Remi Gallard

This guy is crazy french who does a lot of stupid things that will make you laugh , Here are the links for some of his videos

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MytfhzcSF-Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRefZf3gj74&feature=channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81szj1vpEu8&translated=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrlrMYbMMFg&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXsY2r1_9C0&feature=channel

This one is one of his very best

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9ApRjtwwTU&feature=related

The top ten Chuck Norris Facts

Have a look . You will laugh
01
Chuck Norris' tears cure cancer. Too bad he has never cried.
02
Chuck Norris counted to infinity - twice.
03
Chuck Norris does not hunt because the word hunting infers the probability of failure. Chuck Norris goes killing.
04
If you can see Chuck Norris, he can see you. If you can't see Chuck Norris you may be only seconds away from death.
05
Chuck Norris sold his soul to the devil for his rugged good looks and unparalleled martial arts ability. Shortly after the transaction was finalized, Chuck roundhouse kicked the devil in the face and took his soul back. The devil, who appreciates irony, couldn't stay mad and admitted he should have seen it coming. They now play poker every second Wednesday of the month.
06
When the Boogeyman goes to sleep every night he checks his closet for Chuck Norris.
07
Chuck Norris built a time machine and went back in time to stop the JFK assassination. As Oswald shot, Chuck Norris met all three bullets with his beard, deflecting them. JFK's head exploded out of sheer amazement.
08
Chuck Norris has already been to Mars; that's why there are no signs of life there.
09
They once made a Chuck Norris toilet paper, but it wouldn't take shit from anybody.
10
A blind man once stepped on Chuck Norris' shoe. Chuck replied, "Don't you know who I am? I'm Chuck Norris!" The mere mention of his name cured this man blindness. Sadly the first, last, and only thing this man ever saw, was a fatal roundhouse delivered by Chuck Norris.

ERP

Certainly ERP are a great technological advantage for companies who have it. However think about how dependent can become a company on a software, imagine that for some reason all the info get stolen o lost, think about how risky is that a few people control all the database. What if someone tries to black mail the administration? Technology is really cool, but in some way can be risky become so dependent on it. Clouding is even more risky since an external company is gathering all the information from other companies. What if they do not want to give you the info anymore? What if they try also to black mail you? Think twice if you wan to be 100% on technology.

Microsoft

If you still are a microsoft fan please have a look in this article:

Microsoft
Bloat
· CNN has a good article which explains why bloat is such a bad thing. Unneeded features make products more cumbersome to use and the addition of new features often sacrifices the performance (and sometimes the integrity) of older features. Why not stick with an older version of the product then? Two reasons: 1) you only get customer support if you stay current and 2) if you need to work with other people using the same program older versions are often incompatible with newer versions, so if anybody is using the newest version then everybody must upgrade.
· "The Bloatware Debate" is a technical discussion of how two separate people dissected one particular Microsoft program and found out, to their shock, that it was over 2,000% larger than it should have been. It would appear from this discussion that the cumbersome size of Microsoft programs is due not only to the continually growing clutter of useless features but it is also due to careless programming (perhaps to an even larger degree).
Perpetual Upgrading
· When Netscape was the dominant web browser, Microsoft made a huge push to get people and organizations to move to Internet Explorer. How did Microsoft reward its customers that made the effort to switch? It released subsequent versions of Internet Explorer and related products which encouraged web publishers to write web pages that would only work with the latest versions of Internet Explorer. It only took a few short years for the main page of Microsoft's own website, http://www.microsoft.com/ , to stop working properly with the early versions of Internet Explorer which it pushed an unprecedented amount to get people to install. References: [Screenshot of http://www.microsoft.com/ breaking IE 4 with HTTP/1.1 support on November 11, 2002]
Microsoft also left these same people that helped Internet Explorer gain the majority market share in the lurch by providing delinquent support for Internet Explorer 5.0 shortly after its release. Internet Explorer 5.01 SP2 was released in June 19, 2001. In December 13, 2001 when Microsoft released a critical security upgrade for Internet Explorer, only versions 5.5 and higher were supported (a patch was finally issued for IE 5.01 nearly 2 months later on February 11, 2002, but as of this writing all early versions of IE appear to have been abandoned as they still have no patches). So customers had a choice to make: stay with the version of Internet Explorer they had already invested the time into deploying and worry (rightly so) about having their computers hacked for an unknown amount of time (which turned out to be a lengthy 2 months), or invest more time to upgrade to the latest version again, even though they may have just upgraded 6 months earlier and they may have no need for any new features. To top it all off, even if they did decide to upgrade, the upgrade was reported to be buggy. References: [Bugginess of Upgrade] [Register Article on Patch] [Slashdot Article on Patch] [Microsoft's Dec 13, 2001 Patch] [Microsoft's Feb 12, 2002 Patch For IE 5]
· Perpetually upgrading has the obvious cost associated with it of new licenses for the new versions, but there are are many additional hidden costs. For a good example of how the costs of upgrading can balloon to much more than the obvious licensing costs, read about all the problems that ensued when one company made the decision to upgrade their Microsoft software. In addition to the costs of the new licenses, newer hardware ended up being required, support problems increased (and support costs money), and there was always the looming cost of losing face with upper management because the next necessitated upgrade to come from Microsoft came so quick on the heels of the first upgrade that it made the initial upgrade appear ill-timed and a pointless cost. Finally, a good illustration is given of how one upgrade can set off a chain of many other required (and costly) upgrades because Microsoft's software is so "integrated".
Hostile treatment of customers
· One example of Microsoft's hostility to its existing customers came in September, 2000. Microsoft demanded that the Virginia Beach government account for all copies of Microsoft software that were in use within the government and provide proof of purchase for each product. The reason? "Nick Psyhogeos, a Washington, D.C.-based attorney for Microsoft, said the firm has found that government agencies sometimes inadvertently acquire counterfeit software." There was no mention of a reason why this particular city government was singled out - they were not investigated because of something which they did to arouse suspicion, but simply because they were a large organization that Microsoft hoped they could frighten more money out of. The city was presumed guilty until proven innocent and this cost the tax payers a great deal of money as the city reassigned 25 percent of its technical work force to work specifically on the task of generating the information demanded by Microsoft. [Pilot Online Article (Dead)] [Pilot Online Article Mirror]
· Microsoft has recently added "features" to its software in order to prevent unlicensed use, and users are already crying out at the negative effect this has had on usability and reliability. [KMFMS Article] [ZDNet Article]
· David Coursey from ZDNet has written about his personal experience of being deprived of the use of his legally licensed Microsoft software at the worst possible time because of Microsoft's over-zealous "anti-piracy" measures.
Predatory Practices
· At the time of its publication, "The (Nearly) Whole Microsoft Catalog" was a fairly complete list of all the companies and products that Microsoft has swallowed with its ever increasing appetite for total market domination. [Catalog (via archive.org)]
· Yes, Microsoft royally screwed over Spyglass by licensing their code and then turning around and giving it away for free. This obviously made it a lot more difficult for Spyglass to sell other licenses since their potential customers could just embed Internet Explorer for free. Not only did Microsoft destroy Spyglass' existing market, but Spyglass also accused Microsoft of not paying the required royalties on the code that they licensed. Spyglass has since been relegated to a niche market, and it is interesting to note that they don't even mention Internet Explorer as one of their accomplishments in their showcase. [Bloomberg Article] [Spyglass Press Release (dead)] [Spyglass Showcase (dead)]
· Microsoft forced major internet web site operators to agree not to promote Netscape Navigator and to forego any business relations with Netscape if they wanted featured placement on the Windows desktop. Yes, you read that correctly - Microsoft didn't just ask for preferential placement of it's own products, it demanded that its competitor's products not be promoted at all. So the next time you hear Microsoft say that they are for consumer choice be aware that they are lying through their teeth. [CNET Article (via archive.org)]
· Even the mighty Compaq feared Microsoft and curtailed business relationships with Go Corp and Netscape under pressure from Microsoft. [ZDNet Article (via archive.org)]
· Why don't you see any computer vendors offering to sell computers that have Windows and some other operating system installed (this is referred to as a dual-boot system)? Considering that many non-Windows operating systems, such as Linux, are free and have excellent, free tools that would be useful to certain types of people (for example, engineering students), you would think that many OEM's would jump at this chance to differentiate the computers they offer. However, the fact of the matter is that they can't because the contract that they have which Microsoft allegedly forbids them from offering a non-Windows operating system as a boot option. (This contract is not available for the public to read because it is classified as a "trade secret" - Microsoft has gone to great lengths to keep its strongarm tactics hidden from the public.) [Byte Article (dead)] [Author's Mirror]
· In November of 1998 Blue Mountain Arts, a company which allows people to send electronic greeting cards, discovered that two separate Microsoft products, WebTV and Outlook Express (which is part of Internet Explorer), had recently begun to automatically delete greeting cards from Blue Mountain Arts. Blue Mountain Arts was an established company in the market for electronic greeting cards and, not surprisingly, at the time that their cards started being automatically deleted by Microsoft products, Microsoft was just beginning the process of entering the same market with their own electronic greeting cards service. Using their tried and tested tactics, Microsoft used their existing products in unrelated markets (WebTV and Outlook Express) to make it look like the competition in the new market was broken, thereby making Microsoft's own greeting card offering appear more reliable. Blue Mountain Arts sued Microsoft because of this and the judge acknowledged the predatory nature of Microsoft's actions by granting a preliminary injunction against Microsoft. References: [Chronology of Trial] [ZDNet Article] [internetnews.com Article]

Bugs, bugs, and more bugs
· System administrators who have had experience with other operating systems know that Windows is a nightmare to maintain. For a taste of what these people must suffer through read this insightful usenet posting by one frustrated sys admin. He describes some inexplicable problems that crop up in Windows and the vastly inadequate support that Microsoft provides when they arise. Especially interesting to note is the catch-22 that Microsoft puts its users in by refusing to give technical support when the user follows the instructions in Microsoft's own "knowledge base". Despite Microsoft's persistent efforts to portray their products as reliable and free from bugs that are worth caring about, their own internal documentation suggests that the story is quite different in reality. In a very rare moment of openness and honesty, Microsoft has published on its own website an article which serves as a full admission of guilt that Microsoft makes a practice of releasing incredibly bug-ridden software and that this has adversely affected customers in a "horrible" way. The author is very harsh on what was released as the production version of Internet Explorer and also strongly alludes that software at Microsoft is frequently shipped under strong protests from its developers as to its lack of fitness. (Although they are not mentioned by name, it is clear that the browsers the article refers to are Internet Explorer and Netscape.) Don't expect this article to stay on the Microsoft website for long now that we are linking to it - read it while you still can. If it is no longer available by the time you get to it, you can search for it under the title of "When Is Software Ready? Ship It Anyway!" by author Victor Stone, dated March 29, 1999. References: [MSDN Article]

Four square

Four square is the result of existing technology gathered together a new product. Certainly is similar to interactive maps produced on GIZ ( geographical information system), but with the advantage of being interactive.

I really believe that four square do not have a future in third world countries in the short term for one main reason Insecurity: kidnapping is common in countries like Mexico, Venezuela, or Colombia; therefore a tool such as four square may facilitate the job for kidnappers and people may be scared about using it. More information may represent more danger or more supervision and control from the people who are managing the data base.

twitter

Hellow guys I found a nice article that maybe will make you think twice abou it:

Twitter is one of the more recent social networking phenomena. Following the sucess of social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook, Twitter is a service that lets people follow each other and stay informed about them using what has been dubbed as 'micro-blogging'. The stated premise of Twitter is for users to answer the simple question 'What are you doing?' in 140 characters or less.
I don't think our enemies are going to gain any exploitable information from following my Twitter feed. Updates about how tired I am, my plans for the day, what I am having for dinner, or how much I love my wife will provide very little actionable intelligence. Al Qaeda isn't going to be able to do much with inane data like whether or not someone is stuck in traffic or how long the line is at the grocery store.
However, the value of the information provided on Twitter might be largely a function of who is providing it. If I send out a 'tweet' letting my Twitter followers know that I have published a new blog post- not much value from a national security or terrorism perspective. However, when the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee sends out tweets like 'Just landed in Baghdad. I believe it may be the first time I've had bb [short for Blackberry] service in Iraq. 11th trip here.' and then proceeds to tweet about the movements of his party through the Green Zone, flying by helicopter, etc.- now that is actionable intelligence with some strategic value.
For the vast majority of Twitter users, the social networking service is little more than harmless and frivolous data. Apparently though, there may be good reason to restrict its use by certain individuals or groups to make sure they don't accidentally 'tweet' the activation codes to our nuclear arsenal or the truth about Area 51 at Roswell.

Casa del Libro

The house of the book is one of the best-known bookstore chains in Spain which offers a great variety and quantity of products, not found in other large bookstores. It is divided into sections arranged thematically, what makes it easy and enjoyable to shop. The prices are cheaper than usual, at least in my experience, I have always found very good deals. A huge advantage is a corner with tables where you can drink a coffee while reading your book.