items, or "free after rebate" items) at thrice-annual garage sales. If extending the logic being applied to these cases (in the event the judiciary acts in such a way as to encourage banal name calling by extending manufacturer rights post-consumer-purchase), my friends could, conceivably, end up being barred from selling certain items (especially if items from manufacturers/vendors who would not be characterized as having market power per an earlier post).
My hope is that fundamentals of a free-market economy will encourage the judiciary to keep a very narrow interpretation of such limitations, should they support them at all. If not, perhaps this will become another bit of tinder to fuel the fire of patent/copyright reform.
I worked at a company where we had Lotus Notes internally. Additionally to the other fabulous features (such as speed, stability and an intuitive interface) of that wonderful software it supported sending 'confidential' and 'highly confidential' mail.
Notes? Lotus Notes? The same system that will consume any and all throughput availalbe to it? The same system whose search feature (pre-release 6) would commonly identify the wrong words as successful search results?
Perhaps it's only my employer's deployment of Notes that is hosed up the wazoo, but I've tried really hard and I still can't find anything nice to say about Notes.
Wait...well...it came from the same parent company that created AmiPro. [reminiscing fondly] May I allocate some of my positive memories of AmiPro as nice things about Lotus Notes?
They've stood upon their "Great Wall" and taunted the Mongols. Unfortunately, their "Great Wall" is little more than a cyclone fence, so I think they're in for a little trouble.
Actually, this will likely have an impact. If the new rating mechanism convinces enough advertisers that it is time on a page that counts, then Google will see its click-based advertising negatively impacted--ad placements through Google will be less valuable for sites that have lower average time-per-visit than they would be for sites where people park for quite some time. So it's true they do get paid per click (and will continue to do so), but this new rating could fundamentally change how advertisers decide where their dollars should go.
If successful, it may even shift advertising back to a local-newspaper model--where advertisers cough up the bucks directly to the site that can keep readers' attention for the longest time. If I had a brand to sell, why trust only context-sensitive ads (not that I would abandon them completely) when I can get a long-term, prominent ad on a site with a well-defined demographic with an average site visit (off-the-cuff for this example) of 37 minutes. That's 37 minutes where my ad can be staring you in the face.
I see one flaw with this method, however--it does not account for "unintentional" long stays--like a default home page in a second browser window, the site that's up when I go to lunch, or the site that is active on my home PC when I turn in for the night. I can imagine a whole slew of ways to game the new system, to increase ad revenues for my site of choice.
I also have to wonder what the average site visit is for Slashdot--there's money to be made!
While my choice of channels would be different, I, too, would be a cable customer if such a service were available. I want to decide what comes in and what I'm paying for. I don't want to pay inflated prices to subsidize some package of channels I don't want. The cable companies try to push it off onto the consumer, suggesting that we just delete the channels from our remote control channel list (or that we use the V-chip--blech!). They don't get it.
The reason they don't offer a la carte? Too many consumers are all too willing to fork over whatever dollars for which the cable companies ask just to get a package that includes their favorite channels. If even 20% of cable subscribers would simply ask for a la carte under threat of cancellation (and then be willing to go through with the cancellation), I think the cable companies would change their business model rapidly.
Anyone have a few million laying around to start a cable company in the upper Midwest that uses an a la carte business model?
The sad truth is that many businesses, including my present employer, force draconian IP ownership agreements upon their employees as a condition for continued employement. Mine claims ownership of anything I develop during my term of employment (retroactive to my start date, since the documents came out 6 years after I started), whether on my time or theirs, and extending 6 months past my termination date.
Yes, yes, I know you ardent idealists will want to deride me for signing such an agreement, but:
1) I only tinker as a coder (I have other things to do when I'm not at work), so I'm not likely to develop anything of value under the agreement. 2) In my state, employment is "at will", which means there is no implied employment contract. They can get rid of any employee at any time for (just about) any reason. Of course, we employees are "free" to do the same--quit whenever we want [hmm...somehow I think such arrangements favor only one side of the deal--you think!]. 3) I have a family--and a large one at that. When handed a piece of paper at a staff meeting and told "sign and return this before the end of the month or you cannot remain employed," I did what I needed to do to keep the job. I can't afford a months-long job search, continuance rates for post-employment medical coverage, or the prospect of "starting over" at another company without planning and foresight (were it a planned, volitional move, it would be fine).
So, if you are working for a company that hasn't gone all IP-over-your-backside, be thankful and code away. I do have some fine ideas I'd like to pursue, but I'm not writing a single line until six months and a day after I leave my present employer (perhaps as soon as they finish paying for my graduate degree--a departure that would be on my own terms).
While I normally would not dignify such a comment with a reply, I must state this: if you are ignorant of how high heterosexual HIV infection rates are around the world, then you are simply to be pitied.
The problem isn't really in recycling the plastics. The problem is having a cost effective means of separating the plastics from other materials so that the plastics may be recycled. In this case, it seems that the process may be able to address some of the issues (e.g. steel threads in tires, copper wire from its sheathing), but that still leaves many potential plastic sources (e.g., consumer electronics, handheld games) that would require some pre-processing before they could be reclaimed [I know much of this occurs in the PC industry, but recovering gold from old systems is likely much more lucrative).
Of course, if they simply could start with simple plastics that are currently considered at the end of their recyclable lives (see many recyclable symbols on containers that go to 7 or higher?), it would be a good start. Anyone want to bet that big oil companies (if/when they view this as a competing source for petrochemicals) lobby to limit the use of this technology in the U.S.? It would make more sense for them to buy/license the technology, but that would simply be too logical.
No, I think you're wrong here. While I don't know how you define "normal people," the distinction between the camps warrants some consideration, regardless how "normal" someone might be.
There are many factors that come into play here. While, on the surface, some could read "republican == corporate interest" into the prevalence of Windows boxes, does it rather reflect an older, more gentrified party base? Does the democratic preference for Linux indicate a younger, more technology friendly campaign base, or was it merely an economic decision (i.e., a decision to limit technology costs so as to maximize advertising dollars later)? Are these choices merely coincidental, or coordinated (i.e., is the democtratic party leveraging Linux to gain an inroads into the technical community)?
Would you have made a similar comment regarding a company's choice for a shipping service, its fleet of trucks, or its preferred adverstising channel? Market share and market penetration are important indicators of trends in every industry. Framing your statement in light of shipping services, for example, we would say "To normal people, the [carrier] has [nothing] to do with anything." While on the surface, that may seem true, the arrival of a company like FedEx to challenge UPS was the harbinger of change in the package delivery market. When the first major companies starting using FedEx nearly exclusively, it would have been big news. Analysts would have compared companies using the new carrier to those retaining the established character. Conclusions were drawn. Millions were made. It is part of the cycle of business. Someone needs to step away from the status quo--sometimes they are applauded for doing so, but most of the time they are just forgotten.
Simply put, I think that's what's happening here--some are breaking out of a mold. Some people lead, others follow. While no Linux fanboy, I see this as a positive event on the road to broader adoption. The real test will be to see how many sites on either side of the aisle can survive undefiled through election day.
To think that the agency did not have its own agenda is (in the opinion of someone who generally trusts the government and is not a conspiracy theorist) naive.
To think that any President is fully aware of all of the activities proposed or undertaken by agencies under the executive branch is delusional.
Now, really, how long before one of the major networks presents a series centered around "disappearing water" events around the globe--"Dehydration" anyone?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm just guessing here, but...
When the network takes a dive, he's the one working nights and weekends to get it back up, while you're at home playing WoW or watching Firefly on DVD.
If he never puts in the time, then he is a slacker and I hope he gets canned. If he is like most other netadmins I know, he probably logs a crapload of time when everyone else is away, yet he's still expected to put in face time during the workday. In cases like that, he's probably judged on network availability and other metrics. When all is going well, he has slack time. When all is not going well, he could put in a couple hundred hours in a couple of weeks.
If I were your manager, I'd be wondering how you found time to look at your netadmin's time in the ticket logs if you are already so busy--just something to think about.
I think there's a fine line (for some) between cyberslacking and taking periodic breaks from the tedium of work. For me, my periodic checks at Slashdot and other news sites are a way to stay sane, so I can hyper focus for other periods of time during the day to get things done. I have a set of sites I visit daily, mostly news/information sites, and my flow works something like this (my days average nine hours sans lunch):
*Arrive, log in, check voice/email messages, responding as appropriate. 30 min.
*Check my preferred websites. 30 min.
*Tackle biggest task(s) for the day. 2-3 hrs.
*Check my preferred websites. 10min.
*Tackle those annoying-but-not-critical tasks. 1-2 hrs.
*Lunch. 15-30 min. (usually at my desk while checking and replying to messages).
*Check my preferred websites. 10min.
*Project work, progress on multi-stage tasks. 2-3 hrs.
*Check my preferred websites. 10 min.
*Follow-up tasks, and assignments to other technology groups. 1-2 hrs.
*IF NOT at the end of the day, check some secondary sites or research some new topics until end of day. 15-30 minutes. This is the one time of day that, for me, comes closest to true cyberslacking. Often I'm just waiting for any final help calls or trouble tickets before our designated end-of-day.
The first site check of the day is longer because most headlines/topics refreshed overnight. Later in the day, I'm only scanning for new headlines or topics of interest. Of course, some days (about once a week), I never get to check my sites. Perhaps once a month I'll have a day where I can read every article that interests me. This works well for me and my employer, as my reading keeps me well aware of numerous trends in and outside of our industry, and it allows me to dive in with greater intesity when I am working. Of course, some will not believe this works without a scientific study, and I'll be the first to say this does not work for everyone. For me, however, I'm glad to work for an employer that allows for some personal use during the workday and is more focused on results than on managing every minute we're in the building. I get my work done on time, seek extra assignments, and pick up slack from my coworkers. Some would argue that my employer is overstaffed [I tried to make that point to a former employer for years until I finally bailed for my current gig, so I know the difference], but that is not the case--it comes down to how I handle my workload. I sprint, then I walk, then I sprint again. My diversions are those little walks that let me run full bore from time to time.
Am I the only one who operates like this?
Why? Because everyone in the United States is now trained to first call for emergency help, then to try to put out the fire only if you feel safe. I think it was a good concept gone awry. I've seen my share of household fires over the past 20 years, and either I or my wife have extinguished them by ourselves.
1)Toaster fire a la [popular frosted toaster pastry] - extinguised with a cup of flour.
2)Oven fire due to grease in a broiler pan - extinguished with LOTS of flour and a blanket.
3) Microwave fire (One of the kids forgot about the "no metal rule"--I was in the bath, and at first thought they only burned some popcorn. When they opened the microwave door to put out the fire, being fueled with ample oxygen, it took off!) - I got to this one in a nick of time, and put it out by smothering the burning item with a wet hand towel after I sent one of the kids to trip the breaker.
4) AC Adapter brick - this one was absolutely the worst. An AC adapter brick overheated, melted, and caught fire. It dripped burning plastic onto the floor, burning the linoleum in spots, and it caught surrounding materials on fire. My wife, after evacuating the kids from the house (those who were not in school), ran back in and started attacking the fire with everything she could find. Afterwards, she called me, not the fire department. While quite annoyed with her risk-taking at the time, she did save the house.
Perhaps we've had worse luck than most regarding fire, but I'm thankful all ended well. So, yes, the laptop owner probably could have put out the fire, but courage to act in situations like that comes from being prepared and keeping a level head. I've heard too many stories of people who attempted to put out fires that should not have done so (using water on a grease fire, for example, or shooting a small extinguisher directly into a burning wastecan, sending flaming embers flying about the room). For this guy, calling 9-1-1 was probably a good call, even if their response (like this post) was overkill.
So it must have been some marketer who put that "B" on the front of the box: bLACK Edition!
Ah, but did you have a home 8-track recorder? I used to stay up late on Sunday night to record the Dr. Demento show on 8-track.
While the combat system was an oversimplification of combat mechanics, established players understood that a "hit" was not merely physical contact, but rather physical contact that conveyed damage to the target. After some really fun game sessions, my buddies and I would often write (or simply re-tell) the stories of the battles--full of glancing blows, hits, misses, and then those final blows that decimated the enemy (i.e., the places in the game where we rolled three "natural 20s" in a row for uber-damage).
Watching those kiosks like hawks? I don't know how busy your store is, but the stores I see (not exclusive to TJMax) have those kiosks near their customer service desks. They might be able to watch them during their slow periods, if they thought it was important enough, but go in when that service desk is busy and it is unlikely that the employees even care what is going on there since they are dealing with Mr. or Ms. "I-got-this-and-it-works-fine-but-its-broke-and-I- don't-need-it-because-my-uncle's-friend-bought-one -like-it-and-it-just-doesn't-match-my-decor-and-no -I-don't have-a-receipt-because-it-was-a-gift-and-all-I-wan t-is-cash-because-I-don't-buy-anything-from-your-s tore-because-of-your-position-on-union-labor-and-y ou-don't-carry-it-in-my-size, please."
In fact, check out Wal-Mart stores. Those kiosks are (9 times out of 10) located in the former layaway area near the rear of the store. Since they no longer offer layawy service, that area is often used to store overstock goods, rarely has anyone in it (unless they're cleaning the bathrooms or going to/from the back room), and would provide ample opportunities for a little kiosk-tampering. Of course, there are security cameras, but it is unlikely anyone would be watching that particular area long enough to figure out something odd was happening--those cameras are more often used after-the-fact to provide evidence, or in cases where they are actively trying to follow a suspected (read: observed) shoplifter.
From the tone of the other replies to your post, you may need the material soon to recover from a serious pummelling...
I'm also skeptical of the validity of the test: levels of particulate were higher during the workday. Duh! People are walking around and moving things during the day. You could have had a toner spill somewhere, the night cleaning crew vacuums it up, effectively distributing the micro-particles everywhere. Then, during the daytime, as people are milling about, they kick up the residue, which includes toner.
Most businesses want to spend time deploying solutions, not evaluating options.
While I don't see the number of distros as a problem, IT management often does. There have been many illustrations used to highlight where a variety of options is good. Let me cite one where similar branching has been bad: the Church.
Regardless where you weigh in on the whole concept of God, I think you'll agree that Christianity's voice is not as strong as it once was. I would argue that the constant multiplication of denominations has watered down the central message: there is often more focus on the areas where they disagree than on the area where they all (presumably) should agree.
Now, let's port that back to the whole *nix argument. [I won't explore the whole parallel with fan(boy)aticism.] While each distro has brought its unique flavor to the *nix buffet, most IT managers are looking for solutions that won't require a lot of advance time to decide which distro is best. They also are accustomed to a model that allows them to leverage training and support resources across the broadest possible base. While some of their concerns may be addressed through education (e.g., knowledge that techs who are up to speed on one distro already know 98%+ of every other distro), their concerns should not be dismissed out of hand. After all, one of the precepts of the open source community is that improvements made by one eventually benefit all.
Lost you there? Is there no room for the multiplicity of distros to begin to amalgamize into more normative releases? Can the diversity of choice be narrowed to provided clearer options? Sure, there will always be a place for specialized distros, but [imo] *nix could have already decimated Microsoft's house of cards had there been a unified front. Think of the unification of the Greek city-states. Compared to empire (Microsoft), those city-states are weak and prone to infighting. Heck, if the Church were to reconcile itself--thereby reducing the number of competing voices--people might actually think that there is something to its teachings (Wow! They're living in unity and harmony the way they're supposed to live! Maybe it isn't as much crap as I once thought it was.).
Now, I'm not proposing that there be a purge of distros. I'm just trying to highlight the fact that those unfamiliar with *nix--whether you think they should be in power or not--are in power, and they come at this issue from traditional business paradigms. Come to them with a unified voice, and they'll be more likely to listen. Preach unity (under the Linux banner) while squabbling between camps, and you'll end up like the church: dozens, hundreds, even thousands of self-satisfied communities, each working its hardest to spread the good news of Open Source until you have a cacophony of opinion so diverse that others won't see what you have in common.
I see a very simple way, in the ITI example, of stopping the online discount auctions: modify the wholesaler's contract so parts may only be sold to authorized retailers (or other authorized distributors). Were I in ITI's shoes, I would not see the eBayer as the problem, but rather the wholesaler who sold the parts.
The cosmetics example is more troubling. If the eBayer did buy the items at a flea market, then the manufacturer should no longer be able to dictate the terms of sale [I would propose that such contracts only be allowed through the first transaction in which a consumer acquires the products]. If the eBayer was buying gobs of this stuff from a local salon and re-selling it A) she would not be buying in the role of consumer, but as that of distributor or reseller, and thus not the end point for any manufacturer controls, and B) I can't imagine she was able to sell it at a profit while yet below the retail price she, presumably, paid as a consumer.
My concern is that any precedent limiting resale by private individuals after a retail (consumer) purchase could be used in other areas as well. I have friends who nicely supplement their income by selling retail goods they purchased at a discount (clearance items, or "free after rebate" items) at thrice-annual garage sales. If extending the logic being applied to these cases (in the event the judiciary acts in such a way as to encourage banal name calling by extending manufacturer rights post-consumer-purchase), my friends could, conceivably, end up being barred from selling certain items (especially if items from manufacturers/vendors who would not be characterized as having market power per an earlier post).
My hope is that fundamentals of a free-market economy will encourage the judiciary to keep a very narrow interpretation of such limitations, should they support them at all. If not, perhaps this will become another bit of tinder to fuel the fire of patent/copyright reform.
Perhaps it's only my employer's deployment of Notes that is hosed up the wazoo, but I've tried really hard and I still can't find anything nice to say about Notes.
Wait...well...it came from the same parent company that created AmiPro. [reminiscing fondly] May I allocate some of my positive memories of AmiPro as nice things about Lotus Notes?
In ye olden days it was thereof spoken:
"Ye have thrown down the gauntlet."
They've stood upon their "Great Wall" and taunted the Mongols. Unfortunately, their "Great Wall" is little more than a cyclone fence, so I think they're in for a little trouble.
Actually, this will likely have an impact. If the new rating mechanism convinces enough advertisers that it is time on a page that counts, then Google will see its click-based advertising negatively impacted--ad placements through Google will be less valuable for sites that have lower average time-per-visit than they would be for sites where people park for quite some time. So it's true they do get paid per click (and will continue to do so), but this new rating could fundamentally change how advertisers decide where their dollars should go.
If successful, it may even shift advertising back to a local-newspaper model--where advertisers cough up the bucks directly to the site that can keep readers' attention for the longest time. If I had a brand to sell, why trust only context-sensitive ads (not that I would abandon them completely) when I can get a long-term, prominent ad on a site with a well-defined demographic with an average site visit (off-the-cuff for this example) of 37 minutes. That's 37 minutes where my ad can be staring you in the face.
I see one flaw with this method, however--it does not account for "unintentional" long stays--like a default home page in a second browser window, the site that's up when I go to lunch, or the site that is active on my home PC when I turn in for the night. I can imagine a whole slew of ways to game the new system, to increase ad revenues for my site of choice.
I also have to wonder what the average site visit is for Slashdot--there's money to be made!
While my choice of channels would be different, I, too, would be a cable customer if such a service were available. I want to decide what comes in and what I'm paying for. I don't want to pay inflated prices to subsidize some package of channels I don't want. The cable companies try to push it off onto the consumer, suggesting that we just delete the channels from our remote control channel list (or that we use the V-chip--blech!). They don't get it.
The reason they don't offer a la carte? Too many consumers are all too willing to fork over whatever dollars for which the cable companies ask just to get a package that includes their favorite channels. If even 20% of cable subscribers would simply ask for a la carte under threat of cancellation (and then be willing to go through with the cancellation), I think the cable companies would change their business model rapidly.
Anyone have a few million laying around to start a cable company in the upper Midwest that uses an a la carte business model?
I was under a mistaken impression. Thank you for the information.
So all someone needs to do is pinch your phone...
The sad truth is that many businesses, including my present employer, force draconian IP ownership agreements upon their employees as a condition for continued employement. Mine claims ownership of anything I develop during my term of employment (retroactive to my start date, since the documents came out 6 years after I started), whether on my time or theirs, and extending 6 months past my termination date.
Yes, yes, I know you ardent idealists will want to deride me for signing such an agreement, but:
1) I only tinker as a coder (I have other things to do when I'm not at work), so I'm not likely to develop anything of value under the agreement.
2) In my state, employment is "at will", which means there is no implied employment contract. They can get rid of any employee at any time for (just about) any reason. Of course, we employees are "free" to do the same--quit whenever we want [hmm...somehow I think such arrangements favor only one side of the deal--you think!].
3) I have a family--and a large one at that. When handed a piece of paper at a staff meeting and told "sign and return this before the end of the month or you cannot remain employed," I did what I needed to do to keep the job. I can't afford a months-long job search, continuance rates for post-employment medical coverage, or the prospect of "starting over" at another company without planning and foresight (were it a planned, volitional move, it would be fine).
So, if you are working for a company that hasn't gone all IP-over-your-backside, be thankful and code away. I do have some fine ideas I'd like to pursue, but I'm not writing a single line until six months and a day after I leave my present employer (perhaps as soon as they finish paying for my graduate degree--a departure that would be on my own terms).
While I normally would not dignify such a comment with a reply, I must state this: if you are ignorant of how high heterosexual HIV infection rates are around the world, then you are simply to be pitied.
The problem isn't really in recycling the plastics. The problem is having a cost effective means of separating the plastics from other materials so that the plastics may be recycled. In this case, it seems that the process may be able to address some of the issues (e.g. steel threads in tires, copper wire from its sheathing), but that still leaves many potential plastic sources (e.g., consumer electronics, handheld games) that would require some pre-processing before they could be reclaimed [I know much of this occurs in the PC industry, but recovering gold from old systems is likely much more lucrative).
Of course, if they simply could start with simple plastics that are currently considered at the end of their recyclable lives (see many recyclable symbols on containers that go to 7 or higher?), it would be a good start. Anyone want to bet that big oil companies (if/when they view this as a competing source for petrochemicals) lobby to limit the use of this technology in the U.S.? It would make more sense for them to buy/license the technology, but that would simply be too logical.
Vivoleum was a gag site associated with a gag presentation to a bunch of industry insiders.
No, I think you're wrong here. While I don't know how you define "normal people," the distinction between the camps warrants some consideration, regardless how "normal" someone might be.
There are many factors that come into play here. While, on the surface, some could read "republican == corporate interest" into the prevalence of Windows boxes, does it rather reflect an older, more gentrified party base? Does the democratic preference for Linux indicate a younger, more technology friendly campaign base, or was it merely an economic decision (i.e., a decision to limit technology costs so as to maximize advertising dollars later)? Are these choices merely coincidental, or coordinated (i.e., is the democtratic party leveraging Linux to gain an inroads into the technical community)?
Would you have made a similar comment regarding a company's choice for a shipping service, its fleet of trucks, or its preferred adverstising channel? Market share and market penetration are important indicators of trends in every industry. Framing your statement in light of shipping services, for example, we would say "To normal people, the [carrier] has [nothing] to do with anything." While on the surface, that may seem true, the arrival of a company like FedEx to challenge UPS was the harbinger of change in the package delivery market. When the first major companies starting using FedEx nearly exclusively, it would have been big news. Analysts would have compared companies using the new carrier to those retaining the established character. Conclusions were drawn. Millions were made. It is part of the cycle of business. Someone needs to step away from the status quo--sometimes they are applauded for doing so, but most of the time they are just forgotten.
Simply put, I think that's what's happening here--some are breaking out of a mold. Some people lead, others follow. While no Linux fanboy, I see this as a positive event on the road to broader adoption. The real test will be to see how many sites on either side of the aisle can survive undefiled through election day.
To think that the agency did not have its own agenda is (in the opinion of someone who generally trusts the government and is not a conspiracy theorist) naive.
To think that any President is fully aware of all of the activities proposed or undertaken by agencies under the executive branch is delusional.
No one saw that giant straw enter our atmosphere?
Now, really, how long before one of the major networks presents a series centered around "disappearing water" events around the globe--"Dehydration" anyone?