Well, Microsoft's VM for example versus Sun's VM was an example - and I think it would get worse.
Another example are C++ compilers, while there is a De Jure standard - all the companies include their own libraries that you just can't use unless you want to be incompatible. I'm thinking everyone would want a custom VM/Compiler (how many open source C compilers are there?)
I would talk about other non-language related projects but I don't want to get slammed (ok, like "this program won't compile on slackware but it'll compile on redhat cause of default library incompatibility issues")
I'm not certain this is a move that should be made. All we need are 18 different 'forks' in the java tree like certain other open source projects. I can just see it now "No no, you need BobJavaVM-1.43.2.43 - it won't run with FastJava V 2"
Re:Hardware *Debugging*?
on
Debugging
·
· Score: 1, Informative
Actually, the first computer "bug" was a hardware bug, as it was a moth that flew into a relay and jammed it. Removing the bug physically was debugging. http://www.maxmon.com/1945ad.htm is a reference.
Besides, when you are building a machine and dealing with Logic Gates - its the same type of debugging as with software logic.
I'd have to disagree with you. The syntax is very similar to C/C++/Java - (don't flame me because its not *EXACTLY* the same - and it is more limited) - and secondly, "but it's full of exploits" - Maybe the interpretter on some platforms gives it power outside the boundries of the language but that is *NOT* the language's fault. Javascript is a tool and has its place and usefulness just like any other tool.
The PDF is unavailable now but I have a window open with the text. Which is posted below.
December 18, 2003 [Name] [Address] Re: AT&T / SCO License No. SOFT-____ Dear UNIX Licensee: You are designated as Licensee under the above-referenced software licensing agreement (the "Agreement"). The undersigned SCO Group, Inc. ("SCO") is the successor licensor. The Agreement is in full force and effect according to its terms. License Grant to Use UNIX Technology You were granted under Para. 2.01 of the Agreement: [A] personal, nontransferable and nonexclusive right to use in the [Authorized Country] each Software Product identified in one or more Supplements hereto, solely for Licensee's own internal business purposes and solely on or in conjunction with Designated CPU's for such Software Product. Such right to use includes the right to modify such Software Product and to prepare derivative works based such Software Product, provided that the resulting materials are treated hereunder as part of the original Software Product. The Software Product thus includes more than the base System V release licensed by you. Software Products also includes: (a) the UNIX software release based on UNIX System V prepared by your UNIX vendor and (b) modifications to, or derivative works based on, any UNIX product made by you. Limitations on Use of UNIX Technology Your limitations on use and other obligations under the Agreement include the following: Para. 2.05. No right is granted by this Agreement for the use of Software Products directly for others, or for any use of Software Products by others. [This is expanded under 2.06 under some contracts.] Para. 4.01. Licensee agrees that it will not, without prior written consent of [SCO], export, directly or indirectly, Software Products covered by this Agreement to any country outside the[Authorized Country]. Para. 7.06(a) [7.05(a). Licensee agrees that it shall hold all parts of the Software Products subject to this Agreement in confidence for [SCO]. Licensee further agrees that it shall not make any disclosure of any or all of the Software Products (including methods or concepts utilized therein) to anyone, except to employees of Licensee to whom such disclosure is necessary to the use for which rights are granted hereunder. Licensee shall appropriately notify each employee to whom such disclosure is made that such disclosure is made in confidence and shall be kept in confidence by such employee. Para. 7.09. Neither this Agreement nor any rights hereunder, in whole or in part, shall be assignable or otherwise transferable by Licensee and any purported assignment or transfer shall be null and void. Para. 7.10. [N]othing in this Agreement grants to Licensee the right to sell, lease, or otherwise transfer or dispose of a Software Product in whole or in part. Required Certification Re: Use of UNIX You are also obligated to certify proper use of the Software Products by you under the Agreement, as required by the following Para. 2.04 2.05: On [SCO's] request, but not more frequently than annually, Licensee shall furnish to SCO a statement, certified by an authorized representative of Licensee, listing the location, type and serial number of all Designated CPUs hereunder and stating that the use by Licensee of Software Products subject to this Agreement has been reviewed and that each such Software Product is being used solely on such Designated CPUs (or temporarily on back-up CPUs) for such Software Products in full compliance with the provisions of this Agreement. (Emphasis added.) Accordingly, SCO requires written certification by your authorized representative under Para. 2.04 within 30 days of receipt of this letter. Such written certification must include statements that: 1. You are not running Linux binary code that was compiled from any version of Linux that contains our copyrighte
My question is, who would want to work for a company that wouldn't hire you because of a former employer? I mean, if I worked for enron as a network guy - and another company doesn't want to hire me for that.... that management of the second company probably isn't the brightest in the world.
I remember there was a company (that shall remain nameless) in NE Ohio awhile back that had promised uncapped speeds (which seems to be the 'unlimited' debate here) -- however there was such a boom in business that their infrastructure couldn't support it, so they capped the bandwidth to 20k upload and (i think) +-100k download. There was a huge uproar about it but it seemed silly to me for people to bitch about the temporary cap whilst that company was upgrading their infrastructure.
What the difference between pasting the text and saying "i'm going to paste the text: " first?
point was, site was slowing down and people wouldn't have been able to read the thing without a posting of it. And as the gentleman said in another reply, i have 4 posts to my name. i'm not a karma whore. although you might have my vote as a troll. Geesh.
Outsourcing to India in Business Week and at MIT... Not all of our students will see this cover story in Business Week on the migration of high-paying jobs to India. But most attended a lecture in 6.171 by the folks who run MIT's latest big IT effort: OpenCourseware (http://ocw.mit.edu), which distributes syllabi, problem sets, and other materials from MIT classes (at least one semester after the class is actually given). During the lecture the students learned that, although ocw.mit.edu is a purely static.html site, it is produced with a database-backed content management system. In fact, of the $11 million donated by foundations to support the service, about $2 million was spent on technology and the salaries of folks at MIT who oversee the technology.
The more sophisticated portion of ocw.mit.edu is a 100 percent Microsoft show. A student asks the speakers why they chose Microsoft Content Management Server, expecting to hear a story about careful in-house technical evaluation done by people sort of like them. The answer: "We read a Gartner Group report that said the Microsoft system was the simplest to use among the commercial vendors and that open-source toolkits weren't worth considering."
Students began to wake up.
A PowerPoint slide contained the magic word "Delhi". It turns out that most of the content editing and all of the programming work for OpenCourseware was done in India, either by Sapient, MIT's main contractor for the project, or by a handful of Microsoft India employees who helped set up the Content Management Server.
Thus did students who are within months of graduating with their $160,000 computer science degrees learn how modern information systems are actually built, even by institutions that earn much of their revenue from educating American software developers.
# Posted by Philip Greenspun on 12/1/03; 10:57:50 AM - Comments [20] Trackback [2]
Slashdot Mirror
Well, Microsoft's VM for example versus Sun's VM was an example - and I think it would get worse.
Another example are C++ compilers, while there is a De Jure standard - all the companies include their own libraries that you just can't use unless you want to be incompatible. I'm thinking everyone would want a custom VM/Compiler (how many open source C compilers are there?)
I would talk about other non-language related projects but I don't want to get slammed (ok, like "this program won't compile on slackware but it'll compile on redhat cause of default library incompatibility issues")
I'm not certain this is a move that should be made. All we need are 18 different 'forks' in the java tree like certain other open source projects. I can just see it now "No no, you need BobJavaVM-1.43.2.43 - it won't run with FastJava V 2"
Actually,
the first computer "bug" was a hardware bug, as it was a moth that flew into a relay and jammed it. Removing the bug physically was debugging. http://www.maxmon.com/1945ad.htm is a reference.
Besides, when you are building a machine and dealing with Logic Gates - its the same type of debugging as with software logic.
I'd have to disagree with you. The syntax is very similar to C/C++/Java - (don't flame me because its not *EXACTLY* the same - and it is more limited) - and secondly, "but it's full of exploits" - Maybe the interpretter on some platforms gives it power outside the boundries of the language but that is *NOT* the language's fault. Javascript is a tool and has its place and usefulness just like any other tool.
Maybe, but you'd be fucked if you botched installing a new kernel.
The PDF is unavailable now but I have a window open with the text. Which is posted below.
December 18, 2003
[Name]
[Address]
Re: AT&T / SCO License No. SOFT-____
Dear UNIX Licensee:
You are designated as Licensee under the above-referenced software licensing agreement
(the "Agreement"). The undersigned SCO Group, Inc. ("SCO") is the successor licensor.
The Agreement is in full force and effect according to its terms.
License Grant to Use UNIX Technology
You were granted under Para. 2.01 of the Agreement:
[A] personal, nontransferable and nonexclusive right to use
in the [Authorized Country] each Software Product
identified in one or more Supplements hereto, solely for
Licensee's own internal business purposes and solely on or
in conjunction with Designated CPU's for such Software
Product. Such right to use includes the right to modify
such Software Product and to prepare derivative works
based such Software Product, provided that the resulting
materials are treated hereunder as part of the original
Software Product.
The Software Product thus includes more than the base System V release licensed by
you. Software Products also includes: (a) the UNIX software release based on UNIX
System V prepared by your UNIX vendor and (b) modifications to, or derivative works
based on, any UNIX product made by you.
Limitations on Use of UNIX Technology
Your limitations on use and other obligations under the Agreement include the following:
Para. 2.05. No right is granted by this Agreement for the
use of Software Products directly for others, or for any use
of Software Products by others. [This is expanded under
2.06 under some contracts.]
Para. 4.01. Licensee agrees that it will not, without prior
written consent of [SCO], export, directly or indirectly,
Software Products covered by this Agreement to any
country outside the[Authorized Country].
Para. 7.06(a) [7.05(a). Licensee agrees that it shall hold all
parts of the Software Products subject to this Agreement in
confidence for [SCO]. Licensee further agrees that it shall
not make any disclosure of any or all of the Software
Products (including methods or concepts utilized therein) to
anyone, except to employees of Licensee to whom such
disclosure is necessary to the use for which rights are
granted hereunder. Licensee shall appropriately notify each
employee to whom such disclosure is made that such
disclosure is made in confidence and shall be kept in
confidence by such employee.
Para. 7.09. Neither this Agreement nor any rights
hereunder, in whole or in part, shall be assignable or
otherwise transferable by Licensee and any purported
assignment or transfer shall be null and void.
Para. 7.10. [N]othing in this Agreement grants to Licensee
the right to sell, lease, or otherwise transfer or dispose of a
Software Product in whole or in part.
Required Certification Re: Use of UNIX
You are also obligated to certify proper use of the Software Products by you under the
Agreement, as required by the following Para. 2.04 2.05:
On [SCO's] request, but not more frequently than annually,
Licensee shall furnish to SCO a statement, certified by an
authorized representative of Licensee, listing the location,
type and serial number of all Designated CPUs hereunder
and stating that the use by Licensee of Software Products
subject to this Agreement has been reviewed and that each
such Software Product is being used solely on such
Designated CPUs (or temporarily on back-up CPUs) for
such Software Products in full compliance with the
provisions of this Agreement. (Emphasis added.)
Accordingly, SCO requires written certification by your authorized representative
under Para. 2.04 within 30 days of receipt of this letter. Such written certification must
include statements that:
1. You are not running Linux binary code that was compiled from any version of Linux
that contains our copyrighte
My question is, who would want to work for a company that wouldn't hire you because of a former employer? I mean, if I worked for enron as a network guy - and another company doesn't want to hire me for that.... that management of the second company probably isn't the brightest in the world.
The robot is only 2 feet tall.
Thus: running.
I remember there was a company (that shall remain nameless) in NE Ohio awhile back that had promised uncapped speeds (which seems to be the 'unlimited' debate here) -- however there was such a boom in business that their infrastructure couldn't support it, so they capped the bandwidth to 20k upload and (i think) +-100k download. There was a huge uproar about it but it seemed silly to me for people to bitch about the temporary cap whilst that company was upgrading their infrastructure.
What the difference between pasting the text and saying "i'm going to paste the text: " first?
point was, site was slowing down and people wouldn't have been able to read the thing without a posting of it. And as the gentleman said in another reply, i have 4 posts to my name. i'm not a karma whore. although you might have my vote as a troll. Geesh.
Outsourcing to India in Business Week and at MIT... .html site, it is produced with a database-backed content management system. In fact, of the $11 million donated by foundations to support the service, about $2 million was spent on technology and the salaries of folks at MIT who oversee the technology.
Not all of our students will see this cover story in Business Week on the migration of high-paying jobs to India. But most attended a lecture in 6.171 by the folks who run MIT's latest big IT effort: OpenCourseware (http://ocw.mit.edu), which distributes syllabi, problem sets, and other materials from MIT classes (at least one semester after the class is actually given). During the lecture the students learned that, although ocw.mit.edu is a purely static
The more sophisticated portion of ocw.mit.edu is a 100 percent Microsoft show. A student asks the speakers why they chose Microsoft Content Management Server, expecting to hear a story about careful in-house technical evaluation done by people sort of like them. The answer: "We read a Gartner Group report that said the Microsoft system was the simplest to use among the commercial vendors and that open-source toolkits weren't worth considering."
Students began to wake up.
A PowerPoint slide contained the magic word "Delhi". It turns out that most of the content editing and all of the programming work for OpenCourseware was done in India, either by Sapient, MIT's main contractor for the project, or by a handful of Microsoft India employees who helped set up the Content Management Server.
Thus did students who are within months of graduating with their $160,000 computer science degrees learn how modern information systems are actually built, even by institutions that earn much of their revenue from educating American software developers.
# Posted by Philip Greenspun on 12/1/03; 10:57:50 AM - Comments [20] Trackback [2]
If i'd had known that was considered a "sweet machine" i wouldn't have ditched the one i found in my basement! Damnit.
I submitted this story based on First Hand events ...
2002-09-30 02:10:48 New and more annoying advertising (articles,news) (rejected)
whats the deal with that?
Interesting to me that the kids who have the cash (or are given the cash) to go to MIT feel the need to try and rip off the casinos...