Exactly - you have to sneak this idea in the door by avoiding any parties that would work hard to fight it, while portraying the bill as a win for the public at large. All in all, I think it's a well-crafted proposal that could hopefully yield bigger results down the road. Admittedly, it will probably be decades down the road, but it's a start...
"The Washington Post has an article saying that it is preparing hundreds of lawsuits against Internet users who illegally trade copyrighted music files."
So the Washington Post is suing music file traders??? Since when did they join the RIAA?
That all depends on the company's financial structure - in a chargeback environment, wherein IT bills internal departments for services rendered, these costs are readily apparent and should be easy to roll into ROI.
What happens in most cases is that there is no followup after the fact to determine whether ROI targets were really hit anyway. In my 10 years of IS experience, I've yet to see that happen.
I think we'll reach a point where IT workers will be free to flourish in businesses and achieve their goals (to become real programmers).
You're missing the critical point here. The goals of the programmers and IT as a whole need to be closely aligned with the business, not with some idea of being a "real programmer" (whatever that means). It's not about getting the PHB's to leave the nerds alone - it's about the nerds coming out of their shell and understanding exactly how business needs and technical solutions come together.
This will also be huge for people who either move or change jobs, thus potentially changing the coverage that they normally get. When I switched jobs from the east side to the west side of Indianapolis, my coverage changed for the worse - I can't wait for the opportunity to change carriers...
and besides, an interview is such a poor way of making the announcement. Far better to walk out onto your balcony, look down on your hordes of Uruk-Hai, and proclaim, "a New Power is Rising..."
Companies do not plan on generating and tracking unique numbers for each individual item in their store - can you imagine the mind boggling difficulty of tracking which specific items have been sold and which should be considered part of inventory at a company like WalMart? They'd have to have a centralized database storing a record for each individual tagged item either stored or sold at any WalMart store anywhere, and have that information available instantly to every POS device in every store. While the paranoid may exclaim, "yeah, that's exactly what they'll do!" it makes absolutely no sense.
What does make sense is to tag items using existing numbering schemes (i.e. UCC, ISBN, SCC-14, etc.), allowing RFID sensors at each step in the supply/demand chain to recognize material quickly and accurately without the need for someone to walk up and scan a barcode.
Bottom line is that we're still a few years from seeing these things in use. Currently, tags cost anywhere from 30 to 50 cents apiece, and to make commercial sense, they need to get the price down to the 5 cent level.
yeesh, buddy, don't pull a muscle patting yourself on the back so much...
Usability and functionality don't have to be mutually exclusive, and there's nothing "elite" about a system that has such a usability barrier. Although, that might be a neat way to pawn off user requests - "oh, you don't need that mod, do you? You're such an elite user, you know..."
Company-to-Company relationships are important
on
What is Open Source?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
That's an interesting point that many people overlook - just because IBM supports Linux doesn't mean that IBM makes a good partner for smaller businesses.
A couple years ago I was part of a vendor selection process for a WMS, and one the three contenders (EXE) basically eliminated themselves by not demonstrating that they took customers of our size (~$200 million) seriously. I sent them data to use for our scripted demo weeks in advance of our visit, only to have their technical sales rep get back to my voice mail with initial questions at 5:30 p.m. the day before we were to arrive - and by that point I was already on the plane. The demo, obviously, turned out underwhelming.
Their functionality was top-notch, but all the signs were that we'd be a small-ish customer to them, and hence not worthy of focused attention (read: flunky implementation consultants among other issues). A major component of any software purchase decision has to be the potential relationship between the customer and vendor, and how well the customer feels they'll be treated going forward...
So you're OK with a WalMart coming along with all their resources and wiping out NetFlix as soon as they see that a market is there worth taking? Yeesh, so much for innovation!
I can understand giving somebody an 18 year monopoly on a product that required lots of money spent on R&D, but allowing any bright idea to be patented is just idiotic.
Well, that pretty much writes off any small inventor. If you have to pour $X into R&D to get a patent, you've basically walled off a class of innovators from ever bringing their ideas to market.
You fool, this is/. - patents are to be ridiculed at all times!
Seriously, though, you're right - this seems to me to be a perfectly valid case for a patent, and hopefully they get a nice licensing fee from WalMart for the opportunity to compete with NetFlix.
Where's the problem here? Netflix came up with a genuinely new business model, for which they should be rewarded if anybody else wants to hop on the same boat. This isn't a blindingly obvious or overly broad patent like the "user clicks on a link and we sell them stuff" that we've seen before.
The drive-thru was a similarly revolutionary idea - whoever started it SHOULD have patented it...
You forgot the other side of the equation, however:
Most Customers Don't Know What They Want
Outside of vague notions about improved efficiency, push-button convenience, and some hot industry jargon, most users fail to properly and clearly define exactly what they're looking for out of a piece of software. The result is a never-ending stream of "and another thing..." requests that stray far from the initial scope of an implementation.
The problem is (and has always been) that too often, the business users don't realize that they will only get what they ask for - they can't just push the question off to IS and expect them to deliver a bottle with a genie inside...
This provides an interesting opportunity to assess the "worth" of HOV lanes from an entirely new perspective. It would be interesting to see how such a market-based approach would value these high-speed lane projects, as opposed to the traditional multi-year study process that planning boards typically use today. What would be required is growth and maturation of the market in these stickers so one could get an estimate of the overall demand.
My guess is that the valuation would come in lower than today's standards, due to many parties who use the roads not participating (infrequent drivers, interstate drivers, etc.).
There are a few factors that you're leaving out, I'm afraid (which is unavoidable in this forum). Starting from the perspective of a basic supply/demand curve, the government mandate acts as an artificially imposed minimum quantity sold, which is much higher than the "clearing" price of an otherwise free market. Price will be higher than normal, due to the lack of bargaining power on the purchaser's side (they have to purchase the software, and all the providers know that), and the fact that higher prices would be required to increase the supply base.
Where this basic type of analysis breaks down is the low marginal cost of software (i.e. selling more licenses carries very little cost). The basic idea, however, holds true - under yesterday's market, there was a certain size customer base for internet filtering software, and due to today's ruling, that customer base will explode. While you can expect some new providers to enter the market, there will be plenty of $$$ around for everyone.
And buy shares in anybody producing internet filters - they've just gotten the Golden Ticket!
First they've got a huge market that must, by law, use their product. Second, that product is painfully inadequate to perform the job it's asked to - hence a nice long development-release-fix cycle that should go on for years, fully funded via government mandate.
The "pins and needles" are because they've been sitting around so long waiting for the next epoch-changing move from Apple that their butts have fallen asleep!
AMD and Intel need to realize the tremendous potential here - within a few years, every family could have a supercomputer that not only meets all your gaming/surfing/ripping/video-editing needs, but also replaces your furnace and water heater!
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly - you have to sneak this idea in the door by avoiding any parties that would work hard to fight it, while portraying the bill as a win for the public at large. All in all, I think it's a well-crafted proposal that could hopefully yield bigger results down the road. Admittedly, it will probably be decades down the road, but it's a start...
That's what they get for running the site on an Intellivision as well...
"The Washington Post has an article saying that it is preparing hundreds of lawsuits against Internet users who illegally trade copyrighted music files."
So the Washington Post is suing music file traders??? Since when did they join the RIAA?
Of course this is a problem, as evidenced by the old joke:
Once upon a time there were two Chinamen - now look how many!
And just why should you get a paycheck for that???
That all depends on the company's financial structure - in a chargeback environment, wherein IT bills internal departments for services rendered, these costs are readily apparent and should be easy to roll into ROI.
What happens in most cases is that there is no followup after the fact to determine whether ROI targets were really hit anyway. In my 10 years of IS experience, I've yet to see that happen.
I think we'll reach a point where IT workers will be free to flourish in businesses and achieve their goals (to become real programmers).
You're missing the critical point here. The goals of the programmers and IT as a whole need to be closely aligned with the business, not with some idea of being a "real programmer" (whatever that means). It's not about getting the PHB's to leave the nerds alone - it's about the nerds coming out of their shell and understanding exactly how business needs and technical solutions come together.
This will also be huge for people who either move or change jobs, thus potentially changing the coverage that they normally get. When I switched jobs from the east side to the west side of Indianapolis, my coverage changed for the worse - I can't wait for the opportunity to change carriers...
and besides, an interview is such a poor way of making the announcement. Far better to walk out onto your balcony, look down on your hordes of Uruk-Hai, and proclaim, "a New Power is Rising..."
Companies do not plan on generating and tracking unique numbers for each individual item in their store - can you imagine the mind boggling difficulty of tracking which specific items have been sold and which should be considered part of inventory at a company like WalMart? They'd have to have a centralized database storing a record for each individual tagged item either stored or sold at any WalMart store anywhere, and have that information available instantly to every POS device in every store. While the paranoid may exclaim, "yeah, that's exactly what they'll do!" it makes absolutely no sense.
What does make sense is to tag items using existing numbering schemes (i.e. UCC, ISBN, SCC-14, etc.), allowing RFID sensors at each step in the supply/demand chain to recognize material quickly and accurately without the need for someone to walk up and scan a barcode.
Bottom line is that we're still a few years from seeing these things in use. Currently, tags cost anywhere from 30 to 50 cents apiece, and to make commercial sense, they need to get the price down to the 5 cent level.
yeesh, buddy, don't pull a muscle patting yourself on the back so much...
Usability and functionality don't have to be mutually exclusive, and there's nothing "elite" about a system that has such a usability barrier. Although, that might be a neat way to pawn off user requests - "oh, you don't need that mod, do you? You're such an elite user, you know..."
That's an interesting point that many people overlook - just because IBM supports Linux doesn't mean that IBM makes a good partner for smaller businesses.
A couple years ago I was part of a vendor selection process for a WMS, and one the three contenders (EXE) basically eliminated themselves by not demonstrating that they took customers of our size (~$200 million) seriously. I sent them data to use for our scripted demo weeks in advance of our visit, only to have their technical sales rep get back to my voice mail with initial questions at 5:30 p.m. the day before we were to arrive - and by that point I was already on the plane. The demo, obviously, turned out underwhelming.
Their functionality was top-notch, but all the signs were that we'd be a small-ish customer to them, and hence not worthy of focused attention (read: flunky implementation consultants among other issues). A major component of any software purchase decision has to be the potential relationship between the customer and vendor, and how well the customer feels they'll be treated going forward...
So you're OK with a WalMart coming along with all their resources and wiping out NetFlix as soon as they see that a market is there worth taking? Yeesh, so much for innovation!
I can understand giving somebody an 18 year monopoly on a product that required lots of money spent on R&D, but allowing any bright idea to be patented is just idiotic.
Well, that pretty much writes off any small inventor. If you have to pour $X into R&D to get a patent, you've basically walled off a class of innovators from ever bringing their ideas to market.
You fool, this is /. - patents are to be ridiculed at all times!
Seriously, though, you're right - this seems to me to be a perfectly valid case for a patent, and hopefully they get a nice licensing fee from WalMart for the opportunity to compete with NetFlix.
Where's the problem here? Netflix came up with a genuinely new business model, for which they should be rewarded if anybody else wants to hop on the same boat. This isn't a blindingly obvious or overly broad patent like the "user clicks on a link and we sell them stuff" that we've seen before.
The drive-thru was a similarly revolutionary idea - whoever started it SHOULD have patented it...
Wow, I bet you're really popular around the office. Don't be surprised if you miss out on the birthday cake next time...
You forgot the other side of the equation, however:
Most Customers Don't Know What They Want
Outside of vague notions about improved efficiency, push-button convenience, and some hot industry jargon, most users fail to properly and clearly define exactly what they're looking for out of a piece of software. The result is a never-ending stream of "and another thing..." requests that stray far from the initial scope of an implementation.
The problem is (and has always been) that too often, the business users don't realize that they will only get what they ask for - they can't just push the question off to IS and expect them to deliver a bottle with a genie inside...
This provides an interesting opportunity to assess the "worth" of HOV lanes from an entirely new perspective. It would be interesting to see how such a market-based approach would value these high-speed lane projects, as opposed to the traditional multi-year study process that planning boards typically use today. What would be required is growth and maturation of the market in these stickers so one could get an estimate of the overall demand.
My guess is that the valuation would come in lower than today's standards, due to many parties who use the roads not participating (infrequent drivers, interstate drivers, etc.).
There are a few factors that you're leaving out, I'm afraid (which is unavoidable in this forum). Starting from the perspective of a basic supply/demand curve, the government mandate acts as an artificially imposed minimum quantity sold, which is much higher than the "clearing" price of an otherwise free market. Price will be higher than normal, due to the lack of bargaining power on the purchaser's side (they have to purchase the software, and all the providers know that), and the fact that higher prices would be required to increase the supply base.
Where this basic type of analysis breaks down is the low marginal cost of software (i.e. selling more licenses carries very little cost). The basic idea, however, holds true - under yesterday's market, there was a certain size customer base for internet filtering software, and due to today's ruling, that customer base will explode. While you can expect some new providers to enter the market, there will be plenty of $$$ around for everyone.
Well, to be fair, I meant it as both - there are a number of hydrogen sources out there that could be considered for use in fuel cells...
And buy shares in anybody producing internet filters - they've just gotten the Golden Ticket!
First they've got a huge market that must, by law, use their product. Second, that product is painfully inadequate to perform the job it's asked to - hence a nice long development-release-fix cycle that should go on for years, fully funded via government mandate.
What about using methane as the hydrogen source? There are already roughly 7,000 drive-through methane generation stations in the US...
The "pins and needles" are because they've been sitting around so long waiting for the next epoch-changing move from Apple that their butts have fallen asleep!
AMD and Intel need to realize the tremendous potential here - within a few years, every family could have a supercomputer that not only meets all your gaming/surfing/ripping/video-editing needs, but also replaces your furnace and water heater!
'You aren't "the consumer". You are "a" consumer. and you are being a smart-ass'
Or is he being the smart-ass?