All modern operating systems offer this functionality, most from the command line (ie on OS X it's kextload/kextunload). It's not some amazing Linux thing.
MS invented Ajax, and for a long time only IE supported the XmlHttpRequest (it was originally designed for Outlook Web Access). So it wasn't a platform-neutral api. I guess it should have been condemned too, because it "broke" the internet, right?
Rich clients and media delivery like Flash, Silverlight, etc. are here to stay, for better or worse. The best you can do is to pitch in and help out with Moonlight, or switch to a Mac and forget about it.
Salesforce.com (crm), Taleo (hr), and various others like them are all successful. SAP is working on an online offering, I hear, and it may already be out there, I don't know. In short, lots and lots of companies offload various critical functions into the "cloud" (argh) if it makes sense to do so.
Also, if they're from the former Yugoslavia, it's best not to mention that you thought Clinton was a great president. They still hold a grudge about all the bombing of Belgrade and stuff.
That's only if she's a Serb. If she's Croatian, it could be a point in your favour.
The takeaway here is that paying attention to geopolitics can pay great dividends.
Bloggers need to say stupid shit like that in order to drive traffic via provocation. kdawson, you should be ashamed of yourself for posting this tripe.
Re:Why only one database language?
on
SQL in a Nutshell
·
· Score: 1
Yes, I knew someone would correct me, thanks;)
Anyway, my point was that any new language would have to have a similar relationship to the relational model that SQL and I assume Quel do.
Re:Why only one database language?
on
SQL in a Nutshell
·
· Score: 2, Informative
It's mainly because SQL was the first (only? someone correct me) language to implement Codd's relational model, via the tuple calculus. The relational model is of course the basis for relational databases, so the idea was SQL would be provably correct in its representation of the relational model. There is a document called The Third Manifesto that details why this is not the case, and makes some suggestions for the way forward, but I don't remember much else about it.
What is the exact barrier to micropayments? Is it the credit card companies? The whole concept is so logical and would solve so many problems, so what is preventing it from being implemented?
We aren't talking about home users here. We're talking about businesses, some very large, that have custom apps that they have no reason to rewrite. There are many of them - I'd guess in the tens of thousands.
There's everything you can imagine available for linux. And as for quality... you're being a troll.
Tax software Video editing software (nice and simple, like iMovie) Enterprise CRM of any sort (SAP, Siebel, PeopleSoft, etc.) Small business financial like Quicken Ability to watch Blu-Ray CAD software Music production/mixing (like GarageBand) iPhone compatibility No full MSN compatibility (voice and video)...and hundreds more.
If none of these matter to you, and they don't for a lot of people, then great. Home users who need a web browsing and email computer will be well-served running desktop Linux.
But don't say there's "everything imaginable", because exactly the opposite is true: chances are, if you do name a piece of software, there will be no Linux analogue.
I hope you're joking, as that is the correct use of the verb "to pore":
pore
1. to read or study with steady attention or application: a scholar poring over a rare old manuscript. 2. to gaze earnestly or steadily: to pore over a painting. 3. to meditate or ponder intently (usually fol. by over, on, or upon): He pored over the strange events of the preceding evening.
How is it a lot more work? You scan massive blocks of ips and run your remote exploit (which the summary assures us is trivial) against them. As the botnet grows, it joins your scanning/exploiting effort. Even if you got only 1% of all Macs, that would still be completely enormous. You'd think SOMEONE would have tried it by now. But no. So maybe remote exploits aren't so trivial after all.
So maybe we have to resort to other malware. One of the main vectors into Windows is the classic malware-infested web page, which exploits ActiveX. If one in ten desktop are Macs, then those are still pretty good odds for malware writers - your classic porn drive-by would work fine. But strangely, that hasn't happened either.
The old "it's not popular so it's not worth it" argument holds no water, or else less popular but extremely insecure software like IIS would never have been exploited. Instead, it would be Apache that's causing problems. But exactly the opposite is true.
But then you'll get all the All Government Is Evil people saying they don't want state control over their textbooks, etc. etc.;)
I am being facetious, obviously. I guess the only question is how to foster competition between authors - perhaps they submit samples and contracts are awarded, kind of like how it works with engineering contracts?
Feel free to offer alternatives, as that's what this entire story is all about. He is soliciting your suggestions on how he can earn a living by writing textbooks.
"Developers that use the GNU GPL protect your rights with two steps: (1) assert copyright on the software, and (2) offer you this License giving you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify it."
Violating the GPL is exactly the same as violating copyright, since the methods of enforcement are the same in each case: copyright law. It doesn't matter what the award is (money, source code, spaghetti, or whatever).
I'm not American either, but since we are talking about the American publishing industry here, I thought it was understood that referencing the US Constitution would be appropriate. We are not talking about the entire world here, obviously.
Anyway, you agree that authorial control for some period is a right - a legal right. It doesn't matter if it MAY no longer make sense (to you), the fact is, the law of the land currently says otherwise. So telling people it's a privilege is in fact not correct.
Slashdot Mirror
Their contact numbers are also Chinese - gee, what an amazing surprise. So I doubt suing them is even an option.
All modern operating systems offer this functionality, most from the command line (ie on OS X it's kextload/kextunload). It's not some amazing Linux thing.
Well, don't discount us swooping in and stealing most of the Detroit Red Wings.
"Escape From Baltimore" doesn't have quite the same ring to it.
MS invented Ajax, and for a long time only IE supported the XmlHttpRequest (it was originally designed for Outlook Web Access). So it wasn't a platform-neutral api. I guess it should have been condemned too, because it "broke" the internet, right?
Rich clients and media delivery like Flash, Silverlight, etc. are here to stay, for better or worse. The best you can do is to pitch in and help out with Moonlight, or switch to a Mac and forget about it.
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/development_tools/silverlight.html
So yes, it is multi-OS. Linux is such a niche desktop OS that it's not a priority for any commercial entity to support it, let alone MS.
Salesforce.com (crm), Taleo (hr), and various others like them are all successful. SAP is working on an online offering, I hear, and it may already be out there, I don't know. In short, lots and lots of companies offload various critical functions into the "cloud" (argh) if it makes sense to do so.
Also, if they're from the former Yugoslavia, it's best not to mention that you thought Clinton was a great president. They still hold a grudge about all the bombing of Belgrade and stuff.
That's only if she's a Serb. If she's Croatian, it could be a point in your favour.
The takeaway here is that paying attention to geopolitics can pay great dividends.
Bloggers need to say stupid shit like that in order to drive traffic via provocation. kdawson, you should be ashamed of yourself for posting this tripe.
Yes, I knew someone would correct me, thanks ;)
Anyway, my point was that any new language would have to have a similar relationship to the relational model that SQL and I assume Quel do.
It's mainly because SQL was the first (only? someone correct me) language to implement Codd's relational model, via the tuple calculus. The relational model is of course the basis for relational databases, so the idea was SQL would be provably correct in its representation of the relational model. There is a document called The Third Manifesto that details why this is not the case, and makes some suggestions for the way forward, but I don't remember much else about it.
What is the exact barrier to micropayments? Is it the credit card companies? The whole concept is so logical and would solve so many problems, so what is preventing it from being implemented?
We aren't talking about home users here. We're talking about businesses, some very large, that have custom apps that they have no reason to rewrite. There are many of them - I'd guess in the tens of thousands.
There's everything you can imagine available for linux. And as for quality... you're being a troll.
Tax software ...and hundreds more.
Video editing software (nice and simple, like iMovie)
Enterprise CRM of any sort (SAP, Siebel, PeopleSoft, etc.)
Small business financial like Quicken
Ability to watch Blu-Ray
CAD software
Music production/mixing (like GarageBand)
iPhone compatibility
No full MSN compatibility (voice and video)
If none of these matter to you, and they don't for a lot of people, then great. Home users who need a web browsing and email computer will be well-served running desktop Linux.
But don't say there's "everything imaginable", because exactly the opposite is true: chances are, if you do name a piece of software, there will be no Linux analogue.
Yes, which is why I said "clamouring" or "clamoring". However, his comment uses "clambering", which is ridiculous.
His initial comment, the first post in the story, has this line:
"Where are all the people clambering for censorship when the internet is used for something good?"
So I sort of did a two-in-one response there, kind of bad form. Sorry.
Not really, as incorrect usage is not the same as punning. Is English your first language?
No, you're an elected official who is abusing your position.
Also, it's "clamouring" or "clamoring".
I hope you're joking, as that is the correct use of the verb "to pore":
pore
1. to read or study with steady attention or application: a scholar poring over a rare old manuscript.
2. to gaze earnestly or steadily: to pore over a painting.
3. to meditate or ponder intently (usually fol. by over, on, or upon): He pored over the strange events of the preceding evening.
How is it a lot more work? You scan massive blocks of ips and run your remote exploit (which the summary assures us is trivial) against them. As the botnet grows, it joins your scanning/exploiting effort. Even if you got only 1% of all Macs, that would still be completely enormous. You'd think SOMEONE would have tried it by now. But no. So maybe remote exploits aren't so trivial after all.
So maybe we have to resort to other malware. One of the main vectors into Windows is the classic malware-infested web page, which exploits ActiveX. If one in ten desktop are Macs, then those are still pretty good odds for malware writers - your classic porn drive-by would work fine. But strangely, that hasn't happened either.
The old "it's not popular so it's not worth it" argument holds no water, or else less popular but extremely insecure software like IIS would never have been exploited. Instead, it would be Apache that's causing problems. But exactly the opposite is true.
But then you'll get all the All Government Is Evil people saying they don't want state control over their textbooks, etc. etc. ;)
I am being facetious, obviously. I guess the only question is how to foster competition between authors - perhaps they submit samples and contracts are awarded, kind of like how it works with engineering contracts?
The number of Macs out there is orders of magnitude larger than the largest botnet. Yet no Mac botnets exist. Why is that?
Feel free to offer alternatives, as that's what this entire story is all about. He is soliciting your suggestions on how he can earn a living by writing textbooks.
The GPL is enforced via copyright law.
"Developers that use the GNU GPL protect your rights with two steps: (1) assert copyright on the software, and (2) offer you this License giving you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify it."
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.html
Violating the GPL is exactly the same as violating copyright, since the methods of enforcement are the same in each case: copyright law. It doesn't matter what the award is (money, source code, spaghetti, or whatever).
I'm not American either, but since we are talking about the American publishing industry here, I thought it was understood that referencing the US Constitution would be appropriate. We are not talking about the entire world here, obviously.
Anyway, you agree that authorial control for some period is a right - a legal right. It doesn't matter if it MAY no longer make sense (to you), the fact is, the law of the land currently says otherwise. So telling people it's a privilege is in fact not correct.