Best of all, Perl is damn fast, usually on par with C for most tasks Any way you could back that up with some numbers? I don't mean to say that you're wrong, but I'm skeptical about any claim that says an interpreted language can beat a compiled one. I would even be surprised if compiled perl could beat compiled C since C's been worked on so much longer and compiling perl into a binary isn't really its focus anyway.
It looks like Big Business is about ten years behind the industry curve How so? The article never adequately addresses the fact that the Linux Foundation is populated by people who use linux on servers. Why should he be surprised that these people are focusing on server issues?
The author worries about the developers ignoring the linux desktop without seeming to realize that the kernel hackers use linux as their desktop. He doesn't mention the scheduler changes to make it more friendly to the desktop. In fact, he comes across as a pouting child who wants their desktop worked on before the servers.
Is it that hard to realize that the linux foundation is about servers and keeping market share in the area of servers while ubuntu and the kernel hackers focus on making the desktop faster? Right now server linux is a business, desktop linux is a side note. Asking them to focus on the desktop at the expense of their big platforms is dumb and short sighted.
I think the potential for abuse is higher than it's potential for good use. As a result, the Overrated option will have to do. That's funny. To prevent the potential for abuse, you should use the most blatantly abused mod of them all.
If you start with the assumption that the distribution of the talent is uniform across the marketplace, then the migration of talent from one shop to the next obviously doesn't change that. That's like saying that if you start with the assumption that the distribution of matter in the universe is uniform, then movements won't change that. But that's not the case. Some shops start with more talented programmers and make an environment where good programmers want to work. Other shops work their programmers like mules and give them a hostile environment that makes them cover their asses instead of working effectively. These processes build on each other until the distribution is more definitely uneven.
In addition, the companies with the best programmers will tend to do better in the marketplace, meaning they can afford to treat the good ones better and fire the bad ones. They can also be pickier about picking up new programmers and will have to hire people less often because they have a core of talent that they tend to expand instead of constantly replacing workers that get fed up. Talent tends to clump just like matter in space, leaving a vacuum where it's hard to find the talent that they need.
the only ones that quiver in fear are the incompetent ones who are easy to replace with a $5/hr from banglore Or those who bosses believe they can be. Or have companies that bring in consultants who can be. Or who get bought out by a cost-saving firm who replace the executives with someone who believes they can be.
But, for the most part, yeah, you're right. The benefits of having programmers in the same time zone who speak the same language who you can go and talk to face to face outweighs the possible benefits.
Kill all bot nets. Seriously. Agreed, although botnets are a tool, not necessarily a source. They make computing power cheap for the underworld, but everyone here should know that computing power is already cheap. The diversified IP addresses is harder for them to mimic, but not impossible.
And have companies who sell operating system take some financial responsibility for future security. Absolutely ridiculous. I've heard this before, and I think it makes as much sense as holding the door manufacturer responsible for home break ins. Microsoft has never claimed to be completely secure and they haven't made any contracts specifying that they should be. They allow other products to work on their platform, and these other products have threatened legal action if Microsoft makes their OS secure (although not in those exact words). It also patches on a regular cycle and it's ultimately a decently secure OS (when you take the patches into consideration).
The ultimate responsibility for what happens on someone's computer is theirs. There's a lot of hatred for Microsoft floating around here, and for good reason, but holding them responsible because people can't protect their computers in the most rudimentary ways is wrong. It also opens the doors for holding any software responsible for any hacking that occurs on them, even if the user could have prevented it with negligible effort. Considering the state of security in the software industry, that would destroy pretty much every company in existence and set us back 10-20 years.
Lets just hope those terms are pro open source Come on, guys. There's no chance in hell that the licensing terms will be pro open source and we all know it. Can we please stop propagating false hope?
I don't know why people spend tons of money on a computer only to throw in a cheap sound card, or even worse - rely on onboard sound Because its primary functions are gaming and programming, and neither of those would be seriously enhanced with a better sound card.
In the short term, it was always a bad idea and I think they knew that. ATI didn't have anything to offer against nVidia for dx10 and they wouldn't for a while. In the medium term it looked like it might start being profitable, and in the long term they were hoping to be able to start revolutionizing the video industry with tighter integration between the CPU and video card.
Right now (heading into the medium term) it looks like they had some missteps but they're doing okay. It's still hard to tell what's going to happen long term, though. Intel's in the entrenched position since they're already the #1 video card maker because of their integrated chipsets. If ATI actually started changing the video card industry, then Intel's in a very good position to start competing with them quickly. I doubt Intel wants to start lagging behind AMD in performance again, especially with their CPUs actually beating AMDs for the first time since the original pentium came out.
All told, buying ATI was questionable, but it's not to the point yet where I would call it either way. AMD's already come into a market dominated by another company and beat it on its own ground, I wouldn't be surprised if they can do it again.
So to sum it up, he wants to tax information. But we've been doing this for a long time now. DVDs, CDs, and books are nothing more than information with some packaging that cost much, much less than the information they hold.
Or, to flip it around, you could just as easily say that they're not taxing the information, they're taxing the actual, physical signals that iTunes is sending you.
Today email is less reliable message delivery medium than regular mail Depends on where you receive your regular mail and how you do email. I've has less than 10% of my emails not get where they were going, and if you take out the former company domain that was spamming people, it's 0%. Where I live now, there's a good 30% chance that my mail won't get to me.
Writing books about developmental versions of PHP doesn't seem like the smartest move in the world. I remember some books when php5 came out that included the keyword "that" which would be used with a few magic functions. This feature was taken out before php5 was released officially and left a lot of books with false information.
Besides, if these books are really for professionals, shouldn't they be able to adapt the solutions to php6 rather easily?
Ok, I'm a heretic And a jackass. I said that linux hasn't been accepted on the desktop. Firefox is the only app that has had much success with the average user, and it's not very high.
I don't think spin and wishful thinking furthers anyones aims I was referencing its success in the server/web/language market, where it's the leader. Apache's the #1 server on the web, php is the #1 language on the web, with ruby and perl also in the rankings. If you work on the web, you can't get away from open source.
I may be trolling or flaming you, but that doesn't change the fact that you're dead wrong and missed the meat of my post.
The most expensive OS ever developed by the largest OS maker in history was produced just to allow Microsoft to buy an overall mediocre online company? Vista's not doing as badly as it could, but it will cost the company millions in revenue at least, and the loss of brand prestige will do millions if not billions of dollars of damage if vista's widely considered a failure. I'm going to guess that your guess is wrong.
Even without the acceptance of Linux on the desktop, there's no doubt that open source has been a ridiculously huge success since then. Equal acceptance (at least) as a server OS, it runs the majority of web servers and web scripting languages. Overall, a very successful life so far. I'm excited to see where it ends up ten years from now.
Fair use does allow for certain things to be reproduced commercially. How do you write an analysis of Shakespeare (a derived work that's covered by Fair Use, btw) without deriving it somewhat from Shakespeare? Cliff Notes are a commercial reproduction of the main points of the story; isn't that what lecture notes are?
Furthermore, the university should be protecting these students by threatening to end the contract. If the book maker's going to be anal about this, they're going to be anal about something else that's important to the university. Also, an attack on the university's students should be viewed as an attack on the university itself. Every other college should be avoiding these guys like the plague too.
Not a dupe at all. The article you reference is about an ISP that tracks for the purposes of advertising and lets the customer know. This, on the other hand, is the ISP snooping on traffic without notifying anyone and lying to someone when they ask about it. It's the difference between consensual sodomy and what happens in prisons. It's also a dumb move on the ISP's side, because they're doing something to people that is rightly linked with illegal and shady practices.
plus for me, this will only work if they test it against another login with the same username and password. The rhythm and speed of my typing in a username depends on which one it is, and the same goes for the password.
However, within the bounds of an identical username/password combination, I would imagine that it would work well for me. The problem is that if there are extenuating circumstances, this would lock me or someone else out of the computer. For instance, what if my wife needed to log in for me while I'm on a business trip? Or I die? Or I break my arm and have to type with one hand? I imagine the usefulness of this technology is in merely logging the "signature" pattern rather than locking someone else based on it. Bruce Schneier has the basic arguments and a much better analysis than I could produce.
You do realize that Dune is a work of fiction by a white man, right? This book's political commentary is no more or less relevant than his opinion would have been without a huge-ass story tacked onto it.
I'm not saying anything bad about the book, especially since I love it so much. But claiming that the book has any special insight may be overstating the case.
I absolutely agree. I chose to keep the old comment system because i like it. It's functional, it's simple, I liked the design, and it was easy for me to read. I would like to know who thought it was a good idea to take those people who chose not to use the new discussion system and upgrade them anyway.
Would I still be spending ~$20 a month on music if each song were ten cents? No, I'd probably go nuts and be spending $50 a month I'm guessing you're in the minority of people that believe there are 500 new songs to buy every month. As for me and my wife, if each song were 10 cents, we'd pay maybe 50 cents per month.
Slashdot Mirror
The author worries about the developers ignoring the linux desktop without seeming to realize that the kernel hackers use linux as their desktop. He doesn't mention the scheduler changes to make it more friendly to the desktop. In fact, he comes across as a pouting child who wants their desktop worked on before the servers.
Is it that hard to realize that the linux foundation is about servers and keeping market share in the area of servers while ubuntu and the kernel hackers focus on making the desktop faster? Right now server linux is a business, desktop linux is a side note. Asking them to focus on the desktop at the expense of their big platforms is dumb and short sighted.
In addition, the companies with the best programmers will tend to do better in the marketplace, meaning they can afford to treat the good ones better and fire the bad ones. They can also be pickier about picking up new programmers and will have to hire people less often because they have a core of talent that they tend to expand instead of constantly replacing workers that get fed up. Talent tends to clump just like matter in space, leaving a vacuum where it's hard to find the talent that they need.
But, for the most part, yeah, you're right. The benefits of having programmers in the same time zone who speak the same language who you can go and talk to face to face outweighs the possible benefits.
The ultimate responsibility for what happens on someone's computer is theirs. There's a lot of hatred for Microsoft floating around here, and for good reason, but holding them responsible because people can't protect their computers in the most rudimentary ways is wrong. It also opens the doors for holding any software responsible for any hacking that occurs on them, even if the user could have prevented it with negligible effort. Considering the state of security in the software industry, that would destroy pretty much every company in existence and set us back 10-20 years.
Good thing for MediaSentry that nobody takes perjury seriously ;)
Wait, I thought he was the one that carried Frodo up the mountain; I'm so confused.
In the short term, it was always a bad idea and I think they knew that. ATI didn't have anything to offer against nVidia for dx10 and they wouldn't for a while. In the medium term it looked like it might start being profitable, and in the long term they were hoping to be able to start revolutionizing the video industry with tighter integration between the CPU and video card.
Right now (heading into the medium term) it looks like they had some missteps but they're doing okay. It's still hard to tell what's going to happen long term, though. Intel's in the entrenched position since they're already the #1 video card maker because of their integrated chipsets. If ATI actually started changing the video card industry, then Intel's in a very good position to start competing with them quickly. I doubt Intel wants to start lagging behind AMD in performance again, especially with their CPUs actually beating AMDs for the first time since the original pentium came out.
All told, buying ATI was questionable, but it's not to the point yet where I would call it either way. AMD's already come into a market dominated by another company and beat it on its own ground, I wouldn't be surprised if they can do it again.
Or, to flip it around, you could just as easily say that they're not taxing the information, they're taxing the actual, physical signals that iTunes is sending you.
Writing books about developmental versions of PHP doesn't seem like the smartest move in the world. I remember some books when php5 came out that included the keyword "that" which would be used with a few magic functions. This feature was taken out before php5 was released officially and left a lot of books with false information.
Besides, if these books are really for professionals, shouldn't they be able to adapt the solutions to php6 rather easily?
I may be trolling or flaming you, but that doesn't change the fact that you're dead wrong and missed the meat of my post.
The most expensive OS ever developed by the largest OS maker in history was produced just to allow Microsoft to buy an overall mediocre online company? Vista's not doing as badly as it could, but it will cost the company millions in revenue at least, and the loss of brand prestige will do millions if not billions of dollars of damage if vista's widely considered a failure. I'm going to guess that your guess is wrong.
Even without the acceptance of Linux on the desktop, there's no doubt that open source has been a ridiculously huge success since then. Equal acceptance (at least) as a server OS, it runs the majority of web servers and web scripting languages. Overall, a very successful life so far. I'm excited to see where it ends up ten years from now.
Ray Guns Don't Kill Zygornians, Zygornians kill Zygornians!
Fair use does allow for certain things to be reproduced commercially. How do you write an analysis of Shakespeare (a derived work that's covered by Fair Use, btw) without deriving it somewhat from Shakespeare? Cliff Notes are a commercial reproduction of the main points of the story; isn't that what lecture notes are?
Furthermore, the university should be protecting these students by threatening to end the contract. If the book maker's going to be anal about this, they're going to be anal about something else that's important to the university. Also, an attack on the university's students should be viewed as an attack on the university itself. Every other college should be avoiding these guys like the plague too.
Not a dupe at all. The article you reference is about an ISP that tracks for the purposes of advertising and lets the customer know. This, on the other hand, is the ISP snooping on traffic without notifying anyone and lying to someone when they ask about it. It's the difference between consensual sodomy and what happens in prisons. It's also a dumb move on the ISP's side, because they're doing something to people that is rightly linked with illegal and shady practices.
plus for me, this will only work if they test it against another login with the same username and password. The rhythm and speed of my typing in a username depends on which one it is, and the same goes for the password.
However, within the bounds of an identical username/password combination, I would imagine that it would work well for me. The problem is that if there are extenuating circumstances, this would lock me or someone else out of the computer. For instance, what if my wife needed to log in for me while I'm on a business trip? Or I die? Or I break my arm and have to type with one hand? I imagine the usefulness of this technology is in merely logging the "signature" pattern rather than locking someone else based on it. Bruce Schneier has the basic arguments and a much better analysis than I could produce.
You do realize that Dune is a work of fiction by a white man, right? This book's political commentary is no more or less relevant than his opinion would have been without a huge-ass story tacked onto it.
I'm not saying anything bad about the book, especially since I love it so much. But claiming that the book has any special insight may be overstating the case.
I absolutely agree. I chose to keep the old comment system because i like it. It's functional, it's simple, I liked the design, and it was easy for me to read. I would like to know who thought it was a good idea to take those people who chose not to use the new discussion system and upgrade them anyway.