No, they wouldn't. The English rules for pronunciation indicates that the 'i' in 'Linux' should be long because the 'u' comes after only one consonant. In the case of 'Lindows', the 'i' is separated from the next vowel, 'o', by two consonants, making it short rather than long.
I saw the film last night (Wednesday) and although I think it is easily the best film of the millenium, your 6 and 9 year olds would probably have nightmares. The 11 year old, maybe; I wouldn't bring my 9 or 12 year olds to see this movie. I reckon to show it to them once they've read the books -- think about it, would you really want to show your kids the battle of Helm's Deep, or the attack on Weathertop? Nazgul are scary and Sauron is Just Plain Evil.
I dunno how much you have to sell it for. But before everybody gets all het up about individual fab closures (too late) it'd be a good idea to keep in mind that it's the direction the whole industry is taking.
Interestingly, in the calculus class I'm taking (final's tomorrow) we're using graphing calculators to help visualize what we're doing. The instructor uses a TI 89, and most of the other students do as well, but I had fond memories of my HP-11C so I went out and bought an HP 49G. So now I've just spent several months observing some differences between the TI and the HP. And guess what? The TI does almost everything the HP does (no RPN that I've seen on the TI, and I must admit that that's one of my favorite things) and the TI has a nicer interface. Frankly, it's a Pain In The Ass to use the HP -- what takes maybe three keystrokes on the TI can take six or more on the HP. Feh. I love my HP geek toy, but I can see why people prefer the TI.
...and you might be interested to know a couple of things about 1984:
The title comes from the year in which it was written, 1948, and was meant as an indictment of Orwell's contemporary society and not as a dystopian prediction.
The whole darned story is a retelling of Yevgeny Zamyatin's We, which was written in Russia in 1921.
You'd still have to clean up all the symlinks, so you're not really buying yourself anything.
It's true that having all the files associated with a given package in a single location makes it easy to see what-all you've got and which files belong to which package, but you'll still require something that will clean up all the symlinks that point off to nowhere.
The last time I looked, LINT had comments to the effect that it would be surprising if it compiled, as some of the options are mutually exclusive. It's been a while, though. Mostly I just keep an eye on UPDATING.
The old RPG Traveller (by Marc Miller) captured this by pointing out (in the rules for generating worlds) the relationship between high population and oppressive government and between oppressive government and high levels of law and law enforcement.
It was only a game. But strangely reality seems to be following pretty much the pattern they mapped out....
Not at all. From where do you think those ideas sprung? Full-grown from his forehead, like some latter-day Minerva? He looked around at the world and filtered his perceptions through his philosophy, and then wrote the game. The game may be "old" in gaming terms, but it's still relatively recent so far as human political evolution is concerned.
Back in 1991 or so, when they were having the groundbreaking ceremony for the new San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA), Survival Research Labs (SRL) performed a piece. One of the devices they used was a railgun which shot rebar. I remember going to the event and then later going to a Q & A session with Mark Pauline. His comment on the railgun was something like, "...we built this railgun that fired rebar, but solid rebar is pretty boring. So we fixed it up with induction coils to melt the iron, so now we've got a railgun that fires liquid iron." It was aimed against a high concrete wall, and the molten iron made pretty showers of orange sparks that caught some of the other stuff on fire (as one might expect at an SRL show). It was awesome.
It's a problem because I trust my own government only slightly more than I trust Phred Terrorist. Or, looking at it another way, I trust my own government less so -- with the terrorist, I know he's trying to kill me.
Basically, I don't trust my own government to do the right thing. Especially because as time passes the responsiveness of the U.S. government to Big Money increases, and the rights of the private citizen decrease. I most certainly don't trust Enron, Phillip Morris, CBS, and AOL to be interested in my well-being. Insofar as Corporate America cares about the individual citizen at all, it's as a revenue source.
There are also those among the quite wealthy and therefore influential who do not think that equal protection before the law should hold. At the very least, the rich should be more equal than others, they believe.
This proposed identification and tracking system does not actually solve any problems we currently face. What it does do is open the door to the abrogation of our every Constitutional right.
I am normally opposed to Libertarians (and libertarians), as I have problems with their philosophy. However, on this issue I believe all Americans can stand united. This is a frightening idea.
Look out, guys, they're performing a paradigm shift!
While I think that designing system components with feedback capabilities is a neat idea, remember that doing this in a safe way requires actual computer science. Or at least extensive modeling. It's cool, sure, but it's going to be a while.
I'm constantly puzzled by the enthusiasm and support shown for mysql and simultaneous aversion to postgresql because both attitudes are clearly not based on technical merit.
I think you've hit the nail on the head, right there. Preferring one product over another on technical merit would involve:
engaging one's critical facility
actually having a deep technical understanding of the job and products
I dunno what sector you work in, but for the past 7 years the web's been built by people who have an often incomplete grasp of both of these. Thus, products which are not the ideal choice get used in spite of flaws, and more appropriate products languish in obscurity. Remember this lesson: while the engineering department is crucial (one must have an actual product), the marketing department is no less so. It doesn't matter how wonderful your technology is if nobody knows about it, or if the people who do know can't figure out how to use it.
What's funny is first, he overuses the $ sign like mad, and perl is so well known to be unreadable.
I bet you're just bitter because you don't understand it.
Wow, touchy much, kilgore? In point of fact, when I read Larry's comment about functional languages overusing parentheses and OO languages overusing . I immediately thought, "Nu? So in Perl 6 we won't have to use $ in front of EVERY SINGLE VARIABLE?"
And as to perl's infamous illegibility, it's true that the code's readability has a lot to do with the author and only a bit to do with the language. But I'll tell you right now that most of the perl fanatics I've met and all of the perl coders with whom I've worked came to the language from little or no programming experience. This means that nearly all the code I (and they) encountered was written by someone who had, at the time of authorship, only the vaguest of notions about legibility.
Remember, dude, just because you like a particular thing doesn't mean it doesn't have flaws.
You wanna use POST instead of GET anyway. When you encode the form submission into the URL, you quickly run into the limits of the various browswers. Some will try to be helpful and rewrite things in the address, URL-encoding characters that shouldn't be encoded (IE, for instance). Others will allow you more space in the address than you're really supposed to have (255 characters) but then chop off your data at some later point. And finally, when Joe Random User tries to use your web app and sees all that crap in the address, he's gonna be Confused.
I think it's much cleaner just to write up a library routine that grabs the GET and POST buffers and parses them into some kind of hash table, and include that library in all my web apps. It keeps the URL clean, and it avoids all the weird browser issues with encoding and length. I can use either POST or GET that way, making it easy to keep things tidy.
Well, actually, this won't provide you with any new programs. What this is really about is giving everybody FreeBSD's version of apt-get-source (from what I understand of Debian).
My guess is that this tarball differs from the ports tree that's available via cvsup (cvsupXX.freebsd.org, where XX is some number on the interval [1,10]) in that the cvsupped ports contain patches that are FreeBSD specific, while this tarball will have settings more appropriate for Linux, such as/tmp rather than/var/tmp,/usr/bin instead of/usr/local/bin,/etc/rc.d instead of/usr/local/etc/rc.d, et cetera.
Okay, I've modified my system for trapping Code Red attacks to log Nimda attacks as well. So, do y'all reckon SecurityFocus wants to know about it as well?
I guess I'm just confused...what have you wanted to do with, say, MS Dev Studio or KDevelop, that these tools wouldn't let you do? Or maybe I'm missing the point. I like having an IDE manage the makefile. I would much rather not have to edit the damned thing with vi. And really, when it comes to designing a window or a dialog, having a graphical tool to do that layout is really nice. And being able to click a tab in the IDE to switch back to the.cpp file that implements the handlers associated with that window, well I like that, too.
But maybe the question isn't about IDEs, but about purely graphical development environments. If that's so, then the editor's comment is out of line -- because KDevelop and Codewarrior both involve typing; a great deal of typing. The only completely graphical development environment I've seen is a weird language for the Mac, called prograph, and even that is more like flowcharting than drawing.
He brings up some very good points -- and the sort of backhand at Slashdot isn't anything that hasn't been said and nodded at by everyone here, and yeah, I'm sure we'll all get over it. Where he runs into a problem, though, is in his amusing assertion that the "legitimate" media [characterization is mine, not a quote] have and adhere to these standards of ethics. That's laughable. I wish I could find the references now, but I don't remember whether it was in the San Francisco Chronicle or the San Francisco Bay Guardian that I read about the publishing policy at the Los Angeles Times a few years ago -- where the publisher overruled the editorial staff and declared that no articles that were antagonistic to the advertisers would be run.
It's true of every news organ that the subscription fees (if any) do not even come close to financing the business. News outlets, whether they're radio, television, print, or online, are not actually in business for the reader. It's the same old story, guys: Follow the Money. The people who are actually making these "news" organs into profitable businesses are the advertisers, and don't think that the editorial and publishing staffs don't know this. They know exactly who their customers are. The customers are the advertisers. And their product is their subscriber base. The way they manufacture their product is to spew forth infotainment designed to keep their product's infamously short attention span focused on the medium long enough to score an ad impression.
The only part of this article that I really disagree with is his holier-than-thou attitude. Yeah right, offline media have ethics. Go watch The Insider and look at how 60 Minutes -- big guns in traditional media, I'd say -- sucked up to tobacco.
If you're in journalism, you're a whore. So what? We're mostly not down on prostitution around here, so long as we get our share. Here's fifty bucks; suck on this.
You tell him, pal. Of course, being Katz, he's unlikely to listen -- he's more interested in being cool and edgy than in being correct. It's why there are so many people who filter Katz out.
And yet, like a demon bent on possession, he manages to claw his way into our minds nonetheless. I filter Katz -- I've got many better things to do than spend my energy on being irritated by his writing. And yet this story showed up, presumably because of the whole Kevin Smith thing. I love Kevin Smith's movies. But showing Jon Katz' writing about something I love when I've asked not to see anything from him ever is sort of like offering me the opportunity to watch a porn video of him and my mother. Bleargh!
Re:No, that is the point...
on
Make Your Own DSL
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Hmm. Sounds kinda like UUCP. Takes me back to 1990, when I graduated from university, moved to San Francisco, and went looking for an email & news account someplace. Wound up at wet!sbeitzel, because I couldn't find an ISP whom I was willing to pay -- they charged a LOT. wet was connected periodically to Netcom, and eventually I got a Netcom account. Shell access, all the time, and a nice fat pipe to the rest of the Internet. Woohoo!
In case you hadn't noticed, there's a reason people don't do UUCP BBSes so much anymore. Sure, Fidonet still exists, and UUCP support still gets built when I rebuild world on my FreeBSD boxen, but that's not my primary method of interaction with the Internet, nor is it for most folks...because it's slow and cranky. Let's hear it for convenience.
Slashdot Mirror
No, they wouldn't. The English rules for pronunciation indicates that the 'i' in 'Linux' should be long because the 'u' comes after only one consonant. In the case of 'Lindows', the 'i' is separated from the next vowel, 'o', by two consonants, making it short rather than long.
I saw the film last night (Wednesday) and although I think it is easily the best film of the millenium, your 6 and 9 year olds would probably have nightmares. The 11 year old, maybe; I wouldn't bring my 9 or 12 year olds to see this movie. I reckon to show it to them once they've read the books -- think about it, would you really want to show your kids the battle of Helm's Deep, or the attack on Weathertop? Nazgul are scary and Sauron is Just Plain Evil.
I dunno how much you have to sell it for. But before everybody gets all het up about individual fab closures (too late) it'd be a good idea to keep in mind that it's the direction the whole industry is taking.
Interestingly, in the calculus class I'm taking (final's tomorrow) we're using graphing calculators to help visualize what we're doing. The instructor uses a TI 89, and most of the other students do as well, but I had fond memories of my HP-11C so I went out and bought an HP 49G. So now I've just spent several months observing some differences between the TI and the HP. And guess what? The TI does almost everything the HP does (no RPN that I've seen on the TI, and I must admit that that's one of my favorite things) and the TI has a nicer interface. Frankly, it's a Pain In The Ass to use the HP -- what takes maybe three keystrokes on the TI can take six or more on the HP. Feh. I love my HP geek toy, but I can see why people prefer the TI.
You'd still have to clean up all the symlinks, so you're not really buying yourself anything.
It's true that having all the files associated with a given package in a single location makes it easy to see what-all you've got and which files belong to which package, but you'll still require something that will clean up all the symlinks that point off to nowhere.
The last time I looked, LINT had comments to the effect that it would be surprising if it compiled, as some of the options are mutually exclusive. It's been a while, though. Mostly I just keep an eye on UPDATING.
Back in 1991 or so, when they were having the groundbreaking ceremony for the new San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA), Survival Research Labs (SRL) performed a piece. One of the devices they used was a railgun which shot rebar. I remember going to the event and then later going to a Q & A session with Mark Pauline. His comment on the railgun was something like, "...we built this railgun that fired rebar, but solid rebar is pretty boring. So we fixed it up with induction coils to melt the iron, so now we've got a railgun that fires liquid iron." It was aimed against a high concrete wall, and the molten iron made pretty showers of orange sparks that caught some of the other stuff on fire (as one might expect at an SRL show). It was awesome.
It's a problem because I trust my own government only slightly more than I trust Phred Terrorist. Or, looking at it another way, I trust my own government less so -- with the terrorist, I know he's trying to kill me.
Basically, I don't trust my own government to do the right thing. Especially because as time passes the responsiveness of the U.S. government to Big Money increases, and the rights of the private citizen decrease. I most certainly don't trust Enron, Phillip Morris, CBS, and AOL to be interested in my well-being. Insofar as Corporate America cares about the individual citizen at all, it's as a revenue source.
There are also those among the quite wealthy and therefore influential who do not think that equal protection before the law should hold. At the very least, the rich should be more equal than others, they believe.
This proposed identification and tracking system does not actually solve any problems we currently face. What it does do is open the door to the abrogation of our every Constitutional right.
I am normally opposed to Libertarians (and libertarians), as I have problems with their philosophy. However, on this issue I believe all Americans can stand united. This is a frightening idea.
Look out, guys, they're performing a paradigm shift!
While I think that designing system components with feedback capabilities is a neat idea, remember that doing this in a safe way requires actual computer science. Or at least extensive modeling. It's cool, sure, but it's going to be a while.
- engaging one's critical facility
- actually having a deep technical understanding of the job and products
I dunno what sector you work in, but for the past 7 years the web's been built by people who have an often incomplete grasp of both of these. Thus, products which are not the ideal choice get used in spite of flaws, and more appropriate products languish in obscurity. Remember this lesson: while the engineering department is crucial (one must have an actual product), the marketing department is no less so. It doesn't matter how wonderful your technology is if nobody knows about it, or if the people who do know can't figure out how to use it.Of course not. But that wasn't really the point I was making, as I'm sure you know.
And as to perl's infamous illegibility, it's true that the code's readability has a lot to do with the author and only a bit to do with the language. But I'll tell you right now that most of the perl fanatics I've met and all of the perl coders with whom I've worked came to the language from little or no programming experience. This means that nearly all the code I (and they) encountered was written by someone who had, at the time of authorship, only the vaguest of notions about legibility.
Remember, dude, just because you like a particular thing doesn't mean it doesn't have flaws.
Hear, hear! I want in on that dream!
Also, don't forget that most Slashdotters who actually care about the Netcraft survey already subscribe to it, and have received the email already. ;-)
You wanna use POST instead of GET anyway. When you encode the form submission into the URL, you quickly run into the limits of the various browswers. Some will try to be helpful and rewrite things in the address, URL-encoding characters that shouldn't be encoded (IE, for instance). Others will allow you more space in the address than you're really supposed to have (255 characters) but then chop off your data at some later point. And finally, when Joe Random User tries to use your web app and sees all that crap in the address, he's gonna be Confused.
I think it's much cleaner just to write up a library routine that grabs the GET and POST buffers and parses them into some kind of hash table, and include that library in all my web apps. It keeps the URL clean, and it avoids all the weird browser issues with encoding and length. I can use either POST or GET that way, making it easy to keep things tidy.
Well, actually, this won't provide you with any new programs. What this is really about is giving everybody FreeBSD's version of apt-get-source (from what I understand of Debian).
/tmp rather than /var/tmp, /usr/bin instead of /usr/local/bin, /etc/rc.d instead of /usr/local/etc/rc.d, et cetera.
My guess is that this tarball differs from the ports tree that's available via cvsup (cvsupXX.freebsd.org, where XX is some number on the interval [1,10]) in that the cvsupped ports contain patches that are FreeBSD specific, while this tarball will have settings more appropriate for Linux, such as
The likelyhood that you'll see a second hit from an infected box that's already hit you is practically zero.
Bzzzt. I've got a page which logs the attacks on my server -- note that the same twerps keep coming back. I'd certainly appreciate a hackback!
Okay, I've modified my system for trapping Code Red attacks to log Nimda attacks as well. So, do y'all reckon SecurityFocus wants to know about it as well?
I guess I'm just confused...what have you wanted to do with, say, MS Dev Studio or KDevelop, that these tools wouldn't let you do? Or maybe I'm missing the point. I like having an IDE manage the makefile. I would much rather not have to edit the damned thing with vi. And really, when it comes to designing a window or a dialog, having a graphical tool to do that layout is really nice. And being able to click a tab in the IDE to switch back to the .cpp file that implements the handlers associated with that window, well I like that, too.
But maybe the question isn't about IDEs, but about purely graphical development environments. If that's so, then the editor's comment is out of line -- because KDevelop and Codewarrior both involve typing; a great deal of typing. The only completely graphical development environment I've seen is a weird language for the Mac, called prograph, and even that is more like flowcharting than drawing.
I doubt it. But hey, I'd certainly pay to see it.
He brings up some very good points -- and the sort of backhand at Slashdot isn't anything that hasn't been said and nodded at by everyone here, and yeah, I'm sure we'll all get over it. Where he runs into a problem, though, is in his amusing assertion that the "legitimate" media [characterization is mine, not a quote] have and adhere to these standards of ethics. That's laughable. I wish I could find the references now, but I don't remember whether it was in the San Francisco Chronicle or the San Francisco Bay Guardian that I read about the publishing policy at the Los Angeles Times a few years ago -- where the publisher overruled the editorial staff and declared that no articles that were antagonistic to the advertisers would be run.
It's true of every news organ that the subscription fees (if any) do not even come close to financing the business. News outlets, whether they're radio, television, print, or online, are not actually in business for the reader. It's the same old story, guys: Follow the Money. The people who are actually making these "news" organs into profitable businesses are the advertisers, and don't think that the editorial and publishing staffs don't know this. They know exactly who their customers are. The customers are the advertisers. And their product is their subscriber base. The way they manufacture their product is to spew forth infotainment designed to keep their product's infamously short attention span focused on the medium long enough to score an ad impression.
The only part of this article that I really disagree with is his holier-than-thou attitude. Yeah right, offline media have ethics. Go watch The Insider and look at how 60 Minutes -- big guns in traditional media, I'd say -- sucked up to tobacco.
If you're in journalism, you're a whore. So what? We're mostly not down on prostitution around here, so long as we get our share. Here's fifty bucks; suck on this.
You tell him, pal. Of course, being Katz, he's unlikely to listen -- he's more interested in being cool and edgy than in being correct. It's why there are so many people who filter Katz out.
And yet, like a demon bent on possession, he manages to claw his way into our minds nonetheless. I filter Katz -- I've got many better things to do than spend my energy on being irritated by his writing. And yet this story showed up, presumably because of the whole Kevin Smith thing. I love Kevin Smith's movies. But showing Jon Katz' writing about something I love when I've asked not to see anything from him ever is sort of like offering me the opportunity to watch a porn video of him and my mother. Bleargh!
Hmm. Sounds kinda like UUCP. Takes me back to 1990, when I graduated from university, moved to San Francisco, and went looking for an email & news account someplace. Wound up at wet!sbeitzel, because I couldn't find an ISP whom I was willing to pay -- they charged a LOT. wet was connected periodically to Netcom, and eventually I got a Netcom account. Shell access, all the time, and a nice fat pipe to the rest of the Internet. Woohoo!
In case you hadn't noticed, there's a reason people don't do UUCP BBSes so much anymore. Sure, Fidonet still exists, and UUCP support still gets built when I rebuild world on my FreeBSD boxen, but that's not my primary method of interaction with the Internet, nor is it for most folks...because it's slow and cranky. Let's hear it for convenience.