I'm sorry, I missed the first one. But let's take your lead and try to look at things at face value. Starting with the GTSLBES. Your expanded (selected?) quote seems to suggest that the GTSLBES is the operating system. I, of course, must be misreading you, because the article clearly describes the GTSLBES as a facility, not a system, and even has a picture of it. Unless, of course, some mad modder out there has case modded a large land-based gas turbine.
Even if I didn't misread you, one might notice, based on information in your quote, that the smart ship system now consists of both contractor and government supplied equipment. While open to interpretation, it seems unlikely that the Integrated Condition Assessment System (government-furnished) is a subset of the Machinery Control System (contractor furnished). It appears that the Navy developed the core of the smart ship system in house, which leads us to the most accurate point you've made so far about the current state of the smart ship system.
Has absolutely nothing to do with Windows NT, as far as I can tell.
The source of the problem on the Yorktown was that bad data was fed into an application running on one of the 16 computers on the LAN. The data contained a zero where it shouldn't have, and when the software attempted to divide by zero, a
buffer overrun occurred -- crashing the entire network and causing the ship to lose control of its propulsion system.
You'll notice I included the link referenced in the article. Follow it. It references an IE 4 flaw. Do you know who writes IE?
But while we're following links, let's check out some of yours...
"Over the past 18 months, approximately 20 versions of software have been tested at the GTSLBES."
Looks like one of the "lessons learned" was to evaluate other software for the Smart Ship platform. I seriously doubt NT has very much to do with it anymore.
I believe you've already illustrated why I've got you marked as a foe. Doesn't mean I can't argue with you.
Perhaps, but it sure makes you look stupid when you lose.
Basically, a buffer overrun in a non-MS program took down the beta system. It's hardly unusual for a beta test to have a couple issues, and it's apparently not even Microsoft's fault in this case.
And then in your "evidence" link:
A badly written (apparently non-Microsoft) application caused a buffer overrun.
What exactly makes that apparent, other than the propaganda that passes for Microsoft training materials these days? Furthermore, are you telling me that it is not a major problem for the United States Navy, a force famous for its history of damage control and system redundancy on its ships to run management software whose kernel can be brought crashing down by one unhandled exception?
Speaking of evidence, it appears to me, if you can look through the propaganda, that the navy has frozen the program. What other ships are currently deployed which use the "smart ship" management system? Try to come up with real evidence this time, and don't cite yourself - the only thing more childish is arguing with someone you've marked as a foe.
That just says it all right there, doesn't it? Checking the patch levels on the most widely used operating system in the world is considered a flighty, fickle act one does in a moment of insanity.
It's almost enough to make me wish I didn't relate to the sentiment.
I've now lost one of my primary arguments for switching my colleagues to Mozilla!
Then switch them to kmail. Kmail has a pass-through script filter option that would allow you to use any console-mode spam filter for Linux, such as bogofilter.
I'm really impressed. Microsoft must really have it on the ball. An organization known to pay $800 for a hammer chose Microsoft as their software vendor.
You know, this story didn't really make sense to me until I read that. If your task is to kill people and break things, Windows is clearly the OS for you.
The heads of the MPAA executives exploded simultaneously today, for reasons unknown as of the time of this writing. Witnesses say they made a gurgling noise shortly before the intracranial blasts, just after being handed their daily printed media summary which included a digest of that day's Slashdot articles. Investigation continuing...
Open Source software solutions exist for virtually all types of business applications.
Don't get me wrong. I am a very big proponent of Open Source software. Not only do I think it is a good idea, I honestly think that it is very good for humanity as a whole. My only problem is that that statement is somewhat misleading.
While the basic office application suite is just reaching a maturity level where it can be plausibly considered a viable solution, business applications consist of a lot more than that, and often include very specialized industry-specific niche software. A PHB is going to read that statement, look at whoever handed them the article (it must be printed for the PHB to read it, so all this is happening in meatspace), and ask them if there is an open source version of the real estate accounting software they use. Those of us who have seen such software will immediately realize that we are not talking about a speadsheet, nor a Quicken clone, but a very complex and full featured accounting package some oddball company with no competition writes for that particular industry. It will be buggy, bloated, and incredibly expensive, but it is often the only tool to do certain things that particular business needs.
Furthermore, there are certian generalized types of business software, most notably document management, groupware, and workflow that don't (to my knowledge) have effective open source solutions. (Part of the reason I am risking a troll mod in writing this is to find out that I am wrong, so if you know something I don't, please reply!)
The way I see it, the Open Source approach to these sorts of problems is to put the problem solver closer to the problem. Rather than pay $80000 to some screwy outfit in Nevada who happens to write the world's only accounting and office managment package for veterinarians, you hook up with the local Linux guru who knows something about PHP, MySQL, etc. and have him develop a database solution. This leverages the flexibility and power of Open Source software and results in a fairer and more responsible arragement between the providers and consumers of technology services.
If that business model is what we are all about (as Open Source people), don't we need to sell that idea to PHBs?
Yeah, vote Libertarian as in end the drug war, legalize marijuana, and strike every law off the books that has anything to do with opening up a strip joint next to your neighborhood.
What were you saying about conservative Republican? If you find yourself at a loss for words, let me see if I can help you out. Freedom has a price. If you choose to live free and you are a liberal, you must come to terms with the idea that government can't solve social problems. If you choose to live free and you are a conservative, you must come to terms with the fact that the government can't legislate morality.
If you can't pay the cost for freedom, then I'll readily admit that you can't support it. Please understand, however, that I will hold you in the highest disdain.
Do our protests against the RIAA involve torches and pitchforks?
I suppose I should be somewhat pleased that they've given up all pretense of rational public discourse. No one would consider their points valid in the context of a dentist comparison.
The issue to focus on here is not any perceived double-standard.
Now this...
The case for hypocracy here is so weak that only somebody who already had an agenda to show Hatch as a hyporcrite (whether he is or not) could possibly be interested in making it.
Would you please make up your mind on the significance of the hypocrisy issue? If you are going to charge off into absurdity, at least move toward it in a straight line.
Okay, so you wish to retract your statement questioning whether hypocrisy is evident in this situation and instead simply point out that it is more productive to address the idea rather than the person. I can go with that. I presume you'll take the next step in elevating the discussion to a purely logical level and retract your attempt to support Sen. Hatch with your opponents' "desperation", and with my "clueless" and/or "willful" "attack"(s)?
So, if you aren't fortune 500, they don't even want to talk to you, huh? Looks to me like the law protects money, not people. Maybe we can see if Orrin Hatch wants to launch airstrikes against the offending systems.
Slashdot Mirror
That kind of implies that Microsoft made the virus
Do the terms "computer virus", "e-mail virus", or "human immunodeficiency virus" suggest that any of those entities created the virus in question?
This worm appears to primarily affect Microsoft systems
From TFA:
It doesn't just happen to seem to affect mostly MS systems. Call it what it is, a Microsoft virus.
Again, another example of selective quoting.
I'm sorry, I missed the first one. But let's take your lead and try to look at things at face value. Starting with the GTSLBES. Your expanded (selected?) quote seems to suggest that the GTSLBES is the operating system. I, of course, must be misreading you, because the article clearly describes the GTSLBES as a facility, not a system, and even has a picture of it. Unless, of course, some mad modder out there has case modded a large land-based gas turbine.
Even if I didn't misread you, one might notice, based on information in your quote, that the smart ship system now consists of both contractor and government supplied equipment. While open to interpretation, it seems unlikely that the Integrated Condition Assessment System (government-furnished) is a subset of the Machinery Control System (contractor furnished). It appears that the Navy developed the core of the smart ship system in house, which leads us to the most accurate point you've made so far about the current state of the smart ship system.
Has absolutely nothing to do with Windows NT, as far as I can tell.
Uh, the Wired article you yourself linked to?
You mean this? (from TFA):
You'll notice I included the link referenced in the article. Follow it. It references an IE 4 flaw. Do you know who writes IE?
But while we're following links, let's check out some of yours...
Looks like one of the "lessons learned" was to evaluate other software for the Smart Ship platform. I seriously doubt NT has very much to do with it anymore.
I believe you've already illustrated why I've got you marked as a foe. Doesn't mean I can't argue with you.
Perhaps, but it sure makes you look stupid when you lose.
Basically, a buffer overrun in a non-MS program took down the beta system. It's hardly unusual for a beta test to have a couple issues, and it's apparently not even Microsoft's fault in this case.
And then in your "evidence" link:
A badly written (apparently non-Microsoft) application caused a buffer overrun.
What exactly makes that apparent, other than the propaganda that passes for Microsoft training materials these days? Furthermore, are you telling me that it is not a major problem for the United States Navy, a force famous for its history of damage control and system redundancy on its ships to run management software whose kernel can be brought crashing down by one unhandled exception?
Speaking of evidence, it appears to me, if you can look through the propaganda, that the navy has frozen the program. What other ships are currently deployed which use the "smart ship" management system? Try to come up with real evidence this time, and don't cite yourself - the only thing more childish is arguing with someone you've marked as a foe.
I checked Windows Update today on a lark...
That just says it all right there, doesn't it? Checking the patch levels on the most widely used operating system in the world is considered a flighty, fickle act one does in a moment of insanity.
It's almost enough to make me wish I didn't relate to the sentiment.
I can't find anything on major problems due to Microsoft Windows malfunctioning - care to enlighten?
Other than a warship rendered completely inert by a buffer overflow?
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,1398 7,00.html
I've now lost one of my primary arguments for switching my colleagues to Mozilla!
Then switch them to kmail. Kmail has a pass-through script filter option that would allow you to use any console-mode spam filter for Linux, such as bogofilter.
I found one for $215. (check the part number against the pricing pdf at the end of the document)
That's $530 in graft and corruption, unless, of course, you visit the terrifying idea of special ordering hammers that have ribbed handles.
Does the BSOD count as friendly fire?
What are you, kidding? The contract strictly stipulates that all BSODs are to be characterized as training incidents.
I'm really impressed. Microsoft must really have it on the ball. An organization known to pay $800 for a hammer chose Microsoft as their software vendor.
The Navy already uses Windows almost exclusively for its day-to-day computing, and it seems to be working out alright.
Really?
You know, this story didn't really make sense to me until I read that. If your task is to kill people and break things, Windows is clearly the OS for you.
The heads of the MPAA executives exploded simultaneously today, for reasons unknown as of the time of this writing. Witnesses say they made a gurgling noise shortly before the intracranial blasts, just after being handed their daily printed media summary which included a digest of that day's Slashdot articles. Investigation continuing...
Dammit, it's not looters! Read the Fine Sig.
Looters act in a situation of chaos. That characterization is inaccurate in this case. The word "pirate" clearly fits.
That's one comment I've seen from you where your sig very effectively punctuates and completes the thought.
As many times as it takes for it to sink in.
So, if I can take a piece of computer code, and distribute a modified version of that code, why is it such a crime to do the same with an idea?
So I guess Outlook 2004 won't be supporting HTML formatted messages?!
From the article:
Open Source software solutions exist for virtually all types of business applications.
Don't get me wrong. I am a very big proponent of Open Source software. Not only do I think it is a good idea, I honestly think that it is very good for humanity as a whole. My only problem is that that statement is somewhat misleading.
While the basic office application suite is just reaching a maturity level where it can be plausibly considered a viable solution, business applications consist of a lot more than that, and often include very specialized industry-specific niche software. A PHB is going to read that statement, look at whoever handed them the article (it must be printed for the PHB to read it, so all this is happening in meatspace), and ask them if there is an open source version of the real estate accounting software they use. Those of us who have seen such software will immediately realize that we are not talking about a speadsheet, nor a Quicken clone, but a very complex and full featured accounting package some oddball company with no competition writes for that particular industry. It will be buggy, bloated, and incredibly expensive, but it is often the only tool to do certain things that particular business needs.
Furthermore, there are certian generalized types of business software, most notably document management, groupware, and workflow that don't (to my knowledge) have effective open source solutions. (Part of the reason I am risking a troll mod in writing this is to find out that I am wrong, so if you know something I don't, please reply!)
The way I see it, the Open Source approach to these sorts of problems is to put the problem solver closer to the problem. Rather than pay $80000 to some screwy outfit in Nevada who happens to write the world's only accounting and office managment package for veterinarians, you hook up with the local Linux guru who knows something about PHP, MySQL, etc. and have him develop a database solution. This leverages the flexibility and power of Open Source software and results in a fairer and more responsible arragement between the providers and consumers of technology services.
If that business model is what we are all about (as Open Source people), don't we need to sell that idea to PHBs?
Yeah, vote Libertarian as in end the drug war, legalize marijuana, and strike every law off the books that has anything to do with opening up a strip joint next to your neighborhood.
What were you saying about conservative Republican? If you find yourself at a loss for words, let me see if I can help you out. Freedom has a price. If you choose to live free and you are a liberal, you must come to terms with the idea that government can't solve social problems. If you choose to live free and you are a conservative, you must come to terms with the fact that the government can't legislate morality.
If you can't pay the cost for freedom, then I'll readily admit that you can't support it. Please understand, however, that I will hold you in the highest disdain.
Fucking mod parent up. If you buy into the two party system, you've already bought into the bullshit, no matter which one you choose.
Do our protests against the RIAA involve torches and pitchforks?
I suppose I should be somewhat pleased that they've given up all pretense of rational public discourse. No one would consider their points valid in the context of a dentist comparison.
First this...
The issue to focus on here is not any perceived double-standard.
Now this...
The case for hypocracy here is so weak that only somebody who already had an agenda to show Hatch as a hyporcrite (whether he is or not) could possibly be interested in making it.
Would you please make up your mind on the significance of the hypocrisy issue? If you are going to charge off into absurdity, at least move toward it in a straight line.
Okay, so you wish to retract your statement questioning whether hypocrisy is evident in this situation and instead simply point out that it is more productive to address the idea rather than the person. I can go with that. I presume you'll take the next step in elevating the discussion to a purely logical level and retract your attempt to support Sen. Hatch with your opponents' "desperation", and with my "clueless" and/or "willful" "attack"(s)?
So, if you aren't fortune 500, they don't even want to talk to you, huh? Looks to me like the law protects money, not people. Maybe we can see if Orrin Hatch wants to launch airstrikes against the offending systems.