What is a line of code anyway? Is that the number of hard returns or the number of semicolons? Even so, can we talk about the number of times a line of code is executed? For instance, an efficiently looped statement can often be broken out into tedious and unnecessary repetition. In this way, bad style can reduce your "defect density" by padding your overall volume of text. At the very least I can change int x,y; into int x; int y; and reduce my defect density by 50% (if the above code weren't brilliantly flawless).
Re:Orwell's vision not happening? NOT!
on
Gates and Security
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
This is so true. When I read 1984, the privacy concerns paled in my mind in comparison with the government's control of information and by extension its absolute power over knowledge. Sure the 24-hour surveillance was scary, but what about not being able to trust the thoughts, beliefs and "facts" inside your own head? Sound like any Fox News shows you've seen recently?
It's not about getting credit, it's about the flexibility of free software. RMS is just (yet again) pointing out that the Linux kernel is only a (replaceable) component in the GNU operating system, the point being not that GNU should get more credit but that the free software community doesn't actually *need* Linux if the SCO madness should somehow go inexplicably wrong.
The audience for this article is not intended to be those of us who have heard it all before, but rather people who are not very aware of what the free software community really is -- which is not (just) Linux.
I want to point out that by 'idiot' we need to clarify that we're not just saying 'this guy doesn't think the way I want him to so I think he's dumb.' The truth is that this Matt Oppenheim truthfully is not nearly as articulate and -- it would seem -- educated as Lessig. Unfortunately that also implies that this articleis not very useful as an impartial debate, especially since it kind of implies that the RIAA never took it very seriously frm the beginning. I totally agree with Lessig's side of this particular story, of course, but even if the two were to switch sides and argue the opposite points I think it's clear that Lessig could still write circles around this gu
In most cases this is absolutely correct *unless* your expert advice is part of the contract. If you are a coder, go ahead and code and let their legal department handle their end of the issue. After all, you don't want to stifle their innovation by throwing up walls that they might well be able to surmount. However, if you are considered an expert in this particular type of application development, then you are obligated to provide your expert advice. That does not mean that your advice should be: I don't think we can do this. Instead, you simply say: Your laywer(s) may need to develop a strategy to be ready in case this problem arises. The fact that you've gone to Slashdot with this question proves that you are not the person to defiitively say one way or the other (and that's a Good Thing in sloppy issues like these).
OK, the misunderstanding here is in your recently-clarified use of the term "liable." A word like that is a can of worms and in a legal sense if we were to hold editors liable for posts then they would necesarily be liable for everything else on the site because ultimately -- even if it is against the supposed rules -- they do have technically feasible control over anything that gets posted here.
I respect the work the editors do, but I think critisism is a good thing in these cases.
I do too. Your comment was not in response to the article. Your comment was made in response to the poster who pointed out that the submittor of the article was at fault and not the editor in question. I still agree with that viewpoint because this is a community site, and if we hold submittors accountable it would seem to me that better submissions would result, leading to fewer inaccuracies -- or as you put it, a *good* site. To expect the editors -- who I can only assume are dealing with a torrent of submissions that I suspect would be too much to individually verify -- to do it is not much of a solution when we already know that mistakes are going to happen on their end. Again, that is from the perspective of someone who does not want to see his favorite website suddenly dragged down by *liability.* Of course the problem could have been caught at any point in the process, but the error was made by the submittor, while the post was made by the editor in (mistakenly) good faith. Yeah, it was a screw up, and by all means grill away, but please let's not talk about liability while we let the real source of the error off the hook.
are you advocating that the editors be less vigilant?
No, I'm advocating that they be about as vigilant as they are and that we as a community appreciate the free service they provide rather than turning it into a thankless magnet for criticism.
I repeat: what is the editors job?
Why, to post articles that Slashdotters are interested in reading and having spirited discussions about -- bearing in mind that they have to cull that out of a huge amount of noise. In this case, I have to say that the editor(s) have done a fine job of at least that much. In fact, I'm having a spirited discussion right now;)
Seriously, your comments are thoughtful and we can both agree that this was not a well-done post. I just had to jump in and defend the guy who said that those of us who submit articles have a responsibility to be careful about our summaries because the editors are not going to catch our every mistake for us. The fact is that they will screw up now and then just as you and I might occasionally at our jobs, and until I start getting a monthly bill from Slashdot I'm not very interested in fixing blame and holding anybody *liable*.
Baloney. If slashdot is your source for accurate coverage than you already have a pretty screwed up view of the world. Slashdot is absolutely not liable at all for anything that gets posted here, otherwise they would be required not only to edit article posts, but also censor user comments and verify moderation. The whole point of this site is to embrace the chaos of free commentary, and as readers *we* are liable to separate the news from the trolls from the corporate shills from the inevitable accidental inaccuracies. I don't blame anyone for being upset about what tends to translate into a misinformed sexist generalization, but get over it. Slashdot as a site is no more accountable for its posts as we users are for our own occasionally misinformed opinions....and I supose you've never made a comment you wanted to take back.
I don't know exactly how much of an offset can be reaped here, but I think one major efficiency of this distribution method is in the massive cost of packaging/distributing side of the gaming marketplace. I would not be a bit surprised to see a massive reduction in material and especially labor overhead when you consider the reduction in manufacturing and transportation, not to mention the massive effort required to maintain relationships with retailers and their markups. Keep in mind also that many games ar sold past their prime at about the $10 pricerange for years after their initial realease, and if it's still profitable at that point then it must be feasible. I think this is just the beginning of 21st-century software distribution, and if I were EB, for example, I'd be working overtime on my Internet strategy right about now.
Everyone?
Actually, just one guy does it and sets up what wuold surely become an active web community of people who contribute and download teh stripped apps. Once that got big, they'd start uploading non-sponsored apps, and then you'd have what we call "Open Source Software." Oh wait, that's supposedly what we're starting with here... I know, we can call the stripped version GNU/(ad-sponsored OSource OSystem name)
I think a major problem in this area is that project management is so difficult with any software development. The problem is particularly accute in Open Source because the project managers are typically coders who are very busy writing code and may not have time to acknowledge everybody else who's contributing. We geeks tend to be biased against "managers" who we see at our jobs always taking credit for projects that other people write, but I'm not talking about bringing "suits" into OS or corporatizing the whole process. I just think we should be more cognizant of the usefulness of effective administrators who can stay on top of a project without trying to do everything themselves.
These people not only keep the project on track, they can also dedicate their time to getting a project the exposure it needs and then transferring the recognition to the programmers who deserve it. Besides, wouldn't it help to make some non-geeks aware that they too have a stake in the success of OS and that their contributions are welcome?
I think that the characters and setting are actually pretty cool. The problem with farscape is the awful writing. The cheesiness is almost entirely in the dialogue... well, that and some of the sets. (How many times are they going to darken the sound stage so we can't see the perimeter, thereby making the set look bigger and saving on the prop/design cost? Not a bad technique, but it's like they're addicted to it or something.)
That's what I'm thinking. Here's what I'll tell Comcast when they call.
"Um, I have my user agreement here and I don't see any violations here... nope, looks like I'm in compliance. btw, my account is fully paid, so if you disconnect me then you are in breach of contract and I am going to have to take you to court."
Pretty simple. Your signature is not on any documents where you agree that this or anything even similar to this is prohibited, and you have the right to expect the service that you agreed to pay for.Meanwhile, y'know, all of this NAT'ing really does considerably cut down on DDOS traffic from cable modem users; as a first level of defense it catches quite a bit from the script kiddies. You'd think Comcast would realize that.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm one techie who's not voting for *anything* unless there's a CowboyNeal option.
Dear Georgy
Do you think there should be a CowboyNeal option in the CA Governor's race?
Or should I not complain about lack of options?
Go to the university, not the software company. If they treat their vendors the way typical corporate customers do they'll get that fix done fast.
Positions on the Slashdot editorial staff will be filled by six rhesus monkeys
Why the upgrade?
Robots will definitely be taking over the task of going back in time to murder the mothers of future human revolutionaries.
Yeah, I trained my dog to bark whenever anybody hacks my box. He's never barked so I know my box must be totally secure.
Must-See threats!
So why is it that the answer to all of my searches is either "wet teens," "Generic Viagra," or "I am a banker from Nigeria?"
That's why I still haven't bought Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey.
Keanu will come back. Any day now...
First time I've ever seen guys compare packages and size doesn't seem to matter.
Not compared: my favorite package
What is a line of code anyway? Is that the number of hard returns or the number of semicolons? Even so, can we talk about the number of times a line of code is executed? For instance, an efficiently looped statement can often be broken out into tedious and unnecessary repetition. In this way, bad style can reduce your "defect density" by padding your overall volume of text. At the very least I can change
int x,y;
into
int x;
int y;
and reduce my defect density by 50% (if the above code weren't brilliantly flawless).
This is so true. When I read 1984, the privacy concerns paled in my mind in comparison with the government's control of information and by extension its absolute power over knowledge. Sure the 24-hour surveillance was scary, but what about not being able to trust the thoughts, beliefs and "facts" inside your own head? Sound like any Fox News shows you've seen recently?
It's not about getting credit, it's about the flexibility of free software. RMS is just (yet again) pointing out that the Linux kernel is only a (replaceable) component in the GNU operating system, the point being not that GNU should get more credit but that the free software community doesn't actually *need* Linux if the SCO madness should somehow go inexplicably wrong.
The audience for this article is not intended to be those of us who have heard it all before, but rather people who are not very aware of what the free software community really is -- which is not (just) Linux.
I want to point out that by 'idiot' we need to clarify that we're not just saying 'this guy doesn't think the way I want him to so I think he's dumb.' The truth is that this Matt Oppenheim truthfully is not nearly as articulate and -- it would seem -- educated as Lessig. Unfortunately that also implies that this articleis not very useful as an impartial debate, especially since it kind of implies that the RIAA never took it very seriously frm the beginning. I totally agree with Lessig's side of this particular story, of course, but even if the two were to switch sides and argue the opposite points I think it's clear that Lessig could still write circles around this gu
In most cases this is absolutely correct *unless* your expert advice is part of the contract. If you are a coder, go ahead and code and let their legal department handle their end of the issue. After all, you don't want to stifle their innovation by throwing up walls that they might well be able to surmount.
However, if you are considered an expert in this particular type of application development, then you are obligated to provide your expert advice. That does not mean that your advice should be: I don't think we can do this. Instead, you simply say: Your laywer(s) may need to develop a strategy to be ready in case this problem arises.
The fact that you've gone to Slashdot with this question proves that you are not the person to defiitively say one way or the other (and that's a Good Thing in sloppy issues like these).
OK, the misunderstanding here is in your recently-clarified use of the term "liable." A word like that is a can of worms and in a legal sense if we were to hold editors liable for posts then they would necesarily be liable for everything else on the site because ultimately -- even if it is against the supposed rules -- they do have technically feasible control over anything that gets posted here.
;)
I respect the work the editors do, but I think critisism is a good thing in these cases.
I do too. Your comment was not in response to the article. Your comment was made in response to the poster who pointed out that the submittor of the article was at fault and not the editor in question. I still agree with that viewpoint because this is a community site, and if we hold submittors accountable it would seem to me that better submissions would result, leading to fewer inaccuracies -- or as you put it, a *good* site. To expect the editors -- who I can only assume are dealing with a torrent of submissions that I suspect would be too much to individually verify -- to do it is not much of a solution when we already know that mistakes are going to happen on their end. Again, that is from the perspective of someone who does not want to see his favorite website suddenly dragged down by *liability.* Of course the problem could have been caught at any point in the process, but the error was made by the submittor, while the post was made by the editor in (mistakenly) good faith. Yeah, it was a screw up, and by all means grill away, but please let's not talk about liability while we let the real source of the error off the hook.
are you advocating that the editors be less vigilant?
No, I'm advocating that they be about as vigilant as they are and that we as a community appreciate the free service they provide rather than turning it into a thankless magnet for criticism.
I repeat: what is the editors job?
Why, to post articles that Slashdotters are interested in reading and having spirited discussions about -- bearing in mind that they have to cull that out of a huge amount of noise. In this case, I have to say that the editor(s) have done a fine job of at least that much. In fact, I'm having a spirited discussion right now
Seriously, your comments are thoughtful and we can both agree that this was not a well-done post. I just had to jump in and defend the guy who said that those of us who submit articles have a responsibility to be careful about our summaries because the editors are not going to catch our every mistake for us. The fact is that they will screw up now and then just as you and I might occasionally at our jobs, and until I start getting a monthly bill from Slashdot I'm not very interested in fixing blame and holding anybody *liable*.
Baloney. ...and I supose you've never made a comment you wanted to take back.
If slashdot is your source for accurate coverage than you already have a pretty screwed up view of the world. Slashdot is absolutely not liable at all for anything that gets posted here, otherwise they would be required not only to edit article posts, but also censor user comments and verify moderation. The whole point of this site is to embrace the chaos of free commentary, and as readers *we* are liable to separate the news from the trolls from the corporate shills from the inevitable accidental inaccuracies.
I don't blame anyone for being upset about what tends to translate into a misinformed sexist generalization, but get over it. Slashdot as a site is no more accountable for its posts as we users are for our own occasionally misinformed opinions.
Nah,
(
girls don't even like that kind of stuff. They want RAM.)
I don't know exactly how much of an offset can be reaped here, but I think one major efficiency of this distribution method is in the massive cost of packaging/distributing side of the gaming marketplace. I would not be a bit surprised to see a massive reduction in material and especially labor overhead when you consider the reduction in manufacturing and transportation, not to mention the massive effort required to maintain relationships with retailers and their markups. Keep in mind also that many games ar sold past their prime at about the $10 pricerange for years after their initial realease, and if it's still profitable at that point then it must be feasible. I think this is just the beginning of 21st-century software distribution, and if I were EB, for example, I'd be working overtime on my Internet strategy right about now.
... can you network it?
Everyone?
Actually, just one guy does it and sets up what wuold surely become an active web community of people who contribute and download teh stripped apps. Once that got big, they'd start uploading non-sponsored apps, and then you'd have what we call "Open Source Software." Oh wait, that's supposedly what we're starting with here... I know, we can call the stripped version GNU/(ad-sponsored OSource OSystem name)
I think a major problem in this area is that project management is so difficult with any software development. The problem is particularly accute in Open Source because the project managers are typically coders who are very busy writing code and may not have time to acknowledge everybody else who's contributing. We geeks tend to be biased against "managers" who we see at our jobs always taking credit for projects that other people write, but I'm not talking about bringing "suits" into OS or corporatizing the whole process. I just think we should be more cognizant of the usefulness of effective administrators who can stay on top of a project without trying to do everything themselves.
These people not only keep the project on track, they can also dedicate their time to getting a project the exposure it needs and then transferring the recognition to the programmers who deserve it. Besides, wouldn't it help to make some non-geeks aware that they too have a stake in the success of OS and that their contributions are welcome?
I think that the characters and setting are actually pretty cool. The problem with farscape is the awful writing. The cheesiness is almost entirely in the dialogue... well, that and some of the sets. (How many times are they going to darken the sound stage so we can't see the perimeter, thereby making the set look bigger and saving on the prop/design cost? Not a bad technique, but it's like they're addicted to it or something.)
That's what I'm thinking. Here's what I'll tell Comcast when they call.
"Um, I have my user agreement here and I don't see any violations here... nope, looks like I'm in compliance. btw, my account is fully paid, so if you disconnect me then you are in breach of contract and I am going to have to take you to court."
Pretty simple. Your signature is not on any documents where you agree that this or anything even similar to this is prohibited, and you have the right to expect the service that you agreed to pay for.Meanwhile, y'know, all of this NAT'ing really does considerably cut down on DDOS traffic from cable modem users; as a first level of defense it catches quite a bit from the script kiddies. You'd think Comcast would realize that.
Hey, sounds like they're perfect for the dot-com workforce!