Can you explain the legal basis as to why you have to be licensed? As far as I understood, that was part of the contract you sign to get the developer kit. No contract, no requiremen. Am I correct?
You'd be amazed how many people think like this. For a recent example, look the latest anti-cloning arguments. They basically amount to the idea that "current cloning technology is imperfect, so research should be forbidden."
/dev/nvram is not your flash BIOS, it's just the settings space. Hell, mine's only 114 chars, which is hardly enough to fit Phoenix/Award's graphical boot screen.
Re:It's not a virus, it's stupid.
on
Linux Virus Alert
·
· Score: 1, Troll
Command (m for help): p
Disk/dev/hda: 255 heads, 63 sectors, 4999 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 bytes
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/hda1 * 1 486 3903763+ c Win95 FAT32 (LBA)
.
.
.
I think we need another compiled language with Python's syntax. I started using Python again after using Perl and C++ for a while, and I found it incredibly clean and easy to use. It's just so clean compared to C++.
Well, maybe I'd help if people could find an introduction to writing window managers. Any time I ask people, all they tell me is "have a look at such-and-such window manager's source code," which is fine, but I haven't had the time to spend weeding through the code to figure out the big picture. (If you'd like to give me an idea of the big picture, or refer me to some documentation that does, I'd be grateful.)
That's nice to say, but all current window managers currently suck in some way, and I don't ever see that changing. All we need is a more specific standard for talking between apps and deciding on icons, menus, drag/drop, copy/paste, etc (and some good docs for writing window managers using ICCCM, since I'm quite confused).
Or, you could accept that it's never going to happen and that it could really be better this way. All we really need is some standard way of setting icons and menus, and doing drag/drop.
Actually, I was referring to the information access restrictions on WinXP, and Microsoft's tendency to insist that everyone except Microsoft employees is too stupid to fix simple bugs. However, I do agree with you.
I'm not trying to trash Linux, because I use it and Windows XP/2000 regularly. The problem is in having a zealot nature, you tend to dismiss the small problems Linux definitely has.
Small problems?:) I've always called them different problems. I'm certainly not a Linux zealot: I was for the first year or so that I ran it, but now I just consider Linux to be the lesser of the two evils (I've considered *BSD, but I don't think I can part with apt-get.)
And Joe Sixpack is in no better condition to fix its problems than Windows.
No, but Joe Sixpack can get help from a programmer friend/relative, or pay a third party to fix things. Note that I am not saying that Linux systems are ready for Joe Sixpack yet.
Exactly. I think that if it's mission-critical, it should probably be written in C. If you aren't confident that you can write mission-critical code in C, then you shouldn't be writing mission-critical code at all (even in Perl).
I think this point needs clarifying: If a project is using one indentation style (this includes tabs vs spaces), for $DIETY's sake, use it!
Also, if you are selecting the coding style style yourself, use K&R style. I don't care if you think it's not 100% logical -- it's readable, and every programmer worth his/her stuff is familiar with it. The only deviation that is really tolerable is one particular hack on function declarations (i.e. some projects use the hack so the regexp/^funcname/ will work, and this is usually OK with most people).
Yes, I'm an asshole, but if you follow these rules, you'll find that your successors will curse your name much less.
Software is not a manufacturing process where you can only test the end product. It's an engineering process which can have checks and balances all through development.
I'll probably be quoting that somewhere, if you don't mind.
Yeah, right. Joe Sixpack with a Windows machine can afford to pay a competent sysadmin. Viruses are very much the users' problem, and it's Microsoft's fault that they proliferate so easily. I'm not saying Linux is excellent security-wise (though it is somewhat better.)
How is this a troll? I'm *serious*. People try to do too much with perl (as they do in VB), when the jobs would be much better done in other languages:
A perl module for developing internet servers in perl
Highly modularized GTK+ mail client written in Perl
I never did learn AWK. (/me reads awk(1)). Hmm... An interesting tool. And lighter-weight than Perl. Might use this for bootdisks or base system scripts or something... Interesting... Thanks.
Re:Where the hell is Microsoft's PR agency?
on
al Qaeda Hacks XP?
·
· Score: 2
Funny thing is that it probably wouldn't actually be such a bad thing. I mean, consider the worst-case scenario in the computer industry, then think about where we're headed. Not much different, eh?
Slashdot Mirror
Can you explain the legal basis as to why you have to be licensed? As far as I understood, that was part of the contract you sign to get the developer kit. No contract, no requiremen. Am I correct?
You'd be amazed how many people think like this. For a recent example, look the latest anti-cloning arguments. They basically amount to the idea that "current cloning technology is imperfect, so research should be forbidden."
V'z fgnegvat gb guvax gung gur hfreanzrf bs gur zbqrengbef fubhyq or vapyhqrq jvgu gurve zbqrengvbaf. Gurfr gebyy naq/be fghcvq zbqrengbef ner ernyyl fgnegvat gb cvff zr bss.
OGJ, lbh'er cebonoyl va ivbyngvba bs gur QZPN, fbzrubj ... rira vs lbh'er abg Nzrevpna.
/dev/nvram is not your flash BIOS, it's just the settings space. Hell, mine's only 114 chars, which is hardly enough to fit Phoenix/Award's graphical boot screen.
Command (m for help): p
/dev/hda: 255 heads, 63 sectors, 4999 cylinders
Disk
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 bytes
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/hda1 * 1 486 3903763+ c Win95 FAT32 (LBA)
.
.
.
I prefer rm -rvf /dos.
Finally, a post with some sense.
Interestingly, if you subtract the profamities, that was actually fairly accurate.
P.S. Can anyone guess which "centain entity" we're talking about?
Sheesh. You're starting to sound like Bill Gates "everyone hates Microsoft because they're jealous."
EU + CW - US >> 0
;-)
Typing useless junk because of the lame lameness filter.
I think we need another compiled language with Python's syntax. I started using Python again after using Perl and C++ for a while, and I found it incredibly clean and easy to use. It's just so clean compared to C++.
Well, maybe I'd help if people could find an introduction to writing window managers. Any time I ask people, all they tell me is "have a look at such-and-such window manager's source code," which is fine, but I haven't had the time to spend weeding through the code to figure out the big picture. (If you'd like to give me an idea of the big picture, or refer me to some documentation that does, I'd be grateful.)
That's nice to say, but all current window managers currently suck in some way, and I don't ever see that changing. All we need is a more specific standard for talking between apps and deciding on icons, menus, drag/drop, copy/paste, etc (and some good docs for writing window managers using ICCCM, since I'm quite confused).
Or, you could accept that it's never going to happen and that it could really be better this way. All we really need is some standard way of setting icons and menus, and doing drag/drop.
Actually, I was referring to the information access restrictions on WinXP, and Microsoft's tendency to insist that everyone except Microsoft employees is too stupid to fix simple bugs. However, I do agree with you.
I'm not trying to trash Linux, because I use it and Windows XP/2000 regularly. The problem is in having a zealot nature, you tend to dismiss the small problems Linux definitely has.
Small problems? :) I've always called them different problems. I'm certainly not a Linux zealot: I was for the first year or so that I ran it, but now I just consider Linux to be the lesser of the two evils (I've considered *BSD, but I don't think I can part with apt-get.)
And Joe Sixpack is in no better condition to fix its problems than Windows.
No, but Joe Sixpack can get help from a programmer friend/relative, or pay a third party to fix things. Note that I am not saying that Linux systems are ready for Joe Sixpack yet.
Exactly. I think that if it's mission-critical, it should probably be written in C. If you aren't confident that you can write mission-critical code in C, then you shouldn't be writing mission-critical code at all (even in Perl).
I think this point needs clarifying: If a project is using one indentation style (this includes tabs vs spaces), for $DIETY's sake, use it!
Also, if you are selecting the coding style style yourself, use K&R style. I don't care if you think it's not 100% logical -- it's readable, and every programmer worth his/her stuff is familiar with it. The only deviation that is really tolerable is one particular hack on function declarations (i.e. some projects use the hack so the regexp /^funcname/ will work, and this is usually OK with most people).
Yes, I'm an asshole, but if you follow these rules, you'll find that your successors will curse your name much less.
Um... /dev/zero ?
Touché.
Someone should prod DJB into writing an OS...
I'll probably be quoting that somewhere, if you don't mind.
Yeah, right. Joe Sixpack with a Windows machine can afford to pay a competent sysadmin. Viruses are very much the users' problem, and it's Microsoft's fault that they proliferate so easily. I'm not saying Linux is excellent security-wise (though it is somewhat better.)
Need I go on?
I never did learn AWK. (/me reads awk(1)). Hmm... An interesting tool. And lighter-weight than Perl. Might use this for bootdisks or base system scripts or something... Interesting... Thanks.
Funny thing is that it probably wouldn't actually be such a bad thing. I mean, consider the worst-case scenario in the computer industry, then think about where we're headed. Not much different, eh?