XP SP2 broke remote desktop connection for me on one computer and caused a USB2 cable's drivers to blue screen when using the network on another every time a network connection was established. I've gone back to SP1 on my home machine but I'm stuck with what I'm provided with at work.
What new "features" will this bug^H^H^Hservicepack contain I wonder?
1. A high level description of the system is put together with a high level estimate of man power and resources needed. Commitments are made and deadlines specified based on these.
2. As detailed planning and then development proceeds - either formally or informally through the developers - additional requirements and requirements changes are identified. This is a good and necessary thing, but is often not controlled properly.
3. Original estimates are never adjusted, or insufficiently adjusted under pressure to deliver in the timeframe originally specified.
4. Repeat 2 and 3 until a working system is put together late and with a budget blowout, or worse make changes so difficult to implement that the project fails, or worse yet the stake holders never come to agreement on what the system should have been like and allow the project to fail without any part being implemented.
5. Bitch about project being late, over budget and not delivering what was required.
A good manager, given the right authority will insist on clear detailed designs and adjust at point 3 correctly. This only happens 5% of the time.
Actually that's just one class of techniques that's been used prior to this. The gravitational disturbance of the parent star (wobble in the star) has been used too.
Now I am still trying to understand why the cashier at walmart needs a full fledged PC, just to sell me my stuff.
This is all well and good but has anyone ever heard of the Universal Turing Machine? A general purpose programable machine is much better for writing software on. The more capability a particular architecture has, the wider a range of purposes it can be used for.
Why not just use a full fledged PC? If you don't need all the power, that's fine get a lower spec'd model. It would be cheaper than having specifically designed underpowered thin clients.
I'll tell you why not. The problem isn't in overpowered hardware. It's in overcomplexity and bloat of the basic operating software.
The operating systems now demand ridiculous specs just to run. The software aritecture isn't modular enough, and doesn't allow for scaling. The manufacturers use this as an excuse to sell you the next generation of hardware, which gives the sofware manufacturers an excuse to charge you for the next generation of software.
What can an end user honestly do today in a typical office environment with a computer that they couldn't do 5 years ago? So why can't you pick up a brand new computer with 5 year old specs for a lot less money?
I am absolutely advocating that current copyright law be scrapped.
People confuse the right to profit from an original work with the right keep others from using it.
Hasbro should be able to take a cut of what ever this guy is making...perhaps even have a say in how he operates (because he's using their good name, and because otherwise he can give away what they would otherwise sell). They shouldn't be able to tell him to cease and desist, and since it's our idea we'll take over all your good work while we're at it.
How often does the original author/inventor take a SIGNIFICANT cut of the profit generated from their work under the current system? Not very often.
If person/company A comes up with an idea/invention/original thought And person/company B then builds on it and makes money Then person/company A can claim a percentage of revenue (not profit) generated BUT person/company A cannot prevent you from using the innovation, and person/company A cannot assign the rights to a third party (though they're free to do as they will with the percentage of revenue)
No bottom feeding of any kind. Still incentive to actually create. Not much incentive to try to hoard rights though.
Perhaps one exception might be that an individual might be able to assign the revenue stream to family in the event of death.
I don't think advanced medical research is any different for that matter. Companies should not be put in a position where it's advantageous to their customers over by charging like wounded bulls. If the medicine is unaffordable I'm just as happy for it never to be invented.
So any games made should not be configurable, because someone might use them to emulate a different copyrighted game?
Knives should never be sold, since they can be used to kill people?
Books should never be published as they put ideas into young impressionable minds?
And _I'm_ opening a pandora's box?
There's a world of difference between enabling someone to do a category of things (eg. manufacturing a knife, file sharing software), some of which might be illegal (eg. stabbing someone to death, downloading copyright material), and actively building something to be used for illegal purposes (eg. the people slayer mark III stabbing knife, setting up a warez torrent).
As someone who practices software development, I have to ask what happens if you externalize all these values.
Instead of having a set number for the value of a letter, make it a configurable parameter.
Instead of having a set score added for using all your pieces, make this configurable too.
Same goes for the board. You can use different graphic sets to draw the squares based on configurable parameters. You can use parameters to specify how large the board is, which squares are word and letter score multipliers, and how many multiples.
Then only with a particular configuration file would the game be identical to Scrabble.
You could change the name based on a parameter too for that matter.
Where would this leave the copyright situation? Would the software still be forfit? Or only the configuration file that makes it identical to scrabble? What if you let users upload their own configuration files, and left it up to the community to set up games based on their own configurations. Would Hasbro then have to sue the individuals for using this man's software to copy their game?
If you ask me copyright law is an absolute mess in the digital age. Hard as it is, we need to move away from a society where the first person who has an idea can block someone else from using it. Certainly they the people responsible for thinking of it should expect to benefit financially, but they should not be able to take all the benefit from the fruits of an implementor's labour nor block someone else from implementing the idea.
Copyright, trademark and patent law came about at a time when the ability to make copies was limited, as was education. We now copy things electronically in the blink of an eye, and hopefully overall we're more educated, meaning that several people may think of similiar ideas at the same time.
Praying to the he-God Nemod on the 3rd day after a new moon, and dancing for him the great triumphant nerd dance of Praytor which involves spinning around in a circle and yelling "hemannamannamanna" at the top of your lungs works much better to bring batteries back to life. Everyone knows that!!!!
This is news? The half-witted ramblings of some bimbo reporter? She's just thought up thin client computing, and either:
a) thinks she's brilliant for thinking of things that are bloody obvious today
or
b) knows perfectly well she's rehashing old junk but thinks she'll be paid all the same if she just mentions a couple of current companies
She reminds me of a 15 year old student on the debating team. Thinks everyone else is stupid so she can get away with talking rubbish. She should never have been paid for the article/editorial. She's a form of troll. Why are we feeding her?/. is getting to be a waste of time.
Haven't you heard of the paper, now considered a classic.
You want to teach kids to code for a career? Here's plan:
1) Get them interested. Best way is to teach them to program games. There are simple game programming environments. One is Game Maker. http://www.cs.uu.nl/people/markov/gmaker/
2) Teach them about automating tasks using command scripts and either Javascript of VBScript.
3) Next teach them about web and database. Start with straight HTML then move to JSP. Help them build something simple. Maybe JSP to pull their favourite sports results out of a table, or a database of their film collection or something. They'll be learning Java.
4) Now you can get them to go back to something like assembly if appropriate. Teach them how the guts of the machine works and why it works now they've done some simple stuff. Don't bother with BASIC though. This isn't the early 80s, and its so far removed from anything they'll be asked to do when they're older (certainly far removed from most coding professional's day to day experience).
5) If they're still interested, show them how to make their own GUI etc. and teach them more computer languages so they get a feel for what right tool for the right job means.
Might take weeks or months but not years to get them to the point where they understand what coding is like. They can then decide if they enjoy the challenges and can deal with the frustrations.
Dude, I've just had a 13 month old Multifunction and an 8 month old digital SLR break. Both were top of the line consumer items from leading manufacturers, and both were treated with care and respect. I can tell you right now when you buy something expensive it doesn't necessarily prove more reliable, and the companies who sold them to you try to gouge you to fix them because they know you must have money to buy something a bit classier in the first place.
On the other hand when something cheap breaks I go back to the bargain shop I bought it at and buy another one.
For any item, if it does the same job and costs 1/6 of the price go for it and plan on buying 2 or 3 of them and still saving money. If you can't get away without the features or build quality you're paying for in the more expensive version, don't try to.
Bottom line is this. The more things you have the more things will break. Don't buy things you don't need.
These are golden words my friend. Particularly, if you're planning to work full time while doing the degree. You're going to be doing some of your degree work in the small hours of the morning, and giving up things to do it. If you don't absolutely love the field you've chosen to study you're in for literally years of hell.
After my B.Sc. Comp Sci, I did a Masters of Astronomy online. I started off loving the degree but for various reasons it was hell to complete (but I did it!). I still love astronomy, but I'm not likely to do another degree any time soon.
Personally I have been on enough interviews to know that you can put anything down on your resume....and be laughed out of the room at your first interview. Most employers worth their salt will give some form of technical interview. For my current job I sat a 3 hour exam before I got to the second interview. It wasn't about getting everything right either, but proving that I could understand and process the questions.
Sure you don't actually need the degree but for some of the questions I answered mine sure came in handy.
"If you don't mind deleting spam manually, that's your prerogative, but don't complain about it. If your ISP doesn't do a good job fighting spam, then switch ISPs or install your own anti-spam software. There are a lot of choices out there."
This fool needs to realize that not everyone is or wants to be a computer expert, or an email specialist just so they can use their email. If every day a barrel of paper junk mail got delivered to your door you'd sure as hell complain, not just arrange to have a paper recycling company sort and collect the rubbish, or learn about the intricacies of the US postal system.
When are we in the IT industry going to stop telling users that they need to be computer experts to run a computer. The RTFM attitude just does not cut it!
If you put something in such a way its so easy to misconstrue while simultaneously trying to put yourself up as an insightful guru you'd better expect intelligent people who aren't bamboozled to say "hang on a minute".
This isn't well thought out anything - its sedrivel, and the author is surprised that people don't bother to respond to his poorly thought out argument.
The fact that you're resorting to abuse or implied abuse tells me all I need to know about you.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the law operates as it does because in fact consenting to being beaten up is really pretty unlikely
Have you never heard of boxing?
Actually they're release notes.
There is some reference to feature changes etc. but I miss the days of proper, easy to read, plain text change logs.
XP SP2 broke remote desktop connection for me on one computer and caused a USB2 cable's drivers to blue screen when using the network on another every time a network connection was established. I've gone back to SP1 on my home machine but I'm stuck with what I'm provided with at work.
What new "features" will this bug^H^H^Hservicepack contain I wonder?
In my experience it goes something like this.
1. A high level description of the system is put together with a high level estimate of man power and resources needed. Commitments are made and deadlines specified based on these.
2. As detailed planning and then development proceeds - either formally or informally through the developers - additional requirements and requirements changes are identified. This is a good and necessary thing, but is often not controlled properly.
3. Original estimates are never adjusted, or insufficiently adjusted under pressure to deliver in the timeframe originally specified.
4. Repeat 2 and 3 until a working system is put together late and with a budget blowout, or worse make changes so difficult to implement that the project fails, or worse yet the stake holders never come to agreement on what the system should have been like and allow the project to fail without any part being implemented.
5. Bitch about project being late, over budget and not delivering what was required.
A good manager, given the right authority will insist on clear detailed designs and adjust at point 3 correctly. This only happens 5% of the time.
...when he sucker punched the monitor...
Sucker punched? What he expected the monitor to react, but it was too stupid for him (a sucker)?
People sure like to anthropomorphize their computers and peripherals!!! Is it any wonder they hit them and sweet talk them?
People tend to mimic what they are exposed to.
Yep, many a time I've seen a good game and gone out and bought myself a copy and played it.
Never did I once try to enact the contents of a violent game in real life.
People forget that kids played Cowboys and Indians before the computer was invented.
Actually that's just one class of techniques that's been used prior to this. The gravitational disturbance of the parent star (wobble in the star) has been used too.
"All you've learned was that Ceasar was a salad dressing dude."
and:
"If I was a short French dude from the past where would I go?"
Now I am still trying to understand why the cashier at walmart needs a full fledged PC, just to sell me my stuff.
This is all well and good but has anyone ever heard of the Universal Turing Machine? A general purpose programable machine is much better for writing software on. The more capability a particular architecture has, the wider a range of purposes it can be used for.
Why not just use a full fledged PC? If you don't need all the power, that's fine get a lower spec'd model. It would be cheaper than having specifically designed underpowered thin clients.
I'll tell you why not. The problem isn't in overpowered hardware. It's in overcomplexity and bloat of the basic operating software.
The operating systems now demand ridiculous specs just to run. The software aritecture isn't modular enough, and doesn't allow for scaling. The manufacturers use this as an excuse to sell you the next generation of hardware, which gives the sofware manufacturers an excuse to charge you for the next generation of software.
What can an end user honestly do today in a typical office environment with a computer that they couldn't do 5 years ago? So why can't you pick up a brand new computer with 5 year old specs for a lot less money?
I am absolutely advocating that current copyright law be scrapped.
People confuse the right to profit from an original work with the right keep others from using it.
Hasbro should be able to take a cut of what ever this guy is making...perhaps even have a say in how he operates (because he's using their good name, and because otherwise he can give away what they would otherwise sell). They shouldn't be able to tell him to cease and desist, and since it's our idea we'll take over all your good work while we're at it.
How often does the original author/inventor take a SIGNIFICANT cut of the profit generated from their work under the current system? Not very often.
Try this.
If person/company A comes up with an idea/invention/original thought
And person/company B then builds on it and makes money
Then person/company A can claim a percentage of revenue (not profit) generated
BUT person/company A cannot prevent you from using the innovation, and person/company A cannot assign the rights to a third party (though they're free to do as they will with the percentage of revenue)
No bottom feeding of any kind. Still incentive to actually create. Not much incentive to try to hoard rights though.
Perhaps one exception might be that an individual might be able to assign the revenue stream to family in the event of death.
I don't think advanced medical research is any different for that matter. Companies should not be put in a position where it's advantageous to their customers over by charging like wounded bulls. If the medicine is unaffordable I'm just as happy for it never to be invented.
...and wants its article back.
Substitute Firefox with Mozilla, and throw in a reference to The Cathedral and the Bazaar while you're at it.
So any games made should not be configurable, because someone might use them to emulate a different copyrighted game?
Knives should never be sold, since they can be used to kill people?
Books should never be published as they put ideas into young impressionable minds?
And _I'm_ opening a pandora's box?
There's a world of difference between enabling someone to do a category of things (eg. manufacturing a knife, file sharing software), some of which might be illegal (eg. stabbing someone to death, downloading copyright material), and actively building something to be used for illegal purposes (eg. the people slayer mark III stabbing knife, setting up a warez torrent).
As someone who practices software development, I have to ask what happens if you externalize all these values.
Instead of having a set number for the value of a letter, make it a configurable parameter.
Instead of having a set score added for using all your pieces, make this configurable too.
Same goes for the board. You can use different graphic sets to draw the squares based on configurable parameters. You can use parameters to specify how large the board is, which squares are word and letter score multipliers, and how many multiples.
Then only with a particular configuration file would the game be identical to Scrabble.
You could change the name based on a parameter too for that matter.
Where would this leave the copyright situation? Would the software still be forfit? Or only the configuration file that makes it identical to scrabble? What if you let users upload their own configuration files, and left it up to the community to set up games based on their own configurations. Would Hasbro then have to sue the individuals for using this man's software to copy their game?
If you ask me copyright law is an absolute mess in the digital age. Hard as it is, we need to move away from a society where the first person who has an idea can block someone else from using it. Certainly they the people responsible for thinking of it should expect to benefit financially, but they should not be able to take all the benefit from the fruits of an implementor's labour nor block someone else from implementing the idea.
Copyright, trademark and patent law came about at a time when the ability to make copies was limited, as was education. We now copy things electronically in the blink of an eye, and hopefully overall we're more educated, meaning that several people may think of similiar ideas at the same time.
Praying to the he-God Nemod on the 3rd day after a new moon, and dancing for him the great triumphant nerd dance of Praytor which involves spinning around in a circle and yelling "hemannamannamanna" at the top of your lungs works much better to bring batteries back to life. Everyone knows that!!!!
This is news? The half-witted ramblings of some bimbo reporter? She's just thought up thin client computing, and either:
/. is getting to be a waste of time.
a) thinks she's brilliant for thinking of things that are bloody obvious today
or
b) knows perfectly well she's rehashing old junk but thinks she'll be paid all the same if she just mentions a couple of current companies
She reminds me of a 15 year old student on the debating team. Thinks everyone else is stupid so she can get away with talking rubbish. She should never have been paid for the article/editorial. She's a form of troll. Why are we feeding her?
I don't believe in God but I do believe in email.
:-)
Does that make me an idiot??!?!?!? I'm worried
Lectures on "God and Computers"?
I'd be more inclined to read them if they were titled "Goddamn computers".
Haven't you heard of the paper, now considered a classic.
You want to teach kids to code for a career? Here's plan:
1) Get them interested. Best way is to teach them to program games. There are simple game programming environments. One is Game Maker. http://www.cs.uu.nl/people/markov/gmaker/
2) Teach them about automating tasks using command scripts and either Javascript of VBScript.
3) Next teach them about web and database. Start with straight HTML then move to JSP. Help them build something simple. Maybe JSP to pull their favourite sports results out of a table, or a database of their film collection or something. They'll be learning Java.
4) Now you can get them to go back to something like assembly if appropriate. Teach them how the guts of the machine works and why it works now they've done some simple stuff. Don't bother with BASIC though. This isn't the early 80s, and its so far removed from anything they'll be asked to do when they're older (certainly far removed from most coding professional's day to day experience).
5) If they're still interested, show them how to make their own GUI etc. and teach them more computer languages so they get a feel for what right tool for the right job means.
Might take weeks or months but not years to get them to the point where they understand what coding is like. They can then decide if they enjoy the challenges and can deal with the frustrations.
Dude, I've just had a 13 month old Multifunction and an 8 month old digital SLR break. Both were top of the line consumer items from leading manufacturers, and both were treated with care and respect. I can tell you right now when you buy something expensive it doesn't necessarily prove more reliable, and the companies who sold them to you try to gouge you to fix them because they know you must have money to buy something a bit classier in the first place.
On the other hand when something cheap breaks I go back to the bargain shop I bought it at and buy another one.
For any item, if it does the same job and costs 1/6 of the price go for it and plan on buying 2 or 3 of them and still saving money. If you can't get away without the features or build quality you're paying for in the more expensive version, don't try to.
Bottom line is this. The more things you have the more things will break. Don't buy things you don't need.
Huh? I've just said I had a 3 hour interview with coding questions, and last I checked Senior Systems Officer was an IT job.
Get a degree in a field that interests you.
These are golden words my friend. Particularly, if you're planning to work full time while doing the degree. You're going to be doing some of your degree work in the small hours of the morning, and giving up things to do it. If you don't absolutely love the field you've chosen to study you're in for literally years of hell.
After my B.Sc. Comp Sci, I did a Masters of Astronomy online. I started off loving the degree but for various reasons it was hell to complete (but I did it!). I still love astronomy, but I'm not likely to do another degree any time soon.
Personally I have been on enough interviews to know that you can put anything down on your resume. ...and be laughed out of the room at your first interview. Most employers worth their salt will give some form of technical interview. For my current job I sat a 3 hour exam before I got to the second interview. It wasn't about getting everything right either, but proving that I could understand and process the questions.
Sure you don't actually need the degree but for some of the questions I answered mine sure came in handy.
"If you don't mind deleting spam manually, that's your prerogative, but don't complain about it. If your ISP doesn't do a good job fighting spam, then switch ISPs or install your own anti-spam software. There are a lot of choices out there."
This fool needs to realize that not everyone is or wants to be a computer expert, or an email specialist just so they can use their email. If every day a barrel of paper junk mail got delivered to your door you'd sure as hell complain, not just arrange to have a paper recycling company sort and collect the rubbish, or learn about the intricacies of the US postal system.
When are we in the IT industry going to stop telling users that they need to be computer experts to run a computer. The RTFM attitude just does not cut it!
If you put something in such a way its so easy to misconstrue while simultaneously trying to put yourself up as an insightful guru you'd better expect intelligent people who aren't bamboozled to say "hang on a minute".
This isn't well thought out anything - its sedrivel, and the author is surprised that people don't bother to respond to his poorly thought out argument.
The fact that you're resorting to abuse or implied abuse tells me all I need to know about you.