There's this technology called "version control". It's rather nice.
Back in the day when sane people still used CVS, I put together a doc store based on CVS with a nice Windows plug-in. Word has a diff viewer, so you could present version diffs as if they used Word change tracking. Would be trivial to do that with SVN today.
Also, folders can have a "readme.txt" in them with all the annotations you want, but that's far too straightforward for anyone who would use Sharepoint.
In the "apps" world what I see is indeed more and more apps, about 95% or more of them crappy. Unskilled developers produce bad apps. Yes, that seems to be the trend.
So, what you're saying is: app appers only app apps? Not Luddite software?
I wouldn't hold my breath on MS going away, but it really seems to be on the "Novell arc" now. It could go for a decade or more on its existing customer base (many of which will move to Azure, so revenue will keep going up), but that's different from getting new customers.
Startups tend to do everything in the cloud these days, and not with expensive MS products. Mac is taking over the end-user workplace where it's not already entrenched MS. I'm not sure what could drive new MS enterprise customer acquisition in the years to come.
Oh, no, you never hide the price of a status symbol! That's why the number associated with most luxury cars goes up with the price.* If your neighbor also gets a luxury car of the same brand, you can immediately see which is most expensive just by comparing the number on the back. Audi is the odd duck there as they don't decorate their model number with fine-grained pricing information.
That was contingency planning for Greece. They didn't expect a country with a real economy to leave. Bit of a furor over Brexit, after all, and talk of punishing Britain or adding incentives for other nations to stay. I won't be surprised if they just take the option off the table instead.
Maintain enough presence in each provider to provide resiliency, and a big enough stick to push down pricing.
Microsoft and Google are definitely selling at a loss right now. Everyone was surprised that AWS was profitable as the same prices.
Currently Google cloud stuff is a rounding error next to Azure and AWS (the pie chart is mostly AWS, a slice of Azure, and a sliver of "other" right now). I'd be very nervous using them, given Google's history of abandoning projects that aren't getting traction, but OP had good advice there - just make sure you can move.
Of course, once you start using all the other cloud services beyond server rentals (file stores, DBs, queues, etc) then you're basically stuck, as there's very little in common there, so again maybe not Google.
The central government never gets weaker. State's rights never get stronger. It's only a matter of time before the EU removes the provision allowing member states to leave.
This really is a moronic article. Programming language choice is not about "popular" or "cool" - it's whatever tool gets the job done.
For a hobby? Sure. Otherwise it's about whatever tool gets the paycheck done. Java sucks today and isn't the best tool for any job, yet it dominates the job market. It was a bad tool 15 years ago, and it will be a bad tool 15 years from now, when it will still dominate the job market. And by then, sadly, $10 computers will run Java easily.
C will always be the kernel guy's tool, and those jobs pay nicely, but there will never be very many of them. C++ has faded (despite being a darn good language with the latest standard, too many burned bridges). C# will go down with the Microsoft ship. Will one of the new fad languages have staying power? Maybe. Likely 1 of them will, if not a current one. But fucking Java just refuses to die.
Knighthood only overlapped with religion in a few times and places - it was really just cavalry. "Chivalry" meant "horsemanship" for most of the time the word was current, and only came to mean "and other things knights should do" towards the end.
Human nature doesn't change, nor does the need to protect civilization from assholes. However, combat robots will fundamentally redefine "arms" in the coming decades, and there's no telling what that looks like.
All who fly them low enough deserve the hate. You don't see many people upset about drones flying high enough that you can't see them, or they're just a dot. It's the assholes who buzz animals, peek into upper story windows, disturb your family in your back yard, that sort of thing.that draws the hate.
In some states, it is perfectly legal to shoot someone on your property as long as you say the magic words "I was in fear for my life". Of course, it would be awkward if your target survived the shot and told a different story, but that problem has a straightforward solution.
True story from Texas: my mother bought a gun after a couple of break-ins. She asked the cops what the rules were. The explained that she should make sure he "falls inside the house *wink*" and that he doesn't survive.
How high it extends is defined by law (state by state), but is something like "the higher of 50 feet or the tallest nearby building". TFS says this drone was under 30 feet, which is just obnoxious (especially near livestock).
In the early days of America, most of the colonies had a law requiring you to bring your gun to church, at least for men, in case something/someone needed shooting that week. Similar laws predate guns, going back, well, as far as we have written records of laws . Many cultures, perhaps most, have required citizens to keep arms in good condition. Heck, mostly what defined a "knight" from roman times to medieval was that your could brings better weapons to the fight.
I wouldn't be worried about his fines, I'd be more worried about the consequences of shooting at an aircraft in federal airspace.
That's a federal crime that could net you up to 20 years in jail.
It depends on the state, but somewhere around 50 feet it stops being "airspace" and starts being "your property". Much like you're still trespassing if you climb a tree.
All my data is stored on a CPM machine with no networking capability. I hand code all binaries in Assembly Language. Never had a breach.
For a long time, the GAO ran all its internet-facing servers on Netware. I don't think they had a breach during those years. I've always thought that was a clever strategy, if only because the list of people who could hack on the Netware kernel was so small.
These days I'm not sure if there really is a platform you could make work in production but is so obscure that no one bothers developing exploits for it. Maybe a mainframe OS, now that the financials have left mainframes behind? But then, government-funded attackers can develop expertise in whatever oddball system they need to, so maybe those days have passed.
It is vital to keep pace with the changing regulatory and technology landscape to safeguard and advance business objectives. Working backwards by identifying and understanding future risks, predicting risks and acting ahead of competition, can make a company more robust
Wow, buzzword bingo in a single quote. Where's Weird Al when you need him? Right here!
This consultant must have been toning it down though. I would have a expected a "proven methodology" and "commitment to quality" in there somewhere, and maybe a "seamless integration" too.
The word filter is particularly egregious since that's a component you just buy. There's not even the excuse of "small dev team in a hurry" for that one. I have a feeling it's a related bug to the punctuation thing, where what they're running through the word filter isn't quite what you type. How they screw up "user-provided string" is a different question.
I wonder how man variations on "Planet'); DROP TABLE Players; --" there are by now.
Hint: no, stop making excuses for them, Hello Games was simply lying.
Each world is procedurally generated from a 64-bit key, plus some randomness (especially post-creation). If two players, each in their single-player game, go to the "same" planet, sure, it will look about the same but there's no unique server-side world. It's just two people at the same coordinates each of which independently generated a world from the same seed.
Sure, the worlds look sort-of the same, mostly, but there are going to be more differences than in a traditional single-player game or MMO, because the random elements are different in each person's single-player game.
For those who have someone escaped the drama associated with NMS and want to learn what all the fuss is about, this review does a great job of explaining - not just listing the missing features, but showing the emotional impact it had on fans who were incredibly hyped for the game.
There are some scam games on Steam that are designed to last two hours to get past the refund limit.
No Man's Sky is one of these.
I think that may be accidental - at least, I don't credit the devs with the skill to cook that up. The problem here is that the game is missing nearly every promised feature, but there's no way to discover that until you leave the first planet. Then it all turns to shit. The timing, specifically, was likely a coincidence, but Hello Games definitely knew what they were shitting out.
Also, the game crashes frequently even on console, but it can go hours between crashes. For PC, we're used to that sort of shit, and while I think that's still worth a refund, you wouldn't get mass outrage. On the console OTOH, Just Works (TM) is the freaking point of console games.
Still, had the game not been missing almost every promised feature, I think the player base would have been content to wait for a patch to fix the crashes.
You could spend 50 hours in NMS just looking for any of the 100 missing promised features. Sure it's not all a lie? Surely it's there somewhere? Dammit.
The marketing for this product was likely illegal under most nations' consumer protection laws - heck, it was so blatant that even under US law they probably crossed the line. When a product is "not fit for purpose", playtime isn't a relevant factor. If Sony's giving refunds, it's only because their legal team told them to stay clear of fraud. I'll give Steam credit for actually caring about customer trust.
You seem to have a bug up your ass about Republicans, but I don't understand it. Most Republicans in DC are indistinguishable from most Democrats, once you look past the theater to what bills actually get passed, which are whatever the billionaire donors want. Everything else is just theater, on both sides.
Not all Whig politicians were able to get re-elected as Republicans, BTW. The platforms weren't the same and some had doubled-down on increasingly unpopular ideas (otherwise, the party never would have faded). I can't predict what coalition will arise from the ashes of the GOP, but Trump proves that catering to the religious whackos has become unnecessary and pointless - it never actually mattered that Trump is pro-choice, and not particularly religious.
And yes, today's GOP is "dead party walking", unless Trump somehow wins (Hillary would have to stroke out) and even then only the name would survive. Trump supporters are furious with the GOP, and without them it's a 40% party.
And of course, there's the legal cases still working their way through the courts where various entities are arguing that even saying to the insurer (who has no practical objection to birth control, it's a cost-saver for them), that they don't want to be involved, is a burden on them, to fill out a form, saying leave us out of it.
The court cases are about filling out a government form registering your religious beliefs. I object to that too: history suggests that sort of thing never ends well.
I'll at least expect a conscientious objector to report their status to the draft board.
Different case. The rule is that the State cannot not compel you to act against your strong moral beliefs unless there's a compelling state interest and the action is the narrowest possibly to address that. Registering as a conscientious objector is a perfect example where both are true. The court found no compelling State interest in having birth control paid for by insurance (rather than, you know, money).
Be open at some hours. Be closed at others. Access for people, even service animals.
You'd be surprised by what gets waved for legitimate religious objections. A strictly kosher restaurant, for example, doesn't follow all the same rules (of course, it has rather more self-imposed).
As for birth control, if it's against your moral principles for a person under your employ to make their own choices about their reproduction
Now you're talking about a very narrow subset of Catholics, and we're effectively back to fringe cults. But if you had it as corporate policy that employees couldn't use birth control, that would be very different legally from not paying for it via insurance. The former is an undue burden on the employee, the latter isn't.
Personally, I'm against any law mandating insurance coverage in all policies for that only women in a certain age range need - that's singling out a group of privileged people for elevated legal treatment, and again history shows that sort of thing never ends well.
Slashdot Mirror
The juxtaposition of stories on the /. front page answers the question. Why Does My Browser Need to be a Server?
FBI Director Says Prolific Default Encryption Hurting Government Spying Efforts
Google: solving problems.
automated so much that less developers are needed.
Wierd Al would like to have a word with you.
There's this technology called "version control". It's rather nice.
Back in the day when sane people still used CVS, I put together a doc store based on CVS with a nice Windows plug-in. Word has a diff viewer, so you could present version diffs as if they used Word change tracking. Would be trivial to do that with SVN today.
Also, folders can have a "readme.txt" in them with all the annotations you want, but that's far too straightforward for anyone who would use Sharepoint.
In the "apps" world what I see is indeed more and more apps, about 95% or more of them crappy. Unskilled developers produce bad apps. Yes, that seems to be the trend.
So, what you're saying is: app appers only app apps? Not Luddite software?
I wouldn't hold my breath on MS going away, but it really seems to be on the "Novell arc" now. It could go for a decade or more on its existing customer base (many of which will move to Azure, so revenue will keep going up), but that's different from getting new customers.
Startups tend to do everything in the cloud these days, and not with expensive MS products. Mac is taking over the end-user workplace where it's not already entrenched MS. I'm not sure what could drive new MS enterprise customer acquisition in the years to come.
Oh, no, you never hide the price of a status symbol! That's why the number associated with most luxury cars goes up with the price.* If your neighbor also gets a luxury car of the same brand, you can immediately see which is most expensive just by comparing the number on the back. Audi is the odd duck there as they don't decorate their model number with fine-grained pricing information.
*Tuner sports models are the exception.
CONSTANTS_IN_JAVA_STILL_LOOK_LIKE_THIS in many shops. C'mon, if there's one thing Java can do better than Cobol, it's end the shouting.
That was contingency planning for Greece. They didn't expect a country with a real economy to leave. Bit of a furor over Brexit, after all, and talk of punishing Britain or adding incentives for other nations to stay. I won't be surprised if they just take the option off the table instead.
Maintain enough presence in each provider to provide resiliency, and a big enough stick to push down pricing.
Microsoft and Google are definitely selling at a loss right now. Everyone was surprised that AWS was profitable as the same prices.
Currently Google cloud stuff is a rounding error next to Azure and AWS (the pie chart is mostly AWS, a slice of Azure, and a sliver of "other" right now). I'd be very nervous using them, given Google's history of abandoning projects that aren't getting traction, but OP had good advice there - just make sure you can move.
Of course, once you start using all the other cloud services beyond server rentals (file stores, DBs, queues, etc) then you're basically stuck, as there's very little in common there, so again maybe not Google.
The central government never gets weaker. State's rights never get stronger. It's only a matter of time before the EU removes the provision allowing member states to leave.
FortyCharacterCobolNamesLikeThisForExample and all.
This really is a moronic article. Programming language choice is not about "popular" or "cool" - it's whatever tool gets the job done.
For a hobby? Sure. Otherwise it's about whatever tool gets the paycheck done. Java sucks today and isn't the best tool for any job, yet it dominates the job market. It was a bad tool 15 years ago, and it will be a bad tool 15 years from now, when it will still dominate the job market. And by then, sadly, $10 computers will run Java easily.
C will always be the kernel guy's tool, and those jobs pay nicely, but there will never be very many of them. C++ has faded (despite being a darn good language with the latest standard, too many burned bridges). C# will go down with the Microsoft ship. Will one of the new fad languages have staying power? Maybe. Likely 1 of them will, if not a current one. But fucking Java just refuses to die.
Knighthood only overlapped with religion in a few times and places - it was really just cavalry. "Chivalry" meant "horsemanship" for most of the time the word was current, and only came to mean "and other things knights should do" towards the end.
Human nature doesn't change, nor does the need to protect civilization from assholes. However, combat robots will fundamentally redefine "arms" in the coming decades, and there's no telling what that looks like.
All who fly them low enough deserve the hate. You don't see many people upset about drones flying high enough that you can't see them, or they're just a dot. It's the assholes who buzz animals, peek into upper story windows, disturb your family in your back yard, that sort of thing.that draws the hate.
In some states, it is perfectly legal to shoot someone on your property as long as you say the magic words "I was in fear for my life". Of course, it would be awkward if your target survived the shot and told a different story, but that problem has a straightforward solution.
True story from Texas: my mother bought a gun after a couple of break-ins. She asked the cops what the rules were. The explained that she should make sure he "falls inside the house *wink*" and that he doesn't survive.
How high it extends is defined by law (state by state), but is something like "the higher of 50 feet or the tallest nearby building". TFS says this drone was under 30 feet, which is just obnoxious (especially near livestock).
In the early days of America, most of the colonies had a law requiring you to bring your gun to church, at least for men, in case something/someone needed shooting that week. Similar laws predate guns, going back, well, as far as we have written records of laws . Many cultures, perhaps most, have required citizens to keep arms in good condition. Heck, mostly what defined a "knight" from roman times to medieval was that your could brings better weapons to the fight.
I wouldn't be worried about his fines, I'd be more worried about the consequences of shooting at an aircraft in federal airspace.
That's a federal crime that could net you up to 20 years in jail.
It depends on the state, but somewhere around 50 feet it stops being "airspace" and starts being "your property". Much like you're still trespassing if you climb a tree.
All my data is stored on a CPM machine with no networking capability. I hand code all binaries in Assembly Language. Never had a breach.
For a long time, the GAO ran all its internet-facing servers on Netware. I don't think they had a breach during those years. I've always thought that was a clever strategy, if only because the list of people who could hack on the Netware kernel was so small.
These days I'm not sure if there really is a platform you could make work in production but is so obscure that no one bothers developing exploits for it. Maybe a mainframe OS, now that the financials have left mainframes behind? But then, government-funded attackers can develop expertise in whatever oddball system they need to, so maybe those days have passed.
It is vital to keep pace with the changing regulatory and technology landscape to safeguard and advance business objectives. Working backwards by identifying and understanding future risks, predicting risks and acting ahead of competition, can make a company more robust
Wow, buzzword bingo in a single quote. Where's Weird Al when you need him? Right here!
This consultant must have been toning it down though. I would have a expected a "proven methodology" and "commitment to quality" in there somewhere, and maybe a "seamless integration" too.
The word filter is particularly egregious since that's a component you just buy. There's not even the excuse of "small dev team in a hurry" for that one. I have a feeling it's a related bug to the punctuation thing, where what they're running through the word filter isn't quite what you type. How they screw up "user-provided string" is a different question.
I wonder how man variations on "Planet'); DROP TABLE Players; --" there are by now.
Hint: no, stop making excuses for them, Hello Games was simply lying.
Each world is procedurally generated from a 64-bit key, plus some randomness (especially post-creation). If two players, each in their single-player game, go to the "same" planet, sure, it will look about the same but there's no unique server-side world. It's just two people at the same coordinates each of which independently generated a world from the same seed.
Sure, the worlds look sort-of the same, mostly, but there are going to be more differences than in a traditional single-player game or MMO, because the random elements are different in each person's single-player game.
For those who have someone escaped the drama associated with NMS and want to learn what all the fuss is about, this review does a great job of explaining - not just listing the missing features, but showing the emotional impact it had on fans who were incredibly hyped for the game.
There are some scam games on Steam that are designed to last two hours to get past the refund limit.
No Man's Sky is one of these.
I think that may be accidental - at least, I don't credit the devs with the skill to cook that up. The problem here is that the game is missing nearly every promised feature, but there's no way to discover that until you leave the first planet. Then it all turns to shit. The timing, specifically, was likely a coincidence, but Hello Games definitely knew what they were shitting out.
Also, the game crashes frequently even on console, but it can go hours between crashes. For PC, we're used to that sort of shit, and while I think that's still worth a refund, you wouldn't get mass outrage. On the console OTOH, Just Works (TM) is the freaking point of console games.
Still, had the game not been missing almost every promised feature, I think the player base would have been content to wait for a patch to fix the crashes.
50 hours? No way.
You could spend 50 hours in NMS just looking for any of the 100 missing promised features. Sure it's not all a lie? Surely it's there somewhere? Dammit.
The marketing for this product was likely illegal under most nations' consumer protection laws - heck, it was so blatant that even under US law they probably crossed the line. When a product is "not fit for purpose", playtime isn't a relevant factor. If Sony's giving refunds, it's only because their legal team told them to stay clear of fraud. I'll give Steam credit for actually caring about customer trust.
You seem to have a bug up your ass about Republicans, but I don't understand it. Most Republicans in DC are indistinguishable from most Democrats, once you look past the theater to what bills actually get passed, which are whatever the billionaire donors want. Everything else is just theater, on both sides.
Not all Whig politicians were able to get re-elected as Republicans, BTW. The platforms weren't the same and some had doubled-down on increasingly unpopular ideas (otherwise, the party never would have faded). I can't predict what coalition will arise from the ashes of the GOP, but Trump proves that catering to the religious whackos has become unnecessary and pointless - it never actually mattered that Trump is pro-choice, and not particularly religious.
And yes, today's GOP is "dead party walking", unless Trump somehow wins (Hillary would have to stroke out) and even then only the name would survive. Trump supporters are furious with the GOP, and without them it's a 40% party.
And of course, there's the legal cases still working their way through the courts where various entities are arguing that even saying to the insurer (who has no practical objection to birth control, it's a cost-saver for them), that they don't want to be involved, is a burden on them, to fill out a form, saying leave us out of it.
The court cases are about filling out a government form registering your religious beliefs. I object to that too: history suggests that sort of thing never ends well.
I'll at least expect a conscientious objector to report their status to the draft board.
Different case. The rule is that the State cannot not compel you to act against your strong moral beliefs unless there's a compelling state interest and the action is the narrowest possibly to address that. Registering as a conscientious objector is a perfect example where both are true. The court found no compelling State interest in having birth control paid for by insurance (rather than, you know, money).
Be open at some hours. Be closed at others. Access for people, even service animals.
You'd be surprised by what gets waved for legitimate religious objections. A strictly kosher restaurant, for example, doesn't follow all the same rules (of course, it has rather more self-imposed).
As for birth control, if it's against your moral principles for a person under your employ to make their own choices about their reproduction
Now you're talking about a very narrow subset of Catholics, and we're effectively back to fringe cults. But if you had it as corporate policy that employees couldn't use birth control, that would be very different legally from not paying for it via insurance. The former is an undue burden on the employee, the latter isn't.
Personally, I'm against any law mandating insurance coverage in all policies for that only women in a certain age range need - that's singling out a group of privileged people for elevated legal treatment, and again history shows that sort of thing never ends well.