I received for Christmas, "The Meaning of Everything", by Simon Winchester. This gives a very interesting and compelling account of the genesis of the dictionary, some of the very strange characters who contributed and the process by which entries are constructed. A very interesting read.
Not true. If you distribute the binary, you are responsible for making the source available to the recipient. It's not enough to link to someone else's website; you must provide the source on request.
I bet you anything that if Linux was the defacto standard for desktops in the home and enterprise, that we would see a hell of a lot more security issues arise on that platform.
But you wouldn't have somebody in authority effectively stating that problems can be addressed by keeping them quiet. If somebody from one of the distributions did say that, users would be able to make a judgement on whether or not it might be better to migrate to a competing supplier. Emphasis on competing. The only reason MS can pay somebody to spout nonsense like this is because they have a monopoly. I hope and believe that that time is coming to an end now.
I think that it's a bit unfair to criticize the entire Guardian staff based on something that Jack Schofield says about Free or Open Source software. The man is fanatical in his hatred of FOSS; the only interesting question about this is, "why?" I personally believe that he's simply "trolling" for readers. There are lots of people like me who tend to read his column in Guardian Online on Thursdays, just to see what boneheaded nonsense he has come out with this time. (I have, however, stopped buying the Guardian on Thursdays as I don't want to financially support them while they print such rubbish). Other people believe that his behaviour is more characteristic of a person who is scared in some way. He is clearly very familiar with Windows and he might be one of those who would prefer not to learn another operating system (in which case you might reasonably ask why he's a technical journalist, of course!) Another school of thought about his hostility is that when he first tried to install Linux he couldn't for some reason. When he went to the communities for help, somebody was a bit horrible to him and he's been bearing a grudge all these years. This is by far the most amusing theory!
I've just thought that there are some clued-up journalists who work for The Guardian and The Observer (for you non-UK readers, these papers are in the same ownership). Glyn Moody wrote the excellent, Rebel Code and he sometimes writes in The Guardian. And on Sunday there is the incomparable John Naughton, who wrote a compelling history of the internet. Naughton's column appears in the Business section of the Observer. It is required reading, IMHO.
That's a very nice report. I was just looking for a quick definition of HyperTransport and you've cleared it up nicely for me! One thing you might want to change is where it says that the AMD64 range always has 1024kb cache. That's no longer true with the Socket 754 AMD64 3000+, which has the same clock speed as the 3200+ but only half the cache.
It is a central strategy of Microsoft that they should seek to undermine standard protocols and use their huge influence to impose their own, proprietary methods. I would suggest that this is the opposite of "doing a lot for IT". By definition, having "standards" that are not standard raises costs for companies who want to use IT. How can he deserve a reward for this?
I sincerely hope you clicked on that ad and mooched around MS's website a little bit. I always do this because I want them to continue to pay to advertize on Slashdot.
It means "thunderbolt", specifically a thunderbolt from Thor's Hammer. I'd love to claim that I keep such knowledge in my head, but I read it only five minutes ago in the link which is included in the article!
You don't even need to RTFA. There's a very useful link in the article summary. It also explains why they rejected the F16 (essentially, at the time they were drawing up the specs, the F16 had a 3-minute start-up time whereas they wanted a maximum delay of 1 minute).
The essay referenced in this article directly contradicts Stallman's own statements, which actually advocate the use of the GPL to "pry" intellectual property away from institutions and businesses.
Boy, that was an impressive post!
Not only did you not read the article, you didn't even read the statement that you are trying to use to discredit it! Just in case you can't be bothered to read your own post either, what you said in your post does not contradict what the Groklaw article says at all.
You don't understand: it doesn't give me cause for concern because I _am_ a computing professional. I see software that affects thousands of computers belonging to other people where the manufacturers have no idea why. In fact, I usually have no idea why something goes wrong with my own software until I've spent a couple of hours looking at it. In fact, sometimes I never do find out what went wrong with my software.
Let me get this straight: You buy a product from a company. This company issues a patch for the product, but they have no idea how this patch got issued, as they thought they had decided not to issue any patches for the time being. And this doesn't give you cause for concern? And the fact that you're not concerned is supposed to prove to me that you're a computing professional? I see.
Seriously, I'm happy to believe that you are being paid; whether you are worth your salary is another matter entirely! All joking aside, this (Microsoft's problem) is not very good. They really should be doing better, given how much money they charge for their software.
The problem with this bug is that it will have affected thousands of computers belonging to other people. And Microsoft has no idea why this has happened. If that doesn't give you cause for concern, you're not a computing professional.
No it is not fucking understandable!! Even Microsoft doesn't understand how the patch came to be re-issued. How can it be "understandable" to you?! Jesus Christ, read the article!
What are you talking about? The Windows patch system issued a patch that Microsoft didn't expect it to issue!!! And you think that we Linux users want that?
Quick! They've done something really cool and clever. Let's Slashdot them back to the stone age. That'll teach them!
Re:This must be the first time..
on
The Opus Interview
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Opus is a leading character from a 1980s comic-strip called "Bloom County". The author of Bloom County is Berkeley Breathed. Opus is a penguin, a naive innocent in a crazy world. Arguably he has himself to blame for this, having been a tuba player in a heavy metal band called Deathtongue (later renamed to Billy and the Boingers) and twice run as a candidate for Vice President of the United States. On both occasions, his co-runner was a dead cat called Bill (he of the Boingers, and indeed the tongue).
Slashdot Mirror
I received for Christmas, "The Meaning of Everything", by Simon Winchester. This gives a very interesting and compelling account of the genesis of the dictionary, some of the very strange characters who contributed and the process by which entries are constructed. A very interesting read.
This might just be the most insightful comment I have ever read at Slashdot. My hat is off to you, iwbcman.
Not true. If you distribute the binary, you are responsible for making the source available to the recipient. It's not enough to link to someone else's website; you must provide the source on request.
But you wouldn't have somebody in authority effectively stating that problems can be addressed by keeping them quiet. If somebody from one of the distributions did say that, users would be able to make a judgement on whether or not it might be better to migrate to a competing supplier. Emphasis on competing. The only reason MS can pay somebody to spout nonsense like this is because they have a monopoly. I hope and believe that that time is coming to an end now.
My apologies for asking what is probably a stupid question, but does this thing run existing 32-bit applications as well?
I think that it's a bit unfair to criticize the entire Guardian staff based on something that Jack Schofield says about Free or Open Source software. The man is fanatical in his hatred of FOSS; the only interesting question about this is, "why?" I personally believe that he's simply "trolling" for readers. There are lots of people like me who tend to read his column in Guardian Online on Thursdays, just to see what boneheaded nonsense he has come out with this time. (I have, however, stopped buying the Guardian on Thursdays as I don't want to financially support them while they print such rubbish). Other people believe that his behaviour is more characteristic of a person who is scared in some way. He is clearly very familiar with Windows and he might be one of those who would prefer not to learn another operating system (in which case you might reasonably ask why he's a technical journalist, of course!) Another school of thought about his hostility is that when he first tried to install Linux he couldn't for some reason. When he went to the communities for help, somebody was a bit horrible to him and he's been bearing a grudge all these years. This is by far the most amusing theory!
I've just thought that there are some clued-up journalists who work for The Guardian and The Observer (for you non-UK readers, these papers are in the same ownership). Glyn Moody wrote the excellent, Rebel Code and he sometimes writes in The Guardian. And on Sunday there is the incomparable John Naughton, who wrote a compelling history of the internet. Naughton's column appears in the Business section of the Observer. It is required reading, IMHO.
That's a very nice report. I was just looking for a quick definition of HyperTransport and you've cleared it up nicely for me! One thing you might want to change is where it says that the AMD64 range always has 1024kb cache. That's no longer true with the Socket 754 AMD64 3000+, which has the same clock speed as the 3200+ but only half the cache.
It is a central strategy of Microsoft that they should seek to undermine standard protocols and use their huge influence to impose their own, proprietary methods. I would suggest that this is the opposite of "doing a lot for IT". By definition, having "standards" that are not standard raises costs for companies who want to use IT. How can he deserve a reward for this?
I sincerely hope you clicked on that ad and mooched around MS's website a little bit. I always do this because I want them to continue to pay to advertize on Slashdot.
Eh? What distro do you use? I've use SUSE and I've not compiled a kernel in YEARS.
I got it from reading the post. He asked what "Viggen" meant and said that he could work out what "Gripen" meant.
It means "thunderbolt", specifically a thunderbolt from Thor's Hammer. I'd love to claim that I keep such knowledge in my head, but I read it only five minutes ago in the link which is included in the article!
You don't even need to RTFA. There's a very useful link in the article summary. It also explains why they rejected the F16 (essentially, at the time they were drawing up the specs, the F16 had a 3-minute start-up time whereas they wanted a maximum delay of 1 minute).
Boy, that was an impressive post!
Not only did you not read the article, you didn't even read the statement that you are trying to use to discredit it! Just in case you can't be bothered to read your own post either, what you said in your post does not contradict what the Groklaw article says at all.
Let me get this straight: You buy a product from a company. This company issues a patch for the product, but they have no idea how this patch got issued, as they thought they had decided not to issue any patches for the time being. And this doesn't give you cause for concern? And the fact that you're not concerned is supposed to prove to me that you're a computing professional? I see.
Seriously, I'm happy to believe that you are being paid; whether you are worth your salary is another matter entirely! All joking aside, this (Microsoft's problem) is not very good. They really should be doing better, given how much money they charge for their software.
The problem with this bug is that it will have affected thousands of computers belonging to other people. And Microsoft has no idea why this has happened. If that doesn't give you cause for concern, you're not a computing professional.
No it is not fucking understandable!! Even Microsoft doesn't understand how the patch came to be re-issued. How can it be "understandable" to you?! Jesus Christ, read the article!
What are you talking about? The Windows patch system issued a patch that Microsoft didn't expect it to issue!!! And you think that we Linux users want that?
Fucking amateurs
I'm sure I don't know any more about the law than you do, but Lawrence Lessig does. And he seems to think that McBride's claims are preposterous. Another source for (para)legal opinions on this nonsense is Groklaw, where even Linus Torvalds has something to say about the latest McBride open letter.
"I see dead executives. Making press releases like regular executives. They don't know they're dead!"
Quick! They've done something really cool and clever. Let's Slashdot them back to the stone age. That'll teach them!
Opus is a leading character from a 1980s comic-strip called "Bloom County". The author of Bloom County is Berkeley Breathed. Opus is a penguin, a naive innocent in a crazy world. Arguably he has himself to blame for this, having been a tuba player in a heavy metal band called Deathtongue (later renamed to Billy and the Boingers) and twice run as a candidate for Vice President of the United States. On both occasions, his co-runner was a dead cat called Bill (he of the Boingers, and indeed the tongue).
Hope that's cleared it up for you!
I don't understand that. What's wrong with SUSE? SUSE is easily the equal of RedHat. (I'm talking about 8.2 here - I've not tried SUSE 9.0 yet).
No it doesn't.
Not true. Anyone who is a copyright holder on kernel code can (and probably should) sue.