Even if a few lines out of millions got copied in the there, the concept of "de minimi" applies.
If you are going to start throwing legal terms like "de minimi" around, you had better reveal your legal credentials, or use a proper disclaimer like IANAL. Well, are you?
Oh god, why does my inner dialogue read this as if I were on the Austin Powers set?! And no, it wasn't a term I envisioned being thrown around..
When I am going through resumes, I basically pass on any with a spelling error. Attention to detail isn't always the most important thing in the world, companies want to hire people that they can work with and are a good fit. However, on something like a resume, where you are putting your best foot forward and representing yourself in a very small amount of space, spelling errors are unacceptable.
Spell check isn't enough either... I really expect someone to know the difference in where/wear/which/witch/there/their/etc. and expect it to be reviewed by someone ELSE who can catch those kinds of mistakes/brainos.
Nope, it's true. The vast majority of the populace is retarded and has trouble double-clicking fast enough(by vast majority, I actually mean say 10% -- just sounds cooler). They click on the name, not the icon as it is a bigger target. I occasionally have to resort to telling them to click once, then hit.
You apparently are not in that category. In fact, I would guess just about all of the users of gnome would not be in that category. However, it should be a tunable feature to allow for accessibility/usability by those that have physical problems.
The big issue for me are the cases where the stupid machine just locks up and does fuck all for 20 seconds or so. CPU meter shows 3% utilization, no disk activity. What is the stupid thing doing?
I couln't agree with you more. Yes, I spent the time the reply with a "me, too".
In the future, could you please not reference "goats.cx" and "put in a backdoor for myself" in the same paragraph? We are now busy trying to poke out our inner eyes.
But the text in between still called a parenthetical expression?
No need for you to tailor your spelling and grammar. For gods sakes, you already have good editorial skills evident from your lack of typos. . . My position isn't that the site isn't international, just that it uses American English and American topics as policy, etc. If you started using French/Italian/Japanese on this site, it would be an issue... the whole paradigm of what is slashdot will break down. Plus, you'd get a lot of flak.
If you say you walked up to someone late at night and put a torch in their face, expect there to be some confusion as to whether there were burnt eyebrows (holy crap, now I have to think about whether to use burnt or burned... DAMN YOU! -- and you see which I chose), especially when you have an international audience. If you use the word spelt just use it. By remarking that it is correct usage (and implying it is more correct by doing that) you are inviting comments. Know your audience:)
I seriously have no idea what the hell this topic is about... this conversation is tons more interesting.
Obviously adding in your parenthetical expression (which is what the text inside these rounded things is called -- are they referred to as bracket expressions elsewhere? (and they can even be nested for no apparent reason (by the way, that question wasn't rhetorical, I really want to know)) solved the problem of smart-ass replies;)
To be perfectly serious, there is a language called American English. Thank Daniel Webster for pushing for a distinct variant in spellings (Two countries separated by a common language and all that). And since this is slashdot, it is very American leaning (see here for the editorial opinion). Thus, your pre-emptive strike regarding which came first is really a moot point. You write for your audience. Do you use polysyllabic words when addressing toddlers?
While correct, the word spelt just comes across as pretentious. It isn't wrong, but it sounds funny to the ear and is distracting in conversation. Of course, that's just Dennis Miller's opinion, he could be wrong.
Not really. Once the ice melts and the house has reached the tempurate mean, it ceases to cool down further due to a lack of a tempurature differential.
Take the block of ice and replace it with some other form of air cooling system... oops, in a closed system, it just generates more heat.
I don't think I have it reversed... the "accept the same data, execute the same programs, and achieve the same results as the imitated system." part is what I meant by Black Box when I defined emulation... I don't care how, just as long as the results are good.
Isn't what you are referring to actually a simulation? Emulation would be far easier. I'm thinking simulation means do it exactly the same way as the real thing, whereas emulation is more of a black box "as long as the outputs match on the same inputs" thing.
Ah, but developers should never had root on dev machines. Why you ask?
I thank you for your reply, but that wasn't my issue at all. In fact, when there is separation between administration and coding, then it is practically mandatory to require that level of lockdown. What I was getting at was that there is more to pay attention to than simply securing the front end system. Exploits in a web server (either the system software or the custom code) would be somewhat contained using non-root user accounts to run production, however, the connection to the database is not in any way protected. That process has the ability to read if not write and modify underlying databases, whether they be on that server or another one. The entire system is still vulnerable, and I care less about a front end machine than my data.
1. The dev enviroment MUST be the production environment. If they are different, things are going to break when you move new code to the production system. If I as the administrator allow these to become different I have failed my developers.
Please clarify, did you mean to say the environments must be the same or even identical? Surely you are not saying that they should be the same.
I don't want developers to have access to start and stop port 80 services because I would need to give them root access, I would prefer that there processes were run under a normal user account with less access. Therefore, I force them to use a high port such as 8000.
You are protecting your organization against one thing: compromise of the target web server. And you know what? That particular machine is generally the least interesting. A bug or "feature" that would allow abnormal access to the backend database which is much more important than the web server itself.
I think there is an issue to think about here:
You need to adequately communicate the simple fact that though you are forcing a developer to run a server under formally more limited restrictions which is in their best interests to minimize risk, they are still responsible for unholy code (the kind that lives on forever because it can't get hacked). The "if you don't understand it, that's not my problem" comment is uncalled for and is precisely what this article is all about.. don't be an asshole.
Not necessarily. You can classify SPAM in a few ways:
An open relay is used to hand off sending millions of copies of the same email.
Dedicated Spammers have their own servers to do the work (bandwidth is cheap for them, too)
Unsolicited mail from "partners" of real companies that you have a business relationship with
Yes, open relays can be a bad thing as they escalate the number of emails that any one Spammer can send, but this can easily be circumvented by a white list. Not that that is especially nice to legitimate emailers, but requiring an interactive session the first time an address wants to send to you would severely shut down SPAM. I say this to argue against your statement that "any technical solution is doomed to fail". Unrealistic, maybe. Difficult to implement across the Internet? Without a doubt. But doomed to failure is quite a strong statement.
$19/hour, 40 hours a week, 4 weeks a month = $3,040 per month.
In Edmonton, the cheapest apartments are about $400/mo, but we'll be a bit generous and assume that you don't want to live in a slum. So, $700/mo for your apartment, plus $50/mo for cable internet, plus $25/mo phone, plus heat/water/power will probably run you up $100/mo (I'm not sure on this one, my roommate pays those bills:)
So, for the $19/hour job, if you factor in those expenses, plus taxes, you're still left with around $2,000/mo for things like food, entertainment, etc. That's a lot of money (to me, anyway).
$3,040 - $700 - $50 - $25 - taxes = $2000
You have taxes = $225, which works out to hmm, lessee about 7.5% of your income. My *sales* tax is 7.75%, therefore I stand by my statement.
OHH, I see, you thought I meant that there are no income taxes, no, I simply meant that's true when one uses your fucked up math. I'll add a smiley next time:)
Standard of living is in question now, too.. I mean, ALL YOUR NEIGHBORS ARE CANADIANS!;)
Well, I did steal the quote from the side of an 18 wheeler with a Jack-in-the-Box on the side: Showed a 10ft high burger that said "Actual size"* *not actual size..
That always made me laugh. At least it is truth in advertising.
OSS voting isn't a bad idea, but it's not going to be run like Apache. It's going to have to be some big, reliable, accountable software vendor willing to make usable, flexible software and put his source up for viewing.
I agree wholeheartedly. In this case it will be a matter of paying someone to engineer a solution that is provably correct. Once that condition is met, it matters not in the least the fact that heck, ANYONE can have that software.
As a consultant, I take that approach for a lot of my work: a client pays me to develop a solution, and they get a hand-crafted solution. Not a single one of my clients cares that I can take that solution and sell it to someone else or give it away... they got what they wanted and paid a fair price for it.
If the US federal govt pays for such a software / hardware package, I have no problem with the fact that cities, counties, other countries, dictators, whoever can also use it. Beats the hell out of sending troops to spread democracy...
As far as I can tell, the only reasons to keep this closed source are:
The software is crap, exploitable and this is piss poor security through obscurity
The compan(y|ies) developing the software isn't being paid enough, and thus needs to protect its product to repeatedly sell it to even break even.
There is large scale corruption going on and this is a way to completely destroy democracy... remember, there is no illuminati.
I think you may mean one of Arnold Schwarzenegger (governer of the *state* testing this stuff) or Tom Ridge (secretary/director of Homeland Security). Bush is the *president*, and generally would not be involved in creating new bills for the California Assembly or for general Homeland Security.
Agreed, but the parent was not saying this was Bush's doing, merely that it fell in line with the Bush agenda as he sees it.
The president does things like approve stuff that the Senate and House agree on first. The senate and House *were* elected by the popular vote, if you'll recall, and they are arguably *more* responsible for the laws that our president have signed...
Interestingly enough, Bush wasn't elected by the popular vote (duh), and the problem with this statement is that through public and private pressure such inapply named things as the Patriot Act were voted on and passed by Congress when most of the members did not have time to read it. Yes, blame congress, but don't underestimate the power of the presidency.. this *is* politics.
If you're a US citizen, you probably oughtta vote in those elections too - if you plan to complain about the direction we're heading.
Damn straight. I think Wanda (from Wanda at Large) said it best when she was on a recent late night talk show: Think about all the kids we have sent off to war over the course of the history of this nation. Think about how many have died protecting our rights to democracy. Now who are these idiots that go into a polling booth thinking "woo hoo, I'm voting for Gary Coleman"
If you meant *government* say "government" - not "Bush". He's only one step in a distributed system designed to prevent one person from having absolute power. That system mostly works, BTW.
He is the head of the dominant party right now. He is the one pushing the agenda in front of the press. He is also the one that doesn't allow ANY dissenters to be visible when he is making a public appearance. You have a sign that says "Bush, I don't agree with you"? Please stand over here with all the other "anti-americans".
Yeah, it mostly works, but when the administration has the power to deny Congress the right to oversee white house involvement in things like September 11, then the checks and balances system breaks down and you end up with a dictator (feel free to take the connotation away from that word.. I am trying to describe a state where a single individual sits at the top rather than an equal 3 ring circus.)
To get back on topic, I have to agree with the parent that this is something that fits in the category of "We are doing this in the name of Homeland Security but it actually doesn't help the situation."
Why not use FreeBSD? Very much the opposite of the "begginner" distro.. which means exactly what?
I don't understand what you are complaining about.. the fact that the install has reasonable defaults so that someone can basically click next next and get a distro installed, or what. It's not like you can't click on advanced on any of these.
Ok, how else would you shorten the term "Cafe Latte"? The simple fact is, on most menus the two syllables of latte reference a single item, so that shortening makes sense. Also, the fact that the word latte is NOT used in normal conversation to be "milk" also makes it unique in almost any context, not just ordering a drink.
What *I* can't understand is why people think that reference books (even Internet ones) are up to date and provide indebatable evidence or proof. They are at best a snapshot of word meanings by a single author or group. The simple fact is that language constantly changes and sometimes you end up with terms that should be opposites (flammable and inflammable) but actually mean the same thing.
Since you seem interested, I refer you to this periodical or even better, this public radio site and specifically the letter that people send in and the responses. You may or may not like it.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to mention the 15 minutes to half hour it takes to get to the ER and have someone draw the blood and test it.
Spell check isn't enough either... I really expect someone to know the difference in where/wear/which/witch/there/their/etc. and expect it to be reviewed by someone ELSE who can catch those kinds of mistakes/brainos.
You apparently are not in that category. In fact, I would guess just about all of the users of gnome would not be in that category. However, it should be a tunable feature to allow for accessibility/usability by those that have physical problems.
Ok, now how many of you just did the math to make sure that statement was correct in hopes of correcting it? Shame on you.
No need for you to tailor your spelling and grammar. For gods sakes, you already have good editorial skills evident from your lack of typos. . . My position isn't that the site isn't international, just that it uses American English and American topics as policy, etc. If you started using French/Italian/Japanese on this site, it would be an issue... the whole paradigm of what is slashdot will break down. Plus, you'd get a lot of flak.
If you say you walked up to someone late at night and put a torch in their face, expect there to be some confusion as to whether there were burnt eyebrows (holy crap, now I have to think about whether to use burnt or burned... DAMN YOU! -- and you see which I chose), especially when you have an international audience. If you use the word spelt just use it. By remarking that it is correct usage (and implying it is more correct by doing that) you are inviting comments. Know your audience :)
I seriously have no idea what the hell this topic is about... this conversation is tons more interesting.
See, I told you my comment wasn't guaranteed.. hell, it wasn't even researched. :)
To be perfectly serious, there is a language called American English. Thank Daniel Webster for pushing for a distinct variant in spellings (Two countries separated by a common language and all that). And since this is slashdot, it is very American leaning (see here for the editorial opinion). Thus, your pre-emptive strike regarding which came first is really a moot point. You write for your audience. Do you use polysyllabic words when addressing toddlers?
While correct, the word spelt just comes across as pretentious. It isn't wrong, but it sounds funny to the ear and is distracting in conversation. Of course, that's just Dennis Miller's opinion, he could be wrong.
Take the block of ice and replace it with some other form of air cooling system... oops, in a closed system, it just generates more heat.
Damn you, entropy!!!!
Don't worry. He doesn't lose his arm, just his hand.
That would be 802.11g
Are you sure that's not what I said? ;)
Isn't what you are referring to actually a simulation? Emulation would be far easier. I'm thinking simulation means do it exactly the same way as the real thing, whereas emulation is more of a black box "as long as the outputs match on the same inputs" thing.
I think there is an issue to think about here:
You need to adequately communicate the simple fact that though you are forcing a developer to run a server under formally more limited restrictions which is in their best interests to minimize risk, they are still responsible for unholy code (the kind that lives on forever because it can't get hacked). The "if you don't understand it, that's not my problem" comment is uncalled for and is precisely what this article is all about.. don't be an asshole.
An open relay is used to hand off sending millions of copies of the same email.
Dedicated Spammers have their own servers to do the work (bandwidth is cheap for them, too)
Unsolicited mail from "partners" of real companies that you have a business relationship with
Yes, open relays can be a bad thing as they escalate the number of emails that any one Spammer can send, but this can easily be circumvented by a white list. Not that that is especially nice to legitimate emailers, but requiring an interactive session the first time an address wants to send to you would severely shut down SPAM. I say this to argue against your statement that "any technical solution is doomed to fail". Unrealistic, maybe. Difficult to implement across the Internet? Without a doubt. But doomed to failure is quite a strong statement.
You have taxes = $225, which works out to hmm, lessee about 7.5% of your income. My *sales* tax is 7.75%, therefore I stand by my statement.
OHH, I see, you thought I meant that there are no income taxes, no, I simply meant that's true when one uses your fucked up math. I'll add a smiley next time :)
Standard of living is in question now, too.. I mean, ALL YOUR NEIGHBORS ARE CANADIANS! ;)
My God, what a great country. Tremendous standard of living and no TAXES, to boot.
That always made me laugh. At least it is truth in advertising.
My close second choice was:
-----------------
"This sentence no verb" -- Douglas Hofstadter
"Ths senternce no speling" -- Cmdrtaco
As a consultant, I take that approach for a lot of my work: a client pays me to develop a solution, and they get a hand-crafted solution. Not a single one of my clients cares that I can take that solution and sell it to someone else or give it away... they got what they wanted and paid a fair price for it.
If the US federal govt pays for such a software / hardware package, I have no problem with the fact that cities, counties, other countries, dictators, whoever can also use it. Beats the hell out of sending troops to spread democracy...
As far as I can tell, the only reasons to keep this closed source are:
The software is crap, exploitable and this is piss poor security through obscurity
The compan(y|ies) developing the software isn't being paid enough, and thus needs to protect its product to repeatedly sell it to even break even.
There is large scale corruption going on and this is a way to completely destroy democracy... remember, there is no illuminati.
Yeah, it mostly works, but when the administration has the power to deny Congress the right to oversee white house involvement in things like September 11, then the checks and balances system breaks down and you end up with a dictator (feel free to take the connotation away from that word.. I am trying to describe a state where a single individual sits at the top rather than an equal 3 ring circus.)
To get back on topic, I have to agree with the parent that this is something that fits in the category of "We are doing this in the name of Homeland Security but it actually doesn't help the situation."
I don't understand what you are complaining about.. the fact that the install has reasonable defaults so that someone can basically click next next and get a distro installed, or what. It's not like you can't click on advanced on any of these.
What *I* can't understand is why people think that reference books (even Internet ones) are up to date and provide indebatable evidence or proof. They are at best a snapshot of word meanings by a single author or group. The simple fact is that language constantly changes and sometimes you end up with terms that should be opposites (flammable and inflammable) but actually mean the same thing.
Since you seem interested, I refer you to this periodical or even better, this public radio site and specifically the letter that people send in and the responses. You may or may not like it.