I agree. What I don't understand is why we in America are allowing the trolls with their lawyer mininons to completely de-rail all vestiges of creativity and innovation in a tidal-wave of litigation and innuendo.
I haven't played role-playing games in a long while, but this barbarian is ready to grab my trusty +4 troll-chopper and go berserk. ..!
SCO-long, see ya later.
This is a golden opportunity to improve your skills in networking and Java Programming. Follow the bouncing ball to freedom. . .
1) First, on your local computer, alter the domain information to query a local names server (or host file for that matter). Then override the URL of this nasty spyware, and route it back to the local box.
2) Set up a nice copy of apache on the local box, make sure it starts autmatically at boot time.
3) Write your own applet to LOOK just like the one at the school, but say lovely things about you.
4) Deploy and enjoy
. . .
5) Almost forgot -- if your connection is always on, you can open up your firewall, and modify your applet to say nice things about other students. You can probably charge them a few bucks to make their parents machines point to your "service". You might also set up a "pay-per-view" counter for additional bonus $.
Have fun!!!
I'll probably get modded troll for this, but why do you need views? I am an oracle DBA who supports a large number of developers, and frankly I'm a bit skittish regarding views. (For the record I also support PostgreSQL and dabble in MySQL . ..).
They can really only do two things: hide columns for security reasons and simplify queries by hiding part of that query.
In general, the first applcation is usually better served by planning, data seperation, and implementing a good security policy. There are times when views are a legitimate solution to problems of this type, and a database is definately better for supporting them in such cases.
The second case, however, is commonly misunderstood by developers, who think a view is some magic incarnation of a snapshot. I frequently see views based on views based upon views, frequently each of which is a poorly-optimized sql statement. The developers seem surprised that performance is abysmal in such cases. A view is a just a convenience, a means to "store" a query, and run that query each time the view is accessed, nothing more.
Since I spend a fair bit of time trying to fix performance problems reusulting from the many myths and rumors about views and their ubiquitous misapplication, I'm not sure that I would consider their omission a bad thing -- it might teach developers better coding habits. . .
We've seen this before in a variety of guises. Nothing new here.
Politico from state with budget shortfall and M$ introduces pro-open source legislation. Total cost 30 minutes to scrawl it on a napkin and send it to his secretary for typing.
Politico voices strong support for bill, makes vaguely disparaging remarks about M$
M$ sends representative to "discuss" the issue, reiterate the fine qualities of M$ software, and generally defuse the situation.
Eventually there's a generous political contribution, and an offer to provide M$ products at "special discount pricing", possibly with an imdemnification against existing liscense violations.
Politico suddenly sees the light, disavows any allegience with open source, and dissapears in a shiny new Mercedes.
The only interesting part of this is how good a settlement M$ will have make to shut this guy up.
I used to sit on the moral high-horse and curl my lip at the unwashed, benighted ghouls who wrote backdoors, particularly in production code.
Experience had made me a wiser man, and when I do contract work I intentionally sabataouge the code. Not your classic hard-coded password or glaring stupidity -- check the laws guys. You can get in big trouble for intentionally compromising a clients systems. I just look for a particularly convoluted piece of code, then find a way to break it in a particularly ugly (and preferably time-dependent) manner.
If the company pays up after delivery, I immediately "discover" the bug and fix it for them. If not - happy trails sucker, I hope you can explain the disappearance of your corporate legers to the tax auditors! The beauty of this is that the bug would be defensible in court as an oversight/honest mistake if discovered, and once removed there are none of the usual backdoor-related vulnurabilites, so I sleep well.
This parallels my own experience. I am a biogeochemist cum computer geek. The best company I ever worked with had a manager who'd gotten fed up with the IT types, and had started hiring people based on their academic and research performance with little regard for their programming skills. We had physicists, chemists, philosophers and mathematicians running with only a few months of programming experience, and it DID take them longer to get up to speed, but the code produced was, frankly, beautiful stuff, better than I've seen at the companies staffed by "computer professionals".
On the other hand, they also employed an uber-geek of legendary prowess (Hi Steeg!) to direct/assist/guide/mentor everyone, and I think their success was due in large part to his skill and the manager's ability to motivate.
I'm surprised by the number of negative posts regarding this device. I can't help but wonder how many nay-sayers are still under 25, in that golden bullet-proof state. I was an adrenaline junkie in my younger days, at just under 40 I'm pretty messed up from all the injuries I racked up.
I used to ride motorcycles -- count me as a fan. I've never had a bad crash, due more to luck than skill. Several of my friends weren't so lucky. Not all injuries heal, not all breaks mend, and not very many body parts can be replaced.
I know several people who have serious, permanant disabilities caused by motorcycle accidents. I agree with the statements made by several posters that this vest presents some hazards, as all airbags do. The concerns regarding passengers and backpacks seem especially relevant.
However, airbags in cars have been statistically proven to greatly reduce injuries (especially when used in conjuction with seat belts). For those who haven't taken or didn't pass basic stats, this means that, even though some injuries are caused by the protective device, the reduction in injury frequency and severity overshadows the risks of use. Your cat-like reflexes and macho biceps probably aren't enough to skew the results, most fatalites thought they had 'em too.
I could learn to live without a leg, a hand or an arm. I'm not sure how I'd deal with quadreplegia -- pretty darn scary stuff. As a cyclist, I rode in gear with protective kevlar plates for road-rash. These would have done NOTHING to prevent spinal or blunt-force trauma injuries. I think this sound like an excellent idea.
First, let me state that your observations are 100% accurate. Film and CRT color reproduction is actually quite good for plain colors, but the ability to reproduce irridescence, chatoyance, metallics, and other forms of iterference-based color is notoriously poor.
I used to work as an aquatic biologist, diving and photographing fishes from all over the globe. My photography skills are legendarily poor, but even the experts I worked with were continually frustrated with the inability of film to capture the brilliant metallic and irridescent colors we saw in person.
Alas, while it may be possible for this display technology to duplicate some of the bright colors, interference colors are usually dependant upon binocular viewing for most of their spectacular effects, and the monitor will definately be mono.
Finally, while I wish it were't so, this technology seems to be display only. I see no ready bridge to adopt this technology to CCD's or film (our two existing image capture options) or to use it directly as a capture device. More's the pity.
Jumped into the govt. just before the bubble burst, and was able to negotiate a reasonably comfortable salary. Now I work in a giant skinner-box of cubicles, but my cube is well-equipped, and there's food in this neat stainless steel box down the hallway, and little cans of bubbly liquid in another machine nearby.
On the other hand, being one of the old-style unix geeks has some advantages: nobody is really sure what I do, but the boxes keep runnin. Periodically they ask for some minor magic to prove that I am really the guru they're paying for, and as long as I mangle my code output into some suitably-obfuscated format, management nods, murmurs appreciatively, and goes back to flogging the HTML and help-desk monkeys. I wear nice jeans with dress shirts, but have a sport-coat and dockers available if a high-ranking poo-bah should appear.
Bottom line, life is a dance, there's some give and take. Dress code is just a part of the whole, dress casually when you can, but be prepared to dress it up when you need to schmooze the brass. In general, try to look like a professional worth some reasonable portion of your salary. Management really only goes balistic when they see an unkempt bum wearing a competitor's T-shirt munching twinkies and demanding another raise.
Remember, most of our bosses are the baby-boomers, and associate the long-haired, grubby look with the hippies of the late 60's, with attendent negative connotations. You probably don't have to wear Armani to appease their corporate sensibilities -- so give a little!
I used to work as an aquatic biologist. Since I only have an M.S. it's possible that my experience is substancially different than those with PhD's. But I've been much happier as a geek.
Funding for primary research has pretty well dried up, and directed research systems tend to be very intense, short-sighted, and goal oriented -- not a good environment for good science. The primary research positions are underfunded, and staffed by the "old dogs" with twenty years of publications under their belt -- you won't get a shot there easily.
The scarcity of funding has led to other undersirable characterists: disposable labor and fraudulent research. Basically, many programs are hiring staff as they need 'em, working them like dogs, then letting them go when they quit working 70 hour weeks. There have also been many disturbing rumors of falsified research, and of course almost nobody is wasting time reproducing other's work.
In addition, unlike the science of the last few decades, information is no longer freely distributed among researchers -- the push is to make money by patenting every little discovery. In short, the ivory tower has crumbled, and what's left is a dirty little sweatshop pursuing the almighty dollar with the same intensity as the most callous prostitute.
I've been in IT for a number of years now, but work extensively with large numbers of scientists and engineers. They envy me, and I daresay rightly so, which is unfortunate -- science was my first love.
Let me preface this by saying that I'm a GIA certified gemologist as well as a geek. Diamonds have been a racket for a long time, and nothing has changed. I hate watching people spend their life savings for chip of crystalized carbon, but it IS tradition.
Have you talked with your fiance? How does she feel? Why are you worried about the resale value -- you ARE planning on being married forever, aren't you?
In all honesty, if she wants a diamond to show her friends, bite the bullet, mutter at the unfairness of the universe, but get the diamond. A few thousand pales in comparison to the long-term costs of maintaining a family. DON'T get a fake - it will, at some point, get tested! (I used to have newlywed women come to the store all the time for "appraisals" - sheesh!).
If your girl is not the materialistic flavor, there is hope. I highly recommend colored stones, but talk with a good gemologist before buying. Many stones are too soft, or have too many cleavages to work well in a wedding ring.
In my case, my wife wanted a diamond, but was emphatic that it not be too large (big stones and mountings tend to be uncomfortable and snag on everything). After sounding out her feelings, I purchased a second-hand diamond ring, and revamped the mounting (incredible savings, as you have noticed, the secondary market stinks.) The result is a lovely ring that is exactly what she wanted, for a total investment of about $250.
Since I wanted to show a bit of class, I built a second ring, with a large Tsavorite (a rare green garnet) as a wedding present for her. It has gone up considerably in value, complements her eyes far better than any diamond, and the baroque setting, while too large for daily wear, is something that always gets compliments.
So, get a diamond if you need to, if not, the colored stone market is generally a much better investment (particularly if you have a gemologist buddy).
Finally, remember that there are several reputable sources for gemstones on the web, and you can buy the stone(s) at near wholesale cost, and have them set by any competent goldsmith.
Best of luck!
I write several languages, and thought I was pretty good at commenting my code. My boss was happy, my co-workers didn't complain, life was good. Then I took a job at a Java-shop, where javadocs were generated hourly for all shared library classes. Since I was writing shared library stuff, that put me in the limelight.
I found I had many bad habits: My class descriptions were frequently too brief, and included no examples of how to use "Widget3.class". If I included multiple constructors, I frequently only documented the "most verbose" variant. Since my variables were hypothetically well named, it seemed superfluous to comment on what they did, even if I defined them globally and used them in multiple methods. The list goes on.
The generated javadocs were used by other developers who depended on my classes for critical functions of their own projects. Surprisingly, they were unhappy with the "minor" omissions in my documentation, and suggested that I look at Sun's classes for a clue. After a hearty helping of humble pie, I actually learned to comment my classes in such a way that they were as useful as those written by the Sun programmers.
Even though I still write perl, C++ etc. the commenting skills I learned with java are now second nature, and very helpful. Try using javadoc on your code, then READ the generated documentation - if it doesn't explain your class accurately, completely, and at a level that would let another programmer understand your program, you have more to learn.
BTW- those in-line comments, while not picked up by javadoc, are absolutely essential for other programmers. If you have time to alter the code you most certainly have time to alter the comments!
First - I am a fan of the noise-canceling headphones (I purchased them to muffle an annoying coworker in a previous job), they worked beautifully.
However, a quiet system is preferable for several reasons:
Wearing headphones all day is uncomfortable.
It's pretty hard to invert the waveform of white noise - so the headphones don't effectively muffle most computer-generated sounds.
These headphones use batteries, which gets expensive quickly.
If you are wearing sound-canceling headphones but not listening to music, youre office mates are likely to start avoiding you! I don't like the headphone cord, and the sound-canceling works fine without any sound input, so I used to clap the phones around, and stuff the cord in my shirt pocket to muffle Ms. noisy - until I got caught wandering to the restroom listening to unplugged headphones . . .
If there are other people around, you have to ask: is it cheaper to buy $200 headphones for all innocent bystanders, or quiet the darn computer down!
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. What I don't understand is why we in America are allowing the trolls with their lawyer mininons to completely de-rail all vestiges of creativity and innovation in a tidal-wave of litigation and innuendo. .!
I haven't played role-playing games in a long while, but this barbarian is ready to grab my trusty +4 troll-chopper and go berserk. .
SCO-long, see ya later.
This is a golden opportunity to improve your skills in networking and Java Programming. Follow the bouncing ball to freedom. . .
1) First, on your local computer, alter the domain information to query a local names server (or host file for that matter). Then override the URL of this nasty spyware, and route it back to the local box.
2) Set up a nice copy of apache on the local box, make sure it starts autmatically at boot time.
3) Write your own applet to LOOK just like the one at the school, but say lovely things about you.
4) Deploy and enjoy
. . .
5) Almost forgot -- if your connection is always on, you can open up your firewall, and modify your applet to say nice things about other students. You can probably charge them a few bucks to make their parents machines point to your "service". You might also set up a "pay-per-view" counter for additional bonus $. Have fun!!!
They can really only do two things: hide columns for security reasons and simplify queries by hiding part of that query.
In general, the first applcation is usually better served by planning, data seperation, and implementing a good security policy. There are times when views are a legitimate solution to problems of this type, and a database is definately better for supporting them in such cases.
The second case, however, is commonly misunderstood by developers, who think a view is some magic incarnation of a snapshot. I frequently see views based on views based upon views, frequently each of which is a poorly-optimized sql statement. The developers seem surprised that performance is abysmal in such cases. A view is a just a convenience, a means to "store" a query, and run that query each time the view is accessed, nothing more.
Since I spend a fair bit of time trying to fix performance problems reusulting from the many myths and rumors about views and their ubiquitous misapplication, I'm not sure that I would consider their omission a bad thing -- it might teach developers better coding habits. . .
The only interesting part of this is how good a settlement M$ will have make to shut this guy up.
Experience had made me a wiser man, and when I do contract work I intentionally sabataouge the code. Not your classic hard-coded password or glaring stupidity -- check the laws guys. You can get in big trouble for intentionally compromising a clients systems. I just look for a particularly convoluted piece of code, then find a way to break it in a particularly ugly (and preferably time-dependent) manner.
If the company pays up after delivery, I immediately "discover" the bug and fix it for them. If not - happy trails sucker, I hope you can explain the disappearance of your corporate legers to the tax auditors! The beauty of this is that the bug would be defensible in court as an oversight/honest mistake if discovered, and once removed there are none of the usual backdoor-related vulnurabilites, so I sleep well.
I just checked -- there are NO zero's anywhere on my paycheck. There's a fair number of other digits, but no zeros at all. I'm a FAILURE!
On the other hand, they also employed an uber-geek of legendary prowess (Hi Steeg!) to direct/assist/guide/mentor everyone, and I think their success was due in large part to his skill and the manager's ability to motivate.
They plug them into the currant bushes, silly!
I used to ride motorcycles -- count me as a fan. I've never had a bad crash, due more to luck than skill. Several of my friends weren't so lucky. Not all injuries heal, not all breaks mend, and not very many body parts can be replaced.
I know several people who have serious, permanant disabilities caused by motorcycle accidents. I agree with the statements made by several posters that this vest presents some hazards, as all airbags do. The concerns regarding passengers and backpacks seem especially relevant.
However, airbags in cars have been statistically proven to greatly reduce injuries (especially when used in conjuction with seat belts). For those who haven't taken or didn't pass basic stats, this means that, even though some injuries are caused by the protective device, the reduction in injury frequency and severity overshadows the risks of use. Your cat-like reflexes and macho biceps probably aren't enough to skew the results, most fatalites thought they had 'em too.
I could learn to live without a leg, a hand or an arm. I'm not sure how I'd deal with quadreplegia -- pretty darn scary stuff. As a cyclist, I rode in gear with protective kevlar plates for road-rash. These would have done NOTHING to prevent spinal or blunt-force trauma injuries. I think this sound like an excellent idea.
I used to work as an aquatic biologist, diving and photographing fishes from all over the globe. My photography skills are legendarily poor, but even the experts I worked with were continually frustrated with the inability of film to capture the brilliant metallic and irridescent colors we saw in person.
Alas, while it may be possible for this display technology to duplicate some of the bright colors, interference colors are usually dependant upon binocular viewing for most of their spectacular effects, and the monitor will definately be mono.
Finally, while I wish it were't so, this technology seems to be display only. I see no ready bridge to adopt this technology to CCD's or film (our two existing image capture options) or to use it directly as a capture device. More's the pity.
On the other hand, being one of the old-style unix geeks has some advantages: nobody is really sure what I do, but the boxes keep runnin. Periodically they ask for some minor magic to prove that I am really the guru they're paying for, and as long as I mangle my code output into some suitably-obfuscated format, management nods, murmurs appreciatively, and goes back to flogging the HTML and help-desk monkeys. I wear nice jeans with dress shirts, but have a sport-coat and dockers available if a high-ranking poo-bah should appear.
Bottom line, life is a dance, there's some give and take. Dress code is just a part of the whole, dress casually when you can, but be prepared to dress it up when you need to schmooze the brass. In general, try to look like a professional worth some reasonable portion of your salary. Management really only goes balistic when they see an unkempt bum wearing a competitor's T-shirt munching twinkies and demanding another raise.
Remember, most of our bosses are the baby-boomers, and associate the long-haired, grubby look with the hippies of the late 60's, with attendent negative connotations. You probably don't have to wear Armani to appease their corporate sensibilities -- so give a little!
I used to work as an aquatic biologist. Since I only have an M.S. it's possible that my experience is substancially different than those with PhD's. But I've been much happier as a geek.
Funding for primary research has pretty well dried up, and directed research systems tend to be very intense, short-sighted, and goal oriented -- not a good environment for good science. The primary research positions are underfunded, and staffed by the "old dogs" with twenty years of publications under their belt -- you won't get a shot there easily.
The scarcity of funding has led to other undersirable characterists: disposable labor and fraudulent research. Basically, many programs are hiring staff as they need 'em, working them like dogs, then letting them go when they quit working 70 hour weeks. There have also been many disturbing rumors of falsified research, and of course almost nobody is wasting time reproducing other's work.
In addition, unlike the science of the last few decades, information is no longer freely distributed among researchers -- the push is to make money by patenting every little discovery. In short, the ivory tower has crumbled, and what's left is a dirty little sweatshop pursuing the almighty dollar with the same intensity as the most callous prostitute. I've been in IT for a number of years now, but work extensively with large numbers of scientists and engineers. They envy me, and I daresay rightly so, which is unfortunate -- science was my first love.
Let me preface this by saying that I'm a GIA certified gemologist as well as a geek. Diamonds have been a racket for a long time, and nothing has changed. I hate watching people spend their life savings for chip of crystalized carbon, but it IS tradition. Have you talked with your fiance? How does she feel? Why are you worried about the resale value -- you ARE planning on being married forever, aren't you? In all honesty, if she wants a diamond to show her friends, bite the bullet, mutter at the unfairness of the universe, but get the diamond. A few thousand pales in comparison to the long-term costs of maintaining a family. DON'T get a fake - it will, at some point, get tested! (I used to have newlywed women come to the store all the time for "appraisals" - sheesh!). If your girl is not the materialistic flavor, there is hope. I highly recommend colored stones, but talk with a good gemologist before buying. Many stones are too soft, or have too many cleavages to work well in a wedding ring. In my case, my wife wanted a diamond, but was emphatic that it not be too large (big stones and mountings tend to be uncomfortable and snag on everything). After sounding out her feelings, I purchased a second-hand diamond ring, and revamped the mounting (incredible savings, as you have noticed, the secondary market stinks.) The result is a lovely ring that is exactly what she wanted, for a total investment of about $250. Since I wanted to show a bit of class, I built a second ring, with a large Tsavorite (a rare green garnet) as a wedding present for her. It has gone up considerably in value, complements her eyes far better than any diamond, and the baroque setting, while too large for daily wear, is something that always gets compliments. So, get a diamond if you need to, if not, the colored stone market is generally a much better investment (particularly if you have a gemologist buddy). Finally, remember that there are several reputable sources for gemstones on the web, and you can buy the stone(s) at near wholesale cost, and have them set by any competent goldsmith. Best of luck!
I write several languages, and thought I was pretty good at commenting my code. My boss was happy, my co-workers didn't complain, life was good. Then I took a job at a Java-shop, where javadocs were generated hourly for all shared library classes. Since I was writing shared library stuff, that put me in the limelight. I found I had many bad habits: My class descriptions were frequently too brief, and included no examples of how to use "Widget3.class". If I included multiple constructors, I frequently only documented the "most verbose" variant. Since my variables were hypothetically well named, it seemed superfluous to comment on what they did, even if I defined them globally and used them in multiple methods. The list goes on. The generated javadocs were used by other developers who depended on my classes for critical functions of their own projects. Surprisingly, they were unhappy with the "minor" omissions in my documentation, and suggested that I look at Sun's classes for a clue. After a hearty helping of humble pie, I actually learned to comment my classes in such a way that they were as useful as those written by the Sun programmers. Even though I still write perl, C++ etc. the commenting skills I learned with java are now second nature, and very helpful. Try using javadoc on your code, then READ the generated documentation - if it doesn't explain your class accurately, completely, and at a level that would let another programmer understand your program, you have more to learn. BTW- those in-line comments, while not picked up by javadoc, are absolutely essential for other programmers. If you have time to alter the code you most certainly have time to alter the comments!
However, a quiet system is preferable for several reasons: