This. And it cannot be said enough. Linux do has a lot of critics, that's not the problem. The problem is on the projects. And on the technical critics.
Example. Developer B critics Project X. Project X leader, Developer F, can't handle the criticism and disses Developer B. Developer B forks the project, brings some with him and now we have a rift. Both because F couldn't handle the criticism (he probably has a self-diagnosed case of Aspherges given him all the excuses he wants without medical basis), and B ego was hur int the process.
I see a lot of "My way or the highway" attitude in most linux projects that are not tied with a big company, that may be what the blogger was writing about, and if so, I agree with him. That's an attitude that hurts the Open Source initiative and public opinion towards it.
Sometimes I'm not sure if what we need is more a PR firm or just a bunch of Yuppi(sp?) programmers.
Oh, and re-installing irix was as simple as constructing an atomic bomb in your garden shed, from 2 paperclips, some woodglue, and a dead panda, whilst your arms are tied behind your back.
Almost worked. There were a few nice parts, but the disclaimer were too over the top, and the thing about Big Ben even more unbeliveable than the oen about Alaska. And if they wanted a game joke, they could have worked better on the Leroy character.
OMGPONIES, I'm meta-moderating April's Fools articles. That's a low blow in my life.
You know the FAQ says it will be real. I bet that is part of the joke, but yes, it was well implemented. If it is not indeed April's Fool, and the system become real (we will see it tomorrow), this would have been as good as GMail.
As a Brazilian programmer who knows English pretty well even before entering programming let me light somethings that I watch in here:
Most of the programmers don't understand English very well (they mispronounce ever English constructor). Their comments are all in Portuguese, as are variables and class names;
Most of the programmers from the top universities (there are some people, even in my class, that were proud to not speak English)do know English very well and they indeed prefer to discuss, comment and use variable names in English. But usually will depend on the nature of the team you are working with;
The amount and quality of documentation is better in English. Most of the online sources in Portuguese are wrong or at least terrible. But that speaks more for the average quality of Brazilian coders than anything else;
If Orkut showed me anything, we as a people have a serious identity crisis that is spilling to the online world, and that makes most of people frown upon foreign languages and do what they can in Portuguese;
The nomenclature problem is very real, we have several "leading experts" (a.k.a. journalists in important papers with fancy titles) that keep arm-wrestling with the proper translations of English terms. It is a bloody PITA, and make some of us (myself included) prefer the English names.
You don't need English because the constructors are in English. Most of them are so simple words that even the most stupid programmer can understand. Even if they don't know the meaning.
So, I agree with you that it was a case of Selection Bias. GP dealt with a part of our programming force that is used to deal with International programmers, and probably comes from the highest and best universities. These are the ones that will prefer English both in comments and in variable names. But to be sincere, I see your anecdote and raise the fact that I never saw people actually "discuss" programming in English among themselves.
Careful here. The burden of what is appropriate or inappropriate to do with a child changed over time. Yes, we now think that it is abhorrent, and it is a crime, but 100, 200 years ago, a woman was ready for sex the moment she had her period, after all, now she could bear a child, and that means she is a woman.
So, during his time, for Mohammad to have sex with an 9 years old, it was perfect normal. Come one, on the western world, about 100 years ago it was common for girls to get married at age 12. You may have all the problems you want with Islam, I don't care (I do have mines), but never let those get in front of critical thinking, that is the path of bigotry. Do you want to become one of them?
Wow, you just can't let go, can you? Bush is out of office and you're still obsessing over him.
Wait, you are saying that just because the game is no longer on the office we should forget and let it go????? I mean, if I could apply that logic to other parts of life it would mean, for example, that I should go prosecuting a copy and unlawfully killed someone because s\he left the corporation. It is stupid and dangerous.
Needing root privileges means that an attacker could put this code on another malware he writes, get an user infected and upload this to the bios. From that point onwards, if they can really disable the AV (both article and presentation are light on details), they can ensure that the box will remain infected, by injecting more code.
Think of it as a sure fire way to get people infect for a botnet without any recourse to stop it. Except updating the EEPROM of the bios (although I couldn't see how it can survive a re-flashing.)
Simply linking to addresses in ACMA's blacklist attracts an $11,000 per-day fine (snip) The blacklist is secret, immune to FOI requests and forms the basis of the Australian (snip)
So you receive a letter on your mailbox saying that you were fined in AUD $11,000 , for linking to a site that you didn't know you could link, and if you knew that you couldn't link to it you would be even more penalized because that information is not for your security level?
Has someone on the Aussie's Government been playing Paranoia recently?
Do that and noone will buy your products. See, it doesn't matter what you actually do, but what can be expected to be done from you. That's the cruxis and the worst of advertising, a costumer will see both you and your competitor, you saying minimum 40min and he saying average 2h. He will buy his, not yours.
you have grounds for libel if it's false or if it was done with malicious intent.
The problem lies on the definition of "malicious intent" and how Massachusetts diverges from the SCOTUS definition. By their definition, if a newspaper runs an article by a whistleblower regarding some shody politicians, based on true verifiable facts, with intent to expose him and make him quit and be jailed, the politician could sue the newspaper acusing the blurb of "malicious intent", since the clear intent was to put the police and public opinion against him, and send him to jail.
To fail at basic info like that, shows a disregard for scientific knowledge. And that is foundation of critical thought (together with some philosophy in it).
I disagree. I think understanding and applying the scientific method is the foundation of science, which is just one method of critical thought. Any particular facts a person knows or does not know may be reflective of their opinions about science, or it may be reflective of their particular interests and cultural influences.
You can't learn how to critically deduce something if you don't know things. A basic example, using something un-scientific, jigsaw puzzle solving. See, I know a basic fact, "the box contains 5000 pieces", I know another basic fact "borders are flat in at least one of the sides". With those in mind you can start creating a process to solve the jigsaw, you can put on that a few more "unit" data: "it is easier to get 1 pair together than 4", and from that place start deriving how you are going to solve it. Ok, it is a silly example, and not that great of an analogy (I'm at work and tired), but it shows that without any of those basic facts I couldn't work on how to solve the problem.
Mind you, I think "critical thought", "Principals of Western Philosophy", "Mathematical proofs", "Basic Algorithms" should all be classes since the 5th grade (10 years old here in Brazil). You need to teach the kids how to think. But you need to show them some fact too, so they can apply what they are learning in terms of thinking, and their curiosity on a bunch of "silly" trivia and from that onwards learn how to think.
It is unlikely, but not impossible, that people who fail such a test are able to apply the scientific method. It is probable that people who pass this test, still have no real understanding of the scientific method, how to apply it, or why it works.
I agree with you that people who pass this test may still have no understading of the scientific method, but I don't think that someone who can't get those facts can know it. Mainly because they are easy to infer from other things. Take the question about how much water there is in the world. I may not know the number, I may not have ever thought about it, but if I saw a map, and thinking a bit about it, I can make a good guess (which means, we should expect a much higher "close enough" percentage). The fact that so many people have no idea about it, shows not just a lack of trivia knowledge but a lack of deducing capabilities.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder what kind of field of view one would get by using these.
Whatever it is, it is much bigger than 0. I hope they find a way to make these cheaper, because they trully sounds great.
It's just WWI and WWII where they fell down.
In a world where hsitory is always forgotten, that's all that matters.
This. And it cannot be said enough. Linux do has a lot of critics, that's not the problem. The problem is on the projects. And on the technical critics.
Example. Developer B critics Project X. Project X leader, Developer F, can't handle the criticism and disses Developer B. Developer B forks the project, brings some with him and now we have a rift. Both because F couldn't handle the criticism (he probably has a self-diagnosed case of Aspherges given him all the excuses he wants without medical basis), and B ego was hur int the process.
I see a lot of "My way or the highway" attitude in most linux projects that are not tied with a big company, that may be what the blogger was writing about, and if so, I agree with him. That's an attitude that hurts the Open Source initiative and public opinion towards it.
Sometimes I'm not sure if what we need is more a PR firm or just a bunch of Yuppi(sp?) programmers.
Oh, and re-installing irix was as simple as constructing an atomic bomb in your garden shed, from 2 paperclips, some woodglue, and a dead panda, whilst your arms are tied behind your back.
So you need to be McGyver?
posting on the internet can NEVER be considered a waste of time.
Wait, I though that was the only reason for it.
I thought that was the reason for all the "Download best smiles EVER for MSN" links I saw around.
Less verbose for sure.
Almost worked. There were a few nice parts, but the disclaimer were too over the top, and the thing about Big Ben even more unbeliveable than the oen about Alaska. And if they wanted a game joke, they could have worked better on the Leroy character.
OMGPONIES, I'm meta-moderating April's Fools articles. That's a low blow in my life.
You know the FAQ says it will be real. I bet that is part of the joke, but yes, it was well implemented. If it is not indeed April's Fool, and the system become real (we will see it tomorrow), this would have been as good as GMail.
Zomg we are doomed. And give me my achievement.
Did anyone else read this as "Oprah Launches Facial Gesture Capability"?
Please no, I beg of you. I don't want to see Oprah's "happiness" face. *shrugs*
As a Brazilian programmer who knows English pretty well even before entering programming let me light somethings that I watch in here:
So, I agree with you that it was a case of Selection Bias. GP dealt with a part of our programming force that is used to deal with International programmers, and probably comes from the highest and best universities. These are the ones that will prefer English both in comments and in variable names. But to be sincere, I see your anecdote and raise the fact that I never saw people actually "discuss" programming in English among themselves.
You see it is our dump versus their dump. You don't want their dump to infiltrate our society and destroy it, do yo?
That you can't be without it for a few hours?
Yes
I think the two main open source alternatives to commercial databases are Firebird and PostgreSQL.
not by volume
So, the man that is considered by Islam to be the ideal role model, capable only of 'human errors in judgment in minor things with good intentions', was also a child rapist.
Careful here. The burden of what is appropriate or inappropriate to do with a child changed over time. Yes, we now think that it is abhorrent, and it is a crime, but 100, 200 years ago, a woman was ready for sex the moment she had her period, after all, now she could bear a child, and that means she is a woman.
So, during his time, for Mohammad to have sex with an 9 years old, it was perfect normal. Come one, on the western world, about 100 years ago it was common for girls to get married at age 12. You may have all the problems you want with Islam, I don't care (I do have mines), but never let those get in front of critical thinking, that is the path of bigotry. Do you want to become one of them?
Wow, you just can't let go, can you? Bush is out of office and you're still obsessing over him.
Wait, you are saying that just because the game is no longer on the office we should forget and let it go????? I mean, if I could apply that logic to other parts of life it would mean, for example, that I should go prosecuting a copy and unlawfully killed someone because s\he left the corporation. It is stupid and dangerous.
Needing root privileges means that an attacker could put this code on another malware he writes, get an user infected and upload this to the bios. From that point onwards, if they can really disable the AV (both article and presentation are light on details), they can ensure that the box will remain infected, by injecting more code.
Think of it as a sure fire way to get people infect for a botnet without any recourse to stop it. Except updating the EEPROM of the bios (although I couldn't see how it can survive a re-flashing.)
The sad thing is that despite all these problems, their leading in this realm, too.
Nintendo would like to disagree with you.
Not only that, but the atention to the whys of the tests it was amazing. I had a very pleasant reading on that review. Kudos to the reviewer.
Saramago, is that you?
Simply linking to addresses in ACMA's blacklist attracts an $11,000 per-day fine (snip) The blacklist is secret, immune to FOI requests and forms the basis of the Australian (snip)
So you receive a letter on your mailbox saying that you were fined in AUD $11,000 , for linking to a site that you didn't know you could link, and if you knew that you couldn't link to it you would be even more penalized because that information is not for your security level?
Has someone on the Aussie's Government been playing Paranoia recently?
3) Advertise "minimum" battery life
Do that and noone will buy your products. See, it doesn't matter what you actually do, but what can be expected to be done from you. That's the cruxis and the worst of advertising, a costumer will see both you and your competitor, you saying minimum 40min and he saying average 2h. He will buy his, not yours.
you have grounds for libel if it's false or if it was done with malicious intent.
The problem lies on the definition of "malicious intent" and how Massachusetts diverges from the SCOTUS definition. By their definition, if a newspaper runs an article by a whistleblower regarding some shody politicians, based on true verifiable facts, with intent to expose him and make him quit and be jailed, the politician could sue the newspaper acusing the blurb of "malicious intent", since the clear intent was to put the police and public opinion against him, and send him to jail.
To fail at basic info like that, shows a disregard for scientific knowledge. And that is foundation of critical thought (together with some philosophy in it).
I disagree. I think understanding and applying the scientific method is the foundation of science, which is just one method of critical thought. Any particular facts a person knows or does not know may be reflective of their opinions about science, or it may be reflective of their particular interests and cultural influences.
You can't learn how to critically deduce something if you don't know things. A basic example, using something un-scientific, jigsaw puzzle solving. See, I know a basic fact, "the box contains 5000 pieces", I know another basic fact "borders are flat in at least one of the sides". With those in mind you can start creating a process to solve the jigsaw, you can put on that a few more "unit" data: "it is easier to get 1 pair together than 4", and from that place start deriving how you are going to solve it. Ok, it is a silly example, and not that great of an analogy (I'm at work and tired), but it shows that without any of those basic facts I couldn't work on how to solve the problem.
Mind you, I think "critical thought", "Principals of Western Philosophy", "Mathematical proofs", "Basic Algorithms" should all be classes since the 5th grade (10 years old here in Brazil). You need to teach the kids how to think. But you need to show them some fact too, so they can apply what they are learning in terms of thinking, and their curiosity on a bunch of "silly" trivia and from that onwards learn how to think.
It is unlikely, but not impossible, that people who fail such a test are able to apply the scientific method. It is probable that people who pass this test, still have no real understanding of the scientific method, how to apply it, or why it works.
I agree with you that people who pass this test may still have no understading of the scientific method, but I don't think that someone who can't get those facts can know it. Mainly because they are easy to infer from other things. Take the question about how much water there is in the world. I may not know the number, I may not have ever thought about it, but if I saw a map, and thinking a bit about it, I can make a good guess (which means, we should expect a much higher "close enough" percentage). The fact that so many people have no idea about it, shows not just a lack of trivia knowledge but a lack of deducing capabilities.