Re:Further OT: A quicker & dirtier transmitter
on
Field Day 2002
·
· Score: 1
It's a shame that what Tesla was trying to do (and, for all practical purposes, failing at) was transmit ENERGY; Marconi used a similar apperatus for transmitting INFORMATION, and succeded wildly with a company selling ship to shore emergency communications gear. And yes, the Patent office bungled it all up by failing to recognize Tesla's prior art in resonant RF circuits.
From Three Amigos: "In a way, all of us have an El Guapo to face someday. For some, shyness might be their El Guapo. For others, a lack of education might be their El Guapo. For us, El Guapo is a big dangerous guy who wants to kill us."
I would say the onus of security rests on the purchaser of license, the company or individual, whether it's the sysadmin or the clu^H^H^H people in management who decide. All software is immune from ALL legal ramifications of useability, security, fitness for marketability blah blah blah (no refunds either), so it comes down to the end user to do their homework, research, labtest, and maintain a relationship with the owners of the software for all updates, patches, issues and news. That is a cost foist on the end users so they might as well face it up front. It's just that *I* trust OSS more than those tricky, lying-to-close-a-sale marketing types. Mgmt may feel more comfortable with the sales flacks with their *.ppt slides for making the choice, altho that starts a bad relation with the sysadmins who always bear the brunt of Mgmt's bad purchasing decisions.
Thus illustrating the danger of using your personal "experience" as proof of anything....
Excuse me if I look to scientific research
Well, somewhere 'science' involves experience, experimentation, observation and recording of FACTS. I'm sorry but the so called 'research' quoted above obviously predicates canabis use as 'bad bad bad' without question, as the myth has been presented by authorities with various political agendas. Unless you can present some actual HEALTH RESEARCH showing just exactly what the so called ILL EFFECTS of cannibis use are it is still pure sophomoric pseudo-academic fluff set out to prove a forgone conclusion. Smoking tobacco can lead to emphysema because you have to keep puffing away on cancer sticks to keep the nicotine buzz, heavy liquor use can lead to cirrosis of the liver. Puffing 3 bowls of pot in the evening leads to WHAT??? A minor sore throat? An enjoyment of a Brahms symphony and a bowl of ice cream? My counter argument at the moment is what, exactly, is so bad about a cannibis HABIT? Does it turn someone into a stupid lazy unemployed Mexican 'marijuana' user? Also, I don't like MY personal freedoms being limited because there are other's in society who can't use it responsibly. Every year there are over 40,000 people who get killed in automobile accidents, most could have been prevented if they had been driving responsibly (and a great many due to that LEGAL alcohol intoxicant that was also prohibited once, a dismal failure) - should EVERYONE be prevented from driving because a few are irresponsible drivers? Did you know that people once clung to the irrational belief that tomatos were deadly poison and eating one would kill you, just because the authorities kept mindlessly repeating it and so nobody ever tried it? No matter how you slice it, cannibis prohibition arguments always turn out to be a tiresome repetition of the same old myths (their last resort so far is the 'stepping stone' argument, as if cannibis users are somehow going to automatically, robotically start shooting up heroine) with very little scientific research into the actual facts involved. I refer you to silly propaganda like the 1930's "Reefer Madness".
You can find someone to research anything you want. I only speak from experience, having smoked heavily one spring, moved to another town and quit quite easily, within weeks the old habit was gone. Have done that several times. Unless you are a 'pothead' you're just spouting the same propaganda nonesense. 'Worse than tobacco smokers' is utter bullcrap.
That's the way it should be - YOU decide what is best for you. Now if we or a federal antitrust judge could only convince Msft to let the rest of us have a choice in browsers, media players, messaging, etc, without all their FUD, skulduggery, bundling, tie-in's and overbearing, heavyhanded and illegal market monopoly extension tactics.
Unfortunately, you're spreading the same disinformation - there's no such thing as a 'pot addict' - it may become a habit, but canabis does NOT create a physical addiction, unlike nicotine, caffein, alcohol, narcotics, cocain, etc. Also, childhood is a great time for indoctrination, kids beleive anything you tell them (Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy, etc). Only a minority rebel and discover the 'truth' behind the lies they've been fed; the vast majority go on to join the system and end up promulgate the same myths.
1st Office: Nothing happening on the hillside, sir.
Sgt Sheer: OK, well lets head back over to that nudist colony with the hot chicks.
---------------
So when are they going to develope a countertechnology: the cloak of invisibility! We have airplanes with low radar profiles, (stealth) so what will it take for low visible / infrared / UV profiles? A kind of flexible mirror suit that reflects the surrounding environment?
There are specialized medical apps inexoribly tied to the Windows platform? No wonder costs have spiraled out of control. I'll bet a big percentage of pharmaceutical costs go toward software licenses in the research dept too. Now there's a lucrative market to corner, with a nice steep demand curve. You have a choice, pay the extortion rate fee, or die. See ya' on the golf course.
and would harm consumers and the entire computer industry.
This is GM's argument from the 50's - what's good for GM is good for the country, only now it's Msft that IS the 'computing industry'. They ARE the computing industry, anything you do to harm the company will harm the computing industry and it's customers, so they say.
Software is immune from defect liability anyway so why bother? I worked as a 'lowlytester' once too, and it's one step below building custodian. The marketing brings in the sales, so they're the crown princes. And the software engineers surely don't appreciate someone pointing out their defects, how rude, especially from someone who just installs and runs it, and doesn't appreciate all the effort it takes to code. Testers are worse then customers. At least the engineers are shielded from customers by tech support. Plus, if a commercial software company actually did publish quality software, it would destroy the whole software cash cow ecosystem that's been carefully evolved over the last 25 years. As long as everyone emits buggy products, it's a level playing field, customers are kept on the perpetual upgrade tredmill, and unit sales keep the gravy train going. But sell a good, working product? Give me a break, that would ruin everything! Sure it would look good on the current balance sheet, but in the long run it would just put competitors out of business, then customers would lose the incentive to try out the next version, in vain hopes that "maybe THIS one will do what we want" and boom, that's the end.
Yesterday we rolled out Symantec WinFaxPro 10.02 and guess what, it breaks Word 2K! Isn't that great? Now you might think, "What, does Symantec think nobody uses fax software and word on the same PC" but that's not the point. The good part is that I got to go around to all these workstations and delete macros and reboot a couple of times, which kept me from dealing with something productive like purchasing a notebook for a field tech. Now that's job security, knowing which files to delete to make Word work again. It's all about the benjamins dude, and bugs and workarounds are an essential part of customer control we leverage to get them. We will not tolerate some lowly 'tester' out to destroy our jobs.
(Apologize to Matt Groening) - every generation or so parents and other authorities get their collective panties in a wad about "Kids aren't getting enough exercise!" and demand that legislators "do something about it" - such was the case in the late 60's when teachers got the orders to corral all us 5th graders into the gym and start doing exercises. Our gym was a very noisy place, bad acoustics, several classes at a time full of kids shouting, screaming, etc. I'm struggling with this routine called 'rocking chair' (12-2-3-4, 13-2-3-4, 14-2-3-4,...) but the instructor (A Christian fundamentalist type math teacher) sees me lagging behing and shouts something at me. I said "What?" and he shouts again, still couldn't make it out. Finally someone in front of me turns around and says, "He said 'do you think you can do these exercises?'" so I shout back at him, "Yes!". At that he marches around to me and starts with the Sgt. Carter drill routine, like "Drop down and give me 20!!", singled out, public humiliation, the whole sad scene. Once that ordeal was over, after class talking with some other kids I found out what he really yelled was, "Do you think you're too good to do these exercises?"
If it was darn easy to plug into a phone, subscribe to an ISP and get browsing and email, it may have a chance, then the genuinely interested users can start up the learning curve and enjoy a crash & virus free existance.
Personally, I've avoided helping out home users with all their GD windows problems for years, as I'm not about to waste my time working free tech support for multi-billionaires, but if I meet someone with one of these it'd be fun to talk shop with them.
I have to disagree - w/o some kind of competition, it's just not capitalism anymore, IMHO. Hmmm, I'd sure like to see Ayn Rand and Karl Marx on the Jerry Springer show;))
Anyway, once a market gets monopolized it's all over - they have no real incentive to innovate, improve effeciency; all they have to do is get fat dumb and happy, collect extortion fees from captive customers and enjoy the good life on the golf course (cf. ATT - the phone system started out long ago as many independent small phone systems, eventually competing in long dist, etc, but by the late 60's and 70's had stagnated a very important industry, etc.) Gobbling up the competition in a free for all laissez faire capitalist system is a poor, temporary substitute for getting the real job done, redefining business plans, and ultimately doesn't benefit the consumer. Makes the current balance sheet look good tho, but is just postponing the inevitable toward an even bigger collapse later.
Lets see, Joe's PC Palace was required by Msft to pay for Windows whether the PC shipped with Win, OS/2 or whatever. Of course they could just not sell Msft products at all and not have to pay Msft for shipping OS/2, but I'd say that 'requirement' for being a Msft franchise was pretty illegal, unlawful, willing, etc.
I think the burden of proof is on the proponents of gw, to show that it is real science. I could make the outrageous claim that ailens landed in my backyard, but it would be up to me to cough up the evidence of that extraordinary event, not on/you/ to disprove it. Specifically, we want conclusive proof that GW is a result of human use of CO2 releasing activity before shutting down entire industries and displacing millions of employees, like some kind of primitive race tossing virgins into the volcano to appease an angry weather god or to bring the sun back from winter solstice before it disappears over the horizon forever, or to atone for some communal cosmic guilt trip.
Alright, who's been pissing in the think tank...
on
ADTI Whitepaper Released
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Slashdot Mirror
It's a shame that what Tesla was trying to do (and, for all practical purposes, failing at) was transmit ENERGY; Marconi used a similar apperatus for transmitting INFORMATION, and succeded wildly with a company selling ship to shore emergency communications gear. And yes, the Patent office bungled it all up by failing to recognize Tesla's prior art in resonant RF circuits.
From Three Amigos: "In a way, all of us have an El Guapo to face someday. For some, shyness might be their El Guapo. For others, a lack of education might be their El Guapo. For us, El Guapo is a big dangerous guy who wants to kill us."
I would say the onus of security rests on the purchaser of license, the company or individual, whether it's the sysadmin or the clu^H^H^H people in management who decide. All software is immune from ALL legal ramifications of useability, security, fitness for marketability blah blah blah (no refunds either), so it comes down to the end user to do their homework, research, labtest, and maintain a relationship with the owners of the software for all updates, patches, issues and news. That is a cost foist on the end users so they might as well face it up front. It's just that *I* trust OSS more than those tricky, lying-to-close-a-sale marketing types. Mgmt may feel more comfortable with the sales flacks with their *.ppt slides for making the choice, altho that starts a bad relation with the sysadmins who always bear the brunt of Mgmt's bad purchasing decisions.
Don't panic, simply turn off the media and resume a normal life. They'll come to some compromise and the whole thing will blow over, it always does.
Thus illustrating the danger of using your personal "experience" as proof of anything....
Excuse me if I look to scientific research
Well, somewhere 'science' involves experience, experimentation, observation and recording of FACTS. I'm sorry but the so called 'research' quoted above obviously predicates canabis use as 'bad bad bad' without question, as the myth has been presented by authorities with various political agendas. Unless you can present some actual HEALTH RESEARCH showing just exactly what the so called ILL EFFECTS of cannibis use are it is still pure sophomoric pseudo-academic fluff set out to prove a forgone conclusion. Smoking tobacco can lead to emphysema because you have to keep puffing away on cancer sticks to keep the nicotine buzz, heavy liquor use can lead to cirrosis of the liver. Puffing 3 bowls of pot in the evening leads to WHAT??? A minor sore throat? An enjoyment of a Brahms symphony and a bowl of ice cream? My counter argument at the moment is what, exactly, is so bad about a cannibis HABIT? Does it turn someone into a stupid lazy unemployed Mexican 'marijuana' user? Also, I don't like MY personal freedoms being limited because there are other's in society who can't use it responsibly. Every year there are over 40,000 people who get killed in automobile accidents, most could have been prevented if they had been driving responsibly (and a great many due to that LEGAL alcohol intoxicant that was also prohibited once, a dismal failure) - should EVERYONE be prevented from driving because a few are irresponsible drivers? Did you know that people once clung to the irrational belief that tomatos were deadly poison and eating one would kill you, just because the authorities kept mindlessly repeating it and so nobody ever tried it? No matter how you slice it, cannibis prohibition arguments always turn out to be a tiresome repetition of the same old myths (their last resort so far is the 'stepping stone' argument, as if cannibis users are somehow going to automatically, robotically start shooting up heroine) with very little scientific research into the actual facts involved. I refer you to silly propaganda like the 1930's "Reefer Madness".
You can find someone to research anything you want. I only speak from experience, having smoked heavily one spring, moved to another town and quit quite easily, within weeks the old habit was gone. Have done that several times. Unless you are a 'pothead' you're just spouting the same propaganda nonesense. 'Worse than tobacco smokers' is utter bullcrap.
I seem to remember that TrueType was an Apple product with MS collaboration.
It was
That's the way it should be - YOU decide what is best for you. Now if we or a federal antitrust judge could only convince Msft to let the rest of us have a choice in browsers, media players, messaging, etc, without all their FUD, skulduggery, bundling, tie-in's and overbearing, heavyhanded and illegal market monopoly extension tactics.
Not Prix, altho it's a common mistake, I guess because so many pilots are.
to Lem's work was thru reading Hofstadter & Dennett's Mind's I. Obviously SciFi worthy of leading edge philosophical musings.
Unfortunately, you're spreading the same disinformation - there's no such thing as a 'pot addict' - it may become a habit, but canabis does NOT create a physical addiction, unlike nicotine, caffein, alcohol, narcotics, cocain, etc. Also, childhood is a great time for indoctrination, kids beleive anything you tell them (Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy, etc). Only a minority rebel and discover the 'truth' behind the lies they've been fed; the vast majority go on to join the system and end up promulgate the same myths.
1st Office: Nothing happening on the hillside, sir.
Sgt Sheer: OK, well lets head back over to that nudist colony with the hot chicks.
---------------
So when are they going to develope a countertechnology: the cloak of invisibility! We have airplanes with low radar profiles, (stealth) so what will it take for low visible / infrared / UV profiles? A kind of flexible mirror suit that reflects the surrounding environment?
App: tabloid media journalists need one to get those photos of media stars sunbathing out their tan lines.
There are specialized medical apps inexoribly tied to the Windows platform? No wonder costs have spiraled out of control. I'll bet a big percentage of pharmaceutical costs go toward software licenses in the research dept too. Now there's a lucrative market to corner, with a nice steep demand curve. You have a choice, pay the extortion rate fee, or die. See ya' on the golf course.
and would harm consumers and the entire computer industry.
This is GM's argument from the 50's - what's good for GM is good for the country, only now it's Msft that IS the 'computing industry'. They ARE the computing industry, anything you do to harm the company will harm the computing industry and it's customers, so they say.
Software is immune from defect liability anyway so why bother? I worked as a 'lowlytester' once too, and it's one step below building custodian. The marketing brings in the sales, so they're the crown princes. And the software engineers surely don't appreciate someone pointing out their defects, how rude, especially from someone who just installs and runs it, and doesn't appreciate all the effort it takes to code. Testers are worse then customers. At least the engineers are shielded from customers by tech support. Plus, if a commercial software company actually did publish quality software, it would destroy the whole software cash cow ecosystem that's been carefully evolved over the last 25 years. As long as everyone emits buggy products, it's a level playing field, customers are kept on the perpetual upgrade tredmill, and unit sales keep the gravy train going. But sell a good, working product? Give me a break, that would ruin everything! Sure it would look good on the current balance sheet, but in the long run it would just put competitors out of business, then customers would lose the incentive to try out the next version, in vain hopes that "maybe THIS one will do what we want" and boom, that's the end.
Yesterday we rolled out Symantec WinFaxPro 10.02 and guess what, it breaks Word 2K! Isn't that great? Now you might think, "What, does Symantec think nobody uses fax software and word on the same PC" but that's not the point. The good part is that I got to go around to all these workstations and delete macros and reboot a couple of times, which kept me from dealing with something productive like purchasing a notebook for a field tech. Now that's job security, knowing which files to delete to make Word work again. It's all about the benjamins dude, and bugs and workarounds are an essential part of customer control we leverage to get them. We will not tolerate some lowly 'tester' out to destroy our jobs.
(Apologize to Matt Groening) - every generation or so parents and other authorities get their collective panties in a wad about "Kids aren't getting enough exercise!" and demand that legislators "do something about it" - such was the case in the late 60's when teachers got the orders to corral all us 5th graders into the gym and start doing exercises. Our gym was a very noisy place, bad acoustics, several classes at a time full of kids shouting, screaming, etc. I'm struggling with this routine called 'rocking chair' (12-2-3-4, 13-2-3-4, 14-2-3-4, ...) but the instructor (A Christian fundamentalist type math teacher) sees me lagging behing and shouts something at me. I said "What?" and he shouts again, still couldn't make it out. Finally someone in front of me turns around and says, "He said 'do you think you can do these exercises?'" so I shout back at him, "Yes!". At that he marches around to me and starts with the Sgt. Carter drill routine, like "Drop down and give me 20!!", singled out, public humiliation, the whole sad scene. Once that ordeal was over, after class talking with some other kids I found out what he really yelled was, "Do you think you're too good to do these exercises?"
I've abhored physical exercise ever since.
Let us know when they get a real antique personal computer like the Simon, circa 1950.
If it was darn easy to plug into a phone, subscribe to an ISP and get browsing and email, it may have a chance, then the genuinely interested users can start up the learning curve and enjoy a crash & virus free existance.
Personally, I've avoided helping out home users with all their GD windows problems for years, as I'm not about to waste my time working free tech support for multi-billionaires, but if I meet someone with one of these it'd be fun to talk shop with them.
I have to disagree - w/o some kind of competition, it's just not capitalism anymore, IMHO. Hmmm, I'd sure like to see Ayn Rand and Karl Marx on the Jerry Springer show ;))
Anyway, once a market gets monopolized it's all over - they have no real incentive to innovate, improve effeciency; all they have to do is get fat dumb and happy, collect extortion fees from captive customers and enjoy the good life on the golf course (cf. ATT - the phone system started out long ago as many independent small phone systems, eventually competing in long dist, etc, but by the late 60's and 70's had stagnated a very important industry, etc.) Gobbling up the competition in a free for all laissez faire capitalist system is a poor, temporary substitute for getting the real job done, redefining business plans, and ultimately doesn't benefit the consumer. Makes the current balance sheet look good tho, but is just postponing the inevitable toward an even bigger collapse later.
Lets see, Joe's PC Palace was required by Msft to pay for Windows whether the PC shipped with Win, OS/2 or whatever. Of course they could just not sell Msft products at all and not have to pay Msft for shipping OS/2, but I'd say that 'requirement' for being a Msft franchise was pretty illegal, unlawful, willing, etc.
there the Casio WristWatch Camera for not much more.
I think the burden of proof is on the proponents of gw, to show that it is real science. I could make the outrageous claim that ailens landed in my backyard, but it would be up to me to cough up the evidence of that extraordinary event, not on /you/ to disprove it. Specifically, we want conclusive proof that GW is a result of human use of CO2 releasing activity before shutting down entire industries and displacing millions of employees, like some kind of primitive race tossing virgins into the volcano to appease an angry weather god or to bring the sun back from winter solstice before it disappears over the horizon forever, or to atone for some communal cosmic guilt trip.
was that you again, Bill? That's disgusting!!
Would this be it?
1 40 911400
0 251962
9 837910
http://dogbert.abebooks.com/abe/BookDetails?bi=
or this http://dogbert.abebooks.com/abe/BookDetails?bi=14
or, hey here's a 1981 Software Engineering Economics http://dogbert.abebooks.com/abe/BookDetails?bi=13