* Scripts that use document.write() will not work in XHTML contexts. Good! document.write() should have been put out to die years ago.
Yes, lets break things! Let's break things everywhere!!!
FTP isn't secure. Kill it! Force everyone to use SFTP right now! HTTP isn't secure. Oh no! Kill it! Force everyone to use HTTPS right now! Someone wrote a complient web page two whole years ago and they expect it to work now???!!! Quick! Kill him!!!
In other words, is it worth to replace a critical bug (security) with a minor bug (annoyance)?
That depends on if the annoyance is so minor. A system that doesn't work isn't much good to anyone. A system that's compromised and leaks your data (and therefore possibly all your money) is worse. It's usually worth doing some amount of testing rather than rushing something out the door. If it's that big a security hole the system should be brought down until it can be fixed PROPERLY.
A bad standard will ensure everyone suffers and everyone does things equally poorly.
I'd rather no standard. People are then not pressured into doing stupid things. Eventually the software people judge to be better prevails and becomes a pseudo-standard. If nothing's significantly better than anything else out there I'd still rather we were forced to deal with the headache of incompatibility than have everyone use a system that is bad and will eventually die.
One of you wants free speech even if that violates company secrets etc. and the other wants you to be able to sign your life away as punishment for not thoroughly reading a contract.
As screwed up as the current laws are, they're more moderate than either of you are suggesting. How about a little common sense in this huh? Oh wait this is/.
Proper application of technology makes us more efficient. (Improper use, or badly implemented technology often slows us down). But as the technology improves more is expected. (eg. a clerk may have been expected to process 20 documents a day by hand, now 100 by computer)
As for the 8 hour work day that has more to do with social trends than efficiency. By the way the 8 hour work day is on the decline if you haven't noticed.
Dude, I've seen problems on every system I've used that's SP2 based. That's pretty bad. I'm not about to try SP2 again any time soon at home. I use it at work and that's more than enough. Thankfully, my work machine/system doesn't use many USB 2 peripherals, doesn't rely on remote desktop etc. It's rock solid. The moment I tried to put in a USB 2 device in at work (a USB2 network cable) it blue screened. It was working fine for me on SP1 at home.
I've tried to upgrade 2 machines and always ended up with a less usable config. That's pretty damn bad. Just because SP2 didn't give you problems, don't assume every other user who tries it and ends up with a wreck of a machine is a moron.
SP2 is pretty damn bad, based on my experience of it. I had no such problems with SP1.
? There are no issues with SP2 and 99% of users, except that it might put an extra dialog box in the way of doing something stupid.
Oh yeah no issues at all. That's why I tried to get my remote desktop connections working for 2 days with no luck. (And I do know what I'm doing, it wasn't just the firewall settings).
Oh and it's also why I had BSOD problems with some of my USB devices.
SP2 is evil. I ditched it for good reason. Calling people stupid if they have problems with a product isn't the way to make friends, even on/.
I hope this was meant to be funny. I'm sure he'd have gotten a job elsewhere. Whether it allowed him the time to develop his theories is a different matter, but make no mistake someone would have developed them very soon thereafter because all the context was there waiting for an enquiring mind with a slightly quirky and rebelious way of looking at things to work out what was happening.
I have collaborated and suffered Word. But it's not the fact that it's WYSIWYG. It's the fact that it's buggy.
When I played with it Lyx was buggy and crashed more often than word ever did. Straight Latex is a nightmare unless you're interested in spending hours learning the markup. It's like trying to write HTML by hand. Programmers will do it, but the lay person shouldn't have to - and I'm talking computer lay person who might be a specialist in another field.
WYSIWYG is a terrible way to do documents anyway. You shouldn't be spending time making it look right, you should spend it writing the silly thing.
Spoken like a true propellerhead with zero social skills. You don't like WYSIWYG, and that's fine. How dare you tell people how they should and shouldn't use their computers or what they should and shouldn't prefer.
I looked into Latex for scientific publishing when I did my astronomy masters. What a horrid piece of software. WYSIWYG (or close to it like Word) allows people who have no interest in learning about markup (let alone specific forms of markup - Latex may not always be the markup of choice through a person's lifetime) to lay out documents as they wish to see them on a piece of paper.
If you want to write the document first then worry about layout that's fine, but others may want to lay it out as they go. (Makes sense to me - like writing code comments as you go it's often better done right then and there when you're thinking about it even though it does split your concentration).
Many people are very visual about how they do things. Artistic types in particular often don't warm to abstract layout schemes. This doesn't make them stupid compared to you. They just think differently and/or have different requiremenst.
Do yourself a favour and lose the narrow minded elitism.
Microsoft comes out with 7 new OS's. Dumb move I grant you, but what are you whining it.
How many Linux distros are there again? Yet there seems to be very few people pointing out that this is a problem. Diversity is a good thing they say.
In my opinion, there should be a HANDFUL of personal computer operating systems - because you need to maintain some healthy competition. But the OS should be a basic thing to build upon. It shouldn't be complex. It shouldn't have a 3D desktop by default when a 2D one does the job just fine. It should be a basic thing that people can rely on. And they should be able to have some confidence that the software they write today will still run in 100 years. No one provides that, and so all the OS manufacturers can bite me.
Well you laugh or you cry. Bottom line is I'm not a U.S. citizen and don't live in the U.S. I have next to no power to do anything against that cowboy you elected. To make matters worse our prime minister wants to be his best buddy.
The spyware can all be run on one of the cores while the other can be used to get work done. I'm getting one for my father-in-law.
The spyware companies all SAY they won't touch the second core now, and they may stick to it for a little while, but that's so that when you buy 2 cores, they have twice the zombie power per PC at your expense!!!
It's good to know no more patches are needed for Windows, and that it is now finally secure.
Next month, on the day formerly known as patch Tuesday, Microsoft will buy everyone a pony. Henceforth it shall be known as Microsoft Pony Tuesday. We shall be celebrating with the pixies and faeries!
Did you know that nuclear fusion is only 20 years away? Just like it was in 1950! (No, I'm not skeptical. Not at all.)
But this is based on much more solid and intelligent evidence. What they did, but don't tell you is that they rang up Microsoft and asked when Vista was ACTUALLY going to be released, then added a year.
On a more serious note I applaud you for saying what you have without getting modded down. Spot on about the bigotry.
hat technicial leaps must it render that requires so much memory?
As I understand it there will be a number of desktops. A couple of old traditional bitmap ones, and the main one's 3D high resolution vector graphics instead of bitmaps. That's for everything. Even your icons.
I think they're on drugs. I don't want my desktop to run like a goddamn experimental 3D video game. This plus the DRM crap they're shelling out means I'm going to try to stay on XP for as long as I can.
But do you honestly think your anology makes sense?
Yes, why else would I post it? You're dodging the point. A nice vague attack on my argument, that does nothing to refute it.
One of the basic market mechanisms is that somebody that's willing to put in more time into a job will get that job. It's as simple as that - you work and you get paid.
You talk like a highschool economics student. There's nothing simple about market forces, and the almighty capitalist system doesn't even everything out in the end.
If there are lots of people more willing to put more time into a job, chances are you're going to be squeezed out of the market no matter how good you are. Not every programmer I've met does well when pushed to do long hours.
I believe in being justly paid.
No, actually it's very clear that you believe that anyone unwilling to put ridiculous hours into their job and give up their holidays and other interests doesn't deserve that job. That's pure rubbish.
That's why I think, for example, that factory workers in Asia are abused. The difference is I get justly paid for my work, and they don't, even though they too work crazy hours.
And by your logic if enough people can be found willing to work for less money you too are out of a job my friend. It's called outsourcing. Or have you been asleep for the last few years? The problem with your simplistic "all hail the free market" approach is that worker's rights and standard of living declines with time, as there is always someone less well off than you willing to work for less just so they can eat!
Demanding people to quit a job market because they're willing to put in more hours than you is something I disagree with completly.
Oh yes I "demand" they leave the job market. Thanks for misrepresenting me so well. I demand they stop pulling down the minimum standards. I don't mind other people work in IT. I don't mind competition. But how about not dragging standards down so there's room for other things in life besides work?
This has been attempted a number of time before - people in countless central and eastern european countries will tell you that it was not such a good idea. Unless you consider soviet Russia to be a succesful endeavour, in which case I rest my case.
So now you're implying I'm a communist. Thanks mate. Tell me something. Do you oppose minimum working standards? Do you think it should all be market driven? How about you go pray to the god of capitalism, and I'll just stick to advocating a decent standard of living.
sure, anything is unhealthy. You just need to balance things out.
So your argument is that never taking a vacation is healthy and balanced. What kind of drugs are you on exactly?
We are not all the same - some of us are suited to work long hour and it takes less toll on them. Some of us are not. The end result - most people don't have the qualities to work in high stress enviroments. Maybe you're opne of them. Maybe you should switch jobs to something less demanding
Who's telling who to get out of the job market now you hypocrite!
I have a good job, that I enjoy. I work on design, development and support including after hours and 24 hour support at a major financial institute that is essential to the economy. I have a 35 hour week. I get one rostered day off a month. I get 4 week paid vacation. My salary isn't going to make me rich but it's not anything I'd complain about either.
I also have hobbies and a social life. I'm into astronomy, fishing, chess, r/c planes if I get a chance. I take my girlfriend to see her parents 600km away occassionally, and socialise. I own and look after pets. I take time off to go to new places and see new things, or to be with family and friends on special occassions. Basically I have a life.
Never having a vacation would mean I couldn't do these things. It's not a weakness to
If you're getting time with the family at least that's something.
I'm glad you enjoy your job. I have a good job too. One of the things I like about it is that I do get time off.
What would you do with the time off? Have you thought about a holiday? See something new. Experienced something you haven't? Too expensive? How about doing something social? Visit relatives you rarely see.
Or how about a hobby? I'm into a number of hobbies - photography, astronomy, r/c aircraft. There's a world of skills to pick up that have nothing to do with earning a crust.
I honestly feel for you knowing that you think there's nothing to do but work.
As for troubleshooting at 3am. Done that too. Will do it again (all too soon). That's fine. But then if I have time owing to me I can take it. So it's not always 24x7. (In fact my employer's particularly good about having a rotating roster, and the systems are critical financial systems).
No longer can we speak from higher ground to any other country.
Ah to be young and naive. When could you ever? Ever heard of the civil rights and women's rights movements? A lifetime ago in the US, women couldn't vote and blacks couldn't share the same resturants.
Honestly, getting worked over somebody else's life choices is silly. ...unless someone else's lifestyle becomes the accepted norm and takes away your freedom to choose a different lifestyle.
It's fine taking no vacation if you're happy to make work your entire life. If you want a family or to enjoy a hobby or two a lack of vacation becomes a problem. Bottom line: It's unhealthy to focus your life on nothing else but work, no matter how much you enjoy it. This is becoming the norm more and more.
Say your lifestyle choice was to smoke. I'd say go ahead and kill yourself, but not anywhere near me thanks because I don't want your second hand smoke. So yeah go ahead have no life, take no vacation - just find a different job market to be in thanks.
In any case don't you find it more than a little hypocritical "getting worked up" and telling me I'm being silly because I'm "getting worked up"???
What you've never shelved an expensive piece of software out of frustration?
The advantage of the $50 initial payout is that basically Blizzard gets the $50 plus an initial $15 I assume, regardless of whether you like the game or not.
I don't know whether to pity you or swear at you. There's more to life than work and if you've settled for an arrangement where you accept that you don't get vacations, you're the kind of fool turning the world into a 3rd world sweatshop for rich businessmen.
I've 3-4 CDs I've burned from friends, but compared to the ca. 700 I _bought_, you'll agree that these are peanuts.
Careful there. You've admitted to violating copyright. You might as well be admitting to distributing drugs. (But your honour it was only 3 marijuana leaves! I think you'll agree that's peanuts compared to the coca cola I consume).
Make no mistake RIAA/MPAA and the rest would very much like to, over such a simple thing as copying 4 CDs , send you to prison with a large cellmate named Bubba for ahem company. After taking all your cash and bankrupting you that is.
Actually what they've said is very accurate technically. By becoming a customer (buying from them) you agree to the terms and conditions, and accept music in file formats which contain (are laden with) DRM. You've given up any fair use rights on penalty of fines and jail time that make being a drug dealer seem less of a risk.
This says you aren't forced to be a customer, but the minute you decide to be a customer you are forced to play by their rules.
Slashdot Mirror
* Scripts that use document.write() will not work in XHTML contexts.
Good! document.write() should have been put out to die years ago.
Yes, lets break things! Let's break things everywhere!!!
FTP isn't secure. Kill it! Force everyone to use SFTP right now!
HTTP isn't secure. Oh no! Kill it! Force everyone to use HTTPS right now!
Someone wrote a complient web page two whole years ago and they expect it to work now???!!! Quick! Kill him!!!
In other words, is it worth to replace a critical bug (security) with a minor bug (annoyance)?
That depends on if the annoyance is so minor. A system that doesn't work isn't much good to anyone. A system that's compromised and leaks your data (and therefore possibly all your money) is worse. It's usually worth doing some amount of testing rather than rushing something out the door. If it's that big a security hole the system should be brought down until it can be fixed PROPERLY.
A bad standard will ensure everyone suffers and everyone does things equally poorly.
I'd rather no standard. People are then not pressured into doing stupid things. Eventually the software people judge to be better prevails and becomes a pseudo-standard. If nothing's significantly better than anything else out there I'd still rather we were forced to deal with the headache of incompatibility than have everyone use a system that is bad and will eventually die.
You're both nuts.
/.
One of you wants free speech even if that violates company secrets etc. and the other wants you to be able to sign your life away as punishment for not thoroughly reading a contract.
As screwed up as the current laws are, they're more moderate than either of you are suggesting. How about a little common sense in this huh? Oh wait this is
Proper application of technology makes us more efficient. (Improper use, or badly implemented technology often slows us down). But as the technology improves more is expected. (eg. a clerk may have been expected to process 20 documents a day by hand, now 100 by computer)
As for the 8 hour work day that has more to do with social trends than efficiency. By the way the 8 hour work day is on the decline if you haven't noticed.
Dude, I've seen problems on every system I've used that's SP2 based. That's pretty bad. I'm not about to try SP2 again any time soon at home. I use it at work and that's more than enough. Thankfully, my work machine/system doesn't use many USB 2 peripherals, doesn't rely on remote desktop etc. It's rock solid. The moment I tried to put in a USB 2 device in at work (a USB2 network cable) it blue screened. It was working fine for me on SP1 at home.
I've tried to upgrade 2 machines and always ended up with a less usable config. That's pretty damn bad. Just because SP2 didn't give you problems, don't assume every other user who tries it and ends up with a wreck of a machine is a moron.
SP2 is pretty damn bad, based on my experience of it. I had no such problems with SP1.
? There are no issues with SP2 and 99% of users, except that it might put an extra dialog box in the way of doing something stupid.
/.
Oh yeah no issues at all. That's why I tried to get my remote desktop connections working for 2 days with no luck. (And I do know what I'm doing, it wasn't just the firewall settings).
Oh and it's also why I had BSOD problems with some of my USB devices.
SP2 is evil. I ditched it for good reason. Calling people stupid if they have problems with a product isn't the way to make friends, even on
I hope this was meant to be funny. I'm sure he'd have gotten a job elsewhere. Whether it allowed him the time to develop his theories is a different matter, but make no mistake someone would have developed them very soon thereafter because all the context was there waiting for an enquiring mind with a slightly quirky and rebelious way of looking at things to work out what was happening.
I have collaborated and suffered Word. But it's not the fact that it's WYSIWYG. It's the fact that it's buggy.
When I played with it Lyx was buggy and crashed more often than word ever did. Straight Latex is a nightmare unless you're interested in spending hours learning the markup. It's like trying to write HTML by hand. Programmers will do it, but the lay person shouldn't have to - and I'm talking computer lay person who might be a specialist in another field.
WYSIWYG is a terrible way to do documents anyway. You shouldn't be spending time making it look right, you should spend it writing the silly thing.
Spoken like a true propellerhead with zero social skills. You don't like WYSIWYG, and that's fine. How dare you tell people how they should and shouldn't use their computers or what they should and shouldn't prefer.
I looked into Latex for scientific publishing when I did my astronomy masters. What a horrid piece of software. WYSIWYG (or close to it like Word) allows people who have no interest in learning about markup (let alone specific forms of markup - Latex may not always be the markup of choice through a person's lifetime) to lay out documents as they wish to see them on a piece of paper.
If you want to write the document first then worry about layout that's fine, but others may want to lay it out as they go. (Makes sense to me - like writing code comments as you go it's often better done right then and there when you're thinking about it even though it does split your concentration).
Many people are very visual about how they do things. Artistic types in particular often don't warm to abstract layout schemes. This doesn't make them stupid compared to you. They just think differently and/or have different requiremenst.
Do yourself a favour and lose the narrow minded elitism.
Bloody /.
Microsoft comes out with 7 new OS's. Dumb move I grant you, but what are you whining it.
How many Linux distros are there again? Yet there seems to be very few people pointing out that this is a problem. Diversity is a good thing they say.
In my opinion, there should be a HANDFUL of personal computer operating systems - because you need to maintain some healthy competition. But the OS should be a basic thing to build upon. It shouldn't be complex. It shouldn't have a 3D desktop by default when a 2D one does the job just fine. It should be a basic thing that people can rely on. And they should be able to have some confidence that the software they write today will still run in 100 years. No one provides that, and so all the OS manufacturers can bite me.
Well you laugh or you cry. Bottom line is I'm not a U.S. citizen and don't live in the U.S. I have next to no power to do anything against that cowboy you elected. To make matters worse our prime minister wants to be his best buddy.
The spyware can all be run on one of the cores while the other can be used to get work done. I'm getting one for my father-in-law.
The spyware companies all SAY they won't touch the second core now, and they may stick to it for a little while, but that's so that when you buy 2 cores, they have twice the zombie power per PC at your expense!!!
If it were any other company but Googe would we hear about this. /. continues to slide in relevance!
It's good to know no more patches are needed for Windows, and that it is now finally secure.
Next month, on the day formerly known as patch Tuesday, Microsoft will buy everyone a pony. Henceforth it shall be known as Microsoft Pony Tuesday. We shall be celebrating with the pixies and faeries!
Did you know that nuclear fusion is only 20 years away? Just like it was in 1950! (No, I'm not skeptical. Not at all.)
But this is based on much more solid and intelligent evidence. What they did, but don't tell you is that they rang up Microsoft and asked when Vista was ACTUALLY going to be released, then added a year.
On a more serious note I applaud you for saying what you have without getting modded down. Spot on about the bigotry.
hat technicial leaps must it render that requires so much memory?
As I understand it there will be a number of desktops. A couple of old traditional bitmap ones, and the main one's 3D high resolution vector graphics instead of bitmaps. That's for everything. Even your icons.
I think they're on drugs. I don't want my desktop to run like a goddamn experimental 3D video game. This plus the DRM crap they're shelling out means I'm going to try to stay on XP for as long as I can.
You're talking nonesense man, and you know it.
But do you honestly think your anology makes sense?
Yes, why else would I post it? You're dodging the point. A nice vague attack on my argument, that does nothing to refute it.
One of the basic market mechanisms is that somebody that's willing to put in more time into a job will get that job. It's as simple as that - you work and you get paid.
You talk like a highschool economics student. There's nothing simple about market forces, and the almighty capitalist system doesn't even everything out in the end.
If there are lots of people more willing to put more time into a job, chances are you're going to be squeezed out of the market no matter how good you are. Not every programmer I've met does well when pushed to do long hours.
I believe in being justly paid.
No, actually it's very clear that you believe that anyone unwilling to put ridiculous hours into their job and give up their holidays and other interests doesn't deserve that job. That's pure rubbish.
That's why I think, for example, that factory workers in Asia are abused. The difference is I get justly paid for my work, and they don't, even though they too work crazy hours.
And by your logic if enough people can be found willing to work for less money you too are out of a job my friend. It's called outsourcing. Or have you been asleep for the last few years? The problem with your simplistic "all hail the free market" approach is that worker's rights and standard of living declines with time, as there is always someone less well off than you willing to work for less just so they can eat!
Demanding people to quit a job market because they're willing to put in more hours than you is something I disagree with completly.
Oh yes I "demand" they leave the job market. Thanks for misrepresenting me so well. I demand they stop pulling down the minimum standards. I don't mind other people work in IT. I don't mind competition. But how about not dragging standards down so there's room for other things in life besides work?
This has been attempted a number of time before - people in countless central and eastern european countries will tell you that it was not such a good idea. Unless you consider soviet Russia to be a succesful endeavour, in which case I rest my case.
So now you're implying I'm a communist. Thanks mate. Tell me something. Do you oppose minimum working standards? Do you think it should all be market driven? How about you go pray to the god of capitalism, and I'll just stick to advocating a decent standard of living.
sure, anything is unhealthy. You just need to balance things out.
So your argument is that never taking a vacation is healthy and balanced. What kind of drugs are you on exactly?
We are not all the same - some of us are suited to work long hour and it takes less toll on them. Some of us are not. The end result - most people don't have the qualities to work in high stress enviroments. Maybe you're opne of them. Maybe you should switch jobs to something less demanding
Who's telling who to get out of the job market now you hypocrite!
I have a good job, that I enjoy. I work on design, development and support including after hours and 24 hour support at a major financial institute that is essential to the economy. I have a 35 hour week. I get one rostered day off a month. I get 4 week paid vacation. My salary isn't going to make me rich but it's not anything I'd complain about either.
I also have hobbies and a social life. I'm into astronomy, fishing, chess, r/c planes if I get a chance. I take my girlfriend to see her parents 600km away occassionally, and socialise. I own and look after pets. I take time off to go to new places and see new things, or to be with family and friends on special occassions. Basically I have a life.
Never having a vacation would mean I couldn't do these things. It's not a weakness to
If you're getting time with the family at least that's something.
I'm glad you enjoy your job. I have a good job too. One of the things I like about it is that I do get time off.
What would you do with the time off? Have you thought about a holiday? See something new. Experienced something you haven't? Too expensive? How about doing something social? Visit relatives you rarely see.
Or how about a hobby? I'm into a number of hobbies - photography, astronomy, r/c aircraft. There's a world of skills to pick up that have nothing to do with earning a crust.
I honestly feel for you knowing that you think there's nothing to do but work.
As for troubleshooting at 3am. Done that too. Will do it again (all too soon). That's fine. But then if I have time owing to me I can take it. So it's not always 24x7. (In fact my employer's particularly good about having a rotating roster, and the systems are critical financial systems).
No longer can we speak from higher ground to any other country.
Ah to be young and naive. When could you ever? Ever heard of the civil rights and women's rights movements? A lifetime ago in the US, women couldn't vote and blacks couldn't share the same resturants.
Honestly, getting worked over somebody else's life choices is silly. ...unless someone else's lifestyle becomes the accepted norm and takes away your freedom to choose a different lifestyle.
It's fine taking no vacation if you're happy to make work your entire life. If you want a family or to enjoy a hobby or two a lack of vacation becomes a problem. Bottom line: It's unhealthy to focus your life on nothing else but work, no matter how much you enjoy it. This is becoming the norm more and more.
Say your lifestyle choice was to smoke. I'd say go ahead and kill yourself, but not anywhere near me thanks because I don't want your second hand smoke. So yeah go ahead have no life, take no vacation - just find a different job market to be in thanks.
In any case don't you find it more than a little hypocritical "getting worked up" and telling me I'm being silly because I'm "getting worked up"???
What you've never shelved an expensive piece of software out of frustration?
The advantage of the $50 initial payout is that basically Blizzard gets the $50 plus an initial $15 I assume, regardless of whether you like the game or not.
You don't get time off work, and you're happy???
I don't know whether to pity you or swear at you. There's more to life than work and if you've settled for an arrangement where you accept that you don't get vacations, you're the kind of fool turning the world into a 3rd world sweatshop for rich businessmen.
I've 3-4 CDs I've burned from friends, but compared to the ca. 700 I _bought_, you'll agree that these are peanuts.
Careful there. You've admitted to violating copyright. You might as well be admitting to distributing drugs. (But your honour it was only 3 marijuana leaves! I think you'll agree that's peanuts compared to the coca cola I consume).
Make no mistake RIAA/MPAA and the rest would very much like to, over such a simple thing as copying 4 CDs , send you to prison with a large cellmate named Bubba for ahem company. After taking all your cash and bankrupting you that is.
Actually what they've said is very accurate technically. By becoming a customer (buying from them) you agree to the terms and conditions, and accept music in file formats which contain (are laden with) DRM. You've given up any fair use rights on penalty of fines and jail time that make being a drug dealer seem less of a risk.
This says you aren't forced to be a customer, but the minute you decide to be a customer you are forced to play by their rules.
What's biased about that? It's fact.