Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Please automate accounting more! (Score 1) 414

It isn't solved I assure you. EDI is useful but not easy or simple enough to be universally implemented.

I meant in terms of the message formats, not in terms of the existing EDI "solutions" (if a vendor says "solution" at you, run the other way). That's how to provide the requisite interoperability with existing EDI systems. Speak their language. That's specifically one of the wheels I wouldn't want to reinvent. No sense trying to design a whole new protocol when there are existing standards (even if they are the limp, gated standards everybody in the world except computer engineers seems to favor).

The idea would be to write an EDI extension for QuickBooks. Something light weight and as unobtrusive as possible that automatically interacts with an email address to send and receive data in EDI format while maintaining audit trails of incoming and outgoing messages and providing interfaces to compose and send outbound EDI data automatically assembled from QuickBooks as well as display inbound data, confirm the details with a user, and automatically integrate the results in QuickBooks. I saw some crap about how EDI is better thought of as a system than a data format, and that's all well and good, but I'm talking about minimizing the "system" part and enabling the data format.

I think we can safely assume that Intuit doesn't have a brain in their skull, so it will have to be done by a third party. More to the point, even if they did, it would probably end up being one of these horrific "solutions" that quickly becomes a process disaster. Better that someone else does it who isn't burdened with their idiot corporate culture.

Comment: Re:Please automate accounting more! (Score 1) 414

Yep! Total chicken and egg problem though perhaps not an unsolvable one. You'd basically have to make something that is easy to start and easy to use and falls back gracefully for customers not using it yet. Plug in to popular accounting software packages and maybe a web interchange.

The standardized format part appears to be a solved problem. The Wikipedia article on EDI is rather sparse, but the standards evidently do exist. Rather too many of them, I'd say. Which one is actually likely to be useful for the majority of people? I can't tell from the article. (And naturally there's a gate-keeping committee who thinks they can charge $850 for ASCX12. What a joke.)

Extensions to QuickBooks does seem like the logical route to take. However, I personally have no interest in running a web interchange, especially since EDI via email and FTP are standardized. Given my allergy to "screw the customer as hard as possible" business models, I'd sooner write a system that takes advantage of communication systems businesses already have, rather than try to collect extra.

Comment: Re:Please automate accounting more! (Score 1) 414

One of my clients continues to use QB Pro 2000 to this day.

That's a large part of the problem that I left unspoken. Finding an SDK for current versions is difficult enough, but a great many people refuse to play the upgrade game and are running one of the many many prior versions. Supporting enough of them to be useful makes the problem a great deal harder, especially when the upgrade treadmill means the vendors are intentionally eliminating access to SDKs for older versions.

Comment: Re:Please automate accounting more! (Score 1) 414

Want to make a fortune? Come up with an EDI type system that doesn't cost an arm and leg and allows businesses to exchange invoices, delivery information, order acknowledgements, etc automatically between businesses of any size and that integrates with existing accounting systems. Start with Quickbooks and Sage.

I want to make a fortune, but when I looked, I found all links to PeachTree's SDK are dead.

And that right there is the reason why what you want doesn't exist and won't exist. The two businesses that own the accounting market for small and medium businesses are focused exclusively on maintaining an "upgrade" treadmill and milking you for all the money they can squeeze out of you. Making your job more efficient is not even an interest, let alone a priority.

I might be interested in adding EDI read and write capabilities to something like PostBooks (if it doesn't already have it), but Intuit and Sage's business models are toxic. I have no interest in chasing after annual cosmetic upgrades and squeezing through the tiny keyholes they set up around your data.

Comment: Re:The fossil fuel "subsidies" are a lie. (Score 1) 338

The IMF opinion is indeed nonsensical, but fossil fuels are subsidized.

In 2009:

        Tenaska's Taylorville Energy Center – loan coverage $2.6 billion for a 730 MW coal-fired IGCC with CCS.
        Leucadia's Indiana Gasification SNG project – loan coverage of $1.6 billion to produce Substitute Natural Gas (syngas) from coal for sale to customers in Indiana, with proposed carbon capture for enhanced oil recovery.
        Leucadia's Mississippi Gasification SNG project – loan coverage of $1.689 billion to produce syngas from petroleum coke feedstock, for sale to electric utilities in the region, with proposed carbon capture for enhanced oil recovery.

Subsidies identical to the type received by Tesla and Solyndra both.

In July 2013, the US Department of Energy made available $8 billion in loan guarantees to the fossil fuel industry, again, the identical type of subsidy received by Tesla. For an industry that has been recording record profits for the past 6 years.

So either stop claiming Solyndra received a subsidy or stop claiming fossil fuel industries don't receive any. You can't have it both ways.

Comment: Re:Climate engineering? (Score 0) 338

Why do so many people confuse weather with climate?

Because climate IS weather? It's just lots of it averaged over time. This winter is a valid data point that will drag down the average temperature for the decade, and that statistical behavior is perfectly acceptable. What did you think you were measuring, anyway? Tree rings?

Comment: Re:Power? (Score 1) 630

by Areyoukiddingme (#46708739) Attached to: Navy Debuts New Railgun That Launches Shells at Mach 7

You need massive banks of capacitors to store and then discharge that energy very rapidly. There is going to be a lot of heat generated. The lifetime of the capacitors and heat dissipation ability are probably the limiting factors.

On the plus side, you're floating on top of a very large, very agreeable heat sink.

Comment: Re:Fuck him and the rest of the Republicans (Score 1) 1109

by Areyoukiddingme (#46699747) Attached to: Mozilla CEO Firestorm Likely Violated California Law

Political litmus tests for employment have been a big no-no for a damn good reason.

Sure. In 9 states. In the other 41, it's legal. In Washington, California, Colorado, Michigan, New York, North Dakota, Oregon, Louisiana, and Florida it's illegal to fire someone for political activity or for not voting for your employer's preferred candidate, or for belonging to a particular party (one or more of those protections, depending on the state).

The linked blog post is by an employment attorney, so it's reasonably sure to be correct. Some states are more specific than others about what specific political activity can not be used to justify firing. Some extend protection to all activity. Others are specific only to voting. Your Republican in South Carolina example is perfectly legal.

Never trust a computer you can't repair yourself.

Working...