I personally haven't tried it but Google Docs keeps trying to get me to install this plugin which seems like its function is to allow you to work off-line with your docs.
I'm quite certain if someone big enough (like a GE) requested such a thing that Google would provide it. Until then, it's a great and probably welcome cost saver for mom-and-pops.
The issue is probably more of an IT security nightmare than anything else. How much street cred could someone get for hacking the POTUS's e-mail account. Of course, that's a good way to get bagged and tagged too... but kids are dumb these days.
I could imagine a large corporation (or government) using IPv6 internally and then needing to pretend to be IPv4 at some proxy or something so that they can connect to the interweb. Of course, I don't really know what I'm talking about so someone will likely correct my thinking for me.
Re:TFA says Juniper is doomed. Not so fast.
on
Google Router Rumors
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I've often heard this referred to as the Wal-Mart effect. Once Wal-Mart distributes your product nationally, they basically own you. Because once you ramp up production to meet Wal-Mart needs, you can't just scale back down if they drop you... and they can and will drop you if you do not behave.
We're still feeling the pain of the last time we artificially inflated the IT market during the 90s. There just isn't the skillset out there to have another 1 Million people working on IT infrastructure.
When you artificially grow the supply of labor by trucking in employees from other places you deplete the wages of people who are already there. Is it selfish? Yes. But it's no more selfish than the people who want to move into my area because we have higher wages.
Re:Free Linux Docs Re:So much for free!
on
Ubuntu Kung Fu
·
· Score: 1
I've always found fedorafaq.org and ubuntuguide.org to be very helpful for 99% of my distro related problems/questions. Those just happen to be the two major distributions I have experience with.
A few years ago there was a bug in Turbo Tax. It was prolific enough that the IRS fudged the rule which Turbo Tax had incorrectly calculated that tax year. Another year Intuit had a server overload and the IRS gave extensions to all Turbo Tax filers to compensate. I couldn't find an article on either incident within 10 seconds of Googling, so I apoligize for not having a citation. Also, Turbo Tax guarantees any fees/interest you pay due to a Turbo Tax calculation error. The consumer protection is pretty good on the proprietary stuff at least afaik. If some OSS software was as prolific as Turbo Tax, I bet you could get similar protections.
Once X amount of features have been developed in the OS version, Y amount of dollars would need to be invested in a proprietary product to compete. Once the dollar amount becomes big enough, uncertainty regarding returns means that no competing proprietary software will be developed, ever again.
See, you cite that as a downfall of open source and I cite it as a benefit. I've always felt that what open source does BEST is commoditize the software that people use the most: e-mail, browser, instant messaging, basic text editing, etc. I, as a consumer, don't want to pay for re-implementations of the same old stuff. If you want to make money, do something differently (Google Docs?) or do something NEW. Read: innovate.
Now there's going to be plenty of people who are religious about open source who will argue my point... but note I said *I* have always felt that's what open source did best. Other people like it for different reasons and that's fine. I think for most consumers/businesses who aren't interested in editing the software they use daily, the 'best' benefit of OSS is the commoditization of the most common stuff.
When making a moderate to large sized purchase ($50+) I almost always check out the Amazon reviews. The reviews are usually pretty accurate and they're easier to follow and *less* like ads that you see on the typical 'reviews' sites.
Land lines were put in place a long time ago, when businesses and government were still foolish enough to consider common citizens in their decision making. Therefore the land lines have MUCH better redundancy systems in place when compared to the wireless systems.
In the states they're referred to as techs. Techs help bathe patients (and other general tasks), and will even do really minor medical stuff like take your blood pressure and temperature.
By using that logic no company should ever advertise because it raises the base cost of doing business... which is bad for their customers. The reality is that advertising increases market share which generally lowers the per transaction cost and saves customers money. If we all thought your way there'd be no such thing as marketing. Wait.. maybe you're on to something...
I see the problem a little differently. Right now EVERY SINGLE rate plan is priced so that the carrier can subsidize the price of the phone. If I go to a carrier they will give me a free phone or at the very least dramatically reduce the price of the phone if I sign a contract for 2 years. In my imaginary example let's say I get a contract + phone for $50/mo for 2 years. Now if I go to that same carrier and say I ALREADY have a phone I would like to use, what is the cost of service? They will respond: Well, we have this $50/mo plan for you. In the current market I'm paying for the 'subsidized' phone whether I get the phone or not, which is ridiculous. The only way to NOT have to do this is to get a pay as you go plan, which is annoying because I don't want to have to keep buying cards/minutes. I just want to pay $40/mo for the same plan I could get for $50/mo + phone. Until the phone is no longer subsidized by the rate plans, I don't think we'll every be free of this ridiculous system.
Seriously, the company you work for does not exist to enrich your life. It exists to enrich the life of the owner(s). You are paid a stipend to perform labor because the owner(s) believe that your work will further enrich them.
Oh please. Out of Obama, McCain, Biden, and Palin it's Palin who has the most executive experience. Don't get me wrong, I fully understand we're talking about a woman who believes in fossil fuels, but not fossils. She's not an intellectual sociotype and that's why people give her a hard time, but I don't think that's what we need to be focused on.
It's also important not to be fooled by the 'steady hand' of Obama. He's still more of the same. Sure, he wants to nudge us to the left a little compared to McCain but neither one of these chumps is revolutionary at all. What Obama does have going for him is that he's charismatic. And hopefully he can help this country get out of this depression/funk it's been in.
It seems no one else noticed the naming convention matches the proposed name for the next major release for Windows. This processor is designed specifically to play Solitaire on Windows 7.
I don't see what the big problem is. You said yourself that dumping millions of tons of anything anywhere is probably a bad idea. My response to you is that whether human caused global warming is real or not shouldn't change our behavior. We should strive very hard not dump millions of tons of stuff into our atmosphere. The 'climate change' debate is just a distraction.
The MICR ink is not a requirement. Contrary to popular belief you can still write out a check on a napkin if you wish. It'll just take 2+ weeks to cash because a person will have to actually deal with it instead of their computerized systems.
I dunno where you're from, but America's hat rations their healthcare. Things that are considered elective surgeries sometimes get bumped for years. When you need a knee replacement surgery, it doesn't feel elective to you, I can assure you.
wealth != income. I could be worth $1 Billion but only make $15k this year. Holding 38% of the wealth does NOT necessarily mean you earn 38% of the income that particular year. I dunno what the real numbers are, but your conclusion shouldn't come from the numbers you presented.
I've always been puzzled by this concept of 'wealth redistribution'. Who is it being redistributed to? Seriously, who is making all those bucks? Well, the two biggest earners are doctors (medicare/medicaid) and defense contractors... aka rich people. Now don't get me wrong, poor people are getting some services, but the WEALTH is actually being redistributed to the service providers. This isn't socialism, it's hijacked capitalism. Actual WELFARE programs are such a small part of our budget it boggles my mind why it ever even comes up in conversation.
Slashdot Mirror
I personally haven't tried it but Google Docs keeps trying to get me to install this plugin which seems like its function is to allow you to work off-line with your docs.
I'm quite certain if someone big enough (like a GE) requested such a thing that Google would provide it. Until then, it's a great and probably welcome cost saver for mom-and-pops.
...he would have had to switch proxies every 5 password attempts.
I wonder what the security implications are of IPv6. Until this moment I hadn't really thought about it in that context.
The issue is probably more of an IT security nightmare than anything else. How much street cred could someone get for hacking the POTUS's e-mail account. Of course, that's a good way to get bagged and tagged too... but kids are dumb these days.
I could imagine a large corporation (or government) using IPv6 internally and then needing to pretend to be IPv4 at some proxy or something so that they can connect to the interweb. Of course, I don't really know what I'm talking about so someone will likely correct my thinking for me.
I've often heard this referred to as the Wal-Mart effect. Once Wal-Mart distributes your product nationally, they basically own you. Because once you ramp up production to meet Wal-Mart needs, you can't just scale back down if they drop you... and they can and will drop you if you do not behave.
We're still feeling the pain of the last time we artificially inflated the IT market during the 90s. There just isn't the skillset out there to have another 1 Million people working on IT infrastructure.
When you artificially grow the supply of labor by trucking in employees from other places you deplete the wages of people who are already there. Is it selfish? Yes. But it's no more selfish than the people who want to move into my area because we have higher wages.
I've always found fedorafaq.org and ubuntuguide.org to be very helpful for 99% of my distro related problems/questions. Those just happen to be the two major distributions I have experience with.
A few years ago there was a bug in Turbo Tax. It was prolific enough that the IRS fudged the rule which Turbo Tax had incorrectly calculated that tax year. Another year Intuit had a server overload and the IRS gave extensions to all Turbo Tax filers to compensate. I couldn't find an article on either incident within 10 seconds of Googling, so I apoligize for not having a citation. Also, Turbo Tax guarantees any fees/interest you pay due to a Turbo Tax calculation error. The consumer protection is pretty good on the proprietary stuff at least afaik. If some OSS software was as prolific as Turbo Tax, I bet you could get similar protections.
Once X amount of features have been developed in the OS version, Y amount of dollars would need to be invested in a proprietary product to compete. Once the dollar amount becomes big enough, uncertainty regarding returns means that no competing proprietary software will be developed, ever again.
See, you cite that as a downfall of open source and I cite it as a benefit. I've always felt that what open source does BEST is commoditize the software that people use the most: e-mail, browser, instant messaging, basic text editing, etc. I, as a consumer, don't want to pay for re-implementations of the same old stuff. If you want to make money, do something differently (Google Docs?) or do something NEW. Read: innovate.
Now there's going to be plenty of people who are religious about open source who will argue my point... but note I said *I* have always felt that's what open source did best. Other people like it for different reasons and that's fine. I think for most consumers/businesses who aren't interested in editing the software they use daily, the 'best' benefit of OSS is the commoditization of the most common stuff.
When making a moderate to large sized purchase ($50+) I almost always check out the Amazon reviews. The reviews are usually pretty accurate and they're easier to follow and *less* like ads that you see on the typical 'reviews' sites.
Land lines were put in place a long time ago, when businesses and government were still foolish enough to consider common citizens in their decision making. Therefore the land lines have MUCH better redundancy systems in place when compared to the wireless systems.
In the states they're referred to as techs. Techs help bathe patients (and other general tasks), and will even do really minor medical stuff like take your blood pressure and temperature.
By using that logic no company should ever advertise because it raises the base cost of doing business... which is bad for their customers. The reality is that advertising increases market share which generally lowers the per transaction cost and saves customers money. If we all thought your way there'd be no such thing as marketing. Wait.. maybe you're on to something...
I see the problem a little differently. Right now EVERY SINGLE rate plan is priced so that the carrier can subsidize the price of the phone. If I go to a carrier they will give me a free phone or at the very least dramatically reduce the price of the phone if I sign a contract for 2 years. In my imaginary example let's say I get a contract + phone for $50/mo for 2 years. Now if I go to that same carrier and say I ALREADY have a phone I would like to use, what is the cost of service? They will respond: Well, we have this $50/mo plan for you. In the current market I'm paying for the 'subsidized' phone whether I get the phone or not, which is ridiculous. The only way to NOT have to do this is to get a pay as you go plan, which is annoying because I don't want to have to keep buying cards/minutes. I just want to pay $40/mo for the same plan I could get for $50/mo + phone. Until the phone is no longer subsidized by the rate plans, I don't think we'll every be free of this ridiculous system.
Seriously, the company you work for does not exist to enrich your life. It exists to enrich the life of the owner(s). You are paid a stipend to perform labor because the owner(s) believe that your work will further enrich them.
NAFTA
Oh please. Out of Obama, McCain, Biden, and Palin it's Palin who has the most executive experience. Don't get me wrong, I fully understand we're talking about a woman who believes in fossil fuels, but not fossils. She's not an intellectual sociotype and that's why people give her a hard time, but I don't think that's what we need to be focused on.
It's also important not to be fooled by the 'steady hand' of Obama. He's still more of the same. Sure, he wants to nudge us to the left a little compared to McCain but neither one of these chumps is revolutionary at all. What Obama does have going for him is that he's charismatic. And hopefully he can help this country get out of this depression/funk it's been in.
It seems no one else noticed the naming convention matches the proposed name for the next major release for Windows. This processor is designed specifically to play Solitaire on Windows 7.
I don't see what the big problem is. You said yourself that dumping millions of tons of anything anywhere is probably a bad idea. My response to you is that whether human caused global warming is real or not shouldn't change our behavior. We should strive very hard not dump millions of tons of stuff into our atmosphere. The 'climate change' debate is just a distraction.
The MICR ink is not a requirement. Contrary to popular belief you can still write out a check on a napkin if you wish. It'll just take 2+ weeks to cash because a person will have to actually deal with it instead of their computerized systems.
I dunno where you're from, but America's hat rations their healthcare. Things that are considered elective surgeries sometimes get bumped for years. When you need a knee replacement surgery, it doesn't feel elective to you, I can assure you.
wealth != income. I could be worth $1 Billion but only make $15k this year. Holding 38% of the wealth does NOT necessarily mean you earn 38% of the income that particular year. I dunno what the real numbers are, but your conclusion shouldn't come from the numbers you presented.
I've always been puzzled by this concept of 'wealth redistribution'. Who is it being redistributed to? Seriously, who is making all those bucks? Well, the two biggest earners are doctors (medicare/medicaid) and defense contractors... aka rich people. Now don't get me wrong, poor people are getting some services, but the WEALTH is actually being redistributed to the service providers. This isn't socialism, it's hijacked capitalism. Actual WELFARE programs are such a small part of our budget it boggles my mind why it ever even comes up in conversation.