So, do they also own the trademark on mandrake, the plant? Why can't Mandrake-the-Linux-company claim that they're named after the root long thought of as magical by certain cultures?
Even if both parties involved are a customer of the same ISP, no provider I've ever worked for or with would consent to allow a customer to "sell" their netblock.
Let's try that with a similar but slightly different concept:
Why shouldn't IP addresses be salable? They're a part of you; you give out your IP address, when people connect they expect to get you.
That really doesn't stand up, does it? So, what is the fundamental difference between a phone number and a static IP that makes one property and the other a resource?
Not to spoil anything for you, but Python and Perl have this functionality with dcop modules.
Sure, but I was doing this on production systems in 1990. As I said, I'm not advocating REXX. However, it had a lot of really cool features that didn't seem to be in wide existence anywhere else at the time it came around. Python is much nicer than REXX, and I love it to the point that it's my primary development language, but REXX was alive and doing the same stuff (on a more primative level) nearly 15 years go. You have to give it some credit for that.
Re:It's CobolScript for Unix!!!
on
Rexx for Everyone
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
ADDRESS SYSTEM ls WITH OUTPUT FIFO '' ERROR NORMAL
That's definitely verbose and ugly, but behind the scenes, that code just "connected" to the "SYSTEM" port, issued the "ls" command, and sent some configuration information.
PARSE PULL line
When you "ADDRESS"ed the SYSTEM object, you basically imported it's API into the REXX namespace. See that "PARSE PULL" bit? That command comes from the SYSTEM object, and isn't part of the REXX language proper. Imagine this code sample (completely invented and unlikely to work without modification, but still illustrative) instead:
#!/usr/bin/rexx ADDRESS POSTGRESQL SELECT * from tablename DO WHILE rowsleft() \= 0 RETRIEVE row ADDRESS EMAILER SEND row TO emailuser@company.com SUBJECT "SQL Query Row" END
Suddenly it doesn't seem quite so horrible, does it, when you realize that you can connect directly to any REXX-enabled application and control it as though you were written a script directly within that application?
I'm not saying that I'd ever for a moment consider touching REXX code again without a large monetary incentive, but you should understand that noone said "hey, this language has no redeeming values, let's use it!". It has its own unique properties, and while the ugliness outweighs the good stuff, it certainly had its niche back in the day.
You're right about REXX as a stand-alone language. About the only thing it had going for it was that, if you had an Amiga, then you didn't have to buy a C compiler to write a little program.
Where it really shined, though, was in its ability to control other running applications. Most decent Amiga programs had an "AREXX port", which was basically an API that you could connect to while the program was running. You could write a script so that whenever your newsreader encountered a URL on a trusted website, then it would execute an AREXX script that would queue a request on your web browser to visit that page. Or, maybe you wanted your MP3 player to tell your IRC client to tell the whole channel that you were playing a new CD.
By itself, AREXX was pretty lame. As a global scripting language that could tie abitrary applications together, it was wonderful.
AREXX absolutely ruled. I once wrote a script to pull transfer completion status from a graphical FTP program, convert it to a pair of (x,y) coordinates a proportional distance along a line from (0,0) to (maxX,maxY), and pass that to a graphics program as the endpoint of a photo-realistic lightning bolt. As my transfer moved along, the lightning grew closer to the ground.
Useless? Sure, but it looked a lot cooler than your average progress bar, and I could poke my head into the room to see at a glance how far along I was on my hour-long 2MB download from Aminet (via a 28.8 modem).
No kidding. And out of those 20, 19 will be to Geocrawler in all its cruddy non-threaded, un-intuitive glory, meaning that I usually revert to searching groups.google.com for the same post so that I can read it in context.
I'm not too impressed with anybody in the race, but if I'm getting spam from them - there's no way in hell I'd vote for them.
So, the most important issue in your world is spam? Seriously? You don't care about foreign relations, or the economy, or health care, or tort reform, or the DMCA, or the Patriot Act, or anything else at all more than you care about whether you get a cold-call email from the candidate in question?
Where is this place you live, and could you tell me how to get there? In the real world, spam is annoying, but there are a lot of more important things to get wound up about.
[...] there are many good social services that regular telephone companies are legally required to provide at their expense that these new VoIP companies will not have to provide:
Except for maybe the 911 locator, those are good things not to be forced to provide. It's just plain wrong for me to have to pay extra on my line so that someone meeting an arbitrary set of conditions gets either 1) cheaper service or 2) extra services. If you can't pay for a luxury service (and telephone is a luxury, regardless of what anyone tells you), then don't get it. If you want to use extra services, like text relaying, expect to pay for them.
From another perspective, if the company that you personally started, built up, and ran received a government mandate to start providing free stuff to certain customers, how would you feel?
do you actually know what a number with 34 zeros behind it is called??
Yeah, it's called n*10^34 by everyone I'd ever discuss such large numbers with. Assigning an arbitrary and inconsistent name (see your US vs. everybody comment) is just plain dumb. Do you think crypto guys convert between decillions and decajillions when discussing collision rates, or that physicists have any interest in petadillions or hexamuphillions other than when they have to write a press release? No. There's a widely used and accurate naming system for numbers - you just use the numbers themselves. It's easy, it's universal, and it's a Good Thing.
Where did you get your inside information stating that OS 6 will use the exact same protocols as older versions? Given that PalmOS is a closed system, and holding the reins for all future development, I'd like to share your certainty new hardware will continue to work with updated versions of current non-Palm systems.
There are actually cases of people photoshopping fingerprints to "bring them out".
Is there any reason you couldn't "clean room engineer" the fingerprints? That is, couldn't you ensure that there's a strict separation between the person "enhancing" the fingerprints and the person comparing them to a suspect's print?
It's one thing to go into court saying "well, Your Honor, see how these fingerprints look like this one after I used a computer to make them look slightly different", and another to testify that "I received a set of fingerprint from Detective Smith. I enhanced them and gave them to Detective Jones, and he compared my enhanced imagery to the suspect's prints.". The first statement sounds more than a little fishy. The second testimony seems pretty reasonable.
OK, this is stupid pendanticism, but it's hard to respect an article that labels pictures of the outside of the product in question as "screenshots". Well, it's a snapshot, maybe, and it is on my screen, but that's not what I usually associate with that word.
If it had 15 transparent Eterms with a naked chick as the background, then, yeah, it's a screenshot. A JPG of a computer case doesn't cut it.
Both OpenSSH and OpenSSL (what you really meant) are available under BSD licenses. Microsoft hasn't said anything bad about BSD-licensed software and has admitted to using it for years.
I hate to sound like this, but that must be a Mandrake thing (or maybe a low RAM thing - 256 isn't exactly a lot these days). These are the results of me launching OO Writer and hitting ^Q as soon as the window opens:
kirk@janus:~/projects$ time oowriter
Starting configuration import into user data..
real 0m3.903s user 0m2.586s sys 0m0.135s kirk@janus:~/projects$ time oowriter
Starting configuration import into user data..
real 0m3.898s user 0m2.573s sys 0m0.145s kirk@janus:~/projects$ time oowriter
Starting configuration import into user data..
real 0m3.492s user 0m2.577s sys 0m0.136s
I'm using KDE 3.2 (which shouldn't matter) on an Dell Dimension 4600 with 1280MB of RAM (thanks to a mistake by the ordering department). I don't doubt your numbers, and they seem in line with others I've heard, but they're certainly far different than my local results.
That very much depends on the definition of "run it only on Windows". Are Wine's Windows-alike libraries sufficient to say it "runs on Windows"? What if the user takes DLLs from a legitimately licenced Windows installation and uses those instead of the Wine-native versions - is that "running on Windows"? How much of the running code has to originate from Microsoft before that restriction was met?
Personally, I'd be perfectly happy to buy a copy of Windows if Wine could use the files in it to make applications work properly (I have to run Quickbooks Pro 2002 and it doesn't currently run on Wine).
Re:Bill Gates, Hall of Fame Hacker? (P.S. First Po
on
Hackers Hall of Fame
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Geez, thanks for making me notice the grey hairs starting to spring up on my noggin. What's scary is not that I understood your reference, but that I actually remembered what it did after literally 20 years of not interacting with the C=64's memory map.
I also remember writing self-modifying code in BASIC by clearing the screen, PRINTing the desired line of new code, writing the keycodes for "up-arrow up-arrow return" into the 64's 10-character keyboard input buffer, and stopping execution. The keyboard reader would interpret those as having been typed manually and would move the cursor to the line in question and send a return, and the BASIC interpreter would insert that line into the already-loaded program. Follow the line of code with "RUN $LINENUM" and voila!, your program would have successfully altered itself and resumed execution.
Finally, I'll never forget the day my parents broke down and bought me the "C=64 Macro Assembler" and "Programmer's Reference Manual". I didn't know at the time that Assembler was supposed to be difficult to learn - I thought it was a super-simplified BASIC and treated it accordingly: "Hmmm, I need to set a variable. What command sets a memory location to a value? (Scanning the opcode list in the PRM...) Oh, this'll work! (Typing: LDA, 42; STA $C001)."
Heck, I learned binary math by working through the examples to calculate sprite bitmaps. Man, I loved that little machine.
Slashdot Mirror
You have Unix-ish stuff in Omaha? Nice. I recently moved to Norfolk, NE, and I'm fairly sure I'm the only professional Unix admin in the city. :-/
You forgot to include "certified", "engineer", and "customer-driven". Other than that, good work!
So, do they also own the trademark on mandrake, the plant? Why can't Mandrake-the-Linux-company claim that they're named after the root long thought of as magical by certain cultures?
Even if both parties involved are a customer of the same ISP, no provider I've ever worked for or with would consent to allow a customer to "sell" their netblock.
I had a similar experience a few years ago. Hie thee to phonespell.org to see what fun you may be missing!
That really doesn't stand up, does it? So, what is the fundamental difference between a phone number and a static IP that makes one property and the other a resource?
In effect, you "lease" your phone number. As long as you don't get it permanently disconnected, the number is yours, but you do not own it.
Sure, but I was doing this on production systems in 1990. As I said, I'm not advocating REXX. However, it had a lot of really cool features that didn't seem to be in wide existence anywhere else at the time it came around. Python is much nicer than REXX, and I love it to the point that it's my primary development language, but REXX was alive and doing the same stuff (on a more primative level) nearly 15 years go. You have to give it some credit for that.
That's definitely verbose and ugly, but behind the scenes, that code just "connected" to the "SYSTEM" port, issued the "ls" command, and sent some configuration information.
When you "ADDRESS"ed the SYSTEM object, you basically imported it's API into the REXX namespace. See that "PARSE PULL" bit? That command comes from the SYSTEM object, and isn't part of the REXX language proper. Imagine this code sample (completely invented and unlikely to work without modification, but still illustrative) instead:
Suddenly it doesn't seem quite so horrible, does it, when you realize that you can connect directly to any REXX-enabled application and control it as though you were written a script directly within that application?
I'm not saying that I'd ever for a moment consider touching REXX code again without a large monetary incentive, but you should understand that noone said "hey, this language has no redeeming values, let's use it!". It has its own unique properties, and while the ugliness outweighs the good stuff, it certainly had its niche back in the day.
Where it really shined, though, was in its ability to control other running applications. Most decent Amiga programs had an "AREXX port", which was basically an API that you could connect to while the program was running. You could write a script so that whenever your newsreader encountered a URL on a trusted website, then it would execute an AREXX script that would queue a request on your web browser to visit that page. Or, maybe you wanted your MP3 player to tell your IRC client to tell the whole channel that you were playing a new CD.
By itself, AREXX was pretty lame. As a global scripting language that could tie abitrary applications together, it was wonderful.
Useless? Sure, but it looked a lot cooler than your average progress bar, and I could poke my head into the room to see at a glance how far along I was on my hour-long 2MB download from Aminet (via a 28.8 modem).
No kidding. And out of those 20, 19 will be to Geocrawler in all its cruddy non-threaded, un-intuitive glory, meaning that I usually revert to searching groups.google.com for the same post so that I can read it in context.
The writers of NBC's "Scrubs" thank you for using their (unattributed) quote.
So, the most important issue in your world is spam? Seriously? You don't care about foreign relations, or the economy, or health care, or tort reform, or the DMCA, or the Patriot Act, or anything else at all more than you care about whether you get a cold-call email from the candidate in question?
Where is this place you live, and could you tell me how to get there? In the real world, spam is annoying, but there are a lot of more important things to get wound up about.
Except for maybe the 911 locator, those are good things not to be forced to provide. It's just plain wrong for me to have to pay extra on my line so that someone meeting an arbitrary set of conditions gets either 1) cheaper service or 2) extra services. If you can't pay for a luxury service (and telephone is a luxury, regardless of what anyone tells you), then don't get it. If you want to use extra services, like text relaying, expect to pay for them.
From another perspective, if the company that you personally started, built up, and ran received a government mandate to start providing free stuff to certain customers, how would you feel?
Yeah, it's called n*10^34 by everyone I'd ever discuss such large numbers with. Assigning an arbitrary and inconsistent name (see your US vs. everybody comment) is just plain dumb. Do you think crypto guys convert between decillions and decajillions when discussing collision rates, or that physicists have any interest in petadillions or hexamuphillions other than when they have to write a press release? No. There's a widely used and accurate naming system for numbers - you just use the numbers themselves. It's easy, it's universal, and it's a Good Thing.
Where did you get your inside information stating that OS 6 will use the exact same protocols as older versions? Given that PalmOS is a closed system, and holding the reins for all future development, I'd like to share your certainty new hardware will continue to work with updated versions of current non-Palm systems.
I've also owned and used various DayRunner paper organizers.
One of these will be usable with my wife's iMac and can hold a checkbook, paper receipts, and business cards. The other plays solitaire.
Goodbye, Palm - it's been fun.
And even if it doesn't, you can find 2 or 3 people who openly claim that trepanning is a Good Thing, but nobody admits to liking SCO.
Is there any reason you couldn't "clean room engineer" the fingerprints? That is, couldn't you ensure that there's a strict separation between the person "enhancing" the fingerprints and the person comparing them to a suspect's print?
It's one thing to go into court saying "well, Your Honor, see how these fingerprints look like this one after I used a computer to make them look slightly different", and another to testify that "I received a set of fingerprint from Detective Smith. I enhanced them and gave them to Detective Jones, and he compared my enhanced imagery to the suspect's prints.". The first statement sounds more than a little fishy. The second testimony seems pretty reasonable.
If it had 15 transparent Eterms with a naked chick as the background, then, yeah, it's a screenshot. A JPG of a computer case doesn't cut it.
Both OpenSSH and OpenSSL (what you really meant) are available under BSD licenses. Microsoft hasn't said anything bad about BSD-licensed software and has admitted to using it for years.
I'm using KDE 3.2 (which shouldn't matter) on an Dell Dimension 4600 with 1280MB of RAM (thanks to a mistake by the ordering department). I don't doubt your numbers, and they seem in line with others I've heard, but they're certainly far different than my local results.
Personally, I'd be perfectly happy to buy a copy of Windows if Wine could use the files in it to make applications work properly (I have to run Quickbooks Pro 2002 and it doesn't currently run on Wine).
I also remember writing self-modifying code in BASIC by clearing the screen, PRINTing the desired line of new code, writing the keycodes for "up-arrow up-arrow return" into the 64's 10-character keyboard input buffer, and stopping execution. The keyboard reader would interpret those as having been typed manually and would move the cursor to the line in question and send a return, and the BASIC interpreter would insert that line into the already-loaded program. Follow the line of code with "RUN $LINENUM" and voila!, your program would have successfully altered itself and resumed execution.
Finally, I'll never forget the day my parents broke down and bought me the "C=64 Macro Assembler" and "Programmer's Reference Manual". I didn't know at the time that Assembler was supposed to be difficult to learn - I thought it was a super-simplified BASIC and treated it accordingly: "Hmmm, I need to set a variable. What command sets a memory location to a value? (Scanning the opcode list in the PRM...) Oh, this'll work! (Typing: LDA, 42; STA $C001)."
Heck, I learned binary math by working through the examples to calculate sprite bitmaps. Man, I loved that little machine.