You seem to fear higher ISP prices. My fear is censorship from a monopoly. We are already seeing this as Google AdWords often bans political ads.
But as for the cost side of the equation -- your observation of airline prices is correct, but only half the story. While the airline industry is in fact an oligopoly that incrementally raises prices in tandem over time, it also suddenly slashes prices in tandem periodically. This is the behavior of an oligopoly, which while not ideal, is preferable to a monopoly.
My take: the real fear is monopoly control of the Internet. Since monopolies are a problem independent of the Internet, we need to strengthen anti-monopoly laws rather than pretend we're living like it's 1969 on the ARPANET.
Whereas a few years ago the laptop did everything, now we're seeing divergence. The trend on the desktop is toward multiple displays (heads), and the trend for mobile is the PDA/phone. The laptop, therefore, will be rent in two -- the CPU will return to the desktop in a little black box under the desk, and the storage will transition to the PDA/phone (think iPhone). You'll dock your PDA/phone with all your data (encrypted, of course) into your multi-headed display.
It always amuses me how execs think men will suddenly start carrying around purses.
Going off on the same tangent, here's an example of a fragile base class. The Virginia legislature shortened (rather than completely eliminate, as in your malloc() dangling reference example) a list of businesses subject to some exemptions, not realizing that that same list was also used by another law saying which businesses had to be closed on Sundays.
Gatto famously claims that literacy was near 100% prior to the advent of public education. A group in Idaho provides some research to back up Gatto's claim.
The central planning of the Soviet Union came up with a new economic plan every five years.
That Kentucky (or any state in the U.S.) applies the same logic to education is no surprise, but why do Slashdotters acquiesce to determining teachers' salary by central planning and government mandate? The free market should determine teachers' salaries. The prerequisite, of course, would be to eliminate government-run schools and let private schools compete for tuition money from parents.
You are right. I meant Calendar.equals(). I just now double-checked the API source code for JDK 1.4.2_08:
/** * Compares this calendar to the specified object. * The result is <code>true</code> if and only if the argument is * not <code>null</code> and is a <code>Calendar</code> object that * represents the same calendar as this object. * @param obj the object to compare with. * @return <code>true</code> if the objects are the same; * <code>false</code> otherwise. */ public boolean equals(Object obj) { if (this == obj) return true; if (!(obj instanceof Calendar)) return false;
I believe on Solaris the JVM does get the timezone info from the OS. However, in my example, there could still be a problem -- one Solaris machine (e.g. the data server) could have the updated time zone rules and another Solaris machine (e.g. the application server) could have the old time zone rules. Having an OS that's two years old is common in a production enterprise environment.
It's the subtlety of the issue in Java that's a problem. If one were really sharp, one might assume that Date.equals() also compares time zones -- but who would've guessed that also the time zone rules would have been compared in Date.equals()?
Newer JDK's already have the new time zone rules encoded, and this can cause subtle bugs to suddenly surface. It turns out that Date.equals() does a deep object compare, including the time zone rules (not just which time zone you're in, but the rules regarding when daylight savings starts and ends). Thus if you have multiple JVMs involved, such as one on a database server and one on an application server running slightly different JVM revs (e.g. 1.4.2_08 vs. 1.4.2_11), then naive date comparisons (using equals() instead of equality on getTime()) can fail.
It's ironic to see "kindergarten" and "technology" in the same sentence, since Frobel invented Kindergarten in the early 19th century as a "garden" for children where they can learn through physical manipulation of materials and practical life activities. This description sums it up best:
Friedrich Froebel's enduring significance was through his formulation of the 'kindergarten system' with its emphasis on play and its use of 'gifts' (play materials) and 'occupations (activities).
Friedrich Froebel believed that humans are essentially productive and creative - and fulfilment comes through developing these in harmony with God and the world. As a result, Froebel sought to encourage the creation of educational environments that involved practical work and the direct use of materials. Through engaging with the world, understanding unfolds. Hence the significance of play - it is both a creative activity and through it children become aware of their place in the world. He went on to develop special materials (such as shaped wooden bricks and balls - gifts), a series of recommended activities (occupations) and movement activities, and an linking set of theories. His original concern was the teaching of young children through educational games in the family. In the later years of his life this became linked with a demand for the provision of special centres for the care and development of children outside the home.
For those wondering how this fits in with Montessori, Maria Montessori independently rediscovered much of the same nearly a century later, but as part of a much more comprehensive and cohesive system of education.
How about an alternative conspiracy theory?
on
SCO Vs. Groklaw
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
However, I will say that the timing and content of her blog post is totally consistent with someone trying not to be found
Instead of giving credence to SCO's conspiracy theory, how about the one that presents itself at face value -- that she really is ill, and SCO wants to kick her while she's down?
Those ads triggered Bush's Medicare prescription plan, which is a significant portion of the $50 trillion overhang of unfunded future liabilities of the U.S. government. We Gen X'ers don't owe the baby boomers patented drugs. If they want to be drugged off the public dole, they should be happy with ten-year-old drugs (first ten years of patented medicine is with the FDA).
Indeed, have we forgotten about the Clipper Chip
on
The Privacy Candidate
·
· Score: 1
Hillary's Rose Hill law firm was involved in relations between the NSA and the ill-fated Clipper Chip that her husband was pushing.
The problem is the rate increases. Four years ago, I got a Nokia 3650 camera phone (a newish but not brand-new phone at the time) for negative $50 from Amazon (obviously the phone was subsidized) and a two-year contract with 1000 minutes/month for $40/month. Now, I pay $60/month for 900 minutes under a two-year contract. If I wanted month-to-month, it would have been $80/month. I don't understand why cell phone rates have gone up when all other technology prices have gone down.
With phone number portability, the 2-year contracts are no longer tied to just phone subsidies, they now exist for their own sake. Even if your phone is "paid off", most carriers now have one monthly fee if you agree to a 2-year contract and another, higher, fee if you want month-to-month.
Wikipedia critics -- and even the fans -- compare it to the Encyclopedia Britannica, when in fact it should be compared -- favorably -- to Google. When you search for something in Wikipedia, you get a synopsis and a bunch of links. The content can change over time. Sound familiar?
Wikipedia is presently unsuitable for citation because citing means citing an author, not a web page (that can change, I might add). Even if the person doing the citing has the foresight to cite a deep link to a specific version of a page (i.e. "oldid" is encoded in the Wikipedia URL), Wikipedia does not offer a direct way to know who wrote what within the article. Wikipedia does not even guarantee the identity of contributors.
Remember, when explaining the usefulness of Wikipedia to your friends, just say "Wikipedia is the new Google."
I like that idea being tossed around by the school of outright banning Wikipedia -- might as well ban Google and the entire Internet and just stick to dead trees.
The premise of the Google exec was that companies could save money by outsourcing servers, e-mail, security, etc., thereby freeing up IT budget for innovation. This is wrong because:
Servers, e-mail, security, and whatever else "Google Apps" offers now or in the forseeable future is a small portion of any company that has any kind of serious IT going on. Most companies have a lot of custom apps, or at least highly-customized "off-the-shelf" solutions. I don't see Google offering a solution to reduce costs in that area.
Any cost savings from outsourcing will not translate into increased corporate R&D. The PHBs and bean-counters will just give themselves raises.
The PHB raises are not just because of greed, but because "forward-looking" on today's Wall Street means the next quarter -- thus no R&D.
The biggest barrier to innovation is corporate culture. The Google exec even touts that as a benefit within Google, but fails to mention it as a barrier in companies other than Google. I still remember the first time many years ago that I made what I thought was an innovative suggestion within a Fortune 500 company, and then hearing the response, "that's nice to have," and feeling flattered. Only a few minutes later I came to realize that in corporate-speak "nice to have" really means "not nice to have" because "nice to have" is meant to mean "it's nice to have but not needed to have, so we won't be doing that".
Sarbanes Oxley. Nothing much else happens in the IT departments of publicly traded companies these days except for SOX compliance.
Innovation is easier when everything's in house. Having servers, e-mail, security, etc. outsourced creates barriers to deep integration and high degrees of customization.
Despite the wrongness of the Google exec's assertion, it will be well received by PHBs because they'll get to cut costs while simultaneously pretending to be in favor of innovation.
The line between lobbying and blogging could get fuzzy, but "readership of 500" is not the line. Heck, my neighborhood association (of 1100 homes) invited our Congress member to come to our meeting, and issues like federal funding of transportation were raised. This meeting was announced on the association's website.
Readership is not even the right axis of measurement. Controlling lobbying used to be about controlling money spent to make sure people couldn't just buy elections. Now that the Internet allows the dissemination of ideas for next to nothing, they're trying to control speech with "readership of 500". The cat's out of the bag with this bill's text -- "controlling lobbying" is all about those in power wishing to remain in power by controlling ideas, and not about keeping the fat cats at bay.
Slashdot Mirror
But as for the cost side of the equation -- your observation of airline prices is correct, but only half the story. While the airline industry is in fact an oligopoly that incrementally raises prices in tandem over time, it also suddenly slashes prices in tandem periodically. This is the behavior of an oligopoly, which while not ideal, is preferable to a monopoly.
My take: the real fear is monopoly control of the Internet. Since monopolies are a problem independent of the Internet, we need to strengthen anti-monopoly laws rather than pretend we're living like it's 1969 on the ARPANET.
It always amuses me how execs think men will suddenly start carrying around purses.
Government is the labor union of last resort.
Going off on the same tangent, here's an example of a fragile base class. The Virginia legislature shortened (rather than completely eliminate, as in your malloc() dangling reference example) a list of businesses subject to some exemptions, not realizing that that same list was also used by another law saying which businesses had to be closed on Sundays.
Gatto famously claims that literacy was near 100% prior to the advent of public education. A group in Idaho provides some research to back up Gatto's claim.
See Gatto's talk on the 14 differences between elite boarding schools and other schools (public and private).
That Kentucky (or any state in the U.S.) applies the same logic to education is no surprise, but why do Slashdotters acquiesce to determining teachers' salary by central planning and government mandate? The free market should determine teachers' salaries. The prerequisite, of course, would be to eliminate government-run schools and let private schools compete for tuition money from parents.
Yes, I am one of the tens of thousands of signatories to the Proclamation for the Separation of School and State
If you see my other response in this thread, I was confusing Date.equals() with Calendar.equals(). Calendar.equals() indeed does a deep compare.
It's the subtlety of the issue in Java that's a problem. If one were really sharp, one might assume that Date.equals() also compares time zones -- but who would've guessed that also the time zone rules would have been compared in Date.equals()?
Newer JDK's already have the new time zone rules encoded, and this can cause subtle bugs to suddenly surface. It turns out that Date.equals() does a deep object compare, including the time zone rules (not just which time zone you're in, but the rules regarding when daylight savings starts and ends). Thus if you have multiple JVMs involved, such as one on a database server and one on an application server running slightly different JVM revs (e.g. 1.4.2_08 vs. 1.4.2_11), then naive date comparisons (using equals() instead of equality on getTime()) can fail.
Java is big in the finance industry because: 1) it's not subject to a monopoly, and 2) there's still somebody to sue when something goes wrong.
Those ads triggered Bush's Medicare prescription plan, which is a significant portion of the $50 trillion overhang of unfunded future liabilities of the U.S. government. We Gen X'ers don't owe the baby boomers patented drugs. If they want to be drugged off the public dole, they should be happy with ten-year-old drugs (first ten years of patented medicine is with the FDA).
Hillary's Rose Hill law firm was involved in relations between the NSA and the ill-fated Clipper Chip that her husband was pushing.
The problem is the rate increases. Four years ago, I got a Nokia 3650 camera phone (a newish but not brand-new phone at the time) for negative $50 from Amazon (obviously the phone was subsidized) and a two-year contract with 1000 minutes/month for $40/month. Now, I pay $60/month for 900 minutes under a two-year contract. If I wanted month-to-month, it would have been $80/month. I don't understand why cell phone rates have gone up when all other technology prices have gone down.
With phone number portability, the 2-year contracts are no longer tied to just phone subsidies, they now exist for their own sake. Even if your phone is "paid off", most carriers now have one monthly fee if you agree to a 2-year contract and another, higher, fee if you want month-to-month.
Wikipedia is presently unsuitable for citation because citing means citing an author, not a web page (that can change, I might add). Even if the person doing the citing has the foresight to cite a deep link to a specific version of a page (i.e. "oldid" is encoded in the Wikipedia URL), Wikipedia does not offer a direct way to know who wrote what within the article. Wikipedia does not even guarantee the identity of contributors.
Remember, when explaining the usefulness of Wikipedia to your friends, just say "Wikipedia is the new Google."
I like that idea being tossed around by the school of outright banning Wikipedia -- might as well ban Google and the entire Internet and just stick to dead trees.
- Servers, e-mail, security, and whatever else "Google Apps" offers now or in the forseeable future is a small portion of any company that has any kind of serious IT going on. Most companies have a lot of custom apps, or at least highly-customized "off-the-shelf" solutions. I don't see Google offering a solution to reduce costs in that area.
- Any cost savings from outsourcing will not translate into increased corporate R&D. The PHBs and bean-counters will just give themselves raises.
- The PHB raises are not just because of greed, but because "forward-looking" on today's Wall Street means the next quarter -- thus no R&D.
- The biggest barrier to innovation is corporate culture. The Google exec even touts that as a benefit within Google, but fails to mention it as a barrier in companies other than Google. I still remember the first time many years ago that I made what I thought was an innovative suggestion within a Fortune 500 company, and then hearing the response, "that's nice to have," and feeling flattered. Only a few minutes later I came to realize that in corporate-speak "nice to have" really means "not nice to have" because "nice to have" is meant to mean "it's nice to have but not needed to have, so we won't be doing that".
- Sarbanes Oxley. Nothing much else happens in the IT departments of publicly traded companies these days except for SOX compliance.
- Innovation is easier when everything's in house. Having servers, e-mail, security, etc. outsourced creates barriers to deep integration and high degrees of customization.
Despite the wrongness of the Google exec's assertion, it will be well received by PHBs because they'll get to cut costs while simultaneously pretending to be in favor of innovation.Readership is not even the right axis of measurement. Controlling lobbying used to be about controlling money spent to make sure people couldn't just buy elections. Now that the Internet allows the dissemination of ideas for next to nothing, they're trying to control speech with "readership of 500". The cat's out of the bag with this bill's text -- "controlling lobbying" is all about those in power wishing to remain in power by controlling ideas, and not about keeping the fat cats at bay.
Here is some evidence from the New York Times that assassins are created.