business

The power of Linux comes from its adaptability (to the will of the system administrator). That's what Windows and MacOS X cannot offer. Instead, they offer a one-size-fits-all solution. Linux, on the other hand, offers a multitude of distros (cf DistroWatch http://distrowatch.com/)

The problem is that it takes a long time and/or a lot of experience to achieve the customization of Linux needed for one's evolving needs, let alone a whole society's. If we want the Linux userbase to grow, all users shouldn't be required to be system administrators.

1. If I own a physical copy of the album (BluRay, DVD, CD, tape, LP), does that entitle me to freely download or stream the same album?
2. If I purchase or am entitled to a digital copy of the album, can I lend it to my friends? my wife? my daughter?
3. Can I store my legal digital copy on a streaming server for me to enjoy anywhere I go?

Affirmative answers to these questions would open up new ways of distributing music content that no one seems to be contemplating today.

It just hit me that all the countries that congratulate themselves on upholding freedom of speech and even try to shove it down other people's throats have a blatant breach of that principle right under their very eyes: the secrecy practices of corporations. When an employee is hired or fired, he signs a non-disclosure agreement concerning the activities of the company he joined. If he breaks that agreement, he is liable to legal pursuit, from the same legal system which holds freedom of speech as a sacred principle.

I wish to unveil before an unsuspecting population a plan to reconcile P2P technology with the interests of content producers: music labels, production firms, software firms, book publishers, etc. I do so at the risk of being laughed out of my own blog.

The Microsoft bid to acquire Yahoo! is the latest desperate move from a dinosaur to avoid extinction. Actually, the only thing keeping that dinosaur alive right now is its cash, because it is plain to see that Microsoft just doesn't "get" the Web. It drove Hotmail to the ground years ago, it created a single sign-on system that everybody hates, and I don't think Live.com is much better than MSN.com - even the name is as bland.

One of the most frustrating phenomena of business is the ASAP syndrome. No matter how high or low in the corporate hierarchy, every task is urgent, and no time can be spent thinking about it with the team. Decisions are made on the fly, with little regard to their side effects or dependencies. All the recipient of the request has to do is comply, putting aside his own plan and adopting blindly that of the manager to get to work NOW NOW NOW.

Any process carried out by more than one human is a social process. One could make the observation that organically, every social process has evolved ethics surrounding the activities of the process. Ethics have the role of lubricating the process and ensuring better overall human benefit. Here are some examples in no particular order:

1. Netiquette
2. Craftsmanship
3. The Hippocratic Oath

(In my opinion, these examples are manifestations of ethics, in specific socio-professional settings).

Now since ethics play such an obviously important role in ensuring process quality, why aren't they an indivisible part of corporate training?