> Are you saying that we need to abolish governments > and corporations? If so, what comes next?..;)
Maybe he's suggesting that both should be smaller.
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/
The link above explains what we had before big government/big corporations, and explains how some of the early big corporations designed the school system (yes, the one you send your children to) to create compliant people.
> The problem with liberalism taken to extremes. is that you end up having to defend the right of others to be intollerant.
The question is, as always, "What do we choose to be tolerant of". Most people these days base their choice on the ancient Wiccan saying "An it harm none, do as ye will" (ie. it's OK if it doesn't hurt anyone). The difference between myself and most other people comes in the definitions of "harm" and "anyone". For example, I include God in the anyone, and most other people don't. Some of the things I think harm other people aren't seen that way by others. Who makes the choices?
Any law made implicitly imposes cultural values. For example, in some cultures, vigilante justice is the norm and acceptable. I'm sure you can all think of practises around the world ("cultural values") which we would not allow in Western countries (cultural values imposed by law).
These are interesting questions, to which I don't have the answers, although I think I tend to lean towards right-wing libertarianism (or more likely, middle-wing libertarianism:) ).
SRV records lack popular support. My guess is lack of demand due to ignorance on the part of many. But interestingly, Jabber wants everyone to use SRV records. This means that your Jabber ID can be the same as your e-mail address, but on a different machine. It also means that if Jabber catches on, a lot of admins are going to need to learn about SRV records. And when they learn about them, they'll use them. And when they use them, hopefully the big browser developers will recognise the demand and implement them.
You wrote: --- # Change SMTP servers easily - Laptop users are often frustrated with mozilla because there is no easy way to switch between predefined smtp servers when they are between home and work. ---
There's a fix. Set up SMTP auth, and then allow anyone who auth'ed to forward mail from any address they like. Now the laptop users don't need to have a different SMTP server at home.
So wait, I'm driving down the road. I see a tollway coming up. I take a turn to avoid it, because I don't want to go there anyway. The car doesn't respond to the wheel. It continues down the hallway.
That's why I've applied for a Sourceforge site for the DefendMail project I'm working on. It basically permits mail software vendors and ISPs to wear a "DefendMail" logo if their site complies with the guidelines. If the site gets approved, it will appear at http://defendmail.sourceforge.net/
DefendMail requires things of products and sites in the following categories: - Encryption (ie. SSL) - Authentication (for SMTP too) - Mobility (ie. central storage of folders) - Validation (spam/virus/non-compliant message) - Monitoring - Security (ie. sites have a good software update procedure) - Support (Sites must have some support, eg. an answered abuse e-mail) - Redundancy - Traceability - Interaction Communication (ie. will this system talk to non-DefendMail systems?) - Future tech (ie. IPv6 support)
Another problem is that there are fires elsewhere in Australia. I live in Geelong (near Melbourne, nowhere near Canberra), and there is smoke all throughout Geelong and Melbourne today because of fires "in the Otways". While I'm not sure where the Otways start and end exactly, Geelong and Melbourne are about 100km apart, and the smoke is about the same in both places. I think the Otways are at least 100km in the other direction, so they're pretty big fires.
Normally, if there were no fires down here, many of our fire teams would go North to help with the Canberra fires. We're the next most populous state after NSW (Canberra is a small territory imbedded in NSW), so that's probably cutting into their firefighting ability.
Most country towns have a volunteer firefighting organisation. They're the ones that usually go.
Politically, they could just call for more people to be trained as volunteer firefighters.:)
I'd be using cfengine (or something similar) to manage something that size. cfengine claims to be able to deal with Windows NT as well as Unix. I only discovered it a few months ago, so I'm still in the planning stages for our network (which is all Unix anyway), but hopefully something like that will be useful.
http://pikt.uchicago.edu/pikt/other.html
Then again, cfengine might take a while to roll out:).
Object-oriented is good, but it's really modularity we're trying to achieve here. If the problem space is object-oriented, that's a good solution. But sometimes the problem space is something else.
Personally, I'd like to see more Table-Oriented Programming implemented in new programming languages (preferably with a useful GUI).
TOP (Table Oriented Programming)? See below...
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/6888/ to p.htm
I agree with the person who said that the PC and the Internet have done the most. To me, the next biggest change was changing from something like C to something like Perl (where most of the work is done for you). The next big change will be.NET or Parrot; something which allows people to use code from other languages with minimal fuss. I've often wanted a Perl/Spreadsheet combo, and I may get it before I die:).
Also, just as a side note, I was reading a book by Raphael Finkel on Advanced Programming Language Design. He listed a number of criteria by which languages could be assesed as to the quality of the programming language. I noticed at the time that Perl had made the Expressiveness criterion more important than all the others, hence its lack of academic elegance, speed, and other criteria.:)
Why is this funny? I was annoyed in year 9 (age 15) because I knew more assembler and MS-DOS interrupts than anyone I knew except my Dad, and he didn't always have time to help me.:)
Step 6: discover that the promise Linux drivers won't let you boot from that drive, or just won't work Step 7: discover that you need kernel 2.4.12 or so to get the appropriate support in linux. step 8: realise that the promise is just software RAID anyway, and you could've saved yourself the money by using the Linux software RAID step 9: Buy an Arco Duplidisk (or imitation) Step 10: ??? Step 11: Profit!
Different programs have different needs from their config files. Trying to fit one model to all isn't really a good solution, as that model would have to cater for the extremely complex configuration some software might need, while still be very simple for the programs that just need five key-value pairs.
True. I'd like to see a standard set of configuration types (ie. INI, table (tab-delimited or whatever), shell script, etc), and then a special type called "custom". That way, someone could say "Standard INI file", or "Standard table configuration file", and there'd be not only a library which parses the thing, but a documented format for the little weirdnesses of each format (ie. INI files all need to have [] header sections, or whatever). Then "custom" means "I'm weird", eg. Sendmail, and it's non-standard.
Of course this also means that there would have to be a hierarchy for configuration-only files, and any non-configuration files in/etc should have to find a new home. eg. RH73/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts has both configuration files (ifcfg-*) and programs (ifup*, ifdown*). Whether eg. init's rc-files are configuration or programs is of course questionable..
You'll find that the ifcfg files are actually shell scripts too, it's just that they only set variables, and don't do anytihng else.
Perhaps configuration file hierarchy should be such where each package would use it's own directory, and where necessary, use symlinks.
I don't like this because, at the moment, you back up/etc and you have all configuration. Basically, there are two ways of dividing files -- by program (cf. Windows), and by file purpose. Unix has chosen the latter, and package managers are designed to allow grouping by the former.
The result of this is that everyone who designs something new will have it running over port 80, instead of something else. Imagine how much simpler life would be if we had separate ports for: - ECMAscript (Javascript) - SOAP
Basically, the more we block other ports, the more people will use port 80 for non-HTML stuff.
>DO NOT discriminate because they haven't programmed in your particular programming language, unless the work is very short term. They're all dialects of the same language.
>The only exceptions are pointers and object oriented code. Some people just can't get it. Test them [by showing them code to review] if you use either.
> C, VB, Java, and FORTRAN
The languages you mentioned (C, VB, FORTRAN, and Java) all translate pretty well, as does Pascal.
You made a point about OO and pointer code. The same goes for functional languages (ML, LISP), and for thinkgs like Prolog and APL. And Regexes. Personally, I can't program in functional lanugages (although I'd like to learn), have never programmed in Prolog, and had a lot of trouble with APL. Perl (with regexes) is second nature.:)
Well, it's quite simple. Someone says something trollish about it, and then some of the insightful people argue with him. Then we have some insightful posts, and others argue with them. Mark my words, we'll soon have another set of insightful anti-DMCA diatribes, some disappointment that we didn't get to try the DMCA against such a stupid case, and a bunch of people claiming that HP, as a corporation, has done this in their own self-interest.:)
Slashdot Mirror
> ...as Chinese people become more and more
> prosperous, they will become more intelligence,
Allow me to present exhibit A - the USA. These people are clearly more intelligent than anyone else [/sarcasm]
> Are you saying that we need to abolish governments
> and corporations? If so, what comes next?..;)
Maybe he's suggesting that both should be smaller.
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/
The link above explains what we had before big government/big corporations, and explains how some of the early big corporations designed the school system (yes, the one you send your children to) to create compliant people.
> The problem with liberalism taken to extremes. is that you end up having to defend the right of others to be intollerant.
:) ).
The question is, as always, "What do we choose to be tolerant of". Most people these days base their choice on the ancient Wiccan saying "An it harm none, do as ye will" (ie. it's OK if it doesn't hurt anyone). The difference between myself and most other people comes in the definitions of "harm" and "anyone". For example, I include God in the anyone, and most other people don't. Some of the things I think harm other people aren't seen that way by others. Who makes the choices?
Any law made implicitly imposes cultural values. For example, in some cultures, vigilante justice is the norm and acceptable. I'm sure you can all think of practises around the world ("cultural values") which we would not allow in Western countries (cultural values imposed by law).
These are interesting questions, to which I don't have the answers, although I think I tend to lean towards right-wing libertarianism (or more likely, middle-wing libertarianism
SRV records lack popular support. My guess is lack of demand due to ignorance on the part of many. But interestingly, Jabber wants everyone to use SRV records. This means that your Jabber ID can be the same as your e-mail address, but on a different machine. It also means that if Jabber catches on, a lot of admins are going to need to learn about SRV records. And when they learn about them, they'll use them. And when they use them, hopefully the big browser developers will recognise the demand and implement them.
Anyway...
http://www.defendmail.sunet.com.au/
You wrote:
---
# Change SMTP servers easily - Laptop users are often frustrated with mozilla because there is no easy way to switch between predefined smtp servers when they are between home and work.
---
There's a fix. Set up SMTP auth, and then allow anyone who auth'ed to forward mail from any address they like. Now the laptop users don't need to have a different SMTP server at home.
We'll soon rectify that!
...however, I'm not in North America (I'm in Australia). Is there some other group I should be keeping up with, or is NANOG still it?
Turtle:
:).
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~bh/
(look at the Berkeley Logo section)
I use this. It's cool
So wait, I'm driving down the road. I see a tollway coming up. I take a turn to avoid it, because I don't want to go there anyway. The car doesn't respond to the wheel. It continues down the hallway.
:)
Kaching!
That's how to make money from wifi-enabled cars
Ha! We now have Unicode and operator overloading. Just wait until I get to it. Perl6 will be the new APL! :)
That's why I've applied for a Sourceforge site for the DefendMail project I'm working on. It basically permits mail software vendors and ISPs to wear a "DefendMail" logo if their site complies with the guidelines. If the site gets approved, it will appear at http://defendmail.sourceforge.net/
DefendMail requires things of products and sites in the following categories:
- Encryption (ie. SSL)
- Authentication (for SMTP too)
- Mobility (ie. central storage of folders)
- Validation (spam/virus/non-compliant message)
- Monitoring
- Security (ie. sites have a good software update procedure)
- Support (Sites must have some support, eg. an answered abuse e-mail)
- Redundancy
- Traceability
- Interaction Communication (ie. will this system talk to non-DefendMail systems?)
- Future tech (ie. IPv6 support)
Obviously solves more than Spam.
Another problem is that there are fires elsewhere in Australia. I live in Geelong (near Melbourne, nowhere near Canberra), and there is smoke all throughout Geelong and Melbourne today because of fires "in the Otways". While I'm not sure where the Otways start and end exactly, Geelong and Melbourne are about 100km apart, and the smoke is about the same in both places. I think the Otways are at least 100km in the other direction, so they're pretty big fires.
:)
Normally, if there were no fires down here, many of our fire teams would go North to help with the Canberra fires. We're the next most populous state after NSW (Canberra is a small territory imbedded in NSW), so that's probably cutting into their firefighting ability.
Most country towns have a volunteer firefighting organisation. They're the ones that usually go.
Politically, they could just call for more people to be trained as volunteer firefighters.
I'd be using cfengine (or something similar) to manage something that size. cfengine claims to be able to deal with Windows NT as well as Unix. I only discovered it a few months ago, so I'm still in the planning stages for our network (which is all Unix anyway), but hopefully something like that will be useful.
:).
http://pikt.uchicago.edu/pikt/other.html
Then again, cfengine might take a while to roll out
Object-oriented is good, but it's really modularity we're trying to achieve here. If the problem space is object-oriented, that's a good solution. But sometimes the problem space is something else.
/ to p.htm
Personally, I'd like to see more Table-Oriented Programming implemented in new programming languages (preferably with a useful GUI).
TOP (Table Oriented Programming)? See below...
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/6888
That's why we have HTML::Mason.
.NET or Parrot; something which allows people to use code from other languages with minimal fuss. I've often wanted a Perl/Spreadsheet combo, and I may get it before I die :).
:)
I agree with the person who said that the PC and the Internet have done the most. To me, the next biggest change was changing from something like C to something like Perl (where most of the work is done for you). The next big change will be
Also, just as a side note, I was reading a book by Raphael Finkel on Advanced Programming Language Design. He listed a number of criteria by which languages could be assesed as to the quality of the programming language. I noticed at the time that Perl had made the Expressiveness criterion more important than all the others, hence its lack of academic elegance, speed, and other criteria.
Why is this funny? I was annoyed in year 9 (age 15) because I knew more assembler and MS-DOS interrupts than anyone I knew except my Dad, and he didn't always have time to help me. :)
Step 6: discover that the promise Linux drivers won't let you boot from that drive, or just won't work
Step 7: discover that you need kernel 2.4.12 or so to get the appropriate support in linux.
step 8: realise that the promise is just software RAID anyway, and you could've saved yourself the money by using the Linux software RAID
step 9: Buy an Arco Duplidisk (or imitation)
Step 10: ???
Step 11: Profit!
Different programs have different needs from their config files. Trying to fit one model to all isn't really a good solution, as that model would have to cater for the extremely complex configuration some software might need, while still be very simple for the programs that just need five key-value pairs.
/etc should have to find a new home. eg. RH73 /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts has both configuration files (ifcfg-*) and programs (ifup*, ifdown*). Whether eg. init's rc-files are configuration or programs is of course questionable..
/etc and you have all configuration. Basically, there are two ways of dividing files -- by program (cf. Windows), and by file purpose. Unix has chosen the latter, and package managers are designed to allow grouping by the former.
True. I'd like to see a standard set of configuration types (ie. INI, table (tab-delimited or whatever), shell script, etc), and then a special type called "custom". That way, someone could say "Standard INI file", or "Standard table configuration file", and there'd be not only a library which parses the thing, but a documented format for the little weirdnesses of each format (ie. INI files all need to have [] header sections, or whatever). Then "custom" means "I'm weird", eg. Sendmail, and it's non-standard.
Of course this also means that there would have to be a hierarchy for configuration-only files, and any non-configuration files in
You'll find that the ifcfg files are actually shell scripts too, it's just that they only set variables, and don't do anytihng else.
Perhaps configuration file hierarchy should be such where each package would use it's own directory, and where necessary, use symlinks.
I don't like this because, at the moment, you back up
The result of this is that everyone who designs something new will have it running over port 80, instead of something else. Imagine how much simpler life would be if we had separate ports for:
- ECMAscript (Javascript)
- SOAP
Basically, the more we block other ports, the more people will use port 80 for non-HTML stuff.
>DO NOT discriminate because they haven't programmed in your particular programming language, unless the work is very short term. They're all dialects of the same language.
:)
>The only exceptions are pointers and object oriented code. Some people just can't get it. Test them [by showing them code to review] if you use either.
> C, VB, Java, and FORTRAN
The languages you mentioned (C, VB, FORTRAN, and Java) all translate pretty well, as does Pascal.
You made a point about OO and pointer code. The same goes for functional languages (ML, LISP), and for thinkgs like Prolog and APL. And Regexes. Personally, I can't program in functional lanugages (although I'd like to learn), have never programmed in Prolog, and had a lot of trouble with APL. Perl (with regexes) is second nature.
...and the correct answers are:
:)
Which compiler do you prefer? GCC
Complete the sequence. 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128
Are the voices in your head loud enough to disturb your coworkers? No
If you think users don't need that kind of help, let me introduce you to some of my users :)
Nonononono. Post number #3996458
Well, it's quite simple. Someone says something trollish about it, and then some of the insightful people argue with him. Then we have some insightful posts, and others argue with them. Mark my words, we'll soon have another set of insightful anti-DMCA diatribes, some disappointment that we didn't get to try the DMCA against such a stupid case, and a bunch of people claiming that HP, as a corporation, has done this in their own self-interest. :)