"Any time there's a lot of sharing going on then you need a lowest common denominator..."
While I agree with the logic is that not how Microsoft Office became so pervasive and constantly being upgraded to begin with, people lacking that common sense?
I am unaware of any person that I know personally who uses over 50% of Microsoft Word's functionality as a very simple example. Excel, even less. Access? Lesser still.
Usually it's that one person who upgraded, management or a spoiled MSCE admin*, that caused everyone else to need an upgrade.
*NOTICE: with every blanket statement are exceptions - that did not read all MSCE's are spoiled nor incompetent.
You can't honestly expect to use the internet and be anonymous about it. You can use a service and expect a degree of privacy but just because you expect does not equate to being the case.
All the prolog out of the way - can you really trust anyone? If you want something private, never let it leave your head...if it is truly that important to you.
A large number of people think AOL is _THE_ internet. A larger number of people think Windows is _THE_ computer.
Mindshare is the effect you get when there are many options to choose from but only a limited subset of those options are recalled for purpose of selection. It may very well be a buzzword left over from the craziness of the dot.com era but its meaning is still valid in this context and still applies, regardless whether it is or is not a quality metric of purchase.
And in a shocking twist of events people are pissed off that he found a way to capitalize on the mentality of this behavior to make billions. Seems to me like he relized something:
People are going to pirate software. If it can be built, it can be taken apart.
These two things will never change. So instead of fighting the system you work with it to find things to exploit for the purpose of getting ahead..
Lock up the data and people will be forced to migrate to your schedule on your terms.
Never been impressed with Mr. Gates technical abilities but I have always tipped my hat to his shrewed business prowess.
Probably the most insightful comment in this thread relating to the actual story.
Re:The future is tangiable
on
The New Boom
·
· Score: 2
Not that I patently disagree with the spirit of your post:
"The future is in deliverables, not data."
In some situations data is the deliverable.
How does the saying go, knowledge is the cheapest thing to acquire and the most expensive thing to buy. Some people/groups/businesses have a better model of how to exploit that fact than others, thus making money.
It appears to me his point is valid while yours is valid as well in a different context. Context being the key point here. Without the comment you would not know that statement was buggy HOWEVER with the comment you are more likely to pay attention to the comment and not the actual bug right in front of you. Given this particular scenario it seems you would be more "correct" than the GP since the comment in this example is crucial to knowing the purpose of the code. Of course in actual practice there would be more than a single line of code thus giving a context of the purpose for the code which validates the point of the GP.
I find commenting code resembles trying to woo the opposite sex; regardless of your style it simply doesn't work as intended in all cases. Much like programming languages I don't think there is a silver bullet for documentation either. The simple fact is that the code are the facts - not necessarily the intention; be it code or documentation - everything else is subjective IMHO including whether documenting code is good or bad.
While I am neither siding for or against the GP I will comment on your statement since you prefaced it with a genuine interest of knowledge seeking:
"Care to elaborate on what the 'right libraries' are?""
Looking at my sig will do just that as they are geared for various different tasks. The list is not inclusive nor is it necessarily correct. In fact it may very well be the most subjective thing you have ever read and total crap waste of time, but I have provided it for people just like you.
"I'll never understand why it's not possible to even enable bounds checking in STL arrays..."
If you read "The C++ Programming Language" you will find out exactly why this isn't enabled in the default libraries. Also how to provide a trivial wrapper with just a few lines using at() and why it is left to you to do so instead of specified by the standard and implimentation details. Granted you said it's not "even possible to even enable..." when in fact this is not true. There are implimentations of C++ that actually do enable such switches during compilation.
"Dunno "Active Record" from a hole in the ground, but I've had plenty of experience with packages that only take 3 lines to give you almost what 300 lines would otherwise do, and somewhere down the line you end up writing most of those other 297 lines to handle the edge cases."
" xml itself is designed to be easy to use, easy to read in "human" form..."
XML is designed to be easy to machine parse regardless of the extension markups you use. Nothing about it is suppose to be easy to read in "human" form.
In other words, grandma isn't suppose to be able to open up an XML document and read it. Her browser and e-mail system may rely on it though.
"...Yet you claim they can easily protect themselves? gee if only we all had the millions to easily protect ourselves..."
This seems more like a symptom of a very larger problem which is, here in the US, you have to weigh every move you make with the question, "How are my actions going to prevent someone else from making money?" Since we obviously live in a litigious society, the minute someone, somewhere feels that you have deprived them of that perceived right you are liable and typically end up in court, be it bogus or not.
Sad state of affairs when in a capitalistic society your idea fails you can capitalize on the success of those who did not fail through pay-offs, lottery-style judgements, or essentialy extortion through the threat of litigation unless your target does have millions to play the game.
Reform, sure. Patents?, not sure if that's the core problem. Just my opinion though.
Let me pose this: Microsoft is a publicly traded company with shareholders that have interest. With that said, they have a responsbility and with other companies around doing the same thing [acquiring patents regardless of validity] can Microsoft be blamed for doing the same?
The reason I ask this way at the risk of sounding like a "MS aplogists" is because the other companies could use your the same logic and they don't. IBM comes to mind as a single example. (We do love IBM here a/. this week, right?)
As much as I think Microsoft is an unethical company, I can't justify faulting its actions on this subject and still take myself seriously doing it. Microsoft has done for more damaging things that I am unable to overlook but this isn't one of them, at least not yet.
OT: Before you lump me in as a Microsoft supporter, think again...I am very familiar with its history.
First I qualified that I didn't disagree with the parent poster. I then proceeded to to say that I would use Sun, the other hated company around slashdot*, that didn't have the baggage of a monopoly attached to it that the very people the original poster was referring to might get.
Congratulations! You missed my point, assume that you know more about capitalism than me _or_ that I don't know it at all, and managed to try and correct me because you assume my stance or understanding is somehow limited and you have no idea what I'm talking about.
By the way, Microsoft _IS_ the most successfull in the very concept and terms you claim I don't understand. I didn't whine nor complain about it.
Hmm, seems the pro-F/OSS slashbot's aren't the only one with a knee-jerk reaction. Chew on that for a second or think before you post a response to someone next time. Oh wait, now I'm making an assumption. Am I right? Did you miss this point too?
*I get confused on what day we are suppose to hate what company and what day we are suppose to praise them.
" Absolutely. People tend to forget that Microsoft is a corporation. They can do whatever they want with their software. Their goal in life is to keep you buying their goods and using their software so that they can lock you in and sell you more! Its all about money. Google is not making software out of the goodness of their heart."
I hear your point but I would have used Sun instead of Microsoft. Since Microsoft has been convicted of abusing its monopoly power, they can't do whatever they want - hence the conviction.
"I think up to here we agree." Actually I think we are on the same page more than you realize. Read as I actually agree with your entire response.
"The problem lies with the fact that you think it is the techie's job..." You may perceive me as thinking this way but that is not the case:
Good people will inform management of choices and good management will make decisions based off of known options they supply to the executive for policy. If you surround yourself with people pushing their own agenda (grunts or managment) the business will suffer. Period.
I realize you do not need this information, I merely state it to give you my point of reference.
Believe it or not, a zealot I may sound like, but I can assure you I am not and I deal with them daily. (It's like/. but with Microsoft bias instead, just as dispicable, just as bad)
Slashdot Mirror
"...more traffic and more congestion. Does something similar apply to networks?"
Sure - RFC 1925 Section 2.9 of Networking Truths.
"Any time there's a lot of sharing going on then you need a lowest common denominator..."
While I agree with the logic is that not how Microsoft Office became so pervasive and constantly being upgraded to begin with, people lacking that common sense?
I am unaware of any person that I know personally who uses over 50% of Microsoft Word's functionality as a very simple example. Excel, even less. Access? Lesser still.
Usually it's that one person who upgraded, management or a spoiled MSCE admin*, that caused everyone else to need an upgrade.
*NOTICE: with every blanket statement are exceptions - that did not read all MSCE's are spoiled nor incompetent.
...is still valid? Do one thing, do it well.
Imagine that - simple, solid advice survives time. Reminds me of the Twelve Networks Truths of RFC 1925 Section 2-11
...between anonymous and private.
You can't honestly expect to use the internet and be anonymous about it.
You can use a service and expect a degree of privacy but just because you expect does not equate to being the case.
All the prolog out of the way - can you really trust anyone? If you want something private, never let it leave your head...if it is truly that important to you.
What item should I pick to always win in rock, scissors, paper?
A large number of people think AOL is _THE_ internet.
A larger number of people think Windows is _THE_ computer.
Mindshare is the effect you get when there are many options to choose from but only a limited subset of those options are recalled for purpose of selection. It may very well be a buzzword left over from the craziness of the dot.com era but its meaning is still valid in this context and still applies, regardless whether it is or is not a quality metric of purchase.
For the same reason grandma uses windows along with your mom and dad.
Mindshare folks...
And in a shocking twist of events people are pissed off that he found a way to capitalize on the mentality of this behavior to make billions. Seems to me like he relized something:
People are going to pirate software.
If it can be built, it can be taken apart.
These two things will never change. So instead of fighting the system you work with it to find things to exploit for the purpose of getting ahead..
Lock up the data and people will be forced to migrate to your schedule on your terms.
Never been impressed with Mr. Gates technical abilities but I have always tipped my hat to his shrewed business prowess.
Realizing the humor meant to be delivered in your post, one must not forget the fundamental truths of networking - Section 3 of RFC 1925:
"With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine."
Probably the most insightful comment in this thread relating to the actual story.
Not that I patently disagree with the spirit of your post:
"The future is in deliverables, not data."
In some situations data is the deliverable.
How does the saying go, knowledge is the cheapest thing to acquire and the most expensive thing to buy. Some people/groups/businesses have a better model of how to exploit that fact than others, thus making money.
It appears to me his point is valid while yours is valid as well in a different context. Context being the key point here. Without the comment you would not know that statement was buggy HOWEVER with the comment you are more likely to pay attention to the comment and not the actual bug right in front of you. Given this particular scenario it seems you would be more "correct" than the GP since the comment in this example is crucial to knowing the purpose of the code. Of course in actual practice there would be more than a single line of code thus giving a context of the purpose for the code which validates the point of the GP.
I find commenting code resembles trying to woo the opposite sex; regardless of your style it simply doesn't work as intended in all cases. Much like programming languages I don't think there is a silver bullet for documentation either. The simple fact is that the code are the facts - not necessarily the intention; be it code or documentation - everything else is subjective IMHO including whether documenting code is good or bad.
While I am neither siding for or against the GP I will comment on your statement since you prefaced it with a genuine interest of knowledge seeking:
"Care to elaborate on what the 'right libraries' are?""
Looking at my sig will do just that as they are geared for various different tasks. The list is not inclusive nor is it necessarily correct. In fact it may very well be the most subjective thing you have ever read and total crap waste of time, but I have provided it for people just like you.
"I'll never understand why it's not possible to even enable bounds checking in STL arrays..."
If you read "The C++ Programming Language" you will find out exactly why this isn't enabled in the default libraries. Also how to provide a trivial wrapper with just a few lines using at() and why it is left to you to do so instead of specified by the standard and implimentation details. Granted you said it's not "even possible to even enable..." when in fact this is not true. There are implimentations of C++ that actually do enable such switches during compilation.
Damn! That post actually caused me to laugh.
Nice one.
"Dunno "Active Record" from a hole in the ground, but I've had plenty of experience with packages that only take 3 lines to give you almost what 300 lines would otherwise do, and somewhere down the line you end up writing most of those other 297 lines to handle the edge cases."
::snicker::
Excellent point!
> or we can all use this from now on: username AnonymousCoward password password
>> No, actually, you can't. The NYT routinely removes accounts that are being used by more than one IP.
As opposed to somebody that just decides to hijack the account and change the password?
" xml itself is designed to be easy to use, easy to read in "human" form..."
XML is designed to be easy to machine parse regardless of the extension markups you use. Nothing about it is suppose to be easy to read in "human" form.
In other words, grandma isn't suppose to be able to open up an XML document and read it. Her browser and e-mail system may rely on it though.
"...Yet you claim they can easily protect themselves? gee if only we all had the millions to easily protect ourselves..."
This seems more like a symptom of a very larger problem which is, here in the US, you have to weigh every move you make with the question, "How are my actions going to prevent someone else from making money?" Since we obviously live in a litigious society, the minute someone, somewhere feels that you have deprived them of that perceived right you are liable and typically end up in court, be it bogus or not.
Sad state of affairs when in a capitalistic society your idea fails you can capitalize on the success of those who did not fail through pay-offs, lottery-style judgements, or essentialy extortion through the threat of litigation unless your target does have millions to play the game.
Reform, sure. Patents?, not sure if that's the core problem. Just my opinion though.
I hear what your saying, I think...
/. this week, right?)
Let me pose this: Microsoft is a publicly traded company with shareholders that have interest. With that said, they have a responsbility and with other companies around doing the same thing [acquiring patents regardless of validity] can Microsoft be blamed for doing the same?
The reason I ask this way at the risk of sounding like a "MS aplogists" is because the other companies could use your the same logic and they don't. IBM comes to mind as a single example. (We do love IBM here a
As much as I think Microsoft is an unethical company, I can't justify faulting its actions on this subject and still take myself seriously doing it. Microsoft has done for more damaging things that I am unable to overlook but this isn't one of them, at least not yet.
OT: Before you lump me in as a Microsoft supporter, think again...I am very familiar with its history.
"...I am going to say again that you are wrong and Linux is NOT ready for the desktop no matter how many times people like you claim it is."
Proof by analogy is fraud, ok with that said:
Are stick shift cars not ready for the road since a number of people can only drive automatics?
Not that I am missing your perspective nor disagree on its merit. Perhaps I should have used motorcycles instead of stick shifts?
0racle, meet clue. Clue, 0racle:
..."
"I hear your point but I would
First I qualified that I didn't disagree with the parent poster. I then proceeded to to say that I would use Sun, the other hated company around slashdot*, that didn't have the baggage of a monopoly attached to it that the very people the original poster was referring to might get.
Congratulations! You missed my point, assume that you know more about capitalism than me _or_ that I don't know it at all, and managed to try and correct me because you assume my stance or understanding is somehow limited and you have no idea what I'm talking about.
By the way, Microsoft _IS_ the most successfull in the very concept and terms you claim I don't understand. I didn't whine nor complain about it.
Hmm, seems the pro-F/OSS slashbot's aren't the only one with a knee-jerk reaction. Chew on that for a second or think before you post a response to someone next time. Oh wait, now I'm making an assumption. Am I right? Did you miss this point too?
*I get confused on what day we are suppose to hate what company and what day we are suppose to praise them.
" Absolutely. People tend to forget that Microsoft is a corporation. They can do whatever they want with their software. Their goal in life is to keep you buying their goods and using their software so that they can lock you in and sell you more! Its all about money. Google is not making software out of the goodness of their heart."
I hear your point but I would have used Sun instead of Microsoft. Since Microsoft has been convicted of abusing its monopoly power, they can't do whatever they want - hence the conviction.
"I think up to here we agree."
/. but with Microsoft bias instead, just as dispicable, just as bad)
Actually I think we are on the same page more than you realize. Read as I actually agree with your entire response.
"The problem lies with the fact that you think it is the techie's job..."
You may perceive me as thinking this way but that is not the case:
Good people will inform management of choices and good management will make decisions based off of known options they supply to the executive for policy. If you surround yourself with people pushing their own agenda (grunts or managment) the business will suffer. Period.
I realize you do not need this information, I merely state it to give you my point of reference.
Believe it or not, a zealot I may sound like, but I can assure you I am not and I deal with them daily. (It's like
M-x doctor RET is what you need then from the sound of it.
::snicker::
That OS requires to have a doctor on call for when the realization that it lacks a decent editor kicks in.