* Advertisers want to know about the demographics of the people who will be visiting the site. It would be difficult (although not impossible) to develop this information for a honeypot.
Ok, how about a guarantee of location. I.e. "Hey, you're just 2 blocks from Bob's Coffee Shop. Mention this ad and get 10 cents off a mocha!"
If the weapon sending the beam is enormous (say 100 times the size of the target), it can withstand the "equal and opposite" force generated by object it's acting on.
Furthermore, if it's in space, it might just be sent to a higher orbit around the earth.
Actually, my linux (RedHat 7.3) installation will freeze occasionally. I find that it freezes when RealPlayer + many other things are running at once. (I think RealPlayer doesn't play nice with resources, but I'm just guessing.)
Has anybody else seen this behavior before, and if so, what was the cause? My computer is so stable otherwise...
Hey, we all need our little joys. I happen to enjoy being blasted out of my seat by a nice surround-sound DVD of The Matrix. I also like to watch the Iron Chef and some Baseball/Football/Basketball. I also read books and hike and mountain bike. And go out drinking with friends.
You know, it IS possible to have stuff you like AND do other things too.
This vulnerability has a simple patch. All modems are known to be vulnerable to ATH0 commands. You can disable command mode by making a change in the registry in windows.
Can Microsoft be held liable for selling a product with a LONG-KNOWN vulnerability and NOT fixing it with the WebTV auto-updating functionality. Assuming that it is easy to fix, of course, which I am (of course) assuming.
And by the way, YES, WebTV has always been able to auto-update.
The rest smacks of xenophobia. I don't buy into the common myth that style and naming conventions are critical to maintainability.
Seriously, some people use crappy style and variable names. At my last job, someone had written this complicated function using variables like: s1, s2, s3, d1, etc. It made it very difficult to figure out his code, and eventually, I had to change all the names just so I'd be able to read the code a month later.
It's much easier to fix bugs in someone else's code if you can read it. If you can't, you're screwed. You can call it xenophobia if you'd like, but honestly, I'm expressing my experience.
Anyone who can read a complicated C declaration isn't going to have any problem with non-politically-correct variable names or different styles.
Good straw-man. My problem isn't with non-politically-correct variable names (functionToFixBugInLinux() ). My problem is with unintentionally obfuscated code.
Style is arbitrary but functionality is not. If the code review process doesn't consider program correctness, it's a waste of time.
About program correctness: most of the time it's not worth the time required. And no, I'm not talking about security or crypto or compression or anything like that. Those sections of your code should be provably correct. But proving the correctness of your little GUI app is just silly.
On the other hand, style may be arbitrary to you, but for me, style is very important. The parts that bother me are when someone has written a bunch of button code with names like "b1, b2, b3". Or logic like a=((a=read(n)-4)?(b+5):(b+3)). Even if it works now, it will never be maintainable later.
# Code review. Code review is a power trip and best, and a drain on morale at worst. If a programmer cannot be trusted to develop excellent code, he should be replaced with somebody who can. It's a tight labor market on the developers' side, so incompetent programmers should be spending their time reading O'Reilley books instead of playing games and looking at porn in their parents' basement.
No, no, no. Code-review is VERY USEFUL. No, it won't catch architecture mistakes (necessarily). No, it won't catch design mistakes. Hopefully you already know how to design before you get your first software job.
What code-review catches is the annoying things that the best developers tend to think don't matter so much. Style-differences from company practices. Naming conventions not being followed. Poorly chosen variable-names. Lack of documentation.
In short, code-review makes your code more maintainable. Your company may not use it, but that doesn't make it useless.
"What, the US steel industry is inefficient? That's OK says Bush, we'll just impose huge trade barriers and flood Europe with cheap foreign steel to protect voters in the rust belt."
That reminds me of someone who said (JWZ?) " Linux is only free if your time is worth nothing ".
This is so untrue. I work at a software company, and I spend SO LITTLE time actually making my linux-based laptop work in day-to-day use and installation compared with my co-workers who use windows.
Add to that the fact that my little machine basically never crashes (although sometimes RealPlayer does), never gets viruses, never needs reinstalling, auto-updates through Ximian Gnome, and I'd say that I'm saving BOTH MY TIME AND MY COMPANY'S MONEY using Linux.
Hey, nobody said Linux may not be gratis, just libre and "cheaper than windows".
Yeah, well, they did buy WebTV long ago (rumor has it they bought it so they could kill WebTV's Java plans), and they released their own UltimateTV a couple of years ago. Both of these were PVRs...
By the way, you've made a mistake I see all the time. I don't know where people got the impression that a company is plural, but it's not. A company is a single entity. Your sentence should be phrased, "I think Microsoft was hoping..."
Actually, SlashChick, that depends on where you live. The British actually refer to companies in the plural. Supposedly that's standard in Australia as well.
If you look at the last table in the paper, it's clear that alpha projects have the most developers.
In fact, mature projects should have fewer developers since there's much less left to do. In many cases, it's likely that the one remaining developer can accept all the patches and fix all reported bugs themselves.
Furthermore, the most popular Open Source projects aren't even hosted on Sourceforge. Where's the data on Mozilla, OpenOffice.org, Apache, Bind, the Linux kernel?
Isn't sourceforge designed as an incubator for smaller projects?
Finally, suppose it's true that there are only a few developers on a list? That doesn't mean they're the only bug-finders, even. Where's the statistics on numbers of bugs found?
In short, is this just another example of sample-bias?
My god this is moronic - and not funny at all. Please, please, please can we keep holocaust jokes modded down? They will never be funny for relatives of the 6 million Jews or millions of others who were murdered, tortured, and forced into hard labor in this way.
Yeah, my youth was spent searching out text-based entertainment on the computer before the internet really took off. One day I discovered a BBS called The Bionic Dog. It was on FIDONet, of course.
One thing I found there, but haven't seen since, was "The Never-Ending Story", this conversation that was basically a group story-telling experience. Everybody had their nicknames. I remember one person was called the Artful Dodger and another Southern Cross.
Actually, yes, I have tried it. Web Folders does work. It mounts a WebDAV-enabled HTTP "directory" on your windows box. Don't believe me? Feel free to try it yourself with a free account on Xythos's free evaluation-server first before taking the plunge with your own mod_dav server.
I'd say what you need is an internet-enabled file system. Some might say NFS, and that seems like a fine solution.
On the other hand, if you have a computer that is always on, that can run Apache, you can have your own personal WebDAV server instead. Simply install mod_dav, and access it through mod_ssl, and have a secure web-based filesystem.
Better than NFS, you can mount it on Windows (through web folders), Linux (through davfs) and Mac OSX (through the native DAV file system client that is designed to run with iDisk).
NOTE: I work for Xythos software, and we make an enterprise-level WebDAV server called the Xythos WebFile Server. It's significantly more expensive than free, and we run in-house copies of the product (y'know eat your own dogfood), so that's where I keep my shared data, but if I didn't, I'd have mod_dav running right now.
The movies are the sole intellectual property of GEORGE LUCAS.
Ok, I agree, George Lucas owns those movies. But the ideas he put down on film in episodes 4-6 are our common experience. They are part of our culture. We know what happened in the first star wars trilogy and we know what didn't happen.
I'm from Boston, and I know that in 1986, the Red Sox lost the world series on a grounder through the legs of Bill Buckner. I also know that the Red Sox DID NOT win the world series, have not since 1918. As much as I wish it could be otherwise, this is the way the world is.
Fiction is otherwise, but it's still a shared common experience. We all know Luke lost his hand in episode 5. We all know Han was encased in carbonite. We all know Yoda dies in episode 6. These are as much facts for us as the 1986 world series or the Apollo moon landing or 9/11/2001 or Tiennanmen Square.
Now, suppose George Lucas could rewrite history. Would we approve? No, of course not. This is, in many ways, no different. Jar Jar Binks was not in "A New Hope". But now Lucas is saying "No, no, I can change history. I own this Intellectual Property and can do as I wish with it.". In short, yes, he CAN make a mockery of our common heritage. I, for one, certainly hope he doesn't.
Episodes 4-6 stand on their own as a saga of epic proportions. They live on in my mind as memories of happy days in the past, before the dark times, before Jar Jar. I only hope my children will have the opportunity to feel the same way.
Sun didn't invent the LeJOS system, but they certainly do like it.
Last year, a bunch of undergraduates and I participated in the Java Lego Mindstorm challenge, a particularly silly competition between Stanford, UC Berkeley, and UC Santa Cruz. Berkeley won with a money-sorter.
Anyway, working with the kit was really fun and leJOS worked well. Check out the photos:
http://www.sun.com/developers/evangcentral/chall en ge/photos.html
Or read about the event:
http://www.sun.com/developers/evangcentral/chall en ge/
LeJOS really is all it's cracked up to be. It provides a very familiar (for Java junkies) interface to the sensors, motors, etc. of the lego mindstorms kit. Of course, you still need some fine muscle control in order to be able to assemble the legos. The undergrads did that part.;-)
ON THE OTHER HAND, Mozilla succeeded because of JWZ. First, without JWZ pushing hard at the beginning, Mozilla would never have been released in the first place.
Furthermore, JWZ's high-profile exit had one major effect on Mozilla. It galvanized the community. I'm sure I'm not alone in seeing it as a highly-effective kick-in-the-pants that the community sorely needed.
Jamie got tired of waiting. I did too, to be honest. But then when he left the project, he had a point. The community hadn't yet formed around the project. Most of the bug-reports, bug-fixes, and code were being written BY NETSCAPE employees. Not members of the community. Months after Jamie's departure, things had changed for the better, but in the year just before, Jamie was right.
I suspect you'd like Chimera. It's got the nifty OSX interface but it renders through Gecko. The current release is numbered 0.2.7, but it seems to work pretty well most of the time. Anyway, it sure is pretty and installs through the OSX disk image paradigm.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, Mandrake 8.2 ships with KDE 2.2.2, which is much slower than 3.0.3
IMHO, of course...
* Advertisers want to know about the demographics of the people who will be visiting the site. It would be difficult (although not impossible) to develop this information for a honeypot.
Ok, how about a guarantee of location. I.e. "Hey, you're just 2 blocks from Bob's Coffee Shop. Mention this ad and get 10 cents off a mocha!"
Actually, it depends.
If the weapon sending the beam is enormous (say 100 times the size of the target), it can withstand the "equal and opposite" force generated by object it's acting on.
Furthermore, if it's in space, it might just be sent to a higher orbit around the earth.
Actually, my linux (RedHat 7.3) installation will freeze occasionally. I find that it freezes when RealPlayer + many other things are running at once. (I think RealPlayer doesn't play nice with resources, but I'm just guessing.)
Has anybody else seen this behavior before, and if so, what was the cause? My computer is so stable otherwise...
Right. You could worship shoes instead.
Hey, we all need our little joys. I happen to enjoy being blasted out of my seat by a nice surround-sound DVD of The Matrix. I also like to watch the Iron Chef and some Baseball/Football/Basketball. I also read books and hike and mountain bike. And go out drinking with friends.
You know, it IS possible to have stuff you like AND do other things too.
This vulnerability has a simple patch. All modems are known to be vulnerable to ATH0 commands. You can disable command mode by making a change in the registry in windows.
Can Microsoft be held liable for selling a product with a LONG-KNOWN vulnerability and NOT fixing it with the WebTV auto-updating functionality. Assuming that it is easy to fix, of course, which I am (of course) assuming.
And by the way, YES, WebTV has always been able to auto-update.
JPEG is a "de facto" standard, like the others you mention.. Which is to say it's in use, and will be used (probably) in the future.
On the other hand, it's ALSO currently a "de jure" standard, which is to say it has the "seal of approval" of a standards body, in this case, ISO.
There is a difference, and it has a lot to do with how standards bodies work and how governments relate to them.
The rest smacks of xenophobia. I don't buy into the common myth that style and naming conventions are critical to maintainability.
Seriously, some people use crappy style and variable names. At my last job, someone had written this complicated function using variables like: s1, s2, s3, d1, etc. It made it very difficult to figure out his code, and eventually, I had to change all the names just so I'd be able to read the code a month later.
It's much easier to fix bugs in someone else's code if you can read it. If you can't, you're screwed. You can call it xenophobia if you'd like, but honestly, I'm expressing my experience.
Anyone who can read a complicated C declaration isn't going to have any problem with non-politically-correct variable names or different styles.
Good straw-man. My problem isn't with non-politically-correct variable names (functionToFixBugInLinux() ). My problem is with unintentionally obfuscated code.
Style is arbitrary but functionality is not. If the code review process doesn't consider program correctness, it's a waste of time.
About program correctness: most of the time it's not worth the time required. And no, I'm not talking about security or crypto or compression or anything like that. Those sections of your code should be provably correct. But proving the correctness of your little GUI app is just silly.
On the other hand, style may be arbitrary to you, but for me, style is very important. The parts that bother me are when someone has written a bunch of button code with names like "b1, b2, b3". Or logic like a=((a=read(n)-4)?(b+5):(b+3)). Even if it works now, it will never be maintainable later.
# Code review. Code review is a power trip and best, and a drain on morale at worst. If a programmer cannot be trusted to develop excellent code, he should be replaced with somebody who can. It's a tight labor market on the developers' side, so incompetent programmers should be spending their time reading O'Reilley books instead of playing games and looking at porn in their parents' basement.
No, no, no. Code-review is VERY USEFUL. No, it won't catch architecture mistakes (necessarily). No, it won't catch design mistakes. Hopefully you already know how to design before you get your first software job.
What code-review catches is the annoying things that the best developers tend to think don't matter so much. Style-differences from company practices. Naming conventions not being followed. Poorly chosen variable-names. Lack of documentation.
In short, code-review makes your code more maintainable. Your company may not use it, but that doesn't make it useless.
"What, the US steel industry is inefficient? That's OK says Bush, we'll just impose huge trade barriers and flood Europe with cheap foreign steel to protect voters in the rust belt."
Actually, worse than that, it's making retrofitting the Bay Bridge much too expensive. I fear the next big earthquake around here could make All Tomorrow's Parties" a reality.
That reminds me of someone who said (JWZ?) " Linux is only free if your time is worth nothing ".
This is so untrue. I work at a software company, and I spend SO LITTLE time actually making my linux-based laptop work in day-to-day use and installation compared with my co-workers who use windows.
Add to that the fact that my little machine basically never crashes (although sometimes RealPlayer does), never gets viruses, never needs reinstalling, auto-updates through Ximian Gnome, and I'd say that I'm saving BOTH MY TIME AND MY COMPANY'S MONEY using Linux.
Hey, nobody said Linux may not be gratis, just libre and "cheaper than windows".
Yeah, well, they did buy WebTV long ago (rumor has it they bought it so they could kill WebTV's Java plans), and they released their own UltimateTV a couple of years ago. Both of these were PVRs...
I had a good experience buying memory that was advertised on Pricewatch.
Mushkin was who I actually bought from, and they make great memory.
www.mushkin.com
By the way, you've made a mistake I see all the time. I don't know where people got the impression that a company is plural, but it's not. A company is a single entity. Your sentence should be phrased, "I think Microsoft was hoping..."
Actually, SlashChick, that depends on where you live. The British actually refer to companies in the plural. Supposedly that's standard in Australia as well.
If you look at the last table in the paper, it's clear that alpha projects have the most developers.
In fact, mature projects should have fewer developers since there's much less left to do. In many cases, it's likely that the one remaining developer can accept all the patches and fix all reported bugs themselves.
Furthermore, the most popular Open Source projects aren't even hosted on Sourceforge. Where's the data on Mozilla, OpenOffice.org, Apache, Bind, the Linux kernel?
Isn't sourceforge designed as an incubator for smaller projects?
Finally, suppose it's true that there are only a few developers on a list? That doesn't mean they're the only bug-finders, even. Where's the statistics on numbers of bugs found?
In short, is this just another example of sample-bias?
My god this is moronic - and not funny at all. Please, please, please can we keep holocaust jokes modded down? They will never be funny for relatives of the 6 million Jews or millions of others who were murdered, tortured, and forced into hard labor in this way.
Yeah, my youth was spent searching out text-based entertainment on the computer before the internet really took off. One day I discovered a BBS called The Bionic Dog. It was on FIDONet, of course.
One thing I found there, but haven't seen since, was "The Never-Ending Story", this conversation that was basically a group story-telling experience. Everybody had their nicknames. I remember one person was called the Artful Dodger and another Southern Cross.
Just a memory now...
Nah, then nobody would be able to read my "css-descramble" t-shirt.
"the only advantage is carrying around 1 less gadget"
Heathen! Carrying around 1 less gadget is nirvana. Or maybe it only seems like nirvana when I'm carrying around:
Cell-phone, organizer, pager, fold-up-keyboard, bad of dice, slide-rule, and Gameboy Advance...
Actually, yes, I have tried it. Web Folders does work. It mounts a WebDAV-enabled HTTP "directory" on your windows box. Don't believe me? Feel free to try it yourself with a free account on Xythos's free evaluation-server first before taking the plunge with your own mod_dav server.
I'd say what you need is an internet-enabled file system. Some might say NFS, and that seems like a fine solution.
On the other hand, if you have a computer that is always on, that can run Apache, you can have your own personal WebDAV server instead. Simply install mod_dav, and access it through mod_ssl, and have a secure web-based filesystem.
Better than NFS, you can mount it on Windows (through web folders), Linux (through davfs) and Mac OSX (through the native DAV file system client that is designed to run with iDisk).
NOTE: I work for Xythos software, and we make an enterprise-level WebDAV server called the Xythos WebFile Server. It's significantly more expensive than free, and we run in-house copies of the product (y'know eat your own dogfood), so that's where I keep my shared data, but if I didn't, I'd have mod_dav running right now.
The movies are the sole intellectual property of GEORGE LUCAS.
Ok, I agree, George Lucas owns those movies. But the ideas he put down on film in episodes 4-6 are our common experience. They are part of our culture. We know what happened in the first star wars trilogy and we know what didn't happen.
I'm from Boston, and I know that in 1986, the Red Sox lost the world series on a grounder through the legs of Bill Buckner. I also know that the Red Sox DID NOT win the world series, have not since 1918. As much as I wish it could be otherwise, this is the way the world is.
Fiction is otherwise, but it's still a shared common experience. We all know Luke lost his hand in episode 5. We all know Han was encased in carbonite. We all know Yoda dies in episode 6. These are as much facts for us as the 1986 world series or the Apollo moon landing or 9/11/2001 or Tiennanmen Square.
Now, suppose George Lucas could rewrite history. Would we approve? No, of course not. This is, in many ways, no different. Jar Jar Binks was not in "A New Hope". But now Lucas is saying "No, no, I can change history. I own this Intellectual Property and can do as I wish with it.". In short, yes, he CAN make a mockery of our common heritage. I, for one, certainly hope he doesn't.
Episodes 4-6 stand on their own as a saga of epic proportions. They live on in my mind as memories of happy days in the past, before the dark times, before Jar Jar. I only hope my children will have the opportunity to feel the same way.
Sun didn't invent the LeJOS system, but they certainly do like it.
l en ge/photos.html
l en ge/
;-)
Last year, a bunch of undergraduates and I
participated in the Java Lego Mindstorm challenge, a particularly silly competition between Stanford, UC Berkeley, and UC Santa Cruz. Berkeley won with a money-sorter.
Anyway, working with the kit was really fun and leJOS worked well. Check out the photos:
http://www.sun.com/developers/evangcentral/chal
Or read about the event:
http://www.sun.com/developers/evangcentral/chal
LeJOS really is all it's cracked up to be. It provides a very familiar (for Java junkies) interface to the sensors, motors, etc. of the lego mindstorms kit. Of course, you still need some fine muscle control in order to be able to assemble the legos. The undergrads did that part.
Mozilla succeeded despite JWZ.
ON THE OTHER HAND, Mozilla succeeded because of JWZ. First, without JWZ pushing hard at the beginning, Mozilla would never have been released in the first place.
Furthermore, JWZ's high-profile exit had one major effect on Mozilla. It galvanized the community. I'm sure I'm not alone in seeing it as a highly-effective kick-in-the-pants that the community sorely needed.
Jamie got tired of waiting. I did too, to be honest. But then when he left the project, he had a point. The community hadn't yet formed around the project. Most of the bug-reports, bug-fixes, and code were being written BY NETSCAPE employees. Not members of the community. Months after Jamie's departure, things had changed for the better, but in the year just before, Jamie was right.
I suspect you'd like Chimera. It's got the nifty OSX interface but it renders through Gecko. The current release is numbered 0.2.7, but it seems to work pretty well most of the time. Anyway, it sure is pretty and installs through the OSX disk image paradigm.
Check it out at:
http://chimera.mozdev.org/