Both of these can be done in the client-side code, and in some ways are easier for a smaller system. Moving app logic out into the DB can yield some benefits, but the fact that now you have two paths of execution to consider can complicate things too much.
We use both in our systems (and have been since 5.0 was beta), and we've had mixed results. Triggers still can be very flaky. The stored procedures are handy, though, and work pretty well.
That's the point. It's not dying. It is still the basis of the majority of system-critical back-end applications. Insurance, airlines, finance - they are all still depending on these platforms.
Dying? Not even close. Not that I expect colleges to change their curriculum, that is not the point of university. If these positions are not being filled, the industry itself has to get on the stick and figure out a way to fill them. For one thing, maybe recruiting bonuses to lure grads into the field, and training programs to get them up to speed on the "how to" portions.
''Some of us started dying," said Robert Stanley, 56, director of research for Air Traffic Software Architectures Inc. in Ottawa. ''Heart attacks and the like. Thirty years of Twinkie-eating."
In reading the paper, and carefully looking at apps I support, I don't see an issue just yet. The paper does outline some very interesting hacks that are possible. Of course, many/most of these require some specific arrangement of servers and server versions to be practical. As noted in other comments, the biggest issue is for those running proxy servers that are a likely vector for the actual cache poisoning attacks.
If you're pretty sure you have no XSS vulnerabilities in your deployed applications, and you have authentication well locked down also (so the access to credentials theoretical exploit isn't a huge deal), then you're probably OK.
I think. I asked co-workers to audit things too to make sure I'm not being too complacent. I'll update the installs if a new patch for 2.0.x comes out, that's probably just prudent in any case.
Wow, I had no idea BlackBerry devices did that. I'll be sure to try "abc123" 10 times on the next one I get my hands on, and then we'll see how much the person loves that feature.
What a moronic thing to do. I thought it was realized years ago what a great DOS opportunity things like this are. Much like auto-locking accounts on bad password attempts...
Groovy is a very cool language, but it's been hampered by lack of documentation and a bit of a chaotic, "lets do whatever comes to mind" approach to the language evolution. It needs to come into maturity, settle down the feature-set, and document what is there.
I was pleased to hear at JavaOne that there may be some Groovy books coming out Real Soon Now, including an O'Reilly Book, and that might go a long way towards making it a more useful project.
Wow, points for tossing out the inflated years of experience, but he loses for junking non-CS degrees. Many (most?) good programmers I know either have no CS degree or no degree at all. I myself have a degree in an unrelated field, but I found my general experience in getting a technical degree helped me learn skills I use directly in programming work.
I suppose if you have 100+ resumes to trim down, maybe you need an approach like that, but that's a poor criteria to use IMHO. Much better to take a little more time, look at the experience listed, and not miss an otherwise good candidate. I'd value someone with an art degree and 10 years programming experience over someone with a CS degree and 2 years experience.
That being said, it might be nice to have both on my team. Sometimes the formalisms *do* come in handy.
Pedantic and paradigm have nothing to do with each other. Nothing. Not even close.
Neither word is a bad word, wrong word, or buzzword. Really. Paradigm is over-used, usually by people who have no idea what it really means or how it should be used, but oh well.
I use the word "pedantic" all the time. Usually to tell a co-worker to stop being so pedantic and correcting me if I overload a term or am slightly loose in how I refer to things (in the interest of just talking about the "big picture"). Like if I say "schema" when I mean "database" (mixing Oracle terms and MySQL terms, but we all know what I mean in context).
Of course, I'm a complete hypocrite, because I do the same thing myself:-).
Anyway, if someone correctly used the terms pedantic or paradigm, I would be more likely to hire them. It shows they have some book-learnin', and sometimes I like to see that.
Actually, I think something like Applescript for Windows would be awesome. It's a very Unix-like way to get apps to work together, it could make Windows a lot more flexible for many people's needs.
Dude, you're clueless in the extreme. He ran a Linux desktop for years and years. I've read his blog and seen his various rants numerous times. Time and time again he had annoyances with software and hardware, when all he wanted was something that works.
So now he makes a personal decision, not even one he's encouraging others to follow on, and buys a machine that - surprise surprise - just works. Why the fuck can't anyone get that?
He did his time on the Linux chain gang. He decided to try something a little less painful. I find it hilarious that this seems to offend so many people.
Well, it's that disregarding that tends to drive people away, isn't it? It is forever going to relegate Linux to hobbyist status at best when the first response to a legitimate complaint (i.e., "This audio card I bought that is bog-standard doesn't work for shit in Linux even after a few days of me trying to get it working") is to call someone a whiner.
Also, he's allowed to complain about Mozilla. Having been one of the foremost advocates for "doing the right thing" at Netscape, and seeming to have a bit of a clue on these matters, he gets some latitude from me in that area. Besides, whining and complaining are clearly his strong suits, so we shouldn't complain that Jamie plays to his strengths:-).
But, are body modifications going to get in the way if you are a really great catch with sought-out skills? Probably not.
I have several earrings and a tattoo (I know, nothing crazy - but still, it's bodyart). I have never hesitated to be open about my bodyart. Now, all the same, I also wear suits to interviews and am able to have a decent conversation in which I make sure my skillset is going to get more attention than any bodyart.
I think if you are willing to accept that you will sometimes have to overcome prejudices, it's not something to worry about. Certainly, for someone already well entrenched in the industry, I don't think it's a big deal. I do recall taking my earrings out for my first interview, but after a year on the job, I was confident enough to be more open and I haven't looked back since then.
In all fairness, this is a research project. It doesn't need to be justified or marketed, so even if there are other ways to do this, that's OK. It may be a stupid application of the technology, but researching self-organizing mobile networks is cool regardless.
No, apparently not. They did it. They made more money and had more happy people. Technology loses, sorry. It's not always this forward march towards inevitable happiness. You can back off a bit, take some time where you shut off the 'net, and be happy without being a total Luddite.
Why in the world would they *want* to try a different, more complex, less likely to work solution when just shutting the darn thing off seems to be working fine? If some people don't like it, that's OK... they can go somewhere else. It's not the end of the world. If they lose enough customers, I guess they'd change their minds. Considering that many of the wi-fi users were not generating the revenue to justify the business they were driving off I think they might have made the right decision.
Slashdot Mirror
Both of these can be done in the client-side code, and in some ways are easier for a smaller system. Moving app logic out into the DB can yield some benefits, but the fact that now you have two paths of execution to consider can complicate things too much.
We use both in our systems (and have been since 5.0 was beta), and we've had mixed results. Triggers still can be very flaky. The stored procedures are handy, though, and work pretty well.
Actually, they did pursue a strategy to write a mail/news client for Netscape Communicator in Java:
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Grendel
Right. For that, you want a full head transplant.
I'd certainly chip in to get him to shut the fuck up for once.
That's the point. It's not dying. It is still the basis of the majority of system-critical back-end applications. Insurance, airlines, finance - they are all still depending on these platforms.
Dying? Not even close. Not that I expect colleges to change their curriculum, that is not the point of university. If these positions are not being filled, the industry itself has to get on the stick and figure out a way to fill them. For one thing, maybe recruiting bonuses to lure grads into the field, and training programs to get them up to speed on the "how to" portions.
''Some of us started dying," said Robert Stanley, 56, director of research for Air Traffic Software Architectures Inc. in Ottawa. ''Heart attacks and the like. Thirty years of Twinkie-eating."
That has been tried before. Didn't work out too well.
In reading the paper, and carefully looking at apps I support, I don't see an issue just yet. The paper does outline some very interesting hacks that are possible. Of course, many/most of these require some specific arrangement of servers and server versions to be practical. As noted in other comments, the biggest issue is for those running proxy servers that are a likely vector for the actual cache poisoning attacks.
If you're pretty sure you have no XSS vulnerabilities in your deployed applications, and you have authentication well locked down also (so the access to credentials theoretical exploit isn't a huge deal), then you're probably OK.
I think. I asked co-workers to audit things too to make sure I'm not being too complacent. I'll update the installs if a new patch for 2.0.x comes out, that's probably just prudent in any case.
Wow, I had no idea BlackBerry devices did that. I'll be sure to try "abc123" 10 times on the next one I get my hands on, and then we'll see how much the person loves that feature.
What a moronic thing to do. I thought it was realized years ago what a great DOS opportunity things like this are. Much like auto-locking accounts on bad password attempts...
Groovy is a very cool language, but it's been hampered by lack of documentation and a bit of a chaotic, "lets do whatever comes to mind" approach to the language evolution. It needs to come into maturity, settle down the feature-set, and document what is there.
I was pleased to hear at JavaOne that there may be some Groovy books coming out Real Soon Now, including an O'Reilly Book, and that might go a long way towards making it a more useful project.
Wow, points for tossing out the inflated years of experience, but he loses for junking non-CS degrees. Many (most?) good programmers I know either have no CS degree or no degree at all. I myself have a degree in an unrelated field, but I found my general experience in getting a technical degree helped me learn skills I use directly in programming work.
I suppose if you have 100+ resumes to trim down, maybe you need an approach like that, but that's a poor criteria to use IMHO. Much better to take a little more time, look at the experience listed, and not miss an otherwise good candidate. I'd value someone with an art degree and 10 years programming experience over someone with a CS degree and 2 years experience.
That being said, it might be nice to have both on my team. Sometimes the formalisms *do* come in handy.
I agree totally. He's strayed into complete nutball territory, and I predict a shack in Montana in his future :-).
I'll be sure to tell the smarty-pants in question next time I see him. He should know since he's also pushing us to use the 5.0 version ASAP :-).
Um, you do know that Java was originally created to be an embedded consumer electronics language, right?
Let me be pedantic here.
:-).
Pedantic and paradigm have nothing to do with each other. Nothing. Not even close.
Neither word is a bad word, wrong word, or buzzword. Really. Paradigm is over-used, usually by people who have no idea what it really means or how it should be used, but oh well.
I use the word "pedantic" all the time. Usually to tell a co-worker to stop being so pedantic and correcting me if I overload a term or am slightly loose in how I refer to things (in the interest of just talking about the "big picture"). Like if I say "schema" when I mean "database" (mixing Oracle terms and MySQL terms, but we all know what I mean in context).
Of course, I'm a complete hypocrite, because I do the same thing myself
Anyway, if someone correctly used the terms pedantic or paradigm, I would be more likely to hire them. It shows they have some book-learnin', and sometimes I like to see that.
Actually, I think something like Applescript for Windows would be awesome. It's a very Unix-like way to get apps to work together, it could make Windows a lot more flexible for many people's needs.
Dude, you're clueless in the extreme. He ran a Linux desktop for years and years. I've read his blog and seen his various rants numerous times. Time and time again he had annoyances with software and hardware, when all he wanted was something that works.
So now he makes a personal decision, not even one he's encouraging others to follow on, and buys a machine that - surprise surprise - just works. Why the fuck can't anyone get that?
He did his time on the Linux chain gang. He decided to try something a little less painful. I find it hilarious that this seems to offend so many people.
Well, it's that disregarding that tends to drive people away, isn't it? It is forever going to relegate Linux to hobbyist status at best when the first response to a legitimate complaint (i.e., "This audio card I bought that is bog-standard doesn't work for shit in Linux even after a few days of me trying to get it working") is to call someone a whiner.
:-).
Also, he's allowed to complain about Mozilla. Having been one of the foremost advocates for "doing the right thing" at Netscape, and seeming to have a bit of a clue on these matters, he gets some latitude from me in that area. Besides, whining and complaining are clearly his strong suits, so we shouldn't complain that Jamie plays to his strengths
I disagree. Can you get away with anything? Nope.
But, are body modifications going to get in the way if you are a really great catch with sought-out skills? Probably not.
I have several earrings and a tattoo (I know, nothing crazy - but still, it's bodyart). I have never hesitated to be open about my bodyart. Now, all the same, I also wear suits to interviews and am able to have a decent conversation in which I make sure my skillset is going to get more attention than any bodyart.
I think if you are willing to accept that you will sometimes have to overcome prejudices, it's not something to worry about. Certainly, for someone already well entrenched in the industry, I don't think it's a big deal. I do recall taking my earrings out for my first interview, but after a year on the job, I was confident enough to be more open and I haven't looked back since then.
Who would want to buy something like this...
(Looks at screen shots)
OMG! Puppies! Cute!
OK, maybe I can understand the appeal of this to crazy dog people like me. Darn it, now I'm pondering getting a DS.
Well, living in Motown, I have a good hunch. But if I told you, I'd have to kill you ;-).
In all fairness, this is a research project. It doesn't need to be justified or marketed, so even if there are other ways to do this, that's OK. It may be a stupid application of the technology, but researching self-organizing mobile networks is cool regardless.
Oh god, I am so glad I'm not the only one to think that.
(ObBitching: Slashdot is dumb to make me wait 20 seconds to post this. Don't discriminate against me because I'm a fast typist, OK?)
> "When it started with Snoop and NWA back in
:-)
> the day"
I don't recall Snoop and NWA being around in the 70s.
(Not that I would mind a Snoop/Dre cover of "Rapper's Delight", anyone heard of one, maybe a live cover?)
No, apparently not. They did it. They made more money and had more happy people. Technology loses, sorry. It's not always this forward march towards inevitable happiness. You can back off a bit, take some time where you shut off the 'net, and be happy without being a total Luddite.
Why in the world would they *want* to try a different, more complex, less likely to work solution when just shutting the darn thing off seems to be working fine? If some people don't like it, that's OK... they can go somewhere else. It's not the end of the world. If they lose enough customers, I guess they'd change their minds. Considering that many of the wi-fi users were not generating the revenue to justify the business they were driving off I think they might have made the right decision.