...I did a fair bit of database conversion/munging work in ADS (don't ask) accessing ISAM files on a 286 running the Convergent Technology Operating System (CTOS) (again, don't ask).
Loading 5-6K records took several hours, unless it failed, which it did often and randomly, in which case I would restart in hopes of a success.
Yup, sure... I guess I just thought that a game project would be somehow different - that there'd be one person with a vision for the game and he'd sort of drive it. I guess I'm kind of stuck in the past, you know, old-school one-guy-in-a-garage game writing...
We're seeing a lot of pressure on medium-sized developers today. And it's not just the little guys. We've killed projects internally that have been three to five million dollars in. That's not a little development team.
Jeepers. Killing a game after spending $3M on developing it? How does a game get that far only to be cancelled?
> Time, as we experience it, is > a total illusion.
C.S. Lewis talks about this - he asks (paraphrasing): Why are we always surprised by the passage of time? Why do we say 'oh my goodness, little Billy has grown so fast'? It's as if a part of us is eternal, and is unable to completely come to grips with a life that's contained by a linear, finite span of time.
Another Lewis quote, this time verbatim - "The difference [God's] timelessness makes is that this now (which slips away from you even as you say the word now) is for Him infinite."
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses ( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected ( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks ( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it ( ) Users of email will not put up with it ( ) Microsoft will not put up with it ( ) The police will not put up with it ( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers (x) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once (x) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers ( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists ( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it (x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email ( ) Open relays in foreign countries ( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses ( ) Asshats ( ) Jurisdictional problems ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money ( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP ( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack ( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email ( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes ( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches ( ) Extreme profitability of spam (x) Joe jobs and/or identity theft ( ) Technically illiterate politicians ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers (x) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves ( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering ( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
( ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable (x) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation ( ) Blacklists suck (x) Whitelists suck ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud ( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks ( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually ( ) Sending email should be free ( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers? ( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses ( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome ( ) I don't want the government reading my email ( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work. ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
For example Legion sold around 35,000 copies in the US and we received about $2-$3 a unit.
Jeepers. So even selling a million units only gets you $2.5M. Seem like you'd need to turn out a million unit seller every year just to stay in business....
...for Compuware's software. For example, from the article:
"Highly skilled and experienced Java developers are quick to recognise the value of MDA..."
where "MDA" is Compuware's acronym for "buy our software and generate all your code". And since "highly skilled developers recognise the value", anyone who doesn't "recognise the value" and buy their product is an unskilled dolt.
Slashdot Mirror
Too bad they're running IIS:Ah well.
...I did a fair bit of database conversion/munging work in ADS (don't ask) accessing ISAM files on a 286 running the Convergent Technology Operating System (CTOS) (again, don't ask).
Loading 5-6K records took several hours, unless it failed, which it did often and randomly, in which case I would restart in hopes of a success.
Yup, same here:
- Apache 2.0.48
- mod_jk 2.0.2
- mod_php 4.3.4
- JDK 1.4.2_03
on SemWebCentral. Runnin' fine so far...
> Happens all the time with software projects
Yup, sure... I guess I just thought that a game project would be somehow different - that there'd be one person with a vision for the game and he'd sort of drive it. I guess I'm kind of stuck in the past, you know, old-school one-guy-in-a-garage game writing...
Jeepers. Killing a game after spending $3M on developing it? How does a game get that far only to be cancelled?
> go to the Treefort Wars website
Nice! But what happened to the GForge project site? Looks like there are bits and pieces remaining...
> Time, as we experience it, is
> a total illusion.
C.S. Lewis talks about this - he asks (paraphrasing): Why are we always surprised by the passage of time? Why do we say 'oh my goodness, little Billy has grown so fast'? It's as if a part of us is eternal, and is unable to completely come to grips with a life that's contained by a linear, finite span of time.
Another Lewis quote, this time verbatim - "The difference [God's] timelessness makes is that this now (which slips away from you even as you say the word now) is for Him infinite."
> all you have really shown is that you /. blurb.
> did not bother to dig any deeper than
> the rather misleading
Touche!
$2K per domain, eh? Whew. A bit steep.
Cool! As I said in my other post, I Googled around but couldn't find the original.
That's a good question - I'm not sure. I Googled around a bit trying to find a place where I could just link to the original, but came up dry...
This article advocates a
(x) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work.
(One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may
have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal
law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
( ) Users of email will not put up with it
( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
( ) The police will not put up with it
( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
(x) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
(x) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential
employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
(x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
( ) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
( ) Asshats
( ) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
( ) Extreme profitability of spam
(x) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
( ) Technically illiterate politicians
( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
(x) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
( ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been
shown practical
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
(x) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
(x) Whitelists suck
( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
( ) Sending email should be free
( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
...written by Tong Liu (the lead developer) in last month's LinuxWorld.
You have to be a subscriber to view the HTML, but it seems that you can download the PDF version for free...
Jeepers. So even selling a million units only gets you $2.5M. Seem like you'd need to turn out a million unit seller every year just to stay in business....
where "MDA" is Compuware's acronym for "buy our software and generate all your code". And since "highly skilled developers recognise the value", anyone who doesn't "recognise the value" and buy their product is an unskilled dolt.
> they're trying to figure out of
> GF is really a good fit for them
Cool. Maybe I'll email them with some current government usages of GForge... can't hurt.
> that old RBAC patch i submitted
Actually, Tim and Guillame were chatting about that on IRC just yesterday, I think...
There's the COUGAAR agent framework and its supporting projects - it's funded by the feds.
There's also this NOAA project site.
...this? It sounds like the same thing.
Sounds like a perfect opportunity for another GForge installation... one more for the list!
that this was modded off-topic - it's a direct quote from the article. Ah well.
...which looks like it's seen a battle or two already.
...or is it "you can't bring a cell phone to work"?
You might be able to get a waiver for the former... the latter seems like a misguided attempt at a security policy, perhaps?
...there's a good discussion of VoiceXML and various other accessibility enablers by Charles McCathieNevile in this presentation.
It talks quite a bit about RDF and the Semantic Web, too.
Yup, MacDonald has even been referred to by Jeff Gardiner as the grandfather of modern fantasy.
...in case of Slashdotting.
...DOOM .
The source is there for multiple platforms, lots of WADs are out there, lots of utilities are around... good times.