Seriously, screw the next guy. Just follow your companies procedures (no more no less) and move on your merry way.
When you said "seriously", you were joking, right?
I mean, c'mon! The great U.S. of A. is gonna remain on top of the world by "obscurity" ?
The reason the guy in India/Mexico/Nebraska/whereever makes $5/hr and is worth it is because he does a job that is only worth $5/hr. If the job is worth $55/hr, then a $55/hr person will get that job.
Do you honestly believe that you are able to hold onto a higher paying position because your code is not documented? Do you honestly believe that this is the way to stay ahead of the game?
It is this mentality that has stifled innovation. People spend all sorts of time trying to figure out how-in-the-hell they got to where they are instead of trudging forward down avenues unknown.
Unions in the Western World are doing just this: pressure tactics to avoid "outsourcing" of work. The reason the work is being outsourced is that it is no longer work worthy of a high-paying (and supposedly higher-quality) employee. The work is being shipped off elsewhere because someone else can do it cheaper (possibly at a lower quality or a lower efficiency, but if the resultant product effectively meets the desired goal, then it is the right move for the company and, ultimately, ITS CUSTOMERS).
The Unions need to work with the companies to find ways to take these higher-productive workers and make the company even higher returns. But Unions don't "work with" management and fight all change.
Oh, don't get me wrong! I know that management has just as many boobs running the show too. They make plenty of mistakes themselves. But the nature of "management vs. union" mentality keeps the unions from effectively working with (upper) management to enable change that makes better use of all resources and, in turn, makes the company more profitable.
Seriously (no, I'm not kidding...I mean seriously), you cannot believe that documenting your code, outlining your procedures, using effective architectural designs, and improving the company procudures is threatening your job, can you? If you do, then realize that a single, competent manager is all it takes to tear down your warped house of cards...
There is absolutely nothing wrong with treating things as "black boxes".
Of course in embedded systems that's not the case. When developing code for a medical device, you've got to understand how the hardware responds to a software crash, etc.
You are still treating the medical system as a black box. Knowing how a black box responds to something is part of its interface. If you don't know how it responds to something, then it is a black hole, not a black box.
There are many, many problems that can answer the question you have posed. Most have to do with improper resource allocation and/or improper analysis (which can, itself, be considered improper resource allocation).
If a project doesn't understand each of the components involved in the overall system, then that is improper analysis (or improper communication of the analysis, or improper interpretation of the communication).
However, even as an "embedded engineer", you do not need to understand every single bit and byte from power source to CPU to each sub-system behind its interface. If you did, then there's no point in having interfaces! No point in designing sub-systems...
I do agree that many (all?) hardware/software systems out there have deficiencies. All of these deficiencies could be overcome by pouring the right amount of the right resources at them. However, everything has its limits and the final GA'ed product is an acceptance of those limits (costs, timelines, resource availabilities, politics, accountabilities, etc...)
Yes, many engineers come up short on stability and/or usability in their products. Sometimes this is due to their own limitations, sometimes it is due to limitations imposed on them by others.
But I've always been under the impression that borrowing code from a GPL based package was acceptable, as long as credit is given where credit is due
Your thinking about another license altogether. With the GPL, you can't "borrow code" and keep it locked up inside of your code base.
GPL "opens" code. It does not allow people to "close up" the code. In a nutshell, if you use GPL code, you must make your source code freely available to whoever receives your binary.
(There are a number of subtle points beyond this, but this is the GPL in a nutshell).
If you aren't going to make your source code available, then don't include GPL code with your code. It's simply a matter of choice.
Applets are still irrelevant. The JRE on the desktop argument is not about applets running in IE. It is about having a single, standards conforming runtime environment on the #1 (only?) business desktop in the IT industry.
With such a runtime available to all desktops, then client-side Java applications could have a chance to make it.
MS's abuse of the Java standard and its blocking of efforts to get a compliant JRE onto the desktop, thus stiffling Java's advancement as an application platform, is what is at stake...not the ability to have more annoying "web-based" applets (and application can be "web-based" without it being an applet...in fact, it is better that way).
Problem as I see it is...you won't be able to be elitist. They want to control how, when and what people do on the 'net. They don't care about who, because they expect that to be everyone.
If the conglomerates just happen to control the entry points to the 'net as well (ISPs, cable, wireless, teleco, etc.) then just how do we expect to be (or remain) elitist?
I want to remain elitist...but give the (mainly) U.S. corporations the lead-way, and they'll quash elitism as we know it. General computing devices are, after all, potential tools for terrorism/hacking/spying/media-hype-word-of-the-mo nth.
Oddly enough, Sybase bought Powersoft a few years later so that they could use Powerbuilder to compete against Oracle's front-end tools. This meant Sybase ended up with Watcom's assets, even though they were not particularly interested in them.
And to continue the story...
Sybase bought Powersoft in 1995.
The "Watcom" group, still based in Waterloo Ontario, became the Mobile And Embedded (MEC) division of Sybase.
I see the problem as involving how offensive these sites make the ads. I find Flash and Shockwave ads so offensive [...] that I simply browse with them disabled.
Problem is that you are an advanced-user. The average user [i.e. The Masses (tm)] don't know how to disable this stuff and can't be bothered to find out.
And the mainstream manufacturers of the tools they use to access such offensive materials are not AT ALL persuaded to add blocking/fast-forwarding features...they are, after all, mostly owned or partnered with the Mass Media outfits themselves.
This is the reason for the big push for "home console units". Xbox and PS2 aren't simply "rivals" to Nintendo. MS and the likes see the extreme control that these consoles give them in serving content to the user.
Imagine a world where your email, browsing, games, television, movies, music, voice-mail, messaging, (and more!) are contolled by a single device.
Now consider this device to be developed by MicroSonyTimeFoxVivendi Corp.
EuroTV and Streetmap are trying to use legal tactics to tackle technical problems. Soon the Big Fish will use the ultimate technical tactic...they own the devices and the lend them to us...
The only thing that should be affected by this is your own web account. If not, then you are paying your hosting service too much!
If you misconfigure this thing, or leave it lying around, or make the password guessable...well, how's this different from having a buggy CGI-script or otherwise?
This tool is meant to be installed by someone who wants shell access to an account that they already have read and execute access to. If their web account is set up correctly (which it should be if the ISP is worth a damn), then the worst that happens is that the account of the web customer gets compromised...and that is the web customer's fault for installing the script when they don't know what they are doing.
I, for one, am considering using this on a couple of my customers' sites. They are hosted on systems where I can't get shell access. This will let me configure some things on the system without having an identical setup on my own box (or running a bunch of "echo `env | sort`" type CGI scripts)
I won't keep this script around in the account. When I need it I can upload it, do my deeds, and then remove it. I can change passwd each time I re-install.
BTW: I don't consider this any less secure than the (clear-text) FTP access I have to the account. The fact that this program exists means that anyone could have written it (or a similar proggy) and uploaded it to the CGI-BIN directory.
Bad analogy. All analogies are bad...it's just like, say, pork.
AOL has not been found guilty in a U.S. federal court of law of illegally using their monopoly to quash competitors.
Perl, Python, PHP (or the entities responsible thereof) have not taken Microsoft to court to argue that they have been stifled by illegal monopolistic practices.
Sun is the plaintif; the ruling is in favour of Sun.
fair competition is what started this whole case (or a lack thereof).
Read this book a lot
on
Effective Java
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
This is not a read-once-keep-on-bookshelf book. This book should be read through a few times at least.
I rarely find a tech book that offers more than a few examples I ear-mark. This book however has me re-reading it from time to time. The lessons picked up take time to sink in, and IMO no one can truly pick up all of the lessons on one read through.
Re:That's because Linux admins are self-taught
on
Linux Is Cheaper
·
· Score: 2
Problems are normally solved as follows.
Format the HDD and reinstall windows et all.
The problem's gone, but another one's reappeared [...]
Sounds like the QA department at a s/w company I used to work for..."couldn't it be our software doing that?" I'd ask.
Their stock price is under $0.30. Are these related?
According to a Management Science course I took at UWaterloo, less than 2% of jobs are ever published (print, radio, internet). Most jobs are acquired via "networking" (no, not IRC...or maybe...).
Of the three jobs I've had to date, I got one from the newspaper (my first...silly newbie) and two via head-hunters (they just happened to catch me on bad days;-).
Now, see, every once in a while I start to wonder why in the hell it is that I bother reading/. threads. It's posts like these that keep me coming back for more.
Nothing in the GPL says that one's own code must be made freely available...unless you go to give (sell, whatever) the resulting work to others.
The GPL specifically states that changes made for one's own use do not have to be distributed.
In other words, feel free to take this publically funded work and do whatever you want to with it. However if you are going to distribute your changes (for example, make money by selling the derived work), you must then make your source code changes available.
Let's not be like the politicians. Making sweeping statements like "obligate one to make one's own code freely available" is an inaccurate statement about the GPL and completely ignores its intent.
I loved the Web back in the early '90s when people didn't have much of a clue about the Web and robots (this hasn't changed much, actually, but now there are "books" and "experts").
I couldn't count the amount of emails from irate "webmasters" (and phone calls from U.S. law-enforcement agencies) insisting that we hacked their sites because no links exist on their site to their hidden web pages...
I'm in the same boat. I'm now looking for a Perl script to help me strip existing <HEAD> tags and replace them with meta tags I've been given in a spreadsheet...or I'll end up coughing up my own script.
People who run their own search engines can make good use of <META> tags. Public search engines, however, cannot rely on the validity of such tags.
I'm thinking of putting "Pamela", "Jennifer", and other top-10 search terms into our META tags...I'm sure that when our technical docs show up in a pr0n search that we'll get traffic...
Slashdot Mirror
I mean, c'mon! The great U.S. of A. is gonna remain on top of the world by "obscurity" ?
The reason the guy in India/Mexico/Nebraska/whereever makes $5/hr and is worth it is because he does a job that is only worth $5/hr. If the job is worth $55/hr, then a $55/hr person will get that job.
Do you honestly believe that you are able to hold onto a higher paying position because your code is not documented? Do you honestly believe that this is the way to stay ahead of the game?
It is this mentality that has stifled innovation. People spend all sorts of time trying to figure out how-in-the-hell they got to where they are instead of trudging forward down avenues unknown.
Unions in the Western World are doing just this: pressure tactics to avoid "outsourcing" of work. The reason the work is being outsourced is that it is no longer work worthy of a high-paying (and supposedly higher-quality) employee. The work is being shipped off elsewhere because someone else can do it cheaper (possibly at a lower quality or a lower efficiency, but if the resultant product effectively meets the desired goal, then it is the right move for the company and, ultimately, ITS CUSTOMERS).
The Unions need to work with the companies to find ways to take these higher-productive workers and make the company even higher returns. But Unions don't "work with" management and fight all change.
Oh, don't get me wrong! I know that management has just as many boobs running the show too. They make plenty of mistakes themselves. But the nature of "management vs. union" mentality keeps the unions from effectively working with (upper) management to enable change that makes better use of all resources and, in turn, makes the company more profitable.
Seriously (no, I'm not kidding...I mean seriously), you cannot believe that documenting your code, outlining your procedures, using effective architectural designs, and improving the company procudures is threatening your job, can you? If you do, then realize that a single, competent manager is all it takes to tear down your warped house of cards...
There are many, many problems that can answer the question you have posed. Most have to do with improper resource allocation and/or improper analysis (which can, itself, be considered improper resource allocation).
If a project doesn't understand each of the components involved in the overall system, then that is improper analysis (or improper communication of the analysis, or improper interpretation of the communication).
However, even as an "embedded engineer", you do not need to understand every single bit and byte from power source to CPU to each sub-system behind its interface. If you did, then there's no point in having interfaces! No point in designing sub-systems...
I do agree that many (all?) hardware/software systems out there have deficiencies. All of these deficiencies could be overcome by pouring the right amount of the right resources at them. However, everything has its limits and the final GA'ed product is an acceptance of those limits (costs, timelines, resource availabilities, politics, accountabilities, etc...)
Yes, many engineers come up short on stability and/or usability in their products. Sometimes this is due to their own limitations, sometimes it is due to limitations imposed on them by others.
Your thinking about another license altogether. With the GPL, you can't "borrow code" and keep it locked up inside of your code base.
GPL "opens" code. It does not allow people to "close up" the code. In a nutshell, if you use GPL code, you must make your source code freely available to whoever receives your binary. (There are a number of subtle points beyond this, but this is the GPL in a nutshell).
If you aren't going to make your source code available, then don't include GPL code with your code. It's simply a matter of choice.
With such a runtime available to all desktops, then client-side Java applications could have a chance to make it.
MS's abuse of the Java standard and its blocking of efforts to get a compliant JRE onto the desktop, thus stiffling Java's advancement as an application platform, is what is at stake...not the ability to have more annoying "web-based" applets (and application can be "web-based" without it being an applet...in fact, it is better that way).
Problem as I see it is...you won't be able to be elitist. They want to control how, when and what people do on the 'net. They don't care about who, because they expect that to be everyone.
If the conglomerates just happen to control the entry points to the 'net as well (ISPs, cable, wireless, teleco, etc.) then just how do we expect to be (or remain) elitist?
I want to remain elitist...but give the (mainly) U.S. corporations the lead-way, and they'll quash elitism as we know it. General computing devices are, after all, potential tools for terrorism/hacking/spying/media-hype-word-of-the-mo nth.
And to continue the story...
iAnywhere makes the very powerful, popular (and developer friendly!) SQL Anywhere Studio as well as other products.
See more:
- Sybase Milestones
- iAnywhere Solutions History and Milestones
Caveat: I might have some biases...And the mainstream manufacturers of the tools they use to access such offensive materials are not AT ALL persuaded to add blocking/fast-forwarding features...they are, after all, mostly owned or partnered with the Mass Media outfits themselves.
This is the reason for the big push for "home console units". Xbox and PS2 aren't simply "rivals" to Nintendo. MS and the likes see the extreme control that these consoles give them in serving content to the user.
Imagine a world where your email, browsing, games, television, movies, music, voice-mail, messaging, (and more!) are contolled by a single device.
Now consider this device to be developed by MicroSonyTimeFoxVivendi Corp.
EuroTV and Streetmap are trying to use legal tactics to tackle technical problems. Soon the Big Fish will use the ultimate technical tactic...they own the devices and the lend them to us...
If you misconfigure this thing, or leave it lying around, or make the password guessable...well, how's this different from having a buggy CGI-script or otherwise?
I, for one, am considering using this on a couple of my customers' sites. They are hosted on systems where I can't get shell access. This will let me configure some things on the system without having an identical setup on my own box (or running a bunch of "echo `env | sort`" type CGI scripts)
I won't keep this script around in the account. When I need it I can upload it, do my deeds, and then remove it. I can change passwd each time I re-install.
BTW: I don't consider this any less secure than the (clear-text) FTP access I have to the account. The fact that this program exists means that anyone could have written it (or a similar proggy) and uploaded it to the CGI-BIN directory.
I rarely find a tech book that offers more than a few examples I ear-mark. This book however has me re-reading it from time to time. The lessons picked up take time to sink in, and IMO no one can truly pick up all of the lessons on one read through.
Sounds like the QA department at a s/w company I used to work for..."couldn't it be our software doing that?" I'd ask.
Their stock price is under $0.30. Are these related?
I work elsewhere now.
Of the three jobs I've had to date, I got one from the newspaper (my first...silly newbie) and two via head-hunters (they just happened to catch me on bad days ;-).
Thank you for the info!
The GPL specifically states that changes made for one's own use do not have to be distributed.
In other words, feel free to take this publically funded work and do whatever you want to with it. However if you are going to distribute your changes (for example, make money by selling the derived work), you must then make your source code changes available.
Let's not be like the politicians. Making sweeping statements like "obligate one to make one's own code freely available" is an inaccurate statement about the GPL and completely ignores its intent.
I loved the Web back in the early '90s when people didn't have much of a clue about the Web and robots (this hasn't changed much, actually, but now there are "books" and "experts").
I couldn't count the amount of emails from irate "webmasters" (and phone calls from U.S. law-enforcement agencies) insisting that we hacked their sites because no links exist on their site to their hidden web pages...
Blank text indeed.
People who run their own search engines can make good use of <META> tags. Public search engines, however, cannot rely on the validity of such tags.
I'm thinking of putting "Pamela", "Jennifer", and other top-10 search terms into our META tags...I'm sure that when our technical docs show up in a pr0n search that we'll get traffic...
VirtuaWin, a GPL'ed virtual desktop for Win32.
I use it extensively when GIMP'ing too (take that you nay-sayers!) :-)
There's finding out what's not documented, reverse-engineering how it really works, and implementing that.
Then there's finding out what's documented, reverse-engineering how it really works, and implementing that.
It's a great esay written by Assay.
It means that the patent holders will go after software makers, not users.
Then again, they didn't have a fee for the decoder until recently...so their stand on this point may not be static either ;-)
I'm sure its not just Canadians working on OpenBSD...