Arguably even if you weren't formally taught the concept of a source file in class, you should pick it up over 4 years of CS training. I wonder how many applicants would stumble.
Sadly, I graduate with people who still had trouble with the concept. 8*(
5. Ease of interface (why spend time trying to teach kids to use a command-line debugger, a command-line compiler, and vi or emacs--none of which _directly_ contributes to your ability to produce C++ code--when it's easier to spend a day showing people the "new file" and "compile" buttons)
Because the rats will leave the ship without even knowing what a source file is. I completed my undergrad at the Armpit of North Carolina Universities. The had mandatory usage of some crappy M$ DOS IDE. It took forever for the system to come up on the schools network, so I'd just use DOS edit to modify the files. The TA was astounded when I opened one of the source files in a text editor!! He was completely baffled when I showed him that you could call the compiler from the command line and save 5minutes waiting for Windows and then the IDE to come up.
IDE shouldn't be allowed until students know what they are doing with the IDE in the same way that gradeschoolers shouldn't be allowed to use calculators until they know how to add.
The article says that the contols become responsive when the subject raises the high frequency brainwaves. The way this is done is by being calm.
It is possible to learn to be calm under high pressure situations. I spent a semester at the US Air Force Academy (found out that not everyone in the Air Force flew fighter planes 24/7, and I had no chance of being one of those that did). I am still amazed at how much calmer I was under nearly all situations when I came home. I was rather high strung before that stint. The video games are the same as the upperclassmen yelling contradictory orders in our face. There is a high-stress situation that must be handled calmly (any sign of being flustered was a sure ticket of more 'treatment').
Currently, video games offer the stress, but there is nothing to force it to be handled with serenity. My youngest son is border ADD (he ain't touching Ridlin), and I think this would help him. But I'd like to get one of these devices to use myself. I'm a little to high strung (USAFA was 15yrs ago), and I think this would be better than meditation.
One poster wrote that the StrongARM is only about.60 the speed of a PentiumIII at the same clock. That number varied and would even go down to.10.
But at 1.6W and only costing around $20, how many of these could you put together to summarily spank the Pentium performance-wise and still run cooler and leave more in my pocket? Are there any workstations that already have multiple StrongARMs?
When, instead of a dozen radio stations, there are a million playlists to choose from, the listeners won't choose those on which a spot can be bought with bribes, and the record companies will no longer have the ear of the listening public.
The highlighted portion is the reason there will still be music in the industry. There are millions of songs online, but how do I find the few hundred that I like. Just like the postal service had to change when the brown trucks came into town, RIAA and there crowd need to look at what their customers want. So far, they've turned music into a factory industry to benefit from economies of scale, but the market is turning to customization of everything. Henry Ford is dead. Don't tell me that I can have any music I like as long as it's by a 19yr old with a bad haircut.
Ok, you're a troll, but I'm responding anyway, because you illustrate why this system should not only be allowed, but encouraged.
The President doesn't create the budget and then spend the money. He has a lot of influence, sometimes to the point of forcing the Congress' hand by claiming 'they shut down the government', but in the end it's always a tug of war. The fact that says that someone has to explain such a simple concept to you (forgive me if you're not from the US), signifies that you don't know enough to vote. You are obviously so confused by media hype that you can be whipped around to believe anything. Why shouldn't you be able to sell that vote to someone who is willing to put their own money on the line? You're not informed enough to weild it properly.
Democrat, Republican, Liberalist, I don't care. Everyone should be required to pass a test on civil law before they are allowed register to vote. Else, we deginerate into mob rule with debates that go along the lines of :
R: It's their fault! I'm just President.
People: Yeah! That right!
D: Nuh-uhn. It's their fault! We're just Congress.
People: Yeah! That right!
online stores only NEED 1 piece of information you order: a shipping address.
That is true, unless they're worried about actually staying in business. If the store don't profile you, the one down the street will. This store will be able to make better decisions according to what its customers want and will thereby have higher sales. Commodity store have very slim margins and must therefore rely on volume to turn a profit. A few percentage more volume means a lot. A few percentage less shelf time for product means a lot. A few percentage more sales per customer means a lot.
The reason groceries stores are doing more profiling that others is because of the need to move merchandise in higher volumes in order to maintain a profit. The store want to know you so that the can get stock for what you want, and NOTHING else.
I understand how you all feel though. I had a butler once, and dammit if he didn't insist that I tell him how I liked my eggs cooked in the morning. I fired the bastard. I just value my privacy TOO much to just give that information up to anyone.
Re:What about PocketLinux?
on
LinuxWorld
·
· Score: 2
My question is, "Will it display remote running X apps?"
That is, can I attach a wireless networking card and then display Netscrape that's running on a remote server. Remember, many of us still have the goal or reading/. on the stool. (Garbage in...)
Buying a complete notebook for this purpose is just too expensive and too bulky. An oversized IPaq with wireless networking would be the perfect fit for my problem space.
Will the developers of XMMS drop their work from threats that MS will kill Office? How about the author of X-CDRoast? Will those people working on KOffice throw there hands up in despair the day that MS releases?
Let's assume for a second that they did. It doesn't matter!! The source is available. Just as soon as those developers stepped off, another would step on. You forget one of the major incentives of open source developers. WE LIKE TO DEVELOPE!! We like to make programs that are cool and others will use. The availablility of MSOffice will do nothing to stop that. Threatning to pull MSOffice will do nothing to stop that.
StarOffice is getting componentized and GPLed. If/when MS releases an Office suite for Linux, it will have to go head to head with a solid, componentized, FREE product. When MS uprades in an attempt to extend, the open sources will be right there adding another component (or enhancing an existing one) to keep up. Meanwhile, other open-sourcers will be adding things MS never dreamed of. Thus is our nature.
In summary: The Linux community is a herd. Microsoft is used to manipulating herd mentallity. Unfortunately, for them, the Linux community is a herd of cats.
I've worked (am working) in commercial software. Code re-use, libraries of common functions, even a rudimentary code-optimiser...all are ignored.
Generally, things go like this.
Manager: The customer has requested a new feature. Mr. Designer, can you come up with a plan.
Mr.Designer: (Thinks for three minutes) Well, we could modify module A, B and D and then write module L and T.
Manager: I'll put some people right on it.
There aren't enough engineers so a college grad is hired or someone is brought in from another project where they have been working in another language for several years.
Manager: I know you're new here, but we're in a crunch. You have two days to review our 11MB CVS code base, and the weekend to get the feature implemented.
Programmer: Sounds reasonable.
11pm on Sunday night.
Programmer: None of the stuff is coded right. None of it makes any sense. I'll just write the feature from scratch and hardcode some links into modules A and B.
The feature is written like it was a seperate program and shipped. The new guy writes his own library functions. A code optimizer is never run against it to see what's duplicated or if the 30MB of resources (mostly library icons the the Manager paid a lot to license) is ever used. No-one with an overall knowledge of how the whole code base works is ever kept around.
It doesn't matter though. The next new-hire will just continue the tradition.
It takes more time (and hence money) to set up Linux than it does to set up Windows. Flame away, my brethern, if you must, but 't is a fact, that is to say, 't is fact if you want to set up Linux as a desktop OS (which it was not exactly meant to be).
Let's compare:
Windows:
1 man-day to install.
2 man-weeks to actually get everything working
1 man-hour to make a disk image
Linux:
1 man-day to install
2 man-weeks to actually get everything working
1 man-hour to make a disk image
Where is the extra time for Linux?
Note: Dell doesn't run an install from CD on each machine seperately. They create a master image and copy that to thousands of disk which each go into one of thousands of identical machines. If they didn't do it that way, Linux would win hands down, because you would do the install and then run "Dell's Install Script", while the Windows machine require fiddling with the GUI seperately.
The purpose of the OS is to control access to parts of the computer by other parts of the computer. When you sit down at the PC, you can consider yourself just another input device. Why shouldn't the OS control input? This is done through multiple logins.
Now a personal computer would be 'personal'. It would only ever have one operator. But shouldn't the OS still protect your personal computer from unauthorized access? Unless you're planning to have the thing embedded in your brain I can only see requiring a login as a benefit.
Get rid of the CLI? The most productive interface available once the learning curve has been overcome? Why?
I'm glad that you have a perfect power supply where you live so that a journalling file system has no advantage, but the unfortunate fact is that the rest of us live in the real world. The journalling FS is there to protect data. I can see how it would be unnecessary to protect your saved-games, but some of us use our destops for real work.
The GUI is an incredibly heavy piece of software that is near impossible to prove correct with todays techonology. Wrapping it into the OS is stupid. What you propose is to take the most important part of the computer and wrap it with instability. Just because I'm the only person using the computer doesn't mean that I don't have jobs running in the background.
So if we design a new OS, we want have problems with licensing problems or feature bloat? Some people decided to re-write Netscape, a mere application. What do people complain about?...licenscing problems and feature bloat (whether they actually exist or not).
After replying to your post, I get the feeling that you are a troll. "Heh everybody, dump Linux and use something that looks exactly like Windows instead!" Do a little research to find out the advantages of the 'UNIX way' before posting that we should dump it.
Don't you just love the way he sidestepped trashing MicroSoft. Not that I blame him. He wants to sell computers, not fight a holy OS war. But couldn't you just tell by his tone that what he really wanted to say would go something like:
Q. And what about MicroSoft? How will Linux affect them?
A. I hope that piece of crap OS get's plowed under like last years chaff so that we don't have to support Gate's business model anymore. I'm so sick of supporting his closed source flotsam I could puke. Linux will let us cut our support staff in half, and with the source code we'll be able to push the envelope of what the PC can do. In a few years, you will see us shipping Dell computer that truly inovative and not just Wintel tag-alongs.
Why the hell does linux NEED commercial acceptance?
Because the drivers to my new HP930C suck. If I want to print a photo quality picture, I have to boot to Windows and waste about three sheets of expensive photo paper before it prints without Windows crashing. If Linux had commercial acceptance, HP would write and distribute drivers better than those in Windows. I've never wrote a device driver, but knowing what I do of programming in Windows, it has got to be easier to write one for Linux.
Because I want to pick up the cheapest scanner I can find (who wants to pay a lot of money for a seldom used peripheral), and have it work out of the box. The $50 flatbed at Circuit City doesn't have Linux support and (again) I have no experience writing device drivers.
I want to sign up for any ISP and have it work from the get-go. Reading 50 pages of doc is cool and all that, but sometimes I just want it to work so that I can concentrate on other things. I still want to be able to tinker under the covers later when my wife's not wanting to check her email -- right now. "But, Honey, I've got to read the PPP and IP-Chains HOWTO before we get online, and then I have to hack a sendmail filter before you can read your email," just doesn't cut it with her. (You married guys know how it is.)
And there are a thousand other examples of neat things that you can do easily with your computer if you are running Windows, and willing to give up security, configurability, robustness, stability...
Where are the childrens games for Linux? Where are the DTP apps for Linux? With some commercial acceptance, these apps will appear. Lots of things that tend to be used by non-technical people appear. I still want to program and hack, but I'd also like to play with some of the newer dodads that all seem to say, "Requirements: Windows 95"
When other companies see AOL using Linux and not paying the Redmond tax, they'll take a look at their own accounting spreadsheets and see what they're paying. After they clean their pants, they'll figure out a way of ditching the Redmond tax themselves. Hopefully, before long, enough companies will have switched that the OS power will be back in the hands of the market (ie, the people).
what you are using, unless they are snooping your traffic? If all they are doing is pushing packets then how do they know what those packets contain? Could this clause be safely ignored? If they threaten to cut service because you're running NAT or VPN, then you can sue them for 'breaking and entering' your property. (Remember, the lawyers are claiming that information is property.)
What happens if the USPS starts deciding that they want to open and read all the mail?
What if someone in Spain was using a loud speaker to auction off Nazi paraphenalia near the French border in such a way that the French people could hear? What would the judge do? He should do the same thing in this case.
What if someone from Amsterdam floated a hot-air balloon advertising certain adult services such that the picturesque advert could be seen from other countries where such pubi^Hlic displays were other-than-legal? What would the judge do then? He should do the same thing in this case.
If your country has laws that makes it illegal to see information then contact your leaders and inform them that they need to round up every person with access to the internet and throw them in jail. If there is also public access to the internet, then inform the leader that they need to round up everyone in the whole damn country, including themselves, and lock up the whole bunch. Stupid problems require stupid solutions afterall.
BTW, I do draw a distinction between having access to information and acting on it.
"Coremetrics is merely an agent that collects this data on behalf of an individual customer, for that individual's sole use only. We do not collect data, as was inferred very incorrectly by Interhack, across multiple unrelated websites, with any intention of selling it to third parties -- or even distribution to third parties. That's because we, as the agent, do not own that data, nor do we have any rights to that data. Toys 'R' Us, and Toys 'R' Us only, is the sole owner of that data. So legally, we cannot do any of the possibilities that Interhack had alluded to in their report."
I'd have to agree that Corematics doesn't have a right to that data, but do the companies they're collecting it for have a right to it?
What rights do I have to it? It it is being sold, that means it has value. Where's might cut of the proceeds? If you and I own a peice of property, and you sell it without my knowledge or consent, and I find out about it, can't I sue for my share?
The corps can't have it both ways can they? If it is intellectual 'property', then aren't I half owner?
So we've hired the foxes to watch over us chickens, but who's going to look over the foxes?
Every group consisting of more than a few people has both good and bad, all mixed together. What's worse, some people's ideas of good are what others consider bad. Who gets to decide?
In the US, the people get to decide through elected officials, the legislative branch of government...UNLESS the executive branch (the ones who are supposed to be doing the bidding of the legislative branch) decides that they'll do all their work undercover. In this case, the executive branch can do anything they damn well please, because there will be no one to stop them.
History has proven again and again that police organizations tend to look out for their own before the general populace, even if that means allowing thier own to commit horrendous crimes. Without full disclosure there will be no one to watch the foxes.
Also, remember that MS has spent a lot of money to figure out what people want. If there is a right solution, maybe it's just possible that MS has gotten close to it. They should have gotten close with the amount they've stolen from everyone else!! Copying an interface isn't necessarily bad, if it is what people know and like.
Now, when projects start copying the M$ "Damn-the-stability-we-need-features" attitude is when I'll have problems.
Yeah, but consider the bulk of a keyboard compared to the bulk of a stylus. If I have a pad to cary around and use throughout the house/office, it would be nice not to always have to lug the keyboard around. If I get to the point where I'm going to be doing heavy text entry, then I'd probably be sitting down at a desk anyway. So I leave my keyboard at the desk and only plug it in when I have to. The best of all worlds (well, not really, but options are nice).
Do you really think that telling M$ that their scripting capablility has the potential to cripple the Internet would slow them from releasing it? Would they even pause to consider the implications? Obviously, they didn't. With all the well publicized history that went before, they went right ahead and release software that would easily allow geometric progression of data transmission.
It wasn't until someone actually wrote some code that the Great Beast was forced to roll-over and grumble. Corporate entities do not respond to warnings. Corporate entities only respond to crisis. There is no crisis until someone codes the bitch.
Besides, even most sysadmins don't respond to "there is a possible exploit..." like they respond to "this program will copy all the passwords on your system to..."
All these marketers want to get peoples attention. Why don't they pay homeless people to urinate from the top of tall buildings onto the crowds below then hold up billboards. That'll get people to really look and get your name out there. It won't make people much madder either.
I guess it must depend on the ratio of good packets to spoofed ones. If you only have to spend a few cycles to throw out a useless packet, that is a packet that isn't sucking bandwidth. The complication is, you don't just check that packet, you have to check them all. So, 1)at what point does the slow-down from checking packet headers meet the slow-down from transmitting spoofed packets? 2)Is there any way to do an imperical study to track some statistics?
Slashdot Mirror
Arguably even if you weren't formally taught the concept of a source file in class, you should pick it up over 4 years of CS training. I wonder how many applicants would stumble.
Sadly, I graduate with people who still had trouble with the concept. 8*(
5. Ease of interface (why spend time trying to teach kids to use a command-line debugger, a command-line compiler, and vi or emacs--none of which _directly_ contributes to your ability to produce C++ code--when it's easier to spend a day showing people the "new file" and "compile" buttons)
Because the rats will leave the ship without even knowing what a source file is. I completed my undergrad at the Armpit of North Carolina Universities. The had mandatory usage of some crappy M$ DOS IDE. It took forever for the system to come up on the schools network, so I'd just use DOS edit to modify the files. The TA was astounded when I opened one of the source files in a text editor!! He was completely baffled when I showed him that you could call the compiler from the command line and save 5minutes waiting for Windows and then the IDE to come up.
IDE shouldn't be allowed until students know what they are doing with the IDE in the same way that gradeschoolers shouldn't be allowed to use calculators until they know how to add.
The article says that the contols become responsive when the subject raises the high frequency brainwaves. The way this is done is by being calm.
It is possible to learn to be calm under high pressure situations. I spent a semester at the US Air Force Academy (found out that not everyone in the Air Force flew fighter planes 24/7, and I had no chance of being one of those that did). I am still amazed at how much calmer I was under nearly all situations when I came home. I was rather high strung before that stint. The video games are the same as the upperclassmen yelling contradictory orders in our face. There is a high-stress situation that must be handled calmly (any sign of being flustered was a sure ticket of more 'treatment').
Currently, video games offer the stress, but there is nothing to force it to be handled with serenity. My youngest son is border ADD (he ain't touching Ridlin), and I think this would help him. But I'd like to get one of these devices to use myself. I'm a little to high strung (USAFA was 15yrs ago), and I think this would be better than meditation.
One poster wrote that the StrongARM is only about .60 the speed of a PentiumIII at the same clock. That number varied and would even go down to .10.
But at 1.6W and only costing around $20, how many of these could you put together to summarily spank the Pentium performance-wise and still run cooler and leave more in my pocket? Are there any workstations that already have multiple StrongARMs?
a few thousand years from now. It's called an SEP (Somebody Else's Problem). Every BistroMatic has one.
When, instead of a dozen radio stations, there are a million playlists to choose from, the listeners won't choose those on which a spot can be bought with bribes, and the record companies will no longer have the ear of the listening public.
The highlighted portion is the reason there will still be music in the industry. There are millions of songs online, but how do I find the few hundred that I like. Just like the postal service had to change when the brown trucks came into town, RIAA and there crowd need to look at what their customers want. So far, they've turned music into a factory industry to benefit from economies of scale, but the market is turning to customization of everything. Henry Ford is dead. Don't tell me that I can have any music I like as long as it's by a 19yr old with a bad haircut.
This is the same argument that my wife uses. She's an aerobics instructor. She'll often argue with me that 'everyone' works out everyday.
I'll respond to you the way I respond to her. The people you know are an extremely small subset of the worlds population.
Ok, you're a troll, but I'm responding anyway, because you illustrate why this system should not only be allowed, but encouraged.
The President doesn't create the budget and then spend the money. He has a lot of influence, sometimes to the point of forcing the Congress' hand by claiming 'they shut down the government', but in the end it's always a tug of war. The fact that says that someone has to explain such a simple concept to you (forgive me if you're not from the US), signifies that you don't know enough to vote. You are obviously so confused by media hype that you can be whipped around to believe anything. Why shouldn't you be able to sell that vote to someone who is willing to put their own money on the line? You're not informed enough to weild it properly.
Democrat, Republican, Liberalist, I don't care. Everyone should be required to pass a test on civil law before they are allowed register to vote. Else, we deginerate into mob rule with debates that go along the lines of :
R: It's their fault! I'm just President.
People: Yeah! That right!
D: Nuh-uhn. It's their fault! We're just Congress.
People: Yeah! That right!
online stores only NEED 1 piece of information you order: a shipping address.
That is true, unless they're worried about actually staying in business. If the store don't profile you, the one down the street will. This store will be able to make better decisions according to what its customers want and will thereby have higher sales. Commodity store have very slim margins and must therefore rely on volume to turn a profit. A few percentage more volume means a lot. A few percentage less shelf time for product means a lot. A few percentage more sales per customer means a lot.
The reason groceries stores are doing more profiling that others is because of the need to move merchandise in higher volumes in order to maintain a profit. The store want to know you so that the can get stock for what you want, and NOTHING else.
I understand how you all feel though. I had a butler once, and dammit if he didn't insist that I tell him how I liked my eggs cooked in the morning. I fired the bastard. I just value my privacy TOO much to just give that information up to anyone.
My question is, "Will it display remote running X apps?"
/. on the stool. (Garbage in...)
That is, can I attach a wireless networking card and then display Netscrape that's running on a remote server. Remember, many of us still have the goal or reading
Buying a complete notebook for this purpose is just too expensive and too bulky. An oversized IPaq with wireless networking would be the perfect fit for my problem space.
There's a major flaw in this argument.
Will the developers of XMMS drop their work from threats that MS will kill Office? How about the author of X-CDRoast? Will those people working on KOffice throw there hands up in despair the day that MS releases?
Let's assume for a second that they did. It doesn't matter!! The source is available. Just as soon as those developers stepped off, another would step on. You forget one of the major incentives of open source developers. WE LIKE TO DEVELOPE!! We like to make programs that are cool and others will use. The availablility of MSOffice will do nothing to stop that. Threatning to pull MSOffice will do nothing to stop that.
StarOffice is getting componentized and GPLed. If/when MS releases an Office suite for Linux, it will have to go head to head with a solid, componentized, FREE product. When MS uprades in an attempt to extend, the open sources will be right there adding another component (or enhancing an existing one) to keep up. Meanwhile, other open-sourcers will be adding things MS never dreamed of. Thus is our nature.
In summary: The Linux community is a herd. Microsoft is used to manipulating herd mentallity. Unfortunately, for them, the Linux community is a herd of cats.
I've worked (am working) in commercial software. Code re-use, libraries of common functions, even a rudimentary code-optimiser...all are ignored.
Generally, things go like this.
Manager: The customer has requested a new feature. Mr. Designer, can you come up with a plan.
Mr.Designer: (Thinks for three minutes) Well, we could modify module A, B and D and then write module L and T.
Manager: I'll put some people right on it.
There aren't enough engineers so a college grad is hired or someone is brought in from another project where they have been working in another language for several years.
Manager: I know you're new here, but we're in a crunch. You have two days to review our 11MB CVS code base, and the weekend to get the feature implemented.
Programmer: Sounds reasonable.
11pm on Sunday night.
Programmer: None of the stuff is coded right. None of it makes any sense. I'll just write the feature from scratch and hardcode some links into modules A and B.
The feature is written like it was a seperate program and shipped. The new guy writes his own library functions. A code optimizer is never run against it to see what's duplicated or if the 30MB of resources (mostly library icons the the Manager paid a lot to license) is ever used. No-one with an overall knowledge of how the whole code base works is ever kept around.
It doesn't matter though. The next new-hire will just continue the tradition.
It takes more time (and hence money) to set up Linux than it does to set up Windows. Flame away, my brethern, if you must, but 't is a fact, that is to say, 't is fact if you want to set up Linux as a desktop OS (which it was not exactly meant to be).
Let's compare:
Windows:
1 man-day to install.
2 man-weeks to actually get everything working
1 man-hour to make a disk image
Linux:
1 man-day to install
2 man-weeks to actually get everything working
1 man-hour to make a disk image
Where is the extra time for Linux?
Note: Dell doesn't run an install from CD on each machine seperately. They create a master image and copy that to thousands of disk which each go into one of thousands of identical machines. If they didn't do it that way, Linux would win hands down, because you would do the install and then run "Dell's Install Script", while the Windows machine require fiddling with the GUI seperately.
Do you want a desktop or a personal OS?
The purpose of the OS is to control access to parts of the computer by other parts of the computer. When you sit down at the PC, you can consider yourself just another input device. Why shouldn't the OS control input? This is done through multiple logins.
Now a personal computer would be 'personal'. It would only ever have one operator. But shouldn't the OS still protect your personal computer from unauthorized access? Unless you're planning to have the thing embedded in your brain I can only see requiring a login as a benefit.
Get rid of the CLI? The most productive interface available once the learning curve has been overcome? Why?
I'm glad that you have a perfect power supply where you live so that a journalling file system has no advantage, but the unfortunate fact is that the rest of us live in the real world. The journalling FS is there to protect data. I can see how it would be unnecessary to protect your saved-games, but some of us use our destops for real work.
The GUI is an incredibly heavy piece of software that is near impossible to prove correct with todays techonology. Wrapping it into the OS is stupid. What you propose is to take the most important part of the computer and wrap it with instability. Just because I'm the only person using the computer doesn't mean that I don't have jobs running in the background.
So if we design a new OS, we want have problems with licensing problems or feature bloat? Some people decided to re-write Netscape, a mere application. What do people complain about?...licenscing problems and feature bloat (whether they actually exist or not).
After replying to your post, I get the feeling that you are a troll. "Heh everybody, dump Linux and use something that looks exactly like Windows instead!" Do a little research to find out the advantages of the 'UNIX way' before posting that we should dump it.
Don't you just love the way he sidestepped trashing MicroSoft. Not that I blame him. He wants to sell computers, not fight a holy OS war. But couldn't you just tell by his tone that what he really wanted to say would go something like:
Q. And what about MicroSoft? How will Linux affect them?
A. I hope that piece of crap OS get's plowed under like last years chaff so that we don't have to support Gate's business model anymore. I'm so sick of supporting his closed source flotsam I could puke. Linux will let us cut our support staff in half, and with the source code we'll be able to push the envelope of what the PC can do. In a few years, you will see us shipping Dell computer that truly inovative and not just Wintel tag-alongs.
Why the hell does linux NEED commercial acceptance?
Because the drivers to my new HP930C suck. If I want to print a photo quality picture, I have to boot to Windows and waste about three sheets of expensive photo paper before it prints without Windows crashing. If Linux had commercial acceptance, HP would write and distribute drivers better than those in Windows. I've never wrote a device driver, but knowing what I do of programming in Windows, it has got to be easier to write one for Linux.
Because I want to pick up the cheapest scanner I can find (who wants to pay a lot of money for a seldom used peripheral), and have it work out of the box. The $50 flatbed at Circuit City doesn't have Linux support and (again) I have no experience writing device drivers.
I want to sign up for any ISP and have it work from the get-go. Reading 50 pages of doc is cool and all that, but sometimes I just want it to work so that I can concentrate on other things. I still want to be able to tinker under the covers later when my wife's not wanting to check her email -- right now. "But, Honey, I've got to read the PPP and IP-Chains HOWTO before we get online, and then I have to hack a sendmail filter before you can read your email," just doesn't cut it with her. (You married guys know how it is.)
And there are a thousand other examples of neat things that you can do easily with your computer if you are running Windows, and willing to give up security, configurability, robustness, stability...
Where are the childrens games for Linux? Where are the DTP apps for Linux? With some commercial acceptance, these apps will appear. Lots of things that tend to be used by non-technical people appear. I still want to program and hack, but I'd also like to play with some of the newer dodads that all seem to say, "Requirements: Windows 95"
When other companies see AOL using Linux and not paying the Redmond tax, they'll take a look at their own accounting spreadsheets and see what they're paying. After they clean their pants, they'll figure out a way of ditching the Redmond tax themselves. Hopefully, before long, enough companies will have switched that the OS power will be back in the hands of the market (ie, the people).
what you are using, unless they are snooping your traffic? If all they are doing is pushing packets then how do they know what those packets contain? Could this clause be safely ignored? If they threaten to cut service because you're running NAT or VPN, then you can sue them for 'breaking and entering' your property. (Remember, the lawyers are claiming that information is property.)
What happens if the USPS starts deciding that they want to open and read all the mail?
there were no hypothetical questions?
No no no. That's someon's sig.
What if someone in Spain was using a loud speaker to auction off Nazi paraphenalia near the French border in such a way that the French people could hear? What would the judge do? He should do the same thing in this case.
What if someone from Amsterdam floated a hot-air balloon advertising certain adult services such that the picturesque advert could be seen from other countries where such pubi^Hlic displays were other-than-legal? What would the judge do then? He should do the same thing in this case.
If your country has laws that makes it illegal to see information then contact your leaders and inform them that they need to round up every person with access to the internet and throw them in jail. If there is also public access to the internet, then inform the leader that they need to round up everyone in the whole damn country, including themselves, and lock up the whole bunch. Stupid problems require stupid solutions afterall.
BTW, I do draw a distinction between having access to information and acting on it.
"Coremetrics is merely an agent that collects this data on behalf of an individual customer, for that individual's sole use only. We do not collect data, as was inferred very incorrectly by Interhack, across multiple unrelated websites, with any intention of selling it to third parties -- or even distribution to third parties. That's because we, as the agent, do not own that data, nor do we have any rights to that data. Toys 'R' Us, and Toys 'R' Us only, is the sole owner of that data. So legally, we cannot do any of the possibilities that Interhack had alluded to in their report."
I'd have to agree that Corematics doesn't have a right to that data, but do the companies they're collecting it for have a right to it?
What rights do I have to it? It it is being sold, that means it has value. Where's might cut of the proceeds? If you and I own a peice of property, and you sell it without my knowledge or consent, and I find out about it, can't I sue for my share?
The corps can't have it both ways can they? If it is intellectual 'property', then aren't I half owner?
So we've hired the foxes to watch over us chickens, but who's going to look over the foxes?
Every group consisting of more than a few people has both good and bad, all mixed together. What's worse, some people's ideas of good are what others consider bad. Who gets to decide?
In the US, the people get to decide through elected officials, the legislative branch of government...UNLESS the executive branch (the ones who are supposed to be doing the bidding of the legislative branch) decides that they'll do all their work undercover. In this case, the executive branch can do anything they damn well please, because there will be no one to stop them.
History has proven again and again that police organizations tend to look out for their own before the general populace, even if that means allowing thier own to commit horrendous crimes. Without full disclosure there will be no one to watch the foxes.
Also, remember that MS has spent a lot of money to figure out what people want. If there is a right solution, maybe it's just possible that MS has gotten close to it. They should have gotten close with the amount they've stolen from everyone else!! Copying an interface isn't necessarily bad, if it is what people know and like.
Now, when projects start copying the M$ "Damn-the-stability-we-need-features" attitude is when I'll have problems.
Yeah, but consider the bulk of a keyboard compared to the bulk of a stylus. If I have a pad to cary around and use throughout the house/office, it would be nice not to always have to lug the keyboard around. If I get to the point where I'm going to be doing heavy text entry, then I'd probably be sitting down at a desk anyway. So I leave my keyboard at the desk and only plug it in when I have to. The best of all worlds (well, not really, but options are nice).
Just dont code the bitch.
..."
Do you really think that telling M$ that their scripting capablility has the potential to cripple the Internet would slow them from releasing it? Would they even pause to consider the implications? Obviously, they didn't. With all the well publicized history that went before, they went right ahead and release software that would easily allow geometric progression of data transmission.
It wasn't until someone actually wrote some code that the Great Beast was forced to roll-over and grumble. Corporate entities do not respond to warnings. Corporate entities only respond to crisis. There is no crisis until someone codes the bitch.
Besides, even most sysadmins don't respond to "there is a possible exploit..." like they respond to "this program will copy all the passwords on your system to
All these marketers want to get peoples attention. Why don't they pay homeless people to urinate from the top of tall buildings onto the crowds below then hold up billboards. That'll get people to really look and get your name out there. It won't make people much madder either.
I guess it must depend on the ratio of good packets to spoofed ones. If you only have to spend a few cycles to throw out a useless packet, that is a packet that isn't sucking bandwidth. The complication is, you don't just check that packet, you have to check them all. So,
1)at what point does the slow-down from checking packet headers meet the slow-down from transmitting spoofed packets?
2)Is there any way to do an imperical study to track some statistics?