I bet you they're running the COXEN in some boxen.
I bet you the COXEN is a big... application, and the boxen are tight...ly... integrated... if they run Linux. Otherwise the boxen are hosen. Or something.
Blue-Collar Man: Excuse me. I don't mean to interrupt, but what were you talking about? Randal: The ending of Return of the Jedi. Dante: My friend is trying to convince me that any contractors working on the uncompleted Death Star were innocent victims when the space station was destroyed by the rebels. Blue-Collar Man: Well, I'm a contractor myself. I'm a roofer... (digs into pocket and produces business card) Dunn and Reddy Home Improvements. And speaking as a roofer, I can say that a roofer's personal politics come heavily into play when choosing jobs. Randal: Like when? Blue-Collar Man: Three months ago I was offered a job up in the hills. A beautiful house with tons of property. It was a simple reshingling job, but I was told that if it was finished within a day, my price would be doubled. Then I realized whose house it was. Dante: Whose house was it? Blue-Collar Man: Dominick Bambino's. Randal: "Babyface" Bambino? The gangster? Blue-Collar Man: The same. The money was right, but the risk was too big. I knew who he was, and based on that, I passed the job on to a friend of mine. Dante: Based on personal politics. Blue-Collar Man: Right. And that week, the Foresci family put a hit on Babyface's house. My friend was shot and killed. He wasn't even finished shingling. Randal: No way! Blue-Collar Man: (paying for coffee) I'm alive because I knew there were risks involved taking on that particular client. My friend wasn't so lucky. (pauses to reflect) You know, any contractor willing to work on that Death Star knew the risks. If they were killed, it was their own fault. A roofer listens to this... (taps his heart) not his wallet.
Monsanto was on there at #27. Monsanto are the people that patent genes, have lobbied to have certain legislation* added to the new Iraq constitution, have engineered plants that are sterile and can't be replanted so people have to keep buying new seeds... that's not even the half of it, and lets not even get started on their history of litigation.
Once I saw them on there, I promptly closed the browser tab.
* Note: the article I linked came at the top of the Google search, but it may not be the most correct or objective.
I've already heard a lot about how the legal dept's of companies discourage the use of GPL'ed and Open Source software. Corporations fear any form of risk, however remote. (Unlike a government, they'd never install a thermal exhaust port that could be used to blow up their space station.) Corporations want to have total control over everything they are involved with. This has, from what I've heard, slowed FOSS adoption significantly.
If more fears of the GPLv3 affecting business models are heard, could the coming of the GPLv3 cause a chilling effect on FOSS adoption in the commercial sector? Or worse, could opponents of FOSS twist concerns about the GPLv3 into a FUD campaign? Perhaps they have even started already...
This is messed up on so many levels. I don't know where to begin!
FIRST of all, they might as well block the entire Internet. I can put up a web page claiming to be by Smarty McPants, Ph.D, that says smoking is good for you. I can even Googlebomb it up so (for a while, anyways) any relevant search shows my page in a top spot. Just because something is on the Internet does not make it credible! Are they going to block Google too?
Heck, I could print out a booklet on my bubblejet that looks authoritative, but that doesn't make it true! Establishing credibility and using multiple sources is a required part of the research process! There is never, ever, any single source you can refer to as definitive when you are looking at a subject in depth.
SECOND of all, Wikipedia has a (loosely enforced, but enforced nonetheless) policy of citing sources. So while it may not be super-reliable given that a vandal could have been by in the past 30 seconds, it is still a valuable research tool... given you know how to use it (ie. a copy-paste of the article does not count as "research" by any stretch of the imagination).
LASTLY, what exactly is "reliable" anyways? Plenty of textbooks have errors by the handfuls. And really, if they are going to block Wikipedia, they'd best block Fox News too. There are huge examples of innacuracies and lack of research from Fox, like the story about how Barack Obama went to "terrorist school".
The idiots who made this policy obviously don't know anything about the Internet, or information, or research. And we wondedr why the educational system is failing and the US is falling behind in the science sector!
...putting it on a trajectory to reach comet Boethin in December 2008.... (The probe only had one projectile though, so we will not see another brilliant man-made explosion on this comet.)
That's too bad... otherwise NASA's leaders would be telling us "many Boethins died to bring us this information".
Time to overthrow these corrupt corporate bastards.
While I agree with most of what you say, we should pay attention to how the "corrupt corporate bastards" came about; it's not a problem inherent in our economic system, or neither (to a lesser degree) our political system, so much as the fact that the average citizen doesn't take an active role in politics, and the average consumer doesn't "vote with their dollar". They are content to unthinkingly stick with a imperceptably decending status quo, content to unthinkingly give their dollars to abusive faceless corporations.
In other words, nothing in the system inherently encourages corrupt centralization... it is the average person's unwillingness to participate in the system, and actively defend their liberties, that is the problem. People also let themselves be deluded into thinking things aren't that bad, and they fear the changes that become necessary once the system starts slipping towards a corrupt, authoritarian system with no respect for human rights. Many people are also selfish and short-sighted, with little concern for their fellow citizen, a la "they came for the Jews, but I did nothing because I was not a Jew...".
They only solution I see for the people willing to fight for their rights, is for us to stick together and find ways to move in our own direction and leave the complacent ones to their demise while their ancestors, who sacrificed so much for freedom and peace, spin at 5000 RPM in their graves.
Microsoft makes most of its money through its OEM deals. I believe the number bandied about is that 80% of its Windows revenue comes not directly from the consumer, but from the "Microsoft tax" on nearly all computers sold. Also, the price MS charges OEMs for Windows is already a lot lower than that charged for an off-the-shelf version.
A lot of Microsoft's revenue also depends on businesses and government, not consumers.
These "discounts" seem more like the fevered imaginings of a marketing drone who wants to make Windows seem like a "sweet deal". It may not even be a ploy to make more sales in the consumer section, it might be just another trick to increase awareness of the Vista brand; nothing makes consumers perk up their ears like the word "discount", even if they are ultimately not interested in a new operating system.
The court is now debating whether or not software is actually patentable.
Answer: Software is not patentable.
See, wasn't that easy?
It's very simple. Software is, by definition, entirely conceptual. The only difference between a programming language construct and a human language construct is that the human language construct changes the electrical signals in the reader's brain, while programming language constructs can also change the electrical signals in a computer's hardware.
Language constructs cannot be (and when the law is interpreted properly, are not) patentable. They are covered by copyright.
Nobody calls up the GNOME foundation complaining that 2.16 crawls on their PIII-450 with 256MB of RAM
Both the Ubuntu desktop and now, experimentally, the Kubuntu desktop, ran fine on my PIII-450 with 256MB (might even only have 128MB) of RAM. Admittedly, that old box is usually just used as a test server, but I've used the desktop on many occasions and it runs surprisingly smoothly. Windows XP crawled and chugged on the same hardware.
If anything, in my experience with Linux desktops it almost seems that they don't adequately take advantage of faster hardware... on an Athlon XP box, a Linux desktop doesn't feel as snappy as Windows XP does on the same hardware. Although with the newfangled Beryl/Compiz and whatnot, I guess all desktops will soon be fully accelerated.
As always, there's not enough information. Why do you want to do this? What are you trying to accomplish? What apps? How critical are they? If you want to switch just for the sake of switching, then really, you should be fired.
Dude, this is Slashdot. The benefits of switching to an Free/Open solution should be obvious.
At the very least, we can assume the goal here is to prise the organization from the jaws of Vendor Lock-In. A vendor like Microsoft has no reason to be nice to a small- to medium-sized company, and this leaves anyone locked in to a Microsoft system vunerable.
Also, despite all the "TCO" FUD Microsoft adversises, a move to a Free/Open solution can potentially save a lot of money. Not in all cases of course, but the question being asked isn't "Why should I?" but "How can I?". And I don't see any reason why the submitter should be assumed to be an idiot incapable of using proper judgement.
A leader should be more experienced than the people he or she leads. This does not mean the leader should know about or be concerned with the smaller details, but he should have a broad enough background to comprehend the individual tasks he is organizing people to do.
A manager is not there to tell people what to do, he is there to organize the division of labour. If a manager was cloned ten times he should be able to replace the people he organizes after learning the specifics of each task he would otherwise be unable to cover as one person.
A manager is the frontal lobe; He has to do the higher level strategizing, but not get distracted with the reflexes and autonomous functions. However, he should still know what every part is doing. He should not be disconnected.
A common misconception is that a manager capable of "lower level" tasks may become distracted or tend to micromanage. This is not the case; indeed, many can attest that managers who like to "get involved" tend to know even less about the task that they are interfering with, than managers that take a "hands off" approach.
If you're on pins and needles looking forward to November 17th...
I bet there's a disparaging joke in there, but I'm sure there must be some people out there who want to rootkit -- er, root -- for Sony's new console. In the name of fairness, wii all should give the P$3 the benefit of the DRM^H^H^H doubt, despite the large price tag and dubious overall entertainment value... to say nothing of Sony's utter contempt for the consumer...
Hatch caused an overnight controversy on June 17, 2003 by proposing that copyright owners should be able to destroy the computer equipment and information of those suspected of copyright infringement, including file sharing. In the face of criticism, especially from technology and privacy advocates, Hatch withdrew his suggestion days later, after it was discovered that Sen. Hatch's official website was using an unlicensed JavaScript menu from United Kingdom based software developer Milonic Solutions. Milonic founder Andy Woolley stated that "We've had no contact with them. They are in breach of our licensing terms."
On a lighter note, apparently lots of people in Utah are rather tired of Orrin Hatch. Particularly, it seems, his advertising. (From the OneGoodMove weblog; Where they have things that might be clues.)
I think some competition will be good for Linux and OSS at this point. Linux distros aren't just a desktop OS, they are an infinitely adaptable and extensible platform, one that I'd like to see taken to new places while these two companies duke it out. I can see this doing good things for enterprise IT, and the general consumer, too. As long as the fight stays in the OSS ring, the best man will win, fighting based on actual merit, without anyone resorting to proprietary licenses, patents, or lawsuits (hopefully).
Also note that while Microsoft further locks down what ISV's can do with their platform, yet another formidable company picks up the Linux gauntlet...
Merriam-Webster defines fascism as "a political philosophy, movement, or regime... that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition".[3]
Two particular definitions reflect the fact that Fascism has always arisen from an extreme right-wing ideology:
(1) "A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism." --American Heritage Dictionary (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1983)
(2) "Extreme right-wing totalitarian political system or views, as orig. prevailing in Italy (1922-43)." --The Pocket Oxford Dictionary (Oxford University Press, 1984)
From the Wikipedia article on Fascism
I don't think they're quite there yet, but I see they are working hard on it. Note that, TMK, the British system of government is much more centralized than that of America's. It is also commonly said that the Prime Minister has a lot more power over government than the President.
It's almost impossible to shoot a bill or a check stub dead on, at close rage, without fish-eye'ing, and without getting in your own shadow.
Thats assuming you need a pristine, perfect photo of the item to be OCR'ed. I suspect this is not the case: chances are that as long as you are trying to digitize printed (not handwritten) documents, the OCR won't mind a little fisheye distortion and offish lighting (as long as you make sure there is enough contrast and no dark shadows.) It really depends on the flexibility of your OCR software; it might not work well with the imperfections resulting from using a digital camera.
Best way would be to test out a few handfuls of documents, tweak your setup so you get the best resulting digital images, and then see how your OCR software handles things. I have used a digital camera to digitize things on paper when a scanner wasn't available, and sometimes got decent results for what I needed. Usually using the camera's flash is a mistake; instead, try setting up a flourescent tube so you get even ambient lighting. YMMV.
Slashdot Mirror
I bet you they're running the COXEN in some boxen.
I bet you the COXEN is a big... application, and the boxen are tight...ly... integrated... if they run Linux. Otherwise the boxen are hosen. Or something.
*ducks*
I'm sorry, but I wouldn't enjoy working for a company like that.
But then again, I don't kill kittens for fun in my spare time.
Reminds me of a scene from Clerks:
Blue-Collar Man: Excuse me. I don't mean to interrupt, but what were you talking about?
Randal: The ending of Return of the Jedi.
Dante: My friend is trying to convince me that any contractors working on the uncompleted Death Star were innocent victims when the space station was destroyed by the rebels.
Blue-Collar Man: Well, I'm a contractor myself. I'm a roofer... (digs into pocket and produces business card) Dunn and Reddy Home Improvements. And speaking as a roofer, I can say that a roofer's personal politics come heavily into play when choosing jobs.
Randal: Like when?
Blue-Collar Man: Three months ago I was offered a job up in the hills. A beautiful house with tons of property. It was a simple reshingling job, but I was told that if it was finished within a day, my price would be doubled. Then I realized whose house it was.
Dante: Whose house was it?
Blue-Collar Man: Dominick Bambino's.
Randal: "Babyface" Bambino? The gangster?
Blue-Collar Man: The same. The money was right, but the risk was too big. I knew who he was, and based on that, I passed the job on to a friend of mine.
Dante: Based on personal politics.
Blue-Collar Man: Right. And that week, the Foresci family put a hit on Babyface's house. My friend was shot and killed. He wasn't even finished shingling.
Randal: No way!
Blue-Collar Man: (paying for coffee) I'm alive because I knew there were risks involved taking on that particular client. My friend wasn't so lucky. (pauses to reflect) You know, any contractor willing to work on that Death Star knew the risks. If they were killed, it was their own fault. A roofer listens to this... (taps his heart) not his wallet.
Monsanto was on there at #27. Monsanto are the people that patent genes, have lobbied to have certain legislation* added to the new Iraq constitution, have engineered plants that are sterile and can't be replanted so people have to keep buying new seeds... that's not even the half of it, and lets not even get started on their history of litigation.
Once I saw them on there, I promptly closed the browser tab.
* Note: the article I linked came at the top of the Google search, but it may not be the most correct or objective.
Still, an MMOG has to be more creative than another freaking toy-brand-based television cartoon.
I've already heard a lot about how the legal dept's of companies discourage the use of GPL'ed and Open Source software. Corporations fear any form of risk, however remote. (Unlike a government, they'd never install a thermal exhaust port that could be used to blow up their space station.) Corporations want to have total control over everything they are involved with. This has, from what I've heard, slowed FOSS adoption significantly.
If more fears of the GPLv3 affecting business models are heard, could the coming of the GPLv3 cause a chilling effect on FOSS adoption in the commercial sector? Or worse, could opponents of FOSS twist concerns about the GPLv3 into a FUD campaign? Perhaps they have even started already...
OSNews just linked an article about the first computer that could fit in this category, from 1981, the Epson HX-20.
Kind of looks like a neat idea for its time, albeit a little limited by the available information processing technology of that era.
Fuhgeddaboudit!
This is messed up on so many levels. I don't know where to begin!
FIRST of all, they might as well block the entire Internet. I can put up a web page claiming to be by Smarty McPants, Ph.D, that says smoking is good for you. I can even Googlebomb it up so (for a while, anyways) any relevant search shows my page in a top spot. Just because something is on the Internet does not make it credible! Are they going to block Google too?
Heck, I could print out a booklet on my bubblejet that looks authoritative, but that doesn't make it true! Establishing credibility and using multiple sources is a required part of the research process! There is never, ever, any single source you can refer to as definitive when you are looking at a subject in depth.
SECOND of all, Wikipedia has a (loosely enforced, but enforced nonetheless) policy of citing sources. So while it may not be super-reliable given that a vandal could have been by in the past 30 seconds, it is still a valuable research tool... given you know how to use it (ie. a copy-paste of the article does not count as "research" by any stretch of the imagination).
LASTLY, what exactly is "reliable" anyways? Plenty of textbooks have errors by the handfuls. And really, if they are going to block Wikipedia, they'd best block Fox News too. There are huge examples of innacuracies and lack of research from Fox, like the story about how Barack Obama went to "terrorist school".
The idiots who made this policy obviously don't know anything about the Internet, or information, or research. And we wondedr why the educational system is failing and the US is falling behind in the science sector!
Gaaahh!
Dammit, Hawthorne01 beat me to the joke by less than a minute! What are the odds!?
In other words, nothing in the system inherently encourages corrupt centralization... it is the average person's unwillingness to participate in the system, and actively defend their liberties, that is the problem. People also let themselves be deluded into thinking things aren't that bad, and they fear the changes that become necessary once the system starts slipping towards a corrupt, authoritarian system with no respect for human rights. Many people are also selfish and short-sighted, with little concern for their fellow citizen, a la "they came for the Jews, but I did nothing because I was not a Jew...".
They only solution I see for the people willing to fight for their rights, is for us to stick together and find ways to move in our own direction and leave the complacent ones to their demise while their ancestors, who sacrificed so much for freedom and peace, spin at 5000 RPM in their graves.
Microsoft makes most of its money through its OEM deals. I believe the number bandied about is that 80% of its Windows revenue comes not directly from the consumer, but from the "Microsoft tax" on nearly all computers sold. Also, the price MS charges OEMs for Windows is already a lot lower than that charged for an off-the-shelf version. A lot of Microsoft's revenue also depends on businesses and government, not consumers. These "discounts" seem more like the fevered imaginings of a marketing drone who wants to make Windows seem like a "sweet deal". It may not even be a ploy to make more sales in the consumer section, it might be just another trick to increase awareness of the Vista brand; nothing makes consumers perk up their ears like the word "discount", even if they are ultimately not interested in a new operating system.
See, wasn't that easy?
It's very simple. Software is, by definition, entirely conceptual. The only difference between a programming language construct and a human language construct is that the human language construct changes the electrical signals in the reader's brain, while programming language constructs can also change the electrical signals in a computer's hardware.
Language constructs cannot be (and when the law is interpreted properly, are not) patentable. They are covered by copyright.
Case closed.
If anything, in my experience with Linux desktops it almost seems that they don't adequately take advantage of faster hardware... on an Athlon XP box, a Linux desktop doesn't feel as snappy as Windows XP does on the same hardware. Although with the newfangled Beryl/Compiz and whatnot, I guess all desktops will soon be fully accelerated.
Because you can never have too much karma. ;)
Here, here, here and here.
At the very least, we can assume the goal here is to prise the organization from the jaws of Vendor Lock-In. A vendor like Microsoft has no reason to be nice to a small- to medium-sized company, and this leaves anyone locked in to a Microsoft system vunerable.
Also, despite all the "TCO" FUD Microsoft adversises, a move to a Free/Open solution can potentially save a lot of money. Not in all cases of course, but the question being asked isn't "Why should I?" but "How can I?". And I don't see any reason why the submitter should be assumed to be an idiot incapable of using proper judgement.
A leader should be more experienced than the people he or she leads. This does not mean the leader should know about or be concerned with the smaller details, but he should have a broad enough background to comprehend the individual tasks he is organizing people to do. A manager is not there to tell people what to do, he is there to organize the division of labour. If a manager was cloned ten times he should be able to replace the people he organizes after learning the specifics of each task he would otherwise be unable to cover as one person. A manager is the frontal lobe; He has to do the higher level strategizing, but not get distracted with the reflexes and autonomous functions. However, he should still know what every part is doing. He should not be disconnected. A common misconception is that a manager capable of "lower level" tasks may become distracted or tend to micromanage. This is not the case; indeed, many can attest that managers who like to "get involved" tend to know even less about the task that they are interfering with, than managers that take a "hands off" approach.
But how much is that in Libraries of Congress?
(^_^) - - <-- Joke
/
/. . \
,,,,
(> < ) <-- You (put a shirt on, please!)
\o
/ |. | \
|| |
|| |
These diagrams never get old, I tell ya.
So yeah! Go PlayStation 3!
I think some competition will be good for Linux and OSS at this point. Linux distros aren't just a desktop OS, they are an infinitely adaptable and extensible platform, one that I'd like to see taken to new places while these two companies duke it out. I can see this doing good things for enterprise IT, and the general consumer, too. As long as the fight stays in the OSS ring, the best man will win, fighting based on actual merit, without anyone resorting to proprietary licenses, patents, or lawsuits (hopefully).
Also note that while Microsoft further locks down what ISV's can do with their platform, yet another formidable company picks up the Linux gauntlet...
It's almost impossible to shoot a bill or a check stub dead on, at close rage, without fish-eye'ing, and without getting in your own shadow.
Thats assuming you need a pristine, perfect photo of the item to be OCR'ed. I suspect this is not the case: chances are that as long as you are trying to digitize printed (not handwritten) documents, the OCR won't mind a little fisheye distortion and offish lighting (as long as you make sure there is enough contrast and no dark shadows.) It really depends on the flexibility of your OCR software; it might not work well with the imperfections resulting from using a digital camera.
Best way would be to test out a few handfuls of documents, tweak your setup so you get the best resulting digital images, and then see how your OCR software handles things. I have used a digital camera to digitize things on paper when a scanner wasn't available, and sometimes got decent results for what I needed. Usually using the camera's flash is a mistake; instead, try setting up a flourescent tube so you get even ambient lighting. YMMV.