This is hands-down my favorite jazz album (he says as he trotts over to iTunes.) Remember: real Jazz is LIVE Jazz. Even a recording of a live performance loses something - most Jazz albums are over-engineered to my taste. "Diminuendo in Blue and Crescendo in Blue" has probably the best trumpet solo I've ever heard. This is also historically important - it represented an important comeback in Duke Ellington's career.
Things that make you go "Hmmm... BULLSHIT!"
on
Settling SCOres
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I find it interesting that this "independent" developer manages to talk at great length without actually describing the codee in sufficient detail that we could determine what it is. If someone competent had actually seen that code, and were discussing it without fear of NDA, would they not have described it in more detail? Just a function name is all that's really needed, neh?
Can somebody say "troll"? (Probably some teenage Windozer having a good laugh.)
If 10% leakage causes an 8% depletion, then if we just pumped the hydrogen straight into the air we could get rid of 80% of the ozone and save the hassle of having a middle-man! Woo-hoo! Way to go Cal-Tech!
Who's got the time?
on
Ageism in IT?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I think what may really be happening is that younger people can devote themselves to a subject with an intensity that older people simply don't have to spare. I know I have often wished, in my studies, that I could be eighteen again and essentially have two-thirds of my time to waste totally, instead of squeezing dribbles of time out here and there for my own projects. I certainly know I spent a lot more time studying new technology back then.
Sun reminds me of DEC. DEC had great hardware, impeccable service and Ultrix rocked. However, they couldn't market. Look where it got them.
WHAT?!?! ULTRIX rocked? As a former Ultrix admin, let me just say that that is the biggest load of nonsense I've ever heard. Yes, it was stable, but it was also slow, poorly supported by most applications, and full of silly nonsense that wasn't really needed. By 1990 or so, Ultrix was hopelessly outdated, yet DEC decided to put all their effort into OSF/1 (later Digital UNIX, Tru64, and probably something different under HP.) Ultrix bit the big one.
Comparatively, and from the same time period, SunOS 4 was much nicer to work with.
For those who haven't used it, the LVM support on AIX is probably the best in the industry. It allows you to do just about anything, in a very clean, structured (if somewhat hard to figure out at first) way. I personally have not used it on Linux, so can't comment on the poster's main question, but the kernel-raid stuff is not up to part with IBM's LBM.
It's pretty clear that SCO is trying to get IBM customers to pressure IBM to settle this. However, it frankly seems pretty absurd. The bottom line is that, as a customer, I am not responsible for IBM's alleged failure to maintain a proper license for UNIX. IBM's license is a license to *copy* UNIX software, and copying is the only activity that could possibly be prophibited. Given that IBM's customers already HAVE copies of AIX, unless IBM's license from SCO has some very odd language in it it seems extremely improbable that customers could lose the license they already have.
However, I think a good start would be a fairly simple Ruby script that scans your IP ranges for SNMP agents, looking for anything unrecognizable.
The right way, of course, is to keep a careful database of what's on your network, and report any unscheduled/unauthorized changes. You could either use rmon or something similar or a few strategically placed Linux boxes running tcpdump to find IP addresses broadcasting on the network and send a trap. Or, you could look for changes in the ARP tables on your routers (which you could retrieve using SNMP pretty easily.) This would still leave you vulnerable to various kinds of sniffing attacks, but might be a start.
These are just ideas, but any of them could be implemented in 100 lines of ruby (or perl if you must.)
Don't just look at the end binary. Look at the symbol tables. Even on different compilers, the symbol tables will tend to be very similar. Especially if optimizaiton is not set to absolute max.
Ignore all the jerks telling you they are not lawyers - you don't need one. You just need a license that will be a form that must be accompanied with a largish check. In exchange, they will give you a little sticker that goes on your window saying you are licensed. (We do this at my church, it's not hideously expensive for churches anyway.)
What's wrong with everything? They are making some fairly outrageous claims against the Linux kernel, and have provided nothing to substantiate them. They are sueing one company (IBM) to the tune of $1 Billion, and have threatened a thousand other companies with unspecified legal action without any substantiating evidence.
Like it or not, it's not enough to say "we think you might be infringing, please stop." If they want us to take them seriously, they have got to provide enough evidence to allow us to evaluate their claims. And that much evidence is, as you put it, "everything."
Further, this is not unreasonable. If SCO's account of events is correct, any trade-secret value of the code in question is irrevocably compromised already. Why should they not make the code available? Why should they not make it possible for us to cure the alleged infraction? Why should they be able to make broad accusations against us without providing us any evidence whatsoever?
(Hint: License fees in excess of $10 million from Microsoft.)
Ok "ClosedSource" (whaddaya work for MicroSoft?) I'm not even going to try to analyze the fallacies in this little troll, I'll just rebut them.
So first SCO is at fault for not showing any evidence. Now that they have, the claim is that they can't prove the code is theirs. If the Linux community wasn't going to accept code as evidence, why ask for it in the first place?
What code? All we've got at this point, from what I can tell, is one non-programmger "analyst" with no significant UNIX experience and a degree in communication/minor in French lit claiming that "comments are the DNA." I'll consider the code as having been given once I have:
The code, including line numbers, filenames, and the whole sourcefile from UNIXWARE it is based on.
The SCO changelog showing the code goes back a long time.
Linux's changelog showing the code doesn't go back a long time.
Until SCO provide specifics to the Linux development community, they've provided *nothing*.
n your post you are asking why this code, that you don't believe is valid evidence, be made public. Why should SCO bother? Besides, copied or not, you already have it. Just look in the Linux source.
Listen here, troll-boy... Do you have any IDEA how many lines of code there are in Linux? SCO hasn't said where this code is, hasn't given any description of the code, and hasn't given any evidence that they didn't copy it from Linux or introduce it into Linux themselves. They've provided no evidence, just FUD.
I've never said that it was enough for SCO to reveal some code to somebody. I'm saying that SCO needs to reveal enough code to figure out what actually happened to the general public. So far, they've made *nothing* public.
I have to disagree. Not too long ago, I was diagnosed ADHD (at the age of 29) after twenty years of life being pretty shitty. Prior to that time, I dropped out of high school, dropped out of college, my marriage was falling apart because of outbursts of "screaming fits" that I couldn't seem to get a handle on, I was unable to function in the ministry to which I felt called, and my life was generally sucky. I couldn't even keep my checkbook balanced because I couldn't pay attention long enough.
Then I met Mr. Ritalin. I am now well on my way to a Ph.D. in Biblical Studies, having finished college. My pastor recently remarked that my marriage is the most stable he's seen in a long time. Did I mention that I have a 4.3 GPA (gotta love those "A+'s" at a school that is most definitely *not* a charm school? I no longer get angry except when *I* chose to, I am at least able to function in ministry (although not nearly as well as I would like) and my life is much better now.
So, bottom line: either I was a colossal fuck-up for twenty years and my recovery was either a miracle or entirely psychosomatic (calling something psychosomatic is really just another way of saying miracle), or ADHD is a very real thing. If you think it's bogus, I wonder where you don't have an emotional commitment to that claim? I'm not saying everyone is ADHD, nor am I saying that Ritalin has fixed all my problems (I'm still an arrogant asshole sometimes) but it at least took the "dys" our of "dysfunctional."
Incidentally, it's worth noting that the Ritalin scare of the late 80's was underwritten by the Scientologists as part of their ongoing feud with the psychological profession. Be careful what you read on this subject, there are a lot of outright lies out there.
Most likely, most geeks are addicted to caffeine because they are self-medicating for ADHD. There is a strong positive correlation between ADHD and IQ. The problem with caffeine is that it causes serious physical side-effects long before it has enough effect on Dopamine levels. It's also quite common to find people smoking compulsively and even taking cocaine in an unconscious effort to alleviate ADHD.
To make a long story short, there are some wonderful meds out there that will do a much better job than caffeine for this problem. Caffeine is really a pretty nasty drug: if you're "hooked" (i.e. find you can't function without it) I suggest you see a doctor.
Re:Not a whole lot left...
on
C&W Bails Out
·
· Score: 1
Actually, It's looking like UUNet/Worldcom/MCI may make a run of it yet. They are correcting some of the accounting problems and coming out of bankruptcy with good positive cash flow. Of course, they ditched half their workforce to do it... but hey, whaddaya want?
Does anyone know for sure which office suite they are using? I'm guessing OpenOffice (since in one place Babelfish calls it "Open Source Office". But it's never stated.
It's like this. The rent on my house (low for the area) is $900/month. I have four small children. From what I hear, unemployment will give me a whopping $800/month, for which I cannot even rent an apartment, much less feed my kids, buy clothes, shoes, keep up my car payment, etc.
My wife went straight from college to mothering, and has never worked, so has few job skills. The company for whom I work (who shall remain nameless) just sold my position to a contracting company, with one weeks' notice. Despite their company policy, they are not giving me any severance whatsoever if I don't take the job with the contractors. The contractors *require* a two-year NCA, and stated unequivocally that anyone who would not sign would lose their job immediately. The contracting company is *huge*, and it is quite likely that any potential job I get may conceivably compete with them somehow.
Did I mention that there aren't really any jobs out there right now? Do you think I'm in a position to fight the contract? No, I signed, and I will try to tough it out as best I can. If I have to leave (or get fired) from the contractor, I will get a new job as quietly as I can, not tell my former boss, and hope they don't notice.
The idea that everyone has free choice in signing contracts is foolish. The bottom line is that a disproportionate amount of power is placed in the hands of employers during hard economic times. They should not be able to do anything they chose because of that. The solution you propose -- which as I read it is pure Laissez-faire -- was more or less tried in the 19th century. It resulted in horrible abuses, and horrible conditions for working people. It resulted in the unlimited importation of cheap labor from foreign countries (every read "The Jungle"?) It resulted in 60 hour work-weeks for 12-year-old kids. All this was done as good examples of "free enterprise". It was in reaction to these conditions that labor unions were formed and fair labor practices laws were passed.
It is no coincidence that these abuses started at a time of great economic growth (the Industrial Revolution.) The laissez-faire approach might work in a smaller economy. However, the creation of shared-stock companies has the effect of watering down the process of making ethical decisions so that no one feels personally responsible. Instead, everyone operates on a scheme of plausible deniability. It is correct and appropriate in such cases for the government -- who created the shared stock company as a separate persona in its own right in the first place -- to take action to ensure just and moral practices.
From the article, it appeared to me that the association was less with being a Buddhist from a doctrinal point of view (i.e. holding a belief in the four-fold truths, reincarnation, etc.) than with Buddhist practices. I wonder if you would not find a similar correlation with people who pray regularly or meditatie within the context of another meditative tradition? Having known more than a few Franciscans, my impression is on a whole that they are happier than the non-meditative orders (e.g. the Jesuits) -- yet they are not Buddhists. They are just people who practice spiritual disciplines.
It's not the difficulty of switching the keyboard - it's the difficulty of switching the brain to remember "now I'm typing Dvorak, now I'm typing Qwerty." Also switching the layout on a dozen computers in order to use them for three minutes is not very practical.
When I developed carpal tunnel a few years ago, I learned to type in dvorak. Here's why I switched back to QWERTY:
It's the standard. I moved to a position where I had to use many different computers that were used by other people. I found it difficult to switch back and forth.
You can type dvorak on almost any computer. But the keycaps will be wrong, and newer contoured keyboards make it difficult to change.
It's difficult to get correct keycaps on unusual computers, such as sun workstations or laptops.
Slashdot Mirror
This is hands-down my favorite jazz album (he says as he trotts over to iTunes.) Remember: real Jazz is LIVE Jazz. Even a recording of a live performance loses something - most Jazz albums are over-engineered to my taste. "Diminuendo in Blue and Crescendo in Blue" has probably the best trumpet solo I've ever heard. This is also historically important - it represented an important comeback in Duke Ellington's career.
Can somebody say "troll"? (Probably some teenage Windozer having a good laugh.)
If 10% leakage causes an 8% depletion, then if we just pumped the hydrogen straight into the air we could get rid of 80% of the ozone and save the hassle of having a middle-man! Woo-hoo! Way to go Cal-Tech!
I think what may really be happening is that younger people can devote themselves to a subject with an intensity that older people simply don't have to spare. I know I have often wished, in my studies, that I could be eighteen again and essentially have two-thirds of my time to waste totally, instead of squeezing dribbles of time out here and there for my own projects. I certainly know I spent a lot more time studying new technology back then.
Comparatively, and from the same time period, SunOS 4 was much nicer to work with.
For those who haven't used it, the LVM support on AIX is probably the best in the industry. It allows you to do just about anything, in a very clean, structured (if somewhat hard to figure out at first) way. I personally have not used it on Linux, so can't comment on the poster's main question, but the kernel-raid stuff is not up to part with IBM's LBM.
As a fat person, let me just say that I've had no complaints from my not-fat wife. Don't knock it till you try it.
It's pretty clear that SCO is trying to get IBM customers to pressure IBM to settle this. However, it frankly seems pretty absurd. The bottom line is that, as a customer, I am not responsible for IBM's alleged failure to maintain a proper license for UNIX. IBM's license is a license to *copy* UNIX software, and copying is the only activity that could possibly be prophibited. Given that IBM's customers already HAVE copies of AIX, unless IBM's license from SCO has some very odd language in it it seems extremely improbable that customers could lose the license they already have.
However, I think a good start would be a fairly simple Ruby script that scans your IP ranges for SNMP agents, looking for anything unrecognizable.
The right way, of course, is to keep a careful database of what's on your network, and report any unscheduled/unauthorized changes. You could either use rmon or something similar or a few strategically placed Linux boxes running tcpdump to find IP addresses broadcasting on the network and send a trap. Or, you could look for changes in the ARP tables on your routers (which you could retrieve using SNMP pretty easily.) This would still leave you vulnerable to various kinds of sniffing attacks, but might be a start.
These are just ideas, but any of them could be implemented in 100 lines of ruby (or perl if you must.)
Don't just look at the end binary. Look at the symbol tables. Even on different compilers, the symbol tables will tend to be very similar. Especially if optimizaiton is not set to absolute max.
You need to talk to MPLC:
Happy karma.This is more likely an issue with your python build. You might try rebuilding python. (Or, better, just use Ruby instead. :)
I love your signature... Now where did I put that password...
Like it or not, it's not enough to say "we think you might be infringing, please stop." If they want us to take them seriously, they have got to provide enough evidence to allow us to evaluate their claims. And that much evidence is, as you put it, "everything."
Further, this is not unreasonable. If SCO's account of events is correct, any trade-secret value of the code in question is irrevocably compromised already. Why should they not make the code available? Why should they not make it possible for us to cure the alleged infraction? Why should they be able to make broad accusations against us without providing us any evidence whatsoever?
(Hint: License fees in excess of $10 million from Microsoft.)
- The code, including line numbers, filenames, and the whole sourcefile from UNIXWARE it is based on.
- The SCO changelog showing the code goes back a long time.
- Linux's changelog showing the code doesn't go back a long time.
Until SCO provide specifics to the Linux development community, they've provided *nothing*. Listen here, troll-boy... Do you have any IDEA how many lines of code there are in Linux? SCO hasn't said where this code is, hasn't given any description of the code, and hasn't given any evidence that they didn't copy it from Linux or introduce it into Linux themselves. They've provided no evidence, just FUD.I've never said that it was enough for SCO to reveal some code to somebody. I'm saying that SCO needs to reveal enough code to figure out what actually happened to the general public. So far, they've made *nothing* public.
Riddle me this. If you take Ritalin, you get hyper, excited, overstimulated. If I take Ritalin, I calm down. Why do you suppose this is?
Then I met Mr. Ritalin. I am now well on my way to a Ph.D. in Biblical Studies, having finished college. My pastor recently remarked that my marriage is the most stable he's seen in a long time. Did I mention that I have a 4.3 GPA (gotta love those "A+'s" at a school that is most definitely *not* a charm school? I no longer get angry except when *I* chose to, I am at least able to function in ministry (although not nearly as well as I would like) and my life is much better now.
So, bottom line: either I was a colossal fuck-up for twenty years and my recovery was either a miracle or entirely psychosomatic (calling something psychosomatic is really just another way of saying miracle), or ADHD is a very real thing. If you think it's bogus, I wonder where you don't have an emotional commitment to that claim? I'm not saying everyone is ADHD, nor am I saying that Ritalin has fixed all my problems (I'm still an arrogant asshole sometimes) but it at least took the "dys" our of "dysfunctional."
Incidentally, it's worth noting that the Ritalin scare of the late 80's was underwritten by the Scientologists as part of their ongoing feud with the psychological profession. Be careful what you read on this subject, there are a lot of outright lies out there.
To make a long story short, there are some wonderful meds out there that will do a much better job than caffeine for this problem. Caffeine is really a pretty nasty drug: if you're "hooked" (i.e. find you can't function without it) I suggest you see a doctor.
Actually, It's looking like UUNet/Worldcom/MCI may make a run of it yet. They are correcting some of the accounting problems and coming out of bankruptcy with good positive cash flow. Of course, they ditched half their workforce to do it... but hey, whaddaya want?
Does anyone know for sure which office suite they are using? I'm guessing OpenOffice (since in one place Babelfish calls it "Open Source Office". But it's never stated.
My wife went straight from college to mothering, and has never worked, so has few job skills. The company for whom I work (who shall remain nameless) just sold my position to a contracting company, with one weeks' notice. Despite their company policy, they are not giving me any severance whatsoever if I don't take the job with the contractors. The contractors *require* a two-year NCA, and stated unequivocally that anyone who would not sign would lose their job immediately. The contracting company is *huge*, and it is quite likely that any potential job I get may conceivably compete with them somehow.
Did I mention that there aren't really any jobs out there right now? Do you think I'm in a position to fight the contract? No, I signed, and I will try to tough it out as best I can. If I have to leave (or get fired) from the contractor, I will get a new job as quietly as I can, not tell my former boss, and hope they don't notice.
The idea that everyone has free choice in signing contracts is foolish. The bottom line is that a disproportionate amount of power is placed in the hands of employers during hard economic times. They should not be able to do anything they chose because of that. The solution you propose -- which as I read it is pure Laissez-faire -- was more or less tried in the 19th century. It resulted in horrible abuses, and horrible conditions for working people. It resulted in the unlimited importation of cheap labor from foreign countries (every read "The Jungle"?) It resulted in 60 hour work-weeks for 12-year-old kids. All this was done as good examples of "free enterprise". It was in reaction to these conditions that labor unions were formed and fair labor practices laws were passed.
It is no coincidence that these abuses started at a time of great economic growth (the Industrial Revolution.) The laissez-faire approach might work in a smaller economy. However, the creation of shared-stock companies has the effect of watering down the process of making ethical decisions so that no one feels personally responsible. Instead, everyone operates on a scheme of plausible deniability. It is correct and appropriate in such cases for the government -- who created the shared stock company as a separate persona in its own right in the first place -- to take action to ensure just and moral practices.
I prefer the key of C - no sharps, no flats, and the easiest to play (at least on the keyboard)!
From the article, it appeared to me that the association was less with being a Buddhist from a doctrinal point of view (i.e. holding a belief in the four-fold truths, reincarnation, etc.) than with Buddhist practices. I wonder if you would not find a similar correlation with people who pray regularly or meditatie within the context of another meditative tradition? Having known more than a few Franciscans, my impression is on a whole that they are happier than the non-meditative orders (e.g. the Jesuits) -- yet they are not Buddhists. They are just people who practice spiritual disciplines.
It's not the difficulty of switching the keyboard - it's the difficulty of switching the brain to remember "now I'm typing Dvorak, now I'm typing Qwerty." Also switching the layout on a dozen computers in order to use them for three minutes is not very practical.
- It's the standard. I moved to a position where I had to use many different computers that were used by other people. I found it difficult to switch back and forth.
- You can type dvorak on almost any computer. But the keycaps will be wrong, and newer contoured keyboards make it difficult to change.
- It's difficult to get correct keycaps on unusual computers, such as sun workstations or laptops.
Nothing major, but enough to keep me on qwerty.