What, exactly, is the problem here? Are you entering the country? Do you have some sort of "problems" you don't want law-abiding people to know about?
Then don't complain. Why liberals feel this compulsion to oppose things that make the U.S. more secure is beyond me. Maybe if you people had spent less time "freaking out" over little things like this and more time volunteering to defend the country we wouldn't even have to do this.
Blizzard doesn't release sequels anymore, they just release half-assed updates and add-ons for retards who think World of Warcraft is either "good" or an RPG.
Whoever thought up WoW should be kicked in the beanbag repeatedly for the damage they've done to computer gaming in general, and RPGs in particular. Between WoW and Halo, gaming has fallen just as fast and hard as TV since Survivor first came out (although TV didn't have half as far to go...). Computer and video games used to be fun, now they're just derivative WoW and Halo clones for mushbrained frat boys with shriveled nutsacks.
Fuck Blizzard and fuck Activision for just making generally crummy games. I hope this merger kills them both and I hope everyone employed by both companies winds up on the street eating rotting baked beans out of a dumpster.
Since when is traffic shaping "hacker like"? Seems more "network administration like" to me.
I guess the fact that Comcast's bullshit is more a matter of not advertising the throttling to potential customers who may be negatively impacted wasn't salacious enough for good ol' Zonk, though. Gotta keep up them ad impressions, you know.
Frankly, I'm glad you don't work for us. The fact that you would consider "rewriting" code that works well just because it was written by someone external to your company doesn't speak well for your sense of business priorities or usage of time.
You're either massively incompetent or getting your jollies out of intentionally misleading people.
The code is copyrighted. Who owns the copyright, how it came to be in the first place, and what sort of legal trouble the real owner of the code has the power to stir up are all unknowns. If you wouldn't sacrifice 4 or 5 hours of developer time to completely eliminate what has the potential to be a company-ending legal threat, you have no business talking about priorities.
If that post was an honest statement of your thoughts on the matter, you're an imbecile and you need to be removed from whatever position of authority you may hold at your current place of employment.
A game login and a forum login are distinct data containers. That they may happen to contain the same values is irrelevant and does not in any way threaten the normalization of the databases.
It's a very simple principle: handing out information to people just because they asked for it is always stupid. Just because you can't see a problem with it NOW doesn't mean there won't be one in the FUTURE after it's too late to take it all back. Therefore, if they're asking for info, but not giving you any good reason to give it, if you're smart, you won't give it.
For example, without too much imagination, I'm sitting here imagining a spammer or botnet owner practically drooling over the possibility of an organized list of millions of IP addresses and the software installations - and the associated vulnerabilities - behind each one.
It's called self-interest. I know a lot of people don't seem to have any these days, but it would be nice if you retards could at least pretend you had a LITTLE common sense now and then.
Anyone can log in to any of the popular MMOs and clearly see that they're populated mainly by dickheads and idiots, too, what's your point? All it takes is five seconds of "Barrens" chat in Warcraft or the opening areas of Guild Wars, LOTRO, and Everquest 2 to see the simple fact that the games are overrun by children who think the height of wit is drawing a phallus on the minimap and lifeless morons who have an embolism if someone new asks a "n00b" question.
MMOs are predominantly played by immature children and people who's only accomplishment in life is obtaining a +4 Vapid Nerdblade of Retardation.
Not everybody thinks that playing videogames with people who constantly scream COCKNBALLS! in the all chat window or boast about their 1337 ability to click the mouse in PvP matches is fun. Deal with it.
Based solely on reading your comment one could assume then that console gamers are made up entirely of self-righteous, elitist, condescending assholes.
That's not a logical conclusion at all. In fact, it doesn't even make sense.
In fact, to the contrary, if we assume you're one of the retards addicted to MMOs, it really only just provides more evidence of my claim that you're all idiots and dickheads.
The only real selling point of any MMOG is "community", but 99% of the people playing them are either complete dicks or immature little twats who have unfettered access to a parent's credit card. Generally speaking, the sorts of people that drift to online social gatherings are exactly the sort of people no normal human would want to socialize with. Normal human beings don't want pimply little nincompoops trash-talking them across the internet just because the lifeless nerd managed to hit the proper combination of keystrokes to win at PvP or morons talking about their nutsack while you're trying to have an epic battle with some fantastical creature of legend out in the wilderness.
MMOGs are almost exclusively the realm of immature brats and idiots. Until someone fixes that problem... I'm with you brother. Hand me the other control pad.
Yes, lawyers are paid to convince people they're right, not to BE right.
However, the point is that the RIAA continued to press a case based on what MIGHT HAVE happened when no finding ever - before, during, or after that current litigation - was left standing that said that it actually DID happen. In effect, people were persecuted by the court because they might have committed infringement, not because anybody has yet determined that they actually did. It's less about the RIAA - slimy and dishonest as the tactic was - and more about how shitty the court system is sometimes.
Zonk just doesn't post things that are properly written, that's all.
Unless of course you mean they are dumb compared to smart humans which is a pretty self evident and meaningless statement...
Actually, it's neither self-evident nor meaningless to an average person. Most people are wholly unaware that scoring 100 - an "average" score - on a typical IQ test is a poor showing of intellect. I mean, "average" means not real great, but not bad, right? Right!?
Quit your misanthropy and give our species a break.
I don't think so. Humanity is both pointless and cruelly idiotic. If every human being on the planet vanished tomorrow and left no trace of existence behind, the living conditions of hundreds of billions of creatures, if not trillions, would be vastly improved, and billions of human beings would cease living pointless, painful, and ultimately wasted lives. Even if only smart people existed, it would still be pointless because intellect is only the first of a vast number of massive flaws in our species.
A "break"? No, I think not. Humanity has never achieved anything purposeful, and I seriously doubt it ever will. For all the hubbub of our cultural, architectural, technological, whatever accomplishments, we've done little more than make this planet a worse place for a significant chunk of our existence, and I'm rather certain that the odds are favorable that when we're snuffed out - or we snuff ourselves out - the planet will be that much better for it.
The "victory" is mixed much like my feelings... downloading the songs illegally was wrong. I find no moral standing there. Yet, at the same time, the ridiculous approach the RIAA is taking in these cases - and this equally ridiculous reward - leave me unwilling to condemn the defendant.
Oh well. I've bought one RIAA-backed album in four years, and that was a mistake. RIAA Rader. Learn it. Love it. Tell the RIAA they can go fuck themselves with various sharp objects.
I always figured it was a symptom of a larger problem. The majority of people seem to have very little ability to completely think through the consequences of their actions (or are unwilling to). Think of how many people you know who will get completely raped by a store over something, to the point they're fuming mad, but they'll immediately go back and buy something else just because it's the cheapest place to buy that something else.
The problem here is really that IQs are specifically built to fit a bell curve so they're always an average, but the average person isn't really that bright. The vast majority of people, speaking from the perspective of an absolute intelligence, are pretty dumb.
Shouldn't you expect to get what you're paying for?
It's the old adage of "better on paper". People should be holding companies liable when they pull that sort of crap, but consumers don't act in a self-interested manner anymore. Capitalism only works right if everybody involved in the process does their part to keep everybody else in check, but consumers have just rolled over and asked for it up the rear over the last few decades, so they're getting exactly what they requested now.
So.... a monopoly - which is only a monopoly because it has customers that continue to happily purchase from it year after year - is the reason the competition - which isn't able to sell itself to customers - can't standardize.
So... the monopoly should play nice and standardize... because otherwise people won't stop buying its products?
I'm more annoyed that it has extended to colleges. It used to be that public schools peddled this super-sensitive horseshit. Now kids are not only learning it in high school, they're having it reinforced throughout college.
I don't know whether to be ecstatic that my job is secure, or annoyed that my employees from now on will all be clueless idiots....
If you're not competent to set up fallover support on a webserver so it'll cope with a dying hardware component, it is your fault, and you should be blamed if it's not "accesible"[sic].
Come talk to me about this once you're out of high school and you've actually had to submit and justify a budget. At this point, I really have no reason to believe you have any idea what you're talking about.
Either you're just a child, or you're so extremely lucky that you've managed to retain a rather childish optimism. I've had to deal with actual buffoons who can fire me, so I'm not so optimistic.
I'd love to meet the person who honestly believes that Microsoft would follow the ODF standard, were it to be implemented.
The fact is, if ODF wins it's software versus software warfare. Microsoft won't follow the ODF standard, they'll only make a few changes to Office so they can make a seriously pedantic argument that they're following ODF. In all likelihood they'll just try to consume and "extend" it so that nobody can effectively use it.
You cannot forecast when to replace PC's? And you have 160+ users?
I don't think you know what you're talking about.
We have a LINE OF CREDIT with certain companies that we use to REPLACE or UPGRADE phones and PCs. Beyond that, I have to submit a budget and it has to be approved. I've done this in three different companies, so I'm thinking this is perfectly normal.
Yeah, maybe you could just answer the question, okay?
You're just being a dickhead for the sake of it. It doesn't matter why apache "fails". If the network card goes down, then "apache fails" as far as 125 people are concerned and if I'm the guy who suggested we use apache, it's my fault. I'm not dissing apache, I'm just pointing out the fact that I'm the guy who will get blamed if it's not accesible, whether it's apache's fault or not, while I'm the guy who will get kudos for "fixing" IIS even when it's IIS's faulty design that causes the inaccesibility to begin with.
Whether you like it or not, whether you admit it or not, OOS has to be 100% perfect to succeed on each individual basis, becuase if it's not, the guy who suggested moving to it gets blamed by the incompetents who, never-the-less, make the hiring decisions.
The remainder of your comment is just idiotic. I'm fully aware that Apache is stable and more reliable than IIS. The fact is, however, that because Microsoft's name is behind IIS, I don't have to worry about becoming the fall-guy when the web server goes down. If IIS fails, and I bring it up quickly, I get "kudos" for "fixing" the problem. If I suggest apache, however, and the ISP flakes out on me, I get fired.
If you have an actual solution to this absurd state of affairs, by all means, give it. If, however, all you have is the juvenile pro-OSS nonsense that dominates the "debate" spare me. I'm not risking MY job for YOUR principle.
Of course, I didn't comment on the ODF standard so much as on the focus of the article, but whatever. I'm the one who's a troll, after all, for discussing... well... the actual article.
We're a little over a 100 people and we spend over $500,000 a year on a single contract.
That's a rolling budget that I have access to without having to submit pre-approved expenditures for. It's primarily used for replacing user PCs, phones, etc, which is why I mentioned it here. I can request as much as I want, I just don't always get it. For example, we moved to SAM-FS last year for recovery and it cost us a pretty penny thanks to a subsidiary that has an assload of data, but I had to request pre-approval for the expenditure.
Why would Apache "fail"?
Ah, yes, the hubris of the OSS community... forgot to mention that.
Apache can "fail" for many reasons. Your excessively technical question suggests to me that you're not very involved in the business. Regardless of why apache "fails" - be it because of some flaw in the program or because of a simple hardware failure - if apache is new apache is blamed. This is just how it is, unfair as it may be. I inherited IIS from my predecesor (who was, admittedly, clueless) and I won't risk my job switching to apache. The simple fact is that 99% of the failures in IIS can be patched or solved with a reboot and I come out the other side looking better for "fixing" the problem.
Perverse? You betcha. But I'm not a big enough man to risk my career for a technological principle, is what it all comes down to.
Again: when I'm the guy who's hiring for the position I'm in, we'll make some changes. Until then?
Not a bloody chance.
What is "holding OSS back" is the fact that all those companies have LARGE investments in their current systems.
You'd be surprised. We deal one-on-one with a lot of businesses and I can't see too many of them running their own vertical apps. That being the case, most of them could switch to OSS/ODF with minimal effort and a moderate investment in training, they just choose not to for the same reasons I won't switch my people: if it goes wrong, I take the blame from higher-ups and I'm the one who's out of a job.
Well, simply put, it doesn't matter to me if you believe me. I have no way of proving it one way or another, but I'll say it again: I make buying decisions. I have access to two $25,000 lines of credit and one $10,000 line of credit and I make purchasing decisions for a 164 employee company (primarily related to replacing user PCs and web/database/file servers).
Every now and then when I need to buy something I question whether or not I should propose a 164 seat reinstall that includes OOo (and whether or not I should replace Apache with IIS since I wouldn't need pre-approval to do it). Every time I chicken out because the simple fact is, as much as I like Apache and OOo, I won't get blamed when IIS or Office fail.
Like I said elsewhere in this thread, until I get to hire/fire the guy who makes the buying decisions, I can't really influence it all that much. Five years ago I had a high profile account here where I supported OOS, but now that I'm in IT management, I realize that it's the non-technical executives that are really holding OSS back. It's sad, but it's true.
Regardless of the internal quibbling at MS or other closed corps, they're established, and that carries and awful lot of weight, as unfair as it may be.
Slashdot Mirror
What, exactly, is the problem here? Are you entering the country? Do you have some sort of "problems" you don't want law-abiding people to know about?
Then don't complain. Why liberals feel this compulsion to oppose things that make the U.S. more secure is beyond me. Maybe if you people had spent less time "freaking out" over little things like this and more time volunteering to defend the country we wouldn't even have to do this.
Blizzard doesn't release sequels anymore, they just release half-assed updates and add-ons for retards who think World of Warcraft is either "good" or an RPG.
Whoever thought up WoW should be kicked in the beanbag repeatedly for the damage they've done to computer gaming in general, and RPGs in particular. Between WoW and Halo, gaming has fallen just as fast and hard as TV since Survivor first came out (although TV didn't have half as far to go...). Computer and video games used to be fun, now they're just derivative WoW and Halo clones for mushbrained frat boys with shriveled nutsacks.
Fuck Blizzard and fuck Activision for just making generally crummy games. I hope this merger kills them both and I hope everyone employed by both companies winds up on the street eating rotting baked beans out of a dumpster.
Since when is traffic shaping "hacker like"? Seems more "network administration like" to me.
I guess the fact that Comcast's bullshit is more a matter of not advertising the throttling to potential customers who may be negatively impacted wasn't salacious enough for good ol' Zonk, though. Gotta keep up them ad impressions, you know.
You're either massively incompetent or getting your jollies out of intentionally misleading people.
The code is copyrighted. Who owns the copyright, how it came to be in the first place, and what sort of legal trouble the real owner of the code has the power to stir up are all unknowns. If you wouldn't sacrifice 4 or 5 hours of developer time to completely eliminate what has the potential to be a company-ending legal threat, you have no business talking about priorities.
If that post was an honest statement of your thoughts on the matter, you're an imbecile and you need to be removed from whatever position of authority you may hold at your current place of employment.
A game login and a forum login are distinct data containers. That they may happen to contain the same values is irrelevant and does not in any way threaten the normalization of the databases.
It's a very simple principle: handing out information to people just because they asked for it is always stupid. Just because you can't see a problem with it NOW doesn't mean there won't be one in the FUTURE after it's too late to take it all back. Therefore, if they're asking for info, but not giving you any good reason to give it, if you're smart, you won't give it.
For example, without too much imagination, I'm sitting here imagining a spammer or botnet owner practically drooling over the possibility of an organized list of millions of IP addresses and the software installations - and the associated vulnerabilities - behind each one.
It's called self-interest. I know a lot of people don't seem to have any these days, but it would be nice if you retards could at least pretend you had a LITTLE common sense now and then.
Anyone can log in to any of the popular MMOs and clearly see that they're populated mainly by dickheads and idiots, too, what's your point? All it takes is five seconds of "Barrens" chat in Warcraft or the opening areas of Guild Wars, LOTRO, and Everquest 2 to see the simple fact that the games are overrun by children who think the height of wit is drawing a phallus on the minimap and lifeless morons who have an embolism if someone new asks a "n00b" question.
MMOs are predominantly played by immature children and people who's only accomplishment in life is obtaining a +4 Vapid Nerdblade of Retardation.
Not everybody thinks that playing videogames with people who constantly scream COCKNBALLS! in the all chat window or boast about their 1337 ability to click the mouse in PvP matches is fun. Deal with it.
BACKPEDAL HARDER
That's not a logical conclusion at all. In fact, it doesn't even make sense.
In fact, to the contrary, if we assume you're one of the retards addicted to MMOs, it really only just provides more evidence of my claim that you're all idiots and dickheads.
Go back to waving your e-peen at thirteen year olds in Warcraft. They might actually think something of it.
No, you're just mature.
The only real selling point of any MMOG is "community", but 99% of the people playing them are either complete dicks or immature little twats who have unfettered access to a parent's credit card. Generally speaking, the sorts of people that drift to online social gatherings are exactly the sort of people no normal human would want to socialize with. Normal human beings don't want pimply little nincompoops trash-talking them across the internet just because the lifeless nerd managed to hit the proper combination of keystrokes to win at PvP or morons talking about their nutsack while you're trying to have an epic battle with some fantastical creature of legend out in the wilderness.
MMOGs are almost exclusively the realm of immature brats and idiots. Until someone fixes that problem... I'm with you brother. Hand me the other control pad.
Yes, lawyers are paid to convince people they're right, not to BE right.
However, the point is that the RIAA continued to press a case based on what MIGHT HAVE happened when no finding ever - before, during, or after that current litigation - was left standing that said that it actually DID happen. In effect, people were persecuted by the court because they might have committed infringement, not because anybody has yet determined that they actually did. It's less about the RIAA - slimy and dishonest as the tactic was - and more about how shitty the court system is sometimes.
Zonk just doesn't post things that are properly written, that's all.
Actually, it's neither self-evident nor meaningless to an average person. Most people are wholly unaware that scoring 100 - an "average" score - on a typical IQ test is a poor showing of intellect. I mean, "average" means not real great, but not bad, right? Right!?
I don't think so. Humanity is both pointless and cruelly idiotic. If every human being on the planet vanished tomorrow and left no trace of existence behind, the living conditions of hundreds of billions of creatures, if not trillions, would be vastly improved, and billions of human beings would cease living pointless, painful, and ultimately wasted lives. Even if only smart people existed, it would still be pointless because intellect is only the first of a vast number of massive flaws in our species.
A "break"? No, I think not. Humanity has never achieved anything purposeful, and I seriously doubt it ever will. For all the hubbub of our cultural, architectural, technological, whatever accomplishments, we've done little more than make this planet a worse place for a significant chunk of our existence, and I'm rather certain that the odds are favorable that when we're snuffed out - or we snuff ourselves out - the planet will be that much better for it.
Tra-la-fucking-la.
The "victory" is mixed much like my feelings... downloading the songs illegally was wrong. I find no moral standing there. Yet, at the same time, the ridiculous approach the RIAA is taking in these cases - and this equally ridiculous reward - leave me unwilling to condemn the defendant.
Oh well. I've bought one RIAA-backed album in four years, and that was a mistake. RIAA Rader. Learn it. Love it. Tell the RIAA they can go fuck themselves with various sharp objects.
I always figured it was a symptom of a larger problem. The majority of people seem to have very little ability to completely think through the consequences of their actions (or are unwilling to). Think of how many people you know who will get completely raped by a store over something, to the point they're fuming mad, but they'll immediately go back and buy something else just because it's the cheapest place to buy that something else.
The problem here is really that IQs are specifically built to fit a bell curve so they're always an average, but the average person isn't really that bright. The vast majority of people, speaking from the perspective of an absolute intelligence, are pretty dumb.
It's the old adage of "better on paper". People should be holding companies liable when they pull that sort of crap, but consumers don't act in a self-interested manner anymore. Capitalism only works right if everybody involved in the process does their part to keep everybody else in check, but consumers have just rolled over and asked for it up the rear over the last few decades, so they're getting exactly what they requested now.
So.... a monopoly - which is only a monopoly because it has customers that continue to happily purchase from it year after year - is the reason the competition - which isn't able to sell itself to customers - can't standardize.
So... the monopoly should play nice and standardize... because otherwise people won't stop buying its products?
Impeccable logic.
But, on the other hand, that's also not necessarily a reason not to do it.
I'm more annoyed that it has extended to colleges. It used to be that public schools peddled this super-sensitive horseshit. Now kids are not only learning it in high school, they're having it reinforced throughout college.
I don't know whether to be ecstatic that my job is secure, or annoyed that my employees from now on will all be clueless idiots....
Come talk to me about this once you're out of high school and you've actually had to submit and justify a budget. At this point, I really have no reason to believe you have any idea what you're talking about.
Either you're just a child, or you're so extremely lucky that you've managed to retain a rather childish optimism. I've had to deal with actual buffoons who can fire me, so I'm not so optimistic.
I'd love to meet the person who honestly believes that Microsoft would follow the ODF standard, were it to be implemented.
The fact is, if ODF wins it's software versus software warfare. Microsoft won't follow the ODF standard, they'll only make a few changes to Office so they can make a seriously pedantic argument that they're following ODF. In all likelihood they'll just try to consume and "extend" it so that nobody can effectively use it.
I don't think you know what you're talking about.
We have a LINE OF CREDIT with certain companies that we use to REPLACE or UPGRADE phones and PCs. Beyond that, I have to submit a budget and it has to be approved. I've done this in three different companies, so I'm thinking this is perfectly normal.
You're just being a dickhead for the sake of it. It doesn't matter why apache "fails". If the network card goes down, then "apache fails" as far as 125 people are concerned and if I'm the guy who suggested we use apache, it's my fault. I'm not dissing apache, I'm just pointing out the fact that I'm the guy who will get blamed if it's not accesible, whether it's apache's fault or not, while I'm the guy who will get kudos for "fixing" IIS even when it's IIS's faulty design that causes the inaccesibility to begin with.
Whether you like it or not, whether you admit it or not, OOS has to be 100% perfect to succeed on each individual basis, becuase if it's not, the guy who suggested moving to it gets blamed by the incompetents who, never-the-less, make the hiring decisions.
The remainder of your comment is just idiotic. I'm fully aware that Apache is stable and more reliable than IIS. The fact is, however, that because Microsoft's name is behind IIS, I don't have to worry about becoming the fall-guy when the web server goes down. If IIS fails, and I bring it up quickly, I get "kudos" for "fixing" the problem. If I suggest apache, however, and the ISP flakes out on me, I get fired.
If you have an actual solution to this absurd state of affairs, by all means, give it. If, however, all you have is the juvenile pro-OSS nonsense that dominates the "debate" spare me. I'm not risking MY job for YOUR principle.
Of course, I didn't comment on the ODF standard so much as on the focus of the article, but whatever. I'm the one who's a troll, after all, for discussing... well... the actual article.
That's a rolling budget that I have access to without having to submit pre-approved expenditures for. It's primarily used for replacing user PCs, phones, etc, which is why I mentioned it here. I can request as much as I want, I just don't always get it. For example, we moved to SAM-FS last year for recovery and it cost us a pretty penny thanks to a subsidiary that has an assload of data, but I had to request pre-approval for the expenditure.
Ah, yes, the hubris of the OSS community... forgot to mention that.
Apache can "fail" for many reasons. Your excessively technical question suggests to me that you're not very involved in the business. Regardless of why apache "fails" - be it because of some flaw in the program or because of a simple hardware failure - if apache is new apache is blamed. This is just how it is, unfair as it may be. I inherited IIS from my predecesor (who was, admittedly, clueless) and I won't risk my job switching to apache. The simple fact is that 99% of the failures in IIS can be patched or solved with a reboot and I come out the other side looking better for "fixing" the problem.
Perverse? You betcha. But I'm not a big enough man to risk my career for a technological principle, is what it all comes down to.
Again: when I'm the guy who's hiring for the position I'm in, we'll make some changes. Until then?
Not a bloody chance.
You'd be surprised. We deal one-on-one with a lot of businesses and I can't see too many of them running their own vertical apps. That being the case, most of them could switch to OSS/ODF with minimal effort and a moderate investment in training, they just choose not to for the same reasons I won't switch my people: if it goes wrong, I take the blame from higher-ups and I'm the one who's out of a job.
Well, simply put, it doesn't matter to me if you believe me. I have no way of proving it one way or another, but I'll say it again: I make buying decisions. I have access to two $25,000 lines of credit and one $10,000 line of credit and I make purchasing decisions for a 164 employee company (primarily related to replacing user PCs and web/database/file servers).
Every now and then when I need to buy something I question whether or not I should propose a 164 seat reinstall that includes OOo (and whether or not I should replace Apache with IIS since I wouldn't need pre-approval to do it). Every time I chicken out because the simple fact is, as much as I like Apache and OOo, I won't get blamed when IIS or Office fail.
Like I said elsewhere in this thread, until I get to hire/fire the guy who makes the buying decisions, I can't really influence it all that much. Five years ago I had a high profile account here where I supported OOS, but now that I'm in IT management, I realize that it's the non-technical executives that are really holding OSS back. It's sad, but it's true.
Regardless of the internal quibbling at MS or other closed corps, they're established, and that carries and awful lot of weight, as unfair as it may be.