No necessarily good for employees either. Good for VCs, Kleiner Perkins in Google's case. They'll cash out at IPO. Most employee options have a lockout period where they cannot cash out (e.g. six months after IPO).
For all of you hyping Google's IPO, just ask yourself these questions: Who has the most to gain by Google's IPO? And does that entity have any vested interest in Google's continued success? Seriously, what purpose is there to Google's IPO other than paying off Kleiner Perkins?
This is probably the debate that has been going on inside Google for quite some time now (just my educated guess):
Google: Why go public? We're already profitable; we don't need to raise cash; we don't need to be beholden to stockholder whims. Going public will kill us. Just look at <just about every other internet stock>!
VC: We didn't invest in you to build a search engine. We invested to make a return on our investment. An IPO is going to provide the best return on our investment. The market is ready, dying really, for Google to IPO. We'll make a killing. Don't complain. You can make a bundle too, after your six month lockout ends.
Google: Well, what if our stock crashes before our lockout ends?
VC: That's too bad, but what do we care? We'll have cashed out on Day One.
What happens when someone calls you while you are sleeping? Does that wake you up and get you coherent enough to answer it? If so, try using the alarm feature on your cell phone to "call" yourself in the morning, or some other way to get yourself a wake up call.
Phone calls are harder to ignore than alarms, because there's always the potential that it is an important call (such as your boss calling to yell at you for oversleeping again).
I don't know about you, but I've already got the early warning system installed in my car. It's called a "passenger". Specifically, that passenger that suddenly shouts "OH, OH, OH, OH!" as you driving down the street.
Then after you slam on the brakes to avoid an unseen danger (while hoping you don't get rear-ended in the process), your passenger continues, "I didn't know there was an In 'N Out here!".
Just imagine the backlash that will come from inter-company communication via Excel and Word
Great. You pointed out a huge reason why things will actually improve. DRM incompatibilities will make it such a hassle to email MS Office docs all over the place, that people will just end up printing to PDF, without DRM enabled, and just email those files instead. No more Word or Excel docs means no more macro virii and no more "hidden confidential data" unknowingly appended and sent out. But in return, we'll get MS-bloated PDF files instead.
Of course, that's probably not what MS intended (defeating DRM), but it would certainly be an improvement.
SCO has shipped these products for many years, in some cases for nearly two decades, and this is the first time that IBM has ever raised an issue about patent infringement in these products.
Apparently, SCO doesn't know how to play the patent game. As anyone who's worked for a big company with large patent portfolios would know, the patent game works something like this:
Company A: You are infringing on our patents. We're going to sue you.
Company B: Oh yeah? Well, you are infringing on our patents. We're going to sue you back!
Company A: Ok. We'll let you use ours if you let us use yours (i.e. cross-licensing)
Company B: Sure, no problem.
For those of you still not clear on the concept is that it doesn't matter what particular patents you have but rather how many you have. In other words, how many cards do you have to trade? If you don't have enough patents cards to play, you are either going to get sued out of existence or you will be sent running with your tail between your legs.
Now, you would think that SCO would understand this game, having been around a while, so to speak, but then again, what is now called SCO hasn't really been around that long.
The thing that really gives away their cluelessness is that when most intelligent companies think of suing IBM, they don't think of easy money from deep pockets. They think about IBM's deep legal pockets, and how to deal when IBM comes back over the top with their countersuit. Even those loser companies that buy patents and try to sue people know enough to go after the easily bullied small fry before trying to take on someone who can fight back with a vengence.
I'm confused. I didn't see any mention of sharing their licensing revenues with copyright holders of the rest of the kernel. Are they just licensing the use of their copyrighted code, or are they licensing the entire kernel on behalf of everyone? Or does all the code base are belong to SCO, so they get to keep all the revenue?
I didn't want to have to block mail from even more tainted subnets.
This is probably the main reason why Asia is complianing about an IP shortage:
"My IP has been blacklisted; I need a new one so I can run my open SMTP relay. Shoot, this one has been blacklisted, too; I need another new IP. Darn... this one has been blacklisted as well... what, they've all been blacklisted? Well, get some new ones then, because I need one...
In the "real world", those EEs who design things but aren't expected to debug it and make it work are called architects. The real engineers are the ones that inherit the poor architectural choices and bad design constraints/decisions and find the kludges and workarounds that make it "work as expected".
Check out the Sharp Actius MM10. It's basically a 10.5" screen and keyboard with integrated wi-fi. Just over 0.5" thick, 2.1 lbs and fanless. I saw it at Fry's for about $1300, but if you just want a machine that is basically a wi-fi terminal, this is the one for you.
Re:That's not really the problem.
on
NYT on RFID Tags
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Sure, they can and perhaps, should track any and everything in their store. The problem is that RFIDs are not deactivated. They continue to work forever. Or, at least until the washer has worn out your panties.
Who says the RFID tag needs to stay in your clothes? Seems like I'm going to get a free RFID tag with every purchase that I can use as I please; after all, I paid for it. All I need is my own scanner.
Come on, when AOL started shipping their CDs in DVD cases and tins, which one of us wasn't thinking "Cool, a free DVD case... a free CD tin"?
What would you do if you had a whole boxful of RFID tags and your own scanner? Think about it. You'll be able to find your keys, your remotes, your books, whatever. All you need to do if figure out a way to read the RFID tag on the scanner when you misplace that.
I for one am not about to bet national security on whether or not MS can implement a bug free security procedure.
You don't get it. This is a great idea for Microsoft to improve security for their products. On the surface, this plan doesn't really make sense, because if I don't want to you to read something, I wouldn't send it to you.
However, what about all those instances where someone or something else is sending your files without your knowledge... Hypothetically speaking of course, what if someday, someone writes a virus that exploits Outlook or MS Office's scripting capabilities, and picks up one of your confidential files, attaches itself to it, and forwards it to everyone in your addressbook? Not only have you been exploited by a virus, but now your confidential files have been forwarded to who knows who?
With Office 11, you be reassured that your confidential information is still safe. Don't you get it? It's a brilliant pro-active move by Microsoft to make your machine more secure before problems like that might occur.
If you are interested, I would suggest that you start by reading The Code Book by Simon Singh. It gives a good overview of the history of the battle between cryptography and cryptanalysis, and how ciphers have evolved to defeat methods of codebreaking. It's an interesting and entertaining read and you might gain some insight on how you would approach this particular cipher.
BTW, I have a truly marvellous solution to your cipher which this textarea is too small to contain.
If you've got the room, build a berm at the bottom of the run that will redirect the sledder to go perpendicular to the fall line. The upward slope of the berm would slow you down fairly quickly, and the turn would you get you out of the way of the sledder on your tail. This is what I've seen them do on the tubing runs at ski resorts.
Just make sure you build it high enough so that it would acted as a banked turn and not a jump, and this would make things safer for everyone who uses that run.
I think a boycott of all of Idealabs companies are in order. GoTo Networks (another public Idealab company) went after Disney and lost. I guess Disney can afford better lawyers than "starving artists".
Here's the link to an article on Yahoo business news
Slashdot Mirror
A good introduction to SQL databases with lots of Oracle-related examples is SQL for Web Nerds.
Already mentioned this above, but seems more appropriate here. Let's search google for French Military Victories.
Ah, history. French history. You made me curious, so I decided to google for French military victories and boy, did I learn a lot.
For all of you hyping Google's IPO, just ask yourself these questions: Who has the most to gain by Google's IPO? And does that entity have any vested interest in Google's continued success? Seriously, what purpose is there to Google's IPO other than paying off Kleiner Perkins?
This is probably the debate that has been going on inside Google for quite some time now (just my educated guess):
What happens when someone calls you while you are sleeping? Does that wake you up and get you coherent enough to answer it? If so, try using the alarm feature on your cell phone to "call" yourself in the morning, or some other way to get yourself a wake up call.
Phone calls are harder to ignore than alarms, because there's always the potential that it is an important call (such as your boss calling to yell at you for oversleeping again).
I don't know about you, but I've already got the early warning system installed in my car. It's called a "passenger". Specifically, that passenger that suddenly shouts "OH, OH, OH, OH!" as you driving down the street.
Then after you slam on the brakes to avoid an unseen danger (while hoping you don't get rear-ended in the process), your passenger continues, "I didn't know there was an In 'N Out here!".
Great. You pointed out a huge reason why things will actually improve. DRM incompatibilities will make it such a hassle to email MS Office docs all over the place, that people will just end up printing to PDF, without DRM enabled, and just email those files instead. No more Word or Excel docs means no more macro virii and no more "hidden confidential data" unknowingly appended and sent out. But in return, we'll get MS-bloated PDF files instead.
Of course, that's probably not what MS intended (defeating DRM), but it would certainly be an improvement.
Apparently, SCO doesn't know how to play the patent game. As anyone who's worked for a big company with large patent portfolios would know, the patent game works something like this:
For those of you still not clear on the concept is that it doesn't matter what particular patents you have but rather how many you have. In other words, how many cards do you have to trade? If you don't have enough patents cards to play, you are either going to get sued out of existence or you will be sent running with your tail between your legs.
Now, you would think that SCO would understand this game, having been around a while, so to speak, but then again, what is now called SCO hasn't really been around that long.
The thing that really gives away their cluelessness is that when most intelligent companies think of suing IBM, they don't think of easy money from deep pockets. They think about IBM's deep legal pockets, and how to deal when IBM comes back over the top with their countersuit. Even those loser companies that buy patents and try to sue people know enough to go after the easily bullied small fry before trying to take on someone who can fight back with a vengence.
I'm confused. I didn't see any mention of sharing their licensing revenues with copyright holders of the rest of the kernel. Are they just licensing the use of their copyrighted code, or are they licensing the entire kernel on behalf of everyone? Or does all the code base are belong to SCO, so they get to keep all the revenue?
This is probably the main reason why Asia is complianing about an IP shortage:
SCO: All your [code] base are belong to us!
In the "real world", those EEs who design things but aren't expected to debug it and make it work are called architects. The real engineers are the ones that inherit the poor architectural choices and bad design constraints/decisions and find the kludges and workarounds that make it "work as expected".
Check out the Sharp Actius MM10. It's basically a 10.5" screen and keyboard with integrated wi-fi. Just over 0.5" thick, 2.1 lbs and fanless. I saw it at Fry's for about $1300, but if you just want a machine that is basically a wi-fi terminal, this is the one for you.
Who says the RFID tag needs to stay in your clothes? Seems like I'm going to get a free RFID tag with every purchase that I can use as I please; after all, I paid for it. All I need is my own scanner.
Come on, when AOL started shipping their CDs in DVD cases and tins, which one of us wasn't thinking "Cool, a free DVD case... a free CD tin"?
What would you do if you had a whole boxful of RFID tags and your own scanner? Think about it. You'll be able to find your keys, your remotes, your books, whatever. All you need to do if figure out a way to read the RFID tag on the scanner when you misplace that.
You don't get it. This is a great idea for Microsoft to improve security for their products. On the surface, this plan doesn't really make sense, because if I don't want to you to read something, I wouldn't send it to you.
However, what about all those instances where someone or something else is sending your files without your knowledge... Hypothetically speaking of course, what if someday, someone writes a virus that exploits Outlook or MS Office's scripting capabilities, and picks up one of your confidential files, attaches itself to it, and forwards it to everyone in your addressbook? Not only have you been exploited by a virus, but now your confidential files have been forwarded to who knows who?
With Office 11, you be reassured that your confidential information is still safe. Don't you get it? It's a brilliant pro-active move by Microsoft to make your machine more secure before problems like that might occur.
If you are interested, I would suggest that you start by reading The Code Book by Simon Singh. It gives a good overview of the history of the battle between cryptography and cryptanalysis, and how ciphers have evolved to defeat methods of codebreaking. It's an interesting and entertaining read and you might gain some insight on how you would approach this particular cipher.
BTW, I have a truly marvellous solution to your cipher which this textarea is too small to contain.
If you've got the room, build a berm at the bottom of the run that will redirect the sledder to go perpendicular to the fall line. The upward slope of the berm would slow you down fairly quickly, and the turn would you get you out of the way of the sledder on your tail.
Just make sure you build it high enough so that it would acted as a banked turn and not a jump, and this would make things safer for everyone who uses that run.This is what I've seen them do on the tubing runs at ski resorts.
Sorry. Here's the right link
Here's the link to an article on Yahoo business news