Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Waiting for MS to underbid (Score 1) 319

I actually like Unity but at leaston my hardware (core2duo t7200 thinkpad Intel graphics), it ran dog slow. I even went so far as to creates couple of my own indicator apps in python and customized my dock icons with custom menus. But on lark last weekend, i wwanted gnome2 so I installed debian stable on another partition and it was llike buying a nnew ccomputer. I mean the performance upgrade was unbelievable. Needless to say, I havent looked back.

Now all you need to do is fix that keyboard driver and you'll be all set!

Comment Re:weed out the weak (Score 1) 473

as most people in the western world have no conception of how to survive even a plane crash

Care to elaborate? One presumes that you're speaking from a position of authority here. Which plane crash(es) have you survived? What advice do you have to others that might find themselves in the same predicament? Oh, and do you have a newsletter?

Regards,

dj

Comment Re:be smart (Score 1) 283

The act of asking a question shows you want to learn, understand that someone else may have the answer and are willing to listen.

Not necessarily. The act of asking a question may show that, depending on the question and how it is asked. It might also show that the person asking is lazy, and doesn't care to find an answer on his/her own. If you are asked the same question by the same person repeatedly, it might indicate that you're not answering it clearly or that the person is incapable of understanding the answer.

I do agree that believing that the mere act of asking a question is a problem itself is ridiculous, however.

Regards,

dj

Comment Re:oops (Score 2) 328

Maybe this comes from the facile suggestion that 'corporations are people' because of Citizens United, but it has no bearing on actual corporate accounting or taxes.

You seem to be arguing that this is a good thing. It is not, and here's why: Corporations are citizens, at least in the US, and have been for a very long time. You summed up the problem very nicely: "it has no bearing on actual corporate accounting or taxes."

In effect, the US now has a two-tier citizenry - the "human citizens" and the "corporate citizens", yet corporate citizens get preferential treatment under the law.

As someone already pointed out, a corporation pays income tax on profits, which is fundamentally defined as "Gross income minus expenses", of which salary/wage costs are included, and so are immediately removed from gross profit.

Now, consider the case of a typical human citizen. Their income is considered to be pure profit at the outset, despite the fact that, in an accounting sense, it is a simple exchange of time/labor/skills for money, and so would, in any sane world, be an even exchange.

They are not able to avail themselves of the same treatment as corporate citizens, because according to the IRS, their time has no value as an expense as individuals, even though it does for the corporations that employ them.

Call me crazy, but if that doesn't prove that corporate citizens are given preferential treatment over human citizens in the US, I don't know what does.

You aren't supposed to pay 35% of revenue. Taxes are paid on profits.

That leads me to one of my favorite quotes, from Animal Farm: "All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others." Or, in this case: "All citizens are equal but some citizens are more equal than others."

Human citizens are told what their expenses can be as a percentage of gross income/profit, in the form of deductions in set amounts, because for human citizens they are treated as one and the same: Gross income for human citizens equals net profit, for the most part.

But the salaried guy is only responsible for himself and his family. He doesn't have to cover payroll.

Sure he does, only the payroll for him is individual - he covers it by working. If he doesn't work, he doesn't get paid.

Unless you're suggesting that corporations shouldn't have deductions?

*I* certainly am not, I have no problems in general with the way corporate citizens are allowed to calculate profits. The problem that I have is that because of the two-tiered nature of citizenry in the US, such laws are now inherently biased in favor of corporations, and not only when it comes to taxation.

You, and people like you, believe that corporate citizens should be given special treatment, because of the benefits they bring to the economy. However, such benefits could not be realized without the human citizens that work for them. Why shouldn't they be treated equally under the law? After all, unlike corporate citizens, which can be effectively immortal, human citizens give up the only thing that any human being truly possesses: Their life, expressed in part as time working, in exchange for the money needed to live in our society.

Such an exchange, while necessary, can hardly be considered profit when viewed in human terms.

And therein lies the true problem, I think. We've lost the concept of individual human dignity, the idea that human lives are valuable, and replaced it with the amorality of corporations upon whom most of us now depend to live.We've given them unparalleled power over our lives, over our government, with next to no accountability, and in return have become serfs at best, slaves at worst, to legal fictions created by the greedy and self-centered, aided and abetted by the politicians we've trusted for so long to represent us.

Regards,

dj

Comment Re:Finally! (Score 3, Insightful) 179

Now it's mostly just crap about who pissed on who's patents

Well, that's marginally better than the copyright wars that reigned here not so long ago... or the global warming debate... or... what was before that? I forget.

I imagine, however, that those generated more revenue. Patent battles among corporations are pretty much a battle among giants, and most of us here are just nerdly peons, fairly removed from such. They're gonna do whatever they want, work it out in the end, and the rest of us will get shat upon, one way or another.

From here in the "cheap seats"? Shit is shit, regardless of who is dumping it on you, or so it seems to me.

Cynically,

dj

Comment Re:That's too bad... (Score 0) 258

Hi,

As much as it's deemed crass to reply to one's post, I'd also like to say this: I have the SAME opinion of Bill Gates, albeit for different reasons.

My opinion of Bill Gates, and Microsoft, is that they were the first to release software that was "good enough", which resulted in the current unreliability of software in general.

So, I say this: Bill Gates? I hope that you contract a cancer that is uncurable, slowly progressing, and painful. And, further, when you die? I hope that you will burn in the fires of Hell, for all Eternity, screaming in agony that will never stop, for your greed, your arrogance.

Regards,

dj

Comment Re:That's too bad... (Score 1) 258

It's much worse than that, it means that I can't buy a copy of OSX and install it on my own non-Apple hardware without violating their EULA which is now legally enforceable.

You say this as though it is a BAD thing. It is not. Let Apple retain their proprietary OS, while pretending to be open and standards-compliant. It is, after all, not well suited for business: OS X doesn't integrate well with ANY business/enterprise networks, and in fact is less secure than Windows or Linux when any MIS/IT department attempts to do so.

Given Apple's insistence on lesser default security at the network level, to insure backward compatibility with its previous insecure network implementations, this represents a HUGE security risk for enterprise networks.

In addition, Apple has not made ANY appreciable efforts to correct this, leading to what one can only deem an "attack by the clueless upon corporate efforts to ensure the security of their networks, simply by the ever-increasing popularity of their computers in the coporate world, mostly by sales people, who are, by definition, the least technically competent people in a company, but often the most influential:" "I generate a LOT of revenue for this company, and so I SHOULD be able to have whatever computer I wish, and I want an Apple computer, 'cause it is cool, pretty and enhances my stature"

My personal experience, with regards to those that insist upon using Apple computers? They have NO appreciation of corporate network security, at all. For them, Apple has no security problems, ever. Integration with the corporate network, established for the company for which they work, to create a secure, stable corporate infrastructure under which ALL those that need access/use of such? ANY security risks are NOT their concern: They are completely oblivious, even when presented with security flaws.

They simply don't care, you see. All they want is to be able to use Apple computers, because they think that they are "the best", in their estimation, regardless.

So, we deal with them now, in my MIS department, as best as we can. They are, in general, the most clueless, least technically competent/aware users, and they have NO consideration at all for anyone besides themselves in the company. Most of them are technically incompetent for the jobs for which they have been hired, and cannot, and will not, abide the company's TOS/AUP: They're all "special flowers", you see, ostensibly hired for the skills/knowledge/expertise that they would bring to the company... but, they refuse to use the standard tools, which integrate perfectly not only into our corporate network, but also serve them in doing their jobs, because we in MIS have created them so. Because they ARE, in their estimation, exceptional, and so MIS should accommodate them, regardless.

Sadly, this has been my experience with EVERYONE that has insisted upon using an Apple computer in our company: THEIR needs/desires, come first, always, and when they cannot do their jobs with an Apple computer? MIS is to blame, of course. They have NO concept of anything beyond that, No appreciation of anything beyond that, and their needs/desires.

And of course, this IS what Apple encourages: Their mantra is "Think Different" [sic], after all. And, by "different", they mean "You're allowed to use your Apple computer to do whatever you want."

And you know what? I don't have a problem with that, when it comes to personal use: I use my personally-owned Windows and Linux computers, as I choose, too.

However, when it comes to my work computers? I use them to do my job, and I do so, in accordance with my company's AUP. ALL of our current Apple users think that such doesn't apply to them. We're dealing with Apple users that think that they are entitled to bootleg copies of Windows, because they cannot do their jobs otherwise.They not only bootleg Windows, they bootleg copies of VMWare fusion, for their convenience, apparently with the same rationalization: Since they cannot do their jobs, with their Apple computers, it's OK to bootleg the software that permits them to do so, regardless of the fact that it's illegal, and so makes our company liable.

And all of this, despite the fact that MIS can provide them with a perfectly functional Windows computer, whose software is legal.

So I say, again: Let Apple win. Fuck "choice", when it comes to OS X: Let them have it, and let them keep their cloistered world.

I only hope that everyone else will see what they're doing, and encapsulate them, isolate them. The rest of the computing world is converging, slowly, working towards integration and interaction, albeit slowly and reluctantly.

Apple doesn't want that, and never has: Their goal, Steve Jobs' vision, is one where Apple rules over everything.

My personal hope? I hope Steve Jobs' body rejects his transplanted liver, and that he dies a slow, painful death, for his arrogant insistence that the "Apple way" is the only way, for his ability to convince so many that this is true, leading to SO much work for so many in corporate IT/MIS as a result. He's an asshole. He's ALWAYS been an asshole, albeit a charismatic one. He's NEVER worked in the trenches, never had to deal with the results of his influence in the real world, never been accountable for anything, so far as I can see.

After all, the world deems him a "visionary", and that apparently absolves him of all responsibility.

Fuck that, and fuck him.

Regards,

dj

Comment Re:5th Amendment (Score 1) 885

Say hello to the new boss, same as the old boss.

You know, that shit's 40 years old now. Put a lid on it...

Well, putting a lid on it would at least block some of the stench of the Federal Government's shitty actions over the years.

Comment Re:Ha ha ha (Score 1) 436

And just like the Federal reserve note - an IOU to pay gold, it doesn't pay anything back.

A Federal Reserve Note is *not* "an IOU to pay gold". It's fiat money, and has no inherent value.

But, you don't have to believe me, you can read it for yourself on the Federal Reserve's web site: "And, at the base of the financial system, with the abandonment of gold convertibility in the 1930s, legal tender became backed--if that is the proper term--by the fiat of the state." - http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/speeches/2002/200201163/default.htm

The site used to have a FAQ page that explicitly addressed this, but it appears to have vanished. You can, however, search for "fiat money" on it, and find all kinds of interesting things.

Slashdot Top Deals

The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh

Working...