People do all kinds of crazy things in commercial environments when their boss says "I need this app written today!" Throwing sanctimonious rocks at them makes you feel superior, but makes you look like a jerk to the people who actually have to do this crazy stuff for a living.
Using a config file isn't even a good idea, since anyone with enough access to get to your code may have enough access to get to the config file, and the auditors will certainly frown on that when you have to undergo the torture of a SOX audit. We add another layer of security onto this by serving up certain host/login/password via a web service, but for most applications, the database layer is isolated by using web services that serve up the data via XML/JSON rather than letting applications or clients have direct access to the database. It also gives a single point of control for logging, security, and auditing purposes.
We have multiple web servers in the enterprise - it would be a hassle to change all of their config files if we moved the server from, say, SQL Server to Oracle - so we have everyone talk to the web services server - and we have only one point that needs to be changed, and the changes propagate to the clients and applications automatically.
Another advantage of using web services to isolate everything is that for desktop apps you no longer need to install database-specific drivers on everyone's desktop, a fact that has made Operations very happy.
Totally a waste of time. UUCP over Bluetooth works just fine. Supports arbitrary packet sizes, checkpoint/restart, low overhead, etc. In short, UUCP is designed for efficient data transfer over a low speed unreliable network like the cell phone network, unlike SMS.
SMS over a cell phone is probably one of the worst ideas anyone has ever come up with. Are we sure this wasn't a late April Fool's joke?
they may have pretty free rein in terms of what they're allowed to access on your computer
Actually, this is correct only in terms of criminal liability - since Circuit City wasn't apparently an agent of the government, the Fourth Amendment doesn't apply here. But they may still be liable for a civil suit.
Moral: if you've got stuff on your computer that you'd rather not have others taking a peek at, encryption software is your friend.
Excuse me? Someone's patented this? All this is is one of those PVC misters that you see everywhere in the southern US during the summer, just on a bigger scale. What's so unique about that?
Shudder? Ick? Oh, please. Don't pretend you haven't thought about it.
I hate people who pretend to be above it all.. it usually turns out that they are actually doing the dirty along with everyone else, they just don't want anyone else to find out about it.
and the integration of X11 with apps. Finally, he argues that Linux needs a committee to insure that all GUIs work consistently and integrate better on the back-end with the kernel.
First off, you don't "integrate" X with applications - the applications themselves call libraries that talk to X. Secondly, you don't "integrate" a GUI with the kernel - again, you call a library routine that talks to the kernel.
This is a great way to go if you're into non-portability, non-interoperability, and non-monolithism.
Err, so what? People have been using stego and PGP to hide encrypted message in Usenet postings for years now. I don't understand why this is such a big deal...
Lots of kids (including myself) loved COBOL because it was easy to wrap their heads around it logically and structurally, while lots of the traditional OOP kids struggled because it was out of the norm of their experience.
Lots of people can't wrap their heads around both object-oriented and procedural languages.
I hated COBOL because it was waaaaay too much typing... give me APL any day!:)
We can really start believing what are the reasons for OS what is based to microkernel, while the monolith OS is HUGE to maintain...
Except that I seriously doubt this number is LOC for the kernel itself - this undoubtedly includes drivers and other loadable modules. The number of LOC for the kernel itself, excluding loadable modules, is much less. Linux cannot seriously be called "monolithic".
Haha, thanks for the offer but I don't have anything that will take MCA boards... that was an interesting attempt by IBM to retake the PC market they lost. Oh, well.
As to Ethernet being first, I thought it was the other way around?
However, with a switch at least one packet always gets through.
Wrong. There is no "collision detection", the only way to tell that you had a collision is if the packet didn't get there. If two devices transmit at the same time, you get a mangled packet that won't pass CRC and gets dropped.
What they're really looking for is token ring - which was (and still is) a superior protocol - for Ethernet, as you increase the bandwidth utilization beyond 10%, you get so many collisions that your throughput goes through the floor, while for token ring, the throughput degradation is much more gradual. For bandwidth utilization above 10%, token ring is far superior to Ethernet.
Why Ethernet was adopted over token ring has more to do with religious issues and who can scream the loudest and bully their way through technical issues with emotion than it has to do with technical superiority.
Speaking as someone who has worked for a couple of cell phone companies in the past, I can tell you that this is complete fantasy. The "signal strength" doesn't actually measure signal strength because it's almost meaningless if your signal isn't analog. It's actually a measure of good/bad packets received from the cell site averaged over a period of time. The idea that a cell phone manufacturer would tweak this for marketing purposes is a ridiculous conspiracy theory.
I wonder what Dan was smoking when he wrote this paranoid fantasy piece?
How is ANTLR better than YACC? Since the reviewer isn't familiar with the grand-daddy of compiler-compiler tools, how can one take the review seriously? As for the statement "there's nothing else like it out there", that's just plain fiction - there are a number of compiler-compiler books out there, especially dealing with YACC.
Slashdot Mirror
Not a good idea from a SOX-compliant point of view, since once you generate the random login/password, you lose control. See my previous post.
People do all kinds of crazy things in commercial environments when their boss says "I need this app written today!" Throwing sanctimonious rocks at them makes you feel superior, but makes you look like a jerk to the people who actually have to do this crazy stuff for a living.
Using a config file isn't even a good idea, since anyone with enough access to get to your code may have enough access to get to the config file, and the auditors will certainly frown on that when you have to undergo the torture of a SOX audit. We add another layer of security onto this by serving up certain host/login/password via a web service, but for most applications, the database layer is isolated by using web services that serve up the data via XML/JSON rather than letting applications or clients have direct access to the database. It also gives a single point of control for logging, security, and auditing purposes.
We have multiple web servers in the enterprise - it would be a hassle to change all of their config files if we moved the server from, say, SQL Server to Oracle - so we have everyone talk to the web services server - and we have only one point that needs to be changed, and the changes propagate to the clients and applications automatically.
Another advantage of using web services to isolate everything is that for desktop apps you no longer need to install database-specific drivers on everyone's desktop, a fact that has made Operations very happy.
Already done, sorry to say. The parents are scum for exploiting their kid for money - they had to sign those releases...
Totally a waste of time. UUCP over Bluetooth works just fine. Supports arbitrary packet sizes, checkpoint/restart, low overhead, etc. In short, UUCP is designed for efficient data transfer over a low speed unreliable network like the cell phone network, unlike SMS.
SMS over a cell phone is probably one of the worst ideas anyone has ever come up with. Are we sure this wasn't a late April Fool's joke?
they may have pretty free rein in terms of what they're allowed to access on your computer
Actually, this is correct only in terms of criminal liability - since Circuit City wasn't apparently an agent of the government, the Fourth Amendment doesn't apply here. But they may still be liable for a civil suit.
Moral: if you've got stuff on your computer that you'd rather not have others taking a peek at, encryption software is your friend.
Stipulated, counselor; does this mean that the RIAA and its individual lawyers can be sanctioned - by the court, the bar, or both?
Not H5N1, but H1N1. Similar to the 1918 flu.
Sounds like the future of crap to me.
I bring up stories like this every time I hear an emergency manager say, "oh, we don't need ham radio anymore, we have cell and sat phones."
Excuse me? Someone's patented this? All this is is one of those PVC misters that you see everywhere in the southern US during the summer, just on a bigger scale. What's so unique about that?
"I'd rather not pay yearly rent on a server or backup/storage solution"
Amazon S3. dirt cheap, there forever.
Either you can't read, or you're a shill for Amazon, which is it?
Shudder? Ick? Oh, please. Don't pretend you haven't thought about it.
I hate people who pretend to be above it all .. it usually turns out that they are actually doing the dirty along with everyone else, they just don't want anyone else to find out about it.
and the integration of X11 with apps. Finally, he argues that Linux needs a committee to insure that all GUIs work consistently and integrate better on the back-end with the kernel.
First off, you don't "integrate" X with applications - the applications themselves call libraries that talk to X. Secondly, you don't "integrate" a GUI with the kernel - again, you call a library routine that talks to the kernel.
This is a great way to go if you're into non-portability, non-interoperability, and non-monolithism.
Err, so what? People have been using stego and PGP to hide encrypted message in Usenet postings for years now. I don't understand why this is such a big deal...
Lots of kids (including myself) loved COBOL because it was easy to wrap their heads around it logically and structurally, while lots of the traditional OOP kids struggled because it was out of the norm of their experience.
:)
Lots of people can't wrap their heads around both object-oriented and procedural languages.
I hated COBOL because it was waaaaay too much typing... give me APL any day!
don't do bit manipulation in COBOL. Ever.
Actually, don't do bit manipulation in anything but C or ASM - it's too expensive otherwise, as you found out...
We can really start believing what are the reasons for OS what is based to microkernel, while the monolith OS is HUGE to maintain...
Except that I seriously doubt this number is LOC for the kernel itself - this undoubtedly includes drivers and other loadable modules. The number of LOC for the kernel itself, excluding loadable modules, is much less. Linux cannot seriously be called "monolithic".
Uh, this isn't new - a friend of mine in Des Moines has had one of these for at least three years. Maybe new to the Brits?
Haha, thanks for the offer but I don't have anything that will take MCA boards ... that was an interesting attempt by IBM to retake the PC market they lost. Oh, well.
As to Ethernet being first, I thought it was the other way around?
I wouldn't worry too much about it - the appellate court will undoubtedly reverse this. This isn't the Ninth Circuit, you know...
However, with a switch at least one packet always gets through.
Wrong. There is no "collision detection", the only way to tell that you had a collision is if the packet didn't get there. If two devices transmit at the same time, you get a mangled packet that won't pass CRC and gets dropped.
What they're really looking for is token ring - which was (and still is) a superior protocol - for Ethernet, as you increase the bandwidth utilization beyond 10%, you get so many collisions that your throughput goes through the floor, while for token ring, the throughput degradation is much more gradual. For bandwidth utilization above 10%, token ring is far superior to Ethernet.
Why Ethernet was adopted over token ring has more to do with religious issues and who can scream the loudest and bully their way through technical issues with emotion than it has to do with technical superiority.
All I can say is "Viva PGP/GPG!" Encryption is your friend.
Speaking as someone who has worked for a couple of cell phone companies in the past, I can tell you that this is complete fantasy. The "signal strength" doesn't actually measure signal strength because it's almost meaningless if your signal isn't analog. It's actually a measure of good/bad packets received from the cell site averaged over a period of time. The idea that a cell phone manufacturer would tweak this for marketing purposes is a ridiculous conspiracy theory.
I wonder what Dan was smoking when he wrote this paranoid fantasy piece?
Or they could checksum their UDP packets. The entire packet, not just the customer payload. Duh.
How is ANTLR better than YACC? Since the reviewer isn't familiar with the grand-daddy of compiler-compiler tools, how can one take the review seriously? As for the statement "there's nothing else like it out there", that's just plain fiction - there are a number of compiler-compiler books out there, especially dealing with YACC.