Because we all know that there's only one style of programming that works for everyone and is guaranteed to be most efficient.
He wasn't talking about programming style. He was talking about programming, period.. I think that -- even if you find that you can productively get 'up to speed' on a programming task, you have to remember that (most?) others on your team will be working best under the '3-hour' rule. If you keep distracting them every 15 minutes this points to 2 things:
1) you're breaking their concntration cycle, which is probably much longer than yours.
2) do you really have any sort of concentration cycle at all??
they are just going to log in, use office, eudora, IE, etc. Most stuff works generally the same.
The transition to KDE/Gnome is much steeper of a learning curve.
Logs in, uses (Open) office, Mozilla (for both mail and surfing).Not much more to learn there.
Plus, in lots of small offices, they have some 'advanced' regular windows user who doubles as a sys admin/troubleshooter.
Same person will be happy as a pig in sh*t learning his/her way 'round Linux. Not much harder than learning their way 'round XP if they're only used to '95.
In my experience, Linux seems to be much easier for a user to learn because there's much better separation between user and admin space.
The free software is nice, but it does come at a considerable initial investiment in training and getting in someone who actually knows the system and can set it up and troubleshoot it.
$300-$400 per user will pay for a good bit of setup and training.
You'd have to do setup and training for XP too, BTW. For the most part, I'd expect that you'd have 4 or 5 Linx setups (max) that would handle 98% of all users.
The setup would actually be much easier because you don't have to worry about per-user licenses.. The only reason to not load everything would be disk space constraints (if you're trying to keep using the old disks on the old systems) amd install/upgrade bandwidth.. This would probably mean even fewer setup types.
My old roomie was a definite non-techie type. After a month or so of handholding (Mostly consisting of "How do I install Flash" type questions), he was in heaven with Linux. He stopped booting into Windows after about 2 weeks -- and started proselytizing Linux after about a month (no joke. He had me editing his rants the second month he was here). -- and that was on RH 5.2. Linux has gone a long way since then.
Linux/Unix programs now generally complain if you try to use really weak passwords.There's no reason why the MS equivalent's couldn't do the same thing -- especially for the admin password.
[samuel@localhost samuel]$ passwd Changing password for user samuel. Changing password for samuel (current) UNIX password: _______________ New password: _______ BAD PASSWORD: it is based on a dictionary word
Cantral Command (also known as the Vexira Anti-Virus people have a good bit more detail -- including a password list. If historical data is any indication, I'd expect about a 10-20% hit ratio just with the password 'password' (and simple variants thereof).
And when they found out they were on slashdot.....
on
Tcl Core Team Interview
·
· Score: 3, Funny
I definitely hate the "Install Linux, Problem Solved" crew,
Installing Linux won't get rid of all your problems. It'll trade your current problems for a brand new set of (hopefully much nicer) problems. -- Like "what do we do with the money we saved on Licensing? (Software development? tax cuts? (better) training?). You'll also have the obvious change-of-platform issues, but possibly less so than going from '95 to XP.
(I still can't get over the idea of having to worry about getting permission to upgrade my RAM...)
in addition, our parts database has pdf's, doc's, xls's and such as part of the oracle database. there is a web frontend, but what good is it if you can't open the microsoft attachments.
Never used Linux, have you?? Those are all openable under Linux -- especially the Win-95 versions which are the best reverse-engineered (if only due to the time that they've been out).
there are many other layers of shackles in place, and there is no way anyone would easily be able to change platforms.
Most such changes are structural in nature... Build once, deploy to the entire enterprise. Those sorts of things amortize very nicely with OS, but not so much so with MS per-seat licenses.
Since you'd have to teach a bunch of '95 users how to use XP anyways, training costs would probably be no different than with Linux. When I forced my roommate to deal with my Linux box, he had few months of "how do you do this" -- maybee once per week. After that he was an absolute Linux booster. Even though the machine could dual boot to Windows, he almost never did that after the first month -- no need to. Linux worked so much better for him.
do you think they will notice the little * indicating to look at the small print saying some shows may not be recordable.
He won't have to. They'll have their best friend right behind them ranting about how the stupid thing keeps re-inserting commercials, won't record certain programs, randomly forces them to record Survivor VII, and deletes Simpsons episodes after 4 months.
SCO started out life as a part of (tada!) Microsoft under the name Xenix. The group was then then split off/sold to the Santa Cruz Operation and then morphed into SCO.
They just happened to purchase the rights to UNIX somewhere along the line (that somewhere being rather near the end).
Don't be so sure. Although it'd be difficult to get someone extradited from China for using forged headers, penalties are mostly financial. Most spammers have at least a residual attachment to the US. The $50K~$500K penalties could be garnished from their VISA/MC accounts.
A further point is that most of the spammers -- even though they may use foreign servers -- actually reside in the US. Those asholes would have something very real to worry about, since we could possibly seize their homes as the proceeds of criminal activity.
IBM makes a pretty good first target when you think about it:
They have very heavy ties to both UNIX (via AIX) and Linux. It wouldn't be a big shock to learn that they've moved some top engineers between the two OSs. They've also got big pockets, and a large customer base which means -- if they lose -- you can dig deep into those big pockets.
IBM is also, arguably, among the least sympathetic of the big Linux players. They have a history of being a mega-corp who (in their own time) defined the acronym FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt). Perhaps SCO is hoping that the Linux community will be less whole-hearted in jumping to the defence of the once - anything - but - open - source megalith.
If IBM loses big, the size of the settlement/charge could shell-shock smaller linux companies into looking for a cheap out.
Running against SCO, however, is the fact that Unix is ancient.. Ancient enough that patents on it's basic design technology -- if they were patentable back then -- are going to be expired by now. This means that most of the violations are likely to be copyright violations -- and most of Linux's code base is not from IBM.
Happily, IBM is far from an early booster for Linux. By the time IBM jumped on the bandwagon, Linux already had a long and happy history of exponentional growth and improvement. SCO's claim that Linux couldn't have grown that fast without stealing code is going to have to swim against that tide.
Yo prove IBM liable for copyright violation, SCO is going to have to point to specific code that IBM stole from UNIX, and show that it was IBM that installed that code in Linux and not somebody else. That's going to be a difficult feat == especially given Linux's history and idea pool (the whole world).
IBM is well versed in litigation by attrition. Much like Microsoft, they took on the DOJ in the '70s -- arguably with more success.
SCO has a formidable opponent, and the possibility of massive profits if it wins big. Needless to say, I do not wish them luck.
Were customers informed of this downside of burstable bandwidth?? The nice thing about non-burstable service is that -- although a DDOS attack can shut your non-burstable service down more easily, they at least can't cost you $3,000 in bandwidth charges by saturating your (local) 100Mbit network for a day.
Statistically speaking, bandwidth spikes are to be expected. Sometimes they're just the result of a bunch of people doing something at the same time. Orher times, they're the result of a DDOS or just a heavy probe.
It's sometimes soooo eassssy for a sales droid to upsell alll of the advantages of a burstable link, without bothering to mention the more nasty impliccations. If you take it out of their hide (or better yet -- their comissions) every time an angry, uninformed, customer comes screaming into the ofice, I expect that exxplaining the cost implications of an umlimite connection will start to become stamdard practice..
Somebody else pointed out that -- if only for good customer relations, the first 'hit' should probably be on the ISP -- but attached to an educatin program. (what you can do, what you can't do, what to do about an attack). After that, however, "A drone's gotta do what a drone's gotta do."
What's the alternative? We need a central authority on domain name issues to ensure that standards are kept and every country is on an equal footing when disputes occur.
Perhaps, but an organization that carries such a role needs the respect and support of its constituants. There is a big question about whether or not ICANN fits that bill. Ican seems to have foolishly spent the goodwill that it started with. Many (most?) of the people who understand the history and intent of both the internet and ICANN seem to be entirely unhappy with ICANN.
In short, ICANN seems to be acting more like a despot than a consensus maker.
Until this changes, many countries are likely to continue to be loathe to vow fealthy to the directors of ICANN.
If it is absolutely necessary to have ICANN be the central authority, then it may be necessary to disolve ICANN in it's current form and reconstitute it almost from scratch.
For the poster who asked about the amount of spam-per-address...to be honest, I'm not sure. I didn't keep a good record of how many different tags I've used, and I'm not entirely sure how to adjust for the effects of dictionary attacks.
Probably the best way to figure out which address your email is going
to is to check your mail logs.
The logs that I get from sendmail are pretty useful in that respect (presuming you keep them for any length of time..). If you want, I could probably rewrite the perl tools I used to do that sort of stuff when I was the email admin for a medium sized ISP.
send me the last 200 lines of your mail log, and I'll see what I can do.
My login is samuel my domain is bcgreen.com .
There is a Linux solution:
Have the users with a default Umask of 200 and each user has their own group. they also have group 'shared' as a secondary group.
Creae a directory/group that is rw group 'shared', and setgid.
any file that gets created in/group will be owned by group 'shared' and writable by anybody in group shared (as a result of the umask value). peoples files will, by default be created writable to their group (but since they are the only default members of their group, this isn't a problem). The only place where this will cause problems is things like ssh config files that won't be used if they are hgroup writable (uesrs will need to be educated on this).
The nice thing about this approach -- vs the samba solution -- is that you can
limit this 'public' access to specific users, rather than everybody, by simply controlling who is a member of the appropriate group.
It is already in Syndication. Has been for two years on FX and others.....
Have you watched it?
My guess is not.. If (s)he thinks that the show sucks so bad then chances are that he hasn't seen more than part of one episode. My sister used to have the same reaction to Dr. Who. from walking by while I was watching it. Then she watched a few episodes....
Then she watched a lot more.
I didn't even think to watch buffy until about a year ago, when I was asked to help tape back episodes for a friend (Space Channel in Canada plays 5 episodes a week). After watching it for a few episodes, I realized that it was both hilarious and deep (A combination I'd never expected to find).
The last time I was this enthusiastic about a show was Babylon 5.
Read any book on the insides of competing in the computer chess arena: Getting your system ready to run in a competition actually takes work. Having managed a CS research lab, I'd say that the last week is often dedicated to locking down the system, pulling out the really flaky experimental parts and testing it to make sure that there aren't any nasty surprises in the middle of the 'show'.
If the Loebner prize isn't respected by your peers, then the competition isn't that much worth the work of cleaning up your system for the competition. If competing was simply a case of opening up a telnet port to the equivalent of your running nightly build, it wouldn't be such a big issue running in each and every competition out there.
... when a certain combination of options were enabled.
You didn't mention that "when a certain combination of options were chosen" meant "maximum visual quality". People are pissed that setting the card to 'best quality' looks ugly and you're talking like the bug only showed up when people fiddled with random settings.
Vague PR DuckSpeak phrases like that are intended to be immune to complaints of inaccuracy without conveying the specifics of what they're describing. Getting snotty that what you said was misunderstood is essentially complaining that your words had their intended effect.
would anybody in the Guilford, CT (203 area code) local calling area be willing to call them ( 1-203-467-5378 ) and express my distaste? It'll just take you a moment of your time (kinda like their spam).
(The page that describes their spam tools and points to the page above is here, if you're interested)
Slashdot Mirror
Urgh! Wrong discussion... No wonder nobody had made the 'obvious comment'.
(god how embarassing).
Homer Simpson would be very VERY happy.
(roommate's friend blurted out that one in passing).
He wasn't talking about programming style. He was talking about programming, period.. I think that -- even if you find that you can productively get 'up to speed' on a programming task, you have to remember that (most?) others on your team will be working best under the '3-hour' rule. If you keep distracting them every 15 minutes this points to 2 things:
1) you're breaking their concntration cycle, which is probably much longer than yours.
2) do you really have any sort of concentration cycle at all??
The transition to KDE/Gnome is much steeper of a learning curve.
Logs in, uses (Open) office, Mozilla (for both mail and surfing).Not much more to learn there.
Plus, in lots of small offices, they have some 'advanced' regular windows user who doubles as a sys admin/troubleshooter.
Same person will be happy as a pig in sh*t learning his/her way 'round Linux. Not much harder than learning their way 'round XP if they're only used to '95.
In my experience, Linux seems to be much easier for a user to learn because there's much better separation between user and admin space.
The free software is nice, but it does come at a considerable initial investiment in training and getting in someone who actually knows the system and can set it up and troubleshoot it.
$300-$400 per user will pay for a good bit of setup and training.
You'd have to do setup and training for XP too, BTW. For the most part, I'd expect that you'd have 4 or 5 Linx setups (max) that would handle 98% of all users.
The setup would actually be much easier because you don't have to worry about per-user licenses.. The only reason to not load everything would be disk space constraints (if you're trying to keep using the old disks on the old systems) amd install/upgrade bandwidth.. This would probably mean even fewer setup types.
My old roomie was a definite non-techie type. After a month or so of handholding (Mostly consisting of "How do I install Flash" type questions), he was in heaven with Linux. He stopped booting into Windows after about 2 weeks -- and started proselytizing Linux after about a month (no joke. He had me editing his rants the second month he was here). -- and that was on RH 5.2. Linux has gone a long way since then.
Linux/Unix programs now generally complain if you try to use really weak passwords.There's no reason why the MS equivalent's couldn't do the same thing -- especially for the admin password.
Pretty much a no-brainer, if you ask me.Cantral Command (also known as the Vexira Anti-Virus people have a good bit more detail -- including a password list. If historical data is any indication, I'd expect about a 10-20% hit ratio just with the password 'password' (and simple variants thereof).
They were TCLed pink.
Installing Linux won't get rid of all your problems. It'll trade your current problems for a brand new set of (hopefully much nicer) problems. -- Like "what do we do with the money we saved on Licensing? (Software development? tax cuts? (better) training?). You'll also have the obvious change-of-platform issues, but possibly less so than going from '95 to XP.
(I still can't get over the idea of having to worry about getting permission to upgrade my RAM...)
Never used Linux, have you?? Those are all openable under Linux -- especially the Win-95 versions which are the best reverse-engineered (if only due to the time that they've been out).
there are many other layers of shackles in place, and there is no way anyone would easily be able to change platforms.
Most such changes are structural in nature... Build once, deploy to the entire enterprise. Those sorts of things amortize very nicely with OS, but not so much so with MS per-seat licenses.
Since you'd have to teach a bunch of '95 users how to use XP anyways, training costs would probably be no different than with Linux. When I forced my roommate to deal with my Linux box, he had few months of "how do you do this" -- maybee once per week. After that he was an absolute Linux booster. Even though the machine could dual boot to Windows, he almost never did that after the first month -- no need to. Linux worked so much better for him.
He won't have to. They'll have their best friend right behind them ranting about how the stupid thing keeps re-inserting commercials, won't record certain programs, randomly forces them to record Survivor VII, and deletes Simpsons episodes after 4 months.
They just happened to purchase the rights to UNIX somewhere along the line (that somewhere being rather near the end).
Grr. I never thought I'd be doing virus checks on my snail-mail.
Life is always full of surprises, isn't it?
Are leading zeroes OK?
Don't be so sure. Although it'd be difficult to get someone extradited from China for using forged headers, penalties are mostly financial. Most spammers have at least a residual attachment to the US. The $50K~$500K penalties could be garnished from their VISA/MC accounts.
A further point is that most of the spammers -- even though they may use foreign servers -- actually reside in the US. Those asholes would have something very real to worry about, since we could possibly seize their homes as the proceeds of criminal activity.
They have very heavy ties to both UNIX (via AIX) and Linux. It wouldn't be a big shock to learn that they've moved some top engineers between the two OSs. They've also got big pockets, and a large customer base which means -- if they lose -- you can dig deep into those big pockets.
IBM is also, arguably, among the least sympathetic of the big Linux players. They have a history of being a mega-corp who (in their own time) defined the acronym FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt). Perhaps SCO is hoping that the Linux community will be less whole-hearted in jumping to the defence of the once - anything - but - open - source megalith.
If IBM loses big, the size of the settlement/charge could shell-shock smaller linux companies into looking for a cheap out.
Running against SCO, however, is the fact that Unix is ancient.. Ancient enough that patents on it's basic design technology -- if they were patentable back then -- are going to be expired by now. This means that most of the violations are likely to be copyright violations -- and most of Linux's code base is not from IBM.
Happily, IBM is far from an early booster for Linux. By the time IBM jumped on the bandwagon, Linux already had a long and happy history of exponentional growth and improvement. SCO's claim that Linux couldn't have grown that fast without stealing code is going to have to swim against that tide.
Yo prove IBM liable for copyright violation, SCO is going to have to point to specific code that IBM stole from UNIX, and show that it was IBM that installed that code in Linux and not somebody else. That's going to be a difficult feat == especially given Linux's history and idea pool (the whole world).
IBM is well versed in litigation by attrition. Much like Microsoft, they took on the DOJ in the '70s -- arguably with more success.
SCO has a formidable opponent, and the possibility of massive profits if it wins big. Needless to say, I do not wish them luck.
Statistically speaking, bandwidth spikes are to be expected. Sometimes they're just the result of a bunch of people doing something at the same time. Orher times, they're the result of a DDOS or just a heavy probe.
It's sometimes soooo eassssy for a sales droid to upsell alll of the advantages of a burstable link, without bothering to mention the more nasty impliccations. If you take it out of their hide (or better yet -- their comissions) every time an angry, uninformed, customer comes screaming into the ofice, I expect that exxplaining the cost implications of an umlimite connection will start to become stamdard practice..
Somebody else pointed out that -- if only for good customer relations, the first 'hit' should probably be on the ISP -- but attached to an educatin program. (what you can do, what you can't do, what to do about an attack). After that, however, "A drone's gotta do what a drone's gotta do."
Perhaps, but an organization that carries such a role needs the respect and support of its constituants. There is a big question about whether or not ICANN fits that bill. Ican seems to have foolishly spent the goodwill that it started with. Many (most?) of the people who understand the history and intent of both the internet and ICANN seem to be entirely unhappy with ICANN.
In short, ICANN seems to be acting more like a despot than a consensus maker. Until this changes, many countries are likely to continue to be loathe to vow fealthy to the directors of ICANN.
If it is absolutely necessary to have ICANN be the central authority, then it may be necessary to disolve ICANN in it's current form and reconstitute it almost from scratch.
Probably the best way to figure out which address your email is going to is to check your mail logs.
The logs that I get from sendmail are pretty useful in that respect (presuming you keep them for any length of time..). If you want, I could probably rewrite the perl tools I used to do that sort of stuff when I was the email admin for a medium sized ISP.
send me the last 200 lines of your mail log, and I'll see what I can do.
My login is samuel my domain is bcgreen.com .
Wouldn't that be lossers?
Have the users with a default Umask of 200 and each user has their own group. they also have group 'shared' as a secondary group.
Creae a directory /group that is rw group 'shared', and setgid.
any file that gets created in /group will be owned by group 'shared' and writable by anybody in group shared (as a result of the umask value). peoples files will, by default be created writable to their group (but since they are the only default members of their group, this isn't a problem). The only place where this will cause problems is things like ssh config files that won't be used if they are hgroup writable (uesrs will need to be educated on this).
The nice thing about this approach -- vs the samba solution -- is that you can limit this 'public' access to specific users, rather than everybody, by simply controlling who is a member of the appropriate group.
Have you watched it?
My guess is not.. If (s)he thinks that the show sucks so bad then chances are that he hasn't seen more than part of one episode. My sister used to have the same reaction to Dr. Who. from walking by while I was watching it. Then she watched a few episodes....
Then she watched a lot more.
I didn't even think to watch buffy until about a year ago, when I was asked to help tape back episodes for a friend (Space Channel in Canada plays 5 episodes a week). After watching it for a few episodes, I realized that it was both hilarious and deep (A combination I'd never expected to find).
The last time I was this enthusiastic about a show was Babylon 5.
If the Loebner prize isn't respected by your peers, then the competition isn't that much worth the work of cleaning up your system for the competition. If competing was simply a case of opening up a telnet port to the equivalent of your running nightly build, it wouldn't be such a big issue running in each and every competition out there.
You didn't mention that "when a certain combination of options were chosen" meant "maximum visual quality". People are pissed that setting the card to 'best quality' looks ugly and you're talking like the bug only showed up when people fiddled with random settings.
Vague PR DuckSpeak phrases like that are intended to be immune to complaints of inaccuracy without conveying the specifics of what they're describing. Getting snotty that what you said was misunderstood is essentially complaining that your words had their intended effect.
It led me to a nice text page with their physical contact information.
would anybody in the Guilford, CT (203 area code) local calling area be willing to call them ( 1-203-467-5378 ) and express my distaste? It'll just take you a moment of your time (kinda like their spam).
(The page that describes their spam tools and points to the page above is here, if you're interested)