That's fine. And the next time your car breaks down, you should continue to recommend that make and model of car to your friends. When they get unhappy because it doesn't work, tell them they have no right to complain because the company who made the car didn't make all the parts, and it breaking down isn't the car maker's fault.
I said that I don't care whose fault it is. I care what works and what doesn't. You have not only misunderstood this, but somehow interpreted it backwards if you can translate it as "if a piece of Windows software, that Microsoft didn't write, is broken it's necessarily Microsoft's fault". The whole point is that no one cares whose fault it is.
Then how do you grade it? These students are new to programming, and everyone's pseudocode will look different. What do you do if you're not sure what someone's pseudocode is supposed to mean. Everyone is going to use different symbols or syntax and you're going to have to figure out what they might have meant. Similarly, if you write the test questions in pseudocode, some people will make poor assumptions about how the "code" works. In practice, the whole exam being pseudocode would mean that students would end up learning "AP standard pseudocode", which is a waste of time. You might as well have them just learn a language and test them in that.
Just because it's in a specific langauge doesn't mean that the exam is about the language. It does test general progrmaming concepts and so forth, just like you want. It does not test nit-picky details of java syntax. I admit that I'm assuming the style of the test is the same as when I took it in pascal. But even if it's not, the point remains that having a standard language for questions that require code doesn't mean the tast has to be a Java test rather than a CS test.
Just because it's by hand doesn't mean you couldn't have "references and resources". Many of my college programming tests were by hand, but were open-book. The AP is closed-book, though, right? It's been a while for me (good ol' pascal. Nothing beats that).
Your complaint is that there is no pre-built binary for your sound-card. This is not a fault of Linux
Fault? I used to think that when linux apologists said this they knew it was bullshit, but I've started to suspect otherwise. A computer is a tool. A piece of software is a tool. If a tool doesn't do what I want, I don't use it. Instead, I get a tool that does. And I certainly don't sit there with a broken tool and say "oh, but it's not their fault, so I don't mind" or "if they had more market share, I'm sure this would work, and that's almost the same as me having a computer that can play sound".
It's still nice to see a large non-tech organization come out and say, "Hey, this is crap."
True, but perhaps they are saying this because they have a financial interest in cheaply available software, rather than out of the goodness of their hearts? I don't think this is a case of a large organization that "can't be wrong" (downthread) or of them really believing it's a "false claim" so much as businesses protecting their business interests.
Maybe I should have a little more faith in giant, giant trade organizations to always act in the way that's best for the world and for justice rather than for what will fill their wallets.
It never had anything to with security save for in name and spin.
Actually it did (or maybe "does" now that the story has been corrected). The idea is that your computer will only run cryptographically signed code. This means that you can't get a virus, or if you do get one, it will be signed and it will thus be known who the author is (and their signing certificate could be revoked so others won't run the virus). Today, no one knows for sure who wrote a piece of code that's running on your computer. Good if you want to write illegal tools, etc., bad if you want the security of having unsafe code blocked (like for a business who cares more about uptime and protection against viruses than being able to crack DVDs).
Here here and amen! When looking for programmers, I don't care as much about your specific experience as your ability to think
I agree. A large part of the reason employers want to see that you have done well at math and computer science in school is that it shows that you are smart and good at solving problmes. This isn't to imply that everyone with a degree fits this description, but you have to play the odds, and someone who has a strong math and cs background and has been successful in those areas is probably going to be better at solving the problems your company needs solved than someone who has read a "how to" book and knows how to copy and paste from code examples.
This is the same as in many other areas. For example, law schools are impressed by students who have done well in their classes in a difficult major, even if this doesn't give them skills directly applicable to the practice of law.
It means that tin-foil-hat crowd who were posting as recently as yesterday about how microsoft was conspiring to bring about "the end of computing as we know it" and intended to somehow create laws to make untrusted operating systems unable to load on any legal hardware, etc., etc., were complete idiots. As most of us already knew.
The patents describe the technologies, not how to implement them. And what good does it do you, anyway? If you know how something is done but are legally prevented from implementing it, it might as well be closed
I usually don't criticize people on slashdot for trying to lecture on topics about which they are very uninformed, because if I started doing that it would keep me busy all day, every day.
But honestly, if you don't even know what a patent is, you should probably find out before butting in to these discussions.
The only way an application could do that under linux is if they had some code like:
It can do it by requiring write access to somewhere normal users won't (or at least shouldn't) have access to, like/bin
I could take a regular user in Linux, and with enough screwing around, turn him into root. I can give him permission to do _anything_ in the system. You can't do that in windows. The feature just isn't there.
Is this a joke? You list one of the major areas where even unix advocates admit windows is better and then say it "isn't there" in windows? In Unix, your only options are to set read, write or execute for the owner, the world or the "group". That's it. On Windows, you can use ACLs to specify exactly what permissions every individual user has from a much richer list of choices, and you can ACL any directory, file or even an individual regkey.
IMHO _ALL_ inbound traffic should be blocked, if someone tries to make an inbound connection, it should be prompted (Allow Inbound to: xxx port xxx application - yes/no/always/only_from_that_host -> as most firewalls will allow set up of).
Probably. Given that that business model is working well for Apple with iTunes/ iPod, it shouldn't be surprising that others would try a similar strategy.
you can graduate from a Purdue CS curiculum and honestly can't admin a Linux machine, you may have mis-invested your tuition dollars
Or perhaps he spent his time and tuition money on learning Computer Science? That's what I did when I got my CS degree (not at purdue). I think if you went to school to study cs and instead learned how to be a network admin, it may be you who wasted your tuition. Rather than speding your time learning specific technical facts that will be obselete in a few years anyway and that you could easily teach yourself, like where YaST networking configuration is, perhaps you would be better off getting an actual education while in school.
Slashdot Mirror
That's fine. And the next time your car breaks down, you should continue to recommend that make and model of car to your friends. When they get unhappy because it doesn't work, tell them they have no right to complain because the company who made the car didn't make all the parts, and it breaking down isn't the car maker's fault.
I said that I don't care whose fault it is. I care what works and what doesn't. You have not only misunderstood this, but somehow interpreted it backwards if you can translate it as "if a piece of Windows software, that Microsoft didn't write, is broken it's necessarily Microsoft's fault". The whole point is that no one cares whose fault it is.
Then how do you grade it? These students are new to programming, and everyone's pseudocode will look different. What do you do if you're not sure what someone's pseudocode is supposed to mean. Everyone is going to use different symbols or syntax and you're going to have to figure out what they might have meant. Similarly, if you write the test questions in pseudocode, some people will make poor assumptions about how the "code" works. In practice, the whole exam being pseudocode would mean that students would end up learning "AP standard pseudocode", which is a waste of time. You might as well have them just learn a language and test them in that.
Just because it's in a specific langauge doesn't mean that the exam is about the language. It does test general progrmaming concepts and so forth, just like you want. It does not test nit-picky details of java syntax. I admit that I'm assuming the style of the test is the same as when I took it in pascal. But even if it's not, the point remains that having a standard language for questions that require code doesn't mean the tast has to be a Java test rather than a CS test.
That's pretty similar to most C++ programming jobs, really.
Just because it's by hand doesn't mean you couldn't have "references and resources". Many of my college programming tests were by hand, but were open-book. The AP is closed-book, though, right? It's been a while for me (good ol' pascal. Nothing beats that).
Yes, but it's off by default.
No, yes and no.
Fault? I used to think that when linux apologists said this they knew it was bullshit, but I've started to suspect otherwise. A computer is a tool. A piece of software is a tool. If a tool doesn't do what I want, I don't use it. Instead, I get a tool that does. And I certainly don't sit there with a broken tool and say "oh, but it's not their fault, so I don't mind" or "if they had more market share, I'm sure this would work, and that's almost the same as me having a computer that can play sound".
Can we please stop modding up posts that just explain or repeat the joke made in their parent? This is the third one I've seen today.
True, but perhaps they are saying this because they have a financial interest in cheaply available software, rather than out of the goodness of their hearts? I don't think this is a case of a large organization that "can't be wrong" (downthread) or of them really believing it's a "false claim" so much as businesses protecting their business interests.
Maybe I should have a little more faith in giant, giant trade organizations to always act in the way that's best for the world and for justice rather than for what will fill their wallets.
Actually it did (or maybe "does" now that the story has been corrected). The idea is that your computer will only run cryptographically signed code. This means that you can't get a virus, or if you do get one, it will be signed and it will thus be known who the author is (and their signing certificate could be revoked so others won't run the virus). Today, no one knows for sure who wrote a piece of code that's running on your computer. Good if you want to write illegal tools, etc., bad if you want the security of having unsafe code blocked (like for a business who cares more about uptime and protection against viruses than being able to crack DVDs).
I agree. A large part of the reason employers want to see that you have done well at math and computer science in school is that it shows that you are smart and good at solving problmes. This isn't to imply that everyone with a degree fits this description, but you have to play the odds, and someone who has a strong math and cs background and has been successful in those areas is probably going to be better at solving the problems your company needs solved than someone who has read a "how to" book and knows how to copy and paste from code examples.
This is the same as in many other areas. For example, law schools are impressed by students who have done well in their classes in a difficult major, even if this doesn't give them skills directly applicable to the practice of law.
I don't want to sound stupid, but I'm missing the irony in that. Can you explain?
My guess is Windows.
It means that tin-foil-hat crowd who were posting as recently as yesterday about how microsoft was conspiring to bring about "the end of computing as we know it" and intended to somehow create laws to make untrusted operating systems unable to load on any legal hardware, etc., etc., were complete idiots. As most of us already knew.
I usually don't criticize people on slashdot for trying to lecture on topics about which they are very uninformed, because if I started doing that it would keep me busy all day, every day.
But honestly, if you don't even know what a patent is, you should probably find out before butting in to these discussions.
I think xp home allows you to leave a blank password without complaining, while xp pro does not. Could be wrong though.
Intereseting. So how does the version that so many people have downloaded and tried work "without an actual line of code"? Seem difficult.
It can do it by requiring write access to somewhere normal users won't (or at least shouldn't) have access to, like
Is this a joke? You list one of the major areas where even unix advocates admit windows is better and then say it "isn't there" in windows? In Unix, your only options are to set read, write or execute for the owner, the world or the "group". That's it. On Windows, you can use ACLs to specify exactly what permissions every individual user has from a much richer list of choices, and you can ACL any directory, file or even an individual regkey.
You mean exactly like it works in xp sp2?
I'm sure when you told them that it's actually a demon, they felt a lot better.
"my" is the two-letter "country code" for malaysia. So the .my tld belong to malaysia. I'm pretty sure that's what he was referring to.
Probably. Given that that business model is working well for Apple with iTunes/ iPod, it shouldn't be surprising that others would try a similar strategy.
Or perhaps he spent his time and tuition money on learning Computer Science? That's what I did when I got my CS degree (not at purdue). I think if you went to school to study cs and instead learned how to be a network admin, it may be you who wasted your tuition. Rather than speding your time learning specific technical facts that will be obselete in a few years anyway and that you could easily teach yourself, like where YaST networking configuration is, perhaps you would be better off getting an actual education while in school.
No, but microsoft doesn't really do this either. So I'm not sure what the distinction is.