The spirit of the Internet isn't gone - merely retreated to the high-tide mark.
Feb 22, 2002
The spirit being, of course, the idea that Internet surfers are much, much more than pocketbooks to be plumbed. More than commodities to be traded. More than passive recipients for the speakers’ opinions.
Google, for one, makes a firm, no-bullshit statement regarding the non-use of popup ads on its site. They also provide information about how Internet surfers can complain about intrusive popup ads.
I like that quite a lot…
Permalink
What next? Patenting certain series of keystrokes? (Maybe I shouldn't give them ideas...)
Feb 11, 2002
Did I read this right? BTexact, the research arm of UK company BTInternet, has claimed to have a patent on — wait for it — hyperlinks.
There’s no story on this over at the Register, and they’re fairly equal-opportunity when it comes to laughing at Stupid Tech Company Tricks. Still, I’d love to know more about this. ZDNet is likely telling just enough to start some kind of grassroots movement. I find it a little scary to believe that amateur webmasters would have to pay for creating hyperlinks on their sites. Perhaps BT is hoping to milk money out of the companies that create and/or market HTML authoring tools.
If that’s the case, let’s hear it for hand-coding.
Permalink
So now for something technology-related.
Feb 08, 2002
I haven’t visited the IT news world in over a week. The trade isn’t hopping as much as it might have been during the height of the dotcom boom, but it’s kicking. Now, it’s just easier to see what’s going on, with out all the notices of new companies, nascent-but-stupid technology ideas, turf wars, and whatnot.
Permalink
Yet more pointless personality tests.
Feb 04, 2002
Took another personality test today (I’ve taken a few of these for laughs, actually, just haven’t bothered posting the results unless they were truly interesting.) I’m not sure whether it’s the subject matter of the tests, or the results, that are beginning to unnerve me more. At any rate, here’s the latest round of results:
Okay, this is pretty silly. It just chooses which movie you’ll “live in” when you “grow up”. This doesn’t tell you much that you didn’t already know (or suspect, at any rate) when you started.
That’s it, NO MORE PERSONALITY TESTS.
Might I pitch over Legolas and let his adoring fangirls have him (hey “Stacy”, the elfhood’s over here…) and keep the sylvan home? That sounds rather nice, actually. And honestly, he fancies those hairyfooted halflings — though Sam will kill him if he tries anything.
Permalink
The fable of the astronomer and the computer company.
Feb 01, 2002
Tech companies, notably computer firms, have a history of code-naming their products, partially to protect from industrial espionage, but more out of a sense of whimsy. Each company follows its own theme: SGI (Silicon Graphics), for example, used the names of beers, and would get the company to donate free beer to SGI employee functions for the duration of the product’s development cycle. In the early 1990s, Apple computer would name its computers after individuals. This began when Steve Jobs named the predecesor to the Macintosh after his illegitimate daughter, Lisa.
In 1994, Apple began developing the Power Macintosh 7100. They chose the internal code name “Sagan”, referring to astronomer Carl Sagan. Sagan found out about the name, and objected — vigorously. With lawyers and everything. Change the name, he said. I don’t want people to falsely believe that I endorse this product, he said. It’s infringement. Disheartened, the folks at Apple Computer finally changed the name.
They called it “butthead astronomer”.
The moral of the story is: be careful what you wish for. You may get it.
Codicil:
Carl Sagan sued Apple for libel over the new name, claiming that it subjected him to contempt and ridicule. Sagan lost this lawsuit, too.
Other References
- Everymac: Apple Power Macintosh 7100 Specs
- Other codenames were Butthead Astronomer & Lawyers are Wimps.
- Wired: Lighten Up, Carl
- Remember when we reported on Carl Sagan’s new nickname over at Apple Computer (for your edification, it was “butthead astronomer.” Apple developers had code-named a secret new computer “Sagan,” only to be threatened by Sagan’s lawyers that the use of his name on a product, even in prototype stage, was infringement). Well, ol’ Carl’s now suing Apple for libel, claiming that the “butthead astronomer” moniker is defamatory and subjects him to “hatred, contempt, ridicule, and obloquy.” The Wall Street Journal pointed out that the outcome of the case will hinge on the definition of “butthead.” Thanks for helping us understand, Carl.
Watch out for meek mild mannered computer programmers. We are not nice people when pushed into a corner…
Permalink
It's all really very simple.
Feb 01, 2002
ANARCHISM: You have two cows. The cows decide you have no right to do anything with their milk and leave to form their own society.
ANARCHISM: You have two cows. You steal your neighbor’s bull and ignore the government.
ANARCHISM: You have two cows. You keep the cows and steal another one. You ignore the government.
ANARCHISM: You have two cows. Either you sell the milk at a fair price or your neighbors try to take the cows and kill you.
ANARCHISM: You have two cows. Your neighbor hits you over the head with a brick, steals your cows, then shoots them for fun. You later discover that he is a Nazi.
ARISTOCRATISM: You have two cows. You sell both and buy one really big cow…with a pedigree.
ARTIST, VISUAL: You have two cows. You stuff them and put them in glass display boxes. In London.
BRITISH: You have two cows. They are crazy. You try to sell them in Europe.
BRITISH, MAJOR: You have two cows. One has BSE. You get a vet to give the other one the all clear, and then declare there is no problem from BSE in your country.
BUREAUCRACY: You have two cows. To register them, you fill in 17 forms in triplicate and don’t have time to milk them.
BUREAUCRACY: You have two cows. At first the government regulates what you can feed them and when you can milk them. Then it pays you not to milk them. Then it takes both, shoots one, milks the other and pours the milk down the drain. Then it requires you to fill out forms accounting for the missing cows.
BUREAUCRACY, EUROPEAN UNION: You have two cows. The EU loses one cow, milks the other and then spills the milk.
BUREAUCRACY, UNITED STATES: You have two cows. The government takes both, loses one while moving it to a farm in Puerto Rico and forgets to milk the other.
CANADIANISM: You have two cows. The bank takes both of them, shoots one, throws away the milk and you shoot yourself.
CAPITALISM: You don’t have any cows. The bank will not lend you money to buy cows, because you don’t have any cows to put up as collateral.
CAPITALISM, AMERICAN: You have two cows. You sell one of them, and buy a bull. The cow and bull have a great love life; you sell the movie rights to Hollywood. Then you go into real estate.
CAPITALISM, ENRON STYLE: You have two cows. You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax exemption for five cows. The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company. The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more.
CAPITALISM, HONG KONG: You have two cows. You sell three of them to your publicly-listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt / equity swap with associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax deduction for keeping five cows. The milk rights of six cows are transferred via a Panamanian intermediary to a Cayman Islands company secretly owned by the majority shareholder, who sells the rights to all seven cows’ milk back to the listed company. The annual report says that the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more. Meanwhile, you kill the two cows because the feng shui is bad.
CENTRALISM: You have two cows. And a problem finding them in the middle of the field with 100,000,000 other cows.
CONSERVATIVISM: You have two cows. You freeze the milk and embalm the cows.
CONSERVATIVISM: You have two cows. You lock them up, and charge people to look at them.
COMMUNISM: You have two cows. The government takes both of them and gives you part of the milk.
COMMUNISM: You have two cows. The government takes both cows. The government sells the milk in government stores. You can’t afford the milk. You wither away.
More..!
Permalink
