Not all Microsoft customers are end users. Some of them are businesses, and those businesses want to send you spam. And they can't track their spam unless they can use 'DHTML, scripting, cookies and all of that other crap'.
So just get over it. You can't tell Microsoft what to do, so use another browser/email client. There are plenty of them out there. Vote with your feet, not your Slashdot Soapbox.
It seems that you are still confused, because you said "he didn't have any data in the Direction class". Like I pointed out earlier, the 'data' doesn't matter. The java.lang.Object.equals method compares the actual memory location, not the internal 'data' of the object.
This example:
public class Direction {
private Direction() { }
public final static Direction NORTH = new Direction();
public final static Direction SOUTH = new Direction();
public final static Direction EAST = new Direction();
public final static Direction WEST = new Direction();
}
Will absolutely work, even though there is no 'data'. I think you are confusing the behaviour of java.lang.String with java.lang.Object.
If that wasn't the parent you were referring to, I apologize.
Actually, the equals method in java.lang.Object will return true only if the memory locations of the two objects are the same. It does not compare the internal "data".
So in the above example,
Direction.EAST.equals(Direction.WEST)
would return false. I think you are confused with the way Strings work: the equals method on java.lang.String does indeed compare the internal string representation (the "data"), so if Direction.EAST was a String, your comment would be correct. But its not a String, its a Direction.
Maybe if we say that a few more times, it will sink in. I had a friend who was a senior foriegn policy advisor in the office of one of the Florida Senators, and we talked about constituent mail one day. She said they usually put the lowest/newest intern on the mail answering duty, and the contents of the mail never trickle up past that person.
I asked her, that person doesn't give a report or something at the end of the day? Nope. do you even keep a tally of where people stand? Nope. Does it matter if the writers are actually constituents or not? Nope.
She said most people who write in are nuts, and they just don't care about them at all.
They do write back to everyone, but wake up: Patrick Leahy is not writing back to you, an 18 year old that just moved to DC from Vermont is.
If you want to have any impact on legislation, there is only one thing they listen to: money. Unless you can get a big enough group, say 1 million people, to all go to the capital on the same day...
-Mike
PS I lost a lot of confidence in our government that day.
I'll agree with you -- for pounding out web pages, it is much easier to do it in perl or php. But if that's all you want, then even perl and php are overkill. Why not just write static HTML pages?
JSP is useful when you need to talk to Java components to get real work done. If you are a web designer, then don't use it. But if you are working on a big project, then the web interface is probably the least important part of the whole thing. Java provides a much richer set of tools than perl or php for creating reusable business components, and JSP provides an easy way to stick a front end on top of that.
JSP scales a lot better than PHP/perl for mulitple developers, too. It sounds like you are more of a web designer than a programmer. JSP might make you feel unconfortable, because you wouldn't get to program as much, but the lines of responsibility are more clearly drawn. The guys in charge of the business beans would make up tags for you to use, and you could work on making the screens look pretty in Dreamweaver.
So what can you do with JSP that you can't do with PHP, Perl, ASP, etc? Talk to Java. That's what we want to do.
If you want to talk to a perl module, then use mod_perl or HTML::Mason. If you have COM objects, then use ASP.
JSP is just a front end! The decision has already been made, long ago, to go with Java for all of its obvious business programming advantages.
1. Create WAR file
2. cp WAR file to $TOMCAT_HOME/webapps
done. You guys are having problems with this? Installing jserv was much harder -- you had to compile it, and then change the httpd.conf to work with it, and set up tomcat to listen to the right directories.
Working with Tomcat 3.x is one of the most painless experiences I have ever had.... Except for when a JSP doesn't compile, it doesn't give you a very good message.
There is a perl module that will read in an XML file into a big hash for you, so you can treat it like a normal perl data structure. It is called XML::Simple.
The problem I have with it is that it doesn't respect a DTD. This places too much dependence on a specific XML file. If I have a node that is allowed to have more than one child, XML::Simple will return different results depending on how many children are in the node. If it is just one, then the data in that node is placed as a scalar. If there are more than one, then the data is put into an array(an arrayref, actually).
Personally, I think it should always be an array if there is a possiblity for more than one element. If there is just one thing in there, then it should have just one element. But you can't tell if there would ever be more than one element inside a node just by looking at the XML file, because that is just one instance. You have to look at the DTD.
XML::Simple would be extremely useful if it returned the same data structure for the same DTD, every single time. Each XML instance would have different data filled out, of course, but the structure of the data would be the same. Maybe this isn't quite possible in perl.
I think a lot of the XML development I have seen really ignores the usefulness of DTD's. If you want to make nicely structured data, XML is great. But if you really want to provide something robust and extensible, you have to provide a DTD and test that you will be able to handle anything that DTD provides. Otherwise you are just kidding yourself.
-Mike
Here's how open source would be better...
on
Code Red: the Aftermath
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Microsoft fixed the problem before there was a problem. I don't see how Open Source would be any better in this regard.
Its true that Microsoft put out a patch before the virus took off, so that's a good thing. But Microsoft releases patches all the time, and that is a bad thing. I'm on the security mailing list from MS, and I get at least 3 or 4 alerts a week. I'm also on the slackware list, and I have received 3 or 4 alerts in the last six months.
The reason for this is because Open Source projects tend to fix their security bugs before they are released. If Apache shipped with something that allowed this kind of remote exploit in one of the 2.0 betas, there is a better chance that someone else out there will see it. What is the chance that someone can do an independent security audit of Windows XP?
Closed source can be perfectly good at closing holes, if the company is as big as Microsoft. But Open Source is much better at closing those holes before they are shipped: many eyeballs make all bugs shallow. Open Source doesn't catch every bug, of course; but enough are found that when the odd hole is announced, it is a big enough deal that the patches are more likely to be installed.
Closed Source hurts Microsoft security in more ways than one. Not only are all default installations compromised, but since so many new patches come out every week most admins don't keep up with them. While this is partially the admin's fault, it is also the fault of the software model that prevents these problems from being found quickly.
-Mike
PS: how do we know that "Microsoft fixed the problem before there was a problem", anyway? The patch came out before this big worm hit, but how many servers were quietly compromised in the last year?
ONLOAD, ONUNLOAD, and any time it appears outside of a conditional block or function. I think that would do it?
Nah, because then they can just put the open command inside any link on the page. So when you go to the main New York Times page from your bookmarks, you don't get any bookmarks. But each link has an onClick="open X10 window", so each time you read a story it pops up a new window.
The only way to fix this is with Mozilla's solution -- block by site name. Hopefully there will eventually be a UI for this feature, and maybe a 'warn me before opening a new window/remember this decision' prompt.
Also, the artist would come over to your house and force you to watch previews of his other work each time you tried to look at the one you already bought. He might even throw in some unrelated commercials. And if you tried to ask him to leave, he would say "That operation is not permitted at this time."
I'm trying to find a cite confirming this with google, and I can't find anything. Can you give some more information regarding the Soviet spy plane landing in alaska?
I don't think Napster has a super heavy bandwidth problem. Songs are downloaded from other users, and don't go through the napster server at all. The only bandwidth napster has to deal with is the small amount sent to tell about all the.mp3 files on your harddrive.
That's not insignificant, of course, but its not like the bandwidth required by mp3.com or even a high volume web site like slashdot.
Ender's Game was, and still is a big factor in shaping my life and how I live it.
Whoa, maybe I missed something. Could you explain what is life shaping about Ender's Game?
If you think that book had a big effect on your life, just wait until you read Hemingway or even Joe Haldeman...
Card is just so frustrating to read. After reading Speaker for the Dead and Xenocide I've decided that he is anti-science. Every character is super-duper smart(and Card can't seem to go more than 2 paragraphs without reminding us about this), but they can't even figure the most obvious things in the world, like the fact that those trees are more than just regular trees. And those pygmies don't think that death is permanent, which the reader figures out about 4 pages in. The Best Scientists of All Time take another 400 pages and two generations, though.
Don't you get tired of reading the endless inner monologue? I should be able to figure out what people are thinking based on their actions, and that would give me some real questions to ask and things to think about after reading the book. Reading Card is like reading Kevin Anderson; every freaking thought it laid out in excruciating detail. When you are done, you never have to ask, "why do someone do such and such?", because the author has gone to extreme lengths to make sure you never have to think about anything.
Maud'dib - doesn't mean 'messiah'. Maybe they were thinking of the Kwisatz Haderach?
I think they were saying 'Mahdi', which would be appropriate. I'd have to check the close-captioning to be sure.
The planet is 'Arrakis'. Was this mentioned even once in the MS?
Yes, in the voice over in the very beginning.
I think most posters are being over critical. For years, Dune fans have complained about the Lynch film and how inaccurate it was. This mini series is far more accurate so far -- no voice activated weapons, and (God help us) no rain at the end.
Sure, there are some problems (Gurney being too old to fight effectively? Irulan all over the place, as if she and Paul will actually fall in love? Getting the Litany against Fear wrong?). But overall, this is a pretty decent mini series, and I'll be sure to watch the rest of it.
When running mozilla, you must run the mozilla executable in the foreground. I usually open up a new xterm, type 'mozilla', and then minimize that window.
If I run 'mozilla &', it will fail just like said.
Wow, great story. So all you need to break into Microsoft is a few friends that work there. What is Microsoft supposed to do about that? Of course you can't hide your source code from your own developers! That's not a security breach. How can Microsoft possiby control that?
What are you suggesting, that Microsoft should not allow its own developers access to the source code?
If you actually watched the debate, you will find that this was a small topic that Gore threw out there. Its not even on his web site.
So all we have to go on are the *two sentences* that is in the debate transcript. According to that line,
I've been involved myself in negotiating and helping to move along the negotiations with the Internet service providers to get a parents' protection page every time 95 percent of the pages come up. And a feature that allows parents to automatically check, with one click, what sites your kids have visited lately.
From this quote, it sounds like he is trying to get ISP's to offer this as a feature. Note that hs is negotiating with them. He did not say anything like "I am supporting the McCain-whoever bill..." or "As president, I will require all ISP's..."
If you actually go read Gore's response, he wants to give parents the responsibility to control their own kids. This ISP-based history list is just a tool towards that end.
Bush, on the other hand, wants mandatory filters. He wants "character education" in schools. He doesn't want parents to be responsible; he wants the government to be responsible.
If there is anything that the federal government has done to place the economy where it is today, it is the 1993 tax plan that Republicans said would destroy the earth. It is extremely revisionist to say that congress is in any (good) way responisible for the current economy. The Republicans fought that bill as hard as they could. They even said that if the bill passed, they didn't want to be held responsible. Fine with me. And oh yeah, who cast the tie breaking vote? Gore.
Actually, the biggest thing the government did to foster the current economic environment is the developement of the internet. And no polition has been more important than Gore when it comes to that. You can make fun of him all you want, but as early as the 80's he was talking about a nationwide commercial internet. Most people in technology didn't think about that at the time; even Bill Gates didn't see the importance of the internet until over 5 years later.
People don't buy computers to run Windows. They buy computers to run AOL. If AOL can see an "AOL" box, complete with AOL and a tightly integrated Mozilla for $200, they would no longer be dependent on Microsoft. Don't you see where this is going? AOL would become Microsoft.
It would be so easy for AOL to see a decent box in the $200 range, as long as you agreed to a few years of AOL. And why wouldn't you? Its the only thing the box is good for.
I'm not talking about a normal linux box like yours or mine. I'm talking about a set-top appliance, where you turn it on, and it says "Welcome to AOL" just like my Tivo does.
Your third point is valid. It is the current barrier to entry: not enough web software runs on linux. But that is exactly what Mozilla is going to fix! Once Mozilla is done, all that's left is a few trivial plugins, like Flash and Realplayer. And those companies would come around quick with a little help from AOL, and then everyone else would have to get on board or face losing all the AOL customers.
mod_perl is much better than standard cgi, but it doesn't even touch servlets.
First, mod_perl doesn't eliminate the startup time. Each time a new httpd is forked to handle requests, the script must be recompiled. Is there some way around this?
More importantly, servlets answer all the requests from one instance of the servlet. This makes it extremely easy to reuse database connections, share information between requests, track sessions within the servlet, etc. Java servlets are much more powerful than mod_perl for that reason alone.
Slashdot Mirror
Not all Microsoft customers are end users. Some of them are businesses, and those businesses want to send you spam. And they can't track their spam unless they can use 'DHTML, scripting, cookies and all of that other crap'.
So just get over it. You can't tell Microsoft what to do, so use another browser/email client. There are plenty of them out there. Vote with your feet, not your Slashdot Soapbox.
-Mike
It seems that you are still confused, because you said "he didn't have any data in the Direction class". Like I pointed out earlier, the 'data' doesn't matter. The java.lang.Object.equals method compares the actual memory location, not the internal 'data' of the object.
This example:
public class Direction {
private Direction() { }
public final static Direction NORTH = new Direction();
public final static Direction SOUTH = new Direction();
public final static Direction EAST = new Direction();
public final static Direction WEST = new Direction();
}
Will absolutely work, even though there is no 'data'. I think you are confusing the behaviour of java.lang.String with java.lang.Object.
If that wasn't the parent you were referring to, I apologize.
-Mike
Actually, the equals method in java.lang.Object will return true only if the memory locations of the two objects are the same. It does not compare the internal "data".
So in the above example,
Direction.EAST.equals(Direction.WEST)
would return false. I think you are confused with the way Strings work: the equals method on java.lang.String does indeed compare the internal string representation (the "data"), so if Direction.EAST was a String, your comment would be correct. But its not a String, its a Direction.
-Mike
Money
Money
Money
Maybe if we say that a few more times, it will sink in. I had a friend who was a senior foriegn policy advisor in the office of one of the Florida Senators, and we talked about constituent mail one day. She said they usually put the lowest/newest intern on the mail answering duty, and the contents of the mail never trickle up past that person.
I asked her, that person doesn't give a report or something at the end of the day? Nope. do you even keep a tally of where people stand? Nope. Does it matter if the writers are actually constituents or not? Nope.
She said most people who write in are nuts, and they just don't care about them at all.
They do write back to everyone, but wake up: Patrick Leahy is not writing back to you, an 18 year old that just moved to DC from Vermont is.
If you want to have any impact on legislation, there is only one thing they listen to: money. Unless you can get a big enough group, say 1 million people, to all go to the capital on the same day...
-Mike
PS I lost a lot of confidence in our government that day.
-Mike
Yet another non-Java developer trashing JSP's.
I'll agree with you -- for pounding out web pages, it is much easier to do it in perl or php. But if that's all you want, then even perl and php are overkill. Why not just write static HTML pages?
JSP is useful when you need to talk to Java components to get real work done. If you are a web designer, then don't use it. But if you are working on a big project, then the web interface is probably the least important part of the whole thing. Java provides a much richer set of tools than perl or php for creating reusable business components, and JSP provides an easy way to stick a front end on top of that.
JSP scales a lot better than PHP/perl for mulitple developers, too. It sounds like you are more of a web designer than a programmer. JSP might make you feel unconfortable, because you wouldn't get to program as much, but the lines of responsibility are more clearly drawn. The guys in charge of the business beans would make up tags for you to use, and you could work on making the screens look pretty in Dreamweaver.
So what can you do with JSP that you can't do with PHP, Perl, ASP, etc? Talk to Java. That's what we want to do.
If you want to talk to a perl module, then use mod_perl or HTML::Mason. If you have COM objects, then use ASP.
JSP is just a front end! The decision has already been made, long ago, to go with Java for all of its obvious business programming advantages.
-Mike
1. Create WAR file
2. cp WAR file to $TOMCAT_HOME/webapps
done. You guys are having problems with this? Installing jserv was much harder -- you had to compile it, and then change the httpd.conf to work with it, and set up tomcat to listen to the right directories.
Working with Tomcat 3.x is one of the most painless experiences I have ever had.... Except for when a JSP doesn't compile, it doesn't give you a very good message.
-Mike
The problem I have with it is that it doesn't respect a DTD. This places too much dependence on a specific XML file. If I have a node that is allowed to have more than one child, XML::Simple will return different results depending on how many children are in the node. If it is just one, then the data in that node is placed as a scalar. If there are more than one, then the data is put into an array(an arrayref, actually).
Personally, I think it should always be an array if there is a possiblity for more than one element. If there is just one thing in there, then it should have just one element. But you can't tell if there would ever be more than one element inside a node just by looking at the XML file, because that is just one instance. You have to look at the DTD.
XML::Simple would be extremely useful if it returned the same data structure for the same DTD, every single time. Each XML instance would have different data filled out, of course, but the structure of the data would be the same. Maybe this isn't quite possible in perl.
I think a lot of the XML development I have seen really ignores the usefulness of DTD's. If you want to make nicely structured data, XML is great. But if you really want to provide something robust and extensible, you have to provide a DTD and test that you will be able to handle anything that DTD provides. Otherwise you are just kidding yourself.
-Mike
Its true that Microsoft put out a patch before the virus took off, so that's a good thing. But Microsoft releases patches all the time, and that is a bad thing. I'm on the security mailing list from MS, and I get at least 3 or 4 alerts a week. I'm also on the slackware list, and I have received 3 or 4 alerts in the last six months.
The reason for this is because Open Source projects tend to fix their security bugs before they are released. If Apache shipped with something that allowed this kind of remote exploit in one of the 2.0 betas, there is a better chance that someone else out there will see it. What is the chance that someone can do an independent security audit of Windows XP?
Closed source can be perfectly good at closing holes, if the company is as big as Microsoft. But Open Source is much better at closing those holes before they are shipped: many eyeballs make all bugs shallow. Open Source doesn't catch every bug, of course; but enough are found that when the odd hole is announced, it is a big enough deal that the patches are more likely to be installed.
Closed Source hurts Microsoft security in more ways than one. Not only are all default installations compromised, but since so many new patches come out every week most admins don't keep up with them. While this is partially the admin's fault, it is also the fault of the software model that prevents these problems from being found quickly.
-Mike
PS: how do we know that "Microsoft fixed the problem before there was a problem", anyway? The patch came out before this big worm hit, but how many servers were quietly compromised in the last year?
Nah, because then they can just put the open command inside any link on the page. So when you go to the main New York Times page from your bookmarks, you don't get any bookmarks. But each link has an onClick="open X10 window", so each time you read a story it pops up a new window.
The only way to fix this is with Mozilla's solution -- block by site name. Hopefully there will eventually be a UI for this feature, and maybe a 'warn me before opening a new window/remember this decision' prompt.
-Mike
Also, the artist would come over to your house and force you to watch previews of his other work each time you tried to look at the one you already bought. He might even throw in some unrelated commercials. And if you tried to ask him to leave, he would say "That operation is not permitted at this time."
Mike
http://www.theonion.com/onion3714/asshole_son.html
Mike
I'm trying to find a cite confirming this with google, and I can't find anything. Can you give some more information regarding the Soviet spy plane landing in alaska?
Thanks,
Mike
I don't think Napster has a super heavy bandwidth problem. Songs are downloaded from other users, and don't go through the napster server at all. The only bandwidth napster has to deal with is the small amount sent to tell about all the .mp3 files on your harddrive.
That's not insignificant, of course, but its not like the bandwidth required by mp3.com or even a high volume web site like slashdot.
Mike
If you think that book had a big effect on your life, just wait until you read Hemingway or even Joe Haldeman...
Card is just so frustrating to read. After reading Speaker for the Dead and Xenocide I've decided that he is anti-science. Every character is super-duper smart(and Card can't seem to go more than 2 paragraphs without reminding us about this), but they can't even figure the most obvious things in the world, like the fact that those trees are more than just regular trees. And those pygmies don't think that death is permanent, which the reader figures out about 4 pages in. The Best Scientists of All Time take another 400 pages and two generations, though.
Don't you get tired of reading the endless inner monologue? I should be able to figure out what people are thinking based on their actions, and that would give me some real questions to ask and things to think about after reading the book. Reading Card is like reading Kevin Anderson; every freaking thought it laid out in excruciating detail. When you are done, you never have to ask, "why do someone do such and such?", because the author has gone to extreme lengths to make sure you never have to think about anything.
There is more subtext in Harry Potter books.
Mike
I think most posters are being over critical. For years, Dune fans have complained about the Lynch film and how inaccurate it was. This mini series is far more accurate so far -- no voice activated weapons, and (God help us) no rain at the end.
Sure, there are some problems (Gurney being too old to fight effectively? Irulan all over the place, as if she and Paul will actually fall in love? Getting the Litany against Fear wrong?). But overall, this is a pretty decent mini series, and I'll be sure to watch the rest of it.
Mike
This is just my experience, so YMMV.
When running mozilla, you must run the mozilla executable in the foreground. I usually open up a new xterm, type 'mozilla', and then minimize that window.
If I run 'mozilla &', it will fail just like said.
Mike
You can check here.
Mike
Wow, great story. So all you need to break into Microsoft is a few friends that work there. What is Microsoft supposed to do about that? Of course you can't hide your source code from your own developers! That's not a security breach. How can Microsoft possiby control that?
What are you suggesting, that Microsoft should not allow its own developers access to the source code?
Mike
So all we have to go on are the *two sentences* that is in the debate transcript. According to that line,
From this quote, it sounds like he is trying to get ISP's to offer this as a feature. Note that hs is negotiating with them. He did not say anything like "I am supporting the McCain-whoever bill..." or "As president, I will require all ISP's..."If you actually go read Gore's response, he wants to give parents the responsibility to control their own kids. This ISP-based history list is just a tool towards that end.
Bush, on the other hand, wants mandatory filters. He wants "character education" in schools. He doesn't want parents to be responsible; he wants the government to be responsible.
Mike
Actually, the biggest thing the government did to foster the current economic environment is the developement of the internet. And no polition has been more important than Gore when it comes to that. You can make fun of him all you want, but as early as the 80's he was talking about a nationwide commercial internet. Most people in technology didn't think about that at the time; even Bill Gates didn't see the importance of the internet until over 5 years later.
Mike
Mike
It would be so easy for AOL to see a decent box in the $200 range, as long as you agreed to a few years of AOL. And why wouldn't you? Its the only thing the box is good for.
I'm not talking about a normal linux box like yours or mine. I'm talking about a set-top appliance, where you turn it on, and it says "Welcome to AOL" just like my Tivo does.
Your third point is valid. It is the current barrier to entry: not enough web software runs on linux. But that is exactly what Mozilla is going to fix! Once Mozilla is done, all that's left is a few trivial plugins, like Flash and Realplayer. And those companies would come around quick with a little help from AOL, and then everyone else would have to get on board or face losing all the AOL customers.
Mike
Why would you want to reverse a double-linked list?
Mike
mod_perl is much better than standard cgi, but it doesn't even touch servlets.
First, mod_perl doesn't eliminate the startup time. Each time a new httpd is forked to handle requests, the script must be recompiled. Is there some way around this?
More importantly, servlets answer all the requests from one instance of the servlet. This makes it extremely easy to reuse database connections, share information between requests, track sessions within the servlet, etc. Java servlets are much more powerful than mod_perl for that reason alone.
Mike