While I won't argue your excellent metaphor some of us unfortunately need to use Windows at work in order to pay bills to buy nice toys like the MacBook Pro.
While true, I suspect our corporate overlords will supply us with a perfectly reasonably Windows box for this purpose.
Hacking around on this newish hardware to get XP to install and run is not something I'd want to be doing for money.
I think it might be instructive to reframe the assumptions around this report.
If we place tech workers in the same box as all other workers, we find that while the real requirements for getting an entry-level job are increasing, the real pay and paid time off has been decreasing. I'm not making this stuff up. I'm too bored to Google for it myself, so do that if you need the facts.
We've place a premium on a university (or college in the U.S.) education, and in doing so have conflated computer science with computer industry jobs. There are plenty of good reasons to get a comp. sci. degree. The promise of a basic programming or tech job is not one of them.
University is intended to give individuals a broad education and introduction to life-long learning. In short, the best university education should teach one how to develop a solid set of learning and critical thinking skills.
It may possibly pave the way for intense specializations at the Masters or Doctorate level. You may even be able to get a decent tech job with a university degree of any sort. Many employers look for degrees simply because they hope that it is a good indication that someone has the skills to figure things out even if they do not have the immediate expertise. This is especially so for entry-level positions (which this report seems to be focusing on.)
However, many tech employers are also looking for other things. They are looking for that specific expertise. That particular skill. Some specific technology that can be explained in a series of acronyms.
Tech jobs (which may even turn into a career) do not require a computer science degree. A typical computer science degree does not adequately prepare most people for a career working for Dilbert Inc. as a coder. This is ok because this is not really what a comp. sci. degree was intended to do.
Note that I'm not saying a smart university graduate cannot get a good tech job and succeed at it. I'm saying that the skillset and job requirements in todays technical job market does not quite match what a typical computer science degree gives you. This can be quite a shock after several years of blood, sweat and tears that represents your largest personal debt.
I'm suggesting we start looking at many tech jobs as just that: jobs. Jobs are often done by tradespeople, and coding should be often viewed as a trade. By all means, if you want to get deep into the science of computing, go ahead and get a computer science degree. As an employer (and I am in a position where I could interview you right now!) an expensive university degree is no guarantee you can actually solve problems and code worth a damn. So many fresh graduates can't read other people's code, or debug a problem, or work with other people to solve a problem. So companies often have to spend the money waiting for the good ones to come up to speed.
My point is that all this hand-wringing about the lack of computer science graduates is misplaced. The majority of the jobs these guys are talking about can be handled nicely by smart people who have a 2-year certificate or diploma from a decent technical college.
These people will have the interest and immediate paying skills to fill positions now. A good technical college will stress learning a variety of languages, and PCs (or Xterms) are not necessarily the only computers they will find in the real world. Tech colleges will offer real-world skills that employers want now, and skills that can be continually maintained.
Heck, many careers offer the chance of funded university anyway, so you can always go back to school.
Computer science is a good thing, and we need smart people developing the tools and techniques of the future. We also need tradespeople using those tools and techniques to solve customer problems and get things done.
-- clvrmnky
(Long time employed journeyman coder with a certificate in programming from night school.)
Very true. In my university days I know I made a few online gaffes sorting out USENET, email and ftp. Fortunately, I was just one of the Legions of September who had a few old-timers help me find my footing. I can still go back and look at my early posts on Google Groups (shudder.)
The Ham radio folks call old-timers who "look over the shoulder" of novice radio operators to help them out Elmers. I had a few cyber-Elmers help me with my baby steps. In turn, I've tried to be a bit of an Elmer myself.
The main problem with a sudden and constant growth of new users is that the Elmer-to-newbie ration drops off quite a bit. It's hard to stay calm when you see that 2/3rds of new USENET posts can be solved with a single Google search. Given this recent statistic, I don't think we can expect things to get better.
Well, that and we've gained a significant number of l0s3rs, as well. Can't be helped, I guess.
I'm not even sure blocking AOL users from USENET will even have an impact. Between Google and the other big ISPs, the signal-to-noise ratio is not going to be affected all that much. Certainly USENET spam won't change, and Clueless Newbies are legion everywhere you go. They no longer limit themselves to AOL or small Canadian Universities.
I have never, ever, seen such an "informative" posting before.
Oh, and the OP forgot to add that everyone in Waterloo gets a free "Rimjob" when they graduate from the UofW with at least a 90% average. Interns are encouraged to wear loose-fitting clothes during their tenure at RIM for this reason.
RIM is also planning to place a dome over the entire quad-city area, and turn the entire region into a subtropical paradise.
5) 4% (note that this is legal in Germany, and AFAIK, Canada)
Yes, this is also the case in Canada, and has been for some years now. We have these little laws that, you know, protect consumer rights and guarantee access to media in a fair and reasonable way.
They are working for the govt in this case, which is notorious for not paying attention until it becomes and a campain issue.
Dude, I love this word you created:
Campain \Cam*pain"\, n. [F. campaigne, It. campagna, fr. L. Campainia the level country about Naples strewn with band-aids, fr. campus field. See Camp, and cf. Champaign, Champaigne.]
An field of pain; a large, open pain without considerable pills. See{Champaign. --Grath.
(Mil.) A connected series of military operations which cause significant pain.
The feeling one gets during and after a political operations preceding an election; a canvass. [Cant, U. S.]
(Metal.) The period during which a blast furnace is continuously in operation while your face is in it.
Like many others here, I'm a little skeptical of this "analyst's" line of reasoning and ultimate conclusions.
I think it's important to remember that this was a freakin' dog & pony show. Everyone knows multi-core is the future. Everyone knows that having a multi-core CPU shipping in some critical timeframe is important.
Does Intel actually have working prototypes? Who cares.
Will Intel ever have working multi-core 64-bit CPUs. They will, or they will no longer be significant.
Unless the MS encryption scheme was given to all music media players (including rival OSs), a music industry crushing fair use lawsuit should be brought.
Not to mention that there are countries where refusing to honour fair use would make this completely illegal. There are countries where it is a consumer right to copy any media for personal use. Many countries have very deliberate laws governing and protecting consumer access to copyrighted or licensed material, and have had as much for many, many years. It seems we've had problems like this in the past, where interested parties used the law as a weapon to seriously restrict access to media, partially in order to create a monopoly on that access.
Restricting those rights may well be illegal (standard disclaimer: IANAL) and it would be very difficult for corporate interests like the RIAA in the US and Microsoft anywhere sue anyone accused of circumventing or hacking this particular DRM scheme. They certainly cannot stop me from copying every CD I own as many times as I want. Nor can they stop my friends from borrowing my CDs and doing the same.
For some reason, one of the datasets retrieved from the device is a human finger. Upon closer inspection, it appears to match other fingers collected from the Hollywood region of the southwestern coastal United States.
NASA can offer no conclusions at this time, but one NASA insider has speculated that this may indicate that California may, at one time, supported life.
How can you call something "the most secure OS" when there is still a concept of a root user that has access to the entire system?
Well, my understanding is that the most common exploits are simply bugs in userland and kernel code.
Even if one of these exploits leads to a remote or local privilege escalation, arguably it is the original exploit that is the real problem, since it led to the privilege escalation in the first place.
Furthermore, there is a fair amount of work being done to place all daemons on OpenBSD in a chroot jail, basically making running things like a mail server or http server no less secure than running without, which is a huge win for admins.
So, all that ACLs might give you is protection against local privilege escalation from the shell, which is nothing to sneeze at in principle; though the OBSD developers have been quick to suggest ACLs as offering minimal protection for the work involved. The consensus seems to be that there is more important work to be done elsewhere, like ensuring that a non-priv process isn't elevated to root. Though, this has not stopped others from thinking about this.
I'm also interested in what other altenatives you consider more secure, and if those alternatives are free-as-in-speech such that I can use it for a simple edge box for my internal network. I'm curious what other people are using.
Does the NTP spec describe exactly how a running server can be queried for this information? I mean, the definition of the various terms ntptrace reports on is defined in RFC-1305. Does this RFC also talk about how a third-party tool might query a running server? Seems unlikely.
If not, then ntptrace probably relies on the ntpd server from ntp.org to be running. I mean, this is where ntptrace comes from, right?
OpenNTPd is probably just ignoring ntptrace queries on port 123 since they appear malformed from it's point of view. The ntpd from the ports tree probably knows how to speak to ntptrace. It is an ntp.org specific tool.
I can't be critical of a group of people that release their own BSD in their spare time, but I guess I'm not seeing SMP as being important enough to fork an entire BSD system.
That would be one of the main points. DragonFly wanted to get away from a specifically symmetric model (the "S" in SMP) that was being adopted for FreeBSD 5.x.
Part of their aim is a more modern MP model that also benefits UP, and does not depend on symmetric processing. This can also gives them a headstart on support for the future multi-core CPUs, which are decidedly not symmetric.
Also, this fork is not about "getting away" from another BSD at all. All BSDs borrow heavily from each other -- it's part of the culture.
I, for one, welcome our nouvelle overlord of freedom.
Unfortunately, the grammarian shock troops would probably just toss you in a re-education camp as soon as they arrived.
You probably meant nouveau suzerain (or nouveaux suzerains to maintain parity with the Simpsons.)
Of course, by posting this in the clear and not as an AC, I'm now exposing myself to our new overlords as someone who may also need a few years of work^h^h^h^hre-education, otherwise know as "French II".
Thanks for the pointer to the article. My fave quote:
At 5 bucks a share, with almost nothing available to short, SCO isn't worth much of your investing effort. But it's definitely worth watching, if only as an example of the way a company can be run into the ground, taking investors along.
Ouch. Not even recommended for a short-sell anymore. Nothing left but cash-burn.
Remember to turn out the lights on your way out. Leave the keys at the night desk.
It's a file explorer provided on Win32 operating systems. While it's best to use this to browse only local files and folders, it has been extended to access remote files and objects over a variety of protocols.
It's also known as "Windows Explorer", or just "Explorer".
In theory, this should be doable. In practice, it will be a mess of backporting and three-way merging.
Not to mention something you will have to do every time the Apache people release new versions with their own patches. You can only maintain your own abandoned tree for so long.
I guess you could build off of your own copy of their CVS tree, and just rebuild based on their tags. This defeats the purpose (to me) of a nice easy./configure...; make; make install.
For specific solutions requiring fast startup and minimal size for serving static pages, I bet thttpd is perfectly reasonable.
I'm not sure a non-forking, 100% in memory, server can replace a full commercial installation of Apache (when tuned properly, that is).
Not having looked at thttpd in any real way, this is my first concern.
I also depend on a fair amount of module support in Apache (so obviously, I'm not _that_ concerned with performance!) so switching to some new model might be a bit of a challenge.
Now that I think about it this way, I wonder how useful a "J2EE" model of webserver might work. Have a standard server framework that one can tweak via add-ons. Whether this is done via JavaBeans, or native plugins is not the point. I'm only riffing on the idea of a standard server framework that can implement a true plugin protocol using some kind of published and open API.
I'm sure this has been thought of already. I wonder if there is an implementation (other than general-purpose app servers, like JBoss)?
Hey, it's nice to see Canuck contributions being noticed.
Maybe all of us up here in Canader are actually the source of the, er, open-source problem.
Between training our students to (gasp!) write operating sytems and computer languages from scratch (in one Canadian-style semester) and coming up with dangerous ideas like Java, it looks like Canada is turning into a dangerous, anti-Microsoft^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^hinnovation entity. A well-known Canadian company even helped define the POSIX standard (not surprisingly, this company is linked to one of the creators of Coherent). Sounds like terrorist training camps for software zealots to me. Where do I sign up!
Perhaps Finland and Canada are the ringleaders of the real Axis of Evil. You know, up here near the earth's axis. We even have agents working on the inside.
If Brown doesn't do his job, he might be writing his idiotic screeds with a CNC editor compiled under Watcom C in a POSIX shell. We'll "allow" him to use an editor that supports en-CA localization. If he can hold his liquor and learns to follow a hockey game without asking stupid questions.
Hey, maybe in the future the phrase "a vacation in Canada" might be a euphemism for "open-source re-education camp."
I'd assume that this issue addresses the various OS X schedules, and not the Darwin cron daemon. The cron daemon is what drives the periodics scripts.
From a look at the Archive.bom file, cron was not touched in this update.
Of course, it's possible that Apple has some OS X specific hack around the cron way of doing things that was fixed in one of the other many files that this update affected.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank the gods. Platform chauvinism is boring. Trying to achieve and maintain self-worth by buying a specific brand is sort of silly.
It's just branding, and they needed a way to refer to the new hardware, without resorting to "Intel PowerBook".
While true, I suspect our corporate overlords will supply us with a perfectly reasonably Windows box for this purpose.
Hacking around on this newish hardware to get XP to install and run is not something I'd want to be doing for money.
I think it might be instructive to reframe the assumptions around this report.
If we place tech workers in the same box as all other workers, we find that while the real requirements for getting an entry-level job are increasing, the real pay and paid time off has been decreasing. I'm not making this stuff up. I'm too bored to Google for it myself, so do that if you need the facts.
We've place a premium on a university (or college in the U.S.) education, and in doing so have conflated computer science with computer industry jobs. There are plenty of good reasons to get a comp. sci. degree. The promise of a basic programming or tech job is not one of them.
University is intended to give individuals a broad education and introduction to life-long learning. In short, the best university education should teach one how to develop a solid set of learning and critical thinking skills.
It may possibly pave the way for intense specializations at the Masters or Doctorate level. You may even be able to get a decent tech job with a university degree of any sort. Many employers look for degrees simply because they hope that it is a good indication that someone has the skills to figure things out even if they do not have the immediate expertise. This is especially so for entry-level positions (which this report seems to be focusing on.)
However, many tech employers are also looking for other things. They are looking for that specific expertise. That particular skill. Some specific technology that can be explained in a series of acronyms.
Tech jobs (which may even turn into a career) do not require a computer science degree. A typical computer science degree does not adequately prepare most people for a career working for Dilbert Inc. as a coder. This is ok because this is not really what a comp. sci. degree was intended to do.
Note that I'm not saying a smart university graduate cannot get a good tech job and succeed at it. I'm saying that the skillset and job requirements in todays technical job market does not quite match what a typical computer science degree gives you. This can be quite a shock after several years of blood, sweat and tears that represents your largest personal debt.
I'm suggesting we start looking at many tech jobs as just that: jobs. Jobs are often done by tradespeople, and coding should be often viewed as a trade. By all means, if you want to get deep into the science of computing, go ahead and get a computer science degree. As an employer (and I am in a position where I could interview you right now!) an expensive university degree is no guarantee you can actually solve problems and code worth a damn. So many fresh graduates can't read other people's code, or debug a problem, or work with other people to solve a problem. So companies often have to spend the money waiting for the good ones to come up to speed.
My point is that all this hand-wringing about the lack of computer science graduates is misplaced. The majority of the jobs these guys are talking about can be handled nicely by smart people who have a 2-year certificate or diploma from a decent technical college.
These people will have the interest and immediate paying skills to fill positions now. A good technical college will stress learning a variety of languages, and PCs (or Xterms) are not necessarily the only computers they will find in the real world. Tech colleges will offer real-world skills that employers want now, and skills that can be continually maintained.
Heck, many careers offer the chance of funded university anyway, so you can always go back to school.
Computer science is a good thing, and we need smart people developing the tools and techniques of the future. We also need tradespeople using those tools and techniques to solve customer problems and get things done.
-- clvrmnky (Long time employed journeyman coder with a certificate in programming from night school.)Very true. In my university days I know I made a few online gaffes sorting out USENET, email and ftp. Fortunately, I was just one of the Legions of September who had a few old-timers help me find my footing. I can still go back and look at my early posts on Google Groups (shudder.)
The Ham radio folks call old-timers who "look over the shoulder" of novice radio operators to help them out Elmers. I had a few cyber-Elmers help me with my baby steps. In turn, I've tried to be a bit of an Elmer myself.
The main problem with a sudden and constant growth of new users is that the Elmer-to-newbie ration drops off quite a bit. It's hard to stay calm when you see that 2/3rds of new USENET posts can be solved with a single Google search. Given this recent statistic, I don't think we can expect things to get better.
Well, that and we've gained a significant number of l0s3rs, as well. Can't be helped, I guess.
I'm not even sure blocking AOL users from USENET will even have an impact. Between Google and the other big ISPs, the signal-to-noise ratio is not going to be affected all that much. Certainly USENET spam won't change, and Clueless Newbies are legion everywhere you go. They no longer limit themselves to AOL or small Canadian Universities.
Woo-hoo!
Go modders go!
I have never, ever, seen such an "informative" posting before.
Oh, and the OP forgot to add that everyone in Waterloo gets a free "Rimjob" when they graduate from the UofW with at least a 90% average. Interns are encouraged to wear loose-fitting clothes during their tenure at RIM for this reason.
RIM is also planning to place a dome over the entire quad-city area, and turn the entire region into a subtropical paradise.
Yes, this is also the case in Canada, and has been for some years now. We have these little laws that, you know, protect consumer rights and guarantee access to media in a fair and reasonable way.
Dude, I love this word you created:
Campain \Cam*pain"\, n. [F. campaigne, It. campagna, fr. L. Campainia the level country about Naples strewn with band-aids, fr. campus field. See Camp, and cf. Champaign, Champaigne.]
Like many others here, I'm a little skeptical of this "analyst's" line of reasoning and ultimate conclusions.
I think it's important to remember that this was a freakin' dog & pony show. Everyone knows multi-core is the future. Everyone knows that having a multi-core CPU shipping in some critical timeframe is important.
Does Intel actually have working prototypes? Who cares.
Will Intel ever have working multi-core 64-bit CPUs. They will, or they will no longer be significant.
Not to mention that there are countries where refusing to honour fair use would make this completely illegal. There are countries where it is a consumer right to copy any media for personal use. Many countries have very deliberate laws governing and protecting consumer access to copyrighted or licensed material, and have had as much for many, many years. It seems we've had problems like this in the past, where interested parties used the law as a weapon to seriously restrict access to media, partially in order to create a monopoly on that access.
Restricting those rights may well be illegal (standard disclaimer: IANAL) and it would be very difficult for corporate interests like the RIAA in the US and Microsoft anywhere sue anyone accused of circumventing or hacking this particular DRM scheme. They certainly cannot stop me from copying every CD I own as many times as I want. Nor can they stop my friends from borrowing my CDs and doing the same.
It's the fucking law around here.
For some reason, one of the datasets retrieved from the device is a human finger. Upon closer inspection, it appears to match other fingers collected from the Hollywood region of the southwestern coastal United States.
NASA can offer no conclusions at this time, but one NASA insider has speculated that this may indicate that California may, at one time, supported life.
It's not the bike riding, it's the act of "taking a break from the problem."
I'll second that. I do some of my best coding in the bathtub, sans the dangerous electronics, of course.
Well, my understanding is that the most common exploits are simply bugs in userland and kernel code.
Even if one of these exploits leads to a remote or local privilege escalation, arguably it is the original exploit that is the real problem, since it led to the privilege escalation in the first place.
Furthermore, there is a fair amount of work being done to place all daemons on OpenBSD in a chroot jail, basically making running things like a mail server or http server no less secure than running without, which is a huge win for admins.
So, all that ACLs might give you is protection against local privilege escalation from the shell, which is nothing to sneeze at in principle; though the OBSD developers have been quick to suggest ACLs as offering minimal protection for the work involved. The consensus seems to be that there is more important work to be done elsewhere, like ensuring that a non-priv process isn't elevated to root. Though, this has not stopped others from thinking about this.
I'm also interested in what other altenatives you consider more secure, and if those alternatives are free-as-in-speech such that I can use it for a simple edge box for my internal network. I'm curious what other people are using.
Does the NTP spec describe exactly how a running server can be queried for this information? I mean, the definition of the various terms ntptrace reports on is defined in RFC-1305. Does this RFC also talk about how a third-party tool might query a running server? Seems unlikely.
If not, then ntptrace probably relies on the ntpd server from ntp.org to be running. I mean, this is where ntptrace comes from, right?
OpenNTPd is probably just ignoring ntptrace queries on port 123 since they appear malformed from it's point of view. The ntpd from the ports tree probably knows how to speak to ntptrace. It is an ntp.org specific tool.
That would be one of the main points. DragonFly wanted to get away from a specifically symmetric model (the "S" in SMP) that was being adopted for FreeBSD 5.x.
Part of their aim is a more modern MP model that also benefits UP, and does not depend on symmetric processing. This can also gives them a headstart on support for the future multi-core CPUs, which are decidedly not symmetric.
Also, this fork is not about "getting away" from another BSD at all. All BSDs borrow heavily from each other -- it's part of the culture.
Unfortunately, the grammarian shock troops would probably just toss you in a re-education camp as soon as they arrived.
You probably meant nouveau suzerain (or nouveaux suzerains to maintain parity with the Simpsons.)
Of course, by posting this in the clear and not as an AC, I'm now exposing myself to our new overlords as someone who may also need a few years of work^h^h^h^hre-education, otherwise know as "French II".
Hey, I've got prior art!
I mean, I've been fetishizing "personal" technology for years now by having as many gadgets touching my bare skin as possible. I'm doing it right now.
Oh darn. Did I just say that out loud?
^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h
^d^d^d^d^c^c^c^c^z^z^z^z
Thanks for the pointer to the article. My fave quote:
Ouch. Not even recommended for a short-sell anymore. Nothing left but cash-burn.
Remember to turn out the lights on your way out. Leave the keys at the night desk.
Note to self: be more obvious when using sarcasm in postings.
It's a file explorer provided on Win32 operating systems. While it's best to use this to browse only local files and folders, it has been extended to access remote files and objects over a variety of protocols.
It's also known as "Windows Explorer", or just "Explorer".
In theory, this should be doable. In practice, it will be a mess of backporting and three-way merging.
Not to mention something you will have to do every time the Apache people release new versions with their own patches. You can only maintain your own abandoned tree for so long.
I guess you could build off of your own copy of their CVS tree, and just rebuild based on their tags. This defeats the purpose (to me) of a nice easy ./configure ...; make; make install.
Hmmm. Non-forking model.
For specific solutions requiring fast startup and minimal size for serving static pages, I bet thttpd is perfectly reasonable.
I'm not sure a non-forking, 100% in memory, server can replace a full commercial installation of Apache (when tuned properly, that is).
Not having looked at thttpd in any real way, this is my first concern.
I also depend on a fair amount of module support in Apache (so obviously, I'm not _that_ concerned with performance!) so switching to some new model might be a bit of a challenge.
Now that I think about it this way, I wonder how useful a "J2EE" model of webserver might work. Have a standard server framework that one can tweak via add-ons. Whether this is done via JavaBeans, or native plugins is not the point. I'm only riffing on the idea of a standard server framework that can implement a true plugin protocol using some kind of published and open API.
I'm sure this has been thought of already. I wonder if there is an implementation (other than general-purpose app servers, like JBoss)?
Hey, it's nice to see Canuck contributions being noticed.
Maybe all of us up here in Canader are actually the source of the, er, open-source problem.
Between training our students to (gasp!) write operating sytems and computer languages from scratch (in one Canadian-style semester) and coming up with dangerous ideas like Java, it looks like Canada is turning into a dangerous, anti-Microsoft^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^hinnovation entity. A well-known Canadian company even helped define the POSIX standard (not surprisingly, this company is linked to one of the creators of Coherent). Sounds like terrorist training camps for software zealots to me. Where do I sign up!
Perhaps Finland and Canada are the ringleaders of the real Axis of Evil. You know, up here near the earth's axis. We even have agents working on the inside.
If Brown doesn't do his job, he might be writing his idiotic screeds with a CNC editor compiled under Watcom C in a POSIX shell. We'll "allow" him to use an editor that supports en-CA localization. If he can hold his liquor and learns to follow a hockey game without asking stupid questions.
Hey, maybe in the future the phrase "a vacation in Canada" might be a euphemism for "open-source re-education camp."
I'd assume that this issue addresses the various OS X schedules, and not the Darwin cron daemon. The cron daemon is what drives the periodics scripts.
From a look at the Archive.bom file, cron was not touched in this update.
Of course, it's possible that Apple has some OS X specific hack around the cron way of doing things that was fixed in one of the other many files that this update affected.
I see no evidence to suggest this, however.
Dude, what the heck do you do where you have to stamp actual paper, and more than once a day?
If you tell me you have a red stapler that someone once stole, I'm leaving for a 4-day weekend right now.
Well, actually, tell me anything and I'm going on a 4-day weekend. But still.