How many american resturants serve native American food? Hmmm? Thought so.
You likely thought wrong. There are many cooking styles developed in America (often derived from or blends of imported cuisines) and large numbers of chefs and restaurants who specialize in those styles. You obviously don't get the Food Network where you live.
Re:If everyone has to re-write the fix ...
on
Sun Eyes PostgreSQL
·
· Score: 1
Besides, it's not like fragmentation isn't a hugely rampant problem in the GPL-based world. Unusually, there's much more of it than in the BSD world.
Not to be overly critical, but maybe you should provide some real proof before making such claims.
I think what you mean is that Linus fork()ed and got 3 new processes going...
... and will soon discover that they are closed source proprietary processes with broken signal handlers which close STDIN whenever you most need to communicate with them. This tends to happen after they have been running for about 13 years.
Your group should already have made contact with another church in the area and asked them for sponsorship and a project that your group could contribute toward. The sponsoring church and project will dictate what you need to bring. If you did not do that already and expect to just jump in a truck with a vague plan to offer your help, then you are fools who are not needed in the area. Stay home. In any case, this was a really, really dumb question to be asking slashdot.
But if you decide to go anyway, bring a pair of heavy duty work boots, gloves, and a hard hat. The area is a disaster site that will soon be on its way to being one BFC (Big F'ing Construction) site. It won't be a playground.
I've played wiht Linux on 500MHZ cpus, Linux crawls on this.
I first ran Linux (0.99) + X on a 386SX25 w/ 9MB RAM. Worked fine. Of course these days I'm running 2.6 on a 2xPIII@1Ghz w/ 1GB of RAM, so I'd say that "crawls" is a relative term.
Ummm, I don't believe I said anything excusing the Democrats in my posting. Criticizing Republican ineptness is not the same as believing the Dems would be any better. And the fact that local Democrats screwed up Katrina, too, is no reason for letting the President off the hook when he was part and parcel of the same mess. As for equating Iraq with post WWII Japan, I don't recall the US Army letting non-governmental Japanese religious and political factions keep armed private militias the way we have let the Shiites and Kurds keep theirs. An administration that decides to occupy another country with no coherent plan for pacifying the locals afterward doesn't come across as very competent.
*sigh* And in case you're not really paying attention to what this whole political-speech-blog issue is REALLY about, it's Republicans trying to exclude bloggers from regulation, not the other way around. RTFA, OK?
Scott Thomas, the Republican Chairman of the FEC is calling for more regulation:
But Scott E. Thomas, the FEC commissioner, said his agency's original exemption for the Internet was a mistake and the FEC should come up with rules for Internet campaign ads in light of the $14 million spent on Internet ads in the 2004 campaign.
Now you're getting it. A less effective government will be less intrusive, and that's Good.
President Bush has probably run the least effective government in years (Katrina response, Iraq) and yet he has also run one of the most instrusive (Patriot Act).
Because the Unix businesses couldn't settle on software development standards, ISVs (independent software vendors) had to write not a single application to get the whole Unix market, they had to write up to a half-dozen different versions. Which would you rather do? Write a single application that would run on all Windows systems, or six different ones, each with its own unique quality assurance and support problems?
I've written several reasonably big Unix server programs over the years (mostly workflow engines and document management systems written in C and C++ with CORBA, multiple DB backends, etc.) and I think the posters statement is nonsense. Typically, one has to write an app for one version and make only minor tweaks to make it run on other versions. Often, those tweaks will point out mistakes made in the original and so are quite helpful in QA.
The headache is the patch management systems for all of the different vendor's OS versions. When the customer of your product says "We have problem X" and the solution is to tell them to install Unix vendor Y's OS patch 123456, that becomes a support headache. But it really is not very different from telling the customer they need to install a Windows service pack when a product that runs on an MS OS has problems.
Complaining that Unix OSs aren't perfectly standardized clones is like complaining that RDBMSs don't all implement the SQL standards perfectly. But most server application architects/programmers don't have too many problems converting their apps to use DB2 instead of Oracle. These kinds of minor differences haven't led to a monopolist RDBMS supplier.
"I would like you to provide proof that there is a trademark on the name Mozilla in Korea."
Not required to be enforceable. But you didn't know that did you, because the sum total of your argument is nonsense.
Do some research before you throw around epithets, especially when you're so obviously ignorant of the facts.
I suppose that you are an expert in Korean trademark law? Not saying you're wrong, but maybe you could provide some research to show that you're not just as obviously ignorant as the parent.
How is recommending that people drop Java and go back to C++ or use Mono with Gtk+ "astroturfing"?
Because essentially the only thing you have said is "I think Java sucks" without really backing up any of your claims. To those of us who write large scale Java apps for large customers, it is pretty clear that you either don't know what you are talking about or have some hidden agenda.
But the submitter is right. Though code security is important, the number of users is also a huge factor.
The coding standards and testing proceedures of the project/programmers matters also. I just switched from Netscape 7 to Moz 1.7.11 and found an annoying (non-security related) bug in Moz. Looked it up in Moz's bugzilla and found it had been a problem in 1.4, patches submitted, and it was marked "fixed." And yet, 3 versions later I've found exactly the same bug. Whatever testing proceedures Mozilla & Firefox are using look pretty weak and if they don't take regression testing more seriously, I predict that they will be hit again and again by the same bugs, some of which will be security issues.
The big advantage of Firefox is that it is not integrated with the OS in the same way that IE is. That alone is a big factor in reducing the number and severity of security bugs.
I once called IBM to let them know about a bug in OS/2. The bug was from a third party app that used the serial drivers and caused an OS/2 equivalent of a BSOD. I'd figured out why this happened, found a work around, and thought I'd let IBM know about both the bug and the solution. The report was an altruistic attempt to help IBM make their software better for everyone. My mistake. The first words out of the IBM rep were "Your 90 days of free support start now."
As for the "instance"... First, the app should not be able to query the environment to see what you've got running (security).
More often, the prog is trying to open a ~/.lock file and discovers the file is already there. This can be caused by a previous instance that crashed before it could remove the file as it would during a normal exit. So the new instance doesn't really try and determine if another instance is really running or not. As to security, a program can always run the equivalent of system("ps -eaf") and discover exactly what is running on the machine. And if a program can't do that, you as a user probably couldn't either. That would be damned inconvenient.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
coupled with IV,
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
V,
No person shall... be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...
and XIV,
... No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...
add up to a Right To Privacy. Between them, what the Framers were saying was that if the state wants to invade your personal space, they had better be able to show a pretty compelling reason.
Oh, and when the Feds institute that system of internal passports that some folks are worried about in connection with the new driver's license law, remember that the Constitution guarantees no explicit Right To Travel either.
When I click on the link to view the images, my browser tells me:
No appropriate application found!
If Mozilla can already determine that a patent isn't very useful, it should be a piece of cake for Mozilla to determine that an invention is obvious and thus should not be patentable in the first place. Why isn't the USPTO using this technology?
On one hand, some would choose to ignore the clear ethical implications of destroying what is strictly and technically speaking "human life", no matter how undeveloped, yet find troubling ethical implications with genetic testing.
No, it is not at all clear that a small collection of cells leftover from someone's attempt to become pregnant and now sitting in a vat of liquid nitrogen is, in fact, a human life. Those cells are just cells with a potential to create a new human life. If it isn't ethical to destroy those, then it probably isn't ethical for my wife and I to use condoms either since we, too, are destroying cells with the potential to create new human life.
In the US at least, most of the stuff like right to due process only applies to citizens
No. In the US, due process applies to anyone who is in the US. The Vth Amendment applies to all persons, not just citizens:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Same for the XIVth Amendment which was added in the aftermath of the Civil War:
... nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Health care, like all other goods in an economy, is rationed. The US rations health care by allowing the free market to set a price which is too high for 10-15% of the population to afford. Those that can't afford it, die. The Canadians ration health care by setting a Gov't limit on the care any individual can receive, but guaranteeing that all persons will receive at least some care. Those that can't afford to wait, die. Is one system ethically better than the other? I'm not qualified to answer that. But no economy can afford to provide an unlimited amount of health care to all of its citizens.
Bottom line: life sucks and then you die.
As to the charges of inefficiency in the Canadian system, anyone who has ever worked in an MDs office or a hospital in the US will have few positive things to say about the efficiencies of the private insurance system. In fact, in many respects, Gov't systems like VA hospitals are light years ahead of the private sector in using IT to cut the costs of providing health care.
Slashdot Mirror
How many american resturants serve native American food? Hmmm? Thought so.
You likely thought wrong. There are many cooking styles developed in America (often derived from or blends of imported cuisines) and large numbers of chefs and restaurants who specialize in those styles. You obviously don't get the Food Network where you live.
Besides, it's not like fragmentation isn't a hugely rampant problem in the GPL-based world. Unusually, there's much more of it than in the BSD world.
Not to be overly critical, but maybe you should provide some real proof before making such claims.
As for the food 'quip', how about four out of the top ten restaurants in the world being in Britain.
How many of 'em actually serve native British food?
I think what you mean is that Linus fork()ed and got 3 new processes going...
... and will soon discover that they are closed source proprietary processes with broken signal handlers which close STDIN whenever you most need to communicate with them. This tends to happen after they have been running for about 13 years.
Your group should already have made contact with another church in the area and asked them for sponsorship and a project that your group could contribute toward. The sponsoring church and project will dictate what you need to bring. If you did not do that already and expect to just jump in a truck with a vague plan to offer your help, then you are fools who are not needed in the area. Stay home. In any case, this was a really, really dumb question to be asking slashdot.
But if you decide to go anyway, bring a pair of heavy duty work boots, gloves, and a hard hat. The area is a disaster site that will soon be on its way to being one BFC (Big F'ing Construction) site. It won't be a playground.
I've played wiht Linux on 500MHZ cpus, Linux crawls on this.
I first ran Linux (0.99) + X on a 386SX25 w/ 9MB RAM. Worked fine. Of course these days I'm running 2.6 on a 2xPIII@1Ghz w/ 1GB of RAM, so I'd say that "crawls" is a relative term.
Dude, you forgot the URL:
Duct tape!
5. Fund more important research.
Ummm, I don't believe I said anything excusing the Democrats in my posting. Criticizing Republican ineptness is not the same as believing the Dems would be any better. And the fact that local Democrats screwed up Katrina, too, is no reason for letting the President off the hook when he was part and parcel of the same mess. As for equating Iraq with post WWII Japan, I don't recall the US Army letting non-governmental Japanese religious and political factions keep armed private militias the way we have let the Shiites and Kurds keep theirs. An administration that decides to occupy another country with no coherent plan for pacifying the locals afterward doesn't come across as very competent.
*sigh* And in case you're not really paying attention to what this whole political-speech-blog issue is REALLY about, it's Republicans trying to exclude bloggers from regulation, not the other way around. RTFA, OK?
Scott Thomas, the Republican Chairman of the FEC is calling for more regulation:
But Scott E. Thomas, the FEC commissioner, said his agency's original exemption for the Internet was a mistake and the FEC should come up with rules for Internet campaign ads in light of the $14 million spent on Internet ads in the 2004 campaign.
Now you're getting it. A less effective government will be less intrusive, and that's Good.
President Bush has probably run the least effective government in years (Katrina response, Iraq) and yet he has also run one of the most instrusive (Patriot Act).
Because the Unix businesses couldn't settle on software development standards, ISVs (independent software vendors) had to write not a single application to get the whole Unix market, they had to write up to a half-dozen different versions. Which would you rather do? Write a single application that would run on all Windows systems, or six different ones, each with its own unique quality assurance and support problems?
I've written several reasonably big Unix server programs over the years (mostly workflow engines and document management systems written in C and C++ with CORBA, multiple DB backends, etc.) and I think the posters statement is nonsense. Typically, one has to write an app for one version and make only minor tweaks to make it run on other versions. Often, those tweaks will point out mistakes made in the original and so are quite helpful in QA.
The headache is the patch management systems for all of the different vendor's OS versions. When the customer of your product says "We have problem X" and the solution is to tell them to install Unix vendor Y's OS patch 123456, that becomes a support headache. But it really is not very different from telling the customer they need to install a Windows service pack when a product that runs on an MS OS has problems.
Complaining that Unix OSs aren't perfectly standardized clones is like complaining that RDBMSs don't all implement the SQL standards perfectly. But most server application architects/programmers don't have too many problems converting their apps to use DB2 instead of Oracle. These kinds of minor differences haven't led to a monopolist RDBMS supplier.
"I would like you to provide proof that there is a trademark on the name Mozilla in Korea."
Not required to be enforceable. But you didn't know that did you, because the sum total of your argument is nonsense.
Do some research before you throw around epithets, especially when you're so obviously ignorant of the facts.
I suppose that you are an expert in Korean trademark law? Not saying you're wrong, but maybe you could provide some research to show that you're not just as obviously ignorant as the parent.
How is recommending that people drop Java and go back to C++ or use Mono with Gtk+ "astroturfing"?
Because essentially the only thing you have said is "I think Java sucks" without really backing up any of your claims. To those of us who write large scale Java apps for large customers, it is pretty clear that you either don't know what you are talking about or have some hidden agenda.
But the submitter is right. Though code security is important, the number of users is also a huge factor.
The coding standards and testing proceedures of the project/programmers matters also. I just switched from Netscape 7 to Moz 1.7.11 and found an annoying (non-security related) bug in Moz. Looked it up in Moz's bugzilla and found it had been a problem in 1.4, patches submitted, and it was marked "fixed." And yet, 3 versions later I've found exactly the same bug. Whatever testing proceedures Mozilla & Firefox are using look pretty weak and if they don't take regression testing more seriously, I predict that they will be hit again and again by the same bugs, some of which will be security issues.
The big advantage of Firefox is that it is not integrated with the OS in the same way that IE is. That alone is a big factor in reducing the number and severity of security bugs.
I once called IBM to let them know about a bug in OS/2. The bug was from a third party app that used the serial drivers and caused an OS/2 equivalent of a BSOD. I'd figured out why this happened, found a work around, and thought I'd let IBM know about both the bug and the solution. The report was an altruistic attempt to help IBM make their software better for everyone. My mistake. The first words out of the IBM rep were "Your 90 days of free support start now."
Hi, I'm Clippy. I see that you are trying to write a column. Would you like to troll the Linux fans?
As for the "instance"... First, the app should not be able to query the environment to see what you've got running (security).
More often, the prog is trying to open a ~/.lock file and discovers the file is already there. This can be caused by a previous instance that crashed before it could remove the file as it would during a normal exit. So the new instance doesn't really try and determine if another instance is really running or not. As to security, a program can always run the equivalent of system("ps -eaf") and discover exactly what is running on the machine. And if a program can't do that, you as a user probably couldn't either. That would be damned inconvenient.
All European Languages Are Derived From Greek Theory
Why not? Most US public schools already teach that all European Languages Are Greek.
Amendment IX,
... be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ...
... No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ...
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
coupled with IV,
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
V,
No person shall
and XIV,
add up to a Right To Privacy. Between them, what the Framers were saying was that if the state wants to invade your personal space, they had better be able to show a pretty compelling reason.
Oh, and when the Feds institute that system of internal passports that some folks are worried about in connection with the new driver's license law, remember that the Constitution guarantees no explicit Right To Travel either.
When I click on the link to view the images, my browser tells me:
No appropriate application found!
If Mozilla can already determine that a patent isn't very useful, it should be a piece of cake for Mozilla to determine that an invention is obvious and thus should not be patentable in the first place. Why isn't the USPTO using this technology?
On one hand, some would choose to ignore the clear ethical implications of destroying what is strictly and technically speaking "human life", no matter how undeveloped, yet find troubling ethical implications with genetic testing.
No, it is not at all clear that a small collection of cells leftover from someone's attempt to become pregnant and now sitting in a vat of liquid nitrogen is, in fact, a human life. Those cells are just cells with a potential to create a new human life. If it isn't ethical to destroy those, then it probably isn't ethical for my wife and I to use condoms either since we, too, are destroying cells with the potential to create new human life.
In the US at least, most of the stuff like right to due process only applies to citizens
... nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
No. In the US, due process applies to anyone who is in the US. The Vth Amendment applies to all persons, not just citizens:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Same for the XIVth Amendment which was added in the aftermath of the Civil War:
Despite the current economic conditions, PhD's don't work cheap.
No. but their grad students do.
I have an 8-track deck in my Charger...
Will you please RTFA. It clearly says 7 and 9 track tapes.
But statistically speaking, it ought to work on average.
Health care, like all other goods in an economy, is rationed. The US rations health care by allowing the free market to set a price which is too high for 10-15% of the population to afford. Those that can't afford it, die. The Canadians ration health care by setting a Gov't limit on the care any individual can receive, but guaranteeing that all persons will receive at least some care. Those that can't afford to wait, die. Is one system ethically better than the other? I'm not qualified to answer that. But no economy can afford to provide an unlimited amount of health care to all of its citizens.
Bottom line: life sucks and then you die.
As to the charges of inefficiency in the Canadian system, anyone who has ever worked in an MDs office or a hospital in the US will have few positive things to say about the efficiencies of the private insurance system. In fact, in many respects, Gov't systems like VA hospitals are light years ahead of the private sector in using IT to cut the costs of providing health care.