>programmers that tend to approach problems with a 'black box', or 'virtual machine' mentality without considering the entire system?
I think there's a lot of truth in this. For example, how many programmers think about writing software from the standpoint of a support technician? In fact, how many programmers even have experience as a support technician? I've never even heard anyone even talk about writing supportable software, yet, when considering the overall costs or quality of a system, I think it's important to consider how heavily the introduction of that system will tax the support department. Whether you're shipping or deploying the system, lower support needs will lower over all costs and vastly improve the reputation of the system.
The same applies for security and usability. It's really not a question of programming/technical ability, but a question of mentality. I think programmers need to have a specific (or perhaps not-so-specific) mindset to get a bigger picture, and not very many programmers are willing to do that. Part of it may be inherent to programmer-types, but it also might be cultural (the whole "us vs. them" elitist attitude).
>how do you propose, genius, that they could have "repaired" the "damage" in space?
I've heard people say that nothing could've been done even if they had known, and maybe that indeed was the case. But I keep thinking of Apollo 13 where some of the most brilliant minds came to gether and took one broken ship all the way to the moon and back. Sure, it didn't have a damaged heat shield, but they certain didn't give up on it either.
Had we known, they may have at least made an attempt at saving 7 lives, and who knows, maybe it could've made a difference. Saying "we couldn't have done anything" sounds more like a rationalization for not having done everything that could've been done.
From the CNN article:
>people are reluctant to install them for fear they will interfere with their systems.
Our DBA installed the patch on our server at work, and it's been blue screening every few days... Blue screening isn't something that should happen to a DB that drives an eCommerce site.
We're thinking of switching to MySQL on MacOS X servers, since everything else is either on MacOS X or FreeBSD. MacOS X sounds like a good choice because Apple usually comes out with patches through the Secutiy Update software that's easy to use and it actually works.
Or why not go after the software vendor that wrote and sold vulnerable software? Or go after the software vendor for dumbing down systems so much that incompetent admins are put in charge to maintain them?
Personally, I don't think the whole "blame game" is very effective...but that's just me.
If you have your own server or host, you can setup different aliases for various online services that require email addresses. So if you go to randomsite.com, you can create an alias called randomsite@domain.com. When you start receiving spam at that address, you simply forward everything to/dev/null. You also get evidence that randomsite.com is selling email addresses, should you wish to persuit the matter further.
Combine that with the usual safeguards, and you probably won't receive any spam. I know I don't, at least...
It very well could be. But it also very well may not be. I'm not making a judgement either way because I haven't seen enough evidence for either case. What's so difficult to understand about that?
From the article: Marvel subsidiary Toy Biz Inc. pushed Judge Barzilay to declare its heroes nonhuman
Ironic, isn't it? The creators (well, sort of) asked them to be classified as non-humans to lower tariffs on imported plastic figures, yet in the actual stories they strive for acceptance.
The score: Capitalism: 1, acceptance of mutants: nil.
>What is really scary is the number of people who won't even entertain an idea because some "expert" says it's nutso
There's a difference between entertaining an idea and believing in one. I entertain the idea of extraterrestrial life, but I don't think every unidentified flying object is one. I'll believe it when someone proves their existence using logical reasoning and not wishful thinking.
Yeah, that's what it seems like...but where's the MPAA? I'm thinking they've gone around for a flanking maneuver. Sneaky bastards...
Although, it'd be nice if they just had a simple difference in opinion. If we could get the RIAA and MPAA to fight each other, that'd solve our problems. Doubt it would ever happen though.
>Apple may benefit simply by virtue of having multiple browsers on the market.
I agree, but I think we can extend that to say "multiple Open Source browsers on the market." I think Apple adopting and improving on KHTML helps the KHTML guys, which makes them a better competitor to Mozilla. The same way a M$ monopoly is harmful to the industry, a monopoly by one Open Source browser, IMHO, is also not a good thing. So at the end, I think this will help everybody, not just Apple.
It's really a matter of mindset and habit. It's an easy problem to avoid if you get to the point where a little flag goes off in your head every time you see an unchecked variable passed to a function that accesses files (i.e. include(), fopen()).
>It's all about the analytical thinking skills, which are generally very important for CS folks. Math proves that you have them.
Not being good at math doesn't mean you don't have analystical skills.
I'm not good at math because I don't like it, and I'm not smart enough to get an A in calculus without doing the work (I can get a B though). But I can kick most math majors' asses in programming, or general applied analytical thinking, any time of day.
I definitely wouldn't want to be a soldier once they figure these things out. After all, if the soldiers could get nutrition from a patch, why feed them at all? Or at least that's what their thinking will be.
It's not the end of the world, but it could be the end of the web as we know it (and for some people, that's the same as the end of the world).
Let me put it this way. Microsoft owns the browsert market (unfortunately), and a sizable chunk of the server market (not a huge chunk, but big enough). Macromedia owns the content development market. If Microsoft manages to buy Macromedia, they'll own the entire process, from your browser to the server. It's called "vertical integration" if I recall correctly, and it's a very bad thing for consumers.
And somebody tell me. Why the hell did our incompetent courts not shut down that monster when they had the chance? Oh, right, they're incompetent. Forgot about that....
>Yet, the porn industry has been able to thrive even in a highly saturated market.
You don't ever mess with the porn industry. And the MPAA knows that.
I'm serious. The porn industry has proven itself to be vital in propogation of new technologies. Whether it's the internet, "rich content" or cable TV, the porn industry has always lead the industry at large. Killing the porn industry is equivalent to technological suicide.
Re:Cable is Better in YOUR area
on
DSL Rising
·
· Score: 2
>Of course, Europe didn't really need to run much coax to begin with.
And they didn't have much TV to begin with. When I moved to Germany in 1990, we got 2 or 3 channels, and their content sucked (looked like something from the 70's in the US). By '97 or so, IIRC, we had 5 or 6 channels, and the quality had also gone way up (on par with the US, for the most part).
I think the bottom line is that Europeans, in general, aren't nearly as obsessed with TV as Americans are (which, IMHO, is a good thing).
I work. But I spend most of my time working on my own project because it only takes me 10% of the alloted time to do what they tell me to do.
Re:Not only useful for dating...
on
Googling For Dates?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I try to have a good resume, keep up my GPA, keep a clean traffic record and on top of all that, I have to keep a clean Google Record. Who says it's easy living in the information age?
>I run a store. I'd like to give away my products *and* pay my mortgage. It ain't gonna happen.
Oh, it happens (on this planet too). Phone companies give away cell phones and cell service. Gilette gives away disposable razors and sells replacement blades. Radio stations give away music and sell air time for commercials. It's actually a well known business model. The tough part, at least for me, is to apply the same for my software.
> When it comes to putting bread on the table [...] I'd rather be a suit.
Maybe I shouldn't be speaking since I'm a college student and only have myself to feed, but I sure hope I don't ever say "I'd rather be a suit." Maybe it sounds immature and naive when I say this, but to me, it sounds an aweful lot like admitting defeat and submitting to the norm.
Personally, I'd like to give my software away for free and still put bread on the table. I don't know if it's possible, but I like to think it is. And I'll be damned if I don't at least try.
> Big companies still don't care about your rights!
Yeah, I don't see what the big deal is either. Especially for the slashdot crowd... I mean, everybody here should know that when an ISP sends you a "new and improved" version with "amazing new features," installing it is the last thing you want to do.
Slashdot Mirror
I think there's a lot of truth in this. For example, how many programmers think about writing software from the standpoint of a support technician? In fact, how many programmers even have experience as a support technician? I've never even heard anyone even talk about writing supportable software, yet, when considering the overall costs or quality of a system, I think it's important to consider how heavily the introduction of that system will tax the support department. Whether you're shipping or deploying the system, lower support needs will lower over all costs and vastly improve the reputation of the system.
The same applies for security and usability. It's really not a question of programming/technical ability, but a question of mentality. I think programmers need to have a specific (or perhaps not-so-specific) mindset to get a bigger picture, and not very many programmers are willing to do that. Part of it may be inherent to programmer-types, but it also might be cultural (the whole "us vs. them" elitist attitude).
I've heard people say that nothing could've been done even if they had known, and maybe that indeed was the case. But I keep thinking of Apollo 13 where some of the most brilliant minds came to gether and took one broken ship all the way to the moon and back. Sure, it didn't have a damaged heat shield, but they certain didn't give up on it either.
Had we known, they may have at least made an attempt at saving 7 lives, and who knows, maybe it could've made a difference. Saying "we couldn't have done anything" sounds more like a rationalization for not having done everything that could've been done.
>people are reluctant to install them for fear they will interfere with their systems.
Our DBA installed the patch on our server at work, and it's been blue screening every few days... Blue screening isn't something that should happen to a DB that drives an eCommerce site.
We're thinking of switching to MySQL on MacOS X servers, since everything else is either on MacOS X or FreeBSD. MacOS X sounds like a good choice because Apple usually comes out with patches through the Secutiy Update software that's easy to use and it actually works.
Or why not go after the software vendor that wrote and sold vulnerable software? Or go after the software vendor for dumbing down systems so much that incompetent admins are put in charge to maintain them?
Personally, I don't think the whole "blame game" is very effective...but that's just me.
If you have your own server or host, you can setup different aliases for various online services that require email addresses. So if you go to randomsite.com, you can create an alias called randomsite@domain.com. When you start receiving spam at that address, you simply forward everything to /dev/null. You also get evidence that randomsite.com is selling email addresses, should you wish to persuit the matter further.
Combine that with the usual safeguards, and you probably won't receive any spam. I know I don't, at least...
It very well could be. But it also very well may not be. I'm not making a judgement either way because I haven't seen enough evidence for either case. What's so difficult to understand about that?
Marvel subsidiary Toy Biz Inc. pushed Judge Barzilay to declare its heroes nonhuman
Ironic, isn't it? The creators (well, sort of) asked them to be classified as non-humans to lower tariffs on imported plastic figures, yet in the actual stories they strive for acceptance.
The score: Capitalism: 1, acceptance of mutants: nil.
There's a difference between entertaining an idea and believing in one. I entertain the idea of extraterrestrial life, but I don't think every unidentified flying object is one. I'll believe it when someone proves their existence using logical reasoning and not wishful thinking.
Yeah, that's what it seems like...but where's the MPAA? I'm thinking they've gone around for a flanking maneuver. Sneaky bastards...
Although, it'd be nice if they just had a simple difference in opinion. If we could get the RIAA and MPAA to fight each other, that'd solve our problems. Doubt it would ever happen though.
I agree, but I think we can extend that to say "multiple Open Source browsers on the market." I think Apple adopting and improving on KHTML helps the KHTML guys, which makes them a better competitor to Mozilla. The same way a M$ monopoly is harmful to the industry, a monopoly by one Open Source browser, IMHO, is also not a good thing. So at the end, I think this will help everybody, not just Apple.
It's really a matter of mindset and habit. It's an easy problem to avoid if you get to the point where a little flag goes off in your head every time you see an unchecked variable passed to a function that accesses files (i.e. include(), fopen()).
Not being good at math doesn't mean you don't have analystical skills.
I'm not good at math because I don't like it, and I'm not smart enough to get an A in calculus without doing the work (I can get a B though). But I can kick most math majors' asses in programming, or general applied analytical thinking, any time of day.
I definitely wouldn't want to be a soldier once they figure these things out. After all, if the soldiers could get nutrition from a patch, why feed them at all? Or at least that's what their thinking will be.
It's not the end of the world, but it could be the end of the web as we know it (and for some people, that's the same as the end of the world).
Let me put it this way. Microsoft owns the browsert market (unfortunately), and a sizable chunk of the server market (not a huge chunk, but big enough). Macromedia owns the content development market. If Microsoft manages to buy Macromedia, they'll own the entire process, from your browser to the server. It's called "vertical integration" if I recall correctly, and it's a very bad thing for consumers.
And somebody tell me. Why the hell did our incompetent courts not shut down that monster when they had the chance? Oh, right, they're incompetent. Forgot about that....
Uh...wait. So you're telling me that we were supposed to be bathing this whole time?! Oh my god! Why didn't anyone tell me this earlier?
You don't ever mess with the porn industry. And the MPAA knows that.
I'm serious. The porn industry has proven itself to be vital in propogation of new technologies. Whether it's the internet, "rich content" or cable TV, the porn industry has always lead the industry at large. Killing the porn industry is equivalent to technological suicide.
And they didn't have much TV to begin with. When I moved to Germany in 1990, we got 2 or 3 channels, and their content sucked (looked like something from the 70's in the US). By '97 or so, IIRC, we had 5 or 6 channels, and the quality had also gone way up (on par with the US, for the most part).
I think the bottom line is that Europeans, in general, aren't nearly as obsessed with TV as Americans are (which, IMHO, is a good thing).
Am I the only one who interpreted "Googling for a date" to mean "Use google to find a date"?
Actually, that wouldn't be a bad idea: a Google-based dating service. A match-making algorith can't be that different to a search algorithm, could it?
I work. But I spend most of my time working on my own project because it only takes me 10% of the alloted time to do what they tell me to do.
I try to have a good resume, keep up my GPA, keep a clean traffic record and on top of all that, I have to keep a clean Google Record. Who says it's easy living in the information age?
Oh, it happens (on this planet too). Phone companies give away cell phones and cell service. Gilette gives away disposable razors and sells replacement blades. Radio stations give away music and sell air time for commercials. It's actually a well known business model. The tough part, at least for me, is to apply the same for my software.
I lost 60lb since leaving home 5 years ago. If I trim down any more, I'm afraid I might start floating!
Maybe I shouldn't be speaking since I'm a college student and only have myself to feed, but I sure hope I don't ever say "I'd rather be a suit." Maybe it sounds immature and naive when I say this, but to me, it sounds an aweful lot like admitting defeat and submitting to the norm.
Personally, I'd like to give my software away for free and still put bread on the table. I don't know if it's possible, but I like to think it is. And I'll be damned if I don't at least try.
That's impressive. Except...they're still not profitable? Wow. They must've been screwing up big time before.
It's still nice to hear some good news for once I guess.
Yeah, I don't see what the big deal is either. Especially for the slashdot crowd... I mean, everybody here should know that when an ISP sends you a "new and improved" version with "amazing new features," installing it is the last thing you want to do.