> They look cool, are safe, and are > environmentally friendly
I have a problem with the "wind is free" idea behind the assumption that windmills are environmentally friendly.
Not believing in any something-for-nothing gimmick, I took to wondering about the effect on the downwind ecosystem of removing wind energy from its environment. Conservation of energy must say that these areas will get less energetic airflow than they have grown up with.
I have no idea how to do the math (it sure feels like an insignificant amount) but I think the wind enthusiasts should at least show that their windfarms don't harm natural and human residents in their airflow shadow.
And I just went to a command window on my Windows box (I often leave one open) and typed shutdown/s/t 0. Then I had to power up again so I could post this.
I won't bother figuring out if init 0 still works on every version of UNIX.
Me too. Back when I interviewed testers I had a favorite problem-solving question (my own invention) that I used to assess the ability of the candidate to get practical and realistic about the problem, not reply in abstractions. I deliberately stated the question (on the whiteboard) in a concrete way but was amazed at the abstracted waffling I got. Also at the inability to think beyond a box I (intentionally) created. There were about 4 different directions you could take; only one person ever found the truly lateral-thinking one. He got hired.
But I never let the problem take more than 20% of the interview time. Don't be misled by this book or some of the replies: watching the candidate think and talk about the problem is enormously valuable, but I also asked the most-proud and handle-conflict and 5-year questions. For candidates who need to code (devs and some testers) I asked them to write atoi() on the whiteboard; the results were usually embarrassing. For coders who claim to know C++, ask for an explanation of overrides/virtual/pure - again I was amazed at the ignorance out there.
BTW, I was hired as a tester and my very first interview started with being handed the pen and told to code atoi(). I first asked if I should account for leading whitespace and sign, was told no, and did them anyway. The interviewer then asked if I wanted a developer position instead (I said no).
It infected VMS and SunOS - it tried to run the code for both architectures on any given machine.
I think this was the first example of an attack using a BO to smash the stack - RTM danced on a cafeteria table when he figured it out, goes the legend.
Working at Prime, what I remember best is having to go to a room full of visiting customers the next morning to assure them their Primos boxes were safe. The hype level was high.
The big prize, and the price demanded by many on the (especially religious, I won't dignify them with the word Christian) Right, is the overturning of Roe vs Wade. And it's likely that Bush will be able to appoint enough justices to let that happen. It'll be an unspoken litmus test.
The philosophical underpinning of Roe vs Wade was that the Constitution contains a right to privacy. The way to undo the decision is to negate that understanding.
Do you get it? The collateral damage of this rage to repeal Roe will be a Supreme Court that says there is no Constitutional privacy right. Suddenly, there will be no Supreme Court backstop against the anti-privacy lawmakers. I fear that.
I agree - I am nothing but impressed with W2K Advanced Server. I have extensive experience with Solaris/HP/AIX in a production environment, and we have been playing with W2K recently.
If the original AC poster of this is still listening, I'd like to talk to you about your experience. You can contact me at d_w_toone@hotmail.com. Thanks.
In the end, there will have to be people with guns to enforce any sort of procedure of eliminating private property.
Interesting: remove eliminating and... well, you get my drift.
Me, I associate socialists with social contracts and minimal force, and I see libertarians as the most prone to advocate lethal force. Why are "libertarian" and "gun" so closely linked in my mind, I wonder?
Then maybe someone "higher up" can clear up the Active Directory / DNS flak I keep hearing about. If M$ can control what kind of DNS server you must query (i.e. Win2K), thats some, whats the word, uncompetitive business practices.
Perhaps you are referring to the fact that Microsoft actually implements the relevant RFCs, and much of the UNIX world yet has to catch up because people like sticking with old versions of BIND.
For all the gory details, check out the February issue of Windows 2000 Magazine, which shows you how to use the two DNSes either alone or coexisting. Basically, get updated to BIND 8.2.2 first, and please do try to keep up.
Re: MS had to try and trumpet the fact that this appears to have been run on Unix boxes and Microsoft is trying to turn this entire DoS affair into one gigantic media coup.
Where? What evidence do you have that Microsoft is doing anything, media-wise, about this?
Slashdot Mirror
You have that exactly backwards.
> They look cool, are safe, and are
> environmentally friendly
I have a problem with the "wind is free" idea behind the assumption that windmills are environmentally friendly.
Not believing in any something-for-nothing gimmick, I took to wondering about the effect on the downwind ecosystem of removing wind energy from its environment. Conservation of energy must say that these areas will get less energetic airflow than they have grown up with.
I have no idea how to do the math (it sure feels like an insignificant amount) but I think the wind enthusiasts should at least show that their windfarms don't harm natural and human residents in their airflow shadow.
And I just went to a command window on my Windows box (I often leave one open) and typed shutdown /s /t 0. Then I had to power up again so I could post this.
I won't bother figuring out if init 0 still works on every version of UNIX.
This is silly anyway.
> You mean the Start menu used to Shut down Windows
As opposed to the init command used to shut down UNIX?
Me too. Back when I interviewed testers I had a favorite problem-solving question (my own invention) that I used to assess the ability of the candidate to get practical and realistic about the problem, not reply in abstractions. I deliberately stated the question (on the whiteboard) in a concrete way but was amazed at the abstracted waffling I got. Also at the inability to think beyond a box I (intentionally) created. There were about 4 different directions you could take; only one person ever found the truly lateral-thinking one. He got hired.
But I never let the problem take more than 20% of the interview time. Don't be misled by this book or some of the replies: watching the candidate think and talk about the problem is enormously valuable, but I also asked the most-proud and handle-conflict and 5-year questions. For candidates who need to code (devs and some testers) I asked them to write atoi() on the whiteboard; the results were usually embarrassing. For coders who claim to know C++, ask for an explanation of overrides/virtual/pure - again I was amazed at the ignorance out there.
BTW, I was hired as a tester and my very first interview started with being handed the pen and told to code atoi(). I first asked if I should account for leading whitespace and sign, was told no, and did them anyway. The interviewer then asked if I wanted a developer position instead (I said no).
How many people use printf() where puts() would do, just because K&R decided to do it the inefficient way?
(OK, if you want efficiency in a "production as opposed to sample" environment, you probably arrange things so that you can use write()).
It infected VMS and SunOS - it tried to run the code for both architectures on any given machine.
I think this was the first example of an attack using a BO to smash the stack - RTM danced on a cafeteria table when he figured it out, goes the legend.
Working at Prime, what I remember best is having to go to a room full of visiting customers the next morning to assure them their Primos boxes were safe. The hype level was high.
The big prize, and the price demanded by many on the (especially religious, I won't dignify them with the word Christian) Right, is the overturning of Roe vs Wade. And it's likely that Bush will be able to appoint enough justices to let that happen. It'll be an unspoken litmus test.
The philosophical underpinning of Roe vs Wade was that the Constitution contains a right to privacy. The way to undo the decision is to negate that understanding.
Do you get it? The collateral damage of this rage to repeal Roe will be a Supreme Court that says there is no Constitutional privacy right. Suddenly, there will be no Supreme Court backstop against the anti-privacy lawmakers. I fear that.
If the original AC poster of this is still listening, I'd like to talk to you about your experience. You can contact me at d_w_toone@hotmail.com. Thanks.
Interesting: remove eliminating and... well, you get my drift.
Me, I associate socialists with social contracts and minimal force, and I see libertarians as the most prone to advocate lethal force. Why are "libertarian" and "gun" so closely linked in my mind, I wonder?
Perhaps you are referring to the fact that Microsoft actually implements the relevant RFCs, and much of the UNIX world yet has to catch up because people like sticking with old versions of BIND.
For all the gory details, check out the February issue of Windows 2000 Magazine, which shows you how to use the two DNSes either alone or coexisting. Basically, get updated to BIND 8.2.2 first, and please do try to keep up.
MS had to try and trumpet the fact that this appears to have been run on Unix boxes
and
Microsoft is trying to turn this entire DoS affair into one gigantic media coup.
Where? What evidence do you have that Microsoft is doing anything, media-wise, about this?