Slashdot Mirror

RMS dislikes the use of "win" to refer to the MS Windows platform because he regards using MS Windows as a loss, not a win. So in the GNU Emacs source code, all variables and functions in the MS Windows port that had been named win32-* were changed to w32-*.

Additionally, In the Emacs manual, "MS-DOG" is used to reference MS-DOS.

"Writing something provocative and intresting, and timing it so that it gets a lot of exposure and revinue is not trolling."

troll
1. v.,n. [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames; or, the post itself. Derives from the phrase "trolling for newbies" which in turn comes from mainstream "trolling", a style of fishing in which one trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite.

But let's not get pedantic now here...

From the article:

The Nazis were archetypal Romantics.

While appearing on the web, not on Usenet, clearly this is a violation of Godwin's Law.

Sorry, Dave.

The real, current bogofilter page is at http://bogofilter.sourceforge.net.

Two words: fetchmail, bogofilter

Who cares what his political and moral persuasions may or may not be? If he helps reduce the thousands of spam emails that hit my mail server every day I'd be very grateful for his opinions to be aired.

Two words: fetchmail, bogofilter

Who cares what his political and moral persuasions may or may not be? If he helps reduce the thousands of spam emails that hit my mail server every day I'd be very grateful for his opinions to be aired.

The parent is modded Redundant? Hmmmm.

For what it's worth, I concur with ShavenYak's statement that what they meant was that apps compiled with 3.1.1 will run on 3.1.0 systems and vice versa. The term forward compatible itself, therefore, is redundant, not the parent. Backward compatibility already takes care of the "forward" part (3.1.0 apps working with 3.1.1), so we must relegate this part of the release announcement to the realm of Buzzword Compliant. ;-P

So no, I don't expect that people will understand stateful packet inspection, ingres/egres filtering, bogon filters, application versus network versus physical layer differentiation, or any of the other industry specific jargon I could name...

I think that with some thought, even a VB coder like myself can figure out most of those terms. But I knew I'd spent too much time online when the first one that my mind clearly identified was the Bogon Filter!

Yikes... have I spent so much time following random links in the Jargon File, that I've lost touch with the actual jargon of my chosen profession?

Moderators: I know, I'm straying off topic... I'm not using the +1, so please don't hurt me! :)

When I read the headline, I thought it was yet another backdoor in login, like the one Ken Thompson put there in the early days of UNIX.

This is a fun discussion, but you've clearly got the upper hand. I'm not too pedantic about language because I don't know that much about it. I know the basics such as nouns and verbs, subjects and predicates, but when it comes to any advanced elements of grammar or syntax, I'm lost. (I just learned the proper spelling for `grammar' a few months ago. It looks really bad to misspell that word.)

Thanks for that Calvin and Hobbes link, that's a cool site. I like Calvin's sentence because it shows a certain playfullness that's very endearing to me. To turn the noun "verb" into a verb in a sentence about verbing is truly beautiful (IMHO). You're probably already familiar with The Jargon File, but just in case you're not, you may want to check out this, this, this, this, and this. (I'm going for an award for Most Gratuitous Linking To ESR's Site. :-) )

As much as I like word play, I'm not always very good at it. I can't tell if your quotation at the end is simply saying, "apathy is bad", or if it's grammatically incorrect in some amusing and subtle way.

This is a fun discussion, but you've clearly got the upper hand. I'm not too pedantic about language because I don't know that much about it. I know the basics such as nouns and verbs, subjects and predicates, but when it comes to any advanced elements of grammar or syntax, I'm lost. (I just learned the proper spelling for `grammar' a few months ago. It looks really bad to misspell that word.)

Thanks for that Calvin and Hobbes link, that's a cool site. I like Calvin's sentence because it shows a certain playfullness that's very endearing to me. To turn the noun "verb" into a verb in a sentence about verbing is truly beautiful (IMHO). You're probably already familiar with The Jargon File, but just in case you're not, you may want to check out this, this, this, this, and this. (I'm going for an award for Most Gratuitous Linking To ESR's Site. :-) )

As much as I like word play, I'm not always very good at it. I can't tell if your quotation at the end is simply saying, "apathy is bad", or if it's grammatically incorrect in some amusing and subtle way.

This is a fun discussion, but you've clearly got the upper hand. I'm not too pedantic about language because I don't know that much about it. I know the basics such as nouns and verbs, subjects and predicates, but when it comes to any advanced elements of grammar or syntax, I'm lost. (I just learned the proper spelling for `grammar' a few months ago. It looks really bad to misspell that word.)

Thanks for that Calvin and Hobbes link, that's a cool site. I like Calvin's sentence because it shows a certain playfullness that's very endearing to me. To turn the noun "verb" into a verb in a sentence about verbing is truly beautiful (IMHO). You're probably already familiar with The Jargon File, but just in case you're not, you may want to check out this, this, this, this, and this. (I'm going for an award for Most Gratuitous Linking To ESR's Site. :-) )

As much as I like word play, I'm not always very good at it. I can't tell if your quotation at the end is simply saying, "apathy is bad", or if it's grammatically incorrect in some amusing and subtle way.

This is a fun discussion, but you've clearly got the upper hand. I'm not too pedantic about language because I don't know that much about it. I know the basics such as nouns and verbs, subjects and predicates, but when it comes to any advanced elements of grammar or syntax, I'm lost. (I just learned the proper spelling for `grammar' a few months ago. It looks really bad to misspell that word.)

Thanks for that Calvin and Hobbes link, that's a cool site. I like Calvin's sentence because it shows a certain playfullness that's very endearing to me. To turn the noun "verb" into a verb in a sentence about verbing is truly beautiful (IMHO). You're probably already familiar with The Jargon File, but just in case you're not, you may want to check out this, this, this, this, and this. (I'm going for an award for Most Gratuitous Linking To ESR's Site. :-) )

As much as I like word play, I'm not always very good at it. I can't tell if your quotation at the end is simply saying, "apathy is bad", or if it's grammatically incorrect in some amusing and subtle way.

This is a fun discussion, but you've clearly got the upper hand. I'm not too pedantic about language because I don't know that much about it. I know the basics such as nouns and verbs, subjects and predicates, but when it comes to any advanced elements of grammar or syntax, I'm lost. (I just learned the proper spelling for `grammar' a few months ago. It looks really bad to misspell that word.)

Thanks for that Calvin and Hobbes link, that's a cool site. I like Calvin's sentence because it shows a certain playfullness that's very endearing to me. To turn the noun "verb" into a verb in a sentence about verbing is truly beautiful (IMHO). You're probably already familiar with The Jargon File, but just in case you're not, you may want to check out this, this, this, this, and this. (I'm going for an award for Most Gratuitous Linking To ESR's Site. :-) )

As much as I like word play, I'm not always very good at it. I can't tell if your quotation at the end is simply saying, "apathy is bad", or if it's grammatically incorrect in some amusing and subtle way.

Too bad you didn't provide the link for the crackerjack box from which you read that. The counter argument you provide is flawed, unfortunately.

..machines must either make the same leap in complexity such that their actual thought processes can no longer be mapped directly to the underlying formal system..

The thing about this is, the difference between one and the other doesn't necessarily lie in any physical complexity. The idea is that a system of sufficient complexity should develop higher level processes that aren't directly mappable to the structure all by itself. Take the ant hill, for instance. Hofstadter explained it quite sufficiently, so I won't.

So you see, computers don't need to make any "leap in complexity". You're invoking images of some kind of mystical metamorphosis. When and if a computer is made of sufficiently complexity and linkage, these "actual thought processes" (as opposed to some kind of false thought process?) will manifest themselves quite apart from the designer's intention.

And those manifestations will probably be considered bugs. Mandelbugs. So could it be that computers are already beginning to reach sentience, and that the ones that are furthest along are always "fixed", thus resetting the process? Such a thing, left to itself, would not just accrue sentience. Computers are at a disadvantage because they cannot gather input of their own free will. They can only gather input when they're being used, unless they're specifically set to do it by automation. Nobody wants to waste the power of the ASCI White by reconfiguring it with simple data rearrangement rules and setting it to parse the internet by itself, just on the off-chance it will become self-aware. After all, what is sentience except the ability to respond to input in a meaningful way by referring back to previous input that is somehow similar? It is in how "similarity" is judged that the fuzzy issues come into play.

A child who has never been taught anything in its life, including language, will not be able to understand that "It thinks, therefore it is." Is it, then, any less sentient? Even if it did understand, how would an external interrogater learn that? The child doesn't understand language. Even if you teach it to push bits according to an external rule system, it won't necessarily be able to use this knowledge to convey it's own thoughts about sentience. Chinese room scenario again. The child is sentient, but it doesn't have to understand what it's doing with the bits to do it right. So it wouldn't be able to use this method of output as a way to declare its sentience. The child+rulebook understands, but the child does not. So we'd have to wait until the system of the child+rulebook developed sentience of its own, apart from that of the child. And would THAT sentience understand that the child was sentient? Not necessarily. Not to mention that the relationship between the child and the rulebook is so simple, that system would never devlop sentience.

Or perhaps you subscribe to the "Breath of Life" school of thought, that claims some magical "extra" is necessary for sentience. Puh-lease. I'm going to shoot the next person that says "only God can create life".

Mobile communications are nothing new either, not even mobile computer-mediated communication. Sure, it's a lot more convenient now than in the early 1980s where one lugged around something like a TI Silent700 terminal with built-in acoustic modem and hooked it up to a pay-phone (been there, done that, got the wierd looks), but it isn't new. There were a lot of us bixen whose weapon of choice when on the road was a Radio Shack Model 100 (with its built-in 4-line screen) with either its acoustic coupler or handy-dandy phone jack 'n alligator clips to hook into the motel's telephone system.

I must say you seem surprisingly defensive about a comment that in no way maligned your book, unless you have such a deep emotional investment in believing that you have come up with some new observation that you feel maligned. I haven't read your book, so perhaps you have -- although it seems to me that human sociological phenomena are based in no small part on the way humans are wired, so while there may be new expressions of sociological phenomena, I don't think there'll be new phenomena without a much more fundamental change in the human experience than "just" better communication and data access.

My little brother is (informally diagnosed) ADD, possibly ADHD, and after reading a couple of chapters of Driven to Distraction I'm convinced that I'm at least borderline ADD.

I've always felt, however, that my distractability was not a negative trait -- in fact, with some effort, I've been able to train myself so I can, for instance, participate in two conversations at once, or some similar multi-input task. In fact, I'm convinced that this is the flip side of what the Jargon File calls hack mode, "a Zen-like state of total focus on The Problem" to the exclusion of everything else. This is an ability that I greatly value, even though it's sometimes not fun to finish a project and then suddenly realize that I've forgotten to eat, sleep, or use the bathroom for way too long.

My question, then is: is this a trait (or a mental ability) that is related somehow to the "hacker" mentality? Comments above have indicated that ADD children are often very intelligent and often have logical/mathematical abstract thinking patterns -- both of which are characteristic of hackers. I'd love to see some statistics (if there are any) on the relationship there.

When I got started, it was (chagrin) through Stephenson's ITBWTCL, which piqued my interest along with ESR's work.

Beginner courses should probably focus on what Linux does really well conceptually. Like how it's a hot-rodder's dream - that you can really trick out the system the way you like it. Or appeal to the political side and talk about the freedoms you get with the switch.

Geeks need to appeal to things other than reason and logic. Right?

Nobody should be required to pick up a manual and read through hundreds of pages before they're able to use something.

Err yes they should and that goes for anything technical. Reading and training are essential but practice is most important. We're not learning to ride a bike here. I think what your trying to say is that reading a book on programming isn't going to make you a good programmer because it won't. Often I see ppl ask dumb questions that could be solved by typing in a man command. I think the absolute first thing any newbie should read are these 2 documents ->

Asking smart questions
How to report bugs effectively

Godwin's Law prov.

[Usenet] "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." There is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. Godwin's Law thus practically guarantees the existence of an upper bound on thread length in those groups. However there is also a widely- recognized codicil that any intentional triggering of Godwin's Law in order to invoke its thread-ending effects will be unsuccessful.

They even had a (norwegian) article titled "Hero or hacker?"

They oughta do some reading

Please see this and also this entry of The Jargon File (aka The New Hacker's Dictionary), the pre-eminent and oldest hacker slang resource, currently maintained by OSS guru Eric S. Raymond.

(Note the etymology shows no reference to any type of necrophilic acts)

Please see this and also this entry of The Jargon File (aka The New Hacker's Dictionary), the pre-eminent and oldest hacker slang resource, currently maintained by OSS guru Eric S. Raymond.

(Note the etymology shows no reference to any type of necrophilic acts)

Please see this and also this entry of The Jargon File (aka The New Hacker's Dictionary), the pre-eminent and oldest hacker slang resource, currently maintained by OSS guru Eric S. Raymond.

(Note the etymology shows no reference to any type of necrophilic acts)

Please see this and also this entry of The Jargon File (aka The New Hacker's Dictionary), the pre-eminent and oldest hacker slang resource, currently maintained by OSS guru Eric S. Raymond.

(Note the etymology shows no reference to any type of necrophilic acts)

From The Jargon File:

bogon /boh'gon/ n.

[very common; by analogy with proton/electron/neutron, but doubtless reinforced after 1980 by the similarity to Douglas Adams's `Vogons'; see the Bibliography in Appendix C and note that Arthur Dent actually mispronounces `Vogons' as `Bogons' at one point] 1. The elementary particle of bogosity (see quantum bogodynamics ). For instance, "the Ethernet is emitting bogons again" means that it is broken or acting in an erratic or bogus fashion. 2. A query packet sent from a TCP/IP domain resolver to a root server, having the reply bit set instead of the query bit. 3. Any bogus or incorrectly formed packet sent on a network. 4. By synecdoche, used to refer to any bogus thing, as in "I'd like to go to lunch with you but I've got to go to the weekly staff bogon". 5. A person who is bogus or who says bogus things. This was historically the original usage, but has been overtaken by its derivative senses 1-4. See also bogosity , bogus ; compare psyton , fat electrons , magic smoke .

The bogon has become the type case for a whole bestiary of nonce particle names, including the `clutron' or `cluon' (indivisible particle of cluefulness, obviously the antiparticle of the bogon) and the futon (elementary particle of randomness , or sometimes of lameness). These are not so much live usages in themselves as examples of a live meta-usage: that is, it has become a standard joke or linguistic maneuver to "explain" otherwise mysterious circumstances by inventing nonce particle names. And these imply nonce particle theories, with all their dignity or lack thereof (we might note parenthetically that this is a generalization from "(bogus particle) theories" to "bogus (particle theories)"!). Perhaps such particles are the modern-day equivalents of trolls and wood-nymphs as standard starting-points around which to construct explanatory myths. Of course, playing on an existing word (as in the `futon') yields additional flavor. Compare magic smoke .

Note: This is a static quote from The Jargon File version 4.3.3, which is lovingly maintained by our own Eric S. Raymond. If you are reading this post long after its freshness date, please refer to the original entry.

From The Jargon File:

bogon /boh'gon/ n.

[very common; by analogy with proton/electron/neutron, but doubtless reinforced after 1980 by the similarity to Douglas Adams's `Vogons'; see the Bibliography in Appendix C and note that Arthur Dent actually mispronounces `Vogons' as `Bogons' at one point] 1. The elementary particle of bogosity (see quantum bogodynamics ). For instance, "the Ethernet is emitting bogons again" means that it is broken or acting in an erratic or bogus fashion. 2. A query packet sent from a TCP/IP domain resolver to a root server, having the reply bit set instead of the query bit. 3. Any bogus or incorrectly formed packet sent on a network. 4. By synecdoche, used to refer to any bogus thing, as in "I'd like to go to lunch with you but I've got to go to the weekly staff bogon". 5. A person who is bogus or who says bogus things. This was historically the original usage, but has been overtaken by its derivative senses 1-4. See also bogosity , bogus ; compare psyton , fat electrons , magic smoke .

The bogon has become the type case for a whole bestiary of nonce particle names, including the `clutron' or `cluon' (indivisible particle of cluefulness, obviously the antiparticle of the bogon) and the futon (elementary particle of randomness , or sometimes of lameness). These are not so much live usages in themselves as examples of a live meta-usage: that is, it has become a standard joke or linguistic maneuver to "explain" otherwise mysterious circumstances by inventing nonce particle names. And these imply nonce particle theories, with all their dignity or lack thereof (we might note parenthetically that this is a generalization from "(bogus particle) theories" to "bogus (particle theories)"!). Perhaps such particles are the modern-day equivalents of trolls and wood-nymphs as standard starting-points around which to construct explanatory myths. Of course, playing on an existing word (as in the `futon') yields additional flavor. Compare magic smoke .

Note: This is a static quote from The Jargon File version 4.3.3, which is lovingly maintained by our own Eric S. Raymond. If you are reading this post long after its freshness date, please refer to the original entry.

From The Jargon File:

bogon /boh'gon/ n.

[very common; by analogy with proton/electron/neutron, but doubtless reinforced after 1980 by the similarity to Douglas Adams's `Vogons'; see the Bibliography in Appendix C and note that Arthur Dent actually mispronounces `Vogons' as `Bogons' at one point] 1. The elementary particle of bogosity (see quantum bogodynamics ). For instance, "the Ethernet is emitting bogons again" means that it is broken or acting in an erratic or bogus fashion. 2. A query packet sent from a TCP/IP domain resolver to a root server, having the reply bit set instead of the query bit. 3. Any bogus or incorrectly formed packet sent on a network. 4. By synecdoche, used to refer to any bogus thing, as in "I'd like to go to lunch with you but I've got to go to the weekly staff bogon". 5. A person who is bogus or who says bogus things. This was historically the original usage, but has been overtaken by its derivative senses 1-4. See also bogosity , bogus ; compare psyton , fat electrons , magic smoke .

The bogon has become the type case for a whole bestiary of nonce particle names, including the `clutron' or `cluon' (indivisible particle of cluefulness, obviously the antiparticle of the bogon) and the futon (elementary particle of randomness , or sometimes of lameness). These are not so much live usages in themselves as examples of a live meta-usage: that is, it has become a standard joke or linguistic maneuver to "explain" otherwise mysterious circumstances by inventing nonce particle names. And these imply nonce particle theories, with all their dignity or lack thereof (we might note parenthetically that this is a generalization from "(bogus particle) theories" to "bogus (particle theories)"!). Perhaps such particles are the modern-day equivalents of trolls and wood-nymphs as standard starting-points around which to construct explanatory myths. Of course, playing on an existing word (as in the `futon') yields additional flavor. Compare magic smoke .

Note: This is a static quote from The Jargon File version 4.3.3, which is lovingly maintained by our own Eric S. Raymond. If you are reading this post long after its freshness date, please refer to the original entry.

From The Jargon File:

bogon /boh'gon/ n.

[very common; by analogy with proton/electron/neutron, but doubtless reinforced after 1980 by the similarity to Douglas Adams's `Vogons'; see the Bibliography in Appendix C and note that Arthur Dent actually mispronounces `Vogons' as `Bogons' at one point] 1. The elementary particle of bogosity (see quantum bogodynamics ). For instance, "the Ethernet is emitting bogons again" means that it is broken or acting in an erratic or bogus fashion. 2. A query packet sent from a TCP/IP domain resolver to a root server, having the reply bit set instead of the query bit. 3. Any bogus or incorrectly formed packet sent on a network. 4. By synecdoche, used to refer to any bogus thing, as in "I'd like to go to lunch with you but I've got to go to the weekly staff bogon". 5. A person who is bogus or who says bogus things. This was historically the original usage, but has been overtaken by its derivative senses 1-4. See also bogosity , bogus ; compare psyton , fat electrons , magic smoke .

The bogon has become the type case for a whole bestiary of nonce particle names, including the `clutron' or `cluon' (indivisible particle of cluefulness, obviously the antiparticle of the bogon) and the futon (elementary particle of randomness , or sometimes of lameness). These are not so much live usages in themselves as examples of a live meta-usage: that is, it has become a standard joke or linguistic maneuver to "explain" otherwise mysterious circumstances by inventing nonce particle names. And these imply nonce particle theories, with all their dignity or lack thereof (we might note parenthetically that this is a generalization from "(bogus particle) theories" to "bogus (particle theories)"!). Perhaps such particles are the modern-day equivalents of trolls and wood-nymphs as standard starting-points around which to construct explanatory myths. Of course, playing on an existing word (as in the `futon') yields additional flavor. Compare magic smoke .

Note: This is a static quote from The Jargon File version 4.3.3, which is lovingly maintained by our own Eric S. Raymond. If you are reading this post long after its freshness date, please refer to the original entry.

From The Jargon File:

bogon /boh'gon/ n.

[very common; by analogy with proton/electron/neutron, but doubtless reinforced after 1980 by the similarity to Douglas Adams's `Vogons'; see the Bibliography in Appendix C and note that Arthur Dent actually mispronounces `Vogons' as `Bogons' at one point] 1. The elementary particle of bogosity (see quantum bogodynamics ). For instance, "the Ethernet is emitting bogons again" means that it is broken or acting in an erratic or bogus fashion. 2. A query packet sent from a TCP/IP domain resolver to a root server, having the reply bit set instead of the query bit. 3. Any bogus or incorrectly formed packet sent on a network. 4. By synecdoche, used to refer to any bogus thing, as in "I'd like to go to lunch with you but I've got to go to the weekly staff bogon". 5. A person who is bogus or who says bogus things. This was historically the original usage, but has been overtaken by its derivative senses 1-4. See also bogosity , bogus ; compare psyton , fat electrons , magic smoke .

The bogon has become the type case for a whole bestiary of nonce particle names, including the `clutron' or `cluon' (indivisible particle of cluefulness, obviously the antiparticle of the bogon) and the futon (elementary particle of randomness , or sometimes of lameness). These are not so much live usages in themselves as examples of a live meta-usage: that is, it has become a standard joke or linguistic maneuver to "explain" otherwise mysterious circumstances by inventing nonce particle names. And these imply nonce particle theories, with all their dignity or lack thereof (we might note parenthetically that this is a generalization from "(bogus particle) theories" to "bogus (particle theories)"!). Perhaps such particles are the modern-day equivalents of trolls and wood-nymphs as standard starting-points around which to construct explanatory myths. Of course, playing on an existing word (as in the `futon') yields additional flavor. Compare magic smoke .

Note: This is a static quote from The Jargon File version 4.3.3, which is lovingly maintained by our own Eric S. Raymond. If you are reading this post long after its freshness date, please refer to the original entry.

From The Jargon File:

bogon /boh'gon/ n.

[very common; by analogy with proton/electron/neutron, but doubtless reinforced after 1980 by the similarity to Douglas Adams's `Vogons'; see the Bibliography in Appendix C and note that Arthur Dent actually mispronounces `Vogons' as `Bogons' at one point] 1. The elementary particle of bogosity (see quantum bogodynamics ). For instance, "the Ethernet is emitting bogons again" means that it is broken or acting in an erratic or bogus fashion. 2. A query packet sent from a TCP/IP domain resolver to a root server, having the reply bit set instead of the query bit. 3. Any bogus or incorrectly formed packet sent on a network. 4. By synecdoche, used to refer to any bogus thing, as in "I'd like to go to lunch with you but I've got to go to the weekly staff bogon". 5. A person who is bogus or who says bogus things. This was historically the original usage, but has been overtaken by its derivative senses 1-4. See also bogosity , bogus ; compare psyton , fat electrons , magic smoke .

The bogon has become the type case for a whole bestiary of nonce particle names, including the `clutron' or `cluon' (indivisible particle of cluefulness, obviously the antiparticle of the bogon) and the futon (elementary particle of randomness , or sometimes of lameness). These are not so much live usages in themselves as examples of a live meta-usage: that is, it has become a standard joke or linguistic maneuver to "explain" otherwise mysterious circumstances by inventing nonce particle names. And these imply nonce particle theories, with all their dignity or lack thereof (we might note parenthetically that this is a generalization from "(bogus particle) theories" to "bogus (particle theories)"!). Perhaps such particles are the modern-day equivalents of trolls and wood-nymphs as standard starting-points around which to construct explanatory myths. Of course, playing on an existing word (as in the `futon') yields additional flavor. Compare magic smoke .

Note: This is a static quote from The Jargon File version 4.3.3, which is lovingly maintained by our own Eric S. Raymond. If you are reading this post long after its freshness date, please refer to the original entry.

From The Jargon File:

bogon /boh'gon/ n.

[very common; by analogy with proton/electron/neutron, but doubtless reinforced after 1980 by the similarity to Douglas Adams's `Vogons'; see the Bibliography in Appendix C and note that Arthur Dent actually mispronounces `Vogons' as `Bogons' at one point] 1. The elementary particle of bogosity (see quantum bogodynamics ). For instance, "the Ethernet is emitting bogons again" means that it is broken or acting in an erratic or bogus fashion. 2. A query packet sent from a TCP/IP domain resolver to a root server, having the reply bit set instead of the query bit. 3. Any bogus or incorrectly formed packet sent on a network. 4. By synecdoche, used to refer to any bogus thing, as in "I'd like to go to lunch with you but I've got to go to the weekly staff bogon". 5. A person who is bogus or who says bogus things. This was historically the original usage, but has been overtaken by its derivative senses 1-4. See also bogosity , bogus ; compare psyton , fat electrons , magic smoke .

The bogon has become the type case for a whole bestiary of nonce particle names, including the `clutron' or `cluon' (indivisible particle of cluefulness, obviously the antiparticle of the bogon) and the futon (elementary particle of randomness , or sometimes of lameness). These are not so much live usages in themselves as examples of a live meta-usage: that is, it has become a standard joke or linguistic maneuver to "explain" otherwise mysterious circumstances by inventing nonce particle names. And these imply nonce particle theories, with all their dignity or lack thereof (we might note parenthetically that this is a generalization from "(bogus particle) theories" to "bogus (particle theories)"!). Perhaps such particles are the modern-day equivalents of trolls and wood-nymphs as standard starting-points around which to construct explanatory myths. Of course, playing on an existing word (as in the `futon') yields additional flavor. Compare magic smoke .

Note: This is a static quote from The Jargon File version 4.3.3, which is lovingly maintained by our own Eric S. Raymond. If you are reading this post long after its freshness date, please refer to the original entry.

From The Jargon File:

bogon /boh'gon/ n.

[very common; by analogy with proton/electron/neutron, but doubtless reinforced after 1980 by the similarity to Douglas Adams's `Vogons'; see the Bibliography in Appendix C and note that Arthur Dent actually mispronounces `Vogons' as `Bogons' at one point] 1. The elementary particle of bogosity (see quantum bogodynamics ). For instance, "the Ethernet is emitting bogons again" means that it is broken or acting in an erratic or bogus fashion. 2. A query packet sent from a TCP/IP domain resolver to a root server, having the reply bit set instead of the query bit. 3. Any bogus or incorrectly formed packet sent on a network. 4. By synecdoche, used to refer to any bogus thing, as in "I'd like to go to lunch with you but I've got to go to the weekly staff bogon". 5. A person who is bogus or who says bogus things. This was historically the original usage, but has been overtaken by its derivative senses 1-4. See also bogosity , bogus ; compare psyton , fat electrons , magic smoke .

The bogon has become the type case for a whole bestiary of nonce particle names, including the `clutron' or `cluon' (indivisible particle of cluefulness, obviously the antiparticle of the bogon) and the futon (elementary particle of randomness , or sometimes of lameness). These are not so much live usages in themselves as examples of a live meta-usage: that is, it has become a standard joke or linguistic maneuver to "explain" otherwise mysterious circumstances by inventing nonce particle names. And these imply nonce particle theories, with all their dignity or lack thereof (we might note parenthetically that this is a generalization from "(bogus particle) theories" to "bogus (particle theories)"!). Perhaps such particles are the modern-day equivalents of trolls and wood-nymphs as standard starting-points around which to construct explanatory myths. Of course, playing on an existing word (as in the `futon') yields additional flavor. Compare magic smoke .

Note: This is a static quote from The Jargon File version 4.3.3, which is lovingly maintained by our own Eric S. Raymond. If you are reading this post long after its freshness date, please refer to the original entry.

From The Jargon File:

bogon /boh'gon/ n.

[very common; by analogy with proton/electron/neutron, but doubtless reinforced after 1980 by the similarity to Douglas Adams's `Vogons'; see the Bibliography in Appendix C and note that Arthur Dent actually mispronounces `Vogons' as `Bogons' at one point] 1. The elementary particle of bogosity (see quantum bogodynamics ). For instance, "the Ethernet is emitting bogons again" means that it is broken or acting in an erratic or bogus fashion. 2. A query packet sent from a TCP/IP domain resolver to a root server, having the reply bit set instead of the query bit. 3. Any bogus or incorrectly formed packet sent on a network. 4. By synecdoche, used to refer to any bogus thing, as in "I'd like to go to lunch with you but I've got to go to the weekly staff bogon". 5. A person who is bogus or who says bogus things. This was historically the original usage, but has been overtaken by its derivative senses 1-4. See also bogosity , bogus ; compare psyton , fat electrons , magic smoke .

The bogon has become the type case for a whole bestiary of nonce particle names, including the `clutron' or `cluon' (indivisible particle of cluefulness, obviously the antiparticle of the bogon) and the futon (elementary particle of randomness , or sometimes of lameness). These are not so much live usages in themselves as examples of a live meta-usage: that is, it has become a standard joke or linguistic maneuver to "explain" otherwise mysterious circumstances by inventing nonce particle names. And these imply nonce particle theories, with all their dignity or lack thereof (we might note parenthetically that this is a generalization from "(bogus particle) theories" to "bogus (particle theories)"!). Perhaps such particles are the modern-day equivalents of trolls and wood-nymphs as standard starting-points around which to construct explanatory myths. Of course, playing on an existing word (as in the `futon') yields additional flavor. Compare magic smoke .

Note: This is a static quote from The Jargon File version 4.3.3, which is lovingly maintained by our own Eric S. Raymond. If you are reading this post long after its freshness date, please refer to the original entry.

From The Jargon File:

bogon /boh'gon/ n.

[very common; by analogy with proton/electron/neutron, but doubtless reinforced after 1980 by the similarity to Douglas Adams's `Vogons'; see the Bibliography in Appendix C and note that Arthur Dent actually mispronounces `Vogons' as `Bogons' at one point] 1. The elementary particle of bogosity (see quantum bogodynamics ). For instance, "the Ethernet is emitting bogons again" means that it is broken or acting in an erratic or bogus fashion. 2. A query packet sent from a TCP/IP domain resolver to a root server, having the reply bit set instead of the query bit. 3. Any bogus or incorrectly formed packet sent on a network. 4. By synecdoche, used to refer to any bogus thing, as in "I'd like to go to lunch with you but I've got to go to the weekly staff bogon". 5. A person who is bogus or who says bogus things. This was historically the original usage, but has been overtaken by its derivative senses 1-4. See also bogosity , bogus ; compare psyton , fat electrons , magic smoke .

The bogon has become the type case for a whole bestiary of nonce particle names, including the `clutron' or `cluon' (indivisible particle of cluefulness, obviously the antiparticle of the bogon) and the futon (elementary particle of randomness , or sometimes of lameness). These are not so much live usages in themselves as examples of a live meta-usage: that is, it has become a standard joke or linguistic maneuver to "explain" otherwise mysterious circumstances by inventing nonce particle names. And these imply nonce particle theories, with all their dignity or lack thereof (we might note parenthetically that this is a generalization from "(bogus particle) theories" to "bogus (particle theories)"!). Perhaps such particles are the modern-day equivalents of trolls and wood-nymphs as standard starting-points around which to construct explanatory myths. Of course, playing on an existing word (as in the `futon') yields additional flavor. Compare magic smoke .

Note: This is a static quote from The Jargon File version 4.3.3, which is lovingly maintained by our own Eric S. Raymond. If you are reading this post long after its freshness date, please refer to the original entry.

From The Jargon File:

bogon /boh'gon/ n.

[very common; by analogy with proton/electron/neutron, but doubtless reinforced after 1980 by the similarity to Douglas Adams's `Vogons'; see the Bibliography in Appendix C and note that Arthur Dent actually mispronounces `Vogons' as `Bogons' at one point] 1. The elementary particle of bogosity (see quantum bogodynamics ). For instance, "the Ethernet is emitting bogons again" means that it is broken or acting in an erratic or bogus fashion. 2. A query packet sent from a TCP/IP domain resolver to a root server, having the reply bit set instead of the query bit. 3. Any bogus or incorrectly formed packet sent on a network. 4. By synecdoche, used to refer to any bogus thing, as in "I'd like to go to lunch with you but I've got to go to the weekly staff bogon". 5. A person who is bogus or who says bogus things. This was historically the original usage, but has been overtaken by its derivative senses 1-4. See also bogosity , bogus ; compare psyton , fat electrons , magic smoke .

The bogon has become the type case for a whole bestiary of nonce particle names, including the `clutron' or `cluon' (indivisible particle of cluefulness, obviously the antiparticle of the bogon) and the futon (elementary particle of randomness , or sometimes of lameness). These are not so much live usages in themselves as examples of a live meta-usage: that is, it has become a standard joke or linguistic maneuver to "explain" otherwise mysterious circumstances by inventing nonce particle names. And these imply nonce particle theories, with all their dignity or lack thereof (we might note parenthetically that this is a generalization from "(bogus particle) theories" to "bogus (particle theories)"!). Perhaps such particles are the modern-day equivalents of trolls and wood-nymphs as standard starting-points around which to construct explanatory myths. Of course, playing on an existing word (as in the `futon') yields additional flavor. Compare magic smoke .

Note: This is a static quote from The Jargon File version 4.3.3, which is lovingly maintained by our own Eric S. Raymond. If you are reading this post long after its freshness date, please refer to the original entry.

From The Jargon File:

bogon /boh'gon/ n.

[very common; by analogy with proton/electron/neutron, but doubtless reinforced after 1980 by the similarity to Douglas Adams's `Vogons'; see the Bibliography in Appendix C and note that Arthur Dent actually mispronounces `Vogons' as `Bogons' at one point] 1. The elementary particle of bogosity (see quantum bogodynamics ). For instance, "the Ethernet is emitting bogons again" means that it is broken or acting in an erratic or bogus fashion. 2. A query packet sent from a TCP/IP domain resolver to a root server, having the reply bit set instead of the query bit. 3. Any bogus or incorrectly formed packet sent on a network. 4. By synecdoche, used to refer to any bogus thing, as in "I'd like to go to lunch with you but I've got to go to the weekly staff bogon". 5. A person who is bogus or who says bogus things. This was historically the original usage, but has been overtaken by its derivative senses 1-4. See also bogosity , bogus ; compare psyton , fat electrons , magic smoke .

The bogon has become the type case for a whole bestiary of nonce particle names, including the `clutron' or `cluon' (indivisible particle of cluefulness, obviously the antiparticle of the bogon) and the futon (elementary particle of randomness , or sometimes of lameness). These are not so much live usages in themselves as examples of a live meta-usage: that is, it has become a standard joke or linguistic maneuver to "explain" otherwise mysterious circumstances by inventing nonce particle names. And these imply nonce particle theories, with all their dignity or lack thereof (we might note parenthetically that this is a generalization from "(bogus particle) theories" to "bogus (particle theories)"!). Perhaps such particles are the modern-day equivalents of trolls and wood-nymphs as standard starting-points around which to construct explanatory myths. Of course, playing on an existing word (as in the `futon') yields additional flavor. Compare magic smoke .

Note: This is a static quote from The Jargon File version 4.3.3, which is lovingly maintained by our own Eric S. Raymond. If you are reading this post long after its freshness date, please refer to the original entry.

From The Jargon File:

bogon /boh'gon/ n.

[very common; by analogy with proton/electron/neutron, but doubtless reinforced after 1980 by the similarity to Douglas Adams's `Vogons'; see the Bibliography in Appendix C and note that Arthur Dent actually mispronounces `Vogons' as `Bogons' at one point] 1. The elementary particle of bogosity (see quantum bogodynamics ). For instance, "the Ethernet is emitting bogons again" means that it is broken or acting in an erratic or bogus fashion. 2. A query packet sent from a TCP/IP domain resolver to a root server, having the reply bit set instead of the query bit. 3. Any bogus or incorrectly formed packet sent on a network. 4. By synecdoche, used to refer to any bogus thing, as in "I'd like to go to lunch with you but I've got to go to the weekly staff bogon". 5. A person who is bogus or who says bogus things. This was historically the original usage, but has been overtaken by its derivative senses 1-4. See also bogosity , bogus ; compare psyton , fat electrons , magic smoke .

The bogon has become the type case for a whole bestiary of nonce particle names, including the `clutron' or `cluon' (indivisible particle of cluefulness, obviously the antiparticle of the bogon) and the futon (elementary particle of randomness , or sometimes of lameness). These are not so much live usages in themselves as examples of a live meta-usage: that is, it has become a standard joke or linguistic maneuver to "explain" otherwise mysterious circumstances by inventing nonce particle names. And these imply nonce particle theories, with all their dignity or lack thereof (we might note parenthetically that this is a generalization from "(bogus particle) theories" to "bogus (particle theories)"!). Perhaps such particles are the modern-day equivalents of trolls and wood-nymphs as standard starting-points around which to construct explanatory myths. Of course, playing on an existing word (as in the `futon') yields additional flavor. Compare magic smoke .

Note: This is a static quote from The Jargon File version 4.3.3, which is lovingly maintained by our own Eric S. Raymond. If you are reading this post long after its freshness date, please refer to the original entry.

Oh, then it works just as it should. I mean, if that denifition of Hacking/Hacker is the right one, because the Hacker is the The Good Guy, Computer Geek, Professional who every corporation wants to have enrolled to them, instead of competition.

"...the word HACK is used as a verb to indicate a massive amount of nerd-like effort." -Harley Hahn, A Student's Guide to Unix

Hacker = A skilled and enthusiastic user of computers. Developer Guru. Good Guy
Craker = Computer using criminal, possibly with low computer skills. Bad Guy
Media intentionally uses term Hacker for Crakers - Just for Sensation
More info: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/hacke r.html

I suggest to to make two categories to filter, Hacker and Cracker sites, and use those right. It means that every IT guy in there is encouraged to read Hacker sites, because it developes their skills - its like getting free studies for them. Actually if someon doesn't read those, that guy doesn't really like to keep his/her job.
Of course the Cracker sites are then more in line of adult entertainment sites. (not really wanted to spent working time on there, I guess)

Oh, then it works just as it should. I mean, if that denifition of Hacking/Hacker is the right one, because the Hacker is the The Good Guy, Computer Geek, Professional who every corporation wants to have enrolled to them, instead of competition.

"...the word HACK is used as a verb to indicate a massive amount of nerd-like effort." -Harley Hahn, A Student's Guide to Unix

Hacker = A skilled and enthusiastic user of computers. Developer Guru. Good Guy
Craker = Computer using criminal, possibly with low computer skills. Bad Guy
Media intentionally uses term Hacker for Crakers - Just for Sensation
More info: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/hacke r.html

I suggest to to make two categories to filter, Hacker and Cracker sites, and use those right. It means that every IT guy in there is encouraged to read Hacker sites, because it developes their skills - its like getting free studies for them. Actually if someon doesn't read those, that guy doesn't really like to keep his/her job.
Of course the Cracker sites are then more in line of adult entertainment sites. (not really wanted to spent working time on there, I guess)

Then, The Jargon Lexicon is for you !

The One True Brace Style is K&R, by definition.

From the What is TheOpenCD website:

"It also includes a selection of essays about Open Source philosophy, and links to other programs that might be of interest."

I'm sorry, but what is exactly open source philosophy? Open source is about technical and economical advantages. Free software is about philosophy. Please do not flame me for saying the obvious. When Eric Raymond took Debian Free Software Guidelines and published them as Open Source Definition in 1998 he did it exactly because he wanted free software without the strong philosophy associated with the "free software" term since at least the announcement of the GNU Project in 1983.

I think that TheOpenCD project should not talk about philosophy if they want to promote the open source movement. But if they think that the philosophy is important, then they should promote the free software movement and change their name to TheFreeCD. Because the philosophy is exactly the difference between free software and open source movements. If they talk about "open source philosophy" they are being against the main priciples of both movements.

TheOpenCD project people should read these books:

• The Cathedral and the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary by Eric S. Raymond (online version)
• Free as in Freedom: Richard Stallman's Crusade for Free Software by Sam Williams (online version)
• Free Software, Free Society: Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman by Richard M. Stallman (GNU philosophy website, book CVS source)

Those books are not very long, but they provide enough background to let avoid using such unfortunate oxymorons like "open source philosophy." I strongly respect both free software and open source movements and I can not stay ignorant when people insult any of them, while the term "open source philosophy" insults both.

Now there's a language that needs a .net binding. But even so there are others that need integration with .net first. Primary among these (of course) must be INTERCAL especially the revised version with the "COME FROM" statement.

That would be this. Excellent guide to becoming a hacker (hacker, as he explains it, in the sense of: "hackers build things, crackers break them."). Among other things , he does talk about the importance of learning multiple languages:

But be aware that you won't reach the skill level of a hacker or even merely a programmer if you only know one or two languages -- you need to learn how to think about programming problems in a general way, independent of any one language. To be a real hacker, you need to get to the point where you can learn a new language in days by relating what's in the manual to what you already know. This means you should learn several very different languages.

Ohhhhhhh, sorry! By violating Godwin's law, you have just lost the argument. But hey, thanks for playing!

This is not real engineering.

This sad situation has come about because it's too easy to do develop this mentality in the software world, where making quick changes is as simple as hitting backspace a few times and typing some new code. ("I don't have to plan! I can get it sorta right, then fix it later! It's easy!")

When one is building a circuit, or a bridge, one can't simply make quick changes. Any changes are ltime consuming, expensive, and painful. Thus, REAL engineers actually plan stuff.

(Not that there's no room for kludges and "screwing around". I always have a "Let's mess around and do neat stuff" period at the beginning of projects. But once this is done, and we've come up with some fun and clever stuff, we roll up our sleeves and do real engineering to build a real product. And, Hey Presto!, we end up with solid and usable applications.

Ok this is where I lose you. That link says that Mozilla is going to provide spam filters. How is that bloatware? Trolling? Got me.

Well, doesn't have the kitchen sink yet, but I hear they're working hard on that. What does it have? Let's see here, web browser, email fetching, filtering, and sorting; news client, chat client, HTML design frontend, contacts manager, banner ad blocking, the list goes on. This all culminates in 20MB or so of source that took six and a half hours to compile on my Duron 800.

Last time I checked, all of this comes very close to the textbook definition of feature creep and bloat. And now, coming to a Mozilla near you, spam filters! They're not fixing any of their nearly 12,000 bugs. In other words, yes, it's buggier than Win2K, but by God, it filters spam! I included the spam filters link to illustrate the Bill-worthy feature creep Mozilla suffers from.

Lest you think I'm the only one saying this, JWZ, one of the principal authors of Netscape, resigned from Netscape and Mozilla.org over these very issues.

I've spelled it out for you this far, might as well carry on until the bitter end. My ultimate point was that if Mozilla were a Microsoft product, the righteous wrath of /. would be brought to bear on it for all of these reasons. But since it's not, it can commit all of these Gatesian mortal sins and escape such scrutiny.

Agian ya lost me. I use Mozilla every day. I havent found anything major. Well besides the bug they just fixed.

Read my post - I use it all the time too. And quite often, I find that it doesn't work right. It tries to load forms as perl scripts to save on the HDD. It doesn't handle Java well at all. Plugins take forever to load. It randomly eats my SMTP server entry. My point is, there is much room for improvement. But no, they've taken the Gatesian approach of kludging feature upon feature atop a buggy, marginally-usable codebase.

Ranting??? School? Get a life. At least your school runs opensource. (maybe judging from the rest of your post)

Wrong as usual. My school does not run open source. They got taken in by the slick-talking outsourcing salesdroids and are now firmly wedded to His Billness. But what the hell, did you expect anything different just across the bridge from Redmond? Be that as it may, the only reason I brought it up was to say when I intended to nuke Windows from my computer, and that only to show I'm not a trolling Microdroid evangelist.

I really should stop feeding these trolls

Re-read my previous paragraph. Carefully. Again. And again. And think hard before you hit submit next time.

Um... no.

Sturgeon said, "90% of everything is crud."

Thanks for contributing to the 90%!

Perhaps, what I'm asking is, can anybody compare and contrast the two architectures; is there a certain advantage to one or the other?

Yah - AMD will offer it to the consumer combined with motherboards from tier-1 manufacturers like Asus, Abit, IWill, Tyan, and so forth, all at an attractive price (read: the same price as the Athalon XP CPUs).

Intel, on the other hand, will keep their 64 bit CPUs out of the consumer hands by pricing them above what most consumers are willing to pay, thus reaping a premium on them by selling them in servers through Dell and IBM (making even more money on cases and motherboards). There will be limited support for the CPU outside Intel's own motherboard offerings, and if you run with a hard-drive, video card, CD-Rom that has not been explicitly approved by Intel, then forget support (we've had this problem with Intel on some of their server motherboards).

Intel is taking the Cathedral approach, and AMD a Bazaar approach.