Re:What are you talking about?
on
Effective XML
·
· Score: 1
If only there were a native binary format, we wouldn't have this problem to begin with.
Is it too much to ask from the W3C for a binary encoded xml format? Maybe to make my point I'll start using one character tags in UTF-8 encoding. Put the popular tags in using 8 bits, and the unpopular tags in as 16 bits, then I'll just do xslt when anyone wants a copy.:) Also, by all means never put unneeded whitespace.
I bet that would shave a good 20-30% off file size and parse time. Too bad you wouldn't be able to read it because unicode a's are different than normal a's but they would look the same. TitleHello World! is much smaller than
Title
Hello World!
Now if you really want to be naughty to improve performance of parsing you can require tags that give the offset of other tags. 026040
That way you can tell where tags begin without parsing the entire file if all you want is just one little peice.
I don't know if I can be annoying enough myself to actually get someone to make a binary xml counterpart standard, but I'm sure plenty of/.'ers can come up with seem neat ideas. You'd be amazed at what all you can actually call XML.:)
I thought the first amendment rights superceded such non-sense anyhow. I'll call it whatever the hell I want. Arbitrarily picking words to be offended with is a very silly practice. I'm offended by the word cheese, from now on, I want everyone to use fromage. Isn't that about the same caliber. Why do we even have the words master and slave if we can't friggen use them? It's not like anyone has ever referred in public to the jumper setting as "Massuh". Maybe they are trying to free the oppressed drives! They deserve their own channel to call home!
Next we'll have to free the symbology of having only female connectors on devices... Female connectors can leave home and lead very low impedance connections too!
Re:The CIS majors must know something the CS don't
on
In Search of Stupidity
·
· Score: 1
Someone has to take the CIS major down a peg. They get into the workforce and are hired by business majors who say things like "Computer programming expertise is easy to find, it's business skills that is hard to get." from a guy who needs help double-clicking. Eventually they ride some wave like outsourcing to Indian CS majors or some CS contractor to actually do the real work, but they'll get dictated to on how important it is that the software run on Windows, IIS, and MS SQL server because "it makes business sense".
Anyone that suggests Windows as a server probably doesn't have much business sense. Anyone willing to accept the vendor tie-in that is ASP or COBOL really has no business nor technical sense at all. (Unless they are being paid by Fujitsu or Microsoft to make such a claim.)
Re:The CIS majors must know something the CS don't
on
In Search of Stupidity
·
· Score: 1
This from the same people that don't know what a CPU is, can't do simple calculus, and think there is a sustainable market for COBOL programmers.
I would expect you CIS majors to believe the ads that the handwriting recognition was actually good. When the newton came out, handwritting recognition wasn't possible because the funamental research wasn't done yet. (CPU speed, neural nets for learning, etc.) Handwriting recognition still isn't really possible today. It's closer to gesture recognition as the same technology couldn't be incorperated into OCR software with any accuracy. The tablet PC recognizes words anyhow. You can't write code on it, and it will probably not work with any technical documents like Biology where you put in peices of Genetic code, or math where you need to draw mathematic symbols, etc.
Handwritting recognition is still pretty much a fairytale to most technical workers for anything but email, blogging, and posting to slashdot. Then again, you'ld have to pry my DVORAK keyboard from my hands to get my to use a pen to begin with. I'll just learn the one handed portable DVORAK keyboard layout before I would do anything significant with handwritting recognition.
Why don't people just use a different language when they run into common names like firebird... It could be: Ignisaves (who speaks latin?) Purornis (no one could dispute what it means in Greek anyhow)
The software is named after the hat, that is named after an Italian Opera, Fedora, that gets it's name from the princess in the story, Princess Fedora Romazov.
It's a stupid name to begin with, just like "Red Hat". Besides, RedHat is more identified as a welcome mat for hackers than a Linux distrobution with all their insecure hacks on generally secure software packages (including the kernel). Which is probably why they are trying to get away from the RedHat branding of Linux anyhow. I always believed the hat was red because trying to keep the system secure would likely cause cerebral hemorrhaging.
You shouldn't bother with the whole opening and closing bit really. If you are really concerned with performance you would be using pooled connections to begin with.
I'm still angry because no one wants to use the XML standard that already exists for formated documents, xsl-fo. They don't even export it. I had to download Abiword and a special, barely working, xml-fo export plugin to save my documents as xml-fo. Optionally you can use DocBook and megabytes of xslt to convert it.
Why does no one like xsl-fo? Is there some reason?
On a side note, is there an xslt to convert OOo XML into xsl-fo?
Hey, most of the web people browse/., we should be arguing: Stop using JavaScript completely!
Of course that will break Mozilla's plans for XUL. The best thing you could do is re-invent how JavaScript works. What if pages with JavaScript required a signature? Then we could set up trust levels per site/coder. A significant enough people use Mozilla such that people would fix their sites if they wanted to use JavaScript. If you ran into a site that didn't have signatures, and ran JavaScript you could have an automated email webmaster@domain to let the user complain, and I'm sure that will get some attention!:)
Just make a new header for it, and you could have apache implement auto-signing using.htaccess so you only need to put two files in your directory to sign.
It would also be cool if there was a non-profit signature authority that used postal addresses and publicly appointed (and paid) members to track down both spam and crackers to reject their keys. It would also be cool to only return your key to an increasing subset of the population as time goes without complaint. (ex. only 1/10 people see your site for the first 100 viewers and day, then it bumps up to 1/2 for the next week, then you get full priveleges unless your key is signed by another as a voucher). Complaints need speedy verification, and require an account so you can get blacklisted for bad complaints. I think this would also be cool for normal certs too, but have the spam stream configurable (spam.opencertification.org and opencertification.org) then put it in e-mail too.
Kill all the net-scum in one attack. Maybe we can even make it so that programs reject running if they aren't signed. That'll take care of executable viruses and I could also make it impossible for my clients to install gatorized software. (They just don't know when they are installing something bad, and they can't bother me everytime they run across something neat online).
I'm sure at least some of my ideas are good. Pick some out and maybe we can get enough following to get something done for good about IT abuse, which I'm betting just all of us have to deal with from scams, cleaning viruses, pop-up porn, spam, etc. It may not fix it all, but I think certs would put a dent in it, and has much less of a chance of getting abused like SPEWS was (massive amounts of people not being able to function in the IT world because someone hosts their DNS entry on the same ISP as you, or the 6 month aftermath that doesn't seem to have died with the SPEWS DB).
You know, I've seen a lot of people attacking ads for the impossible, but no one seems to have mentioned (or I missed it) the actual issue of long requirements.
I have been using C and Java for for 6 years, and I know no more about them now than I did after the first 2 years except for the changes in the API. In fact, if someone only had 2 years of experience in Java I would recommend them over someone with 10 years of experience. That person with ten years of experience probably doesn't know the newer API's as well. They'll probably not know all the Swing goodies as much as AWT. (I actually ran the developmental Swing libraries when I started 6 years ago.) They'll also have some misguided belief that the garbage collector would be happier if you closed connections in a finally method or some other non-sense from the age of "Oak".
As far as C goes, I haven't learned anything at all new, because the spec doesn't change. The API's are dynamic, but they aren't part of C. They should be more specific about their requirements there. Do they want Win32 API calls? If so, I don't know a whole lot about that, except for the dozens of incidents where I've had to do something with the Win32 API directly and cried from the pure horror it is (I had to resort to inline assembly to get the borland compiler and the Win32 API to talk properly in some cases.).
Asking for anything more than 2 years of experience with any language is limiting the number of employees your willing to hire arbitrarily. Bring them in and take someone from the project where they are going to be working and put them in a room for an hour. I've seen people with legitimate 5 years experience in VBA that didn't know much of anything. He got 5 years by bouncing from company to company pretending to do his job for 3-6 months or doing simple modification of programs he found online until he got called on it and fired. The only way to catch those people is put them in a room with someone that you trust that knows the technology inside out and get his opinions. No one is going to bullshit me into believing they know something about Java or C or VB that they don't, but I've seen so many managers screwed that way.
Well yeah, I have been developing software for the American Society of Primatologists and the Japan Society of Protozoology for a decade now.
Actually, I've seen a lot of people asking for impossible requirements. I never apply for them because I don't want to be working for anyone so stupid that they don't have a clue about what the technologies are or how long they've been around, and much, much worse, they don't have a clue what they need if they are asking for something impossible.
People don't use application servers, they use end products. An application server is very much similar to a kernel in that they run an application. Also, they have to provide standards like JMS, EJB containers, etc. where kernels don't really implement an interface, you just have libraries that implement an interface for cross-platform at source level. With Java, I would have binary compatiblity between JBoss and Geronimo.
What if FreeBSD's kernel was better than the Linux kernel? You would see a lot of people move toward FreeBSD (and we've seen this happen in some sectors of the market before when FreeBSD got a leg up on Linux).
My premise, that I should have stated, was that Geronimo being an ASF project instead of a project hosted by a for profit company headed by a man that has been known to alienate developers (http://www.coredevelopers.net/ incident where some of the core JBoss developers split off) has a chance of gaining more developer attention. Large companies don't donate code to JBoss, but they do to the ASF. SUN will certify Geronimo for free.
All I'm trying to say is that projects started at Apache generally have a greater following, and often better products. It's do partially to the license (corperate involvement) and partially to the Apache trademark, following, and the general trust for ASF's quality of code.
My only meaning was that people aren't downloading the official Xalan or Xerces. They get what SUN puts in the rt.jar. I don't know if SUN is using Xerces or Xalan code, but even if they are, it's not Xalan or Xerces strictly speaking.
Struts is the single most popular web framework for Java. Log4J is still a lot more popular than 1.4 logging. The only things 1.4 really took away from them was regexp and XML parsers, which most people depend on 1.4 for now.
It's not that much too rosie:)
Yeah, it'll take Geronimo some time to catch up, but if you go back a couple of years and look at JBoss you would have said without help from somewhere, they would never catch up with BEA or Websphere. They haven't really, but they have definately narrowed the gap (maybe really close on WebLogic). What JBoss did manage to do is cut out all the small players.
The second commer doesn't have to be that much better actually. We're talking Java here, not kernels. If Geronimo gets any bit better than JBoss, it'ld take me a maximum of an hour to make an average sized project work on Geronimo. There is a spec for it. While the spec isn't perfect, it certainly is much easier to port from JBoss to Geronimo than from Linux to FreeBSD. (Not that it would be hard in either case.) A lot of people use JBoss for testing and development, then they deploy on Weblogic and Websphere. That is a pretty good testament to how well the J2EE spec is working (there are a lot of holes in the J2EE spec, just the holes don't amount to as much as you would think).
Yeah, I know it's eroding, this is just going to mean more of the same, I think.
I read some of the documentation. I was expecting better, but it definately adequate. I stick mostly with O'Reilly books these days (Entereprise JavaBeans and Java Enterprise in a Nutshell) for anything that isn't JBoss specific. The docs are handy, but the forums and other books are a more useful combination.
I would like to get the forums from JBoss exported and Lucene indexed for a neat Eclipse plugin, or at least something with better search capabilities and faster.
JBoss will erode away the lower ends of the J2EE spectrum for sure. This deal only raises the level of the metaphorical water. I don't know if JBoss will ever be able to compete with IBM, but they may be able to play games with BEA. BEA is more like JBoss in that they are primarily centered around their J2EE server. JBoss can snap into any architecture that BEA already has and they can just avoid paying BEA. IBM sells the J2EE server, the development tools, the database server, the server hardware to run it on, and probably a building to put it in if you asked:)
I think Geronimo has a greater chance of causing havok in the J2EE arena. JBoss isn't getting big business promotion like Geronimo will being part of the ASF. IBM and SUN like Apache and their licensing. In fact, it would be very likely that Geronimo would become certified for free. ASF has a history of making very popular software packages, especially Java related. They had the most popular regex library, XML parsers, Logging library, and the biggies Struts and Tomcat. J2SDK 1.4 clobbered the regex library and xml parser because honestly, if you're going to get the latest stable version of Java, and it comes with a regexp library and XML parsers, are you really going to go download another?
I'm very excited and hopeful about Geronimo. If it doesn't get screwed up by JBoss, it's likely to become the most popular J2EE server.
What I do believe will happen with JBoss out there though is that there will be a greater number of developers using J2EE that would otherwise not have. Most people judge J2EE wholistically as a sum of all it's parts instead of a some of the best parts. You don't have to use all of J2EE, but it's very nice to have a robust, generic, mail API that supports MIME attachments, a transactional message server, transparent session data replication and clustering, declarative security and transactions, database abstraction gaurantee of at least SQL92 standard (or even better JDO or Hibernate or CMP Object-Relational mapping that is completely database independant), and even some integration into existing authentication schemes that JBoss supports. Tomcat can handle some of that, but JBoss integrates it, and brings security, transactions, and EJB.
I think you'll have to ask yourself if the Matrix was a derivative of the 13th floor. The general consensus I see is that as long as you don't violate trademarks and you don't directly copy the code, then you'll be just fine.
Another consideration is that you can't copyright a mathematical equation. You can make it a trademark, or you can patent it, but you can't copyright mathematics. Math existed long before you did. Can you really copyright a setter or getter function then? A lot of what I've seen has been names of classes and variables, getters and setters, and what appear to be almost generated Javadoc comments.
Even the directory structure seems to be different, as well as some classes are interfaces now with implementing classes postfixed with Impl. Can no one use the same package heirarchy now that JBoss has done it? Can no one name their classes the same?
Marc is just pissed at the whole idea. He doesn't want to have to compete with a certified J2EE open source server (SUN will certify Apache projects because they are non-profit). He is especially angry that they are using his ideas (require a patent to protect). Just to throw it over the top, frome what I can tell this is mostly about the fracture of The JBoss Group. The company forked, and so did the software once Marc saw that they were trying to make an Apache licensed version. I think a lot of the people working on this Apache version were part of the split and actually own a lot of the code from JBoss and have the rights to relicense it.
So, are you saying that by reading the JBoss code that is freely available that if I make a method similar to one of theirs I could be target of some legalities?
I think this is a patent vs copyright issue. Copyrights protect from direct copying, patents protect from copying ideas.
Is JBoss's API copyrighted would be the question that I would be looking at. The J2EE API may or may not be copyrighted as well, but JBoss doesn't hold that copyright.
I think it's fair game to steal design from any unpatented source. Design is not concrete enough that copying it would make a working product. Consider the design of books. Almost all books use similar design in that they put related information into smaller sections known as chapters. If you wanted to prevent anyone else from doing this in their book, you would need to own a patent, not a copyright.
As far as I can tell Marc Fleury is in one of his moods again. Most of those developers tried to be part of the JBoss project to contribute their code to JBoss where beneficial but were kicked off the team from what I can tell. In fact, this seems to be the whole purpose of Elba.
I like JBoss, and I like most of the very friendly developers, but some of the things that Marc has done, have been petty.
Like I said in another post, it's very likely that everyone "trading" for that stock is doing the same thing. Playing financial chicken is not the way to get ahead. If a company has nothing to sell, not even an idea, then they are worthless. If you're investing in a company that you don't understand without help from trusted friends who do understand, then you run a high risk of loosing your money. The people that make money off of the scheme you cite depend on people like you that think they can make some money by just buying low and selling high. No real money is made since there is no growth. Overall, you should end up getting screwed more often because the stock price usually ends up lower than when you bought because they are in a death spiral. If everyone tries to dump their stock at once, the market for the stock will be saturated and you'll all end up with less than you paid for it.
The only way to actually make net profits is to either be an inside trader or invest in a good idea/product. Statistics will catch up to you if get in on pump and dump schemes... One day you'll end up buying someone elses dumped stock without anyone to dump it on yourself.
Have you ever seen the movie "A Beautiful Mind"? Truely good investments consider your own good and the good of society. When everyone acts only for their own good in spite of the bad of many, statistically, the majority of people will get screwed. You could say "Capitalism still works because people will incorperate this into their equation of what is good for them." but you would be sadly mistaken. If a position of power is available for them to grab (insider trading, monopolies) that distort the field, it is very prone to the corruption we have today.
True capitalism borders anarchy, true communism borders slavery, somewhere in the middle is a decent balance, and it begins with the proper thinking of net good + my good instead of greed. If everyone was as parasitic as those in your scenario are, then nothing good would ever happen.
He is if it's not worth.78. What if everyone that buys the stock is trying to do that, then he's screwed isn't he? The only people that really make any money that way are inside traders.
Like I said, the only way to invest is to look for marketable products with a strong prejudice against anyone having to resort to sueing or being sued over the majority of their IP.
I'm kindof torn on that one. Anyone actually stupid enough to invest in SCO probably is just going to get what they deserve. It takes a pretty big idiot to invest in a company that is in the middle of a lawsuit to begin with. Legalities are expensive and non-productive in the long run. Just taking my few ECO classes in college tells me to only invest in companies that have something marketable (SCO Unix isn't marketable in it's current form compared to competition). Thinking SCO can stamp out all it's competition with a horde of lawyers would be very naive.
Nope, naive investers are about to learn a very expensive lesson in economics that only costed me 300$ tuition + 50$ book.:)
Saddam wasn't aiding terrorists, he didn't have WMD either. I was just pointing out that charity is how the Republicans now justify the war. The truth is Iraq made an assload of money by switching to the Euro to trade their oil and OPEC was getting jealous. You thinking killing millions of children by denying Iraq Chlorine to clean their water was justifiable? If so, you're one of the causes of terrorism. If someone put sanctions on me that caused my children to die painful diseased deaths that could have been avoided, you better believe I'ld be looking for revenge.
If people like you would stop being assholes, then perhaps the world wouldn't hate us enough to want to commit terrorism.
It's not the web-designers, it's demanding ignorant clients that think it somehow helps their site for people to see stupid animations before they can actually get to the actual content they are looking for. I should know, I get cornered into making Flash and I just about refuse every time, but they don't give up, even after explaination of why it's not good for their site.
The problem is that clients don't use the internet enough to imagine what it would be like if Google had a flash intro. The only popular sites with flash intros that are still popular are all-flash sites.
Slashdot Mirror
If only there were a native binary format, we wouldn't have this problem to begin with.
:) Also, by all means never put unneeded whitespace.
/.'ers can come up with seem neat ideas. You'd be amazed at what all you can actually call XML. :)
Is it too much to ask from the W3C for a binary encoded xml format? Maybe to make my point I'll start using one character tags in UTF-8 encoding. Put the popular tags in using 8 bits, and the unpopular tags in as 16 bits, then I'll just do xslt when anyone wants a copy.
I bet that would shave a good 20-30% off file size and parse time. Too bad you wouldn't be able to read it because unicode a's are different than normal a's but they would look the same.
TitleHello World!
is much smaller than
Title
Hello World!
Now if you really want to be naughty to improve performance of parsing you can require tags that give the offset of other tags.
026040
That way you can tell where tags begin without parsing the entire file if all you want is just one little peice.
I don't know if I can be annoying enough myself to actually get someone to make a binary xml counterpart standard, but I'm sure plenty of
I thought the first amendment rights superceded such non-sense anyhow. I'll call it whatever the hell I want. Arbitrarily picking words to be offended with is a very silly practice. I'm offended by the word cheese, from now on, I want everyone to use fromage. Isn't that about the same caliber. Why do we even have the words master and slave if we can't friggen use them? It's not like anyone has ever referred in public to the jumper setting as "Massuh". Maybe they are trying to free the oppressed drives! They deserve their own channel to call home!
Next we'll have to free the symbology of having only female connectors on devices... Female connectors can leave home and lead very low impedance connections too!
Someone has to take the CIS major down a peg. They get into the workforce and are hired by business majors who say things like "Computer programming expertise is easy to find, it's business skills that is hard to get." from a guy who needs help double-clicking. Eventually they ride some wave like outsourcing to Indian CS majors or some CS contractor to actually do the real work, but they'll get dictated to on how important it is that the software run on Windows, IIS, and MS SQL server because "it makes business sense".
Anyone that suggests Windows as a server probably doesn't have much business sense. Anyone willing to accept the vendor tie-in that is ASP or COBOL really has no business nor technical sense at all. (Unless they are being paid by Fujitsu or Microsoft to make such a claim.)
This from the same people that don't know what a CPU is, can't do simple calculus, and think there is a sustainable market for COBOL programmers.
I would expect you CIS majors to believe the ads that the handwriting recognition was actually good. When the newton came out, handwritting recognition wasn't possible because the funamental research wasn't done yet. (CPU speed, neural nets for learning, etc.) Handwriting recognition still isn't really possible today. It's closer to gesture recognition as the same technology couldn't be incorperated into OCR software with any accuracy. The tablet PC recognizes words anyhow. You can't write code on it, and it will probably not work with any technical documents like Biology where you put in peices of Genetic code, or math where you need to draw mathematic symbols, etc.
Handwritting recognition is still pretty much a fairytale to most technical workers for anything but email, blogging, and posting to slashdot. Then again, you'ld have to pry my DVORAK keyboard from my hands to get my to use a pen to begin with. I'll just learn the one handed portable DVORAK keyboard layout before I would do anything significant with handwritting recognition.
Bah... It's never too late... I think I'll start a petition to get them to put Tom in LoTR:FoTR. He's cooler than that sissy Saruman anyhow.
Why don't people just use a different language when they run into common names like firebird... It could be:
Ignisaves (who speaks latin?)
Purornis (no one could dispute what it means in Greek anyhow)
The software is named after the hat, that is named after an Italian Opera, Fedora, that gets it's name from the princess in the story, Princess Fedora Romazov.
It's a stupid name to begin with, just like "Red Hat". Besides, RedHat is more identified as a welcome mat for hackers than a Linux distrobution with all their insecure hacks on generally secure software packages (including the kernel). Which is probably why they are trying to get away from the RedHat branding of Linux anyhow. I always believed the hat was red because trying to keep the system secure would likely cause cerebral hemorrhaging.
You shouldn't bother with the whole opening and closing bit really. If you are really concerned with performance you would be using pooled connections to begin with.
I'm still angry because no one wants to use the XML standard that already exists for formated documents, xsl-fo. They don't even export it. I had to download Abiword and a special, barely working, xml-fo export plugin to save my documents as xml-fo. Optionally you can use DocBook and megabytes of xslt to convert it.
Why does no one like xsl-fo? Is there some reason?
On a side note, is there an xslt to convert OOo XML into xsl-fo?
Hey, most of the web people browse /., we should be arguing:
:)
.htaccess so you only need to put two files in your directory to sign.
Stop using JavaScript completely!
Of course that will break Mozilla's plans for XUL. The best thing you could do is re-invent how JavaScript works. What if pages with JavaScript required a signature? Then we could set up trust levels per site/coder. A significant enough people use Mozilla such that people would fix their sites if they wanted to use JavaScript. If you ran into a site that didn't have signatures, and ran JavaScript you could have an automated email webmaster@domain to let the user complain, and I'm sure that will get some attention!
Just make a new header for it, and you could have apache implement auto-signing using
It would also be cool if there was a non-profit signature authority that used postal addresses and publicly appointed (and paid) members to track down both spam and crackers to reject their keys. It would also be cool to only return your key to an increasing subset of the population as time goes without complaint. (ex. only 1/10 people see your site for the first 100 viewers and day, then it bumps up to 1/2 for the next week, then you get full priveleges unless your key is signed by another as a voucher). Complaints need speedy verification, and require an account so you can get blacklisted for bad complaints. I think this would also be cool for normal certs too, but have the spam stream configurable (spam.opencertification.org and opencertification.org) then put it in e-mail too.
Kill all the net-scum in one attack. Maybe we can even make it so that programs reject running if they aren't signed. That'll take care of executable viruses and I could also make it impossible for my clients to install gatorized software. (They just don't know when they are installing something bad, and they can't bother me everytime they run across something neat online).
I'm sure at least some of my ideas are good. Pick some out and maybe we can get enough following to get something done for good about IT abuse, which I'm betting just all of us have to deal with from scams, cleaning viruses, pop-up porn, spam, etc. It may not fix it all, but I think certs would put a dent in it, and has much less of a chance of getting abused like SPEWS was (massive amounts of people not being able to function in the IT world because someone hosts their DNS entry on the same ISP as you, or the 6 month aftermath that doesn't seem to have died with the SPEWS DB).
You know, I've seen a lot of people attacking ads for the impossible, but no one seems to have mentioned (or I missed it) the actual issue of long requirements.
I have been using C and Java for for 6 years, and I know no more about them now than I did after the first 2 years except for the changes in the API. In fact, if someone only had 2 years of experience in Java I would recommend them over someone with 10 years of experience. That person with ten years of experience probably doesn't know the newer API's as well. They'll probably not know all the Swing goodies as much as AWT. (I actually ran the developmental Swing libraries when I started 6 years ago.) They'll also have some misguided belief that the garbage collector would be happier if you closed connections in a finally method or some other non-sense from the age of "Oak".
As far as C goes, I haven't learned anything at all new, because the spec doesn't change. The API's are dynamic, but they aren't part of C. They should be more specific about their requirements there. Do they want Win32 API calls? If so, I don't know a whole lot about that, except for the dozens of incidents where I've had to do something with the Win32 API directly and cried from the pure horror it is (I had to resort to inline assembly to get the borland compiler and the Win32 API to talk properly in some cases.).
Asking for anything more than 2 years of experience with any language is limiting the number of employees your willing to hire arbitrarily. Bring them in and take someone from the project where they are going to be working and put them in a room for an hour. I've seen people with legitimate 5 years experience in VBA that didn't know much of anything. He got 5 years by bouncing from company to company pretending to do his job for 3-6 months or doing simple modification of programs he found online until he got called on it and fired. The only way to catch those people is put them in a room with someone that you trust that knows the technology inside out and get his opinions. No one is going to bullshit me into believing they know something about Java or C or VB that they don't, but I've seen so many managers screwed that way.
I think that means you don't need to speak English, but just French and any other language. So if you spoke French and Klingnon, you should be ok.
Well yeah, I have been developing software for the American Society of Primatologists and the Japan Society of Protozoology for a decade now.
Actually, I've seen a lot of people asking for impossible requirements. I never apply for them because I don't want to be working for anyone so stupid that they don't have a clue about what the technologies are or how long they've been around, and much, much worse, they don't have a clue what they need if they are asking for something impossible.
People don't use application servers, they use end products. An application server is very much similar to a kernel in that they run an application. Also, they have to provide standards like JMS, EJB containers, etc. where kernels don't really implement an interface, you just have libraries that implement an interface for cross-platform at source level. With Java, I would have binary compatiblity between JBoss and Geronimo.
What if FreeBSD's kernel was better than the Linux kernel? You would see a lot of people move toward FreeBSD (and we've seen this happen in some sectors of the market before when FreeBSD got a leg up on Linux).
My premise, that I should have stated, was that Geronimo being an ASF project instead of a project hosted by a for profit company headed by a man that has been known to alienate developers (http://www.coredevelopers.net/ incident where some of the core JBoss developers split off) has a chance of gaining more developer attention. Large companies don't donate code to JBoss, but they do to the ASF. SUN will certify Geronimo for free.
All I'm trying to say is that projects started at Apache generally have a greater following, and often better products. It's do partially to the license (corperate involvement) and partially to the Apache trademark, following, and the general trust for ASF's quality of code.
My only meaning was that people aren't downloading the official Xalan or Xerces. They get what SUN puts in the rt.jar. I don't know if SUN is using Xerces or Xalan code, but even if they are, it's not Xalan or Xerces strictly speaking.
Struts is the single most popular web framework for Java. Log4J is still a lot more popular than 1.4 logging. The only things 1.4 really took away from them was regexp and XML parsers, which most people depend on 1.4 for now.
:)
It's not that much too rosie
Yeah, it'll take Geronimo some time to catch up, but if you go back a couple of years and look at JBoss you would have said without help from somewhere, they would never catch up with BEA or Websphere. They haven't really, but they have definately narrowed the gap (maybe really close on WebLogic). What JBoss did manage to do is cut out all the small players.
The second commer doesn't have to be that much better actually. We're talking Java here, not kernels. If Geronimo gets any bit better than JBoss, it'ld take me a maximum of an hour to make an average sized project work on Geronimo. There is a spec for it. While the spec isn't perfect, it certainly is much easier to port from JBoss to Geronimo than from Linux to FreeBSD. (Not that it would be hard in either case.) A lot of people use JBoss for testing and development, then they deploy on Weblogic and Websphere. That is a pretty good testament to how well the J2EE spec is working (there are a lot of holes in the J2EE spec, just the holes don't amount to as much as you would think).
Yeah, I know it's eroding, this is just going to mean more of the same, I think.
I read some of the documentation. I was expecting better, but it definately adequate. I stick mostly with O'Reilly books these days (Entereprise JavaBeans and Java Enterprise in a Nutshell) for anything that isn't JBoss specific. The docs are handy, but the forums and other books are a more useful combination.
I would like to get the forums from JBoss exported and Lucene indexed for a neat Eclipse plugin, or at least something with better search capabilities and faster.
JBoss will erode away the lower ends of the J2EE spectrum for sure. This deal only raises the level of the metaphorical water. I don't know if JBoss will ever be able to compete with IBM, but they may be able to play games with BEA. BEA is more like JBoss in that they are primarily centered around their J2EE server. JBoss can snap into any architecture that BEA already has and they can just avoid paying BEA. IBM sells the J2EE server, the development tools, the database server, the server hardware to run it on, and probably a building to put it in if you asked :)
I think Geronimo has a greater chance of causing havok in the J2EE arena. JBoss isn't getting big business promotion like Geronimo will being part of the ASF. IBM and SUN like Apache and their licensing. In fact, it would be very likely that Geronimo would become certified for free. ASF has a history of making very popular software packages, especially Java related. They had the most popular regex library, XML parsers, Logging library, and the biggies Struts and Tomcat. J2SDK 1.4 clobbered the regex library and xml parser because honestly, if you're going to get the latest stable version of Java, and it comes with a regexp library and XML parsers, are you really going to go download another?
I'm very excited and hopeful about Geronimo. If it doesn't get screwed up by JBoss, it's likely to become the most popular J2EE server.
What I do believe will happen with JBoss out there though is that there will be a greater number of developers using J2EE that would otherwise not have. Most people judge J2EE wholistically as a sum of all it's parts instead of a some of the best parts. You don't have to use all of J2EE, but it's very nice to have a robust, generic, mail API that supports MIME attachments, a transactional message server, transparent session data replication and clustering, declarative security and transactions, database abstraction gaurantee of at least SQL92 standard (or even better JDO or Hibernate or CMP Object-Relational mapping that is completely database independant), and even some integration into existing authentication schemes that JBoss supports. Tomcat can handle some of that, but JBoss integrates it, and brings security, transactions, and EJB.
1-800-HARASSS, the extra S is for the extra harassment.
-SNL
I think you'll have to ask yourself if the Matrix was a derivative of the 13th floor. The general consensus I see is that as long as you don't violate trademarks and you don't directly copy the code, then you'll be just fine.
Another consideration is that you can't copyright a mathematical equation. You can make it a trademark, or you can patent it, but you can't copyright mathematics. Math existed long before you did. Can you really copyright a setter or getter function then? A lot of what I've seen has been names of classes and variables, getters and setters, and what appear to be almost generated Javadoc comments.
Even the directory structure seems to be different, as well as some classes are interfaces now with implementing classes postfixed with Impl. Can no one use the same package heirarchy now that JBoss has done it? Can no one name their classes the same?
Marc is just pissed at the whole idea. He doesn't want to have to compete with a certified J2EE open source server (SUN will certify Apache projects because they are non-profit). He is especially angry that they are using his ideas (require a patent to protect). Just to throw it over the top, frome what I can tell this is mostly about the fracture of The JBoss Group. The company forked, and so did the software once Marc saw that they were trying to make an Apache licensed version. I think a lot of the people working on this Apache version were part of the split and actually own a lot of the code from JBoss and have the rights to relicense it.
So, are you saying that by reading the JBoss code that is freely available that if I make a method similar to one of theirs I could be target of some legalities?
I think this is a patent vs copyright issue.
Copyrights protect from direct copying, patents protect from copying ideas.
Is JBoss's API copyrighted would be the question that I would be looking at. The J2EE API may or may not be copyrighted as well, but JBoss doesn't hold that copyright.
I think it's fair game to steal design from any unpatented source. Design is not concrete enough that copying it would make a working product. Consider the design of books. Almost all books use similar design in that they put related information into smaller sections known as chapters. If you wanted to prevent anyone else from doing this in their book, you would need to own a patent, not a copyright.
As far as I can tell Marc Fleury is in one of his moods again. Most of those developers tried to be part of the JBoss project to contribute their code to JBoss where beneficial but were kicked off the team from what I can tell. In fact, this seems to be the whole purpose of Elba.
I like JBoss, and I like most of the very friendly developers, but some of the things that Marc has done, have been petty.
Like I said in another post, it's very likely that everyone "trading" for that stock is doing the same thing. Playing financial chicken is not the way to get ahead. If a company has nothing to sell, not even an idea, then they are worthless. If you're investing in a company that you don't understand without help from trusted friends who do understand, then you run a high risk of loosing your money. The people that make money off of the scheme you cite depend on people like you that think they can make some money by just buying low and selling high. No real money is made since there is no growth. Overall, you should end up getting screwed more often because the stock price usually ends up lower than when you bought because they are in a death spiral. If everyone tries to dump their stock at once, the market for the stock will be saturated and you'll all end up with less than you paid for it.
The only way to actually make net profits is to either be an inside trader or invest in a good idea/product. Statistics will catch up to you if get in on pump and dump schemes... One day you'll end up buying someone elses dumped stock without anyone to dump it on yourself.
Have you ever seen the movie "A Beautiful Mind"? Truely good investments consider your own good and the good of society. When everyone acts only for their own good in spite of the bad of many, statistically, the majority of people will get screwed. You could say "Capitalism still works because people will incorperate this into their equation of what is good for them." but you would be sadly mistaken. If a position of power is available for them to grab (insider trading, monopolies) that distort the field, it is very prone to the corruption we have today.
True capitalism borders anarchy, true communism borders slavery, somewhere in the middle is a decent balance, and it begins with the proper thinking of net good + my good instead of greed. If everyone was as parasitic as those in your scenario are, then nothing good would ever happen.
He is if it's not worth .78. What if everyone that buys the stock is trying to do that, then he's screwed isn't he? The only people that really make any money that way are inside traders.
Like I said, the only way to invest is to look for marketable products with a strong prejudice against anyone having to resort to sueing or being sued over the majority of their IP.
I'm kindof torn on that one. Anyone actually stupid enough to invest in SCO probably is just going to get what they deserve. It takes a pretty big idiot to invest in a company that is in the middle of a lawsuit to begin with. Legalities are expensive and non-productive in the long run. Just taking my few ECO classes in college tells me to only invest in companies that have something marketable (SCO Unix isn't marketable in it's current form compared to competition). Thinking SCO can stamp out all it's competition with a horde of lawyers would be very naive.
:)
Nope, naive investers are about to learn a very expensive lesson in economics that only costed me 300$ tuition + 50$ book.
Saddam wasn't aiding terrorists, he didn't have WMD either. I was just pointing out that charity is how the Republicans now justify the war. The truth is Iraq made an assload of money by switching to the Euro to trade their oil and OPEC was getting jealous. You thinking killing millions of children by denying Iraq Chlorine to clean their water was justifiable? If so, you're one of the causes of terrorism. If someone put sanctions on me that caused my children to die painful diseased deaths that could have been avoided, you better believe I'ld be looking for revenge.
If people like you would stop being assholes, then perhaps the world wouldn't hate us enough to want to commit terrorism.
It's not the web-designers, it's demanding ignorant clients that think it somehow helps their site for people to see stupid animations before they can actually get to the actual content they are looking for. I should know, I get cornered into making Flash and I just about refuse every time, but they don't give up, even after explaination of why it's not good for their site.
The problem is that clients don't use the internet enough to imagine what it would be like if Google had a flash intro. The only popular sites with flash intros that are still popular are all-flash sites.