Most of the childes asked, believed that what they found on the internet is true, 100% fact, and they had no training in spotting what's not facts or how to check the sources.
Not at all surprising, and it's very unlikely that you'll ever succeed in convincing kids not to believe everything they read. Kids don't seem to be capable of evaluating factual information until they're in their early teens.
*sigh* Wouldn't it be nice if we could live in such a world? Kids at that age haven't learned to distrust the world. I think the problem is less that kids are naive but that our world is a little too screwed up...
You're so engrained in mathematical notation that you seem to have accepted the fact that a = b + c is the natural way to do things.
Excellent point! I think I mislead a little with my post. I don't advocate everything look exactly like mathematical notation, but rather that languages be flexible enough to adapt to whatever their user is most comfortable with. I believe strongly in DSLs and have been on-again off-again doing research in the area.
There are certainly lots of people that find things very readable that I find absolutely opaque and vice versa.
That's really sad. You have all the functionality you want but can't progress because your favourite syntactical sugar isn't there?
Well, let's just do everything in Lambda calculus then.. it has all the same functionality.
Syntactic sugar is the purpose of programming languages. It's to make writing algorithms as easy, natural, and efficient as possible. We're so engrained in these procedure based languages that we seem to have accepted the fact that add(a, b) is the natural way to do things.
It's not. Learning complex procedural libraries is just as terribly complicated as learning a new language (if not worse assuming the new language would offer a more natural means of expressing ideas). I think the real point for the poster is that Java is obviously not the right tool for the job here. Eclipse has a C/C++ plugin (CDT) coupled with the GNU toolchain gives you an equivalent environment for C/C++ as for Java with just as much (if not more) freeness.
Doing something because "it's the thing of the future" is sort of silly. Who had thought Java would be more than a web-developers language 5 years ago? Who's to say we'll even be talking about Java in another 5 years...
Things change rapidly in our industry. Don't chase the future because by the time you get there you're going to be stuck in the past.
I don't remember why but I did have a valid reason for using this at some point.. I believe it was because I was initializing a variable with the results of a function but I cannot recall at this point. Anyway, I got thoroughly lectured on why this was evil by my team:-) Forgot I even had that as my sig...
This sounds like Strake Jesuit to me. A friend of mine went there and just told me a story about the ~75 year old marine... I can attest that the education there is quite good.
I'm from an area in Jersey that had a ton of Catholic schools. Some of them were exceptionally good and some were exceptionally bad. In fact, the public school system was much better than a good number of them.
I think the most common theme I've seen in the quality of a school system is the socio-economic profile of the majority of it's students. Kids with parents that care about schooling and access to private tutoring tend to do better.
Vlad is definitely not a student. He's a ridiculusly smart guy who's been working on GATOS forever. ATI has had this NDA deal with GATOS for a long time too, since way before nVidia ever put out an OS driver. ATI was revolutionary with their support for Linux (they provided documentation at a time when noone even knew what Linux was).
GATOS' own success has been it's biggest downfall. Because there was something there that was working pretty well, I imagine Linux support was never high on ATI's radar.
At any rate, I don't think there's a tremendous economic incentive for ATI to provide world-class Linux drivers. Remember, this is a commodity market so there's got to be tremendous volume for the numbers to work out right.
If he really hates shipping Windows binaries, he could:
1) Add source code to shut off XChat after 30 days with an --enable-thirty-day-shutoff configure flag. 2) Compile with above flag for Windows and offer for free download off of the site. 3) Compile w/o the above flag for Windows and offer for a $20 service fee.
The key, of course, is that the same code must be available upon request from a person downloading either binary. Certainly, this would result in someone compiling the binary without the flag and distributing it on a mirror site.
I imagine though that the license shift is more about greed though. I expect the FSF will step in soon enough.
It's free as in beer and performs a lot better than Cygwin. MS has special hooks in the kernel for SFU so thinks like piping actually has a reasonable performance (on Cygwin it sucks major ass). Not as fast as running natively on Unix and much much much less reliable but probably a better option.
I normally don't endorse MS products but in this case you'll actually get reasonable vendor support (something you can't really say with Cygwin).
Let me start off with a disclaimer: I do work for IBM however the following represents my opinions, not that of IBM.
There's a reason that they say you never get fired for going with IBM. IBM has more super-computing experience than anyone. We've got an amazing turn-around capability when it comes to building clusters. But perhaps the best thing with going with IBM is the fact that it builds the relationship.
IBM is very involved with universities especially in the areas of high performance computing. We offer a number of grant programs to help out. I've seen how we handle universities where we make hardware investments. The people handling it really care about making sure things work out well for the students and professors involved.
It's definitely worth calling an IBM sales person about it. If you need a number, feel free to email me and I'll do my best to find you one.
We go through great lengths in Samba to be as portable as possible. Our build farm runs the most popular unices on all sorts of architectures (you'd be amazed how different Linux on x86 can be than Linux on say a s390). We support a ton of platforms including some as obscure as the Amiga.
What I'd do if I were you is to just grep the Samba source code before you use a function. You'll likely find a list of platforms that it doesn't work on, or that simply doesn't have that particular function. You may also find workarounds for bugs in particular implementations.
It's never an individual's fault. It's a breakdown in the QA/FVT/review structure. Is it the person who coded it's fault? Is it the team that reviewed the code? Is it the author of the FVT tests? Is it the person in charge of QA?
What's that you say, this is all the same person? No wonder you had the bug to begin with...
97 comments were filed publicly. Everyone from RMS to IEEE to, well, me.
Basically, software warranties would make Free Software illegal. The model wouldn't work if we were held to quality expectations. Read the comments to educate yourself.
Winmodems have been a problem in Linux not because we haven't been able to figure them out but because there really is no good solution. The FCC regulates any piece of equipment that uses standard phone lines. This is why the UARTs have such a well-defined interface (the Hayes command set). You can pull a UART and use it in your project since these guys have already been blessed by the FCC.
Winmodems are cheaper to manufactor because the UARTs are pretty complex beasts (one poster said they cost $1 a piece.. thumbing through my digi-key catalog, it looks like in volume they run at least $3-8 a piece).
At any rate, portions of the software for winmodems have to be signed off from the FCC. These portions are usually firmware and can be downloaded right to the board. This is not universally true though. So the Winmodems that work in Linux tend to be the ones that 1) use a downloadable firmware and 2) come from companies that don't mind you using the firmware outside of the original driver.
For an entry level candidate, you should have no more than one page. Anything else just shows your arrogant. There are a lot of people who are a lot smarter than you. There are reasons why most recruiters only want one page but just accept this for now.
You want to have an aestically pleasing resume. You should look at it and immediately notice whatever you are most proud of. You'll want to make very clear your past work experience and especially the skills you possess.
Most recruiters run through resumes looking to fill jobs. They'll look for a "Linux developer with n years C/C++ experience" or a "Java programmer with J2EE blah blah blah".
I imagine the fact that you have more than one page is why you're not getting interviews. Most recruiters I know immediately throw out resumes greater than one page.
Dude, you seriously don't understand. Window is *not* more usuable than Linux. I've not used Windows in close to a decade and I can't find my way through the thing.
You're just used to it. There's nothing we can do about that short of cloning Windows. Well f that.
(2) Follow standard industry disciplinary procedures: . ..A verbal warning first, then a written warning; and finally suspension or being expelled.
If you were caught intentionally taking source code from the internet and passing it off as your own and that code was in product lines now, you better bet you're ass would be fired very quickly.
Whats ultimately needed is a standard ABI for the linux kernel - in this way drivers compiled for say, 2.4.8 would still work on 2.4.26.
You don't see a lot of standard APIs (let alone ABIs) in the Open Source world because programming has to be enjoyable to attract programmers and let's face it, coding around standards generally isn't enjoyable. Not to mention the fact that the kernel is notorious for doing huge overhauls to support greater scalability, etc. The kernel is a great example of a project that started from humble roots and was refactored into something quite nice.
b) Kernel developers are unwary of giving manufacturers an easy way to ship binary drivers, thus making it easier for them to make the choice to withhold source. - Be aware it does not preclude this choice.
There are already problems with vendors jumping through hoops to violate the kernel licensing... It's not fun to have your code stolen.
It should be remembered that Linux has not been built solely to provide a platform for people who are sick of Windows who want something that works exactly the same but for free,
Let me extend this. Linux is not at all written to provide a platform for people who are sick of Windows who want something that works exactly the same but for free. Not at all. Linux is about making a good, robust, and fun operating system that the people who develop it actually like to use.
The minute it has things like automagic driver install that requires some "trusted third party" to sign any driver I write in order to distribute it (or starts doing logo certification or something gay like that), is the day I stop using Linux and start working on something else (and I imagine a lot of people feel the same way as I do).
"Use a good linker". (Good C++ linkers are exceedingly rare, because there's little demand for them, but they can exist)
How would a "good linker" alleviate the problem of templates? The code will be generated when a template is instantiated. There's no way to avoid that. It seems to me the license is broken here--not the language.
I'll accept your critism about semantics of "cannot" however I don't think a technical solution (short of providing source) is really obivous.
Tejas was named by the Spanish after the Tejas Indians.
Actually Tejas is an Hasinai indian word (that was the tribe that was native to the area of central texas) meaning "friends". Texas is an english version of the word.
The name Tejas comes from the first mission established in this area called Francisco de los Tejas.
I tell you one thing though. Except for the MS astro turfers most people here never claimed open source was un american or a cancer or communist.
Yes, but I'd also wager that a lot of folks here have come into developer channels and spammed about their silly problems because they cannot read the documentation themselves. And I know for a fact there's a lot of people here that go around spreading all sorts of FUD about Microsoft and make many of the people in the community that are conspiracy theorists look bad.
Look, in the Open Source world, you get judged by merit. I don't care about what their marketing engine has said and done. None of that affects me. None of that has affected the code I write.
As far as I'm concerned, code speaks louder than words.
Slashdot Mirror
Most of the childes asked, believed that what they found on the internet is true, 100% fact, and they had no training in spotting what's not facts or how to check the sources.
Not at all surprising, and it's very unlikely that you'll ever succeed in convincing kids not to believe everything they read. Kids don't seem to be capable of evaluating factual information until they're in their early teens.
*sigh* Wouldn't it be nice if we could live in such a world? Kids at that age haven't learned to distrust the world. I think the problem is less that kids are naive but that our world is a little too screwed up...
You're so engrained in mathematical notation that you seem to have accepted the fact that a = b + c is the natural way to do things.
Excellent point! I think I mislead a little with my post. I don't advocate everything look exactly like mathematical notation, but rather that languages be flexible enough to adapt to whatever their user is most comfortable with. I believe strongly in DSLs and have been on-again off-again doing research in the area.
There are certainly lots of people that find things very readable that I find absolutely opaque and vice versa.
That's really sad. You have all the functionality you want but can't progress because your favourite syntactical sugar isn't there?
Well, let's just do everything in Lambda calculus then.. it has all the same functionality.
Syntactic sugar is the purpose of programming languages. It's to make writing algorithms as easy, natural, and efficient as possible. We're so engrained in these procedure based languages that we seem to have accepted the fact that add(a, b) is the natural way to do things.
It's not. Learning complex procedural libraries is just as terribly complicated as learning a new language (if not worse assuming the new language would offer a more natural means of expressing ideas). I think the real point for the poster is that Java is obviously not the right tool for the job here. Eclipse has a C/C++ plugin (CDT) coupled with the GNU toolchain gives you an equivalent environment for C/C++ as for Java with just as much (if not more) freeness.
Doing something because "it's the thing of the future" is sort of silly. Who had thought Java would be more than a web-developers language 5 years ago? Who's to say we'll even be talking about Java in another 5 years...
Things change rapidly in our industry. Don't chase the future because by the time you get there you're going to be stuck in the past.
I don't remember why but I did have a valid reason for using this at some point.. I believe it was because I was initializing a variable with the results of a function but I cannot recall at this point. Anyway, I got thoroughly lectured on why this was evil by my team :-) Forgot I even had that as my sig...
Why the Samba Team of course. Where would we be without it?
This sounds like Strake Jesuit to me. A friend of mine went there and just told me a story about the ~75 year old marine... I can attest that the education there is quite good.
I'm from an area in Jersey that had a ton of Catholic schools. Some of them were exceptionally good and some were exceptionally bad. In fact, the public school system was much better than a good number of them.
I think the most common theme I've seen in the quality of a school system is the socio-economic profile of the majority of it's students. Kids with parents that care about schooling and access to private tutoring tend to do better.
Vlad is definitely not a student. He's a ridiculusly smart guy who's been working on GATOS forever. ATI has had this NDA deal with GATOS for a long time too, since way before nVidia ever put out an OS driver. ATI was revolutionary with their support for Linux (they provided documentation at a time when noone even knew what Linux was).
GATOS' own success has been it's biggest downfall. Because there was something there that was working pretty well, I imagine Linux support was never high on ATI's radar.
At any rate, I don't think there's a tremendous economic incentive for ATI to provide world-class Linux drivers. Remember, this is a commodity market so there's got to be tremendous volume for the numbers to work out right.
If he really hates shipping Windows binaries, he could:
1) Add source code to shut off XChat after 30 days with an --enable-thirty-day-shutoff configure flag.
2) Compile with above flag for Windows and offer for free download off of the site.
3) Compile w/o the above flag for Windows and offer for a $20 service fee.
The key, of course, is that the same code must be available upon request from a person downloading either binary. Certainly, this would result in someone compiling the binary without the flag and distributing it on a mirror site.
I imagine though that the license shift is more about greed though. I expect the FSF will step in soon enough.
Keep in mind, IANAL
It's free as in beer and performs a lot better than Cygwin. MS has special hooks in the kernel for SFU so thinks like piping actually has a reasonable performance (on Cygwin it sucks major ass). Not as fast as running natively on Unix and much much much less reliable but probably a better option.
I normally don't endorse MS products but in this case you'll actually get reasonable vendor support (something you can't really say with Cygwin).
Let me start off with a disclaimer: I do work for IBM however the following represents my opinions, not that of IBM.
There's a reason that they say you never get fired for going with IBM. IBM has more super-computing experience than anyone. We've got an amazing turn-around capability when it comes to building clusters. But perhaps the best thing with going with IBM is the fact that it builds the relationship.
IBM is very involved with universities especially in the areas of high performance computing. We offer a number of grant programs to help out. I've seen how we handle universities where we make hardware investments. The people handling it really care about making sure things work out well for the students and professors involved.
It's definitely worth calling an IBM sales person about it. If you need a number, feel free to email me and I'll do my best to find you one.
We go through great lengths in Samba to be as portable as possible. Our build farm runs the most popular unices on all sorts of architectures (you'd be amazed how different Linux on x86 can be than Linux on say a s390). We support a ton of platforms including some as obscure as the Amiga.
What I'd do if I were you is to just grep the Samba source code before you use a function. You'll likely find a list of platforms that it doesn't work on, or that simply doesn't have that particular function. You may also find workarounds for bugs in particular implementations.
It's never an individual's fault. It's a breakdown in the QA/FVT/review structure. Is it the person who coded it's fault? Is it the team that reviewed the code? Is it the author of the FVT tests? Is it the person in charge of QA?
What's that you say, this is all the same person? No wonder you had the bug to begin with...
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/warranty/
97 comments were filed publicly. Everyone from RMS to IEEE to, well, me.
Basically, software warranties would make Free Software illegal. The model wouldn't work if we were held to quality expectations. Read the comments to educate yourself.
What about our rights not to have to deal with this scumware?
What about our rights not to have to hear hate speech!
What about our rights not to have to see minorities in the same store as us!
Your right to be "left alone" just doesn't exist. Just stop downloading software. It's not hard.
Winmodems have been a problem in Linux not because we haven't been able to figure them out but because there really is no good solution. The FCC regulates any piece of equipment that uses standard phone lines. This is why the UARTs have such a well-defined interface (the Hayes command set). You can pull a UART and use it in your project since these guys have already been blessed by the FCC.
Winmodems are cheaper to manufactor because the UARTs are pretty complex beasts (one poster said they cost $1 a piece.. thumbing through my digi-key catalog, it looks like in volume they run at least $3-8 a piece).
At any rate, portions of the software for winmodems have to be signed off from the FCC. These portions are usually firmware and can be downloaded right to the board. This is not universally true though. So the Winmodems that work in Linux tend to be the ones that 1) use a downloadable firmware and 2) come from companies that don't mind you using the firmware outside of the original driver.
For an entry level candidate, you should have no more than one page. Anything else just shows your arrogant. There are a lot of people who are a lot smarter than you. There are reasons why most recruiters only want one page but just accept this for now.
You want to have an aestically pleasing resume. You should look at it and immediately notice whatever you are most proud of. You'll want to make very clear your past work experience and especially the skills you possess.
Most recruiters run through resumes looking to fill jobs. They'll look for a "Linux developer with n years C/C++ experience" or a "Java programmer with J2EE blah blah blah".
I imagine the fact that you have more than one page is why you're not getting interviews. Most recruiters I know immediately throw out resumes greater than one page.
Dude, you seriously don't understand. Window is *not* more usuable than Linux. I've not used Windows in close to a decade and I can't find my way through the thing.
You're just used to it. There's nothing we can do about that short of cloning Windows. Well f that.
Oh, and FYI
GNOME DID IT FIRST!
We don't use the Apple HIG because we use the Gnome HIG.
And before the flames begin - I love the IDEA of linux. Please! Really! Save me from Windows! I HATE Windows !!!
Save yourself. You're right, I don't give a damn. If you want me to make the software easier for you to use, you can pay me.
As long as you're not paying me, I don't really care what you think. You should be happy that I'm letting you use my software for free.
(2) Follow standard industry disciplinary procedures: .A verbal warning first, then a written warning; and finally suspension or being expelled.
. .
If you were caught intentionally taking source code from the internet and passing it off as your own and that code was in product lines now, you better bet you're ass would be fired very quickly.
We'll be wondering what happened to cheap PCs that we could install Linux on.
We'd get cheap Power workstations to install Linux on thanks to economies of scale.
Remember, IBM is making these PowerPC chips.. I wouldn't be worried about Linux compatibility.
Whats ultimately needed is a standard ABI for the linux kernel - in this way drivers compiled for say, 2.4.8 would still work on 2.4.26.
You don't see a lot of standard APIs (let alone ABIs) in the Open Source world because programming has to be enjoyable to attract programmers and let's face it, coding around standards generally isn't enjoyable. Not to mention the fact that the kernel is notorious for doing huge overhauls to support greater scalability, etc. The kernel is a great example of a project that started from humble roots and was refactored into something quite nice.
b) Kernel developers are unwary of giving manufacturers an easy way to ship binary drivers, thus making it easier for them to make the choice to withhold source. - Be aware it does not preclude this choice.
There are already problems with vendors jumping through hoops to violate the kernel licensing... It's not fun to have your code stolen.
It should be remembered that Linux has not been built solely to provide a platform for people who are sick of Windows who want something that works exactly the same but for free,
Let me extend this. Linux is not at all written to provide a platform for people who are sick of Windows who want something that works exactly the same but for free. Not at all. Linux is about making a good, robust, and fun operating system that the people who develop it actually like to use.
The minute it has things like automagic driver install that requires some "trusted third party" to sign any driver I write in order to distribute it (or starts doing logo certification or something gay like that), is the day I stop using Linux and start working on something else (and I imagine a lot of people feel the same way as I do).
"Use a good linker". (Good C++ linkers are exceedingly rare, because there's little demand for them, but they can exist)
How would a "good linker" alleviate the problem of templates? The code will be generated when a template is instantiated. There's no way to avoid that. It seems to me the license is broken here--not the language.
I'll accept your critism about semantics of "cannot" however I don't think a technical solution (short of providing source) is really obivous.
Tejas was named by the Spanish after the Tejas Indians.
Actually Tejas is an Hasinai indian word (that was the tribe that was native to the area of central texas) meaning "friends". Texas is an english version of the word.
The name Tejas comes from the first mission established in this area called Francisco de los Tejas.
I tell you one thing though. Except for the MS astro turfers most people here never claimed open source was un american or a cancer or communist.
Yes, but I'd also wager that a lot of folks here have come into developer channels and spammed about their silly problems because they cannot read the documentation themselves. And I know for a fact there's a lot of people here that go around spreading all sorts of FUD about Microsoft and make many of the people in the community that are conspiracy theorists look bad.
Look, in the Open Source world, you get judged by merit. I don't care about what their marketing engine has said and done. None of that affects me. None of that has affected the code I write.
As far as I'm concerned, code speaks louder than words.