...from Meaning of Life in which the administrator describes how by selling equipment and leasing it back, it costs more, but the expenses show up in Operations Costs rather than assets (or Capital Outlays, or whatever). Sounds like maybe your executives have seen this movie!
And I had *wondered* where all the good jobs went! I'm off to the local PPP, resume in hand! This sounds like a BOON for IT workers who feel under-employed. Anybody like that on Slashdot? Thanks, er, Padre.
---
BTW: For those moderating today--I am making a JOKE. If you don't get it, keep your filthy "offtopic" hands off my post.
According to the report, roughly 50% of current initiatives will fail to breakeven even if the benefit of the initiative is assumed to be $25 per user per month.
Let's also assume a statistical overrepresentation of "connected" workers in the areas so equipped. Let's further assume than most of the systems work acceptably well. Let's even still further more (and yet) assume that those workers are made more efficient through access to their data, their schedules, the people making their schedules, and the ability to review documentation from *wherever* they are. SO there goes Jupiter's $25/month metric.
Muni wi-fi is not intended to simply replace household ISPs. $25/month is a meaningless measure of effectiveness. For one, think of the traffic and fuel costs potentially avoided by allowing wired workers improved access. This is a direct benefit to the city. You know; as long as we're making assumptions.
Sorry, didn't mean to ridicule through oversimplification. But considering Mr. de Villepin is the one pushing the thing, it's no surprise that many countries find it an ill-fitting document. "Even" France couldn't accept it, which shows how much an Ivory-Tower construct it is.
I am familiar with the history of the US Constitution, and stand in awe of the fellows who put it together, and got it done (two different but linked tasks). I suspect that the EU will never get a Constitution done, not as they envision it now, because the rest of the government really needs to flow from it, rather than tacking the thing on top of several long-established, wildly different sovereign States.
They could prove me wrong, of course--but in an atmosphere like that, I wonder why they bother with things like the details of how online music sales should go! Will they opt for a Napster (v3) model, or iTunes? DRM in the file, or in the players, too?
Then, even if they get everything right, does this mean that online sales models not conforming closely enough to the approved standard are subject to action all the way up to the [Supreme Court] of the EU?
As much as TFA says the system is supposed to increase revenues for artists by streamlining things, that's great. But I suspect most of what will happen is that another government-mandated program will be too slow and inflexible to allow its supposed beneficiaries to profit from a rapidly changing business world.
Chalk one up for the people who can't even get a constitution done. Do you really want them involved in your label? Software patents, anyone?
I tell people to use a separate hardware firewall. Most home users will be just fine sitting behind a NAT device with a "web-based" interface; and at least a little curiousity about using it. Anything but leaving the whole burden on Windows' shoulders. No doubt this is a frequently-covered topic on/., but this Claria thing just makes me more sure.
Police say Benjamin Smith III, 41, used his Acer brand laptop to hack into Dinon's wireless Internet network.
...You can't trust those pr1cks from Acer Labs. Did you know that Acer is based in HK? That's right--"HAcKer"!
</tinfoil_hat>
I didn't see the brand of the "SUV". I didn't see the builder of the house. And the only thing which might have mattered--who made the Access Point? This collection of trivia and FUD is what passes for journalism.
Gosh, serverroomguy, you must work in the server room. Me, I figure that computers themselves are just a fad, and once we all get back to pen and paper, we'll finally get some work done around here.
"'It's no different if I went out and bought a Microsoft program and started sharing it with everyone in my apartment. It's theft,' said Kena Lewis, spokeswoman for Bright House Networks in Orlando."
Who is she criticizing here? The owner of the AP or the infringer? It would be no different if I shared some carrots from the salad bar at the Healthy Hippie. A customer at an all-you-can-eat joint has a service contract. A Microsoft Customer* has purchased copyrighted goods. You can let your friend come over to your house and do something on your computer, yes, even using your copy of a MS product. But you can't let him eat off your plate at the salad place.
Long story short: Does anybody know what an unsecured AP does to a person's "reasonable expectation of privacy"?
Only if by "freedom fighter" you mean "technologically inclined terrorist". I suppose one of the optional packages might have the thing roll into a crowded restaurant and blow itself up.
And what would you intend with your anti-"killing device" license? Do you *really* want to drive the people who intend to kill with computers into the arms of Microsoft? I can see it now; the "Blue Screen of Death to America"
Moderator Filter: If you want to call me a troll, READ THE FUCKING PARENT.
...a long time ago that his NeXT business would either be the last computer maker to succeed, or the first to fail outright*. Oddly enough, it was both.
* [Wild paraphrase]
It wasn't. The article itself seemed to strive to be art, or at least artsy. Hi-falutin' in any case.
Here's my take on it: Programming and painting are skill sets. You can paint houses, roads, portraits, "Dogs Playing Poker", or the Mona Lisa. But you don't hear anybody asking "is painting art?" Painting, like programming is a skill set with which you can create art.
He takes the spaghetti of thousands of cables and makes it so neat and logical it would make an artist weep. But is it art? No...that's a stupid question.
It's not a stupid question; if your man were trying to create art with 100Base-T as his chosen medium, he certainly could. It would require conscious intent and aesthetically pleasing arrangement. You would have to be able to look at it and say both "I can tell that whoever did this meant for it to look exactly this way", and "I find it pleasing to the eye."
Well, I have snipped a bunch of this for length, but my point is this: Programming is a skill set with which you can execute art.
Something which ocurred to me: How often have you been told that you can't appreciate art, or don't understand art, or have no competent qualifying cultural referential framework with which to comprehend the totality of individualistic combinatorial elements as anything other than a dozen eggs? You say it's art; I say it's paint thrown at a wall. This is not to say that the definition of art is only subjective. What I'm saying is that if the sniffy fine-arts types want to tell us that we don't know art because we're not qualified, then that works against them in this case, doesn't it? So Ivory-tower-ism will not get us a definition. Hi-falutin' or not.
Slashdot Mirror
Then they'll have to race Chevron!
...which out to be a fair fight. I'd put a multinational oil conglomerate up against the world's largest tin-pot dictatorship anyday.
...We have SDI!
...to surf the web where I, uh, do my business. Now I can surf where a bear does his business!
...from Meaning of Life in which the administrator describes how by selling equipment and leasing it back, it costs more, but the expenses show up in Operations Costs rather than assets (or Capital Outlays, or whatever). Sounds like maybe your executives have seen this movie!
And I had *wondered* where all the good jobs went! I'm off to the local PPP, resume in hand! This sounds like a BOON for IT workers who feel under-employed. Anybody like that on Slashdot? Thanks, er, Padre.
---
BTW: For those moderating today--I am making a JOKE. If you don't get it, keep your filthy "offtopic" hands off my post.
Let's also assume a statistical overrepresentation of "connected" workers in the areas so equipped. Let's further assume than most of the systems work acceptably well. Let's even still further more (and yet) assume that those workers are made more efficient through access to their data, their schedules, the people making their schedules, and the ability to review documentation from *wherever* they are. SO there goes Jupiter's $25/month metric.
Muni wi-fi is not intended to simply replace household ISPs. $25/month is a meaningless measure of effectiveness. For one, think of the traffic and fuel costs potentially avoided by allowing wired workers improved access. This is a direct benefit to the city. You know; as long as we're making assumptions.
Sorry, didn't mean to ridicule through oversimplification. But considering Mr. de Villepin is the one pushing the thing, it's no surprise that many countries find it an ill-fitting document. "Even" France couldn't accept it, which shows how much an Ivory-Tower construct it is.
I am familiar with the history of the US Constitution, and stand in awe of the fellows who put it together, and got it done (two different but linked tasks). I suspect that the EU will never get a Constitution done, not as they envision it now, because the rest of the government really needs to flow from it, rather than tacking the thing on top of several long-established, wildly different sovereign States.
They could prove me wrong, of course--but in an atmosphere like that, I wonder why they bother with things like the details of how online music sales should go! Will they opt for a Napster (v3) model, or iTunes? DRM in the file, or in the players, too?
Then, even if they get everything right, does this mean that online sales models not conforming closely enough to the approved standard are subject to action all the way up to the [Supreme Court] of the EU?
Just wondering...
As much as TFA says the system is supposed to increase revenues for artists by streamlining things, that's great. But I suspect most of what will happen is that another government-mandated program will be too slow and inflexible to allow its supposed beneficiaries to profit from a rapidly changing business world.
Chalk one up for the people who can't even get a constitution done. Do you really want them involved in your label? Software patents, anyone?
etc.
I tell people to use a separate hardware firewall. Most home users will be just fine sitting behind a NAT device with a "web-based" interface; and at least a little curiousity about using it. Anything but leaving the whole burden on Windows' shoulders. No doubt this is a frequently-covered topic on /., but this Claria thing just makes me more sure.
...TiVo pokes around Peter Seebach?
Because then the machine would have to simulate itself on earth, and could cause the program to crash. Think of the simulated /.ers!
...slashdot had it covered.
Gotcha there, canal-boy.
America!!
America!!
America!!
</tinfoil_hat>
I didn't see the brand of the "SUV". I didn't see the builder of the house. And the only thing which might have mattered--who made the Access Point? This collection of trivia and FUD is what passes for journalism.
Gosh, serverroomguy, you must work in the server room. Me, I figure that computers themselves are just a fad, and once we all get back to pen and paper, we'll finally get some work done around here.
Sincerely,
supplyclosetguy
...maintained by a shitbag.
Long story short: Does anybody know what an unsecured AP does to a person's "reasonable expectation of privacy"?
"To Serve Man"
I, too, felt a little lost until I saw a "welcome...overlord" post. Everything is OK. You're safe now.
Only if by "freedom fighter" you mean "technologically inclined terrorist". I suppose one of the optional packages might have the thing roll into a crowded restaurant and blow itself up.
And what would you intend with your anti-"killing device" license? Do you *really* want to drive the people who intend to kill with computers into the arms of Microsoft? I can see it now; the "Blue Screen of Death to America"
Moderator Filter: If you want to call me a troll, READ THE FUCKING PARENT.
...a long time ago that his NeXT business would either be the last computer maker to succeed, or the first to fail outright*. Oddly enough, it was both. * [Wild paraphrase]
Here's my take on it: Programming and painting are skill sets. You can paint houses, roads, portraits, "Dogs Playing Poker", or the Mona Lisa. But you don't hear anybody asking "is painting art?" Painting, like programming is a skill set with which you can create art. It's not a stupid question; if your man were trying to create art with 100Base-T as his chosen medium, he certainly could. It would require conscious intent and aesthetically pleasing arrangement. You would have to be able to look at it and say both "I can tell that whoever did this meant for it to look exactly this way", and "I find it pleasing to the eye."
Well, I have snipped a bunch of this for length, but my point is this: Programming is a skill set with which you can execute art.
Something which ocurred to me: How often have you been told that you can't appreciate art, or don't understand art, or have no competent qualifying cultural referential framework with which to comprehend the totality of individualistic combinatorial elements as anything other than a dozen eggs? You say it's art; I say it's paint thrown at a wall.
This is not to say that the definition of art is only subjective. What I'm saying is that if the sniffy fine-arts types want to tell us that we don't know art because we're not qualified, then that works against them in this case, doesn't it? So Ivory-tower-ism will not get us a definition. Hi-falutin' or not.