Offer x large numbers of hours of decent content mailed back on disk for every hour of volunteer transcribing? There might be a ton of semi or full retired folks might want to get into that, if the software deal was setup for them and it was easy to use and understand.
"Offer x large numbers of hours of PORN mailed back on disk for every hour of volunteer transcribing? There might be a ton of semi or full retired folks might want to get into that, if the software deal was setup for them and it was easy to use and understand.
Then maybe its time to switch to another operating system?
I have yet to have a patch break openSuse, either at work or at home...
Same thing with RedHat before that.
Same thing with Mandrake before that.
Same thing with Slackware before that.
Yes, I heard about the stupid Ubuntu patch that broke people's logging in. One of my coworkers got hit by it - but that's the only occasion this century that I've seen it happen.
Please read the article AGAIN. Nowhere does it say this is for an embedded system. The actual language:
"I am planning to sell embedded-like boxes with an OS (Linux or BSD) and this code."
In other words, a bog-standard beige box with a copy of an OS (either linux or BSD) running some closed-source code. Could be a web app, a firewall, a port forwarder, a replicator... its not stated and we don't know, but what we do know is its NOT an embedded system. Its hardware (a pc) and software sold as closed package.
Its the choice of words... you said the plants were "designed" that way. That implies a designer - as opposed to plants "evolved" that way, which doesn't.
That's why I said you might want to rethink your orginal choice of words.
You may want to rephrase that - or attribute the "design" to the Flying Spaghetti Monster. (unless you're in favor of "Intelligent Design" and Cretionism).
Gee, someone doesn't like yu, to mod you off-topic when there's a link to your post and the main topic, if anyone cares to connect the dots.
article is about "scientific consensus" - in rebuttal to the scientific consensus on the damage we're doing to the environment;
I start a sub-thread about pollution "exported" by consumers to China;
you post about your success in reducing trash by 87% - which we wouldn't be bothering with if we weren't running out of landfills and there wasn't a general consensus (not just among the scientific community) that we've got to stop treating the world like a big dumpster
someone mod-bombs you...
You were not off-topic; you probably pricked the conscience of someone who needs a Cadillac Escalade or a Hummer to feel fulfilled.
And who is CONSUMING all the stuff made in China? You wouldn't have the same scale of pollutant production from manufacturing in China if you didn't have the huge demand from the US. MOre than 300 BILLION dollars a year. That's a lot of "exported" pollution.
Tsk tsk tsk... why is refusing to believe an obvious bogus article a recipe for becoming bitter? Or do you believe in the old saying "ignorance is bliss"?
Calling them "bugs" is a way for us to avoid blame for making mistakes, either in the code itself or in the processes we use to plan and implement that code.
Calling an error a "bug" makes it sound like it could have crawled in there on its own. ("Gee, I don't know how that bug got in there. I'll fix it.")
It didn't just crawl in there on its onw, and its not a feature or a bug, its a mistake, pure and simple. And someone made it.
We (hopefully) learn from our mistakes. Labelling them "bugs" makes it less likely we'll take personal responsibility for them; hence more likely to make the same mistake the next time than if we were honest with ourselves and said "I screwed up - that's a mistake."
Sure, calling it a bug might sooth our egos (we don't have to admit we made a mistake - the program is just "buggy"), but really, are our egos that easily bruised that we can't own up to our mistakes?
"complex software written for use on a wide variety of configurations WILL HAVE BUGS"
A buffer overflow has nothing to do with how you configure your PC. Neither do dangling pointers. They're errors - not "bugs". They don't craw into your PC when you're not looking.
I'll leave it to the brits
Macs are more secure: official
Apple's recent campaign claiming its machines were more secure and less likely to crash or pick up a virus than Windows PCs has been cleared by the UK's Advertising Standards Authority (ASA).
o word on whether the smugness of comedians Mitchell and Webb is likely to break acceptable bounds though.
A national press campaign included a picture of Webb holding a sign reading in part: "I run Mac OS X so you don't have to worry about the viruses and spyware that PCs do".
The ASA received 14 complaints, nine of which considered the virus claims misleading and irresponsible because viruses attack operating systems rather than machines and some PCs could run on operating systems, like Linux, which were just as safe as Mac OSX. Apple said the advert was meant to refer to PCs running Microsoft Windows and provided evidence that 97 per cent of home PCs - targeted by the ad - run Microsoft Windows. Apple identified 114,000 viruses that target PCs and that it did not claim Macs were entirely immune to viruses.
A second advert shown in cinemas and online showed Mitchell sneezing and warning his Mac mate Webb that he had a virus. The third advert subject to complaint was a cinema advert which showed the PC character played by Mitchell repeatedly freezing to illustrate a crashed PC.
The ASA ruled in Apple's favour in each of the three complaints.
Apple, you'll be relieved to hear, will not be running the adverts again.
Patch Tuesday is there because Microsoft can't compete. It has nothing to do with the "cost" of patching, and everything to do with the "cost" of shipping a buggy product.
Simple economics:
Ship buggy product - lock customers in, customers bear cost of patching
""Trolltalk" is as fitting a name as I've ever come across.
"
The domain name had been available for 11 months before I grabbed it a couple of weeks ago, to start a site for tech discussions. You're welcome to submit an article, and if its at all relevant I'll post it on the front page. However, this "ask slashdot" should NOT have been front-page material for any serious site.
I have no problem showing newbies the ropes - but this "article" was trolling - and crappy trolling at that. I've done my share of trolling (under my main account), and I try to stick to one rule - make sure that it makes people THINK! This "article" suffers from hydrocephaly.
I'm not the only one who has called "bullshit" on this article. It IS bullshit.
Look at this choice quote: "I personally got a 'go to hell with your @#$ closed code' slur on Slashdot". So, this has been "asked and answered" before. Nice way to distract us from real issues, like Xandros/Linspire/Novell + Microsoft - ask the same question AGAIN, knowing ahead of time that it will generate a certain response.
Whick leads me to 2 points:
If the poster has already asked the question and gotten responses, why ask it again (unless the poster is lying, recycling someone else's question in the hope of generating dissention)
If the post is genuine, the poster obviously doesn't have the technical skills necessary to avoid accidental icenses violations. Not when the skill level is "dynamic linking is too hard." They don't have an understanding of the real issues involved with static linkage to GPL or other-type licenses.
Its either a troll, or a bad business plan with fatal flaws. If its a troll, what's the harm in pointing it out? If its a fatally flawed plan, again, what's the harm in pointing it out?
But it IS a troll. And one so poorly done that it may end up backfiring on the troll, because people like us can then end up having relatively sane conversations, find out that, despite the troll-baiter trying, to sow dissention we have some common ground in wanting to see genuine newbies who are passionate about code succeed, and take it from there.
But "I want to do "xyz" and I find "abc" is too hard and don't bother complaining about "def" because "ijk "already did "uvw"...?" If you're really serious about setting this up as a buisness, and you don't have the skills, you get a partner who does... This is just a transparent troll submitted by an AC, and should be slapped down accordingly.
Which policy would you rather your OS vendor have:
Wait for the monthly "patch Tuesday"
Close vulnerabilities ASAP
Consider this - this is just a "preview" product - and not even on "their" platform. Its good publicity. They're handling the vulnerabilities the same way Tylenol handled the poisoned pill problem - actively, instead of with their head up Gates/Ballmer's rear end going "no problemo".
When I was a kid, RAM was made of flip-flops and I had to go to school with three feet of snow, and it was uphill both ways. Oh boy.
You were lucky - you had a supply of cheap beach sandals! We had to make our bits out of acorns. Our computers would crash every fall when the squirrels would bury all our RAM.
"01 must go to 10 before it can reach 11 and must got to 11 before it can be "flipped" to 00 again. All memory works on the same concept."
WTF? You sound like youy have a fine future ahead in law... but not in computers. 01 can be flipped directly to 11 - each bit is stored in a separate junction. Or are you going to say that an 8-byte memory address has to be flipped repeatedly all the way to 11111111 before it can be reset to 00000000?
Actually, even less than a troll - a smart troll would have phrased the question along a scenario that at least sounds believable.
Dynamic linking "is to hard" is a joke. #include <dlfcn.h>, then call dlopen() using RTLD_LAZY so you don't load the library until you need it.
Its not just that, though. "I want to start a business..." "I just want to do my job..." (well, which is it?).
The poke at the end about already being flamed over closed-source... welllllll duh! When even Sun is running onto the open-source bandwagon because it makes more sense?
Read the ENTIRE article. "I want to start a business" + "I just want to do my job." Well, which is it? Start a business, or do his job? In this case, its neither. Its just useless blather, and people see it, and call "bullshit."
The person who said "There are no stupid questions - only stupid answers" didn't wait for those 1 million monkeys on one million keyboards to finish. This "Ask slashdot" was one of THOSE questions.
So tell me.... were you born knowing how to use dlopen() et all? Or was there some time when YOU were a beginning programmer, and had no idea wtf you were doing half the time?
Anyone wanting to use dlopen just has to look at the links I provided in another post (either here or in another thread - too busy to look). I also linked to example code. Its trivial to use. If you can't figure out how to use dlopen() after reading the examples, I'd hate to see you use something a bit more complicated like, say, printf. (And if you're intimidated by simple functions like dlopen() and printf(), you should give your idea of writing and selling proprietary software a quick reality check).
Really... the poster asked for opinions. My opinion is simple - the poster's proposal is less than half-baked at this jucture. Maybe its impolitic to say so, but that's reality. They asked for opinions, and got more than what they bargained for, from some of the other posters' comments.
This person is not cut out to be a programmer. Let them take up marketing, politics, sales, or some other "fuzzy" problem domain.
Re:You need the russian guy from armageddon
on
ISS Computer Failure
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
Nyet. Russian computers... we need more COAL, nerdsky.
Everyone know we not make Russian hardware run on solar power, Is not dependable. Sun go down every day. Then what? Run on moonshine? Nyet - Russian potato vodka much better.
"want to start (very small) software/hardware business". -1 "dev wannabe" mod
the nature of the question itself - 1 "too lazy to just fuckinggoogleforit" mod
"dynamic loading is to hard" -1 fucking moron mod
Already its a -4 by most reasonable standards. I browse at -1, but this... its utter crap. Anyone who thinks that calling dlopen() is "too hard" better go back to whatever Microsoft is selling that replaced VB and play with their pretty form designers...
Like a lot of posters, I'm in doubt about the seriousness of the whole question. It sounds like somthing a high school student would ask. The question said the reason that dynamic linking was ruled out was because its "too hard", when its one of the easier things to do.
If it was Troll Tuesday, I'd say the editors were playing with us.
You can't have your cake and eat it too. If you want to benefit from other people modding your code, you have to share it. If you want to GPL it, yoiu can't say "GPL except for X, Y and Z people".
As for locking out defense industries - do you REALLY want cruise missiles under the control of a Windows box? There were enough problems during the original Desert Storm because Windows wasn't designed to go more than 45 days without a reboot, and someone forgot. Same as some ATC software at a major airport - someone removed the reboot from the scheduled maintenance.
"Gartner predicts that by year-end 75% of enterprises 'will be infected with undetected, financially motivated, targeted malware that evaded traditional perimeter and host defenses.'"
Dear computer owner:
The computer industry has been determines to be infected by malicious 'analysts' who make a living out of regurgitating the same old news every year. God forbid they actually do something constructive for a change.
Slashdot Mirror
Offer x large numbers of hours of decent content mailed back on disk for every hour of volunteer transcribing? There might be a ton of semi or full retired folks might want to get into that, if the software deal was setup for them and it was easy to use and understand.
"Offer x large numbers of hours of PORN mailed back on disk for every hour of volunteer transcribing? There might be a ton of semi or full retired folks might want to get into that, if the software deal was setup for them and it was easy to use and understand.
There ... fixed it for you.
Then maybe its time to switch to another operating system?
I have yet to have a patch break openSuse, either at work or at home ...
Same thing with RedHat before that.
Same thing with Mandrake before that.
Same thing with Slackware before that.
Yes, I heard about the stupid Ubuntu patch that broke people's logging in. One of my coworkers got hit by it - but that's the only occasion this century that I've seen it happen.
Please read the article AGAIN. Nowhere does it say this is for an embedded system. The actual language:
"I am planning to sell embedded-like boxes with an OS (Linux or BSD) and this code."
In other words, a bog-standard beige box with a copy of an OS (either linux or BSD) running some closed-source code. Could be a web app, a firewall, a port forwarder, a replicator ... its not stated and we don't know, but what we do know is its NOT an embedded system. Its hardware (a pc) and software sold as closed package.
Its the choice of words ... you said the plants were "designed" that way. That implies a designer - as opposed to plants "evolved" that way, which doesn't.
That's why I said you might want to rethink your orginal choice of words.
Here's your generic open-source internet video closed caption. Please feel free to distribute it under the BSD license.
BEGIN CLOSED CAPTION
[cheesy elevator music]
Oh ah yes that's it yes baby ooohh right uh uh yes yes ysss ysss! oh god yes more omigod YES
[sound of bed breaking]
[cheesy elevator music]
END CLOSED CAPTION - LOOP
"the plants that live underwater are designed to.
You may want to rephrase that - or attribute the "design" to the Flying Spaghetti Monster. (unless you're in favor of "Intelligent Design" and Cretionism).
You were not off-topic; you probably pricked the conscience of someone who needs a Cadillac Escalade or a Hummer to feel fulfilled.
And who is CONSUMING all the stuff made in China? You wouldn't have the same scale of pollutant production from manufacturing in China if you didn't have the huge demand from the US. MOre than 300 BILLION dollars a year. That's a lot of "exported" pollution.
Shipping a buggy product and locking customers in are not connected in any of the four dimensions.
Look up "sunk cost fallacy."
Tsk tsk tsk ... why is refusing to believe an obvious bogus article a recipe for becoming bitter? Or do you believe in the old saying "ignorance is bliss"?
Calling them "bugs" is a way for us to avoid blame for making mistakes, either in the code itself or in the processes we use to plan and implement that code.
Calling an error a "bug" makes it sound like it could have crawled in there on its own. ("Gee, I don't know how that bug got in there. I'll fix it.")
It didn't just crawl in there on its onw, and its not a feature or a bug, its a mistake, pure and simple. And someone made it.
We (hopefully) learn from our mistakes. Labelling them "bugs" makes it less likely we'll take personal responsibility for them; hence more likely to make the same mistake the next time than if we were honest with ourselves and said "I screwed up - that's a mistake."
Sure, calling it a bug might sooth our egos (we don't have to admit we made a mistake - the program is just "buggy"), but really, are our egos that easily bruised that we can't own up to our mistakes?
"complex software written for use on a wide variety of configurations WILL HAVE BUGS"
A buffer overflow has nothing to do with how you configure your PC. Neither do dangling pointers. They're errors - not "bugs". They don't craw into your PC when you're not looking.
I'll leave it to the brits
Patch Tuesday is there because Microsoft can't compete. It has nothing to do with the "cost" of patching, and everything to do with the "cost" of shipping a buggy product.
Simple economics:
""Trolltalk" is as fitting a name as I've ever come across. "
The domain name had been available for 11 months before I grabbed it a couple of weeks ago, to start a site for tech discussions. You're welcome to submit an article, and if its at all relevant I'll post it on the front page. However, this "ask slashdot" should NOT have been front-page material for any serious site.
I have no problem showing newbies the ropes - but this "article" was trolling - and crappy trolling at that. I've done my share of trolling (under my main account), and I try to stick to one rule - make sure that it makes people THINK! This "article" suffers from hydrocephaly.
I'm not the only one who has called "bullshit" on this article. It IS bullshit.
Look at this choice quote: "I personally got a 'go to hell with your @#$ closed code' slur on Slashdot". So, this has been "asked and answered" before. Nice way to distract us from real issues, like Xandros/Linspire/Novell + Microsoft - ask the same question AGAIN, knowing ahead of time that it will generate a certain response.
Whick leads me to 2 points:
Its either a troll, or a bad business plan with fatal flaws. If its a troll, what's the harm in pointing it out? If its a fatally flawed plan, again, what's the harm in pointing it out?
But it IS a troll. And one so poorly done that it may end up backfiring on the troll, because people like us can then end up having relatively sane conversations, find out that, despite the troll-baiter trying, to sow dissention we have some common ground in wanting to see genuine newbies who are passionate about code succeed, and take it from there.
But "I want to do "xyz" and I find "abc" is too hard and don't bother complaining about "def" because "ijk "already did "uvw" ...?" If you're really serious about setting this up as a buisness, and you don't have the skills, you get a partner who does ... This is just a transparent troll submitted by an AC, and should be slapped down accordingly.
Fortran ... that brings back memories :-)
Consider this - this is just a "preview" product - and not even on "their" platform. Its good publicity. They're handling the vulnerabilities the same way Tylenol handled the poisoned pill problem - actively, instead of with their head up Gates/Ballmer's rear end going "no problemo".
When I was a kid, RAM was made of flip-flops and I had to go to school with three feet of snow, and it was uphill both ways. Oh boy.
You were lucky - you had a supply of cheap beach sandals! We had to make our bits out of acorns. Our computers would crash every fall when the squirrels would bury all our RAM.
"01 must go to 10 before it can reach 11 and must got to 11 before it can be "flipped" to 00 again. All memory works on the same concept."
WTF? You sound like youy have a fine future ahead in law ... but not in computers. 01 can be flipped directly to 11 - each bit is stored in a separate junction. Or are you going to say that an 8-byte memory address has to be flipped repeatedly all the way to 11111111 before it can be reset to 00000000?
(but then again, we already knew that)
That should get more people looking to Macs on their next hardware upgrade.
Actually, even less than a troll - a smart troll would have phrased the question along a scenario that at least sounds believable.
Dynamic linking "is to hard" is a joke. #include <dlfcn.h>, then call dlopen() using RTLD_LAZY so you don't load the library until you need it.
Its not just that, though. "I want to start a business ..." "I just want to do my job ..." (well, which is it?).
The poke at the end about already being flamed over closed-source ... welllllll duh! When even Sun is running onto the open-source bandwagon because it makes more sense?
Of course, posting AC didn't help either.
Read the ENTIRE article. "I want to start a business" + "I just want to do my job." Well, which is it? Start a business, or do his job? In this case, its neither. Its just useless blather, and people see it, and call "bullshit."
The person who said "There are no stupid questions - only stupid answers" didn't wait for those 1 million monkeys on one million keyboards to finish. This "Ask slashdot" was one of THOSE questions.
Anyone wanting to use dlopen just has to look at the links I provided in another post (either here or in another thread - too busy to look). I also linked to example code. Its trivial to use. If you can't figure out how to use dlopen() after reading the examples, I'd hate to see you use something a bit more complicated like, say, printf. (And if you're intimidated by simple functions like dlopen() and printf(), you should give your idea of writing and selling proprietary software a quick reality check).Really ... the poster asked for opinions. My opinion is simple - the poster's proposal is less than half-baked at this jucture. Maybe its impolitic to say so, but that's reality. They asked for opinions, and got more than what they bargained for, from some of the other posters' comments.
This person is not cut out to be a programmer. Let them take up marketing, politics, sales, or some other "fuzzy" problem domain.
Nyet. Russian computers ... we need more COAL, nerdsky.
Everyone know we not make Russian hardware run on solar power, Is not dependable. Sun go down every day. Then what? Run on moonshine? Nyet - Russian potato vodka much better.
Already its a -4 by most reasonable standards. I browse at -1, but this ... its utter crap. Anyone who thinks that calling dlopen() is "too hard" better go back to whatever Microsoft is selling that replaced VB and play with their pretty form designers ...
Like a lot of posters, I'm in doubt about the seriousness of the whole question. It sounds like somthing a high school student would ask. The question said the reason that dynamic linking was ruled out was because its "too hard", when its one of the easier things to do.
If it was Troll Tuesday, I'd say the editors were playing with us.
You can't have your cake and eat it too. If you want to benefit from other people modding your code, you have to share it. If you want to GPL it, yoiu can't say "GPL except for X, Y and Z people".
As for locking out defense industries - do you REALLY want cruise missiles under the control of a Windows box? There were enough problems during the original Desert Storm because Windows wasn't designed to go more than 45 days without a reboot, and someone forgot. Same as some ATC software at a major airport - someone removed the reboot from the scheduled maintenance.
"Gartner predicts that by year-end 75% of enterprises 'will be infected with undetected, financially motivated, targeted malware that evaded traditional perimeter and host defenses.'"
Dear computer owner:
The computer industry has been determines to be infected by malicious 'analysts' who make a living out of regurgitating the same old news every year. God forbid they actually do something constructive for a change.