Let's say it takes 1.5 minutes to download a song. Let's say each kid has a seperate computer with a dedicated connection.
45 songs/hour * 48 hrs * 3 kids = 6,480 songs.
That's IF they spent no time searching and downloaded for 2 days straight. Aren't minors required by law to work something less than 24 hrs a day, anyway?
Hmm, ever hear of filling up a download queue and then doing whatever else you want while the computer downloads your choices automagically? It's not as if you need to be there pressing some magical download button constantly.
Who around here would want to do code maintenance or . debugging, etc on a complex code project that is as described.
You do the maintanence on the code that is not obfuscated, then you obfuscate it when you actually publish it. You just permanently save the clear code (which you wrote in the first place) for doing your mods, while only compiling and releasing the obfuscated mess. You don't ever even need to look at the obfuscated code - you only use it for compiling and public release.
The article looks real, but is probably about 5 years too late. I don't know of many people who use external modems. As for routers: the theoretical upper limit is 10Mbs, so my 100Mbps network is safe.
What about all the external NAT routers? What about external cable and xDSL modems?
Also, even if you have a 100Mbps connection, you probably aren't fully utilizing that capacity all of the time, so portions of your sessions may in fact be susceptible to this (if it works at all).
How can Microsoft state that they cannot create an OS without an imbedded browser, when Solaris, BSD, and Linux are all perfectly viable, and usable operating systems, that do not have the browser imbedded in them. Someone please enlighten me.
They aren't saying that they can not create a new OS without an embedded browser - they are saying that they can not remove the already embedded browser (Internet Explorer) from their current OS's without breaking them to the point where they would no longer function. That's a big difference, and whether or not you believe them is up to you.
Why didn't they do anything else interesting. If you are going to screen for something, why not go all out?
Read the article - her family had a history of very early alzheimers, where they would be in the full stages of it by age 40. This was an attempt to prevent the 50% likelihood of the offspring having alzheimers by age 40 as well.
At one point, the major weakness of D3D is that it has no future largely because it is not cross-platform capable, but when he gets to OpenGL, he states that OpenGL's cross-platform capabilities are irrelevant anyway. So which is it?
Should have specified Windows-only developers
on
The Problem Of Developing
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The question left for the reader is where this leaves developers. Was it a better world when developers could chose different languages based on the requirements of the application? Or should all languages do the same thing with different syntaxes? Microsoft has decided which way it prefers, and choice is out.
You still can choose different languages. Nothing says you can't use C/C++, VB 6, Perl, Python, or whatever else you want. While the implication in the article is that all developers have only two choices, the article should have said that Windows-specific developers are left with the two choices of Java or the CLR languages while other developers are still free to choose the tools that fit the problem. Nothing has changed unless you are only going to do Win32 programming.
Anyway, don't you need a license from Sony to develop software for the dreamcast? If you don't have one, how is wrong to restrict access to a tool that's only purpose is do development, even if its academic.
No wonder the Dreamcast folded - you apparently need a license from Sony to develop software for it. Naturally, they denied all licenses so that Sega's product couldn't compete with the PS1/PS2.
Unfortunately, I think you are correct. That is part of the reason I posted that people could go to libraries rather than believing that they have to purchase a book in order to read it. If more people would go to libraries rather than purchasing all of their books, the libraries would be better off and so would civilization.
Libraries free? Kind of. And I believe in them. But the Gutenberg Project and its kin make my living room a library bigger than any in the world.
It's great that you use the library. It just seems that many people have the attitude around here that the only way to read a book is to purchase it. As you said, Gutenberg is a good resource, but you are largely out-of-luck if you want to read anything fairly recent. Libraries can assist with that, and often carry out-of-print works that are still not available on Gutenberg because of the copyright restrictions. Cheers.
This has opened up the world for me. I thought I was well-educated until I realized how many classics I'd never touched. And FREE. To buy them would have cost me a couple thousand dollars--and many are just not available any more.
I have some information about a special place for you - you may have even heard of it. They have these great places called libraries, where you get to borrow a book and read it for free. All you have to do is get a card and agree to return whatever you borrow, and you can read all of the classics that you want for FREE.
The index would send color-coded signals to airlines. Green would indicate no problem. Yellow would indicate the need for more questioning. Red means apprehend. Ogilvie said the company would try to offer the same sort of service to cruise ships and other facilities that want to bolster security.
This could make security worse. People with little technological training (airline security screeners) often put so much faith in a computer system that if it says something, it must be so. This will result in the screeners seeing a green light and thinking, "This person got green, he can go on through." Unfortunately, they will be looking more at the light and less at the entire circumstances surrounding each passenger because they will trust the all-knowing computer - "just look at how much data it has, it must be right! And gee, if I see the green light I don't have to do any extra work."
For instance, if somebody has a normal name, doesn't have any irregular travel patterns, doesn't have any warrants, and buys their own ticket with a return trip in advance, they will get a green light in most cases. Now, the problem with that is simply that just because you don't have a recorded history of problems doesn't mean you won't cause problems. So, the screeners will just waive you on through because they don't know that this will be your first and last act of terrorism, you got a green light, and the green light will be all that matters to them. Great.
Well, let's see...alternatives. Pay them $10 an hour, and pay for benefits. Rough cost? Hmm, in a mediocre plan, roughly $400 a month. Translates into about $2.50 raise. Not exactly going to break the bank.
A $2.50/hour raise may not look large, but it amounts to an increase of 25% in labor costs. Want to think again about whether that may "break the bank" when you apply that to several hundred/thousand workers?
Not that I always agree with the way the corporate folks run their businesses, but a 25% increase is not something you can just casually implement without raising the cost of the end product.
Isnt this the beauty of the GPL, AOL already has the full source to RedHat.
They acquire the talent, the distribution, and the brand recognition all in one move. It would save them money in the long run versus hiring knowledgeable people and creating a distro to capture the market share redhat already has.
It just makes more sense (for a large conglomerate) when moving into a new market to buy an established company than it does to start your own division that knows nothing about the new market and spend time playing catch-up. They can spend those resources instead on going where they want to go from the established base.
It better check for exact duplicates only, down to the variable names. Many undergraduate CS assignments are programs so basic that there are really only a few ways to implement them. It would suck to be a student who from scratch used the same algorithm as another student, and have them both flagged as cheaters.
Just use really odd variable names in your program, such as MyProfessorIsSuchADoink and you should be okay.
But Windows XP is not the only Microsoft product with security failings.
For example Microsoft Bob.
I've been waiting for a service pack for it for years. I'm just not as comfortable hooking Bob up to the internet as I once was. Bob has gotten more viral infections than an old French Whore in a port town.
That actually raises another point - how long would the companies be obligated to continue to release security patches for their old products, and how long would they be accountable for the security of their old products in general?
What about a belt drive? Or a shaft drive if you really want some nano-torque?
Well, they did take your statements into consideration:
Vernon fabricated a microchain rather than a microbelt because although silicon belts are tough and flexible, they are spring-like and produce too much torque on gears not aligned in a straight line.
While you could potentially get the source to a "small, insignificant program," it won't necessarily work. There are a variety of exclusions that an agency could use to keep the source code private, and just about any of the ones below could be bended to prevent release.
From the DOJ: The exemptions authorize federal agencies to withhold information covering: (1) classified national defense and foreign relations information; (2) internal agency rules and practices; (3) information that is prohibited from disclosure by another federal law; (4) trade secrets and other confidential business information; (5) inter-agency or intra-agency communications that are protected by legal privileges; (6) information involving matters of personal privacy; (7) certain types of information compiled for law enforcement purposes; (8) information relating to the supervision of financial institutions; and (9) geological information on wells. The three exclusions, which are rarely used, pertain to especially sensitive law enforcement and national security matters.
So, as you can see, the FOIA does *not* mean you have access to everything.
I am talking about the ones from his student days in Switzerland, which was prior to 1905 and around the time of the birth of his daughter.
The papers were mostly submitted to his professors, with a few going to professors at other institutions. I have read direct quotes from those professors obtained from their correspondance with him, and some were discounting or berating his works. I haven't read the title you mentioned, but have read others. I think we are talking slightly different periods here, which is where the confusion is coming from.
A variety of things were involved in that decision. In part I want to work on other projects and ideas. I've already been using some of the time freed up to rewrite the aacraid driver and to clean up some of the very old and grungy SCSI drivers instead.
It's also good that a system doesn't settle down with a sort of elite who created it and that new ideas and younger people are always stepping into the project. I want to be sure that when I'm an old fart there are plenty of people in the community with both the knowledge and the standing to call me an idiot when I say something stupid, rather than treat my words as gospel.
This is a refreshing attitude, and a wise one. People need the freedom to try new ideas without fear that their ideas will be rejected simply for being different than the currently accepted "gospel."
As an example, if Einstein had listened to his early professors in Switzerland, who thought they couldn't possibly be wrong and had nothing to learn from him, he would not have started down the road to many of his discoveries. Many of his early papers and theories were rejected simply because they didn't side with the accepted theories of the "experts." While not all of those early theories were correct, some were and formed the basis for his later work.
University was a slightly checkered career, not on the whole due to taking other people's computers apart but because of the rather odd rules at Aberystwyth. I learned a lot there (more from my own experiments and trying to achieve things than from the course), but because of the other courses you had to pass (Physics in my case) ended up changing university to one that didn't require I could do physics but required I could do computer science.
Here is the key part that follows:
Looking back on university I'm very glad I did it. At the time I thought management skills, software engineering, databases and even bits of maths like proof by induction were completely irrelevant. I've used all of them in my Linux work. - Alan Cox
Maybe I should file this one away for those fairly regular Ask Slashdot questions about whether one should go to university or just get a certification in order to work in the computer industry. Attending university is not the end-all-be-all, but his comment does sum up one of the best arguments for seeking a degree.
From the article:... the groups $35 million per year budget is a trivial slice of the NASA pie, but on a dollars-per-line basis, it makes the group among the nation's most expensive software organizations.
I don't think following their method is a viable commercial model. You would virtually always be beaten to the market, and you would have such large up-front costs that you may not be able to survive until the software is released and selling well. NASA has the benefits of massive funding and defined problems that they can wait to solve correctly rather than worrying about selling a product just to survive. Oh, and if they don't do it right, somebody may be killed. That's a large incentive to spend the time and dollars necessary for nearly flawless software, but it doesn't translate to most corporations' markets - thus the release of buggy software that requires later patching.
it advertised "Deleted Scenes" but thoes scenes wernt in the movie, they were in a seperate menu, and some of them would have helped the movie
Many of the discs I own with deleted scenes do not put them back into the movie because they were cut before they were brought up to production quality. If they had put them in, they would have had to match lighting and sound levels, for which they may not have wanted to spend the time and/or money to do - but, by putting them in the DVD menus in their unfinished state, I still get to see the cut footage and have some added insight into the director's vision. I think that is valuable on its own, and would rather have the cut footage included unfinished than not see it at all because it couldn't be worked back into the movie.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's say it takes 1.5 minutes to download a song. Let's say each kid has a seperate computer with a dedicated connection.
45 songs/hour * 48 hrs * 3 kids = 6,480 songs.
That's IF they spent no time searching and downloaded for 2 days straight. Aren't minors required by law to work something less than 24 hrs a day, anyway?
Hmm, ever hear of filling up a download queue and then doing whatever else you want while the computer downloads your choices automagically? It's not as if you need to be there pressing some magical download button constantly.
Who around here would want to do code maintenance or . debugging, etc on a complex code project that is as described.
You do the maintanence on the code that is not obfuscated, then you obfuscate it when you actually publish it. You just permanently save the clear code (which you wrote in the first place) for doing your mods, while only compiling and releasing the obfuscated mess. You don't ever even need to look at the obfuscated code - you only use it for compiling and public release.
The article looks real, but is probably about 5 years too late. I don't know of many people who use external modems. As for routers: the theoretical upper limit is 10Mbs, so my 100Mbps network is safe.
What about all the external NAT routers? What about external cable and xDSL modems?
Also, even if you have a 100Mbps connection, you probably aren't fully utilizing that capacity all of the time, so portions of your sessions may in fact be susceptible to this (if it works at all).
How can Microsoft state that they cannot create an OS without an imbedded browser, when Solaris, BSD, and Linux are all perfectly viable, and usable operating systems, that do not have the browser imbedded in them. Someone please enlighten me.
They aren't saying that they can not create a new OS without an embedded browser - they are saying that they can not remove the already embedded browser (Internet Explorer) from their current OS's without breaking them to the point where they would no longer function. That's a big difference, and whether or not you believe them is up to you.
Why didn't they do anything else interesting. If you are going to screen for something, why not go all out?
Read the article - her family had a history of very early alzheimers, where they would be in the full stages of it by age 40. This was an attempt to prevent the 50% likelihood of the offspring having alzheimers by age 40 as well.
At one point, the major weakness of D3D is that it has no future largely because it is not cross-platform capable, but when he gets to OpenGL, he states that OpenGL's cross-platform capabilities are irrelevant anyway. So which is it?
The question left for the reader is where this leaves developers. Was it a better world when developers could chose different languages based on the requirements of the application? Or should all languages do the same thing with different syntaxes? Microsoft has decided which way it prefers, and choice is out.
You still can choose different languages. Nothing says you can't use C/C++, VB 6, Perl, Python, or whatever else you want. While the implication in the article is that all developers have only two choices, the article should have said that Windows-specific developers are left with the two choices of Java or the CLR languages while other developers are still free to choose the tools that fit the problem. Nothing has changed unless you are only going to do Win32 programming.
Anyway, don't you need a license from Sony to develop software for the dreamcast? If you don't have one, how is wrong to restrict access to a tool that's only purpose is do development, even if its academic.
No wonder the Dreamcast folded - you apparently need a license from Sony to develop software for it. Naturally, they denied all licenses so that Sega's product couldn't compete with the PS1/PS2.
Unfortunately, I think you are correct. That is part of the reason I posted that people could go to libraries rather than believing that they have to purchase a book in order to read it. If more people would go to libraries rather than purchasing all of their books, the libraries would be better off and so would civilization.
Libraries free? Kind of. And I believe in them. But the Gutenberg Project and its kin make my living room a library bigger than any in the world.
It's great that you use the library. It just seems that many people have the attitude around here that the only way to read a book is to purchase it. As you said, Gutenberg is a good resource, but you are largely out-of-luck if you want to read anything fairly recent. Libraries can assist with that, and often carry out-of-print works that are still not available on Gutenberg because of the copyright restrictions. Cheers.
This has opened up the world for me. I thought I was well-educated until I realized how many classics I'd never touched. And FREE. To buy them would have cost me a couple thousand dollars--and many are just not available any more.
I have some information about a special place for you - you may have even heard of it. They have these great places called libraries, where you get to borrow a book and read it for free. All you have to do is get a card and agree to return whatever you borrow, and you can read all of the classics that you want for FREE.
The index would send color-coded signals to airlines. Green would indicate no problem. Yellow would indicate the need for more questioning. Red means apprehend. Ogilvie said the company would try to offer the same sort of service to cruise ships and other facilities that want to bolster security.
This could make security worse. People with little technological training (airline security screeners) often put so much faith in a computer system that if it says something, it must be so. This will result in the screeners seeing a green light and thinking, "This person got green, he can go on through." Unfortunately, they will be looking more at the light and less at the entire circumstances surrounding each passenger because they will trust the all-knowing computer - "just look at how much data it has, it must be right! And gee, if I see the green light I don't have to do any extra work."
For instance, if somebody has a normal name, doesn't have any irregular travel patterns, doesn't have any warrants, and buys their own ticket with a return trip in advance, they will get a green light in most cases. Now, the problem with that is simply that just because you don't have a recorded history of problems doesn't mean you won't cause problems. So, the screeners will just waive you on through because they don't know that this will be your first and last act of terrorism, you got a green light, and the green light will be all that matters to them. Great.
Well, let's see...alternatives. Pay them $10 an hour, and pay for benefits. Rough cost? Hmm, in a mediocre plan, roughly $400 a month. Translates into about $2.50 raise. Not exactly going to break the bank.
A $2.50/hour raise may not look large, but it amounts to an increase of 25% in labor costs. Want to think again about whether that may "break the bank" when you apply that to several hundred/thousand workers?
Not that I always agree with the way the corporate folks run their businesses, but a 25% increase is not something you can just casually implement without raising the cost of the end product.
Isnt this the beauty of the GPL, AOL already has the full source to RedHat.
They acquire the talent, the distribution, and the brand recognition all in one move. It would save them money in the long run versus hiring knowledgeable people and creating a distro to capture the market share redhat already has.
It just makes more sense (for a large conglomerate) when moving into a new market to buy an established company than it does to start your own division that knows nothing about the new market and spend time playing catch-up. They can spend those resources instead on going where they want to go from the established base.
Like all true geeks, Love doesn't forget to include in his comments that, despite being a computer nerd, he does, in fact, have a girlfriend.
RL: Approximately how much time per week do you spend working on your kernel patch for Linux?
Love: My girlfriend would probably say too much. Anywhere from a couple hours a week to many hours a day.
It better check for exact duplicates only, down to the variable names. Many undergraduate CS assignments are programs so basic that there are really only a few ways to implement them. It would suck to be a student who from scratch used the same algorithm as another student, and have them both flagged as cheaters.
Just use really odd variable names in your program, such as MyProfessorIsSuchADoink and you should be okay.
But Windows XP is not the only Microsoft product with security failings.
For example Microsoft Bob.
I've been waiting for a service pack for it for years. I'm just not as comfortable hooking Bob up to the internet as I once was. Bob has gotten more viral infections than an old French Whore in a port town.
That actually raises another point - how long would the companies be obligated to continue to release security patches for their old products, and how long would they be accountable for the security of their old products in general?
What about a belt drive? Or a shaft drive if you really want some nano-torque?
Well, they did take your statements into consideration:
Vernon fabricated a microchain rather than a microbelt because although silicon belts are tough and flexible, they are spring-like and produce too much torque on gears not aligned in a straight line.
The pdf version is much easier to read through than the site.
While you could potentially get the source to a "small, insignificant program," it won't necessarily work. There are a variety of exclusions that an agency could use to keep the source code private, and just about any of the ones below could be bended to prevent release.
From the DOJ: The exemptions authorize federal agencies to withhold information covering: (1) classified national defense and foreign relations information; (2) internal agency rules and practices; (3) information that is prohibited from disclosure by another federal law; (4) trade secrets and other confidential business information; (5) inter-agency or intra-agency communications that are protected by legal privileges; (6) information involving matters of personal privacy; (7) certain types of information compiled for law enforcement purposes; (8) information relating to the supervision of financial institutions; and (9) geological information on wells. The three exclusions, which are rarely used, pertain to especially sensitive law enforcement and national security matters.
So, as you can see, the FOIA does *not* mean you have access to everything.
Here is more information:
FOIA Reference Guide
I am talking about the ones from his student days in Switzerland, which was prior to 1905 and around the time of the birth of his daughter.
The papers were mostly submitted to his professors, with a few going to professors at other institutions. I have read direct quotes from those professors obtained from their correspondance with him, and some were discounting or berating his works. I haven't read the title you mentioned, but have read others. I think we are talking slightly different periods here, which is where the confusion is coming from.
A variety of things were involved in that decision. In part I want to work on other projects and ideas. I've already been using some of the time freed up to rewrite the aacraid driver and to clean up some of the very old and grungy SCSI drivers instead.
It's also good that a system doesn't settle down with a sort of elite who created it and that new ideas and younger people are always stepping into the project. I want to be sure that when I'm an old fart there are plenty of people in the community with both the knowledge and the standing to call me an idiot when I say something stupid, rather than treat my words as gospel.
This is a refreshing attitude, and a wise one. People need the freedom to try new ideas without fear that their ideas will be rejected simply for being different than the currently accepted "gospel."
As an example, if Einstein had listened to his early professors in Switzerland, who thought they couldn't possibly be wrong and had nothing to learn from him, he would not have started down the road to many of his discoveries. Many of his early papers and theories were rejected simply because they didn't side with the accepted theories of the "experts." While not all of those early theories were correct, some were and formed the basis for his later work.
From his section on university:
University was a slightly checkered career, not on the whole due to taking other people's computers apart but because of the rather odd rules at Aberystwyth. I learned a lot there (more from my own experiments and trying to achieve things than from the course), but because of the other courses you had to pass (Physics in my case) ended up changing university to one that didn't require I could do physics but required I could do computer science.
Here is the key part that follows:
Looking back on university I'm very glad I did it. At the time I thought management skills, software engineering, databases and even bits of maths like proof by induction were completely irrelevant. I've used all of them in my Linux work. - Alan Cox
Maybe I should file this one away for those fairly regular Ask Slashdot questions about whether one should go to university or just get a certification in order to work in the computer industry. Attending university is not the end-all-be-all, but his comment does sum up one of the best arguments for seeking a degree.
From the article: ... the groups $35 million per year budget is a trivial slice of the NASA pie, but on a dollars-per-line basis, it makes the group among the nation's most expensive software organizations.
I don't think following their method is a viable commercial model. You would virtually always be beaten to the market, and you would have such large up-front costs that you may not be able to survive until the software is released and selling well. NASA has the benefits of massive funding and defined problems that they can wait to solve correctly rather than worrying about selling a product just to survive. Oh, and if they don't do it right, somebody may be killed. That's a large incentive to spend the time and dollars necessary for nearly flawless software, but it doesn't translate to most corporations' markets - thus the release of buggy software that requires later patching.
it advertised "Deleted Scenes" but thoes scenes wernt in the movie, they were in a seperate menu, and some of them would have helped the movie
Many of the discs I own with deleted scenes do not put them back into the movie because they were cut before they were brought up to production quality. If they had put them in, they would have had to match lighting and sound levels, for which they may not have wanted to spend the time and/or money to do - but, by putting them in the DVD menus in their unfinished state, I still get to see the cut footage and have some added insight into the director's vision. I think that is valuable on its own, and would rather have the cut footage included unfinished than not see it at all because it couldn't be worked back into the movie.