you mean linux? Hmmm... good point. that was dumb. I keep forgetting that they actually were caldera at one point in time.
No, not linux. Maybe that UnixWare thing? Or OpenServer? Or maybe microsoft paid them with windows licenses for their contiuned litigation, so that's what they run?
Funny thing is - I checked them out and found that they are violating SCO license. I mean, we all know that SCO owns unix and recalled the AIX license, and yet they are using AIX on their website!
as they say, the higher you fly... the longer you fall. or something like that.
In your post major is the keyworkd. Maintaining and upgrading larger systems becomes quite difficult with difficulty being some function of the size. And the function is by no means linear, in fact, it grows quite fast until it becomes virtually unmanageable.
When I read this post, I had a sudden flashback ot a recent AT&T wireless fiasco. Same thing - too large of a system to manage, to many spaghetti soultions (procrastination and irresponsible management didn't help either, but it was quite bad even without them). At least be thankful it wasn't your heart pacer that was being upgraded, and it wasn't something that flies...
Very troubling indeed. Especially when coming user with a low slashdot ID (138474).
No, I am not saying the user is dumb. What I am saying is that if a slashdot geek with years of slashdot "experience" (whatever that is) has a problem with this rather basic functionality, how can I expect my grandma to figure that out?
--footnote-- I am exceptionally fortunate that my wife is using my linux box with little or no complaints, but my grandma would be really, really lost... but then you have to ask yourself if you really want your grandma to use your box at all
It is fscking incredible that anyone would think it reasonable to be governed by laws that you have to pay to see.
On the flip side, wouldn't this make it a lot easier to claim ignorance? Right now if you go to court and say "Sorry, your honor - I didn't know that the thing I did was not allowed", your honor is going to put your butt in jail where you will have plenty of time to study that law. On the other hand, if you say "Sorry, your honor, but I do not have the funds to buy access to all laws that may or may not apply to my daily activities. Hence, I had no way of knowing that I was violating the law. My ignorance of the law is not my choice but rather the result of a deliberate withholding of the text of law from me, so ultimately the one who withholds the law is the one who is responsible for my miscondict.", then you may stand a chance.
Sounds absurd, isn't it? Well, maybe not so absurd as one would think. Think of your cable modem provider. - Sir, you've exceeded your reasonable bandwidth usage this month. If this repeats, we'll terminate your account - I thought the access was unlimited... - It is unlimited, but you've used that unlimited service a lot more than anyone else in your neighborhood, and thus are over your limit. - What is my my monthly limit? - We can't tell you, because there is no limit, but if you go over it again, your account will be terminated. So make sure not to do that again.
You'll be tracking more deer than humans I imagine
You know, your post made me first think that the whole people-tracking idea was isiotic, but then I realized that it may just be the one decent use for RFIDs.
If you are concerned about your privacy, by no means do you have to do anything at all - just go and hike as you always do. However, if you value your safety higher than your privacy (or hiking alone, or you are unfamiliar with the route - whatever), it would be really cool if you could pick up something like a little badge at the trailhead that has a RFID chip embedded. You could also sign the time you left, and the badge # on some sort of a signup sheet.
This way you'd be tracked, it'd be 100% voluntarily, the work of search&rescues people would be easier, and no deer would trigger the system. RFIDs are not evil as long as their use can be 100% voluntary. What do you think?
Make sure the area has good cell phone coverage. Require all missing hikers to carry a cell phone.... And then you find out that your carrier started sucking real bad, and you are screwed. Let me elaborate. A few years back I chose AT&T as my carrier because they were offering the best outdoors coverage, largely due to the fact that their phones worked in both analog and digital modes.
Then one day they decided to just turn off the analog part. Apparently, this is a part of some big transition where they'll be re-using that analog chunk of the spectrum for some new digital stuff. Who needs that old antique analog mode anyway, right? (Sorry, I don't have more info - don't have a link handy, but you could google for that)
The problem is, I've gone out to the wilderness in that particular part of the Mount Rainier National Park many times before, and each time had decent analog coverage. So, I started relying on it. Now, all of a sudden, I look at my phone and see that I am alone in the middle of nowhere with no coverage whatsoever. Obviously, nobody at AT&T bothered to tell me that they are discontinuing the analog service; I had to find it out on the trail! Not that it was a life-threatening situation, or anything - I just made sure not to do anything stupid for the rest of the trip, but if I were to, say, fall & break my leg, could my family sue AT&T for failing to provide the service they promised when I needed it the most?
Wow! One person on slashdot who shows intelligence higher than that of a gullible 3-year-old. For a while I was thinking that there is not a single slashdotter here who sees that this is a complete fragrant BS.
No, think about it - I expect slashdot crowd to be - (somewhat) smart, - paranoid that the government is there to get us - not believing anything unless there is an undisputable proof, etc.
And here we are, being fed a stupid hoax that tells us a tale about the exploits of our super-cool goverment. Nevermind the fact that it is arguable who could write better oil pipeline software - us or russians. Nevermind the fact that such software is very much bound to the hardware, and one cannot be developed without the other. Moreso in the old times, but even now this certainly holds true. Nevermind the fact that it is immensely more difficult to plant a bug in a piece of software that will probably be rigorously tested and extensively modified than it is to locate it. Nevermind... a lot of other obvios facts that we somehow managed to miss altogether!
It sounds like we are not talking about oil pipeline software that the Russians allegedly stole with a carefully planted bug, but about some version of MS Office with the insidious clippy embedded.
It would've been funny if it weren't so sad to see how gullible we really are. Go slashdot!
Totally agree with the parent. We seem to have forgotten that there are more than just two ways to kill people on a large scale, not just 'declared war' and 'terrorism'. What you call 'undeclared war', I call murder - it seems to fit the definition quite nicely.
No, not really. When you terrorize others it doesn't qualify as terrorism - it's OK. Better yet, if you can do it in such a way that it looks like you are actually fighting terrorism (Afghanistan, Iraq), you get extra brownie points.
But who cares - the whole thing is 1. a dupe 2. a hoax
That should be the end of it.
a day without sunshine?
on
SCOoby Snacks
·
· Score: 1
... that means SCO's gotta have an office down in Seattle somewhere!
After Apollo 11 successfully landed, the Soviet lunar program was classified for many years and not publicly acknowledged until the laet 1990s
A lot of the moon-related exploration stuff was available to public - just visit the space museum in Moscow. Some parts of the exhibitions from the 1980s are, I believe, still there.
In range of what? There won't be no ISS by 2012, at least judging by how things are going now, it'll either fall apart or be abandoned due to lack of money.
Seriously, what do you do if you dump 100 billion into a scientific project, it is falling apart, behind schedule, and hasn't produced any science anyway, what do you do? You count it as loss and move on! It won't take till 2012 to realize that.
Besides, it was my understanding (and please correct me, if I am wrong - astronomy is not one of my strenghts) that the ISS orbit is way too low, and in many other aspects far from an ideal one for a telescope. It's not enough just to put a telescope in space - the space is a pretty big place. You have to choose a place. Choosing an orbit just so you can tie a new telescope to an old piece of junk that is already in space and might be there a little longer is just plain stupid. An orbit should be chosen to maximize its scientific potential.
Ah, don't worry. Hubble will be just fine. It's not how, but when you approach NASA asking for it not to be killed - just wait till this fall.
Right now NASA is wasting all its resources on ISS, which is starting to look more and more like a dead end. Right now we need to keep it alive and every shuttle when (and if) they ever fly will be used to haul stuff up to the ISS, instead of fixing some silly Hubble. Why do we do that? Because it's too hard to accept that we wasted billions of dollars on a station that's worthless. Well, not really worthless - if nothing else, we proved that we could have a space station just like the Russians did, even bigger and beter. So, now we can't accept the obvious fact that we wasted so much money irresponsibly, and our pride is not letting us part with the ISS.
When Bush wins the upcoming elections, that pride can go down the drain. However much I dislike him, I must admit that he's capable of making significant decisions, including unpopular ones if he feels like they are the right ones to make. Right any unpopular decisions that hurt American pride are out of question. But after the elections... start making your bets on how many weeks it'll take to abandon the project. He's already omitting ISS from his speaches about future space exploration.
Now, when we abandon ISS, and if the Shuttles fly (and I hope they will), there will be a few flights that NASA can dedicate to some real science, like servicing Hubble. So, keep pestering NASA bit by bit continuously about the Hubble - that way they'll remember it is a priority. And once we abandon ISS, really start reminding them that Hubble is too valuable to be trashed, and now we have some Shuttles to spare.
It's not about safety, or value to science. It's about money and timing. So, you know how they say 'pick your fights carefully'? Well, in addition to that, pick their timing carefully too! Just wait till the elections are over.
When you plan something big, you plan a big contigency plan, even if it's expensive. $400M Mars rovers have many contigency plans, most satellites at least have insurance, etc. One of the best contigency plans for a milti-billion $$$ space station would be to make sure that there is more than one nation that can fly to it. Now think of Shuttles... Even when they DID fly, they were worthless for boosting the altitude and doing correction maneuvers; the progress ships were the only ones capable of that...
If you don't like the 50 deg. inclination orbit that is designed to fit the Russians better, fine! You'd be left with a dead station in a better orbit now (as opposed to a live, though not doing anything useful, station in an orbit you don't like as much). Take a pick.
I am still figuring out what that whole 'jumping off' thing is all about. WHere did we want to jump again?
I'll put it this way: my cable modem has had more downtime than my satellite TV over the last two years...... and? Some things are just the basics of life. You've got to just accept them as they are - the grass is green, microsoft is a monopoly, cable modems are less reliably than your pinto, antarctica is cold...
No, I think I got that point. What I was referring to is the real-world situation when anything but a trivial HTML file will render very differently in different browsers, when implementations of javascript are so different that you feel like you are dealing with entirely different languages.
The only way to make sure your webapp works properly in IE is to actually run it in IE, which was the original statement. I don't think anyone can disagree with that. Now, my employer used to pay me to make sure our stuff worked flawlessly in IE, hence I was forced to use it, regardless of my preferences.
I think - No, dude, SCO is not the dark side of the open source movement. Aside from old Caldera, it has no relation to any side of the open source movement.
"A web app that requires a single brand of browser is not a web app... it's a client/server app".... and that's what I have adopted:
"An employer willing to pay you to develop an app that runs in a particular brand of browser is still an employer." And, in case that wasn't enough, I'd add "The cash that the aforementioned employer is willing to pay you is still cash". So forget about that 'any HTML should run in any browser' crap. That, or move to a perfect world and tell me where it is:)
I think it's akin to 'text readable'. Or 'MP3 playable'. From what I saw, it just tried to execute that HTML code in the browser, which should simply result in parsing it, no?
Slashdot Mirror
you mean linux? Hmmm... good point. that was dumb. I keep forgetting that they actually were caldera at one point in time.
No, not linux. Maybe that UnixWare thing? Or OpenServer? Or maybe microsoft paid them with windows licenses for their contiuned litigation, so that's what they run?
Funny thing is - I checked them out and found that they are violating SCO license. I mean, we all know that SCO owns unix and recalled the AIX license, and yet they are using AIX on their website!
no, no coincidence at all. Both were using ScoWare.
as they say, the higher you fly... the longer you fall. or something like that.
In your post major is the keyworkd. Maintaining and upgrading larger systems becomes quite difficult with difficulty being some function of the size. And the function is by no means linear, in fact, it grows quite fast until it becomes virtually unmanageable.
When I read this post, I had a sudden flashback ot a recent AT&T wireless fiasco. Same thing - too large of a system to manage, to many spaghetti soultions (procrastination and irresponsible management didn't help either, but it was quite bad even without them). At least be thankful it wasn't your heart pacer that was being upgraded, and it wasn't something that flies...
I don't know if it is really the karma that is to blame. Maybe they were just using SCO software to begin with :).
We all know it's so good that linux just had to steal from it to become enterprise-ready. RBC surely must've used it!
Very troubling indeed. Especially when coming user with a low slashdot ID (138474).
No, I am not saying the user is dumb. What I am saying is that if a slashdot geek with years of slashdot "experience" (whatever that is) has a problem with this rather basic functionality, how can I expect my grandma to figure that out?
--footnote--
I am exceptionally fortunate that my wife is using my linux box with little or no complaints, but my grandma would be really, really lost... but then you have to ask yourself if you really want your grandma to use your box at all
It is fscking incredible that anyone would think it reasonable to be governed by laws that you have to pay to see.
On the flip side, wouldn't this make it a lot easier to claim ignorance? Right now if you go to court and say "Sorry, your honor - I didn't know that the thing I did was not allowed", your honor is going to put your butt in jail where you will have plenty of time to study that law. On the other hand, if you say "Sorry, your honor, but I do not have the funds to buy access to all laws that may or may not apply to my daily activities. Hence, I had no way of knowing that I was violating the law. My ignorance of the law is not my choice but rather the result of a deliberate withholding of the text of law from me, so ultimately the one who withholds the law is the one who is responsible for my miscondict.", then you may stand a chance.
Sounds absurd, isn't it? Well, maybe not so absurd as one would think. Think of your cable modem provider.
- Sir, you've exceeded your reasonable bandwidth usage this month. If this repeats, we'll terminate your account
- I thought the access was unlimited...
- It is unlimited, but you've used that unlimited service a lot more than anyone else in your neighborhood, and thus are over your limit.
- What is my my monthly limit?
- We can't tell you, because there is no limit, but if you go over it again, your account will be terminated. So make sure not to do that again.
could go something like that
Favorite addictive non-computer game:
- poker
- solitaire
- monopoly
- russian roulette
(or something like that)
You'll be tracking more deer than humans I imagine
You know, your post made me first think that the whole people-tracking idea was isiotic, but then I realized that it may just be the one decent use for RFIDs.
If you are concerned about your privacy, by no means do you have to do anything at all - just go and hike as you always do. However, if you value your safety higher than your privacy (or hiking alone, or you are unfamiliar with the route - whatever), it would be really cool if you could pick up something like a little badge at the trailhead that has a RFID chip embedded. You could also sign the time you left, and the badge # on some sort of a signup sheet.
This way you'd be tracked, it'd be 100% voluntarily, the work of search&rescues people would be easier, and no deer would trigger the system. RFIDs are not evil as long as their use can be 100% voluntary. What do you think?
Make sure the area has good cell phone coverage. Require all missing hikers to carry a cell phone. ... And then you find out that your carrier started sucking real bad, and you are screwed. Let me elaborate. A few years back I chose AT&T as my carrier because they were offering the best outdoors coverage, largely due to the fact that their phones worked in both analog and digital modes.
Then one day they decided to just turn off the analog part. Apparently, this is a part of some big transition where they'll be re-using that analog chunk of the spectrum for some new digital stuff. Who needs that old antique analog mode anyway, right? (Sorry, I don't have more info - don't have a link handy, but you could google for that)
The problem is, I've gone out to the wilderness in that particular part of the Mount Rainier National Park many times before, and each time had decent analog coverage. So, I started relying on it. Now, all of a sudden, I look at my phone and see that I am alone in the middle of nowhere with no coverage whatsoever. Obviously, nobody at AT&T bothered to tell me that they are discontinuing the analog service; I had to find it out on the trail! Not that it was a life-threatening situation, or anything - I just made sure not to do anything stupid for the rest of the trip, but if I were to, say, fall & break my leg, could my family sue AT&T for failing to provide the service they promised when I needed it the most?
Wow! One person on slashdot who shows intelligence higher than that of a gullible 3-year-old. For a while I was thinking that there is not a single slashdotter here who sees that this is a complete fragrant BS.
No, think about it - I expect slashdot crowd to be
- (somewhat) smart,
- paranoid that the government is there to get us
- not believing anything unless there is an undisputable proof, etc.
And here we are, being fed a stupid hoax that tells us a tale about the exploits of our super-cool goverment. Nevermind the fact that it is arguable who could write better oil pipeline software - us or russians. Nevermind the fact that such software is very much bound to the hardware, and one cannot be developed without the other. Moreso in the old times, but even now this certainly holds true. Nevermind the fact that it is immensely more difficult to plant a bug in a piece of software that will probably be rigorously tested and extensively modified than it is to locate it. Nevermind... a lot of other obvios facts that we somehow managed to miss altogether!
It sounds like we are not talking about oil pipeline software that the Russians allegedly stole with a carefully planted bug, but about some version of MS Office with the insidious clippy embedded.
It would've been funny if it weren't so sad to see how gullible we really are. Go slashdot!
Totally agree with the parent. We seem to have forgotten that there are more than just two ways to kill people on a large scale, not just 'declared war' and 'terrorism'. What you call 'undeclared war', I call murder - it seems to fit the definition quite nicely.
No, not really. When you terrorize others it doesn't qualify as terrorism - it's OK. Better yet, if you can do it in such a way that it looks like you are actually fighting terrorism (Afghanistan, Iraq), you get extra brownie points.
But who cares - the whole thing is
1. a dupe
2. a hoax
That should be the end of it.
... that means SCO's gotta have an office down in Seattle somewhere!
Or am I carbon dating myself?
dating? carbon? yack! It takes a REAL GEEK to date carbon! I personally prefer girls.
Untill they decide to go to Mars...
After Apollo 11 successfully landed, the Soviet lunar program was classified for many years and not publicly acknowledged until the laet 1990s
A lot of the moon-related exploration stuff was available to public - just visit the space museum in Moscow. Some parts of the exhibitions from the 1980s are, I believe, still there.
In range of what? There won't be no ISS by 2012, at least judging by how things are going now, it'll either fall apart or be abandoned due to lack of money.
Seriously, what do you do if you dump 100 billion into a scientific project, it is falling apart, behind schedule, and hasn't produced any science anyway, what do you do? You count it as loss and move on! It won't take till 2012 to realize that.
Besides, it was my understanding (and please correct me, if I am wrong - astronomy is not one of my strenghts) that the ISS orbit is way too low, and in many other aspects far from an ideal one for a telescope. It's not enough just to put a telescope in space - the space is a pretty big place. You have to choose a place. Choosing an orbit just so you can tie a new telescope to an old piece of junk that is already in space and might be there a little longer is just plain stupid. An orbit should be chosen to maximize its scientific potential.
Ah, don't worry. Hubble will be just fine. It's not how, but when you approach NASA asking for it not to be killed - just wait till this fall.
Right now NASA is wasting all its resources on ISS, which is starting to look more and more like a dead end. Right now we need to keep it alive and every shuttle when (and if) they ever fly will be used to haul stuff up to the ISS, instead of fixing some silly Hubble. Why do we do that? Because it's too hard to accept that we wasted billions of dollars on a station that's worthless. Well, not really worthless - if nothing else, we proved that we could have a space station just like the Russians did, even bigger and beter. So, now we can't accept the obvious fact that we wasted so much money irresponsibly, and our pride is not letting us part with the ISS.
When Bush wins the upcoming elections, that pride can go down the drain. However much I dislike him, I must admit that he's capable of making significant decisions, including unpopular ones if he feels like they are the right ones to make. Right any unpopular decisions that hurt American pride are out of question. But after the elections... start making your bets on how many weeks it'll take to abandon the project. He's already omitting ISS from his speaches about future space exploration.
Now, when we abandon ISS, and if the Shuttles fly (and I hope they will), there will be a few flights that NASA can dedicate to some real science, like servicing Hubble. So, keep pestering NASA bit by bit continuously about the Hubble - that way they'll remember it is a priority. And once we abandon ISS, really start reminding them that Hubble is too valuable to be trashed, and now we have some Shuttles to spare.
It's not about safety, or value to science. It's about money and timing. So, you know how they say 'pick your fights carefully'? Well, in addition to that, pick their timing carefully too! Just wait till the elections are over.
If I had a mod point, I'd give you another one.
When you plan something big, you plan a big contigency plan, even if it's expensive. $400M Mars rovers have many contigency plans, most satellites at least have insurance, etc. One of the best contigency plans for a milti-billion $$$ space station would be to make sure that there is more than one nation that can fly to it. Now think of Shuttles... Even when they DID fly, they were worthless for boosting the altitude and doing correction maneuvers; the progress ships were the only ones capable of that...
If you don't like the 50 deg. inclination orbit that is designed to fit the Russians better, fine! You'd be left with a dead station in a better orbit now (as opposed to a live, though not doing anything useful, station in an orbit you don't like as much). Take a pick.
I am still figuring out what that whole 'jumping off' thing is all about. WHere did we want to jump again?
I'll put it this way: my cable modem has had more downtime than my satellite TV over the last two years... ... and? Some things are just the basics of life. You've got to just accept them as they are - the grass is green, microsoft is a monopoly, cable modems are less reliably than your pinto, antarctica is cold...
United what?
No, I think I got that point. What I was referring to is the real-world situation when anything but a trivial HTML file will render very differently in different browsers, when implementations of javascript are so different that you feel like you are dealing with entirely different languages.
The only way to make sure your webapp works properly in IE is to actually run it in IE, which was the original statement. I don't think anyone can disagree with that. Now, my employer used to pay me to make sure our stuff worked flawlessly in IE, hence I was forced to use it, regardless of my preferences.
I think - No, dude, SCO is not the dark side of the open source movement. Aside from old Caldera, it has no relation to any side of the open source movement.
that I've adopted:
... and that's what I have adopted:
:)
"A web app that requires a single brand of browser is not a web app... it's a client/server app".
"An employer willing to pay you to develop an app that runs in a particular brand of browser is still an employer." And, in case that wasn't enough, I'd add "The cash that the aforementioned employer is willing to pay you is still cash". So forget about that 'any HTML should run in any browser' crap. That, or move to a perfect world and tell me where it is
I think it's akin to 'text readable'. Or 'MP3 playable'. From what I saw, it just tried to execute that HTML code in the browser, which should simply result in parsing it, no?