A business partner did this, and a month later he had $6k of bogus charges on his credit card. So be aware that these people are probably not above reselling your info and then throwing up their hands and saying, "Oh my, how'd that happen?"
However, lawmakers overwhelming voted to get rid of them (117-3 in the House, 42-9 in the Senate), because "the cameras were an invasion of privacy and their constituents thought they had been unfairly ticketed."
So despite the company and local municipalities profiting from this, constituents actually made their voices heard and their representatives acted accordingly?
I am deeply confused. This is not the democracy I am used to. I'm going to have to find something else to be cynical about today.
You aren't imagining it--iPhone 2.0 brought this wonderful feature:-(
Apparently people complained about missing text messages, and Apple's solution was to give you two--with no option to opt out. Great. I just don't get how you go to two without an option to stay at one. Sigh.
I know right now they have this one connection that they send push notifications down. I'd love some way to attach my other mail servers to that channel.
I'm not expecting to see that any time (if ever), but man, that would completely and utterly rock. I could hook my work Zimbra server into that channel and get instant notification of work email. I've gotten so used to MobileMe/.Mac being that way that it sucks having work be on a 15 minute refresh.
And yes, once you get used to it, you want to know immediately for all the rest of your email. Right now, I just set my phone to silent with vibrate off when I need privacy--then the phone just leaves me be during my DND times.
Right now, it defaults to once, and if you don't unlock the phone, it does it again. I'd like to set it just to once... period. I figure if they allow you to set it to once, why not to X with some suitable max value.
But I'd settle for once. I get a lot of texts while in meetings, and I don't need the confusing second notification in there making me think I got another. Right now, I just glance at the screen and see what's there without unlocking--it's annoying when I see it's the same text from before.
The update reverted Scalar::Util, which disabled the weak reference stuff needed by a lot of Catalyst libs. I just re-installed it and it worked again.
But on all my new machines, I just use a local lib instead of the system stuff. I don't need sudo access and then the whole lib gets backed up by Time Machine. If you just upgrade the system perl, you have to re-do it every time you restore from a Time Machine backup (it doesn't copy system stuff as near as I can tell).
Also, as some have observed, CPAN is a bad idea. I say this as someone who got screwed when Catalyst went to 5.7100 (I was at 5.7015). When I did a restore to a new machine, CPAN got all the new Catalyst libs and all my customizations blew up spectacularly.
If you are doing serious Perl development on your local Mac, use a local lib and do not rely on CPAN to automatically handle your dependencies. Install things by hand or create a (perl) script to handle the deps for you. That's what we had to do, as we needed to make sure the module version we used matched our production systems--where we do NOT use CPAN and where we upgrade manually and with careful thought.
When I moved across the US a year ago, I had a ton of older hardware and less room to move into (house to apartment). Basically, I gave everything away that I wasn't actively using.
Rather than muck about with secure erasing or degaussers, I just took the dozen drives out to the shed and beat the daylights out of them. Most of my machines were in various states of not running--so the amount of time I would have had to spend putting together a working machine, swapping around more than a dozen older drives, running secure erase on them... well, it just seemed a lot simpler. There was no way I was giving intact hard drives to random people I did not know, especially drives that may or may not have been erased enough.
I recommend safety goggles. Some of the boards tend to shatter and send little bits flying everywhere:-)
Could some super spy possibly lift data? Maybe. But no ID theft script kiddie will. I saw it like using a paper shredder--only a lot more fun. Sure, some super spy agency might be able to re-assemble shredded documents or lift data from the mangled platters of my drives--but why should I be worried about them? They already have a current file on me, I'm sure--they don't need old drives;-)
A friend of mine put it nicely: "There's nothing like the feeling of raw destruction you can wreak with a 10lb sledgehammer." It's right up there with using a proper chainsaw. Deconstructing stuff is *fun*:-D
If I am ever worried about super-spies, I look forward to discovering the wonderful destructive power of thermite:-)
I was with you for that whole first list, but you lost me when you got to "control." Control for whom?
The people making the app. Yes, I know that makes freedom folk really upset, but let's set aside the whole "inalienable right to hack" for a sec. You are a large company, and you need to make an app that works for a lot of people over a wide range of machines. If you want to be able to maintain that app, you need a way to make sure customers are using exactly the right version, maybe even have multiple versions specialized for troublesome platforms. And then there's security--how do you make an app secure, prevent data breaches, etc?
For that, you need control. Can it be abused? Sure. But if you have to plan apps for a corporation and your butt is on the line if the app fails, you start to look at issues of control and freedom a little differently.
I'm not saying that it doesn't get abused--it does. I'm just saying there are realities of securing, maintaining and testing applications on a budget that are very difficult, and they only get more difficult as you release more control over the app. Do corps go insane and go too far? Definitely. But if we look down to some of the real problems and the practical solutions to those problems, controlling exactly what the user is using and where that happens is an effective tool.
The "Back to the Mainframe" approach of web apps gives you this element of control.
You don't control what program you're running. Someone else does.
Yep. And as I said in my original post, and here, that's a boon depending on your perspective. I'll grant you it gets abused, but if you are on a budget and you need a secure, maintainable customer facing application, you need a higher degree of control. And web apps are a modern way to do that.
The big problem I have with web apps is that almost none of them are open-source. Just when I have thousands of debian packages worth of applications to choose from, why in the world would I want to revert to a model where half the code is client-side code that I as a user have no control over, and the other half is server-side code that I can't even see?
As I've been trying to point out, your perspective is different from a VP of Tech for a bank or investment firm. And even if you weren't one of those risk adverse people, the advantages of a web app in terms of maintenance and upgrades is huge. Also from a development perspective, you have easily halved, if not quartered, your development costs. Cross platform development is very, very expensive. Cross browser development is expensive, but it doesn't even come close to Windows + Mac cross platform development, and never mind adding Linux to that mix.
I've done cross platform. The only way to keep it cheap(er) is to use something like Java. And then it looks like crap on ALL the platforms.
So, as a firm with a budget (and I think that excludes 99% of open source projects) web apps are very appealing. Unless there is a technical reason for why a web app just won't work, most firms choose it for those reasons. And even when it won't work, they choose the web app anyways and cut features to make it feasible--because the advantages of cheap, maintainable cross-platform development are not easily dismissed.
All that said, I can see why most open source people turn their nose up at web apps. It's not sexy, and it's often very difficult to do anything clever. And let's not talk about installation--now someone needs to setup databases and apache? Compare that to downloading a binary and just running, it can all be very tedious.
I've made my bread and butter off web apps. Heck, you could say web apps and Java bought my house! But the first real fun I have had in years was making an iPhone app. So I understand people who might not like web apps or regard them as a step back--I feel it too. But my next paycheck is coming in from a Perl, Catalyst-based web app that is customer facing.
So I work for the man to enslave the masses and maintain control during the day, and then I hack on my little apps at night:-D
Here's a big shocker: not everything is a web app! No really.
Yep, you're right. But the reality is that the web app is the greatest advancement in maintenance since the mainframe/dumb-terminal. Right now, web apps are a complete PITA to develop in terms of simple things like storage, persistence, etc. But in terms of compatibility, deployment, and upgrades, they have the local app beat.
So while not everything is a web app, the web app is the *first* approach considered by 90% of people putting out customer facing apps, maybe even closer to 99%. Can web apps do everything? No. But they do answer issues of maintenance, upgrades, and control a lot better than locally installed apps.
I'm still not sure I buy all this cloud stuff, and I think a lot of it is hype. But we are going somewhere like that in one degree or another, and a lot of the apps you use in the future for day to day work are going to be web apps. So Chrome is aimed at that. Will it replace things like Adobe Photoshop? Doubt it. Will it make your online banking experience not suck? Oh, I sure hope so:-)
None of that will happen by magic. But then if Google gets behind web standards hard and shows IE that yes, you can make a browser that doesn't suck--well, the future of web apps might be a little brighter.
Sorry about that, this is in RHEL 5. I used the FC7 SRPM when I made my patch (back in April).
Still principle's the same--just get your current SRPM (e.g. perl-5.8.8-10.el5_0.2.src.rpm), go get the latest FC SRPM (e.g. perl-5.8.8-28.fc7.src.rpm), find the U28775 patch file, add it to the spec, rebuild your original SRPM with that patch file in its spec, etc.
Geez, what was with me and question marks in that post? I need to preview a little longer.
That's what we did. Download the SRPM for RHEL5's perl (currently unreleased), and pull the perl-5.8.8-U28775.patch. Download the SRPM for your RHEL4-based OS, edit the spec to include:
Patch28775: perl-5.8.8-U28775.patch
And then make sure to then add:
%patch28775 -p1
Somewhere in the patch section.
You then get "official" RH perl with the patch for the reblessing. It took me about 30 minutes to do all that my first time, including dusting off my RPM setup and knowledge.
Should RH have fixed it 2 years ago. Oh yes. For this, RH should be burned in effigy. You could say that everyone already knows about this, except that some of us poor slobs keep discovering it anew:-(
Yeah, that's me discovering it all on my own. Fun!
But honestly, when has RH ever gotten the perl interpreter completely right. From RH 4 all the way to today, the general opinion is that you should build your own perl interpreter from the freshest, stable release. RH has a long history of screwing up perl patches or being slow to get the latest in. This one (#28775) is just the worst in a long history of messing up perl for RedHat:-(
And I *like* RedHat. I have used them for years now, and I continue to recommend them as the gold standard for enterprise deployments. So I'm not saying this as a hater, just an annoyed schmuck who continues to use them (I'm probably just lazy at this point).
Great link (I downloaded it myself). But it doesn't help you at all with malls:
In any case, when a property owner tells you not to take photographs while on the premises, you are legally obligated to honor the request.
Which covers malls. Actually "Reverend" Billy's What Would Jesus Buy covers this problem (whether it is balanced or not, I leave to the reader). In a society where all public gathering places are private property, how do we still have the right to free assembly? The answer: we don't—at least not on mall premises. Not even in the parking lot.
The problem is also arising that "public places" in America are increasingly commercialized or managed by commercial entities. Can you assemble in a public transit station? Can you take pictures? I'd bet the answer is at first glance, "no," as some private entity can argue that you are on their property and subject to their whims.
Sure, you should have the right to control what is done on your private property. But when the line between your property being privately owned and being used by the public as a "commons" is blurred, I wish the US would start erring on the side of public rights.
Dude, *lighten up*. Stephen Colbert is a comedian and satirist. Is roasting China along with everyone else in the room him being undiplomatic or him doing his thing?
If China can't take some ribbing from a comedian, what kind of super-power does that make them? Remember when that guy got a monkey to throw up just like Bush? Hilarious! Did we get on his case for lacking in diplomacy?
The only "misstep" diplomatically was putting Colbert in the room with that many powerful people, and then handing him a mike and asking him to do his thing. If the people in that room couldn't handle some humor, then he shouldn't have been asked to do the speech.
And frankly, I'm getting tired of everyone pussy-footing around China. Welcome to the World stage, China! You wanted to be a super-power? You wanted recognition and a bigger say in how things go? Well guess what, my Chinese friends? Along with greater visibility and decision making power comes a lot more criticism, outrage, and being mocked.
Welcome to our world. People have been beating on the US for years. Sometimes it was just whining (hey, I wanted to be in charge instead of you!), and sometimes it was because we used our power to run rough-shod over people. Regardless, the world didn't spare us anything--and they shouldn't.
But China? Oh, poor China! Everyone is so insensitive, so judgmental! Poor, poor China! They only own everyone on the planet through trade imbalances or by owning the country's debt. When people start to complain about China's policies, a Chinese representative reminds them that China owns them lock stock and barrel, and then an apology along with copious amounts of back pedaling ensues (see US toy makers after the lead paint fiascos).
So pardon me if I don't feel sorry for them. No one in the rest of the world is treated with as much fear and trepidation as China. And when they don't feel they get enough respect, they come down on people hard. They are big-boy country. They can clearly take care of themselves.
Ever work on a big project? One that was over due by a significant amount? Yeah, easily $4M.
That amount is like the military paying someone to think about it and give them a paper on it. I've been on civilian-side government projects that were well beyond $4M. Sounds like someone got a "sure, toss some cash at it and see what happens" approval, but not an official "this is a priority, make it so" approval.
Now, $40M is where we start to see some serious thinking about the issue. Yeah, it's an arbitrary amount, but warfare grade network inspection and defense? $40M would be a drop in the bucket for R&D for such a system. $4M is a joke.
Amen, brother. I can't figure out if Stephenson thinks it artistic or something to end his books like that. For me, it's just a sign of bad writing. There are all sorts of stuff you think are artsy until you improve your craft--and then you realize you were just excusing crap work under a label of "artistic."
For once, I'd like a Stephenson book with a decent ending. I think the only quasi-ending he has ever written might be the ending of the Baroque Cycle. But is that an ending or beating a subject matter to death so thoroughly that there is nothing left to say?;-)
I say this all as a big fan. For me, his books are great right up until the end, where I am promised a very dissatisfying, unresolved end to the book. And for no good reason as near as I can tell. Doesn't stop me from reading them--but it also doesn't stop me from complaining either:-)
I updated my iPhone around 11 and it was down right up till the time I had to go pick a friend up from the airport. I just tried right now and the activation step went through without a hitch.
So the iTunes storm seems to be over. I wonder if it was iTunes or iTunes-to-AT&T that was the problem. I seem to remember AT&T's systems was the bottleneck at the launch. I know the computers at the store I was at were crawling and barely able to keep up.
It's a reasonable read if you have been ignoring the iPhone and want to know what the hype is about over this release, but doesn't break any new ground if you've been paying attention.
Thanks. That was truly one of the first useful summaries I have read in a while. Now I can skip TFA;-)
No you're not wrong. The easy access is called a "paper clip".
That said, I don't think you can just carry SIMs and jack them in and out of the iPhone. I believe you have to take the newly SIMed iPhone and sync it with iTunes to get it working again.
In that regard, it has easy access, but not to the feature the parent wants.
Work for any financial firm (and if you write software for in a big city, odds are you are or have worked for a financial firm at one time) you have to get fingerprinted. No one throws a stink about that. After this ridiculous mortgage crisis, is it any surprise they extended it to include lenders?
Maybe I'm just used to it, so I don't see the big deal. But I think I have been fingerprinted at least 4 times over the past 10 years in order to work for financial firms.
Meh. Perhaps it is something to get worked up over. But it isn't really a new thing--perhaps it is to many here? This practice, or something like it, has been in place for years in the greater financial market.
Wow. I guess we can just count Vista as stillborn at this point. Oh sure, there's no way 7 will be out next year (try late 2009, most likely late 2010). But Gates announcing 7 that quickly, it's like he was trying to put a stake through Vista's heart.
Hopefully they had a lot of reusable concepts and code that they can leverage. Otherwise, that's an awful waste of code and effort.
The horrendously crippled bluetooth stack on the iPhone doesn't support this, however.
Gosh, I had forgotten all about that;-) I had originally hoped to use my iPhone to connect my MacBook to the internet while roaming about. There turned out to be no way to do it. But in the end, I stopped taking my MacBook around with me so much, as I could just about everything I really needed with my iPhone. Any time I needed my MacBook, I almost was always near Wifi... so I guess I just forgot about the problem for the most part.
I'm with you on the camera. My iPhone has become my primary camera just because it's always with me--even though the quality sucks. If they could boost the resolution, get the focus and color quality a little better, add a flash--all of that would be really nice. What I would really dig is if you could shoot quicktime with it. All of my point-n-shoot digital cameras shot video in quicktime. I'm really surprised the iPhone doesn't shoot any kind of video (even the little 15-30 second clips).
I know everyone complains about EDGE, but I hope the 3G layers on top of the EDGE support. You can get EDGE just about anywhere--even if it is dog slow. Sometimes that's really handy.
For me, more memory and a better camera would be my main selling points. I want fast access, but I usually make do with EDGE. I suppose I'd change my mind if I saw what 3G could be like on an iPhone;-)
Slashdot Mirror
They sarcastically slam Boston, but then list it as one of the 10 cities where "all the IT jobs are". So make up your mind already.
And as someone living in Boston, screw you and your list :-)
A business partner did this, and a month later he had $6k of bogus charges on his credit card. So be aware that these people are probably not above reselling your info and then throwing up their hands and saying, "Oh my, how'd that happen?"
Whoa. That was seriously cool ... and a little creepy. The action on the penguins was eerie!
So despite the company and local municipalities profiting from this, constituents actually made their voices heard and their representatives acted accordingly?
I am deeply confused. This is not the democracy I am used to. I'm going to have to find something else to be cynical about today.
You aren't imagining it--iPhone 2.0 brought this wonderful feature :-(
Apparently people complained about missing text messages, and Apple's solution was to give you two--with no option to opt out. Great. I just don't get how you go to two without an option to stay at one. Sigh.
I know right now they have this one connection that they send push notifications down. I'd love some way to attach my other mail servers to that channel.
I'm not expecting to see that any time (if ever), but man, that would completely and utterly rock. I could hook my work Zimbra server into that channel and get instant notification of work email. I've gotten so used to MobileMe/.Mac being that way that it sucks having work be on a 15 minute refresh.
And yes, once you get used to it, you want to know immediately for all the rest of your email. Right now, I just set my phone to silent with vibrate off when I need privacy--then the phone just leaves me be during my DND times.
Right now, it defaults to once, and if you don't unlock the phone, it does it again. I'd like to set it just to once ... period. I figure if they allow you to set it to once, why not to X with some suitable max value.
But I'd settle for once. I get a lot of texts while in meetings, and I don't need the confusing second notification in there making me think I got another. Right now, I just glance at the screen and see what's there without unlocking--it's annoying when I see it's the same text from before.
The update reverted Scalar::Util, which disabled the weak reference stuff needed by a lot of Catalyst libs. I just re-installed it and it worked again.
But on all my new machines, I just use a local lib instead of the system stuff. I don't need sudo access and then the whole lib gets backed up by Time Machine. If you just upgrade the system perl, you have to re-do it every time you restore from a Time Machine backup (it doesn't copy system stuff as near as I can tell).
Also, as some have observed, CPAN is a bad idea. I say this as someone who got screwed when Catalyst went to 5.7100 (I was at 5.7015). When I did a restore to a new machine, CPAN got all the new Catalyst libs and all my customizations blew up spectacularly.
If you are doing serious Perl development on your local Mac, use a local lib and do not rely on CPAN to automatically handle your dependencies. Install things by hand or create a (perl) script to handle the deps for you. That's what we had to do, as we needed to make sure the module version we used matched our production systems--where we do NOT use CPAN and where we upgrade manually and with careful thought.
When I moved across the US a year ago, I had a ton of older hardware and less room to move into (house to apartment). Basically, I gave everything away that I wasn't actively using.
Rather than muck about with secure erasing or degaussers, I just took the dozen drives out to the shed and beat the daylights out of them. Most of my machines were in various states of not running--so the amount of time I would have had to spend putting together a working machine, swapping around more than a dozen older drives, running secure erase on them ... well, it just seemed a lot simpler. There was no way I was giving intact hard drives to random people I did not know, especially drives that may or may not have been erased enough.
I recommend safety goggles. Some of the boards tend to shatter and send little bits flying everywhere :-)
Could some super spy possibly lift data? Maybe. But no ID theft script kiddie will. I saw it like using a paper shredder--only a lot more fun. Sure, some super spy agency might be able to re-assemble shredded documents or lift data from the mangled platters of my drives--but why should I be worried about them? They already have a current file on me, I'm sure--they don't need old drives ;-)
A friend of mine put it nicely: "There's nothing like the feeling of raw destruction you can wreak with a 10lb sledgehammer." It's right up there with using a proper chainsaw. Deconstructing stuff is *fun* :-D
If I am ever worried about super-spies, I look forward to discovering the wonderful destructive power of thermite :-)
I was with you for that whole first list, but you lost me when you got to "control." Control for whom?
The people making the app. Yes, I know that makes freedom folk really upset, but let's set aside the whole "inalienable right to hack" for a sec. You are a large company, and you need to make an app that works for a lot of people over a wide range of machines. If you want to be able to maintain that app, you need a way to make sure customers are using exactly the right version, maybe even have multiple versions specialized for troublesome platforms. And then there's security--how do you make an app secure, prevent data breaches, etc?
For that, you need control. Can it be abused? Sure. But if you have to plan apps for a corporation and your butt is on the line if the app fails, you start to look at issues of control and freedom a little differently.
I'm not saying that it doesn't get abused--it does. I'm just saying there are realities of securing, maintaining and testing applications on a budget that are very difficult, and they only get more difficult as you release more control over the app. Do corps go insane and go too far? Definitely. But if we look down to some of the real problems and the practical solutions to those problems, controlling exactly what the user is using and where that happens is an effective tool.
The "Back to the Mainframe" approach of web apps gives you this element of control.
You don't control what program you're running. Someone else does.
Yep. And as I said in my original post, and here, that's a boon depending on your perspective. I'll grant you it gets abused, but if you are on a budget and you need a secure, maintainable customer facing application, you need a higher degree of control. And web apps are a modern way to do that.
The big problem I have with web apps is that almost none of them are open-source. Just when I have thousands of debian packages worth of applications to choose from, why in the world would I want to revert to a model where half the code is client-side code that I as a user have no control over, and the other half is server-side code that I can't even see?
As I've been trying to point out, your perspective is different from a VP of Tech for a bank or investment firm. And even if you weren't one of those risk adverse people, the advantages of a web app in terms of maintenance and upgrades is huge. Also from a development perspective, you have easily halved, if not quartered, your development costs. Cross platform development is very, very expensive. Cross browser development is expensive, but it doesn't even come close to Windows + Mac cross platform development, and never mind adding Linux to that mix.
I've done cross platform. The only way to keep it cheap(er) is to use something like Java. And then it looks like crap on ALL the platforms.
So, as a firm with a budget (and I think that excludes 99% of open source projects) web apps are very appealing. Unless there is a technical reason for why a web app just won't work, most firms choose it for those reasons. And even when it won't work, they choose the web app anyways and cut features to make it feasible--because the advantages of cheap, maintainable cross-platform development are not easily dismissed.
All that said, I can see why most open source people turn their nose up at web apps. It's not sexy, and it's often very difficult to do anything clever. And let's not talk about installation--now someone needs to setup databases and apache? Compare that to downloading a binary and just running, it can all be very tedious.
I've made my bread and butter off web apps. Heck, you could say web apps and Java bought my house! But the first real fun I have had in years was making an iPhone app. So I understand people who might not like web apps or regard them as a step back--I feel it too. But my next paycheck is coming in from a Perl, Catalyst-based web app that is customer facing.
So I work for the man to enslave the masses and maintain control during the day, and then I hack on my little apps at night :-D
Here's a big shocker: not everything is a web app! No really.
Yep, you're right. But the reality is that the web app is the greatest advancement in maintenance since the mainframe/dumb-terminal. Right now, web apps are a complete PITA to develop in terms of simple things like storage, persistence, etc. But in terms of compatibility, deployment, and upgrades, they have the local app beat.
So while not everything is a web app, the web app is the *first* approach considered by 90% of people putting out customer facing apps, maybe even closer to 99%. Can web apps do everything? No. But they do answer issues of maintenance, upgrades, and control a lot better than locally installed apps.
I'm still not sure I buy all this cloud stuff, and I think a lot of it is hype. But we are going somewhere like that in one degree or another, and a lot of the apps you use in the future for day to day work are going to be web apps. So Chrome is aimed at that. Will it replace things like Adobe Photoshop? Doubt it. Will it make your online banking experience not suck? Oh, I sure hope so :-)
None of that will happen by magic. But then if Google gets behind web standards hard and shows IE that yes, you can make a browser that doesn't suck--well, the future of web apps might be a little brighter.
Sorry about that, this is in RHEL 5. I used the FC7 SRPM when I made my patch (back in April).
Still principle's the same--just get your current SRPM (e.g. perl-5.8.8-10.el5_0.2.src.rpm), go get the latest FC SRPM (e.g. perl-5.8.8-28.fc7.src.rpm), find the U28775 patch file, add it to the spec, rebuild your original SRPM with that patch file in its spec, etc.
Geez, what was with me and question marks in that post? I need to preview a little longer.
That's what we did. Download the SRPM for RHEL5's perl (currently unreleased), and pull the perl-5.8.8-U28775.patch. Download the SRPM for your RHEL4-based OS, edit the spec to include:
Patch28775: perl-5.8.8-U28775.patch
And then make sure to then add:
%patch28775 -p1
Somewhere in the patch section.
You then get "official" RH perl with the patch for the reblessing. It took me about 30 minutes to do all that my first time, including dusting off my RPM setup and knowledge.
Should RH have fixed it 2 years ago. Oh yes. For this, RH should be burned in effigy. You could say that everyone already knows about this, except that some of us poor slobs keep discovering it anew :-(
http://blog.rshtech.com/2008/04/rh-el-5-perl-interpreter-bug.html
Yeah, that's me discovering it all on my own. Fun!
But honestly, when has RH ever gotten the perl interpreter completely right. From RH 4 all the way to today, the general opinion is that you should build your own perl interpreter from the freshest, stable release. RH has a long history of screwing up perl patches or being slow to get the latest in. This one (#28775) is just the worst in a long history of messing up perl for RedHat :-(
And I *like* RedHat. I have used them for years now, and I continue to recommend them as the gold standard for enterprise deployments. So I'm not saying this as a hater, just an annoyed schmuck who continues to use them (I'm probably just lazy at this point).
Great link (I downloaded it myself). But it doesn't help you at all with malls:
Which covers malls. Actually "Reverend" Billy's What Would Jesus Buy covers this problem (whether it is balanced or not, I leave to the reader). In a society where all public gathering places are private property, how do we still have the right to free assembly? The answer: we don't—at least not on mall premises. Not even in the parking lot.
The problem is also arising that "public places" in America are increasingly commercialized or managed by commercial entities. Can you assemble in a public transit station? Can you take pictures? I'd bet the answer is at first glance, "no," as some private entity can argue that you are on their property and subject to their whims.
Sure, you should have the right to control what is done on your private property. But when the line between your property being privately owned and being used by the public as a "commons" is blurred, I wish the US would start erring on the side of public rights.
You never know when you might get a visit from your local federal branch for such innovative commentary ...
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2001/12/20/211923/84
Dude, *lighten up*. Stephen Colbert is a comedian and satirist. Is roasting China along with everyone else in the room him being undiplomatic or him doing his thing?
If China can't take some ribbing from a comedian, what kind of super-power does that make them? Remember when that guy got a monkey to throw up just like Bush? Hilarious! Did we get on his case for lacking in diplomacy?
The only "misstep" diplomatically was putting Colbert in the room with that many powerful people, and then handing him a mike and asking him to do his thing. If the people in that room couldn't handle some humor, then he shouldn't have been asked to do the speech.
And frankly, I'm getting tired of everyone pussy-footing around China. Welcome to the World stage, China! You wanted to be a super-power? You wanted recognition and a bigger say in how things go? Well guess what, my Chinese friends? Along with greater visibility and decision making power comes a lot more criticism, outrage, and being mocked.
Welcome to our world. People have been beating on the US for years. Sometimes it was just whining (hey, I wanted to be in charge instead of you!), and sometimes it was because we used our power to run rough-shod over people. Regardless, the world didn't spare us anything--and they shouldn't.
But China? Oh, poor China! Everyone is so insensitive, so judgmental! Poor, poor China! They only own everyone on the planet through trade imbalances or by owning the country's debt. When people start to complain about China's policies, a Chinese representative reminds them that China owns them lock stock and barrel, and then an apology along with copious amounts of back pedaling ensues (see US toy makers after the lead paint fiascos).
So pardon me if I don't feel sorry for them. No one in the rest of the world is treated with as much fear and trepidation as China. And when they don't feel they get enough respect, they come down on people hard. They are big-boy country. They can clearly take care of themselves.
Ever work on a big project? One that was over due by a significant amount? Yeah, easily $4M.
That amount is like the military paying someone to think about it and give them a paper on it. I've been on civilian-side government projects that were well beyond $4M. Sounds like someone got a "sure, toss some cash at it and see what happens" approval, but not an official "this is a priority, make it so" approval.
Now, $40M is where we start to see some serious thinking about the issue. Yeah, it's an arbitrary amount, but warfare grade network inspection and defense? $40M would be a drop in the bucket for R&D for such a system. $4M is a joke.
Amen, brother. I can't figure out if Stephenson thinks it artistic or something to end his books like that. For me, it's just a sign of bad writing. There are all sorts of stuff you think are artsy until you improve your craft--and then you realize you were just excusing crap work under a label of "artistic."
For once, I'd like a Stephenson book with a decent ending. I think the only quasi-ending he has ever written might be the ending of the Baroque Cycle. But is that an ending or beating a subject matter to death so thoroughly that there is nothing left to say? ;-)
I say this all as a big fan. For me, his books are great right up until the end, where I am promised a very dissatisfying, unresolved end to the book. And for no good reason as near as I can tell. Doesn't stop me from reading them--but it also doesn't stop me from complaining either :-)
I updated my iPhone around 11 and it was down right up till the time I had to go pick a friend up from the airport. I just tried right now and the activation step went through without a hitch.
So the iTunes storm seems to be over. I wonder if it was iTunes or iTunes-to-AT&T that was the problem. I seem to remember AT&T's systems was the bottleneck at the launch. I know the computers at the store I was at were crawling and barely able to keep up.
Thanks. That was truly one of the first useful summaries I have read in a while. Now I can skip TFA
No you're not wrong. The easy access is called a "paper clip".
That said, I don't think you can just carry SIMs and jack them in and out of the iPhone. I believe you have to take the newly SIMed iPhone and sync it with iTunes to get it working again.
In that regard, it has easy access, but not to the feature the parent wants.
Work for any financial firm (and if you write software for in a big city, odds are you are or have worked for a financial firm at one time) you have to get fingerprinted. No one throws a stink about that. After this ridiculous mortgage crisis, is it any surprise they extended it to include lenders?
Maybe I'm just used to it, so I don't see the big deal. But I think I have been fingerprinted at least 4 times over the past 10 years in order to work for financial firms.
Meh. Perhaps it is something to get worked up over. But it isn't really a new thing--perhaps it is to many here? This practice, or something like it, has been in place for years in the greater financial market.
Wow. I guess we can just count Vista as stillborn at this point. Oh sure, there's no way 7 will be out next year (try late 2009, most likely late 2010). But Gates announcing 7 that quickly, it's like he was trying to put a stake through Vista's heart.
Hopefully they had a lot of reusable concepts and code that they can leverage. Otherwise, that's an awful waste of code and effort.
Gosh, I had forgotten all about that
I'm with you on the camera. My iPhone has become my primary camera just because it's always with me--even though the quality sucks. If they could boost the resolution, get the focus and color quality a little better, add a flash--all of that would be really nice. What I would really dig is if you could shoot quicktime with it. All of my point-n-shoot digital cameras shot video in quicktime. I'm really surprised the iPhone doesn't shoot any kind of video (even the little 15-30 second clips).
;-)
I know everyone complains about EDGE, but I hope the 3G layers on top of the EDGE support. You can get EDGE just about anywhere--even if it is dog slow. Sometimes that's really handy.
For me, more memory and a better camera would be my main selling points. I want fast access, but I usually make do with EDGE. I suppose I'd change my mind if I saw what 3G could be like on an iPhone