If ever, I repeat ever, see a consultant/vendor/salesperson enter the room with this device I know I am in for a 30+ powerpoint presentation; if only the laser were powerful enough to stun me to minimize the pain...
So from the article we can deduce there is a disconnect between the actual placing of the bet to the actual determination of a payoff. What they need is a chain-of-evidence system, so that bet's are placed (stored securely), once the race is closed for betting, the records should be posted to a new server (stored securely), then finally at payoff, the two records should be verified to have have been tampered with. Of course, this Engineer could have known both databases, but in this case you could insure no one person has rights to both databases. Of course a conspiracy of two is possible. My final problem with this is what about a one-way hash on these things: hasn't Kumar in India ever read about database encryption, why should an Engineer be allowed to see the plain-text record anyway? Otherwise you set HORSE_NBR = 5 (High Chapperal).
"Sun's biggest asset right now is its installed base, and as we've seen, linux/x86 is eroding that because for many things, the port is almost free, and because the hardware is soooo much cheaper (absolute and price/perf)"...couldn't be more accurate. I buy a generic PC with quality parts and slap Linux on it, it's a phenomenal choice cost-wise with little or no risk. Plus, I haven't bought into any one paradigm of how things should be... the potential for companies is huge...that's why their stock price is bad. If you could get a car half of what you bought your current one for which was/is basically the same..what would you do?
I'm not a huge SUN fan, from a business standpoint, but this actually has some merit. I can see some applications for admins, engineers, etc., though still a niche-market. They say that even a mouse will fight a lion if backed into a corner. So it's interesting to see the last death throes of Sun. I just don't think this strategy is the kind of thing that makes sense.
--RIP DMC, here's some 40 for me, and some for my homies.
In some ways I'm hoping that this doesn't affect me as both a corporate IT person, and an avid computer geek, but alas, I think it is not so. The chips adhere to the law of spoilage; that if not brought to the marketplace before a certain time, they will actually be sold for a loss. I like the plantiff's position in this, in that they simply just need to wait it out while the fruit rots on the loading dock. I'm not a legal scholar, but what is all this hedging in the suit: I appeal, but lose 100 million, I win, lose the 100 million, you win, the 100 million, plus appeal money, but possibly lose... oh I can't keep up..
Lynn states, "We want to welcome and bring to the table all that are interested in issues that concern ICANN," Of course, the other half of this sentence is, "..without really taking your comments seriously."
I'm sorry to disagree with the modder, but to WAKE a furby you shake it. To make it COO, you turn it upside down. The fact that I know this is quite sad.
Talking about antimatter sails when we don't even have a permanent base on the Moon (haven't been there in 30 years) or Mars is like my Labrador talking about the day he becomes President. Somethings got to evolve. You know the old addage, no bucks no Buck Rogers.
It makes perfect sense if you understand the context. First, the EU commission has realized that there is a huge market for investigation. They've set penalities for food, steel, clothes, they feel have not been priced accordingly. To me, it looks like the international version of a class-action lawsuit: sign up some clients, shake some trees, get a settlement or fine. I agree with your point, a game is not food, air, or water, you have the right NOT to buy if the price is too high; apparently it wasn't since they sold well.
"...UnitedLinux is in a strong position to compete with Red Hat..."; not necessarily. They really need to think about corporate support channels, plus a little hype don't hurt.
That's exactly true. Of course, there are two different types of licenses I find: the first is the server/admin/software license. Typically this is what comes with the software in the form of a serial-number, or key, or product-key, etc. So when you buy the software on EBAY, you are buying the software and the one server/product license that comes with that software. Next, is the seat license, which many break down into named and unnamed (this maybe review for some of you), but essentially this is the HIGH, HIGH, HIGH margin sale. Now, what would be awesome, (see earlier post in thread about web-site), would be to tell these companies that the licenses I'm about to purchase are "universally transferrable" so I can sell the seats on ebay, transfer to a subsidiary, store in a database and use throughout my conglomeration. This is really a take-off on how the refining companies sell energy credits, but I would love to see in the IT industry. Would it be nice to go into the open market and buy say 1000 seat licenses for Oracle 8i?
I've thought about this for sometime and I'm not sure how you could get around the NDA (just don't sign it, of course), but it's the same problem everyone complains about with airline seats: two people sitting next to each other pay completely different prices. It would be nice to see what a tech company pays for say a SuperDome versus say a bank or an airline.
This sort of rears it's ugly head every now and then. Honestly, MS is doing what everyone else does. Oracle, for instance, when we spun a company wouldn't let us transfer licenses to the new company; basically, because they want to resell all new licenses. Even though we had a license per person, since that person was in a new address, you needed a new license. Microsoft, unfortunately, doesn't care about the sale, obviously, they just want to be able to renegotiate a new deal with whomever buys the company. Honestly, I think the single greatest thing we could do in the IT industry is create a web-site where everyone puts in the prices they pay for licenses, hardware, etc. then we'd have all the information.
I remember an AIRBUS being flown for the first time at an airshow (video available somewhere). Apparently, the pilot made a slow fly-by over the runway at a couple hundred feet. Apparently, in this near stall configuration, the computer guidance was in "error" mode and thus took over the controls of the fly-by-wire system. Of course, applying full-power is like the worst thing you can do because you operate in what engineer's call the "back-side" of the power-curve. Which means additional horsepower actually means less thrust. Of course, the computer, sensing all the available data to it, does just that: full power. The plane slowly enters the canopy of a forest grove at the end of the runway and then a violent explosion erupts.
Wow. With headlines like "Roll-up TV screens to hit living rooms" and
"This brings the dream of flexible plastic monitors and TVs a step closer to fruition", you'd think that these are ready to be rolled off the shelf. Actually, it doesn't. It simply means that instead of fighting with each other, they'll now work together and thus hopefully save some money. However, imagine if you will, that betamax and vhs joined forces before the marketplace was well defined? Who would win? Exactly, it wouldn't matter because the winner would already be decided and we'd all have betamax players. So this is probably not seen as a good thing because a) these companies will no longer compete (something I'm sure all/.ers see as a negative) and b) they will carve up/patent this technology and innovation will stagnate (HDTV) and c) it will ripple to other technologies which may or may not rely on this in the future because they will have a stranglehold on the technology. Finally, when companies merge with similar products and or technologies, the resulting product-lines are often lowest-common denominators of the two. A little research and you'll find business history littered with just such examples.....
On Several web-sites, most notably www.weather.com, if you get to certain page(s), your icon turns to an MSN(tm) butterfly. I have no problem with Microsoft per se, ip so facto, but that's annoying.
I realize, after reading many comments, why many/.ers are having trouble digesting this. It's a simple matter of economics. Harddrives have become a commodity product. In the old days, you bought a harddrive and it was expensive and you needed a warranty to justify the expense. Fastforward, harddrives are cheap and you don't use a warranty as reason to make the purchase, because you know if this drive fails I will be able to buy a bigger harddrive later at an even lower price. The other driving factor here is that warranties are a liability and must be carried on the books as such. I think this will be the trend for all future hardware components.
I've liked The Humane Interface: New Directions for Designing Interactive Systems, written by Jef Raskin. He was one of the early Mac engineers. This maybe a little higher-level than you are looking for though.
First, the article suggests another "blow" to MS office penetration. MS has 95% market share by revenue. You are not going to get market share by creating a worse product (i.e. less functional) and giving it away. I will always pay for steak when a burnt shoe is free. Why not try and make a better/similar product for less money. Wow, what a thought! Read these comments carefully, everyone says I love OO or I love SO, but it doesn't do this or that. Your right it doesn't. Microsoft does. They try to be everything to everybody (and you pay for it). The other thing I've found w/ other productivity suites is that they don't do TEXT TO COLUMNS. TEXT TO COLUMNS is the most used business function in the US today bar none. Someday someone will come out with a Microsoft-equivalent for less money and that will win the day.
I can just hear the laughter from outer-space: "GLeebob, come here quick look what those silly humans are trying. Yup, they're trying the ladder-thingy. Remember when we tried the ladder-thingy..Ooooh, that was a dumb-idea. What will they do next, human-pyramid? Come on humans, bang those rocks together..."
There will be no IT turnaround in 2003. Let me repeat that: THERE WILL BE NO IT TURNAROUND in 2003. So what your telling me is that if the economy rebounds in 2003 that suddenly the IT spending floodgates will open wide? All the.commers can come back? I think it will be even worse that that: companies are currently learning that they can live without the latest and greatest. Which means, of course, that when the economy does come back, that big companies (HP, SUN, IBM) aren't going to get the big IT paychecks they think they're going to get. Which means of course, that all these layoffs are more or less permanent.
I love it when a site grows a couple of large, hanging-fruits, and decides to take these lilly-livered, low-down, bookworm losers, picked last in kickball, thurgood marshall wanna-be's, no girlfriend, need a punch in the mouth idiots to task...(suit filed, subpoena recieved). Okay, I'll shut up now.
I must take some exception to the poster to suggest that was a GREAT interview. Yawn. It left me somewhere between less than satisfied and really, really, dissatisfied. This is hard-hitting news: the SMB protocol?
All this tells me is that we (computer industry) are still in our infancy if we need to create emulators to share files? We have to create an entire code-base to share files? We need to get way passed this and set some sort of standard. Samba's a good product, but it's just adds to the complexity: one more thing to break and one more thing to admin.
Anything with less than 100 comments was recieved less than favorably by the readers. This makes 99.
"Look. In twentieth-century Old Earth, a fast food chain took dead cow meat, fried it in grease, added carcinogens, wrapped it in petroleum-based foam, and sold nine hundred billion units. Human beings. Go figure."
WSH is an important tool, but it's only the command interpreter, it's the code that's sent to it and how it executes that truly the problem.
But the most overlooked part of Windows 2000 and above is Microsoft's implementation of the Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI) API. With this interface an admin can script against any Microsoft Class and has full rights to change, modify, stop, start, etc. The box is yours. And it's installed by default!
Currently, it's a little under the radar, so many are unaware of it's implementation, but remote scripting is completely available and documented, just need the first exploit to overcome the security context and Houston we have a problem.
Slashdot Mirror
If ever, I repeat ever, see a consultant/vendor/salesperson enter the room with this device I know I am in for a 30+ powerpoint presentation; if only the laser were powerful enough to stun me to minimize the pain...
So from the article we can deduce there is a disconnect between the actual placing of the bet to the actual determination of a payoff. What they need is a chain-of-evidence system, so that bet's are placed (stored securely), once the race is closed for betting, the records should be posted to a new server (stored securely), then finally at payoff, the two records should be verified to have have been tampered with. Of course, this Engineer could have known both databases, but in this case you could insure no one person has rights to both databases. Of course a conspiracy of two is possible. My final problem with this is what about a one-way hash on these things: hasn't Kumar in India ever read about database encryption, why should an Engineer be allowed to see the plain-text record anyway? Otherwise you set HORSE_NBR = 5 (High Chapperal).
"Sun's biggest asset right now is its installed base, and as we've seen, linux/x86 is eroding that because for many things, the port is almost free, and because the hardware is soooo much cheaper (absolute and price/perf)"...couldn't be more accurate. I buy a generic PC with quality parts and slap Linux on it, it's a phenomenal choice cost-wise with little or no risk. Plus, I haven't bought into any one paradigm of how things should be ... the potential for companies is huge...that's why their stock price is bad. If you could get a car half of what you bought your current one for which was/is basically the same..what would you do?
I'm not a huge SUN fan, from a business standpoint, but this actually has some merit. I can see some applications for admins, engineers, etc., though still a niche-market. They say that even a mouse will fight a lion if backed into a corner. So it's interesting to see the last death throes of Sun. I just don't think this strategy is the kind of thing that makes sense.
--RIP DMC, here's some 40 for me, and some for my homies.
In some ways I'm hoping that this doesn't affect me as both a corporate IT person, and an avid computer geek, but alas, I think it is not so. The chips adhere to the law of spoilage; that if not brought to the marketplace before a certain time, they will actually be sold for a loss. I like the plantiff's position in this, in that they simply just need to wait it out while the fruit rots on the loading dock. I'm not a legal scholar, but what is all this hedging in the suit: I appeal, but lose 100 million, I win, lose the 100 million, you win, the 100 million, plus appeal money, but possibly lose ... oh I can't keep up..
Lynn states, "We want to welcome and bring to the table all that are interested in issues that concern ICANN," Of course, the other half of this sentence is, "..without really taking your comments seriously."
I'm sorry to disagree with the modder, but to WAKE a furby you shake it. To make it COO, you turn it upside down. The fact that I know this is quite sad.
Talking about antimatter sails when we don't even have a permanent base on the Moon (haven't been there in 30 years) or Mars is like my Labrador talking about the day he becomes President. Somethings got to evolve. You know the old addage, no bucks no Buck Rogers.
It makes perfect sense if you understand the context. First, the EU commission has realized that there is a huge market for investigation. They've set penalities for food, steel, clothes, they feel have not been priced accordingly. To me, it looks like the international version of a class-action lawsuit: sign up some clients, shake some trees, get a settlement or fine. I agree with your point, a game is not food, air, or water, you have the right NOT to buy if the price is too high; apparently it wasn't since they sold well.
"...UnitedLinux is in a strong position to compete with Red Hat..."; not necessarily. They really need to think about corporate support channels, plus a little hype don't hurt.
That's exactly true. Of course, there are two different types of licenses I find: the first is the server/admin/software license. Typically this is what comes with the software in the form of a serial-number, or key, or product-key, etc. So when you buy the software on EBAY, you are buying the software and the one server/product license that comes with that software. Next, is the seat license, which many break down into named and unnamed (this maybe review for some of you), but essentially this is the HIGH, HIGH, HIGH margin sale. Now, what would be awesome, (see earlier post in thread about web-site), would be to tell these companies that the licenses I'm about to purchase are "universally transferrable" so I can sell the seats on ebay, transfer to a subsidiary, store in a database and use throughout my conglomeration. This is really a take-off on how the refining companies sell energy credits, but I would love to see in the IT industry. Would it be nice to go into the open market and buy say 1000 seat licenses for Oracle 8i?
I've thought about this for sometime and I'm not sure how you could get around the NDA (just don't sign it, of course), but it's the same problem everyone complains about with airline seats: two people sitting next to each other pay completely different prices. It would be nice to see what a tech company pays for say a SuperDome versus say a bank or an airline.
This sort of rears it's ugly head every now and then. Honestly, MS is doing what everyone else does. Oracle, for instance, when we spun a company wouldn't let us transfer licenses to the new company; basically, because they want to resell all new licenses. Even though we had a license per person, since that person was in a new address, you needed a new license. Microsoft, unfortunately, doesn't care about the sale, obviously, they just want to be able to renegotiate a new deal with whomever buys the company. Honestly, I think the single greatest thing we could do in the IT industry is create a web-site where everyone puts in the prices they pay for licenses, hardware, etc. then we'd have all the information.
I remember an AIRBUS being flown for the first time at an airshow (video available somewhere). Apparently, the pilot made a slow fly-by over the runway at a couple hundred feet. Apparently, in this near stall configuration, the computer guidance was in "error" mode and thus took over the controls of the fly-by-wire system. Of course, applying full-power is like the worst thing you can do because you operate in what engineer's call the "back-side" of the power-curve. Which means additional horsepower actually means less thrust. Of course, the computer, sensing all the available data to it, does just that: full power. The plane slowly enters the canopy of a forest grove at the end of the runway and then a violent explosion erupts.
Wow. With headlines like "Roll-up TV screens to hit living rooms" and "This brings the dream of flexible plastic monitors and TVs a step closer to fruition", you'd think that these are ready to be rolled off the shelf. Actually, it doesn't. It simply means that instead of fighting with each other, they'll now work together and thus hopefully save some money. However, imagine if you will, that betamax and vhs joined forces before the marketplace was well defined? Who would win? Exactly, it wouldn't matter because the winner would already be decided and we'd all have betamax players. So this is probably not seen as a good thing because a) these companies will no longer compete (something I'm sure all /.ers see as a negative) and b) they will carve up/patent this technology and innovation will stagnate (HDTV) and c) it will ripple to other technologies which may or may not rely on this in the future because they will have a stranglehold on the technology. Finally, when companies merge with similar products and or technologies, the resulting product-lines are often lowest-common denominators of the two. A little research and you'll find business history littered with just such examples.....
On Several web-sites, most notably www.weather.com, if you get to certain page(s), your icon turns to an MSN(tm) butterfly. I have no problem with Microsoft per se, ip so facto, but that's annoying.
I realize, after reading many comments, why many /.ers are having trouble digesting this. It's a simple matter of economics. Harddrives have become a commodity product. In the old days, you bought a harddrive and it was expensive and you needed a warranty to justify the expense. Fastforward, harddrives are cheap and you don't use a warranty as reason to make the purchase, because you know if this drive fails I will be able to buy a bigger harddrive later at an even lower price. The other driving factor here is that warranties are a liability and must be carried on the books as such. I think this will be the trend for all future hardware components.
I've liked The Humane Interface: New Directions for Designing Interactive Systems, written by Jef Raskin. He was one of the early Mac engineers. This maybe a little higher-level than you are looking for though.
First, the article suggests another "blow" to MS office penetration. MS has 95% market share by revenue. You are not going to get market share by creating a worse product (i.e. less functional) and giving it away. I will always pay for steak when a burnt shoe is free. Why not try and make a better/similar product for less money. Wow, what a thought! Read these comments carefully, everyone says I love OO or I love SO, but it doesn't do this or that. Your right it doesn't. Microsoft does. They try to be everything to everybody (and you pay for it). The other thing I've found w/ other productivity suites is that they don't do TEXT TO COLUMNS. TEXT TO COLUMNS is the most used business function in the US today bar none. Someday someone will come out with a Microsoft-equivalent for less money and that will win the day.
I can just hear the laughter from outer-space:
"GLeebob, come here quick look what those silly humans are trying. Yup, they're trying the ladder-thingy. Remember when we tried the ladder-thingy..Ooooh, that was a dumb-idea. What will they do next, human-pyramid? Come on humans, bang those rocks together..."
There will be no IT turnaround in 2003. Let me repeat that: THERE WILL BE NO IT TURNAROUND in 2003. So what your telling me is that if the economy rebounds in 2003 that suddenly the IT spending floodgates will open wide? All the .commers can come back? I think it will be even worse that that: companies are currently learning that they can live without the latest and greatest. Which means, of course, that when the economy does come back, that big companies (HP, SUN, IBM) aren't going to get the big IT paychecks they think they're going to get. Which means of course, that all these layoffs are more or less permanent.
I love it when a site grows a couple of large, hanging-fruits, and decides to take these lilly-livered, low-down, bookworm losers, picked last in kickball, thurgood marshall wanna-be's, no girlfriend, need a punch in the mouth idiots to task...(suit filed, subpoena recieved). Okay, I'll shut up now.
I must take some exception to the poster to suggest that was a GREAT interview. Yawn. It left me somewhere between less than satisfied and really, really, dissatisfied. This is hard-hitting news: the SMB protocol?
All this tells me is that we (computer industry) are still in our infancy if we need to create emulators to share files? We have to create an entire code-base to share files? We need to get way passed this and set some sort of standard. Samba's a good product, but it's just adds to the complexity: one more thing to break and one more thing to admin.
Anything with less than 100 comments was recieved less than favorably by the readers. This makes 99.
"Look. In twentieth-century Old Earth, a fast food chain took dead cow meat, fried it in grease, added carcinogens, wrapped it in petroleum-based foam, and sold nine hundred billion units. Human beings. Go figure."
Probably coded to sit idle if it's domain is symantec.com, etc.
WSH is an important tool, but it's only the command interpreter, it's the code that's sent to it and how it executes that truly the problem.
But the most overlooked part of Windows 2000 and above is Microsoft's implementation of the Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI) API. With this interface an admin can script against any Microsoft Class and has full rights to change, modify, stop, start, etc. The box is yours. And it's installed by default!
Currently, it's a little under the radar, so many are unaware of it's implementation, but remote scripting is completely available and documented, just need the first exploit to overcome the security context and Houston we have a problem.