I've yet to find a mail client that I like that can write to LDAP address books. Read? Sure. Write? Nope. Apple's Address Book application is great for searching directories, but don't expect to use it to update entries (AFAIK - I'd love to be proven wrong!).
NIS is easy to set up and works great for what it's intended for.
LDAP is extensible; adding new schemas is pretty trivial.
If you need to authenticate Unix logins on a secure network, NIS is easy to use and works out-of-the-box. If you need to store any other data (Windows logins, mailserver logins, IM server logins, address books, etc.) then LDAP is the clear winner.
Sure we can - it's just that we have to find a well-lit (from one end), airless, frictionless, weightless highway to use them on.
Seriously, what would make you think these problems are even distantly related? Last time I checked there wasn't a massive international rocket fuel infrastructure that has to be considered when developing new spacecraft propulsion methods. Inventing a clean-fuel car would be trivial if all politics were completely removed from the situation and you were given a fresh start.
Canopy wasn't The Evil That Made SCO at the time they invested in Trolltech. Furthermore, Trolltech's been trying to buy themselves out of the debacle for many months now.
Analogy: Bank of America financed my mortgage a few years ago. If they were to suddenly get into the "conflict diamonds" business, does that retroactively make me a bad person? Would you refuse to use the software that I wrote or contributed to? Even if I was actively trying to refinance my house with a different investor?
And if you are calling someone a jackass because they are sticking to their principles on some issue, you're no better!
Which weird principals are those? Not using a piece of Free software because someone you don't like used to own a bit of the company that released it to the world? That's inventing ways to pretend that you're more disciplined than those around you - nothing more.
If you've been avoiding KDE because of who owns their stock, then you're a jackass. I'll bet some rather unsavory people own stock in lots of other companies you actually spend money with, so where does this bizarro unreachable standard for Trolltech come from?
And how big would this prize have to be in order to make someone interested in competing for it?
Prize? How about "we'll get out of the way and let you do your thing"? AFAIK, right now it's legally impossible for a private enterprise to go to the moon. Change that, and I'll bet companies do everything in their power to be the one in the record books.
You use "prize" as though it has to be monetary. I think Boeing, for example, couldn't care less about some pittance of a governmental bonus compared to the potential trillions of dollars in profit from being the first established extra-terrestrial cargo carrier.
Face facts. Putting people in space is expensive. It's also a one-off proposition; there will never be lots of companies competing on price to take people into space.
s/space/The New World/. I think it's a pretty solid analogy.
Interestingly, I have absolutely zero interest in your spending priorities. None. And yet it's likely that I'll pay even more next year to support the programs I don't approve of. This is how nations work - we all chip in for the common benefit, even if we don't individually profit from it.
Going to Mars would be cool. Just don't use my money to get there.
Fair enough. However, since it's widely accepted that investments in the Apollo program gave ridiculously high returns, then we'll need to also find a way to keep the money I willingly paid to our space program from coming back to you.
NASA wants to spend 16.5 billion dollars in 2006, or.14% of America's GDP, in 2006. If you can't stand the idea of even doubling that with a likely return of 1000% on the investment, then you're even worse at finance than you are at public policy.
They're usually automatically derived from the 48-bit MAC address, but can be statically assigned if so desired. Even if you did statically assign them, all (2^64)-2 of them would have to be on the same (flat) subnet, which would be one huge honkin LAN.
Not true. I have a/64 netblock from HE (You read that correctly: not/48. Why? Who knows.), but that gets split across several/80 segments on my router: one to the LAN, one to wireless, one to DMZ, etc. Of course, autoconfig doesn't work on/80 blocks so I have to statically number all my hosts (I haven't been bothered to set up DHCP6 yet). Still, you definitely can route blocks smaller than/64.
Once NAT+Firewalls became popular enough, the requirement for large IP chunks for offices and stuff disappeared.
That's right, because I freakin' love having to configure separate views in BIND so that "www.mycompany.com" is resolvable by both the world at large and our LAN. Yeah, I know, "set up another NAT and all the extra routing tables" - that's a crappy hack, too.
There's a lot to be said for a globally-addressable internal namespace, and NAT just doesn't deliver any of it.
That's kind of disingenuous, though, like saying that "C by itself doesn't perform". That's true, in as much as both are standards and not implementations. However, it's a bit misleading because C, at least, has features that make it inherently difficult to optimize (as compared to other languages like Fortran).
IANA DB theorist, but I could imagine that SQL might also contain some "traps" that might necessarily make its implementations slower than what another query language might make possible.
This might be the one thing that will put FP back into the undergraduate curriculum.
While I agree with everything else you said, I have to ask: are there any undergrad programs that don't include FP? I'd almost go as far as to say that if a school doesn't at least expose its students to FP, then it doesn't really teach CompSci.
You would be safe as long as you weren't stupid enough to download your brain to flash memory.
"So I was wondering if CLICK wondering if you would like to CLICK like to go out to CLICK out to dinner with me? I CLICK me? I CLICK could pick you CLICK pick you CLICKDAMN YOU, IOMEGA!"
Your subtlety was a bit strong; you gave every appearance of saying "this is probably silly, but I guess it could make sense after all".
Ways to identify a Slashdot newbie, #104: they can't believe you wouldn't give another poster's intelligence the benefit of the doubt. It's like someone commenting, on their first day of tech support work, that surely people can't be that dumb...
The Chinese gender birth calendar thingy also works, apparently.
Please stop it. Really, just stop it. The Chinese birth calendar crap has absolutely zero correlation to documented birth rates.
I suppose it is possible for the gravitational pull of the moon to alter the path of a given sperm
No, it's not. Remember, everything would experience the same miniscule force, including the mother and all her parts. The moon's gravity won't selectively apply to only the gametes.
My wife and I have experienced a 100% correlation between whether the sum of birth month plus birth day is prime or not and whether our children are male or female, but I don't have the ethical deficiency to run out and write a book about it.
If that were generally accepted, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Your stating it as fact doesn't necessarily make it so.
First of all, it is a quotient
Most mappings from test score -> 100-centered scale involve standard deviations. That is, IQ = 100 + (number of standard devations from the mean) * (15 or 16). 15 or 16 comes from an effort to correlate that score with the rational score you mentioned, but that's about the only tie between the two.
Second, the IQ test was designed with children in mind
There is no "the" IQ test. There are many to choose from, depending on who and what you wish to attempt to measure.
Well, when Funky B and I were sipping Cristal on the One Microsoft Way parked off the Seychelles, he said that he was going to buy Canada and deport IBM to Saskatchewan. That silly guy - he never can make up his mind. Not like the new pope, though, who last week was telling me over brunch...
Yeah, but I let my subscription lapse. Basically, their values have drifted away from my values to the point that their reviews just weren't very meaningful to me anymore.
For example, if they were comparing two home theater systems, they might recommend the one that's pretty much inferior in every way except that it uses $2 less electricity per year. I really wish I could say that was a joke or exaggeration, but it's not.
Since I started their emphasis on efficiency over other qualities, I stopped caring. Don't get me wrong; all else being equal, I like using less energy as much as anyone else. When I'm shopping for a HDTV, though, I really don't care whether one draws two watts more than another. It simply doesn't interest me.
Slashdot Mirror
OT: JuK blasted out "My Jesus I Love Thee" a couple of weeks ago when I left it on random play for a few hours. Thought you might like to know.
I've yet to find a mail client that I like that can write to LDAP address books. Read? Sure. Write? Nope. Apple's Address Book application is great for searching directories, but don't expect to use it to update entries (AFAIK - I'd love to be proven wrong!).
If you need to authenticate Unix logins on a secure network, NIS is easy to use and works out-of-the-box. If you need to store any other data (Windows logins, mailserver logins, IM server logins, address books, etc.) then LDAP is the clear winner.
Seriously, what would make you think these problems are even distantly related? Last time I checked there wasn't a massive international rocket fuel infrastructure that has to be considered when developing new spacecraft propulsion methods. Inventing a clean-fuel car would be trivial if all politics were completely removed from the situation and you were given a fresh start.
An unexploited hack is still a hack.
Still, it's a pretty clever karma hack to re-post an insightful comeback to the re-post of a troll.
Analogy: Bank of America financed my mortgage a few years ago. If they were to suddenly get into the "conflict diamonds" business, does that retroactively make me a bad person? Would you refuse to use the software that I wrote or contributed to? Even if I was actively trying to refinance my house with a different investor?
tar cvzf sco.tar.gz /usr/src/linux
Cheers,
Darl
Which weird principals are those? Not using a piece of Free software because someone you don't like used to own a bit of the company that released it to the world? That's inventing ways to pretend that you're more disciplined than those around you - nothing more.
2) "had" (although I think it was Canopy and not SCO, but I'm too lazy to look it up at the second).
3) Your call.
That only makes one defensible reason among two stupid ones.
That's perfectly fine. Me? I like it. However, it's still OK to judge such things on personal taste. :-)
If you've been avoiding KDE because of who owns their stock, then you're a jackass. I'll bet some rather unsavory people own stock in lots of other companies you actually spend money with, so where does this bizarro unreachable standard for Trolltech come from?
Prize? How about "we'll get out of the way and let you do your thing"? AFAIK, right now it's legally impossible for a private enterprise to go to the moon. Change that, and I'll bet companies do everything in their power to be the one in the record books.
You use "prize" as though it has to be monetary. I think Boeing, for example, couldn't care less about some pittance of a governmental bonus compared to the potential trillions of dollars in profit from being the first established extra-terrestrial cargo carrier.
Face facts. Putting people in space is expensive. It's also a one-off proposition; there will never be lots of companies competing on price to take people into space.
s/space/The New World/. I think it's a pretty solid analogy.
Going to Mars would be cool. Just don't use my money to get there.
Fair enough. However, since it's widely accepted that investments in the Apollo program gave ridiculously high returns, then we'll need to also find a way to keep the money I willingly paid to our space program from coming back to you.
NASA wants to spend 16.5 billion dollars in 2006, or .14% of America's GDP, in 2006. If you can't stand the idea of even doubling that with a likely return of 1000% on the investment, then you're even worse at finance than you are at public policy.
Not true. I have a /64 netblock from HE (You read that correctly: not /48. Why? Who knows.), but that gets split across several /80 segments on my router: one to the LAN, one to wireless, one to DMZ, etc. Of course, autoconfig doesn't work on /80 blocks so I have to statically number all my hosts (I haven't been bothered to set up DHCP6 yet). Still, you definitely can route blocks smaller than /64.
That's right, because I freakin' love having to configure separate views in BIND so that "www.mycompany.com" is resolvable by both the world at large and our LAN. Yeah, I know, "set up another NAT and all the extra routing tables" - that's a crappy hack, too.
There's a lot to be said for a globally-addressable internal namespace, and NAT just doesn't deliver any of it.
Ahem.
That's kind of disingenuous, though, like saying that "C by itself doesn't perform". That's true, in as much as both are standards and not implementations. However, it's a bit misleading because C, at least, has features that make it inherently difficult to optimize (as compared to other languages like Fortran).
IANA DB theorist, but I could imagine that SQL might also contain some "traps" that might necessarily make its implementations slower than what another query language might make possible.
While I agree with everything else you said, I have to ask: are there any undergrad programs that don't include FP? I'd almost go as far as to say that if a school doesn't at least expose its students to FP, then it doesn't really teach CompSci.
"So I was wondering if CLICK wondering if you would like to CLICK like to go out to CLICK out to dinner with me? I CLICK me? I CLICK could pick you CLICK pick you CLICK DAMN YOU, IOMEGA!"
Ways to identify a Slashdot newbie, #104: they can't believe you wouldn't give another poster's intelligence the benefit of the doubt. It's like someone commenting, on their first day of tech support work, that surely people can't be that dumb...
Please stop it. Really, just stop it. The Chinese birth calendar crap has absolutely zero correlation to documented birth rates.
I suppose it is possible for the gravitational pull of the moon to alter the path of a given sperm
No, it's not. Remember, everything would experience the same miniscule force, including the mother and all her parts. The moon's gravity won't selectively apply to only the gametes.
My wife and I have experienced a 100% correlation between whether the sum of birth month plus birth day is prime or not and whether our children are male or female, but I don't have the ethical deficiency to run out and write a book about it.
If that were generally accepted, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Your stating it as fact doesn't necessarily make it so.
First of all, it is a quotient
Most mappings from test score -> 100-centered scale involve standard deviations. That is, IQ = 100 + (number of standard devations from the mean) * (15 or 16). 15 or 16 comes from an effort to correlate that score with the rational score you mentioned, but that's about the only tie between the two.
Second, the IQ test was designed with children in mind
There is no "the" IQ test. There are many to choose from, depending on who and what you wish to attempt to measure.
Boy, you are just full of yourself, aren't you?
Yes; yes, he was. I'll give you that one. :-)
Well, when Funky B and I were sipping Cristal on the One Microsoft Way parked off the Seychelles, he said that he was going to buy Canada and deport IBM to Saskatchewan. That silly guy - he never can make up his mind. Not like the new pope, though, who last week was telling me over brunch...
Yeah, but I let my subscription lapse. Basically, their values have drifted away from my values to the point that their reviews just weren't very meaningful to me anymore.
For example, if they were comparing two home theater systems, they might recommend the one that's pretty much inferior in every way except that it uses $2 less electricity per year. I really wish I could say that was a joke or exaggeration, but it's not.
Since I started their emphasis on efficiency over other qualities, I stopped caring. Don't get me wrong; all else being equal, I like using less energy as much as anyone else. When I'm shopping for a HDTV, though, I really don't care whether one draws two watts more than another. It simply doesn't interest me.