Thanks for the info (i.e., I support the mod-up). My $20 figure was meant to mean simply "much higher than today". But there must be some point at which expensive extraction/production of hydrogen for fuel cells would be cost-effective, and we're clearly not there yet. Just as clearly, if the supply truly is finite, and we're nearing the peak of production, then we should at least be able to envision $20 gas...
I've been reading about fuel cells and the potential hydrogen economy for more than twenty years. All the "breakthroughs" seem like the equivalent of re-dating the origin of the universe by few billion years: impressive science, perhaps, but not much practical value, yet. TFA just seems like one more in a seemingly endless chain of hype. Hey, I'd still give the student an A, but I wouldn't publish an article about it, because it's not news that hydrogen has potential.
We won't see production breakthroughs until the economics are radically different. That will either come from a very different kind of scientific breakthrough (e.g., "Researchers Scale 'Cold' H-Cell Fuel Extraction; Energy Stocks Plummet") or a cross-over in economics, where oil is so expensive (try $10-20/gallon or more for gasoline) that some very expensive but non-petroleum based method of extraction then becomes economically viable. That won't be as scary as it sounds if the run-up to $20 gas allows us enough time to build the public consensus it will take to fund more intensive research, including the production engineering. If the run-up is too short, then the war predictions don't sound too far-fetched.
ISO-9000 is not meant to ease the software development process. It's design is to make the process auditable. It takes some very good ideas about development and totally buries them in bullshit.
I wish I had a few mod points... well said!
One could infer the same about Disgruntled Software Engineer's firm, which already has
... a software development process [with] over two-dozen documents totaling 200 pages each!
Standards seem like a great idea. Unfortunately, some people extrapolate to conclude that more and more detailed standards must be an even greater idea. (e.g., "a bulleted list that is 17 pages long!")
Having said that, I think there may be a way to give DSE an improvement on two fronts. As I see it, DSE needs two things:
A document to hand to the PHBs that will hopefully achieve ISO 9000 compliance or satisfy the PHBs that it is "better" (not as crazy as it sounds, or maybe crazier, depending on your PHB quotient)
A streamilined process to follow in the real world
DSE's own set of documents would make a great basis for an ISO submission. It's already heavy-weight and not even read by the people who are supposed to follow it. Perfect. What needs to be done with this (not a small task, unfortunately, but probably one that can be pawned off on some unsuspecting intern or "process expert", i.e., someone without anything important to do, like work) is to create a mapping between DSE's existing documents and the ISO 9000 documents. The desired outcome of this seemingly pointless and mind-numbing exercise, of course, is to show the PHBs how DSE has already complied with ISO 9000 --- hopefully even exceeded them. No one reads much except section headers and lead/summary paragraphs (and mabye, maybe the first page of a 17-page bulleted list), so this is definitely a feasible direction. Just claim that the existing (documented, not real) processes cover every one of the ISO 9000 requirements by drawing arrows between the two sets of requirements and then saying something like "we developed our own internal discipline in response to intrinsic requirements of our domain and found that they were, in fact, more rigorous than ISO standards". Preferably, the "map" should actually be a wall-sized map with lots and lots of arrows. Color-coding would be a nice touch (e.g., all the arrows proving DSE already complies with ISO category X should be in Cyan...). If you can somehow laminate the thing, you're golden, because most people are afraid to question anything encased in acetone or plastic, and if they are tempted, DSE can simply remind them how expensive the map is, which should get the PHBs to respect it and even bless it.
The second objective involves real work, so it needs to involve real people (not interns or "process experts"). Make the existing documentation match what truly works and throw out the rest. Note that, because of the requirements of the first objective, "throw out" needs to mean something like "re-document" (by segregating the truly important and valuable into short documents that are used and keeping the rest in impenitrable documents that no one but interns and process experts will read or discuss. It will also give them something to do.
Note: if you have an intern or process expert who really adds value and don't think it's fair to relegate them to the space I've identified, then reward them with real titles that reflect real value.
There is no silver bullet that will address all problems!
Awww... and I was so on the same page with you, until you went all cliche on me!
Isn't "cherry picking" one of the problems with all charter schools (virtual or not)? Having said that, I guess it could apply to all good schools (charter, private, the one across town...); i.e., taking the better/more motivated/etc students out of a school will hurt that school. I hope we have a better long-term solution for those below the median, because otherwise, they're fucked. (Of course, 90% of us think we're above the median, right?)
I haven't followed this very closely at all, but I seem to recall that most of these guys kept at least one, if not two or more, very nice houses, worth in the millions. It's not the billions they were worth on paper, but c'mon, that's not losing the entire fortune, especially when the "billions" were an illusion.
A recent RAND Corporation study of expert opinion found that nuclear warheads are more likely to target populous areas, such as New York City and other major cities. The study concluded that residents of Nkwajalalakalaka, a small village in East Borneo, are statistically the least likely to be targeted for nuclear annihilation.
In related news, the mayor of Nkwajalalakalaka announced that the council of village elders have voted unanimously to "drop off the map". (The original East Borneonian phrase is "biyamacanlaffatdawinteloserindaspotalita", which has no literal English translation.)
If you've out grow the shared environment, it's time to contract a sys admin.
Isn't that what a hosting provider is? Don't the companies that offer shared, dedicated or managed servers "admin" them?
That might beg the question of what specifically a sys admin does, but that goes beyond the scope of this thread, maybe. Or maybe the answer to that would help define "managed" host.
Is the Quicken standard open? If so, then maybe the OSS approach to financial software can start not by trying to replace QuickBooks or similar programs but by supplementing them with... I don't know, but maybe there are some serious unmet needs on the margins. A health add-on community might even encourage closed vendors to open up a bit, or at least not close things further. (Yeah, that sounds a bit naive, doesn't it?)
you still won't be able to connect with your bank via the software. You won't be able to download cancelled checks, write new ones/pay bills, or any of these other functionalities
What about OFX? I can download my bank info in XML format, and have been able to do so for years. So, the banks have already "opened their systems", probably enough so that this isn't the problem with OS financial apps.
As for bill-pay and other functionalities, most banks of any size probably already have either web-based applications or "free client" applications for their customers to interact with their systems. But, I interpreted the meaning of "financial applications" to be more about the internal systems of the business, like general ledger, payables and receivables, etc. For those systems, the updating issues (tax and accounting rule changes) already discussed are indeed tedious.
"Regulators are investigating whether companies broke securities and tax laws by backdating stock-option grants to coincide with the lowest possible price. The practice of backdating is drawing scrutiny because it maximizes the amount of money executives can make in exercising options."
It seems like plenty of As need Cing, but I think it's way to early to say "the technique is not illegal".
Yeah, that could mean sign[s]. It could mean a post-it note inside their screen door. I don't think we quite have the "facts" of this case, just yet. I think it's doubtful we'll ever truly know how to sort out the following statements:
Karlis didn't know about the security camera until his second visit, when Michael Gannon told him to "smile" for the camera, police reported.
and
Janet Gannon said her husband explicitly warned officers of the camera, later adding "smile," as a joke.
What did [whoever] know, and when did [whoever] know it? It might make a big difference.
Having said that, I certainly agree with the prevailing sentiment that so many aspects of this case are ridiculous; mostly the behavior/retaliation of the police, but also a family that clearly has some "problem kids", and, of course, the law that might prohibit a citizen from videotaping on his own front porch. You never get the easy case of the clearly law-abiding citizen against the clearly law-breaking police. Still, this doesn't have to be a hard case (as in, "hard cases make bad law"), depending on what we know when all the facts are known.
I'm also just very curious about the time gap:
Michael Gannon "was arrested Tuesday night"; "Janet Gannon spoke with The Telegraph by phone Wednesday afternoon, before going to bail out her husband".
Sooo... Janet, didja hafta scrounge for cash, or didja just think maybe Mike could use a time-out?
OK, maybe NH law prevents bailing someone out before they spend a night in jail, but it still seems curious.
I wasn't supporting (or attacking) GeekSquad, merely offering explanation.
You find looking in a "fucking phone book" to be a good search method. Many people, faced with unfamiliar territory, do not. They rely on things like advertising. I didn't say it was efficient, effective, or anything else, just that it is so. For whatever reason, they don't trust random listings from a phone book or referrals (maybe because they don't have any trusted referrers).
You might also note my explicit use of the word "perceived" in points 2 and 3: the fact that you percieve things differently from the way "morons" perceive them doesn't change the fact that many do so.
Many people also want to feel some level of comfort with the "techies" that they choose to fix their computers. For instance, they might not feel comfortable with technowitalls who think that "50% or more of the cost is going to their ads". There's a reason that the SNL skit is perceived as funny, even if the perceivers are "morons".
I can't disagree! However, if it weren't for crap of various forms, we wouldn't have ideas for new businesses of various forms. In other words, one customer's crap is another entrepreneur's opportunity.
Sure, it would be nice if Geek Squad would just say, "hey, we can't fix this ourselves, but you can take it directly to our upstream supplier for half the cost of what we would charge you, and we won't make any money on the transaction".
But there aren't many industries that are completely disintermediated, with absolutely no middlemen between the ultimate producer and the ultimate consumer. True, when too many layers exist, or when a particular layer takes too much of the value chain, opportunities arise for newer, more efficient business models (disintermediation or other forms of reorganization).
Yes, theoretically, you could market directly to Geek Squad's customers. Got ad budget? There's a big value in successful brand strategy, and Geek Squad's got it right now in this niche. For every genius who knows the guy who only charges $75, there are a dozen "idiots" who know guys who charge $300 for the same "service" and don't know any better. It's not a commodity business, by any means, so it's not surprising that prices (and quality) vary more for this than for 5-pound bags of refined sugar.
Whether or not it's good or bad at repair, Geek Squad is successful because it
lowers consumer search costs
provides a (perceived) uniformity of quality, much like McDonald's
at (perceived) reasonable/low prices
Almost nobody thinks McDonald's burgers are the best in the world, or anything close. Likewise, most of us know a "better" place even for cheap, fast food. But most of us eat at McDonald's at least on occasion for one of the above reasons.
You want a two-year warranty or fries with that new hard drive?
This doesn't cover all the CMS you might want to investigate (nothing costing $10K, for instance, in case that really is something you want), but http://opensourcecms.com/ has dozens of systems installed for demo use, so you might be able to get a sense of whether one of them would be appropriate. I have found that the demo versions don't have all the modules, so it wouldn't surprise me if you can't actually "test drive" any project management modules for the systems. For general demo, though, it's pretty cool.
One of the volunteers on that site also runs http://ongetc.com/, which has summary information on a few more CMS possibilities. The first site is restricted to open source tools that use PHP/MySQL. The second site seems less restrictive. I'm still looking for more general sources.
So, does that mean that they're "advancing in a different direction", and not "retreating"?
If we're going to split hairs over semantics and use euphemisms in place of metaphors, I vote we call this all a "police action" instead of a "war" and then try to figure out who plays the role of the U.N.
Interesting -- and not inappropriate -- that MS is at the center of the drawing, but I wonder what it looks like from each of the other players' perspectives (since they would still naturally see themselves at the center).
Even if the first comment was flamebait, forking presents an intereseting partial solution.
Wikipedia is essentially open source content. It tries to draw on the strengths of open processes to produce "better" content.
Even in areas like software, reasonable people can disagree on "which way is better". When that happens with FOSS, we get a fork, or at least an alternative project.
With topics like George Bush, Bill Clinton and other lightning rods, I doubt that a large majority could even agree on who the reasonable people are, much less what the "right" content is. So, forking seems inevitably necessary.
That still leaves the problem of vandalism, but might make it a little bit less persistent, since some highly motivated "vandals" would have alternatives. I'm not sure why anyone would object to the basic idea of protection. After all, I can't go to some distro of Linux and overwrite it with my 'version' of the kernel, can I? I hope not, because my version of the kernel comes with biscuits and a soda and doesn't really help a cpu. The point is, people like me should be prevented from making changes to some things, absent strong evidence that we won't muck it up.
The new Netscape.com will have links to news stories grouped under broad categories such as movies, health and fitness.
Wow. Really?
Seems pretty ambitious to "reinvent" the idea of links and the idea of news stories and the idea of broad categories all in one business model. I think they'll end up having to split the property so that separate entities can focus on each one of these innovations.
In a follow up interview, Calacanis boldly stated, "this could revolutionize yawning, as we know it".
Streaming video of new point-and-click "mouse" device at 11...
I tend to agree with the comment suggesting that you look for something different, like a life.
However, if that's not feasible (e.g., maybe you need more money; maybe you don't want a life right now), then how about a pet... project?
You could work on an open source project. Or you could think of an "unmet need" and code the solution, get some angel money, parlay that into VC funding, cash out and criticize the government full time (on/., of course).
the Linux one is still free (or, say, $60 for SuSE) versus the Windows one, which is now into the low thousands of dollars
Amen! I'm in week 2 of my conversion to Linux. In my case, I didn't even pay for the CD, because MEPIS allows download of a.ISO file to burn the CD.
keep adding things to comparison: firewalls, chat clients, web browsers, application servers, infrastructure services. All free. All included
Yeah, I really can't add anymore (I'm over 40), but it's a lot. What a pleasant surprise (words not likely to describe even the most satisfied MS customer!). I wasn't expecting so much in the distro. Heck, KDE alone, not only included but automagically installed, was more than enough!
I don't believe in pirating this stuff.
Neither do I; anyone who pirates truly doesn't believe in freedom, no matter what they say.
I'm hoping that more people come to see it that way.
Me, too, but as a non-techie (semi-techie?; enough "knowledge" to do serious harm at times), I understand why many still choose Winders.
It's not a painless transition. I had a bit of trouble getting my wireless connection to work, and that assumes it's working in stable condition now. Samba still doesn't seem to work, but I haven't spent any real time trying to figure out why. I'm sure I'll get that fixed, because the MEPIS forums are great. I'm sure the forums are great for most other distributions as well.
But that process for installing Linux and getting all the details is so different from the traditional proprietary software experience, that I think most users are intimidated by it. That's not entirely irrational for those who don't have both the time and the inclination to try Linux. They are willing to pay for the comfort of having a number to call for "support", even if it isn't always very helpful.
I suppose the Red Hat model of offering support similar to proprietary software vendors is the middle ground here. Except that Red Hat seemed pretty darned expensive. Of course, when I was evaluating options, I didn't think about all the stuff that might be bundled with the distro. Assuming Red Hat includes anywhere near what MEPIS does, then it's still a lot cheaper than Windoze.
Is my lack of awareness of all the "extra" advantages of the Linux distro evidence of "bad Linux marketing" or my own stupidity? The effect is essentially the same, either way.
As I go through the transition process, it repeatedly occurs to me that this seems like a great opportunity for a Dell or similar outfit to do all the installation and offer one-stop shopping of the whole hardware/software bundle. It turns out that you can get Dell to sell you a Linux machine (Red Hat Enterprise, anyway), but, not surprisingly, it's not that easy to find and certainly not promoted. I wonder if the folks in Redmond have influenced that situation in any way. Hmm...
If you are a power user (hint: if you use del.icio.us or a news reader or if you visit Digg, that probably means you) and if you have decorated your browser with, oh, say, 20 extensions or more, Flock may not be for you. We like these services as much as you do, and we share the basic values of transparency and control that are an essential component of the participatory web. We are trying to bring these services to mere mortals.
It's all good, but why not just create a Firefox distribution package with the best of Firefox + Extensions, and just write extensions for the things that aren't yet available from others?
I know this sounds too simplistic. That's why I like the Colbert Report. It doesn't matter if I'm right (because I'm sure the experts will show me many ways in which my take isn't feasible, isn't the way development "actually" happens, etc.); but my way seems like it would be easier.
Great replies, pointing out a lot of useful/valuable features of IM. I didn't mean to imply that I don't think backhoes have value. I just still don't know if the underlying problem is more like a swimming pool or two shrubs in the backyard. So, all I was suggesting is that cell phones might be on the short list, absent information defining the problem in terms of requirements like non-repudiation or simultaneity with other voice conversations or sharing of code (all good reasons the solution would need to be text) or working in a building made of electrical tranmission cables (OK, I know lots of buildings have poor wireless reception).
The replies here filled in the "strengths" column for IM in the evaluation scorecard. Certainly, I agree that cell phones would have entries in the "weaknesses" column, too. I'm not a huge fan of voice mail or "texting" without a real keyboard. But I am a huge fan of saving money and using solutions that leverage technologies already in place, which might be the case for cell phones. It sure seems that way in restaurants and movie theaters, anyway!
This could actually help sk8dork; where's our fee?
That's close enough to make me think this is no coincidence.
Now, if today's article had said it was a propyl alcohol cloud, and the last article had said it was a methyl alcohol cloud, then I'd say maybe we're talkin' about two very different kettles of fish... thanks to EmagGeek, I really did learn something from this thread!
Not trying to be flamebait here, but I would have modded this up.
How big can the place be if the guy is the only internal IT person?
A shovel and a backhoe are both "technology" solutions. If you're digging a swimming pool, the backhoe is the better technology match. If you're planting two shrubs in your back yard, the shovel is the better technology match.
Why can't a cell phone work here? Does the "instant" message need to be in text and not voice? I'll grant that it might be too difficult to teach people to text message. If that's the case, I'm pretty sure a significant fraction of them will refuse to use IM and leave voice mail.
What's the magic of IM, as opposed to anything that will solve the underlying problem?
I was, indeed, just looking at it from an end user point of view. I understand the "social" costs as well, but TFA seemed more focused on scaring the bejaysus out of me as an end user, rather than any reasoned analysis of the true ("social") problem.
And... the hype worked! I ignored the "true" problem! (Unless you agree that part of the true problem is the hype.)
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for the info (i.e., I support the mod-up). My $20 figure was meant to mean simply "much higher than today". But there must be some point at which expensive extraction/production of hydrogen for fuel cells would be cost-effective, and we're clearly not there yet. Just as clearly, if the supply truly is finite, and we're nearing the peak of production, then we should at least be able to envision $20 gas ...
I've been reading about fuel cells and the potential hydrogen economy for more than twenty years. All the "breakthroughs" seem like the equivalent of re-dating the origin of the universe by few billion years: impressive science, perhaps, but not much practical value, yet. TFA just seems like one more in a seemingly endless chain of hype. Hey, I'd still give the student an A, but I wouldn't publish an article about it, because it's not news that hydrogen has potential.
We won't see production breakthroughs until the economics are radically different. That will either come from a very different kind of scientific breakthrough (e.g., "Researchers Scale 'Cold' H-Cell Fuel Extraction; Energy Stocks Plummet") or a cross-over in economics, where oil is so expensive (try $10-20/gallon or more for gasoline) that some very expensive but non-petroleum based method of extraction then becomes economically viable. That won't be as scary as it sounds if the run-up to $20 gas allows us enough time to build the public consensus it will take to fund more intensive research, including the production engineering. If the run-up is too short, then the war predictions don't sound too far-fetched.
I wish I had a few mod points
One could infer the same about Disgruntled Software Engineer's firm, which already has
Standards seem like a great idea. Unfortunately, some people extrapolate to conclude that more and more detailed standards must be an even greater idea. (e.g., "a bulleted list that is 17 pages long!")
Having said that, I think there may be a way to give DSE an improvement on two fronts. As I see it, DSE needs two things:
- A document to hand to the PHBs that will hopefully achieve ISO 9000 compliance or satisfy the PHBs that it is "better" (not as crazy as it sounds, or maybe crazier, depending on your PHB quotient)
- A streamilined process to follow in the real world
DSE's own set of documents would make a great basis for an ISO submission. It's already heavy-weight and not even read by the people who are supposed to follow it. Perfect. What needs to be done with this (not a small task, unfortunately, but probably one that can be pawned off on some unsuspecting intern or "process expert", i.e., someone without anything important to do, like work) is to create a mapping between DSE's existing documents and the ISO 9000 documents. The desired outcome of this seemingly pointless and mind-numbing exercise, of course, is to show the PHBs how DSE has already complied with ISO 9000 --- hopefully even exceeded them. No one reads much except section headers and lead/summary paragraphs (and mabye, maybe the first page of a 17-page bulleted list), so this is definitely a feasible direction. Just claim that the existing (documented, not real) processes cover every one of the ISO 9000 requirements by drawing arrows between the two sets of requirements and then saying something like "we developed our own internal discipline in response to intrinsic requirements of our domain and found that they were, in fact, more rigorous than ISO standards". Preferably, the "map" should actually be a wall-sized map with lots and lots of arrows. Color-coding would be a nice touch (e.g., all the arrows proving DSE already complies with ISO category X should be in CyanThe second objective involves real work, so it needs to involve real people (not interns or "process experts"). Make the existing documentation match what truly works and throw out the rest. Note that, because of the requirements of the first objective, "throw out" needs to mean something like "re-document" (by segregating the truly important and valuable into short documents that are used and keeping the rest in impenitrable documents that no one but interns and process experts will read or discuss. It will also give them something to do.
Note: if you have an intern or process expert who really adds value and don't think it's fair to relegate them to the space I've identified, then reward them with real titles that reflect real value.
There is no silver bullet that will address all problems!
Awww
Isn't "cherry picking" one of the problems with all charter schools (virtual or not)? Having said that, I guess it could apply to all good schools (charter, private, the one across town ...); i.e., taking the better/more motivated/etc students out of a school will hurt that school. I hope we have a better long-term solution for those below the median, because otherwise, they're fucked. (Of course, 90% of us think we're above the median, right?)
FTA:
"He lost a fortune, his family lost a fortune."
I haven't followed this very closely at all, but I seem to recall that most of these guys kept at least one, if not two or more, very nice houses, worth in the millions. It's not the billions they were worth on paper, but c'mon, that's not losing the entire fortune, especially when the "billions" were an illusion.
This Just In:
A recent RAND Corporation study of expert opinion found that nuclear warheads are more likely to target populous areas, such as New York City and other major cities. The study concluded that residents of Nkwajalalakalaka, a small village in East Borneo, are statistically the least likely to be targeted for nuclear annihilation.
In related news, the mayor of Nkwajalalakalaka announced that the council of village elders have voted unanimously to "drop off the map". (The original East Borneonian phrase is "biyamacanlaffatdawinteloserindaspotalita", which has no literal English translation.)
If you've out grow the shared environment, it's time to contract a sys admin.
Isn't that what a hosting provider is? Don't the companies that offer shared, dedicated or managed servers "admin" them?
That might beg the question of what specifically a sys admin does, but that goes beyond the scope of this thread, maybe. Or maybe the answer to that would help define "managed" host.
Is the Quicken standard open? If so, then maybe the OSS approach to financial software can start not by trying to replace QuickBooks or similar programs but by supplementing them with ... I don't know, but maybe there are some serious unmet needs on the margins. A health add-on community might even encourage closed vendors to open up a bit, or at least not close things further. (Yeah, that sounds a bit naive, doesn't it?)
you still won't be able to connect with your bank via the software. You won't be able to download cancelled checks, write new ones/pay bills, or any of these other functionalities
What about OFX? I can download my bank info in XML format, and have been able to do so for years. So, the banks have already "opened their systems", probably enough so that this isn't the problem with OS financial apps.
As for bill-pay and other functionalities, most banks of any size probably already have either web-based applications or "free client" applications for their customers to interact with their systems. But, I interpreted the meaning of "financial applications" to be more about the internal systems of the business, like general ledger, payables and receivables, etc. For those systems, the updating issues (tax and accounting rule changes) already discussed are indeed tedious.
According to The San Francisco Chronicle:
"Regulators are investigating whether companies broke securities and tax laws by backdating stock-option grants to coincide with the lowest possible price. The practice of backdating is drawing scrutiny because it maximizes the amount of money executives can make in exercising options."
It seems like plenty of As need Cing, but I think it's way to early to say "the technique is not illegal".
Almost everyone keeps referring to the "sign[s]".
... Janet, didja hafta scrounge for cash, or didja just think maybe Mike could use a time-out?
What "sign[s]"? FTA: the Gannons posted warnings
Yeah, that could mean sign[s]. It could mean a post-it note inside their screen door. I don't think we quite have the "facts" of this case, just yet. I think it's doubtful we'll ever truly know how to sort out the following statements:
Karlis didn't know about the security camera until his second visit, when Michael Gannon told him to "smile" for the camera, police reported.
and
Janet Gannon said her husband explicitly warned officers of the camera, later adding "smile," as a joke.
What did [whoever] know, and when did [whoever] know it? It might make a big difference.
Having said that, I certainly agree with the prevailing sentiment that so many aspects of this case are ridiculous; mostly the behavior/retaliation of the police, but also a family that clearly has some "problem kids", and, of course, the law that might prohibit a citizen from videotaping on his own front porch. You never get the easy case of the clearly law-abiding citizen against the clearly law-breaking police. Still, this doesn't have to be a hard case (as in, "hard cases make bad law"), depending on what we know when all the facts are known.
I'm also just very curious about the time gap:
Michael Gannon "was arrested Tuesday night"; "Janet Gannon spoke with The Telegraph by phone Wednesday afternoon, before going to bail out her husband".
Sooo
OK, maybe NH law prevents bailing someone out before they spend a night in jail, but it still seems curious.
Dear Nick Barnes:
I think you missed my point(s) entirely.
I wasn't supporting (or attacking) GeekSquad, merely offering explanation.
You find looking in a "fucking phone book" to be a good search method. Many people, faced with unfamiliar territory, do not. They rely on things like advertising. I didn't say it was efficient, effective, or anything else, just that it is so. For whatever reason, they don't trust random listings from a phone book or referrals (maybe because they don't have any trusted referrers).
You might also note my explicit use of the word "perceived" in points 2 and 3: the fact that you percieve things differently from the way "morons" perceive them doesn't change the fact that many do so.
Many people also want to feel some level of comfort with the "techies" that they choose to fix their computers. For instance, they might not feel comfortable with technowitalls who think that "50% or more of the cost is going to their ads". There's a reason that the SNL skit is perceived as funny, even if the perceivers are "morons".
... they're still crap ...
I can't disagree! However, if it weren't for crap of various forms, we wouldn't have ideas for new businesses of various forms. In other words, one customer's crap is another entrepreneur's opportunity.
But there aren't many industries that are completely disintermediated, with absolutely no middlemen between the ultimate producer and the ultimate consumer. True, when too many layers exist, or when a particular layer takes too much of the value chain, opportunities arise for newer, more efficient business models (disintermediation or other forms of reorganization).
Yes, theoretically, you could market directly to Geek Squad's customers. Got ad budget? There's a big value in successful brand strategy, and Geek Squad's got it right now in this niche. For every genius who knows the guy who only charges $75, there are a dozen "idiots" who know guys who charge $300 for the same "service" and don't know any better. It's not a commodity business, by any means, so it's not surprising that prices (and quality) vary more for this than for 5-pound bags of refined sugar.
Whether or not it's good or bad at repair, Geek Squad is successful because it
- lowers consumer search costs
- provides a (perceived) uniformity of quality, much like McDonald's
- at (perceived) reasonable/low prices
Almost nobody thinks McDonald's burgers are the best in the world, or anything close. Likewise, most of us know a "better" place even for cheap, fast food. But most of us eat at McDonald's at least on occasion for one of the above reasons.You want a two-year warranty or fries with that new hard drive?
This doesn't cover all the CMS you might want to investigate (nothing costing $10K, for instance, in case that really is something you want), but http://opensourcecms.com/ has dozens of systems installed for demo use, so you might be able to get a sense of whether one of them would be appropriate. I have found that the demo versions don't have all the modules, so it wouldn't surprise me if you can't actually "test drive" any project management modules for the systems. For general demo, though, it's pretty cool.
One of the volunteers on that site also runs http://ongetc.com/, which has summary information on a few more CMS possibilities. The first site is restricted to open source tools that use PHP/MySQL. The second site seems less restrictive. I'm still looking for more general sources.
So, does that mean that they're "advancing in a different direction", and not "retreating"?
If we're going to split hairs over semantics and use euphemisms in place of metaphors, I vote we call this all a "police action" instead of a "war" and then try to figure out who plays the role of the U.N.
Interesting -- and not inappropriate -- that MS is at the center of the drawing, but I wonder what it looks like from each of the other players' perspectives (since they would still naturally see themselves at the center).
Even if the first comment was flamebait, forking presents an intereseting partial solution.
Wikipedia is essentially open source content. It tries to draw on the strengths of open processes to produce "better" content.
Even in areas like software, reasonable people can disagree on "which way is better". When that happens with FOSS, we get a fork, or at least an alternative project.
With topics like George Bush, Bill Clinton and other lightning rods, I doubt that a large majority could even agree on who the reasonable people are, much less what the "right" content is. So, forking seems inevitably necessary.
That still leaves the problem of vandalism, but might make it a little bit less persistent, since some highly motivated "vandals" would have alternatives. I'm not sure why anyone would object to the basic idea of protection. After all, I can't go to some distro of Linux and overwrite it with my 'version' of the kernel, can I? I hope not, because my version of the kernel comes with biscuits and a soda and doesn't really help a cpu. The point is, people like me should be prevented from making changes to some things, absent strong evidence that we won't muck it up.
From Wired:
...
The new Netscape.com will have links to news stories grouped under broad categories such as movies, health and fitness.
Wow. Really?
Seems pretty ambitious to "reinvent" the idea of links and the idea of news stories and the idea of broad categories all in one business model. I think they'll end up having to split the property so that separate entities can focus on each one of these innovations.
In a follow up interview, Calacanis boldly stated, "this could revolutionize yawning, as we know it".
Streaming video of new point-and-click "mouse" device at 11
I tend to agree with the comment suggesting that you look for something different, like a life.
... project?
/., of course).
However, if that's not feasible (e.g., maybe you need more money; maybe you don't want a life right now), then how about a pet
You could work on an open source project. Or you could think of an "unmet need" and code the solution, get some angel money, parlay that into VC funding, cash out and criticize the government full time (on
the Linux one is still free (or, say, $60 for SuSE) versus the Windows one, which is now into the low thousands of dollars
.ISO file to burn the CD.
...
Amen! I'm in week 2 of my conversion to Linux. In my case, I didn't even pay for the CD, because MEPIS allows download of a
keep adding things to comparison: firewalls, chat clients, web browsers, application servers, infrastructure services. All free. All included
Yeah, I really can't add anymore (I'm over 40), but it's a lot. What a pleasant surprise (words not likely to describe even the most satisfied MS customer!). I wasn't expecting so much in the distro. Heck, KDE alone, not only included but automagically installed, was more than enough!
I don't believe in pirating this stuff.
Neither do I; anyone who pirates truly doesn't believe in freedom, no matter what they say.
I'm hoping that more people come to see it that way.
Me, too, but as a non-techie (semi-techie?; enough "knowledge" to do serious harm at times), I understand why many still choose Winders.
It's not a painless transition. I had a bit of trouble getting my wireless connection to work, and that assumes it's working in stable condition now. Samba still doesn't seem to work, but I haven't spent any real time trying to figure out why. I'm sure I'll get that fixed, because the MEPIS forums are great. I'm sure the forums are great for most other distributions as well.
But that process for installing Linux and getting all the details is so different from the traditional proprietary software experience, that I think most users are intimidated by it. That's not entirely irrational for those who don't have both the time and the inclination to try Linux. They are willing to pay for the comfort of having a number to call for "support", even if it isn't always very helpful.
I suppose the Red Hat model of offering support similar to proprietary software vendors is the middle ground here. Except that Red Hat seemed pretty darned expensive. Of course, when I was evaluating options, I didn't think about all the stuff that might be bundled with the distro. Assuming Red Hat includes anywhere near what MEPIS does, then it's still a lot cheaper than Windoze.
Is my lack of awareness of all the "extra" advantages of the Linux distro evidence of "bad Linux marketing" or my own stupidity? The effect is essentially the same, either way.
As I go through the transition process, it repeatedly occurs to me that this seems like a great opportunity for a Dell or similar outfit to do all the installation and offer one-stop shopping of the whole hardware/software bundle. It turns out that you can get Dell to sell you a Linux machine (Red Hat Enterprise, anyway), but, not surprisingly, it's not that easy to find and certainly not promoted. I wonder if the folks in Redmond have influenced that situation in any way. Hmm
From TFA:
If you are a power user (hint: if you use del.icio.us or a news reader or if you visit Digg, that probably means you) and if you have decorated your browser with, oh, say, 20 extensions or more, Flock may not be for you. We like these services as much as you do, and we share the basic values of transparency and control that are an essential component of the participatory web. We are trying to bring these services to mere mortals.
It's all good, but why not just create a Firefox distribution package with the best of Firefox + Extensions, and just write extensions for the things that aren't yet available from others?
I know this sounds too simplistic. That's why I like the Colbert Report. It doesn't matter if I'm right (because I'm sure the experts will show me many ways in which my take isn't feasible, isn't the way development "actually" happens, etc.); but my way seems like it would be easier.
Great replies, pointing out a lot of useful/valuable features of IM. I didn't mean to imply that I don't think backhoes have value. I just still don't know if the underlying problem is more like a swimming pool or two shrubs in the backyard. So, all I was suggesting is that cell phones might be on the short list, absent information defining the problem in terms of requirements like non-repudiation or simultaneity with other voice conversations or sharing of code (all good reasons the solution would need to be text) or working in a building made of electrical tranmission cables (OK, I know lots of buildings have poor wireless reception).
... cool!
The replies here filled in the "strengths" column for IM in the evaluation scorecard. Certainly, I agree that cell phones would have entries in the "weaknesses" column, too. I'm not a huge fan of voice mail or "texting" without a real keyboard. But I am a huge fan of saving money and using solutions that leverage technologies already in place, which might be the case for cell phones. It sure seems that way in restaurants and movie theaters, anyway!
This could actually help sk8dork; where's our fee?
Oh yeah, that karma thingy
I think it is the same "cloud", but people from across the pond (either way) forgot to check the units.
... thanks to EmagGeek, I really did learn something from this thread!
From a handy online calculator, 463 kilometer = 287.694 862 006 mile.
That's close enough to make me think this is no coincidence.
Now, if today's article had said it was a propyl alcohol cloud, and the last article had said it was a methyl alcohol cloud, then I'd say maybe we're talkin' about two very different kettles of fish
Not trying to be flamebait here, but I would have modded this up.
How big can the place be if the guy is the only internal IT person?
A shovel and a backhoe are both "technology" solutions. If you're digging a swimming pool, the backhoe is the better technology match. If you're planting two shrubs in your back yard, the shovel is the better technology match.
Why can't a cell phone work here? Does the "instant" message need to be in text and not voice? I'll grant that it might be too difficult to teach people to text message. If that's the case, I'm pretty sure a significant fraction of them will refuse to use IM and leave voice mail.
What's the magic of IM, as opposed to anything that will solve the underlying problem?
mea culpa!
... the hype worked! I ignored the "true" problem! (Unless you agree that part of the true problem is the hype.)
I was, indeed, just looking at it from an end user point of view. I understand the "social" costs as well, but TFA seemed more focused on scaring the bejaysus out of me as an end user, rather than any reasoned analysis of the true ("social") problem.
And