Slashdot Mirror

Yes. Aparently the lessons of gorilla arm has been forgotten. Each generation seems set on repeating the mistakes of their predecessors.

According to my users it's not easier for them.

Hence, if the old system allowed them to type in invalid addresses (hey, shipping will call us if there's a problem, then we'll just call the customer and ask ...), invalid bank account numbers (hey, its accounts' job to sort that out), invalid product codes (hey, I usually see the production manager during tea break, we'll discuss it then...) then they'll prefer the old system. The new one's the wrong colour, too.

That's why they're users.

You lose.

NAT is a kludge and, albeit its success will never be more than a kludge, with bad side-effects.

But, I have to grant this, you are technically correct, and probably know NAT's problems as well as I do. It's just that less informed people might think that: a) NAT's don't have side effects. b) NAT's are good for security because they filter packets. Both are wrong.

--fred

Google + IANAL + I'm feeling lucky

OK, I read the manual. Isn't the thread supposed to end now?

It isn't quite USEnet, but what the heck.

Godwin's Law is hereby invoked. Sooner than I thought it would be, too. Come on, /.! We're better than this! Why, when there's an interesting conversation regarding the insecurity of a widely used voting system, do we have to bring up the nazis?

(Move along, move along. Nothing left to see here. The Nazis have been kind enough to produce flamebait for everyone.)

For example, someone could mention something about how this is another example of the ignorance of the masses being taken advantage of, once again, by the technical elite. People trust those in charge of systems like this to have integrity. I don't care what party you belong to. Doesn't the thought of a hacked together MS Access database without any non-trivial security protocols being responsible for your election results send a chill through your soul? It sure as heck does mine.

I think that a situation such as this is absolutely key to enlightening the public of the dangers of ignorance and blind acceptance with regards to technology. I really believe that, in the US, the people are the ultimate power. Would the DMCA have ever passed through the legislature if the average Joe on the street knew it existed and had even the slightest inkling of its ramifications? No, of course not. If the average Joe were aware of some implications, the people who do tend to write letters to their representatives would have run their local post offices out of stamps. (Pure conjecture, of course)

What we need to do, as the responsible answer to these technical elitists who are trying to hide their incompetence behind the shimmering curtains of copyright law and technical wizardry, is explain to our less-technical friends what this means and what sort of implications it has. Set up your own little database in Access if you want (read: If you can stomach using Access for that long) and demo just how easy it would be to change the vote results in such an insecure system. 3 clicks changing the outcome of the race oughta' be enough to convince any skeptic just how scary this can be.

Alright, then, I've said my piece. Resume your discussion of Nazis, Hitler, conservatives, liberals, and all other flamebait.

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving September 11 or terrorists approaches one.

So there is precedent for granting rights to non-humans, though corporations are 'assemblies of humans.'

"Valentina: Soul in Sapphire" by Joseph H. Delaney and Marc Stiegler got into exactly this back in 1984. (even beat NextGen to the punch by a few years). It was actually done quite well, including things like MMORPGs, corporate entities, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, etc. It's quite a pity that it is no longer in print. I'd put it in the ballpark of True Names

The incorrect word was used. Said In Context is for more than typos; it is used for poor grammar and incorrect usage. Here the word "hackers" is used where the context calls for "crackers".

The incorrect word was used. Said In Context is for more than typos; it is used for poor grammar and incorrect usage. Here the word "hackers" is used where the context calls for "crackers".

You LOSE! ;)

Doesn't Godwin's Law dictate that this thread ends with your post? (Assuming, of course, you were not deliberately trying to invoke it, which negates its effect)

Whenever I see stories of people doing things "to protect children", I often look for alternative motives. I think press departments of governments/corporations use this as a way of ceasing debate, but they know that people are too afraid to oppose the thing done because they don't want to be seen as against protecting children.

HM Government wants new snooping powers on email - undoubtedly as the legislation gets closer, the "protecting children" trump card will be played.

Like the experts say, What MS are doing will not protect children. They will find alternative chat rooms, possibly in juristictions outside the UK, with absolutely NO regulation or searches by police being available.

In this case, it looks like one of the following is the real story:-

MS are scared of getting sued

MS are looking to get people using messenger to increase their stranglehold.

MS are looking to publicise MSN as a service, encouraging non-savvy parents to believe that signing up to MSN means their kids won't use chatrooms.

MS want some publicity to help spin the image of them being a good company with strong, secure software who care about their users after the virus disaster.

If MS really cared about children, they'd host chatrooms and put some of their massive resources into moderating them.

Of course, the mainstream media are too thick to deal with the real issues in this - protecting children through education of parents and children in using the internet.

I guess this could be considered "news for newbies" because this has been in the jargon file for quite some time.

That's ok, you go read it guys. I'll just sit back sipping my ISO standard cup of tea and enjoying some ANSI standard pizza.

Be sure to submit a story when you find out why it's called El Camino Bignum.

I guess this could be considered "news for newbies" because this has been in the jargon file for quite some time.

That's ok, you go read it guys. I'll just sit back sipping my ISO standard cup of tea and enjoying some ANSI standard pizza.

Be sure to submit a story when you find out why it's called El Camino Bignum.

I guess this could be considered "news for newbies" because this has been in the jargon file for quite some time.

That's ok, you go read it guys. I'll just sit back sipping my ISO standard cup of tea and enjoying some ANSI standard pizza.

Be sure to submit a story when you find out why it's called El Camino Bignum.

http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/m/Murphy_s_La w.html

It's called the best of both worlds.

We could stop calling it the September that never ended.

That'd be worth a lot of hassle.

First, a dose of reality:

If you want to believe that Americans are losing their jobs to inferior non-U.S. programmers, you have your head in the sand. Their work is not inferior. Not by a long shot. In fact, I have to say that in my experience working with a LOT of Korean, Chinese, and Indian programmers, that very few - VERY few - American programmers have any real skills by comparison. For every great American programmer, I can name 5 Indian programmers of equal or nearly equal skill. If I can count that up, you can bet that CIOs can count it up as well.

The U.S. created much of the technology in use around the world today, but Indian and Chinese shops are filled with very hungry workers who are busting their butts to be better programmers than any American programmer. Theirs is not a luxury of choosing the best benefits package, people. Some workers in China are fined if they leave their work chair slightly askew.

American IT love to be arrogant, bent on condescending attitudes and poor communication skills. Those will be the first to lost their jobs. And, they will be very vocal about it. But they will either have to adapt or move on.

I have no excuses for myself in the face of such competition. The profile of J. Random Hacker is accurate in the idea that I.T. is embraced as a form of mental kung-fu, and while I respect those I face in competition, only by working even harder to be of greater value to corporations will I remain employed.

I have always admired the hunger shown by immigrant and non-U.S. workers and vowed long ago that I would not fall into the trap of so many of my fellow Americans by taking my citizenship and opportunity for granted. No excuses allowed. Too many people came before me and died so that I could have the opportunity offered me, and I'm certainly not going to go down putting out half-ass code.

Welcome to the real world, kids. Adapt or die, but stop whining and name calling, because it won't get you your job back.

http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/g/Godwin_s_La w.html

Keep in mind how they measure things when they don't have a measuring device. Who says they aren't equally creative when it comes to computing things with out a computing device?

-- MarkusQ

P.S. That's what my wife (an MIT grad) claims to be doing sometimes when she stares off into space. Since the result often conflicts with my pet theory of the moment, I'm not sure how accurate the process is though.

I've never heard that about any of Woz's code, though it's certainly possible. That sounds a bit like The Story of Mel though.

Woz did reportedly write the original Integer BASIC for the ][ in his head, and designed the Disk ][ controller (the first personal computer magnetic disk system) over lunch one day - due to his own procrastination and a show deadline more than anything else. ;)

As a lower post points out Godwin Law

J. Random Hacker

>That is because Apple is not a convicted monopoly. MS is doing this to
>strenghten their monopoly. Apple donates computers and software. MS is
>donating a project manager. Guess what solutions this "project manager" will
>demand? MS ONLY solutions. This is a way to entrench themselves more. These
>tactics are not much worse then what Hitler was doing.

Bzzt! Godwin's Law!

Thanks for playing.

well if you think nothing i write rises above simple trolling, then congratulations:

YHBT YHL HAND

anything i can help you with dear? LOL

xoxoxoxoxoxoxox

ian's comment strikes me as a huge breach of godwin's law

yes, the patriot act sucks, but we're not putting jews in ovens or rolling panzer tanks into canada or holding mass book burnings

hyperbole and hysteria are interesting phenomena, look into the issue if you find yourself with a feeling of vertigo

relax people, there is a LOT wrong with the current state of US politics and government (i personally view the influence of corporate money as a larger issue) but our adherence and commitment to the basic principles this country was founded upon is strong and well in the hearts of the majority of americans

there is no illuminati folks, there is no man behind the curtain, no one is going to wave their hands and *poof* 250 years of american fundamentals are going to disappear overnight because we got scared on september 11th

and if you don't believe me, blink, and in 2004 or 2008 gw bush will be gone

some 1000 year reich that is

and the last time i checked, the eu isn't exactly a hot bed of personal freedom, capice?

hyperbole

hysteria

please by all means, do not stop fighting the patriot act, but PLEASE don't believe the hype, i am getting kind of sick of the everyone crying wolf- know what i mean?

You are one frightening right-wing son of a bitch. I can see we are getting dangerously close to invoking Godwin's Law.

See also Jargon File: Imminent Death of the Net Predicted! and Brad Templeton's classic timeline.

Yes, that was 1989. Same old same old...

We already have the technology for something that writes that fast. Problem is, you can't read from it...

Yes, he was talking about the magic smoke inside all ICs.

Jargon file entry. (I know you have another reply)

I read about you!

I hearby invoke Godwin's Law on this thread.

Insert witty cut and pasted quote found on obscure Usenet thread that has no relevance to the subject.

Now by my earlier invokation of Godwin's Law, I now declare myself a Nazi sympathizer and deserve to be drug into the street and shot, or foribly relocated to France.

It's actually not- boxen is a "fanciful plural" of box.

Godwin's Law

AOL made it easy to access Usenet

FM888

You have been found in violation of Godwin's Law.

You Lose. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. Thank you for playing.

Further, I agree with you that in going from gasoline-powered vehicles to electrics, we are indeed (in general) trading one type of pollution for another. Really, this is the sticky point. Admittedly fallible scientists, bureaucrats, environmentalists make educated guesses (sometimes well-informed ones, sometimes less so) about the relative damage caused by each technology. Is the potential environmental damage associated with smelting and handling lead more or less serious than the damage associated with drilling, shipping, and pumping petroleum products? As you say, first world nations do very little to attempt to control lead emissions from smelting in other countries--but they also ignore environmental slips associated with processing and handling hydrocarbons. You ask if I'm concerned about the environment as a whole, or just my own backyard--fair enough, but I can't ignore petroleum spills here or elsewhere, either.

You pointed out that "nobody is allowed to touch old air conditioning systems unless..." What does this encourage? Does this better the environment? Human nature doesn't work that way. You can now go to Wal-Mart and purchase a $40 kit to convert your car AC system from R-12 to R-134. The package warns you that you have to have a "qualified professional" recover the R-12. How many people actually are going to pay the money to do that vs. the people that are just going to crack the valve and let it leak? Been there, done that. I don't know of any backyard mechanic who's actually taken his R-12 in to be recovered.

To say that you don't know of any backyard mechanic who has had the R-12 recovered from his car is beside the point. Those who have had their vehicles serviced at a dealership, major chain garage, or law-abiding independent mechanic will have had the Freon recovered from thir A/C system. Yes, there will be individuals who will just dump the refrigerant to the atmosphere, just as there are individuals who will pour used motor oil out on the lawn or into a storm sewer. This doesn't mean that these practices should be encouraged, or tolerated. Also, we don't discourage the use of motor oil because it might be disposed of improperly.

Incidentally, referring to "eviro-nazis" may be viscerally satisfying, but it won't help persuade anyone in an argument--remember Godwin's Law.

The Jargon Lexicon.

Helping newbies understand the net since...a long time ago...

Woot!

For the uninformed: http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/g/Godwin_s_La w.html

You seem to think that OpenSource = GPL. This is not true. There is plenty of open and not-so-open source license. In fact the FSF try to distance itself from the open source movement. The GPL is probably the worse of these license. Don't get me wrong. I don't want to post a troll here. IANAL but I have some arguments who make me think GPL should never be used.

1- The text is too long. I know this is an overused argument but a license should merely say what you can do and can't do with the software the license cover. The GPL is much more a political manifest that a license: it don't only say WHAT it permits/forbid but also WHY. The text is bloated and that make it obscure.

2- The GPL claims it can be recursively modified by the FSF on the back of the copyright holder of a GPLed software. The GPL says:

"9. The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions of the General Public License from time to time. Such new versions will be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to address new problems or concerns.

Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and "any later version", you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that version or of any later version published by the Free Software Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation"

Imagine this scenario: You wrote a great piece of code. As you wanted to share it with the community, you made it GPLed. Then the FSF create a new version of the GPL but you don't agree with it. What can you do? Nothing. Your software is now *free*. You must live with the new GPL no matter what.

You said: "If the GPL does change to define, say, execution of programs via CGI interface, as distribution, it's hard to fully imagine what the repercussions will be". I don't agree with you. It's easy to imagine the main repercussion. If the GPL do such a change, many people will feel betrayed and stop GPLing their software and they will stop using GPLed software too.

Oh come on. Can you really say there is anything non-spammy about any business sending you email? If they make money off you and they send you email, it is spam. Period.

I think little by little, SCO's efforts to create FUD may inconvenience substantial numbers of people. It wouldn't be a bad idea for a website to be started, for keeping track of the myriad ways that SCO's threats of copyright infringement liability have caused tangible expense and inconvenience.

It would be a good knowledge base to have, and might come in handy for purposes of a potential class-action suit against SCO, if the company's claims of infringement are found by the courts to be without merit. In any case, this would be one way to give SCO's backers some FUD of their own.

Why not just patent the CPU instruction set? Then every piece of software is really owned by the company that owns the CPU manufacturer? AHHHH! :-)

NB: obviously instruction sets are patented; even MS patents it dot net vm.

I think we must recall the creation of the PC compatible: a new BIOS was created from scratch to run the hardware. IBM fought tooth-and-nail to protect their BIOS-IP, but lost in court because the BIOS was created in a "clean-room" environment by programmers who had never been exposed to the original IBM copyrighted BIOS code, neither source nor decompiled. If you remember, this was a big win for the computer industry. I'll even go so far to argue that it was this court decision that enabled the PC to become as proliferous as it is today. This court decision established the notion that a basic computer algorithm cannot be patented, but the source code and executable that executes the algorithm can... Otherwise, some greedy company could patent "MOV AX, 9", or the powerful two hex bytes, "CD21", and then where would we all be?

But wait! What about the recently patent-liberated GIF compression scheme that Unisis held onto for so many years (GIF Patent Prepares to Expire refers)?

The point I'm making is that IP law will never kill the software industry. As long as there are CPUs which need programming, there will be programmers around to do the job. If anything, I honestly believe (I admit, a bit of RMS RDF in effect here) that because of the specifics of this SCO vs. IBM case, a clear line in the sand will be drawn much like the original IBM PC BIOS case, that allows cleanly-developed software to be developed to mimic IP software. Thus there will never be a threat to Linux, until the next big thing in OS technology comes along and the Linux community refuses to adopt it.

If anything, this will be a painful and expensive battle, but it's outcome will greatly benefit our community.

Karrick

No, it doesn't.