*sigh* So they are STILL trying to put bandaids on their old, insecure, highly-patched (and therefore low quality) software rather than ditching insecure communications protocols and writing a simpler browser that is secure from the gound up.
Yep - Microsoft is all in favor of security - so long as it maintains backward compatibility and they don't have to throw anything away.
Yes, once again Microsoft S/W Engineers learn that the more public the demo or the more important the audience, the more likely some will go wrong. It's one of Murphy's laws. Been there. Did that. Barely survived.
Experience is the human quality that enables you to recognize a mistake immediately when you make it again.
Bosses make decisions based on relationships and trust. When they don't know a subject, they seek the advice of trusted experts to help them understand it so they can make an informed decision. If you have worked at developing your relationship with your bosses, if you have shown them articles and facts, if you have stated your expert opinion succinctly and they have rejected it, then they simply do not recognize you as a worthy technical authority. It is time to resign and move on. Your vision is just too different from theirs for them to trust you. I hope you can find a place where you will be happier.
Oh. Then I was only partly successful. The comment was intended to be vapid and mildly humorous, although I hadn't thought it to be cryptic.
My comment is actually a gentle lampoon of the original story, aping its essential characteristics. The story documents, IMO, a vapid and unimportant topic. It really doesn't have anything to do with news, just as my comment doesn't have anything to do with the story.
Wouldn't you love to be in Google's founders' shoes right now?
How much tax of any kind is owed on stock options sales when you hold them for more than a year? Let's see - google on stock sales - OK. Your profit is the sales proceeds minus the basis (acquisition price) minus the expenses of selling. Nutz. I KNEW I should not have just trusted TurboTax to compute the tax owed for me! Now I don't understand it!:-/ Darn computers.
I'd have to agree - Five's charge is too expensive for the content they offer. However, I'd gladly pay 3 US bucks / one pound fifty for a quality show that does not contain advertising.
TANSTAAFL, you know - if we want content, a company needs an income stream to produce it. Free to downloader / viewers means charging someone else, such as advertisers or the government, to cover both creation and distribution. How might one charge for advertising when the total audience is distributed over time and there are associated periodic charges for infrastructure such as servers and ISP connections? Might the audience be found by summing the number of downloads, say, on a monthly basis? What happens when an advertiser decides to cancel his advertisements? For embedded advertising, must the show be withdrawn and new advertising embedded? Could advertising be merged into the download on the fly? These are easy questions for a businessman to answer while putting together a new business model (and the processes and procedures that implement it).
Sigh. I only wish a large media company would see downloading as the new business opportunity it is rather than treating it as a scourge.
Much maligned for his business practices, is this proof that sometimes the ends justify the means? Let's see if the Linux community can match his generosity.
Nah. This kind of behavior is common among robber barons. Take a look at history. Railroads, steel making, and any number of other areas undergoing incredible change produced the same kind of successful people with exactly the same behavior
The Linux community has the head count (and they have the resources) to match this sum. It could be done save for one drawback. Our strengths in software development are our weaknesses here - volunteerism and decentralization. No one has yet volunteered to organize the collection and get it into the right hands, whatever "the right hands" means, or if they have they have not yet published their message sufficiently.
You know the movie biz - if there's a buck to be made, they'll find a way to make it - making a remake of a bad movie is a tried and true formula for it. And I ask you - how many remakes turn out as good or better than the original?
The cultural values approach produces some interesting insights.
The obvious stuff:
1) Coding for other programmers promotes code reuse. Code reuse promotes productivity.
2) Security is affected by code reuse. It propagates bugs resident in the reused code but avoids bugs that would be introduced should the user have to recode that functionality. The net gain is that, so long as the reused code is in a common library, fixing it once fixes multiple applications. Available source means that more (and fresh) eyes review the common code, improving the possibility of finding the bugs in the first place.
3) Writing for end users, when done well, produces applications with better usability. Naturally it tends to sell better.
4) Writing only for end users tends to produce inflexible applications. The user must use the program exactly as the author intended and no other way, unless the programmer takes the higher road. In the first-to-market commercial business environment, taking the higher road is as hard as pushing a rope.
5) Literate end users is not only a contradiction in terms, it is an unreasonable expectation. Programmers cannot expect end users to learn more than the minimum needed to operate the computer because (1) they see it as a tool to to accomplish their real goal, and (2) The inner workings of the hardware and software do not interest them. Is it reasonable to expect all drivers to understand the inner workings of an automobile, or kitchen users to understand the inner workings of their dishwashers?
6) If Unix is to succeed on the desktop, it must cater to end users.
My conclusions:
1) If we really want Unix to succeed on the desktop, it seems to me like we need cultural fusion. We must pay more attention to end users but without losing the values in the Unix community that produce modular, reusable, secure, reliable code.
2) This fusion alone is necessary but not sufficient, else Apple would have more market share than it does.
3) The cultural fusion discussed so far is in the technical world. But IT vendors' companies rest on three pillars: the technical pillar, the business pillar, and the merchandising/marketing pillar. Every company that hopes to put Unix on the desktop would be well-advised to rethink their business processes, standard contracts, and advertising so as to cater to home end users and to give business end users more visibility and consideration. First on my list of business processes to review would be the help desk metaphor. What a universally negative experience!
Of course! That's the beauty of having choice - tune your (dedicated?) system for its application. Mix and match - make an ext2 partition for the application that needs speed and can deal with occasional data corruption. Add an XFS or JFS partition for general purpose. Add others as needed.
Database systems, which are among the slowest and most highly I/O bound of applications, take this idea to its logical extreme -- they often operate on raw partitions and handle everything themselves just to speed up I/O.
So the big T. made the list. So RMS didn't. So Gates and Jobs rank well too. So what? This is just a journalist's opinion of who is influential anyway. Ordering is based on those he knows and how visible they are. The world has LOTS of opinions - at least as many as there are people.
We use a home-grown "database" in Lotus Notes to track RFCs (Requests for Change) - they are part of a larger formal CM system that tracks problems, changes, status, assigned developers, releases, files, file versions, etc for all releases of all projects in our division. It is designed to mesh with our engineering processes so that it is easy to keep everything straight with minimal effort.
Utilities such as telephones are taxed by several levels of government, not just the states. The shift of the telephone service to a permanently untaxable form will have a corresponding multi-level effect. Here in Fairfax County, VA we really get soaked - 22% levied against local service - see Fairfax County Tax Rates for details.
Take the bigger picture. This matter is really one of revenue shaping. It takes so many dollars to run the governments (that we hope are acting for the common good). They can get tax revenue from many places. The government sets various tax levels on different goods and services, and by so doing decides which industries and activities it wishes to encourage by giving them a break. This principle is applied at all levels of government. Losing the telephone tax base is not the end of the world - governments will increase the revenue stream elsewhere. Income, personal property, and real estate are perennial favorites here in the US.
That said, Congress should think carefully before reducing the choices that subordinate government levels have.
Compare the machine to your average bovine gas generator. The bovine version: - requires no input of inergy for hot composting - can accept a wider range of biomass - has a multistage biomass conversion mechanism
(i.e. multiple stomachs) - requires no biomass harvesting and preprocessing - produces firtilizer - produces milk (with proper prep & handling) - is self repairing - is self propagating
All we need now is a way to harness bovine gas production! I can see it now! So we back the cattle into their stalls and shove the... uhm, never mind.
If you are REALLY insecure about this, here's a paranoid's list of things that will make you harder to find than most, which will induce lazy crooks to look for easier pickings. Frankly, I think most of this stuff is as effective as snapping your fingers to keep away elephants (hey - see any elephants? It works, then!) but some folks swear by them.
1) Don't maintain more cyber access than you really need. Protect the cyber access you do need by using different user IDs (if possible) and ALWAYS use different, strong passwords for each account. Keep them in a safe if you must write them down.
2) Stay off everyone's profile list. Never, EVER give your privacy or profile information to anyone that calls you. Give it to those you call when you have a legitimate need, or when filling in an application for something you need, like an auto loan.
3) Set your browser up to refuse cookies, or notify you and ask if it should accept cookies from a site. NEVER store passwords in your browser. Set your cache to wipe itself out after each session.
4) Don't use credit cards unless you have to, and never use them on the net unless you have the one-time use version like AMEX has. Even then, make sure the site is secure and has a good security track record.
5. Don't sign up for "free services" especially those on the internet. Do you really need automatic bill paying, on-line bill paying, e-mail news, and who knows what else?
This approach is as much a way of thinking as it is a list of actions to take or to avoid. Consider the benefits, the costs, and the risks of each act where you reveal your private information, then make a rational decision.
Slashdot Mirror
*sigh* So they are STILL trying to put bandaids on their old, insecure, highly-patched (and therefore low quality) software rather than ditching insecure communications protocols and writing a simpler browser that is secure from the gound up.
Yep - Microsoft is all in favor of security - so long as it maintains backward compatibility and they don't have to throw anything away.
You've not dealt with much real-world hardware, have you?
Not dealt with hardware much? I'll bet he has! Heh. He has an adequate budget, unlike you. In fact, I'd hazard a guess he works for the government!
Yes, once again Microsoft S/W Engineers learn that the more public the demo or the more important the audience, the more likely some will go wrong. It's one of Murphy's laws. Been there. Did that. Barely survived.
Experience is the human quality that enables you to recognize a mistake immediately when you make it again.
Dacap
No, he doesn't. He bought that crappy typewriter from e.e. cummings last year on e-bay.
Bosses make decisions based on relationships and trust. When they don't know a subject, they seek the advice of trusted experts to help them understand it so they can make an informed decision. If you have worked at developing your relationship with your bosses, if you have shown them articles and facts, if you have stated your expert opinion succinctly and they have rejected it, then they simply do not recognize you as a worthy technical authority. It is time to resign and move on. Your vision is just too different from theirs for them to trust you. I hope you can find a place where you will be happier.
Not a Star Trek TOS fan? For more information on Horta, see
http://www.70disco.com/startrek/horta.htm
dacap
Oh. Then I was only partly successful. The comment was intended to be vapid and mildly humorous, although I hadn't thought it to be cryptic.
My comment is actually a gentle lampoon of the original story, aping its essential characteristics. The story documents, IMO, a vapid and unimportant topic. It really doesn't have anything to do with news, just as my comment doesn't have anything to do with the story.
Then again, I could simply be full of it.
Wouldn't you love to be in Google's founders' shoes right now?
:-/ Darn computers.
How much tax of any kind is owed on stock options sales when you hold them for more than a year? Let's see - google on stock sales - OK. Your profit is the sales proceeds minus the basis (acquisition price) minus the expenses of selling. Nutz. I KNEW I should not have just trusted TurboTax to compute the tax owed for me! Now I don't understand it!
I'd have to agree - Five's charge is too expensive for the content they offer. However, I'd gladly pay 3 US bucks / one pound fifty for a quality show that does not contain advertising.
TANSTAAFL, you know - if we want content, a company needs an income stream to produce it. Free to downloader / viewers means charging someone else, such as advertisers or the government, to cover both creation and distribution. How might one charge for advertising when the total audience is distributed over time and there are associated periodic charges for infrastructure such as servers and ISP connections? Might the audience be found by summing the number of downloads, say, on a monthly basis? What happens when an advertiser decides to cancel his advertisements? For embedded advertising, must the show be withdrawn and new advertising embedded? Could advertising be merged into the download on the fly? These are easy questions for a businessman to answer while putting together a new business model (and the processes and procedures that implement it).
Sigh. I only wish a large media company would see downloading as the new business opportunity it is rather than treating it as a scourge.
DaCAP
Hey! means No Text! What are you doing looking here??????
Much maligned for his business practices, is this proof that sometimes the ends justify the means? Let's see if the Linux community can match his generosity.
Nah. This kind of behavior is common among robber barons. Take a look at history. Railroads, steel making, and any number of other areas undergoing incredible change produced the same kind of successful people with exactly the same behavior
The Linux community has the head count (and they have the resources) to match this sum. It could be done save for one drawback. Our strengths in software development are our weaknesses here - volunteerism and decentralization. No one has yet volunteered to organize the collection and get it into the right hands, whatever "the right hands" means, or if they have they have not yet published their message sufficiently.
You know the movie biz - if there's a buck to be made, they'll find a way to make it - making a remake of a bad movie is a tried and true formula for it. And I ask you - how many remakes turn out as good or better than the original?
Trusted Computing!?!?! What are Deibold and Trusted Computing doing in the same sentence????
I espcially liked the part about hacking your OS with a binary editor and changing the kilobyte constant to 256.
DaCAP
The cultural values approach produces some interesting insights.
The obvious stuff:
1) Coding for other programmers promotes code reuse. Code reuse promotes productivity.
2) Security is affected by code reuse. It propagates bugs resident in the reused code but avoids bugs that would be introduced should the user have to recode that functionality. The net gain is that, so long as the reused code is in a common library, fixing it once fixes multiple applications. Available source means that more (and fresh) eyes review the common code, improving the possibility of finding the bugs in the first place.
3) Writing for end users, when done well, produces applications with better usability. Naturally it tends to sell better.
4) Writing only for end users tends to produce inflexible applications. The user must use the program exactly as the author intended and no other way, unless the programmer takes the higher road. In the first-to-market commercial business environment, taking the higher road is as hard as pushing a rope.
5) Literate end users is not only a contradiction in terms, it is an unreasonable expectation. Programmers cannot expect end users to learn more than the minimum needed to operate the computer because (1) they see it as a tool to to accomplish their real goal, and (2) The inner workings of the hardware and software do not interest them. Is it reasonable to expect all drivers to understand the inner workings of an automobile, or kitchen users to understand the inner workings of their dishwashers?
6) If Unix is to succeed on the desktop, it must cater to end users.
My conclusions:
1) If we really want Unix to succeed on the desktop, it seems to me like we need cultural fusion. We must pay more attention to end users but without losing the values in the Unix community that produce modular, reusable, secure, reliable code.
2) This fusion alone is necessary but not sufficient, else Apple would have more market share than it does.
3) The cultural fusion discussed so far is in the technical world. But IT vendors' companies rest on three pillars: the technical pillar, the business pillar, and the merchandising/marketing pillar. Every company that hopes to put Unix on the desktop would be well-advised to rethink their business processes, standard contracts, and advertising so as to cater to home end users and to give business end users more visibility and consideration. First on my list of business processes to review would be the help desk metaphor. What a universally negative experience!
What say you, technical literati?
Of course! That's the beauty of having choice - tune your (dedicated?) system for its application. Mix and match - make an ext2 partition for the application that needs speed and can deal with occasional data corruption. Add an XFS or JFS partition for general purpose. Add others as needed.
Database systems, which are among the slowest and most highly I/O bound of applications, take this idea to its logical extreme -- they often operate on raw partitions and handle everything themselves just to speed up I/O.
So the big T. made the list. So RMS didn't. So Gates and Jobs rank well too. So what? This is just a journalist's opinion of who is influential anyway. Ordering is based on those he knows and how visible they are. The world has LOTS of opinions - at least as many as there are people.
We use a home-grown "database" in Lotus Notes to track RFCs (Requests for Change) - they are part of a larger formal CM system that tracks problems, changes, status, assigned developers, releases, files, file versions, etc for all releases of all projects in our division. It is designed to mesh with our engineering processes so that it is easy to keep everything straight with minimal effort.
Not bad, for a mixed Govt/Contractor team, eh?
Utilities such as telephones are taxed by several levels of government, not just the states. The shift of the telephone service to a permanently untaxable form will have a corresponding multi-level effect. Here in Fairfax County, VA we really get soaked - 22% levied against local service - see Fairfax County Tax Rates for details.
Take the bigger picture. This matter is really one of revenue shaping. It takes so many dollars to run the governments (that we hope are acting for the common good). They can get tax revenue from many places. The government sets various tax levels on different goods and services, and by so doing decides which industries and activities it wishes to encourage by giving them a break. This principle is applied at all levels of government. Losing the telephone tax base is not the end of the world - governments will increase the revenue stream elsewhere. Income, personal property, and real estate are perennial favorites here in the US.
That said, Congress should think carefully before reducing the choices that subordinate government levels have.
Compare the machine to your average bovine gas generator. The bovine version:
... uhm, never mind.
- requires no input of inergy for hot composting
- can accept a wider range of biomass
- has a multistage biomass conversion mechanism
(i.e. multiple stomachs)
- requires no biomass harvesting and preprocessing
- produces firtilizer
- produces milk (with proper prep & handling)
- is self repairing
- is self propagating
All we need now is a way to harness bovine gas production! I can see it now! So we back the cattle into their stalls and shove the
Ah, yes. As in regulating retail price without regulating wholesale price. It's no wonder the power distribution companies when bankrupt!
lack of knowledge rarely deters people either from voicing their opinions or arguing strongly for their position, no matter how insane or inane.
If you are REALLY insecure about this, here's a paranoid's list of things that will make you harder to find than most, which will induce lazy crooks to look for easier pickings. Frankly, I think most of this stuff is as effective as snapping your fingers to keep away elephants (hey - see any elephants? It works, then!) but some folks swear by them.
1) Don't maintain more cyber access than you really need. Protect the cyber access you do need by using different user IDs (if possible) and ALWAYS use different, strong passwords for each account. Keep them in a safe if you must write them down.
2) Stay off everyone's profile list. Never, EVER give your privacy or profile information to anyone that calls you. Give it to those you call when you have a legitimate need, or when filling in an application for something you need, like an auto loan.
3) Set your browser up to refuse cookies, or notify you and ask if it should accept cookies from a site. NEVER store passwords in your browser. Set your cache to wipe itself out after each session.
4) Don't use credit cards unless you have to, and never use them on the net unless you have the one-time use version like AMEX has. Even then, make sure the site is secure and has a good security track record.
5. Don't sign up for "free services" especially those on the internet. Do you really need automatic bill paying, on-line bill paying, e-mail news, and who knows what else?
This approach is as much a way of thinking as it is a list of actions to take or to avoid. Consider the benefits, the costs, and the risks of each act where you reveal your private information, then make a rational decision.
Clearly, you have never had to deal with collection agencies! :-)
But guess whose ground is gonna get scorched? :-D