Wow. More inflammatory, ridiculous rhetoric from the drooling nerd crowd.
What on earth are you talking about? Are you an idiot? They haven't ever been 'convicted' of a criminal offense. The only thing they're guilty of is aggravating a bunch of dirty, hypocritical ("I'm a libertarian... Up with big government, down with Microsoft!") dweebs.
Umm, yes Java is 'pure-OO' whatever that means. Other than the primitives.
Dressing up the succubus..
on
Exegesis 4 Out
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
Great. Now sysadmins-cum-bad programmers will be even more tempted to use Perl for huge applications and God Knows What because they think it's a 'real' language. Seriously - Perl is greate for most day to day administration tasks, and has been since Perl4. Perl5 added some decent, usable features. Perl6 is a joke.
Enter the players. Fair succubus Perl cries out to the scraggly, geeky administrator in his cube...
Perl: Come to me. I'm not a language conducive to horrible, horrible code. I don't tempt system administrators to brute-force huge systems by way of overblown syntax! Really, the shorter and more efficient code makes it _better_ code!
Administrator: I can hear your call! I love your myriad randomly chosen operators! I love your flexibility, it means me and my colleague will never understand eachothers code! I can even pretend to be a 'real programmer' because I'm dabbling in your poorly designed OO features!
Perl: And don't forget the job security! Every Perl programmer thinks he can write good manageable Perl code! It's only the other poor slob who can't, and screw him!
Administrator: Very well. Let us begin writing our financial management systems in perl, our web applications, everything!
Learn to use OO (or any other methodology which lets you segment code based on likelihood of change). e.g. in Java you do your analysis and design, and your interfaces are more or less 'set'. Then you just code the implementations, and you don't generally tromp all over eachother nearly as much.
Interesting? I've pulled more interesting things out of my nose.
DES cracking, "security issues", and keys of this sort are 3 completely separate things. Do you not understand this, are you stupid, or are you just a "Microsoft Security Sucks" dancing monkey?
This has little to do with encryption, and nothing to do with security. You just analyze the valid keys and find some pattern of valid keys. Then you sit there and validate them. The solution space is much smaller than DES and the possible letters/combos are smaller. What, do you want them to have 512-byte keys?!
Right.. Some of us value our political ideas more than our nerd ideas - freedom and all. Fascist? Did some idiot say fascist? Umm, no. You should probably look the word up - it doesn't mean what you think it does. Damned Dimwitted dirty nerds.
Your petty outrage is fashionable, but baseless. _Why_ should we be so outraged? Because of the millions dying in the streets from using Microsoft products?
Microsoft finally found out they have to play the political games like all of their competition have been.
Comparing Microsoft with Enron is laughable - you should be ashamed. Microsoft performs well for their stockholders and employees, and you are being disingenuous.
First - I'm glad you're discussing this rationally (both of you).
My first point would be to put these points aside (for a minute) and point out that the people most vocipherously arguing agains Microsoft tend to be technical people (whom I'll refer to as 'nerds' from here on out). Why is that, you think? I'd say two reasons.
One - self interest. A lot of nerds either at the technical level or at the business level (competitors) are damaged by Microsoft's success. None of these arguments you make would apply here - they simply want more money. No high minded ideals, no lives saved by Windows XP being cheaper or having more competition.
Two - they're dirty nerds. By which I mean they're so fascinated by their craft that it overcomes their other [typically] more important ideals, like politics and belief in a free market. I don't see as many 'normal people' complaining about Microsoft, do you? These people just love their OS's and they hate Microsoft because it's too plaebian (sp?) for their tastes.
I actually semi-agree with your main points. Microsoft has no rights that aren't granted by the people in this society. Noone has demonstrated any harm to society from Microsoft that would warrant restricting those rights. Only whiny competitors and dirty, geeky nerds.
Did you expect anything else from this gaggle of dirty nerds? Half of them, if you asked, would claim to be 'libertarian', but they want to impose government burdens on a company that has won in the marketplace because they harm their geek sensitivities.
"I don't like Windows, and it pisses me off that the whole world isn't using Linux! To Hell with my political ideals, Go Big Brother!"
And then, of course, you get the language police after you for any minor typo. Stupid nerds.
I fully support the current proposed remedy in the Microsoft case. I have _not_ been contacted or encouraged by Microsoft, and am doing so of my own free will.
This case is an insane drain on resources for all parties, and it is not the point of antitrust laws or the duty of its enforcers to aid Microsoft competitors who could not compete in the marketplace and who have attempted to compensate in the courts. Consumer harm has not been proven, and there are demonstrably _dozens_ of viable competitors in every market Microsoft competes in.
Please end this disgusting display of intellectual property-grabbing and accept the proposed settlement.
Here's a little hint - let the free market system deal with it. That's how things are done in the US. If people don't think Microsoft is secure (as opposed to the _wonderful_ security history Unix vendors have had - please note dripping sarcasm) then buy other products.
Here's another little hint - your buddies at Sun just fell victim to a Solaris security hole
Did someone say this is eloquent? It's called 'sophistry' - look it up.
The majority of your average schmoe consumers use Windows, hence the majority of your average schmoe software is available for Windows (only).
Where is Joe Schmoe going to figure out how to use his USB camera on Linux? How's he going to play the games he buys (Oh God, hear comes the 'but Linux has games!' crowd of dirty nerds - I can hear them now hoofing their way towards me).
The very idea of distributing Linux in this situation is idiotic at a level that almost reaches 'instinctual knowledge'. I don't even need to put much thought into it - the first issues it brings to mind are show-stoppers.
I'm a PC guy (Windows and Unix) but I have to admit the iMac is a good choice here.
Why do people mod comments about alternatives as Flamebait (and presciently, this one)? Are people afraid to hear that you should't write large scale systems in Perl?
It really is valid (and in my opinion, correct) to say that if you _are_ going to do this you should look at other technologies and languages. Perl is for system administrators and system administrators-cum-developers, not real software development. Look at java. Look at PHP. Look at commercial and non-commerical web application systems, like Zope. Or don't rewrite it at all if it works. But for God's Sake, don't rewrite it in Perl - it's pointless.
Re:Microsoft is irrelevant.
on
XBox Released
·
· Score: 1
You're a liar and an idiot. The hardware is (objectively) superior. And what you monkeys don't seem to understand is that this console is _brand_ new. The games for PS2 sucked when it was released too.
"blow it away". Seems we have a little bit of a reality/exagerration problem, here, don't we?
In real life, AMD's top end is _comparable_ in some benchmarks to the 2.0Ghz. In other benchmarks (particularly highly optimized and memory-intensive) the 2.0Ghz beats them nicely.
Please try to exist in the same world as the rest of us.
Another area of Linux with problems (albeit mostly non-kernel related) is the threading model. For Christ's sake, grow up. "We can do kernel context switches fast enough for 1:1 threading model!". Pure hubris. Linux is unusable for any serious Java development.
One common thread I'm seeing this this mystique of the 'religious warrior' and his supposedly supernatural power to overcome our weak invading forces. "Oh no, they've declared jihad!" Even people who don't believe in their God somehow see this as giving them some kind of edge because they're willing to die.
Frankly - fuck 'em. I'm not intimidated by anyone in some third world bass-ackwards country even if they're "defending their home and their religion". I'm not taken up in the sentimental (even if subconscious) attraction to the freedom fighter (as they see themselves) or the desparate religious zealot (as others see them).
Quite simply - our superior technology, superior productivity, and superior will will prevail. I don't care how dirty and desparate they are.
I'm sure someone mentioned this, but I don't see it. The real benefit of Java (duh) is client-server development. RMI is freaking beautiful and simple. Jini is pretty nice, too. There's no other language where client-server or peer-peer development is as easy as Java.
A secondary benefit which I did see mentioned is ease of support/development. You go ahead and write your code in C/C++ - we'll see how quickly you can turn out your product and how easily you can extend and bugfix it.
That's not flaimbait - you have to consider the fact that many people are advocating terror (don't fuck with the US or we'll bomb everyone in sight, civilians and all!) to fight terror.
A terrorist act is one committed with the purpose to change political behavior by fear of tragedy. If we bomb out of anger then we're no better.
Not that we shouldn't bomb - just make sure we know who we're bombing, and to do it for a military and defensive purpose.
Slashdot Mirror
It's called a civil trial, rocket surgeon.
It takes more than crypto sigs to authenticate yourself.
I can send you a PGP message saying I'm the President of Uraguay in the signature. How can you prove or disprove that?
I'd trust a Verisign signature way before I'd trust a PGP signature.
Classes are objects. What are you talking about?
What on earth are you talking about? Are you an idiot? They haven't ever been 'convicted' of a criminal offense. The only thing they're guilty of is aggravating a bunch of dirty, hypocritical ("I'm a libertarian... Up with big government, down with Microsoft!") dweebs.
What? PGP 'technology' is not an alternative or competitor to Passport. What are you smoking?
Umm, yes Java is 'pure-OO' whatever that means. Other than the primitives.
Enter the players. Fair succubus Perl cries out to the scraggly, geeky administrator in his cube...
Perl: Come to me. I'm not a language conducive to horrible, horrible code. I don't tempt system administrators to brute-force huge systems by way of overblown syntax! Really, the shorter and more efficient code makes it _better_ code!
Administrator: I can hear your call! I love your myriad randomly chosen operators! I love your flexibility, it means me and my colleague will never understand eachothers code! I can even pretend to be a 'real programmer' because I'm dabbling in your poorly designed OO features!
Perl: And don't forget the job security! Every Perl programmer thinks he can write good manageable Perl code! It's only the other poor slob who can't, and screw him!
Administrator: Very well. Let us begin writing our financial management systems in perl, our web applications, everything!
Learn to use OO (or any other methodology which lets you segment code based on likelihood of change). e.g. in Java you do your analysis and design, and your interfaces are more or less 'set'. Then you just code the implementations, and you don't generally tromp all over eachother nearly as much.
And a lot of their XML standards have had a far reaching impact on real software development. What was your message supposed to mean, again?
Interesting? I've pulled more interesting things out of my nose.
DES cracking, "security issues", and keys of this sort are 3 completely separate things. Do you not understand this, are you stupid, or are you just a "Microsoft Security Sucks" dancing monkey?
This has little to do with encryption, and nothing to do with security. You just analyze the valid keys and find some pattern of valid keys. Then you sit there and validate them. The solution space is much smaller than DES and the possible letters/combos are smaller. What, do you want them to have 512-byte keys?!
Right.. Some of us value our political ideas more than our nerd ideas - freedom and all. Fascist? Did some idiot say fascist? Umm, no. You should probably look the word up - it doesn't mean what you think it does. Damned Dimwitted dirty nerds.
Microsoft finally found out they have to play the political games like all of their competition have been.
Comparing Microsoft with Enron is laughable - you should be ashamed. Microsoft performs well for their stockholders and employees, and you are being disingenuous.
My first point would be to put these points aside (for a minute) and point out that the people most vocipherously arguing agains Microsoft tend to be technical people (whom I'll refer to as 'nerds' from here on out). Why is that, you think? I'd say two reasons.
One - self interest. A lot of nerds either at the technical level or at the business level (competitors) are damaged by Microsoft's success. None of these arguments you make would apply here - they simply want more money. No high minded ideals, no lives saved by Windows XP being cheaper or having more competition.
Two - they're dirty nerds. By which I mean they're so fascinated by their craft that it overcomes their other [typically] more important ideals, like politics and belief in a free market. I don't see as many 'normal people' complaining about Microsoft, do you? These people just love their OS's and they hate Microsoft because it's too plaebian (sp?) for their tastes.
I actually semi-agree with your main points. Microsoft has no rights that aren't granted by the people in this society. Noone has demonstrated any harm to society from Microsoft that would warrant restricting those rights. Only whiny competitors and dirty, geeky nerds.
"I don't like Windows, and it pisses me off that the whole world isn't using Linux! To Hell with my political ideals, Go Big Brother!"
And then, of course, you get the language police after you for any minor typo. Stupid nerds.
I fully support the current proposed remedy in the Microsoft case. I have _not_ been contacted or encouraged by Microsoft, and am doing so of my own free will.
This case is an insane drain on resources for all parties, and it is not the point of antitrust laws or the duty of its enforcers to aid Microsoft competitors who could not compete in the marketplace and who have attempted to compensate in the courts. Consumer harm has not been proven, and there are demonstrably _dozens_ of viable competitors in every market Microsoft competes in.
Please end this disgusting display of intellectual property-grabbing and accept the proposed settlement.
Wow, quite a little tirade there.
Here's a little hint - let the free market system deal with it. That's how things are done in the US. If people don't think Microsoft is secure (as opposed to the _wonderful_ security history Unix vendors have had - please note dripping sarcasm) then buy other products.
Here's another little hint - your buddies at Sun just fell victim to a Solaris security hole
The majority of your average schmoe consumers use Windows, hence the majority of your average schmoe software is available for Windows (only).
Where is Joe Schmoe going to figure out how to use his USB camera on Linux? How's he going to play the games he buys (Oh God, hear comes the 'but Linux has games!' crowd of dirty nerds - I can hear them now hoofing their way towards me).
The very idea of distributing Linux in this situation is idiotic at a level that almost reaches 'instinctual knowledge'. I don't even need to put much thought into it - the first issues it brings to mind are show-stoppers.
I'm a PC guy (Windows and Unix) but I have to admit the iMac is a good choice here.
Why do people mod comments about alternatives as Flamebait (and presciently, this one)? Are people afraid to hear that you should't write large scale systems in Perl?
It really is valid (and in my opinion, correct) to say that if you _are_ going to do this you should look at other technologies and languages. Perl is for system administrators and system administrators-cum-developers, not real software development. Look at java. Look at PHP. Look at commercial and non-commerical web application systems, like Zope. Or don't rewrite it at all if it works. But for God's Sake, don't rewrite it in Perl - it's pointless.
You're a liar and an idiot. The hardware is (objectively) superior. And what you monkeys don't seem to understand is that this console is _brand_ new. The games for PS2 sucked when it was released too.
Damn monkeys.
"blow it away". Seems we have a little bit of a reality/exagerration problem, here, don't we?
In real life, AMD's top end is _comparable_ in some benchmarks to the 2.0Ghz. In other benchmarks (particularly highly optimized and memory-intensive) the 2.0Ghz beats them nicely.
Please try to exist in the same world as the rest of us.
Another area of Linux with problems (albeit mostly non-kernel related) is the threading model. For Christ's sake, grow up. "We can do kernel context switches fast enough for 1:1 threading model!". Pure hubris. Linux is unusable for any serious Java development.
It's pretty interesting...
One common thread I'm seeing this this mystique of the 'religious warrior' and his supposedly supernatural power to overcome our weak invading forces. "Oh no, they've declared jihad!" Even people who don't believe in their God somehow see this as giving them some kind of edge because they're willing to die.
Frankly - fuck 'em. I'm not intimidated by anyone in some third world bass-ackwards country even if they're "defending their home and their religion". I'm not taken up in the sentimental (even if subconscious) attraction to the freedom fighter (as they see themselves) or the desparate religious zealot (as others see them).
Quite simply - our superior technology, superior productivity, and superior will will prevail. I don't care how dirty and desparate they are.
I'm sure someone mentioned this, but I don't see it. The real benefit of Java (duh) is client-server development. RMI is freaking beautiful and simple. Jini is pretty nice, too. There's no other language where client-server or peer-peer development is as easy as Java.
A secondary benefit which I did see mentioned is ease of support/development. You go ahead and write your code in C/C++ - we'll see how quickly you can turn out your product and how easily you can extend and bugfix it.
That's not flaimbait - you have to consider the fact that many people are advocating terror (don't fuck with the US or we'll bomb everyone in sight, civilians and all!) to fight terror.
A terrorist act is one committed with the purpose to change political behavior by fear of tragedy. If we bomb out of anger then we're no better.
Not that we shouldn't bomb - just make sure we know who we're bombing, and to do it for a military and defensive purpose.