*they* refused to reveal what their criteria was for when they would manually adjust a page's rank.
Ya, because lod knows, a computer could never make a mistake without human intervention.
Gimme a break, bouyant slimeballs will find a way to float on any popular search engine no matter how it is implemented. The only prayer an OSS search engine has of staying "pristine" would be making sure not many people ever use it.
Because of the way the things work most testing was "live" - it had to be carried out on a real train moving in the real world - if your software failed people died.
Copyright exists to provide incentives to push works into the public domain, not to keep them out of it.
Actually, copyright exists to advance the state of the art. Somewhere along the way the idea of the public domain came around because free and available material was recognized as a necessary precursor to advancing that same state of the art.
So, in a sense, if copyright dumps on the public domain, it is dumping on its own purpose, but it isn't all that direct or obvious, which is probably why too many justices voted for the Sonny Bono copyright act...
hmm... Good point. I'd only doublethunk. With the help of your triplethought I now realize that Bill *was* telling the truth. By pushing Palladium he's insuring Orwell's future won't happen because people will rebel and overthrow the premise behind Palladium.
"Wait... what if I quadruplethink?" *oof* thud, "My head hurts."
Try to walk into a corporate boardroom and convince a Fortune 100 company to buy into Free Software because "Microsoft tr[ies] to control and manipulate their users and destroy competition
Um... IBM is a "fortune 100" company is it not? They seem to have a small truck with Microsoft's practices and methods. To the tune of how many million in OSS funding again? Maybe it is all just a publicity stunt but the cash is real.
Pursuing a level playing field is not the same thing as attempting to blame all the industry's woes on Microsoft. Watching Microsoft pursue something other than a level playing field... Well it certainly can have entertainment value.
*scratch* *scratch* Course I'm just a barefoot, stubble-chinned reliability freak, what do I know?
So, um... if you find anything fitting that description in the software industry, please let me know. The search has been difficult and fruitless.
Either way. I'll start worrying about commies when the IT industry begins to run out of jobs, and I'll start worrying about capitalist pig-dogs when I see folks thrown in jail for giving away code.
A quick hop over to the Debian site makes it seem that "Linux" runs on Alpha, ARM, HP PA-RISC, x86, IA-64, Motorola 680x0, MIPS, MIPS(DEC), PowerPC, IBM S/390, and SPARC. Hardly seems like OSS is "married" to Intel.
In fact, the Linux, BSD, and other modern OSS Unix flavors are tied to hardware about as little as any software ever written. The only necessary requirements are the GNU tools like gcc, glibc, and friends. So as long as developers are around to port code to new and interesting hardware platforms OSS will run on them. So, until someone starts throwing programmers in jail or shooting them for working on the gcc and other FSF tools, I think we can rest assured OSS will be an available alternative.
Now, will OSS be able to interoperate with newer Microsoft offerings? That is another question entirely.
Bill Gates, Microsoft's chairman, told a technology conference in Washington on Wednesday. "This technology can make our country more secure and prevent the nightmare vision of George Orwell at the same time."
Yes Bill that's right. You can usher in the technology that may bring about Orwell's vision and at the same time help it slide through by simply claiming the exact opposite from the other side of your mouth.
Dyuh... It's somehow related to the truth, perhaps that means I should believe it.
Hmm... I also started my programming in BASIC (applesoft) in high-school. And I also happen to be 27, though I just work for a small company, I do know more than a couple languages and am (sometimes) tasked with documenting large portions of code no one else seems to "grok".
I have to say... I also think differently than nearly anyone else I've ever met, and I find that there are two "modes" of engineering. There are those that are "forward" and those "reverse". I find many skills I learned from BASIC apply to dissassembly and other "hackish" persuits, but that what I learned in formal programming classes applies to proper design, problem solution, and "forward" engineering.
My conclusion is, both skill sets are important, but also that both parts of my nature ("hackish" and "engineer") fight with each other at times. Most interestlingly, I tend toward dislike of most code I read, even my own.
Send them to any "intro" class at the nearest community college. There is no faster way for them to find out what's available and where they stand in terms of skill and interest.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make her a programmer.
I was expecting a +4 funny, not a +5 insightful with that comment.
Looks like most points about DHCP have been made already by more knowledgeable folks than I.
One thing I don't see mentioned is your love for paper, and/or "handing out CD's". A decent file/web server along with a printer attached, and the same information available on the internet ahead of time would seem to solve this problem with ease. Of course, not being a BOFH myself, (or even a PFY, rather one of those engineer types) I don't know what information to actually make available, just how it can be managed effectively...
Of course, redcode is a wierd language. I'd much rather they had based it on something closer to a "real-world" instruction set.
Of course the key to a game such as you mention is that security would be taken "very" seriously. Just as in open source, your game would be taking security to be far more important than typical commercial software because security would not be ignored.
3. Learn to research better. Be thorough about what you do. According to a survey conducted last year, only one in 20 people will scroll to the second page of search results.
*Better* researching indeed. Given multiple pages of results on Google (or another engine), I'd far rather submit a finer grained search than read every result. In fact, I rarely read past the first 5 entries of a search, but yet I don't often miss critical data.
No rumors of vi? Anything with even POSIX 1 support can run something of the sort... IBM's website even mentions vi as a supported command for z/OS. Looks like MVS runs vi as well.
As for os370, do people even still use that? All I seem to find online about it are "Real Programmer" jokes.
perl, vi, emacs or anything you'd expect on a nix box... tcp/ip may be a possibility
What no vi??! You've got to be joking. I've yet to meet a platform without at least a couple crappy clones. Next you'll tell me regular expressions are not available and you're using a C compiler without ANSI support.
Seriously though, any system not supporting the tools you mention would seem halfway dead already. I'd figure the only thing such an environment would be good for is jumping to something more useful. Perhaps in some cases it really would be more feasible to consider emulation instead of porting and/or rewriting. But if the question of getting onto something a little more mainstream isn't even being asked, that sounds like a recipe for disaster. (ie: someone else will do it for you, and gain a huge competitive advantage)
You want experts on Rexx, JCL, RACF/ACF2 and such? Train them *after* you hire them. Additional languages (and platforms) should be easy enough to pick up for any halfway decent programmer or sys admin.
For the record: z/OS has POSIX 2 support. os370 blech! Keep it away! MVS has at least POSIX 1 support. etc? not sure...
Na, just limit copyright protection to the exact bit-pattern of the binaries released. That way seriously hacked versions or versions derived from the source (however it is aquired) are protected in no way whatsoever by copyright.
Copyright only protects the "fixed media". It isn't our fault software companies don't bother fixing anything.
Bah, I just vote Libertarian. Cutting off 9/10ths of the federal budget seems like a great place to start governmental reform.
Basically... If you have a big pile of crap, the best way to "fix things" is to throw out the whole pile and start over. With a bathtub the size of the Pacific Ocean, there's not much hope of finding a living baby in there...
Another alternative might be simply using a very low voltage DC(AC?) power source on the ducts themselves. After all, what is a metal air conditioning vent if not a giant con*duct*or?
Slashdot Mirror
How would you ever be certain code injected into your system willfully is "harmless"?
b) there is some sort of unofficial 'opt-out' method like checking a worms.txt file (like robots.txt) before 'fixing' unknowing users' computers.
There is some part of me that wants to say: "Vulnerability implies consent".
Of course, if most folks actually followed it, a worms.txt file might be a wonderful thing. Personally, I'd call it "keep.out".
The problem is... code performs as it is written rather than as it is intended. So ideas like this are best implemented with great care, if at all.
*they* refused to reveal what their criteria was for when they would manually adjust a page's rank.
Ya, because lod knows, a computer could never make a mistake without human intervention.
Gimme a break, bouyant slimeballs will find a way to float on any popular search engine no matter how it is implemented. The only prayer an OSS search engine has of staying "pristine" would be making sure not many people ever use it.
Because of the way the things work most testing was "live" - it had to be carried out on a real train moving in the real world - if your software failed people died.
Yeesh. Ever hear of models.
In a free society, my rights would end where your nose begins...
Wait, I'm sorry, I'll come back to the real world now.
Copyright exists to provide incentives to push works into the public domain, not to keep them out of it.
Actually, copyright exists to advance the state of the art. Somewhere along the way the idea of the public domain came around because free and available material was recognized as a necessary precursor to advancing that same state of the art.
So, in a sense, if copyright dumps on the public domain, it is dumping on its own purpose, but it isn't all that direct or obvious, which is probably why too many justices voted for the Sonny Bono copyright act...
hmm... Good point. I'd only doublethunk. With the help of your triplethought I now realize that Bill *was* telling the truth. By pushing Palladium he's insuring Orwell's future won't happen because people will rebel and overthrow the premise behind Palladium.
"Wait... what if I quadruplethink?" *oof* thud, "My head hurts."
Try to walk into a corporate boardroom and convince a Fortune 100 company to buy into Free Software because "Microsoft tr[ies] to control and manipulate their users and destroy competition
Um... IBM is a "fortune 100" company is it not? They seem to have a small truck with Microsoft's practices and methods. To the tune of how many million in OSS funding again? Maybe it is all just a publicity stunt but the cash is real.
Pursuing a level playing field is not the same thing as attempting to blame all the industry's woes on Microsoft. Watching Microsoft pursue something other than a level playing field... Well it certainly can have entertainment value.
*scratch* *scratch* Course I'm just a barefoot, stubble-chinned reliability freak, what do I know?
So, um... if you find anything fitting that description in the software industry, please let me know. The search has been difficult and fruitless.
Either way. I'll start worrying about commies when the IT industry begins to run out of jobs, and I'll start worrying about capitalist pig-dogs when I see folks thrown in jail for giving away code.
A quick hop over to the Debian site makes it seem that "Linux" runs on Alpha, ARM, HP PA-RISC, x86, IA-64, Motorola 680x0, MIPS, MIPS(DEC), PowerPC, IBM S/390, and SPARC. Hardly seems like OSS is "married" to Intel.
In fact, the Linux, BSD, and other modern OSS Unix flavors are tied to hardware about as little as any software ever written. The only necessary requirements are the GNU tools like gcc, glibc, and friends. So as long as developers are around to port code to new and interesting hardware platforms OSS will run on them. So, until someone starts throwing programmers in jail or shooting them for working on the gcc and other FSF tools, I think we can rest assured OSS will be an available alternative.
Now, will OSS be able to interoperate with newer Microsoft offerings? That is another question entirely.
In this context, trusted computing means that your computer program can be trusted to operate according to its software code.
Ya, that's the problem with software, always running according to some machine's code instead of following a user's intent.
From the article:
Bill Gates, Microsoft's chairman, told a technology conference in Washington on Wednesday. "This technology can make our country more secure and prevent the nightmare vision of George Orwell at the same time."
Yes Bill that's right. You can usher in the technology that may bring about Orwell's vision and at the same time help it slide through by simply claiming the exact opposite from the other side of your mouth.
Dyuh... It's somehow related to the truth, perhaps that means I should believe it.
Hmm... I also started my programming in BASIC (applesoft) in high-school. And I also happen to be 27, though I just work for a small company, I do know more than a couple languages and am (sometimes) tasked with documenting large portions of code no one else seems to "grok".
I have to say... I also think differently than nearly anyone else I've ever met, and I find that there are two "modes" of engineering. There are those that are "forward" and those "reverse". I find many skills I learned from BASIC apply to dissassembly and other "hackish" persuits, but that what I learned in formal programming classes applies to proper design, problem solution, and "forward" engineering.
My conclusion is, both skill sets are important, but also that both parts of my nature ("hackish" and "engineer") fight with each other at times. Most interestlingly, I tend toward dislike of most code I read, even my own.
Face it, the best jokes are always true.
Send them to any "intro" class at the nearest community college. There is no faster way for them to find out what's available and where they stand in terms of skill and interest.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make her a programmer.
I was expecting a +4 funny, not a +5 insightful with that comment.
Looks like most points about DHCP have been made already by more knowledgeable folks than I.
One thing I don't see mentioned is your love for paper, and/or "handing out CD's". A decent file/web server along with a printer attached, and the same information available on the internet ahead of time would seem to solve this problem with ease. Of course, not being a BOFH myself, (or even a PFY, rather one of those engineer types) I don't know what information to actually make available, just how it can be managed effectively...
Can't go wrong with that combination.
Just make sure the BOFH has the nicest kit and plenty of beer.
Of course, redcode is a wierd language. I'd much rather they had based it on something closer to a "real-world" instruction set.
Of course the key to a game such as you mention is that security would be taken "very" seriously. Just as in open source, your game would be taking security to be far more important than typical commercial software because security would not be ignored.
3. Learn to research better. Be thorough about what you do. According to a survey conducted last year, only one in 20 people will scroll to the second page of search results.
*Better* researching indeed. Given multiple pages of results on Google (or another engine), I'd far rather submit a finer grained search than read every result. In fact, I rarely read past the first 5 entries of a search, but yet I don't often miss critical data.
No rumors of vi? Anything with even POSIX 1 support can run something of the sort... IBM's website even mentions vi as a supported command for z/OS. Looks like MVS runs vi as well.
As for os370, do people even still use that? All I seem to find online about it are "Real Programmer" jokes.
perl, vi, emacs or anything you'd expect on a nix box ... tcp/ip may be a possibility
What no vi??! You've got to be joking. I've yet to meet a platform without at least a couple crappy clones. Next you'll tell me regular expressions are not available and you're using a C compiler without ANSI support.
Seriously though, any system not supporting the tools you mention would seem halfway dead already. I'd figure the only thing such an environment would be good for is jumping to something more useful. Perhaps in some cases it really would be more feasible to consider emulation instead of porting and/or rewriting. But if the question of getting onto something a little more mainstream isn't even being asked, that sounds like a recipe for disaster. (ie: someone else will do it for you, and gain a huge competitive advantage)
You want experts on Rexx, JCL, RACF/ACF2 and such? Train them *after* you hire them. Additional languages (and platforms) should be easy enough to pick up for any halfway decent programmer or sys admin.
For the record:
z/OS has POSIX 2 support.
os370 blech! Keep it away!
MVS has at least POSIX 1 support.
etc? not sure...
Na, just limit copyright protection to the exact bit-pattern of the binaries released. That way seriously hacked versions or versions derived from the source (however it is aquired) are protected in no way whatsoever by copyright.
Copyright only protects the "fixed media". It isn't our fault software companies don't bother fixing anything.
Bah, I just vote Libertarian. Cutting off 9/10ths of the federal budget seems like a great place to start governmental reform.
Basically... If you have a big pile of crap, the best way to "fix things" is to throw out the whole pile and start over. With a bathtub the size of the Pacific Ocean, there's not much hope of finding a living baby in there...
Another alternative might be simply using a very low voltage DC(AC?) power source on the ducts themselves. After all, what is a metal air conditioning vent if not a giant con*duct*or?