Check Sum are not a good way to validate if some thing is valid.
For each Check Sum value - N number of files different files will have the same Check Sum.
If we take the LRC (XOR) : adding nulls or pairs of characters (two 2's or 3's) will change a file and leave the Check Sum alone.
If we take the CRC (long division): adding leading nulls or adding binary adding the file to itself will result in the same CRC.
Check Sums can act as a "finger print" so you have a good idea if it is right, but you will never be sure until an outside (out of band) test is made -- one ears.
Been in use in Europe of the last 15 years. Saw my first one in a train station in Bern, CH in '87. Spent CHF 40.00 just playing with it - got some good chocolates too!
It is configured corrected. We also removed the route to prevent an open port say:80 from getting access to internet, if other settings fail or are overriden.
This is just another "hurl" to prevent the connections.
You see, you do not rely on just one "hurl" to prevent problems... you rely on multiple. Simple ones like removing a default from routers and servers to complex like vpn tunnels, certificates, and auto removal of "unsafe" programs from the desktops.
We are placing secondary firewalls, between the servers the desktop. We have found that most servers have extra ports open, then even if you them off, some thing will get them turned on again. Like a Patch "fixing" a break.
By placing isulating the servers from the rest of the network, we are able to control the port issues both ways. So ODBC and Remote Job Submits can be sent. The app is all green screen based.
Having the second firewall also prevents the servers "getting out" on the internet, becuase we removed the defualt route from the firewalls, so they do not know where the gateway to the internet is.
When bidding you must bid with two thoughts in mind... 1) What is the customer's budget. 2) What is their estimate.
If you come to far under their budget, their managers will wonder about their ability to manage and estimate. Because by the time you come in, the project been around for a while. So they are all ready prepared to payin a price range.
You need to talk to your cleint and bring them into your thinking while understanding the pressures in their enviroment.
When writing the proposal, you can also set up two amounts - a minimum and maximum bill. This way you can place your actual amount (min) and give the client there interal estimate (max). Then bill the contact by the hour and not flat amount. Gives the cusomter filling they are right, and bid the project to what is right for you. If you are wrong, then there is leaway for you get a liitle extra and the customer is still protected.
Finally, you can always underbill for the work. This way you stay ethical to yourself.
One job is to bring your client to the next level. Yes - you are trying to train them to be better. But it is not a class, it is by example.
That is the point of the over all thread... Geeks teaching Geeks or Management deciding training.
The first case - by example brings every one along. You lower your cost for doing business, the Client becomes better, They lower their cost of doing business... so and so on.
The second case - wastes money in all forms that I have seen implymented. Even in the one case where I claimed it "worked", after 6 months half the staff was let go. Not resigned to other projects that where going using the skills... Just dropped. So how good was the use of the money?
My background: I support a system that was used in one form or another in over 1600 sites in 80 countries. I had locations running code that was two to three behind the current release. I supported them in all their efforts. By I would not lower our standard for one outdated location. I brought that location to current level - even if it meant them kicking a screaming.
Oh, I do mean screaming. I had a 3:00am call from a VP to come and fix the broken code I sent to site in Eygpt. I got to the office by 3:30am, the VP yelling at me for taking so long (a 30 mile trip plus getting dress.) Took the phone asked the site to print the script in error, asked the date and time stamp at the top also the status of a control flag, showed the VP the date and time stamp of the master copy, theirs was changed two hours before and the control flag was cleared. Made the PTF install with the master date and time stamps with a control flag to catch these types of errors. Told the client to reload the PTF, one their programmers did not test their work. Handed the phone to VP explain how our system time stamps every thing for the last 8 years and to clean up the mess. VP had placed a sorry into my folder the before I got to work the next day.
You used knowledge, so the training money was not completily wasted.
Now, could it have been spent better?
L337 note: So he is using his knowledge by hacking when not working on old code. Would it not be better use of company money to have L337 rewrite the code into current requiremnts. Then the knowledge is being used for the betterment of the company. If the code was current, then company could get possiblily use a less costly mainter.
Like I said the only training that "worked" as a new language course.
I have been around for a while. Until the knowledge is used, no training is worth the money spent.
It would be better spent throwing a party, to build moral. Have not seen those be very suceesful either.
Training is not a goal of a company. Dollars are. If you want to train yourself, then do it. It shows that you have more on the ball than the other around you.
I have not seen a single management based training to have any meaning. Outside firms do not understand the systems that are used internally.
The only training that was project related that "worked" (1 out of 2 got it) was the language that we were going to used in a new project. 1 week and you were are an expert.
Training is over all farse. It is the doing that actual trains the programmer. It is their failures that they learn from the best.
A lawyer defending can not put is client on the stand if HE KNOWS HE WILL LIE.
Placing a junk patents into the system is lying. To believe otherwise toss all the laws and declair a "free" soc^h^h^hmess.
One of the jobs in filing a patent is to look for prior art and other patents that conflict. If the lawyer does not do his job and wastes all of your money to for the "lottery" you propose... The lawyer is at fault period.
My view of showing in court that patent is true versus everyone else showing it is false solves the issue of judging. Once the first case is desided then the following claims will be harder. At least that way the system remains stable... You file your claim, you get your patent, you ask for linense fees, they say no, you prove you are right and try to prove you worng. But the right must prove it case... just as in crimal court. The "infringer" is not guilty of infringment first, but after a court date.
There are at least two "gatekeepers" in this problem.
1) the US Patent Office
2) the Lawyer filling out forms / giving advise.
If 1) is not responcible because is only a clerk and not a judge.
Then what you are saying about 2) is "Go for it! Hit lottery (for me)!" Then the lawyer gave his client bad advise and most cases in most states IS NOT WORKING IN THE BEST INTEREST OF HIS CLIENT.
Part Judical System relies on Lawyers with ethics. Submitting junk patents is not ethical. Future once a patent is issued it is deemed the TRUTH, and others have to PROVE it is not.
Why not change the system so it is the other way around? The claimant proves it is the truth?
I personally think then it is the Patent Lawyer is one at fault, if the US Patent Office is not required to filter out junk requests. Since the Patent Lawyer is there to look for prior art and advise is client what to do.
So Patent Lawyer files, he either: looking for future fees paid to him during the upcoming suits, or did not do his job in the first place.
Nor does it make it right for a company to patent simple processing.
The method they patented, if you removed reference to memory, would also cover:
1) Forward and Backward pointing link list 2) Node Balancing in B-Trees
And that is just the tip of iceburg.
It is time to remove US Patent Office from the software business, they have proven over and over they inability to allow only real inventions in software development. Else the other chose could be is require the Patent Office and its examiers to pay ALL cost and triple damages when they fail to do their jobs.
I started a CD Server to handle this mess. Was going to do it all on hard disks, but my wife got me a gift. 28 CD Players in single box (Library Auction - $50). Now all the games are in their CD drive ready to play.
In reading part of it...
If you have not done it before, you got wacked.
If you are not a business model, you got wacked. So no new comers and no non-business.
And Gartner?? I personally have yet to see one report that was not bais in favor of their other clients. Like the MS pages on their site.
And it is swamp that it is built on. KSC is built in the middle of wildlife refuse.
The rock road bed is to handle the load without coplasing. You see mud is hard to build on. they dug down 30' and back filled with rock.
The lanchpads are high in the air also, because the ground being just above sealevel and sandy... if you dug a hole, it will be filled with water. This way they are able to build a large platform to spread out the wieght and direct the blast away.
Cool thing is to thing that the rockets base is setting on the lauch platform, and that platform is setting on 6! pipes. YUP 6 pipes/columns.
You must go and have a tour. It is great fun. And the Saturn 5 rocket that you get to wake under is GREAT.
They are the same... Creationism: A "fireside story" simplifing Evolution.
They are different... Creationism: Defining God's joke on Mankind. Making Man think that Evolution is true.
Relign of century have been trying to prove the bible stories as true. Looking at DNA is one more method to of proof.
Evolution was a theory based prior on theories and examples, from "why are sea shells on top of mountians?" to "why do men look different, if all are created in God's image".
We know the mountains are getting taller as the crust of earth slowly shifts and press ridges form. We know that this rising is slow, so getting a sea bed of sea shells 7,000+ feet into air will take a LONG LONG time.
We find in the DNA that all men are (~) the same. DNA drifts slow over time as well - so at one time we were all in the same image.
So Evolution and Creationism support each other if you remove the TIME issue.
Now if the world was created some 5k years ago, then all the information showing it was longer, was great set dressing - hence the JOKE.
Now if world's clock is ALOT longer, then Creationism shows a simplified view of the Evolution making it easier to understand and giving man a referance guide to understand world around them - hence "fire side story".
Remember the bible was written by men, with God's help. So why not help his children unstand and learn about the world around them?
My car is not public place. Just as my house is not a public place. My car travels on a public roads and private roads. My house sits next to a public road.
Now what goes on in the car or the house is visable to from public or private locations makes them publicly viewable. Hence you can be arrested for not wearing clothes.
A police officer can not "go to town on the rest of the car"... He can though look in windows and see what is in open view (publicly viewable). If he see some thing that can warrent a search warrant, then he can get a search warrant on that bases.
He can also get you to be dumb enought to give up your rights and search with your consent.
One my car is NOT Public place. I own my car and its contents. What I contain in my car is my business, where I take my car is my business.
My car can be viewed by the Public. There is no illusion that I can see out and you can not see in. In a limo with tinted windows, that another story.:-)
The police are allowed to look at a car see what is visible. In your example: your nake body and atrest you for "not being dressed". They can arrest in your home of the same reason, if they could see you in the window.
Slashdot Mirror
So did I.
Check Sum are not a good way to validate if some thing is valid.
For each Check Sum value - N number of files different files will have the same Check Sum.
If we take the LRC (XOR) : adding nulls or pairs of characters (two 2's or 3's) will change a file and leave the Check Sum alone.
If we take the CRC (long division): adding leading nulls or adding binary adding the file to itself will result in the same CRC.
Check Sums can act as a "finger print" so you have a good idea if it is right, but you will never be sure until an outside (out of band) test is made -- one ears.
Been in use in Europe of the last 15 years. Saw my first one in a train station in Bern, CH in '87. Spent CHF 40.00 just playing with it - got some good chocolates too!
It is configured corrected. We also removed the route to prevent an open port say :80 from getting access to internet, if other settings fail or are overriden.
This is just another "hurl" to prevent the connections.
You see, you do not rely on just one "hurl" to prevent problems... you rely on multiple. Simple ones like removing a default from routers and servers to complex like vpn tunnels, certificates, and auto removal of "unsafe" programs from the desktops.
We are placing secondary firewalls, between the servers the desktop. We have found that most servers have extra ports open, then even if you them off, some thing will get them turned on again. Like a Patch "fixing" a break.
By placing isulating the servers from the rest of the network, we are able to control the port issues both ways. So ODBC and Remote Job Submits can be sent. The app is all green screen based.
Having the second firewall also prevents the servers "getting out" on the internet, becuase we removed the defualt route from the firewalls, so they do not know where the gateway to the internet is.
When bidding you must bid with two thoughts in mind...
1) What is the customer's budget.
2) What is their estimate.
If you come to far under their budget, their managers will wonder about their ability to manage and estimate. Because by the time you come in, the project been around for a while. So they are all ready prepared to payin a price range.
You need to talk to your cleint and bring them into your thinking while understanding the pressures in their enviroment.
When writing the proposal, you can also set up two amounts - a minimum and maximum bill. This way you can place your actual amount (min) and give the client there interal estimate (max). Then bill the contact by the hour and not flat amount. Gives the cusomter filling they are right, and bid the project to what is right for you. If you are wrong, then there is leaway for you get a liitle extra and the customer is still protected.
Finally, you can always underbill for the work. This way you stay ethical to yourself.
Last Paragraph is not true.
You choose to leave the client 10 behind.
One job is to bring your client to the next level. Yes - you are trying to train them to be better. But it is not a class, it is by example.
That is the point of the over all thread... Geeks teaching Geeks or Management deciding training.
The first case - by example brings every one along. You lower your cost for doing business, the Client becomes better, They lower their cost of doing business... so and so on.
The second case - wastes money in all forms that I have seen implymented. Even in the one case where I claimed it "worked", after 6 months half the staff was let go. Not resigned to other projects that where going using the skills... Just dropped. So how good was the use of the money?
My background: I support a system that was used in one form or another in over 1600 sites in 80 countries. I had locations running code that was two to three behind the current release. I supported them in all their efforts. By I would not lower our standard for one outdated location. I brought that location to current level - even if it meant them kicking a screaming.
Oh, I do mean screaming. I had a 3:00am call from a VP to come and fix the broken code I sent to site in Eygpt. I got to the office by 3:30am, the VP yelling at me for taking so long (a 30 mile trip plus getting dress.) Took the phone asked the site to print the script in error, asked the date and time stamp at the top also the status of a control flag, showed the VP the date and time stamp of the master copy, theirs was changed two hours before and the control flag was cleared. Made the PTF install with the master date and time stamps with a control flag to catch these types of errors. Told the client to reload the PTF, one their programmers did not test their work. Handed the phone to VP explain how our system time stamps every thing for the last 8 years and to clean up the mess. VP had placed a sorry into my folder the before I got to work the next day.
You proved the statement.
You used knowledge, so the training money was not completily wasted.
Now, could it have been spent better?
L337 note: So he is using his knowledge by hacking when not working on old code. Would it not be better use of company money to have L337 rewrite the code into current requiremnts. Then the knowledge is being used for the betterment of the company. If the code was current, then company could get possiblily use a less costly mainter.
You assumed, I assumed programming.
Like I said the only training that "worked" as a new language course.
I have been around for a while. Until the knowledge is used, no training is worth the money spent.
It would be better spent throwing a party, to build moral. Have not seen those be very suceesful either.
Training is not a goal of a company. Dollars are. If you want to train yourself, then do it. It shows that you have more on the ball than the other around you.
I have not seen a single management based training to have any meaning. Outside firms do not understand the systems that are used internally.
The only training that was project related that "worked" (1 out of 2 got it) was the language that we were going to used in a new project. 1 week and you were are an expert.
Training is over all farse. It is the doing that actual trains the programmer. It is their failures that they learn from the best.
I like this inducement. If you can not see the TV you only pay half.
If you can not hear the TV, do you also pay half? Because of course you would not use the radio.
Then we are back to WHO REAL KNOWS THE IP LAW?
The lawyers.
A lawyer defending can not put is client on the stand if HE KNOWS HE WILL LIE.
Placing a junk patents into the system is lying. To believe otherwise toss all the laws and declair a "free" soc^h^h^hmess.
One of the jobs in filing a patent is to look for prior art and other patents that conflict. If the lawyer does not do his job and wastes all of your money to for the "lottery" you propose... The lawyer is at fault period.
My view of showing in court that patent is true versus everyone else showing it is false solves the issue of judging. Once the first case is desided then the following claims will be harder. At least that way the system remains stable... You file your claim, you get your patent, you ask for linense fees, they say no, you prove you are right and try to prove you worng. But the right must prove it case... just as in crimal court. The "infringer" is not guilty of infringment first, but after a court date.
But IS the point.
There are at least two "gatekeepers" in this problem.
1) the US Patent Office
2) the Lawyer filling out forms / giving advise.
If 1) is not responcible because is only a clerk and not a judge.
Then what you are saying about 2) is "Go for it! Hit lottery (for me)!" Then the lawyer gave his client bad advise and most cases in most states IS NOT WORKING IN THE BEST INTEREST OF HIS CLIENT.
Part Judical System relies on Lawyers with ethics. Submitting junk patents is not ethical. Future once a patent is issued it is deemed the TRUTH, and others have to PROVE it is not.
Why not change the system so it is the other way around? The claimant proves it is the truth?
Great - then it is the fault of who?
Patent Lawyer?
Claimant?
I personally think then it is the Patent Lawyer is one at fault, if the US Patent Office is not required to filter out junk requests. Since the Patent Lawyer is there to look for prior art and advise is client what to do.
So Patent Lawyer files, he either: looking for future fees paid to him during the upcoming suits, or did not do his job in the first place.
So the lawyer should pay triple damages??
Nor does it make it right for a company to patent simple processing.
The method they patented, if you removed reference to memory, would also cover:
1) Forward and Backward pointing link list
2) Node Balancing in B-Trees
And that is just the tip of iceburg.
It is time to remove US Patent Office from the software business, they have proven over and over they inability to allow only real inventions in software development. Else the other chose could be is require the Patent Office and its examiers to pay ALL cost and triple damages when they fail to do their jobs.
There can be not comparsion until APPLE releases it for a general PC.
Being on APPLE hardware makes it something that most all will never see.
I started a CD Server to handle this mess. Was going to do it all on hard disks, but my wife got me a gift. 28 CD Players in single box (Library Auction - $50). Now all the games are in their CD drive ready to play.
My 1 and 3 year olds are very happy.
Yup above board... :-)
In reading part of it...
If you have not done it before, you got wacked.
If you are not a business model, you got wacked.
So no new comers and no non-business.
And Gartner?? I personally have yet to see one report that was not bais in favor of their other clients. Like the MS pages on their site.
Like I said, yeah sure.
And it is swamp that it is built on. KSC is built in the middle of wildlife refuse.
The rock road bed is to handle the load without coplasing. You see mud is hard to build on. they dug down 30' and back filled with rock.
The lanchpads are high in the air also, because the ground being just above sealevel and sandy... if you dug a hole, it will be filled with water. This way they are able to build a large platform to spread out the wieght and direct the blast away.
Cool thing is to thing that the rockets base is setting on the lauch platform, and that platform is setting on 6! pipes. YUP 6 pipes/columns.
You must go and have a tour. It is great fun. And the Saturn 5 rocket that you get to wake under is GREAT.
They are the same... Creationism: A "fireside story" simplifing Evolution.
They are different... Creationism: Defining God's joke on Mankind. Making Man think that Evolution is true.
Relign of century have been trying to prove the bible stories as true. Looking at DNA is one more method to of proof.
Evolution was a theory based prior on theories and examples, from "why are sea shells on top of mountians?" to "why do men look different, if all are created in God's image".
We know the mountains are getting taller as the crust of earth slowly shifts and press ridges form. We know that this rising is slow, so getting a sea bed of sea shells 7,000+ feet into air will take a LONG LONG time.
We find in the DNA that all men are (~) the same. DNA drifts slow over time as well - so at one time we were all in the same image.
So Evolution and Creationism support each other if you remove the TIME issue.
Now if the world was created some 5k years ago, then all the information showing it was longer, was great set dressing - hence the JOKE.
Now if world's clock is ALOT longer, then Creationism shows a simplified view of the Evolution making it easier to understand and giving man a referance guide to understand world around them - hence "fire side story".
Remember the bible was written by men, with God's help. So why not help his children unstand and learn about the world around them?
My car is not public place. Just as my house is not a public place. My car travels on a public roads and private roads. My house sits next to a public road.
Now what goes on in the car or the house is visable to from public or private locations makes them publicly viewable. Hence you can be arrested for not wearing clothes.
A police officer can not "go to town on the rest of the car"... He can though look in windows and see what is in open view (publicly viewable). If he see some thing that can warrent a search warrant, then he can get a search warrant on that bases.
He can also get you to be dumb enought to give up your rights and search with your consent.
Actually driving is a requirement of our current urban life. Try keeping horse and buggy.
Since the government and your neighbors will not allow you keep another form of realitly safe transportion, driving has become a right.
You can NOT be made agree, such as giving up your rights, underdress. Remember that when you are being searched to fly some where or go to school.
You are mixing two types of Public.
:-)
One my car is NOT Public place. I own my car and its contents. What I contain in my car is my business, where I take my car is my business.
My car can be viewed by the Public. There is no illusion that I can see out and you can not see in. In a limo with tinted windows, that another story.
The police are allowed to look at a car see what is visible. In your example: your nake body and atrest you for "not being dressed". They can arrest in your home of the same reason, if they could see you in the window.
Amen!
When they change the program nightly to adjust for his play, he was not playing against the computer but 6 hidden people.
Also do not forget effect of gravity.