Yeah, I mean why waste 2 years when I can reply to one of my spams and just buy any degree that I want up to a PhD? Or I could answer one of those obnoxious radio adds and become an MCSE. They say no computer experience required!
Who needs a degree anyway? It doesn't say much, except "your one of us". I've never had a "CS" or computer class in my life, and I do OK as a *NIX sysadmin in a research setting at a university. College has pretty much just become a thing to keep people out of the job market for 4 or 5 years (or more:). I know there are exceptions, but every CS major I've talked to either in school or had just finished didn't know crap about programming or that terribly much about computers.
I'm not trying to dis education, but rather point out that eduction has very little to do with education anymore. Its basic learning (problem solving) and social skills. An undergraduate in any field typically knows very little about that field. Graduate degrees are different.
The Defendants are five music distributors and three music retailers.
I'm sick of people refering to the RIAA as if they are a company that sells CDs or something. They are a handfull of office people that hand out plaques to people that sell X numbers of albums or singles, put MA labels if there's profanity within an album. The rest of the staff at the RIAA are lawyers. The RIAA does not care if you "steal" music, buy albums, or pose for goatse pictures. All they care about is getting paid for suing people. They don't care if they go to court, they don't care if they win, because that does not change their bottom line. They are a bunch of lawyers that cannot get a real job. They have no power, except what we give them. Please people, do not perpetuate the RIAA nonsense.
I still resent having to register for newspaper sites. I don't need to register to pick one up at the newsstand, why should I for the site?
Its a computer thing. Don't know why either. For example, I just bought some tickets from Ticketmaster (thats another topic for another day), and I had 2 choices to get the tickets in the 8 or so that they were on sale.
1) call on a telephone thingy
or
2) go to the website
If I were able to get through to the website (I know noone that did), I would have had to "create an account" and think of a username and password (I create a new one, every time) and then recieve their spam, plus whatever spam that comes from them selling my email address.
But if I use the old school technology, aka telephone, I just give them the pertinant information CC#, address, name, etc. And I don't even have to create an account or a password or anything.
Its a fad. Don't some people here work with websites? I mean, do you ever ask your PHB why users have to create accounts to buy something over the computer when they don't over any other form of commerce?
Another thing webmasters. Please stop opening links in new windows. The user can do that for themselves.
The publishers own the content, and can put up whatever barriers around that content that they want. As you have pointed out, the barriers don't necessarily have to make sense. And even when it doesn't make sense, it remains the sole prerogative of the publisher to conclude that their barriers don't make sense, or are alienating customers, or whatever, and make changes.
Yeah, I know of at least 3 publishers that make complete bank off of having no readers.
Well, make that 2.
Well, come to think of it, I think all publishers need an audience for them to make money.
I have a powerbook 15" 1.25GHz as well, and I've never gotten over 2 hours of battery. But I've always been on a wireless lan, dunno if that eats battery but it seems as though DVDs would eat more battery than the wireless card.
Oops, copied the wrong url its http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf. Either you believe in conspiricies or lots of bad luck and random happenings. I mean, 47 story steel buildings don't just fall down from a fire that is not hot enough to melt steel. Also, note the occupants of the building in the document.
Yes, thats right. Back in the late 80s or early 90s the US military wanted to use velcro for pockets and whatnot on military uniforms. Unfortunately, none of the higher ups had ever used velcro, nor knew that velcro made a swwwissh ripping noise when opened, so when they arrived, the soldiers thought they might get shot if they opened their pocket for a condom or something. So they spent many more millions of dollars to invent stealth velcro.
I'm a sysadmin, and I'm not worried about my job being outsourced to another country.
Although I can do 99.999% of my job remotely, I'm needed from time to time to physically be there to diagnose a hardware problem or something else that requires me to be physically near the machines.
Diffie is probably best renowned for his methodology known as knapsack encryption.
I would think that he is known for Diffie-Hellman key exchange, especially since Hellman created the knapsack encryption:)
Diffie-Hellman key exchange is done every day when one makes a ssl or ssh connection.
Re:People still use a shell for Linux?
on
Bash 3.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
With zsh (and I think some other shells), you can do one liner for loops without the do/done.
For example:
for i in img*.jpg <RETURN>
convert $i `basename $i.jpg` <RETURN>
I do for loops all the time, and in my experience zsh is most flexable with them.
Re:Looks great, but prefer Ash for scripts
on
Bash 3.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
Ash is OK, but I've seen it puke/die/ or do something wrong with a very long single quoted text passed as an embedded awk script.
I used to be fairly familiar with ash, and considered being its maintainer, but I did find subtle issues with it that I did not feel like fixing.
If you want a fast/bin/sh, compile your own bash, link it _statically_ (important), and use the./configure scripts options to strip out the fluff. There might even be a --make-sh-only option or something like that.
I used to roll my onw/bin/sh's, but ever since computers got fast enough, I just took whatever was sitting in/bin.
BTW, any unix system by definition must have a/bin/sh.
Yes, this looks like flamebait, but I'm actually surprised that it's taking MS this long, considering the resources they can throw at any given problem.
MS historically is not that good at portability. NT on powerpc, alpha, mips(maybe) failed. MS apps are not like *nix apps where most of them are designed from the ground up to be portable across platforms, including different byte ordering and default word sizes. Linux and the BSDs have this in their OS _and_ in their apps. Even if MS were to have a working version of XP for 64bit platforms, there would be no apps for it.
One thing that kills me are the MS macros/typedefs for working in their system. For example, the DWORD (unsigned long, 4 bytes) means "double word" which is left over from the 16bit days (2x 2 bytes). However, on most 32bit systems an int and a long are the same size (4 bytes each), on 16bit systems they are 2 bytes and 4 bytes respecively, and on 64bit systems they are 4 and 8 bytes respectively. People run into problems when they are expecting a DWORD == pointer size, and so on.
One of MS's strong points is its backwards compatability, one of Linux and other unixlike things (including solaris) is that they are forward compatable.
MS has got some work to do to play in a heterogenious world (read not IA32).
Of all the problems I can spot in the current crop of OSs, filesystems aren't one of them.
Nobody has come up with a compelling reason or feature to make me want to change filesystems.
I disagree. Why can I go to google and search the entire web for something and get an answer in less than 1 sec, and I can't do that on my computer or lan?
The trick is to have a receipt and maintain anonymity.
I never thought that in 2004 that it would be that difficult to count things. I'm not sure if everyone has seen this or not, but I just love this voting machine!.
Although its funny, its actually not a bad design. Especially for the elderly and visually impaired.
technology n. 1a) The application of science, especially to industrial or commercial objectives. 1b) The scientific method and material used to achieve a commercial or industrial objective.
To me, google is the definition of technology. My personal definition of technology is more towards the applicaton, knowledge and use of science by people. Give a calculator to someone who cannot do math, and the "technology" does nothing.
Google is known and used by everyone who uses computers. I can't think of any other technology offered by a single company/organization that can say that.
"Open Source software allows you to get under the hood and fix problems"
The original article asks "Who does this?" I do, and many others do. Every distro, to my knowledge applies some kind of patch to most all of the open source packages. I have hacked a number of software packages to "fix" them, add enhancements, etc.
Also, I am indebted to OSS for teaching me how to program. I can't tell you how valuable it is to have every piece of code that you use every day with the source completely available. I'm not talking about snippets of code, or a silly piece of "freeware". I'm talking about everything. I have learned so many tricks from reading OSS code over the past 10 years or so. I've never had a CS or any other computing class, and I feel as though I have gotten a better education from OSS than any 4 year college (at least from the people I've met).
Also, closed source software usually means that its limited to one or a handful of plaforms. With OSS, I can run the apps that I'm used to on multiple platforms. For example, I've used cdrecord on OSX, Linux, and Win2k. Also, by having the source available for portable code, again it helps me to learn about some "gotchas" with portable code.
To sum it up, I don't think this is a myth at all.
Too bad there aren't any high quality pics (at least from what I saw). It would be cool to print up some large prints of these or even use them as a desktop wallpaper. Is it asking too much to have 35 year old pics that were paid for by our tax dollars avaiable back to the people?
This goes against the whole idea of Free Software.
No it doesn't. Free Software is about free software. It comes with no warantee, and a brand new kernel from kernel.org has not been thoroughly tested outside of the developers boxes themselves.
I don't like sitting around waiting for Patrick to make a new kernel. I like to update my kernel myself from the official Linus tarball as and when required. This will no longer be possible.
You are free to download it or not, however its pretty ignorant to blindly run untested software in a production environment (I'm not talking about your personal box).
Plus, what feature or bugfix have you needed that required a brand new kernel? I've only needed a bleeding edge kernel once in my life and that was because I needed more file descriptors per process than 256 and the 2.0 kernel did not provide this. I ran 2.1.115 (IIRC) because in my testing of the 2.1 branch, that one was stable. It was not the latest at the time and I did not upgrade to 2.2 until I've heard reports that it was stable.
This is bad. Not all distribution maintainers have armies of patch people. This will push people to one of a few distributions such as RedHat or Suse. Espcially if 2.6 becomes an unstable piece of crap.
Its not really any different than it is now. There have been production kernel releases that have sucked, and most people who are using linux beyond a hobby are already relying on a distribution to provide a stable kernel. I will say that the linux kernel has never been an "unstable piece of crap" since I've been running it (about version 1.0 or earlier). I've run at least a handful of kernels from each stable and unstable branch. The bugs I have experienced personally have included random freezes, reparable filesystem corruption, kernel panics, and certain device drivers/modules that were just broken. I've only had a production kernel freeze on me once and that was a 2.0 kernel I believe. It was a slight bug in the ethernet driver that was fixed quickly. When I have had a buggy kernel, I just backed up to the previous one. The linux kernel is good code written by excellent programmers, and it only keeps getting better over time.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I mean why waste 2 years when I can reply to one of my spams and just buy any degree that I want up to a PhD? Or I could answer one of those obnoxious radio adds and become an MCSE. They say no computer experience required!
Who needs a degree anyway? It doesn't say much, except "your one of us". I've never had a "CS" or computer class in my life, and I do OK as a *NIX sysadmin in a research setting at a university. College has pretty much just become a thing to keep people out of the job market for 4 or 5 years (or more:). I know there are exceptions, but every CS major I've talked to either in school or had just finished didn't know crap about programming or that terribly much about computers.
I'm not trying to dis education, but rather point out that eduction has very little to do with education anymore. Its basic learning (problem solving) and social skills. An undergraduate in any field typically knows very little about that field. Graduate degrees are different.
I still resent having to register for newspaper sites. I don't need to register to pick one up at the newsstand, why should I for the site?
Its a computer thing. Don't know why either. For example, I just bought some tickets from Ticketmaster (thats another topic for another day), and I had 2 choices to get the tickets in the 8 or so that they were on sale.
1) call on a telephone thingy
or
2) go to the website
If I were able to get through to the website (I know noone that did), I would have had to "create an account" and think of a username and password (I create a new one, every time) and then recieve their spam, plus whatever spam that comes from them selling my email address.
But if I use the old school technology, aka telephone, I just give them the pertinant information CC#, address, name, etc. And I don't even have to create an account or a password or anything.
Its a fad. Don't some people here work with websites? I mean, do you ever ask your PHB why users have to create accounts to buy something over the computer when they don't over any other form of commerce?
Another thing webmasters. Please stop opening links in new windows. The user can do that for themselves.
The publishers own the content, and can put up whatever barriers around that content that they want. As you have pointed out, the barriers don't necessarily have to make sense. And even when it doesn't make sense, it remains the sole prerogative of the publisher to conclude that their barriers don't make sense, or are alienating customers, or whatever, and make changes.
Yeah, I know of at least 3 publishers that make complete bank off of having no readers.
Well, make that 2.
Well, come to think of it, I think all publishers need an audience for them to make money.
I have a powerbook 15" 1.25GHz as well, and I've never gotten over 2 hours of battery. But I've always been on a wireless lan, dunno if that eats battery but it seems as though DVDs would eat more battery than the wireless card.
my 2c
Oops, copied the wrong url its http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf.
Either you believe in conspiricies or lots of bad luck and random happenings. I mean, 47 story steel buildings don't just fall down from a fire that is not hot enough to melt steel. Also, note the occupants of the building in the document.
yeah. You can read FEMA's take on it here (pdf). I vaguely remember hearing about it in 2001, but the press has burried it. Can't stop the machine.
Wars are about money, power and control, not fighting. A new military uniform rollout is big bucks.
stealth velcro.
Yes, thats right. Back in the late 80s or early 90s the US military wanted to use velcro for pockets and whatnot on military uniforms. Unfortunately, none of the higher ups had ever used velcro, nor knew that velcro made a swwwissh ripping noise when opened, so when they arrived, the soldiers thought they might get shot if they opened their pocket for a condom or something. So they spent many more millions of dollars to invent stealth velcro.
Today they use snaps and zippers.
I'm a sysadmin, and I'm not worried about my job being outsourced to another country.
Although I can do 99.999% of my job remotely, I'm needed from time to time to physically be there to diagnose a hardware problem or something else that requires me to be physically near the machines.
Diffie is probably best renowned for his methodology known as knapsack encryption.
:)
I would think that he is known for Diffie-Hellman key exchange, especially since Hellman created the knapsack encryption
Diffie-Hellman key exchange is done every day when one makes a ssl or ssh connection.
With zsh (and I think some other shells), you can do one liner for loops without the do/done.
.jpg` <RETURN>
For example:
for i in img*.jpg <RETURN>
convert $i `basename $i
I do for loops all the time, and in my experience zsh is most flexable with them.
Ash is OK, but I've seen it puke/die/ or do something wrong with a very long single quoted text passed as an embedded awk script.
/bin/sh, compile your own bash, link it _statically_ (important), and use the ./configure scripts options to strip out the fluff. There might even be a --make-sh-only option or something like that.
/bin/sh's, but ever since computers got fast enough, I just took whatever was sitting in /bin.
/bin/sh .
I used to be fairly familiar with ash, and considered being its maintainer, but I did find subtle issues with it that I did not feel like fixing.
If you want a fast
I used to roll my onw
BTW, any unix system by definition must have a
Yes, this looks like flamebait, but I'm actually surprised that it's taking MS this long, considering the resources they can throw at any given problem.
MS historically is not that good at portability. NT on powerpc, alpha, mips(maybe) failed. MS apps are not like *nix apps where most of them are designed from the ground up to be portable across platforms, including different byte ordering and default word sizes. Linux and the BSDs have this in their OS _and_ in their apps. Even if MS were to have a working version of XP for 64bit platforms, there would be no apps for it.
One thing that kills me are the MS macros/typedefs for working in their system. For example, the DWORD (unsigned long, 4 bytes) means "double word" which is left over from the 16bit days (2x 2 bytes). However, on most 32bit systems an int and a long are the same size (4 bytes each), on 16bit systems they are 2 bytes and 4 bytes respecively, and on 64bit systems they are 4 and 8 bytes respectively. People run into problems when they are expecting a DWORD == pointer size, and so on.
One of MS's strong points is its backwards compatability, one of Linux and other unixlike things (including solaris) is that they are forward compatable.
MS has got some work to do to play in a heterogenious world (read not IA32).
Of all the problems I can spot in the current crop of OSs, filesystems aren't one of them.
Nobody has come up with a compelling reason or feature to make me want to change filesystems.
I disagree. Why can I go to google and search the entire web for something and get an answer in less than 1 sec, and I can't do that on my computer or lan?
The trick is to have a receipt and maintain anonymity.
I never thought that in 2004 that it would be that difficult to count things. I'm not sure if everyone has seen this or not, but I just love this voting machine!.
Although its funny, its actually not a bad design. Especially for the elderly and visually impaired.
I believe that Intel has already stated that they want to make some radical changes to the way the BIOS works.
They are ditching the BIOS in favor of EFI.
But I think the technology is WAY over hyped.
technology n. 1a) The application of science, especially to industrial or commercial objectives.
1b) The scientific method and material used to achieve a commercial or industrial objective.
To me, google is the definition of technology. My personal definition of technology is more towards the applicaton, knowledge and use of science by people. Give a calculator to someone who cannot do math, and the "technology" does nothing.
Google is known and used by everyone who uses computers. I can't think of any other technology offered by a single company/organization that can say that.
"Open Source software allows you to get under the hood and fix problems"
The original article asks "Who does this?" I do, and many others do. Every distro, to my knowledge applies some kind of patch to most all of the open source packages. I have hacked a number of software packages to "fix" them, add enhancements, etc.
Also, I am indebted to OSS for teaching me how to program. I can't tell you how valuable it is to have every piece of code that you use every day with the source completely available. I'm not talking about snippets of code, or a silly piece of "freeware". I'm talking about everything. I have learned so many tricks from reading OSS code over the past 10 years or so. I've never had a CS or any other computing class, and I feel as though I have gotten a better education from OSS than any 4 year college (at least from the people I've met).
Also, closed source software usually means that its limited to one or a handful of plaforms. With OSS, I can run the apps that I'm used to on multiple platforms. For example, I've used cdrecord on OSX, Linux, and Win2k. Also, by having the source available for portable code, again it helps me to learn about some "gotchas" with portable code.
To sum it up, I don't think this is a myth at all.
What happened to playing music for the sheer artistry of it? I play music, and just the fact of someone WANTING to hear it would make me happy.
Its not the artists that are complaining and/or asking for the money, its the people that they signed contracts with.
How is it that guns are an essential liberty, but iPods are so dangerous that they must be outlawed?
Our freedom of speech and right bear arms is to protect us from tyranical powers of government.
Maybe its time to exercise our rights.
Oops, I found them. Excellent! However, the site is too slashdotted.
Too bad there aren't any high quality pics (at least from what I saw). It would be cool to print up some large prints of these or even use them as a desktop wallpaper. Is it asking too much to have 35 year old pics that were paid for by our tax dollars avaiable back to the people?
This goes against the whole idea of Free Software.
No it doesn't. Free Software is about free software. It comes with no warantee, and a brand new kernel from kernel.org has not been thoroughly tested outside of the developers boxes themselves.
I don't like sitting around waiting for Patrick to make a new kernel. I like to update my kernel myself from the official Linus tarball as and when required. This will no longer be possible.
You are free to download it or not, however its pretty ignorant to blindly run untested software in a production environment (I'm not talking about your personal box).
Plus, what feature or bugfix have you needed that required a brand new kernel? I've only needed a bleeding edge kernel once in my life and that was because I needed more file descriptors per process than 256 and the 2.0 kernel did not provide this. I ran 2.1.115 (IIRC) because in my testing of the 2.1 branch, that one was stable. It was not the latest at the time and I did not upgrade to 2.2 until I've heard reports that it was stable.
This is bad. Not all distribution maintainers have armies of patch people. This will push people to one of a few distributions such as RedHat or Suse. Espcially if 2.6 becomes an unstable piece of crap.
Its not really any different than it is now. There have been production kernel releases that have sucked, and most people who are using linux beyond a hobby are already relying on a distribution to provide a stable kernel. I will say that the linux kernel has never been an "unstable piece of crap" since I've been running it (about version 1.0 or earlier). I've run at least a handful of kernels from each stable and unstable branch. The bugs I have experienced personally have included random freezes, reparable filesystem corruption, kernel panics, and certain device drivers/modules that were just broken. I've only had a production kernel freeze on me once and that was a 2.0 kernel I believe. It was a slight bug in the ethernet driver that was fixed quickly. When I have had a buggy kernel, I just backed up to the previous one. The linux kernel is good code written by excellent programmers, and it only keeps getting better over time.