<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>schestowitz.com &#187; Op-Ed</title>
	<atom:link href="https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/category/op-ed/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog</link>
	<description>Reflections on Technology</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2026 16:47:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.40</generator>
	<item>
		<title>In Defence of Publication Reform</title>
		<link>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2011/07/23/real-worth-of-research/</link>
		<comments>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2011/07/23/real-worth-of-research/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Jul 2011 16:51:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Roy Schestowitz]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Op-Ed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://schestowitz.com/Weblog/?p=2499</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[t various stages throughout my career (I am 29 now), myself and others pondered starting a blog about Open Access, Open Data or open research (opening one&#8217;s lab, including data, methods, etc.), but since I already spend more time than I can afford advocating GNU/Linux, I ended up spending a lot of my energy fighting [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img title="A" src="/IMG/Caps/a.png" alt="A" hspace="0" vspace="4" align="left" border="0"/>t various stages throughout my career (I am 29 now), myself and others pondered starting a blog about Open Access, Open Data or open research (opening one&#8217;s lab, including data, methods, etc.), but since I already spend more time than I can afford advocating GNU/Linux, I ended up spending a lot of my energy fighting against software patents. This is one aspect among several involving the sharing and transparency of the sciences. There is of course also a dimension associated with copyrights and despite its importance I no longer have time to pursue the issue; many people already do so anyway. To put the core argument succinctly, nowadays when we have the Internet and we have a presentation layer such as the World Wide Web (for exchange of inter-connected rich media), we no longer depend on many analogue technologies and the notion of scarcity must cope and catch up with what&#8217;s available. To expect people to publish their findings only in paper form with pagination is to pretend that we are locked into legacy, which we should not. Computer Vision is considerably limited by paper. There are much better and faster ways of getting messages across, especially in this age of information overload. Moreover, travelling for presentation to a crowd (conference) is less necessary now that many people&#8217;s Internet connections permit video streaming at a good resolution. Romanticising over the nostalgia which is 20<sup>th</sup> century-esque research is no longer beneficial as it leads to inheriting inherent limitations. I was reminded of this in an IRC conversation last night. It was agreed upon that the theory about publishers exploiting academics to write, review and even edit entire publications for the publishers to profit from at the expense of those academics is something that needs to be stopped. Many academics these days have their own homepages and sometimes their blogs too. They can publish a lot of material there and let the quality/accuracy be determined by citation, e.g. something like the PageRank system which merely inherits the ideas of algorithms before its time (take away Google&#8217;s/Stanford&#8217;s patent while at it). The issue of course is that people cannot reference papers by Internet addresses, at least not by conventional means. The idea that papers should be accessible through libraries though is outdated as libraries too are going somewhat extinct and the speed of working there is inferior. Other than self pride and honour from peers, what incentive is there really to being heavily involved in the publication industry which benefits publishers and offers writers not so much exposure anymore? Fewer people seem to be searching journals; they use external search engines or Wikipedia instead (it&#8217;s multi-lingual). The debate becomes ever more relevant now that Aaron Schwartz is being hounded for just doing his job.</p>
<p>Eventually, prices will converge somewhere around zero not because academic work is worthless but because people&#8217;s goal is to share and disseminate their ideas, not to serve someone else&#8217;s paywall. <em>The real worth of research is derived from its reach, not its scarcity</em>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2011/07/23/real-worth-of-research/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Scary Face of Free Software?</title>
		<link>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2007/11/19/scary-face-of-free/</link>
		<comments>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2007/11/19/scary-face-of-free/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2007 07:55:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Roy Schestowitz]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Op-Ed]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2007/11/19/scary-face-of-free/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why are people so scared of free open source software anyway?]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="/IMG/Caps/o.png" border="0" align="left" hspace="0" vspace="4" alt="O" /><b>NE pet peeve of mine has a lot to do with stereotypes</b>. To give an example, consider an old <abbr title="Fear, uncertainty and doubt">FUD</abbr> phrase which says that open source programs are not user friendly. Well, open source is a development method (Free software has more to do with the licences and distribution as well). Buy why on earth does a development method affect user interfaces? It does not. Just because you close your code and take it away from users (who can otherwise bring valuable feedback in the form of patches) won&#8217;t necessarily (and magically) fix a broken GUI.</p>
<p><b>There is no correlation between level of openness and user experience</b>. It is a myth.</p>
<p>The type of FUD mentioned above is just one among many. FUD changes perception. it scares people. Here is a message sent to me by a friend (Harvey) about the fear of leaving Microsoft Windows.</p>
<blockquote><p>
Have you ever written an article about the fear of change?</p>
<p>I think people like myself who have finally become adept at using the Microsoft OS, hesitate to switch. Itâ€™s analogous to birthing your second baby, especially if delivering the first was a painful experience.</p>
<p>Apprehension and fear are normal mind blockers. However, I would guess that the younger generation with years of computer expertise is more daring, and therefore more willing to experiment and acquiring something new and better than what they now use. Thatâ€™s probably why I-pods,  Blackberries, games and other devices are still selling like hot cakes.</p>
<p>You might want to expand, correct and add to this gibberish, and to make an article out of it.
</p></blockquote>
<p>Well, many articles have been written about the barriers to GNU/Linux adoption on the desktop. They address the issue of fear as well. It is always important to ask oneself, &#8220;am I being told the truth, or is someone trying to manipulate me using scare tactics?&#8221; In many cases, it&#8217;s the latter. Vested interest is to blame.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2007/11/19/scary-face-of-free/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Migrating to Linux in the Enterprise via Standards</title>
		<link>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2007/07/19/migrating-to-linux/</link>
		<comments>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2007/07/19/migrating-to-linux/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2007 06:21:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Roy Schestowitz]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Op-Ed]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2007/07/19/migrating-to-linux/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An essay of mine (published on Monday)]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The State of Massachusetts is nowadays deciding on the issue of open standards and whether to accept or reject a vendor-specific format, namely OOXML. A <a href="http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3688891">new article discusses how a decision about choice of format</a> can affect the ability of a business to free itself from the shackles of one single application and platform. From the article: &#8220;An impulsive and immediate migration to Linux can sometimes lead to disappointment. Ambitious businesses are sometimes led to believe that their data can merely be be dumped from one platform onto another, but the reality is a little more complex than this.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2007/07/19/migrating-to-linux/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Quote of the Day &#8212; Why Free Software Suits Business Better</title>
		<link>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2007/03/09/free-software-means-business/</link>
		<comments>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2007/03/09/free-software-means-business/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2007 07:47:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Roy Schestowitz]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Op-Ed]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2007/03/09/free-software-means-business/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jon "Maddog" Hall on Free Software in the enterprise]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote>
<p><img src="/IMG/Caps/q.png" border="0" align="left" hspace="0" vspace="4" alt="Q" /><b>uestion</b>: You say that &#8220;you can bet your business on Free Software&#8221;; how do you back up that statement?</p>
<p><b>Answer</b>: How can you bet your business on proprietary software? If a company is bought, goes bankrupt or merges or decides to delete a product line you have no choice but to go with whatever product or path they desire. How can you plan when the company keeps changing its licensing terms, and you have no real alternatives? What do you do when the company that makes your software puts its own profits and its values ahead of yours, the customer? When the software company holds back on releasing the latest bug fix so it fits its &#8220;release schedule?&#8221; When you can&#8217;t get that one little feature added that would allow you to streamline your business, save a lot of money and beat your competition to market?</p>
<p>What happens if that company (no matter where it is) is embargoed?</p>
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &#8212; Jon &#8220;Maddog&#8221; Hall
</p></blockquote>
<p align="center">
<a href="/Weblog_Frames/SSH_multiple.jpg" target="_new" title="Show full-size image" style="border: none;"><img src="/IMG/blog/SSH_multiple_sm.jpg" border="0" alt="Multiple SSH sessions" /></a><br />
<font size="1">My desktop still serves me well</font></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2007/03/09/free-software-means-business/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Novell is SCO 2.0?</title>
		<link>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/11/27/novell-is-sco/</link>
		<comments>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/11/27/novell-is-sco/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Nov 2006 07:42:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Roy Schestowitz]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Memories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Novell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Op-Ed]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/11/27/novell-is-sco/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If Tom Yager says that Novell is the next SCO, can this be true?]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Technocrat, which is the Web site where Bruce Perens	initially (and correctly) predicted Microsoft&#8217;s yet-to-come &#8216;<abbr title="Fear, uncertainty and doubt">FUD</abbr> campaign&#8217;, is <a href="http://technocrat.net/d/2006/11/26/11383" title="http://technocrat.net/d/2006/11/26/11383">reporting</a>, through Bruce himself, that the &#8220;strong feeling on this issue seems to be very widespread&#8221;. Over 2000 people have signed his <a href="http://boycottnovell.com/2006/11/22/open-letter-to-novell/" title="Bruce Perens Open Letter to Novell">Open Letter</a>. Meanwhile, ComputerWorld has just <a href="http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id%3b957400408%3bfp%3b4194304%3bfpid%3b1" title="Microsoft and Novell pull a SCO">published an article</a> titled &#8220;Microsoft and Novell pull a SCO&#8221;. Below lies a snippet.</p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id%3b957400408%3bfp%3b4194304%3bfpid%3b1"><p>
The shape of this agreement suggests that Microsoft and Novell have learned from the best, the corporate strategic masterminds at The SCO Group. The scheme there, which you may recall Microsoft championed early and loudly, was to declare that Linux incorporated source code protected by SCO Group copyrights. This declaration gave SCO the power to send out threatening letters to software vendors and customers. The letters said, in essence, that the lucky recipient could pay SCO a license fee now, or risk having its name added to the big list of defendants in its case and pay far more.
</p></blockquote>
<p>As <a href="http://boycottnovell.com/2006/11/20/novell-protection-racket/" title="Can Novellâ€™s Protection Racket Swing a Timebomb?">mentioned previously</a>, this type of comparison is intended to stir up strong feelings and reactions. This may be an overstatement that instills fear, if not a case of &#8216;trolling&#8217; for traffic, so you are advised take it with a grain of salt.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/11/27/novell-is-sco/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Trademark/Servicemark Debate</title>
		<link>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/11/21/legal-pickles/</link>
		<comments>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/11/21/legal-pickles/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Nov 2006 12:10:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Roy Schestowitz]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Novell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Op-Ed]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/11/21/legal-pickles/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Will Red Hat come under threat over trademark voilations?]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>David Berlind of ZDNet argues that, while Novell denies responsibility for or admission of patent infringements, a door remains open <a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=3986" title="Perhaps Microsoft will sue Red Hat for trademark infringement (vs. copyright or patent)">on the trademarks front</a>. This is a long write-up which concludes that Steve Ballmer could go for legal pickles rather than major baseless allegations over <abbr title="Intellectual Property">IP</abbr>.</p>
<blockquote cite="http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=3986"><p>
That could be in the case. Especially since Novell, in its watershed deal with Microsoft, has taken great care to reiterate that it still believes that it has not infringed on any Microsoft patents. Why then would Novell pay such a huge sum of money (with a promise of longer-term royalities) if it really believed this? Answer? Microsoft may have presented Novell with compelling evidence that Linux (or something that Novell was distributing) infringes on its copyright.  Or maybe a trademark (or a servicemark).
</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/11/21/legal-pickles/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Reducing Digital Complexity</title>
		<link>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/11/11/reducing-digital-complexity/</link>
		<comments>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/11/11/reducing-digital-complexity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2006 21:49:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Roy Schestowitz]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Op-Ed]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/11/11/reducing-digital-complexity/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Keep it simple, stupid (KISS)]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p align="center">
<img src="/IMG/blog/volume-wheel.jpg" alt="Volume controller" />
</p>
<p>The following <a href="http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/accent/155392.php" title="Digital-age simplicity is goal of professor">story</a> has caught my eye.</p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/accent/155392.php"><p>
&#8220;For reasons such as this, Maeda is now a &#8220;repentant&#8221; technowhiz and a leading apostle of simplicity. In 2004 he founded the MIT Simplicity Consortium at the Media Lab, which works with major corporations to design technologies for simplicity-driven products.&#8221;
</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/11/11/reducing-digital-complexity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Alexa Ranks &#8211; Only Make Belief</title>
		<link>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/10/24/alexa-rank-myth/</link>
		<comments>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/10/24/alexa-rank-myth/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Oct 2006 15:25:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Roy Schestowitz]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Browsers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Op-Ed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEO]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/10/24/alexa-rank-myth/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Should you trust Alexa traffic ranks? Probably not.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Alexa ranks can be fun. But <a href="http://cyber-knowledge.net/blog/2006/10/19/alexa-amazons-most-flawed-idea/" title="Alexa: Amazonâ€™s Most Flawed Idea">can they ever be trusted</a>?</p>
<blockquote cite="http://cyber-knowledge.net/blog/2006/10/19/alexa-amazons-most-flawed-idea/"><p>
What does a high Alexa rating mean to a web master? It shouldnâ€™t mean that much as itâ€™s not accurate. Alexa is a website that tracks a websiteâ€™s traffic history, and gives a ranking based upon the number of visitors. However the fact that it requires a tool bar to work flaws it in many ways.</p>
<p>[...]</p>
<p>Apparently the folks at Alexa have never heard of any other browser besides Internet Explorer and FireFox. This seems quite unprofessional coming from a company owned by Amazon.com.
</p></blockquote>
<p>My main site peaked at ~17,000<sup>th</sup> for Alexa (with Netscraft rank currently at 18,608<sup>th</sup> for <code>schestowitz.com</code>). In the latter case, however,  the figures are grossly biased because I have the toolbar installed. Ranks very much depend on the audience the site attracts. System administrators , for example, fancy the Netscraft toolbar. Its primary service addresses a niche.</p>
<p>Alexa traffic ranks prove to be a real problem (as well as a perpetual pain) to Webmasters. This remains the only number which can conveniently be assigned to a Web site. It is a silly label that should be disregarded, but the average user does not know this. Luckily, not every average user will have such ranks displayed. Alexa as a comparator is a misleading assessor. Even top sites cannot be compared, unless one judges by orders of magnitude (and takes these with a grain of salt). In fact, PageRank and the likes of it weigh more factors other than traffic, so they ought to surpass Alexa in terms of validity.</p>
<p>As a timely rant, I was temporarily able to influence Alexa rank with a local installation of the A9 toolbar, but then Microsoft took over A9&#8242;s operations and forced them to shut down some competing services, the toolbar included. Yet another example of acquisitions or mergers that are practically death knells (and a penalty to Mac/Linux/BSD users in this case). That is just why I took it personally.</p>
<div align="center">
<img src="/IMG/blog/alexarank.jpg" alt="AlexRank"  title="Picture without copying restrictions" /><br />
<font size="2"><span style="color:#FF6600">Search</span><span style="color:#536893">Status</span> in action</font>
</div>
<p><b>Related item</b>: <a href="https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2005/07/07/firefox-toolbars/" title="Firefox Toolbars">Firefox Toolbars</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/10/24/alexa-rank-myth/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The &#8216;New Netscape&#8217;? Anything Like the &#8216;New Digg&#8217;?</title>
		<link>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/09/10/digg-top-users/</link>
		<comments>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/09/10/digg-top-users/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Sep 2006 18:45:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Roy Schestowitz]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CMS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cyberspace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Op-Ed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/09/10/digg-top-users/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My take on the discriminatory changes in Digg.com]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p align="center">
<a href="/Weblog_Frames/front-page-digg.jpg" target="_new" title="Show full-size image" style="border: none;"><img src="/IMG/blog/front-page-digg-small.jpg" border="0" alt="The Digg front page" /></a>
</p>
<p><img src="/IMG/Caps/d.png" border="0" align="left" hspace="0" vspace="4" alt="D" /><b>IGG is changing</b>. It potentially transforms itself for the better, but there are residual side effects. There will no longer be a tiered set of users. Top Diggers, including myself as a former active Digger, largely resent the new move.</p>
<p>To those unaware of these recent sizzling developments I&#8217;m referring to, Digg&#8217;s algorithm is being modified to be less (or more) democratic, essentially by weighting user&#8217;s votes as though they are not necessarily equal. It could bring about improvements, but it also raises many questions, affects morale, and lowers aspirations among new and senior contributers alike.</p>
<p>More latterly, several Digg contributers have been trying to assassin the character of Netscape, suggesting that the idea of <a href="http://digg.com/tech_news/Top_Digg_Users_Removing_Avatars_Hired_by_Netscape" title="Digg Users Removing Avatars Hired by Netscape">removing avatars in protest</a> came from Netscape or some shills it had recruited. It didn&#8217;t (see quotes below).</p>
<p>There are some Digg contributers who seek to blame Netscape for all the in-house trouble. But the removal of avatars, whose progress I followed from early stages, appears to have begun from the top and gone downwards with folks like DigitalGopher, P9, and George W. I didn&#8217;t realise what it was all about the first time I spotted the pattern. I thought top users were being banned or stripped of their identity. There are intersting discussion about the <a href="http://digg.com/tech_news/What_would_happen_if_the_top_diggers_stopped" title="What would happen if the top diggers stopped?">impact of the change</a>.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s another thought I had: if top diggers lose power and are then perceived as ordinary, that will a considerable turn-off, which is sure to stop them from participating much, let alone &#8216;game the system&#8217;, as Kevin Ross called it (impulsive accusation perhaps).</p>
<p>So what should we now expect from top contributers? Just a submission here and there to keep up appearance and be part of the scene (presence), not &#8216;becoming the next Albert Pacino (top all-time contributer)&#8217;, who long ago decided to hang up the towel.</p>
<p>Lastly, here is are some bits from an <a href="http://www.omninerd.com/2006/09/09/news/913?highlight=c7503#c7503" title="Digg Changes Algorithm; Top User Resigns">interview with the top Digger</a>, who quit abruptly.</p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.omninerd.com/2006/09/09/news/913?highlight=c7503#c7503"><p>
The other users did not remove their avatars in support of me. It was in protest of Kevin&#8217;s message as well as the verbal filth that many Digg users were spewing at Digg&#8217;s top submitters.</p>
<p>The #33 Digg user, Curtiss Thompson, had many of the same things to say, in an email to Wired&#8217;s Michael Calore:</p>
<p>The blog post by Kevin Rose in response to the Digg community&#8217;s outcry about top diggers gaming the system has caused many top diggers to be singled out from the community and buried not on the merit of their content, but on their unfounded accusations that the top Diggers were manipulating or &#8220;gaming&#8221; Digg&#8217;s democratic system. Not only was the blog post misrepresented, but it was misinterpreted, by the Internet community to support one Digg user&#8217;s claim that The Digg System Is Being Gamed By Top Users.
</p></blockquote>
<p><b>Side notes</b>:</p>
<ul>
<li>A Digg friend was kind enough to have me <a href="http://justanothertechblog.blogspot.com/2006/09/what-is-going-on-with-digg.html" title="What is going on with Digg?">mentioned and even credited</a>. Thanks, buddy!</li>
<li>I had an interview about my recent move to Netscape/AOL. I will post a pointer to the text (or a copy thereof) in my blog as soon as it goes live.</li>
</ul>
<p><b>Update</b>: some <a href="http://www.sparkplug9.com/bizhack/index.php/2006/09/10/netscapes-calacanis-has-the-last-laugh/" title="Netscapeâ€™s Calacanis has the last laugh?">comprehensive, link-rich coverage</a> has just been posted on the topic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/09/10/digg-top-users/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Reality Check: Getting a &#8216;Real&#8217; Job</title>
		<link>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/07/24/get-a-real-job/</link>
		<comments>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/07/24/get-a-real-job/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Jul 2006 12:14:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Roy Schestowitz]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Op-Ed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/07/24/get-a-real-job/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Is working for somebody else the only way to life?]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p align="center">
<img src="/IMG/blog/computer_lab.jpg" border="0" alt="Computer lab" /><br />
<em><font color="#555555">Another day, another dollar.<br />But is your workplace a dreadful place to be?</font></em>
</p>
<p><img src="/IMG/Caps/i.png" border="0" align="left" hspace="0" vspace="4" alt="I" /><b> quite enjoy my life in an arena which involves research, publications, public appearances, sharing of code that I produce, and technical writings that I rapidly accumulate</b>. All of that, in fact, is something that reaches culmination through the Internet and Web sites, which are &#8212; to me at least &#8212; a gateway to a wider world. For long I have pondered (and even lost sleep over) a scenario where I find myself in a cubicle, coding for somebody else day, by day, by day&#8230;</p>
<p>Dreadful forecasts aside, there are other ways to make a living. Fortunately, a happy life is one where making ends meet should suffice, <a href="https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2005/05/16/dreadful-vacations/" title="Dreadful Vacations">vacations are unnecessary</a>, and <a href="https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2005/07/29/my-role-in-society/" title="My Role in Society">help for those that surround us gets elevated</a>. I seem to be getting worried prematurely. Here is one such article that <a href="http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2006/07/10-reasons-you-should-never-get-a-job/" title="10 Reasons You Should Never Get a Job">speaks of self-employment</a> and affordable independence.</p>
<blockquote><p>
Itâ€™s funny that when people reach a certain age, such as after graduating college, they assume itâ€™s time to go out and get a job.  But like many things the masses do, just because everyone does it doesnâ€™t mean itâ€™s a good idea.  In fact, if youâ€™re reasonably intelligent, getting a job is one of the worst things you can do to support yourself.  There are far better ways to make a living than selling yourself into indentured servitude.
</p></blockquote>
<p>This reminded me of an <a href="http://blog.guykawasaki.com/2006/01/hindsights.html" title="Hindsights">older blog item</a> (a speech actually) which I once read and boomarked. It moved me enormously.</p>
<blockquote><p>
I was a diligent Oriental in high school and college. I took college-level classes and earned college-level credits. I rushed through college in 3 1/2 years. I never traveled or took time off because I thought it wouldn&#8217;t prepare me for work and it would delay my graduation.</p>
<p>Frankly, I blew it.</p>
<p>You are going to work the rest of your lives, so don&#8217;t be in a rush to start. Stretch out your college education. Now is the time to suck life into your lungs-before you have a mortgage, kids, and car payments.
</p></blockquote>
<p>Another nice item from the first author (one which I commented on before) speaks of <a href="https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/06/25/work-pleasant/" title=" Making Your Work More Pleasant">10 ways to relaxify your workspace</a>. Recommended reading!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/07/24/get-a-real-job/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
