It isn't that there's a "fear of...rollover". It's that open source types that aren't marketing their code have the luxury of making the version numbers actually mean something. Apps can change major version numbers when the file format changes. Libraries when compatibility-breaking ABI changes take place.
If you have a marketing department, *they* want to jack the major version numbers constantly so that it looks like one "must" upgrade, or because it makes the changes look better.
Frankly, I'd prefer 2.6 over 3.0. The kernel's performance has been improved, but there's been no rearchitecting. I consider it a bit of a mark of pride.
Also, people complaining in many of these posts about the number of devel releases before a stable -- be sure that you aren't the *same* people complaining about lack of QA on the stable branch, as this is what it's intended to fix.
The value of reviews would increase, and publications would come out giving customers said information. Since consumers now have choice, and control over what they're reading, the information is of value.
Yes, a few business models would break. That's always going to happen when you start mucking around with economic rules. New ones will also come up.
It pretty much comes down to "If you don't let us force Foo (useful product news/advertising) on you, you won't get Foo and you wouldn't want that". This ignores the fact that if customers wanted Foo, they'd willingly sign up for free Foo. Yes, current advertising generally sucks from an informational standpoint, and isn't that entertaining. There would have to be changes in the product information distribution system.
Exactly. They're giving up the point that has the least value to them -- forged headers -- to become more palatable and try to codify in law the legality of opt-out and spam in general. I had the same eye opening "whoah" when I saw the first news stories, but then I read their bodies. Nothing more to see here...
Then they get the media to report that they've gone good and wonderful...
You see, a few people protesting sweatshops *do* have a valid point -- if what they're doing is specifically trying to get existing sweatshops to pay out more money.
The thing is that the entire movement was started by and is a tool for the US labor protectionists.
What you're doing right there neatly falls into the propoganda being put out. You're trying to avoid countries with "unfair labor laws" *entirely*, not trying to figure out what companies there pay their workers more. You're simply avoiding non-US products.
And in doing so, you cause far more damage to the "poor, exploited" foreign workers than the Nike-buyers. You see, the reason those workers are working under such extreme conditions is because they *have* to to avoid starving. Companies can get away with said wages because people there are *starving*.
So, you've been swayed by AFL/CIO images of "giving a poor, exploited foreign worker better wages", and are ending up depriving them of jobs and starving them. Wonderful.
Until there's a labor *shortage* instead of surplus in said countries, there will never be wage increases. Not going to happen.
Ironically enough, buying products from companies with production facilities in said countries is likely to help the workers, since it increases demand for local labor. If the levels of demand can produce a labor shortage...then sure enough, wages will rise.
Any other solution, like government-mandated minimum wages, just produces inflation, as the enconomy corrects itself to keep the buying power of those on the bottom the same.
Scientology is, frankly, a company/cult. It is not even remotely close to being a religion. It was founded by a science fiction author who had been quoted earlier as saying "If a man truly wished to become wealthy, the best thing he could do would be to start a religion."
Techies have a legitimate beef with the Church of Scientology -- the CoS went on a series of attacks on USENET against people that had escaped Scientology. These people had been posting information about Scientology (the stuff that you aren't *supposed* to find out about until you're deep in debt and will believe anything that makes it look like you haven't been suckered.)
Being a real, tech loving geek and being a Scientologist may not be completely incompatible, but it's damn near.
Actually, I disagree. My bank account is presumably stored on a server somewhere, and its just a collection of 0's and 1's. But I would be rather unimpressed if all those 0's and 1's disappeared one day.
I suppose you'd also consider game theory, at first developed around simple "I help/hurt you, you help/hurt me" to be done by people with "too much time on their hands?"
Since e-cash is, at some point, going to become a reality, and MMORPGs are small scale models representing this, this is an important area.
Besides, where else can an economist find as interesting a research area?
Yes, I will probably log in to my root account over this connection, to maximize the possible damage. I think it would be funny for my machine to be part of any number of DDoS attacks, and obscene emails sent to all of my closest relatives.
More plausibly, he broke into someone *else*'s machine, hooked up perl to their AIM client, and would like nothing better than to have everyone on Slashdot sending it random commands...
Are you all nuts? An AC makes an obviously bogus post and it gets +5?
I should post AC that, oh, I don't know. That Stephen King is dead. People would probably buy into that as well.
You really think a legitimate employee would be handing out information on which systems are honeypots? And then bogus pseudo-hacker crap like "the attack calls himself 'Fadaboi'"? Where did that come from?
The caching nameserver pdnsd does something like this -- if it can't manage to get a new record, it uses the old (stale) copy. So you have a cached copy of Slashdot's NS for a long, long time.
If root DNS went down, you'd have to have Slashdot's DNS move as well.
You are correct, but you made one bad assumption -- that people designing web pages are interested in responsible use of the network.
You've got a web designer who can "improve his user experience" by marking everything as prefetchable -- what do you think is going to happen?
And the overwhelming majority of web designers these days use GUI tools. After word gets out that websites designed with tool "foo" are snappier (because it uses prefetch by default), and it becomes a selling point...
After all, what web designer wants to believe that people won't delve deeper into his site, and hit those pages *anyway*?
They appear completely ignorant of Boards of Directors.
Which a CEO has far more influence over than an engineer does over his CEO.
Oh, and by the way, engineers DO recieve millions of dollars in stock options when the company does well.
Bull. You might be able to find a few isolated cases where this happens, like early developers at Microsoft. This is not even close to the norm, and certainly not the norm at the companies mentioned where the CEOs *are* making tens of millions of dollars.
My little iMac can encode MPEG4 video in realtime. Show me an x86 that can do that. Or, shut up about x86 performance.
Slashdot Mirror
After all, their support is probably going to come from the distribution manu, not IRC or a mailing list.
One would like to think. I can already see help support requests going to lkml...
It isn't that there's a "fear of ...rollover". It's that open source types that aren't marketing their code have the luxury of making the version numbers actually mean something. Apps can change major version numbers when the file format changes. Libraries when compatibility-breaking ABI changes take place.
If you have a marketing department, *they* want to jack the major version numbers constantly so that it looks like one "must" upgrade, or because it makes the changes look better.
Frankly, I'd prefer 2.6 over 3.0. The kernel's performance has been improved, but there's been no rearchitecting. I consider it a bit of a mark of pride.
Also, people complaining in many of these posts about the number of devel releases before a stable -- be sure that you aren't the *same* people complaining about lack of QA on the stable branch, as this is what it's intended to fix.
That says that the fines aren't in line.
What they need to do is add a penalty for vandalism done in the name of a profit, and fine them the amount of money estimated made.
It's obviously getting more widespread, as advertising agencies realize that the damages are "worth the action".
The value of reviews would increase, and publications would come out giving customers said information. Since consumers now have choice, and control over what they're reading, the information is of value.
Yes, a few business models would break. That's always going to happen when you start mucking around with economic rules. New ones will also come up.
It pretty much comes down to "If you don't let us force Foo (useful product news/advertising) on you, you won't get Foo and you wouldn't want that". This ignores the fact that if customers wanted Foo, they'd willingly sign up for free Foo. Yes, current advertising generally sucks from an informational standpoint, and isn't that entertaining. There would have to be changes in the product information distribution system.
Exactly. They're giving up the point that has the least value to them -- forged headers -- to become more palatable and try to codify in law the legality of opt-out and spam in general. I had the same eye opening "whoah" when I saw the first news stories, but then I read their bodies. Nothing more to see here...
Then they get the media to report that they've gone good and wonderful...
they are exceptional situations
Just decent-sized companies, the same ones that have armies of engineers. What, only 20 person companies count?
not a 720x480 signal.
Which you did not stipulate in your signature.
Ah, yes.
You see, a few people protesting sweatshops *do* have a valid point -- if what they're doing is specifically trying to get existing sweatshops to pay out more money.
The thing is that the entire movement was started by and is a tool for the US labor protectionists.
What you're doing right there neatly falls into the propoganda being put out. You're trying to avoid countries with "unfair labor laws" *entirely*, not trying to figure out what companies there pay their workers more. You're simply avoiding non-US products.
And in doing so, you cause far more damage to the "poor, exploited" foreign workers than the Nike-buyers. You see, the reason those workers are working under such extreme conditions is because they *have* to to avoid starving. Companies can get away with said wages because people there are *starving*.
So, you've been swayed by AFL/CIO images of "giving a poor, exploited foreign worker better wages", and are ending up depriving them of jobs and starving them. Wonderful.
Until there's a labor *shortage* instead of surplus in said countries, there will never be wage increases. Not going to happen.
Ironically enough, buying products from companies with production facilities in said countries is likely to help the workers, since it increases demand for local labor. If the levels of demand can produce a labor shortage...then sure enough, wages will rise.
Any other solution, like government-mandated minimum wages, just produces inflation, as the enconomy corrects itself to keep the buying power of those on the bottom the same.
Can't you realize sarcasm when you hear it?
Let's hear it for sweatshops!
Not really.
Ogg Vorbis has better audio quality than MP3. Someone who just wants better quality would say the same thing.
Furthermore, supporting *wma* (also rarely used and lower quality than vorbis) costs money and doesn't have a lot of point.
Have you ever read, actually read Operation Clambake?
Scientology is, frankly, a company/cult. It is not even remotely close to being a religion. It was founded by a science fiction author who had been quoted earlier as saying "If a man truly wished to become wealthy, the best thing he could do would be to start a religion."
Techies have a legitimate beef with the Church of Scientology -- the CoS went on a series of attacks on USENET against people that had escaped Scientology. These people had been posting information about Scientology (the stuff that you aren't *supposed* to find out about until you're deep in debt and will believe anything that makes it look like you haven't been suckered.)
Being a real, tech loving geek and being a Scientologist may not be completely incompatible, but it's damn near.
Actually, I disagree. My bank account is presumably stored on a server somewhere, and its just a collection of 0's and 1's. But I would be rather unimpressed if all those 0's and 1's disappeared one day.
*I'd* be impressed.
As long as it is sufficiently rare and useful, people will attach some sort monetary value to it.
This is two lines after you were talking about stamps and baseball cards? How about:
"As long as it is sufficiently rare, people will attach some sort of monetary value to it."
I suppose you'd also consider game theory, at first developed around simple "I help/hurt you, you help/hurt me" to be done by people with "too much time on their hands?"
Since e-cash is, at some point, going to become a reality, and MMORPGs are small scale models representing this, this is an important area.
Besides, where else can an economist find as interesting a research area?
Yes, I will probably log in to my root account over this connection, to maximize the possible damage. I think it would be funny for my machine to be part of any number of DDoS attacks, and obscene emails sent to all of my closest relatives.
More plausibly, he broke into someone *else*'s machine, hooked up perl to their AIM client, and would like nothing better than to have everyone on Slashdot sending it random commands...
You're worried about a lack of formality...so you're wearing ThinkGeek clothing?
Did I miss something?
Notice that everything he's directly quoted on in the article is straightforward...and then a completely bizarre indirect quote.
Most likely he gave a bunch of examples of macro viruses or undocumented APIs and the reporter decided to "condense" things a bit.
One of the first sentences in my high school French textbook...
The reason why is that true geeks know that voice communication has no proper place in the world.
...
"It isn't working!"
"Still not working"
"Damn, it blue-screened!"
"Hey!"
Are you all nuts? An AC makes an obviously bogus post and it gets +5?
I should post AC that, oh, I don't know. That Stephen King is dead. People would probably buy into that as well.
You really think a legitimate employee would be handing out information on which systems are honeypots? And then bogus pseudo-hacker crap like "the attack calls himself 'Fadaboi'"? Where did that come from?
Christ.
Any very large company follows the "IBM model", where some branches/employees absolutely suck. There are others that rock.
So the ones doing marketing for the consumer registry suck. The netadmins handling the root servers have next to nothing to do with them.
The caching nameserver pdnsd does something like this -- if it can't manage to get a new record, it uses the old (stale) copy. So you have a cached copy of Slashdot's NS for a long, long time.
If root DNS went down, you'd have to have Slashdot's DNS move as well.
You are correct, but you made one bad assumption -- that people designing web pages are interested in responsible use of the network.
You've got a web designer who can "improve his user experience" by marking everything as prefetchable -- what do you think is going to happen?
And the overwhelming majority of web designers these days use GUI tools. After word gets out that websites designed with tool "foo" are snappier (because it uses prefetch by default), and it becomes a selling point...
After all, what web designer wants to believe that people won't delve deeper into his site, and hit those pages *anyway*?
They appear completely ignorant of Boards of Directors.
Which a CEO has far more influence over than an engineer does over his CEO.
Oh, and by the way, engineers DO recieve millions of dollars in stock options when the company does well.
Bull. You might be able to find a few isolated cases where this happens, like early developers at Microsoft. This is not even close to the norm, and certainly not the norm at the companies mentioned where the CEOs *are* making tens of millions of dollars.
My little iMac can encode MPEG4 video in realtime. Show me an x86 that can do that. Or, shut up about x86 performance.
Okay.