I wasn't really speaking only of MBA degrees. Also if what you say is true then that only adds weight to my argument -- MBA course creators have obviously recognised that a degree is not sufficient (but presumably from their persepective it is necessary).
You mean dselect the tool that lets you as the user select a load of stuff that isn't needed on a production server? If you didn't want that stuff installed don't install it.
Personally I always skip the tasksel and dselect stages in a debian install anyway. then
apt-get install aptitude less hdparm wget ssh rsync tree
And i have one minimally configured system ready to go.
The vulnerability exists in the way that Windows shares files across networks. The carefully crafted code of the worm swamps a memory buffer which forces a machine to carry out instructions hidden in the tail of the file.
Isn't that a lovely sanitised way of saying it? It's not "in the way that windows shares files" it is "in the way microsoft implemented the method for sharing files". And the evil worm apparently "swamps a memory buffer" instead of "attacks a badly implemented, remote facing, input buffer.... again"
How can it be that these ports all need to be open? What services can possibly be needed that have to open four ports to the world? I was feeling all smug that I don't run Windows, but I started getting calls from Windows drones this morning asking me to come and fix their compromised computers. And this after mocking me for using Linux as well... tempted to tell them where to stick it.
It doesn't matter, as long as it's consistent. The assumptions are 1) open and closed source are comprable 2) the ratio of bugs findable by bugscan : total bugs is the same for all programs. Given that these are true (not an entirely unreasonable assumption). Then even if bugscan only finds 1% of bugs in a program then when you run it on open source and find that there are 100 bugs per megabyte and on closed source and find that there are 200 bugs per megabyte then you have some evidence that open source is more secure.
There does not need to be an official measure, a measure is sufficient.
If they're part of your organisation then their purchase becomes your purchase and they don't owe you any money. Sounds like a business model that needs some work to me.
Good. The world would be a nicer place if it was GNU/World. Although maybe without the "GNU/". And maybe without RMS. And his beard.:-)
I actually think it is the BSD license that is utopian in its view. The BSD license assumes that everyone is lovely and will share because we do. The GPL license knows they won't so it forces them to. However, as I said in a reply to you above. The choice is the original author's to make.
I think you've cheated a bit there. You've moved from discussing the BSD license to the BSD operating systems. Obviously without BSD operating systems we would all have been worse off. However, the question being addressed by the grandparent is whether we would have been better off had all the BSD *nixs been released GPL?
I buy a pencil for 10p + VAT = (11.75p) I sell the pencil for 30p + VAT = (35.25p) Profit (regardless of VAT) = 20p
I work out my VAT bill: VAT on purchases = 1.75p VAT on sales = 5.25p VAT bill (i.e. VAT on profit) = 3.5p
Notice that the sale of the pencil was 5.25p over what I wanted for it. i.e. the VAT to my supplier plus the VAT on my profit. The customer paid every part of the VAT. Just because I wrote the cheque does not mean it came from my pocket. As a VAT registered business you act merely as a tax collector for the inland revenue. Companies do not pay VAT, customers do.
You think I owe you and the rest of the world something. I don't. I did the work on the improvements, I can license them as I see fit. If you don't like it you can take the original code and attempt to duplicate my work.
Unfortunately, you do owe something. Your improvements are based on the work of others, who gave you that for free. Why should they not be compensated for that? The compensation they require is that you do the same for them. To paraphrase you... if you don't like it you can write the original code base friom the ground up in an attempt to duplicate my work.
However, that is the choice of the original authors. If the original authors are the government, then they may choose to promote growth of industry by choosing a licence other than GPL - BSD as you advocate. The arguments against that being promoted here are, I think, not relevent. The fact that historically, large corporations have taken open standards and corrupted them would not be relevant now. The open source movement is bigger and more motivated now than it was when these things happened. There are plenty of talented people who would (and do) exactly what you suggest and create equivlent operation. In fact, they have even managed it where the original source was completely closed (a la OpenOffice and MS Office).
Further - how can SCO be upping there damages if the infringing code is in the development kernel; that has nowhere near as wide a circulation as the stable tree. In fact (if they were right -- although obviously they're not) surely their duty of care would be to say which parts of the development kernel are infringing so that they can be removed before they get distributed to the four winds?
Of course, I know who I'd like to distribute to the four winds.
Consistency and incompleteness are not mutually exclusive.
Theory of relativity? Bollocks, I say. Where's all the stuff about quantum mechanics eh? See - all wrong einstein you stupid git. It's easy to travel faster than the speed of light, the universe isn't curved and black holes only exist in your plot line... err theory.
But is it worth risking yet another islamist onslaught on the people of Egypt just to get this film shown?
Yes.
I was told a story by my Mum, who works in a children's nursery. She suggested to the playgroup leader that they get one of those boards with the kids names on and give them gold stars for doing something good. The idea was rejected; the reason being that the playgroup leader once worked as a missionary in Africa, teaching children. They introduced just such a board. When a child was given a gold star, some of the others would pick on them. Their solution was to stop giving out stars. Did this make better children? The result - the children who would have gotten stars no longer did, perhaps leaving them unrewarded and unfulfilled; the children who thought bullying was acceptable were never corrected and were left to continue on in life to who knows what; the teachers are left feeling impotent - there job has become to tip-toe around children, not causing trouble.
I would argue that not facing up to problems like this very rarely makes them better.
I think "the truth" referred to by the parent is the encumbant religions in egypt. Nobody would seriously suggest that the Matrix is some sort of basis for new world order. However, I (and I believe the parent) would suggest that questioning "the truth" over the last 1000 years of human society has led to our continued advancement (and in some cases regression) as a species and should not be so lightly brushed aside.
Your point about Joe-6-amphorae not wanting to see the movie may well be true. It may well be that every egypitian would despise the movie. But we'll never know that will we because a small subset of the population has decreed that they are incapable of viewing it without destroying society. (I notice that the censor hasn't instantly gone on an all out looting spree).
I think you are concentrating too much on the content of the movie - good/bad/accurate/theistic/philosophic/whatever - none of these is the point. It could be a film about mutant peanuts from the planet foobar, the point is - it is a work of fiction that has been unilaterally edited out of a nation. The level of condecension and disrespect to the population that is needed to do such a thing is staggering.
Similar things (though not so extreme) are happening in many western societies as well at the momemnt. As an example; the UK government is considering an unhealthy food tax. Leaving aside the economic unfairness (to poorer families) of this, it is an example of the state forcing its view of good and bad on a population; if not removing the choice then certainly limiting it serverely.
Phew. I think I'll stop now before I bust a vein or something....
In your future visions paper early on you talk about Reiser's Rule of Thumb #2. However, I can't find Reiser's Rule of Thumb #1 -- what is it? Is it a secret? Does it contain the sum of all human knowledge?
They've said that there is no infringing code in the kernel. They've said they want to arrange a payment schedule for those using Unix libraries. Does anyone else think that they might well be going after glibc?
Have IBM done any work in glibc? If memory serves the new super-duper threads implementation had some IBM help.
There are only rare occasions that I personally need high bandwidth. The appeal of "broadband" is the always on nature. I would like BT to get there arses kicked in the same sort of way as NTL have here because they've put a 150 hour limit (or some such) on their broadband service. Surely broadband == high bandwidth + always on?
Slashdot Mirror
I wasn't really speaking only of MBA degrees. Also if what you say is true then that only adds weight to my argument -- MBA course creators have obviously recognised that a degree is not sufficient (but presumably from their persepective it is necessary).
Degree != real-world experience.
I've got both, as I'm sure do many on slashdot. The two are symbiotic, not the same.
Personally I always skip the tasksel and dselect stages in a debian install anyway. thenAnd i have one minimally configured system ready to go.
Isn't that a lovely sanitised way of saying it? It's not "in the way that windows shares files" it is "in the way microsoft implemented the method for sharing files". And the evil worm apparently "swamps a memory buffer" instead of "attacks a badly implemented, remote facing, input buffer
How can it be that these ports all need to be open? What services can possibly be needed that have to open four ports to the world? I was feeling all smug that I don't run Windows, but I started getting calls from Windows drones this morning asking me to come and fix their compromised computers. And this after mocking me for using Linux as well... tempted to tell them where to stick it.
It doesn't matter, as long as it's consistent. The assumptions are 1) open and closed source are comprable 2) the ratio of bugs findable by bugscan : total bugs is the same for all programs. Given that these are true (not an entirely unreasonable assumption). Then even if bugscan only finds 1% of bugs in a program then when you run it on open source and find that there are 100 bugs per megabyte and on closed source and find that there are 200 bugs per megabyte then you have some evidence that open source is more secure.
There does not need to be an official measure, a measure is sufficient.
They could - but who would see it? :-)
Stop your yammering.
If they're part of your organisation then their purchase becomes your purchase and they don't owe you any money. Sounds like a business model that needs some work to me.
Good. The world would be a nicer place if it was GNU/World. Although maybe without the "GNU/". And maybe without RMS. And his beard. :-)
I actually think it is the BSD license that is utopian in its view. The BSD license assumes that everyone is lovely and will share because we do. The GPL license knows they won't so it forces them to. However, as I said in a reply to you above. The choice is the original author's to make.
I think you've cheated a bit there. You've moved from discussing the BSD license to the BSD operating systems. Obviously without BSD operating systems we would all have been worse off. However, the question being addressed by the grandparent is whether we would have been better off had all the BSD *nixs been released GPL?
Erm... what?
I buy a pencil for 10p + VAT = (11.75p)
I sell the pencil for 30p + VAT = (35.25p)
Profit (regardless of VAT) = 20p
I work out my VAT bill:
VAT on purchases = 1.75p
VAT on sales = 5.25p
VAT bill (i.e. VAT on profit) = 3.5p
Notice that the sale of the pencil was 5.25p over what I wanted for it. i.e. the VAT to my supplier plus the VAT on my profit. The customer paid every part of the VAT. Just because I wrote the cheque does not mean it came from my pocket. As a VAT registered business you act merely as a tax collector for the inland revenue. Companies do not pay VAT, customers do.
You think I owe you and the rest of the world something. I don't. I did the work on the improvements, I can license them as I see fit. If you don't like it you can take the original code and attempt to duplicate my work.
... if you don't like it you can write the original code base friom the ground up in an attempt to duplicate my work.
Unfortunately, you do owe something. Your improvements are based on the work of others, who gave you that for free. Why should they not be compensated for that? The compensation they require is that you do the same for them. To paraphrase you
However, that is the choice of the original authors. If the original authors are the government, then they may choose to promote growth of industry by choosing a licence other than GPL - BSD as you advocate. The arguments against that being promoted here are, I think, not relevent. The fact that historically, large corporations have taken open standards and corrupted them would not be relevant now. The open source movement is bigger and more motivated now than it was when these things happened. There are plenty of talented people who would (and do) exactly what you suggest and create equivlent operation. In fact, they have even managed it where the original source was completely closed (a la OpenOffice and MS Office).
Further - how can SCO be upping there damages if the infringing code is in the development kernel; that has nowhere near as wide a circulation as the stable tree. In fact (if they were right -- although obviously they're not) surely their duty of care would be to say which parts of the development kernel are infringing so that they can be removed before they get distributed to the four winds?
Of course, I know who I'd like to distribute to the four winds.
People being inspired to read about ideas they would have laughed at a year ago. Yeah, that's a bad thing.
Consistency and incompleteness are not mutually exclusive.
Theory of relativity? Bollocks, I say. Where's all the stuff about quantum mechanics eh? See - all wrong einstein you stupid git. It's easy to travel faster than the speed of light, the universe isn't curved and black holes only exist in your plot line... err theory.
But is it worth risking yet another islamist onslaught on the people of Egypt just to get this film shown?
Yes.
I was told a story by my Mum, who works in a children's nursery. She suggested to the playgroup leader that they get one of those boards with the kids names on and give them gold stars for doing something good. The idea was rejected; the reason being that the playgroup leader once worked as a missionary in Africa, teaching children. They introduced just such a board. When a child was given a gold star, some of the others would pick on them. Their solution was to stop giving out stars. Did this make better children? The result - the children who would have gotten stars no longer did, perhaps leaving them unrewarded and unfulfilled; the children who thought bullying was acceptable were never corrected and were left to continue on in life to who knows what; the teachers are left feeling impotent - there job has become to tip-toe around children, not causing trouble.
I would argue that not facing up to problems like this very rarely makes them better.
I think "the truth" referred to by the parent is the encumbant religions in egypt. Nobody would seriously suggest that the Matrix is some sort of basis for new world order. However, I (and I believe the parent) would suggest that questioning "the truth" over the last 1000 years of human society has led to our continued advancement (and in some cases regression) as a species and should not be so lightly brushed aside.
Your point about Joe-6-amphorae not wanting to see the movie may well be true. It may well be that every egypitian would despise the movie. But we'll never know that will we because a small subset of the population has decreed that they are incapable of viewing it without destroying society. (I notice that the censor hasn't instantly gone on an all out looting spree).
I think you are concentrating too much on the content of the movie - good/bad/accurate/theistic/philosophic/whatever - none of these is the point. It could be a film about mutant peanuts from the planet foobar, the point is - it is a work of fiction that has been unilaterally edited out of a nation. The level of condecension and disrespect to the population that is needed to do such a thing is staggering.
Similar things (though not so extreme) are happening in many western societies as well at the momemnt. As an example; the UK government is considering an unhealthy food tax. Leaving aside the economic unfairness (to poorer families) of this, it is an example of the state forcing its view of good and bad on a population; if not removing the choice then certainly limiting it serverely.
Phew. I think I'll stop now before I bust a vein or something....
In your future visions paper early on you talk about Reiser's Rule of Thumb #2. However, I can't find Reiser's Rule of Thumb #1 -- what is it? Is it a secret? Does it contain the sum of all human knowledge?
TELL ME!
What are you talking about? I am firewalled and behind a proxy and bittorrent causes no problems at all. Have you tried setting $http_proxy?
That's a damned clever webcam you've got there that knows how much money you earn, what diseases, etc, etc.
They've said that there is no infringing code in the kernel. They've said they want to arrange a payment schedule for those using Unix libraries. Does anyone else think that they might well be going after glibc?
Have IBM done any work in glibc? If memory serves the new super-duper threads implementation had some IBM help.
These "students" shouldn't be so damned picky then and should try OpenOffice.
As much as I dislike Microsoft, I don't think that they owe me a copy of their software. Neither does Codeweavers.
FYI: Flash MX works fairly well under Crossover office (and I would imagine under Wine as well).
Yeah, but I guess it will just end like: "Oh, you are using lycoris/linux. Can't you afford Windows?"
What if the answer is "no"?
There are only rare occasions that I personally need high bandwidth. The appeal of "broadband" is the always on nature. I would like BT to get there arses kicked in the same sort of way as NTL have here because they've put a 150 hour limit (or some such) on their broadband service. Surely broadband == high bandwidth + always on?