I think you have an interesting point here. I'm reading about 260k of MS-bashing, but arent we biassed? It is perfectly possible that the benchmark conditions weren't appropriate and that Microsoft didn't want these guys to publish bullshit. I have to few information to join this MS-bashing-fest, the column never mentioned anything about the benchmark's quality...
1. they're not good at;
2. they don't have time for;
(Aplaud-for-yourself-alert!!) I am good. I got all the best projects within the companies when I went on traineeship. These were either the-most-fun-projects, or the-most-prestegious-projects, stuff the ordinary people didn't have time for. So in the case you're good, be better than the regulars, and teach that to the people who work for your company.
I was also a cheap labour, but I learned a lot, then you get a win-win situation right?
For your situation now, if they don't give you good projects, get another company if possible, or take a deep breath and search for 'projects' on your next co-op.
In my opinion, if you want people to be able to program, then you should think of your brother/sister or neighbour participating in the programming world. First the apprentice sees is the Presentation of the application, then it's the data they'll see, and lastly you could bother them with the algorithms used for the data-flow-processes. If they can handle this, bother them with quicksorts and hashtables. Can they handle that? Let them enter the world of Lex and Yacc.
What you can see is that levels are going from up to down. Not everybody is able to program at deep levels, but everybody should be able to make themselves useful. In order to do this, I think certain programming model (i.e. based on n-tier systems) should be made. People can focus into the level they want, and hop upwards and downwards at their own will. Perhaps a new programming model should be designed for something like this, I'm not sure it's possible...
Hypothesis: You can't find a real number "x" such that x^2
Proof: Left as an excersise for the reader
Easy, the plus operator '+' is something which can't be proven mathematically, this means that 1+1=2 is an axiom - an unprovable assumption, maybe we could call it 'rule'. Such is the case with negative and positive numbers, change the rules and you will find an X^2 number smaller than zero.
I must say that Mathematics is a very well researched science, we cannot prove that a super-mathematics does not exist. Is this a troll? I'm just comparing Boolean Logic with Fuzzy Logic; could a new science replace the maths we know today?
This is a trivial one... and a bit sneaky as well. An 'today's' problem of mankind is, that we can't define the characteristics of 'information', that's why you see all funny stuff in the MPAA vs 2600.org conflict (you know - painting pictures with DeCSS code, or making MP3's with DeCSS Lyrics). Lacking the proof of 'what-is-information' does not mean that *erasing* and *encrypting* information is the same thing, you cannot prove that, not even when fundamental knowledge is missing. You can't confuse cold and heat, not even when you have not invented fire yet.
I've seen this coming for the past 1.5 years, I'm even surprised it took so long. The article means that political lobbies have been started. MS is fighting the battle from multiple sides, they also want to illegalize the reselling of naked PC's. Now they have started the lobby to illegalize Open Source? Everybody thinks 'well, they can't', but they might find a way. I compare this with the Napster case, everything good for Disney's revenue is legal, everything threatening Disney's revenue is illegal. Does this mean I can be charged for not buying certain products in future? I think this is possible within the next 150 years...
Feels like somebody else is owning your computer. I can pay something like $2000 for a PC with Windows and software here in Europe - that's a medium luxerious system - and somebody else is acting like they own it? If people succeed to read this policy and succeed to understand it, I don't think Juno has much future...
Perhaps I'm not much of a yahoo user, but I remember this being a search engine... If the search engine vanishes, then Google takes over, because no-one will ever aquire Google right?
ThE middle-man, thE distributor, thE record industry has now protected their revenue? This means that artists still don't get jack-shit for their 'creative work'?
What's happening man? I mean, Britney is not a musician or a vocalist, she's a couple of dancing tits! (Okay, nothing against tits there, but you get the point). Musicians are pushed to the background, 'idols' are pushed to the front because marketing laws say that quality is defined by the user's experience - what does one feel during product usage. Does this mean that entertainment industries will sell you life-styles in future, aren't they already doing this?
The only party getting rich is the distributor, which isn't Napster.
In fact, RIAA's own techs were convinced that it would be easily breakable. It's quite simple, what the French site says is true for most protection schemes: The algorithmn must be secrect for a technology to survive. This does not apply for PKI encryption methods, but PKI methods do not apply for digital watermarking. Not even a scheme like CSS is desired or usefull for Audio content - they want to be able to trace who opened the purchased copy, i.e. the watermark identifies the purchaser of the audio content.
The article in the above link tells us that the RIAA wanted something which is technologically impossible, but refused to listen to the techs. They needed a watermarking system, and they want it now.
I think the great thing about these French guys actually publishing their work is actually putting the genie out of the bottle. SDMI tried to prevent that in the agreement of the contest - one was not allowed to publish the hack methods or results and they'll likely enforce this by law. Fortunately, we here in Europe are concious of the fact that US does not apply here - forgetting this is a mistake which US corporates have made before (i.e. DeCSS).
The most important surviving factor for Suse, RedHat, Slackware et al. is community acceptance. I understand that the community has a moral problem with this license, so my guess is that Suse will come with an explanation for this licensing scheme, or maybe retreat (sorry folks, I guess it didn't work).
If they're going to introduce this in the Netherlands, I will sue the state personally. The state can simply not force me to pay for a product for which I've sworn myself to boycot (and that will be Holywood, Microsoft, and the majority of RIAA products). I think the state needs to prove to me, that the 'artists' whom get protected actually receive the money I pay extra for digital media. I think the state needs to prove that Microsoft et al does not receive a penny from my pocket. A law like this simply takes away my freedom of speech - the right to boycot a product and a company. With extra taxing laws on digital media, this boycot is simply impossible.
Warp is cool, but hasn't much software support, well it didn't back in 1995 when I removed it from my HD. Linux does have software support, which is often free. I think Ballmer here is speaking about the server market so the 'Linux-customer' can be considered a specialist.
Does not sound very likely as most moons are much smaller than their planet, I believe pluto is an exception to this. If these moons 're too big, they'll crash into the planet.
Some point I must admit, it is very hard to draw conclusions as the evidence is quite circumstantial, as what I've heard of this technology anyway. Hopefully more advanced technology will provide more confident answers.
With this slashdot story and this story from The Register, it is clear that Microsoft is now fighting the battle at both ends. A new PC means a new Operating system. Thanks God that Microsoft isn't in the automobile business, a new set of wheels would mean a new car right?
You probably did not understand my sarcasm there... Some press articles claim for Java to have failed on the propriaty thing. This is not *my* opinion, but you must admit, things are going well for Java since Sun loosened the license restrictions, before that Java struggled to become popular.
The HDCP system can't be broken, however, because only high definition sets will have the HDCP decoder
Does this mean only JVC sells this stuff? As ever, the industry needs standards, for competition.One of the 'official' reasons for Java to have 'failed' is that Sun wanted a industry standard propriaty language. Fail Fail Fail! Did not work sorry. Won't work for any recordable media either.
Suppose only JVC sells this stuff: no competition and probably too expensive
Suppose others sell this stuff: Take over the technique, and service it into new products, like a PC HDTV video player (and recordables ofcourse). Lets buy two of these machines and start copying. I know stories of drugsdealers who switched to selling illegal CD-ROMS when internet wasn't much popular yet, this will happen for this new video technology if more conveniant ways for piracy is not found or possible. The internet will then only be used as a broker - you search, we supply.
Content does not have to be doomed... It may just be the new economy to be doomed. No one realizes that the internet does not -have- to be used to make money
Organizing schemes on the internet are non-US, they are global. Every ISP in every country needs to comply. Won't happen sorry. Here in the Netherlands we have the moral 'the user pays'. If I buy a cassette tape, then 0.25 cents goes to the record industry. That's bullshit, that means I can infringe copyright right?
Revenue protection due to the transparent system mentioned in the article means that:
* The entertainment industry has a secure income even though not everybody uses the product. So they can produce even less quality than they do now.
* As a concious not-consumer of TV-shows, and Holywood films, I pay for their product, I don't think I want that - I'm boycotting their crap while I'm paying for it?
* Third world countries whom will never cooperate with the ISP regulations can watch any movie, while the west pays. For small countries this shouldn't be much of a problem, but demographics teach that there are second and third world countries with millions of people on-line
To be short - don't think this is feasible at all.
I'm an external for a dot-com. This dot-com company has both CIO and CTO. What I understand is that they have the following roles / tasks within the company:
CIO: Chief Information Officer knows the (business) needs of the company. ICT is considered to be a service with company performance as goal. The CIO does not communicate with technical guys very often. The CIO is focusses on _business_ needs - company profit in performance and costs supported with an ICT solution to the problem.
CTO: Chief Technology Officer knows about all projects within the company at technical level. He does not define the requested service, although he communicates feasibility, performance, technical problems with the CIO. The CTO also does study for new technologies, to be used in new projects. The CTO is focussed at the technical face of ICT
So in this company, the CIO and CTO actually do have different task
Slashdot Mirror
I think you have an interesting point here. I'm reading about 260k of MS-bashing, but arent we biassed? It is perfectly possible that the benchmark conditions weren't appropriate and that Microsoft didn't want these guys to publish bullshit. I have to few information to join this MS-bashing-fest, the column never mentioned anything about the benchmark's quality...
But what are we doing here? The music industry is lying through their teeth? And what now? Will this save Napster?
How many tons of dynamite do we actually need?
2. they don't have time for;
(Aplaud-for-yourself-alert!!) I am good. I got all the best projects within the companies when I went on traineeship. These were either the-most-fun-projects, or the-most-prestegious-projects, stuff the ordinary people didn't have time for. So in the case you're good, be better than the regulars, and teach that to the people who work for your company.
I was also a cheap labour, but I learned a lot, then you get a win-win situation right?
For your situation now, if they don't give you good projects, get another company if possible, or take a deep breath and search for 'projects' on your next co-op.
In my opinion, if you want people to be able to program, then you should think of your brother/sister or neighbour participating in the programming world. First the apprentice sees is the Presentation of the application, then it's the data they'll see, and lastly you could bother them with the algorithms used for the data-flow-processes. If they can handle this, bother them with quicksorts and hashtables. Can they handle that? Let them enter the world of Lex and Yacc.
What you can see is that levels are going from up to down. Not everybody is able to program at deep levels, but everybody should be able to make themselves useful. In order to do this, I think certain programming model (i.e. based on n-tier systems) should be made. People can focus into the level they want, and hop upwards and downwards at their own will. Perhaps a new programming model should be designed for something like this, I'm not sure it's possible...
Easy, the plus operator '+' is something which can't be proven mathematically, this means that 1+1=2 is an axiom - an unprovable assumption, maybe we could call it 'rule'. Such is the case with negative and positive numbers, change the rules and you will find an X^2 number smaller than zero.
I must say that Mathematics is a very well researched science, we cannot prove that a super-mathematics does not exist. Is this a troll? I'm just comparing Boolean Logic with Fuzzy Logic; could a new science replace the maths we know today?
This is a trivial one... and a bit sneaky as well. An 'today's' problem of mankind is, that we can't define the characteristics of 'information', that's why you see all funny stuff in the MPAA vs 2600.org conflict (you know - painting pictures with DeCSS code, or making MP3's with DeCSS Lyrics).
Lacking the proof of 'what-is-information' does not mean that *erasing* and *encrypting* information is the same thing, you cannot prove that, not even when fundamental knowledge is missing. You can't confuse cold and heat, not even when you have not invented fire yet.
I've seen this coming for the past 1.5 years, I'm even surprised it took so long. The article means that political lobbies have been started. MS is fighting the battle from multiple sides, they also want to illegalize the reselling of naked PC's. Now they have started the lobby to illegalize Open Source? Everybody thinks 'well, they can't', but they might find a way. I compare this with the Napster case, everything good for Disney's revenue is legal, everything threatening Disney's revenue is illegal. Does this mean I can be charged for not buying certain products in future? I think this is possible within the next 150 years...
Feels like somebody else is owning your computer. I can pay something like $2000 for a PC with Windows and software here in Europe - that's a medium luxerious system - and somebody else is acting like they own it? If people succeed to read this policy and succeed to understand it, I don't think Juno has much future...
typedef struct { ; ; ; ; ;
int nitems
ELM MyArray[1]
} nasty_example_t
nasty_example_t *pleuropvar
pleuropvar = (nasty_example*) malloc( (size_t) 512 )
Perhaps I'm not much of a yahoo user, but I remember this being a search engine... If the search engine vanishes, then Google takes over, because no-one will ever aquire Google right?
What's happening man? I mean, Britney is not a musician or a vocalist, she's a couple of dancing tits! (Okay, nothing against tits there, but you get the point). Musicians are pushed to the background, 'idols' are pushed to the front because marketing laws say that quality is defined by the user's experience - what does one feel during product usage. Does this mean that entertainment industries will sell you life-styles in future, aren't they already doing this?
The only party getting rich is the distributor, which isn't Napster.
The article in the above link tells us that the RIAA wanted something which is technologically impossible, but refused to listen to the techs. They needed a watermarking system, and they want it now.
I think the great thing about these French guys actually publishing their work is actually putting the genie out of the bottle. SDMI tried to prevent that in the agreement of the contest - one was not allowed to publish the hack methods or results and they'll likely enforce this by law. Fortunately, we here in Europe are concious of the fact that US does not apply here - forgetting this is a mistake which US corporates have made before (i.e. DeCSS).
The most important surviving factor for Suse, RedHat, Slackware et al. is community acceptance. I understand that the community has a moral problem with this license, so my guess is that Suse will come with an explanation for this licensing scheme, or maybe retreat (sorry folks, I guess it didn't work).
If they're going to introduce this in the Netherlands, I will sue the state personally. The state can simply not force me to pay for a product for which I've sworn myself to boycot (and that will be Holywood, Microsoft, and the majority of RIAA products). I think the state needs to prove to me, that the 'artists' whom get protected actually receive the money I pay extra for digital media. I think the state needs to prove that Microsoft et al does not receive a penny from my pocket. A law like this simply takes away my freedom of speech - the right to boycot a product and a company. With extra taxing laws on digital media, this boycot is simply impossible.
I think you're right, they would not find a backdoor, but rather a back-harbour...
Warp is cool, but hasn't much software support, well it didn't back in 1995 when I removed it from my HD. Linux does have software support, which is often free. I think Ballmer here is speaking about the server market so the 'Linux-customer' can be considered a specialist.
Does not sound very likely as most moons are much smaller than their planet, I believe pluto is an exception to this. If these moons 're too big, they'll crash into the planet.
Some point I must admit, it is very hard to draw conclusions as the evidence is quite circumstantial, as what I've heard of this technology anyway. Hopefully more advanced technology will provide more confident answers.
With this slashdot story and this story from The Register, it is clear that Microsoft is now fighting the battle at both ends. A new PC means a new Operating system. Thanks God that Microsoft isn't in the automobile business, a new set of wheels would mean a new car right?
You probably did not understand my sarcasm there... Some press articles claim for Java to have failed on the propriaty thing. This is not *my* opinion, but you must admit, things are going well for Java since Sun loosened the license restrictions, before that Java struggled to become popular.
Does this mean only JVC sells this stuff? As ever, the industry needs standards, for competition.One of the 'official' reasons for Java to have 'failed' is that Sun wanted a industry standard propriaty language. Fail Fail Fail! Did not work sorry. Won't work for any recordable media either.
Suppose only JVC sells this stuff: no competition and probably too expensive
Suppose others sell this stuff: Take over the technique, and service it into new products, like a PC HDTV video player (and recordables ofcourse). Lets buy two of these machines and start copying. I know stories of drugsdealers who switched to selling illegal CD-ROMS when internet wasn't much popular yet, this will happen for this new video technology if more conveniant ways for piracy is not found or possible. The internet will then only be used as a broker - you search, we supply.
nah...
Content does not have to be doomed... It may just be the new economy to be doomed. No one realizes that the internet does not -have- to be used to make money
Revenue protection due to the transparent system mentioned in the article means that:
* The entertainment industry has a secure income even though not everybody uses the product. So they can produce even less quality than they do now.
* As a concious not-consumer of TV-shows, and Holywood films, I pay for their product, I don't think I want that - I'm boycotting their crap while I'm paying for it?
* Third world countries whom will never cooperate with the ISP regulations can watch any movie, while the west pays. For small countries this shouldn't be much of a problem, but demographics teach that there are second and third world countries with millions of people on-line
To be short - don't think this is feasible at all.
CIO: Chief Information Officer knows the (business) needs of the company. ICT is considered to be a service with company performance as goal. The CIO does not communicate with technical guys very often. The CIO is focusses on _business_ needs - company profit in performance and costs supported with an ICT solution to the problem.
CTO: Chief Technology Officer knows about all projects within the company at technical level. He does not define the requested service, although he communicates feasibility, performance, technical problems with the CIO. The CTO also does study for new technologies, to be used in new projects. The CTO is focussed at the technical face of ICT
So in this company, the CIO and CTO actually do have different task
Always nice to know that somebody is thining of the next-generation-nerds ;)
China!