Rather than just reformat the floppy as a 1.722MB, they'd rather just get everything fitting onto a 1.44MB. Kudos to you, FreeBSD team!
Sure, it sounds easy. But it isn't when you look closely at the problem. You have documentation to worry about that specify 1.44MB format. You have to test all the various affected tools to make sure none are defaulting to 1.44MB format. Etc, etc. That stuff takes a significant amount of time.
What you should do is call her and explain why it actually was thoughtlessness.
I really don't have that much free time. But if you do, please go right ahead spending the next two weeks explaining to her why. Then be prepared for another two week follow up session a month after that.
It's not that my mother is dumb, it's just that she doesn't have a frame of reference with which to understand the problem.
I can't remember the last time I actually wanted to see something in Flash.
Every time my Mother sends me an online animated card for my birthday, Christmas, Easter, etc. I just don't open them, but call her up anyway and thank her for her thoughtfulness.
A person would have to be extremely ignorant to not understand why the _world_ doesn't like the US.
The "world", or rather, a small part of the "world" doesn't like the US because the US doesn't consider the UN to be an authority over it. This is at its essence a clash between two opposing philosophies of sovereignty. Note that there was virtually no opposition to the US going into Bosnia during the previous administration, because it had the approval of the UN.
In order to be a member of the EU, the member nation has to give up a portion of its sovereignty. It is not so hard to understand why most members (not all) of the EU are tweaked when they see the US not doing likewise in regards to the UN. After all, when the EU can tell Germany how to brew beer and France how to make wine, it's pretty irksome to see the US not heeding their advice on Iraq. (The US is frequently guilty of this attitude as well, but that's beside the point)
The US doesn't need the UN's permission to go to war. Shocking, but true. A lot of the world is pissed because this is the death knell of the UN's usefulness. But I wonder if the UN ever had any usefulness anyway, other than on paper.
The whole thing isn't exactly giving a good image of the USA as the "land of the free and brave" but rather something like the "rich and blinded by power".
If the prosecution can appeal, then it's double jeopardy, like it or not. It sucked when OJ got retried (even though I believe he was thoroughly guilty), and it sucks now that Johansen is being retried (even though I believe he is thoroughly innocent).
is there really such bloat and slowdown that you should recompile?
It's not that there's necessarily bloat, but it does create dependencies on both Gnome and KDE. Not everyone has 80+Gig harddrives. If you don't need Gnome for a GTK+ application, why should you suck in the incredibly complex Gnome dependency tree? In my case, the only "gnome" program I use is Dia. I certainly do not want 50Megs (if not more) of Gnome installed just to run Dia, especially when I don't have to.
Besides which, my system belongs to me. I should be the one making decisions about it, not some anonymous integrator for a distribution. Your typical Windows installer gives you the choice of "custom". Binary packagers under Linux/BSD/UNIX do not give you this option. But source based ports do. If you fear that freedom, then you are free not to excercise it. FreeBSD allows you to use "anonymous integrator" binary packages if you don't want to hassle with source builds.
Note that software developed with Qt Free Edition must be distributed as free/Open Source software
Name one Free or Open Source license that does not allow this. There aren't any. Note that this does not specify that ALL people EVERYWHERE must be able to distribute it as free/open, just that the person with the Qt GPL/QPL license must do so; i.e. the original author.
the receivers must be free to give it to whomever they like.
Since the receivers got the software in a free/open form, then of course they are free to give it to whomever they like.
What if you use an unrestricted license (BSD/MIT/etc) that allows the recipient to create a closed fork? Not a problem. In order to create a closed fork, they must either remove Qt, or the dependency on Qt. If they use Qt, then they have to follow Qt's license. If they remove the dependency, then the Qt license is no longer involved.
Would you use BSD over something better like Linux?
Who says Linux is better? Well, Linus would, but he's biased.
You know, it's funny that whenever there's a BSD story, all you guys stop bashing each other for a few minutes to bash us. But we know better. Tomorrow things will go back to Slashdot normalcy and you'll see folks asking why they should use Redhat when Debian is better, or some variation of that theme.
if you use free Qt then your program can never be non-GPL
A persistant myth. Free Qt is released under a dual license GPL/QPL. The QPL allows you to use any Free or Open Source license. You are NOT restricted to the GPL.
Doesn't the title "engineer" assume you know what your making before you start the implementation?
Yes it does. Which is why I refuse to implement any code that doesn't have a complete requirements or specifications document. And then I write a design document before I start coding, and don't consider myself done until validation and verification is complete.
I've never found that to be the case.
Which is truly sad. You don't need an engineer to tune up a car. But you really want one if you're designing a new car. Which is why Ford doesn't hire technicians to design their new line up. The real problem is not code monkeys thinking they're engineers, but companys hiring code monkeys to do the work of engineers.
Without the state licensing, you're not an Engineer, and you shouldn't call yourself one.
My state does not require licensing for software engineering. If it did, I would have a license. But since a license is not required, and I do the work of an engineer in every respect, I am indeed an engineer. I specify, design, write, review, validate and verify system software, according to CMM, ISO and SEI processes. Only about ten percent of my time is actually spent writing code.
Sigh. It was an estimate. I estimated the time I needed to research the code base and existing design, time to actually code an implementation, and time needed to perform a thorough verification and validation. All before it was to be handed off to QA. Most bugs do not take this much work. But the bug in question was actually a change in specification and the code to go along with it.
I'm definitely a Software Engineer. Not only does my job title say so, I do the work of one. I am NOT a code monkey. 90% of my time is spent on requirements, specifications, design,validation, verification, and reviews. Excepting the calculus and state licensing, I do the same things an engineer in any other field does.
Unfortunately the upper management is full of people who don't understand that. They think we're still code monkeys and think I'm being sarcastic when I give them an estimate of 6-8 weeks for a bug fix.
Considering that Debian has the highest package-to-application ratio of any system I know, let me respond by saying "so what?"
Where NetBSD has the "fubar" package, Debian as "fubar", "fubar-docs", "fubar-devel", "fubar-optional" and "fubar-gtk".
True, Debian has more applications in its package collection than NetBSD does, but don't even begin to claim that the raw number of packages in Debian means anything relevant to the world outside of Debian. Because it doesn't.
But that's the point! Don't you get it? That's just the very stuff programmers have wanted for thirty years.
The solutions over the years have been to either reinvent the wheel or use a tool unsuited for the job. Thus there are one million GROUP:NAME:VALUE config formats, two million instances of storing a two record database in MySQL (because someday you might need to store ten records), etc, not to count the three million application data formats.
XML gets rid of all that by providing a single standardized generic format suitable for most many disparate kinds of data. Most people opposed to XML seem to be, IMHO, RDBMS afficianados. But XML is not a panacea any more than RDBMS is. It's just as stupid to use XML to index a million customer purchase database as it is to use an RDBMS to save configuration data.
Good arguments for going with the original system Gentoo copied: FreeBSD. Not only do you get all the benefits of Gentoo, you get a pedigree closer to UNIX than even Solaris. Plus top notch documentation and legendary stability.
Slashdot Mirror
Rather than just reformat the floppy as a 1.722MB, they'd rather just get everything fitting onto a 1.44MB. Kudos to you, FreeBSD team!
Sure, it sounds easy. But it isn't when you look closely at the problem. You have documentation to worry about that specify 1.44MB format. You have to test all the various affected tools to make sure none are defaulting to 1.44MB format. Etc, etc. That stuff takes a significant amount of time.
What you should do is call her and explain why it actually was thoughtlessness.
I really don't have that much free time. But if you do, please go right ahead spending the next two weeks explaining to her why. Then be prepared for another two week follow up session a month after that.
It's not that my mother is dumb, it's just that she doesn't have a frame of reference with which to understand the problem.
Becaue Java apps that create other Java apps tells us nothing about Java. Where are the Java apps that non-Java developers use?
I can't remember the last time I actually wanted to see something in Flash.
Every time my Mother sends me an online animated card for my birthday, Christmas, Easter, etc. I just don't open them, but call her up anyway and thank her for her thoughtfulness.
The fact that the court system of a weak vassal state, oops, I mean, "ally" is incidental.
I know many Norwegians who would take great offense at that.
A person would have to be extremely ignorant to not understand why the _world_ doesn't like the US.
The "world", or rather, a small part of the "world" doesn't like the US because the US doesn't consider the UN to be an authority over it. This is at its essence a clash between two opposing philosophies of sovereignty. Note that there was virtually no opposition to the US going into Bosnia during the previous administration, because it had the approval of the UN.
In order to be a member of the EU, the member nation has to give up a portion of its sovereignty. It is not so hard to understand why most members (not all) of the EU are tweaked when they see the US not doing likewise in regards to the UN. After all, when the EU can tell Germany how to brew beer and France how to make wine, it's pretty irksome to see the US not heeding their advice on Iraq. (The US is frequently guilty of this attitude as well, but that's beside the point)
The US doesn't need the UN's permission to go to war. Shocking, but true. A lot of the world is pissed because this is the death knell of the UN's usefulness. But I wonder if the UN ever had any usefulness anyway, other than on paper.
The whole thing isn't exactly giving a good image of the USA as the "land of the free and brave" but rather something like the "rich and blinded by power".
Funny, I thought he was being tried in Norway...
A) Norway isn't a member of the EU
B) The EU is just pissed because the US doesn't follow their orders.
If the prosecution can appeal, then it's double jeopardy, like it or not. It sucked when OJ got retried (even though I believe he was thoroughly guilty), and it sucks now that Johansen is being retried (even though I believe he is thoroughly innocent).
Yes! It has already been implemented. See daily.daemonnews.org or details.
But just to reassure all the Real Men and Real Women out there... the BSD systems will not attempt to conform to the LSB by adopting RPM ;-)
The title of the article is "LCD Price Fixing". Yet the question is implying nothing of the sort. (maybe the link did, but it's slashdotted now...)
The answer to why LCD monitors have high prices can be answered from a quote in the Cliff's comments: "the market is willing to bear these prices."
is there really such bloat and slowdown that you should recompile?
It's not that there's necessarily bloat, but it does create dependencies on both Gnome and KDE. Not everyone has 80+Gig harddrives. If you don't need Gnome for a GTK+ application, why should you suck in the incredibly complex Gnome dependency tree? In my case, the only "gnome" program I use is Dia. I certainly do not want 50Megs (if not more) of Gnome installed just to run Dia, especially when I don't have to.
Besides which, my system belongs to me. I should be the one making decisions about it, not some anonymous integrator for a distribution. Your typical Windows installer gives you the choice of "custom". Binary packagers under Linux/BSD/UNIX do not give you this option. But source based ports do. If you fear that freedom, then you are free not to excercise it. FreeBSD allows you to use "anonymous integrator" binary packages if you don't want to hassle with source builds.
Note that software developed with Qt Free Edition must be distributed as free/Open Source software
Name one Free or Open Source license that does not allow this. There aren't any. Note that this does not specify that ALL people EVERYWHERE must be able to distribute it as free/open, just that the person with the Qt GPL/QPL license must do so; i.e. the original author.
the receivers must be free to give it to whomever they like.
Since the receivers got the software in a free/open form, then of course they are free to give it to whomever they like.
What if you use an unrestricted license (BSD/MIT/etc) that allows the recipient to create a closed fork? Not a problem. In order to create a closed fork, they must either remove Qt, or the dependency on Qt. If they use Qt, then they have to follow Qt's license. If they remove the dependency, then the Qt license is no longer involved.
Would you use BSD over something better like Linux?
Who says Linux is better? Well, Linus would, but he's biased.
You know, it's funny that whenever there's a BSD story, all you guys stop bashing each other for a few minutes to bash us. But we know better. Tomorrow things will go back to Slashdot normalcy and you'll see folks asking why they should use Redhat when Debian is better, or some variation of that theme.
Considering that Gentoo copied the concept from BSD, you could say instead that Gentoo is the BSD of Linux!
if you use free Qt then your program can never be non-GPL
A persistant myth. Free Qt is released under a dual license GPL/QPL. The QPL allows you to use any Free or Open Source license. You are NOT restricted to the GPL.
Doesn't the title "engineer" assume you know what your making before you start the implementation?
Yes it does. Which is why I refuse to implement any code that doesn't have a complete requirements or specifications document. And then I write a design document before I start coding, and don't consider myself done until validation and verification is complete.
I've never found that to be the case.
Which is truly sad. You don't need an engineer to tune up a car. But you really want one if you're designing a new car. Which is why Ford doesn't hire technicians to design their new line up. The real problem is not code monkeys thinking they're engineers, but companys hiring code monkeys to do the work of engineers.
Without the state licensing, you're not an Engineer, and you shouldn't call yourself one.
My state does not require licensing for software engineering. If it did, I would have a license. But since a license is not required, and I do the work of an engineer in every respect, I am indeed an engineer. I specify, design, write, review, validate and verify system software, according to CMM, ISO and SEI processes. Only about ten percent of my time is actually spent writing code.
Sigh. It was an estimate. I estimated the time I needed to research the code base and existing design, time to actually code an implementation, and time needed to perform a thorough verification and validation. All before it was to be handed off to QA. Most bugs do not take this much work. But the bug in question was actually a change in specification and the code to go along with it.
I'm definitely a Software Engineer. Not only does my job title say so, I do the work of one. I am NOT a code monkey. 90% of my time is spent on requirements, specifications, design,validation, verification, and reviews. Excepting the calculus and state licensing, I do the same things an engineer in any other field does.
Unfortunately the upper management is full of people who don't understand that. They think we're still code monkeys and think I'm being sarcastic when I give them an estimate of 6-8 weeks for a bug fix.
Considering that Debian has the highest package-to-application ratio of any system I know, let me respond by saying "so what?"
Where NetBSD has the "fubar" package, Debian as "fubar", "fubar-docs", "fubar-devel", "fubar-optional" and "fubar-gtk".
True, Debian has more applications in its package collection than NetBSD does, but don't even begin to claim that the raw number of packages in Debian means anything relevant to the world outside of Debian. Because it doesn't.
But that's the point! Don't you get it? That's just the very stuff programmers have wanted for thirty years.
The solutions over the years have been to either reinvent the wheel or use a tool unsuited for the job. Thus there are one million GROUP:NAME:VALUE config formats, two million instances of storing a two record database in MySQL (because someday you might need to store ten records), etc, not to count the three million application data formats.
XML gets rid of all that by providing a single standardized generic format suitable for most many disparate kinds of data. Most people opposed to XML seem to be, IMHO, RDBMS afficianados. But XML is not a panacea any more than RDBMS is. It's just as stupid to use XML to index a million customer purchase database as it is to use an RDBMS to save configuration data.
Good arguments for going with the original system Gentoo copied: FreeBSD. Not only do you get all the benefits of Gentoo, you get a pedigree closer to UNIX than even Solaris. Plus top notch documentation and legendary stability.
we have to run csh on all our Solaris servers for hysterical reasons
Just don't run csh then! Duh. The alternatives are numerous. tcsh, ksh, bash, zsh, etc. All work just fine under Solaris.