"Have you acquired large amounts of liquid assets? Do you feel as though the desire for more wealth is consuming your life? Is your estate becoming burdensome in its enormity? Come to the Greed-Addiction center. We can help! I guarantee it! Cash, credit and money orders accepted."
I empathize. I had cataract surgery (lens removal) at a very young age. At the time replacement was not an option. My brain never learned to use binocular vision. As it's now a nuerological issue, medical science has a way to go for me. I too am eagerly anticipating 3-d video that doesn't require two healthy eyes.
It doesn't matter if the notice is valid if the host fears the issuers lawyers more than the poster. That's one of the worst parts of the act: it encourages hosts to assume infringement solely on the basis of one accusation.
I think that distrusting someone who pursues a life working and rising within an inherently broken system is healthy and rational. "Compromise" is the word of the day in political systems, why would the concept stop before principles? Show me a modern politician who actively pursues less power for himself personally. (Yeah yeah, I like Paul too, but I promise you'll be flamed if you use him in this argument. You know who you are.) I think the best one can say of politicians is that some few start out with good intentions.
"You are screwing yourself and your fellow employees."
If you're not exempt, and especially if you have a job that logs time, this has to be reiterated. You may be willing to trade your free time to help yourself, your team, or your company. A world where nothing ever goes wrong could accept this kind of behavior. Unfortunately, we live in a world with lawyers (apologies Ray if you're reading, you're my hero). If you're off the clock and anything that needs to be "official" (read: "documented") happens, your life just got a new headache. "Why were you there? Was it your fault? Were you involved? Again, why were you there?" If your coworker sues because they feel like their job depends on doing unpaid work, what will you say when they ask you the facts? Who have you helped then? You make yourself more of a liability by working off the clock. To me, the cost outweighs the benefit, from the perspective of both employer and employee.
It sounds like they're not outright blocking VOIP (yes, I get that it was a joke, bear with me) but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to find that they're screwing with VOIP traffic. Don't they already provide phone service on board? Sounds like what I would do to protect that business.
And I'd say that includes file-sharing and network tv. Americans are pretty trained to their video stimulus, and they'll find it. They also, however, have been trained to expect it for free. The box is open, I don't see it closing now.
I had to read this far down to find the star wars reference. I only opened the story to see the joke. I'm still waiting to hear how many Bothans died to bring them this information.
Good on you anyway though.:-)
Assuming religion is a purely human construct, I've always assumed that fear of death was one of its motivating factors. Isn't the practice of burial rites one of the first signs of religion in a culture? I'd have to lean towards siding with those who say fear of death and religious belief are strongly correlated.
I don't quite get the point you're trying to make here so, instead of deciding whether I'm arguing, I'll just add my thoughts. Parents who pay for their childrens' education twice (tuition and taxes) get an active role in deciding what kind of education they get. Private education allows market forces to play a part. Don't want your child to hear about evolution? Well, there's a place for that. Want your child to have access to actual college preparation? Private school is your only option unless you are lucky enough to live in an affluent area with better than average public education.
Sure, Microsoft has next to no credibilty in this crowd. Are we past most people thinking that Windows IS the computer? I don't think so chums.
It may not be as crucial in this economy, but every company has to hire. This is bad press to future prospective employees. And the kind of talented IT professionals that any successful software company must employ are just the type to read this type of press.
They may have a substantial market share, but they've created an environment where customers expect constant updates and scheduled major upgrades. In order to compete they must have the human capital.
What do you mean it's in my contract? You mean that 50 page thing full of legal jargon? Who has time to read that? I just scrolled down and clicked "I accept."
If looked at purely as a method of accessing the artists' work it seems ineffectual. However, as a total package this is a genius appeal to the "always on" "web 2.0" environment of today's Internet. For 2.99, a price I think many will pay, users recieve a portal on their mobile device into the world of their favorite artists. Bios, extra content, tour dates, blogs, and ALL their
music in one place. Sounds like something a fan would gladly pay 2.99 to have access to.
I see immediately two ways that jobs would be created by the government using open source software. The first, and most obvious, is through the existing open source business model. Namely, support. The second is through in-house maintenance. By it's nature, open source software is much easier to personalize. Employing programmers to upkeep and specialize applications would certainly be cheaper than commisioning code that only satisfies your needs today. Tomorrow you may need the program to scale or perform a related function that was not included in the original. And if this new function makes it an attractive program for other departments, you just send your team to get them set up. No new licenses, no capital expenditures. As far as wage is concerned, there is a cost associated with keeping your infrastructure operational. That money will be spent by you or your supplier. You both are going to have to pay a programmer, why not have your own?
I agree that it's foolish to believe that the government is going to throw money at an industry that many lobbyists will be telling them is "bad for business".
The real pitch should be as such:
Open source software is auditable for security
The talent exists to make it whatever you need it to be
The TCO of any supported OSS product is lower than the alternative
By utilizing OSS in the public sector you create jobs in both while contributing to the wealth of the nation through technological advance.
OSS is not beholden to the hardware manufacturers. This means that by using OSS you can upgrade hardware based on internal needs. As it stands now, all proprietary software follows the lead of the closed source OS providers, forcing you to upgrade software AND hardware based on their schedule.
There's so much more to be said, but you see my point. OSS is an industry that can say, "we can save you money while allowing you to create more jobs for middle-class Americans and increase your information security."
Slashdot Mirror
That's a wonderful idea! Money addiction!
"Have you acquired large amounts of liquid assets? Do you feel as though the desire for more wealth is consuming your life? Is your estate becoming burdensome in its enormity? Come to the Greed-Addiction center. We can help! I guarantee it! Cash, credit and money orders accepted."
And, as evidenced by this article, totally unreasonable. Not just to ask, but to expect. Meet the new boss...
It would be cool if it was alive today...
Yeah... That would roc!!
CNN: Thieves strike Apple store in NJ... I'm just saying.
Good thing they didn't shoot the guard though. Bet the judge would have given them iLife.
The joke's on the thieves really. I hear that by the time they made it back to the hideout 13 of those iPhones had cracked displays.
See, now I read the title and thought "great! That damn thimble WAS always falling off the board!"
I empathize. I had cataract surgery (lens removal) at a very young age. At the time replacement was not an option. My brain never learned to use binocular vision. As it's now a nuerological issue, medical science has a way to go for me. I too am eagerly anticipating 3-d video that doesn't require two healthy eyes.
It doesn't matter if the notice is valid if the host fears the issuers lawyers more than the poster. That's one of the worst parts of the act: it encourages hosts to assume infringement solely on the basis of one accusation.
I think that distrusting someone who pursues a life working and rising within an inherently broken system is healthy and rational. "Compromise" is the word of the day in political systems, why would the concept stop before principles? Show me a modern politician who actively pursues less power for himself personally. (Yeah yeah, I like Paul too, but I promise you'll be flamed if you use him in this argument. You know who you are.) I think the best one can say of politicians is that some few start out with good intentions.
"You are screwing yourself and your fellow employees."
If you're not exempt, and especially if you have a job that logs time, this has to be reiterated. You may be willing to trade your free time to help yourself, your team, or your company. A world where nothing ever goes wrong could accept this kind of behavior. Unfortunately, we live in a world with lawyers (apologies Ray if you're reading, you're my hero). If you're off the clock and anything that needs to be "official" (read: "documented") happens, your life just got a new headache. "Why were you there? Was it your fault? Were you involved? Again, why were you there?" If your coworker sues because they feel like their job depends on doing unpaid work, what will you say when they ask you the facts? Who have you helped then? You make yourself more of a liability by working off the clock. To me, the cost outweighs the benefit, from the perspective of both employer and employee.
"Hyperdimensional RAID 1" Sounds like a Dalek Universal Domination plan. "EXTerminate!"
Nothing's going to screw with my offsite storage on the other side of the galaxy.
Denial of service as it were?
It sounds like they're not outright blocking VOIP (yes, I get that it was a joke, bear with me) but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to find that they're screwing with VOIP traffic. Don't they already provide phone service on board? Sounds like what I would do to protect that business.
And I'd say that includes file-sharing and network tv. Americans are pretty trained to their video stimulus, and they'll find it. They also, however, have been trained to expect it for free. The box is open, I don't see it closing now.
I had to read this far down to find the star wars reference. I only opened the story to see the joke. I'm still waiting to hear how many Bothans died to bring them this information. Good on you anyway though. :-)
Assuming religion is a purely human construct, I've always assumed that fear of death was one of its motivating factors. Isn't the practice of burial rites one of the first signs of religion in a culture? I'd have to lean towards siding with those who say fear of death and religious belief are strongly correlated.
I don't quite get the point you're trying to make here so, instead of deciding whether I'm arguing, I'll just add my thoughts. Parents who pay for their childrens' education twice (tuition and taxes) get an active role in deciding what kind of education they get. Private education allows market forces to play a part. Don't want your child to hear about evolution? Well, there's a place for that. Want your child to have access to actual college preparation? Private school is your only option unless you are lucky enough to live in an affluent area with better than average public education.
It may not be as crucial in this economy, but every company has to hire. This is bad press to future prospective employees. And the kind of talented IT professionals that any successful software company must employ are just the type to read this type of press.
They may have a substantial market share, but they've created an environment where customers expect constant updates and scheduled major upgrades. In order to compete they must have the human capital.
What do you mean it's in my contract? You mean that 50 page thing full of legal jargon? Who has time to read that? I just scrolled down and clicked "I accept."
If looked at purely as a method of accessing the artists' work it seems ineffectual. However, as a total package this is a genius appeal to the "always on" "web 2.0" environment of today's Internet. For 2.99, a price I think many will pay, users recieve a portal on their mobile device into the world of their favorite artists. Bios, extra content, tour dates, blogs, and ALL their music in one place. Sounds like something a fan would gladly pay 2.99 to have access to.
I see immediately two ways that jobs would be created by the government using open source software. The first, and most obvious, is through the existing open source business model. Namely, support. The second is through in-house maintenance. By it's nature, open source software is much easier to personalize. Employing programmers to upkeep and specialize applications would certainly be cheaper than commisioning code that only satisfies your needs today. Tomorrow you may need the program to scale or perform a related function that was not included in the original. And if this new function makes it an attractive program for other departments, you just send your team to get them set up. No new licenses, no capital expenditures. As far as wage is concerned, there is a cost associated with keeping your infrastructure operational. That money will be spent by you or your supplier. You both are going to have to pay a programmer, why not have your own?
I agree that it's foolish to believe that the government is going to throw money at an industry that many lobbyists will be telling them is "bad for business".
The real pitch should be as such:
Open source software is auditable for security
The talent exists to make it whatever you need it to be
The TCO of any supported OSS product is lower than the alternative
By utilizing OSS in the public sector you create jobs in both while contributing to the wealth of the nation through technological advance.
OSS is not beholden to the hardware manufacturers. This means that by using OSS you can upgrade hardware based on internal needs. As it stands now, all proprietary software follows the lead of the closed source OS providers, forcing you to upgrade software AND hardware based on their schedule.
There's so much more to be said, but you see my point. OSS is an industry that can say, "we can save you money while allowing you to create more jobs for middle-class Americans and increase your information security."
I suppose putting the attack dogs for anti-competitive businesses in the DOJ is better than putting tax evaders in charge of the IRS...