One, there is still reason to be scared, they have Boies.
Boies isn't infallible. He was on the Microsoft antitrust case and the Napster case. . . and he lost them both. You still have to have a case--you can't win a suit on force of personality alone.
I think the general idea is that the 50-something programmer will most likely wish to retire soon.
I'm old enough to remember when companies kept their employees on long enough to offer them retirement plans. . . and I'm only 28. So if the 50-something wants to retire "soon"--which is probably on the order of 10-15 years--that still gives you several years where you'll have his expertise available not only to do the job but to train newer and younger programmers as well. There's really no good reason not to hire a 50-something, from a long-term economic standpoint; but then, no one's accused American companies of being able to see beyond the next fiscal quarter.
What's the problem, here? If the 50-year-old programmer is the only one who knows jack about mainframes, hire the 50-year-old programmer. Don't whine about not having enough qualified programmers, when what you really want is just-out-of-college programmers that you can bully into working for you at half the salary of someone with real experience.
It wasn't the violence that earned the "R" rating, I'm sure of that. I think it was the half-second of nipple they showed in the Zion Temple Dance Scene.
My OS X box, which I use for web browsing and word processing, crashes about once every three days.
If I had to guess, I'd say you either have faulty RAM in that Mac or else you have an extension conflict in there somewhere. Neither is Apple's fault, though.:)
I'm sure a company charged with coming up with a paranoid scheme of self-destructing media is smart enough to out-wit the average Slashdotter armed with a spray can.
Are you kidding? They're probably still trying to figure out how to defeat the Slashdotters armed with Sharpie pens.
This would be a good case for having an open-source anti-cheat, then, wouldn't it? That way, if you're paranoid enough to want to know what the program is doing (and there's no reason not to be that paranoid, it's your PC after all), you can look at the source.
The Jargon Dictionary makes mention of such predictions as far back as 1983 on Usenet. It doesn't provide any documentation on who might've been first to say it, but it does sound a lot like what Lessig is spouting now.
Actually, I did make the mistake of leaving my back door unlocked once. And yes, my house was robbed. It was a very expensive lesson, but one that I learned well.
Am I saying the people who actually commit the act are not responsible? No--I'm saying that gross negligence does make you partly responsible if something like that happens. This even has a legal precedent: look at the number of lawsuits that companies either settle or lose because they know they were grossly negligent.
And this makes it a wrong answer how, exactly? Just because they don't want to take responsibility for their own (in)action, they shouldn't have to? Nice try, but I don't buy it.
Isn't this just as illegal as releasing the worm itself? What if the fix has some adverse effects that we don't know about?
People who didn't allow their computers to become 0wnz0red in the first place won't have to worry about it; and frankly, people who did deserve any adverse effects that may occur.
You won't see Microsoft take a hint from Intuit or anyone else. They're far beyond the level of market share where they have to concern themselves with trivialities like consumer satisfaction.
So what? Smart people understand that progress of mankind is not and cannot be property of individuals or small groups; it belongs to mankind as a whole.
Y'know, I would want to see this code before I equated it to "progress of mankind.":)
If you think politics in the United States is dangerous, check out the political situations in places like Ivory Coast. At least American citizens survive the voting process.
As a programmer, I develop a test plan before I even start writing code. This is similar to someone giving me a requirement, and then changing the requirement after I've built a test plan and developed code toward that test. . . it's not really fair to the driver developers.
I'm going to side with nVidia, that this is a bug in the driver. Benchmarks make good testing software, but the best way to ensure good drivers is to make the benchmarks as comprehensive as possible. ExtremeTech is attributing to malice what is very likely an oversight on nVidia's part - seems a bit yellow on their part, IMO, especially since they choose to call nVidia's work on driver performance enhancement "corner-cutting."
This is a good lesson to nVidia, though, to give its developers better requirements and probably to test its drivers more comprehensively. If you tell me to maximize the frame-rate, you need to give guidance on how much of a hit you're willing to take on picture quality. And then have humans sit down and test the picture quality, rather than simply running it through a benchmark and analyzing the numbers.
You can't bid lower than zero! Even if Microsoft gives their software away for free, you still have to figure in the time and money you'll have to spend dealing with VBS bugs, SQL Server bugs, DRM bugs--oops, that's a feature--and so on.
I don't think this strategy is anticompetitive, since Linux is free (beer); but I also don't think it will be all that helpful for Microsoft, even in the short term.
Re:Not arrested for spamming
on
Spam, Milord
·
· Score: 1
Al Capone was arrested for tax fraud. **Shrugs** You gotta start somewhere. ..
Not a bad idea! But give us your credit card number and expiration date, because I'm not going to pay for another CD player when I already have a CD-Rom, a CD-RW, and a Playstation 2.
I sometimes wonder how this shit gets modded "informative" when the poster cuts and pastes without spending any time on formatting whatever it is they're trying to post. Did any of the people who modded this actually try to read it? I tried, until my eyes started watering from the run-on, single-paragraph format.
How do you figure? The purpose of CDRW is for me to transfer my own copyrighted material to CD, or to transfer backup copies of others' copyrighted material to CD per Fair Use, not to violate copyright.
There're plenty of ways to throw out this law, without being absurd about it.
Slashdot Mirror
As a famous cybersecurity researcher, you should believe what I tell you.
As a grammar nazi, I should point out that you totally dangled your participles. :) In public, no less!
One, there is still reason to be scared, they have Boies.
Boies isn't infallible. He was on the Microsoft antitrust case and the Napster case. . . and he lost them both. You still have to have a case--you can't win a suit on force of personality alone.
I think the general idea is that the 50-something programmer will most likely wish to retire soon.
I'm old enough to remember when companies kept their employees on long enough to offer them retirement plans. . . and I'm only 28. So if the 50-something wants to retire "soon"--which is probably on the order of 10-15 years--that still gives you several years where you'll have his expertise available not only to do the job but to train newer and younger programmers as well. There's really no good reason not to hire a 50-something, from a long-term economic standpoint; but then, no one's accused American companies of being able to see beyond the next fiscal quarter.
What's the problem, here? If the 50-year-old programmer is the only one who knows jack about mainframes, hire the 50-year-old programmer. Don't whine about not having enough qualified programmers, when what you really want is just-out-of-college programmers that you can bully into working for you at half the salary of someone with real experience.
It wasn't the violence that earned the "R" rating, I'm sure of that. I think it was the half-second of nipple they showed in the Zion Temple Dance Scene.
So what? Last I checked, Americans do still have the right to be communists.
My OS X box, which I use for web browsing and word processing, crashes about once every three days.
If I had to guess, I'd say you either have faulty RAM in that Mac or else you have an extension conflict in there somewhere. Neither is Apple's fault, though. :)
Refresh my memory - wasn't Albert Einstein an immigrant?
I'm sure a company charged with coming up with a paranoid scheme of self-destructing media is smart enough to out-wit the average Slashdotter armed with a spray can.
Are you kidding? They're probably still trying to figure out how to defeat the Slashdotters armed with Sharpie pens.
This would be a good case for having an open-source anti-cheat, then, wouldn't it? That way, if you're paranoid enough to want to know what the program is doing (and there's no reason not to be that paranoid, it's your PC after all), you can look at the source.
The Jargon Dictionary makes mention of such predictions as far back as 1983 on Usenet. It doesn't provide any documentation on who might've been first to say it, but it does sound a lot like what Lessig is spouting now.
Actually, I did make the mistake of leaving my back door unlocked once. And yes, my house was robbed. It was a very expensive lesson, but one that I learned well.
Am I saying the people who actually commit the act are not responsible? No--I'm saying that gross negligence does make you partly responsible if something like that happens. This even has a legal precedent: look at the number of lawsuits that companies either settle or lose because they know they were grossly negligent.
And this makes it a wrong answer how, exactly? Just because they don't want to take responsibility for their own (in)action, they shouldn't have to? Nice try, but I don't buy it.
Isn't this just as illegal as releasing the worm itself? What if the fix has some adverse effects that we don't know about?
People who didn't allow their computers to become 0wnz0red in the first place won't have to worry about it; and frankly, people who did deserve any adverse effects that may occur.
You won't see Microsoft take a hint from Intuit or anyone else. They're far beyond the level of market share where they have to concern themselves with trivialities like consumer satisfaction.
Which is why the warez folks probably go for the corporate edition of XP, which doesn't have serial numbers. D'oh!
So what? Smart people understand that progress of mankind is not and cannot be property of individuals or small groups; it belongs to mankind as a whole.
Y'know, I would want to see this code before I equated it to "progress of mankind." :)
If you think politics in the United States is dangerous, check out the political situations in places like Ivory Coast. At least American citizens survive the voting process.
Quack 3? Is that the one with Howard the Duck in it? :)
As a programmer, I develop a test plan before I even start writing code. This is similar to someone giving me a requirement, and then changing the requirement after I've built a test plan and developed code toward that test. . . it's not really fair to the driver developers.
I'm going to side with nVidia, that this is a bug in the driver. Benchmarks make good testing software, but the best way to ensure good drivers is to make the benchmarks as comprehensive as possible. ExtremeTech is attributing to malice what is very likely an oversight on nVidia's part - seems a bit yellow on their part, IMO, especially since they choose to call nVidia's work on driver performance enhancement "corner-cutting."
This is a good lesson to nVidia, though, to give its developers better requirements and probably to test its drivers more comprehensively. If you tell me to maximize the frame-rate, you need to give guidance on how much of a hit you're willing to take on picture quality. And then have humans sit down and test the picture quality, rather than simply running it through a benchmark and analyzing the numbers.
You can't bid lower than zero! Even if Microsoft gives their software away for free, you still have to figure in the time and money you'll have to spend dealing with VBS bugs, SQL Server bugs, DRM bugs--oops, that's a feature--and so on.
I don't think this strategy is anticompetitive, since Linux is free (beer); but I also don't think it will be all that helpful for Microsoft, even in the short term.
Al Capone was arrested for tax fraud. **Shrugs** You gotta start somewhere. . .
Not a bad idea! But give us your credit card number and expiration date, because I'm not going to pay for another CD player when I already have a CD-Rom, a CD-RW, and a Playstation 2.
I sometimes wonder how this shit gets modded "informative" when the poster cuts and pastes without spending any time on formatting whatever it is they're trying to post. Did any of the people who modded this actually try to read it? I tried, until my eyes started watering from the run-on, single-paragraph format.
How do you figure? The purpose of CDRW is for me to transfer my own copyrighted material to CD, or to transfer backup copies of others' copyrighted material to CD per Fair Use, not to violate copyright.
There're plenty of ways to throw out this law, without being absurd about it.