A nation has a problem when more than 10% of it's GNP is tied up in government. Sure government spends the money it gets. But it is economically more efficient to allow private industry to provide services to the people.
A government providing social services is the devil. There are MANY situations where things need regulation. And it IS the business of governments to undertake such tasks. However, I believe that there needs to be a better balance of regulatory ridiculosness, and proper consumer protection.
But hey, its OUR PLANET we're talking about, so why take chances?
***********
Money?
1. Scientific American slams the book because it doesn't want to upset it's left leaning advertisers/readers?
2. The Economost approves of the book because it doesn't want to upset it's right leaning advertisers/readers?
Not only this... but people tend to forget that money and *Enviromental REGULATION* are directly opposed, but money and *CARE for the environment* don't have to be.
I truly believe there is a greater chance of our nation regulating itself into oblivion rather than our nation using all of the world's resources. *grin*
1. This may be obvious... but I would say that anyone can build an insecure program with any language.
2. I've used C#, it's in the programmer's interest to *not* use unmanaged code both time wise, and in many cases speed wise (the conversion of managed data types to unmanaged data types and back, is expensive.)
3. If we're concerned about unmanaged code, we should really be bitching about the latest version of C++ which (gasp) allows unmanaged code.
essentially this whole argument is moot. it's easier to use managed code, the performance cost is negligible, and poorly writen managed code is a far more likely threat than well written unmanaged code.
just my $.02
-george
As much as I'm a fan of competition. I hate to see useless lawsuites like this. It's not like Netscape is going to be able to sue themselves into profitabillity. They're going down the tubes... there's no reason to waste resources on paying for lawyers, courts, settlements.
The only promising thing is perhaps Orin Hatch won't be involved with this one.
Slashdot Mirror
A nation has a problem when more than 10% of it's GNP is tied up in government. Sure government spends the money it gets. But it is economically more efficient to allow private industry to provide services to the people.
A government providing social services is the devil. There are MANY situations where things need regulation. And it IS the business of governments to undertake such tasks. However, I believe that there needs to be a better balance of regulatory ridiculosness, and proper consumer protection.
***********
But hey, its OUR PLANET we're talking about, so why take chances?
***********
Money?
1. Scientific American slams the book because it doesn't want to upset it's left leaning advertisers/readers?
2. The Economost approves of the book because it doesn't want to upset it's right leaning advertisers/readers?
Not only this... but people tend to forget that money and *Enviromental REGULATION* are directly opposed, but money and *CARE for the environment* don't have to be.
I truly believe there is a greater chance of our nation regulating itself into oblivion rather than our nation using all of the world's resources. *grin*
food for thought.
think globaly, act locally.
don't regulate things to death.
less government is better.
Unsafe code = Unmanaged code =
allows pointers, direct allocation of memory, and you have to keep track of your own garbage collection
Insecure Code =
loginfunc(username,password)
{
return 1;
}
1. This may be obvious... but I would say that anyone can build an insecure program with any language.
2. I've used C#, it's in the programmer's interest to *not* use unmanaged code both time wise, and in many cases speed wise (the conversion of managed data types to unmanaged data types and back, is expensive.)
3. If we're concerned about unmanaged code, we should really be bitching about the latest version of C++ which (gasp) allows unmanaged code.
essentially this whole argument is moot. it's easier to use managed code, the performance cost is negligible, and poorly writen managed code is a far more likely threat than well written unmanaged code.
just my $.02
-george
As much as I'm a fan of competition. I hate to see useless lawsuites like this. It's not like Netscape is going to be able to sue themselves into profitabillity. They're going down the tubes... there's no reason to waste resources on paying for lawyers, courts, settlements.
The only promising thing is perhaps Orin Hatch won't be involved with this one.