Especially if a bunch of sites (scumbags) get together and automatch each other's referer and onunload logs. Then they can actually track users across domains.
Ah, but that's because QA is a process, not a department.
When designing an application, a variety of processes are at work. For example:
security speed long-term maintenance scalability backward-compatibility network support OS support file system support user interface reporting error logging and reporting capabilities of the computer language(s) used to implement the system, pros and cons of each deployment issues long-term upgrade deployment data storage data reliability data openness (open standards or not) data interoperability (accept data in/out from files rather than gui)
Now where does QA stand?
QA is part of the overall process, a little bit of each part. Each decision about the above system must take QA into account. Granted, many programmers will not do a good job of it, so that's why companies have a QA department. But it's shifting the responsibility away from the prorgrammers when they should really be the ones responsible. Imagine if there was a ground crew doing the pre-flight checklist then handing it to the pilots as they entered the plane. Any self respecting pilot (not driven by an insane deadline and an equally insane manager) would do the pre-flight checklist again anyway.
Only an open-source worm would do on a GNU/Linux system...
I think that this is very dangerous... Stop now, all of you, By Order Of the High and Mighty Me...... Janitor walks by. "Say, what are we doing tonight? trying to take over the world?"...The slashdotter: "Mwuhahahaha"... "Ahem"... "hehehe"... Janitor swept away...
Nobody ever said computer programming was easy. It's a difficult job, full of arcane knowledge and fraught with pitfalls. This is why not everybody can be one, and this is why the good ones ought to be paid well.
Airline pilots are highly trained and constantly upgrade their skills, and are highly paid.
Likewise, programmers who run enterprise-strength systems have heavy responsibilities. This is not something one ought to go into for the money, but rather, for the love and dedication to the craft. (not aircraft)...
As far as QA, I tell you what. If the system is designed correctly, it will need very little QA. I know this because some systems can never get it right, no matter how much QA go into them, because of fundamuntal design flaws.
And yes, designing computer software is hard. Like heart surgery. One slip of the old wrist and it's flatline.
It's simple, they have plenty of time to count it all, and if you don't trust them to count them right, then you really ought to move to a different jurisdiction.
Is somebody 17 11/12 not capable of reading Goethe or Jung? Should their feeble mind be protected from the writings of Lenin? Must their sensitivities be spared The Pearl?
Like I said, whatever the hardware will support. If your system is distributed with dual 100 base T on a switched network, get ready for some serious throughput. If you're going giga on a switched network, then even more so. But then consider that if the system is not fully on a lan, you'll either VPN (unsafe) frame-relay (expensive) or drop your own fiber (expensive too). So it depends on the architecture of the company, its existing infrastructure, the number of users and their location.
Yes, well, then they could be pushing for their vendors to make the code open source, or they could release the hardware specs for their products so that the open source community can make devices for them that work well. In fact, though, I think that it would be good for Epson to fund some Open Sourcers to dev the programs for them.
And once these robots are perfected, the Army will swoop in and make it the Armored Vehicle Combat Control System (ARVECOMCOSYS) to be deployed on the latest and greatest Abrahms-Huey Heavy Combat Airborne Platform (see terminator 2 for live screenshot)
Besides, all they have to do is release their software as GNU GPL with source code. Then they're in compliance. Besides, their software could probably handle it. And on top of that they would sell more scanners.
Exactly. But for that matter, english is a code: -Capitalize first letter, -End sentence in period. (What, no semicolon?) -Have exactly one space in between each word (except if you're in college then use two after the period.)
etc ad nauseam.
the key is that the english language is not compiled, but interpreted. (and if you're a politician, twisted at will). Likewise HTML is interpreted. It is a tes of instruction to a rendering engine. High levels of abstraction. For example, italicising is done with a tagged i. No need to tell the engine about which font to use, or how to allocate memory, or all that jazz. High level. Just like english. Actually, it's probably even more high level than written english.
Who said anything about "buying" CDs or DVDs? The hardware required will be this: CPU+Motherboard+HD. Everything else will be wireless in the home/office/neighborhood with self-healing and self configuring wireless network and "bridging" from wireless area to wireless area provided by fiber. The systems will have enough HD space (THANK YOU MAXTOR!!!) to store/cache all content out there simultaneously, without requiring centralized systems.
The systems will also run linux/java/python systems, will communicate through encrypted and user-managed protocols (like it was in the elder days) and the systems will just work 24/7. Take a look at the networking principles behind gaming (counterstrike etc) and hardcore porn to find fully decentralized (nothing to take down that can't be brought back up) and anonymous.
Your average consumer will be able to buy a $200 box with wireless, HD, AMD/transmeta, wireless (all protocols) etc, plug it in, and use the remote in the HDTV and voice activation to do all their stuff (movie, music, chatting online) (On an aside, how long until HDTVs come with built in cameras and microphones?) --If not the HDTV then your Playstation 2007.
See the internet from 1996 to 2002? 6 years. from 2002 to 2008? 6 years. Wireless everywhere. enterprise-grade servers as small as VCRs with terabytes of storage, IPv6, and giga-ethernet. Want a movie? Pick up the remote, click the first three letters of the name, and press play. Free of charge. You know why? Because that movie will exist as nondescript 1meg chunks all over the network, and be fully downloaded to your own HD by the time the SurroundSound logo is displayed.
==
This was the optimistic view-- Now for the MS version.
==
Now you see what they want DRM for. MS wants to charge you for viewing that flick, and Hollyweird is (good boy, good boy; sit, Ubu, sit) fetching the legislators to make it happen.
Microsoft sees computer hardware like cars. In the beginning of the auto industries, there were thousands of automakers in the US. Now there are only three, and only two are not owned by a foreign corp, but are in bed hummering them [yeah, pun]. Same for airlines. 1950, a bunch. Now: Boeing, Airbus.
You see, they are using legislation to raise the "cost of entry" in the computer industry. They are finishing it in software, they are doing it in hardware. They (Microsoft) want to OWN all hardware manufaturers, keiretsu style (look it up, it's fascinating), worldwide, and thus be able to provide it "at reasonable cost" and with "adequate safeguards" to insure public safety and compliance with existing laws.
The beauty of this little scenario is that it's a true and tried method. Many industries have consolidated until there were only one or two top players. As long as industry centralization is not seen as a bother to the economy, governments turn a blind eye. I'll give you another example: Look at keyboards. It used to be that there were many companies making keyboards. It's a commodity now. It's almost free. People don't think about them. There's no talk about "opening the door" to competition in the keyboard market. How about cell phones? Ericsson is tanking. Now all phones essentially do the same thing. They all have the same features. The base models are all "given" to you when you sign up for service. There's no talk about reviving competition in the cell-phone business. Now, they are basically all made in half a dozen factories in southern China, Taiwan, and Malaysia.
Likewise computers will be cheap, disposable items, and they will be all made the same, and sold below cost (like game consoles), and Microsoft will make its money from collecting the fee for "displaying" your "hollywood-provided" content (so that you, the consumer, may enjoy the oustanding performance as the Director intended).
Then the cost-of-entry or cost-of-staying in this business will be too great for competitors (who will fold^H^H^H^Hdiversify) and MS will essentially have aquired and entire industry without raising antitrust concerns.
=== now some ranting ===
I say fooey on all that. If AMD wants to play that game then they're going to lose market share, not gain any. The only people who don't care about DMR in their machines are already conditioned to buy Intel.
On the other hand, if they play their cards right, then they can ride the wave of the future and say buhbye to WinTel.
Remember. Geeks vote, and geeks end up making more money than non-geeks. Geeks are in fact the prime demographic for AMD. The only reason this hasn't been advertised is that geeks respond adversely to advertising. Without geeks, AMD would have tanked a long time ago. They'd better get their priorities straight. For AMD, it's not about meeting the street numbers for next quarter, it's about having a quarter after that.
I work at a bank. I understand about reliability and failover etc.
What we need is some university/some poor souls with money to invest, to build this as a "test case" for linux distributed systems.
============= Requirements: -- 50 TB Data storage -- 100% availability (I don't mean 99.99_) -- Data must be accessible worldwide -- Data must be safe in these events: -----War or terrorist act (building blows up) -----Earthquake (building falls down flat) -----Fire (building burns to foundation) -----Flood (building full of muddy fishy water) --Data must be online in the event of a disaster in 48 hours. --Data must survive: ----Server failure ----Storage medium failure ----telecommunication failure (junk through the pipes) ----Unauthorized access (r0x4H 31g00G) ----Vandalism (maintenance guy with baseball bat or axe) ----Theft of equipment Furthermore: --Data must always be in a non-corrupt state --Data must be fully auditable --Data transaction must always be fully reversible Also: --All procedures (ALL) must be written down on electronic document and on paper and must be available to ONLY the proper personnel. --All personnel must be correctly trained (development of training material, testing, evaluations, etc) --System architecture must allow for connectivity to any known server system, any database system, and any client systems.
===
Oh, and under 20 million dollars. ===
However which way that solution should be implemented is left as an exercise to the reader
Like it or not, companies don't have to turn out a profit. They can go out of business so that their badly designed, badly implemented, highly buggy (but admirably marketed) software can once and for all be removed from circulation like the cheap hoe that it is, and allow real programmers who write really good and reliable software to make computers secure and easy-to-use so the rest of society can go back to their respective careers instead of having to try to remember what kind of file extension is safe to left-click in an email message.
What would be more meaningful would be if the server changed the link to read "Someone please come to this address and turn off the damn crusher... I don't want to end like this..."
Of course not. And the judge will agree completely with you, but since the corporate lawyers would be out in force, they would find some obscure law and the judge would go along with them, and at best they would just take your laptops to make sure you "hadn't" in fact been stealing company secrets. Which of course you weren't, but then the laptops would be retuned to you, and there woould be no telling what those bozos had done to them, so it's: reformat, resintall, change all your password dance...
Slashdot Mirror
It seems you are already in the "World Jail" where freedoms (what's that) don't exist anymore.
Actually we are serfs to non-human entities who are nevertheless granted legal status, are techically immortal, and can never go to jail.
Can you guess?
Bingo, the Corporation.
You are not free to move about the world, so Where Do You Want To Go Today is misleading at best.
Especially if a bunch of sites (scumbags) get together and automatch each other's referer and onunload logs. Then they can actually track users across domains.
Ah, but that's because QA is a process, not a department.
When designing an application, a variety of processes are at work. For example:
security
speed
long-term maintenance
scalability
backward-compatibility
network support
OS support
file system support
user interface
reporting
error logging and reporting
capabilities of the computer language(s) used to implement the system, pros and cons of each
deployment issues
long-term upgrade deployment
data storage
data reliability
data openness (open standards or not)
data interoperability (accept data in/out from files rather than gui)
Now where does QA stand?
QA is part of the overall process, a little bit of each part. Each decision about the above system must take QA into account.
Granted, many programmers will not do a good job of it, so that's why companies have a QA department. But it's shifting the responsibility away from the prorgrammers when they should really be the ones responsible. Imagine if there was a ground crew doing the pre-flight checklist then handing it to the pilots as they entered the plane. Any self respecting pilot (not driven by an insane deadline and an equally insane manager) would do the pre-flight checklist again anyway.
Any question?
Only an open-source worm would do on a GNU/Linux system...
... Janitor walks by. "Say, what are we doing tonight? trying to take over the world?" ...The slashdotter: "Mwuhahahaha"... "Ahem"... "hehehe" ... Janitor swept away...
I think that this is very dangerous... Stop now, all of you, By Order Of the High and Mighty Me...
Nobody ever said computer programming was easy. It's a difficult job, full of arcane knowledge and fraught with pitfalls. This is why not everybody can be one, and this is why the good ones ought to be paid well.
Airline pilots are highly trained and constantly upgrade their skills, and are highly paid.
Likewise, programmers who run enterprise-strength systems have heavy responsibilities. This is not something one ought to go into for the money, but rather, for the love and dedication to the craft. (not aircraft)...
As far as QA, I tell you what. If the system is designed correctly, it will need very little QA. I know this because some systems can never get it right, no matter how much QA go into them, because of fundamuntal design flaws.
And yes, designing computer software is hard. Like heart surgery. One slip of the old wrist and it's flatline.
a machine, plugged in to the power supply only: A stand-olne PC. Add a loopback cable to the ethernet port: Look Ma, I'm on the internet.
Vote by mail.
It's simple, they have plenty of time to count it all, and if you don't trust them to count them right, then you really ought to move to a different jurisdiction.
Define children.
Is somebody 17 11/12 not capable of reading Goethe or Jung? Should their feeble mind be protected from the writings of Lenin? Must their sensitivities be spared The Pearl?
Anyways, back to your barracks, you censors...
Like I said, whatever the hardware will support.
If your system is distributed with dual 100 base T on a switched network, get ready for some serious throughput. If you're going giga on a switched network, then even more so. But then consider that if the system is not fully on a lan, you'll either VPN (unsafe) frame-relay (expensive) or drop your own fiber (expensive too). So it depends on the architecture of the company, its existing infrastructure, the number of users and their location.
It has to be as fast as the network can handle. If 100 base T then that's your benchmark. If it's giga ethernet, then that's your benchmark.
Yes, well, then they could be pushing for their vendors to make the code open source, or they could release the hardware specs for their products so that the open source community can make devices for them that work well.
In fact, though, I think that it would be good for Epson to fund some Open Sourcers to dev the programs for them.
And once these robots are perfected, the Army will swoop in and make it the Armored Vehicle Combat Control System (ARVECOMCOSYS) to be deployed on the latest and greatest Abrahms-Huey Heavy Combat Airborne Platform (see terminator 2 for live screenshot)
And then, buybye saddam.
Besides, all they have to do is release their software as GNU GPL with source code. Then they're in compliance. Besides, their software could probably handle it. And on top of that they would sell more scanners.
What, where's not going to benchmark on Mhz cycles anymore?
I can already picture this:
"Buy Intel's new Pentra Plus 2004, the only processor with a billion transistors!!!" (yay, men in blue dance yadda yadda)
Exactly. But for that matter, english is a code:
-Capitalize first letter,
-End sentence in period. (What, no semicolon?)
-Have exactly one space in between each word (except if you're in college then use two after the period.)
etc ad nauseam.
the key is that the english language is not compiled, but interpreted. (and if you're a politician, twisted at will). Likewise HTML is interpreted. It is a tes of instruction to a rendering engine. High levels of abstraction. For example, italicising is done with a tagged i. No need to tell the engine about which font to use, or how to allocate memory, or all that jazz. High level. Just like english. Actually, it's probably even more high level than written english.
I'll stop now and go drink coffee.
Who said anything about "buying" CDs or DVDs? The hardware required will be this: CPU+Motherboard+HD. Everything else will be wireless in the home/office/neighborhood with self-healing and self configuring wireless network and "bridging" from wireless area to wireless area provided by fiber. The systems will have enough HD space (THANK YOU MAXTOR!!!) to store/cache all content out there simultaneously, without requiring centralized systems.
The systems will also run linux/java/python systems, will communicate through encrypted and user-managed protocols (like it was in the elder days) and the systems will just work 24/7. Take a look at the networking principles behind gaming (counterstrike etc) and hardcore porn to find fully decentralized (nothing to take down that can't be brought back up) and anonymous.
Your average consumer will be able to buy a $200 box with wireless, HD, AMD/transmeta, wireless (all protocols) etc, plug it in, and use the remote in the HDTV and voice activation to do all their stuff (movie, music, chatting online) (On an aside, how long until HDTVs come with built in cameras and microphones?) --If not the HDTV then your Playstation 2007.
See the internet from 1996 to 2002? 6 years. from 2002 to 2008? 6 years. Wireless everywhere. enterprise-grade servers as small as VCRs with terabytes of storage, IPv6, and giga-ethernet.
Want a movie? Pick up the remote, click the first three letters of the name, and press play. Free of charge. You know why? Because that movie will exist as nondescript 1meg chunks all over the network, and be fully downloaded to your own HD by the time the SurroundSound logo is displayed.
==
This was the optimistic view-- Now for the MS version.
==
Now you see what they want DRM for. MS wants to charge you for viewing that flick, and Hollyweird is (good boy, good boy; sit, Ubu, sit) fetching the legislators to make it happen.
Microsoft sees computer hardware like cars. In the beginning of the auto industries, there were thousands of automakers in the US. Now there are only three, and only two are not owned by a foreign corp, but are in bed hummering them [yeah, pun]. Same for airlines. 1950, a bunch. Now: Boeing, Airbus.
You see, they are using legislation to raise the "cost of entry" in the computer industry. They are finishing it in software, they are doing it in hardware. They (Microsoft) want to OWN all hardware manufaturers, keiretsu style (look it up, it's fascinating), worldwide, and thus be able to provide it "at reasonable cost" and with "adequate safeguards" to insure public safety and compliance with existing laws.
The beauty of this little scenario is that it's a true and tried method. Many industries have consolidated until there were only one or two top players. As long as industry centralization is not seen as a bother to the economy, governments turn a blind eye. I'll give you another example: Look at keyboards. It used to be that there were many companies making keyboards. It's a commodity now. It's almost free. People don't think about them. There's no talk about "opening the door" to competition in the keyboard market.
How about cell phones? Ericsson is tanking. Now all phones essentially do the same thing. They all have the same features. The base models are all "given" to you when you sign up for service. There's no talk about reviving competition in the cell-phone business. Now, they are basically all made in half a dozen factories in southern China, Taiwan, and Malaysia.
Likewise computers will be cheap, disposable items, and they will be all made the same, and sold below cost (like game consoles), and Microsoft will make its money from collecting the fee for "displaying" your "hollywood-provided" content (so that you, the consumer, may enjoy the oustanding performance as the Director intended).
Then the cost-of-entry or cost-of-staying in this business will be too great for competitors (who will fold^H^H^H^Hdiversify) and MS will essentially have aquired and entire industry without raising antitrust concerns.
===
now some ranting
===
I say fooey on all that. If AMD wants to play that game then they're going to lose market share, not gain any. The only people who don't care about DMR in their machines are already conditioned to buy Intel.
On the other hand, if they play their cards right, then they can ride the wave of the future and say buhbye to WinTel.
Remember. Geeks vote, and geeks end up making more money than non-geeks. Geeks are in fact the prime demographic for AMD. The only reason this hasn't been advertised is that geeks respond adversely to advertising. Without geeks, AMD would have tanked a long time ago. They'd better get their priorities straight. For AMD, it's not about meeting the street numbers for next quarter, it's about having a quarter after that.
1600x1200 and a sea of white: AAAAAAAAAMEN Brother!
What I want is a coffee maker with a built-in refrigerator to make ice-blended mocha
I work at a bank. I understand about reliability and failover etc.
What we need is some university/some poor souls with money to invest, to build this as a "test case" for linux distributed systems.
=============
Requirements:
-- 50 TB Data storage
-- 100% availability (I don't mean 99.99_)
-- Data must be accessible worldwide
-- Data must be safe in these events:
-----War or terrorist act (building blows up)
-----Earthquake (building falls down flat)
-----Fire (building burns to foundation)
-----Flood (building full of muddy fishy water)
--Data must be online in the event of a disaster in 48 hours.
--Data must survive:
----Server failure
----Storage medium failure
----telecommunication failure (junk through the pipes)
----Unauthorized access (r0x4H 31g00G)
----Vandalism (maintenance guy with baseball bat or axe)
----Theft of equipment
Furthermore:
--Data must always be in a non-corrupt state
--Data must be fully auditable
--Data transaction must always be fully reversible
Also:
--All procedures (ALL) must be written down on electronic document and on paper and must be available to ONLY the proper personnel.
--All personnel must be correctly trained (development of training material, testing, evaluations, etc)
--System architecture must allow for connectivity to any known server system, any database system, and any client systems.
===
Oh, and under 20 million dollars.
===
However which way that solution should be implemented is left as an exercise to the reader
but not if it means breaking the law.
Like it or not, companies don't have to turn out a profit. They can go out of business so that their badly designed, badly implemented, highly buggy (but admirably marketed) software can once and for all be removed from circulation like the cheap hoe that it is, and allow real programmers who write really good and reliable software to make computers secure and easy-to-use so the rest of society can go back to their respective careers instead of having to try to remember what kind of file extension is safe to left-click in an email message.
What would be more meaningful would be if the server changed the link to read "Someone please come to this address and turn off the damn crusher... I don't want to end like this..."
Of course not. And the judge will agree completely with you, but since the corporate lawyers would be out in force, they would find some obscure law and the judge would go along with them, and at best they would just take your laptops to make sure you "hadn't" in fact been stealing company secrets. Which of course you weren't, but then the laptops would be retuned to you, and there woould be no telling what those bozos had done to them, so it's: reformat, resintall, change all your password dance...
Anyway.
yeah, but then they don't get moderated.
Let's say you write something great, and it gets moderated to 5, informative. Then 20 min later, you replace it with "Haxors rulez".
See my point?
Dang, I should have hit preview, that's all. my bad.
I'm not complaining.