"Use MS Software and go to Jail"
NYTimes
After the Justice Department takes those site operators to court for some kind of negligence (they did have a fix available).
Interesting that the MSNBC story about/. was in the "Business" section while this MSNBC story about Thomas Jefferson's concerns about monopolies is located in the "Opinions" section.
Just struck me as funny.
Eco-Terrorists = Communist/Socialist front...
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 1
It's been my belief for a while now, that extreme environmentalists are using the environment as a front to promote a socialist agenda. A couple of examples:
Even more moderate groups like the Union of Concerned Scientists betray socialist views. In a PBS Frontlinestory on Genetically Modified foods, Jane Rissler denounced claims that GM foods would help feed the hungry in poor countries by saying:
"The biggest problem behind hungry people is lack of money" which, if believed, lays a nice foundation for redistributing wealth. Of course, most people believe that hungry people need food, not money.
The Anarchist Golfing Association (Anarchist being another name for Libertarian Socialists) is nothing more than an attack on what is viewed as the capitalist's favorite pasttime.
Some of the "anti-capitalist" views by environmentalists are likely attributed to the fact that industry does pollute, but some of these groups go beyond reasonable concern.
The Yahoo News story actually says that Bush asked federal employees to "cut back" on email, not to "send less" email. Two very different things.
With the way you worded it, you made it sound as if Bush thought having the computer on (and sitting there), did not use as much power as having the computer on AND sending email.
The actual wording indicates that Bush wanted people to use their computers less by cutting back on the time they spend in email. Seems reasonable to me.
"ALso go to some of the l33t rul3z crack3r irc chat rooms and ask some of them what they about linux vs NT in security and most will say unix can be secure but most on the web are not and NT is quite secure but not really stable"
Isn't that like saying my Ford Taurus is dangerous because my neighbor drove his into a tree?
Any of the out-of-box security arguments are simple just FUD esp. when they are talking about business applications. The fact is that ANY business application of any software requires an expert (in-house or consultant) before people should roll it out. It should be safe to assume that those experts would know how to implement the system in a secure fasion on whatever platform you are talking about (if they are truly experts).
Where GNU/Linux shines in this arena is that the security problems are identified and fixed earlier than proprietary OSes. This breeds a culture in OpenSource where everyone takes some responsibility for security.
This point was driven home to me when I took some code I had written years back and compiled on a newer RedHat system. The GNU compiler warned me that I was using wgets() and it might present a security problem because of buffer overruns. I've never had VC++ warn me about any possible security problems.
Is it possible I'm the only one here who tinks that Bakula is one of the worse actors of any series, but esp. a sci-fi series? I tried, and I mean tried to like that crappy show (had a girlfriend at the time who liked it, but then again she also liked Murphy Brown) and could never get past the poor acting of Bakula.
Now, let me get this straight, the geek engineers are the heros behind the military now, while the jock hot-shot pilots are going to be sitting on the sidelines.
Let's see you make fun of my pocket protector now fly-boy!
Likleyhood that the problem computer is Windows...
on
Space Station BSOD
·
· Score: 1
This document describes the Windows NT/95 based Station Support Computer (SCC) system. (see also this site for details on the computer systems and software aboard.)
This page details just some of the problems the crew has had with the SCC and this quote sums it up:
SHIP'S LOG: NARRATIVE OF JOINT OPS 08-09 DEC ... Carlos trying to load the SSC upgrade for the FPP experiment. No go. He spends about 3 hours on this and finally gets it to load after multiple tries. This very consistent with our earlier SSC experience-and one of the big reasons we try to minimize computer reconfigurations.
While these don't offer any hard evidence that the problem is Windows, having read the station logs, I could certainly understand why/. editors might jump to this conclusion.
How vacuous. As one who believes in the theory of evolution, I eagerly clicked on the article that claimed to have found indisputable proof that human evolution is how we came to be. How disappointed I was to find the "proof" offered by Arthur Caplan can be summed up:
"Rah, Rah His Boom Bah, Creationism is dead! It's dead because the proof is indisputable and beyond serious doubt. The mapping of the human genome offers indisputable proof that we evolved from bacteria. Did I mention the proof is indisputable? (BTW, Those who question the previous and current indisputable proof can be dismissed as religious nuts. Pay them no heed.)"
I propose a new standard for online news sources: anytime a journalist (such as Arthur Caplan) makes such a grand claim, perhaps they should offer links to the expert opinions, works and proofs that support the claim. without the proof, journalists appear to be nothing more than ideological cheerleaders.
-bk
I think the best twist would be to replace Mulder with Scully as the "believer". After all she's seen, she has to be convinced sometime. Perhaps the straw that breaks the camels back is Mulder being abducted and Scully goes on a hunt to find him. If this were the case, Scully's replacement could be just about anyone as a new "skeptic".
Besides, anything that shows more of Scully and less of Mulder is a good thing.
I had a conversation with a Microsoftie (he's in their testing department for Win 2000) a year ago about this language. When the first grumblings of this project appeared (it was then called "Cool") I accused MS of simply spreading FUD because I didn't think they were stupid enough to try a platform dependent version of Java. His response made it very clear that MS truly believes people are interested in Java because of the language features and could care less about "the pipe dream" of platform independence. Hrm, maybe they are stupid enough to try this. As far as the so called "pip dream", it's funny how I've written simple Java applications and servlets that run great on Netware, Windows, Solaris and Linux. The only problems I've had, were with applets trying to run on the MS JVM in IE. Coincidence?
Isn't this really just an issue of semantics? What the Prof. is saying, is that a formal specification will define what security is. While this may work in the academic world, REAL security is only proven over time in application. -bk
"An argument often heard in the open source community is that people participate in open source projects because... they want to be 'part of a team.' While this argument may contain a grain of truth, it is puzzling as it stands; for, it is not clear why programmers who are part of a commercial team could not enjoy the same intellectual challenges and the same team interaction as those engaged in open source development."
Through my experience, I've noticed that a significant percentage of commercial developers are barely qualified for their job. This has become more so int he current developer shortage. These are people who have no real love for programming, but rather view it as a "job". In the open source community, you have people who are programming because they love to program. This is not a job, it's a hobby. As a wise man once said. "People are defined by what they do in their spare time, not by what they do in their job." There are no nine to fivers in the open source community.
Interaction in a team environment with the nine to fivers causes more frustration than satisfaction.
Slashdot Mirror
"Use MS Software and go to Jail" NYTimes After the Justice Department takes those site operators to court for some kind of negligence (they did have a fix available).
Interesting that the MSNBC story about /. was in the "Business" section while this MSNBC story about Thomas Jefferson's concerns about monopolies is located in the "Opinions" section.
Just struck me as funny.
A major goal of the Earth Liberation Front is "to speed up the collapse of industry, to scare the rich".
Even more moderate groups like the Union of Concerned Scientists betray socialist views. In a PBS Frontline story on Genetically Modified foods, Jane Rissler denounced claims that GM foods would help feed the hungry in poor countries by saying: "The biggest problem behind hungry people is lack of money" which, if believed, lays a nice foundation for redistributing wealth. Of course, most people believe that hungry people need food, not money.
The Anarchist Golfing Association (Anarchist being another name for Libertarian Socialists) is nothing more than an attack on what is viewed as the capitalist's favorite pasttime.
Some of the "anti-capitalist" views by environmentalists are likely attributed to the fact that industry does pollute, but some of these groups go beyond reasonable concern.
-bk
The Yahoo News story actually says that Bush asked federal employees to "cut back" on email, not to "send less" email. Two very different things.
With the way you worded it, you made it sound as if Bush thought having the computer on (and sitting there), did not use as much power as having the computer on AND sending email.
The actual wording indicates that Bush wanted people to use their computers less by cutting back on the time they spend in email. Seems reasonable to me.
I also suspect that Bush has a fairly good idea as to how much time an average person could waste reading non-essential email from friends/family.
"ALso go to some of the l33t rul3z crack3r irc chat rooms and ask some of them what they about linux vs NT in security and most will say unix can be secure but most on the web are not and NT is quite secure but not really stable"
Isn't that like saying my Ford Taurus is dangerous because my neighbor drove his into a tree?
Any of the out-of-box security arguments are simple just FUD esp. when they are talking about business applications. The fact is that ANY business application of any software requires an expert (in-house or consultant) before people should roll it out. It should be safe to assume that those experts would know how to implement the system in a secure fasion on whatever platform you are talking about (if they are truly experts).
Where GNU/Linux shines in this arena is that the security problems are identified and fixed earlier than proprietary OSes. This breeds a culture in OpenSource where everyone takes some responsibility for security.
This point was driven home to me when I took some code I had written years back and compiled on a newer RedHat system. The GNU compiler warned me that I was using wgets() and it might present a security problem because of buffer overruns. I've never had VC++ warn me about any possible security problems.
This is probably too late, but I'll try any way.
Is it possible I'm the only one here who tinks that Bakula is one of the worse actors of any series, but esp. a sci-fi series? I tried, and I mean tried to like that crappy show (had a girlfriend at the time who liked it, but then again she also liked Murphy Brown) and could never get past the poor acting of Bakula.
Now, let me get this straight, the geek engineers are the heros behind the military now, while the jock hot-shot pilots are going to be sitting on the sidelines.
Let's see you make fun of my pocket protector now fly-boy!
This document describes the Windows NT/95 based Station Support Computer (SCC) system. (see also this site for details on the computer systems and software aboard.)
This page details just some of the problems the crew has had with the SCC and this quote sums it up:
SHIP'S LOG: NARRATIVE OF JOINT OPS 08-09 DEC
...
Carlos trying to load the SSC upgrade for the FPP experiment. No go. He spends about 3 hours on this and finally gets it to load after multiple tries. This very consistent with our earlier SSC experience-and one of the big reasons we try to minimize computer reconfigurations.
While these don't offer any hard evidence that the problem is Windows, having read the station logs, I could certainly understand why /. editors might jump to this conclusion.
How vacuous. As one who believes in the theory of evolution, I eagerly clicked on the article that claimed to have found indisputable proof that human evolution is how we came to be. How disappointed I was to find the "proof" offered by Arthur Caplan can be summed up: "Rah, Rah His Boom Bah, Creationism is dead! It's dead because the proof is indisputable and beyond serious doubt. The mapping of the human genome offers indisputable proof that we evolved from bacteria. Did I mention the proof is indisputable? (BTW, Those who question the previous and current indisputable proof can be dismissed as religious nuts. Pay them no heed.)" I propose a new standard for online news sources: anytime a journalist (such as Arthur Caplan) makes such a grand claim, perhaps they should offer links to the expert opinions, works and proofs that support the claim. without the proof, journalists appear to be nothing more than ideological cheerleaders. -bk
I think the best twist would be to replace Mulder with Scully as the "believer". After all she's seen, she has to be convinced sometime. Perhaps the straw that breaks the camels back is Mulder being abducted and Scully goes on a hunt to find him. If this were the case, Scully's replacement could be just about anyone as a new "skeptic".
Besides, anything that shows more of Scully and less of Mulder is a good thing.
-bk
I had a conversation with a Microsoftie (he's in their testing department for Win 2000) a year ago about this language. When the first grumblings of this project appeared (it was then called "Cool") I accused MS of simply spreading FUD because I didn't think they were stupid enough to try a platform dependent version of Java. His response made it very clear that MS truly believes people are interested in Java because of the language features and could care less about "the pipe dream" of platform independence. Hrm, maybe they are stupid enough to try this. As far as the so called "pip dream", it's funny how I've written simple Java applications and servlets that run great on Netware, Windows, Solaris and Linux. The only problems I've had, were with applets trying to run on the MS JVM in IE. Coincidence?
Isn't this really just an issue of semantics? What the Prof. is saying, is that a formal specification will define what security is. While this may work in the academic world, REAL security is only proven over time in application. -bk
Footnote 13 on page 18 of the paper says this:
... they want to be 'part of a team.' While this argument may contain a grain of truth, it is puzzling as it stands; for, it is not clear why programmers who are part of a commercial team could not enjoy the same intellectual challenges and the same team interaction as those engaged in open source development."
"An argument often heard in the open source community is that people participate in open source projects because
Through my experience, I've noticed that a significant percentage of commercial developers are barely qualified for their job. This has become more so int he current developer shortage. These are people who have no real love for programming, but rather view it as a "job". In the open source community, you have people who are programming because they love to program. This is not a job, it's a hobby. As a wise man once said. "People are defined by what they do in their spare time, not by what they do in their job." There are no nine to fivers in the open source community.
Interaction in a team environment with the nine to fivers causes more frustration than satisfaction.
-bk