When I owned a Saab, a splendid care save for the complexity and unfortunate influence of General Motors, my dealer technician was quite proud of the fact that he was trained and proficient in all repairs and maintenance, even transmission service and body work. Many auto techs are proficient in diagnosis, most engine repair, blah blah, but not in body work nor transmission repair. I was impressed.
Then I had a problem he couldn't figure out - it would stall at a stop, just die, restart fine. After weeks of thinking, diagnosis, blaming fuel, my Google searches found a candidate - and he actually had a used part to swap in and try. Bingo!
It took me a day to ask two questions:
1. How was it I found the solution? 2. How was it he had a spare part laying around to try?
Answer: He did know the problem, but could not recall it.
And my coders, bless them, are so damned good they need not test. Right.
Every activity you pay for is a cost center. Everything that brings in revenue is a profit center.
A business is profitable when the profit centers deliver more value than the cost centers, and are able to do so sufficiently to meet the expectations of investors (if any) and sustain either growth or continuity.
None of this is new, but we do see efforts (not new either) to redefine success in business.
Before forced reductions in anticipation of product decommissioning, we had a dedicated tester, who had good enough regression testing suites that he caught bugs in most releases. And these were most always forehead slappers, 'darn, I forgot that again!!!' type.
Moving to the new version, new platform, they solved the testing problem by delaying releases interminably, denying features until forced, then complaining about schedules and arbitrary timelines, as in being forced to release code 8 years late.
Our web team is magnificent. the usual response to release bugs is 'it didn't do that in test'.
Let's pause for a moment and re-read that. For full effect. You've gotten the joke, I know.
And the then 'Is it doing it for (fill in this blank with any criteria)?'.
Followed closely by retracting the code, re-releasing it, and the same bug occurs. More recriminations and demands for objective reports from users. Yes, as their interface to users, I am regularly questioned as to the veracity of the bug reports.
At my work every necessary app is browser-based, and Chrome is becoming the enterprise standard. Even my terminal sessions are usable in Host On Demand. Except for document generation...
A Chromebook would actually serve. Office whatever can be web based.
My Surface Pro 3 is my PC. My only personal PC. I have an Android tablet and smartphone, but the Surface Pro 3 is my PC.
IDC can play that game, but they are not offering the best information. Sad.
All my Surface Pro lacks is dual-boot, which I've avoided just to avoid munging it too much, and I have a VM running Ubuntu for stuff I need to get done. Workd fine.
For those of you who may be confused, the Surface Pro 3 is a PC.
The broad discussion has turned to exploring just how much this was worth to UA. They could have made it work with excess compensation. I know if I were delayed 2 hours for 4 tickets and some cash, I would be discussing this with my wife and daughter. They just didn't sweeten the pot enough.
And the CEO will be only the biggest fish to fry for this. Multiple errors, plenty of problems exposed. Ship your crew on another carrier. Bad juju.
My current* collection is mirrored in 3 different places, one of which is Google Play. Can't quite bring myself to flood iTunes with it**.
* I've lost 3 record collections and a CD collection due to moves, conflicts, and bad choices. Along with 4 completely wonderful stereo systems. Feh.
** If I don't have a lossless collection, I don;t really have the music. Not sure I trust Apple Lossless. Since I have my library saved locally as WAV, MP3, OGG, and ATRAC, I'm able to recover. yes, I had a Minidisc system, and loved it.
And this is where it gets interesting to me, and is worthy of a/. post.
If indeed they overbooked the flight by 4 seats, AND they had the plane full, asking for volunteers, and indeed got 3 volunteers, this is all over one passenger, already in their seat.
What would United be gaining by removing a passenger from a seat to grant passage to another? A single passenger is that valuable to them? Really? Why?
I get that overbooking makes money - some of the 5 digit/. users here will recognize the parallel with oversubscribing any data service, you make your money on the 60-90% of the time the service isn't congested, balancing that with pain and subscriber loss. For an ISP, this is de rigueur.
But for this instance, this is clearly NOT just about filling seats, rather there is something else going on. United wanted another passenger in that seat. Why? Loyalty member? Crew being shuttled? Executive? A favor?
So is anyone asking about this? Will we get an answer?
We could permit regulated quasi-governmental utilities, sort of how I get water and electricity here in the Phoenix area. Might be better than the current monopolies.
Slashdot Mirror
When I owned a Saab, a splendid care save for the complexity and unfortunate influence of General Motors, my dealer technician was quite proud of the fact that he was trained and proficient in all repairs and maintenance, even transmission service and body work. Many auto techs are proficient in diagnosis, most engine repair, blah blah, but not in body work nor transmission repair. I was impressed.
Then I had a problem he couldn't figure out - it would stall at a stop, just die, restart fine. After weeks of thinking, diagnosis, blaming fuel, my Google searches found a candidate - and he actually had a used part to swap in and try. Bingo!
It took me a day to ask two questions:
1. How was it I found the solution?
2. How was it he had a spare part laying around to try?
Answer: He did know the problem, but could not recall it.
And my coders, bless them, are so damned good they need not test. Right.
And without testing, your post introduced a minor bug into the thread.
Fortunately it is innocuous. Some code is less equal than some other.
Every activity you pay for is a cost center. Everything that brings in revenue is a profit center.
A business is profitable when the profit centers deliver more value than the cost centers, and are able to do so sufficiently to meet the expectations of investors (if any) and sustain either growth or continuity.
None of this is new, but we do see efforts (not new either) to redefine success in business.
Feh.
Before forced reductions in anticipation of product decommissioning, we had a dedicated tester, who had good enough regression testing suites that he caught bugs in most releases. And these were most always forehead slappers, 'darn, I forgot that again!!!' type.
Moving to the new version, new platform, they solved the testing problem by delaying releases interminably, denying features until forced, then complaining about schedules and arbitrary timelines, as in being forced to release code 8 years late.
Our web team is magnificent. the usual response to release bugs is 'it didn't do that in test'.
Let's pause for a moment and re-read that. For full effect. You've gotten the joke, I know.
And the then 'Is it doing it for (fill in this blank with any criteria)?'.
Followed closely by retracting the code, re-releasing it, and the same bug occurs. More recriminations and demands for objective reports from users. Yes, as their interface to users, I am regularly questioned as to the veracity of the bug reports.
This is the Agile process in action. Sort of.
Funny. We started with Norse gods, then flowers, then nuts. Never a Hobbes.
Now it's Catholic officiants. Go figure.
Yes, dear.
It's edgy. Wouldn't fly where I work, but that's WHY I work here. If I wanted edgy, I would go get rejected by Google.
Younger guys will pronounce everything Pussy given half a chance.
The double entendre in this case is probably a triple entendre. Does no one else get it? Weaklings.
F-16s aren't so obsolete because of the airframe or performance so much as avionics and weapons systems.
So 'upgrade' them to drone management, free them from the G-force limits of human pilots in the cockpit, and boom!
If they become part of a hive mind, so much the better!
At my work every necessary app is browser-based, and Chrome is becoming the enterprise standard. Even my terminal sessions are usable in Host On Demand. Except for document generation...
A Chromebook would actually serve. Office whatever can be web based.
My Surface Pro 3 is my PC. My only personal PC. I have an Android tablet and smartphone, but the Surface Pro 3 is my PC.
IDC can play that game, but they are not offering the best information. Sad.
All my Surface Pro lacks is dual-boot, which I've avoided just to avoid munging it too much, and I have a VM running Ubuntu for stuff I need to get done. Workd fine.
For those of you who may be confused, the Surface Pro 3 is a PC.
No, but I understand you.
$1350 is the max required compensation. Go heavy or go home.
I bet the crew need was discerned after the plane was fully boarded.
And that is more bad planning. Bad juju. More big fish to fry.
And you think that doesn't happen?
You're funny.
I've finally gotten that, in the past hour.
The broad discussion has turned to exploring just how much this was worth to UA. They could have made it work with excess compensation. I know if I were delayed 2 hours for 4 tickets and some cash, I would be discussing this with my wife and daughter. They just didn't sweeten the pot enough.
And the CEO will be only the biggest fish to fry for this. Multiple errors, plenty of problems exposed. Ship your crew on another carrier. Bad juju.
My current* collection is mirrored in 3 different places, one of which is Google Play. Can't quite bring myself to flood iTunes with it**.
* I've lost 3 record collections and a CD collection due to moves, conflicts, and bad choices. Along with 4 completely wonderful stereo systems. Feh.
** If I don't have a lossless collection, I don;t really have the music. Not sure I trust Apple Lossless. Since I have my library saved locally as WAV, MP3, OGG, and ATRAC, I'm able to recover. yes, I had a Minidisc system, and loved it.
I never needed drugs to appreciate inventive music.
"Pop is disposable product targeted at the lowest common demoninator anyway"
Which is sex, violence, sex, drugs, sex, violence, sex, and sex.
And small doses of larceny, which, I know, is violence...
Whole Lotta Love
And this is where it gets interesting to me, and is worthy of a /. post.
If indeed they overbooked the flight by 4 seats, AND they had the plane full, asking for volunteers, and indeed got 3 volunteers, this is all over one passenger, already in their seat.
What would United be gaining by removing a passenger from a seat to grant passage to another? A single passenger is that valuable to them? Really? Why?
I get that overbooking makes money - some of the 5 digit /. users here will recognize the parallel with oversubscribing any data service, you make your money on the 60-90% of the time the service isn't congested, balancing that with pain and subscriber loss. For an ISP, this is de rigueur.
But for this instance, this is clearly NOT just about filling seats, rather there is something else going on. United wanted another passenger in that seat. Why? Loyalty member? Crew being shuttled? Executive? A favor?
So is anyone asking about this? Will we get an answer?
We could permit regulated quasi-governmental utilities, sort of how I get water and electricity here in the Phoenix area. Might be better than the current monopolies.
Broadband data *is* a utility by use, demand, and market. It should be delivered thus.
We no longer bother to limit it to Internet service - it's more useful than that.
Except it's a little harder to walk off with your dollars you have in your hand than it is for a Bitcoin exchange to simply vanish.
At least it's harder to abscond with your dollars without some struggle, or at least noticing...
Changing the currency changes the cashless problem?
Who controls Bitcoin? No one? How's your transaction processing time going for ya?