So is CLR like a cross between the Java Sandbox and chroot? If so and it can run native code, how does it protect against buffer overruns? In other words, what is it that's being managed (apart from the consumer;-) ?
Your story demonstrates that it is sometimes good to start from scratch, not that it's easier to develop in Python.
By the way I cannot judge Python here, because I've little experience with it. Personally I find that writing Java with eclipse is very easy. Rewriting is also simplified a lot by the refactor functions.
Maybe there's an equally nice development enviroment for Python, but I don't think so. Deciding on which language is best is also determined by the development environment you are using.
I'm highly sceptical about this story. If true, it would not only mean that information is stored outside of the brain, but also that encoding of this information follows universal rules that enable interpretation of the data in a different brain. So information on what names are, how they are written, how they are pronounced, what a rodeo rider is, this information must have some sort of universal encoding. This is very unlikely. At the very least you could say that the woman was able to associate sounds or images she perceived with muscle movements in her mouth. But even for that to be information that's universally readable by a random brain is very unlikely. Are you sure, you're not trolling?
A system where the _change in content_ is monitored instead of the _ip making the change_ would be almost as simple, more effective and would maintain wikipedias low threshold of entry.
If someone would clear an entire page or add the same large amount of references to other sites this is clearly a spammer and the change should not be accepted.
One of the charming aspects of wikipedia is that anyone can contribute to the total knowledge in it immediately. The threshold is very low and this attracts many contributers. After adding to a few articles, people will become familiar with contributing and become regurlars. If the threshold is increase, less people will join and wikipedia will grow less.
The solution you suggest would deter many people.
The proposed policy where only problem areas are semi-protected seems a nice middle ground where only mainstream articles, for which there would be plenty contributers, are protected from malicious contributors.
Nat Friedman's follow-up to Linus' post is grown-up and sensible
Sorry, but I disagree. Nats mail is condescending. He's telling Linus how to behave in his mail and how to be polite instead of talking about the issue at hand. Linus is using strong words to express his opinion, but at least he's talking on topic and doesn't drown into a meta discussion about the way people should communicate.
For example:
We can snipe at each other all day long. (Linus, every time I copy large files between devices on my Linux system my mouse pointer skips. It works fine on my Mac). That's not productive.
So, this mailing list is not there to address issues but to drink tea together? If Nat had the problem he describes with Linux, he should report it, switch systems or live with it. I certainly could not to any harm to talk about it, but not on this list, because it's the the Gnome list.
Let's have a grown-up discussion. If I worked for Microsoft I'd be very happy to see you throwing pejoratives around like that on this list. Talk about sniping. This comment is not really productive.
Not I'll stop talking meta. Of course Nat's mail isn't the worst, but what he is basically telling Linus to stop complaining, because there are bigger problems in the world, which is a cheap way of ignoring the problem.
And therefore, Qt is a program in the way the Free Software was meant initially. If you want to use my code, fine, but make sure that the results are available to others too. It's a fair and clear deal: use free code, produce free code. If you want to sell your code, then pay for the code you use to make it.
Everything is an information management system, using a combination MySQL and Perl to create a flexible system of entering, linking, and retrieving information.
Re:GCC is the Key to Open Source's Success
on
GCC 4.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
Anonymous Coward, No doubt, your rude trolling will get you modded down soon. But I'd like to point out I have am not involved in the project you're linking to. I only mention it on my homepage as a recursive acronym joke on my first name, which is Jos.
Re:GCC is the Key to Open Source's Success
on
GCC 4.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
Open Source Software is a subset of Software, so to say that GCC is a computer program is absolutely correct, if perhaps more general than you would prefer.
You are error here, but not because you think that software designated Free Software may carelessly be referred to as Open Source software, but because you are ignoring the most important values that lead to the birth of Free Software. These values are very important to the further developement of our computer usage and should be emphasised to people who are ignorant of them.
Not only that. It's worse. The snippet of code is javascript.
This means that the added code has the ability to change the look of the page completely. If at any time Google decided that all web pages should have the word Microsoft replaced by Google, they could do this by adding an onload function to the javascript code that is added to all web pages using this service.
You just replace it with the new glibc, deleting the old version. The running programs will continue to use the old version. Even though it was deleted/replaced, the old version is still available to running programs using it. Only when the last program using the old version is deleted, will the last reference to the lib disappear and the file truly be deleted.
So as a previous comment mentioned, you will need to restart all applications using the affected library, if you are concerned that the security problem may affect them. In practice this means that you'll probably want to restart the server programs you're running.
So you agree that it's a fact that there is no need to pay a Trolltech license for in-house applications?
It seems to me you're only gripe is corporate _perception_, (what Trolltech 'seams' to say) not the actual license. I would not go as far as calling that an issue.
You are suggesting the GPL software cannot be for profit software. Also, if you want to keep your code private, using the GPL version of Qt is fine. Only if you publish a program under a different license that the GPL do you have to pay the license.
This should be no problem, since KDE is compatible with this requirement. Any software Novell might want to add would probably be GPL anyway, because that's the most common license for Linux distros.
Only if Novell wanted to develop a closed source program would the Qt license be a problem. But even then, it would be easy to use a different library if the license fee, (which is not that hight compared to dev. wages) was too much.
Re:Why are we hiding from the police, daddy?
on
Vim 6.4 Released
·
· Score: 1
What is the point of:sh if you have ^z?
Use ^z to put vi in the background and type 'fg' in the shell to get back.
Slashdot Mirror
Parent mean JSON and she should me modded up.
Could you name me one album for which no pirated copy is available because of DRM?
So is CLR like a cross between the Java Sandbox and chroot? If so and it can run native code, how does it protect against buffer overruns? In other words, what is it that's being managed (apart from the consumer ;-) ?
If GPL is not acceptable, buy Qt.
Your story demonstrates that it is sometimes good to start from scratch, not that it's easier to develop in Python.
By the way I cannot judge Python here, because I've little experience with it. Personally I find that writing Java with eclipse is very easy. Rewriting is also simplified a lot by the refactor functions.
Maybe there's an equally nice development enviroment for Python, but I don't think so. Deciding on which language is best is also determined by the development environment you are using.
google-linux.com is still for sale.
I'm highly sceptical about this story. If true, it would not only mean that information is stored outside of the brain, but also that encoding of this information follows universal rules that enable interpretation of the data in a different brain. So information on what names are, how they are written, how they are pronounced, what a rodeo rider is, this information must have some sort of universal encoding. This is very unlikely.
At the very least you could say that the woman was able to associate sounds or images she perceived with muscle movements in her mouth. But even for that to be information that's universally readable by a random brain is very unlikely.
Are you sure, you're not trolling?
Did you know that there's a very small client that ships with Qt. It runs on Windows. Linux and OS X.
From using the command 'string' on the opera binary, I can retrieve the names of 82 Qt classes.
/usr/bin/perl -w
/usr/lib/opera/8.51-20051114.5/opera|grep ^_ZN`;
#!
use strict;
my @lines = `strings
foreach (@lines) {
my $line = $_;
if ($line =~ m/_ZN(\d+)/) {
if ($1 > 9) {
print substr($line, 5, $1)."\n";
} else {
print substr($line, 4, $1)."\n";
}
}
}
A system where the _change in content_ is monitored instead of the _ip making the change_ would be almost as simple, more effective and would maintain wikipedias low threshold of entry.
If someone would clear an entire page or add the same large amount of references to other sites this is clearly a spammer and the change should not be accepted.
One of the charming aspects of wikipedia is that anyone can contribute to the total knowledge in it immediately. The threshold is very low and this attracts many contributers. After adding to a few articles, people will become familiar with contributing and become regurlars. If the threshold is increase, less people will join and wikipedia will grow less.
The solution you suggest would deter many people.
The proposed policy where only problem areas are semi-protected seems a nice middle ground where only mainstream articles, for which there would be plenty contributers, are protected from malicious contributors.
Nat Friedman's follow-up to Linus' post is grown-up and sensible
Sorry, but I disagree. Nats mail is condescending. He's telling Linus how to behave in his mail and how to be polite instead of talking about the issue at hand. Linus is using strong words to express his opinion, but at least he's talking on topic and doesn't drown into a meta discussion about the way people should communicate.
For example:
We can snipe at each other all day long. (Linus, every time I copy large files between devices on my Linux system my mouse pointer skips. It works fine on my Mac). That's not productive.
So, this mailing list is not there to address issues but to drink tea together? If Nat had the problem he describes with Linux, he should report it, switch systems or live with it. I certainly could not to any harm to talk about it, but not on this list, because it's the the Gnome list.
Let's have a grown-up discussion. If I worked for Microsoft I'd be very happy to see you throwing pejoratives around like that on this list.
Talk about sniping. This comment is not really productive.
Not I'll stop talking meta. Of course Nat's mail isn't the worst, but what he is basically telling Linus to stop complaining, because there are bigger problems in the world, which is a cheap way of ignoring the problem.
And therefore, Qt is a program in the way the Free Software was meant initially. If you want to use my code, fine, but make sure that the results are available to others too. It's a fair and clear deal: use free code, produce free code. If you want to sell your code, then pay for the code you use to make it.
The Hawkman
Everything is an information management system, using a combination MySQL and Perl to create a flexible system of entering, linking, and retrieving information.
source
Sounds unlike googlebase to me.
Anonymous Coward,
No doubt, your rude trolling will get you modded down soon. But I'd like to point out I have am not involved in the project you're linking to. I only mention it on my homepage as a recursive acronym joke on my first name, which is Jos.
Open Source Software is a subset of Software, so to say that GCC is a computer program is absolutely correct, if perhaps more general than you would prefer.
You are error here, but not because you think that software designated Free Software may carelessly be referred to as Open Source software, but because you are ignoring the most important values that lead to the birth of Free Software. These values are very important to the further developement of our computer usage and should be emphasised to people who are ignorant of them.
Not only that. It's worse. The snippet of code is javascript.
This means that the added code has the ability to change the look of the page completely. If at any time Google decided that all web pages should have the word Microsoft replaced by Google, they could do this by adding an onload function to the javascript code that is added to all web pages using this service.
You just replace it with the new glibc, deleting the old version. The running programs will continue to use the old version. Even though it was deleted/replaced, the old version is still available to running programs using it. Only when the last program using the old version is deleted, will the last reference to the lib disappear and the file truly be deleted.
So as a previous comment mentioned, you will need to restart all applications using the affected library, if you are concerned that the security problem may affect them. In practice this means that you'll probably want to restart the server programs you're running.
So you agree that it's a fact that there is no need to pay a Trolltech license for in-house applications?
It seems to me you're only gripe is corporate _perception_, (what Trolltech 'seams' to say) not the actual license. I would not go as far as calling that an issue.
Please give me an example where a company was forced to pay license fees to to Qt because SuSE uses KDE as a desktop environment.
You are suggesting the GPL software cannot be for profit software. Also, if you want to keep your code private, using the GPL version of Qt is fine. Only if you publish a program under a different license that the GPL do you have to pay the license.
This should be no problem, since KDE is compatible with this requirement. Any software Novell might want to add would probably be GPL anyway, because that's the most common license for Linux distros.
Only if Novell wanted to develop a closed source program would the Qt license be a problem. But even then, it would be easy to use a different library if the license fee, (which is not that hight compared to dev. wages) was too much.
What is the point of :sh if you have ^z?
Use ^z to put vi in the background and type 'fg' in the shell to get back.
And here's the perfect game for it.
:-)
Now only if I'd have a phone that would support 3D java, I'd port it and make it available for free.
Donations are welcome.
Can you give any tips on good IDE CF drives? I've got an old laptop too.