mccalli (323026) mccalli (email not shown publicly)
Muhahahahaha!
Yep, I thought someone would pick up on that one:-). I do have a defense though - I'm still easily traceable from Slashdot. Just click the homepage details and there I am - not obfuscated in any way. Well, apart from the fact that the photo's now nearly eight years out of date.
Sorry if that was misintepreted - I wasn't calling you low-life scum, I was referring to the spammers who have made the email obfuscation practice the norm.
Surely Usenet is a better place if replies are posted back to the newsgroup, rather than just the individual.
Absolutely. However I'm talking about old messages,say five or more years. A resurrected thread started five years ago might not have the same people reading it, so direct contact is often better.
Cheers,
Ian
I've never really had a problem from spam.I've never given my email address out on usenet...It just seems to me that if people looked after their email address...they would reap the benefit of a spam-free inbox sooner rather than later
However, that makes my email address less useful, and Usenet a less useful resource.
I've never disguised my email address on Usenet or anywhere else (with the exception of some of the more pointless web site registrations). There have been plenty of times I've gone back to ancient archives digging for answers, come across someone who solved almost what I'm trying to do, and sent them an email asking if they'd mind helping me. And the converse has happened too - many people I don't know have emailed me over the years after coming across old posts, and I've helped out where possible.
I'm pretty defiant over this one. I refuse let low-life scum dictate how I can use my address. I am not going to jump through hoops at their behest - my email address is a contact point, and people should be able to use it to contact me.
The game that held my attention with a plotline most recently has been The Getaway on the PS2.
I have two kids and work to contend with, so I rarely get a chance to play games these days. I often ignore story-based games for this reason: no time to finish the story. Zelda: The Wind Waker fell victim to this, Resident Evil, Prince of Persia...lots that are considered to be good by most people's standards (though I had other reasons for dumping Resident Evil too - let me know when they've got a reasonable save system and controls that don't involve walking into every wall, would you?).
But The Getaway passed the test with flying colours. A good plot, great soundtrack, good graphics and lots of tension. Can't knock it - I thoroughly recommend this game to anyone. Very much looking forward to The Getaway 2 which has been announced.
Google's primary purpose is INFORMATION, not the aforementioned advertisement.
Absolutely not. Google is a profit-seeking company, and as a commercial entity Google's primary purpose is the advert, not the information. The information is the lure to get you to see the advert.
So while the history isn't exactly epic there is enough to show that, to date, they have resorted to this sort of action in fewer than one quarter of one percent (.25%) of cases. This strikes me as fairly significant.
And me also, but for different reasons. I've been in the financial services industry since before this company was founded, and I've never heard of a comparable case. The moral to me is to distrust Baystar as a potential investment partner.
I also am fairly sure Delorean designed it in the states.
The DeLorean was a predominately British design, by Lotus and Colin Chapman, though there were other inputs too. The idea was American - DeLorean and Bill Collins, but the details and implementation were British.
...Apple seems to have put blocks into place to refuse iChat AV from working with anything but their iSight hardware product. (I exaggerate a little bit here, but not much.)
You exaggerate massively, in fact. No USB devices work without a third-party driver, but all firewire cams work. I use iChat AV via a JVC camcorder, for example.
Isn't this the type of problem the B Method (and maybe the Z language too) are designed to address? Use proof logic initially - once you have decided on a behavior you want, design the system in such a way that it is provable it executes this design.
Ye gods, you've frightened the hell out of me with reference to Z. I'd almost entirely forgotten it, and had hoped its cold corpse would lie in the ground undisturbed, undiscovered and most importantly of all unreferenced until the end of time. Still, "That is not dead which may eternal lie"...
Z is a beautiful way to mathematically prove that you have design bugs at the highest level possible. You can then design your unit tests around those bugs, and confirm that they're valid.
That's it. It provides nothing else that unit testing on its own couldn't do, with the exception of a few salaries and a research grant here and there. Whilst you can mathematically prove implementations of certain designs, the vast majority of designs have more complex interactions. Try using Z for a multithreaded real-time environment for example - my Software Engineering tutor at the time, Iain Sommerville (well known in the field due to his books, oh and 'at the time' would ~1993), basically said that Z just breaks down in those circumstances. I wouldn't know - I personally had no clue how to even make it begin in those circumstances, let alone break down.
Please confine Z to camp-fire ghost stories used to scare new programmers. It always was a living hell, and it really shouldn't be resurrected now.
Can confirm that I've noticed testing going on for this. On my morning commute from Maidenhead station into Paddington (on the Reading route) my Powerbook has been picking up a wireless network called 'TEST' for a few months now.
Too much meaningless junk in the article. Here's Word's take on the matter:
"A really simple yet radical idea: break web pages down into sentences, and then have the browser walk through sentences and do useful sentence-level things.
Currently implemented features include sentence-level interfaces for TTS, translation, large-type display, and the funkiest of all, dynamic display of an image pulled off the web based on keywords extracted from each sentence -- hey, turn all your web pages into slide shows today! "
IT tried to introduce new more stable trading tools without success, not flexible enough-did not calculate "their" prices correctly-blahblah.
Err...I too work doing rates-related stuff for major banks. Blah blah blah??!! That's the entire point of the rates business - that's why those traders are employed, because they can tweak their prices to make a profit from the market.
Controlling tried to impose new tools on them to get a grip on their price calculation- all very difficult when the only data source is a "spreadsheet".
It did what? Really? A cost centre tried to impose inadequate tools (your own admission - not flexible enough) on to people who were actually generating cash for the bank? And they rejected it did they? Good Lord, how terribly surprising.
Sorry, but I'm utterly shocked at the cavalier attitude displayed here. I work doing a very similar job to the one described (writing tools to control rates pricing), and I tell you now that wandering in to our profit-producing users and saying that their rules are a load of 'blah blah blah' would, quite correctly, get me booted out of the City forever.
[RANT]Come on three maybe four clicks, ok so your a mac user and you can't right click to save the url, but please.. [/RANT]
Misplaced. You've directed me to NeoOfficeJ, whereas what it sounds like I'm after is NeoOffice itself - the Aquified version, not just the wrapper. On that site is a note about how to pull it from CVS, then how to get through two day build process.
Those are the binaries I was looking for, not the NeoOfficeJ ones.
Hmm. Thanks - looks very useful. The site states that it doesn't have any binaries though - anywhere you can get builds of this? Or will I have to set up CVS?
Whilst I appreciate the humour, there's a good argument in favour of MS Office straight away: there's no Mac-native version of OpenOffice.
Now I realise that it's possible to run OpenOffice on a Mac. In fact, I do run OpenOffice v1.1 on a Mac - I can't justify the price of Office X for the limited amounts of time I do that kind of document creation work. However, even though I've made that choice I have to no note that the X11 port of OOo is ugly, has poor font handling and doesn't conform to any of the Mac's environment. Even cut and paste still uses control and not command.
Nope - saying that this leaflet was created on a Mac doesn't help the OpenOffice cause, it reinforces the Microsoft one. It will be 2006 before a Mac-native OOo appears, and even then I wonder if it will conform to Mac UI guidelines or whether it will just have Cocoa components overlaying the same Windows'ish layouts, menu names and key choices.
Mind you, being created on a Mac also shoots down another of their points. There's no Access for the Mac either, though these is Filemaker Pro.
How can the punishment serve a deterent, if the fine does not hurt??
Because the fine is not the punishment. That's just the wrist-slap, although admittedly it's a harder one than normal. Because of the high value the press are focusing on this, but it's not the real action.
No, the meat of this decision is the forcing of the unbundling and the opening up of specifications. That's the punishment, not the cash.
It's eye candy, little more. Frankly, I view Expose as eye candy -- multiple viewports are a far more powerful mechanism, and one that I'm sad that Apple chose not to support.
I'd like to see support for both. I know there are third-party add-ons for OS X that provide this, but we agree that it would be nice to see Apple support mulitple views directly.
I have to disagree with the eye candy comment thought. Expose is a god-send on my Powerbook. I tended to ignore it at first in favour of ways I've always used to move around, but once I started using it seriously it's usefulness became apparent. I really miss it under Windows (my work machine). I find that I use the F10 incarnation more than F9 (show all windows of the current app, not show everything available on the desktop), but I'm still convinced by the technique.
But you're right - it shouldn't be mutually exlusive to multiple desktops.
Of course, it should be noted that by and large IT professionals earn more money then most other jobs - which I suppose is once again a warning of money != happiness
It should also be noted that not being happy in your job doesn't mean you're not happy with your life, either. For example, last year I left a terrible but very well paid job. Thought the job was appalling, but the money I was making from it allowed me to get on with my life in other areas, so overall I was having a good time.
Be wary of describing people as just "IT Professionals" or "Hairdressers". They're not 2D stereotypes, they're full-blown people with all the complexity that implies.
Slashdot Mirror
Nonsense. Precisely what do you think Apple uses for SSH?
IansPowerbook:~ ian$ ssh -v
OpenSSH_3.6.1p1+CAN-2003-0693, SSH protocols 1.5/2.0, OpenSSL 0x0090702f
Cheers,
Ian
Muhahahahaha!
Yep, I thought someone would pick up on that one :-). I do have a defense though - I'm still easily traceable from Slashdot. Just click the homepage details and there I am - not obfuscated in any way. Well, apart from the fact that the photo's now nearly eight years out of date.
Cheers,
Ian
SCO are attacking IBM. Pots of gold don't come a great deal bigger than the ones IBM have at their disposal.
Cheers,
Ian
Sorry if that was misintepreted - I wasn't calling you low-life scum, I was referring to the spammers who have made the email obfuscation practice the norm.
Surely Usenet is a better place if replies are posted back to the newsgroup, rather than just the individual.
Absolutely. However I'm talking about old messages,say five or more years. A resurrected thread started five years ago might not have the same people reading it, so direct contact is often better. Cheers,
Ian
However, that makes my email address less useful, and Usenet a less useful resource.
I've never disguised my email address on Usenet or anywhere else (with the exception of some of the more pointless web site registrations). There have been plenty of times I've gone back to ancient archives digging for answers, come across someone who solved almost what I'm trying to do, and sent them an email asking if they'd mind helping me. And the converse has happened too - many people I don't know have emailed me over the years after coming across old posts, and I've helped out where possible.
I'm pretty defiant over this one. I refuse let low-life scum dictate how I can use my address. I am not going to jump through hoops at their behest - my email address is a contact point, and people should be able to use it to contact me.
Cheers,
Ian
I have two kids and work to contend with, so I rarely get a chance to play games these days. I often ignore story-based games for this reason: no time to finish the story. Zelda: The Wind Waker fell victim to this, Resident Evil, Prince of Persia...lots that are considered to be good by most people's standards (though I had other reasons for dumping Resident Evil too - let me know when they've got a reasonable save system and controls that don't involve walking into every wall, would you?).
But The Getaway passed the test with flying colours. A good plot, great soundtrack, good graphics and lots of tension. Can't knock it - I thoroughly recommend this game to anyone. Very much looking forward to The Getaway 2 which has been announced.
Cheers,
Ian
Absolutely not. Google is a profit-seeking company, and as a commercial entity Google's primary purpose is the advert, not the information. The information is the lure to get you to see the advert.
Cheers,
Ian
If shoes came with shoe laces that never wore out and never snapped, there would be no market for aftermarket shoe laces.
The analogy is flawed.
Cheers,
Ian
Shoe laces wear out and snap. Media Players don't.
It's a bad analogy (from Microsoft - I realise it isn't you who put this analogy forward).
Cheers,
Ian
Cheers,
Ian
And me also, but for different reasons. I've been in the financial services industry since before this company was founded, and I've never heard of a comparable case. The moral to me is to distrust Baystar as a potential investment partner.
Cheers,
Ian
All the way back to 1998, a whole six years ago. Now there's history for you. Almost dynastic in its scope..
Cheers,
Ian
The DeLorean was a predominately British design, by Lotus and Colin Chapman, though there were other inputs too. The idea was American - DeLorean and Bill Collins, but the details and implementation were British.
More here.
Cheers,
Ian
You exaggerate massively, in fact. No USB devices work without a third-party driver, but all firewire cams work. I use iChat AV via a JVC camcorder, for example.
Cheers,
Ian
Ye gods, you've frightened the hell out of me with reference to Z. I'd almost entirely forgotten it, and had hoped its cold corpse would lie in the ground undisturbed, undiscovered and most importantly of all unreferenced until the end of time. Still, "That is not dead which may eternal lie"...
Z is a beautiful way to mathematically prove that you have design bugs at the highest level possible. You can then design your unit tests around those bugs, and confirm that they're valid.
That's it. It provides nothing else that unit testing on its own couldn't do, with the exception of a few salaries and a research grant here and there. Whilst you can mathematically prove implementations of certain designs, the vast majority of designs have more complex interactions. Try using Z for a multithreaded real-time environment for example - my Software Engineering tutor at the time, Iain Sommerville (well known in the field due to his books, oh and 'at the time' would ~1993), basically said that Z just breaks down in those circumstances. I wouldn't know - I personally had no clue how to even make it begin in those circumstances, let alone break down.
Please confine Z to camp-fire ghost stories used to scare new programmers. It always was a living hell, and it really shouldn't be resurrected now.
Cheers,
Ian
Cheers,
Ian
"A really simple yet radical idea: break web pages down into sentences, and then have the browser walk through sentences and do useful sentence-level things.
Currently implemented features include sentence-level interfaces for TTS, translation, large-type display, and the funkiest of all, dynamic display of an image pulled off the web based on keywords extracted from each sentence -- hey, turn all your web pages into slide shows today! "
Cheers,
Ian
Err...I too work doing rates-related stuff for major banks. Blah blah blah??!! That's the entire point of the rates business - that's why those traders are employed, because they can tweak their prices to make a profit from the market.
Controlling tried to impose new tools on them to get a grip on their price calculation- all very difficult when the only data source is a "spreadsheet".
It did what? Really? A cost centre tried to impose inadequate tools (your own admission - not flexible enough) on to people who were actually generating cash for the bank? And they rejected it did they? Good Lord, how terribly surprising.
Sorry, but I'm utterly shocked at the cavalier attitude displayed here. I work doing a very similar job to the one described (writing tools to control rates pricing), and I tell you now that wandering in to our profit-producing users and saying that their rules are a load of 'blah blah blah' would, quite correctly, get me booted out of the City forever.
Cheer,
Ian
Misplaced. You've directed me to NeoOfficeJ, whereas what it sounds like I'm after is NeoOffice itself - the Aquified version, not just the wrapper. On that site is a note about how to pull it from CVS, then how to get through two day build process.
Those are the binaries I was looking for, not the NeoOfficeJ ones.
Cheers,
Ian
Cheers,
Ian
Whilst I appreciate the humour, there's a good argument in favour of MS Office straight away: there's no Mac-native version of OpenOffice.
Now I realise that it's possible to run OpenOffice on a Mac. In fact, I do run OpenOffice v1.1 on a Mac - I can't justify the price of Office X for the limited amounts of time I do that kind of document creation work. However, even though I've made that choice I have to no note that the X11 port of OOo is ugly, has poor font handling and doesn't conform to any of the Mac's environment. Even cut and paste still uses control and not command.
Nope - saying that this leaflet was created on a Mac doesn't help the OpenOffice cause, it reinforces the Microsoft one. It will be 2006 before a Mac-native OOo appears, and even then I wonder if it will conform to Mac UI guidelines or whether it will just have Cocoa components overlaying the same Windows'ish layouts, menu names and key choices.
Mind you, being created on a Mac also shoots down another of their points. There's no Access for the Mac either, though these is Filemaker Pro.
Cheers,
Ian
Not a Python film, although you'd be forgiven for thinking it was. And yes, I'd agree it should be more recognised than it is.
Cheers,
Ian
Because the fine is not the punishment. That's just the wrist-slap, although admittedly it's a harder one than normal. Because of the high value the press are focusing on this, but it's not the real action.
No, the meat of this decision is the forcing of the unbundling and the opening up of specifications. That's the punishment, not the cash.
Cheers,
Ian
I'd like to see support for both. I know there are third-party add-ons for OS X that provide this, but we agree that it would be nice to see Apple support mulitple views directly.
I have to disagree with the eye candy comment thought. Expose is a god-send on my Powerbook. I tended to ignore it at first in favour of ways I've always used to move around, but once I started using it seriously it's usefulness became apparent. I really miss it under Windows (my work machine). I find that I use the F10 incarnation more than F9 (show all windows of the current app, not show everything available on the desktop), but I'm still convinced by the technique.
But you're right - it shouldn't be mutually exlusive to multiple desktops.
Cheers,
Ian
It should also be noted that not being happy in your job doesn't mean you're not happy with your life, either. For example, last year I left a terrible but very well paid job. Thought the job was appalling, but the money I was making from it allowed me to get on with my life in other areas, so overall I was having a good time.
Be wary of describing people as just "IT Professionals" or "Hairdressers". They're not 2D stereotypes, they're full-blown people with all the complexity that implies.
Cheers,
Ian