And you were asked if you were an idiot because even as far north as New York (and further) every summer hear wave comes with reports on the news of how many people died in their homes form the heat. Yes, these are predominantly the old and/or infirm and always the poor. I'm in no way OK with that. Are you?
Those were the worst damn laptops to service. Very cool for the time, but I happened to be a lowly (IBM certified) service tech when they were released and always cringed when one came in the door.
My father is blind. His mailbox is across the street from his house. He needs to cross the street to get his mail. He would never hear an electric car coming down the street if it didn't make a sound that could be identified as a car.
Fortunately evs still have tires, which are what make most of the noise in most any car at residential street or parking lot speeds.
But a telecommunications device is not a house or a car, and the laws for communications are different because of that.
Metaphors are not laws.
--
BMO
Yet the metaphor is accurate, as you still may not use a completely passwordless computer system you find online without at least implied consent (public web servers, etc). This is not up for debate, as it's easy to research case law.
Ummm.....that's not how the law works.
Just because I left my car doors unlocked and the keys int he ignition doesn't mean you can legally take my car. Just because I left my house unlocked doesn't mean you can stroll in and take a nap.
People like to think about the cost of addressing the cost of carbon dioxide pollution as too great to do anything about it. However, the reality is that if we don't the costs will be far, far higher.
You know what else people like to think about? Doing something that actually makes a difference, not just following along with pseudo science and politics (where there is obvious money to be made by the few).
And no, I was not confusing the change in global mean temperature with anything. I said nothing to lead anyone to believe I did.
I can't imagine a more anti science, more anti reason way to try and beat down people you disagree with than the above.
Why is that? I've seen some reasonably convincing evidence that the average temperatures are getting warmer in the past 100+ years.
The real problem is that no one has been able to explain WHY without pseudo-science, emotional ploys, and politics which makes swallowing "humans are runing the world!" difficult for those of us who like facts.
So a GUI is required for doing things that all good admin recognize aren't really appropriate to be doing on a server. I'm not seeing why this can't be done on a desktop machine, even a remote console to one.
GUIs on a server has and always will enable and basically promote poor usage practices on said server. Maybe Microsoft is interested in paving a road to make their server products more in line with the rest of the server marketplace by getting away from that type of thing. By allowing or encouraging this type of user behavior they are being blamed for the problems it causes (rightly or wrongly). I know I'd want to get away from that as well as to get a shot at possibly winning back some business from the majority (by volume) server operating systems being used today (only about 36% Windows, the rest overwhelmingly some unix variant) by getting in line with the requirements of the administrators of those machines......and that necessarily means forcing those who develop the software they run on your OS to get in line with this as well.
Microsoft maybe, but not all vendors. There is an ungodly amount of multi-user software out there that actually requires a Windows session on the server because the core "service" is a Windows GUI application. And I'm not just talking downloaddotcom kind of software, but also pricey specialized stuff, like finance or telecom packages.
That's the point: Microsoft is telling these vendors its time to do things differently. To do things in a way that makes Windows server services more competitive with the rest of the marketplace.
Also, running telecom packages on Windows server is a joke. I work in telecom. Every last piece of telecom server software that I've come across that is available for Windows only was made by someone who has (or had at the time the decision was made) no clue how the telecom business works. I have exactly one Windows server running in my datacenter, and it is to run the VMWare cluster. Absolutely nothing else is running windows or a GUI of any kind. This is at a fairly high volume voip telecom.
Please no, programs can actually be quite complicated. They aren't like web servers which you configure and leave running. Making them GUI-less will just complicate things and make it much harder to use. There's a reason we use GUI's now a days - it's better for some stuff.
It's better for poorly trained underlings. It's much worse for things that actually matter, like proper change control and management, service cloning, mass changes, and many other things admins of actual servers of any number need to do. There are all easy with text based configs, and it works almost exactly the same way with exactly the same tools regardless of the application or who made it.
the admin wants to do something like upload database files somewhere, or move media around, or something related to his organization's operations
Additional clarification -- in the specific context of the discussion, he was talking about use of a GUI application that does something like the above, for which there is no command line / text equivalent. Hope that helps.
And as long as there is no incentive to make proper command line versions of Windows server software, you will always need that slow, bloated GUI to do certain things. Certain things that have been possible on proper CLI systems for decades.
Now, this is the part you missed -- the admin wants to do something like upload database files somewhere, or move media around, or something related to his organization's operations. If he does it through his dial-up, it will be excruciatingly slow. However, his dial-up is fast enough to let him access the server via Remote Desktop or VNC, so hey, presto! Using the GUI remotely allows him to have faster bandwidth. He is effectively then using his local machine analogously to a "dumb terminal".
It's the kind of thing that makes sense after you've experienced it once or twice.
I'm quite positive you too are missing the point here. What part of this requires a GUI?
You're picking nits: ok, you don't spark two wires together, you spark 3-4 pairs of wires together. Not much difference.
Since I know for a fact that it's possible to start my car this way because I've done it, why don't you give your theories on why it's impossible?
And on the off chance you're not full of shit, can you tell me how I'd go about clearing the steering lock?
I seriously doubt you've done it, or you'd know that you aren't "sparking 3-4 pairs of wires together". You are bridging 12v (which you'll find somewhere in the harness) to the ignition, whatever other separated required systems are on the switch depends on the car, and possibly the accessories (but not necessary). Then you are "sparking" the starter solenoid "s" terminal lead to the bundle or some other 12v source.
And you "clear" the steering lock with a slide hammer. And then jam a flat head screwdriver into what is left and fuck the hot wiring, because you can just turn the ignition switch with the screwdriver. No wiring necessary.
Bullshit. Done it with a '79 datsun, a screwdriver, and the solenoid.
A 79 Datsun doesn't need power to an ignition coil? Did you forget to mention the part about it having a mechanically injected diesel motor in it?
This is really, really basic shit. No spark=no run. No voltage to the ignition coil=no spark. You can crank the starter all fucking day and the motor won't run.
Yes, figuring which and how to bridge 4 or more wires is absolutely just as easy as sparking 2 together like in the movies. I'm obviously being totally misleading.
Also, you have plenty of time to figure this out with your multi meter in a nice well lit area while you are stealing a car. And the ignition switches are really easy to get to on things made after the 70s.
You're making hotwiring a car out to be some extremely complicated thing. It's not, I was able to figure it out from scratch in 15 minutes of boredom, I'm pretty sure an accomplished car thief could do it in a matter of seconds.
I think your reading comprehension is probably pretty poor if that was you take-away. I was arguing the simple fact that you don't just "spark two wires together" like in the movies and like the poster I responded two stated.
I work on auto electronics as a side job. This includes wiring race cars from scratch. I've got a better than average idea of how an automotive electrical system works. So, please, do try to argue facts with me if you want to keep this up. I can do it from rote memory while you google away at it.
I have started my 1999 Corolla by yanking a connector out from behind the steering wheel and bridging things with paper clips.
Wasn't able to figure out how to get the steering lock to release though.
I have no idea what this post is supposed to mean. Are you trying to say your 1999 Corolla needs only two wires bridged to start and run? If so, it's the only one in existence.
You won't believe it until you see it with your own eyes -- in person. (you're doing exactly what the ignition switch does, just without the key... turn the ignition on, pulse the starter.)
And how does that make the car start? Never mind, I'll answer for you: it doesn't.
It has never been that simple, despite how many movies you have seen. Cars don't do anything without power to the ignition, ECU, and preferably the accessories. Yes, that means you need to wrap a bunch of wires together first to power them before the magical movie "hot wire" does anything more than spin the starter and uselessly crank the motor. Yes, even cars with carbs. Even car without ECUs and with mechanical fuel pumps. The only exception to this rule are some older mechanically injected diesels which you weren't likely to find even in the 80s unless you were trying to steal Mack R models.
Well, COULD do... back in the 80's. Starting a car by touching the right two wires in the igition harness ended around 1989 with the last of the carbureted cars. (I'm told that was a Subaru Justy.) A carbureted car could be started that way. Cars with electronic ignitions have more wires. And modern ones have anti-theft devices.
God dammit I hate when people on/. talk about cars.
You are just one of the many who are so wrong you are even embarrassing ME .
Especially if he wants to get into a "niche" like Android development.
Spoken like someone who has no idea what the job market is like for Andorid developers. Try to fond a qualified one that doesn't already have a job. I dare you. And if you aren't qualified, you aren't really an Android developer.
No. HR departments used to be the people who dealt with the paperwork for benefits and settled employee disputes/problems when they were not handled by the direct supervisors for whatever reason (like if it involved a supervisor). They also often handled posting jobs ads based on descriptions they got form various departments, and in doing mundane things like running background checks on applications at the behest of those departments after they had narrowed their candidate pool.
sounds like you just bought a shitty phone, I have been using this thing since 2005 and its never locked up or crashed at all
Really? So was the Motorola Q a "shitty phone"? Because mine did exactly what the parent was describing about a few months, as did those of most of the people I knew with them. This was not unexpected, as the various other windows mobile phones they and I had been using seemed to be about the same.
I'm not sure what relevance this has to the latest devices as in what is being discussed here, but your experience seems to be quite out of the ordinary for windows mobile inthe '05-'07ish time frame from my experience and that of many others.
Slashdot Mirror
I asked a valid question.
And you were asked if you were an idiot because even as far north as New York (and further) every summer hear wave comes with reports on the news of how many people died in their homes form the heat. Yes, these are predominantly the old and/or infirm and always the poor. I'm in no way OK with that. Are you?
Those were the worst damn laptops to service. Very cool for the time, but I happened to be a lowly (IBM certified) service tech when they were released and always cringed when one came in the door.
My father is blind. His mailbox is across the street from his house. He needs to cross the street to get his mail. He would never hear an electric car coming down the street if it didn't make a sound that could be identified as a car.
Fortunately evs still have tires, which are what make most of the noise in most any car at residential street or parking lot speeds.
But a telecommunications device is not a house or a car, and the laws for communications are different because of that.
Metaphors are not laws.
-- BMO
Yet the metaphor is accurate, as you still may not use a completely passwordless computer system you find online without at least implied consent (public web servers, etc). This is not up for debate, as it's easy to research case law.
Ummm.....that's not how the law works. Just because I left my car doors unlocked and the keys int he ignition doesn't mean you can legally take my car. Just because I left my house unlocked doesn't mean you can stroll in and take a nap.
People like to think about the cost of addressing the cost of carbon dioxide pollution as too great to do anything about it. However, the reality is that if we don't the costs will be far, far higher.
You know what else people like to think about? Doing something that actually makes a difference, not just following along with pseudo science and politics (where there is obvious money to be made by the few). And no, I was not confusing the change in global mean temperature with anything. I said nothing to lead anyone to believe I did.
Notice the subtle difference in wording? You used warm, which is what I would have chosen.
Of course. We're talking fractions of a degree here. But that's to my point of needing emotion to sell this.
I can't imagine a more anti science, more anti reason way to try and beat down people you disagree with than the above.
Why is that? I've seen some reasonably convincing evidence that the average temperatures are getting warmer in the past 100+ years.
The real problem is that no one has been able to explain WHY without pseudo-science, emotional ploys, and politics which makes swallowing "humans are runing the world!" difficult for those of us who like facts.
So a GUI is required for doing things that all good admin recognize aren't really appropriate to be doing on a server. I'm not seeing why this can't be done on a desktop machine, even a remote console to one.
GUIs on a server has and always will enable and basically promote poor usage practices on said server. Maybe Microsoft is interested in paving a road to make their server products more in line with the rest of the server marketplace by getting away from that type of thing. By allowing or encouraging this type of user behavior they are being blamed for the problems it causes (rightly or wrongly). I know I'd want to get away from that as well as to get a shot at possibly winning back some business from the majority (by volume) server operating systems being used today (only about 36% Windows, the rest overwhelmingly some unix variant) by getting in line with the requirements of the administrators of those machines......and that necessarily means forcing those who develop the software they run on your OS to get in line with this as well.
Microsoft maybe, but not all vendors. There is an ungodly amount of multi-user software out there that actually requires a Windows session on the server because the core "service" is a Windows GUI application. And I'm not just talking downloaddotcom kind of software, but also pricey specialized stuff, like finance or telecom packages.
That's the point: Microsoft is telling these vendors its time to do things differently. To do things in a way that makes Windows server services more competitive with the rest of the marketplace.
Also, running telecom packages on Windows server is a joke. I work in telecom. Every last piece of telecom server software that I've come across that is available for Windows only was made by someone who has (or had at the time the decision was made) no clue how the telecom business works. I have exactly one Windows server running in my datacenter, and it is to run the VMWare cluster. Absolutely nothing else is running windows or a GUI of any kind. This is at a fairly high volume voip telecom.
Wow, did you just bring back some memories. Where did I leave that token ringer tester?
Please no, programs can actually be quite complicated. They aren't like web servers which you configure and leave running. Making them GUI-less will just complicate things and make it much harder to use. There's a reason we use GUI's now a days - it's better for some stuff.
It's better for poorly trained underlings. It's much worse for things that actually matter, like proper change control and management, service cloning, mass changes, and many other things admins of actual servers of any number need to do. There are all easy with text based configs, and it works almost exactly the same way with exactly the same tools regardless of the application or who made it.
the admin wants to do something like upload database files somewhere, or move media around, or something related to his organization's operations
Additional clarification -- in the specific context of the discussion, he was talking about use of a GUI application that does something like the above, for which there is no command line / text equivalent. Hope that helps.
And as long as there is no incentive to make proper command line versions of Windows server software, you will always need that slow, bloated GUI to do certain things. Certain things that have been possible on proper CLI systems for decades.
Now, this is the part you missed -- the admin wants to do something like upload database files somewhere, or move media around, or something related to his organization's operations. If he does it through his dial-up, it will be excruciatingly slow. However, his dial-up is fast enough to let him access the server via Remote Desktop or VNC, so hey, presto! Using the GUI remotely allows him to have faster bandwidth. He is effectively then using his local machine analogously to a "dumb terminal". It's the kind of thing that makes sense after you've experienced it once or twice.
I'm quite positive you too are missing the point here. What part of this requires a GUI?
You're picking nits: ok, you don't spark two wires together, you spark 3-4 pairs of wires together. Not much difference. Since I know for a fact that it's possible to start my car this way because I've done it, why don't you give your theories on why it's impossible? And on the off chance you're not full of shit, can you tell me how I'd go about clearing the steering lock?
I seriously doubt you've done it, or you'd know that you aren't "sparking 3-4 pairs of wires together". You are bridging 12v (which you'll find somewhere in the harness) to the ignition, whatever other separated required systems are on the switch depends on the car, and possibly the accessories (but not necessary). Then you are "sparking" the starter solenoid "s" terminal lead to the bundle or some other 12v source.
And you "clear" the steering lock with a slide hammer. And then jam a flat head screwdriver into what is left and fuck the hot wiring, because you can just turn the ignition switch with the screwdriver. No wiring necessary.
Bullshit. Done it with a '79 datsun, a screwdriver, and the solenoid.
A 79 Datsun doesn't need power to an ignition coil? Did you forget to mention the part about it having a mechanically injected diesel motor in it?
This is really, really basic shit. No spark=no run. No voltage to the ignition coil=no spark. You can crank the starter all fucking day and the motor won't run.
Yes, figuring which and how to bridge 4 or more wires is absolutely just as easy as sparking 2 together like in the movies. I'm obviously being totally misleading.
Also, you have plenty of time to figure this out with your multi meter in a nice well lit area while you are stealing a car. And the ignition switches are really easy to get to on things made after the 70s.
That stuff was totally easy. What was I thinking?
(There's a lot of amps in the ignition circuit... wouldn't want to touch that)
Seriously /. posters. Just stop it. This really is embarrassing to everyone.
You're making hotwiring a car out to be some extremely complicated thing. It's not, I was able to figure it out from scratch in 15 minutes of boredom, I'm pretty sure an accomplished car thief could do it in a matter of seconds.
I think your reading comprehension is probably pretty poor if that was you take-away. I was arguing the simple fact that you don't just "spark two wires together" like in the movies and like the poster I responded two stated.
I work on auto electronics as a side job. This includes wiring race cars from scratch. I've got a better than average idea of how an automotive electrical system works. So, please, do try to argue facts with me if you want to keep this up. I can do it from rote memory while you google away at it.
I have started my 1999 Corolla by yanking a connector out from behind the steering wheel and bridging things with paper clips. Wasn't able to figure out how to get the steering lock to release though.
I have no idea what this post is supposed to mean. Are you trying to say your 1999 Corolla needs only two wires bridged to start and run? If so, it's the only one in existence.
You won't believe it until you see it with your own eyes -- in person. (you're doing exactly what the ignition switch does, just without the key... turn the ignition on, pulse the starter.)
And how does that make the car start? Never mind, I'll answer for you: it doesn't.
It has never been that simple, despite how many movies you have seen. Cars don't do anything without power to the ignition, ECU, and preferably the accessories. Yes, that means you need to wrap a bunch of wires together first to power them before the magical movie "hot wire" does anything more than spin the starter and uselessly crank the motor. Yes, even cars with carbs. Even car without ECUs and with mechanical fuel pumps. The only exception to this rule are some older mechanically injected diesels which you weren't likely to find even in the 80s unless you were trying to steal Mack R models.
Well, COULD do... back in the 80's. Starting a car by touching the right two wires in the igition harness ended around 1989 with the last of the carbureted cars. (I'm told that was a Subaru Justy.) A carbureted car could be started that way. Cars with electronic ignitions have more wires. And modern ones have anti-theft devices.
God dammit I hate when people on /. talk about cars.
You are just one of the many who are so wrong you are even embarrassing ME .
Especially if he wants to get into a "niche" like Android development.
Spoken like someone who has no idea what the job market is like for Andorid developers. Try to fond a qualified one that doesn't already have a job. I dare you. And if you aren't qualified, you aren't really an Android developer.
Isn't that the definition of an HR department?
No. HR departments used to be the people who dealt with the paperwork for benefits and settled employee disputes/problems when they were not handled by the direct supervisors for whatever reason (like if it involved a supervisor). They also often handled posting jobs ads based on descriptions they got form various departments, and in doing mundane things like running background checks on applications at the behest of those departments after they had narrowed their candidate pool.
sounds like you just bought a shitty phone, I have been using this thing since 2005 and its never locked up or crashed at all
Really? So was the Motorola Q a "shitty phone"? Because mine did exactly what the parent was describing about a few months, as did those of most of the people I knew with them. This was not unexpected, as the various other windows mobile phones they and I had been using seemed to be about the same.
I'm not sure what relevance this has to the latest devices as in what is being discussed here, but your experience seems to be quite out of the ordinary for windows mobile inthe '05-'07ish time frame from my experience and that of many others.