As far as I know Linus has only ever exploded at people who have ignored previous warnings/questions about their code or behaviour.
Nope. I don't follow kernel development much these days but I still remember Alan Cox quitting about 20 years ago when Linus tore into him over how he was fixing a bug. Cox was basically #2 in the kernel world at the time. It's an excellent example of the kernel losing a quality developer simply because Linus couldn't keep himself civil.
I'd have to go back and look again but I seem to remember that there was more to it than that. I particularly remember not being surprised when Linux blew up. Which doesn't mean he was justified, of course.
(who do you know who never uses sexual swear-words?)
In a professional setting? Pretty much everybody. Those that can't keep uncivil things from popping out of their mouths don't last for long nor should they.
What an angelic world you must work in! I'll take your word for it but I've never worked anywhere where the word "fuck" wasn't used pretty frequently. Usually after someone put the phone down after talking to a client.
1: Steal money off people by getting them to pay your share of the tax bill 2: Give some of that money back as a "gift" with your name in big lights. 3: Go back to blackmailing states to not implement minimum wage laws. 4: Count the money!
As far as I know Linus has only ever exploded at people who have ignored previous warnings/questions about their code or behaviour.
And basing your code of conduct off someone who is openly anti-meritocracy is a real red flag for any technical project. The old CoC was just fine; enforcement perhaps could have been better. Some people here are asking "Why do you think that he'll stop caring solid engineering just because he stops being an asshole", but the new CoC includes requirements that are not at all technical nor are even normal conduct in real life (who do you know who never uses sexual swear-words?) so, assuming that someone falls foul of these sort of fluffy-unicorn requirements the project may no longer have the option to accept the best solution because its author is not acceptable.
No one is suggesting that any project should accept unrelated abuse from one dev to another, even from Linux. But it must accept that actions which affect the project's quality will, if continued over time, eventually attract a strong response from the guy in charge. And, yeah, that might include swearing and telling you that you're not the centre of the universe and that you have become a problem. Dry your lamps and shape up.
The Linux kernel is a construction site where getting things wrong can literally kill someone someone down the line; everyone involved should be wearing metaphorical hard-hats.
Firstly, why would I believe anything that the Trump administration says about anything?
Secondly, it's a bit handy this coming a few days after the pile of vomit in in the White House twitted about his great new Space Force and how it will "dominate" the world, isn't it? Almost as if the two announcements were connected.
Thirdly, what the hell should anyone about to be "dominated" by the US do? Sit and watch?
Everyone's worried about the warming of the oceans, so Microsoft puts a giant heater in one!
Yeah, yeah - I know. But there was a day when someone said "a bit of plastic dumped in the ocean's not going to matter, is it?". It's called learning from your mistakes; maybe we should try it some time.
In the 1930's, the US was the only nation to increase investment in Nazi Germany because it was a strong government of "people we can work with".
In the 2010's, Google sees Fascist China as "people we can work with" too, and so do many others. This time, the wilful blindness to the consequences is not restricted to the US, however.
So, yeah, can't allow anyone to get around censorship - someone's got to think about the money, you know.
Because we could then compile and install the code ourselves without Apple having any further input; they could just update their gitLab repo every so often instead of releasing sealed and obfuscated binaries as they do now.
I'm not sure what your problem is with someone actually having to back up absolute claims of security.
For the most part it is in Apples best interest in not getting caught betraying our trust in its security feature. The easiest way to not get caught is to not do the action.
Brilliant! You've logically disproven the existence of crime! Think of how much money we can save on cops.
People get used to not having arms. Doesn't make it a positive.
The problem is that this was such a stupid, and OBVIOUSLY stupid idea that it undermined any faith in the language creator - who knows what other crap is lurking in there? Then you have the whole Python 2 Vs 3 thing and basically I've got better things to do with my time.
Occam had many things going for it; this wasn't one of them. Generally speaking, any language which requires a special editor is a broken language - indeed, it isn't really a language as such, since it is not self-contained. APL is an interesting grey area, especially in these days of Unicode.
Okay, genuine question here: is it not the case that all blockchains are vulnerable to someone simply hiring enough CPU time to outvote the rest of the "miners"? So, anyone wanting to use it to track things like university degrees or food shipments or whatever, has to more or less single-handedly try to keep ahead of anyone who thinks of a way to make money by taking the chain over even for a day using AWS or something. Is that right?
I'm sure this exposes my ignorance but it's been bothering me since someone at work suggested using the blockchain for tracking something.
When doctors stare at a sample of blood they were consistently unable to identify that the sample had sickle-cells.
Just saying "AI did it" doesn't actually make this anything more that a centuries-long list of "a medical test has been invented". It's good and all that but there seems to be some idea that "AI" means "voodoo".
And it was the worst book (well, set of 3) I've ever finished. Starts of well, but he has no idea where to go with it and it dribbles out in a pile of wasted ideas and characters that go nowhere. Classic example of a mainstream writer thinking that fantasy must be easy because there's no rules and then demonstrating that it isn't and there are.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope. I don't follow kernel development much these days but I still remember Alan Cox quitting about 20 years ago when Linus tore into him over how he was fixing a bug. Cox was basically #2 in the kernel world at the time. It's an excellent example of the kernel losing a quality developer simply because Linus couldn't keep himself civil.
I'd have to go back and look again but I seem to remember that there was more to it than that. I particularly remember not being surprised when Linux blew up. Which doesn't mean he was justified, of course.
In a professional setting? Pretty much everybody. Those that can't keep uncivil things from popping out of their mouths don't last for long nor should they.
What an angelic world you must work in! I'll take your word for it but I've never worked anywhere where the word "fuck" wasn't used pretty frequently. Usually after someone put the phone down after talking to a client.
1: Steal money off people by getting them to pay your share of the tax bill
2: Give some of that money back as a "gift" with your name in big lights.
3: Go back to blackmailing states to not implement minimum wage laws.
4: Count the money!
It's an ancient scam.
As far as I know Linus has only ever exploded at people who have ignored previous warnings/questions about their code or behaviour.
And basing your code of conduct off someone who is openly anti-meritocracy is a real red flag for any technical project. The old CoC was just fine; enforcement perhaps could have been better. Some people here are asking "Why do you think that he'll stop caring solid engineering just because he stops being an asshole", but the new CoC includes requirements that are not at all technical nor are even normal conduct in real life (who do you know who never uses sexual swear-words?) so, assuming that someone falls foul of these sort of fluffy-unicorn requirements the project may no longer have the option to accept the best solution because its author is not acceptable.
No one is suggesting that any project should accept unrelated abuse from one dev to another, even from Linux. But it must accept that actions which affect the project's quality will, if continued over time, eventually attract a strong response from the guy in charge. And, yeah, that might include swearing and telling you that you're not the centre of the universe and that you have become a problem. Dry your lamps and shape up.
The Linux kernel is a construction site where getting things wrong can literally kill someone someone down the line; everyone involved should be wearing metaphorical hard-hats.
Firstly, why would I believe anything that the Trump administration says about anything?
Secondly, it's a bit handy this coming a few days after the pile of vomit in in the White House twitted about his great new Space Force and how it will "dominate" the world, isn't it? Almost as if the two announcements were connected.
Thirdly, what the hell should anyone about to be "dominated" by the US do? Sit and watch?
Trump is a disgrace to his mother's cunt.
"Funnily enough, people far better informed than you"
Microsoft.
Everyone's worried about the warming of the oceans, so Microsoft puts a giant heater in one!
Yeah, yeah - I know. But there was a day when someone said "a bit of plastic dumped in the ocean's not going to matter, is it?". It's called learning from your mistakes; maybe we should try it some time.
In the 1930's, the US was the only nation to increase investment in Nazi Germany because it was a strong government of "people we can work with".
In the 2010's, Google sees Fascist China as "people we can work with" too, and so do many others. This time, the wilful blindness to the consequences is not restricted to the US, however.
So, yeah, can't allow anyone to get around censorship - someone's got to think about the money, you know.
When my s5 finally dies, or someone steals it or whatever, I just want a new S5. Preferably with an OS that's been patched for security reasons.
Even documents saved in MS Office format sometimes don't convert properly.
The same is true of different versions of MS Office, of which there are many.
Why would that prove anything?
Because we could then compile and install the code ourselves without Apple having any further input; they could just update their gitLab repo every so often instead of releasing sealed and obfuscated binaries as they do now.
I'm not sure what your problem is with someone actually having to back up absolute claims of security.
For the most part it is in Apples best interest in not getting caught betraying our trust in its security feature. The easiest way to not get caught is to not do the action.
Brilliant! You've logically disproven the existence of crime! Think of how much money we can save on cops.
People get used to not having arms. Doesn't make it a positive.
The problem is that this was such a stupid, and OBVIOUSLY stupid idea that it undermined any faith in the language creator - who knows what other crap is lurking in there? Then you have the whole Python 2 Vs 3 thing and basically I've got better things to do with my time.
Occam had many things going for it; this wasn't one of them. Generally speaking, any language which requires a special editor is a broken language - indeed, it isn't really a language as such, since it is not self-contained. APL is an interesting grey area, especially in these days of Unicode.
Okay, genuine question here: is it not the case that all blockchains are vulnerable to someone simply hiring enough CPU time to outvote the rest of the "miners"? So, anyone wanting to use it to track things like university degrees or food shipments or whatever, has to more or less single-handedly try to keep ahead of anyone who thinks of a way to make money by taking the chain over even for a day using AWS or something. Is that right?
I'm sure this exposes my ignorance but it's been bothering me since someone at work suggested using the blockchain for tracking something.
Correct.
Who the hell thought a language which is ambiguous when printed out was a good idea?
...and the National Socialist government will punish any airline that says otherwise.
Stop buying from, going to, or meeting with China. Isolate them, cut them off, destroy their government; save a billion people from oppression.
If this stuff is still believed to be safe in 3 decades of actual use, then I'll give it a go or at least evaluate the dangers.
When doctors stare at a sample of blood they were consistently unable to identify that the sample had sickle-cells.
Just saying "AI did it" doesn't actually make this anything more that a centuries-long list of "a medical test has been invented". It's good and all that but there seems to be some idea that "AI" means "voodoo".
Yeah, Dave, when are you going to Open Source the beer in the cellar? Fascist!
was eliminated by moving it into a different fridge when the inspectors called.
I had to use Windows 10 this week. I'd say MS is a long way from redeemed.
Of course, a company that size is not a monolith.
is "implied nudity" a reason to ban something but banning weapons that enable you to massacre a crowd from a quarter of a mile away is controversial.
I'm going to say that Salesforce is over-charging.
No one would ever make $100Bn back on Instagram because it would be obsolete before you could ever make enough cash from selling the users' data.
The Poles were instrumental in winning WWII, from code-breaking to piloting fighters in the Battle of Britain.
"With how easy it is to bribe, cajole, wheedle, or coerce people into doing things,"
You can't judge everyone by the French.
And it was the worst book (well, set of 3) I've ever finished. Starts of well, but he has no idea where to go with it and it dribbles out in a pile of wasted ideas and characters that go nowhere. Classic example of a mainstream writer thinking that fantasy must be easy because there's no rules and then demonstrating that it isn't and there are.