Yeah, I think Gosling doesn't understand how to use the press. You don't talk *to* an interviewer, on their (how low can you go?) level. You talk *through* them, use them as a bully pulpit to reach your target audience.
(Or perhaps he's a Kantian, and is obligated to treat all moral patients as ends rather than as means.)
Good post! Most serious readers will find Wampler's comparison more illuminating than Gosling's off-the-cuff boosterism, referenced by this slashdot topic. Whether I agree or disagree with Gosling's opinions in the interview -- in fact, I mostly agree -- they remain just that, almost pure op ed, rather than substantive comment. That's not a criticism of Gosling's (presumed) honest expression of his opinions, just a comment on the practical usefulness of the article.
It seems worth pointing out that it is "illegal" (in the sense that that Microsoft owns the law) to do this on Linux. Really. Not kidding. Read the license.
So include a $5 bill in your letter saying "Here's $5 to vote against this bill. If you don't want to vote against the bill, kindly return the $5 in the enclosed SASE."
Run up their support costs until they start using a non-broken proxy cache. Technical solutions are nice, but they only fix the problem for *you*. If you care about your peers, and the community of users, solving the problem for *everyone* is much to be preferred. Most users won't even understand that they are being screwed by the ISP. They depend on you to resolve the issue. Keep calling support until they fix it.
If I didn't trust my wife, I wouldn't have married her. The government, on the other hand, was imposed upon me against my will and is known to commit mass murder on a whim.
This is a bizarre interpretation. MS introduces an incompatible extension to a standardized protocol (as usual) and then when someone doesn't implement that proprietary extension, you fault them for it? I think you are using the word "fault" in some new monkeyboy sense.
As is so very typical of Microsoft's "innovation", it is the pitiable consumers of MS software who suffer, and nobody gains except MS. Because of the prevalence of IE on corp desktops (declining, yes, but still a substantial prevalence), they can use this as an opportunity to push IIS, which implements the proprietary version of digest authentication compatibly with IE.
Actually, if there is a conflict, the satellite people should give up the frequency, because it is far more important to the public interest that 802.11x continue to grow and flourish than that any given satellite band be proof from interference.
OTOH, perhaps that is the complainant's intent: They really want a new frequency allocation, and just aren't willing to say so outright, for some obscure reason.
Hey, got any online docs on the SKIM arch/design/impl? I'm really getting hot about the idea of hanging one of these off of each column of a DRAM. Mail me at alk at pobox dot com, if you wish.
Ok, I take that back: Actually, you could implement this thing with, what, maybe 1000 transistors? It's the ultimate RISC CPU! You could put one of them on every column in your DRAMs, right on the silicon, so that latency to memory would be nigh zero. The resulting machine would be just like a CM-1, with no router. Add a router, and *bang* you've got the ultimate fine-grained MPP.
>If you have code that's beautifully >reusable, but I can rewrite the same features from >scratch each time faster, then other things being >equal I am more productive than you.
But other things aren't equal. Now there is twice as much code to maintain, duplicated business logic that has to be kept synchronized, etc.
>Overgeneralising code in the pursuit of a phantom >"reuse" goal is a major problem...
Agreed. We call it overengineering. No abstraction should be created that does not contribute directly to fulfilling a requirement. This is where the XP mindset shines: Never do anything you don't have to do yet. Future "needs" rarely materialize in the anticipated form.
To carry my basic software toolkit, I have a 200 CD folio which is packed. I have to carry this 10-lb bag with me across the country all too often. A recordable flexible DVD folio with the same data would come in closer to 1/2 pound, and tuck into my laptop case. I'm hoping this progresses to DVD recordable in short order!
In the near-term, yes. But if the distributors don't see demand for the boxes, they won't put them on the shelves. If they aren't on the shelves, Mandrake loses potential new customers.
On the other hand, if retail sales aren't doing the trick now, why should they ever? If they can't we're all better off with a pledge-drive model just like PBS.
Thanks for commenting. Clearly my evaluation overlooked important aspects of Vesta's operation. What I took to be a deficiency, in light of your comment, is actually a strength: The lack of local history storage in remote CVS clients has often been a problem for me in disconnected operation.
I'm definitely going to delve further into Vesta. I hope moderators will take note of the parent, and mod it up, so that other evaluators will take note of Xorian's point.
Vesta requires NFS export from the server to all clients. This is not a feasible mode of operation for a typical distributed development team, with some users on 53k dialups with dynamic IPs. It means you have to put the source server outside the firewall, for example, which is just a non- starter as far as I am concerned.
The SSSCA is, on its face, unconstitutional, as well as being gross folly with regard to its impact on the economic development of the nation, and it is a mark of rank corruption within the Senate that such a bill should ever have been proposed. It is the most dramatic case of my knowledge illustrating the desperate need of campaign finance reform, pitting the interests of the people of the United States against the undue influence of big-spending special interests within the Senate. I will support each of these points in turn:
Unconstitutionality:
The SSSCA, like the DMCA before it, suppresses the creative and political expression of the academic and engineering communities by prohibiting the development and distribution of expressive symbolic speech which describes the construction of devices which may be used to circumvent the devices mandated by the bill. Furthermore, it places an unfunded mandate on industry and micromanages the operations of industry by those same provisions, a mandate in which the state has no evident, much less compelling, interest. Therefore it constitutes an uncompensated confiscation without due process.
Economic folly:
The SSSCA would transform all general-purpose computing devices into the instruments of the will of a few foreign corporations, and create an enormous disincentive to the purchase of post-SSSCA devices. In this way, it would direct funds out of the US, to other nations, and simultaneously depress the domestic market for general-purpose computing devices. Moreover, by reducing the prevalence of general-purpose computing devices, the SSSCA will prevent continuing technological innovation as well as suppressing all derivative markets.
Contrary to the public interest:
The beneficiaries of the SSSCA are primarily, although not exclusively, a small number of foreign corporations, while the technology and media consumers who would be constrained by the bill, if passed, are exclusively U.S. citizens. Like the DMCA and the NET Act before it, the SSSCA is an incursion against the principle of Fair Use. This is closely related to the evisceration of the public domain by the infamous DMCA and Sony Bono act before it, and demonstrates clearly that the interests of the Senators and Representatives who act as paid agents of foreign corporations are directly opposed to the interest of the public, whose 'domain' is being ravaged by slash-and-burn tactics.
While the very fact that such a vile and corrupt bill could be seriously entertained is a tremendously discouraging and disillusioning truth, I for one will not be discouraged to the point of withdrawal from the political process by such evils, but will instead act the more aggressively to remove from office by any means necessary those public servants who would suck the blood from our veins, and crush us with servitude to their foreign masters.
It's called "innocent until proven guilty". In the U.S. we have a tradition that this is an inherent human right, not a priviledge granted by the goverment, revokable as expedient. Of course that tradition does not exist in Canada, historical british statesmen such as Wilberforce notwithstanding.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I think Gosling doesn't understand how to use
the press. You don't talk *to* an interviewer, on
their (how low can you go?) level. You talk
*through* them, use them as a bully pulpit to reach
your target audience.
(Or perhaps he's a Kantian, and is obligated to
treat all moral patients as ends rather than as
means.)
While there probably already are rogue ports,
whether we see them or not depends on who we know
and how hard we look.
Mono is the legit path.
http://www.go-mono.com
Good post! Most serious readers will find Wampler's
comparison more illuminating than Gosling's
off-the-cuff boosterism, referenced by this
slashdot topic. Whether I agree or disagree with
Gosling's opinions in the interview -- in fact,
I mostly agree -- they remain just that, almost
pure op ed, rather than substantive comment.
That's not a criticism of Gosling's (presumed)
honest expression of his opinions, just a comment
on the practical usefulness of the article.
> Why would he be relieved that MS puts out
> mediocre stuff?
Two words: "Stock options".
Here's another, perhaps less mercenary, but also
less rational, explanation:
Many anarchists vote for the worst candidate, on
the theory that when gov't becomes bad enough, it
will be eliminated.
> If you've got a spare FreeBSD or Windows XP ...
It seems worth pointing out that it is "illegal"
(in the sense that that Microsoft owns the law)
to do this on Linux. Really. Not kidding. Read
the license.
Yes, and C# is certainly a mockery:))
Gosling doesn't run *release* JDKs, silly goose.
He runs alphas. There's always an alpha inside sun.
- There's really no difference between an API and
a web user-interface, except stability.
- Making a screen-scraper is a piss-poor OSS
project, because it would be broken most of the
time because of (1).
-
penetration. The rest of the WebServices market
will be pure SOAP, mostly Java-backed.
If a brokerage made me an API, they'd get my
business in a flash.
So include a $5 bill in your letter saying
"Here's $5 to vote against this bill. If you
don't want to vote against the bill, kindly
return the $5 in the enclosed SASE."
Because poor people suck.
Run up their support costs until they start using
a non-broken proxy cache. Technical solutions are
nice, but they only fix the problem for *you*. If
you care about your peers, and the community of
users, solving the problem for *everyone* is much
to be preferred. Most users won't even understand
that they are being screwed by the ISP. They
depend on you to resolve the issue. Keep calling
support until they fix it.
If I didn't trust my wife, I wouldn't have
married her. The government, on the other hand,
was imposed upon me against my will and is known
to commit mass murder on a whim.
This is a bizarre interpretation. MS introduces
an incompatible extension to a standardized
protocol (as usual) and then when someone doesn't
implement that proprietary extension, you fault
them for it? I think you are using the word
"fault" in some new monkeyboy sense.
As is so very typical of Microsoft's "innovation",
it is the pitiable consumers of MS software who
suffer, and nobody gains except MS. Because of the
prevalence of IE on corp desktops (declining, yes,
but still a substantial prevalence), they can
use this as an opportunity to push IIS, which
implements the proprietary version of digest
authentication compatibly with IE.
Actually, if there is a conflict, the satellite
people should give up the frequency, because it
is far more important to the public interest that
802.11x continue to grow and flourish than that
any given satellite band be proof from interference.
OTOH, perhaps that is the complainant's intent:
They really want a new frequency allocation, and
just aren't willing to say so outright, for some
obscure reason.
Hey, got any online docs on the SKIM
arch/design/impl? I'm really getting hot about
the idea of hanging one of these off of each column
of a DRAM. Mail me at alk at pobox dot com, if
you wish.
Yeah, *one* would be slow, but...
Imagine a BEOWULF CLUSTER of these babies!
Ok, I take that back: Actually, you could implement
this thing with, what, maybe 1000 transistors? It's
the ultimate RISC CPU! You could put one of them
on every column in your DRAMs, right on the silicon,
so that latency to memory would be nigh zero.
The resulting machine would be just like a CM-1, with
no router. Add a router, and *bang* you've got
the ultimate fine-grained MPP.
>If you have code that's beautifully
>reusable, but I can rewrite the same features from
>scratch each time faster, then other things being
>equal I am more productive than you.
But other things aren't equal. Now there is twice
as much code to maintain, duplicated business logic
that has to be kept synchronized, etc.
>Overgeneralising code in the pursuit of a phantom
>"reuse" goal is a major problem...
Agreed. We call it overengineering. No
abstraction should be created that does not
contribute directly to fulfilling a requirement.
This is where the XP mindset shines: Never do
anything you don't have to do yet. Future "needs"
rarely materialize in the anticipated form.
To carry my basic software toolkit, I have a 200 CD
folio which is packed. I have to carry this 10-lb
bag with me across the country all too often. A
recordable flexible DVD folio with the same data
would come in closer to 1/2 pound, and tuck into
my laptop case. I'm hoping this progresses to
DVD recordable in short order!
In the near-term, yes. But if the distributors
don't see demand for the boxes, they won't put
them on the shelves. If they aren't on the shelves,
Mandrake loses potential new customers.
On the other hand, if retail sales aren't doing the
trick now, why should they ever? If they can't
we're all better off with a pledge-drive model just
like PBS.
Use their binary? You must be joking, right?
Just run some random binary code I found on the
Internet? You're a terrorist, aren't you?
Thanks for commenting. Clearly my evaluation
overlooked important aspects of Vesta's operation.
What I took to be a deficiency, in light of your
comment, is actually a strength: The lack of local
history storage in remote CVS clients has often been
a problem for me in disconnected operation.
I'm definitely going to delve further into Vesta.
I hope moderators will take note of the parent, and
mod it up, so that other evaluators will take note
of Xorian's point.
Vesta requires NFS export from the server to all
clients. This is not a feasible mode of operation
for a typical distributed development team, with
some users on 53k dialups with dynamic IPs. It
means you have to put the source server outside
the firewall, for example, which is just a non-
starter as far as I am concerned.
CVS is still king.
Cost: $0
The SSSCA is, on its face, unconstitutional, as well as being gross folly with regard to its impact on the economic development of the nation, and it is a mark of rank corruption within the Senate that such a bill should ever
have been proposed. It is the most dramatic case of my knowledge illustrating
the desperate need of campaign finance reform, pitting the interests of the
people of the United States against the undue influence of big-spending special interests within the Senate. I will support each of these points in turn:
Unconstitutionality:
The SSSCA, like the DMCA before it, suppresses the creative and political expression of the academic and engineering communities by prohibiting the
development and distribution of expressive symbolic speech which describes
the construction of devices which may be used to circumvent the devices mandated by the bill. Furthermore, it places an unfunded mandate on industry
and micromanages the operations of industry by those same provisions, a mandate in which the state has no evident, much less compelling, interest.
Therefore it constitutes an uncompensated confiscation without due process.
Economic folly:
The SSSCA would transform all general-purpose computing devices into the instruments of the will of a few foreign corporations, and create an enormous disincentive to the purchase of post-SSSCA devices. In this way, it would direct funds out of the US, to other nations, and simultaneously depress the
domestic market for general-purpose computing devices. Moreover, by reducing the prevalence of general-purpose computing devices, the SSSCA will prevent continuing technological innovation as well as suppressing all derivative markets.
Contrary to the public interest:
The beneficiaries of the SSSCA are primarily, although not exclusively, a small number of foreign corporations, while the technology and media consumers who would be constrained by the bill, if passed, are exclusively
U.S. citizens. Like the DMCA and the NET Act before it, the SSSCA is an incursion against the principle of Fair Use. This is closely related to the
evisceration of the public domain by the infamous DMCA and Sony Bono act before it, and demonstrates clearly that the interests of the Senators and Representatives who act as paid agents of foreign corporations are directly opposed to the interest of the public, whose 'domain' is being ravaged by slash-and-burn tactics.
While the very fact that such a vile and corrupt bill could be seriously entertained is a tremendously discouraging and disillusioning truth, I for one will not be discouraged to the point of withdrawal from the political process by such evils, but will instead act the more aggressively to remove from office by any means necessary those public servants who would suck the blood from our veins, and crush us with servitude to their foreign masters.
Sincerely,
My Name,
My Address
> carte blanche
It's called "innocent until proven guilty". In the
U.S. we have a tradition that this is an inherent
human right, not a priviledge granted by the
goverment, revokable as expedient. Of course that
tradition does not exist in Canada, historical
british statesmen such as Wilberforce notwithstanding.