Student loans are a good way to finance education costs, especially if you don't have other options. I took out a modest amount while at college but I can honestly say that 1. I would not be where I am today without the degree and 2. I would not have been able to pay for colledge without the loans.
Tha debt loan can eat up a decent amount of your income when you first graduate. But, I think it is more important to look at it as an investment. If you can raise your earning potential from $6/hour (12,000 a year) to $15 (31,200) you are seeing over a 100% increse in your investment (yourself) in the first year alone.
Take that over your entire lifetime and see that they will end up giving you more than they take away.
Yes, the do have SIDs. However, mapping SIDs to UIDs is not an easy job especially since SIDS are really a GUID (like {0000002F-0000-0000-C000-000000000046}) which are too long to be cleanly mapped in a UID. Take a look at the Samba's Winbind project here for some more details about the problems involved.
The end result is that there isn't a clean mapping between the two domains. And the implementations of NFS for windows that I have seen have been hackish at best and disfunctional at worst.
Using the windows protocols (CIFS or whatever it is being called these days) may be the best option.
Programmers are morally obligated to give the code to their users and allow their users to freely modify and redistribute the code.
Funny, I didn't see that in "How to be a Programmer, An Introduction". Here I was thinking that the job of a programmer is to write code. I knew I was doing something wrong, silly me.
Does "Noose For A Neck" = "Richard Stallman" ?
(Yes, I know, leave aside the issue of open vs closed source but I had to reply to this)
The company does not always have these rights. It depends on what state the company is located in and what official policies the company has adopted.
The author did not mention whether the company he worked for had any official policies on the subject, but if they did then it doesn't matter who does the asking, if the action is not allowed by the published policy then it should not be done.
As recent history shows, the CEO does not always act for the best of the company; she/he is not above being questioned. And for something like this I would at the very least required the written request or just have refused to delete the mail.
Yeah. Uhm. I can see the problem here. A technology that is in part designed to track stolen cars is used to track a stolen car. So naturally, we can expand that argument to cover the government caring about your bowel movements.
There are technologies that are worth worring about (car rental companies using GPS to attempt to enforce speed limits) and then there ones that are used appropriately (as in this case). I do care about issues like this, I value my privacy. But comments like this do not help the cause - they hurt it by making us all look silly.
No, it is not my own site - I goofed up doing a copy and paste on the link. I was interupted in the middle or writing the link & forgot that the contents on my clipboard changed.
And no, I am not "spewing absolute bullshit". SAP is a very large commerical company that specialized in ERP systems. As you said, they did open-source the database in 2000 - at the tail end of the Internet/Linux/other buzz word craze period.
Ask yourself, why on earth would a company that focuses on large/medium businesses want to give away their database technology? Hmm, could it be for PR purposes?
1. It is relatively unknown 2. Look at the home page for the database - look at the top of the page, see the ad for SAP? I think things like that are a major factor for why no one uses it. From the appearances (IHMO) the sites gives the impression that SAP opened up the database so they could say "we are an open source company" and jump on that bandwagon.
Err, so what? Ultraedit is a great program, I've used it for years now. If the author is very religious then more power to him - it doesn't change the fact that it is (IMHO) one of the better text editors that I've found.
When the Visor first came out Handspring made a point about how they didn't use Flash ROM in the device and how that was a cost saving to the consumer (ie made the device lower priced). They made a big deal about it in their marketing materials.
Now, what happens when they reverse their position?
In short, if price is a concern, don't build it yourself
I have to strongly disagree with that statement. I have built my last two computer myself from parts, and I have to say that not only did I save a significant amount of money, they are very good, fast, and stable besides.
The secret here is that you pay attention to the parts that you are using - don't buy the most expense top-of-the-line parts, buy all around good ones. Set out your requirements and start building out the design. Pay more for the items that are important to you, don't pay for those that aren't.
If you are careful, you can save 10%-40% of the cost of one of these systems from a major outlet (like Dell) and have a very good system to boot.
And what does ssh2 compatibility have anything to do with legacy machine? SSH2 is the standard now - most recent boxen that have ssh use ssh2. And if they don't grab the latest openssh or buy the latest commercial ssh, problem solved.
Actually, I think its a decent question. Its not that normal of a configuration that it would be convered out there on the internet. The first time I did it I had to stumble through it on my own, and it took a little while to figure it out - even though I had done the same thing on Linux-Linux.
If you don't like the question, then ignore it. I think that having a mix of questions makes/. more interesting.
I have that setup working on Win2K. What I did was this:
1. Get the cvs package for windows from www.cvshome.org and install it.
2. Make sure that the cvs exe is in the path (to make life easy).
3. Get the ssh client from www.ssh.com - its the windows workstation version, it comes with a command line version of ssh (ssh2). It is free for non-commerial use (flame away, it works without messing with cygwin, which is what counts for me)
4. Make sure the ssh in in the path (again, makes life easy)
5. Make sure you can connect to your remote server (if applicatable) with ssh either from the gui or the command line (ssh2). You can set up key pairs or other authentication for ssh so that you won't be prompted for the password (if any). See the docs for the ssh server & ssh client for more information.
6. Set the following environment variables: CVSROOT=:ext:user@server:/reposity/pat h CVS_RSH=ssh2
You should be good to go with the normal cvs command now (checkout, update, commit, etc). Test it out by checking out a module or two.
Note that this will not work for those repositories that use cvs's network abilities - for those you *might* be able to tunnel the connection over ssh, but only if the remote side is set up to handle those.
FUD from the cable companies...
on
What Free Cable?
·
· Score: 1
I liked this line from the article:
"The drops are not designed to be split," she said. "The Internet product needs a dedicated feed so that it runs as efficiently as it's supposed to."
That's a little funny. The technician (then ATT@Home) who installed by cable modem did exactly that - put a splitter on the line going to the TV for the cable modem.
I think the big cable companies should ask themselves why pirating is such a big business and spend more time addressing why their customers are so unhappy rather than tring to convice the world that cable theft destroyes the community, warms the environment, adds to the problems in the middle east, and threatens to destroy the world....
(That's not to say that pirating cable is right either...)
By limiting the number of people that can use the software. In a per-seat licensing arrangement, even if you buy a license to use the software, only you can use it - you can't allow other people to use it. Mind you, it's not about distribution, but use.
Since they are distributing the source, doesn't that make that point moot? They can't place restrictions on you using the source, nor can they prevent you have redistributing it - or in other words they can't prevent it from being used (the GPL parts).
What they can say is "If you want our help or support, then you need to pay per user" which is what I believe that they are saying.
As for the non-GPL stuff, they can do whatever they want. Commerial software does have a place in the world.
So what? If they give code with one hand but subtract freedom with the other, the net balance is negative
So, (just to be obnoxious), if they don't give you what you want on the terms that you want they might as well not give anything because you won't give them credit for it anyways?
If it was, it wouldn't be per-seat. Per-seat means each potential user has to pay to have the right to use. Even if it's binaries, GNU GPL software can't have its use restricted in this way. Distributing GNU GPL'd software under such a condition automatically revokes your rights to use and distribute GNU GPL'd software, thus making such lincensing illegal
You are assuming that the "UnitedLinux" product (installation CD, name, installer, etc) and all parts thereof are covered by the GPL. I would be surprised if this was the case. Parts of it may by LGPL, BSD, or (insert other license here).
Besides which, I believe that the GPL states basically that you must publish changes to the code and provide the source to those that you distribute the product to. I don't remember any part that forces you to distribute the code to anyone and everyone - you just have to make the code available to those that you distribute to.
Don't put words in anyone's mouth. RMS doesn't object to people making money, he (and I) does object to restricting other people's freedom.
How is this restricting your freedom? I am assuming that like most other distributions out there that the majority of the software in the distribution is available out there. And they are providing the source - if you want your freedom then download the source, and compile it yourself.
Most of these companies give back to the community it a big way - but they are companies that have to stay in business. So if you want the benefit to your "freedom" then don't complain when they want to turn around and make some money from what they are contributing to.
Yes, that has been the idea in the past, as was the idea with NetZero, etc -- "why should I pay for the internet? It should be free for everyone, man! Free love, free sex, free internet!" but it just doesn't fly.
I don't say free, I say reasonable. For every one person who downloads 3 GB, I would bet there are 10 who maybe download 1 MB per day. And those would be the vast majority of users. So that $.50 GB would be instead (30 MB/Month) over $1.50/MB which is a little high.
but AT&T, TimeWarner, Baby Bell, etc all have huge networks that they have to maintain (not to mention huge staffs) and so that money gets stretched pretty thin
I'm sorry, but at what point did that become the concern of the consumer? If the company can't make a good estimate its costs, thats its problem. If a consumer is having a bad month where "money gets stretched pretty thin" does the company say, gee, your having a bad time, let me lower your payment to make it easier? I don't think so.
These companies are monolopies in their markets (or almost) - there are not real alternatives specifically because these same companies are lobbying hard to make sure there is no competition. So the poor company arguement doesn't hold. If they can't cut it, let them go out of business, and if there is a need, they will be replaced by someone who can do it better.
Broadband users have been riding the wave of cheap access for a long time, and its just about time that we got what was coming to us.
Isn't that the whole idea behing broadband? Fast, cheap access to the net? Otherwise we would be calling it ISDN-band - pay a lot, get a little.
As a format AT&T customer, I can say that their service was so-so, the speed decent. But that price, it kept going up and up and up. And up. I don't mind paying for services that I get. I do mind paying more and more for less and less to a company - and not having the option to look for a better deal (DSL does not count - its just as bad).
If you offer a service and establish a price for it, you should do your homework and figure out how much it is going to cost and what types of returns you expect.
How can they sue for being blacklisted? Sure, they had damanges - loss of business, etc. But that's like a telemarketer sueing for you not listening to their sales pitch. Or saying that it is stealing to watch tv without watching the comercials...
Don't be silly. Suspend their corporate charter and take away their license to do business for acting against the common interest. If you look at the wording of the laws that allow for coporations to exist, you'll see that they require said corporations serve the public interest.
Just out of curosity, who is going to define what the "common interest" is? The government? With the majority of (powerful) policians being bought be large companies - um, don't think so. The courts? They interpret the law, which is passed by the politicians. To use your phrase "don't be silly"
I think one or two revocations of corporate charters would be sufficient to change the behavior of other large corporations, without the need for managerial brainwashing or laws telling people to be nice, don't you?
Again, when the individuals who are responsible for making this happen have a vested interest in making sure it doesn't happen, guess what, it won't happen.
What you're saying sounds nice but, call me a cynic, I don't think it would work.
This is an unfair lawsuit, just like the antitrust lawsuit.
Wow, that's a really profound statement. I originally thought that the antitrust lawsuit might have been a good idea, but now you have me convinced that I was so wrong and that M$ has never done a thing wrong. I've seen the light....
Not.
Although, I do have to agree that the result does not seem to be "fair" - but, in Germany, it seems to be "legal" which is what counts.
Slashdot Mirror
Student loans are a good way to finance education costs, especially if you don't have other options. I took out a modest amount while at college but I can honestly say that 1. I would not be where I am today without the degree and 2. I would not have been able to pay for colledge without the loans.
Tha debt loan can eat up a decent amount of your income when you first graduate. But, I think it is more important to look at it as an investment. If you can raise your earning potential from $6/hour (12,000 a year) to $15 (31,200) you are seeing over a 100% increse in your investment (yourself) in the first year alone.
Take that over your entire lifetime and see that they will end up giving you more than they take away.
Yes, the do have SIDs. However, mapping SIDs to UIDs is not an easy job especially since SIDS are really a GUID (like {0000002F-0000-0000-C000-000000000046}) which are too long to be cleanly mapped in a UID. Take a look at the Samba's Winbind project here for some more details about the problems involved.
The end result is that there isn't a clean mapping between the two domains. And the implementations of NFS for windows that I have seen have been hackish at best and disfunctional at worst.
Using the windows protocols (CIFS or whatever it is being called these days) may be the best option.
Programmers are morally obligated to give the code to their users and allow their users to freely modify and redistribute the code.
Funny, I didn't see that in "How to be a Programmer, An Introduction". Here I was thinking that the job of a programmer is to write code. I knew I was doing something wrong, silly me.
Does "Noose For A Neck" = "Richard Stallman" ?
(Yes, I know, leave aside the issue of open vs closed source but I had to reply to this)
The company does not always have these rights. It depends on what state the company is located in and what official policies the company has adopted.
The author did not mention whether the company he worked for had any official policies on the subject, but if they did then it doesn't matter who does the asking, if the action is not allowed by the published policy then it should not be done.
As recent history shows, the CEO does not always act for the best of the company; she/he is not above being questioned. And for something like this I would at the very least required the written request or just have refused to delete the mail.
Yeah. Uhm. I can see the problem here. A technology that is in part designed to track stolen cars is used to track a stolen car. So naturally, we can expand that argument to cover the government caring about your bowel movements.
There are technologies that are worth worring about (car rental companies using GPS to attempt to enforce speed limits) and then there ones that are used appropriately (as in this case). I do care about issues like this, I value my privacy. But comments like this do not help the cause - they hurt it by making us all look silly.
No, it is not my own site - I goofed up doing a copy and paste on the link. I was interupted in the middle or writing the link & forgot that the contents on my clipboard changed.
And no, I am not "spewing absolute bullshit". SAP is a very large commerical company that specialized in ERP systems. As you said, they did open-source the database in 2000 - at the tail end of the Internet/Linux/other buzz word craze period.
Ask yourself, why on earth would a company that focuses on large/medium businesses want to give away their database technology? Hmm, could it be for PR purposes?
Oops, clipboard error with the home page. I meant to link to the real site.
There are a few reasons
1. It is relatively unknown
2. Look at the home page for the database - look at the top of the page, see the ad for SAP? I think things like that are a major factor for why no one uses it. From the appearances (IHMO) the sites gives the impression that SAP opened up the database so they could say "we are an open source company" and jump on that bandwagon.
Err, so what? Ultraedit is a great program, I've used it for years now. If the author is very religious then more power to him - it doesn't change the fact that it is (IMHO) one of the better text editors that I've found.
When the Visor first came out Handspring made a point about how they didn't use Flash ROM in the device and how that was a cost saving to the consumer (ie made the device lower priced). They made a big deal about it in their marketing materials.
Now, what happens when they reverse their position?
In short, if price is a concern, don't build it yourself
I have to strongly disagree with that statement. I have built my last two computer myself from parts, and I have to say that not only did I save a significant amount of money, they are very good, fast, and stable besides.
The secret here is that you pay attention to the parts that you are using - don't buy the most expense top-of-the-line parts, buy all around good ones. Set out your requirements and start building out the design. Pay more for the items that are important to you, don't pay for those that aren't.
If you are careful, you can save 10%-40% of the cost of one of these systems from a major outlet (like Dell) and have a very good system to boot.
That burning sensation in your pocket? That's your iPaq on Slashdot....
1...2...3.... its down for the count.
Huh? I've never heard of this being in Win 2K..
Could you be talking about Windows Services for Unix?
And what does ssh2 compatibility have anything to do with legacy machine? SSH2 is the standard now - most recent boxen that have ssh use ssh2. And if they don't grab the latest openssh or buy the latest commercial ssh, problem solved.
Actually, I think its a decent question. Its not that normal of a configuration that it would be convered out there on the internet. The first time I did it I had to stumble through it on my own, and it took a little while to figure it out - even though I had done the same thing on Linux-Linux.
/. more interesting.
If you don't like the question, then ignore it. I think that having a mix of questions makes
I have that setup working on Win2K. What I did was this:
t h
1. Get the cvs package for windows from www.cvshome.org and install it.
2. Make sure that the cvs exe is in the path (to make life easy).
3. Get the ssh client from www.ssh.com - its the windows workstation version, it comes with a command line version of ssh (ssh2). It is free for non-commerial use (flame away, it works without messing with cygwin, which is what counts for me)
4. Make sure the ssh in in the path (again, makes life easy)
5. Make sure you can connect to your remote server (if applicatable) with ssh either from the gui or the command line (ssh2). You can set up key pairs or other authentication for ssh so that you won't be prompted for the password (if any). See the docs for the ssh server & ssh client for more information.
6. Set the following environment variables:
CVSROOT=:ext:user@server:/reposity/pa
CVS_RSH=ssh2
You should be good to go with the normal cvs command now (checkout, update, commit, etc). Test it out by checking out a module or two.
Note that this will not work for those repositories that use cvs's network abilities - for those you *might* be able to tunnel the connection over ssh, but only if the remote side is set up to handle those.
A good source of information for setting up cvs is here at www.cvshome.org
I liked this line from the article:
"The drops are not designed to be split," she said. "The Internet product needs a dedicated feed so that it runs as efficiently as it's supposed to."
That's a little funny. The technician (then ATT@Home) who installed by cable modem did exactly that - put a splitter on the line going to the TV for the cable modem.
I think the big cable companies should ask themselves why pirating is such a big business and spend more time addressing why their customers are so unhappy rather than tring to convice the world that cable theft destroyes the community, warms the environment, adds to the problems in the middle east, and threatens to destroy the world....
(That's not to say that pirating cable is right either...)
From the release notes :
Please note that Perl 5.8.0 is a major new release of Perl containing many new features, enhancements to existing features and bug fixes
Since this is a "major" release in the 5.X branch of perl this does qualify for a ".0" release.
In recent history:
First there was the 5.005_X (which was like 5.5.X).
Next there was the 5.6.X branch
Now there is the 5.8.X branch
All of these are part of the perl5 language version like there was a perl4 language.
The 6.X will be a major (or complete, depending on how you look at it) rewrite of the language, it would be a major major release?
By limiting the number of people that can use the software. In a per-seat licensing arrangement, even if you buy a license to use the software, only you can use it - you can't allow other people to use it. Mind you, it's not about distribution, but use.
Since they are distributing the source, doesn't that make that point moot? They can't place restrictions on you using the source, nor can they prevent you have redistributing it - or in other words they can't prevent it from being used (the GPL parts).
What they can say is "If you want our help or support, then you need to pay per user" which is what I believe that they are saying.
As for the non-GPL stuff, they can do whatever they want. Commerial software does have a place in the world.
So what? If they give code with one hand but subtract freedom with the other, the net balance is negative
So, (just to be obnoxious), if they don't give you what you want on the terms that you want they might as well not give anything because you won't give them credit for it anyways?
If it was, it wouldn't be per-seat. Per-seat means each potential user has to pay to have the right to use. Even if it's binaries, GNU GPL software can't have its use restricted in this way. Distributing GNU GPL'd software under such a condition automatically revokes your rights to use and distribute GNU GPL'd software, thus making such lincensing illegal
You are assuming that the "UnitedLinux" product (installation CD, name, installer, etc) and all parts thereof are covered by the GPL. I would be surprised if this was the case. Parts of it may by LGPL, BSD, or (insert other license here).
Besides which, I believe that the GPL states basically that you must publish changes to the code and provide the source to those that you distribute the product to. I don't remember any part that forces you to distribute the code to anyone and everyone - you just have to make the code available to those that you distribute to.
Don't put words in anyone's mouth. RMS doesn't object to people making money, he (and I) does object to restricting other people's freedom.
How is this restricting your freedom? I am assuming that like most other distributions out there that the majority of the software in the distribution is available out there. And they are providing the source - if you want your freedom then download the source, and compile it yourself.
Most of these companies give back to the community it a big way - but they are companies that have to stay in business. So if you want the benefit to your "freedom" then don't complain when they want to turn around and make some money from what they are contributing to.
Yes, that has been the idea in the past, as was the idea with NetZero, etc -- "why should I pay for the internet? It should be free for everyone, man! Free love, free sex, free internet!" but it just doesn't fly.
I don't say free, I say reasonable. For every one person who downloads 3 GB, I would bet there are 10 who maybe download 1 MB per day. And those would be the vast majority of users. So that $.50 GB would be instead (30 MB/Month) over $1.50/MB which is a little high.
but AT&T, TimeWarner, Baby Bell, etc all have huge networks that they have to maintain (not to mention huge staffs) and so that money gets stretched pretty thin
I'm sorry, but at what point did that become the concern of the consumer? If the company can't make a good estimate its costs, thats its problem. If a consumer is having a bad month where "money gets stretched pretty thin" does the company say, gee, your having a bad time, let me lower your payment to make it easier? I don't think so.
These companies are monolopies in their markets (or almost) - there are not real alternatives specifically because these same companies are lobbying hard to make sure there is no competition. So the poor company arguement doesn't hold. If they can't cut it, let them go out of business, and if there is a need, they will be replaced by someone who can do it better.
Broadband users have been riding the wave of cheap access for a long time, and its just about time that we got what was coming to us.
Isn't that the whole idea behing broadband? Fast, cheap access to the net? Otherwise we would be calling it ISDN-band - pay a lot, get a little.
As a format AT&T customer, I can say that their service was so-so, the speed decent. But that price, it kept going up and up and up. And up. I don't mind paying for services that I get. I do mind paying more and more for less and less to a company - and not having the option to look for a better deal (DSL does not count - its just as bad).
If you offer a service and establish a price for it, you should do your homework and figure out how much it is going to cost and what types of returns you expect.
How can they sue for being blacklisted? Sure, they had damanges - loss of business, etc. But that's like a telemarketer sueing for you not listening to their sales pitch. Or saying that it is stealing to watch tv without watching the comercials...
It will be interesting to see how this turns out.
with new integrated scenses - they're part of the script, they can't be removed.
Don't be silly. Suspend their corporate charter and take away their license to do business for acting against the common interest. If you look at the wording of the laws that allow for coporations to exist, you'll see that they require said corporations serve the public interest.
Just out of curosity, who is going to define what the "common interest" is? The government? With the majority of (powerful) policians being bought be large companies - um, don't think so. The courts? They interpret the law, which is passed by the politicians. To use your phrase "don't be silly"
I think one or two revocations of corporate charters would be sufficient to change the behavior of other large corporations, without the need for managerial brainwashing or laws telling people to be nice, don't you?
Again, when the individuals who are responsible for making this happen have a vested interest in making sure it doesn't happen, guess what, it won't happen.
What you're saying sounds nice but, call me a cynic, I don't think it would work.
OK, call me flamebait, but...
This is an unfair lawsuit, just like the antitrust lawsuit.
Wow, that's a really profound statement. I originally thought that the antitrust lawsuit might have been a good idea, but now you have me convinced that I was so wrong and that M$ has never done a thing wrong. I've seen the light....
Not.
Although, I do have to agree that the result does not seem to be "fair" - but, in Germany, it seems to be "legal" which is what counts.