Right, except that you're still oversimplifying. First, five 9s does not make the mistakes that three 9s makes. Second, five 9s recovers smoothly from the mistakes that three 9s makes. Third, five 9s does not let errors go by unnoticed like three 9s does. Fourth, five 9s has a much more critical sense of what constitutes an error. Fifth, when something does break, it has to be fixed. That counts.
Misquote from Dijkstra: "A baby crawling and a jet plane from JFK to LAX are both means of transportation". Probably stays up 100%. That's what? About -1 or -2 9s, methinks.
Re:More interestingly, the article states:
on
1.5 TB DVD by 2010
·
· Score: 2
Does this mean that MSN will have the brain of a butterfly?
If you must use.Net, do it on a wintel machine that can't be any further messed up by Microsoft than it already is. I'm an old fart, but it seems like every time I've heard that something can't get worse, it can and it does. Regardless of who has or has not made what promises, Java looks like a much safer proposition because both IBM and Sun are heavily involved. It's a "who watches the watcher" type of thingee and neither IBM nor Sun will be in any mood to let the other "get away" with much. (The customers of both will also have a say in the matter.) Add some Open Source to the brew and I don't think Java is stoppable in the long term.
Linux, just like every other operating system, is nothing more than a tool. And a Picasso is just a painting. I think good craftsmen and women appreciate good tools, even if they do not totally understand them.
If you look hard for something peculiar, you *will* find it. If you expect something peculiar, you will find it. Without even working too hard. It works this way for (almost) everybody, including those who are always self-assured and are always in control of the situation. It may help to realize that you *must* live with yourself. There is no other way to do it. If you like yourself, and this is easier said than done, then nothing else really matters. Oddly enough, altruism works better than trying to get all you can get. It has to do with this person you *must* live with.
No more BS with students showing up with a paper they typed at home and not being able to open it at school. That's the real payout. And everybody using the same version of the same software is *not* a viable solution. Home, Office, School. Different versions of different software. They all need to be able to read and write. The duo of StarOffice/OpenOffice will tend to ensure that "improvements" and "enhancements" do not introduce gratuitous incompatibilities.
Right. Among other things, OpenOffice forces SUN to stay honest. There are some distinct advantages to the StarOffice/OpenOffice duo. The software itself can be identical, but what the consumer is actually buying is substantially different.
StarOffice is "paid-for" software. This means that support is available because the consumer has a problem. Ultimately, the consumer asks "What am I doing wrong here?" The support is geared toward helping the consumer use the software, not toward fixing anything in the software itself. OpenOffice is "free" software. This means that support is available because the consumer has run into an "interesting" problem. Ultimately, the consumer says "There is a problem, and here is a possible fix". The support is geared toward finding and fixing any remaining problems in the software, with "Read The Fine Manual" a valid response to any problems of user misunderstanding. This makes for an interesting ecosystem. As corporate, I will happily keep spending good money on StarOffice as long as it is not *too* inferior to the free OpenOffice. In a sense, what I'm really buying is that I don't have to "Read The Fine Manual". If I have a problem, I *can* get help. What *will* change is how I use the software, not the software itself. If I'm smarter (and sneakier) than the average PHB, I'll buy StarOffice and *use* OpenOffice. Long term, they reinforce each other. That's what I'm really buying. The... taken the first steps to start using Linux and Staroffice in all schools is accurate. Like Apache, PHP, MySQL, etc., StarOffice/OpenOffice will work on Microsoft Windows, but there are too many edge cases that work with *nix and not with Microsoft Windows.
Are the comments (to the different headlines) substansively different? If the comments are different, does it really matter if the linked story happens to be the same?
If there are any non-Windows components ANYWHERE in the mix, stick w/ J2EE. Among all your customers and suppliers, whom you *will* have to communicate with, there will be some who cannot or are unwilling to run *theirs* with a consistent version of Microsoft Windows.
My take on the situation is that it is the responsibility of the judiciary to *interpret* the law, i.e. what the words in the law actuall mean. My impression is that *intent* matters in *all* criminal cases, with a very long list of precedent and common law behind it. I'm nowhere near being a lawyer, but anything that violates common law will get shorter shrift that if it just violates the constitution. The judge just saw his duty and did it.
Assuming mod_php as an apache module. Mod_php runs as apache (possibly under the name nobody) and can do anything to the server that apache can. Default installation will allow apache to read and write whatever is world readable/writeable, but that can easily be changed to whatever you need. Backquotes work very well in PHP (essentially the same as in shell scripts). While apache and php *will* run under Microsoft Windows, there are several things that work right on *nix and don't work right on Microsoft Windows. PHP and Perl are both very good general-purpose languages. Nothing will really succeed as a "be-all" language.
Locked down so that cmd.exe doesn't work. Problem is, you want it locked down and cmd.exe *does* work. You set it all up nice and perty, but some program you have to run requires administrator rights for the user, and poof goes all your security. ls -l conviently shows owner and group and permissions. DIR does not.
The penny cup at the store? You don't like messing with pennys. You take 1 or 2 pennies from the cup. You put 1 or 2 pennies from you change into the cup. Overall everybody comes out about even and it's less hassle.
You standardize the things that are not worth being different. Different TVs, but they all can view the same channels and use the same antenna connectors. Nice try, but have you every tried to use a US TV in Germany? Some cars use diesel.
Hmmmm, I think you're on to something. One of my favorites of Dijkstra's sayings. (From memory, so probably a bit mangled.) "A baby crawling and a jet liner from New York to Los Angeles are both means of transportation. The same thing at different scales winds up completely different." What seems to be missing from most documentation is the scope of the configuration, when it takes effect, how long does it last, and what does it depend on. Curiously, OpenBSD seems to be better at this than anyone else.
Well put. The calls for standardization sound too much like "Please, please, please bunch up (so you can be more effectively targeted)". You also have the problem of *whose* idea of standardization do you use. I'd be more than a bit suspicious of anyone who wants control of what other people do. Divide and conquor. There's at least two ways to view that one.
Hehe. (No, different Tony) Their "support" is set up on the assumption that everything inside is running perfectly and the problem is something with the customer's computer. (Well it *is* running Microsoft Windows;)
No, not humiliated. Just proves that OpenBSD has been right all along. OpenBSD is Uber secure. They didn't say that OpenBSD was secure. Security is *hard*. OpenBSD has nothing to be ashamed of.
I don't. We shouldn't be, but should and does are different things.
With such as "To keep your system secure, [paraphrased a bit] download the latest security patches". With the idea that a secure connection somehow secures the systems connected. IPv6, where every traffic light has its own ip address.
People are not built to always be looking at what they're exposing. Most people, that is.
electronic "security" is a bit like Zeno's paradox Good point. If you are limited to just reacting to known threats, I think Zeno's paradox very much applies. Keeping up with an unending supply of patches does not seem like a valid solution and seems like it adds new opportunities for exploitation which will not be seen by those supplying the patches. The link seems to have an implicit assumption that there is only *one* infinity. You have an infinite sequence of t/2, 3t/4, 7t/8, etc. which approaches but never reaches t. Real time has t, 2t, 3t, etc., none of which are in that sequence. There are also "long line" thingees: 0,t/2, 3t/4,..., t, t+t/2. t+3t/4,..., 2t, 2t+t/2, 2t+3t/4,... ,.... OT. Infinity is a strange beast. There are *exactly* as many primes as there are rational numbers. There are *more* irrationals that rationals. In fact, for all sets, the power set (set of all subsets) has *more* elements. Then there are real wierdos like Peano's space filling curve (continuous image of unit interval into 2-space which occupies *area*), and Cantor's perfect set (uncountable set with measure zero).
It takes time. There's the matter not just *what* to do, but *when* to do it. Most things run pretty much on inertia.
Perception has a lot to do with it. Linux on the desktop as a mere replacement for Microsoft Windows seems like a waste of valuable resources, and out of character for what Linux should grow up to be. Somewhere, somehow there is something that a Linux desktop should be good for that Microsoft *cannot* compete with. I have no idea what, but it's probably related to the fact that Unix is inherently multi-user and Microsoft seems to have trouble walking and chewing gum at the same time, even for relatively unsophisticated single users.
There is a shifting sense of (can't find the word for it) exemplified by the following joke that seems to be making the rounds.
There are four engineers traveling in a car. One is a mechanical engineer, one a chemical engineer, one an electrical engineer and the other one an engineer from Microsoft.
The car breaks down.
"Sounds to me as if the pistons have seized. We'll have to strip down the engine before we can get the car working again," says the mechanical engineer.
"Well," says the chemical engineer, "it sounded to me as if the fuel might be contaminated. I think we should clear out the fuel system."
"I thought it might be a grounding problem," says the electrical engineer, "or maybe a faulty plug lead."
They all turn to the Microsoft engineer who has said nothing and say. They ask him, "What do you think?"
"Well, I think we should close all the windows, get out, get back in, and open the windows again."
Microsoft bugs happen every day. Open Source bugs happen. The scurrying around may be somewhat disorganized, but the job gets done, rather well and rather quickly actually. Sun bugs do happen, but not that often. "Sun Security Patch Introduces Security Hole" is a pretty rare phenomenon, and even thou I don't use Sun gear, I do want to hear about it. Loud and Fast.
Slashdot Mirror
Right, except that you're still oversimplifying.
First, five 9s does not make the mistakes that three 9s makes.
Second, five 9s recovers smoothly from the mistakes that three 9s makes.
Third, five 9s does not let errors go by unnoticed like three 9s does.
Fourth, five 9s has a much more critical sense of what constitutes an error.
Fifth, when something does break, it has to be fixed. That counts.
Misquote from Dijkstra: "A baby crawling and a jet plane from JFK to LAX are both means of transportation".
Probably stays up 100%. That's what? About -1 or -2 9s, methinks.
Does this mean that MSN will have the brain of a butterfly?
That "one degree of separation" keeps growing and growing and growing and ...
If you must use .Net, do it on a wintel machine that can't be any further messed up by Microsoft than it already is.
I'm an old fart, but it seems like every time I've heard that something can't get worse, it can and it does.
Regardless of who has or has not made what promises, Java looks like a much safer proposition because both IBM and Sun are heavily involved. It's a "who watches the watcher" type of thingee and neither IBM nor Sun will be in any mood to let the other "get away" with much. (The customers of both will also have a say in the matter.) Add some Open Source to the brew and I don't think Java is stoppable in the long term.
Agreed. The key concept is freedom. Freedom to be and do and make of yourself whatever you can. Freedom from artificial limitations.
Linux, just like every other operating system, is nothing more than a tool.
And a Picasso is just a painting.
I think good craftsmen and women appreciate good tools, even if they do not totally understand them.
If you look hard for something peculiar, you *will* find it. If you expect something peculiar, you will find it. Without even working too hard.
It works this way for (almost) everybody, including those who are always self-assured and are always in control of the situation.
It may help to realize that you *must* live with yourself. There is no other way to do it. If you like yourself, and this is easier said than done, then nothing else really matters. Oddly enough, altruism works better than trying to get all you can get. It has to do with this person you *must* live with.
No more BS with students showing up with a paper they typed at home and not being able to open it at school.
That's the real payout. And everybody using the same version of the same software is *not* a viable solution. Home, Office, School. Different versions of different software. They all need to be able to read and write. The duo of StarOffice/OpenOffice will tend to ensure that "improvements" and "enhancements" do not introduce gratuitous incompatibilities.
Right. Among other things, OpenOffice forces SUN to stay honest. ... taken the first steps to start using Linux and Staroffice in all schools is accurate. Like Apache, PHP, MySQL, etc., StarOffice/OpenOffice will work on Microsoft Windows, but there are too many edge cases that work with *nix and not with Microsoft Windows.
There are some distinct advantages to the StarOffice/OpenOffice duo. The software itself can be identical, but what the consumer is actually buying is substantially different.
StarOffice is "paid-for" software. This means that support is available because the consumer has a problem. Ultimately, the consumer asks "What am I doing wrong here?" The support is geared toward helping the consumer use the software, not toward fixing anything in the software itself.
OpenOffice is "free" software. This means that support is available because the consumer has run into an "interesting" problem. Ultimately, the consumer says "There is a problem, and here is a possible fix". The support is geared toward finding and fixing any remaining problems in the software, with "Read The Fine Manual" a valid response to any problems of user misunderstanding.
This makes for an interesting ecosystem. As corporate, I will happily keep spending good money on StarOffice as long as it is not *too* inferior to the free OpenOffice. In a sense, what I'm really buying is that I don't have to "Read The Fine Manual". If I have a problem, I *can* get help. What *will* change is how I use the software, not the software itself. If I'm smarter (and sneakier) than the average PHB, I'll buy StarOffice and *use* OpenOffice. Long term, they reinforce each other. That's what I'm really buying.
The
For the duration of the copyright.
Licensed and bonded.
Are the comments (to the different headlines) substansively different?
If the comments are different, does it really matter if the linked story happens to be the same?
If there are any non-Windows components ANYWHERE in the mix, stick w/ J2EE.
Among all your customers and suppliers, whom you *will* have to communicate with, there will be some who cannot or are unwilling to run *theirs* with a consistent version of Microsoft Windows.
My take on the situation is that it is the responsibility of the judiciary to *interpret* the law, i.e. what the words in the law actuall mean. My impression is that *intent* matters in *all* criminal cases, with a very long list of precedent and common law behind it. I'm nowhere near being a lawyer, but anything that violates common law will get shorter shrift that if it just violates the constitution. The judge just saw his duty and did it.
Assuming mod_php as an apache module.
Mod_php runs as apache (possibly under the name nobody) and can do anything to the server that apache can.
Default installation will allow apache to read and write whatever is world readable/writeable, but that can easily be changed to whatever you need.
Backquotes work very well in PHP (essentially the same as in shell scripts).
While apache and php *will* run under Microsoft Windows, there are several things that work right on *nix and don't work right on Microsoft Windows.
PHP and Perl are both very good general-purpose languages. Nothing will really succeed as a "be-all" language.
Locked down so that cmd.exe doesn't work.
Problem is, you want it locked down and cmd.exe *does* work.
You set it all up nice and perty, but some program you have to run requires administrator rights for the user, and poof goes all your security.
ls -l conviently shows owner and group and permissions. DIR does not.
The penny cup at the store?
You don't like messing with pennys. You take 1 or 2 pennies from the cup. You put 1 or 2 pennies from you change into the cup. Overall everybody comes out about even and it's less hassle.
You standardize the things that are not worth being different.
Different TVs, but they all can view the same channels and use the same antenna connectors.
Nice try, but have you every tried to use a US TV in Germany?
Some cars use diesel.
Hmmmm, I think you're on to something.
One of my favorites of Dijkstra's sayings. (From memory, so probably a bit mangled.) "A baby crawling and a jet liner from New York to Los Angeles are both means of transportation. The same thing at different scales winds up completely different."
What seems to be missing from most documentation is the scope of the configuration, when it takes effect, how long does it last, and what does it depend on. Curiously, OpenBSD seems to be better at this than anyone else.
Well put.
The calls for standardization sound too much like "Please, please, please bunch up (so you can be more effectively targeted)". You also have the problem of *whose* idea of standardization do you use. I'd be more than a bit suspicious of anyone who wants control of what other people do.
Divide and conquor. There's at least two ways to view that one.
Hehe. (No, different Tony)
Their "support" is set up on the assumption that everything inside is running perfectly and the problem is something with the customer's computer. (Well it *is* running Microsoft Windows;)
No, not humiliated. Just proves that OpenBSD has been right all along.
OpenBSD is Uber secure. They didn't say that OpenBSD was secure.
Security is *hard*. OpenBSD has nothing to be ashamed of.
I have confidence that we are not that stupid.
I don't. We shouldn't be, but should and does are different things.
With such as "To keep your system secure, [paraphrased a bit] download the latest security patches". With the idea that a secure connection somehow secures the systems connected. IPv6, where every traffic light has its own ip address.
People are not built to always be looking at what they're exposing. Most people, that is.
electronic "security" is a bit like Zeno's paradox ..., t, t+t/2. t+3t/4, ..., 2t, 2t+t/2, 2t+3t/4, ... , ... .
Good point. If you are limited to just reacting to known threats, I think Zeno's paradox very much applies. Keeping up with an unending supply of patches does not seem like a valid solution and seems like it adds new opportunities for exploitation which will not be seen by those supplying the patches.
The link seems to have an implicit assumption that there is only *one* infinity. You have an infinite sequence of t/2, 3t/4, 7t/8, etc. which approaches but never reaches t. Real time has t, 2t, 3t, etc., none of which are in that sequence. There are also "long line" thingees: 0,t/2, 3t/4,
OT. Infinity is a strange beast. There are *exactly* as many primes as there are rational numbers. There are *more* irrationals that rationals. In fact, for all sets, the power set (set of all subsets) has *more* elements. Then there are real wierdos like Peano's space filling curve (continuous image of unit interval into 2-space which occupies *area*), and Cantor's perfect set (uncountable set with measure zero).
It takes time. There's the matter not just *what* to do, but *when* to do it. Most things run pretty much on inertia.
Perception has a lot to do with it. Linux on the desktop as a mere replacement for Microsoft Windows seems like a waste of valuable resources, and out of character for what Linux should grow up to be. Somewhere, somehow there is something that a Linux desktop should be good for that Microsoft *cannot* compete with. I have no idea what, but it's probably related to the fact that Unix is inherently multi-user and Microsoft seems to have trouble walking and chewing gum at the same time, even for relatively unsophisticated single users.
There is a shifting sense of (can't find the word for it) exemplified by the following joke that seems to be making the rounds.
There are four engineers traveling in a car. One is a
mechanical engineer, one a chemical engineer, one an
electrical engineer and the other one an engineer
from Microsoft.
The car breaks down.
"Sounds to me as if the pistons have seized. We'll have
to strip down the engine before we can get the car
working again," says the mechanical engineer.
"Well," says the chemical engineer, "it sounded to me as
if the fuel might be contaminated. I think we should
clear out the fuel system."
"I thought it might be a grounding problem," says the
electrical engineer, "or maybe a faulty plug lead."
They all turn to the Microsoft engineer who has said
nothing and say. They ask him, "What do you think?"
"Well, I think we should close all the windows, get
out, get back in, and open the windows again."
Bugs happen every day.
A bug is a bug is a bug.
Not.
Microsoft bugs happen every day.
Open Source bugs happen. The scurrying around may be somewhat disorganized, but the job gets done, rather well and rather quickly actually.
Sun bugs do happen, but not that often. "Sun Security Patch Introduces Security Hole" is a pretty rare phenomenon, and even thou I don't use Sun gear, I do want to hear about it. Loud and Fast.