Slashdot Mirror

"Mel" is recommended reading for any new programmer contemplating a large rewrite.

Dissention from the collective childhood warm-fuzzy remeniscence earns a "Troll" rating?

I think partly the trouble is some people, including moderators, don't know what "troll means". I can't find it defined anywhere on in the Slashdot faq, though it does appear in the faq for kuro5hin.

The Jargon File defines "troll" as "to utter a posting on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames; or, the post itself." A key part of this definition is that the poster pretends to be serious about a subject but in fact is trying to attract flames.

From references in comments, I'd guess that many people on Slashdot understand something else by the term, though I'm not sure what. The fact that Slashdot's faq describes anti-troll filters (when from the description they seem to be describing anti-spam filters) seems to imply that the confusion is occasionally present even in the minds of the administrators.

M

Dissention from the collective childhood warm-fuzzy remeniscence earns a "Troll" rating?

I think partly the trouble is some people, including moderators, don't know what "troll means". I can't find it defined anywhere on in the Slashdot faq, though it does appear in the faq for kuro5hin.

The Jargon File defines "troll" as "to utter a posting on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames; or, the post itself." A key part of this definition is that the poster pretends to be serious about a subject but in fact is trying to attract flames.

From references in comments, I'd guess that many people on Slashdot understand something else by the term, though I'm not sure what. The fact that Slashdot's faq describes anti-troll filters (when from the description they seem to be describing anti-spam filters) seems to imply that the confusion is occasionally present even in the minds of the administrators.

M

As to whether or not what they were doing should be called and what term best describes them, careful consultation of The Jargon File seems to indicate that they were, in fact, cracking the system, not hacking it. At the same time, however, it's clear that they (mostly at least) weren't script kiddies or warez d00dz. Perhaps more terminology is in order. Maybe hacker-cracker? (Just kidding)

As to whether or not what they were doing should be called and what term best describes them, careful consultation of The Jargon File seems to indicate that they were, in fact, cracking the system, not hacking it. At the same time, however, it's clear that they (mostly at least) weren't script kiddies or warez d00dz. Perhaps more terminology is in order. Maybe hacker-cracker? (Just kidding)

I had to hack fetchmail recently to keep mail from bouncing when fetched from our isp to our internal postfix server (see the dropdelivered option).

I found hacking the source extremely easy, the source being modular and well documented.

This program could serve as documentation on how mail protocols (SMTP, POP, IMAP, etc) work and how to implement them.

Yay for fetchmail!
--

I had to hack fetchmail recently to keep mail from bouncing when fetched from our isp to our internal postfix server (see the dropdelivered option).

I found hacking the source extremely easy, the source being modular and well documented.

This program could serve as documentation on how mail protocols (SMTP, POP, IMAP, etc) work and how to implement them.

Yay for fetchmail!
--

If this doesn't give you Fear Of A MicroSoft Planet, I don't know what will.

And screw the content; I'm so revolted by the presentation I couldn't bring myself to even try to read page two. More's the pity. I was really looking forward to seeing how far toy robotics had come.

--

LISP is often claimed to be beautiful.

How nice would it be to type "Copy all jpgs with 'sitename' in the filename to 'sitename' directory" rather than a more arcane command or without having to worry about command typos?

Heard of DWIM? I don't want my computer to infer what I want from it's half-assed understanding of English...

"There is absolutely nobody high up in this new administration who is familiar with the Net, and when they do hear about it, it's all hackers and perverts."

Sounds like a pretty good assessment to me.

Steven

"There is absolutely nobody high up in this new administration who is familiar with the Net, and when they do hear about it, it's all hackers and perverts."

Sounds like a pretty good assessment to me.

Steven

If your application is very simple, you can probably just get away with doubling everything.
But if you're writing something even moderately complicated, you should look at doing custom interfaces for both. Why? A number of reasons.

The big one is that interaction styles in desktop and touchscreen environments are generally pretty different. Early touchscreen proponents ignored this, resulting in a lot of problems, including gorilla arm. Fingers are also much bigger and less precise than mouse pointers. This suggests that touchscreens should work hard to make common choices much bigger, to give more macro-ish buttons that perform common sequences, and generally make frequent activities very easy.

Another important reason is that people sitting at a desk are generally in a very different frame of mind then people at a kiosk or running a big piece of machinery. At a desk, you are generally physically comfortable and familiar with your environment; you're also likely to have fewer distractions and be more familiar with the software. In common touchscreen environments, though, people are usually standing or just stopping for a moment, and they're much more likely to be inexpert users. So with a touchscreen, you should probably make the basic interface much simpler: enlarge or emphasize more important information; shrink or remove less important information; relegate rarely used options to other pages; make on-line help more simple and direct; and so on.

Also, a number of the standard GUI widgets don't work as well in touch-screen environments. You'll note that most kiosks only have buttons, with the occasional radio button or checkbox set; there are no pull-down menus (and especially no hierarchical menus), few pop-up lists, scrolling lists, or tabs. And any text or number entry field has to provide a pop-up keyboard.

But if you really can't afford to develop two UIs, then there's a very simple solution: use the touchscreen monitor at a low resolution. An interface that works pretty well at 640x480 on a 15" touchscreen should be adequate on a 1280x1024 17" desktop. But if you do a combined desktop+touchscreen interface, you must do some user testing. Jakob Nielsen's site useit.com has many good hints, including an articles on doing budget user testing plus boss-friendly explanations of why spending a little money on user testing has big payoffs in the long run.

Zkb zdvwh brxu wlph zlwk EIL zkhq d olwwoh dqdobvlv jrhv d orqj zdbv? D vlqjoh-ohwwhu zrug pxvw eh "L" ru "D". Dq dsrvwursklchg vlqjoh-ohwwhu vxiila lv suredeob "v" ru "w". Hyhubwklqj hovh iroorzv qlfhob iurp wkdw...

Moderation is the reward on /.. Though I didn't bother to read the whole story to find out what they were referring to, I am sure they didn't mean moderation.

As ESR stated in his famous little essay (which I'm not going to link to out of spite) the majority of the work done in the community is done for Ego-Gratification. What is more ego gratifiing than a bunch of your peers (or moderators, they're better than the rest of us:) telling us that out comment was good/funny/on-topic?

If it wasn't a reward then there wouldn't be people karma-whoring, and there wouldn't be people who resent that other people get it and protest (trolls?).

Devil Ducky

If you read some RFCs, for example you will see that IP datagrams consist not of bytes, but octets, and words are defined, not assumed, to be 32-bits.

Look at the Jargon file. You'll see byte's proper definition as "A unit of memory or data equal to the amount used to represent one character; on modern architectures this is usually 8 bits, but may be 9 on 36-bit machines. Some older architectures used `byte' for quantities of 6 or 7 bits,"

Have you ever wondered why C uses octal? Or why Unix (and therefore chmod(1)) takes octal numbers for permissions? It's because C and Unix were initially developed on 36-bit DEC machines. A 36-bit word has four 9-bit bytes, each represented by three octal digits.

Honestly.

--

I just thought it might be nice to point out ESR's articles on this matter (that is why the Linux community is so successful compared to proprietary software).

I believe, IMHO, that Linux can only grow from this new challenge.
----

This is nothing new. vadding has been part of hacker culture for years

I grew up within walking distance of an abandoned VA hospital in Augusta, Georgia. In middle school and early in high school, we would go up there and wander through the halls and rooms, looking at abandoned equipment and poking through old filing cabinets. The cool part was that behind the main building--a hotel that had been converted during WWII to support a nearby air base--there was a warren of interconnected buildings with low rooftops between them to run up and down.

There was a security guard who seldom left his post, but as long as you were quiet, you could have a great time. The guard kept ruffians out, and vandals, but us sneaky geeks could have a great time.

One spring we took turns setting up MUDlike puzzles for each other. You dropped clues on floors in various rooms leading to a secret prize somewhere. The prize was a Smurf doll I had appropriated from my younger sister. I'd go to school and the winner would show me the doll, then it was his turn to hide it.

When they demolished the hospital in the mid-1980s, I was left with some great memories. By that time the building had starting to get creepy--scattered beer cans and used condoms littered certain rooms, and the place lost its innocent mystery. But my sister and brother and I would ride horses around on the enormous front lawn on fragrant evenings, ducking the branches of tall magnolias.

But vadding is a hell of a lot of fun. Once you start looking at a building as a machine, you'll want to start poking around to see how it works. The basements and rooftops of the 42-story skyscraper near Underground Atlanta kept me and my colleagues amused on slow workdays in the mid-1990s.

Happiness is an unlocked maintenance door.

--

Hmmm The jargon file has an entry on the word.

The Jargon file entry for the word "Boxen".


----

This past election was the second election I voted in and the first presidential election. I voted in Ocean County, NJ.

They use computers there.

They don't run windows. They don't run Linux. They don't run BSD, or any other general computer OS. They are dedicated voting machines with dedicated hardware and software built in to the microcontroler. Much like your VCR is a computer, but it only does one thing. Your Microwave oven has a computer in it, but it doesn't run Linux or a MS OS either.

The layout they used on this machine was simple. A bunch of buttons (similar to the kind under the plastic panel on your microwave, not the kind of buttons on your keyboard) under a paper overlay under a protective clear plastic sheet. There were probably hundreds of buttons, but only a few are ever used at a time, depending on the requirements of the individual election. Oh yes and there are LED lights next to each button, which holes in the paper so the proper LEDs could shine through.. There was also a keyboard (laid out alphabeticly) to enter write-in votes. This whole setup was perhaps 3'x3' or 4'x4' and took up the front "wall" of the voting booth.
I don't know how the machine OUTPUTS votes, (hard drive, print out, network, etc.) but everything I saw looked fairly straight forward, simple and easy to me. I didn't hear about anyone getting confused in my community. there were PLENTY of elderly voters and I was standing in line at the polling station for a while. The only confusion was over what lines to stand in (there were seperate lines to check your voter ID card and lines for the voting machine, in addition to splitting up lines by first letters of last names for check-in.)

Now, here's my take on how something like this should be designed:

The modularity of the paper overlay is a good idea and can be retained. Either that, or use expensive touch screens. Either is fine, and if cost is not an issue, I believe that touch screens would PROBABLY be a better plan since paper can (concievably) shift or slide. The important part here is that the layout (since either can be dynamic from election to election) needs to be CARFULY considered for each election.

The OS:
- Should NOT be Linux.
- Should NOT be BSD.
- Should NOT be Solaris
- Should not be Windows.
It should NOT HAVE an "OS" in the traditional sence of the term at all! It should have a simple "dumb interface" like a VCR, digital watch, phone, microwave, etc. When is the last time your Microwave "crashed"? If it's EVER happened, I'm sure it's happened less to you than any general computing OS you've ever used. Linux has crashed on me, Windows has crashed on me, Macs have crashed on me. My VCR? Hardware has failed (motors) but the software end of it has to my knowlege never failed.

Also, as to open source... this is a more touchy subject. I do agree that the code (probably C. the Elevator Principal applies perfectly to this situation.) does need to be audited make the source redily available. But I don't see any particular reason that it can't be developed by a private party / company/ whatever.

Several other people brought up concerns about "What if" people obtained the source code, edited it to their liking and installed it on the voting machines. Well, this isn't a problem with dedicated hardware/software on a microcontroler. When is the last time you heard of someone changine the software on their VCR? And without opening the thing up and breaking out the solder gun? And with people (Election officials) that don't want them to do this standing around watching to make sure they don't do this? In any concievable situation where this would be insecure, ANY method (pencil and paper for example) would be insecure due to the amount of corruption it would require. If anything, this might make coruption a little more dificult to pull off since it would require someone with in depth technical know-how AND would almost certainly take a conspiricy rather than a lone nut to rig votes.

Now for the other end of the equation. I believe (due to the companies mentioned) that they want to use a PC type of archetecture. I don't see why. It's insecure, unstable, and too generalized for the task at hand. Life support machines don't run Windows. Missle Guidance Systems don't run BSD. Power Plants don't Run MacOS. Why should this?

Now, I understand that this being /. and all, that one is expected to bash Microsoft.

I think this is lame.

Do I like Microsoft? Not particularly. Do I think they are evil? Only their business practices. But their software is the best thing out there for the home user. For the software I want to run, they and Apple are the only game in town. My web sites, however all run under Red Hat. I wouldn't DREAM of running any kind of site that recieved decent amounts of traffic under NT. However, why is Linux a good choice for VOTING MACHINES? Pick the right tool for the job people. PCs in general simply aren't cut out to going something like this. There's a reason it's called "general computing" because these machines have to be Jacks of all trades. The trade off is that they don't realy master any of those trades. They crash, they're often slower than a dedicated machine for the same task, etc.

Computers are not nessisarily bad for voting. In fact I encourage the use of computers. However, don't use general computers. Don't do this half assed. Don't try to shoe horn in the wrong tool for the job. Use a dedicated hardware/software solution.

Happy to oblige.
--

Well, look here for the story on the backdoor in the Unix C compiler.

>I'll hack hardware, but I don't have a burning desire to redesign furniture.


Doesn't Hacker Originally Mean One Who Works With Furniture?
--------------------

I had been looking for one with the following quote: "Software is like sex, its better when its free." I can't find one anywhere so I think I will have to make my own. (Do it yourself, that's it!)

Linux General Store sells t-shirts with this slogan on them, just click here to get one.

I had three of these things, and one should be hanging around somewhere........it's my favorite shirt, and I even went to geeks with guns in one of these (photo).

Hope this helps.

ObJectBridge (GPL'd Java ODMG) needs volunteers.

I had been looking for one with the following quote: "Software is like sex, its better when its free." I can't find one anywhere so I think I will have to make my own. (Do it yourself, that's it!)

Linux General Store sells t-shirts with this slogan on them, just click here to get one.

I had three of these things, and one should be hanging around somewhere........it's my favorite shirt, and I even went to geeks with guns in one of these (photo).

Hope this helps.

ObJectBridge (GPL'd Java ODMG) needs volunteers.

Obviously you are not versed on your Jargon File. I quote:

pr0n //

[Usenet, IRC] Pornography. Originally this referred only to Internet porn but since then it has expanded to refer to just about anything. The term comes from the warez kiddies tendency to replace letters with numbers. At some point on IRC someone mistyped, swapped the middle two letters, and the name stuck, then propagated over into mainstream hacker usage. Compare filk , grilf , hing and newsfroup .

Obviously you are not versed on your Jargon File. I quote:

pr0n //

[Usenet, IRC] Pornography. Originally this referred only to Internet porn but since then it has expanded to refer to just about anything. The term comes from the warez kiddies tendency to replace letters with numbers. At some point on IRC someone mistyped, swapped the middle two letters, and the name stuck, then propagated over into mainstream hacker usage. Compare filk , grilf , hing and newsfroup .

Obviously you are not versed on your Jargon File. I quote:

pr0n //

[Usenet, IRC] Pornography. Originally this referred only to Internet porn but since then it has expanded to refer to just about anything. The term comes from the warez kiddies tendency to replace letters with numbers. At some point on IRC someone mistyped, swapped the middle two letters, and the name stuck, then propagated over into mainstream hacker usage. Compare filk , grilf , hing and newsfroup .

Obviously you are not versed on your Jargon File. I quote:

pr0n //

[Usenet, IRC] Pornography. Originally this referred only to Internet porn but since then it has expanded to refer to just about anything. The term comes from the warez kiddies tendency to replace letters with numbers. At some point on IRC someone mistyped, swapped the middle two letters, and the name stuck, then propagated over into mainstream hacker usage. Compare filk , grilf , hing and newsfroup .

Obviously you are not versed on your Jargon File. I quote:

pr0n //

[Usenet, IRC] Pornography. Originally this referred only to Internet porn but since then it has expanded to refer to just about anything. The term comes from the warez kiddies tendency to replace letters with numbers. At some point on IRC someone mistyped, swapped the middle two letters, and the name stuck, then propagated over into mainstream hacker usage. Compare filk , grilf , hing and newsfroup .

Obviously you are not versed on your Jargon File. I quote:

pr0n //

[Usenet, IRC] Pornography. Originally this referred only to Internet porn but since then it has expanded to refer to just about anything. The term comes from the warez kiddies tendency to replace letters with numbers. At some point on IRC someone mistyped, swapped the middle two letters, and the name stuck, then propagated over into mainstream hacker usage. Compare filk , grilf , hing and newsfroup .

"Hacking, spreading viruses are much bigger criminal offenses in cyber terrorism than pornography,"
Since when did that become a crime?
Well, we in India aren't allowed By LAW to possess explicit pornography in any form what so ever.
Believe it or not, we're punishable by 2 years RI.

Mehta is a DUMB ASS SUIT.
He knows very little of computers (from what I kno w of him) but manages to be clicked with the right people in the right places.

India is hiring 15-19 year olds who say they can break into a computer in five minutes to install firewalls and configure servers? The only reason I could see to hire some 16-19 year old 'hackers' is to get cheap and semi-knowledgable labor.

They don't pay them much except paying for their internet costs (which are pretty high in India).
The people in charge are b'crats (read idiots).
The real HACKERS (take the meaning mentioned in the Jargon File Jargon) don't work or associate themselves with the GOVT.
Most of them go to institutes like the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, IISc Banglore et al.
The next time you read anything about Mehta, take it with a pinch nay a sack of salt
.

1. Competition is often a Good Thing. Look at the KDE/Gnome split.
2. One of them is free software, the other isn't (or, at least, wasn't). Note that this was originally a cause of the KDE/Gnome split.
3. They might do the same thing in different ways. Consider:
   • ease of use for novices vs. speed of use for experts
   • looking or working more like like this, that or the other existing client
   • eye candy vs. uncluttered
   • more features vs. more speed and less disk space
4. And if they were both GPLd, they could borrow code from one another anyway-- theoretically, at least.

Nor does Netscape for that matter, and they have a lot more money and resources than we.

Anyway, dude, it *does* work.

Relax, open your mind and have some fun ... there is a lot going on here.

Do you realize that you're re-inventing JSP with taglibs

Do you realise that nearly all computer languages in to languages is based on Chomsky's context free grammars. Language P is not. It is probably the worlds first syllabically based, context sensitive grammar. As such, there are things that it can do quite exquisitely simply that are practically impossible in other languages, or quite clumsy.

Online parser is here.

As for Netscapes cretinisms, I will see what I can do about cleaning up the code. Linux port is planned to start in about 6 months, but as they do not support VML yet, we are not concentrating on it as a client at this stage.

Anyone interested in starting a VML project for Netscape?

Do you know anything about XML or do you just like acronyms that start with "X"? They are cool, aren't they...

Well, we know a *little* bit about XML.

Here is a bit of fun, as is here and here.

My version of netscape attempts to save to disk a .prx file, but ie will dump out an XML document if you click the links.

The article takes a legal perspective: the compatibility monopolies section fails to acknowlege the connector conspiracy principle that we all know from the famed JARGON file. It completely misses vital necessary points that are common knowledge among the technical elite, and in the bias the conclusion falls on the wrong side.

When I read things like

... in the 20th century, certain monopolies focused on providing the best product and price to their customers. Microsoft did just that, and judging from their economic success, they accomplished this extremely well.

What I am afraid this article may suggest (to the wrong people) is that the Microsofts and IBMs of the world deserve the right to "innovate" new interfaces, but they must be mediated by a central authority. I fear this authority who will guarantee nothing about the under the table licensing schemes and pre-release engineering samples, but *will* guarantee that software patents worm their way in like a liver fluke as a safeguard for the incentive MS and IBM had to create all that superior technology.

Then again, this is preaching to the choir of "Standards" people. Just remember: standards are created by consortiums of big corporations when and if their legal departments see fit. Also remember to use free software: it rules (and The Law just drools).

The article takes a legal perspective: the compatibility monopolies section fails to acknowlege the connector conspiracy principle that we all know from the famed JARGON file. It completely misses vital necessary points that are common knowledge among the technical elite, and in the bias the conclusion falls on the wrong side.

When I read things like

... in the 20th century, certain monopolies focused on providing the best product and price to their customers. Microsoft did just that, and judging from their economic success, they accomplished this extremely well.

What I am afraid this article may suggest (to the wrong people) is that the Microsofts and IBMs of the world deserve the right to "innovate" new interfaces, but they must be mediated by a central authority. I fear this authority who will guarantee nothing about the under the table licensing schemes and pre-release engineering samples, but *will* guarantee that software patents worm their way in like a liver fluke as a safeguard for the incentive MS and IBM had to create all that superior technology.

Then again, this is preaching to the choir of "Standards" people. Just remember: standards are created by consortiums of big corporations when and if their legal departments see fit. Also remember to use free software: it rules (and The Law just drools).

My Batman Factor is 2, will be 3 if I get a Palm Pilot. Who can claim the highest Batman Factor?

We do have a government-approved standard. It is called Ada.

This would be just like Ada, except that it would cover every conceivable standard!
And, best of all, there is no escape!

And how distracting are cameras? How are people going to handle looking into a camera display while walking down the street? I predict a sharp uptick in pedestrian fatalities when this arrangement becomes popular.

Neutron

There's a mistaken assumption that in order to "make it", one must cater to Windows users.

Maybe on a certain level this is true. But if you want a Windows-esque experience, use Windows.

Certain aspects of the GUI will probably be shared. But to completely duplicate the entire Windows UI is ridiculous.

I agree that there should be some fairly comprehensive tutorials for the "Too Smart for "For Dummies" crowd. But a familiarization is all they need, a boost along the learning curve. Not a redefinition of the learning curve.

I'm sorry, but Linux is, for most intents and purposes, Unix. Unix is obtuse, arcane, and very empowering to use. It requires a steeper learning curve than straight WIMP environments such as Windows.

It'd be a mistake to castrate usability in the name of "user friendliness".


Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!

Funny, I though that "shotgun" approach was what made Linux, and the whole Open-Source movement, so reliable and powerful.

http://www.tuxedo.org/, and read "The Cathedral and the Bazaar", if you haven't already.

There is no such thing as 'nonconsensual' speech.

Alas, that's not true.

Suppose I decide that you and the people in your apartment building are ripe for induction into my MLM scheme; all you need is a little more information about it. So I go buy the biggest loudspeaker system I can find and set it out front. I then rant continuously for days at a time, using pals to keep up a continuous stream of sales pitch. Neither you nor your neighbors are interested, and you are all trying your best not to hear.

When people are talking about nonconsentual communications, that's what they mean. You're welcome to have a different name for it, of course.

The entire point of Free (as in liberty) speech
is that you have the unfettered right to communicate.

I am sad to say that you are again off the mark.

Communication requires at least two participants. If I stand alone in the woods and speak my mind, that isn't communication. And if I stand alone in the woods and just listen to the wind in the trees, that isn't communication, either. Communication only happens when there is a speaker and a listener.

Freedom of speech means that nobody (especially the government) should come between two people trying to communicate. It does not mean the act of flapping ones lips should be at all times protected. If, despite your requests to stop, I chase you down the street shouting obscenities and nonsense words, that's just harassment; free speech never enters into it.

If you're interested in learning more about the nature of communication, you should read that hacker favorite, Godel, Escher, Bach.

It's more a testimony to how idiotic the "enforcement" side of school has become (6-year olds expelled for kissing, etc.).

Way back in about (*cough* *cough), my junior high had a PDP-11 (so I spit on the waffles of you NT youngsters). Was used for accounting, and admin. decided to teach a computer programming class...by the end of it half of us thirteen-year-olds knew more about the thing than anyone. Some of us were asked to help run it, some of us kept trying to crack it.

One of us punks starting collecting passwords with a login spoofer, etc, had a list of all accounting passwords, everything else really.

And when he was caught basically got a "don't do that again" lecture and was asked to show how he did it. Shades of Oliver Wendell Jones...

But of course, these days we have to start following the smart ones early...

I hereby invoke Godwin's Law.

Also see the Largon file entry for syntactic sugar.

Eric Raymond in his seminal work, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, stated that one of the ways to create a successful Open Source project is to release something that developers can use and find useful. As a developer it is easy for me to run a program and decide if I think it has potential or not, on the other hand it's a pain for me to look at 10 - 100 source files trying to figure it if the design is good and why I can't compile it.

Another good thing about releasing binaries is that it gives the developers more incentive to fix bugs and create milestones than if they just released source and makefiles at random because it means they have to make the software run as smoothly as possible and tackle usability/configuration problems early.

In my opinion screenshots are not as useful but still serve a purpose such as enticing people who are just browsing through projects at Sourceforge to take a closer look at your project.

Grabel's Law

If he's really into EE, check out what the top EE depts teach.

And just to follow up, somebody has now decided that my original post was a troll, which is a post "designed to attract predictable responses or flames". Given that I'm the only one to respond to it, does this mean that somebody thinks I fell for my own troll? Or was this just to demonstrate my point that some moderators are apparently clue-deficient?

Sigh.