The easy thing is to say that the tags must be deactivated upon leaving the store.
They already do this for inventory control devices, where they rub the item on a magnetic(?) pad to deactivate it. I can't see why they would not also do this sort of thing for passive RFID devices.
Thomas, you make some good points about some of the shortcomings of APT, but at the same time, you also set up quite a few straw men to knock APT. For example, the "Security and Stability" section criticizes the Debian model of a centralized, high-quality, well-tested software repository for not being trustworthy enough, but in the "APT is not scalable" section, you critize Debian for making it a little more difficult to be part of the repository.
Zero-Install does look interesting, but you really can't claim security advantages over APT, particularly if you're talking about software from Debian's repository...
When you have user log-in to a particular part of the site, you need to store username, password information, and some other session variables in a cookie, so that on subpages within the part that needs to be logged into can check to see is the user is properly logged in.
No, you're wrong. Why should you store all that information in a cookie on the browser? All you really need is a token or key to the data that resides on the server. This is how J2EE web apps (ie, JSPs and Servlets) work. I think ASP works the same way. I'm not sure about PHP, though.
Because it solves a lot of scalability problems for applications that use lots of files/sockets/etc. Before NIO, and application (like a web server) would have to spawn a thread for each connection it is servicing. If you have a web server that is serving 100 simultaneous clients (or Freenet, which makes many connections to neighboring nodes), you've got to create a thread for each one. That can be very expensive on some platforms. Also, those threads are almost always waiting for data to be read from or sent to the socket/file.
One of the features of NIO is the concept of "selectors", which is very similar to the POSIX select() call. In other words, instead of creating a thread for each connection, an application can register channels with the selector, and in a loop, ask the selector for the list of channels that are ready for I/O. As a result, far fewer threads are needed to handle the I/O for many more connections.
Also, with RedHat's aggressive "enterprise" campaign, as well as IBM's openness towards Linux, many application vendors are now buliding their software for Linux. Having easy access to test kernels will make it much easier for them to qualify their products against 2.6, allowing them to get their products "blessed" for 2.6 as soon as it's generally available.
Spoken like a true slashdot elitist snob. Any person who doesn't choose as you do is a sheep.
No. A person who does not choose as I do is not a sheep. A person who doesn't have the initiative to at least explore higher-quality information and entertainment, no matter the subject or perspective, is.
IITs, just like MIT or any other *huge* institution, doesn't run on an organization wide mandate to espouse any one technology over the other... the goal is to provide students with a "well rounded education" in all aspects of (computer) engineering.
While this is most likely true, that really doesn't answer my question, that of the conumption versus the production of open source software. MIT, for example, has been the home of many high-profile open source projects over the years, from students, as well as faculty. A large part of the open source "philosophy" is that of collaboration, or a give-and-take of ideas/code. I am not aware of any open source project whose principal contributors are based in India (though I know RMS spends a lot of time there:^). If IIT has no mandate for or against open source, and I'm assuming that many of their students use it in the course of their studies, why does there not seem to be any signifigant open source production activity?
...think about how many local issues that get squashed because it conflicts with a more profitable (in the minds of the corporate master) slant? Local environmental impact? Oh, no. Mustn't give that airtime lest it impact the profit machines in the big cities....
This is why I'm not clear on the uproar surrounding the FCC decision. If those types of stories are deemed important enough to a community, then what's stopping an independant media outlet from reporting them? In most markets, independant media is going to have a hard time getting along, not because Clear Channel is bringing in bulldozers to crush local media, but because most people are sheep, and won't care about losing local media coverage. Yes, this sucks, but I can't see how you can blame Big Media for the public's apathy for seeking out important local news, interesting music or other programming.
how about this for a twist on the first amendment? Condider offensive material. People in different areas have different standards
The First Amendment pertains to the government, not private enterprise. For example, Wal*Mart doesn't sell CDs with "adult content" on them; as a result, my cash goes to a retailer that does not have the same view. Wal*Mart seems okay with that, so am I.
We shouldn't force global culture to be homogenous, even in the name of "Free Speech" and equal access.
Turn off the TV. Donate to your local college radio station, public television station, or community newspaper. Read a book. Nobody's forcing Survivor down anyone's throat. People choose their own sources for information and entertainment.
Now that open source-based systems are being spread to one of the world's most populous nations, many of whom have years of experience building software, is there much open source development happening there?
Do the big universities (paricularly IIT) encourage participation or leadership of OSS projects?
Well, at least in northern New England, the highway signs show distances in both miles and kilometers, so as to not confuse the visiting Canadians... But they still don't let you give Canadian quarters at the toll booths; I hate it when I get one of these things as change...
I would gladly buy your service if you included Ogg Vorbis support. Any hardware that is capable of decoding video can easily decode Vorbis as well. I am not about to re-encode my CD collection to an inferior proprietary format for this feature.
P.S. FLAC support would be great too, while you're at it.
I wish I had mod points right now... Anyway, I've tried Eclipse about three different times in the past. This "project focus" is the reason I switch back to jEdit every time. I work on a product that has thousands of source files, my focus is on a relatively small part. But, Eclipse forces me to make a project, and it then proceeds to compile it all, which takes hours to complete...
Maybe Eclipse 2.2 will be better, I understand there's an option to edit files outside a project...
In particular, it means it isn't a "fork" of BIND, either in architecture or implementation. If it were a fork, it would possibly be vulnerable to the same attacks as BIND, where they share code. The whole point of this switch is to use a nameserver that does not share those vulnerabilities. I have no doubt nsd has vulnerabilities of its own, but it's far less likely that BIND and nsd share the same vulnerabilities.
Somehow, I would never trust an "extreme programmed" program. I feel (perhaps just a prejudice) that extreme programming is a "do now, think later" kind of approach.
Then you don't understand the whole approach. XP evolved by taking good programming practices (automated testing, peer code review, "integration builds", client communication, etc.), and kind of going overboard with them. As a result, it typically generates higher quality deliverables. For example, in XP, before you write code, you write the test first. Instead of weekly code review meetings, you code with someone else. Instead of everyone writing their code in isolation, then slamming it together to see if it all works, you see if your code works together all the time. Instead of waiting for one or two business days to get a requirement clarification from the customer, you get that information from them much sooner.
There are more practices such as these that make up XP. I've worked on many projects, particularly with the big consultancies, that use waterfall-type methodologies that fail. A 600 page design document is useless when the requirements change during the project, which they always do, due to market demands, time constraints, etc. XP is no silver bullet, but it makes a lot of sense after you've been through lots of projects that go over budget, without all the desired features, even after working 80 hour weeks.
Re:Excellent move
on
Corporate KDE
·
· Score: 2, Informative
KDE is cool, but I'll stick with something like OS X for now.
One of the benefits of XP is that it can tell you much earlier about whether or not to terminate a project in the first place. From Extreme Programming Explained:
One of the features of XP is that customers can see exactly what they are getting as they go along.
JavaOS has been built to be fully ROMable for embedded applications, and can run with as little as 512K ROM and 256K RAM. For network computers, an entire system with JavaOS, the HotJavaTM Browser and space for downloading Web content and applets requires only 3MB ROM and 4MB RAM. JavaOS can be this small because it is almost completely written in Java.
Well, when you combine enough of your small functions/methods together into one big monolith of a program problems tend to surface. What then?
You write tests to encompass these larger pieces of functionality. In general, debuggers are usually used at the lowest levels: checking variables and references, and sometimes as far as processor registers. At higher levels of abstraction, the debugger becomes less useful, as you're generally not looking for null pointers and the like.
When unit testing, once you identify a bug, you write a test case that fails, that you would otherwise expect would pass. Fix the bug such that the test passes, and repeat. This works pretty well in the real world, and the proliferation of unit testing tools (both free (JUnit, CppUnit) and commercial (Parasoft)) is a testament to the usefulness of this technique. Many professional developers I work with haven't dusted off the debugger in years...
[I] have yet to see a reason to abandon debugger use.
I'm not advocating abandoning debugger use, if you find it truly productive. However, over the course of a project I spend less time writing unit tests than I would if I had to fiddle with a debugger.
Sometimes you need to see the cogs in motion.
And this is where configurable logging comes in. It's an automatic process. It's also a lot less painstaking than remembering what watchpoints and breakpoints you had to use when you saw this bug happen last week while fixing somethig else.
As anyone who's ever tried to use software knows, nobody uses debugging tools anyway.
Although I'm guessing your reply was intended as sarcasm, I don't think it's that far from the truth. Debugging is a slow, laborious process. Much of the server-side world doesn't use traditional debugging tools at all- they use small, well defined functions/methods, which are easy to unit test. That, coupled with configurable logging, eliminates many of the scenarios a debugger would be involved in, with the benefit of automation, reproducibility, and defect histories/log files. In my travels, I've seen as developers gain experience, they rely less and less on interactive debuggers, and more on automated testing and configurable logging.
Slashdot Mirror
They already do this for inventory control devices, where they rub the item on a magnetic(?) pad to deactivate it. I can't see why they would not also do this sort of thing for passive RFID devices.
"Please remove your pants, your license has expired."
The nice thing about the Neuros is the "backpack" system used, which will allow users to upgrade to USB2 and/or a bigger hard drive in the future.
Thomas, you make some good points about some of the shortcomings of APT, but at the same time, you also set up quite a few straw men to knock APT. For example, the "Security and Stability" section criticizes the Debian model of a centralized, high-quality, well-tested software repository for not being trustworthy enough, but in the "APT is not scalable" section, you critize Debian for making it a little more difficult to be part of the repository.
Zero-Install does look interesting, but you really can't claim security advantages over APT, particularly if you're talking about software from Debian's repository...
You're wrong.
When you have user log-in to a particular part of the site, you need to store username, password information, and some other session variables in a cookie, so that on subpages within the part that needs to be logged into can check to see is the user is properly logged in.
No, you're wrong. Why should you store all that information in a cookie on the browser? All you really need is a token or key to the data that resides on the server. This is how J2EE web apps (ie, JSPs and Servlets) work. I think ASP works the same way. I'm not sure about PHP, though.
That's a pretty wide range...
Because it solves a lot of scalability problems for applications that use lots of files/sockets/etc. Before NIO, and application (like a web server) would have to spawn a thread for each connection it is servicing. If you have a web server that is serving 100 simultaneous clients (or Freenet, which makes many connections to neighboring nodes), you've got to create a thread for each one. That can be very expensive on some platforms. Also, those threads are almost always waiting for data to be read from or sent to the socket/file.
One of the features of NIO is the concept of "selectors", which is very similar to the POSIX select() call. In other words, instead of creating a thread for each connection, an application can register channels with the selector, and in a loop, ask the selector for the list of channels that are ready for I/O. As a result, far fewer threads are needed to handle the I/O for many more connections.
See this for more information.
Also, with RedHat's aggressive "enterprise" campaign, as well as IBM's openness towards Linux, many application vendors are now buliding their software for Linux. Having easy access to test kernels will make it much easier for them to qualify their products against 2.6, allowing them to get their products "blessed" for 2.6 as soon as it's generally available.
Introduced: 1993
Acquired, new, for nothing because I was a DEC employee: 1994.
No. A person who does not choose as I do is not a sheep. A person who doesn't have the initiative to at least explore higher-quality information and entertainment, no matter the subject or perspective, is.
While this is most likely true, that really doesn't answer my question, that of the conumption versus the production of open source software. MIT, for example, has been the home of many high-profile open source projects over the years, from students, as well as faculty. A large part of the open source "philosophy" is that of collaboration, or a give-and-take of ideas/code. I am not aware of any open source project whose principal contributors are based in India (though I know RMS spends a lot of time there
This is why I'm not clear on the uproar surrounding the FCC decision. If those types of stories are deemed important enough to a community, then what's stopping an independant media outlet from reporting them? In most markets, independant media is going to have a hard time getting along, not because Clear Channel is bringing in bulldozers to crush local media, but because most people are sheep, and won't care about losing local media coverage. Yes, this sucks, but I can't see how you can blame Big Media for the public's apathy for seeking out important local news, interesting music or other programming.
how about this for a twist on the first amendment? Condider offensive material. People in different areas have different standards
The First Amendment pertains to the government, not private enterprise. For example, Wal*Mart doesn't sell CDs with "adult content" on them; as a result, my cash goes to a retailer that does not have the same view. Wal*Mart seems okay with that, so am I.
We shouldn't force global culture to be homogenous, even in the name of "Free Speech" and equal access.
Turn off the TV. Donate to your local college radio station, public television station, or community newspaper. Read a book. Nobody's forcing Survivor down anyone's throat. People choose their own sources for information and entertainment.
Now that open source-based systems are being spread to one of the world's most populous nations, many of whom have years of experience building software, is there much open source development happening there?
Do the big universities (paricularly IIT) encourage participation or leadership of OSS projects?
Well, at least in northern New England, the highway signs show distances in both miles and kilometers, so as to not confuse the visiting Canadians... But they still don't let you give Canadian quarters at the toll booths; I hate it when I get one of these things as change...
Damn. That's got me beat by a few years...
joe,killed by a wraith called joe, while helpless
I would gladly buy your service if you included Ogg Vorbis support. Any hardware that is capable of decoding video can easily decode Vorbis as well. I am not about to re-encode my CD collection to an inferior proprietary format for this feature.
P.S. FLAC support would be great too, while you're at it.
I wish I had mod points right now... Anyway, I've tried Eclipse about three different times in the past. This "project focus" is the reason I switch back to jEdit every time. I work on a product that has thousands of source files, my focus is on a relatively small part. But, Eclipse forces me to make a project, and it then proceeds to compile it all, which takes hours to complete...
Maybe Eclipse 2.2 will be better, I understand there's an option to edit files outside a project...
In particular, it means it isn't a "fork" of BIND, either in architecture or implementation. If it were a fork, it would possibly be vulnerable to the same attacks as BIND, where they share code. The whole point of this switch is to use a nameserver that does not share those vulnerabilities. I have no doubt nsd has vulnerabilities of its own, but it's far less likely that BIND and nsd share the same vulnerabilities.
Then you don't understand the whole approach. XP evolved by taking good programming practices (automated testing, peer code review, "integration builds", client communication, etc.), and kind of going overboard with them. As a result, it typically generates higher quality deliverables. For example, in XP, before you write code, you write the test first. Instead of weekly code review meetings, you code with someone else. Instead of everyone writing their code in isolation, then slamming it together to see if it all works, you see if your code works together all the time. Instead of waiting for one or two business days to get a requirement clarification from the customer, you get that information from them much sooner.
There are more practices such as these that make up XP. I've worked on many projects, particularly with the big consultancies, that use waterfall-type methodologies that fail. A 600 page design document is useless when the requirements change during the project, which they always do, due to market demands, time constraints, etc. XP is no silver bullet, but it makes a lot of sense after you've been through lots of projects that go over budget, without all the desired features, even after working 80 hour weeks.
Of course, you can have both.
Hear it from the players players themselves.
One of the benefits of XP is that it can tell you much earlier about whether or not to terminate a project in the first place. From Extreme Programming Explained:
-- Kent BeckYou write tests to encompass these larger pieces of functionality. In general, debuggers are usually used at the lowest levels: checking variables and references, and sometimes as far as processor registers. At higher levels of abstraction, the debugger becomes less useful, as you're generally not looking for null pointers and the like.
When unit testing, once you identify a bug, you write a test case that fails, that you would otherwise expect would pass. Fix the bug such that the test passes, and repeat. This works pretty well in the real world, and the proliferation of unit testing tools (both free (JUnit, CppUnit) and commercial (Parasoft)) is a testament to the usefulness of this technique. Many professional developers I work with haven't dusted off the debugger in years...
[I] have yet to see a reason to abandon debugger use.
I'm not advocating abandoning debugger use, if you find it truly productive. However, over the course of a project I spend less time writing unit tests than I would if I had to fiddle with a debugger.
Sometimes you need to see the cogs in motion.
And this is where configurable logging comes in. It's an automatic process. It's also a lot less painstaking than remembering what watchpoints and breakpoints you had to use when you saw this bug happen last week while fixing somethig else.
Although I'm guessing your reply was intended as sarcasm, I don't think it's that far from the truth. Debugging is a slow, laborious process. Much of the server-side world doesn't use traditional debugging tools at all- they use small, well defined functions/methods, which are easy to unit test. That, coupled with configurable logging, eliminates many of the scenarios a debugger would be involved in, with the benefit of automation, reproducibility, and defect histories/log files. In my travels, I've seen as developers gain experience, they rely less and less on interactive debuggers, and more on automated testing and configurable logging.