Who are you refering to when you say "we"? The people of the world? The people in your town? The people in your nation? Law and the Internet don't get along well because there are so many jurisdictions involved. Making harsh penalties in the states does nothing if the attacker is sitting in Anguilla.
Better mail protocol? Although a lot of spam has faked headers, it certainly isn't a prerequisite. Where there's a will, there's a way. Consider a protocol that required all users to have PGP signatures. All that ensures is that you know who is spamming you, which is not all that hard to figure out now. There are potentially more complicated solutions, but you are definately raising the bar for the pleebs.
Doesn't it seeem like the more viruses this person/group releases, the easier it will be for them to get caught? Doesn't it seem like if companies use this network to spam, it will be easy to pin down the culprit? Although it sounds like a good story, I don't believe that anyone would be stupid enough to try.
I don't believe it. I simply don't believe that clicking unsubscribe links adds you to other "premium" lists. It implies that the spammers care which accounts are active.
Last month, a spam shop used my email address as the spoofed source for a whole crapload of spam. I got bounces and vacation messages like crazy! So a) their list had a whole bunch of inactive addresses, and b) all feedback about the activity status of an account went to me!
It's simply not worth their time to track what's active and what's not. Just send anyways, because a computer is doing all the work. What's the difference between 10,000 valid addresses, and 20,000 partially valid addresses? Not much.
Tracking the people who *want* to unsubscribe though, that might be worthwhile. The whackos who click unsubscribe might be pissed enough to actually use the local laws to prosecute, form a vigilante mob, etc.
Best case: you get removed. Worst case: nothing happens.
Most people miss that implication. Regulation is the means that most of this kind of stuff is handled through. Cars? Improper use of a car can kill people, so there are laws to dictate what you can and can't do, and a licensing system.
Not applying the latest patches doesn't do any physical harm, even though it may cause financial damage.
Until computer use is legislated, people will continue to leave their systems unpatched because they won't understand that it is important. People see computers as appliances.
That's not what this article says about dogs. Unfortunately, the complete text isn't available online.
The reason why humans were able to create the huge variety in dogs so quickly was because the process at work wasn't evolution, it was direct human intervention. Evolution is a slow long process caused by random changes in genetic code and subsequent breeding (I'm not a geneticist, so this description is weak at best). Dogs, however, were intentionally crossed to enhance certain attributes. People do this with plants all the time, and dogs were no different in this respect.
The study's results can be summarized like this: smoking equals a short life. Your degree doesn't matter so much as whether you smoke or not. No way you're going to live to 600 and be a smoker : )
Piss around with, fine, but to do work with? If someone is more productive with another operating system, what gives you the right to take that away? Sounds like you're hurting the company rather than helping...
You're talking about a shift from unskilled jobs to skilled ones. Fast food experience just does not transfer to tech. There are vast amounts of people with no skills and no more than a high school education (if that). What are these people going to do? Certainly not work in a robot factory!
A note for those wanting to take up running. Running can be pretty hard on the joints. You need to start slowly in order to not only build muscle strength, but to build the stregth of your connective tissues as well.
You might consider the American Running Association's12 week Walk/Run program. It's a great way to get started.
Plus, remember to stretch. You're setting yourself up for a world of pain if you don't.
The implication is that correct and proper is slow. This is certainly not true. Software that is planned out ahead of time and is built following decent practices completely avoids the late-in-project crawl that hurried projects suffer from. It avoids the integration nightmare, the endless debugging fiascos, and although it takes a bit more time up front, ends up in a product that is not only solid, but on-time.
Rapid Development, by Steve McConnell has a lot to say on this topic. One of his more striking anecdotes regards a programming competition where one team set out to follow a strong process approach. They were far ahead during the first checkpoint, but accidentally erased all their work because they hadn't used source control. They came back the next year (with source control), and won.
Organization will win out every time, regardless of deadline. Do it right the first time and you'll have your quick, with quality thrown in for free.
Everyone seems to be trashing the Mozilla mail client, but the bayesian spam filtering really clinches it for me. Once you teach the filter what you're looking for, it all just goes away. Ahhhhh.
Hahahahaha! My roomate used to eat that stuff mixed with yogurt. It was the only way his stomach could handle the insane quantities that he shoveled down during exam time!
I call bullshit. Yes, you're right that a large part of the difficulty comes from management. But the fact is, software development isn't that hard.
The problem is that nobody is willing to put the effort in to do things properly. It's like anything else in life. If you spend time to plan things out in advance, you will produce something of high quality. If your planning is weak, good luck.
I'm tired of people hiding behind this "software is hard" screen. It's not, it just takes careful attention to detail just like any other discipline.
Lisp is not the be all and end all. Even in the case of Orbitz, although the hard algorithms are all implemented in Lisp, they still had to resort to using C++ and Java for some parts. It's really just a question of what the project calls for. You may be a skilled Lisp hacker, but our views are skewed by what we are familiar with.
For the work that I do, low in algorithmic complexity but with real-time requirements, I have become quite efficient in C++. In my case, I see little advantage to moving to Lisp. If, however, my project were more algoritmically complex, I would definately reconsider. Sometimes all you need as a hammer.
Having worked with lisp a little bit, I agree with you. It is powerful. The point I was trying to make, however, was that many of the same ideas can be accomplished in other languages. That extra step that lisp takes is exactly why it is a mostly academic language. Sure you can can dynamically redefine functions without recompilation, but most people just don't need to.
If I was writing a web application, I would quite specifically not want to be able to do this, especially from a security standpoint.
If you want to talk about "pasteurized processed cheese product", talk about VB : )
I have seen this done before (kind of) in a school in Penticton (Canada). Underneath the school there is a huge tank of water. Anti-freeze would probably work better, but water is cheaper. The water helps cool the school in the summer, and heat it in the winter. Pretty neat...
Although I don't argue lambda functions are not useful, the same concept that you've expressed above can be easily and clearly implemented in C++ or any other object oriented language. It's just a matter of inheritance. Every listener has a rating function, but it is defined differently for different kinds of listeners.
I think the reason that you don't see lambda functions in many languages is that they have been replaced by other mechanisms that are easier to understand. That being said, if lambda functions are essential to the paradigm you think in, they can be added to many languages in the form of libraries. The boost libraries (www.boost.org), for example, provide this functionality (among many many others) for C++.
Slashdot Mirror
It means "Having to do with poo", or obscene language relating to poo.
i cal
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=scatolog
i.e. Eat [insert scatalogical expression here] you fool!
The article specifically says that they're NOT related.
Thanks for the link! Utterly fascinating!
Although the Civic hybrid is a ULEV vehicle, the Honda Insight is classified as SULEV. Just a thought...
Who are you refering to when you say "we"? The people of the world? The people in your town? The people in your nation? Law and the Internet don't get along well because there are so many jurisdictions involved. Making harsh penalties in the states does nothing if the attacker is sitting in Anguilla.
Better mail protocol? Although a lot of spam has faked headers, it certainly isn't a prerequisite. Where there's a will, there's a way. Consider a protocol that required all users to have PGP signatures. All that ensures is that you know who is spamming you, which is not all that hard to figure out now. There are potentially more complicated solutions, but you are definately raising the bar for the pleebs.
Doesn't it seeem like the more viruses this person/group releases, the easier it will be for them to get caught? Doesn't it seem like if companies use this network to spam, it will be easy to pin down the culprit? Although it sounds like a good story, I don't believe that anyone would be stupid enough to try.
I don't believe it. I simply don't believe that clicking unsubscribe links adds you to other "premium" lists. It implies that the spammers care which accounts are active.
Last month, a spam shop used my email address as the spoofed source for a whole crapload of spam. I got bounces and vacation messages like crazy! So a) their list had a whole bunch of inactive addresses, and b) all feedback about the activity status of an account went to me!
It's simply not worth their time to track what's active and what's not. Just send anyways, because a computer is doing all the work. What's the difference between 10,000 valid addresses, and 20,000 partially valid addresses? Not much.
Tracking the people who *want* to unsubscribe though, that might be worthwhile. The whackos who click unsubscribe might be pissed enough to actually use the local laws to prosecute, form a vigilante mob, etc.
Best case: you get removed. Worst case: nothing happens.
Unless there is a firewall between the laptop and the rest of the network.
Most people miss that implication. Regulation is the means that most of this kind of stuff is handled through. Cars? Improper use of a car can kill people, so there are laws to dictate what you can and can't do, and a licensing system.
Not applying the latest patches doesn't do any physical harm, even though it may cause financial damage.
Until computer use is legislated, people will continue to leave their systems unpatched because they won't understand that it is important. People see computers as appliances.
That's not what this article says about dogs. Unfortunately, the complete text isn't available online.
The reason why humans were able to create the huge variety in dogs so quickly was because the process at work wasn't evolution, it was direct human intervention. Evolution is a slow long process caused by random changes in genetic code and subsequent breeding (I'm not a geneticist, so this description is weak at best). Dogs, however, were intentionally crossed to enhance certain attributes. People do this with plants all the time, and dogs were no different in this respect.
The study's results can be summarized like this: smoking equals a short life. Your degree doesn't matter so much as whether you smoke or not. No way you're going to live to 600 and be a smoker : )
Piss around with, fine, but to do work with? If someone is more productive with another operating system, what gives you the right to take that away? Sounds like you're hurting the company rather than helping...
You're talking about a shift from unskilled jobs to skilled ones. Fast food experience just does not transfer to tech. There are vast amounts of people with no skills and no more than a high school education (if that). What are these people going to do? Certainly not work in a robot factory!
A note for those wanting to take up running. Running can be pretty hard on the joints. You need to start slowly in order to not only build muscle strength, but to build the stregth of your connective tissues as well.
You might consider the American Running Association's12 week Walk/Run program. It's a great way to get started.
Plus, remember to stretch. You're setting yourself up for a world of pain if you don't.
Yes it does. http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/
The implication is that correct and proper is slow. This is certainly not true. Software that is planned out ahead of time and is built following decent practices completely avoids the late-in-project crawl that hurried projects suffer from. It avoids the integration nightmare, the endless debugging fiascos, and although it takes a bit more time up front, ends up in a product that is not only solid, but on-time.
Rapid Development, by Steve McConnell has a lot to say on this topic. One of his more striking anecdotes regards a programming competition where one team set out to follow a strong process approach. They were far ahead during the first checkpoint, but accidentally erased all their work because they hadn't used source control. They came back the next year (with source control), and won.
Organization will win out every time, regardless of deadline. Do it right the first time and you'll have your quick, with quality thrown in for free.
Everyone seems to be trashing the Mozilla mail client, but the bayesian spam filtering really clinches it for me. Once you teach the filter what you're looking for, it all just goes away. Ahhhhh.
Idiots are people who don't read the article. They have backward facing radar for this.
Hahahahaha! My roomate used to eat that stuff mixed with yogurt. It was the only way his stomach could handle the insane quantities that he shoveled down during exam time!
I call bullshit. Yes, you're right that a large part of the difficulty comes from management. But the fact is, software development isn't that hard.
The problem is that nobody is willing to put the effort in to do things properly. It's like anything else in life. If you spend time to plan things out in advance, you will produce something of high quality. If your planning is weak, good luck.
I'm tired of people hiding behind this "software is hard" screen. It's not, it just takes careful attention to detail just like any other discipline.
Lisp is not the be all and end all. Even in the case of Orbitz, although the hard algorithms are all implemented in Lisp, they still had to resort to using C++ and Java for some parts. It's really just a question of what the project calls for. You may be a skilled Lisp hacker, but our views are skewed by what we are familiar with.
For the work that I do, low in algorithmic complexity but with real-time requirements, I have become quite efficient in C++. In my case, I see little advantage to moving to Lisp. If, however, my project were more algoritmically complex, I would definately reconsider. Sometimes all you need as a hammer.
Having worked with lisp a little bit, I agree with you. It is powerful. The point I was trying to make, however, was that many of the same ideas can be accomplished in other languages. That extra step that lisp takes is exactly why it is a mostly academic language. Sure you can can dynamically redefine functions without recompilation, but most people just don't need to.
If I was writing a web application, I would quite specifically not want to be able to do this, especially from a security standpoint.
If you want to talk about "pasteurized processed cheese product", talk about VB : )
I have seen this done before (kind of) in a school in Penticton (Canada). Underneath the school there is a huge tank of water. Anti-freeze would probably work better, but water is cheaper. The water helps cool the school in the summer, and heat it in the winter. Pretty neat...
The FAQ mentioned that they do AC by using the exhaust...purified air at -30 to 0 celsius.
Although I don't argue lambda functions are not useful, the same concept that you've expressed above can be easily and clearly implemented in C++ or any other object oriented language. It's just a matter of inheritance. Every listener has a rating function, but it is defined differently for different kinds of listeners.
I think the reason that you don't see lambda functions in many languages is that they have been replaced by other mechanisms that are easier to understand. That being said, if lambda functions are essential to the paradigm you think in, they can be added to many languages in the form of libraries. The boost libraries (www.boost.org), for example, provide this functionality (among many many others) for C++.