2. They do not open their source so that other developers can create software on an even playing field with them.
And I bet the Giant's offense won't just hand the ball over to Baltimore. What a bunch of bad guys they are.
I also don't agree with what the originall poster said -- but consider the recent Kerebos extensions fiasco. Opening the code really is useless (or uneeded)... but opening the standard for properly interfacing with existing systems should be expected.
3. They are not responsive to fixing flaws in their systems that are discovered by the community at large.
When the problem is fixable, they usually respond in a decent ammount of time. Think Linux is better? Consider the recent Linux worm.
You mean the worm that only infects RedHat systems? The same one that fixes the hole on infection? The same one thats been patched for months?... and been patched for so long that somebody made a program which can exploit and fix the problem? That's a long time if you ask me... so long that somebody automated the fixing process. When's the last time you saw an exploit for IIS that would download and install the patch for you?:)
I'm one that feels as a system admin it's your responsibility to secure your machines to prevent them from being used in an attack against somebody else. I try to make sure that I don't allow anything out of my network that didn't come from my network -- but that isn't the point of my message here.
On my first read through your post, I agreed... then I realized that I do try and keep people from abusing my servers. Why?
Well, take your analogy... and I'm going to corrupt it entirely here -- analogies are bad but you used one so I shall also.
No, somebody is not liable if a person breaks into their house, steals a weapon and then uses it against another in an illegal manner. Or are they?
How secure was the weapon? Was it unloaded in a safe, with the bullets in another safe? You have taken great measures to make sure your gun is not used by unauthorized people, you are not in the wrong here.
What if your gun is loaded in your sock drawer?
What if your gun is loaded sitting on the counter of your kitchen for "safe keeping?"
What if it's loaded sitting at your doorstep for anybody to find?
I've grossly perverted the example -- for good reason. Computer security is a very unmeasurable thing right now, or at least it is in the eyes of the court. It's much easier for the common man to decided whether or not somebody is properly protecting their fireams for misuse, but not so with technology.
I'm not saying a Sysadmin should be thrown in jail for not protecting his servers... but perhaps they should be held accountable to some level here.
I'm going to be overly blunt on this one... and probably face some seriously bad-mojo form the modterators on this one. Bear with me though:)
3) Taxes. Americans have less infrastructure, and as such, pay less taxes. Period. Don't let anyone tell you different, because they are wrong. Canadians pay about half of their income on taxes; they have higher income, alcohol, fuel, and sales taxes then Americans.
No relavence... but they "forced" me to work in a computing evironment (my office) which I consider hostile as a free human being.
3) Taxes. Americans have less infrastructure, and as such, pay less taxes. Period. Don't let anyone tell you different, because they are wrong. Canadians pay about half of their income on taxes; they have higher income, alcohol, fuel, and sales taxes then Americans.
Ahhh.. but Pepsi has told me that a good looking Faith Hill means Pepsi is good. Hot chick == refreshment. While this may be true I don't really think the refreshment a woman such as Faith Hill can provice resides in a 12oz can of soda.
Has Exxon tried to force you to harbor soldiers against your will?
Nope.. and if they did I've got the 2nd ammendment. Blow the fsck of somebody's head who think they're staying in my house. It's harsh, and it is NOT something I would do personally.... but I think the right should remain there for anybody who feels they need it. I know I've combined two Bill of Rights there.. but I felt they were fittting. (7 beers + some logic == very logical right now).. sue me:)
3) Taxes. Americans have less infrastructure, and as such, pay less taxes. Period. Don't let anyone tell you different, because they are wrong. Canadians pay about half of their income on taxes; they have higher income, alcohol, fuel, and sales taxes then Americans.
Last I knew (from "Paul Harvey"... so take this with a big grain of sault) the average (read:aveage
Face the facts here.. the average Slashdot readers is proabably not of "average" incoming, and if they aren't in the workforce yet they probably aren't destined to be the average worker either. What does that mean? More than 50% of your income goes to the goverment.
Welcome to the "fair" tax system, fellow Americans:)
I love what my country once stood for, in the history books, but I don't see that idealism holding true anymore.
Not a flame, just my opinion. Mark it down, call me troll, but really, I think people have more important things to think about than trying to get everyone to follow some individual's pet agenda.
Agreed, however I am one of those people who tend to nit-pick over the difference between the two terms. Three or four years ago, when I was about 16, I wouldn't have cared at all how people used them. That changed for one good reason.
I like having a "label" for myself. "Geek." Which I proudly proclaim doesn't seem to carry any sort of power with it -- "hacker" does. Even Linus considers himself a "hacker." as do do most good programmers. When I label myself a "hacker" I carry the good connocation along with it. I am not a cracker. If I breech security it's becuase I don't have access to something I should, which I haven't done in years. And that's another subjhet all together.
I'm seeing more and more that those who nit-pick over the difference between cracker and hacker are those who would like an all-encompasing label for themselves. I am one of them -- "hacker" in it's true sense describes me. I'd like to be able to use this word, but the media has contrused it to mean something that it never really has.
I'm going to add on there, becuase I'm sure it would be pointed out by others, that Debian's apt-get system works wonder for upgrading "3rd party" packages. Also I don't want to count out the BSDs out here because their (or maybe it's just FreeBSD)'s "ports" system works quite well.
I have used neither, but I am aware of their existence, and if what I hear is true they're leaps and bounds above everybody else there.
I've always been a bit irked by the idea that there needs to be a MS Windows to Linux translation guide. I just don't "get" it I suppose.
When I ran Win3.1 for a while, way back when, and then got a new machine with Windows 95 on it, I was stumped. I didn't have a Windows 3.1 -> 95 guide, I just poked around and made it work. They acted different, that's expected.
I made the jump to Linux like most people, after using Unix in college for a while. I was geeked, it was an OS that made sense to me again. I like the command line -- sue me.
I'm confused as to why people want this "windows to linux" translation thing still. So what if you mastered Windows 98? How much of that carries over to how a Linux desktop operates? Proably not much.
I'd personally like to see more research done on taking computer illeterate people and plopping them down in front of a properly configured Linux desktop and a properly configured Windows desktop. Then ask them to update everything on their system. Honestly, with Windows, I still cannot do something like this. With linux, I can -- I've been using helix-gnome lately, and I'm uber-impressed. If you want to stay bleeding edge their tools no longer work, but if you want to stay current with what Helix has approved it's a piece of cake. You don't have any way, without a bunch of 3rd party tools to upgrade all your apps in Windows -- you do with Linux, however.
I admit that the learning curve _might_ seem higher in Linux -- it's more complex. But for somebody who wants a pre-packed self maintaining system I think Linux as a desktop is kicking the pooh out of Microsoft Windows there.
Honestly, I can sit computer illerates down in front of my workstation, and they can get around with it. I've had people stop by asking if I have AOLIM that they can use -- yes I do, gaim... and they have no trouble using it. Launch my MP3 player and use it? no problem for them.
I think that the crowd Linux entices is that of the "power user" group, who are are quickly dismayed when they could do it in Windows, but not in Linux. What about the others though? They cannot do a thing in either -- which one is easier to understand for them? I think that's where the real question lies. I realize that this is not a likely scenario, but it is possible in the future.
I was personally _very_ happy to see that AOL was making a version for Linux, I can only hope that this comes to be true. I've never used AOL, nor do I really support them, but the idea is simple. They make an AOL client for Linux, slap it on a CD with the entire OS ready to support it and viola -- AOL and a usable computer in a box. Perhaps the Linux crowd will throw some flack at me for saying this but I would love to see people able to come out of a Best Buy or CompUSA with a machine entirely Microsoft free -- instead they would have their pre-configured AOL client running on top of Linux, and probably a plethora of applications for them.
It's a bunch of random ideas, I know... but perhaps some of them make sense.
Programs which tie directly to the kernel can often be broken by kernel upgrades. See the pcmcia-cs package for an example. It's not a _bad_ thing that this happens, but it's obviously not good either. ,br>
Maintaining backward compatiblity will always lead to a "bloat" of software. I can't see any way around that.
A common rant I have when working in the Win32 environment is that there are mutliple calls that do almost the same thing, and multiple methodologies. The odd thing is is that they all come from the same place. There is a rhyme and a reason behind why Microsoft does this, and that's backward compatibility. The thing that gets me there is that I never see documentation exaplaining _why_ there are so many ways of doing something. If there are 12 calls do to similar things I can't seem to ever find out why the first 11 weren't good enough to do the job, and required somebody to come up with _another_ call. At least when dealing with a system which changes dynamically you're not likely to run into that problem.
Yes, this is horribly off topic. ,br>
Justin Buist
I'm entirely sure you realize this... but I'm going to state it anyway just for poops and giggles.
Of course CPU speed isn't responsible for bootup time.. (duh) it's the OS that takes that extra time.
CPUs become faster, programmers throw more stuff at them, assuming that everybody will have the newest CPU. Why this is the norm I don't know -- I'm a coder myself and I get a chuckle everytime out of other coders saying, "Well... who cares? They can add more RAM or upgrade".
Anytime I see bootup times discussed I can't help but think of a PBS special I saw on Apple a couple of Thanksgivings ago, where "The Woz" talked about Steve Jobs asking him too make the first apple bootup quicker. Woz was happy with the time.. which says alot to me.. but Jobs wanted it faster. Rather than say "screw that"... He took it as a challenge and made it boot quicker. I wish more coders in this day and age took more pride in making their stuff run faster and better... rather than just running at all.
Actually -- I think it points out a program with computer programming languages.
There is only one language that I've ever written in, "compiled" it w/out errors, ran it, and found that I hadn't done anything wrong at runtime. It was Perl.... and about 180 lines of Perl no less. No, I'm not elite coder -- but Perl was well suited to the job and let me define my task nicely. Plus.. it's job was rather simple.
C's harder to debug -- because you can mess more stuff up basically (duh). It's also very well suited to alot of tasks.
C++ can be a bit easier to C... just because it's tighter on type controls and such; it was purposely made hard to shoot yourself in the foot. Granted... you can get some compiler errors from hell when you start templating things.
Please don't read this and think I'm coming off as saying that C, C++, Perl, VB, whatever suck -- they each have their own jobs... but I think Larry Wall is on the right track with perl from a language design standpoint. I'm very much looking forward to what real languages will come up in the future and see if they really do increase programmer productivity.
Note: I've never touched Python.. but I hear good things.
Along with the IP of the offender the time is also logged -- granted, this means that you have to keep your clock in sync on your firewall. Using the IP and the time it occured it should be relatively easy for the ISP to hunt down whoever was using that IP at the given time.
That's not a kernel matter... and your plight is one that has been solved before. Use the shell command 'killalll netscape'... That'll send a SIGTERM signal to netscape. It if still refues to die: killall -9 netscape... sudden death.
I do beleive that the cycle from 2.0 to 2.2 was nearly a year long or thereabouts. The 2.1.x series was up to 2.1.132 (correct me if wrong) before the 2.2.x pre's came around.
Question the sales man you buy your Omnipoint handset on too... I've bought one that simply does not function properly (This is Omnipoints fault... something in the software). No lie my phone would crash randomly... and so often it was to the point I couldn't not use it reasonably. This was an Ericsson handset.
My friend is a salesmen for the things, so he knows when something goes wrong with them (at least over here in the west side of Michigan)... they've also has problems with a Motorola handset crashing everytime you would attempt to dial.
No, I'm not saying Omnipoint is a horrible evil company; but they've had problems with their handsets that I didn't even think were possible (let alone excusable from a programmer's point of view). Apparently you can segfault a handset pretty easy.
Making money of free software isn't a bad thing in my opinion. Commonly people sell technical support to free products that they helped produce, but you don't have to be a developer of the softare to do this. However having the right to saying, "Yeah, I coded it.. you think somebody else knows how to work it better than I do?" pulls some weight with it.
So... a company takes a GPLed tool, makes a web-based frontend to it, and charges people for their service. It frees the user from having to update all their software locally, hands them a nice cross-platform frontend to the application. The user isn't paying for the backend (at least they better not be)... they're paying for the web-based service the company is providing.
In High School (graduated class of '98) I was lucky enough to be permitted to obtain an hour each day for independant study, which I used to educate myself on C/C++/Java/x86 assembly and all sorts of misc. stuff that has proved incredibly valuable to me later on. At the time I had zero experience in Unix and regret that incredibly.
I went to a small high school (graduating class of 85 people here)... so I don't know if something like an independant study is possible for you.... if it is, great! Take it and run with it. I wouldn't bother trying to get a real class out of the deal; if they'll let you go off and do your own thing (Hey, they might buy you a book even.. they never did for me here:) ) that's great.
If you end up stuck working in a Win32 environement the entire time, but use Linux at home it's a good idea to write cross-platform compatible code, assuming you're not programming using MFC or something actually.. in which case you're SOL. I actually have a college prof who wants us to compile and turn in our work on Borland Turbo C++ 3.0... although half the class works on the assignment in our Linux lab, compiles with g++, then when it's all working they head to the DOS/Windows lab and recompile the code into an.exe and hand it all in at once.
You'll start to learn about standard libraries, versus what you get handed to you with your specific compiler. If you do alot of console programming in a Borland environment you probably have a #include at the top of your programs.... which is bad IMHO:)... even my prof uses the bugger and when we take his skeleton code from DOS to Linux we're modifing crap left and right to make it ANSI/ISO compatible.
If your teacher actually understand what portability is they should actually apreciate you writing good clean code. If not oh well.. you'll still become a better coder because of it.
I wish somebody would inform my university's CS department of this. I'm required to take two calculus classes to get my degree here... which is OK by me with one exception.. we're led to beleive that the calcultor and Maple mysteriously find these anti-derivates to functions which "have no antiderivative" when you use our hand methods of finding them. Of course anybody knows that ANY function has an anti-derivative.. but to find it takes too many calculations to do by hand.
Why can't we have a class on calculus for CS majors alone? Teach us how to "correctly" find the answers to these things... with code... not goofy rules that apply to a small number of practical applications.
Of for Heaven's sake drop the calculus requirements all together and just teach us REAL math when it comes to CS and nothing else... we need far more of it... I've heard many many people say that Knuths books are wonderful and should probably be required reading for CS majors.
For any business, the risk of bad guys disrupting profits and assets exists. The technology and means of disruption may change, but the principle remains the same.
A DoS attack is the real-world equivalent to going out, rending a Ryder truck, and driving the sucker through the frontdoor of a local retail store. Businesses are not setup to 'defend' against attacks like this a) because there's no real good way to do it and b) they shouldn't have to in the first place.
I'm big on companies keeping up their security, and I'm all for people poking holes right through it (so long as they don't gain anything from the actual break in)... but DoS attacks are just not something that proves anything.
I'm EXTREMELY curious to see how this stuff really works and would love to grab one just for educational purposes... but I can't find the doggon CD's on BMG's site by searching for it. Weird; perhaps they pulled them already though.
Does anybody know where I could get a CD "encoded" with this stuff? Online prefably.. I am a geek after all.
You can't code an open source project and expect a "bounty" to be paid when it's all said and done. Who gets the money when it's all said and done? Shall the self-proclaimed leader of the project count the number of lines of code actually used in the "final" product and distributed the money accordingly? It's just not feasible. If you were to give $30k to Apache (poor example perhaps)... who the heck would get the money? Nobody really knows who did what exactly. There's no way to make everybody happy.
Along with this competition model you run into another problem: forking! With a $30k prize a state developers will be quick to realize they if they fork off from the main branch and a team of 3 guys can pull it off before the other group finishes thier project they'll only have to divide the money up 3 ways.
Don't get me wrong; it's a neat idea... but it just won't pan out in real life.
Justin Buist
Re:Apocalypse Fixed, but the knowledge gap remains
on
Apocalypse Not
·
· Score: 1
Comeon now - my former employer's customer service software (accounts, billings, credit, cash collection) consisted of 12 million lines of IBM 1401 assembly language vintage 1965 (bet you didn't think that would run on an ES/9000, did you?). No source code, no documentation...
Please tell me you did NOT leave the "fixed" application written like this. For Heaven's sake it may seem like a big jump in the short term but recode the application something that will be around for a while. No I don't content that C, C++, Perl or Java will be here forever... but IBM 1401 assembly? At least go through and document the thing properly so it's possible to understand it.
Slashdot Mirror
2. They do not open their source so that other developers can create software on an even playing field with them.
:)
...rambling as usual
And I bet the Giant's offense won't just hand the ball over to Baltimore. What a bunch of bad guys they are.
I also don't agree with what the originall poster said -- but consider the recent Kerebos extensions fiasco. Opening the code really is useless (or uneeded)... but opening the standard for properly interfacing with existing systems should be expected.
3. They are not responsive to fixing flaws in their systems that are discovered by the community at large.
When the problem is fixable, they usually respond in a decent ammount of time. Think Linux is better? Consider the recent Linux worm.
You mean the worm that only infects RedHat systems? The same one that fixes the hole on infection? The same one thats been patched for months?... and been patched for so long that somebody made a program which can exploit and fix the problem? That's a long time if you ask me... so long that somebody automated the fixing process. When's the last time you saw an exploit for IIS that would download and install the patch for you?
Justin Buist
I'm one that feels as a system admin it's your responsibility to secure your machines to prevent them from being used in an attack against somebody else. I try to make sure that I don't allow anything out of my network that didn't come from my network -- but that isn't the point of my message here.
On my first read through your post, I agreed... then I realized that I do try and keep people from abusing my servers. Why?
Well, take your analogy... and I'm going to corrupt it entirely here -- analogies are bad but you used one so I shall also.
No, somebody is not liable if a person breaks into their house, steals a weapon and then uses it against another in an illegal manner. Or are they?
How secure was the weapon? Was it unloaded in a safe, with the bullets in another safe? You have taken great measures to make sure your gun is not used by unauthorized people, you are not in the wrong here.
What if your gun is loaded in your sock drawer?
What if your gun is loaded sitting on the counter of your kitchen for "safe keeping?"
What if it's loaded sitting at your doorstep for anybody to find?
I've grossly perverted the example -- for good reason. Computer security is a very unmeasurable thing right now, or at least it is in the eyes of the court. It's much easier for the common man to decided whether or not somebody is properly protecting their fireams for misuse, but not so with technology.
I'm not saying a Sysadmin should be thrown in jail for not protecting his servers... but perhaps they should be held accountable to some level here.
I'm going to be overly blunt on this one... and probably face some seriously bad-mojo form the modterators on this one. Bear with me though :)
:)
3) Taxes. Americans have less infrastructure, and as such, pay less taxes. Period. Don't let anyone tell you different, because they are wrong. Canadians pay about half of their income on taxes; they have higher income, alcohol, fuel, and sales taxes then Americans.
No relavence... but they "forced" me to work in a computing evironment (my office) which I consider hostile as a free human being.
3) Taxes. Americans have less infrastructure, and as such, pay less taxes. Period. Don't let anyone tell you different, because they are wrong. Canadians pay about half of their income on taxes; they have higher income, alcohol, fuel, and sales taxes then Americans.
Ahhh.. but Pepsi has told me that a good looking Faith Hill means Pepsi is good. Hot chick == refreshment. While this may be true I don't really think the refreshment a woman such as Faith Hill can provice resides in a 12oz can of soda.
Has Exxon tried to force you to harbor soldiers against your will?
Nope.. and if they did I've got the 2nd ammendment. Blow the fsck of somebody's head who think they're staying in my house. It's harsh, and it is NOT something I would do personally.... but I think the right should remain there for anybody who feels they need it. I know I've combined two Bill of Rights there.. but I felt they were fittting. (7 beers + some logic == very logical right now).. sue me
Justin Buist
3) Taxes. Americans have less infrastructure, and as such, pay less taxes. Period. Don't let anyone tell you different, because they are wrong. Canadians pay about half of their income on taxes; they have higher income, alcohol, fuel, and sales taxes then Americans. Last I knew (from "Paul Harvey"... so take this with a big grain of sault) the average (read:aveage
:)
Face the facts here.. the average Slashdot readers is proabably not of "average" incoming, and if they aren't in the workforce yet they probably aren't destined to be the average worker either. What does that mean? More than 50% of your income goes to the goverment.
Welcome to the "fair" tax system, fellow Americans
I love what my country once stood for, in the history books, but I don't see that idealism holding true anymore.
Justin Buist
Not a flame, just my opinion. Mark it down, call me troll, but really, I think people have more important things to think about than trying to get everyone to follow some individual's pet agenda.
Agreed, however I am one of those people who tend to nit-pick over the difference between the two terms. Three or four years ago, when I was about 16, I wouldn't have cared at all how people used them. That changed for one good reason.
I like having a "label" for myself. "Geek." Which I proudly proclaim doesn't seem to carry any sort of power with it -- "hacker" does. Even Linus considers himself a "hacker." as do do most good programmers. When I label myself a "hacker" I carry the good connocation along with it. I am not a cracker. If I breech security it's becuase I don't have access to something I should, which I haven't done in years. And that's another subjhet all together.
I'm seeing more and more that those who nit-pick over the difference between cracker and hacker are those who would like an all-encompasing label for themselves. I am one of them -- "hacker" in it's true sense describes me. I'd like to be able to use this word, but the media has contrused it to mean something that it never really has.
Justin Buist
printf("Props to: %s\n%s\n%s", Joe Blow #1, Joe Blow #2, Joe Blow #3);
I'm going to add on there, becuase I'm sure it would be pointed out by others, that Debian's apt-get system works wonder for upgrading "3rd party" packages. Also I don't want to count out the BSDs out here because their (or maybe it's just FreeBSD)'s "ports" system works quite well.
I have used neither, but I am aware of their existence, and if what I hear is true they're leaps and bounds above everybody else there.
Justin Buist
I've always been a bit irked by the idea that there needs to be a MS Windows to Linux translation guide. I just don't "get" it I suppose.
When I ran Win3.1 for a while, way back when, and then got a new machine with Windows 95 on it, I was stumped. I didn't have a Windows 3.1 -> 95 guide, I just poked around and made it work. They acted different, that's expected.
I made the jump to Linux like most people, after using Unix in college for a while. I was geeked, it was an OS that made sense to me again. I like the command line -- sue me.
I'm confused as to why people want this "windows to linux" translation thing still. So what if you mastered Windows 98? How much of that carries over to how a Linux desktop operates? Proably not much.
I'd personally like to see more research done on taking computer illeterate people and plopping them down in front of a properly configured Linux desktop and a properly configured Windows desktop. Then ask them to update everything on their system. Honestly, with Windows, I still cannot do something like this. With linux, I can -- I've been using helix-gnome lately, and I'm uber-impressed. If you want to stay bleeding edge their tools no longer work, but if you want to stay current with what Helix has approved it's a piece of cake. You don't have any way, without a bunch of 3rd party tools to upgrade all your apps in Windows -- you do with Linux, however.
I admit that the learning curve _might_ seem higher in Linux -- it's more complex. But for somebody who wants a pre-packed self maintaining system I think Linux as a desktop is kicking the pooh out of Microsoft Windows there.
Honestly, I can sit computer illerates down in front of my workstation, and they can get around with it. I've had people stop by asking if I have AOLIM that they can use -- yes I do, gaim... and they have no trouble using it. Launch my MP3 player and use it? no problem for them.
I think that the crowd Linux entices is that of the "power user" group, who are are quickly dismayed when they could do it in Windows, but not in Linux. What about the others though? They cannot do a thing in either -- which one is easier to understand for them? I think that's where the real question lies. I realize that this is not a likely scenario, but it is possible in the future.
I was personally _very_ happy to see that AOL was making a version for Linux, I can only hope that this comes to be true. I've never used AOL, nor do I really support them, but the idea is simple. They make an AOL client for Linux, slap it on a CD with the entire OS ready to support it and viola -- AOL and a usable computer in a box. Perhaps the Linux crowd will throw some flack at me for saying this but I would love to see people able to come out of a Best Buy or CompUSA with a machine entirely Microsoft free -- instead they would have their pre-configured AOL client running on top of Linux, and probably a plethora of applications for them.
It's a bunch of random ideas, I know... but perhaps some of them make sense.
Justin Buist
Whoa? 5-12? I'm 20, and just got a Mindstorm set, I'm geeked.
Justin Buist
I agree whole heartdly here.
Programs which tie directly to the kernel can often be broken by kernel upgrades. See the pcmcia-cs package for an example. It's not a _bad_ thing that this happens, but it's obviously not good either.
,br> Maintaining backward compatiblity will always lead to a "bloat" of software. I can't see any way around that.
A common rant I have when working in the Win32 environment is that there are mutliple calls that do almost the same thing, and multiple methodologies. The odd thing is is that they all come from the same place. There is a rhyme and a reason behind why Microsoft does this, and that's backward compatibility. The thing that gets me there is that I never see documentation exaplaining _why_ there are so many ways of doing something. If there are 12 calls do to similar things I can't seem to ever find out why the first 11 weren't good enough to do the job, and required somebody to come up with _another_ call. At least when dealing with a system which changes dynamically you're not likely to run into that problem.
Yes, this is horribly off topic.
,br> Justin Buist
I'm entirely sure you realize this... but I'm going to state it anyway just for poops and giggles.
... He took it as a challenge and made it boot quicker. I wish more coders in this day and age took more pride in making their stuff run faster and better... rather than just running at all.
:)
Of course CPU speed isn't responsible for bootup time.. (duh) it's the OS that takes that extra time.
CPUs become faster, programmers throw more stuff at them, assuming that everybody will have the newest CPU. Why this is the norm I don't know -- I'm a coder myself and I get a chuckle everytime out of other coders saying, "Well... who cares? They can add more RAM or upgrade".
Anytime I see bootup times discussed I can't help but think of a PBS special I saw on Apple a couple of Thanksgivings ago, where "The Woz" talked about Steve Jobs asking him too make the first apple bootup quicker. Woz was happy with the time.. which says alot to me.. but Jobs wanted it faster. Rather than say "screw that"
Offtopic.. yes... moderate down as needed
Justin Buist
Intresting idea -- pretty easy to pull off too. I think I'll be spending a bit of time in vim tonight hacking up some perl. Justin Buist
Actually -- I think it points out a program with computer programming languages.
There is only one language that I've ever written in, "compiled" it w/out errors, ran it, and found that I hadn't done anything wrong at runtime. It was Perl.... and about 180 lines of Perl no less. No, I'm not elite coder -- but Perl was well suited to the job and let me define my task nicely. Plus.. it's job was rather simple.
C's harder to debug -- because you can mess more stuff up basically (duh). It's also very well suited to alot of tasks.
C++ can be a bit easier to C... just because it's tighter on type controls and such; it was purposely made hard to shoot yourself in the foot. Granted... you can get some compiler errors from hell when you start templating things.
Please don't read this and think I'm coming off as saying that C, C++, Perl, VB, whatever suck -- they each have their own jobs... but I think Larry Wall is on the right track with perl from a language design standpoint. I'm very much looking forward to what real languages will come up in the future and see if they really do increase programmer productivity.
Note: I've never touched Python.. but I hear good things.
Justin Buist
Along with the IP of the offender the time is also logged -- granted, this means that you have to keep your clock in sync on your firewall. Using the IP and the time it occured it should be relatively easy for the ISP to hunt down whoever was using that IP at the given time.
Justin Buist
- DNS is a protocol
- BIND is a program (daemon actually) that fullfills the DNS protocol.
- BIND is the dominate name serving daemon in the *nix environment.
There isn't (and shouldn't be) any Linux specific name serving daemon. Hope that clears a bit of it up.That's not a kernel matter... and your plight is one that has been solved before. Use the shell command 'killalll netscape' ... That'll send a SIGTERM signal to netscape. It if still refues to die: killall -9 netscape ... sudden death.
I do beleive that the cycle from 2.0 to 2.2 was nearly a year long or thereabouts. The 2.1.x series was up to 2.1.132 (correct me if wrong) before the 2.2.x pre's came around.
Justin Buist
Question the sales man you buy your Omnipoint handset on too... I've bought one that simply does not function properly (This is Omnipoints fault... something in the software). No lie my phone would crash randomly... and so often it was to the point I couldn't not use it reasonably. This was an Ericsson handset.
My friend is a salesmen for the things, so he knows when something goes wrong with them (at least over here in the west side of Michigan)... they've also has problems with a Motorola handset crashing everytime you would attempt to dial.
No, I'm not saying Omnipoint is a horrible evil company; but they've had problems with their handsets that I didn't even think were possible (let alone excusable from a programmer's point of view). Apparently you can segfault a handset pretty easy.
Justin Buist
Making money of free software isn't a bad thing in my opinion. Commonly people sell technical support to free products that they helped produce, but you don't have to be a developer of the softare to do this. However having the right to saying, "Yeah, I coded it.. you think somebody else knows how to work it better than I do?" pulls some weight with it.
... they're paying for the web-based service the company is providing.
So... a company takes a GPLed tool, makes a web-based frontend to it, and charges people for their service. It frees the user from having to update all their software locally, hands them a nice cross-platform frontend to the application. The user isn't paying for the backend (at least they better not be)
Problem? I don't really think so...
Justin Buist
In High School (graduated class of '98) I was lucky enough to be permitted to obtain an hour each day for independant study, which I used to educate myself on C/C++/Java/x86 assembly and all sorts of misc. stuff that has proved incredibly valuable to me later on. At the time I had zero experience in Unix and regret that incredibly.
:) ) that's great.
.exe and hand it all in at once.
:) ... even my prof uses the bugger and when we take his skeleton code from DOS to Linux we're modifing crap left and right to make it ANSI/ISO compatible.
I went to a small high school (graduating class of 85 people here)... so I don't know if something like an independant study is possible for you.... if it is, great! Take it and run with it. I wouldn't bother trying to get a real class out of the deal; if they'll let you go off and do your own thing (Hey, they might buy you a book even.. they never did for me here
If you end up stuck working in a Win32 environement the entire time, but use Linux at home it's a good idea to write cross-platform compatible code, assuming you're not programming using MFC or something actually.. in which case you're SOL. I actually have a college prof who wants us to compile and turn in our work on Borland Turbo C++ 3.0... although half the class works on the assignment in our Linux lab, compiles with g++, then when it's all working they head to the DOS/Windows lab and recompile the code into an
You'll start to learn about standard libraries, versus what you get handed to you with your specific compiler. If you do alot of console programming in a Borland environment you probably have a #include at the top of your programs.... which is bad IMHO
If your teacher actually understand what portability is they should actually apreciate you writing good clean code. If not oh well.. you'll still become a better coder because of it.
I wish somebody would inform my university's CS department of this. I'm required to take two calculus classes to get my degree here... which is OK by me with one exception.. we're led to beleive that the calcultor and Maple mysteriously find these anti-derivates to functions which "have no antiderivative" when you use our hand methods of finding them. Of course anybody knows that ANY function has an anti-derivative.. but to find it takes too many calculations to do by hand.
Why can't we have a class on calculus for CS majors alone? Teach us how to "correctly" find the answers to these things... with code... not goofy rules that apply to a small number of practical applications.
Of for Heaven's sake drop the calculus requirements all together and just teach us REAL math when it comes to CS and nothing else... we need far more of it... I've heard many many people say that Knuths books are wonderful and should probably be required reading for CS majors.
Justin Buist
For any business, the risk of bad guys disrupting profits and assets exists. The technology and means of disruption may change, but the principle remains the same.
... but DoS attacks are just not something that proves anything.
A DoS attack is the real-world equivalent to going out, rending a Ryder truck, and driving the sucker through the frontdoor of a local retail store. Businesses are not setup to 'defend' against attacks like this a) because there's no real good way to do it and b) they shouldn't have to in the first place.
I'm big on companies keeping up their security, and I'm all for people poking holes right through it (so long as they don't gain anything from the actual break in)
Justin Buist
I'm EXTREMELY curious to see how this stuff really works and would love to grab one just for educational purposes... but I can't find the doggon CD's on BMG's site by searching for it. Weird; perhaps they pulled them already though.
Does anybody know where I could get a CD "encoded" with this stuff? Online prefably.. I am a geek after all.
Justin Buist
You can't code an open source project and expect a "bounty" to be paid when it's all said and done. Who gets the money when it's all said and done? Shall the self-proclaimed leader of the project count the number of lines of code actually used in the "final" product and distributed the money accordingly? It's just not feasible. If you were to give $30k to Apache (poor example perhaps) ... who the heck would get the money? Nobody really knows who did what exactly. There's no way to make everybody happy.
Along with this competition model you run into another problem: forking! With a $30k prize a state developers will be quick to realize they if they fork off from the main branch and a team of 3 guys can pull it off before the other group finishes thier project they'll only have to divide the money up 3 ways.
Don't get me wrong; it's a neat idea... but it just won't pan out in real life.
Justin Buist
Comeon now - my former employer's customer service software (accounts, billings, credit, cash collection) consisted of 12 million lines of IBM 1401 assembly language vintage 1965 (bet you didn't think that would run on an ES/9000, did you?). No source code, no documentation...
Please tell me you did NOT leave the "fixed" application written like this. For Heaven's sake it may seem like a big jump in the short term but recode the application something that will be around for a while. No I don't content that C, C++, Perl or Java will be here forever... but IBM 1401 assembly? At least go through and document the thing properly so it's possible to understand it.