Basically, Real Engineers are sticking around
for the long haul. We were here before the boom
and we will be here afterwards [...] People
"burned out by tech jobs" are people who got
into "tech jobs" because it was hot.
Not me! I have been in the business since 1975,
and I have been "burned out" several times since.
I have not left the field, but I have left a number
of bad companies behind me.
Unless you are a real technophobe, I fail to see
how the tech in itself would make you burn out.
Much more likely people burn out because of stress,
unreasobale expectations, and bad management.
Stress and bad management may be unusually common
among tech jobs, but they certainly exist in all
walks of life.
In my humble opinion, if this is the way to go, we should
do the following:
1) keep the file system as it is.
2) Create a new system call fiopen (*) that would open a file
in a consistent way, mathing actual case first, and if that
failed, various alternatives, probably depending on the locale,
and a number of other things. The details to be sorted out
in a horrible flame war;-)
3) Use this call in standard GUI components. Applications
will follow naturally.
The important thing is to figure out the one right way to
handle the case insensitivity correctly and consistently,
and possibly leave the old stubborn user a way not to be
forced to use it if he (**) so prefers.
Notes:
(*) As in stricmp, etc
(**) Since the English language requires me to choose a
gender for an unknown person, I have here chosen the male,
as is often common. Normally I consider users female,
to remind me to go out of my way to be nice to them.
Chauvinist or gentleman - your choice.
File system is an internal, abstract and archaic database that is familiar to programmers and geeks, but a lousy way to represent data for the general user.
Just like democracy - it is a bad system likely to go even worse.
Its only defence is that all the alternatives seem to much
worse...
The first question is who told him not to answer these questions?
The second question is why?
The third question is whom should we direct these valid questions to?
The fourth question is what excuse do the proper authorities have for not answering public questions?
The fifth question is which question was it that trigered all this mess?
The sixth question is what *are* they hiding?
The seventh question is whose interests really matter
The final question is how many newspapers, websites, etc. we
can get to comment on this way of refusing the public to
learn what is going on.
As you must know by now, the USPTO has got itself
a really bad name here, and (imho) rightly so. Yet
I see no end to their silliness (method for amusing
cats with a laser, one-click shopping, wild plants,
human genes...)
Do you see any chance of the rest of the world
succeding in forcing USA to behave? For example,
could we threaten to exclude USA from the international
patent treaties, and stop enforcing US patents
anywhere else?
If this kind of law passes, the rest of the world ought to
declare USA a rogue state that supports (cyber)terrorism,
and put serious economical, political, and diplomatic pressure
on USA.
A good first step would be to exclude USA from
international patent and copyrught organizations, allowing
the rest of the world to freely copy anything American.
Have someone inform BSA that the FSF office is actually
using pirated word processors for all their work. Let them
ask for an audit, and try to force the matter. Immediate
self-lart, with lots of publicity for both parts!
Does anyone know what sort of brains those birds have?
I used to work with the RCA-1802 chip in late 70's,
and someone told me that such a chip was on board one
of the spacecrafts. Unfortunately I can not remember
which one.
It all depends what you have access to. Can you capture
a number of packets with a valid checksum? Can you feed
your own guesses to the box, and get a decent feedback?
Do you know the rest of the protocol? Do you have access to
the drivers or other software (in either end)?
Is it a very
simple machine with a very simple processor and limited
memory? If so, they may well have written their own with
shifts and xors. On the other hand, if it is a modern processor
with megabytes of memory, they probably have used a library
function. Can you get access to the standard libraries
for that chip?
How long is the checksum? What happens if you feed a
wrong one? If it is just a single byte, and the box doesn't
lock up completely on error, try all possible values for every
packet!
Why do you think they put the checksum in the protocol?
To catch a few dropped bits over a bad line, or to prevent
tampering? If the later, watch out for some real cryptography.
If only the former, assume they took the path of least resistance.
They seem to try to fight back
on
L0pht And The FBI
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Looks like someone is pissed at Thomas Greene from the Register
Vatican authorities complain to Italian police. The act is
reported in an Australian paper, and referred to in a U.S.
site (./). I read about it in Denmark, after the story has
already gone once around the whole world.
Seriously, this really shows how the net is international
indeed, and local authorities will have to adjust a lot.
Wonder how the world will look like in 20 years? 50? 100?
I know this is not a commercial project in a large
corporation, I thought I mention it anyway.
In the
GnuGo project we have a large set of simple test
scripts, and all the time we keep track of which of them
succeed, and which fail. There are always some failures, but
we can live with that (we sort of have to). This test set
has saved us a lot of time. It has also given valuable
information on the effects of a new algorithm or piece of
code, or what happens when you adjust some tunable parameters.
No expensive tools used, just a bit extra coding to
make all the necessary information available for the
tests, and a few scripts...
The server can't measure the latency all on it's own.
Of course not, measuring latency requires a packet
to make a round trip. It does not have to be the
same packet as the one used to tell the what move
the user made. This all has to be built in the protocol.
I think the traditional approach is to
let the server measure the time used, like
in the "old days". And let the server measure
the latency, so that it knows how much to
correct.
Even this is not foolproof, as a malicious client
could detect when the server is measuring the
latency, and artificially boost that, so that
the server would overcomensate, giving the player
extra time.
There is also the problem of unpredictable
variations in the latency, which could be
solved by measuring the latencies of every
packet transmitted...
Maybe a two-way system, where the server measures
the latency to the client, and the client measures
the latency to the server. The server recognizes
these measurements, and adds a random extra
latency, and if the client reports that wrong, it
assumes there is foul play, and insists on using
its own guesstimates of the timing.
Hmm, trickier problem that I thought.
Good luck!
You either get crypto on every computer, and DRM, or no crypto and no DRM, you can't have one and not the other
Pray tell why not? Crypto allows me to hide,
sign,and verify things; DRM forces me to do
these things and prevents me from doing all
kind of things with data, possibly my own data.
As to seeing a source code, I doubt it. Sure M$
may show some "trusted" parts some source, but what
guarantees can I ever have that it is the same source
as what is running on my box?
The problem with DRM is, as most of our readers know,
that it is incomaptible with my ability to write any
programs I want, and run them on my computer. That is
why I whine against DRM, and will do my little best
to stop such horror from happening.
There are no simple answers to these questions.
Best you can do is to formulate your own policy,
and stick to it. In real life projects there will
always be exceptions and special cases, but it
helps a lot if all people working on the project
at least know of the existence of common guidelines,
and preferably understand and agree with the reasoning
behind them.
I hope this will be an eye-opener for many users
of commercial software. This is what may happen
to any such software. The only guarantee is to
do like the electronics industry does, and prefer
stuff that has more than one provider. In software
the only way to do this is to go with Open Source.
That always leaves open the possibility of hiring
someone to continue to support the stuff, no matter
what companies get sold, close down, or change strategy.
I have no idea how this would play in a U.S. court, but
I suspect that here in Denmark I could argue that MS
has shipped a faulty product - they admit it themselves
by offering a fix to it - and then refusing to fix the problem
- by requiring me to agree to blatantly unreasonable terms
If I had been using MS stuff, I would take this up with
the local consumer protection authorities (forbrugerombudsman).
(Un?)fortunately I have not purhcased any MS software for
the past many years, so I can not go that way. Hope someone
else will.
This longhorned stuff isn't scheduled to come out
in a few years. In todays market M$ might be able
to pull off a trick like this, but if OS systems
gain a decent market share on the desktop, M$ will
have a much harder time forcing them all to switch.
Even more so if some governments around the world
get around passing laws that require OS stuff to
be used in their administrations and/or multinational
corporations realize that M$ is competing with them,
and forbid the use of its products..
To my untrained eye it seems like they have created
a lattice pattern in some sort of polymer. Then
they compare its behaviour to steel tubes. At least
here in Denmark, most tall poles are already lattice
structures, usually of steel. I wonder if this miracle
material would perform well in a traditionally shaped
lattice or if their new miraculous lattice would work
even better with conventional steel?
Slashdot Mirror
It is a latin word, so it uses roman numerals:
1 viri
2 virii
3 viriii
4 viriv
5 virv
6 virvi
7 virvii
8 virviii
9 virix
10 virx
Not me! I have been in the business since 1975, and I have been "burned out" several times since. I have not left the field, but I have left a number of bad companies behind me.
Unless you are a real technophobe, I fail to see how the tech in itself would make you burn out. Much more likely people burn out because of stress, unreasobale expectations, and bad management.
Stress and bad management may be unusually common among tech jobs, but they certainly exist in all walks of life.
1) keep the file system as it is.
2) Create a new system call fiopen (*) that would open a file in a consistent way, mathing actual case first, and if that failed, various alternatives, probably depending on the locale, and a number of other things. The details to be sorted out in a horrible flame war
3) Use this call in standard GUI components. Applications will follow naturally.
The important thing is to figure out the one right way to handle the case insensitivity correctly and consistently, and possibly leave the old stubborn user a way not to be forced to use it if he (**) so prefers.
Notes:
(*) As in stricmp, etc
(**) Since the English language requires me to choose a gender for an unknown person, I have here chosen the male, as is often common. Normally I consider users female, to remind me to go out of my way to be nice to them. Chauvinist or gentleman - your choice.
Just like democracy - it is a bad system likely to go even worse. Its only defence is that all the alternatives seem to much worse...
The second question is why?
The third question is whom should we direct these valid questions to?
The fourth question is what excuse do the proper authorities have for not answering public questions?
The fifth question is which question was it that trigered all this mess?
The sixth question is what *are* they hiding?
The seventh question is whose interests really matter
The final question is how many newspapers, websites, etc. we can get to comment on this way of refusing the public to learn what is going on.
Do you see any chance of the rest of the world succeding in forcing USA to behave? For example, could we threaten to exclude USA from the international patent treaties, and stop enforcing US patents anywhere else?
A good first step would be to exclude USA from international patent and copyrught organizations, allowing the rest of the world to freely copy anything American.
Have someone inform BSA that the FSF office is actually using pirated word processors for all their work. Let them ask for an audit, and try to force the matter. Immediate self-lart, with lots of publicity for both parts!
Does anyone know what sort of brains those birds have? I used to work with the RCA-1802 chip in late 70's, and someone told me that such a chip was on board one of the spacecrafts. Unfortunately I can not remember which one.
Is it a very simple machine with a very simple processor and limited memory? If so, they may well have written their own with shifts and xors. On the other hand, if it is a modern processor with megabytes of memory, they probably have used a library function. Can you get access to the standard libraries for that chip?
How long is the checksum? What happens if you feed a wrong one? If it is just a single byte, and the box doesn't lock up completely on error, try all possible values for every packet!
Why do you think they put the checksum in the protocol? To catch a few dropped bits over a bad line, or to prevent tampering? If the later, watch out for some real cryptography. If only the former, assume they took the path of least resistance.
And not doing a very good job at it...
Don't ever pick a fight with a person who buys ink by the barrel.
to any other submarines in 30-90 nm radius
Who cares! Once they are within a micrometer, or even a whole
meter from you, you are toast anyway!
Seriously, this really shows how the net is international indeed, and local authorities will have to adjust a lot. Wonder how the world will look like in 20 years? 50? 100?
I know this is not a commercial project in a large corporation, I thought I mention it anyway. In the GnuGo project we have a large set of simple test scripts, and all the time we keep track of which of them succeed, and which fail. There are always some failures, but we can live with that (we sort of have to). This test set has saved us a lot of time. It has also given valuable information on the effects of a new algorithm or piece of code, or what happens when you adjust some tunable parameters. No expensive tools used, just a bit extra coding to make all the necessary information available for the tests, and a few scripts...
Of course not, measuring latency requires a packet to make a round trip. It does not have to be the same packet as the one used to tell the what move the user made. This all has to be built in the protocol.
I think the traditional approach is to let the server measure the time used, like in the "old days". And let the server measure the latency, so that it knows how much to correct. Even this is not foolproof, as a malicious client could detect when the server is measuring the latency, and artificially boost that, so that the server would overcomensate, giving the player extra time. There is also the problem of unpredictable variations in the latency, which could be solved by measuring the latencies of every packet transmitted... Maybe a two-way system, where the server measures the latency to the client, and the client measures the latency to the server. The server recognizes these measurements, and adds a random extra latency, and if the client reports that wrong, it assumes there is foul play, and insists on using its own guesstimates of the timing. Hmm, trickier problem that I thought. Good luck!
Pray tell why not? Crypto allows me to hide, sign,and verify things; DRM forces me to do these things and prevents me from doing all kind of things with data, possibly my own data.
As to seeing a source code, I doubt it. Sure M$ may show some "trusted" parts some source, but what guarantees can I ever have that it is the same source as what is running on my box? The problem with DRM is, as most of our readers know, that it is incomaptible with my ability to write any programs I want, and run them on my computer. That is why I whine against DRM, and will do my little best to stop such horror from happening.
There are no simple answers to these questions. Best you can do is to formulate your own policy, and stick to it. In real life projects there will always be exceptions and special cases, but it helps a lot if all people working on the project at least know of the existence of common guidelines, and preferably understand and agree with the reasoning behind them.
I hope this will be an eye-opener for many users of commercial software. This is what may happen to any such software. The only guarantee is to do like the electronics industry does, and prefer stuff that has more than one provider. In software the only way to do this is to go with Open Source. That always leaves open the possibility of hiring someone to continue to support the stuff, no matter what companies get sold, close down, or change strategy.
I have no idea how this would play in a U.S. court, but I suspect that here in Denmark I could argue that MS has shipped a faulty product - they admit it themselves by offering a fix to it - and then refusing to fix the problem - by requiring me to agree to blatantly unreasonable terms If I had been using MS stuff, I would take this up with the local consumer protection authorities (forbrugerombudsman). (Un?)fortunately I have not purhcased any MS software for the past many years, so I can not go that way. Hope someone else will.
Anyone have more references to this? I used to write a lot of code for the 1802, and never heard of this.
This longhorned stuff isn't scheduled to come out in a few years. In todays market M$ might be able to pull off a trick like this, but if OS systems gain a decent market share on the desktop, M$ will have a much harder time forcing them all to switch. Even more so if some governments around the world get around passing laws that require OS stuff to be used in their administrations and/or multinational corporations realize that M$ is competing with them, and forbid the use of its products..
But now it is dead again, thanks to the slashdot effect
To my untrained eye it seems like they have created a lattice pattern in some sort of polymer. Then they compare its behaviour to steel tubes. At least here in Denmark, most tall poles are already lattice structures, usually of steel. I wonder if this miracle material would perform well in a traditionally shaped lattice or if their new miraculous lattice would work even better with conventional steel?