I did try it. Ford Motor Compnay is the first on the list for a search for "ford" and the other website is first on the list for "ford sucks." You're missing the point. What's the difference in Ford objecting to a domain like "fordsucks.com" and not a website that comes up in the #1 slot when someone does a search for "ford sucks"? The fear that Ford has with someone screwing around with funny search strings is going to be a lot more than someone screwing around with funny URLs.
...there are laws passed to prevent people from "tweaking" search engine results so their page comes up with or even before one of the "big guys." I mean, what if more people link to
a Ford
sucks page than Ford?
...impossible claim proved wrong. Film at eleven. I can't tell if Ellison's claim that Oracle was bulletproof was the act of a madman or genius. Why genius? Nothing gets security experts to test your software with such vigor than when you tell them it's invulnerable. Question is, does this make the NSA more or less secure in choosing Oracle products?
When I see a "beige minitower" next to a slimmed-down small-package computer, I think of one thing: expandability. Is that little marvel of a computer going to be able to support the latest and greatest hardware out there? Hopefully when Firewire and USB2 catch their strides, the idea of adding external devices won't seem so foreign to people. Now if they could only make a FireWire version of the GeForce 4 card, I'd be in business!
Pretty good...in the server market. Why? There are lots and lots of expensive unix workstations that can conceivably be replaced by cheap Intel based PCs that have the same Unix interface and command structure. Kind of like how a system with Windows 3.1 can run DOS apps, and Windows 95 can run 3.1 apps, and Windows 98 can run Windows 95 apps, and... Well you get the idea.
Using UML for system design, you're forced to describe the end solution
almost from the very beginning. Instead of focusing on the requirements and on
the goal, you're focusing on the solution and the process.
Actually, the UML implies a methodology for OO design in general. The
class diagram, for example, is generated early on in the process. But the
reason for that is that the nouns and verbs used in describing the domain of the
problem will be used to create the classes and operations in those classes,
respectively. In fact, the author gives a very short example of this
starting on page40 of the book. Also keep in mind that the design
process isn't a "waterfall." Yes, you may begin the class
diagram early on, but you probably won't finish it right away. It's a
living document that will be refined as the development process progresses.
Another problem with UML code mapping is that it works fine with Java, but
doesn't work well with other languages, like OO-Perl, LISP or some non-OO
languages. UML is not so "U" ML.
Yeah. The UML uses terminology that is very close to Java. I'd be
interested to know how people use the UML in other OO languages. Is there
much "shoehorning" done to get it to make sense?
Things like class diagrams are definitely not going to be very helpful in non-OO
projects. However, other diagrams like the state and sequence would still
be appropriate for non-OO design.
Well, if you generate the class diagrams early on in development, they'll be more of a "time-saver". I've seen people generate the class diagram as they are coding! The whole point of the class diagram is to take the system description and break it down into packages/classes/methods before you start coding.
I'm not even targeting "security" issues. I simply meant software testing in general. Are there NO unit tests available anywhere for any piece of the kernel? (Unit tests are code.)
They both lost because they were so damned concerned about whose hardware was the best bang for the
buck rather than who had the killer applications. Nobody outside of the
"PC compatible" world seemed to worry about developing a solid base of business apps that were
interoperable with the existing file formats. It was the 'ol hardware vs.
software debate. I guess now we know who the winner is. (Actually,
now that I think about it, there was a spreadsheet program for the AtariST
that did have a lot of Lotus1-2-3 features in it. Too bad.)
It's a shame because both the Amiga and ST were faster and cheaper than the Mac
and PCs that were available at the time. In fact, the ST had an emulator
called the MagicSack that could run Mac apps 10% faster! I had an Atari
800, so I purchased the 1040 ST. And why not? They promised Mac
compatibility with an add-on and the sucker could read IBM PC formatted
floppies. The even had a MS-DOS emulator that ran dog slow. The
problem was that the Amiga was a hacker's dream. The audio was better, and
the video modes could be tweaked like crazy! It took a while before
someone figured how to do 512 colors at 320x200 on the ST. The Amiga was
doing 320x400 interlaced at 4,096 colors way before then. The games were
much better on the Amiga, too.
Geez. POWER is equal to voltage multiplied by the current. If you are using TWICE the voltage, you will be consuming half the current.
The power remains constant. Heat is generated by RESISTANCE. You can play with the voltage all you want, but the resistance (or load) of the PC remains the same.
This is a good point. What are the official QA practices of the Linux development team? Is there a place where I can download the unit tests used? Does anyone have a documented system test procedure so that if I develop something in the kernel, I can be assured that I didn't break something else?
Embedded software. When was the last time your TV crashed on
you? Granted, the software is an order of magniture smaller than for PCs, but
the consequence of a big bug in a released piece of consumer electronics is huge
(people demand their money back), so it needs to be more rigorously tested.
My Magnavox television won't power up correctly every once and a while using the
manufacturer's remote. However, I've never had this happen using a
universal remote.
The software in embedded "chips" will continue to get more and more
complex as transistor sizes drop. The more code you write, the greater the
chance for bugs. That's the idea behind code reuse in OO software.
Same code == less code.
For example, hiding known file name extensions by default often tricks
users into launching an executible attachment when they think it's a jpg or
somesuch.
True. That's why I turn that feature off immediately. BTW, didn't
they do that so Windows95 would look more like the Mac OS?
Of course not. If he had insulted a guy he would have gotten a punch in the mouth.
But since he's too much of a coward to talk that way to a man, this is the best story he can tell.
That is, unless you count the time he pushed an eight-year old off his bike
because the kid said, "Linux is for doo-doo heads!"
Speaking of peer pressure, I am reminded of the time three other friends
and I were in a bar. My one friend was kicking it to some woman, and my other
two friends and I were talking to her somewhat cute friend (another female).
Well, I was inebriated, and so naturally the topic changed to operating systems.
In an uncanny moment of smoothness, I asked her if she used Windows. You can
guess that she said "yes." I immediately replied that people who use
Windows are idiots. Well, that pissed her off, but the amazing thing was that my
other two friends joined in ripping on her because of her choice in operating
system. What a fiasco that turned out to be for my (normal) friend who was
hitting on the other woman. Needless to say both women left.
Most Linux zealots repel women by their appearance and smell. But
not you. You do just fine with your repulsive attitude. Most men
usually wait until after they get laid to piss off a woman. I guess
they should have been more appreciative that you revealed yourself to be a jerk
right away. Those sticky "morning after" talks can be so
uncomfortable. But I guess you've never gotten yourself into one of those
situations. So...any other dating tips?
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, I never said it made sense. It doesn't make sense that Ford can muscle the owner of Fordsucks.com to drop his/her registration, but it happened.
Even the dynamic ones?
I did try it. Ford Motor Compnay is the first on the list for a search for "ford" and the other website is first on the list for "ford sucks." You're missing the point. What's the difference in Ford objecting to a domain like "fordsucks.com" and not a website that comes up in the #1 slot when someone does a search for "ford sucks"? The fear that Ford has with someone screwing around with funny search strings is going to be a lot more than someone screwing around with funny URLs.
...there are laws passed to prevent people from "tweaking" search engine results so their page comes up with or even before one of the "big guys." I mean, what if more people link to a Ford sucks page than Ford?
...impossible claim proved wrong. Film at eleven. I can't tell if Ellison's claim that Oracle was bulletproof was the act of a madman or genius. Why genius? Nothing gets security experts to test your software with such vigor than when you tell them it's invulnerable. Question is, does this make the NSA more or less secure in choosing Oracle products?
Unless the kernel is written in Java. Then just use JAD! :)
When I see a "beige minitower" next to a slimmed-down small-package computer, I think of one thing: expandability. Is that little marvel of a computer going to be able to support the latest and greatest hardware out there? Hopefully when Firewire and USB2 catch their strides, the idea of adding external devices won't seem so foreign to people. Now if they could only make a FireWire version of the GeForce 4 card, I'd be in business!
Pretty good...in the server market. Why? There are lots and lots of expensive unix workstations that can conceivably be replaced by cheap Intel based PCs that have the same Unix interface and command structure. Kind of like how a system with Windows 3.1 can run DOS apps, and Windows 95 can run 3.1 apps, and Windows 98 can run Windows 95 apps, and... Well you get the idea.
FYI, the proper weay to refer to it is "the UML."
Using UML for system design, you're forced to describe the end solution almost from the very beginning. Instead of focusing on the requirements and on the goal, you're focusing on the solution and the process.
Actually, the UML implies a methodology for OO design in general. The class diagram, for example, is generated early on in the process. But the reason for that is that the nouns and verbs used in describing the domain of the problem will be used to create the classes and operations in those classes, respectively. In fact, the author gives a very short example of this starting on page40 of the book. Also keep in mind that the design process isn't a "waterfall." Yes, you may begin the class diagram early on, but you probably won't finish it right away. It's a living document that will be refined as the development process progresses.
Another problem with UML code mapping is that it works fine with Java, but doesn't work well with other languages, like OO-Perl, LISP or some non-OO languages. UML is not so "U" ML.
Yeah. The UML uses terminology that is very close to Java. I'd be interested to know how people use the UML in other OO languages. Is there much "shoehorning" done to get it to make sense?
Things like class diagrams are definitely not going to be very helpful in non-OO projects. However, other diagrams like the state and sequence would still be appropriate for non-OO design.
Well, if you generate the class diagrams early on in development, they'll be more of a "time-saver". I've seen people generate the class diagram as they are coding! The whole point of the class diagram is to take the system description and break it down into packages/classes/methods before you start coding.
Bah. Visio stinks. VisualUML or Togethersoft's Together products are a hundred times better.
I'm not even targeting "security" issues. I simply meant software testing in general. Are there NO unit tests available anywhere for any piece of the kernel? (Unit tests are code.)
They both lost because they were so damned concerned about whose hardware was the best bang for the buck rather than who had the killer applications. Nobody outside of the "PC compatible" world seemed to worry about developing a solid base of business apps that were interoperable with the existing file formats. It was the 'ol hardware vs. software debate. I guess now we know who the winner is. (Actually, now that I think about it, there was a spreadsheet program for the AtariST that did have a lot of Lotus1-2-3 features in it. Too bad.)
It's a shame because both the Amiga and ST were faster and cheaper than the Mac and PCs that were available at the time. In fact, the ST had an emulator called the MagicSack that could run Mac apps 10% faster! I had an Atari 800, so I purchased the 1040 ST. And why not? They promised Mac compatibility with an add-on and the sucker could read IBM PC formatted floppies. The even had a MS-DOS emulator that ran dog slow. The problem was that the Amiga was a hacker's dream. The audio was better, and the video modes could be tweaked like crazy! It took a while before someone figured how to do 512 colors at 320x200 on the ST. The Amiga was doing 320x400 interlaced at 4,096 colors way before then. The games were much better on the Amiga, too.
Geez. POWER is equal to voltage multiplied by the current. If you are using TWICE the voltage, you will be consuming half the current. The power remains constant. Heat is generated by RESISTANCE. You can play with the voltage all you want, but the resistance (or load) of the PC remains the same.
To put it succinctly...
YHBT HAND.
Explain why 110v stepped down to 12v is any better than 220v stepped down to 12v?
This is a good point. What are the official QA practices of the Linux development team? Is there a place where I can download the unit tests used? Does anyone have a documented system test procedure so that if I develop something in the kernel, I can be assured that I didn't break something else?
Embedded software. When was the last time your TV crashed on you? Granted, the software is an order of magniture smaller than for PCs, but the consequence of a big bug in a released piece of consumer electronics is huge (people demand their money back), so it needs to be more rigorously tested.
My Magnavox television won't power up correctly every once and a while using the manufacturer's remote. However, I've never had this happen using a universal remote.
The software in embedded "chips" will continue to get more and more complex as transistor sizes drop. The more code you write, the greater the chance for bugs. That's the idea behind code reuse in OO software. Same code == less code.
For example, hiding known file name extensions by default often tricks users into launching an executible attachment when they think it's a jpg or somesuch.
True. That's why I turn that feature off immediately. BTW, didn't they do that so Windows95 would look more like the Mac OS?
Just as long as the deleted "bedroom" scene is in there. That has got to be the first example of "cyber sex" ever.
It's called "Doctorin' the Tardis" by KLF and the Timelords.
And yes, the graphite dust did nasty things to electronics.
Aha! There's the solution to the problem. Just scribble on your hard drive with a Russian pencil and viola! No more data!
Of course not. If he had insulted a guy he would have gotten a punch in the mouth. But since he's too much of a coward to talk that way to a man, this is the best story he can tell. That is, unless you count the time he pushed an eight-year old off his bike because the kid said, "Linux is for doo-doo heads!"
Speaking of peer pressure, I am reminded of the time three other friends and I were in a bar. My one friend was kicking it to some woman, and my other two friends and I were talking to her somewhat cute friend (another female). Well, I was inebriated, and so naturally the topic changed to operating systems. In an uncanny moment of smoothness, I asked her if she used Windows. You can guess that she said "yes." I immediately replied that people who use Windows are idiots. Well, that pissed her off, but the amazing thing was that my other two friends joined in ripping on her because of her choice in operating system. What a fiasco that turned out to be for my (normal) friend who was hitting on the other woman. Needless to say both women left.
Most Linux zealots repel women by their appearance and smell. But not you. You do just fine with your repulsive attitude. Most men usually wait until after they get laid to piss off a woman. I guess they should have been more appreciative that you revealed yourself to be a jerk right away. Those sticky "morning after" talks can be so uncomfortable. But I guess you've never gotten yourself into one of those situations. So...any other dating tips?