Slashdot Mirror

Jurassic Park totally ignored this whole point, which, to me, made the whole premise rather lame

Actually, Jurassic Park didn't ignore that at all. They mentioned that the dinosaurs' DNA had to be genetically spliced with the DNA of a specific frog that offered the chance to fill in the needed pieces of DNA that were missing in the dinosaurs, but also posed little threat of creating a pygmy dinosaur-frog hybrid, as if the two animals had been cross bred. One of the major plot points of the book and the movie was the presence of certain frog traits in the resulting dinosaurs, specifically the frog's ability to change its gender for breeding on the fly, allowing some of the dinosaurs to become male, mate with the dinosaurs that remained female (they were all intended to be female), and create fertile eggs.

And for similar people that will say, "But it's impossible to do that!", please note that Jurassic Park is a piece of science FICTION, not science FACT, and thus has the benefit of future technology and scientific discoveries that do not exist in real life. Personally, I think saying that Jurassic Park "ignored that point" (that "point" being the impossibility of the entire thing using current technology and scientific discoveries) is a nitpick to begin with, because it basically labels all science fiction stories "lame" because they don't use currently existing technology.

I suggest you look up both Science Fiction and more specifically the FICTION part of the term that you are having problems with.

Let's grow up a little, here. Adults don't buy silly little toys, anyway.

Adult (definition)

I am 24 years old. I have attained legal age. I buy silly little toys, and silly big toys, and also silly medium sized toys. This includes a number of action figures, some of which are made by McFarlane toys.

1. Codifying a set of "best practicies" that, when applied, assure a solid product.

I think it's unlikely that a set of 'best practices' could encompass some of the contradictory approaches to systems analysis and design, without resorting to lowest-common-denominator definitions such as 'planning is good, design is good, testing is good'.

For example, I am probably not alone among UK coders to have been taught that SSADM was a good method for analysing a large software project. XP basically refutes the idea that structured methodologies are good for any project that has rapidly changing requirements.

Please, learn the proper English plural of the word 'virus.'

There's no need to be making up words in hopes of sounding smarter. You only end up looking silly.

Im not much of a gammer

You're not much of a speller either. :P
Here ya go

(not to nit-pick)...

Satellite

Yes, the publisher changed the title to "Sorcerer's Stone" because they thought the average American would be too ignorant to know what a "Philosopher's Stone" was.

I thought that was just more playing to the lowest common denominator bunk, but here on Slashdot, the previous comments all seem to indicate that you all miss the reference.

God, you people need to get out and get some humanities exposure...history, literature, *something*...the world isn't all computers...

The legendary philosopher's stone was an item sought by alchemists back when there were folks who thought alchemy was legit. (this was a few centuries back). They thought it would aid in the transmutation of lead into gold, etc.

Look it up

It has a plot? Well, thats one improvement over The Phantom Menace then...

This is +5 funny??? I find it exasperating when folks can't describe why they didn't like a film the invariably resort to "It had no plot." TPM had a plot. You may not have followed it, or thought it tiresome or predictable, but it had a plot.

I don't really have an opinion about whether software engineering is like bridge building. I do believe it is about Engineering.
Lets tackle one of your comments:

> "software engineering" (I hate that name, its programming gadammit)

Programming should be what you do at home, in your own time, for fun. You want to work for a company, and create products, you better be software engineering (a part of which is programming), or someone will sack your ass real soon. Lets have a wee look at the definition of engineering:

engineering
n 1: the practical application of science to commerce or industry
2: the discipline dealing with the art or science of applying scientific knowledge to practical problems; "he had trouble deciding which branch of engineering to study"

Now flame me if I'm wrong, but aren't we dealing with the science (computer) of applying scientific knowledge (computer) to practical problems (customer needs) when we solve requirements?

Compare and contrast with programming:

programming
n 1: setting an order and time for planned events
2: creating a sequence of instructions to enable the computer to do something

You see, when we write a program, we are programming, buts thats just a part of Software Engineering .

I don't really have an opinion about whether software engineering is like bridge building. I do believe it is about Engineering.
Lets tackle one of your comments:

> "software engineering" (I hate that name, its programming gadammit)

Programming should be what you do at home, in your own time, for fun. You want to work for a company, and create products, you better be software engineering (a part of which is programming), or someone will sack your ass real soon. Lets have a wee look at the definition of engineering:

engineering
n 1: the practical application of science to commerce or industry
2: the discipline dealing with the art or science of applying scientific knowledge to practical problems; "he had trouble deciding which branch of engineering to study"

Now flame me if I'm wrong, but aren't we dealing with the science (computer) of applying scientific knowledge (computer) to practical problems (customer needs) when we solve requirements?

Compare and contrast with programming:

programming
n 1: setting an order and time for planned events
2: creating a sequence of instructions to enable the computer to do something

You see, when we write a program, we are programming, buts thats just a part of Software Engineering .

See my point?

A milliard.

I can't believe that "learnt" is really in the dictionary. I suppose that "hillbilly" is now a language. *sigh*

http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=l ea rnt

Not only are you stupid, you dont even know what plagiarism is...

plagiarism n 1: a piece of writing that has been copied from someone else and is presented as being your own work 2: the act of plagiarizing; taking someone's words or ideas as if they were your own

maybe you need to learn how to use a dictionary

I don't know what you gathered from the interview, but if y'd ask me, I think I was might impressed by the ideas in the interview. Hurd, to me, seems like an excellent idea.

As far as GNU's ability to deliver is concered, what about that editor you use (emacs). What about tools like make, flex, yacc, et all? Get real, GNU has done delivered too much to the computing community; and for free.

And I'm sorry, but the basic GNU software set is a disaster. I speak from personal experience. I've been hassling with their bugs for years. Ten or so years ago it was hassling with the official port of GNU source control to DOS -- done by somebody who didn't understand FAT filesystem semantics. Last year I had to sweat blood to deal with the reference counting bug in glibc. This bug was eventually fixed -- after glibc maintenance moved from GNU to Red Hat. What can you say about a team that takes so long to fix such a basic bug? Aside from the fact that it has Lots of Really Great Ideas?

Face it, GNU has "succeeded" only because you need it to do anything useful with the Linux kernel.

Hurd is not there to replace Linux

Look, if Hurd is so wonderful and important, then you should want something serious to happen with it. That is not going to happen if all its supporters just stand around saying "cool!" And it's certainly not going to happen if nobody asks why this project has been chasing its own tail for so long.

I would be pedantic if I used a dictionary definition to define a term that was commonly used differently (since definition in English has been determined by popular use).

But I think everyone I know, technical or otherwise, knows something that's `public domain' is pretty much free for anyone to do whatever they want with anytime. Including you.

But that's fair enough - you're just justifying your position.

Mike ;)

It's probably fair to say that there is little legal overlap between OSS / FS licenses and public domain as it is defined by Mirriam Webster.

I do think that Paula Samuelson's article gives a much more complete and interesting examination of the concept of public domain than is possible from a dictionary definition, though.

But if you want to focus only on the dictionary definition of "public domain"... (and who could fault you for such an academic insistence on precision ?)... then I think you're right.

pretentious
pretentious (pr-tnshs)
adj.
Claiming or demanding a position of distinction or merit, especially when unjustified.

So, how can you say that MS programmers are pretentious? Upper management != programmers. I personally know several MS programmers and they are far from pretentious. Seems like just a little more slander from the Linux group (great advocacy I might add).

And from this definition, it seems that Linux is pretentious. That, or the Linux community is a bunch of hypocrites. I hear time and time again that Linux isn't doing anything above and beyond, but rather just what an OS should do. So where is the justification for all this merit?

I am persuing a career in cinema and film right now. I consider the medium of film/cinema to be one of of the most vividly conveying mediums out there. It can combine the magic of music with the various aspects of visual elements, and intertwine them with a cohesive plot and characters.

In order to keep this on topic, games are, likewise, art. The combine many different elements - music, story, imagry, and, most importantly, creativity depicted. Never let it be said that the great artist, idSoftware, is of little artistic value! ;)

However, I think we should draw the line quite firmly and insist that most software should not be considered, 'art', and here is why.

I'm not aware of the legal definition, but if we look at the dictionary definition of
art, we see that conventional software could indeed be included under this definition, possibly under, "High quality of conception or execution, as found in works of beauty; aesthetic value". However, I would argue that this should not be the case.

If we look at art in a historical fashion, we will notice that art has never held much of a functional purpose, with rare exclusion. This is part of the beauty of art. Surely, the AK-47 is an artfully crafted weapon - inexpensive (in a manufacturing sense), well made, easy to maintain, and accurate. Nobody that is knowledgeable of firearms would deny this fact. The same could be said for the first automobiles made by Henry Ford. However, like most software, both of these items perform or performed very specific tasks. They were undeniably artful in craft, but they are rarely considered 'art', unless we're talking about 'artifacts'. :)

Software should be considered using the same standards. If it performs a practical function (besides relaxation), it should be considered what it was intended - a tool. Software, such as games, that is intended for leasurely consumption should be deemed 'art'.

From the other side of the fence, I'm sure that everyone that has ever created anything they they were proud of has felt that their work was artful and skillful - only naturally.

Human effort to imitate, supplement, alter, or counteract the work of nature. The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colors, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium. The study of these activities. The product of these activities; human works of beauty considered as a group. High quality of conception or execution, as found in works of beauty; aesthetic value.

The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colors, forms, movements, or other elements

High quality of conception or execution, as found in works of beauty

Dude...lighten up! While you're doing that, look up the word satire over at dictionary.com.

Sheesh. Some people can't take a joke.

Dude...lighten up! While you're doing that, look up the word satire over at dictionary.com.

Sheesh. Some people can't take a joke.

I am a URL Happy Slashdot user.

Indeed, your message is more applicable to yourself, since I clearly did address your (only) point, i.e., your concept that forfeiture of rights did not occur due to the use of the information obtained. Rather than counter this, you lean on further emotionalism.

Perhaps you should take a rest and collect your thoughts before making another attempt at discussion, or concede either the correctness of my point or at least the fact that you are unable to counter it logically.

No, I meant "can't."

I guess I should have provided "evidence":

falsifiable: can be proven wrong
unfalsifiable can't be proven wrong.

ya thts rite so sinse we can comunicat spling an teh gramerr arnt emportent cuz u cn get my meenig rite??? and i pronauce celtic lik it sez heer

A.D. 2001
ruse was successful...

[explosion]
Taco: What happen??
Michael: Someone set up us the social engineering!!
Taco: Follow link. We get pr0n...
Slashdot reader: It's you!!
0Bracket0: How are you, suckers. All your hit are belong to us!!
Taco: What you say??
0Bracket0: You have no chance to retract story. Make your time!!
Taco: Take off every submission.
Michael: You know what you doing
Taco: Move every submission to /dev/null. For great justice!!


Slashdot. For great prank!!

See hypocrisy.

CNet has identified a bunch of "others" that the EFF represents. Why not say that EFF represents COMPUTER USERS? They are the group identified when some new M$ transmitted disease is reported. The EFF is devoted to protecting everyone's rights to free speech, they just happen to specialize in digital speech. The author did not feel like he was part of that group.

Sure, I'd like to think I'm a hacker. I bought a house that had an extra bedroom to devote to my hobbies. Ah, so many pleasant hours spent there, but it is trivial and in vain if I can not share it. The negative terms associated with that word keeps me from using it. See also this and that dictionary for more unflattering meanings.

I use Dictionary.com to spell words correctly.

Minor nit pick

The conductivity of water is based purely on the impurites in it. If you had truely pure distilled water, it would not conduct.

I used to work on a transmitter that had water cooled voltage regulator tubes. They regulated many tens of thousands of volts with big wattage. You measured the purity of the water by the measuring the electric conductivity in fractions of micro-mhos

Please, learn the proper English plural of the word 'virus.'

There's no need to be making up words in hopes of sounding smarter. You only end up looking silly.

For Samba to be a competitor it would have to be a company, which it isn't.

Courtesy of Dictionary.com, the definition of competitor:

competitor

n.

One that competes with another, as in sports or business; a rival.

Samba is a tool created by consumers, for consumers, for the purposes of sharing files and printers in a heterogeneous network using Microsoft's communication protocols and standards (namely SMB and CIFS), which currently have to be reverse-engineered by contributors to the Samba project.

Interestingly enough, the fact that the Samba team has a separate implementation of SMB and CIFS than the Microsoft implementation, and that it is intended to be used in the same places where Microsoft file sharing would be done, makes Samba a competitor. Doesn't matter if it was created "by consumers, for consumers", by entering that "market" (I'm using that loosely to mean the set of situations and scenarios in which Samba and NT Server provide the same functionality) Samba became a competitor.

Samba is entirely free, free as in speech, free as in beer. Samba protects the consumer by promoting interoperability in heterogeneous networks.

Linux is entirely free, free as in speech, free as in beer. One could argue it also protects consumers by promoting interoperability in heterogeneous networks. Is it also not a competitor of Microsoft? Or did you just throw in the above phrase to satisfy your zealotry, as it has no bearing on what does and does not constitute competition.

The Samba team has grounds to object because they are consumers who would like to be able to keep their important files on a single powerful and RELIABLE *nix server rather than clusters of redundant and UNRELIABLE NT servers.

Let's leave religious issues out of this, if you please. NT unreliability in the area of interest (CIFS/SMB file sharing) is largely hearsay. If you believe otherwise, please cite (independant, unbiased) studies that prove one way or the other. Otherwise, I'll simply ignore this part offhand as a slashdot-ism, and continue on.

Had you bothered to find out what Samba was before declaring judgement upon them, you would already have known all that.

Not that it's any of your business, but I've been using Samba for the past five or so years on my home networks. I think I have a bit of understanding about what Samba is and is not. However, I'll not retaliate, as then I'll drop to the level of a troll.

check out this dictionary for the correct spelling of simple words, you fuckwit

also, as an adjective, definition 2b is listed as "Of no practical importance; irrelevant". So it seems as if his use is correct though possibly ambiguous.

someone mod all three of us down so i can forget this ever happened.

Moot is an interesting word: it is its own antonym. It means both "debatable" and "not debatable". See http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=moo t for more details.

For more word fun: think of two words in English which contain all five vowels in order (with some intervening consonants).

Keep in mind that pornography literally means "A visual reproduction created solely for pleasure" Wouldn't the enjoyment of watching a graph wiggle be considered porn?

What? What a word "literally" means is totally irrelevent. What is generally agreed a word means is relevent. For example, "sarcasm" literally means "to cut (or rip) flesh", but who gives a crap? When I say "sarcasm", I don't mean literally ripping someone's flesh.

>Theft is still theft, even if its easy and there is no chance of getting caught.

Tough luck on that. I've never seen (decent) software in anything but a locked glass case in a store with on-duty personnel. Then again, considering what winzip sells for, maybe it isn't behind the glass case.

Or did you mean copyright violation? The dictionary very distinctly says it and theft are different things... I've never commited larceny (syn. theft) in my entire life. Ever.

However, being the imperfect being I am, I may have accidentally violated copyright or commited an act against software law by using winzip for longer than the trial period.

Sometimes, agreeably, the dictinary can be contrary, in which case it's probably prudent to take the base definitions and the dates into account. Older words whose base definitions have remained the same longer are, IMHO, considered more correct than "updated" definitions combining these words into a new meaning that doesn't resemble the base words whatsoever.

(This is post #666 right? :-)

>Theft is still theft, even if its easy and there is no chance of getting caught.

Tough luck on that. I've never seen (decent) software in anything but a locked glass case in a store with on-duty personnel. Then again, considering what winzip sells for, maybe it isn't behind the glass case.

Or did you mean copyright violation? The dictionary very distinctly says it and theft are different things... I've never commited larceny (syn. theft) in my entire life. Ever.

However, being the imperfect being I am, I may have accidentally violated copyright or commited an act against software law by using winzip for longer than the trial period.

Sometimes, agreeably, the dictinary can be contrary, in which case it's probably prudent to take the base definitions and the dates into account. Older words whose base definitions have remained the same longer are, IMHO, considered more correct than "updated" definitions combining these words into a new meaning that doesn't resemble the base words whatsoever.

(This is post #666 right? :-)

>Theft is still theft, even if its easy and there is no chance of getting caught.

Tough luck on that. I've never seen (decent) software in anything but a locked glass case in a store with on-duty personnel. Then again, considering what winzip sells for, maybe it isn't behind the glass case.

Or did you mean copyright violation? The dictionary very distinctly says it and theft are different things... I've never commited larceny (syn. theft) in my entire life. Ever.

However, being the imperfect being I am, I may have accidentally violated copyright or commited an act against software law by using winzip for longer than the trial period.

Sometimes, agreeably, the dictinary can be contrary, in which case it's probably prudent to take the base definitions and the dates into account. Older words whose base definitions have remained the same longer are, IMHO, considered more correct than "updated" definitions combining these words into a new meaning that doesn't resemble the base words whatsoever.

(This is post #666 right? :-)

>Theft is still theft, even if its easy and there is no chance of getting caught.

Tough luck on that. I've never seen (decent) software in anything but a locked glass case in a store with on-duty personnel. Then again, considering what winzip sells for, maybe it isn't behind the glass case.

Or did you mean copyright violation? The dictionary very distinctly says it and theft are different things... I've never commited larceny (syn. theft) in my entire life. Ever.

However, being the imperfect being I am, I may have accidentally violated copyright or commited an act against software law by using winzip for longer than the trial period.

Sometimes, agreeably, the dictinary can be contrary, in which case it's probably prudent to take the base definitions and the dates into account. Older words whose base definitions have remained the same longer are, IMHO, considered more correct than "updated" definitions combining these words into a new meaning that doesn't resemble the base words whatsoever.

(This is post #666 right? :-)

>Theft is still theft, even if its easy and there is no chance of getting caught.

Tough luck on that. I've never seen (decent) software in anything but a locked glass case in a store with on-duty personnel. Then again, considering what winzip sells for, maybe it isn't behind the glass case.

Or did you mean copyright violation? The dictionary very distinctly says it and theft are different things... I've never commited larceny (syn. theft) in my entire life. Ever.

However, being the imperfect being I am, I may have accidentally violated copyright or commited an act against software law by using winzip for longer than the trial period.

Sometimes, agreeably, the dictinary can be contrary, in which case it's probably prudent to take the base definitions and the dates into account. Older words whose base definitions have remained the same longer are, IMHO, considered more correct than "updated" definitions combining these words into a new meaning that doesn't resemble the base words whatsoever.

(This is post #666 right? :-)

>Theft is still theft, even if its easy and there is no chance of getting caught.

Tough luck on that. I've never seen (decent) software in anything but a locked glass case in a store with on-duty personnel. Then again, considering what winzip sells for, maybe it isn't behind the glass case.

Or did you mean copyright violation? The dictionary very distinctly says it and theft are different things... I've never commited larceny (syn. theft) in my entire life. Ever.

However, being the imperfect being I am, I may have accidentally violated copyright or commited an act against software law by using winzip for longer than the trial period.

Sometimes, agreeably, the dictinary can be contrary, in which case it's probably prudent to take the base definitions and the dates into account. Older words whose base definitions have remained the same longer are, IMHO, considered more correct than "updated" definitions combining these words into a new meaning that doesn't resemble the base words whatsoever.

(This is post #666 right? :-)

According to websters

software (sôftwâr, sft-)
n. Computer Science
The programs, routines, and symbolic languages that control the functioning of the hardware and direct its operation.

In that sense the .ifo file is software and
you could even argue that the MPEG2 program stream
is software.
But in the same way you could say that a video
casette is software.
What is the legal definition of software?
Is digital television transmitting software?

It's called synecdoche , and it's a common journalist idiom.

Actually, it is 'tachyon'.

Who is the dumbass now?

Actually, both spellings are accurate.

donut

doughnut

And now for the obligatory Simpson's ref.:

Mmmmmmmmmmm, donuts.

Actually, both spellings are accurate.

donut

doughnut

And now for the obligatory Simpson's ref.:

Mmmmmmmmmmm, donuts.

Aficionados

"Renowned".